Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Oren: Israel is taking “Iran plot” seriously — But can we take the ambassador seriously?

By Maidhc Ó Cathail | The Passionate Attachment | October 15, 201

On October 13, Haaretz’s Natasha Mozgovaya reported on an interview Michael Oren gave to MSNBC, in which the Israeli ambassador to the United States described the ludicrous plot as “definitely an escalation”:

“We know the Iran regime. This is an Iranian regime that has not only sponsored terrorist organizations in our area, Hamas and Hezbollah, that have fired thousands and thousands of rockets at our civilian population, but they’ve struck abroad as well,” Oren said in the interview.

The Israeli ambassador then went on to recount how Iran was responsible for the bombing of the Israeli Embassy and a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, killing over a hundred people.

Contrast Oren’s certainty about Iranian responsibility for the twin terror attacks in Argentina in the early 1990s with what investigative journalist Gareth Porter wrote in 2008 of the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish centre:

In an interview last May James Cheek, Clinton’s Ambassador to Argentina at the time of the bombing, told me, “To my knowledge, there was never any real evidence [of Iranian responsibility]. They never came up with anything.” The hottest lead in the case, he recalled, was an Iranian defector named Manoucher Moatamer, who “supposedly had all this information.” But Moatamer turned out to be only a dissatisfied low-ranking official without the knowledge of government decision-making that he had claimed. “We finally decided that he wasn’t credible,” Cheek recalled. Ron Goddard, then deputy chief of the US Mission in Buenos Aires, confirmed Cheek’s account. He recalled that investigators found nothing linking Iran to the bombing. “The whole Iran thing seemed kind of flimsy,” Goddard said.

Are we to believe that the latest plot involving an even more dubious Iranian character — and a second attack on the Israeli embassy in Argentina! — is any less flimsy?

October 15, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | Leave a comment

Did FBI/DEA entrap small-time Iranian drug dealer to frame Tehran in “terror plot” sting?

By Maidhc Ó Cathail | The Passionate Attachment | October 15, 2011

“Although the legal document, called an amended criminal complaint, implicates Iranian-American Manssor Arbabsiar and his cousin Ali Gholam Shakuri, an officer in the Iranian Quds Force, in a plan to assassinate Saudi Arabian Ambassador Adel al-Jubeir, it also suggests that the idea ‘originated with and was strongly pushed by a undercover DEA informant, at the direction of the FBI,’” writes investigative historian and journalist Gareth Porter.

Continuing his analysis of that criminal complaint, Porter points out:

Both that language and the absence of any statement attributed to Arbabsiar imply that the Iranian-American said nothing about assassinating the Saudi ambassador except in response to suggestions by the informant, who was already part of an FBI undercover operation.

The DEA informant, as the FBI account acknowledges in a footnote, had previously been charged with a narcotics offence by a state in the U.S. and had been cooperating in narcotics investigations — apparently posing as a drug cartel operative — in return for dropping the charges. The document is notably silent on whether the conversation was recorded.

A former FBI official familiar with procedures in such cases, who spoke to IPS anonymously, said the FBI would normally have recorded all such conversations touching on the possibility of terrorism.

The absence of quotes from any of those meetings suggests that they do not support the case being made by the FBI and the Obama administration.

The account is quite explicit, on the other hand, that the Jul. 14 and Jul. 17 meetings were recorded at FBI direction. Statements quoted from those transcripts show the DEA informant trying to induce Arbabsiar to indicate agreement to assassinating the Saudi ambassador.

Moreover, a New York Times report on October 13 strongly suggests that the Iranian-born American was a small-time drug dealer:

“Very creepy,” said Bree Tiumalu, who lives two doors down from Mr. Arbabsiar. “We thought of it as ‘the scary house.’ ” There were always lots of people coming and going from the house, mostly in their 20s, she said, but they did not socialize with people on the street. That led some in the community to suspect that drug deals were going on.

While Arbabsiar was a most unlikely recruit for the elite Iranian Qods force, he would appear to be the perfect patsy for pro-Israeli elements in U.S. federal agencies desperately seeking a casus belli with Tehran.

October 15, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Wars for Israel | Leave a comment

Is alleged Iranian plot a “provocation by an outside agency”? asks Guardian

Maidhc Ó Cathail | The Passionate Attachment | October 14, 2011

“It has the ring of a far-fetched Hollywood thriller and even the senior law enforcement official involved in the investigation admitted to journalists that the alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the US did not fit with what was known about the methods and practices of the supposed perpetrators, the Quds force of the Revolutionary Guards,” Julian Borger writes in the Guardian. Of the eight “unanswered questions” Borger raises about the affair, the final one is arguably the most pertinent:

Could the alleged plot be provocation by an outside agency seeking to start a conflict between Iran and its enemies? In that case, Arbabsiar is consciously misleading his interrogators or is being used by his cousin and his associates, who are working for this third party.

When it comes to outside agencies provoking conflicts, few in the mainstream media know the most likely culprits better than Borger. In a July 2003 special investigation entitled “The spies who pushed for war,” the Guardian’s diplomatic editor exposed the Israeli source of the false intelligence coming out of Doug Feith’s Office of Special Plans in the Pentagon that bypassed the CIA and DIA to concoct a justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force:

The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon’s office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam’s Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorise.

“None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels,” said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith’s authority without having to fill in the usual forms.

The exchange of information continued a long-standing relationship Mr Feith and other Washington neo-conservatives had with Israel’s Likud party.

In 1996, he and Richard Perle – now an influential Pentagon figure – served as advisers to the then Likud leader, Binyamin Netanyahu. In a policy paper they wrote, entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, the two advisers said that Saddam would have to be destroyed, and Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran would have to be overthrown or destabilised, for Israel to be truly safe.

October 14, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Wars for Israel | Leave a comment

Targeting Iran: US Playing the Saudi Envoy Game

By Ismail Salami | Palestine Chronicle | October 14, 2011

In a ‘united against Iran campaign,’ the US government has accused Tehran of orchestrating an assassination plot against the Saudi envoy in Washington, a move which is to be seen as part of a US stratagem to carry on with its plan of demonizing and isolating the Islamic Republic of Iran.

US Vice President Joe Biden said on “The Early Show” on Wednesday that “It’s critically important that we unite the world in the isolation of and dealing with the Iranians. That’s the surest way to be able to get results.”

Obviously, the US officials will use the fabricated occasion to press for new international sanctions as they say that Iranian agents have sought to hire a purported member of a Mexican drug cartel to assassinate the Saudi envoy on American soil.

Regardless of the impertinence and hollowness of the claim, one should not disregard the influence of the powerful Zionist lobby in the new mudslinging plan which is, as Iran’s Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani puts it, a ‘tactless and childish game.”

To add more fuel to Iranophobia, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called on other countries to work together against what is becoming a clearer and clearer threat” from Iran and said, “This really, in the minds of many diplomats and government officials, crosses a line that Iran needs to be held to account for.”

Washington, once again, went on a labeling spree and called Iran “the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.”

There is well-grounded speculation that the new move is meant to stir up dissension in the region so that the US may bolster its waning influence among the Middle Eastern countries as Iran wields a great amount of political muscle in the region. In other words, the US will then be in a position to fish in troubled waters.

In concerted efforts with Israel, Washington has a long history of covert operations in Iran including cyber-terrorism, commercial sabotage and targeted assassinations. A notable instance of such operations is a computer worm known as Stuxnet which has hit Iranian nuclear facilities, categorically a deliberate attempt by the US government to destroy what Iranian scientists have reaped during years. The worm was reportedly tested in Israel at the notorious nuclear arsenal Dimona in a joint Israeli-American effort (The New York Times January 15, 2011). Ironically, Dimona which has been used as a testing ground for the worm, houses over 300 nuclear warheads, and was kept hidden for years until Mordechai Vanunu, a former technician at Dimona, fled to Britain in 1986 and revealed the Israeli nuclear program as well as a top-secret underground facility directly below the installation. Reports say that Israel has at its disposal material for roughly 20 hydrogen bombs and 200 fission bombs. Needless to say, Israel is not a global security threat despite its nuclear warheads and irresponsible behavior towards the Palestinians as it is a fawning ally of the USA.

Apart from sabotaging the nuclear program in Iran, Washington has shamelessly engaged in a series of assassinations against Iranian nuclear scientists. In July 2011, a university student named Daryoush Rezaei, 35, was shot down while his wife sustained serious injuries and was rushed to hospital. In 2010, Massoud Ali Mohammadi, a nuclear scientist, was killed by a remote-controlled bomb in Tehran. On November 29, 2010, two other scientists were targeted by bombs that hit their cars in the capital. The assailants, who were on motorcycles, had stuck magnetic bombs to the victims’ cars. Professor Majid Shahriari was killed on the spot, but Dr. Fereydoun Abbasi and his wife sustained minor injuries and were taken to a hospital. A report carried by The Jerusalem Post citing French Weekly Le Canard enchaine revealed that Mossad had conducted the assassinations “with the help of the CIA and MI6.”

According to intelligence sources, the assassinations were part of Joint US-Israeli plots meant to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program. Also, an article published in the Portuguese-language Weekly, The Expresso revealed that high-ranking Mossad officials gathered at the spy agency’s headquarters in northern Tel Aviv, concluding that the killing of Shahriari would be Mossad’s last covert operation under its current director, Meir Dagan. However, the two spy agencies refused to assume any responsibility for the attacks whatsoever.

In the Iowa Republican Presidential Debate in August 2011, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich spurted out his brazen sloganeering against the Islamic republic and when asked about the situation in Libya, he unconsciously gave rein to his anger and started ranting about Iran, saying the nation had “gone on the offensive” against the USA and needed to be confronted. Soon other hawks joined in with former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty speaking venomously in favor of attacking Iran and boldly lauding the “good works” of the US government in assassinating Iranian scientists and the “good work” of creating the Stuxnet computer virus. This was how he let the cat out of the bag, making it clear that the USA was behind all those atrocities.

Some pundits believe that the US move will put Iran in the forefront of global hatred. This will never happen as the US and its lapdog Israel have already played similar games about Iran over and over again.

What the US government has done to the Iranian nation is not easy to forget and the support it keeps voicing for Israel is not difficult to digest.

Isn’t it strange that Iran, which has long been a victim of US-sponsored terrorism and assassinations, should have become a target of threadbare allegations?

~

Ismail Salami is an Iranian author and political analyst. He has written numerous books and articles on the Middle East some of which have been translated into more than ten languages. His analysis can be found on many online publications.

October 14, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, War Crimes | Leave a comment

Why Did the United States Invade Afghanistan?

By Tim Kelly | FFF |  October 12, 2011

The tenth anniversary of the U.S. led war in Afghanistan came and went with very little attention from the mainstream media. U.S. policymakers are nevertheless confronted with many questions regarding that conflict, such as its affordability, the effectiveness of various strategies, and even whether U.S. forces should remain in that country at all.

Those are all important issues, but the one question I believe to be the most important and fundamental regarding the war probably won’t be discussed: Was the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan necessary?

President Obama, who had campaigned as an opponent of the U.S. invasion of Iraq as a war of choice said of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, “This is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity.”

Obama’s words might have made for a good sound bite, but the evidence shows that, like the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan is, indeed, a war of choice.

Many supporters of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan argue that even if the military campaign has turned into a quagmire, the initial attack was a just and necessary response to 9/11. Perhaps President Obama provided the best summary of this position in a speech at West Point. Obama said:

We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, nineteen men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people. They struck at our military and economic nerve centers. They took the lives of innocent men, women and children without regard to their faith or race or station.… As we know, these men belonged to al Qaeda a group of extremists who have distorted and defiled Islam.… After the Taliban refused to turn over Osama bin Laden — we sent our troops into Afghanistan

Here we have the conventional view: The 9/11 attacks were carried out by 19 fanatical Muslims acting on the orders of Osama bin Laden, the founder and leader of al-Qaeda, who was being given sanctuary by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan; and the invasion became necessary when they stubbornly refused to turn him over to U.S. authorities.

The Bush administration then commenced a bombing campaign and invasion of Afghanistan, asserting the need to capture or kill bin Laden and crush his terrorist organization so that they could not launch another deadly attack on the American homeland.

The problem with this narrative is that the claim that the Taliban had stubbornly refused to turn over bin Laden is not true.

CNN reported on September 21, 2001,

The Taliban … refused to hand over bin Laden without proof or evidence that he was involved in last week’s attacks on the United States. … The Taliban ambassador to Pakistan … said Friday that deporting him without proof would amount to an “insult to Islam.” (emphasis added)

CNN also provided an explanation for the Taliban’s “refusal,” reporting: “Bin Laden himself has already denied he had anything to do with the attacks, and Taliban officials repeatedly said he could not have been involved in the attacks.”

So the Taliban were not really refusing to turn him over but rather were demanding certain conditions be satisfied before they did so. That is not unusual. Governments routinely have evidentiary standards that must be met before they grant an extradition request. Bush, however, was not in a diplomatic mood, and he told the Taliban “the demands were not open to negotiation or discussion.”

The refusal by the Bush administration to put any evidence on the table made it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the Taliban to turn bin Laden over. The Washington Post ran a story in October 2001 that quoted Milton Bearden, a former CIA official, who said the Taliban needed a “face-saving formula.” While the Bush administration was saying, “Give up bin Laden,” the Taliban were saying, “Do something to help us give him up.”

Even after the U.S. bombs began falling in October, the Taliban tried to negotiate by offering to turn bin Laden over to a third country if the United States would cease hostilities and provide evidence of his guilt. But Bush remained adamant, saying, “There’s no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he’s guilty.” London’s Guardian, reporting on this story, printed an article entitled “Bush Rejects Taliban Offer To Hand Bin Laden Over.”

Why was the Bush administration so stubbornly opposed to meeting the Taliban’s reasonable demand that they release at least some of the copious evidence they claimed to have gathered against bin Laden? After all, such a gesture might have spared the United States and her NATO allies, and the people of Afghanistan, the costs and consequences of a war that is now entering its eleventh year.

Well, the answer to that question could be that U.S. officials might well have lacked solid evidence of bin Laden’s complicity notwithstanding their certainty that he was behind the attacks. Certainly, the U.S. government has never shown such evidence to the American people.

Let’s review how the Bush administration presented its case against Osama bin Laden after 9/11.

Here is what Secretary of State Colin Powell said during a September 23, 2001, appearance on Meet the Press:

QUESTION: Are you absolutely convinced that Usama bin Laden was responsible for this attack?

SECRETARY POWELL: I am absolutely convinced that the al-Qaida network, which he heads, was responsible for this attack. You know, it’s sort of al-Qaida — the Arab name for it is “the base” — it’s something like a holding company of terrorist organizations that are located in dozens of countries around the world, sometimes tightly controlled, sometimes loosely controlled. And at the head of that organization is Usama bin Laden. So what we have to do in the first phase of this campaign is to go after al-Qaida and go after Usama bin Laden. But it is not just a problem in Afghanistan; it’s a problem throughout the world. That’s why we are attacking it with a worldwide coalition.

QUESTION: Will you release publicly a white paper, which links him and his organization to this attack, to put people at ease?

SECRETARY POWELL: We are hard at work bringing all the information together, intelligence information, law enforcement information. And I think, in the near future, we will be able to put out a paper, a document, that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking him to this attack. And also, remember, he has been linked to earlier attacks against US interests and he was already indicated for earlier attacks against the United States.

The next day there were banner headlines appearing in newspapers across the country telling Americans of the Bush administration’s imminent report on bin Laden’s guilt. The New York Times ran a story citing a government official who claimed evidence “reaches from the southern tip of Manhattan to the foothills of the Hindu Kush mountains of Afghanistan.”

But by the following day, the Bush administration was backpedaling. The White House press secretary, Ari Fleischer, said there were no plans to produce a report and that Powell’s remarks had been “misinterpreted.” At a joint press conference with President Bush, Secretary Powell withdrew his pledge, saying that “most of the evidence” is classified.

Within days, all mention of the promised “white paper” had disappeared from the news media, which continued to credulously repeat the U.S. government’s narrative of events.

Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, citing officials from the Department of Justice and the CIA, said the real reason the Bush administration reneged on its pledge to release the evidence was a “lack of solid information.”

Further questions were raised regarding the U.S. government’s charges against Osama bin Laden by the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists webpage. While the page mentioned bombings in Kenya and Tanzania as terrorist acts for which bin Laden was wanted, it made no mention of the 9/11 attacks. When the FBI was asked about this conspicuous omission, Rex Tomb, the Bureau’s chief of investigative publicity replied: “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”

So, the U.S. government’s case against Osama bin Laden was not good enough to take to court, but it was good enough to take the country to war, a war that has killed or maimed countless people who had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. The anger arising from the invasion and occupation of the country has created a perpetual supply of terrorist recruits, enabling U.S. officials to use the never-ending “war on terror” to eviscerate the Bill of Rights. And we now have a president who asserts the authority to kill off any person he deems a “threat.” I submit that this claim of unaccountable power represents a far greater threat to the peace and security of the country than any terrorist or group of terrorists could ever pose.

Surveying the evidence, it is clear the Bush administration did not even come close to exhausting its diplomatic options in the fall of 2001 and that some other route could have been chosen to respond to the 9/11 attacks. Moreover, the invasion of Afghanistan did not even succeed in its principal goal: the capturing or killing of Osama bin Laden. According to the U.S. government, that mission was accomplished almost ten years later by a team of Navy Seals in an operation lasting only a few hours … in neighboring Pakistan.

October 14, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Progressive Hypocrite | Leave a comment

What a Whopper! U.S. Throws All the Demons in the Mix for the Mother Of All Anti-Iran Psy-Ops

A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford | October 11, 2011

Who said Barack Obama would bring sobriety and dignity to U.S. foreign policy? The president’s men, and Top Woman Hillary Clinton, have thrown every stereotypical demon of middle American nightmares into the psychological operations gumbo, to create a war hysteria against Iran. No reflexive terror button is left unpunished, no racial hysteria unexploited. Bubble, bubble, boil and trouble, the administration is cooking up an almost comically infernal witches brew just in time for Halloween.

What a confabulation! There’s the Mexican drug cartel hit men, the specter of a bomb exploding in a crowded, upscale Washington eatery, plus attacks on Israelis and, of course, in the background, the elite Quds unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. And if you believe the government story – well, that proves you are the typical America, and any idiot can keep you in a state of endless war.

How convenient this alleged plot is, to weave together the interests of the Mexican narco-regime, which is at war with some of its drug billionaires and in league with others, and a permanent lackey of the United States; Saudi Arabia, the most reactionary regime on the planet, where one family demonstrates its fitness to control the world’s largest oil reserves by building a skyscraper three times the height of the Empire State Building in the middle of a vast desert, and is also a collaborator with the United States in turning back the Arab Spring; and Israel, the uncontested champion violator of international law and United Nations resolutions, which maintains its supremacy in the Middle East and unique relationship to the United States by keeping the region permanently on the brink of Armageddon.

All four players now claim Iran has all but declared war on virtually everybody by plotting to kill the Saudi Ambassador to the United States. But the whole thing smells more like the FBI’s schemes to frame Black men in Miami and Newburgh, New York, for terroristic attacks that never did, or could, happen.

Attorney General Eric Holder, the American entrapper-in-chief, says the Iranians wanted to pay $1.5 million to Mexican hit men to kill the ambassador, possibly by blowing up a DC restaurant where lots of congresspersons also dined. But it turns out that a Drug Enforcement Administration “confidential source” in Mexico was the guy the Iranians supposedly contacted for the hit, and that he came up with the bombing idea, and that the restaurant doesn’t even exist. A naturalized American who also kept his Iranian passport is now in custody. His alleged partner is an Iranian who, if you believe the U.S. government, was connected somehow to the Iranian Quds force. We are supposed to accept that this is how the Iranians make war against the western world.

Mexico says the plot was a threat to its national security, although it is not alleged that even one Mexican hit man was actually contacted. Israel – well, the Israelis are always trying to get the U.S. to attack Iran, so there’s nothing new, there. And the Saudis are pretending to be the injured party, even though they years ago promised the use of their airspace to Israel and the United States for the purpose of bombing Iran.

Iran calls the tale “a children’s story.” Which pretty much sums it up, except these American, Saudi, Mexican and Israeli children are vicious, straight out of Lord of the Flies.

October 12, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Progressive Hypocrite | Leave a comment

US allegedly foils hit on Saudi ambassador, but how could Iran benefit from a crime like this?

RT | 11 October, 2011

American authorities reportedly disrupted an Iranian government plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States. Washington declared that it is “committed to holding Iran accountable.”

Two men, Manssor Arbabsiar and Gholam Shakuri, have been charged with conspiracy to assassinate the Saudi Arabian diplomat Adel Al-Jubeir. The FBI has described Shakuri as a member of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s Quds force.  The plot also allegedly involved bombing attacks on the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington.

“The complaint alleges that this conspiracy was conceived, sponsored and directed from Iran and constitutes a flagrant violation of US and international law,” said US Attorney General Eric Holder, as quoted by Agence France-Presse.

“In addition to holding these individual conspirators accountable for their alleged role in this plot, the United States is committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions,” he said.

Shakuri remains at large while Arbabsiar was arrested on September 29 at New York’s John F. Kennedy airport. He made an appearance in a Manhattan court on Tuesday.

Arbabsiar’s arrest came during a sting operation by the FBI and the US Drug Enforcement Administration. A holder of both US and Iranian passports, he is accused of being ready to pay $1.5 million for the murder of the Saudi ambassador. For the hit he allegedly turned to members of the Mexican drug cartel, who in fact were informants for the FBI.

Investigators also say Arbabsiar wired some $100,000 to an FBI undercover bank account as an advance for the assassination.

Iran has rejected claims by the US that Tehran was involved in a plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to Washington, saying this was a “prefabricated scenario” designed to “turn public attention away from domestic problems within the United States.”

In an open letter to the UN, written after the US accused Iran of plotting murder and terror acts on  American territory, Iran’s UN ambassador Mohammad Khazaee strongly and categorically denied all allegations, calling them fabricated and “based on the suspicious claims of an individual.”

“Any country could accuse other countries through fabrication of such stories,” the ambassador wrote to the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, stressing that “This would set dangerous precedents in relations among states.”

The ambassador condemned the politically-motivated allegations of terrorism, calling them “a showcase of animosity towards the Iranian nation.”

The letter also mentions that it is Iran that has been a victim of the terrorist tactics of the US-supported Israeli regime that does not hesitate to kill Iranian nuclear scientists on Iranian soil.

Iran’s official IRNA news agency described the accusations as “America’s new propaganda scenario” against Iran.

Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, took the US claims seriously, thanking the US authorities for foiling the alleged attempt.

The US is already consulting its allies over the alleged assassination plot in a bid to press Europe to support new sanctions against Iran. The British government has been the first to discuss introducing new measures targeting Tehran.

British PM David Cameron’s spokesman Steve Field confirmed on Wednesday that London was in consultations with Washington about anti-Iranian sanctions but ruled out British involvement in any future  military operation against Iran.

­Something is amiss with Washington’s allegations, claims antiwar activist Brian Becker.

“I think that the US has climbed the escalation ladder, and whenever the escalation ladder is climbed, you ratchet up an attack against the other side; the other side then has to reciprocate,” he told RT. “I think we really need to question what is going on here. Is it really in the interest of Iran to carry out the assassination of this Saudi Arabian or Israeli ambassador in the heart of Washington at a time when the Iranian government knows the US is trying to find a pretext to escalate tensions with Iran?”

Becker declared that Iran would not benefit from a crime like this, as it would have brought Tehran closer to war with the largest military power in the world.

“The only beneficiaries are the Israeli regime and the United States government, which wants to ratchet up tensions against Iran,” concluded Becker.

October 12, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Wars for Israel | Leave a comment

There Never Was an Egyptian Revolution

By Ahmed Amr | Dissident Voice | October 12th, 2011

The thrill is gone, the euphoria has faded and our mass delusions have been swept away to make room for the reality that there never was an Egyptian revolution. Eight months after deposing the old despot, Egypt is now in the firm grip of a new and improved military dictatorship – the Supreme Counsel of the Armed Forces. Any lingering doubt about the intentions of the generals to retain command and control of the ship of state vanished on Bloody Sunday.

There is no need for additional forensic evidence of what exactly transpired at Maspero, the site of a massacre that can only be called a crime against humanity. What started out as a peaceful march against religious persecution by Salafi vandals with a nasty habit of destroying Coptic churches turned into a blood bath. Two dozen demonstrators were murdered, the youngest of them 12 years old.

The only real question remaining is whether the slaughter was premeditated. From where I sit in Cairo, it sure looks that way. How else can one explain the outright lies and deceptions propagated by state owned media operatives?

The provocative coverage by State TV made it sound like Coptic gangs armed with machine guns had assaulted unarmed military police. And the public ate it up because they ‘saw’ it on their Telly. A call went out for ‘honorable’ citizens to go out and defend the army.

Of course, that story turned out to be a load of state manufactured manure. The online English language Al-Ahram website, also a government media outlet, gave a very different account.

A march of 10,000 Copts began today from Shubra to the State TV building in Maspero turned violent when protesters were attacked by stone throwing mobs from on top of the surrounding walls while they were trying to cross the Shubra tunnel. A 15-minute battle ensued as the Coptic protesters fought back and hurled stones at their assailants. Gun shots were fired in the sky, leaving terrified demonstrators wondering aloud if they were going to be shot.

During the attack, panic ensued as women protesters were told to stand under the bridge for safety as Coptic youth tried to contain the march. After the battle stopped the march, once again regained its peaceful nature and continued towards Maspero.

On their way to Maspero they stopped in the neighboring Galaa Street and were attacked once again. A car sped through the crowd and randomely shot at protesters. The march continued once again to Maspero where the protesters were attacked again with increased vigour and violence.

An Ahram Online correspondent at Maspero reports seeing glass being thrown down at protesters from inside the State Broadcasting building in Maspero while armoured personnel carriers were driven by the army through the crowds, hitting and running protesters over. Eyewitness accounts posted on Twitter detail people being shot by the armed forces and attacked by plain-clothed thugs, with fire consuming vehicles by the Nile.

So far confirmed as being among those killed are Mina Daniel, an activist and blogger; Wael Yunna, a journalist for Coptic TV; and Michael Mosaad, an activist and member of the Maspero Youth Coalition.

The protest was organised by the Maspero Youth Union, a group of young Coptic activists to protest against the recent violations against Copts. The protesters chanted, ‘raise your head high you are a Copt,’ and ‘no to burning of churches.’

The protesters also chanted against the army, shouting “the people want the fall of the Field Marshall Tantawi,” and chanted: “Tantawi, where is your army, our homes and churches are being attacked.”

The very next morning, the Arabic print version of Al-Ahram spared all of 150 words to report the story. The brief account didn’t even mention a clash or report on the casualties. This sanitary version of the events had Muslims and Christians marching peacefully chanting “Muslims and Copts are One Hand.” My best guess is that they didn’t want to squander all their recently acquired post-revolutionary virginity on a single story.

By Tuesday morning, Al-Ahram was back to usual form and reporting an eyewitness account from a wounded soldier who claimed he saw 14 of his comrades burned alive in an armored personnel carrier. The journalist who wrote that story is well-advised to invest a little money in a calculator. The official death toll is 25 killed. Of those, 21 have already been identified as Copts, two bodies are unidentified and it’s not exactly certain who the other two are. They could have been soldiers but then again they could have been Muslim activists who were marching in solidarity with their Coptic brothers. The army initially claimed that three of its soldiers had died and now refuses to confirm the exact count.

Usually, in similar circumstances, the soldiers who die in the line of duty are identified and their families are awarded compensation and press coverage to honor their sacrifice. So it could be that the military suffered no fatalities.

The bottom line is that the state owned press accounts were all over the place even though the reported events happened right under their noses. The site of the massacre was across the street from the State Television building at Maspero. State media, any state media, is always a suspect source of information. But when you get this level of confusion in Egyptian state media outlets, it is a sure sign of a cover-up.

The behavior of these ‘journalists’ – and I use that word very loosely – is very similar to what happened on February 2, 2011. That is exactly the same scenario that transpired during the infamous “Battle of the Camels” when armed thugs on horses and camels attacked demonstrators in Tahrir Square.

At the time, the army had already committed itself to protecting the demonstrators and volunteered to be a “custodian of the revolution.” But a curious thing happened – the army didn’t intervene and never bothered to explain how the hired goons had penetrated their lines or how they had managed to pass unnoticed through dozens of army checkpoints that were set up to enforce a curfew. That remains a taboo subject.

But there are some things we now know about the Battle of the Camel. It was a carefully orchestrated attempt by the Mubarak regime to abort the revolution and the plan included a very well-defined role for state media operatives. Their instructions were to ignore it and concentrate on reporting on ‘spontaneous’ outbreaks of support for the now deposed president. It’s fair to speculate that similar instructions were handed down to state media operatives on Bloody Sunday. For the record, these government salaried scribes are pretty much the same crowd that faithfully supported Mubarak for thirty years.

The massacre at Maspero came straight out Mubarak’s play book. Manufacture chaos, pose as a savior of the nation and extend the emergency laws or maybe go a bit further and declare martial law. Field Marshal Tantawi is already signaling the need to impose harsher measures against unidentified domestic and foreign provocateurs.

The Coptic demonstrators were not hooligans armed with machine guns; their ranks included women, children and sympathetic Muslim activists. And autopsies confirm that many of them were shot, stabbed, crushed by armored personnel carriers or beaten to death.

There is absolutely no need for a massive inquiry here. Just ask the soldiers and officers what their instructions were and who gave the orders. Pull in a few of the journalists on the state payroll and ask them the same thing. Round up a few of the thugs who attacked the demonstrators to determine if they acted ‘spontaneously’ or if they also had instructions. I’ll bet my last dollar that this was a False Flag operation to manufacture chaos and create enough sectarian tension to justify continued military rule.

Which gets me back to my initial thesis which is that there never was an Egyptian revolution. What happened in Egypt was a coup d’état that rode the back of a popular uprising, tamed it and now plans to re-establish six decades of military dictatorship. The generals were more than happy to get rid of Mubarak and his heir, a son who was not only a corrupt investment banker but also a draft dodger who never served a day in the military and was rumored to have a British passport.

The Copts who perished on Bloody Monday will go down as the last martyrs of the first Egyptian uprising or the first martyrs of the second Egyptian uprising. Either way, their blood will remain an indelible stain on Egyptian history. May God have mercy on their souls.

~

Ahmed Amr is the former editor of NileMedia.com and the author of The Sheep and The Guardians – Diary of a SEC Sanctioned Swindle. He can be reached at: Montraj@aol.com.

October 12, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

Whites walk out as Ahmadinejad calls the 9/11 attacks ‘a mystery’ in UN speech

Aletho News | September 23, 2011

Posing uncomfortable questions in his speech at the UN, the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, asked who had used the “mysterious September 11 incident” as a precursor to war and to dominate the Middle East?

The entire American delegation walked out while Ahmadinejad was still speaking. European delegates also continued to stream out as Ahmadinejad went on, projected on large screens, calling the 9/11 attack “a mystery”.

“By using their imperialistic media network which is under the influence of colonialism they threaten anyone who questions the holocaust and the September 11 event with sanctions and military actions,” Ahmadinejad said.

When an Iranian proposal for an independent fact-finding investigation of ‘the hidden elements’ involved in the attacks was raised last year, Ahmadinejad said, “my country and myself came under pressure and threat by the government of the United States.”

“Instead of assigning a fact-finding team, they killed the main perpetrator and threw his body into the sea,” Ahmadinejad said, referring to the U.S. military’s killing of Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in early May.

“Would it not have been reasonable to bring to justice and openly to trial the main perpetrator of the incident in order to identify the elements behind the safe space provided for the invading aircraft to attack the twin world trade towers?,” he asked.

In this context Maidhc Ó Cathail calls attention to doubts on the official story of the Bin Laden ‘killing’:

Investigative journalist Russ Baker has written an intriguing analysis of Nicholas Schmidle’s much-heralded account in The New Yorker of the Abbottabad raid. Summing up the story’s main weaknesses, Baker writes:

It is based on reporting by a man who fails to disclose that he never spoke to the people who conducted the raid, or that his father has a long background himself running such operations (this even suggests the possibility that Nicholas Schmidle’s own father could have been one of those “unnamed sources.”)

It seems to have depended heavily on trusting second-hand accounts by people with a poor track record for accurate summations, and an incentive to spin.

The alleged decisions on killing bin Laden and disposing of his body lack credibility.

The DNA evidence that the SEALs actually got their man is questionable.

Though certain members of Congress say they have seen photos of the body (or, to be precise, a body), the rest of us have not seen anything.

Promised photos of the ceremonial dumping of the body at sea have not materialized.

The eyewitnesses from the house—including the surviving wives—have disappeared without comment.

As Baker points out, Nicholas Schmidle and his father, Marine Lt. General Robert E. “Rooster” Schmidle Jr., share common sponsors:

You can see a photo of Gen. Schmidle on a 2010 panel about “Warring Futures.” Event co-sponsors include Slate magazine and the New America Foundation, both of which, according to Nicholas Schmidle’s website, have also provided Schmidle’s son with an ongoing perch (with Slate giving him a platform for numerous articles from war zones and the foundation employing him as a Fellow.) These parallel relationships grow more disturbing with contemplation.

Baker doesn’t provide any details about either sponsor, however. Slate was created in 1996 by former New Republic editor Michael Kinsley. Jacob Weisberg is the Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of The Slate Group, which is currently owned by The Washington Post. New America’s Leadership Council includes Jonathan Soros, President and Co-Deputy Chairman, Soros Fund Management, LLC. One of the numerous articles written by Schmidle was a puff piece on Srdja Popovic, the founder of CANVAS, which trains activists around the world in nonviolent resistance to dictators that get in the way of George Soros and his cronies, whose most recent successful “revolution” has been the so-called “Arab Spring.”

Baker concludes the piece thus:

We weren’t allowed to hear from the raid participants. And on August 6, seventeen Navy SEALs died when their helicopter was shot down in Afghanistan. We’re told that fifteen of them came, amazingly, from the same SEAL Team 6 that carried out the Abbottabad raid—but that none of the dead were present for the raid. We do get to hear the stories of those men, and their names.

Of course, if any of those men had been in the Abbottabad raid—or knew anything about it of broad public interest, we’d be none the wiser—because, the only “reliable sources” still available (and featured by the New Yorker) are military and intelligence professionals, coming out of a long tradition of cover-ups and fabrications.

Meanwhile, we have this president, this one who according to the magazine article didn’t ask about the core issues—why this man was killed, who killed him, under whose orders, what would be done with the body.

Well, he may not want answers. But we ought to want them. Otherwise, it’s all just a game.

September 23, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

9/11: A Conspiracy Theory

By James Corbett | September 11, 2011

Everything you ever wanted to know about the 9/11 conspiracy theory in under 5 minutes.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.

These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.

Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidence literally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.

The investigation was delayed, underfunded, set up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimony extracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed. It failed to mention the existence of WTC7, Able Danger, Ptech, Sibel Edmonds, OBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secret, off the record, not under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.

The DIA destroyed 2.5 TB of data on Able Danger, but that’s OK because it probably wasn’t important.

The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that’s OK because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping.

NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7′s collapse, but that’s OK because knowing how they made their model of that collapse would “jeopardize public safety“.

The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9/11 should be kept secret from the public, but that’s OK because the FBI probably has nothing to hide.

This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise him, him, him, and her. (and her and her and him).

Osama Bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away. Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora but somehow got away. Then he lived in Abottabad for years, taunting the most comprehensive intelligence dragnet employing the most sophisticated technology in the history of the world for 10 years, releasing video after video with complete impunity (and getting younger and younger as he did so), before finally being found in a daring SEAL team raid which wasn’t recorded on video, in which he didn’t resist or use his wife as a human shield, and in which these crack special forces operatives panicked and killed this unarmed man, supposedly the best source of intelligence about those dastardly terrorists on the planet. Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team’s members died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.

This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilities and the rescue of Jessica Lynch.

If you have any questions about this story…you are a batshit, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.

This has been a public service announcement by: the Friends of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, SEC, MSM, White House, NIST, and the 9/11 Commission. Because Ignorance is Strength.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

September 20, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

Breivik massacre has “Gladio” clues from previous massacres in Belgium

By Wayne Madsen | Intrepid Report | September 19, 2011

The CIA’s infamous “stay-behind” networks, originally established by the CIA to commit acts of sabotage against an expected Soviet invasion of Western Europe, was, instead, used in the 1970s and 1980s, amid calls for peace and an end to the Cold War in Europe, to stage “false flag” terrorist attacks that were blamed on Communist cells in Western Europe. In fact the terrorist attacks were carried out by right-wing paramilitaries on the payroll of the CIA.

The terror visited by the Gladio fear-stoking paramilitaries was especially felt in the Belgian province of Brabant where the Brabant Gang, active from 1982 and 1985, the height of Europe’s anti-nuclear and anti-U.S. military campaign. Twenty eight people were killed by the Brabant Gang with scores of others injured. Particularly targeted were Delhaize supermarkets, the chain that owns Food Lion in the United States.

Oddly, money stolen from victims was sometimes found dumped by the gang members. Three of the killings stemmed from the robbery of an arms dealer. There were several reports that the Brabant Gang was run by elements of the Belgian Gendarmerie SDRA6 (Service de documentation, de renseignments et d’action VI)—a secret branch of Belgian security—and the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, acting on behalf of the CIA. The Brabant Gang was also linked to the activities of a neo-Nazi organization in Belgium called the Westland New Post, whose terrorist actions were blamed by authorities on the Communist Combatant Cells, also believed to be a construct of the Belgian and American security services.

Among the victims of the Brabant Gang were Belgian real estate tycoon Jacques Fourez and his secretary, Elise Dewit, killed by the gangsters in 1983. Their deaths as well as others were linked to the evidence they possessed of secret parties, called “pink ballets,” at which Belgium’s elite, including members of the royal family, NATO officers, and politicians, participated in orgies with underage males and females.

There is another link between the Belgian Gladio operations in the 1980s and the activities of Anders Behring Breivik in Norway. A number of Belgian neo-Nazi paramilitary members were connected to the Order of the Solar Temple, a secret society founded in the 1960s by French Nazis. The Order of the Solar Temple is a cult following of the Knights Templar. Breivik and his closest associates were also affiliated with anti-Islamic Knights Templar groups. Between 1994 and 1997, a number of Solar Temple members were murdered ritualistic-style or committed mass suicide. The deaths occurred in Cheiry and Salvan, in western Switzerland; Vercors, France; and Morin Heights and Saint-Casimir, Quebec.

Japanese television journalists who contacted this editor in 2000 had discovered similar links between the Solar Temple and the CIA, as they had previously discovered existed between the CIA and the Japanese murder and suicide religious cult, Aum Shinrikyo. The Order of the Solar Temple was founded in 1984 by Joseph di Mambro, a former Rosicrucian, and Luc Jouret, born in the Belgian Congo and a Marxist-turned-neo-Nazi. In 1984, Shoko Asahara founded Aum Shirinkyo, which means “Supreme Truth.” Aum Shirinkyo soon attracted a number of influential adherents, including members of the Japanese royal family. In 1995, Aum attacked the Tokyo subway system with sarin.

In the mid-1990s, Belgian gangster Marc Dutroux was arrested for carrying out a series of kidnappings of young girls, who he proceeded to sexually abuse, torture, and in four cases, murder. Dutroux’s parents had emigrated to the Belgian Congo but later returned to Belgium. Dutroux’s kidnappings and abuse of young girls occurred during the 1980s, the same time frame that members of the Belgian elite were engaging in orgies with underage girls and boys. Dutroux was constantly being let off the hook by the Belgian authorities and the police’s failure to take prompt and severe action against the pedophile rapist ultimately led to the reorganization of Belgian law enforcement. One of the first trial judges in the Dutroux case, Jean-Marc Connerotte, testified that he was threatened by shadowy figures in the highest echelons of the government for trying the case against Dutroux. Dutroux was finally convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2004. Dutroux was also convicted of having murdered his one-time accomplice, Bernard Weinstein.

WMR has been informed by reliable sources that the Belgian pedophile scandal also involved top American officials and is linked to the pedophile networks active in Washington, DC, Los Angeles, and Omaha during the same time frame, the 1980s. In some cases, Belgian and other European politicians who engaged in Pink Ballet activities were blackmailed by the CIA into backing NATO initiatives in Europe.

Previously published in the Wayne Madsen Report.
Copyright © 2011 WayneMadenReport.com

September 19, 2011 Posted by | Corruption, False Flag Terrorism | Leave a comment

CBC and Pacifica Disgraced by Kay

Public Broadcasters Disgraced as Agents of the 9/11 Cover-Up

Anthony Hall | Salem News | September 18, 2011

(LETHRIDGE, Alberta) – Pacifica and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation have joined forces in featuring Jonathan Kay in 9/11/11 coverage aimed at renewing the psychological warfare essential to the invasions, torture, Genocide, illegal occupations and Islamophobia characterizing the 9/11 wars.

Jonathan Kay was a featured guest highlighted in the network coverage of the tenth anniversary of 9/11 as broadcast by both Pacifica Radio in the United States and the English-language radio division of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Kay wrote for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation a hate-inspired, tenth-anniversary text claiming that those engaged in seeking answers for the copious unanswered questions concerning 9/11 are engaged in “absolving” all Muslims collectively of a “terrible crime.” (p. 167)

Kay’s diatribe was funded by a prominent Israeli-based think tank whose leadership comes largely from the Project for the New American Century. PNAC is the think tank which observed in 2000 that its ambitious program of military expansion and invasions could not be met without a “catalyzing event” like a new Pearl Harbor. Entitled “Among the Truthers”, Kay diverts attention away from the evidence of what did and did not happen on 9/11. Instead Kay appoints himself as a psycho-anthropologist in pursuit of what this war promoter and Isamophobe describes as “the growing conspiracist underground.”

In his 9/11/11 coverage Michael Enright, host of CBC Radio’s flag ship show, Sunday Morning, demeaned on air his old colleague, Barrie Zwicker. Zwicker and Enright worked together for many years as reporters at The Globe and Mail, the main competitor in Canada of Kay’s National Post. Zwicker is the author of “Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-Up of 9/11”. As his wonkey subtitle proclaims, Kay equates even the most accomplished of those engaged in the quest for 9/11 truth, investigators like Zwicker as well as Professor David Ray Griffin, with “Birthers, Armageddonites, Vaccine Hysterics, Hollywood Know-Nothings and Internet Addicts.”

Aged 77, the fit, mentally-agile Zwicker was a guest earlier today on Michael Enright’s program. The struggling host could not come anywhere close to keeping up with Zwicker. Instead Enright displayed an ignorance of his subject matter unbefitting of a broadcaster holding a high level of public trust in Canada’s Crown-owned agency. Like the CBC, the Pacifica stations in the United States have frequently featured Kay as an expert commentator on 9/11. While the CBC did not broach the subject of 9/11 skepticism in its 9/11/11 coverage, at least Pacifica did include in its tenth-anniversary broadcast the perspectives of, for instance, architect Richard Gage and University of Copenhagen Chemistry Professor, Niels Harrit. Both educators are highly critical of the official conspiracy theory of 9/11.

See

http://www.cbc.ca/thesundayedition/shows/2011/09/18/paul-martin—a-cruel-coincidence—the-interns/#socialcomments

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/05/27/jonathan-kay-defends-the-sacred-myth-of-911/

http://www.amazon.com/Towers-Deception-Media-Cover-up-11/dp/0865715734

http://davidraygriffin.com/books/911-ten-years-later-when-state-crimes-against-democracy-succeed/

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september072011/911-facts-ah.php

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=217783

September 19, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »