Bin Laden Death Script & the Needed Trigger for Next Step-Pakistan

Time to Talk about ‘Why & Why Now’ It has been over two weeks since the orchestrated ever-changing Bin Laden Death. The question of what happened remains the same except it doesn’t seem to matter any longer. The US media is done after making their initial splash, and the majority is left with one conclusion: the SOB is dead, and who gives a da… how it happened. Whether Osama held an AK-47 while using some damsel in distress as a shield, whether there was a real fight or not, whether it was really Osama’s body in an organic edible shell we fed to the endangered sharks, whether the full credit goes to the CIA or the White House or the Pentagon …no longer seems to matter. Dizzy-fying confusion induced by dozens and dozens of lies and discrepancies and denials has given way to post-adrenaline-rush exhaustion. The question of what happened has been classified as moot and irrelevant. Right or wrong I’ll leave that question behind, at least for now, and instead, go back to focus on the more important question- the question of ‘why and why now.’
As I stated during the first few days of covering the Bin Laden Death Script, when it comes to DC dirty politics, when it comes to the new world order machine, and when it comes to US presidents, timing is everything and there are no such things as coincidences:

Considering the mainstream media’s sensationalism and propaganda tactics and their cemented role as an extension of the establishment, one must step back and take in the entire landscape, the context, connections, and of course the timing. Only after that, after putting the pieces together instead of dumbly staring at the images spread before us by the media, we have a chance to get a grasp of the reality-facts; or at least a chance to come up with real questions.

In the past two weeks, after talking with many experts and sources, both nationally and internationally, Pakistan has been surfacing as the common thread holding the most rational explanation of ‘why and why now.’ Interestingly, I came across the following statement by Rep. Ron Paul during his interview on MSNBC’s Morning Joe:

“The helicopters that landed in Abbottabad won’t be the last to put American troops on the ground in Pakistan, I see the whole thing as a mess, and I think that we are going to be in Pakistan. I think that’s the next occupation and I fear it. I think it’s ridiculous, and I think our foreign policy is such that we don’t need to be doing this.”

I was planning to write a comprehensive piece based on information and analyses I have gathered from my solid intelligence and Pentagon sources. However, after watching the interview with Ron Paul (And he has his credible sources), I decided to go ahead and write a fairly quick commentary on why the question of ‘why and why now’ keeps pointing to Pakistan as the next probable occupation target for our never-dying neocon objective-makers. Actually the following is more of significant developments and a timeline than a subjective interpretation or commentary. I am going to put them together and have us look at the pattern and where these points point to, and that’s exactly what I meant by “one must step back and take in the entire landscape, the context, connections, and of course the timing.”
Let’s start with Project for the New American Century (PNAC) which was launched in 1997 and became known for leading the public campaign to oust Saddam Hussein both before and after the September 11 attacks. As many of my highly aware readers know, those neocons, their objectives and activities, never go away. They may change names or change a few front faces, but like a leech they always hold on to the system; the system they help put in place in the first place:

The blandly-named Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) – the brainchild of Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, neo-conservative foreign policy guru Robert Kagan, and former Bush administration official Dan Senor – has thus far kept a low profile; its only activity to this point has been to sponsor a conference pushing for a U.S. “surge” in Afghanistan.But some see FPI as a likely successor to Kristol’s and Kagan’s previous organisation, the now-defunct Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which they launched in 1997 and which became best known for leading the public campaign to oust former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein both before and after the Sep. 11 attacks.
…

So what’s their mission statement, and what have these neocons been cooking up with the new face, their new president, Obama? The following is from an article by Jim Lobe in 2009:

The mission statement opens by listing a familiar litany of threats to the U.S., including “rogue states,” “failed states,” “autocracies” and “terrorism”, but gives pride of place to the “challenges” posed by “rising and resurgent powers,” of which only China and Russia are named.
…FPI intends to make confrontation with China and Russia the centrepiece of its foreign policy stance. If this is the case, it would mark a return to the early days of the Bush administration, before 9/11, when Kristol’s Weekly Standard took the lead in attacking Washington for its alleged “appeasement” of Beijing… FPI has chosen to push for escalating the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan. The organisation’s first event, to be held here Mar. 31, will be a conference entitled “Afghanistan: Planning for Success”.
…

For now, this is what I want you to take from the above on Obama’s Neoconistic objectives: fiercely counter China-Russia when it comes to establishing US hegemony, especially in Central and South Asia, with emphasis on Afghanistan. Next, let’s look at the strategic importance of the same region for China [All emphasis mine]:
In order for China to sustain its status as the emerging economic superpower, it must take all the necessary steps required in order to have sufficient energy resources for the near future. According to Pakistani think tank, BrassTacks, Chinese interests in the Indian Ocean became visible in 2002, when they invested heavily and began work on the Gwadar Port, located in Baluchestan, a province of Pakistan.
The Gwadar Port has its benefits for both Pakistan and China. According to Abdus Sattar Ghazali, executive editor for American Muslim Perspective, “The cost benefits to China of using Gwadar as the port for western China’s imports and exports are as evident as the long-term economic benefits to Pakistan of Gwadar becoming a port for Chinese goods.” Not only does Gwadar enable China to fulfill its energy needs, but it will also provide a strategic military footprint in the Arabian Sea, which has the United States worried.
…
Okay, now you have Obama’s Neoconistic objectives with China as its main target and competitor, and you have China competing for the same strategic area, Pakistan, to fulfill its energy needs and establish a strategic footprint in the Arabian Sea, and in the middle of it, the point where US-China strategic objectives intersect: Pakistan.

In order to halt this, the globalists need to block China’s access to the Arabian Sea by way of Gwadar. According to BrassTacks, to do this, “there needs to be a ‘new Pakistan’ as indicated in Operation Enduring Turmoil.” Operation Enduring Turmoil is PNAC’s plan to disassemble Pakistan into three parts. According to a “game plan” drawn out by Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, in a 2006 article of the Armed Forces Journal, “Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier tribes would be reunited with their Afghan brethren [and] would also lose its Baluch territory to Free Baluchistan. The remaining ‘natural’ Pakistan would lie entirely east of the Indus, except for a westward spur near Karachi.” With this done, what was once the NWFP, a province of Pakistan, is now part of Afghanistan, and what was once Baluchistan, a province of Pakistan, is now its own state, Free Baluchistan. This would force China to impossibly go through Afghanistan and Free Baluchistan in order to reach the Arabian Sea. Such an arrangement would cut China’s route to the Arabian Sea.
…

Now, please focus on our three main actors- China, US and in the middle, the strategically important Pakistan. Let’s use our common sense minus logic-clouding details, and consider what happens when the strategically crucial actor in the middle starts straying away from one main actor and moving toward the other.
This is from November, 2009:

China has sent out an interesting signal ahead of US president Barack Obama’s scheduled visit to Beijing by offering a set of advanced fighter jets to Pakistan. It has agreed to sell $1.4 billion worth of jets to Islamabad days ahead of the planned visit of the US president Barack Obama to Shanghai and Beijing on November 15-18.
The move is expected to jolt the US administration as it works on notes and talking points for Obama’s meetings with Chinese leaders. He is expected to discuss Beijing’s relationship with India and its role in internal conflicts in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Beijing is keen to reduce US influence on Pakistan, which will make it easier for it to deal with India, sources said. Washington’s recent decision to extend massive financial assistance to Islamabad is seen in some quarters as a policy setback for China.
…

A year later, in October 2010, the following interesting perspective on how things were heating up between the US and Pakistan is published by Margolis:

The neoconservative far right in Washington and its media allies again claim Pakistan is a grave threat to US interests and to Israel. Pakistan must be declawed and dismembered, insist the neocons. Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is reportedly being targeted for seizure or elimination by US Special Forces. There is also talk in Washington of dividing Afghanistan into Pashtun, Tajik and Uzbek mini-states, as the US has done in Iraq, and perhaps Pakistan, as well. Little states are easier to rule or intimidate than big ones. Many Pakistanis believe the United States is bent on dismembering their nation. Some polls show Pakistanis now regard the United States as a greater enemy than India.
…

It is important to remember how Obama passed AIPAC neocons’ test on Pakistan during his presidential campaign in 2007. Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government,”If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will,” Obama said.
Now, let’s fast-forward to early April 2011:

Pakistan’s ambassador to China used a recent celebration of his country’s Republic Day to give a rhetoric-filled talk about Beijing-Islamabad relations. If March 23, 1940, was the day the Muslim League decided to establish Pakistan, then the anniversary would be a time to declare that relations with China will define the way forward. ‘We shall take our bilateral relations to new heights,’ Masood Khan proclaimed. [...] Pakistan has been moving into China’s sphere of influence for decades and the countries routinely refer to each other as ‘all-weather’ partners.
This year will mark the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations. ‘Even when I was there in 1981, ’82, I could see Chinese military factories going up,’ says Stephen Cohen, a Pakistan expert at the Brookings Institution. Now, Pakistan represents a major market for China’s nuclear and military technology. According to SIPRI, a Swedish think tank, over 40 per cent of Chinese arms exports go to Pakistan—the largest share of any country China sells to.”

Obviously Obama’s day in day out bombing of Pakistan, his ‘let’s drone the hell out of them’ policy, had backfired, producing the opposite effect for his Neoconistic global hegemony objectives. Now, things begin to really heat up; this is from April 17, 2011:

President Obama’s rhetoric in Delhi had no substance except to rile the Pakistanis. The Delhi card didn’t quite work. The Chinese Premier visited Islamabad and pledged $20 billion in investment in Pakistan during the next five years. How about them apples? The Pakistani retort is what it has always been we need “Friends Not Masters”.
Britain as a colonial power practiced “Divide and rule” pitting religious and ethnic differences in the Middle East to rule continents. Bhutto famously theorized that the post-colonial powers were working on a “unite and rule” strategy forcing Pakistan to work with India against China.
“The idea of becoming subservient to India is abhorrent and that of cooperation with India, with the object of promoting tension with China, equally repugnant.” Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.
…
Most Pakistanis don’t want closer relations with Washington–they want to build closer relations with Beijing, and work on creating the Muslim Union (similar to the European Union) in Central Asia. Links with Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey are key to the future of Pakistan.
Islamabad is moving ever closer to China, both militarily and economically– and that’s a fact Jack.
…

By mid April things start going downhill; very fast.

The transactional relationship between Washington and Islamabad is coming to an end. While US-Pakistani transactional relations are fraying at both ends, the opposite is true of Sino-Pakistani relations.
Pakistan supported China when she was recognized only by Albania, and built the bridge to the USA. This fact cannot be forgotten by the Chinese who mention it in every summit and mentioned it in this summit also
…
There is renewed energy to pace up the development of Gwadar Port to provide China a shorter route and easy excess to world markets to dispatch its goods to Europe and America.
“The Gwadar port project will transform Pakistan’s Navy into a force that can rival regional navies. The government of Pakistan has designated the port area as a “sensitive defense zone.” The Gwadar port will rank among the world’s largest deep-sea ports. The port provides China a strategic foothold in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean.
Located at the entrance of the Persian Gulf and about 460 kms from Karachi, Gwadar has had immense Geostrategic significance on many accounts. The continued unstable regional environment in the Persian Gulf in particular as a result of the Iran/Iraq war, the Gulf war and the emergence of the new Central Asian States has added to this importance. Considering the Geo-economic imperative of the regional changes, the ADB’s Ports Master Plan studies considered an alternate to the Persian Gulf Ports to capture the transit trade of the Central Asian Republic (CAR) as well as the trans-shipment trade of the region.
…

And finally, on April 27, according to my sources, the following catalyst prompts the Obama team to execute the Kill Osama Bin Laden Script. This is the pivotal point in the Bin Laden Death Operation Script as a catalyst for the soon to come Pakistan Occupation:

Pakistan is lobbying Afghan President Hamid Karzai against building a long-term strategic partnership with the United States, and urging him instead to look to Pakistan and its ally, China, for help in striking a peace deal with the Taliban and rebuilding the economy, according to Afghan officials.
…
Washington’’s relations with Pakistan have reached their lowest point in years following a series of missteps on both sides, and Pakistani officials say that they no longer have an incentive to follow the American lead in their own backyard, the report added.
“Pakistan is sole guarantor of its own interest,” said a senior Pakistani official, adding: “We”re not looking for anyone else to protect us, especially the US. If they”re leaving, they”re leaving and they should go.”
…

The next day, on April 28, , a senior Pakistani government official said that the Export-Import Bank of China will loan Pakistan $1.7 billion to develop a city-wide train system in the eastern city of Lahore.
Since the holes-filled and never-explained ‘kill or capture’ operation, the presidential PR machine, the US media and their extension guised under ‘alternative’ have been beating the war drums. After all, as with any wars of ours, public opinion must be shaped, and public backing must be garnered. This is one of the latest reflecting just that: 

After the killing of Usama bin Laden in Pakistan, few American voters believe that country is an ally of the United States in the war against terrorism. Moreover, most doubt Pakistan is worthy of continued U.S. foreign aid.
That’s according to a Fox News poll released Wednesday.
Nearly three out of four voters — 73 percent — say the United States should stop sending foreign aid until Pakistan demonstrates a deeper commitment to the war against terrorism. Some 19 percent would continue to provide funding.
…
With the discovery that bin Laden apparently had been living in Pakistan for years, the consensus is Pakistan is not a friend (74 percent). A small 16 percent minority of voters views Pakistan as a strong U.S. ally in the war against terrorism.
…

You must be thinking: Pakistan must have tons in their own dossier to expose US government duplicities, lies, and nefarious activities. So why have they been relatively silent in all this? Why don’t they open the flood gate on ‘facts’ surrounding Bin Laden, his supposed role in 9/11, his supposed journey since 9/11, and his supposed death recently? And I have an answer for that: neither party has played all their cards yet. Just take a look at how Gates has been playing both sides carefully while measuring the outcome of various factors in play:

Gates reiterated the accusation that elements within the Pakistani government knew about the location of Osama bin Laden and were keeping that information from the United States. Bin Laden was killed in a US raid earlier this month.
At the same time, Gates echoed comments by other officials, conceding that the US has absolutely no evidence to that effect and that it is “pure supposition on our part.” The repeated accusations, despite being based on “pure supposition” have done major damage to US-Pakistan ties, and have spawned calls from Congress to suspend all aid to Pakistan to punish them.
Gates, who attended the conference with Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen, also said that the US raid that killed bin Laden had “humiliated” the Pakistani government, and that they had “paid a price” for bin Laden’s presence. Mullen added that the US ability to attack Pakistan with impunity was “a humbling experience” for the Pakistani military.
…

The White House neocons are in the midst of age-old diplomatic games, bluffing, and hedging their bets. They have the ‘foreign & military aid’ card. They have the ‘ISI dirt files’ card. They have the ‘ultimate China leaning’ card. And of course, they have the ‘mighty power of preemptive occupation war’ card which is always blessed and supported by NATO and overlooked by their butlers in the UN.
China has its own set of cards; whether it is their biggest market for dumping goods, or carrying the US debt, or who knows what else. For now they are using the ‘talk’ card with no real strings attached:

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao assured his Pakistani counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani of China’s “all-weather friendship” on Wednesday, during a visit that sharply contrasted with anger between Washington and Islamabad.
“I wish to stress here that no matter what changes might take place in the international landscape, China and Pakistan will remain forever good neighbours, good friends, good partners and good brothers,” Wen told Gilani at the start of a meeting in central Beijing’s Great Hall of the People.

Suffice it to say that not all cards have been placed on the table. As the famous Kenny Rogers’ Gambler lyrics go:
You got to know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em,
Know when to walk away and know when to run.
You never count your money when you’re sittin’ at the table.
There’ll be time enough for countin’ when the dealin’s done.
As for us the people, we’ll be sitting and waiting for the three parties to conclude this stage of their global hegemony game. We’ll be reading and watching and listening to their PR machine in the media give us one concocted fantasy after another. As in all other wars of ours we will have zero to say, zilch to gain, and plenty to lose. They have the cards, and we are the piled up tokens on the table.
# # # #
This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

Tags: Afghanistan, Bin Laden Death, Bin Laden Death Timing, Boiling Frogs Post, Central Asia, China, Gwadar Port, neocons, New World Order, Obama, Osama Death Script, Pakistan, PNAC, Ron Paul, sibel edmonds, South Asia.

Posted in Uncategorized by Sibel Edmonds

1. May 20th, 2011 at 10:07 am
   
   Jon Gold Says:
   The United States pointing fingers at Pakistan is like Al Capone pointing fingers at Frank Nitti.
   http://911truthnews.com/death-of-bin-laden-may-distract-from-a-more-disturbing-story/
   http://911truthnews.com/scapegoating-the-pakistani-isi/
   Sibel, please read both… they are both extremely relevant to all of this.
   
2. May 20th, 2011 at 11:08 am
   
   Bill Bergman Says:
   Things appear to be heating up on this score, e.g.
   http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110520/wl_nm/us_pakistan_blast
   It seems like we have to read mainstream news with two eyeballs, one eyeball taking it for granted that they are trying to tell the truth, and the other eyeball considering how and why they might be lying to us, and then putting the messages from both eyeballs together in our brains, and try to make sense out of it.
   
3. May 20th, 2011 at 12:09 pm
   
   yoshi Says:
   For those of you here who think that Ron Paul will be the answer to Obama, consider some points.
   We live in a hypervigilant world (thanks largely to MSM and govt. conditioning). We must defeat the terrorists! We must protect the Homeland at all costs! Also, politicians being what they are (with some rare exceptions), can you can name one national name that would dare to oppose that mentality?
   Set aside the dump-the-Fed-and-fire-Bernanke stuff for a moment. What other examples has Paul done to really differeniate himself from the neocons? No, cable news soundbites don’t count. I’m talking about actual hearings or bills that he’s introduced that have been passed and signed into law.
   Answer? He doesn’t have any.
   If he really opposes the wars that we’re in, why doesn’t he hold a press conference and announce that until we withdraw from said wars, he won’t pay his taxes? Why doesn’t he take a taypayer-funded “Congressional delegation” trip to Gaza to show the world what our “Israeli aid” is really doing there? Why doesn’t he publically back Ken O’Keefe and his efforts to finally bring peace to the Midddle East? Why doesn’t he stand up to Obama and say that he’s using terrorist tactics to “stop terrorism” which is only making it worse?
   Because here politicians don’t stand up to AIPAC. When most members of the House signed a letter pleding their “loyal support” to Israel, did Paul sign it as well? Just making appearances on “Hardball” or some neocon think tank that C-SPAN decides to show really means nothing.
   This tell me that his “campaign strategists” want him to be everything to everybody. He’s not a Democrat, but he’s also not your typical neocon. What does THAT mean?
   Before going into the House, Paul was a Naval flight surgeon. This means that he was under Tri-Care (the military’s national health care). Now, he’s under govt. national health care. I’ve never heard him say that health care is a human right. Coming from a doctor, that’s frankly really disappointing. Why is he entitled to the best care possible but I’m not?
   IMO, Paul has no chance. Millions will vote for Obama because they’re conditioned to think that he’s the lesser of two evils. So that makes it ok. The other thing is that not all but many just don’t care any more. If that’s not true, then we’d have daily millions-in-the-streets protests that the MSM couldn’t avoid talking about. What else could it be?
   
4. May 20th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
   
   Blackflag Says:
   Sibel,
   I will re-review your post in more detail later, but off the top of my head….
   I would suggest rather that Iran is the center piece of the geo-political play here.
   The invasion of Iraq does not support the isolation tactics over China. I cannot connect this dot directly to a China play.
   However, Iraq invasion specifically connects the dot to an Iranian play.
   With Pakistan, Iran is totally surrounded by America -
   -bases (and troops?) in Turkmenistan
   -NATO ally Turkey on one border
   -US-occupied Iraq on one border
   -US-occupied Afghanistan on one border
   -(maybe) US-occupied Pakistan on one border
   -Arabian sea full of US carriers.
   Iran has no outs.
   Now, it could be argued that Iran is a sub-play in a large China play….
   
5. May 20th, 2011 at 1:41 pm
   
   Blackflag Says:
   Further,
   Iran has been a oozing sore since Truman. It was also the first country that Eisenhower doctrine (you are either with us or against us) was applied.
   The overthrow of the Shah significantly disrupted American geo-political position as Iran was one of the two cornerstones of the US projection of power in the region (the other being Israel).
   I think this game over Iran has been in the works since Reagan took office in 1980’s.
   
6. May 20th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
   
   Sibel Edmonds Says:
   @Bill: Many thanks for the link; fits well.
   @Jon: I’ll check them out later today; thanks.
   @Blackflag: Have you seen the headlines today on 9/11 suit against Iran? Interesting, ey?!
   @Yoshi: Thanks for sharing, but I disagree with you. He is the only chance I see; currently.
   

Reality Check: The Profound Hypocrisy of President Obama’s Speech on the Middle East

By Brian Becker and Mara Verheyden-Hilliard

President Obama took to the airwaves today to discuss the revolts and conflicts spreading throughout the Middle East. The U.S. dominance over this strategic and oil-rich region has been the pivot of U.S. foreign policy for decades. Utilizing a system of proxy and client regimes, in addition to its own vast military forces in the region, the United States has supported a network of brutal dictatorships and the Israeli regime for decades.

Now that system of imperial control has been shaken by the popular risings that started in Tunisia and spread to Egypt and elsewhere, the Obama administration spoke today at the U.S. State Department as part of an effort to reassert U.S. leadership over the swiftly changing region.

Using the rhetoric of democracy and freedom to mask the responsibility of U.S. imperialism in the enduring oppression and suffering of the peoples of the Middle East, President Obama’s speech was a demonstration of profound hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy: President Obama said that the “greatest untapped resource in the Middle East and North Africa is the talent of its people.”

Reality: The U.S. strategy is based on control of the Middle East’s most coveted resource: two-thirds of the world's known oil supply. The U.S. government has given billions of dollars and armed the most brutal dictatorships in the Middle East for decades, a practice fully continued by the Obama administration. The U.S. government never cut funds to the Mubarak dictatorship even while the regime murdered more than 850 peaceful protestors. More than 5,000 civilians in Egypt have been convicted and jailed since Jan. 25 following trials conducted by the Egyptian military. The United States continues to provide massive funding to Egypt's military in spite of the ongoing repression against the people.

Hypocrisy: President Obama stated, “it will be the policy of the United States to promote reform across the region, and to support transitions to democracy.”

Reality: The only governments in the Middle East that have been targeted for invasion, economic sanctions and overthrow by the U.S. government are those that pursue policies that are independent of U.S. economic, political and military control. The U.S. never imposed economic sanctions on the Mubarak dictatorship and only came out publicly against Mubarak when the tide of revolution had become irresistible. Likewise, the U.S. supports the brutal Saudi monarchy.

Hypocrisy: President Obama championed for the people of the Middle East the “basic rights to speak your mind and access information,” stating, “the truth cannot be hidden; and the legitimacy of governments will ultimately depend on active and informed citizens.”

Reality: The Obama administration has gone out of its way to punish those who would inform the public by shedding light on the activities of the U.S. government. Bradley Manning remains jailed with the threat of life in prison, having been held in brutal conditions that caused the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture to seek an investigation. The Justice Department is working at full speed to find a way to prosecute Julian Assange of Wikileaks for disclosing government documents to the public, many of which expose the U.S. role in the Middle East. The Obama administration has undertaken a major campaign more aggressive than any prior administration to criminally prosecute whistleblowers who expose the truth of illegal government actions.

Hypocrisy: President Obama stated: “The United States opposes the use of violence and repression against the people of the region.”

Reality: The United States under Obama is involved in the invasion, occupation, and bombings of four predominantly Muslim countries simultaneously: Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Pakistan. Moreover, the head of state who has been the single biggest violator of the basic human rights of Arab people and the perpetuator of violence in the region is George W. Bush, whose illegal invasion of Iraq cost the lives of more than one million people. The March 19, 2003, invasion was a war of aggression against a country that did not pose any threat to the United States or the people of the United States. The invasion and occupation of Iraq led to the deaths of more Arab people than have been killed by all the dictatorships in the region combined. President Obama today called Osama Bin Laden a mass murderer. September 11, 2001, was indeed a great crime that took the lives of thousands of innocent working people, but measured in order of the magnitude of victims killed, Bush’s crime of mass murder in Iraq is unmatched. George W. Bush has not been arrested for the mass killings of Iraqi people but is treated honorifically by the Obama administration.

Hypocrisy: In an effort to appease Arab public opinion, President Obama's speech made it appear as if the United States was insisting that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders. Obama stated, “precisely because of our friendship, it is important that we tell the truth: the status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace.”

Reality: Israel’s war against the Palestinian people would be impossible without U.S. support, which continues unabated. The single biggest recipient of U.S. foreign aid is the state of Israel, which uses the $3 billion it receives annually to lay siege to the people of Gaza, continue the illegal occupation of the West Bank and prevent the return of the families of the 750,000 Palestinians who were evicted from their homes and villages in historic Palestine in 1948. The United Nations in various resolutions has condemned the 1967 Israeli invasion and occupation of Gaza, the West Bank, and Syria’s Golan Heights. Far from imposing economic sanctions, President Obama has promised Israel a minimum of $30 billion in military aid over the next 10 years, thus functioning as a partner in the occupation. Obama’s speech also made it clear that the United States would support Israel retaining vast swaths of the West Bank. This is what he meant by referring to “land swaps.” In the coming days, Obama will have private meetings with Benjamin Netanyahu and will be a featured speaker at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference. He will undoubtedly reinforce the strong U.S.-Israeli military ties and U.S. financial support.

Hypocrisy: President Obama stated: “We support a set of universal rights. Those rights include free speech; the freedom of peaceful assembly; freedom of religion; equality for men and women under the rule of law; and the right to choose your own leaders – whether you live in Baghdad or Damascus; Sanaa or Tehran…. [W]e will continue to insist that universal rights apply to women as well as men.”

Reality: While the U.S. government – along with Britain and France (the former colonizers of the Middle East and Africa) – are bombing Libya with the latest high-tech bombs and missiles in the name of “protecting civilians” and “promoting democracy,” the Obama administration offered the most tepid pro-forma criticism of the Bahrain monarchy as it and the Saudi monarchy kill and imprison peaceful protestors in Bahrain. No sanctions have even been hinted at for Bahrain or Saudi Arabia. The Saudi monarchy is the ultimate negation of democracy, depriving women of all rights, depriving workers of the right to form unions and depriving all sectors of the population of any right to free speech, assembly or press. There has never been an election in Saudi Arabia. But the Saudi monarchy functions as a client of the U.S. government and, as such, is not targeted for economic sanctions or “regime change” as are the governments of Syria and Libya. The Bahrain monarchy likewise functions as a U.S. client and allows the U.S. Fifth Fleet to use Bahrain as its home port, which is why he referred to the monarchy as “a long-standing partner.”

Hypocrisy: President Obama denounced the Iranian government, stating that “we will continue to insist that the Iranian people deserve their universal rights,” and condemned what he called Iran’s “illicit nuclear program.”

Reality: He failed to mention that it was the CIA along with its British counterpart that staged the overthrow of Iran’s democratic government in 1953 and reinstated the Shah’s monarchy. They overthrew Iran’s democracy when Iran nationalized its own oil from AIOC/British Petroleum. The U.S. only broke relations with the Iranian government when the Shah’s dictatorship was overthrown by a populist national revolution. Regarding nuclear weapons, the Israeli government has refused to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and has accumulated 200 “illicit” nuclear weapons. Of course, the United States has thousands of nuclear weapons and remains the only country to have used nuclear weapons, destroying Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

Hypocrisy: President Obama told the world that the United States shares the goals of the Arab revolution, that “repression will fail, that tyrants will fall, and that every man and woman is endowed with certain inalienable rights.”

Reality: The U.S. government, whether it is led by Democrats or Republicans, views the oil-rich Middle East through the lens of empire. Operating through a network of proxy regimes including Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Mubarak dictatorship in Egypt, the Shah of Iran until his overthrow in 1979, and other regimes in the region – and supplemented by tens of thousands of U.S. troops positioned in U.S. bases throughout the region and on aircraft carriers – the United States aims to dominate and control a region that possesses two-thirds of the world’s known oil supply. It has and continues to finance a network of brutal client dictatorships, and it has funded the Israeli war machine and staged repeated invasions, bombing campaigns, and occupations against the people of the region.

Legal threat to coalcares.org (THE YES MEN) from Peabody Energy

The following letter has been sent to lawyers for Peabody Energy in response to their threat:

Dear Andrew Baum, Foley Lardner LLP, and Peabody Energy,

Thank you for your thoughtful letter demanding that we remove Peabody’s name from www.coalcares.org and cease falsely suggesting that Peabody cares about kids made sick by coal.

Your threat, although entirely baseless (see this response, and the EFF's blog post later today), did make us realize one thing: that Peabody, despite being our country's largest coal producer, and one of the largest lobbyists against common-sense policy, accounts for a mere 17% of U.S. coal production. The remaining 83% comes from 28 other companies, who are, every bit as much as Peabody, giving kids asthma attacks and other illnesses.

As even you may agree, the root of the problem is not Peabody, but rather our system of subsidies, regulations, and lobbying that lets your whole industry continue its lethal work. To make this clear, we have changed every instance of the word “Peabody” on www.coalcares.org to a rotating selection of the names of other large U.S. coal producers who, like Peabody, also need to be stopped from killing kids.

Very truly yours,
Coal is Killing Kids and the Yes Lab
coalcares@yeslab.org, (314) 472-5539

P.S. You suggest in your letter that “Peabody has a First Amendment right not to be involved with the dissemination of a message with which it does not agree,” a statement which, while completely untrue, does recall the World Resources Institute’s longstanding demand that you cease falsely attributing to them the nonsense statistic that “for every 10-fold increase in per-capita energy use, individuals live 10 years longer.” As the WRI notes:

First, WRI has never made such an assertion and has never done analysis to that effect. Second, this conclusion ignores critical factors related to energy production and human health. WRI’s longstanding support for a global transition to cleaner, low-carbon energy is well-documented.
We would be grateful if you would stop misquoting WRI and issue a corrective statement within the next 24 hours.

Osama and the real Dalai Lama

By Peter Lee

LOS ANGELES - In reporting on remarks of the Dalai Lama during his visit to the University of California in Los Angeles on May 3, the LA Times ignited something of a media firestorm.

Under the headline, "Dalai Lama suggests Osama bin Laden's death was justified", Mitchell Landsberg wrote:

[I]n an appearance Tuesday at USC, [the Dalai Lama] appeared to suggest that the United States was justified in killing Osama bin Laden.

As a human being, Bin Laden may have deserved compassion and even forgiveness, the Dalai Lama said in answer to a question about the assassination of the al-Qaeda leader. But, he said, "Forgiveness doesn't mean forget what happened ... If something is serious and it is necessary to take

 

counter-measures, you have to take counter-measures." [1]

That started the ball rolling:

NPR: A Symbol Of Compassion, Dalai Lama Hints Bin Laden's Killing Was Justified. [2]

Stephen Jenkins at the Guardian: It's not so strange for a Buddhist to endorse killing; the Dalai Lama's attitude to Bin Laden's death should not be too surprising - Buddhism is not as pacifist as the West fantasizes [3]

AFP: Dalai Lama 'says bin Laden killing justified' [4]
Jeffrey Goldberg at the Atlantic: Dalai Lama Suggests Approval for Bin Laden Killing. [5]

Michael Crowley at Time: Clearly, the precise legalities involved in killing bin Laden are murky ... But unless you are opposed to capital punishment in the absolute, or believe that we are compelled to put on trial any terrorist we are able to capture, the morality is less complicated. Heck, even the Dalai Lama isn't bothered. [6]

Jay Leno's monologue: This is my favorite thing; in an address at USC the other day, the Dalai Lama seemed to suggest that killing Bin Laden was okay. That's when you know you're a bad guy, when the Dalai Lama's going, "I didn't see nothing." [7]

Actually, the real story was less-than-stellar reportage.

Landsberg did get one thing right:

The audience, which included some 3,000 USC students, responded to his message respectfully, even adoringly. Afterward, however, some complained that they had trouble understanding him; the Dalai Lama often speaks about thorny concepts in accented English, sometimes relying on a translator to fill in gaps.

Include Landsberg as one of the audience with an understanding problem. I know, because I was there.

During the question and answer following his remarks at the Galen Center, the Dalai Lama responded to an submitted question as to whether "ensuring justice was more important than being compassionate" in the case of the death of Osama bin Laden. Specifically, was it OK to celebrate his death because, in the official US formulation, he had been "brought to justice"?

This was not a particularly difficult question for the Dalai Lama, and he responded:

Now here must make distinction between actor and action. His actions of course destructive ... they must bring him into justice way. But actor - as human being, as human brother, we must show compassion, sense of concern for his well-being.

In other words, something along the lines of "love the sinner but hate the sin".

The "justice way", in this context, looks like the working of the criminal justice system in dealing with Bin Laden's actions, not some kind of morally endorsed retribution on Bin Laden's person.

Once the "justice way" formalities were out of the way, the Dalai Lama was definitely not suggesting that shooting Bin Laden in the head was a suitable exercise of compassion.

The Dalai Lama continued on in this vein for a couple minutes, saying:

The basis of forgiveness does not mean forget what happened ... but because of that action, keep ill-feeling toward that person, wrong.

So, celebrating Bin Laden's death, definitely wrong.

Things then got somewhat more ambiguous, at least for some listeners.

The Dalai Lama moved on from the actor to his or her actions, to clarify that compassion for Bin Laden didn't mean doing nothing about his destructive actions:

So towards action - destructive action - we must take appropriate action to stop that...if something serious and necessary to take counter-measures, you have to take countermeasures.

It was clear that the Dalai Lama considers flying airplanes into buildings filled with thousands of people as the kind of "destructive actions" that should be stopped with "counter-measures" if possible. Presumably, if Bin Laden had taken up a weapon and the SEALS had shot him in self-defense and in a "more in sorrow than in anger" kind of way, the Dalai Lama would also have approved.

However, it can be stated with a high degree of confidence that the Dalai Lama did not consider the killing of Bin Laden to be "justified" - ie deserved and appropriate punishment for his crimes.
In fact, the Dalai Lama addressed the Bin Laden issue in 2006. In an interview in Dharamsala, India - home to his exiled Tibetan government, he told the Alice Thomson of the UK's Daily Telegraph that terrorists must be treated humanely:

"Otherwise, the problem will escalate. If there is one Bin Laden killed today, soon there will be 10 Bin Ladens. Awesome. Ten Bin Ladens killed, the hatred is spread; 100 bombed, and 1,000 lose members of their families." [8]

After the kerfuffle, the Tibetan government in exile issued a flash news item summarizing the Dalai Lama's remarks. Concerning the Bin Laden question, it stated:

The first question was on His Holiness' emphasis on compassion as a basis of ethics. It asked whether in some situation ensuring justice is more important than being compassionate to the perpetrator of a crime. It referred to the news of the death of Osama Bin Laden and the celebrations of it by some, and asked where compassion fit in with this and ethics. In his response, His Holiness emphasized the need to find a distinction between the action and the actor.

He said in the case of Bin Laden, his action was of course destructive and the September 11 events killed thousands of people. So his action must be brought to justice, His Holiness said. But with the actor we must have compassion and a sense of concern, he added. His Holiness said therefore the counter measure, no matter what form it takes, has to be compassionate action. His Holiness referred to the basis of the practice of forgiveness saying that it, however, did not mean that one should forget what has been done. [9]

Not good enough for the Margherita Stancati of the Wall Street Journal's Chinarealtime blog, who sniffed:

The question explicitly referred to Osama bin Laden, who was killed Sunday night during a US raid in Pakistan's town of Abbottabad.

This placed the Dalai Lama - a man who famously frowns at the idea of killing mosquitoes - in the position of either having to compromise his unflinching commitment to non-violence or publicly declaring his compassion for the world's most wanted terrorist. In a poorly-orchestrated PR move, he managed to do both. [10]

Actually, the Dalai Lama made a point of stating he squashed an occasional mosquito as a way of saying that human forbearance has its limits, even for living Buddhas. Violence is an inevitable element of human existence; the goal is to understand its roots, appreciate its karmic costs, and take measures to reduce it.

Depending on one's degree of pessimism, one can either view the affair as evidence of further decline in standards of stenography and reportage, America's alarming need for enthusiastic, universal validation of its killing of Bin Laden, or a demonstration of the admirable efficiency of the world's press in exploiting the Dalai Lama's global popularity to create a faux controversy and fill a news hole.

Fortunately, the University of Southern California has now posted the Youtube video of the Dalai Lama's remarks, so interested viewers can judge for themselves.

The Bin Laden question appears at around the 45:00 mark. [11]

Notes
1. Dalai Lama suggests Osama bin Laden's death was justified, LA Times, May 4, 2011.
2. A Symbol Of Compassion, Dalai Lama Hints Bin Laden's Killing Was Justified, NPR, May 4, 2011.
3. It's not so strange for a Buddhist to endorse killing, Guardian, May 11, 2011.
4. Dalai Lama 'says bin Laden killing justified', AFP, May 4, 2011.
5. Dalai Lama Suggests Approval for Bin Laden Killing; Human Rights Watch Condemns, The Atlantic, May 4, 2011.
6. Why Was Bin Laden Shot?, Time, May 4, 2011.
7. Steven Tyler interview on Leno, M&C, May 7, 2011.
8. 'Westerners are too self-absorbed', Telegraph, Apr 1, 2011.
9. His Holiness Talks About Secular Ethics and Human Development at University of Southern California, Central Tibetan Administration (in exile), May 4, 2011.
10. Dalai Lama in bin Laden Quandary, Wall Street Journal, May 5, 2011.
11. Secular Ethics, Human Values and Society: The Dalai Lama at the USC Galen Center, YouTube, May 5, 2011.


Peter Lee writes on East and South Asian affairs and their intersection with US foreign policy.

Pakistani-Indian nuclear war seen as real possibility

With the breakdown of relations between Washington and Islamabad over recurring U.S. drone attacks inside Pakistan and the controversy over the U.S. Special Forces raid on Abbottabad that allegedly killed Osama Bin Laden, western intelligence agencies have concluded that a Pakistani-Indian nuclear exchange is now a distinct possibility.

Intelligence sources have also told WMR that Pakistan has recently updated its nuclear target list for India. The Indian high-technology city of Bangalore, which hosts a number of IT firms that provides outsourced jobs for U.S. companies for Indian employees,  has been added to Pakistan's list of targets to be hit in a first wave Pakistani pre-emptive to retaliatory nuclear attack.

India is expected to add some 50 million highly-skilled jobs to its work force in the next decade, with many of the jobs located in the Bangalore high-tech center. A nuclear attack by Pakistan on Bangalore would all but wipe out India's high-tech capabilities, dealing a severe blow to India's economy.

Pakistan still maintains its nuclear attack protocol of avoiding striking Indian cities with large Muslim populations.

Western defense officials are also concerned about new security guarantees given by China to Pakistan as a shield from either Indian or U.S. aggression. China could retaliate against both India and the U.S. Seventh Fleet in Asian waters if an attack by either country were launched against Pakistan.

British spy was assassinated by Mossad team

WMR's well-placed British sources report that Gareth Williams, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) employee who was seconded to the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI-6) and whose badly decomposed body was found stuffed into a sports bag in an MI-6 safe house in the Pimlico neighborhood of London on August 23, 2010, was a victim of a professional Mossad hit team.

The London Metropolitan Police and FBI are continuing to investigate Williams's death as "suspicious and unexplained." Williams's body was discovered in the security-protected MI-6 flat on Alderney Street, not far from MI-6 headquarters. The MI-6 safe house was protected by a fingerprint recognition and retinal scan access system, according to our sources. The safe house was registered to a labyrinth of MI-6 front companies to hide the identity of the actual owners of the residence. The safe house flat's owner was registered in the British Virgin Islands to a company called New Rodina, which was not listed in registered companies in the United Kingdom. The legal representative for New Rodina was a London law firm called Park Nelson, which has ceased to exist. WMR has learned that the safe house's actual owner was incorporated in the Dominican Republic.

Williams had worked for MI-6 on secondment from GCHQ for a year and he had recently visited the National Security Agency (NSA) before his body was discovered.

Immediately after Williams's body was discovered there were leaks to the British media that suggested that Williams died from a "sex game" that had gone wrong. Williams's body was embalmed before a full autopsy could be performed that would helped answer some of the questions raised by Williams's parents, who live in Wales. Leaks to the media of bizarre sexual activities that result in the "accidental" deaths of high-level intelligence and political murder victims represents a classic British intelligence ploy that is intended to ward off demands for full investigations by the next-of-kin.

Williams was a mathematics child prodigy who earned his first college degree in mathematics at age 17. He was one of GCHQ's top experts in encryption.

WMR has learned from our British intelligence sources that Williams was brought to MI-6 from GCHQ in Cheltenham to participate in a major investigation of Israeli Mossad penetration of GCHQ's and MI-6's encrypted communications networks, including those of GCHQ that process signals intelligence (SIGINT) intercepts of communications. Williams visited NSA a number of times to help the American SIGINT agency conduct an investigation of the extent to which Mossad was able to penetrate NSA systems via  interfaces, such as the Zircon instant messaging network, with GCHQ networks.

A "Mediterranean looking" young man and woman, believed to be between 20 and 30 years of age, are suspects in Williams's death, now believed by British police to have been due to poisoning. "Mediterranean" is a politically-correct code phrase used by British police to describe the Israeli Mossad hit team. The FBI uses a similar code phrase, "Middle Eastern-looking," to describe Israeli spies in the United States. The Mossad duo was last seen entering the MI-6 residence where Williams lived in July 2010.

Some British intelligence officials are privately fuming over the cover-up of the details of Williams's murder and Israel's involvement in it. They have promised to exact severe revenge on Israel in a "quiet manner" but one that will leave Tel Aviv under no doubt that it is in retaliation for Mossad's murder of one of Britain's ace intelligence officers.

As for NSA, the penetration of GCHQ by Mossad has endangered America's own encrypted signals intelligence and cyber-warfare networks with the possibility that Israel has had or continues to have access to America's most delicate classified information.

"Wag the Dog" is a training film for the Obama White House

President Obama anxiously kept the media and the world waiting on the evening of May 1 for what later turned out to be his announcement that he ordered a US Navy SEAL team to attack the compound of Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Obama claimed that the SEALs had shot and killed Bin Laden in a firefight.

The reason for the delay of Obama's announcement, according to WMR's sources, had nothing to do with national security but to alert Obama's student supporters at George Washington and Howard universities in Washington, DC to marshal a group of Obama fans to gather at Lafayette Park in front of the White House in a "flash mob" to stage a pep rally for Obama after his announcement. The "Wag the Dog"-inspired demonstration was planned by Obama's political adviser David Plouffe.

MS-NBC's dutiful bleating Obama sycophant, Rachel Maddow, showed a flash mob gathered in Lafayette Park shouting "USA! USA!" while she proceeded to lambast Pakistan for providing sanctuary to Bin Laden and other top Al Qaeda leaders. Of course, Maddow, was merely parroting the new neocon line that Pakistan must be the next nation to be rendered like a kosher chicken in the Maddow kitchen.

Plouffe, of course, arranged for brand new American flags to be distributed to the college students for the widely-televised "impromptu" demonstration. The new, just unfolded American flags appeared faster than the new Libyan royalist flags showed up in Benghazi, Libya after the uprising against Muammar Qaddafi.

The Obama vs. Osama television show continued into the weekend, with the Pentagon releasing a video, said to be captured, along with tera-bytes of other computer data, from Bin Laden's ramshackle lair in Abbottabad. But the White House originally said that Bin Laden's compound was a $1 million dollar "mansion." Obama's counter-terrorism adviser John O. Brennan, the former CIA official who helped craft the agency's kidnapping, rendition, and torture program, was responsible for much of the White House bombast, which later had to be recanted by White House press secretary Jay Carney. It was Brennan's firm, The Analysis Corporation, that had rifled through Obama's passport files at the State Department in January 2008. It now appears that it is Brennan who is Obama's current CIA control officer, the latest in a series of CIA handlers who have "run" Obama since his days at Occidental College in Los Angeles.

It is now apparent that the phony "hit" on Osama was known to only a few White House, CIA, and Pentagon officials, particularly the Air Force, which appears to be under the control of the cabal that is waging a devious information war on behalf of a continued war agenda by the Obama administration. Just two hours after Obama was said to have authorized the "hit" on Bin Laden, RAI television of Italy caught Obama handing a piece of paper to Air Force General Burke E. "Ed" Wilson at Cape Canaveral, Florida where the President landed after touring tornado-ravaged Alabama. After slipping Wilson the piece of paper, the general hands another piece of paper back to Obama. The fact that Obama was using a courier system, keeping whatever was on the pieces of paper away from the official White House communications systems, including the extremely limited access Planning and Decision Aid System (PDAS) that is used to support the operational capabilities to the Joint Staff at the Pentagon and and Combatant Commanders (COCOMs), indicates that Obama, the Air Force cabalists, and the CIA did not trust other elements of the Department of Defense and even the White House Communications Agency to be aware of the plans for Pakistan. Anyone with access to the White House communications systems would have "all-source" and "multi-compartmented" access and requisite security clearances. It is noteworthy that PDAS was used by Vice President Dick Cheney and a limited group of other officials to communicate during the 9/11 attacks.

 

A White House staff photograph issued after the assault on Bin Laden showed Air Force Brigadier General Marshall B. "Brad" Webb operating a laptop, which was said to be involved with providing a live video feed of the attack on Bin Laden's compound from the SEAL team in Pakistan. Webb is the assistant commanding general of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, also home to the Army's Civil Affairs & Psychological Operations Command, which, in the past, has supplied interns who helped craft news stories for CNN's Atlanta headquarters and National Public Radio in Washington.

Senior administration officials gathered in the White House Situation Room were shown intently looking at scenes of the attack on a video screen. Later, it was revealed that the live video feed had gone down prior to the photograph being taken. WMR has learned from news photographers in Washington that the Situation Room photograph was carefully stage-managed by White House staff. Standing among the senior administration officials was the gaunt figure of Brennan, a man who exudes as much warmth as the "cigarette smoking man" in the X-Files.

Webb is a 2008 graduate of the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in Greensboro, North Carolina. As previously reported in WMR's exposé of Obama and his family's past ties to the CIA, the CCL, according to CIA files, was linked to the CIA's Political Psychology Division, renamed the Political Psychology Center in 1984 by another individual with Obama, Webb, and Brennan in the Situation Room, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. In 1984, Gates was the deputy director for intelligence of the CIA.

CIA records show that past graduates of CCL training programs include former National Security Agency (NSA) director Admiral Noel Gayler, and William Verity, Jr., the former chairman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a director at Business International Corporation (BIC) in Manhattan. BIC, a known CIA front company, employed Obama for about a year after his graduation from Columbia in 1983. Verity became Secretary of Commerce in the Reagan administration after Malcolm Baldrige was stormed to death by his horse during a rodeo. CCL is also linked to the Tavistock Institute of London, the "group think" organization that specializes in the type of flash mob operation that took place outside of the White House on the evening of May 1, in addition to operations that support "sock puppet" inundation of Internet sites that question official government story lines.
The Tavistock Institute has long been linked with the CIA's MK-ULTRA and Projects BLUEBIRD and ARTICHOKE mind control and brain-washing operations, conducted by the CIA's top scientist for such matters, Dr. Sidney Gottlieb. Much of the records about MK-ULTRA and other CIA programs was destroyed on the order of CIA director Richard Helms in 1972. BLUEBIRD documents describe what the CIA was trying to accomplish with behavioral modification in the early 1950s: "Can we 'alter' a person’s personality? Can we devise a system for making unwilling subjects into willing agents and then transfer that control to untrained agency agents in the field by use of codes or identifying signs?" In other words, the movie "The Manchurian Candidate," was not purely a fictional account within the CIA's research and scientific community. One of Helms's five favorite universities for the CIA's behavioral science program was the University of Hawaii, the alma mater of Obama's mother, Kenyan father, and Indonesian step-father.
Obama and Brennan will undoubtedly gain further control over the Pentagon when Leon Panetta, an Obama loyalist, transfers from the CIA to the Secretary of Defense office. Another Obama loyalist is Air Force chief of staff, General Norton Schwartz, who may be tapped to become Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Neocons in Washington affectionately call the general, "Nortie" Schwartz. The former Air Force Secretary's chief adviser, John P. Wheeler III, was an integral part of the Air Force chain-of-command through his work on the Air Force's cyber-warfare and related information warfare programs. Wheeler continued his cyber-warfare work at MITRE Corporation after leaving the Pentagon.

Wheeler would have also worked with Dr. Lani Kass, a former Israeli Air Force officer who skyrocketed into a major position in the Air Force hierarchy. Whatever Wheeler knew about the de facto alternate Air Force chain of command went with him to the grave. Wheeler's body was discovered in a Wilmington, Delaware landfill on New Year's Eve last year. Although ruled a homicide, Wheeler's widow has accused Wilmington and Delaware law enforcement law enforcement officials of dragging their feet in the investigation of her husband's death. Delaware's Attorney General also happens to be the son of Vice President Biden, Joseph "Beau" Biden III.

The Lies of Abbottabad
The entire story of the raid on Abbottabad has been a series of lies and half-truths:

-- Bin Laden was first said to have resisted with weapons. It was later revealed that Bin Laden offered no  resistance. Bin Laden, or the man who may have served as his double in U.S. intelligence-produced video tapes since 2001, was also reported to have offerred to surrender before he was shot and killed.
-- According to Brennan, Bin Laden was said to have been buried at sea in accordance with Islamic traditions. Yet, Islamic scholars and clerics said if someone dies on land, they must be buried on land.
-- Obama administration officials stated that Pakistan was not informed of the operation beforehand. Yet Abbottabad residents reported that Pakistani government officials ordered residents of the military cantonment town to turn off their lights and remain indoors at the same time U.S. and Pakistani helicopters were first spotted by residents in the area.
-- SEAL team members and the CIA were not able to get a voice recording of "Bin Laden" before he was killed. Nor could a height be determined of Bin Laden because the strike force had no tape measure. After Brennan stated there was a 99.9 percent certainty that from DNA and other forensics that the man killed was Bin Laden, a military official at Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan, where the "Bin Laden" body was transported, said the degree of certainty was 95 percent. In other words, certainty decreased, not increased, after a more thorough post-mortem examination at Bagram. The comparative DNA used to identify Bin Laden was said to have been obtained from Bin Laden's sister, after she died from cancer. However, Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the house Intelligence Committee, later said DNA samples were used from a number of Bin Laden's relatives.
-- Facial recognition technology used on Bin Laden's corpse at Bagram drove the degree of certainty down to 90 percent.
-- Brennan stated that US forces also killed Bin Laden's son Khalid in the attack. The White House later said it was another Bin Laden son, Hamza, who was killed. Bin Laden's wife, Amal al-Sadeh, was reported by the White House to have been shot and killed while trying to shield Bin Laden. The story was later changed to her being shot in the leg while lunging at one of the SEAL team members.
-- Obama refused to release photos of Bin Laden's body, the burial at sea (from which a determination of the height of Bin Laden could be made since the body was said to have been buried in a simple shroud from a lower deck of the USS Carl Vinson, or the actual military assault on the compound.
-- The compound was originally reported to have been a $1 million mansion. The photographs after the attack show a much less stately abode, one that has been estimated at worth $250,000 or less. Local residents reported they never heard the occupants of the compound speak Bin Laden's native Arabic but only Pashto.

And why would a primarily Pashto-speaking household have a cable or dish satellite television feed that offered only Arabic-language news channels in a primarily Urdu- and Pashto-speaking community? A close look at the elderly "Bin Laden" channel surfing his television shows only Arabic language stations being offered for favorite selection, except for the rock music station DJTV from France, BBC World, and Al Jazeera English.


In addition to Al Jazeera Arabic, Bin Laden's channel surfing favorite options starting from 001 include BBC Arabic, Al Arabiya, Iqraa TV from Saudi Arabia, Al Hiwar from London, ANB TV from Lebanon, Dubai TV, Al Emarah from the UAE, MBC Maghreb, France 24 Arabic, Future TV from Lebanon, Al Anwar TV from Kuwait, Deutsche Welle Arabic, Al Alam from Iran, Sharjah TV, Qatar TV, Saudi 1 TV, Kuwait TV, Libya TV, Sudan TV, Oman TV, LBC Lebanon, and Al Wakrah TV from Qatar (Sports). Pakistan TV (PTV) offers an Arabic service but it was not one of Bin Laden's favorites. In fact, Bin Laden's channel options are more in keeping with those offered in the Gulf states, perhaps Qatar where the U.S. Central Command has a large base that includes psychological warfare elements.

What's next? Hint: You won't like the answer
After neocons and Obama faux liberal Democratic media dragoons began to blame Pakistan for harboring Bin Laden, these same circles began calling for sanctions on Pakistan, as well as seizing Pakistan's nuclear weapons so that they could not fall into the hands of "Al Qaeda" or Bin Laden sympathizers.

The dubious WikiLeaks had previously provided an indication of the staged raid on and killing of Bin Laden. On April 25, five days before the raid on Abbottabad, The Daily Telegraph (UK), known to pander to neocon interests, published an article stating that according to State Department cables it obtained from WikiLeaks, enhanced interrogation of 700 detainees at Guantanamo revealed that Al Qaeda would unleash a "nuclear hellstorm" on the West if Bin Laden were ever captured or assassinated. Five days later, after Bin Laden was killed, there were immediate concerns raised by neocons, many reflecting media talking points originating from Tel Aviv and New Delhi, about the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. The report had the added effect of legitimizing Brennan's rendition and torture program, since the information allegedly was derived form the use of torture. The case was being made for the "ticking nuclear bomb" scenario previously used to convince doubters of torture whether they would still be opposed to the technique if it meant that a ticking nuclear bomb could be located and disarmed.

The CIA and its predecessor, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), have long been involved in helping to produce movies in Hollywood to further the propaganda and mind control goals of the U.S. intelligence community and the Pentagon. Frank Wisner Sr., the creator of Project MOCKINGBIRD, pressed a number of Hollywood moguls into service to support the Cold War propaganda efforts of the CIA. Among those recruited for MOCKINGBIRD were producers Daryl Zanuck of 20th Century Fox, Howard Hughes of RKO,  and Cecille B. DeMille of Paramount, as well as director John Ford. "Predictive programming" was a major component of MOCKINGBIRD's propaganda operations. Many of Steven Spielberg's and Jerry Bruckheimer's movies point to the strong possibility that Wisner's Cold War operations in Hollywood continue to this day.

In fact, since 1996, the CIA has maintained an Entertainment Liaison Office that interfaces with Hollywood on film production. The office's first director was Chase Brandon, a 25-year veteran of the CIA's Clandestine Service who also happens to be a cousin of actor Tommy Lee Jones.
Alan Watt defines "predictive programming" as "the power of suggestion using the media or fiction to create a desired outcome." The WikiLeaks cables about an Al Qaeda nuclear attack was not the only predictive programming operation that occurred in April.

It should be recalled that on March 4, 2001, Fox aired an episode of the X Files spin-off, "The Lone Gunmen," in which the actual scenario for the 9/11 attacks was revealed. In the episode, a Boeing 727, en route to Boston, was hijacked by a shadowy group of U.S. government plotters intent on crashing the plane into the World Trade Center and blaming it on an anti-American despot to drag the United States into war and increase weapons sales. The plot was called "Scenario 12D." The Boeing had its autopilot commandeered from the ground. Unlike the actual 9/11 events, the control of the plane was restored at the last minute to the pilot. "The Lone Gunmen" series was canceled in June 2001.



On April 1, Hollywood released a movie, filmed in Canada and without the support of the Chicago Film Office, Chicago Police Department, or Illinois Film Office, called "Source Code." Film credits do thank the Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Tribune, both owned by neocon interests, for their assistance. David Axelrod, Obama's former political adviser who is currently running Obama's re-election campaign, is a former reporter and columnist for the Tribune. Axelrod reportedly continues to exercise political influence over the newspaper. The movie's theme is that a "lone wolf" terrorist builds a nuclear dirty bomb and is planning to detonate it in a white van parked in downtown Chicago with an estimated death count of 2 million people. Before the terrorist detonates the bomb, he blows up a morning Chicago commuter train after it departs the Glenbrook station, killing all aboard. The train bombing and dirty bomb are said to be one of a series of attacks in Chicago.

Although the doubled-decked commuter train  is called "CCR - Chicago Commuter Rail" - in the film, it is clearly a Chicago Metra commuter train. The bomb is detonated by two cell phones attached to a bomb. The plot is discovered by a top secret remote viewing program, code named "Beleaguered Castle" run out of Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada. One of the series of playing cards that is used to put the remote viewer in trance state is the Queen of Spades. In the film, "The Manchurian Candidate," the trigger card is the Queen of Diamonds. One of the passengers on the targeted commuter train, a professional comedian, is heard telling a joke about "Barack and Michelle."




The remote viewing program in "Source Code" is called "Beleaguered Castle." The Chicago Water Tower is often called "The Castle."
Among the computer files seized from Bin Laden's compound was intelligence that indicated that in February 2010, Al Qaeda was making plans to attack America's rail system. Attacks on rail hubs and rail lines and bridges were said by Homeland Security officials to be in the "aspirational phase."

Chicago appears to replacing New York as the "aspirational" target for the next false flag terrorist attack, one that will all but assure Obama's re-election.

Obama's former chief of staff, the mercurial Rahm Emanuel, will be sworn in as Mayor of Chicago on May 16. Emanuel's team will include a number of individuals who would relish the idea of a false flag terror attack in America's "Second City."



"Al Qaeda" files, Hollywood predictive programming, and dubious WikiLeaks cables setting the stage for an attack involving Chicago's rail transit system.
After spending $45 million in federal funds on the Project Shield, designed to cover Cook County with stationary and mobile security cameras, the cameras have been found not to work, according to a February 16 article in the Chicago Sun-Times. The FBI is supposedly investigating the security debacle.

Emanuel's police superintendent is Garry McCarthy, the deputy commissioner of operations of the New York Police Department under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. Before he became the police chief of Newark, New Jersey, McCarthy threatened two Palisades Interstate Parkway policemen for issuing his daughter a parking ticket in 2005. McCarthy and his wife were arrested after they confronted the officers who issued their daughter the ticket. McCarthy was also handcuffed during the confrontation withe the two officers. McCarthy and his wife were later convicted for obstruction of traffic during their melee with the police officers. McCarthy's bombast certainly matches that of Emanuel.

Emanuel's head the Chicago Office of Emergency Management and Communications is Gary Schenkel, a 29-year veteran of the Marine Corps. According to the December 23, 1999, Chicago Sun-Times, Schenkel, a sharpshooter, "was one of 80 Marines spending three days in Chicago touring bridges and sewers as they studied how to work in urban combat zones" in 1998. The Chicago operation was part of the Marine's "Urban Warrior Advanced Warfighting Experiment." Schenkel took part in similar exercises during the late 1990s in Oakland-Alameda, California; Jacksonville, Florida; New York City; and Charleston, South Carolina. Schenkel headed up the Federal Protective Service (FPS), part of the Department of Homeland Security, in the George W. Bush administration. During his tenure as chief of the FPS, agents of the Government Accountability Office were able to sneak bomb making components into federal buildings with security levels just below those implemented for the White House.

William Daley, the brother of outgoing Mayor Richard Daley, is serving as White House chief of staff. Presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett, who was born in 1956 in Shiraz, Iran. Her father, William Bowman, a geneticist and pathologist, is believed by some Iran experts to have been a CIA clandestine services officer. The Bowmans moved from Shiraz to London in 1961 and to Chicago in 1963. Shiraz was a hotbed of support for Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq, ousted by the CIA in 1953 in Operation Ajax.

Dr. Bowman was reportedly part of a U.S. program that sent Americans to Iran to help with economic development, a program that is similar to the CIA program that saw Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, providing economic assistance and training to Indonesians following the 1965 CIA coup against President Sukarno. In the case of Bowman, he and the Americans were likely providing more than assistance to Iranians. Shiraz was not only a center of support for ousted Prime Minister Mossadeq but also a major center of activity for Iran's Tudeh (Communist) Party, which called for nationalization of Iran's oil industry. A decade before Stanley Ann Dunham was helping to finger Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) members for Indonesian army death squads, Bowman, possibly assisted by his wife, were in a location where Tudeh and pro-Mossadeq forces could also be identified for the dreaded Iranian secret police, the SAVAK, which set up shop with assistance from the CIA and Mossad in 1957. Nemazee, a supporter of the Shah, was born in India to Iranian parents and was a resident of Washington, DC in the late 1940s and early 1950s.

Bowman's cover was the Nemazee Hospital established in Shiraz by Mohamed Nemazee. On August 29, 2009, Nemazee's son, Hassan Nemazee, chairman of Nemazee Capital and brother-in-law of Britain's ambassador to France, was arrested for defrauding Citibank and other banks of $292 million in loans. Nemazee Capital also had a past partnering agreement with AIG, the CIA-linked insurance giant that Obama arranged to bail out with federal money. Namazee was convicted last year of fraud was sentenced to 12 and a half years in prison. Hassan Nemazee was nominated by President Clinton to be U.S. ambassador to Argentina but Clinton suddenyl withdrew the nomination amid congressional opposition. Hassan Nemazee was a major donor to the presidential campaigns of John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and forked over $50,000 to President Obama's Inaugural Committee.

On April 14, 2011. WMR reported on a flurry of suspicious maritime liens filed agianst the U.S. Department of Treasury by leading Chicago and Illinois officials: "WMR has discovered that although less than 100 maritime liens had been filed in Cook County since 1985, since March 28 of this year, 11 maritime liens have been filed in Cook County against the U.S. Treasury Department.

Such a development could be easily explained away, except when examining the names of the maritime lien filers in the order that they were filed. It is not known who some of the individuals are who filed the liens since March 28, but they are also listed:

W. Smith (unknown affiliation)

Lisa Madigan (Attorney General of Illinois)

C. Wallace (unknown affiliation)

Richard Michael Daley (outgoing Mayor of Chicago)

Chicago Police Deptartment

Thomas G. Byrne (Commissioner of the Chicago Streets & Sanitation Department; ex-Chicago Police Department)

Catherine Hennessy (affiliation unknown, possibly Chicago Police Department)

Pat Quinn (Governor of Illinois)

Milton R. Sees (former Illinois Department of Transportation Secretary)

Jesse White (Secretary of State of Illinois)

Ernie Dannenberger (Director of Vehicle Service Department of the Illinois Secretary of State's office)

Filing maritime liens against the US Treasury Department might indicate the future movement of U.S. Navy and/or Coast Guard vessels into Chicago's ports. However, the question looms: As Rahm Emanuel prepares to take over as mayor of Chicago, why was there a sudden flurry of maritime liens filed by top city and state officials a few weeks after Emanuel captured the mayor's seat in the election?"
According to the "intelligence" gleaned from the captured "Al Qaeda" computer files from Abbottabad, attacks on the U.S. rail system were planned for September 11, 2011, the tenth anniversary of the plane attacks on the United States. A handwritten note from February 10, 2010, mentions the possibility of rail attacks on a train on a bridge on the the 10th anniversary of the September 11, 2001.

Chicago should remain ever-vigilant against its new mayor and his cronies, suspicious Israelis masquerading as art students, office/furniture movers, kiosk vendors, and those who speak fluent Arabic and who claim to be security consultants, as well as suspicious financial transactions, and security training exercises planned for the city, especially those involving the Chicago Transit Authority and Metra. The London 7/11 attacks on London transit targets were conducted during an anti-terrorism exercise. One thing that can be said about the architects of false flag terrorist attacks is that they seldom stray from their master playbook.