Censored: Brooklyn Martial Law

 
Turn off corporate lies and obfuscation. The owners of media conglomerates will not tell you the full truth, ever.

 

JFK: 75% Disbelieve Official Story

Gallup poll, plus an exploration of the glaring anomalies used in the official tall tale (lie).

JFK: Will We Ever Know the Truth? | Interview with Russ Baker

] 

Crimes Against Humanity in Iraq

The Guardian today posted an investigation and a documentary film on the architects of the “Salvador Option” and the death squads of Iraq. Col. James Steele and Gen. David Petraus, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Chency, the names are expected but for Steele. The documentary highlights Steele’s atrocities from Vietnam through Central America on his way to Baghdad.

From El Salvador to Iraq: Washington’s man behind brutal police squads

Numerous witnesses are on the record. I have one complaint, however, and that is a bogus civilian casualty count mentioned near the beginning of the film. A total of 130,000 Iraqis is stated as some kind of fact with no discussion or examination. This is likely the US military’s own body count; ironically from an invading force that bragged “we don’t do body counts” (Gen. Tommy Franks).

 

Iraq War Casualties

Lancet survey
601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths

Opinion Research Business survey
1,033,000 deaths as a result of the conflict
 

Holder Approves Drone Murder of US Citizens Right Here

Well it sure didn’t take long for the fascists who finance the government and its lackeys to finally burn the Constitution beyond recognition. With Barack and Eric selectively breaking and enforcing laws, and rewriting the rules of the game daily, when will people start using the “I” word?

That’s not ITunes, by the way, generation zombie.
 

Original.
 

The Real American Hero You Don’t Know About

One of the most powerful segments of radio you will ever hear in your life:

MP3 – The Man Who Stopped the My Lai Massacre

No big Hollywood movie has been made about one of the most defining moments of the Vietnam War, the My Lai massacre.  Helicopter pilot Hugh Thompson was the man who represented the United States of America that day, as barbaric monsters executed babies, children, women, the elderly, in a genocidal rampage that killed over 500 defenseless villagers.

Book also available on Amazon:

Credit to Jon Wiener of KPFK (website) for going back to the archives and reposting this historically crucial interview.

MP3 Mirror Site

 

MURDER? 9/11 Whistleblower & His Children

This is shocking and extremely informative. Wayne Madsen traces connections of recently deceased 9/11 author Phillip Marshall back to Iran Contra and Barry Seal (CIA drug pilot). Original interview with audio on Kevin Barret’s radio show.

Published in Veterans Today:

“100% Certain”: 9/11 Author Was Killed in Black Ops Hit

MADSEN: Yeah, so [Phillip Marshall] was on Coast-to-Coast with Susan Lindauer, and y’know, his book The Big Bamboozle, about how, y’know, the Bush family, Cheney, the Saudi Government, they were all complicit in 9/11; he also added the Neo-Cons in that.

BARRETT: Let’s not forget the Neo-Cons…

MADSEN: Yeah, right. And more importantly, he told a friend of his that he was working on a fourth book, and he said “you’re really going to be shocked to see what I have in this fourth book.”

Amazon Book Description:

The Big Bamboozle: 9/11 and the War on Terror

From the perspective of a Boeing 767 captain and former “special activities” contract pilot, Philip Marshall straps the reader into the cockpits of hijacked commercial airliners to tell the story of the most sophisticated terrorist attack in history. Based on a comprehensive ten-year study into the murders of his fellow pilots on 9/11, he explains how hijackers, novice pilots at the controls of massive guided missiles, were able to beat United States Air Force fighters to iconic targets with advanced maneuvering, daring speeds and a kamikaze finish. But, as Marshall explains, the tactical plan was so precise that it rules out car-bombers and shoe-bombers known as al Qaeda, KSM and Osama bin Laden. So then, who was it? That’s what you are about learn. Backed by official NTSB, FAA and black box recordings, Marshall finds the most capable and most documented group of conspirators buried deep within a Congressional Inquiry’s report and retraces their work in gripping detail. Fasten your seatbelt— the sad truth is that all of the solid evidence points to a dark collaboration between members of the Bush Administration and a covert group of Saudi government officials. This is a game changer that will finally set the record straight on the most horrific crime in US history. This book is a compilation of official reports that disputes the Bush Administration, the Bush Intelligence Community and the American media’s account of the 9/11 attack. United States Senator Bob Graham’s Congressional Joint Inquiry in 2002 revealed that Saudi Arabian Intelligence agents met the 9/11 hijackers in the Los Angeles in January of 2000, harbored them and led them to 18 months of flight training in Florida and Arizona. Marshall follows reports from FBI field agents that warned George W. Bush’s Administration that a “cadre of individuals of investigative interest were engaged in flight training” in the Arizona desert in the spring of 2001. Marshall identifies three top federal investigators who complained that Dick Cheney obstructed justice by refusing access to suspects who supposedly confessed to the greatest crime in U.S. history. None of the federal investigators were ever allowed to verify the confession of Khalid Sheik Mohammed who had been water boarded over 180 times at Guantanamo detention facility. The book disputes the video and media confession of Osama bin Laden and points out that none of the accusations by the Bush Administration could be proved. Marshall asserts that the Saudi government was the true executioners of the 9/11 attack and framed their enemies while CIA special operations set up an elaborate decoy named Osama bin Laden to divert attention away from the Saudi operation. He follows the hijackers to flight training airports and finds that Saudi agents led the hijackers to the Arizona desert where Boeing 757 and Boeing 767 airliners were parked at a secluded CIA operated airport. The operators of the CIA airport were traced to suspicious insider stock trades on two airlines, United Airlines and American Airlines, the only two airlines used in the 9/11 attack. Marshall breaks down the tactical flight plan that was used by the hijackers and chronicles the actions of Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Saudi Arabian Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Dick Cheney and George W. Bsuh to learn that their account of the attack was severely flawed. Three top investigators wrote that Dick Cheney had obstructed the investigation and redacted the involvement of the Saudi government agents who were employed in California by the Saudi Civil Aviation authority. The Congressional Inquiry reported that the Saudi agents had “seemingly unlimited funding from Saudi Arabia” and had traced the hijacker financial support to Prince Bandar through a Riggs Bank account. Finally Marshall chronicles the media trial that allowed Bush and Cheney to derail American Justice by trying the 9/11 case with media propaganda and away from the American federal court system.

 

How The Hurt Locker Put the Fun Back into Mass Murder

CC. Attribution and sharealike david_shankbone

Genocide, Fuck Yeah!

How The Hurt Locker Put the Fun Back into Mass Murder

by Kieran Kelly

There is a question used to illustrate the way in which presuppositions can constrain discourse: “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?” The discourse of US international relations is somewhat like the inverse of that question – perhaps equivalent to “have you been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize yet?” It appears that people find it very difficult not to become apologists for the US when they set out to critique the US. For example a recent paper on possible violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL) in US drone “signature strikes” takes as written that there is a sustainable claim that these strikes are legitimate self-defence. This is in order to make the point that even acts of self-defence must conform to IHL and IHRL. You might think that is a reasonable stance, but how can anyone possibly think that signature strikes are legitimate self-defence? These are attacks carried out against unknown individuals based on patterns of behaviour such as visiting suspect buildings. This simply cannot be reconciled with the right of self-defence given under Article 51 of the UN Charter, so why on Earth would anyone simply concede this utter lie? Even the Obama administration prefers (citing US officials’ opinions as sufficient legal precedent) to claim that it is killing as part of an ongoing war, and that its violations of sovereignty are legitimate because the US has done the same thing in the past (and gotten away with it).

Sometimes, however, you don’t need to concede anything to have a critique subverted by the power of the hegemonic discourse. You stick your black spike of dissent in the path of the giant snowball of empire, and with barely a jolt or change in direction the ball gobbles up your spike which is soon obscured and does no more than add its weight to the thundering behemoth. For example, I greatly like the films Full Metal Jacket and Waltz with Bashir. They are both unflattering depictions of war from a conscript’s viewpoint. The problem is that they exist in a distorted context. It is good to humanise the forces of an aggressor, especially the actual grunts who have to face the dangers and do the most intimate dirty work. But to have a context wherein only the aggressors are humanised is sick and depraved, and I don’t mean that these films are sick and depraved. I mean the society we live in, that has never accorded such a deep three-dimensional humanity to Palestinians, Lebanese or Vietnamese, is sick and depraved – utterly sick and depraved.

Waltz with Bashir deserves an acknowledgement in that, in its final moments, it very movingly humanises the victims of the Sabra and Shatila massacres through still photographs (similar to the approach of DePalma’s Redacted) . However, through no fault of the film-maker (who had his own story to tell), the victims were not protagonists; they were not actors; they were not agents. Both of these films unintentionally act to support Israeli or US aggression. Whenever Israel or the US invades a new country, our imaginations are embedded with their personnel. We think about their fears and their suffering, not the greater fears and suffering of their victims. The emotions of their victims can’t be shown in any significant way, because then the US and Israel would look like the “Bad Guys” and people might find it difficult to believe that their violence is founded in the fight against the “Bad Guys”.

It is not just perceptions of real life that are altered by this one-sidedness. The boundaries of what is allowable within the cinematic discourse may, because of this context, allow utterly toxic pieces of propaganda to pass unnoticed. They fit comfortably within the normal practice of privileging Western lives and Western stories. They blame the victims and revere the sacrifice of the perpetrators. They may even be ostensibly antiwar, but they are pro-war crime. Such a work is The Hurt Locker.

The film Zero Dark Thirty has rightly attracted criticism for being a repugnant pro-torture piece of propaganda. For example the Political Film Blog has quite a collection of posts from various writers on many different aspects of why it is a repulsive work. But writer, Mark Boal, and director, Kathryn Bigelow, received almost universal praise for their previous work, The Hurt Locker, and what criticism there was of this movie made it seem almost as if it was a vapid and empty thriller that, by default, promoted a nihilistic love of US muscularity and capacity for destruction. As one writer puts it: “When the film ends with James marching defiantly toward yet another bomb in slow motion, one can practically hear the parody song, ‘America, Fuck Yeah!’ playing in the background.”

MURDERER IN CHIEF

MSNBC Rachel Maddow and Michael Isikoff discuss the leak about the targeted killing of Americans.

 
Read Glenn Greenwald’s devastating response to this legally specious memo that carries no force of law whatsoever.

 

Petition:

“[N]or shall any person…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” — Article V, U.S. Bill of Rights
 

Official Murder Policies of Obama Administration

// //

Justice Department Leaks Memo “Legalizing” Murdering Americans

By David Swanson

Global Research, February 05, 2013

War is a Crime

Here is the memo.  With a few tweaks and a more creative title — like “Murder With Your Hands Clean” — this memo could sell a lot of copies.

And why not?  Either there’s a whistleblower in the Department of So-Called Justice about to be charged with espionage, and NBC is about to face the same persecution as WikiLeaks, or this is one of those “good” leaks that the White House wanted made public in an underhanded manner — perhaps as an imagined boost to morality-challenged CIA director nominee John Brennan who faces his Senate Rejection Hearing on Thursday.

The memo, which is thought to be a summary of a longer one, says the United States can murder a U.S. citizen abroad (abroad but somehow “outside the area of active hostilities” even though killing him or her seems rather active and hostile) if three conditions are met:

“1. an informed, high-level official of the U.S. government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States;”

The memo goes on to base its claims on the supposed powers of the President, not of some random official.  Who is such an official?  Who decides whether he or she is informed?  What if two of them disagree?  What if he or she disagrees with the President? or the Congress? or the Supreme Court? or the U.S. public? or the United Nations? or the International Criminal Court? What then?  One solution is to redefine the terms so that everyone has to agree.   “Imminent” is defined in this memo to mean nothing at all.  “The United States” clearly means anywhere U.S. troops may be.

“2. capture is infeasible, and the United States continues to monitor whether capture becomes feasible;”

And if a high-level official claims it’s infeasible, who can challenge that?

“3. the operation would be conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles.”

When a U.S. drone strike killed Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, no one had shown either of them to meet the above qualifications.

When a U.S. drone strike targeted and killed 16-year-old Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, no one had shown him to meet the above qualifications; I don’t think anyone has made such a claim to this day.  And what about his cousin who died for the crime of being with him at the wrong time?

The sociopaths who wrote this memo have “legalized” the drone-killing of Americans with the exception of all the Americans known thus far to have been murdered by our government with the use of drones.

 David Swanson’s books include “War Is A Lie.” He blogs at http://davidswanson.org and http://warisacrime.org and works for http://rootsaction.org. He hosts Talk Nation Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @davidcnswanson and FaceBook. 

 

PBS Drone Propaganda (RT Abby Martin)

 

Paid for by Lockheed Martin and the Koch Brothers. Jon Stewart also does his bit to sell the Military Industrial Complex.

And don’t miss this clip on the eyes in the skies, coming to a town/battlefield near you.

 

Another Breaking the Set story: VIRAL GENES in GMO CROPS:

 

Clennon Excoriates Moore on Torture

Good stuff in this morning’s CounterPunch:

Michael Moore’s Repellent Defense of “Zero Dark Thirty”

‘Feminist’ torturer and murderer? Get real, Mike.

[See our extensive coverage of the Zero Dark Thirty torture scandal here.]

PS

Obama just imprisoned the one CIA officer who exposed war crimes in the CIA, whistleblower John Kirakou, while promoting and protecting war criminals who torture and murder for the state. That makes Barack Obama party to the conspiracy to torture. Kirakou is railroaded for “Leaks of highly sensitive, closely held, and classified information” about torture war crimes he allegedly divulged to NY Times journalists and defense lawyers for Guantanamo detainee torture victims.

A petition to Obama demanding to release John Kirakou.

Hey Michael Moore — where are you?

 

Warning

Terrorist Threat