Sunday, May 8, 2011

False Flags Abound: What Is True Agenda Behind The "Killing Osama" Fraud? "Mother of the Century" Cindy Sheehan Mocked On CNN & Economy Sinks (HMD!)

One way or another, the legend of Osama bin Laden had outlived its usefulness.

And why do the-powers-that-be make fun of Cindy Sheehan, who has only been right? Wouldn't it make more sense to just ignore her? Try to watch the following video without cringing for Cindy's treatment on Mother's Day weekend. CNN is seen here in all its collaborative "truth." But it seems that most of our country loves a lie (as long as it ensures mayhem against "savages"). False flags are great tools for increasing the fear factor in the American populace and increasing the "Defense" budget to unimaginable numbers when you consider that the U.S. has had no competition for world domination for the last 22+ years. (How many New York Times reporters are now vying for the almost priceless Judith Miller WMD-Sure-Thing award?) (Emphasis marks added below - Ed.)

False Flags: An American Tradition Stephen Lendman May 7, 2011

Wikipedia defines false or black flags as "covert operations designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities." They're "big lies," defined by Merriam-Webster as "deliberate gross distortion(s) of the truth used especially as a propaganda tactic." America's decade from September 11, 2001 to May 1, 2011 was punctuated by the (big) lie of our time and (big) lie of the moment. Put another way, the official stories are falsified, myths, widely believed fantasies contrary to reality. In his exhaustive research and writings, David Ray Griffin provided convincing evidence that 9/11 was an inside job and that bin Laden died of natural causes in mid-December 2001. The former spawned a decade of overt and covert "war on terror" lawlessness at home and abroad. Policies and events following the second have yet to unfold, but expect little at best to be positive. Past US false flags provided pretexts for militarism, wars, occupations, domestic repression, and national security state extremism, antithetical to democratically free and open societies. Allegedly removing America's "Enemy Number One," in fact, may intensify, not diminish, Washington's scheme for unchallengeable global dominance. More on him below. With or without bin Laden, bogymen threats are plentiful. Since WW II alone, America's had numerous ones, including communists, Al Qaeda, WMDs, the Taliban, Gaddafi, and a host others yet unnamed, as well as numerous "foiled" domestic ones. Among others, they include: -- a fake shoe bomber; -- fake underwear bomber; -- fake Times Square bomber; -- an earlier one there; -- fake shampoo bombers; -- fake Al Qaeda woman planning fake mass casualty attacks on New York landmarks; -- fake Oregon bomber; -- fake armed forces recruiting station bomber; -- fake synagogue bombers; -- fake Chicago Sears Tower bombers; -- fake FBI and other building bombers; -- fake National Guard, Fort Dix and Quantico marine base attackers; -- fake 9/11 bombers; and -- others to enlist public support for the fake war on terror and very real ones it spawned. America, Pakistan, Bin Laden, Official Lies, and Misreporting On May 5, New York Times writer Elisabeth Bumiller headlined, "Pentagon Breaks Silence on Pakistani Role," saying: A "top Pentagon official said....Pakistan would have to work hard to rebuild relations with the United States Congress," including a commitment "to fighting terrorism...." It suggests what some analysts suspect: namely, planned destabilization, confrontation, and balkanization for greater Eurasian control, as well as future terrorist false flags. On May 5, Times writers Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane headlined, "Data Show Bin Laden Plots; CIA Hid Near Raided House," saying: Alleged "computer files and documents seized at the compound where Osama bin Laden was killed," reveal "considered attacks on American railroads, (but) there was no evidence of a specific plot." Perhaps no files and documents either. For sure, no bin Laden. Nonetheless, "(s)ince Sunday night, counterterrorism officials have been alert to (possible) new attacks from Al Qaeda to avenge its leader's death," especially at airports, rail facilities, and other strategic locations. "American officials and terrorism experts have warned that this is not the end of Al Qaeda," not, of course, if they're blamed for planned false flags to intensify US imperial wars. Another May 5 Bumiller Times report ran cover for shifting official accounts about what really happened on May 1 headlined, "Raid Account, Hastily Told, Proves Fluid," saying: "(I)t was a classic collision of a White House desire to promote a stunning national security triumph - and feed a ravenous media - while collecting facts from a chaotic military operation on the other side of the world. At the same time, White House officials worked hard to use the facts of the raid to diminish Bin Laden's legacy." She continued, quoting an unnamed Pentagon official claiming no "intent to deceive or dramatize," adding that "Everything we put out we really believed to be true at the time." She also quoted Victoria Clarke, Bush Pentagon spokeswoman, saying, "First reports are always wrong. It's a fundamental truth in military affairs." In other words, it was OK first to claim a fierce firefight in which no US forces were killed or hurt, then 24 hours later call the battle one-sided, Navy Seals quickly dispatching bin Laden's guards and "Enemy Number One," shooting him unarmed in the head. Notably, however, there's no body, no photos, no video, no evidence, and no truth, just the media regurgitated big lie. In fact, more lies compounded it, including about: -- Pakistan's alleged knowledge of his presence; -- claimed evidence confirming it and assault specifics; and -- fabricated bad theater, explained in a slapdash, keystone cops manner. High Level Skepticism Appearing on CNN May 5, former Pakistani intelligence chief, Hamid Gul, told "In the Arena's" host Eliot Spitzer that bin Laden died years earlier, saying: "Yes, I think he died - he perished some years ago, and I think this was a story which was created (because) nobody would want to believe this version....I (don't believe) the story which was given out by the American media and by the American administration." Whoever was killed May 1 "was probably somebody else . . . . (American authorities) must have known that he died some years ago . . . . were keeping this story on the ice and they were looking for an appropriate moment" to announce it. "(P)eople simply not in Pakistan alone but around the world. . . . don't believe the stories that have been put out." In other words, the entire account was fabricated, the event staged, Western media, including The New York Times, running cover for the big lie. Gul politely called it "a huge intelligence failure." Notable American and Other False Flags Discussed in earlier writing, numerous ones stand out, including: -- In 1898, Spain was falsely accused of blowing up the USS Maine in Havana, Cuba harbor. The Spanish-American war followed. -- On May 7, 1915, a German U-boat was accused of torpedoing the RMS Lusitania, killing 128 US citizens. It helped precipitate America's April 4, 1917, WW I entry, a war Woodrow Wilson wanted and got through a propaganda campaign, turning pacifist Americans into German haters. It was later learned that on board munitions, not a torpedo, exploded, sinking the ship. -- In 1933 Germany, a week before general elections, the strategically timed Reichstag fire (home of the German parliament) was blamed on communists. President Paul von Hindenburg's emergency decree followed. Civil liberties were suspended. Weimar Republic democracy ended, and Hitler assumed fascist powers after enough Nazis were elected to assure it. -- On August 31, 1939, Nazis impersonating Polish terrorists attacked the Gleiwitz radio station on the border between the two countries, starting WW II. -- On December 7, 1941, Roosevelt manipulated Japan to attack Pearl Harbor, giving him the war he wanted from the early 1930s, but had to convince a pacifist public of the threat. The fleet was also tracked across the Pacific, but Admiral HE Kimmel wasn't warned or given known intelligence to assure enough mass casualties for congressional and public support. -- Complicit with Washington, numerous 1949/1950 South Korean incursions north precipitated Pyongyang's retaliation in June 1950, giving Truman the war he wanted. -- In 1962, a US Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed false flag never happened because Kennedy rejected it. Called Operation Northwoods (a part of Operation Mongoose), it included sinking US ships, shooting down US commercial airliners, blowing up buildings in US cities, attacking America's Guantanamo base, other incidents, and blaming it on Cuba as a reason for war. -- The fake August 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident initiated full-scale retaliation against North Vietnam after Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, authorizing war without declaring it. -- In October 1983, after ousting Prime Minister Maurice Bishop, US forces invaded Grenada, allegedly to rescue American medical students threatened by nonbelligerent Cubans building infrastructure. -- In December 1989, manufactured incidents precipitated America's Panama invasion, deposing Manuel Noriega, one-time ally turned enemy because he forgot who's boss. -- in August 1990, Washington colluded with the al- Sabah monarchy, entrapping Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait. In January 1991, it launched the Gulf War, followed by over two decades of sanctions, more war occupation, and destruction of the "cradle of civilization." -- The September 11, 2001 false flag operation launched a decade of imperial wars against Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Palestine allied with Israel, perhaps others to come, as well as proxy wars in Somalia, Yemen, Bahrain, Central Africa, Haiti, Honduras, Colombia, and at home against Muslims, Latino immigrants, and working Americas. On February 16, 2010, a Washington's blog web site ( article titled, "Governments ADMIT That They Carry Out False Flag Terror" listed examples, including: -- The CIA admitted its 1950s role in toppling Iran's democratically government in 1953. -- Israel acknowledged a 1954 attack in Egypt, including planting bombs in US diplomatic facilities, leaving "evidence" of Arab involvement. -- Indonesia's former president, Abdurrahman Wahid, said the nation's police or military most likely were involved in the 2002 Bali bombing, killing over 200 people. -- A former Italian prime minister, judge, and military counterintelligence head, General Gianadelio Maletti, said America's CIA instigated and abetted right wing terrorist groups in the 1970s and earlier, including bombing a Milan bank in 1969 to rally popular anti-communist support in Italy and other European countries. -- Many others, including former Carter administration National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, telling a Senate committee that a false flag terror attack on US soil might occur to blame Iran and justify war. In his 1997 book, "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives," he said: "Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat," the kind 9/11 created - predicted, planned, orchestrated, and carried out to further new world order global dominance. Other False Flag Examples -- The March 2004 Madrid train bombings occurred three days before Spain's general elections. With no supportive evidence, they were blamed on Al Qaeda, yet they stoked public fear of threats against other Western cities, including American ones. -- The July 7, 2005 London underground bombings (called 7/7) were a series of attacks on the city's public transport system during the morning rush hour for maximum disruption and casualties. At precisely the same time, an anti-terror drill occurred, simulating real attacks. It was no coincidence, others in America and Britain came on the same day. -- On 9/11 morning, the CIA ran a "pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building." Held at the Agency's Chantilly, Virginia Reconnaissance Office, AP reported (on August 22, 2002) that it simulated "a small corporate jet (hitting) one of the four towers....after experiencing a mechanical failure." Unmentioned at the time was a later revealed (but unreported) Homeland Security conference announcement a year later to commemorate the 9/11 event. Held under the auspices of the National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, one of its speakers was John Fulton, CIA Chief of the Strategic War Gaming Division of the National Reconnaissance office in charge of the operation. Another coincidence, or was something more sinister afoot? In October 2000, the Pentagon simulated a commercial plane striking the Pentagon, coordinated by its Command Emergency Response Team and the Defense Protective Services Police. This and the 9/11 exercises are more than coincidental, given what's now known and the fallout. -- On June 30, 2007, a Jeep Cherokee with propane canisters crashed into Glasgow International Airport's glass doors, the BBC reporting that it "was in the middle of the doorway burning....The car didn't actually explode. There were a few pops and bangs which presumably was the petrol." The usual suspects were falsely blamed, Al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists. In Miami, on January 11, 2010 (one day before Haiti's earthquake), the Pentagon's US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) simulated a hurricane striking the island in preparation for subsequent measures to be implemented. A carefully prepared military operation, they included occupying, controlling, and plundering the island. Also, Deputy SOUTHCOM head, General PK Keen, was in Haiti when the quake struck, ready to assume command when it did and use a communication tool called the Transnational Information Sharing Cooperation project (TISC), linking other nations and NGOs with the Pentagon and US government to facilitate measures to be implemented. None were to help Haitians. Exposed as bad theater, New York Times writer Elizabeth Harris further discredited the broadsheet, headlining: "Al Qaeda Confirms Bin Laden's Death," citing an unconfirmed statement, warning of new attacks to come. It also said an audio recording days before his death will soon be released. In fact, past video and audio ones were exposed as fakes.

From James Petras, one source of stellar information (whether you believe bin Laden just died or died of kidney failure almost 10 years ago), on the uses and abuses of the government's playing of the "terrorist" card:

Clearly the killing of bin Laden has absolutely no strategic or tactical importance in the major theaters of war and political revolt in the Arab world.
If the US cannot protect its senior officers in its highest security compounds, how can it claim to have "secured" any of the territory outside ­ namely the cities, towns and villages? Two weeks earlier, with the collaboration of jail officials, almost 500 jailed Taliban fighters and leaders escaped via a 300 meter tunnel to a dozen waiting trucks. Only two years earlier 900 prisoners also escaped. In its aftermath the US insisted on the appointment of "highly screened" loyalist collaborators as heads and directors of security and prisons, to no avail.
The major significance of the killing is in the context of the strategic military and political defeats suffered by the US, especially most recently in Afghanistan. On April 27, 2011, nine senior US military officers were assassinated by a "trusted" Afghan fighter pilot in the high security Kabul airport. Four majors, two captains and two lieutenant colonials were killed in the single biggest killing of high US military officials in the 20th and 21st century wars.
Several facts mark this out as a strategically important event. It took place in a high security installation, suggesting that no place in Afghanistan is safe from deadly armed attacks by the Taliban or the armed resistance. Secondly, all US military, no matter how high their rank, are vulnerable to deadly attack. Thirdly, no US trained Afghan military official or soldier can be considered "loyal" ­ even those most closely in collaboration can and will turn their guns on their "mentors".
The overwhelming evidence shows that the US war effort is failing to create an effective puppet regime in Afghanistan. The Taliban is slowly but surely eroding US influence. In the face of major strategic losses, as evident in the astonishing assassination of top military officials, Obama had to mount a political spectacle ­ a "military success story" ­ the killing of unarmed bin Laden, to buoy the spirits of the American public, military and its NATO followers.
Every popular uprising against US puppets in North Africa and the Middle East is a political defeat; the enduring regime in Iran is a defeat for the US - Israel bellicose efforts for regime change; even Gadhaffi's resistance is a defeat for the believers in instant victories. So Obama and his mass media acolytes have to mega magnify the killing of an isolated, political leader of a loose association of marginal terrorists as a world shattering, game turning event. When in fact, the losses and defeats accumulate every day before, during and after the assassination.
The Taliban didn't even blink; ­ their 'spring offensive' marches on; US military officials are wary of any encounters with any 'loyal' Afghan collaborators. Egypt rejects US-Israeli politics toward the unity of Palestinians; the revolts in the Gulf continue. The only stalemate ­ not victory ­ that Washington can celebrate ­ including the killing of Gadhaffi's grandchildren ­ is in Libya where, allied with Al Qaeda, in Benghazi, the war continues.
How about just getting the easily-led's minds off the really bad economic news (before the revocation of Social Security and Medicare and the rest of the safety net programs included in Obama's next bargaining session/collaboration with the Ryan "fake budget balancing" act)? Cause there is plenty to go around. S.J. Sigmund (yes, after Freud) always has something to share with us about our economic realities. Here's this week's terrible news (how much more will we take before our attention is once again diverted to another "terrorist" incident)?
. . . the focus of the first Friday of the month in the econosphere is the Unemployment Report . . . this week's report seemed to even out some of the discrepancies between the two BLS surveys which we've noted in the previous reports, wherein the unemployment rate from the household survey went down in the face of anemic job creation reported by the establishment survey . . . this week the latter reported an addition of 286,000 private jobs, which, less the cutbacks in govt employment, resulted in a non-farms payroll increase of 244,000 . . . and except for government & construction, all sectors added jobs . . . yet the headline unemployed number taken from the household survey increased from 8.8% to 9%, showing a drop of 190,000 . . . adding those working part time who want full time work to that, the U-6 number increased to 15.9% . . . using the establishment survey as a more reliable indicator, as i have in previous months, we've now added 768,000 jobs year to date, or about 168K over what we need to accommodate net working age population increases . . . considering that there were over 7 million jobs lost since the beginning of the recession, and the size of the working age population has grown another 4 million, we would have to add over 11 million jobs just to get back to the "normal" we experienced last decade . . .


Employment-Population Ratio for Americans Aged 25-54 (graphic from BLS)

Other employment numbers weren't so good; the weekly new claims, which I highlighted with a chart last week, jumped to 474,000, raising the 4 week moving average over 431,000, convincingly reversing the improving series of sub 400K reports we were seeing in February & March . . . although the labor force participation rate remained flat, the absolute number of persons not in the labor force hit a new all time record of 86,248,000 . . . and according to research by the WSJ, the number of those who are unemployed and have exhausted their benefits will soon hit 5 1/2 million; & as if to add insult to injury, a bill proposed by the house GOP would allow states to use the unemployment funds extension received from the Federal government (as part of the Mc Connell-Obama tax cuts for the rich deal worked out late last year) for other purposes as to be determined by the state legislatures . . .

Since the debate over the deficit is still ongoing & the debt ceiling is already starting to affect borrowing by state & local governments thru the Treasury, I also want to use the chart I've included to illustrate the origin of the cyclical portion of our current deficit problem; according to the recent BLS release, the median income is over $800 a week, or over $40,000 a year . . . the question i want to ask is how much tax revenue would we generate if the employment ratio were brought back to 80% with median wage jobs? & how much less would the safety net payouts be if that were true? It's obvious that just adding 10 million more taxpayers would go a long way towards closing the budget gap . . . we were in balance before 2000, before the wars in the middle east and before the tax cuts for the rich; there's no reason we can't approach that again if we had full employment, let the tax cuts expire, & bring the troops home . . .

I found it pretty hard to believe how much the alleged killing of Osama Bin Laden dominated the news this week; I had assumed he was already dead or at least rendered harmless anyway, and hadn't seen his name mentioned in relationship to our involvement in the Middle East recently either (there's even some who believe al qaeda is a bogeyman created by our government to keep the game going) . . . but assuming we buy into what we've been told, it's clear who won; the total cost of the Trade Center bombing was 12 boxcutters (their airline tickets were charged & never paid for) and we've been paying for it from the first day we started slamming million dollar Tomahawk missles into mountains in Afghanistan . . . Ezra Klein at the WaPo has attempted to quantify our total costs; by some accounting, even the depth and severity of our financial crisis can be connected to our response to that original provocation . . .

And, of course, from our friends at the Anti-Consumer Agenda we learn what makes the owners of the country really jump for joy (and cry crocodile tears):

The Loving and Merciful Act of Foreclosure

Adam Levitin

I missed this howler from a few months ago, but it's so outrageous that I've got to comment on it, even thought it's stale. I'm amazed that this didn't get much more Press. In the course of a CNBC interview (full show here, foreclosure discussion runs from 4:07 to 5:23), JPMChase CEO Jamie Dimon stated that:

"Giving debt relief to people that really need it, that's what foreclosure is."

As he explained:

"[Homeowners] are probably better off going somewhere else, becuase they get relieved almost 100% of the debt through foreclosure."

For real? It's debt relief? Why not just go old school with "let them eat cake"?

"Debt relief" requires a forgiveness of debt. It's a gift, not an exchange. There's no quid pro quo. In foreclosure, however, the homeowner gives up the house, and doesn't necessarily get any debt relief. If the mortgage is recourse, there could still be a deficiency judgment. Does Dimon mean that JPMChase is forgoing all deficiency judgments? I doubt it. And even if so, there's an exchange of debt for house. That's hardly debt relief. That's debt collection.

There are, without question, some homeowners who feel quite relieved when the foreclosure is complete - the uncertainty of their living situation is finally resolved, and they aren't saddled with a mortgage any more. But they might now have a mountain of unsecured debt.

I can't fathom how Dimon conceives of foreclosure as an act of mercy. Whatever helps you sleep at night, I guess.


I only wish that Congress had expressed the same attitude when Dimon & Co. came looking for their corporate welfare in the fall of '08.

I would expect something far more intelligent than this pap from Mr. Dimon, who surely knows better. That is the kind of thing I would expect from the local right-wing Fox News-brainwashed uninformed moron sitting on a barstool while sipping a Bud Light.

Foreclosure may ultimately provide some sort of emotional relief or what is more commonly called 'closure', but 'debt relief' is an entirely different concept (as ably explained above) and has nothing whatsoever to do with the resolution of stress ('relief') caused by an unaffordable mortgage payment.

I like to use analogies to illustrate someone's really stupid argument. A proper analogy is that what Dimon is saying is a lot like saying genocide is a way to resolve the issue of racism.

Only in Jamie Dimon World is taking someone's home and suing them for the deficiency, or 1099-ing them with a big tax liability, considered debt relief.

I used to be disgusted. Now I'm just amused.

Apologies to Elvis Costello...

Hopefully after Ibanez/Bevilacqua they wont get the opportunity to be so "nice" to the poor people who might lose homes. After all they won't be able to take something they never owned . . .

A big number of people have or are losing their homes due to modification HELL!!! In my case, we asked for a refi to get me off the loan due to divorce. The lender (Chase) told my ex-husband they could lower his payment too. you know the story from here on out . . . just send in x amount every month on a trial mod and we will get the paperwork together. Next thing you know . . . foreclosure . . . without missing a payment . . . not one payment was missed . . . Chase is so kind to do that . . .

Glad it works for Jamie? From our friend the Wall Street Journal:
Number of the Week: Millions Set to Lose Unemployment Benefits 5.5 million: Americans unemployed and not receiving benefits The job market may be on the mend, but that’s not much consolation to millions of Americans facing a frightening deadline: the end of their unemployment benefits.

The country’s unemployment rolls are shrinking fast, after expanding sharply last year as the government extended benefits to ease the pain of a deep economic slump. As of mid-March, about 8.5 million people were receiving some kind of unemployment payments, down from 11.5 million a year earlier, according to the Labor Department.

. . . Many Americans, though, are simply running out of time. As of March, about 14 million people were unemployed and looking for work, according to the household survey. At the time the survey was done, about 8.5 million were receiving some kind of unemployment payments, according to the Labor Department’s Employment and Training Administration. That leaves about 5.5 million people unemployed without benefits, up 1.4 million from a year earlier.

Oh, and one more victory for the investment/banksters:
Bernanke's Bubblenomics:Who Wins and Who Loses
It might surprise you to know that the Fed has become so skilled at bubble-making, that the condition of the underlying economy doesn't really matter any more. Exxon Makes $30.5 Billion, So GOP Votes Unanimously To Give Them Tax Breaks
Hmmm. So there's some good news! For them. (Snark off.) ___________________

1 comment:

kenny's sideshow said...

My respect for Cindy continues to grow. She's my mother of the day. We need so many more like her.