Search This Blog

Thursday, August 26, 2010

New WikiLeaks Publication - CIA worried about US terror

Wikileaks offered its first release since the controversial distribution of documents related to the United States effort in Afghanistan.

The current leak was posted to their web site on August 25. It is titled CIA Red Cell Memorandum on United States "exporting terrorism", 2 Feb 2010.

This CIA "Red Cell" report from February 2, 2010, looks at what will happen if it is internationally understood that the United States is an exporter of terrorism; 'Contrary to common belief, the American export of terrorism or terrorists is not a recent phenomenon, nor has it been associated only with Islamic radicals or people of Middle Eastern, African or South Asian ethnic origin. This dynamic belies the American belief that our free, open and integrated multicultural society lessens the allure of radicalism and terrorism for US citizens.' The report looks at a number cases of US exported terrorism, including attacks by US based or financed Jewish, Muslim and Irish-nationalism terrorists. It concludes that foreign perceptions of the US as an "Exporter of Terrorism" together with US double standards in international law, may lead to noncooperation in renditions (including the arrest of CIA officers) and the decision to not share terrorism related intelligence with the United States.

Don't hold your breath. There's nothing there about the School of the Americas, the shock and awe invasion of Iraq and the carnage that entailed, or 300 dead Panamanians and United States soldiers as a result of the 1981 manhunt for General Manuel Noriega, a former US asset.

This document lists four examples of terrorism exported by citizens of the United States. Five Muslim Americans traveled to Pakistan, tried to join the Taliban, and were arrested. Red Cell notes that, "In 1994, Baruch Goldstein, an American Jewish doctor from New York, emigrated to Israel, joined the extremist group Kach, and killed 29 Palestinians during their prayers." Also singled out are those Irish Americans who provided cash to the Irish Republican Army used to fund terrorist attacks in the United Kingdom.

Of most interest, convicted terrorist David Headley is cited as an example. A Pakistani American from Chicago, Headley recently plead guilty to providing "advanced surveillance" for the 2008 mega-terror attack on the Indian financial capitol, Mumbai.

The London Sunday Times pointed out that Headley had been "working for" the US Drug Enforcement Administration as part of a plea deal in 1997. The Times of India quoted unnamed Indian officials investigating the attacks as speculating that Headley "could have been a double agent for American agencies and Pakistan-based outfits." US government officials deny any connection with Headley after a brief association with DEA.

The analysis concludes "that Americans can be great assets in terrorist operations overseas."

The perception that the US is an "incubator and exporter of terrorism" may create push back by other governments in the War on Terror. The report cautions that this may lead to formal inquiries concerning US citizens by foreign intelligence agencies who may "even request the rendition of US citizens." Renditions involve the transfer of suspected terrorists from one state to another where torture is used to extract information.

The report warns that US failure to cooperate with these requests, "might lead some governments to consider secretly extracting US citizens suspected of foreign terrorism from US soil."

All this might limit cooperation by US allies in anti-terror efforts.

The Red Cell Memorandum Makes No Sense

We are told that the perception of the US exporting terror would limit the cooperation of other nations in anti terror efforts. If that's true, then we would expect that the US would be less than cooperative with other nations that export terrorism, defined as citizens leaving their country and committing terrorist acts elsewhere.

Didn't President George W. Bush kiss the Saudi King and hold his hand in a garden walk in 2005? Was that indiscreetly affectionate behavior deterred by the perception that the Saudis are an "exporter of terrorism" in the form of bin Laden and the Saudi citizens named as pulling off 9/11? Didn't the current Justice Department support Saudi Arabia's attempt to block a suit by 9/11 victims? Didn't the US have up to 10,000 troops in Saudi Arabia from 1991 through 2003 at the very time that Saudi nationals were sponsoring schools throughout the Middle East that taught hatred of what is now called the homeland?

Other nations allow the US to violate their sovereignty to kidnap and torture their citizens as a result of asymmetrical power. The US can crush these nations militarily and financially. The US also offers financial inducements to the leaders of some nations involved. Therefore, they cooperate.

The report assumes that there's some sort of rule book that allows other nations to behave toward the US as the US does toward them, if somehow US citizens leave the country and commit terrorist acts. In reality, there's no referee or rule book, just a one-sided power equation in favor of US action. It's all about power and dominance.

This leak doesn't amount to much more than a peek at what is viewed as a "thought provoking alternative" view within the CIA. It misses the main point regarding the perception of the US throughout the world.

The Real Export of Terror - Reality Trumps Perception

The United States operates what is commonly known as the School of Americas in Georgia. The school offers training in counterinsurgency, interrogation, and anti terror tactics and strategies. Thousands of Latin American military personnel have trained there over the years. Graduates include some of the worst dictators in that region including those behind the deadly Operation Condor in the 1980s. Some of the worst atrocities in the region were committed by school graduates. The school's level of responsibility for the behavior of it's graduate can't be quantified in precise terms. However, for some graduates, the training failed to instill a respect for humanity and taught tactics that were employed against the citizens that the military leaders were to protect.

The US has held the leadership position in NATO since its inception in 1949. In 1990, the European Parliament passed a resolution condemning Operation Gladio and US involvement (European Parliament resolution on Gladio, Nov. 22, 1990, Clause G. 2). This involved paramilitary groups in NATO member nations and France. The groups were created by US and British intelligence after World War II. The original goal was to provide resistance in case of a takeover by the Soviet Union. Long after that was a viable concern, the groups continued by staging false-flag terror attacks against their own citizens. The incidents, which killed thousands, were committed by the Gladio groups and falsely attributed to Communists and Soviet sympathizers.

These are just two examples of the unrestrained and counter productive use of power exported by successive US administrations. It's no accident that this information is kept from US citizens. Sufficiently informed, the vast majority would find these programs offensive and counterproductive. But it's no secret to the rest of the world. The concerns expressed in the Red Cell Memorandum are moot. It's too late. The word is out.


more readking on the subject:

Monday, August 16, 2010

911 media silence - Western Press TABOO

Hameed Gul answeres No 1     post id: 404
by Arnaud de Borchgrave 5:16pm Tue Oct 2 '01

Pakistan's ex-spy Chief blames Israeli Mossad & U.S. Air Force for WTC

The retired Pakistani general who is closest to the Taliban and Osama
bin Laden contends the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York City and
Washington were the work of renegade U.S. Air Force elements working
with the Israelis.
UPI Interview with Gen. Hameed Gul
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, Sept. 26 (UPI) -- The retired Pakistani general
who is closest to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden contends the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington were the work of
renegade U.S. Air Force elements working with the Israelis. Gen. Hameed Gul led Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence during the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Gul serves as an adviser to Pakistan's extremist religious political
parties, which oppose their government's decision to support the United States in any action against Afghanistan's Taliban regime. Gul contends bin Laden had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, saying instead that they were the work of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service -- a version of events that has been endorsed by Islamic fundamentalist clerics and is widely accepted by Muslims throughout the Arab world.

Here is the transcript of the exclusive interview Gul gave to Arnaud de
Borchgrave, United Press International editor at large:

De Borchgrave: So who did Black Sept. 11?

Gul: Mossad and its accomplices. The U.S. spends $40 billion a year on
its 11 intelligence agencies. That's $400 billion in 10 years. Yet the Bush
Administration says it was taken by surprise. I don't believe it.
Within 10 minutes of the second twin tower being hit in the World Trade Center ... CNN said Osama bin Laden had done it. That was a planned piece of disinformation by the real perpetrators. It created an instant mindset and put public opinion into a trance, which prevented even intelligent people from thinking for themselves.

Q: So you're already convinced bin Laden didn't do it?

A: I know bin Laden and his associates. I've been with them here, in
Europe and the Middle East. They are graduates of the best universities
and are highly intelligent with impressive degrees and speak impeccable

These are people who have rediscovered fundamental Islamic values. Many come from the Gulf countries where ruling royal families have generated hatred by the way they flout divine law, wasting billions on gratifying their whims, jetting around in large private jets by themselves, and sailing the Mediterranean in big private boats for weeks on end.

Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, HI(M), SBt, (born 20 November 1936) is a retired Pakistan Army general known for heading the Inter-Services Intelligence Pakistani intelligence agency, after the Soviet-Afghan War, and for instigating the insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir against India in 1989 with the support of the militants, who fought in the Soviet-Afghan war.

Hamid Gul served as the director general of Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence during 1987-89, mainly in the time when Benazir Bhutto was Prime Minister of Pakistan. He was instrumental in the anti-Soviet support of the mujahideen in the Afghanistan War of 1979–89,[1] a pivotal time during the Cold War, and in establishing the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad, a right-wing political party against the Pakistan Peoples Party. He also was a vehement supporter of the Kashmir insurgency against India,[2] and is accused by the United States of having ties to al-Qaeda and the Taliban

===Accusation of US and Israel behind 9/11===

Only days after the [[September 11 attacks]] he stated that they were ''was clearly an inside job''.
<ref>[ UPI news Sept. 26, 2001]</ref> That interview was not published by newspapers.<ref>[] Google news tracker</ref>

Sept. 26, 2001

(Editor's note: After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave had an exclusive interview with former Pakistani Gen. Hamid Gul. In light of the role Gul is given in the recently released secret U.S. military documents, UPI republishes de Borchgrave's interview with Gul. The item was originally published Sept. 26, 2001.)


RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, Sept. 26 (UPI) -- The retired Pakistani general who is closest to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden contends the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington were the work of renegade U.S. Air Force elements working with the Israelis. Gen. Hamid Gul led Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence during the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Gul serves as an adviser to Pakistan's extremist religious political parties, which oppose their government's decision to support the United States in any action against Afghanistan's Taliban regime. Gul contends bin Laden had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, saying instead that they were the work of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service -- a version of events that has been endorsed by Islamic fundamentalist clerics and is widely accepted by Muslims throughout the Arab world.

Here is the transcript of the exclusive interview Gul gave to Arnaud de Borchgrave, United Press International editor at large:


De Borchgrave: So who did Black Sept. 11?

Gul: Mossad and its accomplices. The U.S. spends $40 billion a year on its 11 intelligence agencies. That's $400 billion in 10 years. Yet the Bush Administration says it was taken by surprise. I don't believe it. Within 10 minutes of the second twin tower being hit in the World Trade Center ... CNN said Osama bin Laden had done it. That was a planned piece of disinformation by the real perpetrators. It created an instant mindset and put public opinion into a trance, which prevented even intelligent people from thinking for themselves.


Q: So you're already convinced bin Laden didn't do it?

A: I know bin Laden and his associates. I've been with them here, in Europe and the Middle East. They are graduates of the best universities and are highly intelligent with impressive degrees and speak impeccable English. These are people who have rediscovered fundamental Islamic values. Many come from the Gulf countries where ruling royal families have generated hatred by the way they flout divine law, wasting billions on gratifying their whims, jetting around in large private jets by themselves, and sailing the Mediterranean in big private boats for weeks on end. Osama's best recruits come from feudal areas that are U.S. protectorates and where millions of poor people are seeking human dignity. I have even visited a Christian convent school in Murree, 60 miles from here, where my 13-year-old daughter is studying. The young girls there have told me Osama is their hero. Osama's followers identify with Mujahideen freedom fighters wherever they are defending Islam and its values.


Q: So what makes you think Osama wasn't behind Sept. 11?

A: From a cave inside a mountain or a peasant's hovel? Let's be serious. Osama inspires countless millions by standing up for Islam against American and Israeli imperialism. He doesn't have the means for such a sophisticated operation.


Q: Why Mossad?

A: Mossad and its American associates are the obvious culprits. Who benefits from the crime? The attacks against the twin towers started at 8:45 a.m. and four flights are diverted from their assigned air space and no air traffic controller sounds the alarm. And no Air Force jets scramble until 10 a.m. That also smacks of a small scale Air Force rebellion, a coup against the Pentagon perhaps? Radars are jammed, transponders fail. No IFF -- friend or foe identification -- challenge. In Pakistan, if there is no response to IFF, jets are instantly scrambled and the aircraft is shot down with no further questions asked. This was clearly an inside job. Bush was afraid and rushed to the shelter of a nuclear bunker. He clearly feared a nuclear situation. Who could that have been? Will that also be hushed up in the investigation, like the Warren report after the Kennedy assassination?


Q: At this point, someone might be asking what you've been smoking. What is Israel's interest in such a monstrous plot, which, of course, no one believes except Islamist extremists who concocted this piece of disinformation in the first place, presumably to detract from the real culprits?

A: Jews never agreed to Bush 41 (George H.W. Bush, the 41st president) or 43 (his son George W. Bush, the 43rd president). They made sure Bush senior didn't get a second term. His land-for-peace pressure in Palestine didn't suit Israel. They were also against the young Bush because he was considered too close to oil interests and the Gulf countries. Bush senior and Jim Baker had raised $150 million for Bush junior, much of it from Mideast sources or their American go-betweens. Bush 41 and Baker, as private citizens, had also facilitated the new strategic relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran. I have this from sources in both countries. So clearly the prospect of a Bush 43 was a potential danger to Israel.

Jews were stunned by the way Bush stole the election in Florida. They had put big money on Al Gore. Israel has given its imperialist guardian parent opportunities to turn disaster into a pretext for imposing an all-encompassing military, political and economic agenda to further the cause of global capitalism. While Colin Powell is cautious and others are reckless and want to make up for their failure to defeat Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War 10 years ago, the global agenda is the same.

Israel knows it has a short shelf-life before it is overwhelmed by demographics. It is a state that was born in terrorism that terrorized Palestinians into the exile of refugee camps, where they have now subsisted in squalid refugee camps, and is now very much afraid of Pakistan's nuclear capability.

Israel has now handed the Bush family the opportunity it has been waiting for to consolidate America's imperial grip on the Gulf and acquire control of the Caspian basin by extending its military presence in Central Asia. Bush conveniently overlooks -- or is not told -- the fact that Islamic fundamentalists got their big boost in the modern age as CIA assets in the covert campaign I was also involved with to force the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Bush senior was vice president during that entire campaign. And no sooner did he become president on Jan. 20, 1989, than he summoned an inter-agency intelligence meeting and issued an order, among several others, to clip the wings of ISI (Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence) that had been coordinating the entire operation in Afghanistan. I know this firsthand as I was DGISI at the time (director general, ISI).


Q: So how do you read U.S. strategy in Pakistan?

A: The destabilization of Pakistan is part of the U.S. plan because it is a Muslim nuclear state. The U.S. wants to isolate Pakistan from China as part of its containment policy. President Nixon's book "The Real War" said China would be the superpower of the 21st Century. The U.S. is also creating hostility between Pakistan and Afghanistan, two Muslim states to reverse the perception that the Islamic world now has its own nuclear weapons. Bush 43 doesn't realize he is being manipulated by people who understand geopolitics. He is not leading but being led. All he can do is think in terms of the wanted-dead-or-alive culture, which is how Hollywood conditions the masses to think and act.

All summer long we heard about America's shrinking surplus and that the Pentagon would not have sufficient funds to modernize for the 21st century. And now, all of a sudden, the Pentagon can get what it wants without any Democratic Party opposition. How very convenient! Even your cherished civil liberties can now be abridged with impunity to protect the expansion of the hegemony of transnational capitalism. There is now a new excuse to crush anti-globalization protests.

Bush 43 follows Bush 41. Iraq was baited into the Kuwaiti trap when the U.S. told Saddam it was not interested in his inter-Arab squabbles. Two days later, he moved into Kuwait, which was an Iraqi province anyway before the British Empire decreed otherwise. Roosevelt baited the Pearl Harbor trap for the Japanese empire, which provided the pretext for entering World War II. And now the Israelis have given the U.S. the pretext for further expansion into an area that will be critical in the next 25 years - the Caspian basin.


Q: Were you a fundamentalist in the days of the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan when you worked closely with the CIA?

A: Not as much as I am today.


Q: What turned you against America?

A: Betrayals and broken promises and what was done to my army career.


Q: And what was that?

A: President Ishaq Khan, who succeeded Zia ul-Haq after his plane was blown out of the sky, wanted to appoint me chief of staff, the highest position in the Pakistani army. The U.S., which by then had clipped ISI's wings, also blocked my promotion by informing the president I was unacceptable. So I was moved to a corps commander position. As ISI director, I held the whole Mujahideen movement in the palm of my hands. We were all pro-American. But then America left us in the lurch and everything went to pieces, including Afghanistan.

The U.S. pushed for a broad-based Afghan government of seven factions and then waved goodbye. Even in the best of democracies, a broad-based coalition does not work. So we quickly had seven jokers in Kabul interested in only one thing - jockeying for power. The gunplay quickly followed, which led to the creation of Taliban, the students of the original Mujahideen, who decided to put an end to it.

Saudis ask Musharraf to release Hameed Gul
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
By Rauf Klasra
ISLAMABAD: Saudi Arabia has quietly asked the Pakistani authorities to immediately release the ailing Lt General Hameed Gul who is incarcerated in Adiala jail along with his son Abdullah, as the retired general is considered an old friend of the Kingdom and King Abdullah is one of his admirers.
It would be the first time that the Saudis or any foreign government has made a request for release of a retired Army general who has been put in the jail for opposing the policies of General Musharraf.
Saudi ambassador to Pakistan, Ali Awadh Asseri, has conveyed a message to the Pakistani authorities that the old friend of the Kingdom should be released as he is widely respected for his services to the cause of Islam during the Afghan Jihad.
The Saudis, being the major financiers of the Jihad, used to send millions of dollars through General Gul and were very impressed with his honest handling of the money. He impressed them more when he returned a very expensive gift to his Saudi hosts.
The Saudi ambassador is said to have contacted Uzma Gul, his daughter and expressed his deep sorrow over the ordeal. He is said to have told Uzma that the Saudi government was taking up the issue of his release.
When contacted by The News, Uzma Gul confirmed that she had received a telephone call from the Saudi ambassador in Pakistan. She also confirmed that the ambassador had informed her that the Saudi government was "requesting" Islamabad authorities to release the general. She however refused to give further details of her telephone talk with the Saudi ambassador.
Meanwhile, a board of military doctors after examining Hameed Gul has recommended his immediate shifting to a hospital as his condition was worsening because of heart ailment. His family says he is being humiliated and subjected to mental torture as he is not allowed to sleep in the night. Even his son Abdullah, who is a businessman, has been put in jail to break his nerves.
According to Uzma Gul, General Musharraf, who served as staff officer to General Gul in Multan, wants his former boss to file a mercy petition for his freedom. She said the humiliating offer was simply laughed off by Gul.
General Faiz Ali Chishti, the head of Pakistan ex-service men association, has already written a letter to the vice chief of Army staff General Ashfaq Kiani demanding his release. It would be the third time that the Saudis have made a request to the rulers in Pakistan to save the lives of their friends. They first spoke for ZA Bhutto in 1979, then they secured the release of Nawaz Sharif in 2000 and now they want General Hameed Gul released.
It has been revealed to The News that the intelligence chief of Saudi Arabia, Faisal al Turki is also said to be a close friend of General Gul when both were dealing with the Afghan Jihad. This friendship even continues till date.
All attempts by this correspondent to get the official version did not succeed as Major General Rashid Qureshi and Minister for Information Mohammed Ali Durrani did not return several calls made to them.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Mark Binghams Exif/IPTC data shows as 8/30/2001

Mark Bingham, 31, shown in this 1993 graduation photograph from the University of California, Berkeley.(AP Photo/Contra Costa Times, handout).
United 93 Hero Mark Bingham w/ Mother Alice Ann Hoglan
      Created on: 12-Sep-01
 Registered through:, Inc. (
Contra Costa Times, which covers Contra Costa and Alameda Counties, breaking news, weather, traffic, shopping, sports, jobs, cars, homes and local events.

Mark Bingham, an American hero and other passenger on United Flight 93 was gay and was chosen as the gay Advocate's Man of the Year in 2001.
Mark at Southern Decadence In New Orleans, Labor Day Weekend 2001

Phil Jayhan writes: Here is a rather large blunder on the part of CNN or AP Press; Mark Binghams Exif/IPTC data shows as 8/30/2001. Some 13 days before 9/11, complete with a working bio and obituary, all carefully prepared, or in this case, not so carefully prepared some two weeks before 9/11! It is no wonder that CNN went removing so many hundreds of pictures from their CNN Memorial page

well spotted Phil!

Notice how it says how he was killed, 13 days before 9/11? Just who is Mark Bingham anyway? We were told that he was an openly gay man. President of his fraternity. And told that he nearly missed his flight, Flight 93. We were told the plane actually had closed its door and then reopened it to allow him to board.

Yet we know now that Flight 93 never happened. That Mark Bingham never showed at the airport, nor did any of the other 246 passengers and crew. FYI - We were also informed quietly via the FBI that the Flight 93 drama never occurred. This came out in trial of one of the alleged hijackers;

Mark Bingham is not in the Social Security Death Index nor is he in the Victims Compensation Fund


A Boeing 757 en route from Newark, N.J., to San Francisco. The plane was carrying 38 passengers, two pilots and five flight attendants. It crashed southeast of Pittsburgh around 10 a.m. ET.


Jason Dahl, Denver, Colo., pilot.

1st photo: Jason Dahl, in this undated photo, was the captain of United Airlines Flight 93. (AP Photo/San Jose Mercury News)
2nd photo: Family members of Jason Dahl hold hands in prayer during a memorial service for the United Airlines pilot Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2001, at West Bowles Community Church in Littleton, Colo. (AP Photo/Pool, Helen H. Davis)

Leroy Homer, Marlton, N.J., first officer.
Lorraine G. Bay, flight attendant.
Sandra W. Bradshaw, 38, Greensboro, N.C., flight attendant.
Wanda A. Green, flight attendant.
CeeCee Lyles, Fort Myers, Fla., flight attendant.

Deborah A. Welsh, flight attendant.

United Airlines flight attendent Debbie Welsh is shown in an undated family photo. Welsh was from New York City and grew up in Philadelphia, her parents said.(AP Photo)


Christian Adams

Todd Beamer

1st photo: Todd Beamer is shown in this undated family photo which was displayed during his memorial service Sunday, Sept. 16, 2001, at Princeton Alliance Church in Plainsboro, N.J. Beamer was a passenger aboard United Airlines Flight 93 on Tuesday, and, according to an operator who talked to him during the flight, led other passengers to take action against the plane's terrorist hijackers just before the plane crashed in southwest Pennsylvania. (AP Photo/Family Photo)
2nd photo: Lisa Beamer, widow of Todd Beamer, who died on United Airline Flight 93 that crashed in Pennsylvnia is applauded on Capitol Hill Thursday, Sept. 20, 2001 after being recognized by President Bush during his address before a joint session of Congress. (AP Photo/Kenneth Lambert)

Alan Beaven

This is a handout photo, date and location unknown, of Alan Beaven, an Oakland, Calif. resident who moved to New York only a few months ago. Beaven was an employee of the SYDA foundation, which promates Siddha Yoaga Meditation, and has offices in Oakland and New York. (AP Photo/courtsey of the law offices of Berman, DeValerio, Pease, Tabacco, Burt and Pucillo via Oakland Tribune)

Mark Bingham, 31, San Francisco.

Mark Bingham, 31, shown in this 1993 graduation photograph from the University of California, Berkeley.(AP Photo/Contra Costa Times, handout)

Deora Bodley

Deora Bodley, 20, shown in this undated Santa Clara University handout.(AP Photo/Santa Clara University)

Marion Britton

Thomas E. Burnett Jr., 38, .

Thomas E. Burnett, Jr., 38, senior vice president and chief operating officer, Thoratec Corp, called his wife moments before the hijacked plane crashed. "He said, 'I know we're all going to die - there's three of us who are going to do something about it,'" Burnett told his wife, Deena. (AP Photo)

William Cashman
Georgine Corrigan
Joseph Deluca
Patrick Driscoll
Edward Felt
Colleen Fraser

Andrew Garcia

This is an undated handout photo of Andrew Garcia with wife Dorthy.(AP Photo/Coutesey of The Garcia family)

Jeremy Glick

Jeremy Logan Glick, 31, of West Milford, N.J., is shown with his daughter Emerson in this July 17, 2001, photo. Glick and other passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93, apparently took action against the hijackers aboard the plane Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001, shortly before crashing in a western Pennsylvania field. The jetliner, which government officials suspect was headed for a high-profile target in Washington, was the fourth to crash in a coordinated terrorist attack that likely killed thousands, and the only one that didn't take lives on the ground. (AP Photo/ho)

Lauren Grandcolas, San Rafael, Calif., sales worker at Good Housekeeping magazine
Donald F. Greene, 52, Greenwich, Conn.
Linda Gronlund
Richard Guadagno
Waleska Martinez

Nicole Miller

The photo of Nicole Miller is a 1998 Pioneer High School graduation photo. Miller was visiting a friend in New Jersey and was due to fly back Monday, but bad weather bumped her onto United Airlines Flight 93. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma)

Mark Rothenberg
Christine Snyder, 32, Kailua, Hawaii.
John Talignani
Honor Wainio

According to the official story of the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks, Todd Beamer and Mark Bingham fought terrorists on United Airlines Flight 93 and forced that plane to crash in Pennsylvania.

However, I have discovered that United 93 is not the only connection between Beamer and Bingham.


First of all, Beamer and Bingham went to high school together. Specifically, they attended Los Gatos High School in Los Gatos, a town in northern California.

Mark Bingham attended Los Gatos High School for 4 years, from 1984 to 1988. [1]

Todd Beamer attended Los Gatos High School during the 1986-1987 school year, which was his senior year. [2]

So, for 1 year, Beamer and Bingham went to high school together.


Todd Beamer and Mark Bingham are also connected via the business world.
Specifically, they are both connected to a man named Eric Benhamou.

Mark Bingham graduated from college in 1993, and his own company opened for business in 1999. For some period of time between the 1993 graduation and the 1999 opening, Bingham worked for 3Com Corporation. [3]

The CEO of 3Com from September 1990 to December 31, 2000, was Eric Benhamou. [4]

Thus, Benhamou was the CEO during Mark Bingham's employment at 3Com.

Now, did Benhamou and Bingham know each other personally? Well, if you look at the news database Factiva (available at public libraries), you will find two 3Com press releases, one from September 2, 1999, and the other from October 11, 1999. These press releases appeared in the publication known as Business Wire. If you look at the bottom of each press release, you will see Mark Bingham's name and phone number listed in the "contact" section. So, Bingham was a press secretary for 3Com, just as Tony Snow is the press secretary of the White House. So, just as we are sure that Tony Snow personally knows the people in charge of the White House (Bush, Cheney, etc.), we can be sure that Bingham personally knew Benhamou.

In addition to working for 3Com, Mr. Benhamou was a member of the Board of Directors of the company known as Legato Systems.

Benhamou was appointed to Legato's Board of Directors in 1993. [5]

Benhamou was on Legato's Board as late as September 2001. [6]

David Beamer, Todd Beamer's father, was appointed Legato Systems's executive vice president of worldwide sales in January 2001. [7]

David Beamer was appointed chief operating officer (COO) of Legato Systems in February 2002. [8]

Thus, David Beamer and Eric Benhamou worked at Legato at the same time for at least 9 months (from January 2001 to September 2001).

Furthermore, during those 9 months, Benhamou had the high rank of member of the Board of Directors, and David Beamer had the high rank of executive vice president of worldwide sales. Thus, it is very probable that Eric Benhamou and David Beamer knew each other personally.

So, Eric Benhamou worked with Mark Bingham and with David Beamer, Todd's father.


Also, Mr. Benhamou has many ties to Israel. [9]


There is another passenger from United Airlines Flight 93 that should be noted, and that is Nicole Miller. At the time of 9/11, Nicole was a student at West Valley College in northern California. Alice Hoglan, Mark Bingham's mother, was also a student at West Valley College at the time of 9/11. [10]


So, Todd Beamer has ties to Mark Bingham, and Mark Bingham has ties to Nicole Miller.



Source: 1/22/2002 article in the magazine The Advocate

Source: Benhamou's biography on the 3Com website

Source: June 1993 issue of Software Magazine

Source: 9/24/2001 article in the publication Business Wire

Source: January 8, 2001, article in the publication Business Wire

Source: February 28, 2002, article in the publication Business Wire

Source: Benhamou's biography on the 3Com website


mark also is the only person not to show up on the American airlines mandate which i have in front of me now, Not only is this illegal fo a airliner not to have a full passenger list of any flight he also phones a friend to say he was sitting in seat 4D in first class while the plane got delayed during taxing for 40 mins, the conversation was weird with his mom but when you phone a friend to say you made the flight do you usually mention the seat number your in. i have written a letter to AA requiring an explanation to why mark was not on the passenger list,its also worth pointing out the system that airliners have in place,it is impossible for a name to be mist of. i cant find any one else talking about the mandate and mark Bingham so im wondering if i have missed something or some one could explain to me why his name is not on the official AA mandate which crews use to do a head count.

Mark Bingham (1970-2001), the chief executive officer of The Bingham Group, a public relations firm. Tall and athletic, he started playing rugby as a teenager and continued in college at the University of California, Berkeley. Even after graduating in 1993, Bingham pursued his love of the game, joining the San Francisco Fog, a gay rugby team. Along with sports, he was interested in politics and had served as a volunteer on Senator John McCain's 2000 bid for the Republican presidential nomination. A self-made success story, Bingham founded his own company, which had offices in New York and San Francisco. It was a business trip that led Bingham to take United Airlines Flight 93. After the plane was hijacked, he called his mother, Alice Hoglan, and his aunt, Kathy, to let them know what happened and that he loved them

Letters From Alice Hoglan, Mother of Mark Bingham:
If we condemn Islam, we slur the religious beliefs of Mark Bingham's close friend Joe who is a leader of Team Bingham which sponsored the inaugural Run to Remember September 11 in San Francisco this past Sunday, and whose wedding Mark was traveling aboard Flight 93 to attend.

Apparently on September 11, 2001 he boarded Flight 93 at the last minute, on his way to California to be an usher in his fraternity brother Joseph Salama's wedding.

Anyone who knows about 9/11 conspiracy theories has probably heard about the information indicating that a Boeing 757 did not impact the Pentagon on 9/11. If you are not aware of this evidence, you can see a compilation of it here. For many years, most of the movement believed that Flight 93 had crashed in Shanksville, but was shot down by a US fighter jet. This is government disinformation. Flight 93 did not crash into Shanksville, though I won't deal with that in this post. If you wish to see a compilation of this evidence, check it out here.

Many people in the 911 movement have realized that no plane hit the Pentagon and no plane crashed in Shanksville. This post will cover evidence of a theory shunned by the mainstream 911 leader figures (aka Gatekeepers). The theory that no planes crashed into the World Trade Center. Of course, this sparks one to go "What?? What about the eyewitnesses?". Morgan Reynolds and Andrew Johnson have exposed the fact that most of the eyewitnesses did not see or hear planes. Gerard Holmgren has shown that numerous initial eyewitness accounts reported small planes, missiles, or just explosions. The initial eyewitnesses reporting jetliners were people employed by the mainstream media, such as CNN Vice President of finance Sean Murtagh (Says he saw a big jet) and senior ABC producer Mark Obenhaus (Also says he saw a big jet). Others were simply anonymous callers. Others were TV eyewitnesses who have been exposed as actors in staged, mock interviews.

This post will not cover the issue of eyewitnesses in detail. The main purpose of this post is to expose the TV fakery on 9/11. We will go through the videos. First, let's look at what little footage there is of Flight 11.


Naudet Brothers Video

The most well-known shot of Flight 11 is the one taken by the Naudet brothers. These two French filmmakers were at the right place at the right time. They were in the middle of the street, with hi-tech equipment, with no traffic, with no people walking around, and with a squad of ready-to-go firefighters. Talk about a perfect shot opportunity, with a highly coincidental 'gas leak' to act as the cover for being there to film the event at just the right time. At 9:03, they would also catch the second hit. At 5:20, they would also catch the collapse of Building 7.

Flight 11 appears as no more than an unidentifiable blob and hits, creating a much larger wingspan than it's actual size is. In fact, when it hits, despite appearing small, the gash it creates goes from side to side of the building! Note that smoke comes out from the top of the WTC, below it, and on all sides of it.

A full analysis of this shot was done by Simon Shack, the creator of the amazing September Clues series:

Pavel Hlava

This video surfaced days before the second anniversary of 9/11. Once again, it's an unidentified blob. Note the trippy colored sky. He was allegedly sending home a video postcard. Why would he have the color so messed up if that's what he was trying to do? Seems more like a cruddy fake. Note that the reflection from the car ahead of Hlava shows that the shot was from a fire truck, not an SUV as the official story states..

Further analysis here:

Wolfgang Staehle

The last and poorest fake was done by 'video artist' Wolfgang Staehle. It is three stills:


Note the cartoonish background, the fact that Flight 11 is an unidentifiable blob (again) and looks kind of like a flying saucer, and the fact that the shot was made from the exact same location in the 475 Kent bulding where the TinaCart1 and Robert Clark videos were shot.

Now, before we move on, check out this eyewitness who states that there is no plane debris on the ground after the hit:


Yes, there is hardly any videos of Flight 11 hitting the North Tower, and what we do have appears to be fake. Flight 175, however, was the main PSYOP of the whole operation. It was covered from every angle, and the perpetrators used fake live television shots, 'amateur' video, and mock 'eyewitness interviews'/staged telephone calls.

TV Shots

WABC7(aka 'The International Shot')

Note that the plane image is a black blob. Note that it goes flies behind the building, and then an explosion takes place. Note that the plane image skips across the screen. Note that 17 seconds before the impact, we hear 'be-beep' and just after we hear a snap (Was this an audio cue for the perpetrators in the newsroooms?). There is also a huge problem: Don Dahler is supposedly on-site, yet his microphone picks up no plane sound or impact sound.

NOTE: Shortly after Paul Smith, the pilot of NewsCopter7, which made this shot, started talking to 9/11 researcher Jeff "Shure" Hill from Canada, he died in a strange taxi crash. The taxi driver, Mohammed Chowdury, claims that he was cut off by a 'black car'. [ (10/09/07)]


The eyewitness on the phone, Theresa Renaud, is the wife of an NBC producer. She says that she didn't see what caused the explosion at the WTC, but after the second explosion she suddenly states that she saw 'another plane'. Note how blue the background is in the first angle and how dark and brown the sky is in the second angle. NY never looks like that with any top notch news camera. Also note that in the first angle, we can see the plane image diving downwards toward the building, which completely contradicts the Brooklyn Bridge shot, which shows a straight, level approach. Note that they switch the angle closer to the WTC right before the impact.


Note that the supposed plane image is an unidentified, tiny blob that dives diagonally contradicting flight paths in other videos. Note that it cuts to another angle like the CBS Live shot just before the impact. Note the background is abnormal and is not of NY on a nice day with a top notch camera.

WNYW Fox 5 Shot ... 5-chopper/

Note that the reporter says 'Our chopper now, arriving at the scene" when it is not at the scene, but miles away. Note that the plane should be visible in the wide shot, but it isn't (Proven here: Note that the camera zooms in three times before the plane image enters the screen (Sheer luck??) and that it comes in right after the final zoom-in. Note that the background is yellow. Note that the nose of the plane image exits the building, which is a sign of the virtual image exiting the building caused by the helicopter drifting to the left and knocking the reference line further, which dictates where the explosion should start and where the plane image should stop.. the reference line being knocked further causes the CGI plane to begin to exit the building (Though it is covered up by the explosion). Note that right after the impact, just while the nose image is exiting the building, they cut the feed.. we can hear a sound in the background (a button being pressed?) while the screen cuts to black for 15 frames, and then returns (Was this to cover up the 'nose out' animation glitch?). This footage has been deleted from the WNYW archives and the FOX archives has a different shot in it's place with the same audio track. This shot has never been replayed on any commemorative DVD or TV presentation of 9/11.


Note that the plane image is traveling diagonally instead of a straight line, and the background is brown.


There is no plane in this shot and the small trail that is hardly visible is moving in a flight path that contradicts every other flight path we've seen in the other videos. It's now been edited in the archives to show a bigger but still tiny 'ball' heading diagonally towards the WTC. The background is abnormally


There is no plane in this shot and the reporter first interprets the alleged crash as an explosion in the building.


Plane is a dark, strange shape moving across the screen in a straight line, contradicting shots showing it moving down diagonally. This appears to be the same shot that Devin Clark took.

Devin Clark

Note that Devin Clark is video art major who works for the media. He has worked for Comedy Central, which is owned by Viacom, the company that owns CBS. Note the blue background. Note that the plane is a black sillouhette. Note that it tilts up just before impact. In other videos, such as the famous Hezarkhani shot, it's tilted down. Note that in the collapse video, suddenly a high speed scroll takes place. Note that the smoke shifts 15 seconds into the video. Note that you can hear witnesses in the room, but you can't hear the explosion. Note that only one bird is seen flying throughout the whole video. Note that a black helicopter is visible hovering above the North Tower as it disintegrates. Note that this shot is exactly like the CNN shot, but a building has moved (???), everything else is the same.

"Devin Clark is a large and powerful MANimator! His work is offensive, only in that his ideas are so revolutionary that upon exposure they cause most people's minds to explode...or at the very least lower their I.Q. 20 points. When he is not promoting false knowledge he draws horrible pictures to frighten small children. His masterpieces are smeared all over the television. Comedy Central, MTV, TCM and HBO have all been cursed with his magic. He will draw things. He will make them move. He will curl up in the corner and cry like a baby elk. Be it comics, film, illustration or animation Devin Clark has a passion for telling stories, and the stranger the better. Devin has been involved with a broad range of projects including work for HBO, MTV, Comedy Central, TCM, and The Cartoon Network applying his design and narrative skills to everything from network graphics to traditional cartoons. His films and animation have been featured in Stash Magazine, Animation Block Party, Rooftop Films, Ottawa Film Festival, Platform, and BDA. He is presently running his own animation shop in Brooklyn where he just completed the first season of his animated web-series, 5ON, for Comedy Central.
CONTACT - p 917.763.7046 -"

"Devin Clark Fails Lie Detector Test!"


Note that the flight path is a diagonal dive, contradicting the straight flight path videos. Note that the woman screaming in the video is the same woman that is heard screaming in the TinaCart1 video, but it's from a completely different location!

CBS 11

Note that the plane is moving diagonally down, but the explosion is higher than the flight path, indicating that it had to have 'pulled up' very significantly'. This flight path contradicts every other video.

Techmac Inc

Note that the plane is missing a wing and it's left vertical stabilizer. It's also missing a tail. This is a poor fake. Note that frames are cut and it cuts to the explosion fast.

Luis Alonso

Note that the plane appears to be tilted up, while other videos show it tilted down. Note that it turns black once it is visible again after flying behind a building. Note that the tail becomes invisible after it turns black.

Ronald Pordy

Note that the plane turns black. Could this simply be caused by shadows? No, it goes too dark black. United Airlines planes are blue, red, and gray. They are not black or white.

Fox 5

Note that the video suddenly speeds up at the end. Note how dark everything is.

History Channel

Note the incredibly blue background.

Jersey Park

Many believe that this shot was taken by the dancing Israelis, who were 'documenting the event' in Jersey Park. Officially, it's origin is unknown. Note that the 'plane' is just a line.


Note that it is flying nose-down, contradicting most of the other videos' flight paths.

Park Foreman

Despite the fact that Foreman was an amateur and is filming an object speeding through the air at 530 mph, they are still holding the camera steady, following the plane. Note that the plane turns black while in flight.

Naka Nathaniel

Note that this shot is the same as the Park Foreman shot. Note that this video was shot by Naka Nathaniel, a multimedia journalist for the New York Times.


Note that the plane is a black sillouhette. Note that the smoke makes an unnatural, square shape after the initial explosion. Note that the lines on the Towers are amazingly bright. Note that a mysterious 'bang' happens immediately after impact despite the fact that the sound would reach them 11 seconds later.

Brian Gately ... +wtc+plane

A huge, completely blurred, unidentifiable blob hits the South Tower.

Brooklyn Bridge

Note that the plane travels in a perfectly straight line, contradicting other flight paths.

Bowling For Columbine

Note that the camera zooms out a split second before the plane comes into view.

Earth Station

Note that the video is hazy and gray.


Note the huge zoom out just before the 'crash'.

Scott Myers

Note that Scott Myers is a 3D specialist with links to the mainstream media and the military. Note that the approach sound does not sound like a 767 approach. Note that the impact sound sounds like a car bump, not a plane crash. The impact sound is completely ludicrous. Just listen to it.

BBC World

Unidentifiable blur proves nothing.

Wingless object passes through a gap and allegedly hits the WTC. There is no impact sound. Strid somehow identifies the black bob as a United Airlines plane. How is it possile for someone to identify an airplane flying in the air at 530 mph and hits a building, and when they can only see it in a gap for less than a second? Note that he zooms in right before impact.

Clifton Cloud

It's just an unidentified black ball.

Michael Hezarkhani


Note how it slices into the building like a knife going through butter, which is impossible. Note how the camera zooms out, tilts up and moves to the right just before the plane enters view.

Note that we can hear Hezarkhani say "Oh my God! A plane just crashed into the building. I cannot believe it!" in this video:

..But in other versions of the same video, that isn't heard:

Also note how dark one of the wings is. Note also that the 'pod' that 911: In Plane Site and LetsRoll are getting all worked up about is not a missile under the plane, but it is actually a bulge that 'grows' onto the plane after it is in front of the buildings. In other words, it's evidence of sloppy animation by the perps.


Filmer of accused fake WTC crash video won't disclose shot location ... -wont.html

Note that shots of battery park prior to 9/11 prove that the trees should have blocked the shot, but are shortened down in the Hezarkhani video:



Impossible Penetration. Also, there should be more screaming in the crowd..


Note the impossible penetration. Note the fact that you can hear helicopters and sirens but can't hear the plane approach. Note that the explosion happens right away, even though the filmer is miles away.

Evan Fairbanks

Note the impossible penetration. Note that Fairbanks tells us in other reports that the FBI took his footage. He says that the jet was 'like a bad special effect'.

Further analysis here:

Spiegel TV

Note the impossible penetration.

Jennifer Spell

The camera zooms in just before the crash. Note the impossible penetration.

Gamma Press

The camera zooms out just before the plane comes in (to catch the plane). Note the partially missing right wing. Note that a part the plane exits, yet theres a close up photo that shows no exit hole:



Note that the wing disappears when the plane gets close to the Towers. Note that part of the plane is exiting, even though a later photo shows no exit hole. Note the unbelievably fast, phony birds 40 seconds into the video.

Naudet Brothers

Note the missing right wingtip. Note the guy whos creams "Let's go, move it!" just before impact. Note the three big frame cuts.

Pavel Hlava

Note the partially missing right wing.

Luc Courchesene

Note the weird colors. Note the missing right wing. Note the missile-like approach sound (This is NOT a 767 approach). Note the impossible penetration.


(Thanks to Killtown for video list.)

The Plane Attack Was A Hoax..

Watch "September Clues" Parts 1-9 (& the Epilogue)!

Watch "911 Amateur" Parts 1-3!

Friday, August 13, 2010

Gianfranco Sanguinetti FULL TEXT of "Save Capitalism"

Gianfranco Sanguinetti (centre)

Veritable Report on the Last Chances to Save Capitalism in Italy

by "Censor" (Gianfranco Sanguinetti  wikipedia)

INTRODUCTION (with many good links!)

Here now the FULL TEXT (in english translation!) of the AMAZING HOAX letter that fooled the elites into admitting False-Flag Terror (CIA/Mafia/deep state, see bottom).

Translator's foreword

Table of contents
Preface   Italian Preface ... french preface ...  Discourses on the next chances of ruining capitalism in Italy (Rememdy)
I. Why capitalism must be democratic and the grandeur it attains in being so
II. How capitalism has been badly managed in Italy, and why (1943-1967)
III. In which social war begins again and why nothing is more fatal than prematurely declaring victory (1968-1969)
IV. Why it is never good to only defend oneself, because victory belongs to those on the offensive
V. What the world-wide crisis is, and the different ways in which it manifests itself
VI. Who the communists effectively are, and what one must do
VII. Exhortation to deliver capitalism from its irrationalities and to save it
Sanguinetti was vindicated in 1982, when the so-called P2 scandal brought to light documents that irrefutably proved that the Italian government had indeed been employing "the strategy of tension" since the end of the 1960s and through-out the 1970s.

Proofs of the Nonexistence of Censor by his Author
Press clippings concerning Censor
Declaration of Editions Champ Libre

LETTER from Guy Debord To Gianfranco Sanguinetti

Dedication to the bad workers of Italy and other countries

More false flag terror: London .. NYC ... Turkey ..  SriLanka ... Germany ... Pakistan ... Irak ... Indonesia ... 

Deconstructive DEBORD "artificial terrorism." 9/11 MUST READ  (tongue in cheek 9/11 references!)

"la emancipation de los trabjadores sera la obra de ellos mismos" marx

Monday, August 09, 2010

SAUDI US ISRAEL attack iran (Nagasaki)

This today, on the anniversary of a nuclear atrocity by USA on a japanese city of civilians.

Mass murderers must be stopped. 
The US Corporate Pentagon machine needs to be dismantled.

US' military option against Iran may have moved up from the bottom of the list

09:35 GMT, August 9, 2010 Over the course of July 2010, a few voices in the United States called for a reassessment of a military option against Iran. Some of these figures refused to identify themselves by name, suggesting that they are part of the security or political establishment. Some former senior officials, however, did identify themselves by name. Most notable among them was the former head of the CIA, General Michael Hayden, who explicitly stated in an interview with CNN that an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities is not the United States' worst option. Hayden noted that when he served as the head of the CIA (until February 2009), the military option was at the bottom of the list, but it now seems more likely since all the steps by the United States have proven insufficient to stop Iran from continuing on its path towards a nuclear weapons capability. Hayden's remarks echoed former senators Daniel Coats and Charles Robb and General Charles Wald, former deputy commander of the United States European Command, who as early as September 2009 published a joint article that called for a strong approach towards Iran: if talks with Iran fail, it is incumbent upon the United States to abandon negotiations, prepare for military action in the Gulf area, consider the option of imposing a blockade on Iran, and as a last resort, consider a military strike on Iran, the inherent dangers notwithstanding.

The US administration does not share this position, repeating that while all options, including the military option, are on the table, attacking Iran is a poor choice, dangerous, and therefore not desirable in light of the current circumstances. Between the lines, though, it appears that a certain change is emerging in the American security establishment or among certain elements within it regarding the military option. The change in tone was reflected in part in a recent interview by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen. Despite his recurring reservations about military measures, Mullen cast the military options as "an important option," and stated that if the administration reached a moment of decision and the need for a plan for military action arises, one is already in place.

The confirmation of the existence of military plans, even if no surprise, meshes well with April 2010 statements by administration officials that the American security establishment is engaged in the preparation of military alternatives, which will be presented to the president in the event that diplomacy and sanctions do not prove effective. An Israeli source also said recently that the United States did not have a military option a year ago but currently the Americans are exhibiting a serious approach to plans for a military procedure, which has now become a viable option. American defense sources confirmed that US Central Command, which is responsible for most of the Middle East, is progressing significantly in planning the targets of an air strike in Iran.

The change of tone occurring within and outside the administration regarding the military option stems primarily from the growing skepticism concerning the effectiveness of the sanctions, including the most recent round that has been imposed upon Iran. The sentiment among the various parties in the United States is that at the end of the day, sanctions alone will not stop Iran's quest for nuclear weapons, due to the fact that it would prove difficult to attain international cooperation broad enough to implement and enforce them, as well as the fact that Iran will be determined to continue its nuclear activity despite the sanctions. CIA director Leon Panetta expressed this skepticism in a recent statement that sanctions will apparently not deter Iran from its quest to attain nuclear weapons.

Other voices are joining these outspoken ones from the United States. Moderate Arab states, especially the Gulf states, are revealing increasing concern regarding Iran's progress toward nuclear weapons and the United States' failure to impede it. Reports are that the Saudis raised the issue of a military move in Iran during talks with the US administration, making it clear that they cannot live with the prospect of a nuclear Iran. The United Arab Emirates ambassador in Washington was even reported saying that the risk of a nuclear Iran is far more serious than the risk that would be created following a military action against Iran.

Do these sentiments reflect a change in the American administration's stance regarding the military option? As far as one can tell, not yet. The administration still stresses the extreme risks that it believes are entailed by a military option, and this assessment has not changed. It is obvious that as long as the administration believes that political moves, including the most recent round of sanctions, have not yet been exhausted, it will not tap a military option. Since evaluating the effectiveness of the new sanctions will require time, perhaps even a considerable amount of time, this basically means that at least in the course of the coming months, the administration will not actively consider the military option and will express the hope that Israel will not take independent military action.

But the voices expressed in the United States, including by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are significant. Even if the administration continues to disapprove of military measures at this juncture, the administration and other elements in Washington apparently feel the need to draw attention to a military option in order to attain a number of critical objectives. One is to beef up the pressure of the sanctions on Iran with a vague threat of military action if Iran chooses to be uncooperative. Iran's renewed threats of military retaliation in response to an attack indicate that Iran has taken the American threats seriously. The second objective is to increase the pressure on other governments, specifically Russia and China, to cooperate with the implementation of the sanctions, with the implicit message that if they do not achieve the desired results, the administration will have no choice but to resort to military action. The third objective is to begin setting the stage for military action, both in the international and the domestic US arena, in the event that diplomatic measures fail and the need for military action arises.

It is still too early to tell if these talks about a military option signal some sort of a change in the administration's position. The widening public debate in the United States on this issue suggests that as the technological timetable of the Iranian nuclear plan gets progressively shorter with no successful diplomatic solution to stop it, the American administration – along with the Israeli government – will be stuck between a rock and a hard place: they must choose between taking military action to stop Iran and sitting back while Iran continues its program of uranium enrichment and, further down the road, accept the reality of a nuclear capable Iran. Out of this conundrum, the impression from various reports is that even if the scales are definitely tipped against military action, it has now earned more weight than in the past. Indeed, the fact that General Hayden, until recently a leading professional figure in US security establishment and intelligence community, explicitly took the side of military option is important to the public debate.

By Ephraim Kam, Institute for National Security Studies
INSS Insight No. 197

Sunday, August 08, 2010

Mega Rich steal from the Poor

The world's wealthiest speculators set up a casino where the chips were the stomachs of hundreds of millions of innocent people. They gambled on increasing starvation, and won. Their Wasteland moment created a real wasteland. What does it say about our political and economic system that we can so casually inflict so much pain?

Johann Hari: How Goldman gambled on starvation

Speculators set up a casino where the chips were the stomachs of millions. What does it say about our system that we can so casually inflict so much pain?

Friday, 2 July 2010

By now, you probably think your opinion of Goldman Sachs and its swarm of Wall Street allies has rock-bottomed at raw loathing. You're wrong. There's more. It turns out that the most destructive of all their recent acts has barely been discussed at all. Here's the rest. This is the story of how some of the richest people in the world . Goldman, Deutsche Bank, the traders at Merrill Lynch, and more . have caused the starvation of some of the poorest people in the world.

It starts with an apparent mystery. At the end of 2006, food prices across the world started to rise, suddenly and stratospherically. Within a year, the price of wheat had shot up by 80 per cent, maize by 90 per cent, rice by 320 per cent. In a global jolt of hunger, 200 million people . mostly children . couldn't afford to get food any more, and sank into malnutrition or starvation. There were riots in more than 30 countries, and at least one government was violently overthrown. Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level. Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, calls it "a silent mass murder", entirely due to "man-made actions."

Earlier this year I was in Ethiopia, one of the worst-hit countries, and people there remember the food crisis as if they had been struck by a tsunami. "My children stopped growing," a woman my age called Abiba Getaneh, told me. "I felt like battery acid had been poured into my stomach as I starved. I took my two daughters out of school and got into debt. If it had gone on much longer, I think my baby would have died."

Most of the explanations we were given at the time have turned out to be false. It didn't happen because supply fell: the International Grain Council says global production of wheat actually increased during that period, for example. It isn't because demand grew either: as Professor Jayati Ghosh of the Centre for Economic Studies in New Delhi has shown, demand actually fell by 3 per cent. Other factors . like the rise of biofuels, and the spike in the oil price . made a contribution, but they aren't enough on their own to explain such a violent shift.

To understand the biggest cause, you have to plough through some concepts that will make your head ache . but not half as much as they made the poor world's stomachs ache.

For over a century, farmers in wealthy countries have been able to engage in a process where they protect themselves against risk. Farmer Giles can agree in January to sell his crop to a trader in August at a fixed price. If he has a great summer, he'll lose some cash, but if there's a lousy summer or the global price collapses, he'll do well from the deal. When this process was tightly regulated and only companies with a direct interest in the field could get involved, it worked.

Then, through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into "derivatives" that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in "food speculation" was born.

So Farmer Giles still agrees to sell his crop in advance to a trader for £10,000. But now, that contract can be sold on to speculators, who treat the contract itself as an object of potential wealth. Goldman Sachs can buy it and sell it on for £20,000 to Deutsche Bank, who sell it on for £30,000 to Merrill Lynch . and on and on until it seems to bear almost no relationship to Farmer Giles's crop at all.

If this seems mystifying, it is. John Lanchester, in his superb guide to the world of finance, Whoops! Why Everybody Owes Everyone and No One Can Pay, explains: "Finance, like other forms of human behaviour, underwent a change in the 20th century, a shift equivalent to the emergence of modernism in the arts . a break with common sense, a turn towards self-referentiality and abstraction and notions that couldn't be explained in workaday English." Poetry found its break with realism when T S Eliot wrote "The Wasteland". Finance found its Wasteland moment in the 1970s, when it began to be dominated by complex financial instruments that even the people selling them didn't fully understand.

So what has this got to do with the bread on Abiba's plate? Until deregulation, the price for food was set by the forces of supply and demand for food itself. (This was already deeply imperfect: it left a billion people hungry.) But after deregulation, it was no longer just a market in food. It became, at the same time, a market in food contracts based on theoretical future crops . and the speculators drove the price through the roof.

Here's how it happened. In 2006, financial speculators like Goldmans pulled out of the collapsing US real estate market. They reckoned food prices would stay steady or rise while the rest of the economy tanked, so they switched their funds there. Suddenly, the world's frightened investors stampeded on to this ground.

So while the supply and demand of food stayed pretty much the same, the supply and demand for derivatives based on food massively rose . which meant the all-rolled-into-one price shot up, and the starvation began. The bubble only burst in March 2008 when the situation got so bad in the US that the speculators had to slash their spending to cover their losses back home.

When I asked Merrill Lynch's spokesman to comment on the charge of causing mass hunger, he said: "Huh. I didn't know about that." He later emailed to say: "I am going to decline comment." Deutsche Bank also refused to comment. Goldman Sachs were more detailed, saying they sold their index in early 2007 and pointing out that "serious analyses ... have concluded index funds did not cause a bubble in commodity futures prices", offering as evidence a statement by the OECD.

How do we know this is wrong? As Professor Ghosh points out, some vital crops are not traded on the futures markets, including millet, cassava, and potatoes. Their price rose a little during this period . but only a fraction as much as the ones affected by speculation. Her research shows that speculation was "the main cause" of the rise.

So it has come to this. The world's wealthiest speculators set up a casino where the chips were the stomachs of hundreds of millions of innocent people. They gambled on increasing starvation, and won. Their Wasteland moment created a real wasteland. What does it say about our political and economic system that we can so casually inflict so much pain?

If we don't re-regulate, it is only a matter of time before this all happens again. How many people would it kill next time? The moves to restore the pre-1990s rules on commodities trading have been stunningly sluggish. In the US, the House has passed some regulation, but there are fears that the Senate . drenched in speculator-donations . may dilute it into meaninglessness. The EU is lagging far behind even this, while in Britain, where most of this "trade" takes place, advocacy groups are worried that David Cameron's government will block reform entirely to please his own friends and donors in the City.

Only one force can stop another speculation-starvation-bubble. The decent people in developed countries need to shout louder than the lobbyists from Goldman Sachs. The World Development Movement is launching a week of pressure this summer as crucial decisions on this are taken: text WDM to 82055 to find out what you can do.

The last time I spoke to her, Abiba said: "We can't go through that another time. Please . make sure they never, never do that to us again."

USA War like French Resistance - Racist Chomsky

Red Eye

by Greg Gutfeld

Wednesday, August 04, 2010

So, you know what's been keeping me up at night? My vertical sleeping bag. But also, WikiLeaks . the lefty outfit that leaked nearly a hundred thousand secret U.S. military documents.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates says WikiLeaks is "morally" guilty for putting lives in danger by exposing Afghan contacts, our intelligence methods and screwing with our allies.

Last week I suggested that WikiLeaks head Julian Assange did this to harm America since the a-holes who want to kill us benefit most from his actions. Also, it made him famous. Maybe he can finally afford conditioner.

And this leads me to this question: What if, back in 1943, an organization leaked the names of the members of the French Resistance? They would be seen as evil and the good guys would take care of them.

So I have to wonder: Why is Assange allowed to wander? Where's the call for action on this from the hate the war/love the troops left now that the troops and cooperating friendlies in Afghanistan have been revealed?

I hear crickets. Crickets in patchouli.

But here's the biggest joke: Adrian Lamo, the hacker who tipped off the feds to WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning, claims that two men helped Manning. When asked by CNN about this allegation, WikiLeaks said, "As a matter of policy, we do not discuss any matters to do with allegations relating to the identity of sources."

So transparency is totally important... until it exposes you. In the end, the only identities important enough to protect, in WikiLeak's opinion, are their own. As for lives truly at risk . our troops . no biggie.

And if you disagree with me, you're a racist homophobe who never read Chomsky.

Greg Gutfeld hosts "Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld" weekdays at 3 a.m. ET. Send your comments to: