Tony Cartalucci
Sometime before 1775, American Founding Father, Benjamin Franklin wrote:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Across much of the West, after September 11, 2001, we have indeed given up our essential liberty, and more over, our dignity in exchange for the illusion of safety. Our streets and public events are filled with militarized police and very literally soldiers wielding machine guns and riding around in armored vehicles. And yet with this militarized security, invasive Constitution-violating searches, warrantless wiretaps, humiliating pat-downs by federal security at airports, terrorist bombs still managed to rip through the streets of Boston killing 3 and injuring many more.
There is nothing more symbolic of the fall of America as a free people than scenes of impotent militarized police standing around aimlessly with their immense arsenal cradled in their idle hands in the wake of an attack their presence did nothing to prevent. What’s more, is their presence after the attack was likewise useless, their weapons and armor incapable of doing anything to help the scores of injured.
We have given up our liberty and our dignity in order to obtain a little temporary safety – and predictably we have neither liberty nor safety.
The FBI and the Illusion of Terror
Disturbing is the habit of the FBI’s posing as terrorists with ties to Al Qaeda, approaching patsies who they then provide explosives and other weapons to, and help engineer an attack which they then “foil” to make spectacular headlines. Many times real explosives are test-detonated with suspects, before inert devices are switched in for the final attack.
In one case in Portland Oregon in 2010, a van was actually parked next to a crowded Christmas tree lighting ceremony where the FBI-entrapped suspect attempted and failed to detonate an FBI-provided inert bomb.
More astounding was the fact that the FBI had actually brought this same entrapped suspect earlier to a location in Lincoln County, Oregon, where real explosives were in fact detonated. The FBI’s official statement titled, “Oregon Resident Arrested in Plot to Bomb Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony in Portland,” released by the U.S. Attorney’s Office on November 26, 2010 stated (emphasis added):
According to the affidavit, on November 4, 2010, Mohamud and the undercover FBI operatives traveled to a remote location in Lincoln County, Ore., where they detonated a bomb concealed in a backpack as a trial run for the upcoming attack. Afterwards, on the drive back to Corvallis, undercover FBI operatives questioned Mohamud as to whether he was capable of looking at the bodies of those who would be killed in the upcoming attack in Portland. According to the affidavit, Mohamud responded, “I want whoever is attending that event to leave, to leave either dead or injured.”
More frightening still was the apparent motivation behind the FBI’s uncover operation.
In 2005, Portland became the first city in the United States to withdraw from the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, (JTTF) over concerns it would threaten civil liberties. The FBI, unwelcomed in Portland, decided to then approach a dupe, entrap him, and spectacularly “foil” a high profile terror plot of their own design during Portland’s annual Christmas tree lighting ceremony – without notifying the local government or local law enforcement of the on going operation.
The operation would humiliate local representatives and in particular, Mayor Sam Adams, making them appear negligent, incompetent, and impotent. And, in the wake of the operation, citing the FBI’s charade specifically,Portland would eventually agree to rejoin the JTTF.
What, if not terrorism, would such events be classified as? The FBI’s JTTF was ousted from Portland, and it subsequently used the threat of violence to coerce the city into accepting it back. It was an operation A-Z engineered by the FBI with a specific political motivation lurking just beneath the surface.
The opaque, covert nature of these operations should also profoundly disturb readers. The FBI apparently has access to vast resources to conduct these operations, including weapons, real explosives, vehicles, and just about everything else most likely used in the Boston blasts. According to the New York Times, in their article, “Portland, Ore., Votes to Rejoin Task Force After Terrorism Scare:”
The investigation had been under way for many months, but the Portland police were consulted only near the end, largely to help with logistics of a sting operation. Mayor Sam Adams was unaware until after the arrest.
Who then is overseeing these operations outside of the FBI? These are operations where real explosives are even detonated … and in the case of the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, FBI monitored suspects actually went through with the final attack, killing 6, and wounding many more (The New York Times, “Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast“).
The answer is, no one is overseeing them, and they are kept secret until the FBI either “foils” them for political points, or a witness steps forward and reveals the FBI’s role in successful attacks that maim or kill innocent people.
This constitutes a very real terror threat to America, but one that lurks within Washington and in our cities’ local FBI offices, carried out by men in suits and ties, not cave-dwelling extremists in Afghanistan or “homegrown terrorists.” For the people of Boston, one of the first targets for investigation should in fact be, the local FBI office.
Monsters of Our Own Creation/Perpetuation
And while America’s domestic threat is one contrived and perpetuated primarily by the very people charged with defending the nation against terrorism, real foreign extremists do exist. It should surprise no one however, considering what the FBI does at home, who is minding this terrorist network abroad.
It is now believed that pressure cooker improvised explosive devices were used in the blasts – devices frequently used overseas by Al Qaeda’s many various incarnations. Should “Al Qaeda” turn out to be behind the Boston blasts, readers would benefit from understanding just what exactly “Al Qaeda” is.
CBS News in their report titled, “Homeland Security warned about pressure cooker bombs,” stated:
U.S. authorities warned as far back as nine years ago that terrorists could use metal pressure cookers to cause deadly carnage.
The common kitchen cooking implement – found in countless American homes – has emerged as a key component in the horrific bombings that killed three people and injured more than 170 at the Boston Marathon yesterday.
The article would continue by stating:
In 2004 a memo titled “Potential terrorist use of pressure cookers” alerted border inspectors, agents, law enforcement officers and other first-responders that the seemingly-innocuous items could be used to create improvised explosive devices (IEDs).
The memo says the bomb-making technique is commonly taught in Afghan terrorist training camps – and had already led to bombing casualties.
The article would also mention terrorists operating in Algeria using rigged pressure cooker devices to carry out attacks – militants long associated not only with Al Qaeda directly, but neighboring Libyan terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which was recently handed the nation of Libya by NATO.
This would also be the same Al Qaeda that the US and NATO are in the process of arming and funding in Syria for the past 2 years. Likewise, it is the same Al Qaeda spawned from the sectarian crypto-terror organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, helped into power on the back of region-wide US-engineered political destabilization, and funded to the tune of billions by America’s allies in Riyadh and Doha.
In fact, for the past 30 years, the US, Saudi Arabia, and other regional allies including Israel have cultivated, armed, funded, and expanded Al Qaeda, using them as both a casus belli for military intervention and a global mercenary force everywhere from Libya to Bosnia, Iraq to Iran, Afghanistan, and of course across Syria for the past two years.
And even as the Boston blasts appear to be shaping up as the work of sectarian extremists affiliated with this vast network of US-Saudi sponsored terror, US ally Qatar is defending its aid given to terrorists operating across Syria. Reuters reported in their article, “Qatar says aid for Syria rebels and Islamists won’t harm region,” that:
Qatar on Tuesday rejected criticism that it risked destabilizing the Middle East by supporting rebels in Syria or the Muslim Brotherhood and said it was helping people but did not interfere in governments.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has accused Arab states who are arming and sheltering rebel fighters of actions that could “create a domino effect throughout the Middle East and beyond,” with Saudi Arabia and Qatar clearly in mind.
Qatar had armed, funded, and even provided air support and troops to Al Qaeda in Libya during their successful bid to overthrow the government and take power in Tripoli. The Guardian reported in their article, “Qatar admits sending hundreds of troops to support Libya rebels,” that:
Qatar has admitted for the first time that it sent hundreds of troops to support the Libyan rebels who overthrew Muammar Gaddafi’s regime.
The Gulf state had previously acknowledged only that its air force took part in Nato-led attacks.
So clearly, Qatar is in the business of interfering with governments, and using Al Qaeda militants to do so.
Similarly, Qatar, along with Saudi Arabia, the US, Turkey, Israel and other allies, have been funneling cash andthousands of tons of weapons into Syria – all of which have ended up in the hands of Al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, Jabhat al-Nusra.
The New York Times in their article titled, “Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With C.I.A. Aid,” admits that:
With help from the C.I.A., Arab governments and Turkey have sharply increased their military aid to Syria’s opposition fighters in recent months, expanding a secret airlift of arms and equipment for the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad, according to air traffic data, interviews with officials in several countries and the accounts of rebel commanders.
The airlift, which began on a small scale in early 2012 and continued intermittently through last fall, expanded into a steady and much heavier flow late last year, the data shows. It has grown to include more than 160 military cargo flights by Jordanian, Saudi and Qatari military-style cargo planes landing at Esenboga Airport near Ankara, and, to a lesser degree, at other Turkish and Jordanian airports.
While the West attempts to claim these weapons are being sent to “moderates,” the US itself admits that Al Qaeda is operating in every major city in Syria and is by far the most highly organized, most prominent militant front in the conflict. If the West via Saudi Arabia and Qatar is sending thousands of tons of weapons to “moderates,” who is sending more weapons to Jabhat al-Nusra?
The obvious answer is there are no moderates, and the West has been intentionally arming Al Qaeda from the beginning. In fact, this is a documented conspiracy first revealed as early as 2007 by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his New Yorker article titled, “”The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” which stated specifically:
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
Further evidence that the summation of US aid has fallen into the hands of Al Qaeda in Syria, comes to us from Washington Post propagandist Liz Sly who reported in her article, “U.S. feeds Syrians, but secretly,” that:
In the heart of rebel-held territory in Syria’s northern province of Aleppo, a small group of intrepid Westerners is undertaking a mission of great stealth. Living anonymously in a small rural community, they travel daily in unmarked cars, braving airstrikes, shelling and the threat of kidnapping to deliver food and other aid to needy Syrians — all of it paid for by the U.S. government.
Sly then claims that most Syrians credit Al Qaeda’s al-Nusra with providing the aid:
“America has done nothing for us. Nothing at all,” said Mohammed Fouad Waisi, 50, spitting out the words for emphasis in his small Aleppo grocery store, which adjoins a bakery where he buys bread every day. The bakery is fully supplied with flour paid for by the United States. But Waisi credited Jabhat al-Nusra — a rebel group the United States has designated a terrorist organization because of its ties to al-Qaeda — with providing flour to the region, though he admitted he wasn’t sure where it comes from.
And while Sly attempts to spin the story as merely misdirected anger and ignorance on the part of Syrians receiving the aid, it is well documented that bakeries in terrorist-held territory are manned by Al Qaeda militants. In fact, while Sly maintains that “security concerns” are owed for America’s opaque aid distribution, it appears more likely the US is attempting to insidiously obfuscate its use of humanitarian aid to help its militant proxies win “hearts and minds” amid a humanitarian catastrophe the West itself engineered and perpetuated intentionally.
The London Telegraph reported in their article, “Syria: how jihadist group Jabhat al-Nusra is taking over Syria’s revolution,” that taking over bakeries was a key strategy used by Al Qaeda’s al-Nusra front to “win over” the population:
Then, in the past weeks, Jabhat al-Nusra – which is outside the FSA – pushed other rebel groups out of the stores and established a system to distribute bread throughout rebel areas.
In a small office attached to a bakery in the Miesseh district of Aleppo, Abu Yayha studied a map pinned on the wall. Numbers were scrawled in pencil against streets.
“We counted the population of every street to assess the need for the area,” explained Mr Yahya. “We provide 23,593 bags of bread every two days for this area. This is just in one district. We are calculating the population in other districts and doing the same there.
“In shops the cost is now 125 Syrian pounds (£1.12) for one pack. Here we sell it at 50 Syrian pounds (45p) for two bags. We distribute some for free for those who cannot pay.”
The bakery works constantly. Inside, barrows filled with dough were heaved onto a conveyor belt that chopped it into round and flat segments, before pushing the dough into a giant oven. Workers packed the steaming flatbread in bags.
“I am from Jabhat al Nusra. All the managers of all the bakeries are,” said Abu Fattah, the manager. “This makes sure that nobody steals.”
In essence, Al Qaeda is taking over neighborhoods upon a mountain of US-provided flour, in bakeries overrun and held at the barrels of US-provided guns.
With this in mind, it becomes clear that not only has America traded in its liberty and dignity for the illusion of safety, but they have done so in the face of fear manufactured and intentionally perpetuated by their own government – a government willfully using the very terror organizations they hold over the American people’s heads as justification for an ever-expanding police state at home, as an international mercenary force with which to target their geopolitical enemies abroad.
It is an illusion of both terror and security, masterfully implemented with a myriad of propagandists andcorporate-financier interests working in coordination to foist this scheme upon Western civilization and beyond. It is essential to identify these corporate-financier interests, boycott them, and permanently replace them with local solutions – lest we be bent eternally to this charade, without liberty, without dignity, and clearly, without safety.
Link:
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/boston-highlights-illusion-of-terror.html
All terror attacks are psyops
by: Jon Rappoport
Whether the Boston Marathon murders were staged as a false flag, and if so, by whom, there are certainly contradictions in the media story line so far.
Mike Adams, at natural news, has pointed out several key absurdities in the official scenario, including the apparent controlled demolition of a bomb at the JFK library, a mile away from the explosions at the Marathon finish line.
This demolition, unreported by the press, was mentioned just before it took place, by a Boston Globe tweet: "There will be a controlled explosion opposite the library within one minute as part of bomb squad activities."
The demolition would have taken place about an hour after the two explosions at the Marathon finish line, which means the bomb squad was able to find the Library device, rig it for demolition, and blow it up in record time.
Whatever the cause of the fire/explosion in the Library, that "incendiary device" was spent, and the bomb squad found another unexploded bomb on the premises.
A local Boston TV reporter, Eileen Curran, took a photo of the Library. The exterior of the building, at the employee's entrance, shows blackened walls. If the "electrical fire" or the "incendiary device" caused this damage, the room in the Library where the fire or explosion took place must have been just inside the building. No media sources are specifically reporting that, which seems quite odd.
The press is merely stating there was a fire in a room in the Library. The fact that the fire was quite close to an entrance certainly rates a mention. It adds juicy media drama to the report. But there is no coverage of the fact.
All terror attacks, no matter who launches them, have a psychology. They have a purpose. Inducing fear, of course. Causing the public to give in to a new set of "security regulations," which tighten the screws on freedom, of course. Painting some designated group as heinous, of course.
The third Monday in April, is Patriot's Day. It commemorates the April 19, 1775, opening battles in the Revolutionary War against England, at Lexington and Concord. Previously celebrated on April 19th, it is also the anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombing (1995), and the final FBI attack on the Waco, Texas, Branch Davidian compound that killed 76 men, women, and children (1993). April 15 is also tax day.
So some media commentators are already opining that "anti-tax-pro-patriot-anti-government" persons are behind the Boston murders.
At an elite level, where psyop research is conducted, the psychology of terror attacks involves disrupting the normal perception of reality.
Most people live their days in a more or less steady state of mind. They perform routine tasks over and over. They see their daily environment as quite familiar. All this produces what could be called a light trance.
If that seems improbable, notice what happens when something completely unexpected intrudes on habitual perception and experience. Shock is what happens.
It's as if the person had been sleeping and suddenly and forcibly wakes up.
On a quiet residential street, a car plows into a lamp post. On a peaceful boulevard, a gust of wind blows a sign from its hinges into a store window, smashing it.
People are shocked. They look up. "Wow. Where was I?" Yes, it's like waking from a dream.
Multiply that effect by a thousand. Bombs go off. The sounds of the explosions, the shock waves, people falling, people bleeding, grotesque injuries, death. In the space of a few seconds, and on a street where nothing ever happens.
And one layer removed from this, the world watches it unfold on television.
It's a rip in the fabric of perceived reality. Right now.
Retired psyop planner, Ellis Medavoy (pseudonym), told me in a 2002 interview: "People think it's very esoteric to talk about disruption in the space-time wave. But setting up certain psyops is very much about that. The theory of these operations has everything to do with the fact that people exist in an average and consistent space-time wave.
"They become used to that. They're not even aware of it. So a psyop can go two ways. It can encourage that form of sleep, to make it continue. Or it can blow people right out of their wave into something that's very disorienting.
"In the latter case, you're forcing people out of their average perception of space and time, but you're not giving them anything to replace it. They're hanging in a void, so to speak.
"What's the result? People desperately want a resolution of the psyop, so they can return to their former continuum. And because they feel desperate, they'll take whatever and whoever you give them. You can say a deer chewed on a power cable and blew out the power for the entire east coast for a week, and they'll believe you.
"And that's what you want. The ability to say anything and have people believe you."
I asked Medavoy if this included peppering the public with contradictions in the official account of a terrorist attack.
"Of course," he said. "They'll overlook those contradictions. They won't pay any attention to them. They're so panicked, they just want a resolution. You can plug in anybody as the guilty party, and they'll buy it."
Later in the conversation, I went back to the subject of the "space-time wave."
Medavoy said: "The psychology on this is clear. An overwhelming percentage of people deal with space-time in a passive way. They receive it, so to speak. They are presented with that fundament of reality and they blindly accept it. Therefore, when you take it away, they're lost. A tiny percentage of the population, those who are intensely creative, react differently. That's because they are, in a real sense, projecting their own space and time."
Psyops planners who stage events are aware of these factors. They want to create a world, a picture of a world, that is in dangerous flux and absolutely requires our "leaders" to stop that flux.
One of my more vivid experiences of this came in the mid-1980s. I was interviewing a relative of a soldier who died in Vietnam. When the subject of whether the war was justified came up, he flew off the handle. He went into a towering rage.
The fact that his cousin had been killed there automatically made the war a necessary policy of the government, a correct action. That conclusion stopped the unbearable flux for him. Otherwise, he was lost.
It was, of course, that way on 9/11, too, and in many other such instances.
There is a psychology operating here, and it isn't merely some academic brand of nonsense. It cuts to the heart of how people literally exist in reality, and how it affects their deep response to events managed by professionals, who understand that psychology.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039946_bombings_terror_attacks_Boston_marathon.html#ixzz2QibHkB2F
History is Repeating Itself After Boston Marathon Bombing
Essential Prepper
After the 9/11 attacks, there were a string of political figures who had Anthrax mailed to their office. This stoked the people’s fears after the deadly attacks. It seems that history is now repeating itself.
A letter for Senator Roger Wicker was intercepted at an off-site mail facility today, laced with Ricin, a deadly poison. This is an eerie reminder of the events on 9/11, happening only a day after the Boston Marathon bombings. The bombings are quickly being considered a staged false flag event to ramp up the people’s fears; the Ricin letters are an additional tool used by the globalists to keep Americans living in constant fear.
The good patriots at FromTheTrenchesWorldReport have put together a thorough analysis linking Senator Wicker to the Boston Marathon bombing incident. I recommend you read the entire article, however here is an important quote:
News is just breaking that contends that an envelope sent to Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) contained ricin, a deadly poison. Now one might ask how the Senator, the ricin, and the bombing are connected.
Senator Roger Wicker is one of the sixteen GOP Senators who voted to stop the filibuster which would have shut down the 2nd Article infringement debate which is going on this week in the US Senate. Wicker has been named as a traitor to the Republic by the patriot community, as he and the other fifteen Senators voted for the debate in spite of the fact that they had previously identified the gun legislation as an infringement upon our Bill of Rights, making the act one with knowledge and forethought.
The communists who monitor the internet are not ignorant to the fact that many patriots have called for the arrest and trial of all sixteen of these wanton traitors. Could it be that the communist insurgency is planning more such incidents in an effort to create an illusion wherein American patriots are committing terrorist acts in an effort to …. what, provide an excuse to institute full martial law?
There are many discrepancies surrounding what little information we have about the Boston Marathon bombing. The Facebook tribute page was put up hours before the explosions, Sandy Hook style. The instant finger pointing of a figure from a Muslim country (a Saudi student) is reminiscent of 9/11 as well.
I, and many other people, are finding it difficult to understand why bomb sniffing dogs were there before any explosions went off. Furthermore, we want to know why some authorities were telling everyone to be calm, that it was just a drill.
Were the drills of the same sort as FEMA was carrying out around 9/11, or the drills going on during the Madrid bombings, or the London 7/7 bombings?
This pattern of behavior is nothing new and should strike fear in our hearts. Think of how life used to be. Think back to 9/10/2001, and think of the stark contrast of the world we live in today. Imagine the draconian laws that will be put into place after this event.
We have gone past the tipping point, and there is nothing we can do to stop it.
Link:
http://www.essentialprepper.com/history-is-repeating-itself-after-boston-marathon-bombing/
The Boston Bombing Produces Familiar and Revealing Reactions
As usual, the limits of selective empathy, the rush to blame Muslims, and the exploitation of fear all instantly emerge
by Glenn Greenwald
There's not much to say about Monday's Boston Marathon attack because there is virtually no known evidence regarding who did it or why. There are, however, several points to be made about some of the widespread reactions to this incident. Much of that reaction is all-too-familiar and quite revealing in important ways:
(1) The widespread compassion for yesterday's victims and the intense anger over the attacks was obviously authentic and thus good to witness. But it was really hard not to find oneself wishing that just a fraction of that compassion and anger be devoted to attacks that the US perpetrates rather than suffers. These are exactly the kinds of horrific, civilian-slaughtering attacks that the US has been bringing to countries in the Muslim world over and over and over again for the last decade, with very little attention paid. My Guardian colleague Gary Younge put this best on Twitter this morning:
Juan Cole this morning makes a similar point about violence elsewhere. Indeed, just yesterday in Iraq, at least 42 people were killed and more than 250 injured by a series of car bombs, the enduring result of the US invasion and destruction of that country. Somehow the deep compassion and anger felt in the US when it is attacked never translates to understanding the effects of our own aggression against others.
One particularly illustrative example I happened to see yesterday was a re-tweet from Washington Examiner columnist David Freddoso, proclaiming:
Idea of secondary bombs designed to kill the first responders is just sick. How does anyone become that evil?"
I don't disagree with that sentiment. But I'd bet a good amount of money that the person saying it - and the vast majority of other Americans - have no clue that targeting rescuers with "double-tap" attacks is precisely what the US now does with its drone program and other forms of militarism. If most Americans knew their government and military were doing this, would they react the same way as they did to yesterday's Boston attack: "Idea of secondary bombs designed to kill the first responders is just sick. How does anyone become that evil?" That's highly doubtful, and that's the point.
There's nothing wrong per se with paying more attention to tragedy and violence that happens relatively nearby and in familiar places. Whether wrong or not, it's probably human nature, or at least human instinct, to do that, and that happens all over the world. I'm not criticizing that. But one wishes that the empathy for victims and outrage over the ending of innocent human life that instantly arises when the US is targeted by this sort of violence would at least translate into similar concern when the US is perpetrating it, as it so often does (far, far more often than it is targeted by such violence).
Regardless of your views of justification and intent: whatever rage you're feeling toward the perpetrator of this Boston attack, that's the rage in sustained form that people across the world feel toward the US for killing innocent people in their countries. Whatever sadness you feel for yesterday's victims, the same level of sadness is warranted for the innocent people whose lives are ended by American bombs. However profound a loss you recognize the parents and family members of these victims to have suffered, that's the same loss experienced by victims of US violence. It's natural that it won't be felt as intensely when the victims are far away and mostly invisible, but applying these reactions to those acts of US aggression would go a long way toward better understanding what they are and the outcomes they generate.
(2) The rush, one might say the eagerness, to conclude that the attackers were Muslim was palpable and unseemly, even without any real evidence. The New York Post quickly claimed that the prime suspect was a Saudi national (while also inaccurately reporting that 12 people had been confirmed dead). The Post's insinuation of responsibility was also suggested on CNN by Former Bush Homeland Security Adviser Fran Townsend ("We know that there is one Saudi national who was wounded in the leg who is being spoken to"). Former Democratic Rep. Jane Harman went on CNN to grossly speculate that Muslim groups were behind the attack. Anti-Muslim bigots like Pam Geller predictably announced that this was "Jihad in America". Expressions of hatred for Muslims, and a desire to do violence, were then spewing forth all over Twitter (some particularly unscrupulous partisan Democrat types were identically suggesting with zero evidence that the attackers were right-wing extremists).
Obviously, it's possible that the perpetrator(s) will turn out to be Muslim, just like it's possible they will turn out to be extremist right-wing activists, or left-wing agitators, or Muslim-fearing Anders-Breivik types, or lone individuals driven by apolitical mental illness. But the rush to proclaim the guilty party to be Muslim is seen in particular over and over with such events. Recall that on the day of the 2011 Oslo massacre by a right-wing, Muslim-hating extremist, the New York Times spent virtually the entire day strongly suggesting in its headlines that an Islamic extremist group was responsible, a claim other major news outlets (including the BBC and Washington Post) then repeated as fact. The same thing happened with the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, when most major US media outlets strongly suggested that the perpetrators were Muslims. As FAIR documented back then:
"In the wake of the explosion that destroyed the Murrah Federal Office Building, the media rushed — almost en masse — to the assumption that the bombing was the work of Muslim extremists. 'The betting here is on Middle East terrorists,' declared CBS News' Jim Stewart just hours after the blast (4/19/95). 'The fact that it was such a powerful bomb in Oklahoma City immediately drew investigators to consider deadly parallels that all have roots in the Middle East,' ABC's John McWethy proclaimed the same day.
"'It has every single earmark of the Islamic car-bombers of the Middle East,' wrote syndicated columnist Georgie Anne Geyer (Chicago Tribune, 4/21/95). 'Whatever we are doing to destroy Mideast terrorism, the chief terrorist threat against Americans, has not been working,' declared the New York Times' A.M. Rosenthal (4/21/95). The Geyer and Rosenthal columns were filed after the FBI released sketches of two suspects who looked more like Midwestern frat boys than mujahideen."
This lesson is never learned because, it seems, many people don't want to learn it. Even when it turns out not to have been Muslims who perpetrated the attack but rather right-wing, white Christians, the damage from this relentless and reflexive blame-pinning endures.
Read the rest here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/16/boston-marathon-explosions-notes-reactions
Boston bombing outage rumors shed light on mobile and Internet ‘kill switch’
RT
Following the Boston Marathon bombings, news began to spread of a US government cellphone network shutdown. While the claims were quickly shown to be false, a secret federal rule does, in fact, make such a shutdown possible.
While the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has in the past denied the existence of Standard Operating Procedure 303, as Ars Technica recently pointed out, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) challenged the secrecy of such documents in 2012 by filing a Freedom of Information Act request.
What EPIC found via its lawsuit was that a 2007 report stated that the network shutdown policy was adopted in March of 2006. According to that report, the National Coordinating Center, a part of the DHS, was to be the main player in “any actions leading up to and following the termination of private wireless network connections, both within a localized area, such as a tunnel or bridge, and within an entire metropolitan area.”
There has been particular focus on government possession of any sort of ‘kill switch’ over cell networks and internet service since the embattled government of Hosni Mubarak shut down both in Egypt at the height of protests in 2011.
That same year, when San Francisco’s transit authority made the decision to shut off cell phone networks within its metro service in anticipation of protests, critics were quick to point out the draconian implications.
Somewhat ironically, following the BART incident the Federal Communications Commission launched an investigation into the cell network shutdown that resulted in the government’s so-called SOP 303 rule for that sort of activity. In their response to a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) query, wireless carriers such as AT&T stated that there was, in fact, no need for an inquiry, as government policy on shutting down private cell networks was already established.
“Federal and State authorities, the [FCC], wireless providers and other private stakeholders, have previously considered these issues in a cooperative process that resulted in the National Communications System’s Standard Operating Procedure 303,” AT&T responded. “SOP 303 resolves the questions posed by the Commission in the Notice and eliminates the need for the Commission to reconsider those issues in this docket.”
In plain English, what AT&T responded with in the case of the San Francisco cell network shutdown is that a little-known rule, which the DHS initially denied even existed, was already in effect – and that wireless carriers simply obliged with city government in its request.
In its initial FOIA filing, EPIC requested further information as well as justification for the secrecy behind SOP 303, which is officially understood as “a shutdown and restoration process for use by commercial and private wireless networks during national crises.”
At question is just what might constitute a national crisis, and by which government stakeholders. As Ars Technica, an IT news site reports, the DHS has yet to fully respond to EPIC, though it has already abandoned the idea that no such rule regarding government enactment of a cell network ‘off switch’ exists.
This means that the US government has procedures set in place to shut off private cell phone access across an entire metropolitan region, though it is not publicly understood by what criteria, or what precise process such a rule was anointed to homeland security.
Link:
http://rt.com/usa/government-cell-kill-switch-979/
Boston Marathon Bombings: Questions Remain Unanswered
Thomas R. Eddlem
The motive behind the April 15 twin bombings at the Boston Marathon, which killed at least three and injured more than 175, remains shrouded in mystery as of Tuesday afternoon. Although law enforcement officials reportedly have a Saudi national in custody as a “person of interest,” it remains unclear whether the bombings are an act of terrorism or simply the actions of a lone insane bomber without political motivation. The bombings apparently included a pressure cooker in a backpack, with some type of ball bearing or other shrapnelin it.
The presence of a Saudi national at the marathon event is not by itself suspicious or unusual, as many people come to Boston from around the world for both the marathon and for college study. Boston is largely an international college town, with some 53 colleges and universities within the city and its inner highway Route 128 loop. Several dozen additional colleges and universities are within the outer Route 495 highway loop of the Boston metropolitan area as well.
Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick debunked early news stories that claimed other explosive devices were found. “Two and only two explosive devices were found yesterday,” Patrick said at an April 15 evening press conference. “There were no unexploded explosive devices found.” Early reports that a fire at the JFK Library in Dorchester — several miles from the marathon route — was related proved to be untrue. The library fire was ruled a “mechanical fire” after an initial investigation.
At least one eyewitness to the event, University of Mobile’s cross country coach Ali Stevenson, claimed in an interview with a local television network that he saw bomb-sniffing dogs and unprecedented security even before the bombs exploded.
President Obama said in an April 16 press conference that the bombing was a “cowardly act” and stressed that “the FBI is investigating it as an act of terrorism.” Obama also noted that he had no information as of Tuesday morning about the perpetrator(s) or the motive. “What we don’t yet know, however, is who carried out this attack, or why,” Obama said. “Clearly, we are at the beginning of our investigation…. In the coming days, we will pursue every effort to get to the bottom of what happened.”
The media was quick to speculate about the motives behind the unknown bombers, with Wolf Blitzer suggesting on CNN within moments of the bombing report that since the bombing was on April 15, it could have been carried out by a tax protester or related to the Patriots’ Day holiday in Massachusetts. “It is a state holiday in Massachusetts today called Patriots’ Day and,” Blitzer told his CNN audience, “who knows if that had anything at all to do with these explosions?” ABC News has suggested similar motivations. Blitzer’s speculations were couched in advice not to draw conclusions, but it drew a call from Congressman Steve Stockman for an apology from Blitzer. Indeed, this week is an anniversary to a number of terrorist incidents, such as the Oklahoma City bombing and the Waco massacre.
The bombing drew condemnation from across the Muslim world, though one former Salafist prisoner in Jordan praised the bombing. “Let the Americans feel the pain we endured by their armies occupying Iraq and Afghanistan and killing our people there,” Mohammad el-Chalabi told local press after the bombing.
Obama claimed in his April 16 press conference that “We also know this: The American people refuse to be terrorized.” Yet the pattern after most terrorist incidents is a call for security, even if it does away with traditional civil liberties.
Boston is no stranger to terrorist actions, as two of the four planes that crashed during the September 11 attacks on 2001 took off from Boston’s Logan Airport. It was also the site of a 2007 bomb scare, later determined to be a harmless prank. Moreover, Boston was a target for bombings before and during the “Red Scare” nearly 100 years ago, which involved more than 100 bombings — most through the mail — against major U.S. cities between 1917 and 1920.
Link:
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/15118-boston-marathon-bombings-questions-remain-unanswered
Salon: ‘Let’s hope Boston Marathon bomber is a white American’
Patrick Howley
The liberal online magazine Salon published an opinion piece Tuesday evening by columnist David Sirota entitled, “Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American,” in which Sirota argued that if the perpetrator of Monday’s bombing attack, which left at least three people dead, is identified as a Muslim then conservative Republicans will use the tragedy to block Obama administration policy goals like immigration reform.
“If recent history is any guide, if the bomber ends up being a white anti-government extremist, white privilege will likely mean the attack is portrayed as just an isolated incident — one that has no bearing on any larger policy debates,” Sirota wrote in his Salon piece, which featured an image of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh cropped beside a photograph of Osama bin Laden.
“It will probably be much different if the bomber ends up being a Muslim and/or a foreigner from the developing world. As we know from our own history, when those kind of individuals break laws in such a high-profile way, America often cites them as both proof that entire demographic groups must be targeted, and that therefore a more systemic response is warranted. At that point, it’s easy to imagine conservatives citing Boston as a reason to block immigration reform defense spending cuts and the Afghan War withdrawal and to further expand surveillance and other encroachments on civil liberties,” Sirota wrote.
Read the rest here:
http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/16/salon-lets-hope-boston-marathon-bomber-is-a-white-american/
Nationwide Terror Attacks? Boston, California, D.C.?
Washington’s Blog
You know about the Boston terror attack.
There have also been terrorist incidents today – in which no one has been hurt – in California and Washington D.C.
Specifically, CNN reports that an envelope containing the lethal poison Ricin was mailed to Capitol Hill. It was addressed to Republican Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi, but was intercepted at the U.S. Capitol’s off-site mail facility in Washington.
And CBS San Francisco, ABC 7, KTVU, NBC Bay Area, the San Jose Mercury News and other media outlets are reporting that someone using a high-powered rifle fired bullets at a Pacific Gas & Electric substation near San Jose, California, causing damage (including a leak of 10,000 gallons of oil) and a statewide emergency alert to conserve energy.
About 15 minutes earlier, the same person(s) cut a Silicon Valley AT&T optic cable.
The vandal’s objective appears to have been “shutting down the system,” Sheriff Laurie Smith said at a news conference at the substation Tuesday afternoon.
This feels a lot like 2001, when the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were followed by the anthrax attacks … creating an atmosphere of widespread fear.
These could be unconnected incidents. Or someone might be trying to orchestrate a nationwide terror campaign to cause panic among the American people once again.
Link:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/04/nationwide-terror-attacks-boston-california-d-c.html
Planting the Seed of Propaganda: Media Repeatedly Suggests Patriots Are Responsible for Boston Marathon Bombing
by Daisy Luther
Not unlike the horrible shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School, the Boston Marathon bombing has become a ”blame-it-on-patriots” media event. Without any proof whatsoever, speculation in the mainstream media is pointing the finger directly at people who believe in independence and freedom from tyranny.
None of the mainstream outlets is asking why a person against paying taxes or someone who is pro-Constitution would attempt to harm people out enjoying a race. They are simply looking for a scapegoat. And no kid on the playground is more unpopular than the one who refuses to be herded along with the other children.
Instead of pulling together in solidarity to support the victims of this horrible attack, the “divide-and-conquer” campaign was underway within an hour of the first bomb detonating.
You don’t require my narrative – I’ll just supply the evidence that an unfounded attack on Patriots is underway. Is the stage being set to present a patsy to further an agenda? You be the judge:
Just over an hour after the attack, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer suggested that tax protesters and Patriot’s Day may have been to blame. “One intriguing thought here…it is a state holiday in Massachusett’s called Patriot’s Day and who knows if that had anything at all to do with these explosions.” Correspondent: “That’s always a possibility, you know, especially with it being deemed “Patriot’s Day” there in Boston, Wolf. ”
Next, also from CNN, National Security Analyst Peter Bergen suggested that “right wing extremists” were likely culprits.
Huffington Post blogger and Al Sharpton radio producer Nida Khan speculated on Twitter that an anti-government group may be responsible for the deadly bombings at the Boston Marathon.
“We don’t know anything yet of course, but it is tax day & my first thought was all these anti-gov groups, but who knows.
David Axelrod, former Obama advisor, told CNN that Obama was thinking about tax day. “And I’m sure what was going through the president’s mind is — we really don’t know who did this — it was tax day. Was it someone who was pro–you know, you just don’t know…”
A former FBI agent speculated that “It would not surprise me if this is some local extremist group trying to make a statement.” Brad Garrett mentioned Patriot groups, domestic extremists, neo-Nazis, anti-tax demonstrators and anti-government groups.
Not to be left out, Chris Matthews of MSNBC pointed out that it was “tax day” and “Patriot’s Day”, suggesting the attack had to be domestic.
This morning, not surprisingly, CNN was at it again. The media mouthpiece published a lengthy article making baseless comparisons between this horrific attack and other violent incidents that took place in the United States, linking “domestic terrorism”, “right wing extremism” and “militia activity.”
It’s now a day that will go down in history along with other violent U.S. incidents in April, including the 1993 FBI siege of David Koresh’s compound in Waco, Texas, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, a mass shooting at Columbine High School in 1999 and the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007.
Only the Waco siege and the Oklahoma City bombing actually occurred on April 19, the anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord. Still, to many following developments in Boston online, the proximity of Monday’s attack to the April 19 anniversaries was enough to suggest an act of domestic terrorism.
“Obviously, nobody knows anything yet,” Esquire magazine’s Charles Pierce said, “but I would caution folks jumping to conclusions about foreign terrorism to remember that this is the official Patriots Day holiday in Massachusetts … and that the actual date (April 19) was of some significance to, among other people, Tim McVeigh, because he fancied himself a waterer of the tree of liberty and the like.”
McVeigh and Oklahoma City bombing co-conspirator Terry Nichols were associated with the extreme right-wing and militant Patriot Movement, which rejects the legitimacy of the federal government and law enforcement. Adherents sometimes form armed militia groups and claim the right to armed self-defense against what they believe to be an oppressive government.
McVeigh said he targeted the Federal Building in Oklahoma City to avenge the raid on Waco. Despite commonly held beliefs, it’s unclear whether the Columbine shooters timed that attack to mark either Adolf Hitler’s birthday or the Waco incident.
Time Washington correspondent Alex Altman also noted Patriots Day’s “significance” to the “militia movement” in a tweet that was shared 507 times. He also mentioned the Oklahoma City bombing anniversary. In a subsequent tweet, he clarified that “OKC was on Apr. 19, anniversary of the Battles of Lexington & Concord, which are celebrated in Mass as Patriots Day.”
But is there really something about this time of the year that makes domestic terrorism more prevalent?
Even the British media has jumped into the blame game, with this article suggesting that the Tea Party was responsible:
The right-wing extremist theory was strengthened by fact April 15 is tax day, an event that in recent years has been used as a rallying date for members of the Tea Party group.
The Tea Party movement is, of course, named after the famous Boston Tea Party political protest of 1773 and, with President Obama’s taxation policies widely criticised by many conservative groups – both moderate and extreme – the date is increasingly seen as a focal point for right-wing protest.
Never let a good crisis go to waste, seems to be the theme of the Powers That Be in the United States. Brandon Smith wrote an excellent analysis:
Along with the immediate strangeness of the attack, the timing is also rather perfect for the establishment.
April 15th is tax day across the nation, and Tax Protest Day sponsored annually by Tea Party organizations across the country also just happened to fall on the 15th this year. On top of this, in Massachusetts, Patriots Day (a civic holiday celebrating the battles of Lexington and Concord) is held on the third Monday of April every year, which just happened to be the 15th this year. Oath Keepers, a constitutional organization often wrongly attacked as a “domestic extremist group” by the DHS and SPLC, just happened to have a large pro-freedom rally scheduled for the 19th of April at Lexington Green in Massachusetts. Are we starting to get the picture here?
With the Senate in the midst of the most blatant attack on our 2nd Amendment rights in history following the passage of the absurdly fascist NDAA and the White House’s unwillingness to remove American citizens as potential targets for executive ordered assassination, and with multiple states now implementing draconian gun restrictions and even confiscations, public opinion is quickly moving against the Federal Government. Wouldn’t it be beneficial for their agenda if it turned out that the Boston Marathon Bombing was executed by a group of “pro-gun anti-income tax anti-government domestic terrorists”, or maybe just Constitutionalists and Liberty Movement activists that are labeled as such?
Wouldn’t that be a big turn-off for those on the fence but shifting towards gun rights and constitutionalism? Wouldn’t it be great for the DHS and the SPLC if all their anti-Constitutionalist propaganda was suddenly proven “correct”? Maybe the TSA could even suggest roving street checkpoints and random searches so that such a calamity “never happens again”.
Like many other senseless crimes, we may never know the truth of “who” or “why”. But watch for more rights to be taken away “for our safety”. Watch for more intrusions into our privacy. Watch for more finger-pointing towards those who question the unConstitutional actions taking place in the United States.
Do you see where this is going? Without one shred of evidence, a bulls-eye has been painted on those who love God, liberty, and the founding principles of the country.
Don’t be surprised when an unwitting patsy is wheeled forth by the media – one who owns an AK-47, flies a Gadsden flag, and carries a well-thumbed pocket copy of the Constitution.
For now, pray for the victims and pray for those seeking the truth.
Link:
http://lewrockwell.com/luther/luther25.1.html
I Am a Terrorist
by Jim Karger
The Dollar Vigilante
I have never thought of myself as a terrorist.
Until now.
But, according to the USSA, based on my stated beliefs, I might just be dangerous, or at least someone to keep an eye on.
Why?
Because I consider myself a sovereign citizen, which means nothing more than I have never consented to being ruled by others, whether it be other individuals or by a gang of individuals calling themselves a "government." I have never assented to relinquish my individual liberties at the altar of democracy, a variant of communism where a majority is deemed right even when they are wrong.
Moreover, I never intend to do so.
Other beliefs that may result in my being designated a terrorist, according to government, include the following:
I don't like paying taxes. Indeed, I believe the income tax is unconstitutional and that most of the proceeds in the case of the United States goes to fund unjust wars and genocide, making them not only illegal but morally reprehensible. I pay taxes as do other sovereign individuals not because I believe there is any honor or right thing in doing so, but because I am aware that government will put me in a cage if I do not do so.
I believe gold is better than paper backed by nothing but the promise of a corrupt, bankrupt government, in which neither I, nor most who call themselves US citizens, believe is acting in our individual best interests.
I reject Keynesian economics as nothing more than a Pollyanna-ish justification for abdicating financial responsibility, individually and collectively.
I am not impressed with costumes and badges or the people who wear them. I believe most cops are undereducated thugs with too much testosterone who exist to maintain the power structure as it is. When the power structure is threatened, they are Johnny-on-the-spot with their batons, tear gas, guns, tasers, and now armed personnel carriers and even tanks. Drones are next, but that is another story I will save for later.
I do not support aggression, but I do support self-defense. As an individual who neither aggresses against others, nor will tolerate being aggressed against, I have found the police, when not intrusive, to be useless. Indeed, unless they are busting heads to keeping various minorities from wresting control from their masters or even exercising their rights, cops are note-takers. They show up after a crime is committed, write in their notebooks, and based on the results, they must smoke their notes because no one ever hears from them again.
Because I see the police and military for what they are, I believe vigilantism is a far more effective way of separating the bad from the good. And, to that end it is not surprising that vigilantism is on the rise. After investigating a gang-rape for more than a year, and the after the victim committed suicide from the shame of having her own rape videotaped and put up on the Internet, the Royal Canadian Mounted Fools still could not find their own asses with a set of elk horns, much less the rapists who were hiding in plain sight. It took Anonymous all of 48 hours to identify the culprits, and only after the threat of releasing their identities into the public domain did the Canadian government at various levels decide to have another look at this tragic case instead of finding a way not to do it.
I believe the press is nothing more than the disinformation arm of government. Its purpose is to convince the general public that their votes matter. They don't. The left-right paradigm is deceptive and the worst kind of fiction, the kind people believe and act upon. No better example exists than George W. Bush and Barrack Obama. They are the same person with the same beliefs and the same policies. They are both self-interested, self-important minions of those in control. For power and money they have trashed the Bill of Rights, fomented war, destroyed what was left of the free market, catered to the über-wealthy and their banks, thrown bones to the poor and the working, and have dutifully preserved the status quo. Yet, even in the face of their abject in-your-face sameness, the press has been successful in moderating the pathetic pseudo-confrontation between right and left. The only real difference between right and left is how they offer up socialism - via a fascistic or communistic bent.
I support real activists, people like Matthew Duran, Katherine Olejnik, and Matthew Pfeiffer who found out the hard way just how ruthless government can be after refusing to answer questions before a grand jury about the political opinions and affiliations of their friends who participated in Seattle's May Day protests. They refused to participate in the Constitutional gang-fuck where federal agents sought “anti-government or anarchist literature or material,” blatantly attempting to criminalize political opinions and deter others from having an opinion outside the confines of government-approved group-think. They were imprisoned and placed into solitary confinement, itself considered torture by many experts on the subject. Olejnik went to prison because, in her words, “I truly believe that people have the right to believe whatever they want politically. And it’s none of the government’s business.” I believe that, too.
I believe Julian Assange should be given the Medal of Freedom if such a thing exists. He has done more for transparency than a generation of flag-suckers who have come before him, rank and pathetic apologists for Uncle Sam's version of the Stasi. The fact that some in the political moron-a-thon that is the United States Congress have called for his assassination only furthers my resolve that Assange must go free.
I believe at a cellular level that speech should not be regulated even while government continues to cracks down on legal protests with laws specifically allowing it to do so, to include the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011, which basically declares it illegal to trespass, i.e., protest, anywhere the President or Vice President happen to be, even temporarily. It is not surprising that it was Nixon, a despot and criminal, was the first to propose and be granted such "protection." Nearly every President since has expanded its reach.
Finally, I object to government's efforts to sterilize the younger generations of any connection to the Constitution and the concept of rights beyond those granted by government. By way of example, in Jacksonville, Florida, fourth grade students were recently lectured on the evils of the Second Amendment and required to write “I am willing to give up some of my Constitutional rights in order to be safer or more secure.”
As to how the USSA wants to deal with we "terrorists," that also is clear. With the NDAA, "Obama has exponentially broadened the attack on democratic rights by declaring his "right" to assassinate anyone, anywhere, that he deems to be a "terrorist," conveniently leaving that term undefined. In other words, if we become too effective, he will just have us killed. The end.
And, before getting too comfortable in your own self-imposed anonymity, know that we dissidents are not the only ones in the crosshairs. The Department of Homeland Security, which legislatively has no war mission inside the borders of the United States, recently purchased 3,000 mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers, 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition (with associated weapons), and other weapons systems. And no one should be surprised. Candidate Obama told us all in 2008 that "we cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded [as the United States military]." In short, they are ready and willing to go to war against us and kill all of us if that is what it takes.
The fact I believe these things sincerely may make me a "terrorist" in the eyes of the United States government.
If so, I am proud of the designation.
Res ipsa loquitur.
Link:
http://lewrockwell.com/karger/karger13.1.html
No comments:
Post a Comment