Police hunt missing terror suspect Mohammed Ahmed Mohamed

Danny Shaw Home affairs
4 November 2013

A terror suspect who has gone missing after changing into a burka at a mosque is being hunted by police.

Mohammed Ahmed Mohamed, 27, who was subject to an order restricting his movements, was last seen on Friday leaving the site in Acton, west London.

CCTV images showed him leaving with his face totally covered.

Police say Mr Mohamed, who has been linked to the Somali militant group al-Shabab, should not be approached but do not believe he poses a direct threat.

Ports notified

Security minister James Brokenshire said: “National security is the government’s top priority and the police are doing everything in their power to apprehend this man as quickly as possible.

The TPims system is under intense scrutiny on several fronts.

The disappearance of Mohammed Ahmed Mohamed raises questions as to whether the regime, dubbed “control orders-lite”, is in fact too light.

Mohamed is the second suspect to abscond. On Boxing Day 2012, Ibrahim Magag vanished after reportedly hiring a black cab. He has not been seen since.

There are also doubts about the robustness of the electronic tags that suspects have to wear.

Last week, prosecutions against three men, accused of tampering with their tags, were dropped when it emerged they may have inadvertently come loose.

Then there’s the wider question: How will police and MI5 monitor suspects when their TPims expire after the maximum two years?

“The police and security services do not believe that this man poses a direct threat to the public in the UK.

“The home secretary, on police advice, applied to the High Court for an order protecting anonymity to be lifted in order to assist with their investigation.”

A Labour source said the party would be seeking an “urgent parliamentary explanation” over the case.

The home secretary could be asked to come before MPs to explain what has happened, although the Commons speaker has the final say on whether the question is granted.

Somalia-born Mr Mohamed, who police say has breached his terrorism prevention and investigation measures (TPim) notice, is 5ft 8in tall, and of medium build.

Mr Mohamed arrived at the An-Noor Masjid and Community Centre, in Church Road, Acton, at approximately 10:00 GMT on Friday, and was seen inside at 15:15 GMT.

CCTV images issued by Scotland Yard showed him arriving wearing a jacket and trousers and then leaving the mosque in the burka.

The Metropolitan Police advised anyone who saw Mr Mohamed not to approach him and to call 999.

Police released CCTV images of Mr Mohamed arriving at the mosque Police released CCTV images of Mr Mohamed arriving at the mosque…

A Scotland Yard spokesman said: “The Counter Terrorism Command immediately launched inquiries to trace Mr Mohamed and these continue.

“Ports and borders were notified with his photograph and details circulated nationally. Public safety remains our priority.”

The court-imposed anonymity order banning the publication of Mr Mohamed’s name was lifted on Saturday to allow police to make a public appeal for information.

TPims are aimed at protecting the public from people the home secretary believes to have engaged in terrorism-related activity for whom it is not feasible to prosecute or deport.

The court-approved orders include a requirement that their subjects report daily to the authorities, stay overnight at a specified address, wear a GPS tag, and face restrictions on travel, movement, association and communication.

They were introduced in January 2012 to replace control orders, which had been in place for seven years and also included the power to relocate suspects.

‘Extremely serious’

When the TPims order was obtained, Mr Mohamed was said to have received terrorist training in Somalia and fought on the front line in support of al-Shabab.

Mr Mohamed leaving the mosque … and leaving the mosque

Court documents also say he supported a UK-based network supporting terrorist-related activity in Somalia and had been involved in attack planning against Western interests in east Africa.

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper called for answers on how Mr Mohamed, who is said to now be a UK citizen, was able to abscond and described the situation as “extremely serious”.

“Clearly police and security agencies will be doing everything possible to locate this terror suspect and ensure public safety,” she said.

“The home secretary also needs to provide information about the decisions made over Mohammed Ahmed Mohamed’s TPim, how he was able to abscond and what the risks to the public are.”

She called for the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, David Anderson, to “investigate urgently what has happened and the adequacy of the controls and powers in this case”.

Related articles

G4S tagging contract probe launched

York Press

Press Association 2013

Monday 4th November 2013

_home_panew_uk_news 1-1A criminal investigation has been launched into a contract between security giant G4S and the Government for tagging criminals.

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has opened its inquiry after it emerged G4S – along with Serco –  had charged the Ministry of Justice for monitoring  offenders who were dead, back in prison, had their tags removed, left the  country or never been tagged in the first place.

In July, the Government reported G4S  –  well-known for its botched handling of its Olympics security contract –  when the FTSE 100 firm refused to take part in an additional audit  to rule out any dishonesty.

A spokesman for G4S said: “G4S confirms it has today received notice that the director of the  Serious Fraud Office has opened an investigation into the “contract for  the provision of electronic monitoring services which commenced in April  2005 as amended and extended until the present day”.

“G4S has confirmed to the SFO that it will co-operate fully with the  investigation.”

The SFO confirmed it has also opened a criminal investigation into contracts held with Serco, as well as G4S.

An audit by big four accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, launched in May,  alleged that overcharging began at least as far back as the start of the  current contracts in 2005 – but could have dated as far back as the previous  contracts let in 1999.

Justice Secretary Chris Grayling told the two firms that an independent forensic audit was required  to look at, among other areas, internal email trails between  executives to establish what happened. While Serco agreed to take part, G4S  refused.

A Government-wide review of all contracts held by Serco and G4S was sparked by the allegations last July.

In the course of the audit in September, the Ministry of Justice provided material  to the SFO in relation to Serco’s conduct.

Related articles

‘NSA Decoded’: Snowden’s Revelations Explained

CommonDreams.org

Monday, November 4, 2013

In a new and impressive interactive presentation of their in-depth reporting on the NSA revelations made possible by Edward Snowden, The Guardian shows why it is widely regarded as the best newspaper in the world.

When Edward Snowden met journalists in his cramped room in Hong Kong’s Mira hotel in June, his mission was ambitious. Amid the clutter of laundry, meal trays and his four laptops, he wanted to start a debate about mass surveillance.

He succeeded beyond anything the journalists or Snowden himself ever imagined. His disclosures about the NSA resonated with Americans from day one. But they also exploded round the world.

Check it out here.

Related articles

CIA made doctors torture suspected terrorists after 9/11, taskforce finds

The Guardian home

, health editor

Monday 4 November 2013

Doctors were asked to torture detainees for intelligence gathering, and unethical practices continue, review concludes

CIA made doctors torture suspected terrorists after 9/11, taskforce findsDoctors and psychologists working for the US military violated the ethical codes of their profession under instruction from the defence department and the CIA to become involved in the torture and degrading treatment of suspected terrorists, an investigation has concluded.

The report of the Taskforce on Preserving Medical Professionalism in National Security Detention Centres concludes that after 9/11, health professionals working with the military and intelligence services “designed and participated in cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment and torture of detainees”.

Medical professionals were in effect told that their ethical mantra “first do no harm” did not apply, because they were not treating people who were ill.

The report lays blame primarily on the defence department (DoD) and the CIA, which required their healthcare staff to put aside any scruples in the interests of intelligence gathering and security practices that caused severe harm to detainees, from waterboarding to sleep deprivation and force-feeding.

The two-year review by the 19-member taskforce, Ethics Abandoned: Medical Professionalism and Detainee Abuse in the War on Terror, supported by the Institute on Medicine as a Profession (IMAP) and the Open Society Foundations, says that the DoD termed those involved in interrogation “safety officers” rather than doctors. Doctors and nurses were required to participate in the force-feeding of prisoners on hunger strike, against the rules of the World Medical Association and the American Medical Association. Doctors and psychologists working for the DoD were required to breach patient confidentiality and share what they knew of the prisoner’s physical and psychological condition with interrogators and were used as interrogators themselves. They also failed to comply with recommendations from the army surgeon general on reporting abuse of detainees.

The CIA’s office of medical services played a critical role in advising the justice department that “enhanced interrogation” methods, such as extended sleep deprivation and waterboarding, which are recognised as forms of torture, were medically acceptable. CIA medical personnel were present when waterboarding was taking place, the taskforce says.

Although the DoD has taken steps to address concerns over practices at Guantánamo Bay in recent years, and the CIA has said it no longer has suspects in detention, the taskforce says that these “changed roles for health professionals and anaemic ethical standards” remain.

“The American public has a right to know that the covenant with its physicians to follow professional ethical expectations is firm regardless of where they serve,” said Dr Gerald Thomson, professor of medicine emeritus at Columbia University and member of the taskforce.

He added: “It’s clear that in the name of national security the military trumped that covenant, and physicians were transformed into agents of the military and performed acts that were contrary to medical ethics and practice. We have a responsibility to make sure this never happens again.”The taskforce says that unethical practices by medical personnel, required by the military, continue today. The DoD “continues to follow policies that undermine standards of professional conduct” for interrogation, hunger strikes, and reporting abuse. Protocols have been issued requiring doctors and nurses to participate in the force-feeding of detainees, including forced extensive bodily restraints for up to two hours twice a day.

Doctors are still required to give interrogators access to medical and psychological information about detainees which they can use to exert pressure on them. Detainees are not permitted to receive treatment for the distress caused by their torture.

“Putting on a uniform does not and should not abrogate the fundamental principles of medical professionalism,” said IMAP president David Rothman. “‘Do no harm’ and ‘put patient interest first’ must apply to all physicians regardless of where they practise.”The taskforce wants a full investigation into the involvement of the medical profession in detention centres. It is also calling for publication of the Senate intelligence committee’s inquiry into CIA practices and wants rules to ensure doctors and psychiatrists working for the military are allowed to abide by the ethical obligations of their profession; they should be prohibited from taking part in interrogation, sharing information from detainees’ medical records with interrogators, or participating in force-feeding, and they should be required to report abuse of detainees.

Related articles

Co-op Bank to close 50 branches as hedge funds broker rescue deal

The Guardian home

Monday 4 November 2013

Sweeping restructuring of bank could see hundreds of jobs lost amid closure of around 15% of 324 branches

The Pyramid, Co-operative Bank Building at sunset, Stockport, Greater Manchester, England, UK.

The Co-operative Bank’s Pyramid building in Stockport. The bank needs £1.5bn of extra capital. Photograph: Alamy

The Co-operative Group on Monday sought to reassure customers of its troubled banking arm that its ethical approach could be maintained as it confirmed that activist hedge funds were taking a crucial role in the £1.5bn rescue of the bank.

The loss-making bank indicated that a significant number of jobs were on the line as it announced a sweeping restructuring that will see the closure of around 50 branches from its 324 estate. It plans to move more customers to online banking and its network of corporate banking sectors is also to be rationalised. Even so, it warned that it would not make profits until 2015 at the earliest, and possibly not “for some years thereafter”.

The restructuring is an attempt to stabilise the bank, which needs £1.5bn of extra capital to absorb losses on loans that have turned sour. Until now, it has been 100% owned by the mutual Co-operative Group.

The group of supermarkets, funeral homes and pharmacies is being forced to hand 70% of the bank to bondholders led by the US hedge funds Silver Point and Aurelius, who have forced dramatic changes to the original plan first announced in June.

Richard Pym, the new chairman of Co-op Bank, said that if the bondholders did not vote for the new scheme the only alternative was “resolution” – in other words, being taken under the control of the Bank of England, or even possibly nationalised.

The bank will only be able to use the Co-operative name if it keeps its ethical stance, and customers will be given their say on this next year. They were last asked for their opinions on which businesses to lend to and which ones to turn away in 2009 and, since the bank first began its ethical approach in 1992, it has turned away £1.2bn of business. An independent director will chair an ethics and values committee. The bank said “customer power” would keep it ethical.

The group of hedge funds, advised by Caroline Silver of Moelis and known as LT2, stressed that it was determined to maintain the ethical stance for which the Co-op Bank is best known.

“We are proud that the recapitalisation will enable the Co-op Bank to continue its unique mission as a UK bank committed to the values and ethics of the co-operative movement.  With the benefit of financial strength and the strong leadership brought into the bank this spring, we look forward to the resurgence of this unique institution,” she said.

The Co-op Group will now put £462m into the revamped bank rather than the £1bn announced in June, while the bond holders will take a 70% stake in the bank rather than the 25% originally expected. However, the hedge funds in the LT2 are also putting in an extra £125m of capital in addition to their bonds.

The LT2 group – so-called because they owned lower tier 2 debt – also revealed the identities of their backers as Beach Point Capital Management, Caspian Capital, Canyon Capital Advisors and Monarch Alternative Capital.

Niall Booker, appointed as chief executive of the bank in May, said he now wanted to focus on implementing a business plan that was likely to take five years to implement. He also stressed the commitment to ethics.

“We will strive to make things simpler for our customers, removing unnecessary processes and reducing costs. We will also put greater rigour into our risk management and controls, ensuring our customers are dealt with respectfully, fairly and transparently,” Booker said. The “legacy issues” of the past – largely bad loans from the Britannia Building Society deal in 2009 – were have an “impact for some time”.

Jobs are under threat with the branch closure programme. Some 15% of the 324 branches are to be shut, in sharp contrast to the ambitions of the previous management, which had planned to take the network to almost 1,000 branches via the aborted takeover of 631 branches from Lloyds Banking Group.

Euan Sutherland, who joined from B&Q in May to run the entire Co-op Group, said the bank had lost its way over the previous five years when it had expanded rapidly, merging with the Britannia and then attempting the audacious – and ill-fated – takeover of the so-called Verde branches from Lloyds.

It was the downgrade of the bank’s debt to junk by Moody’s in May that started to expose some of the problems it faced and led to concerns that the Co-op could pull out of banking altogether.

However, Sutherland said he was optimistic for the future of the bank.

Some 30,000 private investors who bought bonds providing a 13% coupon will also need to vote on the restructuring. They are to be offered a bond issued by the group which pays a lower rate of interest and get their capital back in 12 years time or can receive the same income for the next 12 years but forgo their capital at the end of period.

Mark Taber, the activist who has campaigned on behalf of private investors, said: “It is now up to all holders to decide whether to accept but we believe it is a much better solution.”

STUNNING (and depressing) video: What would our $17 Trillion National Debt look like in $100 bills?

Poor Richard’s News

23 October 2013

image

I’m giving you the $1 Trillion in the image above as a teaser.  This video is absolutely mind blowing!  Each of the pallets in the above image represents the to-scale size of a pallet of $100 million dollars in $100 bills.

Wait till you see what our $17 Trillion National Debt would look like!

here’s the video:

No one in the establishment class in Washington has made any serious attempts and lifting this weight off of the shoulders of our children and grandchildren.  Not Republican leaders, not Democrat leaders.  The Washington elite are happy to keep piling on trillions of debt and unfunded liabilities every year.

It is vital that America understands the true gravity of America’s horrible financial situation. We must continue to educate ourselves on the severity of what Washington’s reckless spending and big-government policies do to our country.

I highly encourage our readers to pass share this post with your friends and family on Facebook, Twitter, and any other forum available to you.

Related articles

Arms export rules relaxed

By Rebecca LaFlure

October 18, 2013

A stream of military equipment exports will soon bypass State Department scrutiny

4127929730_2b4f2bc2bb_oA sweeping overhaul by the Obama administration of U.S. rules for exporting military goods to other countries has begun to take effect, offering buyers of spare parts used in military aircraft the opportunity to bypass a series of longstanding federal export controls.

The overhaul, which will soon be extended to military vehicles, vessels, and submarines, was cheered by the Aerospace Industries Association and other manufacturers groups. The State Department, which promotes U.S. arms exports overseas, said the new rules would “strengthen the U.S. defense and aerospace industrial base” and allow the government to “focus [its] export control resources on the most sensitive items,” according to a news release.

But some independent groups have expressed concern that this unprecedented relaxation of rules — more than four years in the making — could allow terrorists or human rights violators to gain access more easily to militarily useful equipment.

“In my mind, this is a major deregulation,” said Steve Pelak, who until June led all government prosecutions of arms export control violations, at a press conference on Oct. 16. These changes “will make enforcement agencies’ jobs… much more difficult.”

Arms exports are a big business for the United States. In 2011, the U.S. government entered into a record-breaking $66.3 billion worth of agreements to export defense articles and services to foreign governments — nearly 80 percent of such arms agreements worldwide, according to the Congressional Research Service.

This total does not include exports made by private companies to foreign buyers independently of the government, a market that experts say amounts to tens of billions of dollars a year. These are the principal transactions affected by the new rules.

Government officials and industry groups say that loosening controls on less sensitive exports will bring substantial economic benefits. The White House noted in an Oct. 15 statement that foreign countries are increasingly buying basic military parts from vendors outside the country to avoid strict U.S. licensing requirements.

At an April 12 Council of Foreign Relations meeting, Andrew Shapiro, then the assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, said export reform is “going to have a real impact on our economy at a time when competition is even more fierce and at a time when our manufacturing base could really use a boost.”

The Aerospace Industries Association said in an Oct. 16 news release that it expects the industry’s estimated $21 billion of annual exports of military aircraft and aircraft engine items to increase under the new rules.

However, William Hartung, director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy, said in an August report on arms exports that because less than 3 percent of U.S. exports are subject to these particular licensing controls, “it is unreasonable to expect that changes in export procedures governing that small a fraction of U.S. exports are likely to have a major economic impact.”

Even so, the reform effort marks an historic change: Thousands of military-related items once monitored by the State Department’s strict export license control system will move to the Commerce Department’s often less restrictive regulatory process. The Commerce Department’s principal function is to improve the health of U.S. businesses.

The first changes, which cover military aircraft and gas turbine engines, went into effect Oct. 15. They affect spare parts such as helicopter blades, cockpit gauges and steel brake wear pads, but — according to Hartung’s report and William Lowell, former director of the State Department’s Office of Defense Trade Controls — some finished products, such as Black Hawk helicopters, will also shift to Commerce Department control.

The State Department will continue to oversee equipment capable of directly threatening U.S. military forces, such as fully assembled fighter jets and surveillance aircraft.

On Jan. 6, Commerce will take control of most equipment and technology used in military vehicles, vessels and submarines, according to the State Department. The government may also soon give Commerce control over items in other categories of military goods, including firearms, ammunition, and explosives,

Remy Nathan, vice president of international affairs at the Aerospace Industries Association, said the change will prevent the government, U.S. companies and foreign allies from “going through regulations for no relevant national security purpose” on basic items like nuts, bolts and screws.

“I’m perplexed sometimes at those who seem to believe this is some kind of major loosening of the system when I believe it just applies the right level of controls to the appropriate level of technology,” Nathan said.

However, some critics argue that while some military parts may sound harmless, they could still pose a threat if they fell into the wrong hands. Open Society Foundations, an advocacy organization that largely focuses on human rights, hosted a press event Oct. 16 to air their concerns, led by Pelak and Lowell.

Lora Lumpe, a senior policy analyst at the foundations said these spare parts are “not the big money,” but are still “vitally important.” Iran, for example, is persistently trying to obtain spare parts for its aged fighter jets, she said.

Companies, in nearly all cases, must obtain a license for every export of a military item listed on the State Department’s Munitions List. Officials weigh the possibility that the equipment or technology may be misused or fall into the wrong hands.  But items moved to Commerce Department control are eligible for more — and broader­ — exemptions from the licensing requirements.

For example, companies may export many types of military equipment and technologies without a license to 36 U.S. allies, including Turkey, Japan and South Korea, if they are used by those governments. Items deemed not “specially designed” for military use would not require a license, though they could not be sent to Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria and China.

They could be re-exported without approval to all countries except Iran, said Colby Goodman, a former political affairs officer with the U.N. Office of Disarmament Affairs who follows the arms trade. Palek said the “specially designed” phrase leaves much room to interpretation, saying that equipment could be exported without a license if a manufacturer “can think of any civilian application” for the item.

Goodman also noted that the State Department is required by law to scrutinize the human rights records of the countries and individuals that receive any U.S. military equipment. The Obama administration has promised that it will continue that oversight for exports under Commerce Department purview, but the administration is not required to do so by law, a fact that worries human rights advocates, Goodman said.

The White House said in its Oct. 15 statement that it will balance “the easing of export licensing requirements for many items” by offering “increased oversight” by special agents and analysts in the Commerce Department’s export enforcement unit.

Related articles

New World Order unmasked!

By Kevin Barrett

Mon Nov 4, 2013 5:28AM GMT

People across the globe are opening their eyes to the deceptions of hegemonic powers.

People across the globe are opening their eyes to the deceptions of hegemonic powers.
Is the New World Order crumbling before our eyes? Are people everywhere rising up against the all-seeing-eye of “total information awareness” ?

The Snowden-triggered NSA spy scandals have thrown a monkey wrench into US-NATO plans for the world empire. Apparently, the world’s seven billion people do not want their every email stolen and stored, every phone call wiretapped and recorded, every pore on every face under the permanent scrutiny of spy satellites … and every world leader blackmailed and controlled.
This Monday and Tuesday, November 4th and 5th, rallies will be held around the world unmasking the global surveillance state.
On Monday, November 4th, all across Iran, people will be rallying to commemorate the 1979 seizure of the US Embassy, otherwise known as “the Den of Espionage.”
And then on Tuesday, November 5th, the “Million Mask March” will bring together supporters of Anonymous, Wikileaks, Occupy, Oath Keepers, whistleblowers, and hacktivists in more than 430 locations around the world.
The Iranians – who have been rallying against the “Den of Espionage” since 1979 – are ahead of their time. Today, 34 years after the US embassy seizure, the whole world is following in their footsteps and protesting against American spying.
Western corporate media, whose mission is keeping people ignorant and confused, are peddling lies and half-truths about these events. Big media tells us the students who seized the US embassy in Iran were scary-looking fanatics, as depicted in the film Argo. And big media will also portray the Million Mask March as a frightening, confusing phenomenon.
But what are these protests REALLY all about?
The Iranian embassy seizure was a response to a long series of crimes committed against Iran by the American National Security State. The CIA and its corporate masters had seized control of Iran in their 1953 coup d’état against democratically-elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, installing a brutal puppet dictator – the Shah – as their front man.
During the reign of the CIA-backed Shah, many thousands of Iranians were tortured in CIA-built torture chambers, using CIA-supplied torture equipment, by CIA-trained torturers. If the makers of Argo had shown this, audiences would have cheered for the Iranian students, not the US diplomats. Those “diplomats,” after all, were directly or indirectly complicit in the torture.
This year, exactly fifty years after the event, the CIA finally admitted that it was behind the 1953 coup. According to the internal CIA history of the coup, released to the National Security Archive and published August 19th 2013: “The military coup that overthrew Mosadeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of US foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government.”
Europeans, unlike Iranians, did not have to wait fifty years to see official US documents proving that an American “den of spies” is conspiring against their nations’ sovereignty. They can thank Edward Snowden for that.
The official US response is that “everybody spies on everybody, so it doesn’t really matter.” Nothing could be further from the truth.
No other country, with the exception of the Israeli regime, has the kind of surveillance capability the US has. And the only reason Israel has it is that the Zionists own the US and can force the NSA to feed them its raw data.
The New World Order empire, run by the global financial elite and its US-British-Israeli military and intelligence communities, is developing the capability to spy on everyone on earth. They are using this capability to build a world government based on “total information awareness.” Once they are able to instantly intercept anyone’s communication, they will be able to blackmail everyone of consequence and prevent anyone from moving against them in any way. Once this surveillance-based global dictatorship is established, they will tell us: “Resistance is futile.” And they will be right.
The Million Mask March aims to stop the rise of the global surveillance state.
Why the masks? By wearing a mask, marchers will be symbolically insisting on their right to privacy and anonymity. The spy satellites watching the marches, and feeding their satellite photos into computers running facial recognition-based tracking systems, will have difficulty identifying and tracking masked marchers.
But the marchers will not be wearing just any masks. The mask of choice is the Guy Fawkes mask popularized by the film V for Vendetta.
By referencing V for Vendetta and holding the Million Mask March on November 5th – Guy Fawkes Day – the marchers are sending a message: “We know that 9/11 was an inside job designed to create an Orwellian total-surveillance dictatorship.”
The film V for Vendetta is a thinly-disguised 9/11 truth allegory. It depicts a society transformed into an Orwellian dictatorship by a spectacular act of false-flag terror. The hero – the guy in the mask – leads a revolution against the false-flag terrorists and their dictatorship.
In like fashion, the Million Mask Marchers will be revolting against the false-flag terrorists who orchestrated 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, Bali, Mumbai, Boston and other deceptions in hopes of establishing an Orwellian global dictatorship.
The Fifth of November, Guy Fawkes Day, is an auspicious date for such a protest. Guy Fawkes Day commemorates the first spectacular act of state-sponsored false-flag terror in modern history: The Gunpowder Plot of 1605.
The Gunpowder Plot was orchestrated by Robert Cecil’s war party. It was designed to drag England into a century of wars against the Catholic nations of Spain and Portugal.
The Gunpowder conspirators found a “radical Catholic” patsy, Guy Fawkes. They claimed Fawkes was about to blow up the Parliament with a few barrels of soggy, low-grade gunpowder. They whipped up anti-Catholic hysteria and launched a century of war against Catholic nations. Those wars led to England’s rise as the world’s leading superpower.
In 2001, the PNAC neoconservatives did almost exactly the same thing. They orchestrated a spectacular attack and blamed it on a “radical Muslim” patsy, Osama Bin Laden. They whipped up anti-Muslim hysteria. And they launched what they hoped would be a century of war against Muslim nations, in order to make the US and its master, Israel, the world’s sole superpowers.
But the PNAC false-flag plotters didn’t count on the rise of the Internet. By 2004, anyone with an Internet connection could watch Netanyahu’s close friend, World Trade Center insurance fraudster Larry Silverstein, confessing to the obvious controlled demolition of Building 7.
Every American who sees the videos of Building 7 coming down will agree with the masked hero of V for Vendetta: “There is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t there?”
We are living in a strange time. 9/11 and the 9/11 wars have been exposed as big lies. The alleged “terrorist threat” has turned out to be a hoax. It turns out that the real reason the NSA is spying on world leaders (and everyone else) is not “to protect us from terrorists” but to grab absolute power.
And as Lord Acton said, power tends to corrupt … and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The New World Order global surveillance dictatorship is absolutely unacceptable.
I look forward to seeing you at the Million Mask March on Tuesday, November 5th.

Related articles

Pakistan to review relations with US after drone strike kills Taliban leader

The Guardian home

Sunday 3 November 2013

Calls for US military supply lines to Afghanistan to be shut down as militants promise revenge for killing of Hakimullah Mehsud

Protest against US drone attacks in Pakistan

Demonstrators in Karachi burn a US flag in protest at the killing of Hakimullah Mehsud, which the government has denounced as a bid to derail peace efforts.  Photograph: Demotix/Corbis

Pakistan is to review its relationship with Washington, the prime minister’s office said on Sunday, following the killing of the Pakistani Taliban leader in a US drone strike.

Hakimullah Mehsud, who had a $5m (£3.1m) bounty on his head, was killed on Friday in the north-western Pakistani militant stronghold of North Waziristan, near the Afghan border.

The Pakistani Taliban have killed thousands of civilians and members of the security forces in their bid to impose Islamist rule, but the new government has been calling for peace talks.

The government denounced Mehsud’s killing as a US bid to derail the talks and summoned the US ambassador on Saturday to complain.

The office of the prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, said he would chair a meeting on the consequences for ties with Washington, but there was no indication when it might take place.

Some politicians have demanded that US military supply lines into Afghanistan be blocked in response.

“It is clear that the US is against peace and does not want terrorism to subside. Now we only have one agenda, to stop Nato supplies going through Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,” said Asad Qaiser, the speaker of the province’s assembly.

Pakistan is the main supply route for US troops in Afghanistan, for everything from food and drinking water to fuel, and the closure of the routes could cause serious disruption as US and other western forces prepare to withdraw by the end of next year.

Pakistani co-operation is also seen as vital in trying to bring peace to Afghanistan, in particular in encouraging the Afghan Taliban into talks with the government in Kabul.

Relations between Washington and Islamabad have been seriously strained several times over recent years, most notably in 2011, when US forces killed  Osama bin Laden in a raid that Pakistan said violated its sovereignty.

Pakistan, however, depends to a great extent on US economic support, and despite frustrations in Washington over the relationship, the US is unlikely to break completely with its nuclear-armed ally.

Three Pakistani Taliban commanders said they had been due to meet a government delegation on Saturday and that they had been meeting to discuss the talks. They said they felt betrayed by Mehsud’s killing and were no longer interested in talks.

A Pakistani Taliban spokesman promised a wave of revenge bombings. Allied militant groups are also planning attacks, said Ahmed Marwat, a spokesman for the Jundullah militant group. The group recently killed more than 80 people when it bombed a church, and is known for major attacks on civilian targets.

Mehsud’s followers have been debating who should replace him while they observe three days of mourning, said Shahidullah Shahid, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban. They have in the meantime appointed Asmatullah Shaheen as interim leader.

Several commanders said on Saturday that 38-year-old Khan Said, known as Sajna, had been chosen, but other factions of the Pakistani Taliban alliance were unhappy with the choice and were supporting other candidates. These include Mullah Fazlullah, the commander from the Swat Valley, north-west of Islamabad, whose men shot and wounded the schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai last year.

Said is seen as a relative moderate and his appointment might facilitate talks with the government, said Imtiaz Gul, the head of the Centre for Research and Security Studies, an Islamabad-based thinktank.

But if Fazlullah is chosen, there would be little hope of compromise, he said. Even if talks started, it was unclear how successful they would be unless the government made significant concessions to the militants.

“You’re compromising the rule of law, and ceding ground to non-state actors, giving in to a small band of criminals. It threatens everything on which Pakistan stands – the constitution, parliament,” Gul said.

“They haven’t thought through the consequences of these talks. They’re just firefighting because they have no long-term remedy for Pakistan’s problems.”

Some in Pakistan’s powerful military have privately voiced their opposition to any potential talks.

Related articles

French Rioting to Dump the Euro

Written by Chriss W. Street

3rd November 2013

French-RiotsFrench riot police fired water cannons and tear gas at 30,000 truckers, farmers, fishermen and food industry workers waving banners of “Right to Work” and hurling rocks and iron bars at police to protest a new “ecotax” on commercial trucking.  The controversial $1.4 billion tax for rail and river expansion is causing layoffs across the French trucking industry.  While Socialist government of French President François Hollande is attempting to avoid a “spiral of violence”, former French Prime Minister François Fillon shocked the media by saying that voting for the far-right National Front that wants to dump the euro common currency may now be “acceptable.”

Acceptable is a code-word for acknowledging that Marine Le Pen’s right-wing National Front party that opposes immigration and euro common currency has such a strong lead in the polls and that French welfare-state politicians better get on board with the rebellious conservatives or be wiped-out in the next election.  With one in four voters supporting the National Front in France, Ms. Le Pen is forming a Tea Party type coalition with nationalists in the United Kingdom, Austria, the Netherlands, Belgium and the Nordic states.  With momentum now on their side, the National Front and its allies seem positioned to win control of the 766 seats European Parliament next year.

François Charles Armand Fillon is far from a hard right conservative; he was the chief architect of expanding the French welfare state over the last decade.  As Minister of Labour in 2002, he pushed through the controversial French 35-hour work week law and lowered the age of full retirement in France to 55 years old.  In 2005 as Minister of National Education he led the adoption of the first “common core” Fillon law on Education.  He was politically rewarded by French President Nicolas Sarkozy with appointment as Prime Minister of France from 2007 to 2012.

But five years of economic crisis and rising unemployment, has caused anti-European rhetoric and calls for greater economic protectionism across France.  During this period, support for the National Front rose from less than 5% in 2008, to 17.9% in the 2012 Presidential elections, and possibly up to 30% today.  Before the last election former President Sarkozy tried to reach out to the Nation Front by calling for curbs on Muslim immigrants and protection of European industry from “unfair” Asian competition.  But the National Front rejected the overtures because Sarkozy refused to abandon the euro.

President Francois Hollande” hard-core socialist policies of attacking business and the rich have thrilled the Left.  But according to the Heritage Foundation, France’s score for Index of Economic Freedom has plunged to 64.1, the lowest of any major country in Europe.  Even before the ecotax, the socialist policies had hurt the economy and infuriated the vast majority of French with a witch’s brew of new tax increases, including:

1) Doubling one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world with a “surtax”; 2) Increase reporting of income and tax obligations subject to VAT tax; 3) Increased pension tax contribution; 4) Energy drink tax of $1.37 per can; 5) Financial transaction tax on all investments; 5) Raising assessed value of all French real estate to collect higher property taxes; and 6) Data tax on all transfers of all information outside the European Union.

The French Socialists under Hollande also increased deficit spending for “investments” to such an extent, that the country’s national debt is expected to reach a dangerous record level of 95.1% of GDP next year.  But while failing to stimulate growth and employment, Socialist massive spending violated the European Commission’s 3% deficit rule.  Consequently, France for the time in since WWII is being forced to make an “unprecedented” $20 billion in public spending cuts for 2014.  The Left is screaming that the cuts will bring “suffering to the people” and the National Front is screaming that the higher taxes are “anti-growth”.

All of this has stimulated the growth of the National Front in France and their nationalist allies from across the continent to run for 2014 European Union Parliamentary elections as common slate of candidates.  The election rules are unique, because European Parliamentary members are elected directly by the general population.  Europeans have traditionally been so apathetic about elections that in the last election in 2009, turnout was only 40%.  This low participation rate will magnify the nationalist parties who are highly motivated to end what they believe is undemocratic domination by liberal elites.

The Parliament after 2009 was given enhanced powers in nearly all areas of setting EU policy, including oversight of the EU budget and the ability to appoint the President of the EU Commission.  Consequently, the European Parliament now has equal status with the European Council, which directly represents the governments of EU members.  A nationalist takeover of Parliament in 2014 would usher in revolutionary change.  They reject most aspects of EU integration, such as the free movement of people within the bloc and the use of the euro currency.  Nationalists believe the European Union undermines member sovereignty and they are demanding restoration of states’ rights.

With the National Front and their allies on the verge of seizing control of the European Parliament and potentially naming its President, such a stunning victory over the Left would be unprecedented since the collapse of communism in the 1990s.  The member states strengthened the power of the European Parliament to win the hearts and the minds of all European voters, but what Europeans seem to want in those hearts and minds is to dump the euro and end the European Union.

Listen to Chriss Street and Paul Preston Streaming 24 Hours Every Day Clicking Here For:  AGENDA 21 Radio

Related articles