Oscar Nominated Palestinian invited to Academy Awards

VIDEO: Oscar Nominated Palestinian invited to Academy Awards BUT Detained at Airport Then Released

5 Broken Cameras

5 Broken Cameras 

VIDEO: Oscar Nominated Palestinian invited to Academy Awards BUT Detained at Airport Then Released

Ask John to ask REAL QUESTIONS of Obama!

Ask John to ask REAL QUESTIONS of Obama!

Torture & Drones

Torture & Drones, Brennan’s Record has only Gotten Worse!

Iraq War Vet Kills "American Sniper"

Iraq War Vet Kills "American Sniper," Media Asks Motive
Shot Dead at Gun Range, American Sniper author Chris Kyle was reportedly murdered by Iraq War veteran suffering PTSD.

Proof That Will Send Bush to Prison

Proof That Will Send Him to Prison: Bush's Lie Exposed 

Terribly Corrosive Force on our World

WARNING: Across U.S. mainstream media they act as if international law does not exist

 Look how across U.S. mainstream media they act as if international law does not exist as far as restraining U.S. power. I really would like you to call the people who write for the NYT, like ISABEL KERSHNER and ask her why she writes articles with a world view that international law does not exist.

Major media are undermining our chance to have a civilized world, it is a terribly corrosive force to have media outlets write their articles from the viewpoint that there is no international law when it comes to U.S. or Israeli actions.

Look at "Israeli Official Hints Pentagon Plans May Make Lone Strike on Iran Unnecessary" Published: January 26, 2013 Notice how she puts the article together, She finds Herbert Krosney, an American-Israeli analyst to say "Mr. Barak’s statement now “indicates that there is close cooperation”" Yet she can't find an expert in international law to comment on Barak’s statement? She doesn't want readers to know that what they are discussing is a war crime?

Please contact people at the NYT and ask them why they continually do this.

Do you think what Lee Hamilton did was OK?

Do you think what Lee Hamilton did was OK?

The Real 9/11 Conspiracy

The Real 9/11 Conspiracy: Traitorous 9/11 Commissioners Served Israel Agenda

9/11 was to punish U.S. for Israel policy

NEW VIDEO: 9/11 was to punish U.S. for Israel policy: Philip Zelikow 9/11 Commission Exec. Dir.

9/11 hearings

Text for upcoming video:

Although this testimony was heard in the 9/11 hearings, when it came time for the commissioners to fulfill their mandate, they intentionally rejected doing so because several references to Israel were omitted from the final 9/11 Report.

Incredibly, the two top 9/11 commissioners, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, admit commissioners' concerns over whether the policy of supporting Israel would be reassessed by the American people influenced what they put in the 9/11 report and what they kept out.


The 9/11 commission betrayed the interests of the American people when they put the final 9/11 Report together because they downplayed the main motive (anger at U.S. support of Israel's crimes) and omitted several references to key testimony mentioning Israel.

9/11 was to punish U.S. for Israel policy: Philip Zelikow 9/11 Commission Exec. Dir.

Wireless Torture Device Control Factor Guns Mental Illness COINTELPRO

Wireless Torture Device Control Factor Guns Mental Illness COINTELPRO Christina's World by Andrew Wyeth

  The movie Control Factor

Christina's World by Andrew Wyeth

"Christina's World is a 1948 painting by American painter Andrew Wyeth, and one of the best-known American paintings of the middle 20th century." "The woman in the painting is Christina Olson (3 May 1893–27 January 1968). She is known to have suffered from polio ... The house depicted in the painting is known as the Olson House, and is located in Cushing, Maine. It is open to the public, operated by the Farnsworth Art Museum; it is a National Historic Landmark." - Christina's World
Wireless Torture Device Control Factor Guns Mental Illness COINTELPRO

See What General Petraeus Said

See What General Petraeus Said about Neocons Frederick & Kimberly Kagan

Abuse of Power: 9/11, War and the Neocons

Abuse of Power: 9/11, War and the Neocons

Israel suspected of being behind AP's dangerous Iran hoax

The news now is that Israel is the one suspected of fabricating intel in order to create an excuse to go after Iran:

•  Israel suspected over Iran nuclear program inquiry leaks, "Western officials believe Israel may have leaked information from IAEA investigation in bid to raise global pressure on Tehran"
•  AP's dangerous Iran hoax demands an accounting and explanation "Evidence proves that the graph trumpeted by AP as evidence of Iran's nuclear weapons program is an obvious sham" 

 The top article linked above indicates that is was Israel which perpetrated the fraud in order to frame Iran. The hoax was "published by the Associated Press (AP), purported to be an Iranian diagram showing the physics of a nuclear blast, but scientists quickly pointed out an elementary mistake that cast doubt on its significance and authenticity. An article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists declared: "This diagram does nothing more than indicate either slipshod analysis or an amateurish hoax.""

"Western officials say they have reasons to suspect Israel of being behind the most recent leak and a series of previous disclosures from the IAEA investigation, pointing to Israel's impatience at what it sees as international complacency over Iranian nuclear activity."

Keep in mind that there is no evidence Iran has diverted any material from its civilian nuclear power program , a program U.S. media often misrepresent or blur the line with misleading reports which make it seem that a nuclear weapons program is being discussed.

There's something extremely wrong going

There's something extremely wrong going on in our country. Jeffrey Goldberg should not be given the platform he is given, especially since he abuses it to deviously protect the racist Zionist agenda and does so ruthlessly. He had the audacity to reply to a woman asking why the terrorists were so angry that they took lessons to fly planes to attack us on 9/11 with BS about anger at "whispering temptation to consume alcohol." The man very clearly has crossed the line and should be fired, he should no longer have a public platform.

See depraved denial of the main motive for the 9/11 attacks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7EB1FxENxQ

The above is my reply to an article called "Jeffrey Goldberg, WMD Expert?"

Defamation (2009) Film by Yoav Shamir

Defamation (2009) Film by Yoav Shamir featuring Abraham Foxman. Highly recommended.

I posted this reply about "anti-Americanism"

Glenn Greenwald has another good article which is called The PSY scandal: singing about killing people v. constantly doing it "Americans would benefit from less outrage at anti-US sentiment and more energy toward understanding why it's so widespread"

 ZeetheGree posted this comment to his article:
ZeetheGree

08 December 2012 1:04 PMLink to this comment

Recommend

17

Shortly after it happened, there were people in Brazil celebrating Al-Qaeda's attack on the twin towers.

Al-Qaeda of course being an organisation dedicated to conquering societies by violence.

It's pointless complaining that America is using military force in countries disingenuously referred to as Muslim: when the American force is being deployed against extremists whose ambition is to force millions of Muslims to live in a theocratic repression regime.

Anti-Americanism is real. And the problem with it is that it's also anti-intellectually honest. Regardless of the 'bad things' America has done historically.

Here are my replies:

RepresentativePress

08 December 2012 1:19 PMLink to this comment

Recommend

10

ZeetheGree, you miss the whole point and the motives of Al-Qaeda. They get their support not for what they supposedly may want to establish in the future, they get their support for what they are against.

I totally understand your confusion because just yesterday CNN's Christiane Amanpour once again suppressed motives. In her recent report she reported on the underwear bomber, conspicuously absent was reporting motive: "attack the United States in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel and in retaliation of the killing of innocent and civilian Muslim populations in Palestine, especially in the blockade of Gaza, and in retaliation for the killing of innocent and civilian Muslim populations in Yemen, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and beyond, most of them women, children, and noncombatants."

And the suppression of motive across mainstream media AND alternative media (for example Amy Goodman's Democracy Now also suppressed “underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's motive.) clearly has an impact on the opinions people hold about this life and death issue.

RepresentativePress

08 December 2012 1:41 PMLink to this comment

Recommend

7

I meant to reply directly to you, hope you see my comment (I don't want to be accused of spamming so I won't report it here. I'll just respond to another part of your comment which is "Anti-Americanism is real"

And defining that is important. Would you call Nat Turner's 1831 slave rebellion an expression of "anti-Americanism." The point is, what is dishonest is the lie that people are attacking the U.S. just for being (as opposed to the actions of killing innocent people, for example the aiding and abetting of Israel's crimes.)

Again, as I said in my other comment, I really can see how you could be confused because there has been a massive underreporting of the motives. Look at the mastermind of the 1993 attack on the WTC, sent a letter to the NYT declaring, ‪"This action was done in response for the American political, economical, and military support to Israel the state of terrorism and to the rest of the dictator countries in the region.
OUR DEMANDS ARE:‬ 
‪1 - Stop all military, economical, and‬ ‪political aid to Israel.‬ ‪
2 - All diplomatic relations with Israel‬ ‪must stop.
‬ ‪3 - Not to interfere with any of the‬ ‪Middle East countries interior affairs." ‬
Yet after that‪,‬ ‪NYT Foreign affairs columnist‬ Thomas Friedman ‪denied that there are specific demands in his NYT opinion piece: "The super-empowered angry men have no specific ideological program or demands. Rather, they are driven by a generalized hatred of the U.S., Israel and other supposed enemies of Islam. Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the World Trade Center bombing, was a super-empowered angry man. Osama bin Laden is another."‬(written after '93 attack but before 9/11)

Neoconservative deviousness put us at risk and paved the way for 9/11

We need to so something about this, the neoconservative leaders cannot be allowed to get away with what they did to us:

 "the Aug. 6 document... is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it. The direct warnings to Mr. Bush about the possibility of a Qaeda attack began in the spring of 2001. By May 1, the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible.

 But some in the administration considered the warning to be just bluster. An intelligence official and a member of the Bush administration both told me in interviews that the neoconservative leaders who had recently assumed power at the Pentagon were warning the White House that the C.I.A. had been fooled; according to this theory,  Bin Laden was merely pretending to be planning an attack to distract the administration from Saddam Hussein, whom the neoconservatives saw as a greater threat. Intelligence officials, these sources said, protested that the idea of Bin Laden, an Islamic fundamentalist, conspiring with Mr. Hussein, an Iraqi secularist, was ridiculous, but the neoconservatives’ suspicions were nevertheless carrying the day.

 In response, the C.I.A. prepared an analysis that all but pleaded with the White House to accept that the danger from Bin Laden was real. “The U.S. is not the target of a disinformation campaign by Usama Bin Laden,” the daily brief of June 29 read, using the government’s transliteration of Bin Laden’s first name. Going on for more than a page, the document recited much of the evidence, including an interview that month with a Middle Eastern journalist in which Bin Laden aides warned of a coming attack," OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR The Deafness Before the Storm By KURT EICHENWALD Published: September 10, 2012

You are not going to get these men to say, "Yeah, we sat back, ignored the warnings, so that when an attack happened we could use it as a pretext for our agenda to attack Iraq." BUT their excuses for why the President should ignore the warnings he was being given are so contrived and self-serving that it basically exposes what they were up to. This isn't over, people still have to pay for what they did to us. Remember that the Iraq War agenda is so devious that the very excuse President Bush gave for attacking Iraq is a flat out provable lie! (a lie that the media has deviously avoided pointing out) That lie specifically is the claim that Saddam didn't let the inspectors in.

Also see: http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2013/09/conspiracy-against-desire-and-duty-of.html for this: (and the agenda was so dirty that they STILL won't release all the PDBs Bush received before 9/11! Look for yourself) (STILL NOT MADE PUBLIC!) "That is, unless it was read in conjunction with the daily briefs preceding Aug. 6, the ones the Bush administration would not release. While those documents are still not public, I have read excerpts from many of them, along with other recently declassified records, and come to an inescapable conclusion: the administration’s reaction to what Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed." http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?_r=0