noworldsystem.com


Chertoff Linked to Body Scanner Manufacturer

Chertoff Linked to Body Scanner Manufacturer

Boston Globe
January 2, 2010

WASHINGTON – Since the attempted bombing of a US airliner on Christmas Day, former Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff has given dozens of media interviews touting the need for the federal government to buy more full-body scanners for airports.

What he has made little mention of is that the Chertoff Group, his security consulting agency, includes a client that manufactures the machines. Chertoff disclosed the relationship on a CNN program Wednesday, in response to a question.

An airport passengers’ rights group on Thursday criticized Chertoff’s use of his former government credentials to advocate for a product that benefits his clients.

“Mr. Chertoff should not be allowed to abuse the trust the public has placed in him as a former public servant to privately gain from the sale of full-body scanners under the pretense that the scanners would have detected this particular type of explosive,’’ said Kate Hanni, founder of FlyersRights.org, which opposes the use of the scanners.

Chertoff’s advocacy for the technology dates to his time in the Bush administration. In 2005, Homeland Security ordered the government’s first batch of the scanners – five from California-based Rapiscan Systems. Rapiscan is one of only two companies that make full-body scanners in accordance with current contract specifications required by the federal government.

Currently 40 body scanners are in use among 19 US airports. The number is expected to skyrocket, at least in part because of the Christmas Day incident. The Transportation Security Administration has said it will order 300 more machines.

In the summer, TSA purchased 150 more machines from Rapiscan with $25 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. Rapiscan was the only company that qualified for the contract because it had developed technology that performs the screening using a less-graphic body imaging system, which is also less controversial. (Since then, another company, L-3 Communications, has qualified for future contracts, but no new contracts have been awarded.)

Military-Industrial Complex Set To Make A Killing From Body Scanners

 



Chertoff: 9/11 Truth Is Akin To Holocaust Denial

Chertoff: 9/11 Truth Is Akin To Holocaust Denial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT5JZVUKPrs

 



REAL ID Back From The Dead

REAL ID Back From The Dead

Richard Esguerra
Electronic Frontier Foundation

August 24, 2009

In February, the opponents of REAL ID were given a bit of hope when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said that she wanted to repeal the REAL ID Act, the federal government’s failed plan to impose a national identification card through state driver’s licenses. But what has taken place since is no return to sanity, as political machinations have produced a cosmetic makeover called “PASS ID” that has revived the push for a national identification card.

The PASS ID Act (S. 1261) seeks to make many of the same ineffectual, dangerous changes the REAL ID Act attempted to impose. Fundamentally, PASS ID operates on the same flawed premise of REAL ID — that requiring various “identity documents” (and storing that information in databases for later access) will magically make state drivers’ licenses more legitimate, which will in turn improve national security.

Proponents seem to be blind to the systemic impotence of such an identification card scheme. Individuals originally motivated to obtain and use fake IDs will instead use fake identity documents to procure “real” drivers’ licenses. PASS ID creates new risks — it calls for the scanning and storage of copies of applicants’ identity documents (birth certificates, visas, etc.). These documents will be stored in databases that will become leaky honeypots of sensitive personal data, prime targets for malicious identity thieves or otherwise accessible by individuals authorized to obtain documents from the database. Despite some alterations to the scheme, PASS ID is still bad for privacy in many of the same ways the REAL ID was. And proponents of the national ID effort seem blissfully unaware of the creepy implications of a “papers please” mentality that may grow from the issuance of mandatory federal identification cards. Despite token provisions that claim to give states the freedom to issue non-federal identification cards, the card will be mandatory for most — the PASS ID Act seeks to require everyone to show the federally recognized ID for “any official purpose,” including boarding a plane or entering a federal building.

At the moment, health care reform is commanding tremendous attention and effort on the hill, so the PASS ID Act seems to be on the backburner for now. But after the August recess, anything can happen. So stay tuned for more about PASS ID and critical opportunities to flag your opposition to this flawed national ID scheme.

 



Obama To Launch North American Union Propaganda

Obama To Launch Propaganda Campaign For North American Union

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
July 23, 2009

A new report out of left leaning globalist think tank the Brookings Institute confirms an agenda to re-brand the long running effort to merge the US, Canada and Mexico into a Federal superstate akin to the European Union.

The report was highlighted by author Jerome Corsi, who points out that the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America has become much maligned owing to it’s quasi secretive advancement of a North American integration agenda.

“Two top Washington think-tanks have now formally suggested in writing that the Obama administration should rename the SPP as a public relations ploy to advance the North American integration agenda without drawing so much flak from those of us interested in preserving U.S. sovereignty,” Corsi writes in his Red Alert newsletter.

In the Brookings Institute report, titled “Toward a New Frontier: Improving the U.S.-Canadian Border”, Christopher Sands, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, where he specializes on North American economic integration, suggests the Obama administration should continue the agenda of the SPP, but under a new name.

“Despite evidence that NAFTA has been beneficial on balance to American business, workers, and consumers the argument remains vilified by many as an unwarranted move to embrace globalization.” Sands writes.

“President Obama recognized this on the campaign trail in 2008, when he called for the renegotiation of NAFTA’s provisions to correct flaws in the original agreement. As a result, the Obama administration will most likely rename the SPP.” Sands concludes.

The report also suggests focusing more on the integration of the US and Canada as a priority, before bringing Mexico into the equation.

Sands suggests the following three courses of action:

1. “President Obama should borrow from the lexicon of the European Union and announce that the United States will proceed in negotiations with its two neighbors ‘at two speeds,’ moving ahead more quickly where possible with its developed neighbor Canada, and allowing Mexico to proceed more slowly as necessary.”

2. “The Obama administration is likely to want to ‘press the reset button’ on the SPP, an unpopular though valuable initiative that has improved policy coordination between the United States and its neighbors.”

3. “The SPP must be re-branded to win any kind of consensus support. The Obama administration recognizes this, and could take a few tactical steps to make the SPP (or its eventual successor) work better and win broader support.”

Sands defines his vision of the re-branded SPP as an effort “to build a truly ‘new frontier’ on the northern border,” adding that “President Obama’s community organizing experience suits him well for the task ahead.”

Sands is deeply entrenched in the integration agenda, being a member of the Advisory Committee to the U.S. Section of The North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), organized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to consult with U.S. government officials in negotiations under the SPP.

The NACC is essentially an elite advisory board comprised of 30 senior private sector representatives of North American corporations that were selected by the American, Canadian and Mexican governments at the June 2006 trilateral meeting in Cancun, Mexico.

Last year, one month prior to the SPP summit in April, documents were uncovered relating how the NACC was formed as part of a public relations overhaul to counter critics of the SPP.

The documents detailed how, through the NACC, corporate representatives were urged to “humanize” North American integration, promote NAFTA success stories to employees and unions and evolve the harmonization agenda “without fueling protectionism”.

The move was seemingly a response to the continued exposition of the integration agenda, which led to representatives within Congress petitioning the government on the secretiveness of the SPP and multiple states introducing resolutions calling on their federal representatives to halt work on the so called “North American Union”.

Earlier this week we revealed that president Obama is scheduled to attend this year’s SPP meeting in Mexico in August 9-10, slated as the “North American Leader’s Summit”.

“The key to understanding what is going on with the SPP under the Obama administration is the realization that globalists always proceed under a stealth agenda,” Jerome Corsi comments.

“Globalists typically mask their real plans to produce regional governments out of trade agreements by changing names and designing different structures when initial attempts to destroy nation-states are exposed and stalled by citizens who are still patriotic enough to cherish what remains left of their national sovereignty.”

The North American Union News Archive

 



Australia To Enforce Mandatory Internet Censorship

Australia To Enforce Mandatory Chinese-Style Internet Censorship
Government to block “controversial” websites with universal national filter

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
October 29, 2008

The Australian government is set to impose Chinese-style Internet censorship by enforcing a universal national filter that will block websites deemed “controversial,” as part of a wider agenda to regulate the Internet according to free speech advocates.

A provision whereby Internet users could opt out of the filter by contacting their ISP has been stripped from the legislation, meaning the filter will be universal and mandatory.

The System Administrators Guild of Australia and Electronic Frontiers Australia have attacked the proposal, saying it will restrict web access, raise prices and slow internet traffic speeds.

The plan was first created as a way to combat child pornography and adult content, but could be extended to include controversial websites on euthanasia or anorexia,” reports the Australian Herald Sun.

Communications minister Stephen Conroy revealed the mandatory censorship to the Senate estimates committee as the Global Network Initiative, bringing together leading companies, human rights organisations, academics and investors, committed the technology firms to “protect the freedom of expression and privacy rights of their users”. (Complete black is white, up is down, double talk).

Human Rights Watch has condemned internet censorship, and argued to the US Senate “there is a real danger of a Virtual Curtain dividing the internet, much as the Iron Curtain did during the Cold War, because some governments fear the potential of the internet, (and) want to control it.”

Speaking from personal experience, not only are “controversial” websites blocked in China, meaning any website that is critical of the state, but every website the user attempts to visit first has to pass through the “great firewall,” causing the browser to hang and delay while it is checked against a government blacklist.

This causes excruciating delays, and the user experience is akin to being on a bad dial-up connection in the mid 1990’s. Even in the center of Shanghai with a fixed ethernet connection, the user experience is barely tolerable.

Not only are websites in China blocked, but e mails too are scanned for “controversial” words and blocked from being sent if they contain phrases related to politics or obscenities.

Googling for information on certain topics is also heavily restricted. While in China I tried to google “Bush Taiwan,” which resulted in Google.com ceasing to be accessible and my Internet connection was immediately terminated thereafter.

The Australian government will no doubt insist that their filter is in our best interests and is only designed to block child pornography, snuff films and other horrors, yet the system is completely pointless because it will not affect file sharing networks, which is the medium through which the vast majority of such material is distributed.

If we allow Australia to become the first “free” nation to impose Internet censorship, the snowball effect will only accelerate – the U.S. and the UK are next.

Indeed, Prime Minister Tony Blair called for Internet censorship last year.

In April 2007, Time magazine reported that researchers funded by the federal government want to shut down the internet and start over, citing the fact that at the moment there are loopholes in the system whereby users cannot be tracked and traced all the time. The projects echo moves we have previously reported on to clamp down on internet neutrality and even to designate a new form of the internet known as Internet 2.

Moves to regulate the web have increased over the last two years.

– In a display of bi-partisanship, there have been calls for all out mandatory ISP snooping on all US citizens by both Democrats and Republicans alike.

– In December 2006, Republican Senator John McCain tabled a proposal to introduce legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. It is well known that McCain has a distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned.

– During an appearance with his wife Barbara on Fox News in November 2006, George Bush senior slammed Internet bloggers for creating an “adversarial and ugly climate.”

– The White House’s own de-classified strategy for “winning the war on terror” targets Internet conspiracy theories as a recruiting ground for terrorists and threatens to “diminish” their influence.

– The Pentagon has also announced its effort to infiltrate the Internet and propagandize for the war on terror.

– In an October 2006 speech, Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff identified the web as a “terror training camp,” through which “disaffected people living in the United States” are developing “radical ideologies and potentially violent skills.” His solution is “intelligence fusion centers,” staffed by Homeland Security personnel which will are already in operation.

– The U.S. Government wants to force bloggers and online grassroots activists to register and regularly report their activities to Congress. Criminal charges including a possible jail term of up to one year could be the punishment for non-compliance.

– A landmark November 2006 legal case on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America and other global trade organizations sought to criminalize all Internet file sharing of any kind as copyright infringement, effectively shutting down the world wide web – and their argument was supported by the U.S. government.

– A landmark legal ruling in Sydney goes further than ever before in setting the trap door for the destruction of the Internet as we know it and the end of alternative news websites and blogs by creating the precedent that simply linking to other websites is breach of copyright and piracy.

– The European Union, led by former Stalinist John Reid, has also vowed to shut down “terrorists” who use the Internet to spread propaganda.

– The EU data retention bill, passed after much controversy and implemented in 2007, obliges telephone operators and internet service providers to store information on who called who and who emailed who for at least six months. Under this law, investigators in any EU country, and most bizarrely even in the US, can access EU citizens’ data on phone calls, sms’, emails and instant messaging services.

– The EU also proposed legislation that would prevent users from uploading any form of video without a license.

– The US government is also funding research into social networking sites and how to gather and store personal data published on them, according to the New Scientist magazine. “At the same time, US lawmakers are attempting to force the social networking sites themselves to control the amount and kind of information that people, particularly children, can put on the sites.”

Governments are furious that their ceaseless lies are being exposed in real time on the World Wide Web and have resolved to stifle, regulate and control what truly is the last outpost of real free speech in the world. Internet censorship is perhaps the most pertinent issue that freedom advocates should rally to combat over the course of the next few years, lest we allow a cyber-gag to be placed over our mouths and say goodbye to our last medium of free and open communication.

 

DARPA building search engine for video surveillance footage

Ars Technica
October 21, 2008

The government agency that birthed the Internet is developing a sophisticated search engine for video, and when complete will allow intelligence analysts to sift through live footage from spy drones, as well as thousands of hours worth of archived recordings, in order to spot a variety of selected events or behaviors. In the past month, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency announced nearly $20 million in total contracts for private firms to begin developing the system, which is slated to take until at least 2011 to complete.

According to a prospectus written in March but released only this month, the Video and Image Retrieval and Analysis Tool (VIRAT) will enable intel analysts to “rapidly find video content of interest from archives and provide alerts to the analyst of events of interest during live operations,” taking both conventional video and footage from infrared scanners as input. The VIRAT project is an effort to cope with a growing data glut that has taxed intelligence resources because of the need to have trained human personnel perform time- and labor-intensive review of recorded video.

The DARPA overview emphasizes that VIRAT will not be designed with “face recognition, gait recognition, human identification, or any form of biometrics” in mind. Rather, the system will search for classes of activities or events. A suggested partial list in the prospectus includes digging, loitering, exploding, shooting, smoking, following, shaking hand, exchanging objects, crawling under a car, breaking a window, and evading a checkpoint. As new sample clips are fed into the system, it will need to recognize the signature features of new classes of search terms.

Read Full Article Here

 

EU Set to Move ‘Internet of Things’ Closer to Reality

Daniel Taylor
Old-Thinker News
November 2, 2008

If the world-wide trend continues, ‘Web 3.0′ will be tightly monitored, and will become an unprecedented tool for surveillance. The “Internet of Things”, a digital representation of real world objects and people tagged with RFID chips, and increased censorship are two main themes for the future of the web.

The future of the internet, according to author and “web critic” Andrew Keen, will be monitored by “gatekeepers” to verify the accuracy of information posted on the web. The “Outlook 2009″ report from the November-December issue of The Futurist reports that,

“Internet entrepreneur Andrew Keen believes that the anonymity of today’s internet 2.0 will give way to a more open internet 3.0 in which third party gatekeepers monitor the information posted on Web sites to verify its accuracy.”

Keen stated during his early 2008 interview withThe Futurist that the internet, in its current form, has undermined mainline media and empowered untrustworthy “amateurs”, two trends that he wants reversed. “Rather than the empowerment of the amateur, Web 3.0 will show the resurgence of the professional,” states Keen.

Australia has now joined China in implementing mandatory internet censorship, furthering the trend towards a locked down and monitored web.

The Internet of Things

Now, the European Union has announced that it will pursue the main component of Web 3.0, the Internet of Things (IoT).

According to Viviane Reding, Commissioner for Information Society and Media for the EU, “The Internet of the future will radically change our society.” Ultimately, the EU is aiming to “lead the way” in the transformation to Web 3.0.

Reporting on the European Union’s pursuit of the IoT, iBLS reports,

“New technology applications will need ubiquitous Internet coverage. The Internet of Things means that wireless interaction between machines, vehicles, appliances, sensors and many other devices will take place using the Internet. It already makes electronic travel cards possible, and will allow mobile devices to exchange information to pay for things or get information from billboards (or streetlights).”

The Internet of Things consists of objects that are ‘tagged’ with Radio Frequency Identification Chips (RFID) that communicate their position, history, and other information to an RFID reader or wireless network. Most, if not all major computer companies and technology developers (HP, Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, etc.) are putting large amounts of time and money into the Internet of Things.

Cisco and Sun Microsystems have founded an alliance to promote the Internet of Things and further its implementation.

South Korea is at the forefront in implementing ubiquitous technology and the Internet of Things. An entire city, New Songdo, is being built in South Korea that fully utilizes the technology. Ubiquitous computing proponents in the United States admit that while a large portion of the technology is being developed in the U.S., it is being tested in South Korea where there are less traditional, ethical and social blockades to prevent its acceptance and use. As the New York Times reports

“Much of this technology was developed in U.S. research labs, but there are fewer social and regulatory obstacles to implementing them in Korea,” said Mr. Townsend [a research director at the Institute for the Future in Palo Alto, California], who consulted on Seoul’s own U-city plan, known as Digital Media City. ‘There is an historical expectation of less privacy. Korea is willing to put off the hard questions to take the early lead and set standards.’

An April 2008 report from the National Intelligence Council discussed the Internet of Things and its possible implications.

A timeline shown in the April 2008 NIC report

The report outlines uses for the technology:

“Sensor networks need not be connected to the Internet and indeed often reside in remote sites, vehicles, and buildings having no Internet connection. Smart dust is a term that some have used to express a vision of tiny, wireless-connected sensors; more recently, others use the term to describe any of several technologies that range from the size of a pack of gum to a pack of cigarettes, and that are widely available to system developers.

Ubiquitous positioning describes technologies for locating objects that may reside anywhere, including indoors and underground locations where satellite signals may be unavailable or otherwise inadequate.

Biometrics enables technology to recognize people and other living things, rather than inanimate objects. Connected everyday objects could recognize authorized users by means of fingerprint, voiceprint, iris scan, or other biometric technology.”

These trends towards internet censorship and the internet of things are undoubtedly going to continue, but restricting your free speech and violating your privacy will be harder with your outspoken resistance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I3T_kLCBAw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKZm34jsNHY

DARPA spies on analyst brains; hopes to offload image analysis to computers
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20..-image-analysis-to-computers.html

Security services want personal data from sites like Facebook

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/oct/15/terrorism-security

UK.gov says: Regulate the internet

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/government_internet_regulation/

 



Biden Predicts “International Crisis” Under Obama

Biden Predicts “International Crisis” Within First 6 Months Of Obama Presidency

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
October 20, 2008

In a striking moment of candor, Joe Biden tells us would-be president Obama will face “an international crisis within his first six months in power and he will need supporters to stand by him as he makes tough, and possibly unpopular, decisions,” Matthew Jaffe reports on ABC News’ Political Radar blog. Speaking at a Seattle fundraiser, Biden said this “test” would likely unfold in the Middle East or Russia. It would likely be coupled with the economy.

“Gird your loins,” Biden told the crowd. “We’re gonna win with your help, God willing, we’re gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It’s like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy.”

It is interesting Biden would mention Greek mythology to make his point. Augeas, one of the Argonauts, is best known for his stables, which housed the single greatest number of cattle in the country and had never been cleaned until the great hero Heracles came along. Apparently Biden would have us believe Obama is Heracles, the son of Zeus, know for his extraordinary strength, courage, ingenuity, and sexual prowess with both males and females. Biden also put the senator from Illinois in the same league as John F. Kennedy.

Biden said Obama, if elected, will do something extremely unpopular within the next year and will trend down in the polls. “I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, ‘Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?’ We’re gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I’m asking you now, I’m asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us,” said Biden.

 

What Will Obama’s “International Crisis” Be?

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
October 22, 2008

Joe Biden’s “guarantee” that an “international crisis” will unfold shortly after President Obama takes office conjures up several different possibilities, but it seems the likely outcome will revolve around an announcement that Iran has developed a nuclear bomb, prompting a potential military attack.

“It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy,” Biden told an audience in Seattle this past weekend.

“Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

The assured tone with which Biden delivered his forecast was staggeringly convincing, and left the observer in no doubt that there will be a major world crisis shortly after Obama takes office. “Mark my words, mark my words,” Biden stressed, adding that “tough” and “unpopular” foreign policy decisions will have to be made.

“I promise you it will occur,” Biden added, “As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it is going to happen.”

Biden’s use of the word “generated” is even more startling. One of the dictionary definitions we find for the word “generated” is “to bring into existence; cause to be; produce,” which begs the question, will this be another staged and manufactured crisis like the 9/11 attacks, which occurred less than 8 months after Bush took office?

Or will it be something even more serious, a nuclear conflagration involving Russia or Iran?

John McCain raised the specter of nuclear war yesterday when he warned that the United States faces “many challenges here at home, and many enemies abroad in this dangerous world,” before mentioning the 1962 Cuban Missile crisis.

Echoing Biden’s comments, McCain said the next president “won’t have time to get used to the office” and “I know how close we came to a nuclear war and I will not be a president that needs to be tested. I have been tested. Senator Obama has not.”

What is the test to which McCain and Biden refer, and how can they be so sure that it will arrive shortly after Obama takes office should he win the election as expected? What was Colin Powell referring to on Meet The Press when he said, “There’s going to be a crisis which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.”

The most likely scenario seems to revolve around Iran announcing, or the U.S. government claiming, that they are ready to build their first nuclear bomb.

Indeed, the Mossad front news outlet Debka File reported yesterday that “Iran will be ready to build its first bomb just one month after the next US president is sworn in.” The very next sentence of the report ties this in with Biden’s promise of an international crisis immediately after Obama takes office.

“DEBKAfile’s military sources cite the new US timeline: By late January, 2009, Iran will have accumulated enough low-grade enriched uranium (up to 5%) for its “break-out” to weapons grade (90%) material within a short time. For this, the Iranians have achieved the necessary technology. In February, they can move on to start building their first nuclear bomb,” according to the report.

Of course, the legitimacy of these claims are likely to be completely fabricated – the official U.S. National Intelligence Estimate concluded in December that Iran had suspended its nuclear weapons campaign in late 2003 – but the Israelis may be laying the groundwork for a propaganda offensive similar to the “weapons of mass destruction” scam that preceded the invasion of Iraq.

Will the military assault on Iran occur not under the highly unpopular Bush administration, as many had predicted, but under an Obama presidency? Riding into office on a wave of popular approval and support, Obama will have the political capital to get the country behind the attack if the threat of imminent danger is cited – or at least stand by and allow Israel to do the dirty work.

Will a nuclear flash point on the scale of the Cuban Missile Crisis turn out to be the “international crisis” that Biden so vehemently promised? Or will the event take on a different characteristic.

Bush exploited 9/11 to realize the pre-set agenda of his Neo-Con masters months after he was inaugurated and Bill Clinton seized upon the Oklahoma City Bombing shortly into his second term to expand federal power. What will Obama’s crisis be that enables him to offer his contribution to building the American police state?

– A terror attack, or a series of attacks, on major American cities, possibly involving crudely designed nuclear bombs or dirty bombs?

– A complete economic collapse and a new great depression leading to food riots and the imposition of martial law?

– A military showdown with Russia should Russia attempt to invade Georgia or another pro-U.S. Russian satellite country?

– A nuclear showdown with Russia should Russia start a nuclear war with Ukraine, as has been threatened?

– The necessity for another military attack on Afghanistan should the Taliban continue to regain control of the country?

– A confrontation with Venezuela should it be revealed that Hugo Chavez is receiving nuclear bomb technology from Russia or Iran?

– A new escalation in the Middle East should Israel deploy its nuclear arsenal to attack Iran, Syria Lebanon, or even Egypt?

Whatever the new “international crisis” that we have been guaranteed turns out to be, you can bet your bottom dollar that the response to it will ultimately lead to more carnage and a further assault on the fast-disappearing freedoms that we still enjoy – and in that sense under an Obama presidency, the more things “change,” the more they will stay the same.

 

National Intelligence Spooks Promise Terror Attack For New President
Both Clinton and Bush exploited bombings within first year of taking office, Obama or McCain likely to enjoy the same opportunity

Prison Planet
May 27, 2008

National intelligence spooks are all but promising that history will be repeated for a third time running, and the new President of the United States – likely Barack Obama or John McCain – will be welcomed into office by a terror attack that will occur within the first year of his tenure.

“When the next president takes office in January, he or she will likely receive an intelligence brief warning that Islamic terrorists will attempt to exploit the transition in power by planning an attack on America, intelligence experts say,” according to a report in the Washington Times.

“Islamic terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in February 1993, in Mr. Clinton’s second month as president. Al Qaeda’s Sept. 11 attacks came in the Bush presidency’s first year….The pattern is clear to some national security experts. Terrorists pay particular attention to a government in transition as the most opportune window to launch an attack.”

Naturally, the Washington Times article makes out as if a terror attack within the early stages of a new presidency is a bad thing, but both Clinton and Bush exploited terror in America to realize preconceived domestic and geopolitical agendas.

The 1993 World Trade Center bombing was an inside job from start to finish – it did not come as a “surprise” to the U.S. government since they ran the entire operation, having cooked the bomb for the “Islamic terrorists” that they had groomed for the attack.

In 1993 the FBI planted their informant, Emad A. Salem, within a radical Arab group in New York led by Ramzi Yousef. Salem was ordered to encourage the group to carry out a bombing targeting the World Trade Center’s twin towers. Under the illusion that the project was a sting operation, Salem asked the FBI for harmless dummy explosives which he would use to assemble the bomb and then pass on to the group. At this point the FBI cut Salem out of the loop and provided the group with real explosives, leading to the attack on February 26 that killed six and injured over a thousand people. The FBI’s failure to prevent the bombing was reported on by the New York Times in October 1993.

“Islamic terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in February 1993, in Mr. Clinton’s second month as president. Al Qaeda’s Sept. 11 attacks came in the Bush presidency’s first year….The pattern is clear to some national security experts. Terrorists pay particular attention to a government in transition as the most opportune window to launch an attack.”

Naturally, the Washington Times article makes out as if a terror attack within the early stages of a new presidency is a bad thing, but both Clinton and Bush exploited terror in America to realize preconceived domestic and geopolitical agendas.

Read Full Article Here

 

Powell Warns Of Coming Crisis “which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now”.
Echoes Biden comments that Obama will be tested in early days of his term

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
October 21, 2008

Colin Powell has made bizarre comments that echo the recent declaration by Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden that there will be an “international crisis” early into Barack Obama’s presidency that will test the new president by forcing him to make unpopular decisions.

Speaking on meet the press two days ago, Powell officially endorsed Obama and also made the following statement:

“The problems will always be there and there’s going to be a crisis which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.

So I think what the President has to start to do is to start using the power of the oval office and the power of his personality to convince the American people and convince the world that America is solid, that America is going to move forward, we are going to fix our economic problems, we’re going to meet out overseas obligations.”

Watch Powell make the comment at 2.35 into the following video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LDBOPcHpeo

Is Colin Powell referring to a theoretical crisis that could occur at any time? If so why does he choose a specific date, within the first two days after the inauguration? Also why does he refer to general problems that the new president will have to deal with in a separate context? We are already in an economic crisis, everyone knows that, so what new crisis is Powell talking about?

Read Full Article Here

 

Chertoff: Change In President Fuels Vulnerability

Bloomberg
October 21, 2008

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the U.S. may be vulnerable to a terrorist attack during the next six months, with violent groups more likely to try to take advantage of a new president and administration.

“Any period of transition creates a greater vulnerability, meaning there’s more likelihood of distraction,’’ Chertoff said in an interview. “You have to be concerned it will create an operational opportunity for terrorists.’’

Read Full Article Here

 

Albright Agrees with Biden: Obama Will Face Unexpected Test

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WD_EAe1N9-M

Biden “Predicted” 9/11 Attack On September 10, 2001
http://blacklistednews.com/news-1974-0-20-20–.html

Obama Wants U.S. Troop Surge In Afghanistan
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/se..AM.20081022.wcampaign_speech23

Low priority for Palestinian issue if Obama elected US president
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5655

 



Strip searches are now called “freedom searches”

Strip searches are now called “freedom searches”

TSA
September 21, 2008

TSA’s primary operational hub was re-named the Freedom Center, symbolizing the agency’s commitment to protecting the nation’s transportation systems against terrorist threats. The name was proposed by Todd Fox, security manager at Philadelphia International Airport, through an agency-wide contest asking TSA employees to submit names.

“The building houses a number of organizations whose main objective is to preserve the freedom of the American public. What better name would remind all of those who work in that building, and in the field, of that objective on a continuing basis.”

The Freedom Center houses many elements of the TSA, including the Federal Air Marshal Service/Office of Law Enforcement as well as other federal agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Defense. Located in Herndon, Va., it links all modes of transportation and coordinates with all homeland security agencies.

Read Full Article Here

 

Homeland Security, Sesame Style

DC Examiner
September 18, 2008

When it comes to securing the homeland, who better to help you sleep at night than various characters from the popular children’s show, “Sesame Street” … ?!?

Seriously.

In a move that will make Bush administration detractors bring back those duct tape jokes again, the Department of Homeland Security has partnered up with the famous children’s show.

“We all want our children to feel safe in this world,” said Meryl Chertoff, wife of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, at a ceremony held at the John Tyler Elementary School to announce the partnership. “And who better to do that than our Sesame Street friends, Grover and Rosita!”

“I always knew that [Mr. and Mrs. Chertoff] would be big muppet Muppett supporters!” said Sesame Workshop CEO Gary Knell.

As you can imagine, the partnership is aimed at children, and seeks to encourage family preparedness plans in the case of emergencies.

“Family preparedness is the cornerstone of personal and community readiness,” said Secretary Chertoff in a statement (he was scheduled to attend the event, but has been busy handling the aftermath of Hurricane Ike in Texas). “And we could not be more pleased to team up with Sesame Workshop.”

But perhaps Grover puts it best in his introductory remarks, published in a pamphlet titled, “Let’s Get Ready!”

“I, your furry, blue friend Grover, have a story to share. Are you wondering what it is about? I will give you an itty-bitty hint: It is about getting ready for emergencies! Oh boy, that was a big hint. Do you want to get ready, too? You do? Oh, I am so pleased. Then read this story with me, and let us get ready together!”

DHS Claims Power To Read/Copy Traveller’s Papers
http://www.eff.org/press/releases/2008/09