Friday, December 23, 2011

We have no indication that the Iranians have made a decision to develop a nuclear weapon

“George Little, the Pentagon press secretary, said Mr. Panetta’s comments should not be taken as a prediction that Iran would have a nuclear weapon within a year.

“The secretary was clear that we have no indication that the Iranians have made a decision to develop a nuclear weapon,” Mr. Little said. “He was asked to comment on prospective and aggressive timelines on Iran’s possible production of nuclear weapons — and he said if, and only if, they made such a decision. He didn’t say that Iran would, in fact, have a nuclear weapon in 2012.

Mr. Little said inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency remained in Iran and had good access to Iran’s continuing production of low-enriched uranium.Should Iran choose to “break out” — diverting low-enriched uranium to produce weapons-grade highly enriched uranium — the inspectors could detect it, Mr. Little said.

“We would retain sufficient time under any such scenario to take appropriate action,” he said.” - Aides Qualify Panetta’s Comments on Iran By Published: December 20, 2011

These people need to be reminded that “appropriate action” means ONLY legal actions and that those engaged in war crimes will be held accountable.

We have no indication that the Iranians have made a decision to develop a nuclear weapon

These people need to be reminded that “appropriate action” means ONLY legal actions and that those engaged in war crimes will be held accountable.

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Iraq War Lie
Romney & Wallace Push Iraq War Lie on the PublicRomney & Wallace Push Iraq War Lie on the Public
Saddam let inspectors in BUT Romney continues to lie. AND he expects to be elected president!
☃Representative Press Store ❄
☺Representative Press Paypal account
★JOIN e-Mail list: ‪‬
See 2 Part video about UN inspectors
Pass it On ☞
Pass it On ☞
Actually, at the time we already knew the intelligence was incorrect because inspectors were checking out the claims made by U.S. intelligence -- BEFORE President Bush started the Iraq war -- and none of the intel turned out to be accurate. Romney has told this lie before. The truth is Saddam WAS letting the inspectors from the United Nations into the various places that they wanted to go. And the IAEA was NOT blocked from going into the palaces.

"Romney's suggestion that weapons inspectors were not permitted into Iraq before the war started is, of course, incorrect. Weapons inspectors from UNMOVIC (the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission) returned to Iraq on November 18, 2002. Led by Hans Blix, the inspectors spent months in Iraq, issuing reports on Iraqi compliance that were a crucial part of the debate over whether to invade Iraq."

Romney repeated the false claim that Hussein never allowed inspectors in, adding that "the IAEA was blocked from going into the palaces." However, in a March 2003 Wall Street Journal op-ed, the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog wrote: "In the past three months they have conducted over 200 inspections at more than 140 locations, entering without prior notice into Iraqi industrial facilities, munitions factories, military establishments, private residences, and presidential palaces, following up on inspection leads provided by other States"

Romney has told this lie before:
On War & Peace: FactCheck: Saddam didn't refuse UN inspectors prior to war
Romney tried to pin the blame for the Iraq war on Saddam Hussein's refusal to allow weapons inspections.
ROMNEY: If Saddam Hussein had opened up his country to IAEA inspectors, and they'd come in and they'd found that there were no WMDs, had Saddam Hussein, therefore, not violated UN resolutions, we wouldn't be in the conflict we're in. But he didn't do those things.
Romney is not alone in playing loose with the facts about weapons inspections. On at least 3 occasions in 2003, Pres. Bush has made the same claim. However, that the UN's IAEA was not permitted to make inspections might come as a bit of a surprise to Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the IAEA, who reported on March 17, 2003, that "late last night I was advised by the US government to pull out our inspectors from Baghdad." Inspectors had been in Iraq since November 2002. They remained until the UN Secretary-General ordered their evacuation on March 17, just three days before US and British troops invaded Iraq.
Source: on 2007 GOP debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007


Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Iran's nuclear power plant and public statements by Iranian leaders

Iran creates electricity in its nuclear power plant. Iran doesn’t have a nuclear weapon and says it doesn't want one, so claiming “Iran threatened to use a nuclear weapon” doesn't even make sense.

Iran’s leaders have publicly stated they don't want nuclear weapons and have explicitly said they have no intention of starting a war. For example, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, stated, “We have no problem with the world. We are not a threat whatsoever to the world, and the world knows it. We will never start a war. We have no intention of going to war with any state.” and President Ahmadinejad has said, “The Iranian nation is highly civilized and has a very rich culture and is not after oppressing any other nation, or launching an aggressive attack against anyone.” and “We have said numerous times and say it over and again: we have no atomic bomb, we want no atomic bomb and we need no atomic bomb.” BUT U.S. mass media has extremely UNDERREPORTED what they said to the point where hardly any American knows it.

Friday, November 18, 2011

Rare Exception to Media Blackout of NYPD's suppression of reporting on OWS eviction

#mediablackout #OWS Chris Glorioso's reporting was a rare exception to media blackout of NYPD's suppression of reporting on OWS eviction. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting's Peter Hart found a rare exception to the pattern of the media not reporting that the NYPD was suppressing the media's attempts to cover the Occupy Wall Street eviction. This example of good coverage of what the NYPD was doing to members of the press was in a local TV news segment by the New York NBC affiliate. Below is the report.

View more videos at:

Here is a link to the post by Peter Hart on the FAIR blog which alerted me to the above story: Crackdown on Journalists at Occupy Wall Street

Here is a link to the article "VIDEO: Media Pushed Back from Occupy Wall Street Raid which was posted along with the video at MBC New York's website.
"Several members of the media reported being blocked from covering the Occupy Wall Street raid overnight, with police pushing them back from the action and preventing reporting and photographing ... journalists were detained by police, including AP writer Karen Matthews, AP photographer Seth Wenig and Daily News reporter Matthew Lysiak, the AP said. ... journalists who identified themselves as working for the New York Post and New York Daily News were pushed back by police in riot gear, along with NBC New York's Chris Glorioso." "Using the hashtag #mediablackout, journalists tweeted throughout the raid about their dustups with police." (from article by By Jonathan Dienst and Shimon Prokupecz | Wednesday, Nov 16, 2011)


Monday, November 07, 2011

Israel vs. Israel

Israel vs. Israel
Israeli peace activists, like former soldier Yehuda Shaul, speak out about the wrongs of Israel's occupation of the West Bank. See what is happening in Hebron.
Israel vs. Israel movie on DVD

Israel vs. Israel movie on DVD

Israel vs. Israel movie on DVD

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Occupy Wall Street Declaration of Occupation @ #OWS General Assembly

See video and pass it on: Occupy Wall Street Declaration of Occupation @ #OWS General Assembly

✭ Help Pass this video on to others, give people this link

Occupy Wall Street Declaration of the Occupation of New York City Accepted by NYC General Assembly

Declaration of the Occupation of New York City
Posted on September 30, 2011 by NYCGA

As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.
Occupy Wall Street Declaration of the Occupation of New York City Accepted by NYC General Assembly

As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.
  • They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.
  • They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.
  • They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.
  • They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.
  • They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices.
  • They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.
  • They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.
  • They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.
  • They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.
  • They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.
  • They have sold our privacy as a commodity.
  • They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press. They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.
  • They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.
  • They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them.
  • They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.
  • They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantial profit.
  • They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.
  • They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.
  • They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.
  • They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad. They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.
  • They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts. *
To the people of the world,
We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.

Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.

To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and all of the resources at our disposal.
Join us and make your voices heard!
*These grievances are not all-inclusive.
Update 10/1/11 – Minor updates to some wording in the facts.

This entry was posted in News, Official General Assembly news, September 17th and tagged Declaration by NYCGA. Bookmark the permalink. Declaration of the Occupation of New York City | NYC General Assembly

Occupy Wall Street Declaration of the Occupation of New York City Accepted by NYC General Assembly

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Underwear Bomber was retaliating for U.S. support of Israel & killing of innocent Muslims

NEW VIDEO: Underwear Bomber was retaliating for U.S. support of Israel & killing of innocent Muslims

✭Send link to others:
Please Join ☞

“underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab transcript of statement on guilty plea to federal court

“underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab transcript of statement on guilty plea to federal court in Detroit:

“In the name of Allah, the most merciful, if I were to say I the father did not do it, but my son did it and he conspired with the holy spirit to do it, or if I said I did it but the American people are guilty of the sin, and Obama should pay for the crime, the Court wouldn't accept that from me or anyone else.

“In late 2009, in fulfillment of a religious obligation, I decided to participate in jihad against the United States. The Koran obliges every able Muslim to participate in jihad and fight in the way of Allah, those who fight you, and kill them wherever you find them, some parts of the Koran say, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

“I had an agreement with at least one person to 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.

“As a result, I traveled to Yemen and eventually to the United States, and I agreed with at least one person to carry an explosive device onto an aircraft and attempt to kill those onboard and wreck the aircraft as an act of jihad against the United States for the U.S. killing of my Muslim brothers and sisters around the world.

“I was greatly inspired to participate in jihad by the lectures of the great and rightly guided mujahedeen who is alive, Sheikh Anwar al-Awlaki, may Allah preserve him and his family and give them victory, Amin, and Allah knows best.

“Participation in jihad against the United States is considered among the most virtuous of deeds in Islam and is highly encouraged in the Koran; however, according to U.S. law, which is unjust and oppressive according to the Koran, my actions make me guilty of a crime in the United States, in particular, the following counts in my indictment.

Count 1, conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism transcending national boundaries, so by me traveling to Yemen, then to Djibouti, to Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria, the Netherlands, and eventually the United States, with an agreement with at least one person to carry an explosive device in an attempt to kill those onboard for the U.S. killing of innocent Muslims, I'm guilty in U.S. law of this count.

Count 2, possession of a firearm or destructive device in the furtherance of a crime of violence, I carried with me an explosive device onto Northwest 253, again, to avenge the killing of my innocent Muslim brothers and sisters by the U.S. So I am guilty in U.S. law of this count.

Count 3, attempted murder within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, again, in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel and Israel massacres of innocent Palestinians, so I am guilty of this count, too.

Count 4, use and carrying of a firearm, destructive device during and in relation to a crime of violence by carrying an explosive device and attempting to use it on Flight 253 for the U.S. killing of innocent Muslims, I am guilty of this count, too.

Count 5, willfully placing a destructive device in and upon, in proximity to a civil aircraft which was used and operated in interstate, overseas, and foreign air commerce which was likely to have endangered the safety of such aircraft, I intentionally carried an explosive device onto Flight 253, for the United States tyranny and oppression of Muslims, so I am guilty of this count in U.S. law, but not in the Koran.

Count 6, possession of a firearm/destructive device in furtherance of a crime of violence. I was in possession of an explosive device intended for use against the United States for U.S. interference in Muslim countries, so I am guilty in U.S. law of this count.

Count 7, attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction, I attempted to use an explosive device which in the U.S. law is a weapon of mass destruction, which I call a blessed weapon to save the lives of innocent Muslims, for U.S. use of weapons of mass destruction on Muslim populations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and beyond. So I am guilty in U.S. law of this count and innocent in Muslim law.

Count 8, willful attempt to destroy and wreck a civil aircraft, I intended to wreck a civil aircraft for the U.S. wreckage of Muslim lands and property, so I am guilty in U.S. law of this count.

“The United States -- the United States should be warned that if they continue and persist in promoting the blasphemy of Muhammad and the prophets, peace be upon them all, and the U.S. continues to kill and support those who kill innocent Muslims, then the U.S. should await a great calamity that will befall them through the hands of the mujahideen soon by God's willing permission. Or God will strike them directly with a great calamity soon by his will, Amin.

“If you laugh at us now, we will laugh at you later in this life and on the day of judgment by God's will, and our final call is all praise to Allah, the lord of the universe, Allahu Akbar.”

Source: U.S. District Court, Detroit

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

#occupywallstreet I was down there last night, wanted to print put could not find a copy place that was open.

#occupywallstreet I was down there at Zuccotti Park last night, I wanted to print out my Solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street protesters flyer but could not find a copy place that was open!

If anyone wants to help, you can click here for a link to a pdf of the flyer, you can download, print and distribute it. It saves paper because each page has three flyers so you can cut it in thirds to hand out to people:

Occupy Wall Street Declaration of the Occupation of New York City Accepted by NYC General Assembly

Thursday, October 06, 2011

#occupywallstreet Tax Stock Trades NOW! Tax Stock Trading!

#occupywallstreet Tax Stock Trades NOW! A Key Demand: Tax Stock Trading!
Read about it: A small tax on all financial-market transactions

Checks and balances that could help the people aren't automatically implemented. If a small group of powerful interests don't want you to know about something, it is possible (there's a pattern) they can get away with keeping you in the dark. The Tobin Tax is a good example.

“Tobin Tax has been scorned or ignored by the world’s key financial institutions — and thus by their political and academic minions. The commercial media have also disdained to report or comment on Tobin’s proposal. So much so that, when a major book, The Tobin Tax : Coping With Financial Volatility, was published last year by the prestigious Oxford University Press, it was boycotted by the media because (according to Noam Chomsky ) of pressure exerted by the big American financial institutions, as well as the Clinton administration.” Rodney Schmidt Tobin Tax

Nader makes a good case for it, pointing out that a transaction tax "would certainly raise enough to make the Wall Street crooks and gamblers pay for their own Washington bailout." Also, I support a tax on currency trades across borders. "Called the Tobin Tax after its originator, the late James Tobin, a Nobel laureate economist at Yale University, 10 to 25 cents per hundred dollars of the huge amounts of dollars traded each day across borders would produce from $100 to $300 billion per year."

Economist Robert Pollin explains, “A small tax on all financial-market transactions, comparable to a sales tax, would raise the costs on short-term speculative trading while having negligible effect on people who trade infrequently. It would thus discourage speculation and channel funds toward productive investment.” - Tax The Speculators

If anyone wants to help, you can click here for a link to a pdf of the flyer, you can download, print and distribute it. It saves paper because each page has three flyers so you can cut it in thirds to hand out to people:
Occupy Wall Street Declaration of the Occupation of New York City Accepted by NYC General Assembly

Friday, September 30, 2011

The Problem Was Not "Faulty Intelligence"

Throughout his interview with UNSCOM, a U.N. special commission,Hussein Kamel reiterated his main point - that nothing was left. "All chemical weapons were destroyed," he said. "I ordered destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons - biological, chemical, missile, nuclear - were destroyed."

Nevertheless, the administration continued to selectively use Kamel's disclosures to bolster its case that Iraq had hidden stockpiles of banned weapons.

Sunday, September 11, 2011

9/11/11 Video: 9/11 Motive & Media Betrayal

9/11 Motive & Media Betrayal See What Dan Rather would NOT READ on 9/11: ISRAEL, the MOTIVE, the WHY of the attacks Motive suppressed by the media! Anger at US support of Israel is something TV news reporters were clearly reluctant to report and that is outrageous because it was the main motivation for 9/11. See Dan Rather in action. Motive suppressed by the media! Omitting motive of anger at US support of Israel is Media Betrayal. Michael Scheuer (former CIA intelligence officer and CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief 1996-99) points out that our politicians are lying to us about why our lives are being put at risk with regard to the motivation of the terrorists attack the U.S. Why they hate us ISN'T "hatred of our freedoms" but rather hatred of specific foreign policies of the U.S. government which are, in fact, unjust, immoral and illegal. The top grievance is anger at the U.S. government's policy of aiding and abetting Israeli crimes.

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

9/11: What You Don't Know is Killing People

NEW VIDEO: 9/11: What You Don't Know is Killing People

9/11 Truth Movement Doesn't Know These Facts. Let's set it straight for the 10th Anniversary. NOT controlled demolition!

Friday, August 12, 2011

Gage Tells 9/11 Lies

Gage Tells 9/11 Lies 9/11 Truth FRAUD Richard Gage "Controlled Demolition" theory is a con.

Saturday, August 06, 2011

9/11 Reality Regardless

9/11 Reality Regardless of What Rather Reported, Misreported or Wouldn't Report

Dan Rather

Dan Rather wouldn't report anger at US support of Israel as motive on 9/11. This is one of my 9/11 10th Anniversary videos, more to come. Also read " As If Reality Wasn't Bad Enough

Tuesday, August 02, 2011

Obama Violated US Constitution

Obama Violated US Constitution
Obama Violated US Constitution, Libya War is Abuse of Power & Betrayal of People's Trust
Obama violated his oath to the U.S. Constitution and betrayed the trust of the American people because he had no right to involve our military in a war in Libya. His violation of the Constitution is a wrong against all U.S. citizens, not only those who trusted him when he made these explicate statements in order to gain our trust. He tricked people into voting for him. We are being robbed of our rights which are stipulated in our Constitution. We have rights, the primary one is our right to our Constitutional republic. The father of the Constitution warned of exactly this abuse of power on the part of a president, James Madison explained how our Constitution was deliberately designed to prevent a president from doing what Obama has done. "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." Our Constitution was deliberately designed to prevent Obama from doing what he explicitly promised he would not do if we entrusted him to uphold the Constitution!

He should be impeached. SEE VIDEO, PASS IT ON:

Thursday, July 21, 2011

Obama didn't even answer Chuck Todd's question

Obama war powers NEWEST VIDEO: You Assume Obama Answered Chuck Todd's Q War Powers Act Constitutional?

NEW VIDEO: Chuck Todd's "Tough" Question for Obama just a Diversion

Chuck ToddOBAMA: Chuck Todd?

CHUCK TODD: Thank you, Mr. President.

There have been a lot of questions about the constitutionality -- constitutional interpretations of a few decisions you've made, so I'd just simply ask: Do you believe the War Powers Act is constitutional? Do you believe that the debt limit is constitutional, the idea that Congress can do this? And do you believe that marriage is a civil right?


OBAMA: Well, that was a hodge-podge.


Chuck we're going to assign you to the Supreme Court, man.


I -- I'm not a Supreme Court justice, so I'm not -- I'm not going to put my constitutional law professor hat on here.

Let me focus on initially the issue of Libya. I want to talk about the substance of Libya, because there's been all kinds of noise about process and congressional consultation and so forth. Let's talk about concretely what's happened.

Moammar Gadhafi, who prior to Osama bin Laden was responsible for more American deaths than just about anybody on the planet, was threatening to massacre his people. And as part of an international coalition, under a U.N. mandate that is almost unprecedented, we went in and took out air defense systems so that an international coalition could provide a no-fly zone, could protect -- provide humanitarian protection to the people on the ground.
I spoke to the American people about what we would do. I said there would be no troops on the ground. I said that we would not be carrying the lion's share of this operation, but as members of NATO we would be supportive of it because it's in our national security interests and also because it's the right thing to do.

OBAMA: We have done exactly what I said we would do.
We have not put any boots on the ground. And our allies, who historically we've complained aren't willing to carry enough of the -- the load when it comes to NATO operations, have carried a big load when it comes to these NATO operations. And, as a consequence, we've protected thousands of people in Libya, we have not seen a single U.S. casualty, there's no risks of additional escalation, this operation is limited in time and in scope.

So I said to the American people, "Here's our narrow mission." We have carried out that narrow mission in exemplary fashion. And throughout this process we consulted with Congress. We've had 10 hearings on it. We've sent reams of information about what the operations are. I've had -- I've had all the members of Congress over to talk about it.

So a lot of this fuss is politics. And if you look substantively at what we've done, we -- we have done exactly what we said to do under a U.N. mandate and we have protected thousands of lives in the process, and as a consequence, a guy who was a state sponsor of terrorist operations against the United States of America is pinned down and the noose is tightening around him.
Now, when you look at the history of the War Powers Resolution, it came up after the Vietnam War, in which we had half a million soldiers there, tens of thousands of lives lost, hundreds of billions of dollar spent. And Congress said, "You know what? We don't want something like that happening again. So if you're going to start getting us into those kinds of commitments, you've got to consult with Congress beforehand." And I think that such consultation is entirely appropriate.

But do I think that our actions in any way violate the War Powers Resolution? The answer is no. So I don't even have to get to the constitutional question.
There may -- there -- there may -- there may be a time...


OBAMA: There -- there -- there may be a time in which there was be a serious question as to whether or not the War Powers Resolution Act was constitutional. I don't have to get to the question.

OBAMA: We have engaged in a limited operation to help a lot of people against one of the worst tyrants in the world, somebody who nobody should want to defend. And we should be sending out a unified message to this guy that he should step down and give his people a fair chance to live their lives without fear.
And -- and this suddenly becomes the cause celebre for some folks in Congress? Come on.
So, you had -- what? -- a three-parter?



OBAMA: What -- what are -- what are the other two?

CHUCK TODD: There is some question about the constitutionality of the War Powers (OFF-MIKE)

OBAMA: I'm just saying, I don't have to reach it. That's -- that's a good legal answer.

Chuck Todd's "Tough" Question for Obama

NEW VIDEO: Chuck Todd's "Tough" Question for Obama just a DiversionChuck Todd Obama's violated the Constitution with his Libya War but Chuck Todd helps divert attention away from that fact with question about the war powers act, asking if Obama thinks it is constitutional. The press conferences are not being run correctly, the people are being short changed. President Obama read from a list, he selected Chuck Todd to ask the question of him.

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Civil Discourse on YouTube

We Can Have Civil Discourse Here on YouTube (NEW VIDEO * CLICK HERE) Communicate Please! Civilized Society Must Have Civil Discourse. Let's not throw away our opportunity here on Youtube. We have to work together to overcome the domination of or public discourse by a powerful elite.

Friday, July 15, 2011

NBC Political Director Chuck Todd notified the Kucinich campaign


"Less than 44 hours after NBC sent a congratulatory note and an invitation to Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich to participate in the Jan. 15 Democratic Presidential debate in Las Vegas, the network notified the campaign this morning it was changing its announced criteria, rescinding its invitation, and excluding Kucinich from the debate.

NBC Political Director Chuck Todd notified the Kucinich campaign this morning that, although Kucinich had met the qualification criteria publicly announced on December 28, the network was "re-doing" the criteria, excluding Kucinich, and planning to invite only Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and former senator John Edwards" - From Kucinich campaign Press release

See Video: Boycott the MSNBC Democratic Debate On Tuesday

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Blockade of the Straits of Tiran

The Menachem Begin quote ("In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.")

Monday, June 06, 2011

About Israel & 9/11

About Israel & 9/11: Caller is Correct, Politician is Wrong


Let's go to James in Los Angeles. Independent caller, you're on the air.
Thank you. What about what General Petraeus had said about U.S. support for Israel against the Palestinians being a threat to American troops in theater? And yesterday, we see Netanyahu getting more standing ovations than President Obama did at the State of the Union. It's outrageous. You can go to

Our support for Israel is what got us attacked on 9/11, you can read page 147 of the 9/11Commission Report, "Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel." Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.

In their book, "Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission," Hamilton and Kean say "this was sensitive ground," and some commissioners worried "listing U.S. support for Israel as a root cause of al Qaeda's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy."

Philip Zelikow, "According to KSM, Bin Ladin had even asked that the attacks occur as early as mid-2000, after Israeli opposition party leader Ariel Sharon caused an outcry in the Middle East by visiting a sensitive and contested holy site in Jerusalem that is sacred to both Muslims and Jews. Although Bin Ladin recognized that Atta and the other pilots had only just arrived in the United States to begin their flight training, the al Qaeda leader wanted to punish the United States for supporting Israel. He allegedly told KSM it would be sufficient simply to down the planes and not hit specific targets." p18
Play Video

MR. HAMILTON: I'm interested in the question of motivation of these hijackers, and my question is really directed to the agents. … But what have you found out about why these men did what they did? What motivated them to do it?
MR. FITZGERALD: I believe they feel a sense of outrage against the United States. They identify with the Palestinian problem, they identify with people who oppose repressive regimes, and I believe they tend to focus their anger on the United States as to what would motivate a young man to sacrifice his rights, to, really, go to that extraordinary next step to do that. Much of it, I believe, originates in rage, and I think when you look at the 19 hijackers and see where they came from, you can begin to see the seeds of that -- that disenfranchisement and anger.
Play Video

Jeremy Scahill: And then another event happened before the Fallujah ambush of the Blackwater contractors. On March 22, the Israeli military killed Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who was a cleric bound in a wheelchair, as he was coming out of morning prayers, killed him and about a half a dozen people in his entourage. And in Fallujah, there was a massive protest against that. And already people believed that the Israelis and the US were working hand-in-hand during the occupation of Iraq. So that was the context leading up to the Fallujah ambush, and it’s almost never talked about.
So the people of Fallujah—I think, rightly—were very outraged at their treatment at the hands of the US and its allies and saw this sort of relationship between the US and Israel as one of conquest in the Middle East and certainly in Iraq. In fact, many people in Iraq believed that private military contractors, like Blackwater, were either CIA or Mossad. So it’s very likely that when those guys rolled into Fallujah that morning, that people thought they were attacking a CIA convoy or a Mossad convoy.

Atta was chosen as the emir, or leader, of the mission. He met with Bin Ladin to discuss the targets: the World Trade Center, which represented the U.S. economy; the Pentagon, a symbol of the U.S. military; and the U.S. Capitol, the perceived source of U.S. policy in support of Israel. The White House was also on the list, as Bin Ladin considered it a political symbol and wanted to attack it as well. p4

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Friday, May 20, 2011

New Video With Transcript

YOu can view the transcript on the video by clicking the "CC" at the bottom of the video. See video here: What Really Happened: Osama bin Laden Death Photo Claim Debunked open letter

Below is a transcript of the words spoke in the above video (Mike Rivero is talking first):
"The photograph presented to the world as proof that Osama bin Laden was dead is a fake. And not only is it a fake, it's apparently been floating around the Internet for like a couple of years. And so, this is another obvious very heavy handed government deception. Alright, obviously top story of the day continues to be Obama bin lying about Osama bin photoshopped."

No Mike, that picture is NOT what President Obama claims to be Osama bin Laden's body. You're fooling people into thinking that Obama released the picture you're showing. Obama, his administration and the US government are NOT making any claims about this photo. They didn't release it, you're taking an old photo from some other source and making a false claim about it.. Could you please post a link to this video to correct your false news story? It's unfair of you to push falsehoods on your website like this.

Those watching this video may not know that I'm addressing an open letter to Mike Rivero who operates a website which, if you have a false idea about bin Laden or 9/11, it's likely you received the false information, either directly or indirectly, from his site. False claims are a pattern on his site.

"But we have a DNA test, even though DNA tests actually take 48 hours. To prove it was really him. And then they had this photo of the dead body all over the media."

Within the same article he argues that the a DNA test couldn't be performed in less than 48 hours. Here's a clip that disputes that: You can get DNA results in less than 12 hours. Another geneticist has been quoted as saying DNA analysis can be completed in as few as 6 hours if it's a prioritized task.
Now look at the source for Mike's claim that DNA tests can't be done in less that 48 hours. This is the level of his research. The most frustrating thing is he has an enormous influence. Mike, you know you do. And it's damaging to the public discourse because I want to make several videos talking seriously about bin Laden and 9/11 and this kind of nonsense undermines that.
Usama bin Laden, we ca'' him "UBL." That's him. Yeah, he just released a fatwa to his followers, a declaration of jihad against America.

Look at his theory about "the plane that crashed into the Pentagon." Even when he understands the fact that a plane did indeed hit the Pentagon, he still manages to claim there's a government conspiracy involved! Even after he sees how absurd the "no plane hit the Pentagon" theory is, he doesn't want to learn from that and question just how possible it is that people are pushing false theories due to ignorance. Instead of questioning the reasoning of people promoting false theories, he wants to blame the government for creating the "no plane hit the pentagon" theory! Don't you think this demonstrates that Mike has government conspiracy on the brain? By blaming the government for tricking web sites, he shifts blame away from these web sites' poor reasoning and research skills.

Also sharing a big part of the blame for these conspiracy theories arising, is both mainstream and alternative media, because they failed to effectively report the motives for the attacks to the general public.They didn't adequately challenge the big lies about why the U.S. was attacked, instead their behavior reinforced confusion and suspicion. Powerful elites like Thomas Friedman have gotten away with fooling people and they share the blame for the existence of these illogical conspiracy theories. There are real abuses of power which we need to address, don't let people fool you into not doing something about it. Please subscribe and share this video with others.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Osama bin Laden & '9/11 Truth'

Osama bin Laden & '9/11 Truth' Conspiracy Factory: Axis of Ignorance Mike Rivero pushes conspiracy theories on his popular website. He's misdirecting people & thus undermining efforts to achieve peace.

Monday, May 02, 2011

Obama Speech: Osama Bin Laden Killed. Shot Dead in Pakistan

Obama Speech: Osama Bin Laden Killed. Shot Dead in Pakistan
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Tonight, I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who's responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

It was nearly 10 years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history. The images of 9/11 are seared into our national memory -- hijacked planes cutting through a cloudless September sky; the Twin Towers collapsing to the ground; black smoke billowing up from the Pentagon; the wreckage of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the actions of heroic citizens saved even more heartbreak and destruction.

And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world. The empty seat at the dinner table. Children who were forced to grow up without their mother or their father. Parents who would never know the feeling of their child's embrace. Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts.

On September 11, 2001, in our time of grief, the American people came together. We offered our neighbors a hand, and we offered the wounded our blood. We reaffirmed our ties to each other, and our love of community and country. On that day, no matter where we came from, what God we prayed to, or what race or ethnicity we were, we were united as one American family.

We were also united in our resolve to protect our nation and to bring those who committed this vicious attack to justice. We quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda -- an organization headed by Osama bin Laden, which had openly declared war on the United States and was committed to killing innocents in our country and around the globe. And so we went to war against al Qaeda to protect our citizens, our friends, and our allies.

Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we've made great strides in that effort. We've disrupted terrorist attacks and strengthened our homeland defense. In Afghanistan, we removed the Taliban government, which had given bin Laden and al Qaeda safe haven and support. And around the globe, we worked with our friends and allies to capture or kill scores of al Qaeda terrorists, including several who were a part of the 9/11 plot.

Yet Osama bin Laden avoided capture and escaped across the Afghan border into Pakistan. Meanwhile, al Qaeda continued to operate from along that border and operate through its affiliates across the world.

And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body. SEE PART 2

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

"Long Story Short" Falsifies Iraq War History

Lies dominate public discourse in this country. Here's another example: Colin Quinn theater show on HBO.
Colin Quinn's False History Pushes Iraq War LIE about UN inspectors & Saddam
We need to be organized in order to push BASIC FACTS into public discourse so we can counter the elite's agenda to mislead the public. Please subscribe to this channel and tell others. Please join the email list too, we need to be able to act quickly to give our efforts an extra boost. We need to start creating the foundation for the formal establishment of a representative press — a media system of checks and balances which is totally transparent and under the general public's complete control. Add your ideas and questions in comments to this video AND at the Representative Press forum.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

"We have Nothing to Hide" transcript

SEE VIDEO: "We have Nothing to Hide" US Hypocrisy: Refusing Access to Manning DAILY PRESS BRIEFING Apr. 12, 2011 Acting Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner delivers the U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing at the State Department.

STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN MARK C. TONER: … Look, for our part, we are – we do our Human Rights Reports every year. We are candid in our exchanges with China about human rights concerns both from the podium and in our private meetings with them. And certainly, we don’t regard it as an interference in our internal affairs when any foreign government or individual organization monitors our human rights practices. And we are proud to say that our system of government allows for that kind of comment without fear or without fear of recrimination. And it speaks to the value of our system, we feel. 

So I wouldn’t describe it as that. (*see botom of this post for prior question from Matthew Lee which includes the description Toner refers to.) Obviously, we’ve got a very broad and complex and varied relationship with China, and as the President said, it’s one of the pivotal relationships of the 21st century, and we feel that these kinds of people-to-people, individual-to-individual exchanges build that relationship and strengthen it going forward. 

MATTHEW LEE (Associated Press): Can you explain why, if the United States is proud of its human rights record, that the UN special rapporteur has complained that you’re not allowing him independent access to Bradley Manning? 

TONER: We’ve been in contact with the UN special rapporteur. We’ve had conversations with you in terms of access to –

LEE: With me?

TONER: I’m sorry. We’ve had conversations with the special rapporteur. We’ve discussed Bradley Manning’s case with him. But in terms of visits to PFC Manning, that’s something for the Department of Defense. 

LEE: And the ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) with the same problem? You are – the State Department is the direct contact with the ICRC. At least it was for the Guantanamo inmates. Have you had any contact with them?

TONER: I’m not aware. I don’t know. I’d have to look into that. But in terms of the UN special rapporteur, we’ve had conversations with him. We have ongoing conversations with him. But in terms of access to Manning, that’s something for the Department of Defense. 

ARSHAD MOHAMMED (Reuters): If you welcome scrutiny, where’s the harm? 

TONER: I said we’re having conversations with him. We’re trying to work with him to meet his needs. But I don’t understand the question. 

MOHAMMED: Well, you said you welcome scrutiny from outsiders of the United States human rights record –

TONER: Right. We do.

MOHAMMED: – that you feel that it speaks to the strength of the U.S. system. So why does it take very lengthy conversations to agree to let a UN special rapporteur have access to an inmate? 

TONER: Well, again, for the specific visitation requests, that’s something that Department of Defense would best answer. But look, we’ve been very clear that there’s a legal process underway. We’ve been forthright, I think, in talking about Private – PFC Manning’s situation. We are in conversations, ongoing conversations with the special rapporteur. We have nothing to hide. But in terms of an actual visit to Manning, that’s something that DOD would handle.

LEE: Well, but you have conveyed messages from DOD back to the UN on this?

TONER: Well, no. We’re just – look, we’re aware of his requests. We’re working with him. 

LEE: Can – you said you’ve been forthright in your discussions of his treatment. It seems to me that the only person who was forthright in discussions of his treatment resigned several days after making those comments. What – can you explain what you mean by you’ve been forthright in terms of his treatment?

TONER: He is being held in legal detention. There’s a legal process underway, so I’m not going to discuss in any more detail than what I – beyond what I’ve just said because there’s a legal process underway.

LEE: So that’s what you mean by forthright?

TONER: I can’t discuss – I can’t discuss his treatment.

LEE: Being forthright is saying nothing because there’s a legal process underway; is that correct? 

TONER: That’s not correct at all. And we’ve – we continue to talk to the special rapporteur about his case. 

LEE: Well, okay. So if you’ve been – what do you talk to him about? 

TONER: I’m not going to talk about –

LEE: He says, “I’d like to visit him and I need to do it privately,” and you say, “No,” and that’s –

TONER: I’m not going to talk about the substance of those conversations. I’d just say we feel we’ve been –

LEE: Well, then I don’t understand how you can say that you’re being forthright about it if you refuse to talk about it. And if you don’t talk about it, at least – forget about what the actual conditions of his treatment are, but if you’re not prepared to talk about your conversations with the special rapporteur, that’s being even less than not being forthright because you’re not telling us what you told him. 

TONER: But you understand the legal constraints that I’m operating under because this is an ongoing legal process. 

LEE: Right. But –

TONER: He is being held –

LEE: I understand that you’re put in a difficult position where you say that you’re willing, as Arshad noted when the – that you’re – you don’t understand why China is so upset because the U.S. is willing to open up its human rights situation to all kinds of scrutiny -- 

TONER: And, Matt – 

LEE: And then the first example that anyone raises, you’re not. 

TONER: And, Matt, I would raise with you the fact that much of China’s report came from open source, which is what an independent media does, and would note that that kind of independent media does serve a function. And there are details about the Manning case and other human rights concerns out there, but I’m not going to talk about it here.
LEE: Last week we saw the annual ritualistic dance of your release of the Human Rights Report and the Chinese immediate condemnation of it, which, frankly, has gotten a little bit tiring every year. But do you think that that coming so soon after this – after this exchange, the annual exchange of vitriol, that these talks will be as productive as they might otherwise be?

TONER: I don’t know if I agree with your characterization of it as an annual exchange of vitriol. Look, for our part, we are ... (continues at the top of this post)