1. We already know that Yemen had nothing to do with the Christmas false flag fake ‘terror attack’. Even if it did, though, there is no reason to get involved:
“The Saudis and the Yemeni central government have portrayed the Houthis as Iranian pawns, and the conflict has been defined as a proxy war between Tehran and Riyadh – yet the real roots of the civil war are buried in Yemen’s storied past, where the religious and political divisions that currently bedevil the regime in Sana’a, the capital city, have their origin.
In addition to the Houthi rebellion in the north, the central government faces a secessionist movement in the south, which has, up until now, largely confined its activities to peaceful protests and demonstrations. Yet the government has treated them in the same way it has confronted the Houthis: with violent repression. Recent demonstrations held by the separatists were met with brute force: eight newspapers were closed by the government for daring to report on the secessionists’ activities.
Naturally, the Yemeni government has every interest in portraying the southern secessionists as a conspiracy hatched by al-Qaeda, and the northern rebels as proxies for Iran – and the US is buying into it, big time, with $70 million in US military and “development” aid this year alone, and much more in the pipeline. Now that President Obama has pledged to “use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us, whether they are from Afghanistan or Pakistan, Yemen or Somalia, or anywhere where they are plotting attacks against the U.S. homeland,” the road is opened to a deepening US presence in that war-torn country, up to and including the large-scale presence of American troops.”
2. Of course they knew about him, since they trained him and set up the attack:
“CIA also knew about suspect”
3. Of course it is – ‘security kabuki’, anyone?
“Is aviation security mostly for show?”
5. “Security theater consists of security countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually improve security.
Such ripple effects are often connected to fear; visible measures such as armed guards and highly intrusive security measures may lead people to believe that there must be a real risk associated with their activity.
Security theater is a component of the culture of fear.”
5. Stein is such a bad faith hypocrite:
“Ben Stein Says Ron Paul Is Antisemitic for Calling US ‘Occupiers’”
6. What a surprise (the article has a fake, photo-shopped picture). Why don’t they just go ahead and torture him, and abandon all pretense of due process?
Insists Giving Detainee Legal Rights Will Make Interrogations ‘More Difficult’
Stripping Abdulmutallab’s legal rights would make it easier for the administration to interrogate him, Rep. King insisted, and they might be able to squeeze more “useful information” out of him if he didn’t have Miranda rights.
The legal basis for this would be unclear, as Abdulmutallab does not appear to have ever been in any country with which the US was at war, and his attack was not against a military target but rather a civilian aircraft.
Granting the military jurisdiction over him solely on the basis that it would be more convenient for the government would normally be a difficult task indeed, but as Abdulmutallab’s failed bombing has already been enough for officials to escalate a war in Yemen and talk of keeping Guantanamo Bay open, it may be somewhat trivial for the president to claim this power.”
7. Since Yemen had nothing to do with it, it’s not surprising they didn’t get warned:
“U.S. never shared suspicions about Abdulmutallab, minister says”
8. “Top Republican Myths about the Crotch Bomber Affair
I hear these on tv or from Reps. Pete Hoekstra and Peter King and Sen. Joe Lieberman.
1. President Obama did not speak publicly swiftly enough. In fact, Bush was silent for 9 days after the shoe bomber attack in 2001.
2. Bush would have tried Abdulmutallab as an enemy combatant. Well, he tried Richard Reid the shoe bomber in civilian courts.”
Fear makes people stupid.
Experts also state that America’s reaction to 9/11 – the “war on terror” – has been counterproductive for keeping us safe.
The report confirms what experts have been saying for years: the war on terror is actually weakening national security (see this, this and this).
As a press release about the study states:
“Terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors, and our analysis suggests that there is no battlefield solution to terrorism.”
And then there is torture. As president-elect of Psychologists for Social Responsibility, Roy Eidelson, points out – most Americans supported the use of torture because they were deceived into thinking that it works and was a necessary tool in a life-or-death war on terror.”
10. “A Grand Jury May Answer the Question: Who Is Accountable for a War Started on The False Claims That Iraq Had WMD?
In an interview this month in The Washington Post, the former UN chief nuclear weapons inspector and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate (2005), Mohamed ElBaradei, was asked why the United States got it so wrong on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. ElBaradei responded that he has discovered that the United States decision to go to war was based on regime change and not based on whether Iraq had WMDs. He asked: “How do you justify that almost a million innocent civilians have died as the price of getting rid of a dictator? Who is accountable for this at the end of the day, after it was found that there were no weapons of mass destruction?”
Perhaps a grand jury will answer his question on accountability. Pending in Washington at the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is a report and request to the grand jury that it conduct an investigation of the Bush Administration’s false and fraudulent statements that Iraq had sought uranium for a nuclear weapon. (See and click on attachment # 1 at the end of this article.) In that report I contend that said statements violated the criminal statutes 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 18 U.S.C. § 371 that prohibit making false and fraudulent statements to Congress and conspiring to obstruct the functions of Congress. My sending such a communication to the grand jury is not illegal. The statute that makes it a crime to attempt to influence a grand jury by writing or communicating to a grand juror, 18 U.S.C. § 1504, states: “Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the communication of a request to appear before the grand jury.” As explained later, the law clearly allows a grand jury to conduct its own independent investigations without the consent or participation of the Justice Department.
Although it would be preferable for the Justice Department to appoint an outside Special Counsel to prosecute President Bush and allow a regular jury to return a conviction in open court, the grand jury by conducting its own investigation without the consent or participation of the Justice Department and by returning an indictmentin open court could perhaps achieve the same result – preventing other unnecessary wars. As of December 19, there have been 4,360 American soldiers who have died in the war in Iraq and 31,606 American soldiers who have been wounded in action. Civilian casualties in Iraq have been much higher.
Such a public indictment by the grand jury acting independently of any branch of the government, as allowed under the above case of In Re Report & Recommendation of June 5, 1972 Grand Jury, would hold President Bush and his officials accountable for their conduct in starting a war based on the fraudulent premise that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.”