Did they really switch sides, or is this more a revolving door arrangement with a captured “regulatory” agency?
US prosecutors and other senior officials who spearheaded the war against drug cartels have quit their jobs to defend Colombian cocaine traffickers, saying their clients are not bad people and that United States drug policy is wrong.
Senior former assistant US attorneys and Drug Enforcement Administration agents are turning years of experience in investigating, indicting and extraditing narcos to the advantage of the alleged traffickers they now represent.
“I’m not embarrassed about the fact that I changed sides,” said Robert Feitel, a Washington-based attorney who used to pursue traffickers and money launderers at the Department of Justice. “And I’m not shy about saying that no one knows better how a prosecutor thinks. That’s what people get when they come to me. There are lots of hidden things to know about these cases.” …
This is ancient history to those who have been paying attention. Still bears some repetition.
Foreign Policy Journal has learned that senior executives of a major U.S. international corporation may have been warned to leave New York on September 11, 2001.
According to an inside source, one of the senior executives of the corporation told him beforehand that “something big” was going to occur and so other corporate executives would be travelling out of New York. …
There have been numerous other indications that individuals within the U.S. had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks.
One such indication was the evidence of insider trading in the days just prior. Short selling and trading in put options, which are essentially bets that stock will drop, skyrocketed over a period of days before 9/11 only in companies that were directly affected.
For instance, purchases were made on 4,744 put options for United Airlines between September 6 and 7. On September 10, purchases were placed on 4,516 put options for American Airlines. United and American were the two airlines that had planes hijacked and destroyed in the attacks. There was no similarly unusual trading in other airlines.
Other companies directly affected also experienced a spike in the purchase of put options, such as Morgan Stanley Dean Witter and Merril Lynch, both of which had offices in the World Trade Center. …
One of the banks involved in the purchases was Alex Brown, the U.S. branch of the German Deutsche Bank, which was headed until 1998 by A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard. He afterwards joined the CIA, and was Executive Director of the agency at the time of the attacks.
Robert Baer is a former CIA case officer and author of “Sleeping with the Devil” and “See No Evil”, which served as the basis for the film “Syriana” starring George Clooney. Baer told Stewart Howe and Jeremy Rothe-Kushel of the L.A. branch of the organization We Are Change, “I know the guy that went into his broker in San Diego and said ‘cash me out, it’s going down tomorrow.’” Baer added that “his brother worked at the White House.”
Baer also indicated that the 9/11 Commission Report had been a cover-up of what really happened and questioned why certain other oddities about 9/11 had not been investigated, such as “the famous white van”, which he said was “an intriguing story” that “deserves a book”.
He was referring to the case of the five Israelis who were witnessed on 9/11 celebrating beside their white van at the sight of the smoking towers from a parking lot in New Jersey. They were later arrested and detained. Upon arrest, the driver of the van told the arresting officers, “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.”
The van was registered to an Israeli-owned company called Urban Moving Systems, whose owner immediately closed shop and fled to Israel. At least two of the five Israelis witnessed videotaping and celebrating the attacks were learned to be operatives of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency. …
Check out the video about Bahrain in the next article and ask yourself whether a government that commits such atrocities abroad (only the most recent in an endless list dating back many decades) couldn’t impose a similar program at home. Why haven’t they already? Perhaps our labor was more valuable than the resources under our feet. But that has changed with globalization. There is no more telling indication of where we’re heading than the export of our industrial infrastructure abroad and the carefully engineered and executed economic bubble and its implosion, and the dollar collapse which is looming just ahead. Obviously newly impoverished people will react to the theft of their future. It’s irrational to think the satanic pedophile banksters (seriously, that appears to be what they’re into) who have bought the government with trinkets and beads haven’t prepared for this reaction.
Just how far will people go to please authority figures and subsequently do what they know to be immoral? The first known laboratory test for groupthink occurred in 1963 by Yale professor, Stanley Milgram. Subjects for this landmark study were recruited for the Yale study through newspaper ads and direct mail. The participants were men between the ages of 20 and 50, from all educational backgrounds, ranging from an elementary school dropout to participants with doctoral degrees.
Milgram wanted to determine what percentage of people would willingly administer enough progressive electric shocks which would result in death simply based on the orders of a perceived authority figure (i.e., the experimenter). …
It is clear that the Obama regime objects to military detention, and I mistook this objection for constitutional scruples.
However, on further reflection I conclude that the Obama regime’s objection to military detention is not rooted in concern for the constitutional rights of American citizens. The regime objects to military detention because the implication of military detention is that detainees are prisoners of war. As Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin put it: Should somebody determined “to be a member of an enemy force who has come to this nation or is in this nation to attack us as a member of a foreign enemy, should that person be treated according to the laws of war? The answer is yes.”
Detainees treated according to the laws of war have the protections of the Geneva Conventions. They cannot be tortured. The Obama regime opposes military detention, because detainees would have some rights. These rights would interfere with the regime’s ability to send detainees to CIA torture prisons overseas. This is what the Obama regime means when it says that the requirement of military detention denies the regime “flexibility.” …
Coming soon to a “theatre” near you.
Law Enforcement Targets, Inc., a provider of shooting targets to the Department of Homeland Security, has admitted that targets depicting pregnant women were “requested” by law enforcement agencies. …
The shooting targets, intended to “help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusual targets for the first time,” include “pregnant woman threat,” “older man with shotgun,” “older man in home with shotgun,” “older woman with gun,” “young school aged girl,” “young mother on playground,” and “little boy with real gun.”
This 1918 Communist propaganda poster from the Russian civil war serves as yet another reminder that tyrannical regimes throughout history have always sought to disarm their populations through gun control.
The poster shows Russian citizens turning in their rifles, handguns and even swords as a communist soldier looms over them with the words, “Comrades, turn in your weapons” appearing in front of a hammer and sickle inside a red star.
… in October 1918, the Council of People’s Commissars (the Communist government) ordered citizens to surrender all firearms, ammunition, and sabres, having first mandated registration of all weapons six months earlier. Just like the Nazis, Communist Party members were exempt from the ban.
A 1920 decree then imposed a minimum six month prison sentence for any non-Communist possessing a weapon. After the civil war, possession became punishable with three months hard labor plus fines. After Stalin came to power, he made possession of unlawful firearms a crime punishable by death.
With Russians almost universally disarmed, Stalin was given free reign to carry out one of history’s most brutal prolonged genocide, with tens of millions of people executed or starved to death in the three decades that followed, a model subsequently mimicked in China and Cambodia.
Of course it can’t happen here, after all, we have the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, at least on paper eh? What was it bush said, “it’s just a piece of paper”. But so is the “patriot act”. The question is which piece of paper to follow.
Guess what, it IS happening right now, before your eyes, at the hands of the same families and institutions that financed the rise of hitler AND lenin, the people who have no ideology except power, the central banksters, who can create money out of nothing and charge interest on it. The ones that have looted this country to penury, and are now preparing to impose the shock doctrine.
The founders weren’t stupid. They knew what it was like to be up against the most powerful military in the world. I bet the vast majority of the british soldiers were just as humane and patriotic and brainwashed as a typical american soldier today. But as history shows, it doesn’t matter. What matters is exposing the traitors in our midst, the ones who carried out 9/11 and countless other criminal acts against countries around the world, so that american soldiers know who the enemy really is.
Also see “Innocents Betrayed” in the reference section.
Gun Control & Genocide
Down through history, governments have disarmed their citizens only to tyrannize those citizens once they were disarmed.
The following chart documents just a few examples from recent history where “gun control” laws were enacted and then tyranny by the government proceeded.
*Click on a country in the chart in order to learn about what occurred in that country.
“GUN CONTROL” LAWS THAT HELPED SLAUGHTER 56 MILLION PEOPLE
|PERPETRATOR GOVERNMENT||DATE||TARGET||# MURDERED (ESTIMATED)||DATE OF GUN CONTROL LAW||SOURCE DOCUMENT|
|Ottoman Turkey||1915-1917||Armenians||1-1.5 million||1886-1911||Art. 166, Penal CodeArt. 166 Penal Code|
|Soviet Union*||1929-1953||Anti-Communists / Anti-Stalinists||20 million||1929||Art. 182 Penal Code|
|Nazi Germany** & Occupied Europe||1933-1945||Jews, Gypsies, Anti-Nazis||13 million||1928-1938||Law on Firearms & Ammunition, April 12 Weapons Law, March 18|
|20 million||1935-1957||Arts. 186-7, Penal Code|
Art. 9, Security Law, Oct. 22
|Guatemala||1960-1981||Maya Indians||100,000||1871-1964||Decree 36, Nov 25|
Decree 283, Oct 27
|300,000||1955-1970||Firearms Ordinance Firearms Act|
|Cambodia||1975-1979||Educated Persons||1 million||1956||Arts. 322-8, Penal Code|
The United States has a higher ratio of maternal deaths than at least 40 other countries, even though it spends more money per capita for maternity care than any other. The lack of a comprehensive, confidential system of ascertainment of maternal death designed to record and analyze every maternal death continues to subject U.S. women to unnecessary risk of preventable mortality. Maternal deaths must be reviewed to make motherhood safer. The United Kingdom’s Confidential Enquiry into Maternal and Child Health is considered the “gold standard” of national professional self-evaluation. The aim of the Safe Motherhood Quilt Project is to raise public awareness of the rising U.S. maternal death rate and necessary steps to a solution. …
Gaskin doesn’t see any problems with circumcision but at least she’s talking about the welfare of mothers at the mercy of this institutional dinosaur.