May 2, 2016
The Corbett Report
May 2, 2016
The Corbett Report
by John W. Whitehead
April 30, 2016
“You had to live – did live, from habit that became instinct – in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.” – George Orwell, 1984
In past ages, those who dared to speak out against tyranny – viewed as an act of treason – were blinded, castrated, disfigured, mutilated, rendered mute by having their tongues cut out of their heads, and ultimately crucified.
In the American police state, the price to be paid for speaking truth to power (also increasingly viewed as an act of treason) is surveillance, censorship, jail and ultimately death.
It’s a diabolically ingenious tactic for muzzling, disarming and ultimately eliminating one’s critics or potential adversaries.
However, where many Americans go wrong is in assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or challenging the government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character, labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.
In fact, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, all you really need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the Internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, question government authority, or generally live in the United States.
With the help of automated eyes and ears, a growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social media and behavior sensing software, government agents are spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies of the state.
It’s the American police state’s take on the dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, and Phillip K. Dick all rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.
What’s more, the technocrats who run the surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you support, and with whom you communicate. Computers now do the tedious work of trolling social media, the Internet, text messages and phone calls for potentially antigovernment remarks – all of which is carefully recorded, documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of the government’s choosing.
Message from Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth
Support Our Most Important Campaign of the Year!
We did it again. I, along with 96 other AE911Truth petition signers who are members of the American Institute of Architects (AIA), have sponsored a bold resolution that calls upon the AIA to officially support a new WTC 7 investigation.
Yesterday the AIA released its Official Delegate Information Booklet. Our resolution, number 16-3 on page 36, is one of just three that will be voted on.
Unlike last year’s resolution, this one contains three pages of powerful evidence upon which we’re basing our call for a new investigation. At least 1,000 AIA members — if not more — will lay eyes on it in the next six weeks.
AIA Resolution Campaign 2.0
Throughout the AIA’s history, many resolutions have been voted down but have returned to the convention floor several times. One notable example was the effort to pass an anti-war resolution during the Vietnam War. As advocates for one of the most challenging issues of our time, we should expect no different.
Last year we captured only 4% of the vote. But we also learned some lessons that will help in our attempt to win a much larger share this year:
Include the most significant evidence in the resolution, thus ensuring that the delegates are educated about WTC 7 when they cast their votes;
Send our materials to the heads of the local AIA chapters before they meet to discuss the resolutions;
Make personal contact: Have one-on-one conversations with delegates at the convention and arrange for as many AIA members as possible to speak on behalf of the resolution at the business meeting.
Our “AIA Resolution Campaign 2.0” is designed to do all of the above.
Help Launch The Campaign Now!
This is one of the most crucial times of the year for AE911Truth.
Over the next six weeks, we’ll be campaigning for this resolution — that is, educating thousands of architects and gaining hundreds of new petition signers at the AIA convention. We need your help to make it all possible.
Our campaign budget this time around has been trimmed to $20,000 — $5,000 less than last year. To reach this goal, we need 800 contributions averaging $25.
Here’s what your donation will pay for:
A 10’ x 10’ expo booth plus accessories, which costs over $5,000 (we’re spending $5,000 less than last year by not going with the 20’ x 20’ booth);
Travel and lodging for our staff and a handful of AIA members, all of whom will participate in our on-the-floor educational efforts;
A full-scale multimedia blitz, which will include a mailer (soon-to-be-released) to 2,300 local, regional, and national AIA leaders, and an online landing page devoted to educating AIA members about the resolution.
Please stand by our unyielding efforts to bring the WTC evidence to A/E communities across the U.S. It is only through your ongoing generosity and our relentless perseverance that the breakthrough we need will come.
By Felicity Arbuthnot
Information Clearing House
April 28, 2016
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.
— Albert Camus, 1913-1960
On May 1st, 2003, George W. Bush stood in a dinky little flying suit on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln and in a super stage managed appearance told the lie of the century:
Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.
The illegal occupation and decimation of Iraq continued until December 2011. In June 2014 they returned to bomb again in the guise of combating ISIS. As the thirteenth anniversary of Bush’s ridiculous appearance with a vast “Mission Accomplished” banner behind him, Iraq is largely in ruins, Iraqis have fled the murderous “liberation” and its aftermath in millions, and there are over three million internally displaced.
The nation is pinned between a tyrannical, corrupt US puppet government, a homicidal, head chopping, raping, organ eating, history erasing, US-spawned ISIS – and a renewed, relentless US bombardment. So much for the 2008 US-Iraq State of Forces agreement, which stated that by 31st December 2011 “all United States forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory.”
On the USS Abraham Lincoln Bush stated:
In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world … Because of you, our nation is more secure. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free.
In what has transpired to be monumental irony, he continued:
The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of al-Qaida, and cut off a source of terrorist funding.
There was, of course, no al-Qaida in Iraq, no funding of fundamentalist terrorism under Saddam Hussein. It is the invasion’s conception, birth, now reached maturity from Baghdad to Brussels, Mosul to the Maghreb, Latakia to London.
In Iraq, US terrorism from the air is back in all its genocidal force.
Incredibly on April 23rd, the Independent reported another staggering piece of either disinformation or childish naivety, in a predictably familiar script: “A spokesperson for the US military said all possible precautions were taken to avoid ‘collateral damage’”, but in approaching 7,000 airstrikes the number of confirmed civilian deaths had risen on Planet Pentagon to just – forty one.
According to the Associated Press, the Obama administration may soon release at least part of a 28-page secret chapter from a congressional inquiry into 9/11 that would detail Saudi relations with and support for the Al Qaeda terrorist network before September 2001. (Los Angeles Times)
April 27, 2016
Los Angeles Times
Of the 19 hijackers who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks, 15 were citizens of Saudi Arabia. What does that fact signify?
According to senior U.S. officials, little or nothing. From the outset, they treated the national identity of the terrorists as incidental, connoting nothing of importance. It was as if the 15 murderers just happened to smoke the same brand of cigarettes or wear the same after-shave.
Had they come from somewhere other than Saudi Arabia, a different attitude would surely have prevailed. Imagine if 15 Iraqis had perpetrated the attacks. In Washington’s eyes, Saddam Hussein’s direct involvement would have been a given. Fifteen Iranians? U.S. officials would have unhesitatingly fingered authorities in Tehran as complicit.
In matters relating to war and peace, U.S. officials tell us what in their judgment we need to know… Why not allow Americans to judge for themselves?
Saudi Arabia, however, got a pass. In its final report, the 9/11 Commission said it “found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually” had funded Al Qaeda. This artfully crafted passage was an exercise in damage control, designed to preserve the existing U.S.-Saudi relationship from critical scrutiny.
The effort never fully succeeded, skeptics suspecting that there might be more to the story. Today those doubts find expression in demands to declassify 28 pages of a congressional investigation said to detail Saudi relations with and support for the Al Qaeda terrorist network before September 2001.
According to a Monday report by the Associated Press, the Obama administration may finally do just that. Whether the 28 pages sustain or refute suspicions of Saudi involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks will remain impossible to say absent such executive action.
by Justin Raimondo
April 27, 2016
What’s the difference between “boots on the ground” and military personnel wearing boots who are engaged in combat – and perhaps dying – on the ground? If you can answer that question convincingly, perhaps you’d like to apply for John Kirby’s job, because he’s not doing it very successfully. Kirby is the State Department spokesman who, in answer to a question from a reporter about the 250 US troops being sent to Syria, denied President Obama ever said there’d be “no boots on the ground” in Syria. Here’s the video, and here’s the relevant transcript:
“Kirby: there was never this – there was never this, “No boots on the ground.” I don’t know where this keeps coming from.
Question: But yes there – well, yes, yes, there was.
Kirby: There was no – there was – no there wasn’t. There was –
Question: More than –
Kirby: We’re not going to be involved in a large-scale combat mission on the ground. That is what the President has long said.”
To anyone who has been following this, Kirby’s argument is patently absurd. The President told the BBC less than twenty-four hours previously that there would be “no boots on the ground” – and then his administration announced that 250 more booted US soldiers would be treading Syrian ground. Not only that, but prior to the summer of last year, the President assured the American people there’d be no “boots on the ground” a total of sixteen times.
Meet the new class profiting from the growth of the national-security state.
By Kelley Vlahos
April 25, 2016
The American Conservative
In no place in America are the abrupt changes in the nation’s security posture so keenly reflected in real estate and lifestyle than the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. In the decade after 9/11, it has grown into a sprawling, pretentious representation of the federal government’s growth, vices and prosperity, encompassing the wealthiest counties, the best schools, and some of the highest rates of income inequality in the country.
“People hate Washington but they don’t really know why,” says Mike Lofgren, a longtime Beltway inhabitant and arch critic of its culture. But show them what is underneath the dignified facades—particularly the greed and excess financed by the overgrown military-industrial complex—and the populist resentment recently harnessed by insurgent candidates Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders just might have a concrete grievance that can drive real change.
For Lofgren, “Beltwayland” is perhaps best described as analogous to the Victorian novel the Picture of Dorian Gray—a rich, shimmering ecosystem in which all of the ugly, twisted aberrations are hidden away in an attic somewhere, or rather sadly, in the poverty-blighted wards and low income zip codes of “the DMV” (The District, Maryland, and Virginia).
Oscar Wilde might have seen a bit of his Victorian England in Washington’s self-indulgent elite, but unlike the gentry of Dorian Gray, men and women here see not leisure, but amassing personal wealth through workaholism, as a virtue of the ruling class. For them, a two-front war and Washington’s newly enlarged national-security state, much of which is hidden in plain sight, have ushered in a 21st-century gilded age only replicated in America’s few, most privileged enclaves. As Lofgren explains:
It is common knowledge that Wall Street and its inflated compensation packages have remade Manhattan into an exclusive playground for the rich, just as tech moguls have made San Francisco unaffordable for the middle class. It is less well known that the estimated $4 trillion spent since 9/11 on the war on terrorism and billions spent on political campaigns ($6 billion on the 2012 elections alone) have trickled down so extravagantly to the New Class settled around Washington’s Beltway that they have remade the landscape of our capital.
9/11 Family Member Lorie Van Auken holding up the JICI showing redacted pages on CNN.
You may have heard of the 28 redacted pages from the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11. They have been redacted for years, and the 9/11 families and others have been fighting for their release since the day it was announced they were redacted. According to people like former Senator Bob Graham, those pages talk about alleged Saudi Government support for the hijackers.
Recently, there was a short segment on 60 Minutes about the pages. This resulted in a much needed push for the release of the 28 redacted pages. When Obama first came into office, it was reported that he told 9/11 Family Member Kristen Breitweiser “that he was willing to make the pages public.” A few years later, according to 9/11 Family Member Bill Doyle, Obama told him “Bill, I will get them released.”
Many times throughout Obama’s Presidency, we have seen him protect the Saudis against the 9/11 Families who want their day in court. Right now, he is threatening to veto a bill called JASTA that would finally give the families that day in court.
The 28 pages were originally classified by the Bush Administration “for reasons of national security.” Obama said that “Jim Clapper, our director of national intelligence, has been going through to make sure that whatever it is that is released is not gonna compromise some major national security interest of the United States.”
We have heard from many people who have read them say that there is nothing in those pages that would affect national security. Rep. Walter Jones said “there’s nothing in it about national security.” Former Sen. Bob Graham has said “they do not affect national security.”
Yesterday, the former Chair and Co-Chair of the discredited 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean & Lee Hamilton released a statement that said “we would recommend that steps be taken to protect the identities of anyone who has been ruled out by authorities as having any connection to the 9/11 plot.”
In other words, they don’t want all of the names within the 28 redacted pages released. As 9/11 Family Member Lorie Van Auken stated the other day on CNN, one of the names listed might be Prince Bandar. Or “Bandar Bush.”
Indeed. Former 9/11 Commissioner John Lehman said “yes. The average intelligent watcher of 60 Minutes would recognize them instantly,” and Rep. Walter Jones said “it’s about the Bush Administration and its relationship with the Saudis.”
If a close personal friend of the Bush family and George Tenet’s is listed within those pages, I think the American people, and the people of the world deserve to know about it. When the 9/11 Commission met with Bush and Cheney behind closed doors, not under oath, with no transcripts allowed, 9/11 Commissioner John Lehman asked Bush about an allegation concerning Princess Haifa and Prince Bandar. Apparently, Bush “dodged the questions.” After his meeting with the 9/11 Commission, Bush held a press conference and said that he “answered every question they asked.” Certainly doesn’t sound like it.
Today, it was reported that the Obama Administration “will likely soon release at least part of a 28-page secret chapter from a congressional inquiry into 9/11…” That is a slap in the face to the 9/11 families and to the people of the world.
All documents pertaining to 9/11 should immediately be released, and completely unredacted. President Bush’s PDBs that came before 9/11 that Kurt Eichenwald reported on, and said “the Aug. 6 document, for all of the controversy it provoked, is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it.” The 80k documents pertaining to the Sarasota/Atta/Saudi story that Dan Christensen is working on. All of the documentation from the 9/11 Commission, including Prince Bandar’s Memorandum For The Record which is currently classified. Any and all documentation pertaining to 9/11 should be released. PERIOD!!!
Protecting those allegedly involved in the murder of 2,976 people is Treason, and the American people shouldn’t stand for it.
As the September Eleventh Advocates recently stated “no amount of money, no greed, no power, no regional interest could ever be worth such treason.”
Their power is enormous
by Justin Raimondo
April 22, 2016
The Constitution provides for three branches of government: the executive, Congress, and the judiciary – but there have been a few additions lately. With the rise of mass communications, common parlance has designated the media as the “Fourth Estate,” because – in theory – it is supposed to act as a “watchdog” on the activities of the other three. (Although in practice, as we have seen, it often doesn’t work out that way.) And as America entered the age of empire, stepping out on the world stage and exerting its power, a development the Founders foresaw – and greatly feared – became a reality: the rise of foreign lobbyists, i.e. the Fifth Estate, as a power in our domestic politics.
This was inevitable as we took the road to empire. Our foreign clients, protectorates, and sock puppets have a material interest in maintaining the status quo: their life blood depends on the smooth workings of the political machinery that keeps the gravy train flowing from Washington to every point on the globe. “Foreign aid,” arms deals, overseas bases that boost their economies, the deployment of “soft power,” and the architecture of entangling alliances that have enmeshed us all over the world – all of this is defended and relentlessly extended by foreign lobbyists who work day and night to protect and expand their very profitable turf.
The latest newsworthy example is the Saudi lobby, which is working overtime these days to burnish the Kingdom’s badly tarnished image. The recent agitation for the release of the censored 28 pages of the joint congressional report on the 9/11 terrorist attacks – and news reports of their horrific war crimes in Yemen – has them on the defensive.
The American people are waking up to the fact that the 9/11 hijackers – who came to this country with little knowledge of English, and few resources – had some significant assistance from at least one foreign intelligence agency, and the Saudi connection, which is the subject of the redacted 28 pages, is now in the spotlight. In response, the Saudi lobby is manning the barricades, with articles like “Saudi Arabia Is a Great American Ally” in Foreign Policy magazine, which basically argues that we need these head-chopping barbarians because Iran is worse. On the legislative front, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-Perpetual War) is blocking a Senate bill that would give the green light to a lawsuit by the families of 9/11 victims to sue the Saudis. Graham and Senator John McCain have long worked hand-in-hand with the Saudis to garner US support for “moderate” Islamist rebels fighting to overthrow the government of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. And when the Saudis launched their terror-bombing of Yemen, Graham was right there cheering them on – and lamenting that “they no longer trust us” because they didn’t give us a heads up.
The Saudis have threatened to sell $750 billion in US assets if the Senate bill passes. In the meantime, President Barack Obama is in Riyadh, on a trip to repair frayed relations, where he is receiving a “chilly reception,” according to news accounts.
Federal agencies relentlessly pursue suspected whistleblowers, while self-serving politicians escape punishment.
By Philip Giraldi
April 19, 2016
The American Conservative
Starting with Hammurabi, rulers have frequently appreciated that their subjects would be more acquiescent to being governed if they had at least a minimal appreciation that they were being treated fairly. That understanding has led to the development of law codes along the lines of the Roman Republic’s laws of the Twelve Tables, which were inscribed in bronze and posted prominently in the Forum so everyone would know what the rules were. In the Middle Ages statues of Justice erected in the Italian republics often had her blindfolded and with a scale in one hand and a sword in the other, indicating that guilt would be weighed fairly and punishment, if merited, would be delivered inexorably. For modern democracies the rule of law has often been translated into the expression “equal justice under law.”
Of course everyone knows that there is no such thing as equal justice. Certain infractions are rarely prosecuted while other crimes are pursued rigorously. Expensive lawyers reduce the risk of there being any serious consequences for the wealthy even when one is caught out. Employees of the state are rarely punished even when their felonies cost the taxpayers millions of dollars because no one wants to look closely at corruption in government.
But there is nevertheless the impression that the law exists to serve everyone equally, which is why the recent comments by President Obama regarding Hillary Clinton’s personal email account, which included 22 emails classified top secret, are so incredible. Obama made two statements regarding Hillary’s private email server while she was secretary of state. His first comment was that he would do nothing to impede the investigation and possible filing of charges against Clinton if the facts should warrant that kind of action, elaborating “That is institutionally how we have always operated: I do not talk to the attorney general about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line.” And then he followed up by stating that “There’s carelessness in terms of managing emails, that she has owned, and she recognizes. I continue to believe that she has not jeopardized America’s national security.”