Who's A Rat - Largest Online Database of Informants and Agents
HomeMembers LoginLatest NewsRefer A LawyerMessage BoardOnline StoreAffiliatesAbout UsContact Us
Who's A Rat - Largest Online Database of Informants and Agents Worldwide!
Site Navigation
Visit Our Store
Refer A Lawyer
Link To Us
Latest News
Top Secret Documents
Make A Donation
Important Case Law
Members Login
Message Board
Legal Information
Advertise your AD, Book or Movie

Informants and Agents?Who's a Rat Message Board

joeb Show full post »
see link for full story

Whistleblower Suit Yields $3 Million False Claims Settlement From CIA Contractors
  March 8, 2013

Three companies that wooed employees of the Central Intelligence Agency with trips to sporting events, meals at restaurants with full-figured waitresses and other enticements to win CIA contracts have agreed to pay the government $3 million as a result of a lawsuit brought by a whistleblower, United States Attorney Neil MacBride has announced.

MacBride’s office said American Systems Corp., Anixter International Inc, and Corning Cable Systems LLC agreed to settle the allegations that they violated the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Act in bidding on a contract with the CIA. An employee of the CIA allegedly provided inside information to the companies to help them get agency business.

The case was initiated by a lawsuit filed in the Eastern District under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act by former Anixter sales representative William Jones, MacBride’s office said. Under the False Claims Act, private citizens may sue on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in any recovery, meaning that Jones will receive $585,000.

“Improper gifts and gratuities paid to government officials are a corrupting influence on government contracts,” MacBride said. “Combating this type of conduct is a high priority in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

A Washington Post account of the case depicts CIA workers seemingly trying to live down any image of the agency as a funless place full of frowning men in dark suits and trenchcoats. On the contrary, the Post said. The employees who gave in to temptation enjoyed trips to Mexico and Myrtle Beach, S.C., fishing excursions, outings to football and baseball games, deer hunting and golf, courtesy of the eager companies.

The Hooters restaurant chain, renowned for comely servers as well as beer and cheeseburgers, was a favorite destination of the CIA project manager in charge of the programs at issue, code-named “Falcon” and “Buckeye,” the Post said.

“This settlement shows that the United States will protect the integrity of the federal procurement process from the wrongful activities of unscrupulous contractors,” said Stuart F. Delery, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice Civil Division.  “Plying government officials with meals and entertainment to gain favorable treatment in the award of federal contracts corrupts the procurement process and will not be allowed.”


The Post said nine CIA employees who allegedly received the illegal gratuities are named in the suit. “CIA spokesman Todd Ebitz said the case is under internal review and said it would be inappropriate to comment on the specific individuals’ status with the agency,” the Post said.

Quote 0 0
see link for full story and FBI  documents

Operation Condor: Trial On Latin American Rendition And Assassination Program
By Carlos Osorio and Peter Kornbluh
Global Research, March 10, 2013

National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 416

Edited by Carlos Osorio

Former military officers from Argentina and Uruguay went on trial this week in Buenos Aires for their human rights abuses in Operation Condor, a cross-border conspiracy of dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s to “eradicate ‘subversion,’ a word which increasingly translates into non-violent dissent from the left and center left,” according to declassified documents posted today by the National Security Archive ( http://www.nsarchive.org).

Today’s posting of documents and evidence provided by the Archive to Argentine prosecutors includes the first briefing report, from August 1976, to then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on the secret police collaboration in the Southern Cone to “find and kill” opponents of their military regimes.

“The documents are very useful in establishing a comprehensive analytical framework of what Operation Condor was,” said Pablo Enrique Ouvina, the lead prosecutor in the case.

Founded by the Pinochet regime in November 1975, Operation Condor was the codename for a formal Southern Cone collaboration that included transnational secret intelligence activities, kidnapping, torture, disappearance and assassination, according to the National Security Archive’s documentary evidence from U.S., Paraguayan, Argentine, and Chilean files.

Prominent victims of Condor include two former Uruguayan legislators and a former Bolivian president, Juan Torres, murdered in Buenos Aires, as well as former Chilean ambassador Orlando Letelier and his 26-year old American colleague, Ronni Moffitt, assassinated by a car bomb in downtown Washington D.C.

The historic trial charges 25 high-ranking military officials, including former Argentine presidents Jorge Videla and Reynaldo Bignone, with conspiracy to “kidnap, disappear, torture and kill” 171 opponents of the military dictatorships that dominated the Southern Cone in the 1970s and 1980s. Among the victims are approximately 80 Uruguayans, 50 Argentines, 20 Chileans and a dozen from Paraguay, Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador who were targeted by Condor operatives. The kidnapping and disappearance of two Cuban Consulate officials in Buenos Aires on August 9, 1976, is also part of the prosecution.

“Condor was a latter day rendition, torture and assassination program,” noted Carlos Osorio, who directs the Archive’s Southern Cone Documentation project. “Holding these officials accountable for the multinational crimes of Condor,” he said, “cannot help but set a precedent for more recent abuses of a similar nature.”

Besides Generals Videla and Bignone, those indicted included 22 Argentine military intelligence officers and agents. In preparation for the trial, prosecutors sought the extradition of several foreign high ranking officers from Chile and Paraguay among other Condor countries. The only foreigner sitting at the courtroom, however, is Uruguayan Army Major Manuel Cordero, charged with participating in death squads and torture at the infamous Orletti Motors secret detention center in Buenos Aires. He was extradited by Brazil where he was living.

Of the 171 Condor victims cited in the indictments, approximately forty-two survived and a number of them are expected to testify in court. One hundred twenty others were killed and/or disappeared.


Document l: Department of State, Report to Kissinger, SECRET, “The Third World War and South America,” August 3, 1976.

This report, based on CIA intelligence, was written by Assistant Secretary of State for Latin America, Harry Shlaudeman and presented to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in August 1976. The document summarizes the coordination of Southern Cone security forces:

“[T]hey are joining forces to eradicate ‘subversion,’ a word which increasingly translates into non-violent dissent from the left and center left. The security forces of the Southern Cone now coordinate intelligence activities closely; operate in the territory of one another’s countries in pursuit of ‘subversives’; have established Operation Condor to find and kill terrorists…in their own countries and in Europe. Brazil is cooperating short of murder operations.”

Document 2: Defense Intelligence Agency, [Report on Operation Condor] “Special Operations Forces,” SECRET, October 1, 1976.

This comprehensive intelligence report, based on information gathered by the FBI legal attaché in Buenos Aires, provides details on the collaboration between Argentina, Uruguay, and other Southern Cone military dictatorships. The document provided critical information to prosecutors on a joint operation with Uruguayan intelligence agents in late September 1976, in which dozens of Uruguayan members of the militant leftist movement OPR-33 were rounded up, detained, tortured, and a number killed in Buenos Aires. “The entire OPR-33 infrastructure in Argentina has been eliminated,” the document states. The kidnapped Uruguayans are among the over one hundred disappeared victims included in the Operation Condor trial. The document goes on to describe the “formation of special teams” to “carry out operations to include assassinations” in countries as far away as Portugal and France. The report cited a “favorite remark” of Southern Cone military officers as saying that “one of their colleagues is out of country because he is flying like a condor.”

Document 3: CIA, SECRET, A Brief Look at Operation Condor, August 22, 1978.

In the aftermath of the Letelier-Moffitt assassination, the CIA prepared this short briefing paper for Eugene Propper, the Justice Department’s lead prosecutor in the case. “Operation Condor is a cooperation effort by the intelligence/security services of several South American countries to combat terrorism and subversion. The original members included services from Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Brazil and Bolivia; Peru and Ecuador recently became members.”

Document 4: Department of State, SECRET, “Conversation with Argentine Intelligence Source,” April 7, 1980.

In this revealing memorandum to Ambassador Castro, James J. Blystone, the Regional Security Officer (RSO) at the US Embassy in Buenos Aires, details his April 2 meeting with an Argentine intelligence source. The anonymous Argentine source describes how Horacio Campiglia and Susana Binstock, two militant Montoneros, were captured by Argentine officers of Battalion 601 (in coordination with Brazilian intelligence), taken to Argentina and held at the Campo de Mayo Army base. Campiglia and Binstock who were never seen again, are amongst the more than a hundred victims included in the Operation Condor trial.
Quote 0 0
Quote 0 0
see link for full story

Police union president Nelson Cuba and head of veterans organization among those arrested in racketeering investigation

Posted: March 12, 2013 - 3:29pm  |  Updated: March 12, 2013 - 6:42pm
Quote 0 0

see link for full story of taxpayer funded FBI  Operation Mop Up

Your Black History: Did You Know that Dr. King’s Mother was Assassinated?
March 14, 2013

Most people know the amazing stories about the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  They know about his most famous speech, his legendary marches and the principals by which he lived his life.  What most people do not know is what happened to his family.  There are stories about the numerous tragedies endured by the Kennedy family, but after reading this, you might know that the King family could give them a run for their money.

Shortly after Dr. King’s death in 1968, Martin’s brother Alfred became co-pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church, where his father and brother preached.  In July of 1969, just a few days before his 39th birthday, Alfred was found dead in a swimming pool.  The case was ruled as an accidental drowning, but many speculate something more sinister might have happened.   According to his father, he was a good swimmer.

Alberta King, Dr. King’s mother, was shot and killed in 1974 while playing the organ at her church.  The shooting was allegedly done by a 23-year old black man by the name of Marcus Wayne Chenault.  Chenault didn’t give any reason for the shooting, except to say that “all Christians are my enemies.”

see link for full story

The Wallace Street Journal: Feds, Please Go Home

 Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:56 pm
WALLACE, Idaho — As anyone who has faced the mirror (sorry, that's a Charles McCabe-ism - McCabe being the famed San Francisco Chronicle columnist and devotee of Rainier Ale [a.k.a. the “Green Death”] who died in 1983 and was this writer's mentor) must know, our saloons lately have been infiltrated by Law Enforcement.
Presumably, these Law Enforcement personnel emit from the state of Idaho's liquor board, its state police department, or perhaps from some outfit authorized to fly armed drones over unarmed civilians. In this goofy age it does not matter: consider yourself and your behaviour under constant surveillance.
The bummer about the Feds' festering presence here in the Silver Valley is that our prostitutes have had to look for other work at Wally World and our plethora of car washes and posh resorts until their legitimate business resumes. We've also had to scrap our Roulette wheels and card tables: Pan is only a word if it is preceded by Peter, or frying. And, Heaven forbid, minor children might, three years older than the minimum age to handle a machine gun under the loving care of Uncle Sugar's military, be permitted to purchase cigarettes.
Heaven also forbid that we should have any fun. (Isn't that the definition of a Liberal - or as they call themselves these days, a Progressive? A person who loses sleep at night fearing that someone, somewhere, is having fun.) 
The United Snakes Environmental Protection Agency and the overlords of the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration straddle us like we are so much unbroken ponies. Notice those sweet words? Protection? Health? These alphabet soup outfits provide neither. They are meter-maids and trash collectors packing the power of the gun.
I wonder, in my darker and most paranoid moments, if Shoshone County hasn't been singled out for some sort of social experiment. (I wonder that about frequent flyers enduring the trepidations of the Transportation Security Agency, too, if the TSA was created for the sole purpose of finding out how far the government can push people without blowback.)
Revisit the events of June 23, 1991, here and ask yourself the same question. More than 150 Federal (there's that word again) Bureau of Investigation agents smashed down doors and swarmed more than 50 establishments here. And for what? A few card games and poker machines. The feds even demanded the the Wallace Elks give up their building for illegal gaming because they kept some antique slot machines locked up in the basement.
Apparently the government doesn't like competition. You can buy a national lottery ticket in a Wallace bar, perfectly legally, but to expect (or to give) a pay-out from a video poker machine puts you in the cross-hairs of “law enforcement.”
The storm-trooper nature of that 1991 raid garnered national headlines, and was, as confessed one harried FBI Special Agent in Charge to this reporter, a training mission for the later murderous assaults on Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and the bloodbath that was the Branch Davidian commune in Waco, Texas.
Remember 1991? The local economy was absolutely in the ditch, thanks to the action of the Federal (there's that word again!) Reserve Board's banks to depress commodities, among them silver, lead and zinc. While the Fed and then-president Ronald Reagan are given credit for cooling down the inflation of the Johnson-Nixon years, what's neglected by historians is that they did so breaking it over the back of the working man. Shoshone County was a prime example.
So into this milieu of a crushed economy stormed the jack-boots, seizing, by their estimate, a half-million dollars worth of private property.
Hey, the mines were down, the smelter was shuttered, multiple thousands of folks out of work, grocery stores closing right and left, the population shrinking by a dozen families a day. Why not kick them while they're down?
And did we take up arms against this sea of troubles? No. We put up with it, just wishing the whole nightmare would go away. And thus the feds learned a potent lesson. You can kick somebody pretty hard when they're down and get away with it. To a despot this is good news.
Was this all about an allegedly crooked sheriff? Two juries — one hung — thought not. Was it about money? One can only suppose that the claimed half-million bucks in seized property, much of it later returned, barely covered the cost of the raid.

Army Gen. Keith Alexander, head of U.S. Cyber Command, yesterday said that civilian agencies should have the lead in responding to most cyber attacks on U.S. soil.
"From my perspective the domestic actor would be the FBI," said Alexander, responding to a question from Rep. Joe Heck about the command's role in responding to cyber attacks that originate in the United States. "We share our tools with the FBI. They work through the courts to have the authority to do what they need to do in domestic space to withstand an attack."
Cyber Command and FBI Director Robert Mueller have "come up with a way that he would do inside [the U.S.] and we would do outside," Alexander added, in testimony to a House Armed Services subcommittee.
Alexander went on to point out that DOD, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security are hammering out ways to share information on cyber threats extremely quickly -- figuring out where the attack is coming from; determining whether it's a criminal, espionage, or destructive attack; and allowing the appropriate agency to take the lead while receiving support from the others. 
"There may be points and times where you have, you know, significant attacks where we need to change parts of that [civilian-led response structure], but the key thing is to have him [Mueller and the FBI] do inside the country," said Alexander. "He would work with the courts as appropriate to do his portion of the mission. Outside the country, that's where we would operate." (Click here to read about the offensive cyber teams that DOD is standing up to conduct operations outside the United States.) 
It's worth noting that some of the teams that Cyber Command is establishing to "operate and defend" networks will work closely with "DHS and FBI as required," said Alexander.
Still, as Alexander noted, "the Defense Department will do its part to defend the country. It's not going to just defend itself. Our job is to defend the country and the focus would be obviously on critical infrastructure, just as it would be in kinetic and other things."
He elaborated on the key questions that govern the debate as to when the military becomes deeply involved in responding to a cyber incident. 

see link for full story


This book review appears in the March 15, 2013 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
Was It Murder? Philip Marshall,
Author of 'Big Bamboozle,' Dead

by William F. Wertz, Jr.

[PDF version of this article]

    The Big Bamboozle:
    9/11 and the War on Terror

    by Philip Marshall
    CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, February 2012
    166 pages, paperback, $14.99

March 9—In February 2012, Philip Marshall, a veteran airline pilot, published The Big Bamboozle: 9/11 and the War on Terror, which documents the role of Saudi Arabia in running the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and of the Bush Presidency in facilitating it by standing down. One year later, on Feb. 2, 2013, Marshall was found dead, along with his two teenage children and his dog, at his home in California.

Local police have called it a murder/suicide. But former National Security Agency officer Wayne Madsen, who spent a week at the scene investigating, says that it was a black-ops assassination, not only for what Marshall reveals in the book, but also for what he might have revealed in the future.

In addition to being an experienced pilot—Marshall had captain ratings on the Boeing 727, 737, 747, 757, and 767s—and was familiar with the training needed to fly such planes, and to carry out such manuevers as the 9/11 hijacker pilots did, Marshall had experience in a DEA sting operation against Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar, and was the pilot for Barry Seal, who participated in the George H.W. Bush/Oliver North operation to arm the Contras in the 1980s.

The story that Marshall tells, although failing to identify the role of the British, corroborates in fine detail the essential features of the assessment of 9/11/2001, presented by Lyndon LaRouche at the time that the attack was occurring. Interviewed that morning on K-TALK radio from Salt Lake City, LaRouche said: "This is not some dumb guy with a turban some place in the world, trying to get revenge for what's going on in the Middle East. This is something different." LaRouche emphasized that "this is a very systematic operation ... to get that kind of thing, to snatch planes like that, that's a pretty sophisticated operation." He also stressed that "Osama bin Laden is a controlled entity. Osama bin Laden is not an independent force." In a webcast address on Jan. 3, 2001, LaRouche had warned that a terrorist incident could be used, as in the case of the Reichstag Fire, to introduce a dictatorial policy in the United States. In that webcast LaRouche said:

    "Special warfare types of the secret government, the secret police teams, will set off provocations, which will be used to bring about dictatorial powers and emotion, in the name of crisis management."

The possibility that Marshall was assassinated cannot be ruled out. In former Sen. Bob Graham's novel Keys to the Kingdom, the lead character, who is a Senator investigating 9/11, is killed. Graham was the co-chair of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11. In similar, true-life cases, Barry Seal was killed on Feb. 19, 1986, in Baton Rouge; J.H. Hatfield, author of The Fortunate Son, in which he reported that George W. Bush's "missing year" was spent in drug rehab, was also found dead, allegedly by suicide, on July 18, 2001; journalist Gary Webb, who exposed the fact that crack cocaine was being shipped to the U.S. to fund arms for the Contras, in a newspaper series entitled "Dark Alliance," allegedly committed suicide on Dec. 10, 2004; and on Feb. 19, 2005, Hunter S. Thompson also allegedly committed suicide while working on a major article on 9/11.
Bin Laden: A False Flag

In the introduction to his book, Marshall cites the fact that in the final version of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, the indisputable evidence about the role of Saudi intelligence was redacted.

    Marshall presents evidence that bin Laden's role in 9/11 was a false flag, to cover for the fact that the funding, logistical support, tactical planning, and training of the 9/11 terrorist attack were all supplied by Saudi Arabia, whose role was covered up by blaming Osama bin Laden, who did not have the means to carry out such a sophisticated operation.

    Secondly, he demonstrates that the operation was effectively facilitated, and then exploited, by the Bush family apparatus, which effectively stood down while the attack was occurring, and ignored warnings of the impending attack.

    And thirdly, he exposes the roles in the coverup of Porter Goss, the House Chairman of the Joint Congressional Inquiry; Philip Zelikow, the director of the 9/11 Commission; and FBI Director Robert Mueller, who was appointed on Sept. 4, 2001. That coverup persists to this day.

Marshall is known to have been in contact with Bob Graham, who has demanded the declassification of the 28-page section of the 9/11 report on the Saudi role in the attack.

The book covers material already reported by EIR and LaRouchePAC from the report of the Joint Congressional Inquiry. This includes the fact that Prince Bandar's wife, the daughter of Prince Turki bin Faisal, then-head of Saudi intelligence, sent money to Saudi Intelligence agent Omar al-Bayoumi; that Bayoumi met with a member of the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles before meeting at a restaurant with the first two hijackers who came to the U.S., Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, and invited them to San Diego; that Bayoumi worked for the Saudi Civil Aviation Authority; that the two hijackers lived for a time in the home of a longtime FBI informant, whom the Joint Inquiry was prevented from interviewing. In fact, the FBI refused to serve the informant a committee subpoena.

Marshall points out that the 9/11 Commission never heard testimony from a civil aviation expert. As an expert himself, he writes that, "The flight profiles revealed that a tailored operating procedure was used to fly directly to predetermined targets, followed by a series of advanced hand-flown maneuvers that included rapid descents, steep turns and coordinated roll outs." None of this could have been done without "critical inside help from aviation and tactical experts." As a 20-year Boeing pilot and captain, he writes that he would have been "challenged to duplicate this performance without several practice flights." The pilots could not have done this on the basis of the training they received in single-engine airplanes. Moreover, their civilian flight instructors all said afterwards, that in early 2001, none of the pilots was competent to fly Boeing airliners.

His conclusion is that they received advanced training in the final phase from Saudi instructors.
The Saudis and the Pilots

Marshall presents the following evidence:

In the six months leading up to 9/11, four of the eventual hijackers travelled to Las Vegas. These hijackers were the pilots of the four planes that were used on 9/11. None of the other hijackeres went to Las Vegas. Marshall concludes that they must have received training at a site somewhere between Las Vegas and Tucson, Ariz. One possible location he identifes as Pinal Airpark, which had 757 and 747 Boeing planes on site at that time, and which is known to have been used by the CIA and the private mercenary company Blackwater.

Many sources have reported that after 9/11, a number of Saudi nationals, who were in the U.S. at the time, including members of the bin Laden family, were allowed to fly out of the country after the attacks.

Marshall also reports that a large entourage of Prince Turki was also in the United States prior to and on Sept. 11, 2001: "Tucked in the back of the commission's report (and later removed) was an account of three separate chartered airliners carrying about 100 Arab men (mostly Saudis) from Las Vegas on midnight transatlantic flights beginning on September 19." Marshall reports that Turki "was near Las Vegas during the time that the 9/11 Commission 'could not explain' why all the hijackers had made trips to Las Vegas in the months leading up to 9/11."

In the week after the attack, there were at least five chartered flights with high-ranking Saudi officials that flew out of Las Vegas, Newark, Boston, and Washington. Three of these were from Las Vegas.

"The chartered departures from Las Vegas were a four-engine DC-8 for Geneva on September 19, 2001, with 69 passengers, including 46 Saudis; a Boeing 727 for England with 18 Saudis on September 20; and on September 23, a jumbo Lockheed L-1011 for Paris. Only 34 passengers were listed on that plane, which has a capacity of nearly 400. On that flight was Prince Turki."

Marshall makes the point that the presence of Turki's entourage in the U.S. in the Summer of 2001 "entailed a perfect opportunity to get the needed Saudi Boeing flight instructors into the country and out after the attacks without anyone interviewing them."

To support this, Marshall points out that Prince Bandar—now the head of Saudi intelligence—is, himself, a pilot. He was Top Gun for his unit in the Royal Saudi Air Force, and the two Saudi intelligence operatives in San Diego, Bayoumi and Bassan, were associated with the Saudi Civil Aviation Authority.
The Saudi-Bush Connection

The role of Prince Bandar, and his relationship to the Bush family, are key. Marshall does not report on the money Bandar had at his disposal as a result of the (British) BAE-Saudi Al-Yamamah arms deal. But he does demonstrate that Bandar has a decades-long close relationship with the Bush family, and with dirty covert operations. For instance, during the Iran-Contra affair, when George H.W. Bush was Vice President, Bandar agreed to fund the Contra operation in 1984 when the Congress had banned U.S. funds for Nicaraguan Contra rebels. Oliver North testified that Bandar "had sought to keep under wraps his role in funneling millions through a Swiss bank account."

Thus Bandar has been the Bush family connection to Saudi Arabia for decades. As Marshall points out, in the past two decades, the Prince "has spent time with the President's family at their Texas ranch, their Kennebunkport home, at Camp David and of course the White House. He has had visits to the Pentagon and has been flown on Air Force One." George H.W. Bush celebrated his 80th birthday on Bandar's A-340. At one point, the Vice President proclaimed that Bandar was an official member of the Bush family. His new name in Kennebunkport was announced as Bandar Bush.

In less than 48 hours after 9/11/2001, Prince Bandar and George W. Bush would be smoking cigars together on the White House balcony. In his book State of Denial, Bob Woodward reports that when George W. Bush was planning to run for the Presidency, Bush Sr. told him to visit Bandar. According to Woodward, Bush Jr. said to the prince, "My dad told me before I make up my mind, go and talk to Bandar."

Although Marshall does not make this point, Prince Bandar, now, as head of Saudi intelligence, continues to do the bidding of the British, in arming al-Qaeda in Syria. The only difference is that today his partner in crime is President Barack Obama who, in following the Bush family tradition, has continued to cover up the Saudi role, both in the original 9/11, and also in 9/11/2012 in Benghazi.
No Defense

Marshall argues that on 9/11, all four of the planes were supposed to hit their targets at the same time, but the hijackers of two of the planes that targeted Washington, D.C., were delayed in taking over the cockpits, which resulted in those planes flying further west than intended, and thus delaying the operation. Marshall's point is that this delay exposed the fact that the Bush White House stalled in responding to the attack. Two military jets were sent up after it became clear that the first plane had been hijacked. However, no additional planes were deployed.

Not a single airplane was send out to defend Washington. Vice President Dick Cheney claimed afterwards that he recommended to Bush that orders be given to shoot down any incoming plane, but there is no record of any such orders being given, even two hours after the attack began. And even if such orders had been given, there were no planes in the air to follow the orders.
The Coverup

The coverup of 9/11 is well documented by Marshall, and echoes the coverup of the Kennedy assassination by the Warren Commission. Just as Allen Dulles was appointed to the Warren Commission to control it, similar appointments were made to obstruct the investigation of both the 9/11 Commission and the Joint Congressional Inquiry.

The person appointed as Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission was Philip Zelikow, a former member of the National Security Council for Bush Sr., and co-author of the 1995 book, Germany United, Europe Transformed, which he co-authored with Condoleezza Rice. Zelikow was a member of the G.W. Bush transition team, and the author of the policy paper that the White House used to justify a pre-emptive invasion of Iraq. The 9/11 Commission staff would describe him as a "White House mole." He was in daily contact with Bush senior advisor Karl Rove and with National Security Advisor Rice. Evidence against Bandar was hidden in the final report, because Zelikow argued that it was not conclusive.

In respect to the Joint Congressional Inquiry, Marshall asserts that the mole was former Rep. Porter Goss, the co-chair from the House. He was named by President George W. Bush in 2004 as Director of National Intelligence and Director of Central Intelligence. As to Goss's background, Marshall presents a photo taken in Mexico City on Jan. 22, 1963, which includes Felix Rodriguez of Contra fame, Barry Seal, and Porter Goss, 20 years before the Iran-Contra affair. Goss was a CIA agent at the time of the the Bay of Pigs. According to Marshall, "some independent investigators believe that this [photo] was the assassination team, nicknamed Operation 40," that was responsible for the Kennedy assassination.

Marshall also reports that Cheney tried to intimidate Senator Graham. Mueller, who was appointed FBI director one week before 9/11, also launched an investigation of the Joint Congressional Inquiry staff itself during their investigation, as a means of intimidation.
A Ploy for War

Marshall's overall thesis is that to bring about the change which has occurred since 9/11, a Pearl Harbor-style attack on the U.S. would be necessary. He quotes a document published by the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), "Rebuilding America's Defenses," which states: "the transformation would be a long one—absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor." Moreover, by blaming the attack on Osama bin Laden, it could be used to justify a policy of pre-emptive warfare, which was then carried out against Iraq, and eventually Syria and Iran.

Marshall argues that such a false flag operation was run to cover up the Saudi involvement and the true intention of the plotters of 9/11.

To support this, Marshall quotes from Steve Pieczenik, who served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under the Nixon, Ford, and Carter administrations, worked under Reagan and Bush Sr., and now works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. Pieczenik, who is also a physician, stated on May 3, 2011, in two radio broadcasts shortly after it was announced that Osama bin Laden had been killed, that he knew that bin Laden had died in 2001. Back in April 2002, Pieczenik said that bin Laden had already been "dead for months."

Pieczenik had met bin Laden, and worked with him during the proxy war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. According to Pieczenik, bin Laden died in 2001, "not because Special Forces had killed him, but because as a physician, I had known that the CIA physicians had treated him and it was on the intelligence roster that he had marfan syndrome. He died of marfan syndrome, Bush junior knew about it, the intelligence community knew about it." Pieczenik reported that CIA physicians had visited bin Laden in July 2001 at the American Hospital in Dubai. "He was already very sick from marfan syndrome and he was already dying, so nobody had to kill him."

Pieczenik also said that he was prepared to tell a Federal grand jury the name of a top general who told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag attack.

Marshall also argues that key to the false flag operation was producing the torture-induced confession of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the so-called mastermind of 9/11.

see link for full story



The FBI and Occupy

03.14.13 - 4:28 pm | Tim Redmond|
A federal judge will decide March 15 whether to dismiss a lawsuit by the ACLU and the Bay Guardian seeking access to FBI records showing the agency’s involvement with the Occupy movement.
As if often the case, the FBI’s legal motions tell an interesting story that sheds light on what some of the still-unreleased documents might show.
The filings make it clear that the FBI was not only spying on the Occupy movement but was sharing data with local law-enforcement agencies -- and at some point may have classified some part of the Occupy movement as international terrorists.
The Guardian and the ACLU have been fighting for more than a year to get the agency to release its complete files on Occupy. After a March 8, 2012 Freedom of Information Act request yielded only a few pages, and the FBI claimed it had no more documents, the ACLU filed suit.
In a declaration dated March 15, 2013, David M. Hardy, chief of the FBI’s Information Section, confirms that the agency was sharing information on Occupy with other police agencies. He states that “The mention of the FBI sharing intelligence with another agency doesn’t mean that the document becomes and intelligence or planning document. It is simply documenting that information was shared.”
Among the documents that the feds did release is a Nov. 2, 2011 memo discussing the FBI’s contact with the Port of Stockton Police Department to “share intelligence about Occupy protesters targetting the Port of Oakland.”
And of course, the fact that the FBI is sharing intelligence means that it was gathering intelligence as well.
By law, the FBI can only investigate when there are federal crimes or federal statutes involved, and the vast majority, if not all, of the Occupy actions in cities all over the country were local in nature. Occupy was a famously diverse group of community-based organizations that had no national structure or leadership. In the few instances were Occupy protesters were charged with crimes -- mostly in cases of civil disobedience or minor vandalism -- there were no federal laws even remotely involved.
Quote 0 0
FBI brawl costs Bears duo $50,000
Lineman broke jaw of teammate
Tomlinson ready to run over Fish
Dec. 10, 2005. 01:00 AM

The heavyweight punch-up between Bears offensive linemen Olin Kreutz and Fred Miller at an FBI shooting range in Chicago will cost them $50,000 each.

After a barbecue and drinks at at the range, roughhousing between Miller and Kreutz escalated to a full-blown brawl.

It ended when Miller hit Kreutz in the head with a five-pound weight, breaking his jaw and opening a cut that required 13 stitches.

The FBI is still investigating the incident at the FBI facility, which is off-limits to civilians.
Quote 0 0

see link for full story


 January 6, 2009

'YEAH, I HAD the son of a bitch killed. I'm glad I did. I'm sorry I couldn't have done it myself!"

These were the words of Carlos Marcello, the Mafia godfather of Louisiana and Texas. And he was talking about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Marcello's startling admission is in uncensored FBI files at the National Archives, detailed for the first time in a new encyclopedic book "Legacy of Secrecy." I have been referring to this work off and on for years while the author, Lamar Waldron, completed his investigation into the murders of John and Robert Kennedy and also into the death of Dr. Martin Luther King.

Waldron's 848-page tome was published in November. It caps 20 years of research that began in 1988 when he didn't know that Marcello had confessed to JFK's murder back in 1985. The FBI kept this fact a secret for more than two decades while "conspiracy theorists" ranged all over the place. And . . . the Warren Commission released its fairy-tale version of the death of JFK at the hands of a lone assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald.

IN 1963, only weeks after JFK was killed, the FBI questioned 14 Marcello mob associates. Yet the godfather's name doesn't even appear in the Warren Report. This secrecy, it seems, was all because of Cuba. (And that info is contained in Waldron's first incredible book, "Ultimate Sacrifice.")

see link for full story

http://www.nysun.com/new-york/ex-fbi-ag ... its/25725/

Ex-FBI Agent Probed for Aiding Mob Hits

By JERRY CAPECI | January 12, 2006

Authorities are investigating allegations that a former mob-busting FBI agent helped Colombo capo Gregory Scarpa carry out four Brooklyn murders during the years the gangster served as a top echelon informer for the agent, Gang Land has learned.

Two of the slayings - one committed by Scarpa, the other by an associate - took place after the FBI agent, R. Lindley DeVecchio, allegedly told the gangster that two Brooklyn hoodlums were stool pigeons just like him, sources said.

Mr. DeVecchio allegedly told Scarpa that mobster Joseph "Joe Brewster" DeDomenico had "found God" and was prepared to tell the truth if subpoenaed, and that Patrick Porco, a young drug dealing buddy of Scarpa's son Joseph, was talking to police, sources said.

DeDomenico, 44, was shot to death on September 17, 1987. Porco, 18, was killed over the Memorial Day weekend in 1990.

Sources said the Brooklyn district attorney's office also has evidence that Mr. DeVecchio, who has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing as an FBI agent, aided Scarpa in the murders of two rival hoodlums he shot to death during the bloody 1991-92 mob family war.

The victims, mob associate Larry Lampesi and capo Nicholas "Nicky Black" Grancio, members of a rival Colombo faction headed byVictor "Little Vic" Orena, were shot to death by Scarpa's crew in 1992. Sources said Mr. DeVecchio facilitated Grancio's murder by calling off a police surveillance team to allow Scarpa to kill him, and assisted Scarpa in Lampesi's murder by letting him know where to find his target.

"The evidence is credible but it remains to be seen whether a murder case can be made," a law enforcement source said, noting that the statute of limitations has long since passed on all other possible charges.

"Lin discussed the murders with Greg before they happened, and after they happened, and knew they were going to happen - that is the allegation," a source who is familiar with the probe by the D.A.'s office said.

Just how far Mr. DeVecchio went in aiding his prized informant has been kicked around by federal prosecutors and mob defense lawyers for more than a decade. He was investigated by the Justice Department's Office of Professional Integrity in 1997, but no charges were ever brought.

Accounts by Scarpa's family detailing Mr. DeVecchio's close, allegedly corrupt, working relationship with Scarpa reached Gang Land a decade ago. Those charges could never be confirmed and Mr. DeVecchio has strongly denied any wrongdoing.

The central figure in the new investigation, sources said, is Scarpa's longtime lover, Linda Schiro, who hooked up with the then 36-year-old mobster in 1964 several months before her 19th birthday and raised two children with him. Their son, Joseph, was shot to death in a drug-related gang murder in 1995 at 24. Scarpa, who contracted the AIDS virus in a blood transfusion, died in prison a year earlier at 66. Ms. Schiro, now 60, met Mr. DeVecchio numerous times during visits to the gangster's home, according to court documents.

While Ms. Schiro is the linchpin of the investigation, the allegations were delivered to the D.A.'s office by Angela Clemente, a private investigator who obtained much of her information from a woman with whom Ms. Schiro planned to write a book several years ago, sources said.

Sources said Ms. Clemente, who has investigated Mr. DeVecchio and other alleged government abuses for years, filed a report with the D.A.'s office last year after a federal judge refused to toss Little Vic Orena's murder and racketeering conviction based on lesser allegations against the 65-year-old retired G-man.

Sources said the report is based largely on information Ms. Clemente obtained from Sandy Harmon, who had planned to pen the Schiro-Scarpa book, and that it contains allegations that have been knocked down by detectives and investigators for Brooklyn's D.A., Charles Hynes.

One discredited charge is that Joseph Scarpa killed Porco, a lifelong friend whose bullet-riddled body was found on May 27, 1990, in the Sheepshead Bay section of Brooklyn, on orders from his father.

"Greg wanted him to, pushed him to do it, but the kid couldn't do it," a source said.

Prosecutors have confirmed the essence of the report, however, and plan to cajole or coerce Ms. Schiro to testify before a grand jury in the hope of lodging murder charges against Mr. DeVecchio and others, sources said.

Ms. Shiro, who implicated Mr. DeVecchio in two minor transgressions during an internal FBI probe - she said he accepted a plate of lasagna and a Cabbage Patch doll as gifts from her and Greg - declined to comment when contacted by Gang Land.

"These allegations are preposterous," Mr. DeVecchio's attorney, Douglas Grover, said. "There's no way that such a well-respected, talented agent who enjoyed a great career with the FBI was ever going to get involved in something like this. There is no doubt that Scarpa was a murderous thug, but there is nothing to suggest that Lin participated in or condoned any of Scarpa's conduct while he was a major FBI informant."

see link for full story



Newly Released Secret Tapes Reveal LBJ Knew but Never Spoke Out About Nixon's 'Treason'

Connor Simpson 3,856 Views Mar 16, 2013
Rumors and whispers of Richard Nixon's 'treason' -- sabotaging Vietnam peace talks to help his Presidential campaign -- have floated around for years, but newly released tapes from Lyndon Johnson's Presidency confirm that LBJ knew about Nixon's behaviour and didn't bother to report it. 
In previously released tapes from Johnson's Presidency, we had heard about Johnson having a substantial body of evidence showing Nixon schemed to keep the South Vietnamese away from the negotiating table at the 1968 Paris peace talks. Johnson recorded all of his conversations held inside the White House while he was President. (Where do you think Nixon got the idea?) Nixon was accused or dispatching Anna Chennault, a senior advisor, to convince the South Vietnamese they would get a better deal if they didn't agree to peace, effectively ending the Vietnam war, until after the U.S. Presidential election. Chennault confirmed she spoke with the Vietnamese in her autobiography, The Education of Anna, but nothing more than that. If true, the charge would likely amount to treason.
Which brings us to today. The BBC's David Taylor reports newly unclassified Johnson tapes, combined with unreleased interviews carried out by the BBC's former Washington correspondent Charles Wheeler with senior Johnson administration officials (before Wheeler's death), reveals new, amazing information about the scandal. In October 1968, there was a breakthrough in the Paris peace talks that would end the Vietname war. At the same time, Nixon's campaign was relying heavily on the war continuing. If a deal was reached, Johnson would halt the bombing of North Vietnam. But Nixon had Chennault convince South Vietnam that they "should withdraw from the talks, refuse to deal with Johnson, and if Nixon was elected, they would get a much better deal," Taylor writes. They did on the day before Johnson was going to announce the end of the Vietnam war.  
And Johnson knew about it all. In the recently released tapes, we can hear Johnson being told about Nixon's interference by Defence Secretary Clark Clifford. The FBI had bugged the South Vietnamese ambassadors phone. They had Chennault lobbying the ambassador on tape. Johnson was justifiably furious -- he ordered Nixon's campaign be placed under FBI surveillance. Johnson passed along a note to Nixon that he knew about the move. Nixon played like he had no idea why the South backed out, and offered to travel to Saigon to get them back to the negotiating table.
Johnson also passed along a note to Nixon's opponent, Democrat Hubert Humphrey. The Democratic campaign found out just days before the election, though, and decided they were close enough in the polls to not release the information. A treason accusation could potentially damage the country's security, they thought, before Humphrey lost a narrow election. Hindsight is 20/20, others say. 
But even before Nixon won, Johnson had his own issues to deal with. The South pulling out of the Paris talks meant the war would continue. Johnson could independently release the information if he wanted, destroy Nixon, and ensure a win for his Democratic ally Humphrey. But he opted not to for the country's greater security concerns
Johnson felt it was the ultimate expression of political hypocrisy but in calls recorded with Clifford they express the fear that going public would require revealing the FBI were bugging the ambassador's phone and the National Security Agency (NSA) was intercepting his communications with Saigon.
So they decided to say nothing.
Definitive Johnson historian Robert Caro, the author of four of a planned five books chronicling Lyndon Johnson's time in American politics, declined to talk about the confusion surrounding Vietnam in this May 2012 interview with NPR's Leonard Lopate. "That's coming in the next book," Caro said. 
Nixon went on to win the Presidency in 1968. In 1973, after escalating the Vietnam War in his first term, a peace deal was finally agreed upon. The rest, as they say, is history.

Quote 0 0


The FBI's anticipatory prosecution of Muslims to criminalize speech

A court ruling in one of the most abusive prosecutions yet highlights the dangers posed by this familiar tactic

Glenn Greenwald

guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 19 March 2013

·         One of the major governmental abuses denounced by the 1976 final report of the Church Committee was the FBI's domestic counter intelligence programs (COINTELPRO). Under that program, the FBI targeted political groups and individuals it deemed subversive and dangerous - including civil rights activists (such as the NAACP and Martin Luther King), black nationalist movements, socialist and communist organizations, anti-war protesters, and various right-wing groups - and infiltrated them with agents who, among other things, attempted to manipulate members into agreeing to commit criminal acts so that the FBI could arrest and prosecute them. This program was exposed only because a left-wing group, the so-called "Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI", broke into an FBI office in Pennsylvania, stole the files relating to the program, and sent them to various newspapers.


·         What made the program so controversial was that the FBI was attempting to create and encourage crimes rather than find actual criminals - all in order to punish those whose constitutionally protected political activism the US government found threatening. As Noam Chomsky wrote in a comprehensive 1999 article on the program: "During these years, FBI provocateurs repeatedly urged and initiated violent acts, including forceful disruption of meetings and demonstrations on and off university campuses, attacks on police, bombings, and so on." Once the program was exposed, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover insisted that there was no centralized authority for it and that it had ended, while the Church Committee's final report made clear just how illegal and threatening it was:


·         . . .

·         . . . .

·         . . . .

·         .

·         Please re-read those last two highlighted sentences, as this is exactly what is happening again now: systematically and without much notice. Over the past decade, US Muslims have been routinely targeted with precisely this same tactic of preemptive or anticipatory prosecution. It's all designed to take people engaged in political and religious advocacy which the US government dislikes - usually very young and impressionable Muslims with zero criminal history, though increasingly non-Muslims engaged in other forms of dissent - and use paid informants to trick them into saying just enough to turn them into criminals who are then prosecuted and imprisoned for decades.


·         The same pattern repeats itself over and over. The FBI ensnares some random Muslim in a garden-variety criminal investigation involving financial fraud or drugs. Rather than prosecute him, the FBI puts the Muslim criminal suspect on its payroll, sending him into Muslim communities and mosques in order not only to spy on American Muslims, but to befriend them and then actively manipulate them into saying just enough to make their prosecution possible. At times, the FBI's informants have been so unstable and aggressive in trying to recruit members to join Terrorist plots that the targeted mosque members themselves have reported the informant to the FBI. Time and again, at the direction of these paid provocateurs who know that their ongoing payments depend upon enabling prosecutions, young Muslims in their late teens or early twenties end up saying something hostile about the US and/or statements that are otherwise politically offensive.


·         The DOJ takes those inflammatory political statements and combines them with evidence of commitment to Islam to depict the target as a dangerous jihadist. They use the same small set of government-loyal "terrorism experts" who earn an ample living testifying for the government and telling juries that unremarkable indicia of Islam are "typical" of Terrorists. Federal judges, notorious for subservience to the government in cases involving Muslims and Terrorism, go out of their way to allow even the most dubious government evidence while excluding the huge bulk of the defendant's.


·         Federal prosecutors use this combination to convince a jury of Americans - inculcated with more than a decade of intense Islamophobic propaganda - to convict the defendants under "material support for terrorism" statutes even though they have harmed nobody and have taken no real steps toward doing so. The case is based overwhelmingly on the political and religious beliefs of the defendants, which are enough to convince Americans jurors that they are Bad People. These convictions not only result in decades of prison, but incarceration in special facilities reserved mostly for Muslims that, in most respects, are as restrictive and oppressive as those found at Guantanamo.


·         There have been several excellent articles reporting on how pervasive this FBI tactic has become, including this Mother Jones article by Trevor Aaronson and this Nation story by Petra Bartosiewicz. Both the Guardian and the Washington Post have reported on some of the worst abuses. I've written about various cases on several occasions. And one truly great organization, the National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms, has devoted itself to chronicling and battling against this assault. As Bartosiewicz reported:


·         "Nearly every major post-9/11 terrorism-related prosecution has involved a sting operation, at the center of which is a government informant. In these cases, the informants — who work for money or are seeking leniency on criminal charges of their own — have crossed the line from merely observing potential criminal behavior to encouraging and assisting people to participate in plots that are largely scripted by the FBI itself. Under the FBI's guiding hand, the informants provide the weapons, suggest the targets and even initiate the inflammatory political rhetoric that later elevates the charges to the level of terrorism."


·         Like most abusive post-9/11 trends, this tactic is now stronger than ever: "there have been 138 terrorism or national security prosecutions involving informants since 2001, and more than a third of those have occurred in the past three years."


·         As common as this tactic has become, it's vital to look at particularly egregious cases to see what is really at play. This week, a panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, by a 2-1 decision, affirmed the 2005 "material support" conviction of US-born Hamid Hayat, and it's one of the worst yet most illustrative cases yet (that's US justice: he was convicted 8 years ago, and his appeal is only now decided). Hayat was convicted for allegedly having attended "a terrorist training camp" when he was 19 years old. In the Sacramento Bee this week, Stanford Law Professor Shirin Sinnar wrote: "Even among anticipatory prosecutions, this case stands out for the fragility of the government's case and the rank taint of prejudice, raising the haunting prospect that a man who had done nothing was convicted for a violent state of mind."


·         Notably, the dissenting judge was A. Wallace Tashima, the first Japanese-American appointed to the federal bench; he was imprisoned during World War II in an internment camp in Arizona. As Professor Sinnar observed: "Perhaps as a Japanese American who was interned as a child, he remembered well the danger of preventative security measures founded on group-based judgments." In dissent, Judge Tashima wrote: "This case is a stark demonstration of the unsettling and untoward consequences of the government's use of anticipatory prosecution as a weapon in the 'war on terrorism.'" He then described anticipatory prosecutions and explained why they are so dangerous:


·         . . .

·         The evidence that Hayat attended a "terrorist training camp" came from a government informant, Nassem Kahn, who was originally arrested by the FBI as part of money laundering scheme. But rather then prosecute Kahn, he was paid between $3,000 and $4,000 per month - as the dissent said, "more than $200,000 by the FBI" total - to infiltrate a local mosque in Lodi, California. That is how he befriended the then-19-year-old Hayat and began trying to induce him into criminal conduct. Desperate to maintain his payments, Kahn outright fabricated stories in order to show his value, including claims - which even the FBI acknowledged were false - that he had on several occasions seen al-Qaida's then-second-highest official, Ayman al Zawahiri, at the Lodi mosque.


·         Over the course of hundreds of hours of recorded conversations, Kahn actively encouraged Hayat to attend a terrorist camp in Pakistan. At one point, he even mocked the youth for failing to do so, and on another, told Hayat that he had spoken to Hayat's father who wanted him to go to the camp:


·         "Hayat traveled with his family to Pakistan in April 2003. Two of the recorded conversations took place when he was there. Like the earlier conversations, they covered a wide range of topics. On one occasion, Khan scolded Hayat for being lazy and not going to a training camp. In response, Hayat protested that the camp was closed during hot weather and that had the camp been open, he 'would have been there.' On another occasion, Khan relayed to Hayat a conversation in which Hayat's father explained that '[Hayat wi]ll enter the Madrassah, and, God Willing, he [will] go for training!' Hayat responded to Khan: 'Um-hmm. . . . No problem, absolutely.' (Underlined portion spoken in English)."


·         Remarkably, the judge allowed Kahn to testify that Hayat told him that he attended a camp, but then refused to allow Hayat's lawyers to ask Kahn about the fact that Hayat eventually told him that he never intended to go to a camp and was simply lying out of bravado. That is one major factor that caused Judge Tashima to insist that the conviction must be reversed:


·         "The prosecution was allowed to introduce inculpatory out-of-court statements Hayat made to Khan, but the defense was prevented from eliciting testimony regarding Hayat's exculpatory out-of-court statements made in the same conversation. . . . . The district court's exclusion of a crucial exculpatory statement made under identical conditions and contemporaneously with the inculpatory statement was grossly unfair. . . . This seriously calls into question the fairness and integrity of the proceedings."


·         Worse, the prosecution was allowed to introduce "expert testimony" telling the jury that "a particular kind of person would carry" a "supplication" prayer written in Arabic that was found in Hayat's wallet: namely, "a person who perceives him or herself as being engaged in war for God against an enemy". As bad as it was to allow such blanket "expert testimony" about his likely state of mind based on a prayer in his wallet, the judge then excluded Hayat's own expert witness who would have testified that such a prayer is common among perfectly peaceful Muslims and has all sorts of possible meanings. As Judge Tashima pointed out, Hayat was merely carrying "a written prayer, whose meaning to any particular faithful likely is obscure. This is particularly so in this case because Hayat did not speak or read Arabic, the language in which the prayer was written." To decide that someone is a Terrorist deserving of decades in prison because of that is a travesty beyond belief.


·         The only other evidence presented was a videotape in which Hayat, after many hours of being badgered in FBI custody, finally said that he had been present a camp at which terrorists were "possibly" or "probably" present. But even an FBI agent, citing how vague and coerced the statement was, himself deemed it the "sorriest confession [he had] ever seen." Judge Tashima derided it as "a meandering and almost nonsensical confession to the FBI". He added that the "confession" was extracted only "after hours of questioning, beginning around 11:00 a.m., and lasting into the early morning hours of the following day, [when] he finally agreed with FBI interrogators, who repeatedly insisted, despite his continuing denials, that Hayat had in fact attended such a training camp." The trial judge refused to allow expert testimony about how and why it was clear that this statement had been coerced.


·         But worst of all - and most revealing - the jury foreperson, Joseph Cote, made all sorts of post-trial statements demonstrating clear Islamophobic bias. Cote excused the FBI informant's fabrications that he had seen al-Zawhiri at the Lodi moseque by saying: "they all look the same when wearing a costume". Other jurors swore in affidavits that "[t]hroughout the deliberation process, Mr. Cote made other inappropriate racial comments." In an interview with the Atlantic, Cote, noting the 2005 London subway bombings, said that he could not let Hayat go free "on the basis of what we know of how people of his background have acted in the past."


·         That is as bigoted a statement as it gets: that Hayat should be subjected to heightened suspicion because he is Muslim. That's exactly the mindset that has led the US to create what New York Times editorial page editor Andy Rosenthal has called "essentially a separate justice system for Muslims." Indeed, Cote specifically endorsed the government's post-9/11 tactic of preemptively prosecuting Muslims. As the Atlantic article by Amy Waldman explained, the US government's treatment of Muslims is a direct repudiation of what had long been the core precept of US justice:


·         "Testifying before Congress in 2004, Paul Rosenzweig of the Heritage Foundation paraphrased a well-known maxim, saying, 'It is better that ten guilty go free than that one innocent be mistakenly punished.' September 11 changed the paradigm, he argued, and now, 'we simply cannot afford a rule that 'Better ten terrorists go undetected than that the conduct of one innocent be mistakenly examined.'"


·         The Atlantic article then quoted Cote, again citing the danger from Muslims, as wholeheartedly concurring with this mindset:


·         "This preventive approach, Cote said, means that 'just as there are people in prison who never committed the crime, this may also happen . . . .He argued that it was 'absolutely' better to run the risk of convicting an innocent man than to let a guilty one go. 'Too many lives are changed' by terrorism, he said. 'So shall one man pay to save fifty? It's not a debatable question."


·         Despite all these comments, the two judges voting to affirm Hayat's conviction contorted themselves into pretzels to find non-bigoted interpretations of these comments and to conclude, ultimately, that even if ugly, these sentiments are not enough to compel a new trial.


·         After the jury found him guilty, Hayat was sentenced to 288 months - 24 years - in federal prison. That included the maximum 15-year sentence for "materially supporting" terrorism. Convicted at the age of 23 and now 30 years old, Hayat will not be free until he's 47 years old - even though there was zero evidence that he had taken any steps to harm anyone.


·         That's why I say that this case, though extreme, is incredibly illustrative. It's how these cases against young Muslims - and, increasingly, non-Muslim activists in the US - typically function. The FBI, using a paid informant, spent years trying to turn him into a criminal. Even with all those efforts, they obtained virtually nothing, but were able to play on the anti-Muslim prejudices of American jurors who equate Muslim religiosity with evidence of Terrorism.


·         But what makes the case so pernicious, what makes the tactic so dangerous, is exactly what the Church Committee cited when denouncing COINTELPRO: namely, it is the US government targeting citizens for their political beliefs, and then turning them into criminals by exploiting their unpopular political views. Here is the summary of the "evidence" against Hayat from the Atlantic's Waldman:


·         "To prove intent, then, the government had to turn to the rubble of Hayat's life—an accretion of circumstantial but ugly evidence that prosecutors said proved 'a jihadi heart and a jihadi mind.' There were Hayat's words, taped by an informant, in which he praised the murder and mutilation of the journalist Daniel Pearl: 'They killed him—I'm so pleased about that. They cut him into pieces and sent him back … That was a good job they did—now they can't send one Jewish person to Pakistan.' There was what the prosecution called Hayat's 'frequently expressed hatred toward the United States'; his comment that his heart 'belongs to Pakistan'; his description of President Bush as 'the worm.' There was, at his house, literature by a virulent Pakistani militant and a scrapbook of clippings celebrating both the Taliban and sectarian violence."


·         It's incredibly common for young people of that age to dabble in extremist thought. But whatever one thinks of those opinions, they are clearly constitutionally protected as free speech. Yet throwing these opinions in the face of the jury, combined with evidence of one's belief in Islam, is more than enough to persuade all too many Americans that the person is guilty of Terrorism, that he has "a jihadi heart and a jihadi mind". And that's what makes these "preemptive" and "anticipatory" prosecutions so menacing: by criminalizing free speech and turning dissidents into felons, they achieve exactly that which the First Amendment, above all else, was designed to prohibit. That these practices created such an intense backlash when exposed 40 years ago by the Church Committee, yet are accepted with such indifference now, speaks volumes about the state of US political culture.

Quote 0 0

The Persecution Of Barrett Brown -- And How To Fight It

By Glenn Greenwald (about the author)    
OpEdNews Op Eds 3/21/2013 


The journalist and Anonymous activist is targeted as part of a broad effort to deter and punish internet freedom activism
Journalist and activist Barrett Brown in a 2012 interview with RT Photograph: screen grab

Aaron's Swartz's suicide in January triggered waves of indignation, and rightly so. He faced multiple felony counts and years in prison for what were, at worst, trivial transgressions of law. But his prosecution revealed the excess of both anti-hacking criminal statutes, particularly the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), and the fixation of federal prosecutors on severely punishing all forms of activism that challenge the power of the government and related entities to control the flow of information on the internet. 

Part of what drove the intense reaction to Swartz's death was how sympathetic a figure he was, but as noted by Orin Kerr, a former federal prosecutor in the DOJ's computer crimes unit and now a law professor at GWU, what was done to Swartz is anything but unusual, and the reaction to his death will be meaningful only if channeled to protest other similar cases of prosecutorial abuse:

"I think it's important to realize that what happened in the Swartz case happens in lots and lots of federal criminal cases. . . . What's unusual about the Swartz case is that it involved a highly charismatic defendant with very powerful friends in a position to object to these common practices. That's not to excuse what happened, but rather to direct the energy that is angry about what happened. If you want to end these tactics, don't just complain about the Swartz case. Don't just complain when the defendant happens to be a brilliant guy who went to Stanford and hangs out with Larry Lessig. Instead, complain that this is business as usual in federal criminal cases around the country -- mostly with defendants who no one has ever heard of and who get locked up for years without anyone else much caring."

Prosecutorial abuse is a drastically under-discussed problem in general, but it poses unique political dangers when used to punish and deter online activism. But it's becoming the pre-eminent weapon used by the US government to destroy such activism.

Just this week alone, a US federal judge sentenced hactivist Andrew "Weev" Auernheimer to 3-1/2 years in prison for exploiting a flaw in AT&T's security system that allowed him entrance without any hacking, an act about which Slate's Justin Peters wrote: "it's not clear that Auernheimer committed any actual crime," while Jeff Blagdon at the Verge added: "he cracked no codes, stole no passwords, or in any way 'broke into' AT&T's customer database -- something company representatives confirmed during testimony." But he had a long record of disruptive and sometimes even quite ugly (though legal) online antagonism, so he had to be severely punished with years in prison. 

Also this week, the DOJ indicted the deputy social media editor at Reuters, Matthew Keys, on three felony counts which carry a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison for allegedly providing some user names and passwords that allowed Anonymous unauthorized access into the computer system of the Los Angeles Times, where they altered a few stories and caused very minimal damage. As Peters wrote about that case, "the charges under the CFAA seem outrageously severe" and, about Keys' federal prosecutors, observed: "apparently, they didn't take away any lessons from the Aaron Swartz case."

<a href="http://ox-d.lanistaconcepts.com/w/1.0/rc?cs=51030f68dd793&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE" ><img src="http://ox-d.lanistaconcepts.com/w/1.0/ai?auid=332813&cs=51030f68dd793&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE" border="0" alt=""></a>

But the pending federal prosecution of 31-year-old Barrett Brown poses all new troubling risks. That's because Brown - who has been imprisoned since September on a 17-count indictment that could result in many years in prison -- is a serious journalist who has spent the last several years doggedly investigating the shadowy and highly secretive underworld of private intelligence and defense contractors, who work hand-in-hand with the agencies of the Surveillance and National Security State in all sorts of ways that remain completely unknown to the public. It is virtually impossible to conclude that the obscenely excessive prosecution he now faces is unrelated to that journalism and his related activism.

A brief understanding of Brown's intrepid journalism is vital to understanding the travesty of his prosecution. I first heard of Brown when he wrote a great 2010 essay in Vanity Fair defending the journalist Michael Hastings from attacks from fellow journalists over Hastings' profile of Gen. Stanley McChrystal in Rolling Stone, which ended the general's career. Brown argued that establishment journalists hate Hastings because he has spent years challenging, rather than serving, political and military officials and the false conventional wisdom they spout.

In an excellent profile of Brown in the Guardian on Wednesday, Ryan Gallagher describes that "before he crossed paths with the FBI, Brown was a prolific writer who had contributed to publications including Vanity Fair, the Guardian, the Huffington Post and satirical news site the Onion." He also "had a short stint in politics as the director of communications for an atheist group called Enlighten the Vote, and he co-authored a well-received book mocking creationism, Flock of Dodos."

But the work central to his prosecution began in 2009, when Brown created Project PM, "dedicated to investigating private government contractors working in the secretive fields of cybersecurity, intelligence and surveillance." Brown was then moved by the 2010 disclosures by WikiLeaks and the oppressive treatment of Bradley Manning to devote himself to online activism and transparency projects, including working with the hacktivist collective Anonymous. He has no hacking skills, but used his media savvy to help promote and defend the group, and was often referred to (incorrectly, he insists) as the Anonymous spokesman. He was particularly interested in using what Anonymous leaked for his journalism. As Brown told me several days ago in a telephone interview from the Texan prison where he is being held pending trial, he devoted almost all of his waking hours over the last several years to using these documents to dig into the secret relationships and projects between these intelligence firms and federal agencies.

The real problems for Brown began in 2011. In February, Anonymous hacked into the computer system of the private security firm HB Gary Federal and then posted thousands of emails containing incriminating and nefarious acts. Among them was a joint proposal by that firm -- along with the very well-connected firms of Palantir and Berico -- to try to persuade Bank of America and its law firm, Hunton & Williams, to hire them to destroy the reputations and careers of WikiLeaks supporters and, separately, critics of the Chamber of Commerce (as this New York Times article on that episode details, I was named as one of the people whose career they would seek to destroy). HB Gary Federal's CEO Aaron Barr, who advocated the scheme, was fired as a result of the disclosures, but continues to this day to play a significant role in this public-private axis of computer security and intelligence.

Brown became obsessed with journalistically investigating every strand exposed by these HB Gary Federal emails and devoted himself to relentlessly exposing this world. He did the same with the 2012 leak of millions of emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor, obtained by Anonymous and published by WikiLeaks. As Gallagher describes about Brown's fixation on these documents:

"Hackers would sometimes obtain data and then pass it on to him. He would spend days and nights hunkered down in his small uptown Dallas apartment pouring through troves of hacked documents, writing blog posts about US government intelligence contractors and their 'misplaced power' while working to garner wider media coverage. ...

"Brown was frustrated that mainstream media outlets were not covering stories he felt deserved attention. He would complain that reporters would often approach him and ask about the personalities of some of the more prominent hackers ... but ignore the deeper issues about governments and private contractors contained in documents that had been hacked."

The issues Brown was investigating are complex and serious, and I won't detail all of that here. In addition to Gallagher's article, two superb and detailed accounts of Brown's journalism in these areas have been published by Christian Stork of WhoWhatWhy and Vice's Patrick McGuire; read those to see how threatening Brown's work had become to lots of well-connected people. Suffice to say, Brown, using the documents obtained by Anonymous, was digging around -- with increasing efficacy -- in places which National Security and Surveillance State agencies devote considerable energy to concealing.

All of this is the crucial background to the charges he currently faces. In March of last year, Brown's home was raided by the FBI, armed with a search warrant relating to both the HB Gary Federal and the Stratfor leaks. Brown told me they were intent on finding out what he had learned about those firms, particularly HB Gary Federal. Having apparently learned that the FBI agents were coming, Brown went to his mother's home, so the FBI broke down his door and entered his apartment. They seized various documents but could find nothing linking him to either hack, so he was not arrested.

After that, FBI agents went to his mother's home. They found Brown there and asked for his laptop, which he denied having. Over the next several months, FBI agents continued to harass not only Brown but also his mother, repeatedly threatening to arrest her and indict her for obstruction of justice for harboring Brown and helping him conceal documents by letting him into her home.

Those months of FBI pursuit, but particularly the threats against his mother, finally caused Brown to explode with rage. Brown has been open in discussing his past battles with substance abuse, and at the time, he had stopped taking various medications which he uses to control his addiction problems. In September, he posted a YouTube video detailing that the FBI and HB Gary Federal had threatened to ruin his life, and was particularly incensed about the threats against his mother. Obviously distraught, he said he intended to do the same to the FBI agent making the threats against his mother, FBI agent Robert Smith. While expressly disavowing any intent to physically harm Smith, Brown issued rambling threats to "destroy" Smith.

That was more than enough pretext to allow the FBI to do what they long wanted: arrest Brown. The same day he posted the video on YouTube, the FBI arrested him on charges of threatening a federal agent, and then kept him imprisoned with no indictment for weeks on the ground that he posed an immediate threat to Smith. Finally in October, the DOJ unveiled an indictment charging him with three counts of, essentially, harassing a federal officer online.

In December, the DOJ filed a second indictment, which is now the heart of the government's case against him. It alleged that he "trafficked" in stolen goods, namely the Stratfor documents leaked by Anonymous and published by WikiLeaks. The indictment focuses on one small part of the leak: a list of Straftor clients and their credit card numbers. Critically, the indictment does not allege that Brown participated in the hack or in obtaining any of those documents.

Instead, it simply alleges that he helped "disseminate" the stolen information. He did that, claims the DOJ, when he was in a chat room and posted a link to those documents that were online. As the harsh Anonymous critic Adrian Chen of Gawker wrote:

"Is it a crime for someone simply to share a link to stolen information? That seems to be the message conveyed by today's indictment of former Anonymous spokesman Barrett Brown, over a massive hack of the private security firm Stratfor. Brown's in legal trouble for copying and pasting a link from one chat room to another. This is scary to anyone who ever links to anything ...

"This charge does not allege Brown actually had the credit card numbers on his computer or even created the link: He just allegedly copied a link to a publicly-accessible file with the numbers from one chat room and pasted it into another. ... As a journalist who covers hackers and has 'transferred and posted' many links to data stolen by hackers -- in order to put them in stories about the hacks -- this indictment is frightening because it seems to criminalize linking."

What makes all of this even worse is that there is zero suggestion that Brown made use of these credit card numbers. To the contrary, when Anonymous advocated that people use the numbers to donate money to charity, Brown vocally condemned that suggestion as a distraction from Anonymous' mission. He told me in our telephone interview that he did the same privately. As McGuire wrote: "It's obvious by looking at the most recent posts on Barrett Brown's blog that while he is highly interested in Stratfor, it wasn't the credit card information that motivated him."

The documents to which he linked contained all sorts of other information that he wanted to investigate and write about, including Straftor's client list. There are countless legitimate reasons to link to those documents, particularly for a journalist. That this extremely dubious allegation now forms the crux of the DOJ's case against him reveals what a persecution this actually is.

In January, the DOJ filed yet another indictment against Brown, its third. This one added charges of "obstruction of justice" for allegedly failing to tell them about his laptop when they came to his mother's house (it also alleged that his mother "aided and abetted" him in these acts, thus maintaining the implicit threat to indict her for having let her son into her home). Those charges, by themselves, carry a possible prison sentence of 20 years.

So here we have the US government targeting someone they clearly loathe because of the work he is doing against their actions. Then -- using the most dubious legal theories, exploiting vague and broad criminal statutes, and driving him to ill-advised behavior with deliberately vindictive harassment (including aimed at his mother) -- they transform what is at worst very trivial offenses into a multi-count felony indictment that has already resulted in his imprisonment for six months and threatens to imprison him for many years more. In his great analysis of the case, Christian Stork compares Brown's treatment to Swartz's (about which Stork wrote previously) and captures perfectly what is going on here and what is at stake:

"Swartz's treatment wasn't anomalous, but 'a symptom of the entire disease' that underlies America's singular status as the world's jailer -- of those who anger formidable interests, and those without friends in the right places.

"Brown's case is even more egregious: As even the government itself concedes, ProjectPM comes under the definition of the legitimate practice of journalism. Brown simply harnessed information gathered from someone else's 'criminal' hack. Then he used it to expose the foul and potentially illegal activities of some of the world's leading corporations -- in partnership with secretive sectors of the government.

"Brown punctured a wall of secrecy, constructed over the past decade, that shields the state from accountability to its citizens. For that, he is threatened with a century behind bars.

"His tale deserves to be told, not just because of the injustice involved. It also shows the awesome power of the Internet in adjusting the balance sheet between the big guys and the small ones. And the lengths the insiders will go to keep their advantage."

Brown may not be as cuddly as Swartz, and certainly does not have the same roster of influential friends. Nor can it be categorically argued that Brown did nothing wrong (just as many of Swartz's most ardent defenders acknowledged about him): that YouTube video, made when he was admittedly struggling with impaired judgment, was certainly ill-advised.

But none of that should matter. The claim with prosecutorial abuse is never that the person targeted is a perfect being or even that he never did anything wrong. The issue with prosecutorial abuse is that the punishments being meted out are wildly disproportionate to the alleged acts when the trivial harms of the acts are considered and/or that the prosecution is being pursued for improper purposes. That's particularly true when viewed next to the far more egregious criminality the US government shields.

Both prongs of prosecutorial abuse are clearly present in Brown's case. There is no evidence that the link he posted to already published documents resulted in any unauthorized use of credit cards, and certainly never redounded in any way to his benefit. More important, this prosecution is driven by the same plainly improper purpose that drove the one directed at Aaron Swartz and so many others: the desire to exploit the power of criminal law to deter and severely punish anyone who meaningfully challenges the government's power to control the flow of information on the internet and conceal its vital actions. Brown's acts, like Swartz's, were political in nature, and the excessive prosecution is equally political.

What the US government counts on above all else is that the persons it targets are unable to defend themselves against the government's unlimited resources. It takes an enormous amount of money to mount an effective defense. That's what often drives even the most innocent people to plead guilty and agree to long prison terms: they simply have no choice, because their reliance on committed and able but time-strapped public defenders makes conviction at trial highly likely, which -- under an outrageous system that punishes people for exercising their right to a fair trial -- means a much harsher punishment than if they plead guilty.

If the US government is going to attempt to imprison activists and journalists like this, it should at the very least be a fair fight. That means that Brown, who is now represented by a public defender, should have a vigorous defense able to devote the time and energy to his case that it deserves. He told me in the telephone interview we had that he believes this is the key to enabling him to avoid pleading guilty and agreeing to a prison term: something he has thus far refused to do in part because he insists he did nothing criminal, and in part because he refuses to become a government informant.

A legal defense fund has been created by several young, smart and committed internet freedom activists, two of whom I had the chance to meet and speak with in the Boston area several weeks ago. I really hope everyone who is able to do so will donate what they can to his defense fund. You can do that at this link here, or via paypal to freebbfund@gmail.com. All donations will be used exclusively to hire private criminal defense counsel and to fund his defense.

The US government's serial prosecutorial excesses aimed at internet freedom activists, journalists, whistleblowers and the like are designed to crush meaningful efforts to challenge their power and conduct. It is, I believe, incumbent on everyone who believes in those values to do what they can to support those who are taking real risks in defense of those freedoms and in pursuit of real transparency. Barrett Brown is definitely such a person, and enabling him to resist these attacks is of vital importance.

Whistleblower documentary

Obviously related to all of this: the great filmmaker Robert Greenwald (no relation) has a new documentary coming out in April entitled "War on Whistleblowers: Free Press and the National Security State." Among other things, it contains interviews with Dan Ellsberg, the Washington Post's Dana Priest, former New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller, persecuted whistleblowers and others (I'm interviewed as well). Here is the new trailer for the documentary:

Q-and-A session tomorrow

Tomorrow (Friday), we're going to have here another Q-and-A session similar to the one we did weeks ago, where I will answer reader questions. The column will be posted at noon Eastern, and you can leave your questions in the comment section. I will then begin answering them in real-time starting at 3:00 pm Eastern.

* Editor's note: this article originally referred to private security firm HB Gary Federal as HB Gary; this was amended at 3pm ET on 21 March.


For the past 10 years, I was a litigator in NYC specializing in First Amendment challenges, civil rights cases, and corporate and securities fraud matters. I am the author of the New York Times Best-Selling book, more...)
Quote 0 0

Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War


North America is now suffering its seventh year of conspicuous and dangerous aerosol and electromagnetic operations conducted by the U.S. government under the guise of national security. Concerned citizens watch in fear as military tankers discolor the skies with toxic chemicals that morph into synthetic clouds.

We continually witness bizarre meteorological occurrences as powerful electromagnetic devices manipulate both the jet stream and individual storm fronts to create artificial weather and climatic conditions. Black operations projects embedded within these aerosol missions are documented to sicken and disorient select populations with biological test agents and psychotronic mind/mood control technologies.Part of what is happening in the atmosphere above us involves the Pentagon’s secret space weapons program, designed for strategic, operational and tactical levels of war. NASA missions will soon be transferred to Pentagon control.1 The Air Force Space Command declares that, in order to monitor and shape world events, it must fight intense, decisive wars with great precision from space.2 Air Force Secretary James G. Roche has stated: “Space capabilities are integrated with, and affect every link in the kill chain.”3 A glimpse into new death technologies under construction is in legislation introduced by Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinch. His unsuccessful Space Preservation Act of 2001 was intended to ban space deployment of:4

* electronic, psychotronic and information weaponry* high altitude ultra low frequency weapons

* plasma, electromagnetic, sonic and ultrasonic weapons

* laser weapons

* strategic, theater, tactical or extraterrestrial weapons

* chemical biological, environmental climate or tectonic weapons

* chemtrails (this item was stricken from a later version, suggesting duress)

In their quest to remain top dog in the kill chain, the purveyors of perpetual war have deliberately dimmed earth’s life-giving sunlight,5 and reduced atmospheric visibility with lung-clogging particulates and polymers.6 This ecological terrorism has severely compromised public health, according to thousands of testimonials. Years of mass appeals to legislators, media and military officials for information, and for cessation of catastrophic atmospheric degradation, have fallen on deaf bureaucratic ears. Public awareness of what befalls us remains as murky as our skies because those “in the know” are muzzled by national secrecy laws and Americans have no authority to challenge matters of national security. Left to gather clues, we know this much so far:

1. At least part of the aerosol project has been dubbed Operation Cloverleaf,7 probably due to its multi-faceted operations, which include: weather modification, military communications, space weapons development, ozone and global warming research plus biological weaponry and detection testing.

2. Dumping tons of particulate matter from aircraft has geo-engineered our planetary atmosphere into a highly charged, electrically-conductive plasma useful for military projects.8 The air we breathe is laden with asbestos-sized synthetic fibers and toxic metals, including barium salts, aluminum, and reportedly, radioactive thorium.9 These materials act as electrolytes to enhance conductivity of military radar and radio waves.10 Poisonous on par with arsenic and a proven suppressant of the human immune system,11 atmospheric barium weakens human muscles, including those of the heart.12 Inhaled aluminum goes directly to the brain and medical specialists confirm that it causes oxidative stress within brain tissue, leading to formation of Alzheimer’s like neurofibrillary tangles.13 Radioactive thorium is known to cause leukemia and other cancers.14

3. Only a small percentage of the military’s atmospheric modification projects are visibly obvious. What we can’t see is equally dangerous. The ionosphere, the earth and its inhabitants are continually bombarded with high frequency microwaves used to manipulate the charged atmosphere for weather modification, information gathering and for tectonic (earthquake-producing) weaponry.15 Independent chemtrail researcher Clifford Carnicom confirms that we are also continuously subjected to extremely low electromagnetic frequencies (ELF) pulsing at 4 hertz multiples, frequencies known to profoundly affect human biological and mental functioning.16

4. There is a well-documented biological component to continuously ongoing atmospheric studies in which nations and regions are furtively inoculated via specially designed delivery systems with combinations of viruses, bacteria, fungi, mycoplasma, desiccated blood cells and exotic biological markers so that testmasters can assess human, animal and plant response.17

5. The multi-organizational megalith perpetrating these bio-chem projects against humanity includes the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and its research arm DARPA, plus the Department of Energy (DOE) with its huge network of national labs and universities. Private defense contractors and pharmaceutical companies are heavily involved.18 Cooperating governments of other nations and probably some United Nations agencies are complicit, since the aerosol projects are global in scope.

Gross chemical and electromagnetic pollution is only part of the horrific realities we endure. The sociopaths who brazenly pervert skies, climate and weather for power and profit are the same madmen who have waged four limited nuclear wars since 1991. Radioactive weaponry, declared both illegal and immoral by the entire civilized world, has been used by the Pentagon in Desert Storm, the Balkans campaign and the on-going occupation-wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. Few Americans understand the extent of carnage inflicted in their name across the planet.

By scientific definition, the missiles, tank penetrators and bunker busting bombs unleashed against Iraq and Afghanistan by U.S. and British forces in the so-called war on terror are nuclear weapons.19 Refuse from radioactive weaponry does not disperse, but remains in the atmosphere organotoxic, mutagenic and carcinogenic to all living flesh for 4.5 billion years.

Inhabitants of the Pentagon’s two newly “liberated” nations are now slowly dying of radiation and heavy metal poisoning. Victims of U.S. weaponry used in Afghanistan have a concentration of non-depleted uranium isotopes in their bodies never before seen in civilian populations.20 Tons of depleted and non-depleted uranium contaminating their land, air, food and water guarantee their painful demise. Using data from the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA), nuclear scientist Leuren Moret calculates that the estimated 2,500+ tons of depleted uranium used against Iraq in 1991 and 2003 is sufficient to cause 25 million new cancers.21 Is it a coincidence that the population of Iraq, according to the CIA, is 25 million?

The quarter million U.S. and British fighting forces who have helped the Pentagon deliver this holocaust also face inevitable radiological death by slow burn. Rotated into atomic war zones since 2001, coalition troops have inhaled and ingested millions of tiny invisible ceramic uranium particles which emit alpha, beta and gamma radiation as they embed in lungs, kidneys, blood, lymph and bone.22 Radiation exposure to a single internalized U-238 (uranium) alpha particle is 50 times the allowable whole body dose for one year under international standards.23 As U-238 decays into daughter isotopes, it becomes ever more radioactive, causing cell and organ destruction to escalate over time.24 Uranium contamination leads to incapacitating, multi-organ system disorders identical to illnesses suffered by thousands of Gulf War I vets. Bodily fluids poisoned with uranium isotopes sicken spouses and visit upon offspring a genetic Armageddon.25

Who knows what a disabled and prematurely dying military population will mean to future stability and safety of USA? Yet Senator Chuck Hagel (R- Neb.) now demands that America provide more fodder for its atomic battlefields by reinstating the military draft so that “all of our citizens…bear some responsibility and pay some price” in order to “understand the intensity of the challenges we face.”26

Despite disingenuous denials that biological harm will result from atomic warfare,27 the Pentagon knows full well the gruesome realities of uranium weaponry by virtue of its own voluminous studies spanning 60 years. Pentagon documents confirm that America’s war establishment knowingly exposes its own troops to dangerous levels of radiation.28 The resulting illness of those now returning from the war zones is already making headlines.29

Because our military-industrial overlords brazenly poison the very grunts who make their war games possible, we must logically conclude there is virtually nothing they would not secretly and sadistically do to the rest of us. Military officials lie as perniciously about chemtrail operations30 as they do about effects of DU weaponry. If people were to consider the published science regarding chemtrails and DU, they would understand that we are all in mortal jeopardy.

Both the Pentagon’s aerosol operations and its limited nuclear wars are deeply interconnected. We can trace the beginnings of Operation Cloverleaf right to the Strangelove brain of Dr. Edward Teller, father of the hydrogen bomb and proponent of nuking inhabited coast lines to rearrange them for economic projects.31 Before he died in 2003, Teller was director emeritus of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, where plans for nuclear, biological and directed energy weapons are crafted. In 1997, Teller publicly outlined his proposal to use aircraft to scatter in the stratosphere millions of tons of electrically-conductive metallic materials, ostensibly to reduce global warming.32

Shortly after Teller’s presentation, the public began seeing frenetic chemtrailing. In 2000, CBS News admitted that scientists were “looking at drastic solutions for global warming, including manipulating the atmosphere on a massive scale.” CBS confirmed that the plan to load the air with tiny particles would “deflect enough sunlight to trigger global cooling.”33

Teller estimated that commercial aircraft could be used to spew these particles at a cost of 33 cents a pound.34 This gives credence to a report by an airline manager, forced by a compulsory non-disclosure agreement to remain anonymous, that commercial aircraft have been co-opted to assist the military in consummating Project Cloverleaf.35 A 1991 Hughes aircraft patent confirms that sunscreen particulate materials can be run through jet engines.36 A science textbook now used in some public schools discusses the sunscreen project by showing a large orange-red jet with the caption, “Jet engines running on richer fuel would add particles to the atmosphere to create a sunscreen.” The logo on the plane says “Particle Air.”37 The implications of this crucial information should not be understated. A program to make America’s millions of annual jet flights a source of specially designed particulate pollution is serious business.

Cloverleaf particles and polymers saturating the air we breathe are smaller than 10 microns (PM 10) and are invisible to the human eye. By comparison, a human hair is 60 to 100 microns in thickness. Scientists and the EPA report that because PM10 and sub-micron pollution particles bypass lung filters and enter the blood stream, they cause radical changes in the endocrine and nervous systems. 38 They can trigger high blood pressure and cause heart attack within two hours of inhalation.39 They cause the blood to become sticky, making it tougher for the heart to pump and increasing the risk of blood clots and vessel damage.40 Now researchers in Taiwan document “a significant increase” in the number of stroke victims when PM10 pollutant levels rise.41 The American Lung Association confirms that we are breathing more toxic air than ever.42 No wonder nationwide asthma rates have been soaring in recent years.43

Tiny synthetic filaments called polymers are part of the brew. In 1990, a NATO report detailed how high-flying aircraft can modify the atmosphere by spraying polymers to absorb electromagnetic radiation.44 U.S. patent number 6315213 describes how cross-linked aqueous polymers dispersed into a storm diminish rain.45

Polymer chemist Dr. R. Michael Castle has studied atmospheric polymers for years. He has found that some of them contain bioactive materials, which can cause “serious skin lesions and diseases when absorbed into the skin.”46 He has identified microscopic polymers comprised of genetically-engineered fungal forms mutated with viruses. He says that trillions of fusarium (fungus)/virus mutated spores, which secrete a powerful mico-toxin, are part of the air we breathe.47 Allergies anyone?

We can safely bet that into our particle-enriched air, experimenters are also dumping nanoparticles, developed for a variety of military and industrial uses. These engineered carbon molecules, as small as one-thousandth the diameter of human hair, display bizarre chemical properties and are known to trigger organ damage.48 A recent study at Southern Methodist University found that fish exposed to one type of nanoparticle suffered severe brain damage after only 48 hours.49

The military’s aerosol operations have been climate altering to the extreme. Air traffic is a huge source of greenhouse pollution. Increasing that traffic exponentially in order to scatter tons of heat-trapping metallic particulates and heat-liberating barium salts have undoubtedly led to accelerated global warming. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide, have reached a record high this year.50 As carbon dioxide levels rise, oxygen levels decrease.

In 1996, Scientists for Global Responsibility compiled a report contending that dangerous geoengineering, as proposed by Teller and the Global Change Research Coordination Office, would be absolutely ineffective in mitigating global warming. The report noted that climate engineering research is funded by industry with a vested interest in continued high consumption of fossil fuels.51 The hair-brained scheme of particle engineering was contrived to ensure that industry polluters will never be forced to decrease their greenhouse gas emissions. But because warming and pollution trends have worsened drastically since the aerosol projects began, we must suspect that the warming mitigation program is a hoax and that chemtrailing is really intended, among other things, to create a series of “hobgoblins.”

The establishment’s modus operandi for maintaining a fierce and lucrative hold upon the collective American mind has been defined precisely by satirist H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) who wrote: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed, and thus clamorous to be led to safety, by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

In The Report from Iron Mountain published in 1967, just as the Pentagon’s lucrative Vietnam War was being revved into high gear, establishment braintrusters confirmed that perpetual war is absolutely vital for controlling and manipulating the masses. The document even suggested a number of options for creating fictitious enemies, noting that perpetual war induces populations to give blind allegiance to political authority.52

Since the 1930s, when the Eastern Establishment, including the Bush family, used its New York banks and oil companies to secretly fund Hitler’s German Nazi party,53 our controllers have employed FEAR, the concept of ENEMY and WAR to keep us in bondage. Chemtrailing is a manifestation of the Fourth Reich, an era of corporate fascism ushered in by a powerful military juggernaut, which manufactures enemies and unleashes fake terror attacks to scare us into voiceless submission.

Both Saddam Hussein and the al Queda networks have long been nourished with U.S. government and corporate funding and groomed by U.S. military and corporate advisors to play useful roles as “enemies.”54  Former German Technology Minister Andreas von Bulow recently confirmed on U.S. radio that hijacked planes were able to fly around the eastern U.S. on 9/11 unimpeded by military interdiction because those attacks were part of a carefully-orchestrated “covert operation” designed to coerce America into perpetual conflict with the Muslim world.55

Now, a “secret” Pentagon report has been conveniently leaked to the media. It contends that abrupt climate change is the most fearful hobgoblin yet.56 Authored by change agents with ties to the CIA and the Royal Dutch/Shell Group, the report contends that abrupt climate change will lead to a global catastrophe of monumental proportions, including nuclear war and natural disasters, as whole nations disappear beneath the encroaching sea and survivors fight for dwindling food, water and energy supplies.

Yet the Pentagon has been involved for decades in the drastic manipulation of weather, climate and atmospheric conditions. The U.S. used a chemical agent dubbed Olive Oil during Operation Popeye to induce heavy rains in Vietnam 40 years ago.57 The Air Force document titled “Weather As a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025″ lists its weaponized agenda for creating abrupt climate change including: Storm creation and modification, fog and cloud creation, precipitation enhancement, precipitation denial, drought inducement and artificial creation of “space weather.” This document also states that the military’s radical weather modification agenda will “become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications.”58

Weather weapons are now routinely used in war zones. A citizen reporting from Serbia noted that during NATO operations in the Balkans, black clouds suddenly materialized out of blue skies, hailstones were the size of eggs, and surreal thunder and lightening terrified the people. He reported that scientists found that the electromagnetic field over Serbia had been punctured, causing rain systems to circumvent the region.59 In addition to manufactured drought, scientists also predict that Serbia will suffer 10,000 cancer deaths from DU weaponry used there.60

According to University of Ottawa Professor Michael Chossudovsky, the military’s High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), operating in Alaska as part of the Strategic Defense Initiative, is a powerful tool for weather and climate modification.61 Operated jointly by the U.S. Navy and Air Force, HAARP antennas bombard and heat the ionosphere, causing electromagnetic frequencies to bounce back to earth, penetrating everything living and dead.62

HAARP transmissions make holes in the ozone,63 creating yet another hobgoblin. HAARP inventor Bernard Eastlund described in his original patent how antenna energy can interact with plumes of atmospheric particles, used as a lens or focusing device, to modify weather.64 HAARP is capable of triggering floods, droughts and hurricanes, much to the chagrin of both the European Parliament and the Russian Duma.65

HAARP also generates sweeping pulses through the ULF/ELF range.66 In 2000, independent researchers monitored HAARP transmissions of 14 hertz. They found that when these signals were broadcast at high output levels, wind speeds topped 70 miles per hour. They watched as these same transmissions dispersed a huge weather front approaching the west coast from California to British Columbia. Although precipitation had been originally forecast, the front was seen shredding apart on satellite photos and rain did not materialize.67 The hobgoblin drought can be an enriching and empowering tool for certain corporate and governing entities.

HAARP is not only capable of destabilizing agricultural and ecological systems anywhere on the planet, but its effects can target select regions to affect human physical, mental and emotional responses during non-lethal warfare projects.68 HAARP frequencies beamed at specific targets can generate catastrophic earthquakes,69 exactly like the quake last December which killed thousands of people in Iran, a nemesis nation according to the Bush administration.

The Pentagon’s warning about climate catastrophe is surely nothing more than a thinly-veiled attempt to prepare the masses for the bizarre atmospheric upheavals we can expect as the military continues to brutalize our planet and near space with its grotesque toys. And we ain’t seen nothing yet. Dr. Eastlund and his ilk have developed plans for solar power satellites designed to modify the weather with electromagnetic beam output that dwarfs the present HAARP system.70 As abrupt climate change is increasingly orchestrated, we will surely need additional fascist agencies, an ever-growing military budget and more poison-particle projects that just happen to ensure population reduction as a side benefit.

Despite visual evidence that every aspect of our physical environment is being manipulated and damaged for war games, some Americans cannot accept that dangerous covert operations are being conducted by a government they still believe to be a virtuous defender of freedom. Their stumbling block is a numbing belief that their own officials would never perpetrate dangerous experimentation on humanity since “they have families too.” History and the release of declassified government documents disprove such naiveté.

Although “they” had families too, the U.S. government and its defense contractors exposed citizens of the northwest U.S. to huge and deliberate releases of radioactive iodine 131 from the Hanford Nuclear Reservation where plutonium was produced for nuclear bombs.71 Those Cold War releases unleashed radiation illnesses upon thousands of downwinders, some of whom received up to 350 rads of radiation when a maximum safety dose is set at .025 rads annually.72 Between 1949 and 1952, radioactive pellets, dust and particles were tested on the hapless citizens of Utah and New Mexico.73

By 1963, 1,200 nuclear weapons tests conducted at the Nevada test site had exposed every person in the U.S. to deadly radioactive fallout, causing millions of fetal deaths, spontaneous abortions, stillbirths and birth defects.74 The U.S. government also conducted over 4,000 radiation experiments on individual human test subjects without their informed consent.75 The delayed effects of decades of radiation exposure from weapons testing are today demonstrated by a U.S. population plagued with epidemic cancer and heart disease, neurological disorders, low fertility, chronic fatigue, obesity (thyroid involvement), immune system dysfunction and learning disabilities. Approximately half of all pregnancies in the U.S. result in prenatal or postnatal death or an otherwise less than healthy baby.76 As military tankers spew white chemical plumes across America at a cost of $3,448 per hour per tanker,77 we are reminded of Dr. Leonard Cole’s 1994 testimony before a Senate Committee regarding 45 years of open air testing during which military aircraft sprayed American cities with bacteria, fungus and carcinogenic chemicals.78 Between 1962-1973, the U.S. Navy conducted hundreds of bio-chem tests known as Operation SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). SHAD projects like Autumn Gold and Copper Head exposed 10,000 navy personnel to aircraft spray laden with biological and chemical warfare agents, including sarin nerve gas.79 The cocktails used in those genocidal “tests” are now linked to cancer, heart and lung problems suffered by surviving guinea pigs.

We are told that defense officials perpetrated these atrocities so that scientists could learn about how to “protect” Americans from attack. So why, in the late 80s, would our “protectors” fall all over themselves to supply Saddam Hussein’s war machine with 90 shipments of chemical and biological weaponry, including sarin, anthrax, botulism, brucella and West Nile Virus?80

It will likely be years before Americans are told what is being tested upon them during our present chemtrail/space wars era. The Hanford downwinders did not learn until 1986 what had been unleashed upon them some 30 years earlier; SHAD victims filed suit in 2003 to learn the extent to which they were intentionally exposed to dangerous substances in the 60s.

To understand how our nation has arrived at this doomsday corruption, we must recall that immediately after WWII ended, the U.S. government initiated Operation Paperclip through which a large number of German Nazi scientists were imported to the United States. Once issued new identities, these death industry pros were employed in U.S. military laboratories to develop a dazzling array of secret weaponry projects.81 With congressional funding, the crowning achievement of this nexus was the creation of ghastly new bioweapons, including the AIDS virus82 and an incapacitating chronic fatigue agent engineered from mycoplasma and brucella.83

The military is empowered to continue lethal experimentation by devious wording of Section 1520a Chapter 32 of U.S. Code Title 50. The law states that the Secretary of Defense may NOT conduct any chemical or biological test or experiment on civilian populations, unless such tests are for medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial purposes or for research in general or for protection against weapons or for law enforcement purposes, including riot control. So DOD may not use us for guinea pigs, unless it is for any “good” reason under the sun! The law states that human subjects must give informed consent. But a nasty loophole in Section 1515 of Chapter 32 allows informed consent to be suspended by executive order during a period of national emergency, a situation under which this nation perpetually labors by deliberate hobgoblin design.

Few American test rats realize that the Pentagon’s boys in Congress have now:

* appropriated millions of dollars for the manufacture and testing of new “mini nukes” and bunker buster bombs.84* authorized the DOE to resume nuclear testing in Nevada.85

* exempted DOD and DOE from landmark environmental laws in the development of these new weapons.86

America’s 70,000 nuclear weapons manufactured since 1945 are not sufficient! As DOE gears up to develop and test fourth-generation nukes, numerous reports continue to surface about the agency’s sordid corruption and mismanagement. DOE’s habitual cover-up of site contamination and its devious efforts to downplay serious illnesses suffered by many of its nuclear workers are among recent scandals.87

When new “low yield” nuclear weapons (defined as being smaller than 5 kilotons) are tested in Nevada, downwinders might like to know that a mini .5 kiloton nuclear warhead would have to burrow 150 feet to eliminate atmospheric fallout. No weapon yet developed can penetrate more than 40 feet into the earth. A tested nuclear warhead that burrows to only 40 feet will throw a million cubic feet of radioactive debris into the atmosphere.88

The Pentagon’s new nuke era is in the capable hands of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who has so ably presided over the pre-emptive nuclear incineration of Middle Eastern Muslims. Rumsfeld has never adequately explained why his Department was unable to defend the Pentagon building despite a full hour’s notice that hijacked planes were in the air. Should Rumsfeld be replaced due to the Pentagon’s Iraqi torture scandal, we are assured that his Bush-appointed successor will share his have-nuke-will-travel ideology.

Working closely with Rumsfeld is a coven of pro-nukers, including his advisor Keith Payne, a vocal advocate of pre-emptive nuclear war. Payne has written that an “intelligent” nuclear offensive launched by the U.S. would result in only 20 million U.S. casualties, “a level compatible with national survival and recovery.”89

Now that we have tied together the historical and political realities for which we mindlessly wave our flags, we still hope that sufficient numbers of American lab rats will miraculously awaken from their collective stupor and take stock of our appalling situation. After all, rodents have a notoriously short life span and are always killed when no longer useful to those conducting research. The irony of this horror story is that we rats are being plundered to finance our own demise. Our national debt of 7.2 trillion grows by $1.8 billion a day.90 The Pentagon cannot account for $2.3 trillion of its shadowy transactions.91

The radioactive operations in Iraq are costing $3.7 billion a month, those in Afghanistan $900 million a month.92 No one knows how many $billions are being flushed into Operation Cloverleaf and other hobgoblin projects. The U.S. spends $11,000 per second on weapons, according to calculations of celebrated author William Thomas.93

So, while we await the great awakening, have a wonderful, barium-dried summer under a synthetic tarpaulin of aluminum-white, particle-laden, electrically-charged aviation scum that passes for sky. Endure well your respiratory and ocular difficulties while staring at huge oily sun rings and smeary sundogs, the patent signature of chemical assault. Don’t forget to salute and click your heels when you see tanker formations patriotically saturating the atmosphere with such a dense, micro-particulate brew that they cast black shadows alongside or ahead of themselves.

As you witness the noxious drama in the skies, remember, it’s all just part of the “kill chain.”


1. “USAF Plans to Utterly Dominate, Rule Space,” Joel Bleifuss, editor of In These Times.com, 9-14-03.

2. Almanac 2000, Journal of the Air Force Association, May 2000, Vol. 83.

3. Roche’s “kill chain” statement was made during his October 2002 speech at the Conference on the Law and Policy Relating to National Security Activities in Outer Space.

4. “Pentagon Preps for War in Space,”Noah Shachtman, http://www.wirednews.com , 2-20-04.

5. “The Theft of Sunlight,” Clifford Carnicom, 10-25-03: “…Measurements show a rapid reduction in the transmission of sunlight from a value of 97% on a ‘clear day’ to the lower level of approximately 80% during the early stages of heavy aerosol operations….The absorption and displacement of this solar energy into environmental, military, biological and electromagnetic operations represents a theft of the natural and divine rights of the inhabitants of this planet.” www.carnicom.com .

6. “Visibility Standards Changed,” Clifford Carnicom, 3-30-01: “It will be noted that in October of 1997, a change in the reporting system of visibility data was reduced from a former maximum of 40 miles to a limit of 10 miles. It is a reasonable question to ask as to why that change was made, and whether or not it was made in anticipation of…large scale aircraft aerosol operations over large scale geographic regions.” http://www.carnicom.com .

7. “A Meeting,” Clifford Carnicom, 7-26-03. See http://www.carnicom.com .

8. “Atmospheric Conductivity,” Clifford Carnicom, 7-09-01, http://www.carnicom.com .

9. For facts on barium toxicity, see Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, September 1995. For references on barium related to chemtrails, see www.carnicom.com for the following articles: “Barium Tests are Positive,” Clifford Carnicom, 5-10-04; “Sub-micron Particulates Isolated,” Carnicom, 4-26-04; “Barium Affirmed by Spectroscopy,” Clifford Carnicom, 11-1-2000; “Electrolysis and Barium,” Carnicom, 5-27-02; “Rainwater Metals,” Carnicom, 7-30-01; “Barium Identification Further Confirmed,” Carnicom, 11-28-00.

10. “The Plasma Frequency: Radar Applications,” Clifford Carnicom, 11-05-01; See http://www.carnicom.com .

11. “Functional heterogeneity in the process of T lymphocyte activation; barium blocks several modes of T-cell activation, but spares a functionally unique subset of PHA-activable T cells,” Clinical Experimental Immunology, Pecanha and Dos Reis, May 1989.

12. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Safety Data Sheet.

13. Aluminum Toxicity, Barbara Barnett, MD, 11-26-02. See http://www.emedicine.com .

14. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, July 1999; For information on thorium in chemtrails: “The Methodic Demise of Natural Earth,” Dr. Mike Castle, 3-27-04, http://www.willthomas.net .

15. Angels Don’t Play This HAARP, Nick Begich and Jeane Manning, 1995; “HAARP: Vandalism in the Sky?” Begich and Manning, Nexus Magazine, January 1996.

16. “Elf Radiation is Confirmed,” Clifford Carnicom, 11-17-02; “Elf Disruption & Countermeasures,” Clifford Carnicom 11-27-02; “A Proposal of Cascading Resonance,” Clifford Carnicom, 4-21-03. See http://www.carnicom.com for these and numerous other frequency studies; also “Electromagnetic Waves Linked to Children’s Brain Tumor,” Kyodo News Service, 6-8-03.

17. Death In the Air, Global Terrorism and Toxic Warfare, Leonard G. Horowitz, Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 2001; “Military Conducting Biological Warfare in Washington,” 12-12-97, www.rense.com; Probing the Chemtrails Conundrum, William Thomas, Essence Publications, 2000, http://www.willthomas.net .

18. For a comprehensive list of those involved in Operation Cloverleaf and associated projects, see: “Chemtrails–Top Intel, Military, and Defense Contractors Watching Carnicom.com,” rense.com, 1-12-00. Among agencies most interested in opposition to chemtrail projects is the United States Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute associated with Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. See: “The Monitors of JGI,” Clifford Carnicom, March 17, 2003, carnicom.com. 19. The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War– A paper presented at the World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference at the University of Hamburg, October 16-19, 2003, Dr. Leuren Moret. Dr. Moret is a former staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Her work is highly documented with scientific papers.

20. Uranium Medical Research Centre, “Afghan Field Trip #2 Report,” November 2002; http://www.umrc.com ; also “Astoundingly High Afghan Uranium Levels Spark Alert,” Alex Kirby, BBC News Online, 5-23-03.

21. Moret, op. cit.

22. “Medical Effects of Internal Contamination with Uranium,” Dr. Asaf Durakovich, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington D.C. March 1999. Volume 40, No. 1

23. Moret, op. cit.

24. “Contamination of Persian Gulf War Veterans and Others By Depleted Uranium,” Leonard A. Dietz, 2-21-99.

25. Durakovich, op cit; Dietz, op. cit. Moret, op. cit.

26. “Republican Senator: Bring Back the Draft,” World Net Daily, 4-20-04.

27. “Pentagon’s Uranium Denial,” New York Daily News, 4-27-04; “Pentagon: Uranium Didn’t harm N.Y. Unit,” Associated Press, 5-3-04. “Pentagon-Depleted Uranium No Health Risk,” Dr. Doug Rokke; 3-15-03. Dr. Rokke was an U.S. Army DU expert (1991-1995) and he confirms that the Pentagon is lying about DU risks.

28. Documents in which the hazards of uranium and depleted uranium exposure are discussed include: U.S. Army Training Manual STP-21-1-SMCT: Soldiers Manual of Common Tasks; “Health Effects of Depleted Uranium,” David E. McClain, Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute (AFRRI) Bethesda, Maryland; Marine Corp Memo Concerning DU (unclassified) 9-8-90; US Army Training Video, U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project video: Depleted Uranium Hazard Awareness, 1995; “Army Not Adequately Prepared to Deal With Depleted Uranium Contamination,” General Accounting Office, January 1993; Office of the Secretary of Defense, Memorandum from Bernard Rostker to chiefs of all military branches re: Depleted Uranium Ammunition Training, 9-09-97.

29. “Soldiers Believe Depleted Uranium Cause of Illnesses,” Associate Press, 4-9-04; “Poisoned?” Juan Gonzalez, New York Daily News, 4-4-04. Other stories in this series are: “Inside Camp of Troubles” and “Army to Test N.Y. Guard Unit.”

30. “Air Force Increases Rank of Lie,” letter by Walter M. Washabaugh, Colonel, USAF, denying the existence of chemtrails, received by e-mail on May 22, 2001 and posted at http://www.carnicom.com by Clifford E Carnicom, May 22 2001.

31. Begich and Manning, op. cit. p. 51.

32. Global Warming and Ice Ages: Prospects for Physics-Based Modulation of Global Change, Edward Teller and Lowell Wood, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, prepared for invited presentation at the International Seminar On Planetary Emergencies, Erice, Italy, August 20-23, 1997; also “The Planet Needs a Sunscreen,” Wall Street Journal, 10-17-97.

33. CBS News Eye on America Report : Cooling the Planet in two parts: 1-15-01 and 1-16-01.

34. Teller and Wood, op. cit.

35. “An Airline Manager’s Statement,” Posted by C.E. Carnicom on behalf of the author, 5-22-00. Quote: “The few airline employees who were briefed on Project Cloverleaf were all made to undergo background checks, and before we were briefed on it we were made to sign non-disclosure agreements which basically state that if we tell anyone what we know we could be imprisoned….They told us that the government was going to pay our airline, along with others, to release special chemicals from commercial aircraft….When we asked them why didn’t they just rig military aircraft to spray these chemicals, they stated that there weren’t enough military aircraft available to release chemicals on such a large basis as needs to be done….Then someone asked why all the secrecy. The government reps then stated that if the general public knew that the aircraft they were flying on were releasing chemicals into the air, environmentalist groups would raise hell and demand the spraying stop.”

36. US patent 5003186; Stratospheric Welsbach Seeding for Reduction of Global Warming, Hughes Aircraft Company, issued March 26, 1991.

37. Secondary school text book: Science I Essential Interactions, published by Centre Point Learning, Inc. of Fairfield, Ohio. See “Chemtrail Sunscreen Taught in Schools,” William Thomas, http://www.willthomas.com .

38. “Dirty Air and High Blood Pressure Linked,” Reuters Health, 3-31-01; “Bad Air Worsens Heart Trouble: Study Blames Particulates for Many Sudden Deaths,” Marla Cone, Los Angeles Times, June 4, 2000.

39. “Tiny Air Pollutants In the Air May Trigger Heart Attacks,” John McKenzie, ABC News 6-21-01, u .

40. “Air Pollution ‘Increases Stroke Risk,’” BBC News, 10-10-2003.

41. Ibid.

42. “Americans Breathing More Polluted, Toxic Air Than Ever,” Natalie Pawelski, CNN Environmental Unit, http://www.cnn.com .

43. Asthma Statistics, www.getasthmahelp.org; “Asthma Deadly Serious,” Spokesman Review, 7-6-97; www.asthmainamerica.com .

44. NATO paper: “Modification of Tropospheric Propagation Conditions,” May, 1990.

45. US patent 6,315,213 (Cordani) issued November 13, 2001.

46. “Chemtrails, Bio-Active Crystalline Cationic Polymers,” Dr. Mike Castle, 7-14-03 See u .

47. Ibid.

48. “Nanoparticles Toxic in Aquatic Habitat, Study Finds,” Rick Weiss, Washington Post, 3-29-04.

49. Ibid.

50. “Greenhouse Gas Level Hits Record High,” 3-22-04, http://www.NewScientist.com .

51. Climate Engineering: A Critical Review of Proposals, Scientists for Global Responsibility, School of Environmental Sciences, UEA, Norwich NR47TJ, November 1996.

52. Lewin L. C et al. Report from Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace, New York: The Dial Press, 1967.

53. Trading With the Enemy, Charles Higham, Delacorte Press, 1983; Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, Antony Sutton, 1976; “IBM Sued by Holocaust Lawyers –100 other US Firms Targeted for Nazi Links,” Paterson and Wastel, The Telegraph, UK, 2-18-0l; “Ford and GM Scrutinized for Alleged Nazi Collaboration,” Michael Dobbs, Washington Post, 11-30-98; “How the Bush Family Made Its Fortune From the Nazis,” John Loftus, 7-2-02, http://www.rense.com . (John Loftus was a U.S. Department of Justice Nazi War Crimes prosecutor.)

54. This is a “Google project” that can fill volumes. Go to Google and type “CIA and al Queda,” then “CIA and Saddam.” Do the same with “Carlyle Group” for information on the Bush family’s shady dealings with the “enemy.”

55. Former German Defense Minister Confirms CIA Involvement in 9/11: Alex Jones Interviews Andreas von Bulow, 2-17-21, http://www.apfn.net

56. “Pentagon Tells Bush: Climate Change Will Destroy Us,” Mark Townsend and Paul Harris, The Observer, UK 2-24-04; “Climate Collapse, The Pentagon’s Weather Nightmare Could change Radically and Fast,” David Stipp, Fortune Magazine, 2-9-04.

57. The Dead Farmer’s Almanac, Who Really Controls the Weather? Jim Larranaga, Priority Publications, 2001.

58. Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather In 2025, June 17, 1996. This report was produced by directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force.

59. “Very Weird Weather in Serbia, What’s Happening?” Goran Pavlovic, 10-30-03, rense.com.

60. “The Secret Nuclear War,” Eduardo Goncalves, The Ecologist, 3-22-01.

61. “Washington’s New World Order Weapons Have the Ability to Trigger Climate Change,” Center for Research on Globalization, Professor Michael Chossudovsky, University of Ottawa, January 2001.

62. “HAARP: Vandalism in the Sky?” Nick Begich and Jeane Manning, Nexus Magazine, December 1995.

63. Ibid.; also Castle, op. cit. Dr. Castle presents information on how HAARP punches massive holes in the open-air column ozone and how the Air Force then uses toxic chemicals to “patch” the holes it has created: Dr. Castle says: “Welsbach seeding and ozone hole remediation sciences utilize chemistries that are toxic to humans and the environment.”

64. “HAARP: Vandalism in the Sky?” Begich and Manning; Researcher David Yarrow is quoted as saying that Earth’s axial spin means that HAARP bursts are like a microwave knife producing a “long tear–an incision” in the multi-layer membrane of ionospheres that shield the Earth’s surface from intense solar radiation.

65. U.S. HAARP Weapon Development Concerns Russian Duma, Interfax News Agency, 8-10-02.

66. HAARP Update, Elfrad Group, http://elfrad.org/2000/Haarp2.htm    6-27-00.

67. “14 Hertz Signal Suppresses Rainfall, Induces Violent Winds,” 10-25-00, Newshawk Inc.; “When the Army Owns the Weather–Chemtrails and HAARP,” Bob Fitrakis, 2-13-02: In this article HAARP inventor Bernard Eastlund is quoted on how HAARP can affect the weather: “Significant experiments could be performed. The HAARP antenna as it is now configured modulates the auroral electrojet to induce ELF waves and thus could have an effect on the zonal winds.” Find this article with search engine at http://www.rense.com .

68. Angels Don’t Play This HAARP, Begich and Manning, op. cit.

69. Ibid.

70. “Space Based Weather Control: The ‘Thunderstorm Solar Power Satellite,’ ” Michael Theroux. See www.borderlands.com/spacewea.htm .

71. “After 12-year Wait for Trial, Downwinders Losing Hope,” Spokesman Review, 5-18-03; also “Hanford Plaintiffs Seek Details,” Spokesman Review, 4-2-04.

72. “Hanford Put Area At Risk: Spokane, North Idaho Were Exposed to Significant Radiation,” Spokesman Review,” April 22, 1994.

73. “Sick Century,” Eduardo Goncalves, The Ecologist, 11-22-01.

74. Moret, op. cit. “The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War” contains excellent statistics on the U.S. health ramifications of Cold War nuclear weapons testing and includes references to numerous scientific papers which document this tremendous damage to the national health.

75. Undue Risk, Secret State Experiments on Humans, Jonathan D. Moreno, Freeman & Co. 1999: Moreno was a senior staff member of the President’s Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments which completed in 1995 its studies of horrific U.S. government radiation experiments conducted since World War II.

76. Information reported by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Science Institute of Medicine in a 2000 study titled: Scientific Frontiers in Developmental Toxicology, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology.

77. “Trouble With Tankers,” William Thomas, http://www.willthomas.net .

78. Testimony by Dr. Leonard A. Cole before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, May 6, 1994; also Clouds of Secrecy, The Army’s Germ Warfare Tests Over Populated Areas, Leonard A. Cole, Rowman & Littlefield, 1988.

79. “Secret Germ Warfare Experiments?” CBS News, 5-15-2000; “Pentagon to Reveal Biowarfare Tests,” CBS News, 9-20-2000; “US Navy Sprayed BioWarfare Chemtrails on Its Own Ships and Men,” NewsMax.com, 7-8-00; “Sailors: ‘We Were Used,’ ” Florida Today, 1-31-03.

80. Senate Banking Committee Report 103-900 (Riegle Report) issued May 25, 1994. This 551-page document contains a comprehensive list of biological and chemical warfare agents shipped to Saddam by U.S. companies under purview of the U.S. Commerce Department for use against Iran during the Iran-Iraq war in the late 80s during the regime of George Bush Sr.

81. Moreno, op.cit. “To this day few Americans know about the special top-secret program that brought German scientists to the United States after World War II, and fewer still know that their number included medical scientists. Code-named Operation Paper Clip…hundreds of ‘specialists’ …entered the United States under Joint Chiefs’ protection, avoiding regular immigration procedures and requirements…It is hard to escape the conclusion that many of the German recruits were for decades important consultants on a myriad of military-medical projects.”

82. Emerging Viruses: Aids and Ebola, Dr. Len Horowitz, Tetrahedron Inc., 1996.

83. The Brucellosis Triangle, Donald W. Scott, Chelmstreet Publishers, 1998.

84. “Bush Signs Bill for New Generation Nuclear Weapons,” rense.com, 12-2-03. The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2004 allocates millions for new nuclear weapons and bolsters readiness for new weapons testing at the Nevada nuclear test site.

85. Ibid.

86. “House Approves Pentagon Wish List–Bill Includes Military Exemptions From Environmental Laws,” Nick Anderson, Los Angeles Times, 11-8-03.

87. “DOE Count of Worker Injuries Inaccurate,” Spokesman Review, 3-28-04; also “Book Alleges Cover-up at Nuclear Site,” Spokesman Review 3-28-04; also DOE Has Record of Broken Promises, editorial, 4-11-04.

88. “Kennedy Warns on Nuclear Tests,” Julian Borger in Washington, The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk , 4-30-03.

89. “Rumsfeld’s Dr. Strangelove,” Fred Kaplan, MSN.com, 5-12-03.

90. “Bush Drives the Nation Towards Bankruptcy,” Peter Eavis, The American Conservative, 2-15-04.

91. The War on Waste, 1-29-02, cbsnews.com.

92. “Money for Iraq Fight Running Out,” The Australian 2-12-04 These figures are from U.S Army Chief of Staff General Peter Schoomaker.

93. “Fight of the Century,” William Thomas, http://www.willthomas.net .

Quote 0 0
see link for full story

'Out of Control:' Senator blasts Boston FBI over mob informant

 Mar 21, 2013

A top-ranking U.S. Senator is leveling harsh criticism against the Boston office of the FBI for its handling of local mob informant Mark Rossetti, saying the office needs a major shakeup.

"I thought it was pretty clear after Bulger as an example, now Rossetti coming out and not having learned any lessons. There needs to be big changes. I'm not running the FBI but this has been going on too long. There have to be big changes," Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, told FOX Undercover.

Grassley launched his own investigation of the FBI's handling of Rossetti after his informant status was publicly revealed in 2011.

Rossetti is a mob captain and suspected murderer who was charged in 2010 with running an organized crime ring including heroin trafficking, loan sharking and extortion. A State Police wiretap on Rossetti that gathered evidence used to indict and ultimately convict him also recorded conversations with his FBI handler, showing he was committing crimes while acting as a paid informant.

"It's very difficult with the use of a Rossetti or a previous person that they wouldn't know it's going on and there wasn't some knowledge of it. And if there isn't knowledge of it there ought to be, otherwise the FBI is not doing its job," Grassley said.

The Boston FBI's office's use of Rossetti is particularly troubling because it was the office where corrupt former agent John Connolly dealt with former mob boss James "Whitey" Bulger.

"Going back a ways, don't you have an FBI agent that was convicted of some wrongdoing because he was involved in this process as well? Doesn't that tell you something about the local office probably being out of control?" Grassley said.


"First of all, they revised them and then they work with Rossetti, and that's a conflict with the original guidelines. I don't know whether just a revision again is going to make any difference. There's something in the culture of the FBI in this particular part of the country that needs to be dealt with. I don't know whether another revision of guidelines would make much difference," Grassley replied.

The FBI in a statement said the internal review is still underway pending access to some state court documents.

"The review consists of thousands of documents, interviews with those directly involved in the matter, including members of the Massachusetts State Police, FBI, district attorney's office and the U.S. Attorney's Office," the FBI statement said.

The culture of the FBI office in Boston was also part of Grassley's investigation. He found that the FBI's relationship with the State Police organized crime section was still poisoned from the Bulger years.

Court records revealed that, early in the investigation, State Police asked the FBI if Rossetti was an informant, which the FBI denied.

"The FBI never communicated with authorities in Massachusetts, particularly with the State Police, that he was an informant, and there was information that was very clear to the FBI that he was involved in criminal activity," Grassley said.

After Rossetti's informant status was publicly revealed, the FBI and State Police issued a joint statement suggesting their relationship was just fine.

"The FBI cooperated for months with the Massachusetts State Police, assisting their organized crime unit until the investigation was complete," the statement said.

Grassley said the press release "was not true."

"There's a great deal of antagonism between the FBI and the State Police. The State Police does not trust the FBI," he said.

"All law enforcement in this country ought to be working together and the FBI is the granddaddy of them all in a sense of being national and federal and crossing state lines and all that. They should be setting the example for cooperation and see local police and state police as a helping hand rather than seeing them as somewhat of an enemy," he said.

The FBI statement says "(T)he FBI cooperated with the MSP in the manner requested by police officials. The FBI and the MSP work closely together on a day-to-day basis in furtherance of our mutual commitment to public safety."

Rossetti pleaded guilty last week to the last of his charges from the state police investigation. He won't be out of prison until he's in his sixties.

But Grassley says it shouldn't be case closed with the Boston FBI.

"I'm not saying just in this case in Boston, in Massachusetts, and I'm not saying it just with the FBI, I'm saying across government, if heads don't roll you don't get any change of behavior," he said.

But in the statement, FBI headquarters is standing by its Boston office.

"FBI leadership has full confidence in FBI Boston management and employees," the statement says.

Quote 0 0
see link for full story


March 27, 2013

2 Texas cops indicted over roadside cavity searches

One trooper was charged with 2 counts of sexual assault and 2 counts of official oppression; the other was charged for theft after a prescription allegedly went missing

Quote 0 0

We now have some photographs of two of the FBI  agents who might have helped assassinate Martin Luther King.

FBI  agent  William Lawrence was directly involved in murdering Dr. King.

Lawerence was the principal handler of FBI  informant and  photographer Ernest Withers

who was standing next to Dr King when he was shot and killed standing on the balcony of the Lorraine

Motel. I suspect William Lawrence had Withers take a photo of the  actual shot as it was being fired.

For more photos of FBI  agent William Lawrence google his name

FBI  agent Hugh Kearney worked closely with William Lawernce.

FBI  agent Arthur Murtagh was in the Atlanta FBI  Office the day Martin Luther King was assassinated.

According to Murtagh:

"When the news of Dr King's murder came over the radio in the office FBI  agents were shouting with joy "we got

him, we got Zorro"  see  http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/coldwar/interviews/episode-13/murtagh1.html

see link for full story     http://liesofourtimes.org/?p=430


FBI Deliberately Ignored Conspiracy Theory in Murders of JFK. RFK ...

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
FBI, Murtagh admitted: "I was ashamed to ... pened to him the day King was as- sassinated. ... announced: 'They just got Zorro! They shot him in Memphis!' "Zorro was ... of mentality we had In the FBI." EX-FBI AGENT. Arthur Murtagh. "We never ...

see link for full story


See larger FBI agent William Lawrence was the puppet master over a web of informants in the Memphis area during the 50's and 60's. At home, Lawrence was an everyday Memphis family man. A Chevy-driving, church-going Republican, he enjoyed an occasional cigar, listened to Cardinals baseball on the radio and regularly walked his dog around the neighborhood. At work, he became the quintessential Cold Warrior. Heading the FBI's Memphis domestic intelligence operations. Photo circa 1962.

FBI agent William Lawrence was the puppet master over a web of informants in the Memphis area during the 50"s and 60's. At home, Lawrence was an everyday Memphis family man. A Chevy-driving, church-going Republican, he enjoyed an occasional cigar, listened to Cardinals baseball on the radio and regularly walked his dog around the neighborhood.
At work, he became the quintessential Cold Warrior. Heading the FBI's Memphis domestic intelligence operations. Photo circa 1962.

see link for full story


Released documents detail FBI informant's role

    April 1, 2013

Documents newly released by the FBI shed light on how a freelance news photographer passed photos and information about the civil rights movement to the agency.

The Commercial Appeal obtained FBI records through a lawsuit settlement and reported Ernest Withers sometimes photographed prominent people involved in the movement in what a historian calls a "vacuum cleaner approach" by the FBI.

In a black and white photo taken by Withers, James Bevel is seen flashing a wide smile for the camera. Bevel was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s director of "direct action," and he was in Memphis on that March 1968 day to organize a massive demonstration.

A short time later, the photo was in an FBI file, along with agent William H. Lawrence's debriefing of Withers about the speech Bevel gave at LeMoyne-Owen College.

Lawrence's notes describe a "most virulent black power talk" by Bevel.

The FBI probe into the Southern Christian Leadership Conference began well before King's assassination in Memphis on April 4, 1968, and continued for a year afterward.

Among photos Withers supplied to the FBI as a paid informant were a candid snapshot of King's top aide, Andrew Young, and one of SCLC field organizer James Orange, standing stunned in the parking lot of the Lorraine Motel shortly after King was fatally shot on a balcony. Another shows Coretta Scott King, speaking at a news conference after the assassination of her husband.

The FBI said Withers was authorized to received $20,088 for his work as a "racial informant."

Despite the revelations about Withers, many people who were in the rights movement harbor no resentment. They blame the FBI.

Withers gave agents photos of Memphis-based U.S. Civil Rights Commission field representative Bobby Doctor holding hands with a young SCLC volunteer. The seeming implication was that Doctor and the volunteer might be having an affair.

Audrey Dandridge, now 74, was the young volunteer. Doctor is referred to in the report as "an admitted agnostic non-believer in Christ."

"Many black people, especially movement people, are not outraged," Dandridge said. "He (Withers) did what he had to do."

The Rev. Harold Middlebrook grew up in Memphis and knew Withers since high school.

"The fact that he was able to tell the story (of the movement) and make the FBI pay him to tell the story of what was going on was beneficial to us," said Middlebrook, 70. "I admire him for being a pretty smart fellow."

Although Withers did little direct informing on King, his reports to the agency on others are indicative of what historian Athan Theoharis called a "vacuum cleaner approach" to FBI surveillance, collecting everything for possible later use.

Who Killed Martin Luther King?

by Maria Gilardin / April 4th, 2008

This article is based on the work of a remarkable man. Dr. William Pepper is an attorney, author, and friend of Martin Luther King and his family. In February 1967 King had asked to meet a young man whose work as a journalist in Vietnam showed the terrible impact on the civilian population. King wept and never wavered in his opposition to the war. That young man was Bill Pepper. He became James Earl Ray’s lawyer and assembled the evidence that exonerated Ray — some of which is described below.

Six-oh-one p.m., April 4th, 1968, Martin Luther King has been felled by a single shot.

In 1977 the family of Martin Luther King engaged an attorney and friend, Dr. William Pepper, to investigate a suspicion they had. They no longer believed that James Earl Ray was the killer. For their peace of mind, for an accurate record of history, and out of a sense of justice they conducted a two decade long investigation. The evidence they uncovered was put before a jury in Memphis, TN, in November 1999. 70 witnesses testified under oath, 4,000 pages of transcripts described the evidence, much of it new. It took the jury 59 minutes to come back with their decision that Loyd Jowers, owner of Jim’s Grill, had participated in a conspiracy to kill King, a conspiracy that included J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI, Richard Helms and the CIA, the military, the Memphis Police Department (MPD), and organized crime. That verdict exonerated James Earl Ray who had already died in prison.

The news of the verdict, in one of the most important national security trials in modern history, was suppressed. And to this day — with very, very few exceptions — the public does not know that this trial took place and what the outcome was.

William Pepper’s 2003 book, An Act of State, The Execution of Martin Luther King, published by Verso, gave a detailed report of the trial. The book was systematically ignored. Pepper said in February 2003 that he had been personally turned down by reviewers for major media. They did not want to put their jobs and reputation on the line.

The New York Times refers to Pepper’s work as “nonsense” in the context of their favorable reviews of Gerald Posner’s book on the King assassination, Killing the Dream. Richard Bernstein praised Posner for stating once and for all that: “James Earl Ray murdered the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.”

In a new attempt to break the silence Verso has just issued An Act of State in paperback. Also, for the first time, parts of the never before seen video record of the 1999 trial are being released on Youtube.

What was so dangerous about the 1999 Memphis trial that it had to be suppressed? The evidence presented — under oath and on the record — made it abundantly clear that the reports of the 1997 House Select Committee on Assassinations, of the Civil Rights Commission appointed by Clinton’s AG Janet Reno, and the New York Times were all wrong. James Earl Ray did not murder King.

With the guilty verdict for Loyd Jowers the jury came closer than anybody before to the identity of the real killer. Jower’s actions in preparation of the assassination and on the day itself, together with the testimony from witnesses who had never been heard before, allowed a minute by minute reconstruction of how and why the crime was committed.

Apparently nobody, not the Mafia, the Memphis Police, the FBI, the CIA, or the Army Military Intelligence teams were taking any chances. If the Mafia contract had not succeeded, someone else was prepared to kill King. When King stepped out on that balcony at the Lorraine Motel he did not know that he was under complete surveillance and that more than one gun was aimed at him.

On December 8, 1999, Dr. William Pepper made his closing statement to the jury in Memphis. Martin Luther King, he said, had become more than a civil rights organizer, and more even than a voice against the war on Vietnam. Pepper explained why King had become so dangerous to the ruling powers that a decision was taken at the highest level that he was not to leave Memphis alive.

Pepper said:

    I put it to you that his opposition to that war had little to do with ideology, with capitalism, with democracy. It had to do with money. It had to do with huge amounts of money that that war was generating to large multinational corporations that were based in the United States.

    When he threatened to bring that war to a close through massive popular opposition, he was threatening the bottom lines of some of the largest construction companies, one of which was in the State of Texas, that patronized the Presidency of Lyndon Johnson and had the major construction contracts at Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam. (Brown and Root was the contractor for the dredging of Cam Ranh Bay – M.G.) This is what Martin King was challenging. He was challenging the weapons industry, the hardware, the armament industries, that all would lose as a result of the end of the war.

    The second aspect of his work that also dealt with money that caused a great deal of consternation in the circles of power in this land had to do with his commitment to take a massive group of people to Washington and there to encamp them in the shadow of the Washington memorial for as long as it took. For as long as it took, they would make daily trips to the halls of Congress and they would try to compel the Congress to act, as they had previously acted in terms of civil rights legislation, now to act in terms of social legislation.

    Now, he begins to talk about a redistribution of wealth, in this the wealthiest country in the world that had such a large group of poor people, of people living then and now, by the way, in poverty. That problem had to be addressed. And it wasn’t a black-and-white problem. This was a problem that dealt with Hispanics, and it dealt with poor whites as well. That is what he was taking on. That’s what he was challenging.

    The powers in this land believed he would not be successful. Why did they believe that? They believed that because they knew that the decision-making processes in the United States had by that point in time, and today it is much worse in my view, but by that point in time had so consolidated power that they were the representatives, the foot soldiers, of the very economic interests who were going to suffer as a result of these times of changes. So the very powerful lobbying forces that put their people in the halls of Congress and indeed in the White House itself and controlled them, paid and bought them and controlled them, were certainly not going to agree to the type of social legislation that Martin King and his mass of humanity were going to require.

    So there was a fear. What happens when they are frustrated? What happens when they don’t get any satisfaction? What would happen? They feared, the military feared, that there would be a violent rebellion in the nation’s capital. And they didn’t have the troops that could contain half a million angry poor alienated Americans. They didn’t have the troops. Westmoreland wanted another two hundred thousand in Vietnam. They didn’t have them to give to him. They didn’t have them.

    They were afraid that what Mr. Jefferson had urged many, many times, that the body politic can only be cleansed by a revolution every twenty years. They were afraid that Mr. Jefferson would be listened to and that that revolution would take place.

    Because of that, those factors, Martin King was not going to be allowed to bring that group of people to Washington.

Dr. William Pepper, continuing his closing argument, went on to address the planning of the King murder, pieced together by his personal decade long research as well as from the 13 volumes of background material that accompanied the 1997 House Select Committee on Assassinations Report. On those pages Pepper found much evidence that contradicted the official findings, including a detailed history of the FBI surveillance of King and the infiltration of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and the Civil Rights movement.

In December of 1963, less than a month after the Kennedy assassination, FBI officials met in Washington to explore ways to “neutralize King as an effective Negro leader”. In spite of that material in their files the House Select Committee declared that the FBI plaid no role in the assassination.

Looking back at the way in which Pepper summarized the evidence collected throughout the trial it becomes obvious how carefully crafted his legal approach was. Loyd Jowers was the defendant and, having been personally so close to the assassination, he was an extremely valuable witness. But his actions, the physical location of his bar and grill, adjacent to the brushy area across from the Lorraine Motel, were only a small part of a much larger picture, in the words of Pepper the wider conspiracy to kill King.

Then, as now, the onus that the right as well as the left puts on the word “conspiracy” has to be taken into account. Pepper, in his explanation to the jury, took back that word and gave it its proper legal and historic meaning. He asked the jury to find that this “constituted conspiracy, legally civil conspiracy under the law.”

Pepper developed for the jury the string of “coincidences” that constitute conspiracy, a chain of evidence backed up by 70 witnesses. All of it can be looked up in detail on 4,000 pages of transcripts or in his book, An Act of State. Here are just a few questions and examples:

The case against defendant Loyd Jowers was the best documented, partly by Jowers’ own admission. Jowers testified that he was asked by Mafia- connected produce dealer Frank Liberto to help in the murder of King. He received money and a gun to hold.

Three witnesses took the stand and corroborated Liberto’s involvement. John McFerren told the jury that, on the afternoon of the assassination, he heard Liberto shout into the phone “Shoot the son-of-a-bitch when he comes on the balcony.” Liberto told Mrs. Lavada Addison, “I arranged to have Martin Luther King killed.” Addison’s son, Nathan, confirmed his remark.

However the Mafia plan would not have succeeded if it had not been for the involvement of many others: Why did King end up in the Lorraine Motel where he had never stayed before? Who made him change his room from a secluded ground floor room to the second floor balcony space? Who ordered MPD Captain Jerry Williams, who normally formed a security unit of black officers when King came to Memphis, not to form a bodyguard this time?

Across from the Lorraine Motel was Fire Station no. 2. Who ordered the only two black firefighters not to show up to work that day? Floyd E. Newsum was later told the order came from the MPD. Norvell E. Wallace was told his life had been threatened and he needed to stay home.

On the morning of the assassination Carthel Weeden, captain of Fire Station no. 2, testified that he was approached by two U. S. Army officers carrying briefcases who indicated they had cameras and wanted the roof of the station for a lookout on the Lorraine Motel. They left after the assassination.

Members of the Army’s 111th Military Intelligence Group, based at Fort McPherson in Atlanta, Georgia, had come to Memphis and were keeping King under 24 hour a day surveillance. MPD intelligence office Eli Arkin testified at the trial that they worked out of his office.

About 10 minutes before the assassination of King, Guy Canipe, owner of the Canipe Amusement Company, observed a bundle being dropped in the Main Street doorway of his company, one block from the Lorraine. The bundle consisted of a 30.06 Remington Gamemaster rifle and unfired bullets — the rifle James Earl Ray was supposed to have used for the assassination.

Loyd Jowers testified that immediately after the killing, MPD Lieutenant Earl Clark, now deceased, came out of the brushy area and gave him a smoking rifle at the rear door of his restaurant, Jim’s Grill. Jowers did not see who killed King, but claimed it was Clark, the MPD’s best marksman.

Criminal Court Judge Joe Brown, who later presided over two years of hearings into the evidence, stated, “It is my opinion… that this is not the murder weapon… 67% of bullets from my tests… did not match the Ray rifle” The rifle’s scope had not been sited; therefore the Remington from Canipe’s door could not have been properly aimed.

Several witnesses at the 1999 trial testified that they saw two men running away from the brushy area, one burning tires as he drove away in a green 1965 Chevrolet past a police car that took no notice, another getting into a police car and being driven away. Nevertheless, the official story has always been that nobody shot from the bushes but that James Earl Ray fired from a bathroom window of the rooming house.

Why then did Maynard Stiles, a senior official in Memphis Sanitation Department, receive a call from MPD Inspector Sam Evans at 7 am on the morning after the assassination “requiring assistance clearing brush and debris from a vacant lot near the site of the assassination.” Stiles assembled a crew and cleaned the site under the direction of the police department.

This is just part of the evidence covered by the 1999 trial. Much of it had been assembled to be presented in the trial that James Earl Ray fought to have for almost 30 years. Given the nature of the evidence it is not surprising that it was never allowed to take place.

The major media and most authors have perpetuated the myth that James Earl Ray confessed. William Pepper, who represented Ray until he died, says that Ray pleaded guilty on advice of his lawyer who told him that this would be the best avenue for a trial — but that Ray never confessed.

There were several attempts to bribe Ray into a confession. One of Ray’s lawyers, Jack Kershaw, was asked by a publishing company to offer Ray $50,000, parole and a new life if he finally confessed. Ray refused. Ray’s brother Jerry was contacted with the same offer with a higher monetary amount ($200,000). Ray, again, refused.

Just before Ray’s death MPD officer Tim Cook, in the presence of William Pepper, leaned heavily on Ray to admit his guilt. He promised Ray that in return he would be released and could die surrounded by his family. Ray refused and died alone on April 23, 1998.

One year and 8 months after his death a jury listened to the closing statement of Ray’s former lawyer, William Pepper, testing the evidence that should have freed Ray.

Pepper’s closing words were:

    Let me close by saying to you that long after people forget what has been said in this courtroom, all the words that you’ve heard from witnesses and lawyers, and long after they have forgotten about accounts that they have read about this case, they are going to remember what was done here. They are going to remember what action you took, what decision you came to.

    You have got to understand the monumental importance of your decision. (The public) are going to forget everything I said, everything defense counsel has said, everything the witnesses have said. They are going to remember one thing, the ruling of this jury, the verdict of this jury because you have heard evidence that has never before been put on in a court of law.

    That is why your decision at this point in time is the most significant decision that will have been taken in thirty-one years in terms of this case. Please don’t underestimate the importance of it.

    In our view, what has happened in this case, the injustice that has happened in this case … is representative of the failure that symbolizes to me the failure of representative democracy in this country. Isn’t it amazing that one could say that over a simple murder case? But when you look at the wealth of evidence that has come forward and you understand how this case has been conducted and you understand how it has been covered up, and when you see how unresponsive elected officials and government have been and how complicit they have been, you can come to no other choice.

    Governmental agencies caused Martin Luther King to be assassinated. They used other foot soldiers. They caused this whole thing to happen. And they then proceeded with the powerful means at their disposal to cover this case up.

    You know, these things do not happen as a rule without the involvement of other people and in this case, this type of murder, without the involvement of seriously prominent individuals in government. So it is in my view a failure of democracy and this Republic that it has not been able to bring this forward.

    What we’re asking you to do at this point in time is send a message. We’re asking you to send a message, not just right a wrong. That’s important, that you right a wrong and that you allow justice to prevail once and for all. Let it prevail.

    But in addition to that, we’re asking you to send a message, send a message to all of those in power, all of those who manipulate justice in this country that you cannot get away with this. Or if you can get away with it, you can only get away with it for so long.

    Send that message. You, you twelve, represent the American people. You are their representatives with respect to justice in this case. They cannot be here. The media will keep the truth from them forever. You represent the people of this land. You must speak for them.

    You have this duty to yourselves, this obligation to your fellow citizens, and you have an opportunity to act in a most significant way that perhaps you can ever imagine, because your verdict of conspiracy in this case, your verdict of liability for the defendant and his other co-conspirators, means history is rewritten, means textbooks have to be rewritten, means the actual result of this case and the truth of this case now must come forward formally.

    On behalf of the family of Martin Luther King, Jr., on behalf of the people of the United States, I ask you to find for the plaintiff and find that conspiracy existed and that those conspirators involved not only the defendant here but we’re dealing in conspiracy with agents of the City of Memphis and the governments of the State of Tennessee and the United States of America.

    We ask you to find that conspiracy existed and once and for all give this plaintiff family justice and let’s cleanse this city and this nation of the ignorance that has pervaded this case for so long.

After less than an hour the jury returned with the verdict, read by Judge James E. Swearengen.

    THE COURT: In answer to the question did Loyd Jowers participate in a conspiracy to do harm to Dr. Martin Luther King, your answer is yes. Do you also find that others, including governmental agencies, were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by the defendant? Your answer to that one is also yes.

Memphis, TN, December 8, 1999.

Their verdict finally lifted responsibility for the murder from James Earl Ray and should have opened the investigation of organized crime, the FBI, the CIA, the military, and the Memphis Police Department.


1. Given all the new evidence presented in the trial, the King family approached President Bill Clinton and asked for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Clinton refused and turned the matter over to AG Janet Reno who appointed a civil rights commission.

In June 2000 the United States Department of Justice published their conclusion that quote: “the trial’s evidence fails to establish the existence of any conspiracy to kill Dr. King… we found no credible evidence to disturb past judicial determinations that James Earl Ray killed Dr. King.”

2. In February 2008 news from New York: Dr. Pepper makes the case for the NYC 911 Ballot Initiative and the re-investigation of 9/11 by an independent citizens commission.


The transcripts of 1999 Memphis trial.

The video of major parts of the court proceedings on Youtube can be reached via the following site.

The audio recording of Pepper’s closing argument.
Quote 0 0

How the Government Killed Martin Luther King, Jr.

By Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News

03 April 13


efore scoffing at this headline, you should know that in 1999, in Memphis, Tennessee, more than three decades after MLK's death, a jury found local, state, and federal government agencies guilty of conspiring to assassinate the Nobel Peace Prize winner and civil rights leader. The same media you would expect to cover such a monumental decision was absent at the trial, because those news organizations were part of that conspiracy. William F. Pepper, who was James Earl Ray's first attorney, called over 70 witnesses to the stand to testify on every aspect of the assassination. The panel, which consisted of an even mix of both black and white jurors, took only an hour of deliberation to find Loyd Jowers and other defendants guilty. If you're skeptical of any factual claims made here, click here for a full transcript, broken into individual sections. Read the testimonies yourself if you don't want to take my word for it.

It really isn't that radical a thing to expect this government to kill someone who threatened their authority and had the power to organize millions to protest it. When MLK was killed on April 4, 1968, he was speaking to sanitation workers in Memphis, who were organizing to fight poverty wages and ruthless working conditions. He was an outspoken critic of the government's war in Vietnam, and his power to organize threatened the moneyed corporate interests who were profiting from the war. At the time of his death, he was gearing up for the Poor People's Campaign, an effort to get people to camp out on the National Mall to demand anti-poverty legislation – essentially the first inception of the Occupy Wall Street movement. The government perceived him as a threat, and had him killed. James Earl Ray was the designated fall guy, and a complicit media, taking its cues from a government in fear of MLK, helped sell the "official" story of the assassination. Here's how they did it.

The Setup

The defendant in the 1999 civil trial, Loyd Jowers, had been a Memphis PD officer in the 1940s. He owned a restaurant called Jim's Grill, a staging ground to orchestrate MLK's assassination underneath the rooming house where the corporate media alleges James Earl Ray shot Dr. King. During the trial, William Pepper, the plaintiff's attorney, played a tape of an incriminating 1998 conversation between Jowers, UN Ambassador Andrew Young, and Dexter King, MLK's son. Young testified that Jowers told them he "wanted to get right with God before he died, wanted to confess it and be free of it."

On the tape, Jowers mentions that those present at the meetings included MPD officer Marrell McCollough, Earl Clark, an MPD lieutenant and known as the department's best marksman, another MPD officer, and two men who were unknown to Jowers but whom he assumed to be representatives of federal agencies. While Dr. King was in Memphis, he was under open or eye-to-eye federal surveillance by the 111th Military Intelligence Group based at Fort McPherson in Atlanta, Georgia. Memphis PD intelligence officer Eli Arkin even admitted to having the group in his own office. During his last visit to Memphis in late March of 1968, MLK was under covert surveillance, meaning his room at the Rivermont was bugged and wired. Even if he went out to the balcony to speak, his words were recorded via relay. William Pepper alleges in his closing argument during King v. Jowers that such covert surveillance was usually done by the Army Security Agency, implying the involvement of at least two federal agencies.

Jowers also gave an interview to Sam Donaldson on "Prime Time Live" in 1993. The transcript of the interview was read during the trial, and it was revealed that Jowers openly talked about being asked by produce warehouse owner Frank Liberto to help with MLK's murder. Liberto had mafia connections, and sent a courier with $100,000 to Jowers, who owned a local restaurant, with instructions to hold the money at his restaurant.

John McFerren owned a store in Memphis and was making a pickup at Liberto's warehouse at 5:15 p.m. on April 4th, roughly 45 minutes before the assassination. McFerren testified that he overheard Liberto tell someone over the phone, "Shoot the son of a bitch on the balcony." Other witnesses who testified included café owner Lavada Addison, who was friends with Liberto in the 1970s. She recalled him confiding to her that he "had Martin Luther King killed." Addison's son, Nathan Whitlock, also testified. He asked Liberto if he killed MLK, and he responded, "I didn't kill the nigger but I had it done." When Whitlock pressed him about James Earl Ray, Liberto replied, "He wasn't nothing but a troublemaker from Missouri. He was a front man ... a setup man."

The back door of Loyd Jowers' establishment led to a thick crop of bushes across the street from the Lorraine Motel balcony where Dr. King was shot. On the taped confession to Andrew Young and Dexter King, Jowers says after he heard the shot, Lt. Earl Clark, who is now deceased, laid a smoking rifle at the rear of his restaurant. Jowers then disassembled the rifle, wrapped it in a tablecloth and prepared it for disposal.

The corporate media says it was James Earl Ray who shot MLK, and he did it from the 2nd floor bathroom window of the rooming house across the street from the Lorraine Motel. The official account alleges the murder weapon was dropped in a bundle and abandoned at Dan Canipe's storefront just before he made his getaway. But even those authorities and media admit that the bullet that tore through MLK's throat didn't have the same metallurgical composition as the bullets in the rifle left behind by James Earl Ray. And Judge Joe Brown, a weapons expert called to testify by Pepper in the 1999 trial, said the rifle allegedly used by James Earl Ray had a scope that was never sighted in, meaning that the weapon in question would have fired far to the left and far below the target.

The actual murder weapon was disposed of by taxi driver James McCraw, a friend of Jowers. William Hamblin testified in King v. Jowers that McCraw told him this story over a 15-year period whenever he got drunk. McCraw repeatedly told Hamblin that he threw the rifle over the Memphis-Arkansas bridge, meaning that the rifle is at the bottom of the Mississippi river to this day. And according to Hamblin's testimony, Canipe said he saw the bundle dropped in front of his store before the actual shooting occurred.

The Conspiracy

To make Dr. King vulnerable, plans had to be made to remove him from his security detail and anyone sympathetic who could be a witness or interfere with the killing. Two black firefighters, Floyd Newsum and Norvell Wallace, who were working at Fire Station #2 across the street from the Lorraine Motel, were each transferred to different fire stations. Newsum was a civil rights activist and witnessed MLK's last speech to the striking Memphis sanitation workers, "I Have Seen the Mountaintop," before getting the call about his transfer. Newsum testified that he wasn't needed at his new assignment, and that his transfer meant that Fire Station #2 would be out of commission unless someone else was sent there in his stead. Newsum talked about having to make a series of inquiries before finally learning that his reassignment had been ordered by the Memphis Police Department. Wallace testified that to that very day, while the official explanation was a vague death threat, he hadn't once received a satisfactory answer as to why he was suddenly reassigned.

Ed Redditt, a black MPD detective who was assigned to MLK's security detail, was also removed from the scene an hour before the shooting and sent home, and the only reason given was a vague death threat. Jerry Williams, another black MPD detective, was usually tasked with assembling a security team of black police officers for Dr. King. But he testified that on the night of the assassination, he wasn't assigned to form that team.

There was a Black Panther-inspired group called The Invaders, who were staying at the Lorraine Motel to help MLK organize a planned march with the striking garbage workers. The Invaders were ordered to leave the motel after getting into an argument with members of MLK's entourage. The origins of the argument are unclear, though several sources affirm that The Invaders had been infiltrated by Marrell McCollough of the MPD, who later went on to work for the CIA. And finally, the Tact 10 police escort of several MPD cars that accompanied Dr. King's security detail were pulled back the day before the shooting by Inspector Evans. With all possible obstacles out of the way, MLK was all alone just before the assassination.

The Cover-Up

Around 7 a.m. on April 5, the morning after the shooting, MPD Inspector Sam Evans called Public Works Administrator Maynard Stiles and told him to have a crew destroy the crop of bushes adjacent to the rooming house above Loyd Jowers' restaurant. This is particularly odd coming from a policeman, since the bushes were in a crime scene area, and crime scene areas are normally roped off, not to be disturbed. The official narrative of a sniper in the bathroom at the rooming house was then reinforced, since a sniper firing from an empty clearing would be far more visible than one hidden behind a thick crop of bushes.

Normally, when a major political figure is murdered, all possible witnesses are questioned and asked to make statements. But Memphis PD neglected to conduct even a basic house-to-house investigation. Olivia Catling, a resident of nearby Mulberry Street just a block away from the shooting, testified that she saw a man leave an alley next to the rooming house across from the Lorraine, climb into a Green 1965 Chevrolet, and speed away, burning rubber right in front of several police cars without any interference. There was also no questioning of Captain Weiden, a Memphis firefighter at the fire station closest to the Lorraine, the same one from which Floyd Newsum had been transferred just a day before.

Memphis PD and the FBI also suppressed the statements of Ray Hendricks and William Reed, who said they saw James Earl Ray's white mustang parked in front of Jowers' restaurant, before seeing it again driving away as they crossed another street. Ray's alibi was that he had driven away from the scene to fix a tire, and these two statements that affirmed his alibi were withheld from Ray's guilty plea jury.

The jury present at Ray's guilty plea hearing also wasn't informed about the bullet that killed MLK having different striations and markings than the other bullets kept as evidence, nor that the bullet couldn't be positively matched as coming from the alleged murder weapon. Three days after entering the guilty plea, James Earl Ray unsuccessfully attempted to retract it and demand a trial. Incredibly, James Earl Ray turned down two separate bribes, one of which was recorded by his brother Jerry Ray, where he was offered $220,000 by writer William Bradford Huey and the guarantee of a full pardon if he would just agree to have the story "Why I Killed Martin Luther King" written on his behalf.

The Deception

One of the 70 witnesses that William F. Pepper called to testify in King v. Jowers was Bill Schaap, a practicing attorney with particular experience in military law, with bar credentials in New York, Chicago, and DC. Schaap testified at great length about how the government, through the FBI and the CIA, puts people in key positions on editorial boards at influential papers like the New York Times and Washington Post. He describes that although these editorial board members and news directors at cable news outlets may be liberal in their politics, they always take the government's side in national security-related stories. Before you write that off as conspiracy theory, remember how people like Bill Keller at the New York Times, as well as the Washington Post editorial board, all cheerfully led the march to war in Iraq ten years ago.

Another King v. Jowers witness was Earl Caldwell, a New York Times reporter who was sent to Memphis by an editor named Claude Sitton. Caldwell testified that the orders from his editor were to "nail Dr. King." In the publication's effort to sell the story of James Earl Ray as the murderer, the Times cited an investigation into how Ray got the money for his Mustang, rifle, and the long road trip to Tennessee from California. The Times said that according to their own findings as well as the findings of federal agencies, Ray got the money by robbing a bank in his hometown of Alton, Illinois. In Pepper's closing argument, he says that when he or Jerry Ray talked to the chief of police in Alton, along with the bank president of the branch that was allegedly robbed, neither said they had been approached by the New York Times, or by the FBI. Essentially, the Times fabricated the entire story in order to sell a false narrative that there was no government intervention and that James Earl Ray was a lone wolf.

So for the following 31 years after King's death, nobody dared to question the constant reiteration of James Earl Ray as the murderer of Martin Luther King. Even 13 years after a jury found the government complicit in a conspiracy to murder the civil rights leader, the complicit media continues to propagate the false narrative they sold us three decades ago and vociferously shout down any alternative theories as to what happened as "conspiracy theory," framing those putting forth such theories as wackjobs undeserving of any credibility. It's strikingly similar to how the Washington Post defended their warmongering in a recent editorial commenting on the invasion of Iraq, and had one of their reporters defend the media's leading of the charge into Iraq.

As we remember Dr. King and the important work he did, we should also reject the official account of his death as loudly as the government and media shout down anyone who tries to contradict their lies. As Edward R. Murrow said, "Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them up, at least a little bit."

Quote 0 0

Lawsuits piling up on ex-trooper

The lawyers representing clients suing embattled former Utah Highway Patrol Trooper Lisa Steed say it may be hard to tell exactly how many lawsuits have been, or will be, filed against her.

Steed, named Trooper of the Year in 2007 when she logged more than 200 DUI arrests, was fired in November after allegations surfaced she was falsifying reports on her record numbers of arrests. She patrolled Davis and Salt Lake counties.

In January, Salt Lake lawyer Rob Sykes, in concert with two other lawyers, including Ogden’s Mike Studebaker, filed a civil rights suit against her and the state of Utah on behalf of two of those she arrested.

Once the state’s lawyers have filed a response, the plaintiff’s attorneys will begin the process of having the suit deemed a class action suit. Sykes and Studebaker say they envision having as many as 800 people once arrested by Steed added as class action plaintiffs.

The suit is pending without date before 2nd District Judge Mike Allphin in Farmington.

The lawyers note, as has been reported in the media since February, that a number of their clients have been interviewed by FBI Agent Cameron Saxey, of the agency’s Salt Lake City field office. The FBI never confirms or denies the existence of an investigation.

As a subset to the civil rights suit, Studebaker has been filing post-conviction relief lawsuits against Steed on behalf of people convicted of DUI when they were sober.

Most of those are being filed in justice courts, where the majority of DUI cases are heard. The post-conviction relief suits name as defendants the town or county of the justice court, not Steed by name.

Because her name is not on them, it is difficult to track the actions against Steed, they said.

“So it’s hard to say how many have been filed,” Sykes said.

To date, Studebaker has filed 18 in Davis and Salt Lake courts. Recently, six of the suits passed their first hurdle, earning an order from a judge requiring a response by the defendants, meaning the suits are not considered frivolous, Studebaker said.

So far, Studebaker said, he has talked to 63 people who experienced a questionable arrest by Steed. In addition to the 18 cases filed, another 18 have declined to proceed with a lawsuit, and 12 already had their case dismissed, he said.

He plans to file 15 more out of the initial batch of 63 interviews, he said.

Quote 0 0
see link for full story

ATF Uses Brain-Damaged Man with Low IQ to Run Drugs, Guns as Part of Federal Probe

The ATF used a brain-damaged man with a low IQ to help to handle drug and gun deals as part of an investigation into a Milwaukee storefront, the AP reports.

The man, Chauncey Wright, was paid in cigarettes, merchandise and money, but was charged with federal drug and gun counts once the operation was done, according to the AP.

Quote 0 0
see link for full story

Ex-officers often investigate police-involved shootings

April 10, 2013 | Shoshana Walter

Noah Berger/The Bay Citizen Oakland officers stopped Alan Blueford and two other teens on suspicion that they were hiding a gun. Eight witnesses said they heard Blueford say, “I didn’t do anything!” before police gunfire killed him.

After Oakland police Officer Miguel Masso shot and killed 18-year-old Alan Blueford last May, prosecutors quickly released their investigator’s findings about the incident, amid a public outcry and a protest that shut down a City Council meeting.

The shooting was justified, according to the evidence collected by Michael Foster – a former Oakland police officer.

In a city seething with distrust of law enforcement, legal experts and residents are now questioning District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s wisdom in assigning former Oakland police officers to the task.
Find out who investigates police-involved shootings in your area
Map: Where have Oakland police officer-involved shootings occurred?
Donate Now
Like our content?
Help us do more.

“I would hope that they would look for somebody not for one side or the other – some impartial person that’s not the police and not a community activist,” said Blueford’s father, Adam Blueford. “The prosecutor just kind of rubber stamps what the police said.”

Foster’s assignment was described as routine. It turns out that the practice of using former police officers to conduct investigations into shootings at their previous departments is widespread, according to a review of police prosecution records by the Center for Investigative Reporting, parent organization of California Watch.

The issue is all the more important now in Oakland, where the beleaguered police department is under court supervision. Last month, a federal judge appointed former Baltimore Police Commissioner Thomas Frazier to oversee the completion of an almost decadelong civil rights reform effort.

The city has seen two officer-involved shootings so far this month. After a witness mistakenly identified a 16-year-old boy as a robbery suspect, police said they perceived the boy as a threat and shot him in the jaw. Two days later, Oakland officers shot and wounded a burglary suspect who they said was brandishing a fake gun.

Prosecutors said they use former police officers for the investigations because they are best suited for the job, coming with years of training and experience. Other prosecutors and investigators said prior police employment wouldn't necessarily bias the investigation or outcome of a case.

O’Malley, Alameda County’s district attorney, said her office provides a separate but thorough investigation of each fatal officer-involved shooting and dispatches a team that includes an experienced attorney and investigator. The attorney, not the investigator, writes the final report, she said.

As for the Blueford investigation, O’Malley said her office reviewed all available evidence and statements from more than 40 witnesses and determined that the case “did not exist to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer involved committed a criminal offense.” Foster declined to comment.

But legal ethicists say the use of former police officers creates an appearance of a conflict of interest that can erode public trust. And those ethicists say many ex-officers still have ties to their former departments, including a sense of allegiance to the “thin blue line” that can influence the subjective process of an investigation.

“Even though he might not want to be a policeman again, he still has an allegiance to the brotherhood,” said Cornell University law professor Charles Wolfram. “If they’re from the same department, that could create obvious problems.”

Ten district attorney’s offices in California contacted by the Center for Investigative Reporting said they use former officers for their police shooting inquiries. W. Scott Thorpe, chief executive officer of the California District Attorneys Association, called the practice “very common.”

Some prosecutors, however, keep the identities of the investigators who work on police officer shootings secret – the public may never know about potential conflicts of interest in police shooting investigations, the CIR review found.

For Oakland residents, prosecutors’ reports are one of the few sources of information about officer-involved shootings. Federal court-appointed monitors, in connection with the civil rights reform effort, have criticized the department’s own investigations as biased and unquestioning. The department seldom releases copies of investigations and police reports on officer-involved shootings, even to the families of the individuals killed.

In Oakland, some officers have faced more shooting investigations than others. According to police records, in the past 12 years, more than half of the department’s officer-involved shootings involved the same 20 officers.

In many cases, the investigations of some of the most shooting-prone officers showed potential conflicts of interest.

Frank Moschetti, a former Oakland police officer for 23 years, investigated a shooting case involving William Pappas, a SWAT team member responsible for three shootings, according to police records. In July 2010, he was among a group of officers who fatally shot a man wielding kitchen knives.

Also in 2010, Moschetti investigated Officers Omar Daza-Quiroz and Eriberto Perez-Angeles. The two officers, who were involved in the shooting death of a man in 2008, were responsible for the fatal shooting of Derrick Jones, an unarmed domestic violence suspect whose death spurred protests and an FBI investigation. He had led the two officers on a foot chase before ditching a marijuana scale that police mistook for a gun. His case is under review by the Department of Justice.

On April 1, both officers involved in the case were cleared of any wrongdoing in a federal civil trial filed by Jones' widow. The city already had paid a $225,000 settlement in a separate civil suit filed by his parents and daughter.

In 2011, three officers shot and killed a man wielding a fake firearm. After Foster completed his investigation, prosecutor John Creighton cleared the officers in Matthew Cicelski’s death. Less than a year earlier, Creighton had received an endorsement from the Oakland Police Officers’ Association during his unsuccessful run for superior court judge.

Deputy District Attorney Teresa Drenick called Foster and the other investigators professional and unbiased. If there is bias, Drenick said, the prosecutors who work alongside the investigators would intervene.

“The district attorney is there throughout the entire thing, everything,” Drenick said. “They go as a pair to all of the interviews. And then the ultimate report that is done is written by the deputy district attorney.”

Foster also investigated the shooting deaths of two alleged gang members in May 2011, relying in part on investigative materials collected by the Oakland Police Department. The officers involved were Capt. Ersie Joyner, who has five officer-involved shootings on his record (the most of any member of the department), and Officer Cesar Garcia, who has two.

To complete his investigation, Foster relied on evidence collected by Oakland police Sgt. Jim Rullamas, according to the prosecutor’s report. Not mentioned was the fact that Joyner once oversaw Rullamas as head of the homicide division, praising the detective as hard working, according to one news report.

After the prosecutor’s office cleared the officers of wrongdoing, some of the cases resulted in hefty civil settlements. Robert Roche, a longtime member of the department’s SWAT team, has been involved in three shootings, including one that resulted in a $500,000 civil suit settlement.

Alameda County prosecutors provided the Center for Investigative Reporting with records on Oakland police officer shootings since 2000 that were proved justified and closed. Out of 23 fatal shooting cases, 10 were investigated by former Oakland police officers, the records show.
‘It’s a specialized skill’

Unlike Alameda County, not every prosecutor’s office in California releases records of shooting investigations involving police officers, which are protected by law from public disclosure. Many prosecutors’ offices declined to provide the names and employment histories of those they assign to investigate the shootings.

But some prosecutors acknowledged that their investigators are most often retired police officers. District attorneys in San Francisco, Santa Clara, Napa and San Mateo counties all said they employ former police officers and sheriff’s deputies to investigate officer-involved shootings.

“It’s pretty common,” said Glenn McGovern, a senior investigator at the Santa Clara County district attorney’s office who leads the training committee for the California District Attorney Investigators’ Association. “In Santa Clara, we have a lot of San Jose police. It’s a specialized skill. You have to go through advanced training for it.”

Some counties in other states have decided against using ex-officers to investigate their former departments. In Miami-Dade County in Florida, for example, only prosecutors with special training investigate officer-involved shootings. The agency does not use former police officers.

In California, legal ethicists expressed concern that most prosecutors make no attempt to avoid the controversial assignments.

“It undermines the legitimacy of the investigation,” said Stanford Law School professor Deborah Rhode. “At the very least, they should try to find investigators hired by somebody else.”

Most counties in California follow the same procedure. When a police officer shoots and kills someone, the police department conducts two separate investigations. One determines whether the officer violated department policy; the other looks for evidence of criminal conduct. Then the county prosecutor’s office either monitors the department’s criminal investigation or conducts its own and decides whether to file charges. In Alameda County, investigators are assigned to officer-involved shootings on a rotating, on-call basis.

Prior to 1985, most states legally allowed police officers to use their firearms to arrest anybody suspected of committing a felony, according to a U.S. Department of Justice report on police use of force. Some states even allowed police to shoot a fleeing suspect, including one suspected of a property crime such as forgery.

Then the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision that changed the landscape of police shooting investigations: An officer may not use deadly force unless he or she “has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others” – in other words, self-defense.

Despite the ruling, it is still extremely rare for a police officer to be charged. While police need only probable cause to make an arrest, prosecutors must prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that an officer acted criminally. Most fatal officer-involved shootings are deemed justifiable homicides.

In 2011, according to the FBI, law enforcement officers nationwide committed 393 justifiable homicides. A review of news articles about on-duty officer-involved shootings in California shows that since 2005, only three officers have been prosecuted in a fatal or near-fatal shooting.

The most prominent was the case of former BART Officer Johannes Mehserle. In 2010, a jury acquitted Mehserle of second-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter after he was captured on video shooting an unarmed man, Oscar Grant, in the back on a train platform in the early morning hours of New Year’s Day 2009. The jury found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter, and he was sentenced to two years.

In 2007, a jury swiftly acquitted former San Bernardino County sheriff’s Deputy Ivory Webb of attempted voluntary manslaughter and assault with a firearm.  A cellphone video had shown Webb opening fire on Iraq War veteran Elio Carrion, a passenger in a car that had led Webb on a high-speed chase.

And in 2005, a San Jose jury acquitted state Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement agent Mike Walker of voluntary manslaughter charges. He’d shot and killed Rudy Cardenas, a father of five whom he’d mistaken for a wanted parole violator, after Cardenas led him on a car and foot chase.

It’s unclear if former police officers investigated the three cases that led to a prosecution – those records are kept secret.
Policies vary across counties

Prosecutors are not legally required to conduct investigations into police shootings.

After budget cuts in 2010, Fresno County District Attorney Elizabeth Egan halted her office’s investigations of officer-involved shootings, a practice that had been in place since 1984. After widespread complaints – including from the Fresno police chief – a Fresno County grand jury recommended Egan reverse her decision. She declined.

Sacramento County District Attorney Jan Scully made a similar decision in 2011. A slew of shootings has since prompted furor over Scully’s decision, including urgent requests from Sacramento County law enforcement to resume the investigations.

“We would like to do them, if we were given the resources,” said Assistant District Attorney Albert Locher, who once supervised the unit.

The Kern County district attorney’s office investigates shootings at the county’s small police agencies but has never investigated officer-involved shootings at the county’s two largest agencies, the Bakersfield Police Department and Kern County Sheriff’s Office.

After a high-profile police shooting several years ago, District Attorney Lisa Green said she saw no need to investigate because “the public might view the district attorney’s office as a rubber stamp.”

“Although I would never approach it that way, the community may view it otherwise,” she said.

But in many cities, officials said, the investigations serve as assurance to the public that the death is being treated seriously. Police officials say the investigations can restore confidence in a department. Without them, only the police are left to investigate their own.

“It allows the public to sleep better at night,” said former police officer Mike Donovan, chief investigator at the Napa County district attorney’s office and treasurer of the California District Attorney Investigators’ Association. “Knowing that if there is an officer-involved shooting, there’s some other level than just the agency itself that gets to make the decision.”

In Los Angeles, law enforcement agencies and the areas they cover are so large that the 256 former police officers at the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office are unlikely to know anyone they are assigned to investigate, spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons said.

Still, some prosecutors have decided to avoid the appearance of a conflict by assigning others to the task.

San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis assigned a single investigator to work on officer-involved shootings. Although a former police officer, the investigator has never worked for a San Diego County law enforcement agency, spokesman Steve Walker said.
Oakland shooting sparks protest

Noah Berger/The Bay Citizen Adam and Jeralynn Blueford’s son Alan, an 18-year-old Hayward resident, was shot to death by an Oakland police officer last May. “If you have nothing else, you want to fight for your kid,” Adam Blueford said.

In Oakland, several police shootings have galvanized the community. But instead of instilling confidence in the system, the report from the Alameda County district attorney’s office has provoked suspicion.

After Officer Miguel Masso fatally shot Alan Blueford in May, activists and residents shut down a City Council meeting in protest, and Blueford’s family filed a civil suit.

In District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s office, several investigators, mainly former law enforcement officers from the Oakland Police Department and a few other county agencies, are assigned to a rotating on-call team.

When an officer-involved shooting occurs, an on-call inspector and prosecutor report to the scene, sit in on witness and officer interviews, and review evidence collected by each police department and coroner’s office. In Blueford’s case, Foster and Senior District Attorney Ken Mifsud were on call.

After O’Malley released a report on Foster’s investigation, Blueford’s supporters released their own, in which they said the prosecutor’s report lacked “professionalism and objectivity, and appears to be directed at swaying public opinion.”

The report writer, Darrell Whitman, a regional investigator for the U.S. Department of Labor, analyzed the heavily redacted police and coroner’s reports released to the public. He said the evidence made it seem more likely that Blueford was unarmed on the ground when Masso shot him.

Masso and his partner had stopped Blueford and two other teens just before midnight on suspicion that they were hiding a gun. Moments later, Blueford broke away. There was a brief foot chase before Masso said Blueford pointed a gun at him, and the officer reacted with gunfire, according to police reports.

At first, Masso said Blueford had shot him. Police later determined that Masso had accidentally shot himself in the foot. The gun Masso said Blueford possessed was found 20 feet from Blueford’s body, and investigators determined it had not been fired. Investigators found one of Blueford’s fingerprints on the gun.

In his report, Whitman pointed to discrepancies in the evidence that he said Foster and Mifsud should have examined. Instead, he said, they unquestioningly accepted Masso’s account. Mifsud declined to comment.
Become a Source
Questions we're asking
Sign up
Report an error: See something wrong in this story?
E-mail our editors.

For example, according to the redacted police reports, of the 16 people who witnessed the shooting, only three said they saw Blueford with a gun. Another witness said he had not seen a gun but had seen Blueford grabbing his waistband. A fifth witness said he had overheard another woman saying Blueford was armed.

Masso told investigators that his first shot caused Blueford to fall into a gate and onto the ground, but according to the redacted reports, most witnesses said Blueford already was on the ground when he was shot.

Eight witnesses said they heard Blueford say, “I didn’t do anything!” right before the gunfire. Mifsud and Foster’s report detailed Masso’s accidental shooting of his own foot but otherwise repeated Masso’s account of the shooting and did not mention Blueford’s alleged statement.

Whitman also said Foster and Mifsud didn’t appear to question some of the police department’s actions. Although investigators found one of Blueford’s fingerprints on the gun, Whitman noted that at least two officers handled the gun before it was secured.

By the time it was photographed, the magazine already had been removed, “possibly contaminating DNA and biological evidence,” he wrote. In addition, per department policy, Masso had never turned on his lapel camera. Whitman said the camera footage might have captured the entire incident.

“If you have nothing else, you want to fight for your kid,” said Blueford’s father, Adam Blueford. “My son was on the ground screaming, pleading for his life.”

O’Malley declined to comment on the report.

“From a public point of view, (using former officers) might not be the best course of action,” said Tony Monheim, a retired Miami-Dade police officer who now leads training on officer-involved shooting investigations.

“The public has its own perception of what is going on,” Monheim said. “Maybe it’s a better thing to try to ease the tension a little bit and not have someone investigate themselves.”
Quote 0 0
see link for full story


2nd Murray County Officer Pleads Guilty In Planting Evidence Case

Friday, April 12, 2013
Joshua L. Greeson pleaded guilty Friday at Federal Court in Rome, Ga., to obstructing a pending public corruption and civil rights investigation by tampering with a witness while employed as a deputy with the Murray County Sheriff’s Department.
Quote 0 0
see link for full story


Malcolm X’s Grandson Describes Inhumane FBI Arrest


*While the world was watching the halftime show during the Super Bowl, Malcolm Shabazz, grandson of iconic civil rights activist Malcolm X, was getting arrested by the FBI.

En route to Iran for a Hollywoodism conference, the man was stopped before boarding the plane. And according to reports, he’s unharmed, but he’s not very happy.

Press TV published a statement he posted on former U.S. representative and activist Cynthia McKinney’s FB page, describing the way he was treated at the time of his arrest.

Read the full statement below:

“I sincerely appreciate the care & concern of the People over my well-being after Press TV’s report of the most recent events which have transpired regarding the F.B.I.’s harassment of me.

Given the storm of lies, and half-truths that come with being associated with being the descendant of El Hajj Malik el Shabazz, also known as Minister Malcolm X, any and everything that I do; great or small, good or not so good, real or imagined is subject to controversy. However, in this missive I will take this opportunity to properly & fully disclose what transpired.

In the beginning of 2012 I had been informed that I was under investigation by the F.B.I.’s Counter Terrorism Task Force Unit located in Goshen, N.Y.

The agents of this division-and in collaboration with others-have visited several residences of which I was known by them to frequent. However, they would never come when they knew me to actually be there. They would leave their cards with the residents asking them to tell me to call them, and then would tell surrounding residents to observe the house and to notify them if they saw me.

These are the homes of long-time friends, and very close supporters. Yet, when federal agents begin knocking on someone’s door on multiple occasions to snoop, and ask questions, whether one is guilty of an offense or not, it’s enough to coerce people into distancing themselves from you. This cheap tactic employed by the F.B.I. is a means of agitation & harassment. They seek to neutralize my networking abilities.

They have visited locations in California, Chicago, Miami and most aggressively in New York.

People were advising me that if I had nothing to hide, then I should just contact them as requested and cooperate. Though I must say that in these kind of matters I am of a particular ethic. For one, I have been engaged in no criminal activity of their concern, and they could have located me if they so chose. Secondly, I don’t recognize the authority in them beckoning me.

It wasn’t even until my mother informed me that they had been contacting her that I truly became agitated. She advised me to see what they had to say, and so I obliged the next time they came around looking for me. My encounter was with 2 federal agents of Goshen, N.Y.’s Counter Terrorism Task Foci Unit. The primary agent identified himself as Special Agent Tom Brozicky.

They expressed concern over-as they put it-my “international travels”; I have lived & studied in Damascus, Syria for over a year, and now the U.S. is instigating conflict within the very same region; I went on ex-congresswoman/former presidential candidate Cynthia Mckinney’s delegation along with Dr. Randy Short to Libya, and met with Leader Muammar Gadhafi one week prior to N.A.T.O. intervention and I was most recently getting ready to travel to Tehran, Iran to be a participant of the International Fajr Film Festival and give a lecture addressing the issues of Hollywood and violence:

- Modern Violence & Terrorism,
- Provoking clashes between religions & populations

I was picked up by authorities after I filed for a visa to Iran, and 2 days prior to my departure. A detective squad from the City of Middletown Police Department surrounded me in the street about 2 blocks from where I was residing. They asked me my name, and I gave them an alias, but they were already well aware of who I actually was. I didn’t tell them my real name because I didn’t know what was going on. When I was brought before a Judge of City of Middletown court I was surprised to be informed that I was being charged with Grand Larceny, and False Impersonation charge. Then I was sent to jail, and told to appear again 7 days later. Then following court date the bogus charge of Grand Larceny, which they only put to justify stopping me in first place, was dropped. And they left me to face the False Impersonation. I was offered 90 days for the offense of giving the authorities the wrong name which I declined before bailing out after 2 weeks.

When I was being held within the belly of the beast on trumped up charges, to my rescue came the journalist at Press TV based in Iran. My relationship with powerful & progressive news outfit began in April of 2012, and prior to that I had discussions with their journalist regarding current events internationally. I developed a positive rapport with some of them, and as a result was invited to travel to Iran to discuss the impact of Hollywood in stereotyping Muslims, Iranians and African people. From January 15th through 18th, 2013, I was a featured interviewee for the Press TV documentary “The Façade of the American Dream”. And prior to my date of departure to Iran, Lifetime television released a television bio-picture called “Betty & Coretta” which was a sensationalistic misrepresentation of my grandparents, my mother and me. This film aside from being poorly acted, and shallow in depth also threatened to inflame old controversies, and open unhealed wounds and to remind the public of sad outcomes without ever identifying B.O.S.S.I., the C.I.A., F.B.I. and other forces that set the climate for my grandfather’s assassination, and made my family a long-suffering casualty of COINTELPRO, and other anti-Black repression programs. Naturally, anything done to stir up old hatred of The Shabazz Family will impact me as the name-sake, and first male heir of Malcolm X, and whether I am high or low in fortunes does not exempt me from this reality.

The formula for a public assassination is: the character assassination before the physical assassination; so one has to be made killable before the eyes of the public in order for their eventual murder to then deemed justifiable. And when the time arrives for these hits to be carried out you’re not going to see a C.I.A. agent with a suit & tie, and a badge that says “C.I.A.” walk up to someone, and pull the trigger. What they will do is to out-source to local police departments in the region of their target, and to employ those that look like the target of interest to infiltrate the workings in order to set up the environment for the eventual assassination (character, physical/incarceration, exile) to take place.

For several months prior to my arrest in late January, 2013 I faced a pattern of harassment from law enforcement which is usually reserved for important figures. On Thursday, November 1, 2012 @ 11:53pm in the park circle area of Middletown, N.Y. I was stopped by officers of the Middletown Police Department, and given a ticket for “J-Walking” (crossing in the middle of the street), which then escalated into a “Disorderly Conduct” supposedly because of the exchange of words that I had with the officers. I told them that they couldn’t possibly be serious for writing me a “J-Walking ticket”, that I didn’t appreciate how they were treating me and that they shouldn’t be looking at me as less of a man because they were in police uniform. For this I was arrested, the officers stole the little amount of money that I had on me, they then stripped me and threw me in a freezing precinct cell for the remainder of that early morning. I was finally taken before the “Judge Steven Brockett” around 1:30pm. He gave me an unreasonable bail, and then ordered that I be remanded to the Orange county Jail.

This penalty may seem a bit extreme or harsh to most of you, but here is where it gets worse: On Tuesday, October 30th, exactly 2 nights prior to this incident, the same officer “J Berman” who wrote me the ticket for “J-Walking” & “Disorderly Conduct” stopped me coming from out of a store in the same area, and questioned me as to what I was doing.

I told him that I was coming out of the store. He asked to see what I bought which was a pack of sun flower seeds. I had actually just so happened to be eating a few while he was talking to me, and I spit one of the shells on the ground. At this point officer “J Berman” threatened to write me a ticket for littering. Needless to say, I was dumbfounded, but I went home that night.

Yet, it still doesn’t even begin there. I had an encounter with other officers of the Midletown Police Department one week prior to officer “J Berman’s” threats to write me a ticket for spitting a sun flower seed on the ground: I was coming out of a restaurant with my mother, and her friend. As the 3 of us entered the car to leave 2 police cars converged on our vehicle, and boxed us in. My mother was petrified. With guns drawn I was then ordered to step out of the back seat. I asked them why to which they replied that I had several warrants for my arrest. I told them that they were mistaken, but I still complied with their request. Humiliated in front of all on-lookers I was then thrown on the car while the officers ripped through my pockets. After they were done they said that it was my lucky day because I actually didn’t have any warrants at all, and so I was free to go! One of these officer’s name was “R. Ribeiro”…

You may wonder if it could possibly get any worse than this. Well, it does! Approximately 3 weeks prior to the public humiliation of my mother, and me by “R Ribeiro” and another officer of the Middletown Police Department I found myself subject to the discrimination & prejudice of Mayor Joseph M. Destefano of Middletown, N.Y. himself. A friend, and I went out to eat at a restaurant in Middletown, N.Y. which is owned by the Mayor, and to our surprise he appeared from nowhere and asked us to leave. When we inquired as to why he stated that officials of the Middletown Police Department told him not to let us patronize his establishment. Mind you that this goes without incident.

As I stand for the people, God-Willing, I would pray that the same people wouldn’t hesitate to stand for me. If these unjust & heinous actions are tolerated & allowed to be done to me without recourse, then no one is safe. Just as Huewy P Newton of the Black Panther Party stated that police are in the white community to protect & serve, yet occupy ours like a foreign troop… I tell you that we shouldn’t fall victim to the conditioning of feeling inferior or fearful at the presence of law enforcement for no apparent reason.

With that being said, I was not arrested by federal agents. I was taken in by a squad from the City of Middletown, N.Y.’s Police Department. I was not being held in an “undisclosed location” so to speak. I was actually being held in the Orange County Jail in Goshen, N.Y. However, from the time that I was booked at the precinct, to standing before a Judge the next day who told me to come back in 7 more, to being processed at the Orange County Jail and up until 7 days later I was not permitted to make any calls to notify anyone of my status; as though I had just been kidnapped from of the street.

Unfortunately, until this day my family hasn’t been fully abreast of my situation as I haven’t had the opportunity to properly consult with any of them. Dr. Randy Short who notified Press TV of my situation is a close comrade of mine who was on our delegation in Libya. Media reports from Press TV about my situation were not intended to create controversy. In reality, I have a few associates that are affiliated with this reputable International media outlet, and they had expected to meet with me in Iran. So when I disappeared, and rumors spread, the inability to get concise information from a credible source prompted them to rouse public attention on my behalf, for which I am grateful. In April of 2012 I had the opportunity to be a guest analyst/contributor on Press TV.

Quote 0 0
Quote 0 0

What's the Matter with Fusion Centers?

The hubs of the post 9/11 domestic intelligence system are the nation’s 72 “fusion centers.” 

Since 2003, with the assistance of Department of Homeland Security funding, these new data collection centers have been developed for the express purpose of “fusing” and analyzing information and surveillance from law enforcement, government entities, and private organizations. The 50 state-based and 22 urban fusion centers have been designated as the primary entities for analyzing Suspicious Activities Reports and sharing state and local terrorism-related information across the country and with federal agencies through the DHS’ Information Sharing Environment. 

Originally intended as terrorism-fighting tools, fusion centers soon adopted an “all crimes” and “all hazards” mission, and have become repositories of traditional criminal information. The Congressional Research Service reported in 2007 that this was necessary because local law enforcement agencies “often didn’t feel threatened by terrorism, nor did they think that their community would produce would-be terrorists.” Spurred by the availability of federal grants, a concept of policing (“predictive policing”) has emerged that is no longer primarily reactive and focused on solving crimes but on collecting evidence of crimes that may be about to be committed.

Above: a screenshot from the Illinois Homeland Security Information Network, listing at the bottom a "World Can't Wait" protest alongside terror threats (click to englarge)

A 2008 DHS Privacy Office review of fusion centers concluded that they presented risks to privacy because of ambiguous lines of authority, rules and oversight; the participation of the military and private sector; data mining; excessive secrecy; inaccurate or incomplete information; the dangers of mission creep.

The following year, Bruce Fein, a conservative constitutional lawyer and former Associate Deputy Attorney General in the Reagan administration, told Congress that fusion centers and Suspicious Activity Reports were worthy of the Soviet Union’s KGB and East Germany’s Stasi, and should be abandoned:

    To an intelligence agent, informant, or law enforcement officer, everything unconventional or unorthodox looks like at least a pre-embryonic terrorist danger.

Examples now abound of legitimate First Amendment activity being regarded by fusion centers as potential “terrorist danger.” For example, late in 2010, the Tennessee Fusion Center included on an Internet map detailing “terrorism events and other suspicious activity” the fact that the ACLU of Tennessee wrote a letter to school superintendents asking them to encourage schools to be supportive of all religious beliefs during the holiday season. A few months later, this Tennessee fusion center received the "Fusion Center of the Year" award from Janet Napolitano, head of DHS.

Early in 2011, plans for a Virginia-based mega fusion center run by the US Joint Special Operations Command came to light. This military targeting center would further blur lines of authority and merge data from the wide reaches of the “global war on terror” in a domestic-foreign cloud-computing network tied into “all elements of U.S. national security from the eavesdropping capabilities of the National Security Agency to Homeland Security’s border-monitoring databases. The computer is designed to sift through masses of information to track militant suspects across the globe” (Associated Press, January 9, 2011). The data would help the military target missile strikes and commando raids oversees, and would also “be used at times to advise domestic law enforcement in dealing with suspected terrorists inside the U.S.”

Check out our Resources page for more on fusion centers, including a detailed white paper and report.
Quote 0 0
see link for full story


Friday, May 03, 2013
State Cops Whale on Young Man With Epilepsy

     MAYS LANDING, N.J. (CN) - A New Jersey state trooper beat and pepper sprayed a young man with epilepsy in a dispute over nuts and bolts in a backyard car, the man's mother claims in court.
     The trooper pepper sprayed his mom too, for no more reason than she assaulted her disabled son, the mother says.
     Craig P. Williams and his parents, Brenda and Billy Williams Jr., sued New Jersey State Troopers S.M. Swift, N.J. Stavoli and J.J. Traini, in Atlantic County Court.
     Brenda says she called state police on the night of April 20, 2011 after Craig reported seeing three people hiding in tall grass behind their home.
     Trooper Swift arrived first.
     Swift found an unregistered car in the backyard and searched it after Brenda told him the car was a hobby for her son, whose epilepsy prevents him from driving.
     Craig, 23, got epilepsy as a result of serious brain trauma in a car accident in 2005.
     Trooper Swift found a bag of nuts and bolts in the car, and Craig told him what it was. Swift said that "it didn't look like that to him, and he ordered Craig to open the door," the family says in the complaint.
     It continues: "Craig began to explain that he had just painted the interior of the door, but that he could open the other side. At that point Trp. Swift exclaimed, 'There's a hard way and an easy way'. Swift then put Craig in a head lock and began dousing his face with pepper spray. Craig immediately recoiled, yelling about the burn and the inability to see. As Craig backed away from the trooper, Brenda began yelling, 'What are you doing'?, 'Why are you doing this?'
     "By this point, Craig had distanced himself approximately four feet from Trp. Swift, when Craig was sprayed a second time. Brenda screamed again, telling the trooper to stop and that 'He's got brain damage, he doesn't know what you're doing'. Craig, his hands now covering his eyes, began running toward the house to wash out the spray. By this time Craig's father, Billy, had appeared at the side door, having heard the screams outside. Brenda yelled to her husband that she had 'called the cops' and now 'this trooper sprayed Craig with pepper spray'.
     "Trp. Swift then yelled to Brenda and Billy that 'he swung at me - you saw him - he swung at me.' Brenda, crying and visibly shaken, turned and went back into her house to try and assist Craig. Trp. Swift stayed outside. When Brenda reached the inside of her home she called 911 reporting the assault on her son and telling the dispatcher that Craig was having trouble breathing after being sprayed with pepper spray although she didn't know why he had been."
     Things got worse when four other state police cars arrived.
     "Defendant Stavoli began kicking the front door, pounding it, while at the same time yelling, 'open the f-ing door', while Brenda remained on the 911 call," the complaint states. "Other troopers were also at the side door when Billy opened it. Troopers Swift, Stavoli, Traini and Cocking all rushed into the home demanding to know where Craig was. When told he was in the bathroom washing his eyes, Trp. Swift banged on the door and Craig opened it. At that point Swift rushed in, confronted Craig and punched him, while placing his leg behind Craig causing Craig to fall backwards hitting his head on the bathtub. Swift again sprayed Craig and both Brenda and Billy watched as Troopers Swift and Stavoli repeatedly punched Craig in the head and torso, Trp. Stavoli actually sitting on top of Craig while punching.
     "Brenda, stunned at the assault being perpetrated on her son, moved toward the bathroom screaming and pleading with the troopers to stop. As she approached the doorway, Trp. Traini pushed her in the chest causing her to fall into the spare bedroom. Traini then screamed that she was a 'lousy f-ing bitch', a 'horrible mother,' took hold of her and slammed her face into the door jamb of the spare bedroom. The trooper thereafter stomped on her foot, and brought her to the floor with the trooper landing on top of her. While Traini was screaming at Brenda to give him her 'f-ing arm' while Brenda was saying 'I can't, you have my arm pinned'."
     As Craig's father began filming the ordeal on his cell phone, "Stavoli ordered that he be immediately arrested for obstruction.
     "Ultimately, Craig was handcuffed on the bathroom floor, literally drug out of the house along the floor, down the steps and onto the cement and thrown into the back of the troop car. Craig was yelling for help from the back seat when troopers walked around, opened the door and struck him with a metal object. Thereafter, Stavoli came back to Craig and pulled his legs from the back seat making them extend to outside of the troop car. At that point he smashed the door on Craig's legs as Craig continued to scream for help while Stavoli laughed. Brenda and Billy were transported in a separate troop car," the complaint states.
     Craig was charged with resisting arrest, disorderly conduct and assaulting a police officer. His parents were charged with obstruction, forcing Craig "to expend the money of his parents for a criminal defense, resulting in dismissal of all criminal charges and a singular plea to a disorderly person's offense of obstruction. Plaintiff Craig P. William's factual basis for that charge was that he ran into his home," the complaint states.

Quote 0 0
see link for full story

 Undercover FBI employees bet, lost federal cash on OU games
Undercover FBI employees won and lost thousands of dollars during a gambling investigation of gambling operation, records show. The inquiry resulted in an indictment last month.
 May 6, 2013  
Undercover FBI employees bet, lost federal cash on OU games

The FBI used undercover employees to identify suspected bookies in Oklahoma and to gather evidence about a gambling website during a lengthy investigation.

The inquiry was known at one point as “Operation Bad Luck.”

Undercover employees would meet with bookie suspects at Oklahoma bingo halls, a doughnut shop, parking lots and restaurants to pay up or get paid, the records show.

Last month, 34 people were accused in an indictment in Oklahoma City federal court of operating an illegal sports bookmaking business known as Legendz Sports. Eight of the defendants are from Oklahoma.

“Legendz Sports solicited millions of illegal bets totaling over … one billion dollars on sports and sporting events from gamblers in the United States, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year,” grand jurors alleged in the indictment.

Legendz Sports had a call center in Panama, records show.

Betting on Sooner games was an FBI undercover employee who identified himself as “Matt” in recorded conversations with a suspect.

He reported winning $952 when he bet in October 2008 that OU would not beat Kansas by three touchdowns or more. OU won by only two touchdowns — 45-31. He lost $1,000, though, betting on the Texas-Missouri football game the same day.

The next week, he reported losing $735 betting against OU in the OU-Kansas State game. He reported losing another $1,050 on the Penn State-Ohio State game.

He reported losing $4,300 on bets on four football games in September 2008.

“Matt” worked undercover in both 2007 and 2008, records show. He signed up online with Legendz Sports on Feb. 1, 2008.

“Hey, any chance I can get one of the swimsuit calendars???” he asked a customer service representative in an online chat that day.

The representative replied: “We are all out of the calendars. They go pretty fast.”

Later that year, he did get the 2008 swimsuit calendar. It is now among the evidence in the case.

Another undercover employee, who called himself “Joey,” won big a couple times in 2008. He collected $5,643 from a bookie suspect in October that year and $10,600 in November, records show.

He paid the suspect $3,230, though, in December 2008, records show.

“Joey” reported the bookie suspect during the December 2008 meeting commented that, even though he was an OU fan, he “needed the Sooners to lose in order for him to break even on the season.”

The two agents asked the suspect if he knew of any public officials involved in illegal gambling, according to the report.

The suspect “stated that he knew of two police officers that currently bet on sports,” according to the report. There was no further detail.
Quote 0 0
see link for full story


Police Allegedly Beat a Woman for Filming another Beating


Baltimore police are under fire for allegedly beating a woman for recording them during a violent arrest.   The police are accused of beating the woman, smashing up her camera and telling her, “You want to film something b-tch? Film this!”  All of this is according to the woman’s claims, which are being presented in court right now.

Makia Smith has sued the Baltimore Police Department, Police Commissioner Anthony Batts and police Officers Nathan Church, William Pilkerton, Jr., Nathan Ulmer and Kenneth Campbell in Federal Court.

Smith says that she was stuck in traffic and saw officers attacking a defendant and arresting a young man at the same time.  She says that when she pulled out her camera, that’s when the officer came at her.

“Officer Church saw plaintiff filming the beating and ran at her,” the complaint states. “He scared her and she sat back in her vehicle. As he ran at her, he yelled, ‘You want to film something b***h? Film this!’

“Officer Church reached into plaintiff’s car and grabbed her telephone-camera out of her hand, threw it to the ground and destroyed it by smashing it with his foot.

Quote 0 0
can anyone help me find my missing tax dime?

couple reads for criminal justice consumers
see link for Department of Lost and Found


FBI agent's car stolen in Ozone Park with assault rifle and bulletproof vest
The items were located in the trunk. The robbery took place at the off-duty agent's home, where in July, thieves tried to break into the agent's red Lexus sedan.

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

An FBI agent had his personal vehicle stolen outside his home in South Ozone Park. Inside it were a bulletproof vest and an M-4 assault rifle.

An FBI agent’s personal vehicle — with an assault rifle in the trunk — was stolen outside his Queens home Tuesday night, law enforcement sources said.

The silver Toyota Camry went missing outside the off-duty agent’s home on 130th St. near Sutter Ave. in South Ozone Park around 8 p.m., sources said

The car had an M-4 assault rifle and a bulletproof vest in the trunk, a law enforcement source said.

It appears that the federal agent has faced some serious trouble on his Queens block before.

2nd story

see link for full story

FBI missing computers, weapons

July 18, 2001

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- An internal FBI review has turned up hundreds of stolen or missing firearms, including submachine guns, and laptop computers, including at least one containing classified information, the Justice Department announced Tuesday.

Attorney General John Ashcroft responded by asking the department's Inspector General to conduct a department-wide review of weapons and equipment inventories.

Nearly 500 weapons were missing, including rifles, pistols and submachine guns, officials said.
The FBI found 184 stolen or missing laptops, including one containing classified information from two closed investigations. Officials refused to identify which investigations were involved, but said they were two or three years old. FBI officials insist there is no evidence any investigation was compromised.

Two FBI officials also said the preliminary findings indicate possibly three other laptops also contained classified information, but they are still checking on that. Of the 13,000 laptops used by the FBI, they said 171 were missing and 13 were stolen.

3rd story

see link for full story

FBI Reports On Missing Laptops and Weapons

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

The FBI said that 160 laptop computers were lost or stolen in less than four years, including at least 10 that contained sensitive or classified information -- one of which held "personal identifying information on FBI personnel," according to a report released yesterday.

The bureau, which has struggled for years to improve its sloppy inventory procedures, also reported the same number of missing weapons -- 160 -- from February 2002 to September 2005. Those weapons included shotguns and submachine guns, according to the report by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine.

In addition to the 10 laptops that were confirmed to contain sensitive information, the FBI could not say whether 51 other computers may also contain secret data, the report said. Six were assigned to the counterintelligence division and a seventh belonged to the counterterrorism division. Both units routinely handle classified information.

"Without knowing the content of these lost and stolen laptops, it is impossible for the FBI to determine the extent of the damage these losses might have had on its operations or on national security," the report said.

The results are an improvement on findings in a similar audit in 2002, which reported that 354 weapons and 317 laptops were lost or stolen at the FBI over about two years. They follow the high-profile losses last year of laptops containing personal information from the Veterans Administration and the Internal Revenue Service.

In a statement yesterday, FBI Assistant Director John Miller emphasized that the report showed "significant progress in decreasing the rate of loss for weapons and laptops" at the FBI. The average number of laptops or guns that went missing dropped from about 12 per month to four per month for each category, according to the report.

But several lawmakers said they are still concerned about the FBI's difficulties in keeping track of weapons and sensitive data.

" 'Making progress' may seem like a win for the FBI, but it's unacceptable when you're talking about lost weapons and computers with sensitive information," said Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a frequent FBI critic.

The report acknowledged the FBI's improved loss rates, and said that "some weapons and laptops will inevitably be stolen or go missing" in a large law enforcement agency. But investigators said they were still troubled by the numbers of lost or stolen items and the haphazard record-keeping surrounding them.

The FBI maintains more than 52,000 weapons and 26,000 laptops, according to the report.

The FBI failed to report 20 percent of the missing weapons and 76 percent of the missing laptops to the Justice Department as required, the report found. In the case of stolen or lost weapons, the bureau even failed to enter the losses into its own criminal information database, the report said.

It also said that in four of the 10 confirmed cases involving missing laptops that contained sensitive data, FBI officials did not attempt to assess the potential damage to national security.

4th read

see link for full story

Three facing charges related to stolen FBI guns in Hattiesburg
July 15, 2012

JACKSON, Mississippi -- Three men are charged with stealing or possessing guns and other equipment taken from an FBI agent's government car while it was parked in front of his house.

Court records say that Cameron Undrae Eatmon, 19, broke into the car in Hattiesburg on June 6, took a submachine gun, an assault rifle, a shotgun and other equipment and gave the loot to Christopher Ryan Burkett, 18. Authorities say Burkett spread the weapons out on his bed, took a cellphone photograph and sent out sales pitches by text message.

5th read

FBI Agent Has Gun and Badge Stolen From Car

6th read

see link for full story

FBI SWAT Van Is Stolen, Stripped of Its Weapons
Crime: Truck is found burned after guns, other assault gear are taken in theft at Memphis hotel.
June 04, 1997|

MEMPHIS — An FBI SWAT van was stolen from a hotel parking lot, stripped of weapons, ammunition and assault gear and then burned, officials said Tuesday.

The gutted shell of the GMC Suburban was found in a poor industrial neighborhood in north Memphis, minus M-16 and MP-5 rifles, grenade launchers, tear gas equipment, ammunition, helmets and bulletproof vests with the FBI insignia.
Quote 0 0

Add a Website Forum to your website.

? ?
Copyright ? 2001-2004 Who?s A Rat. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.