Monday, June 13, 2011
(CNSNews.com) – CIA Director Leon Panetta, who President Barack Obama has nominated to be secretary of Defense, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday that he believes the president can unilaterally use military force, without congressional authorization to “protect our national interests.”
Panetta’s claim of broad unilateral presidential power to initiate U.S. military action absent an attack or imminent threat to the United States came in response to a question from Sen. John McCain—who said he agreed with Panetta.
The U.S. is now involved militarily in Libya even though Congress has never authorized that involvement.
“Does it worry you if the Congress begins to tell the commander in chief as to exactly … what the president can or cannot do in any conflict?” asked McCain.
“Senator, I believe very strongly that the president has the constitutional power as commander in chief to take steps that he believes are necessary to protect this country and protect our national interests,” said Panetta. “And obviously, I think it’s important for presidents to consult, to have the advice of Congress. But in the end, I believe he has the constitutional power to do what he has to do to protect this country.”
Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution says Congress “shall have Power … to declare War, grant letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.” At the constitutional convention in 1787, James Madison of Virginia and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts proposed that the word “declare” war be inserted in place of “make” war in this passage so that it would leave the president the limited power to “repel sudden attacks.” Madison’s proposal was adopted.
Madison notes from the Constitutional Convention clearly indicate that the drafters of the Constitution meant to deny the president the power to initiate military action by the United States except when necessary for self-defense. “The Executive should be able to repel and not to commence war.”
President Barack Obama expressed this same interpretation when he was a presidential candidate. On Dec. 20, 2008, he told the Boston Globe: “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
However, with the ongoing Libyan operation, President Obama has maintained that he does not need explicit congressional authorization because he has sufficient authority as commander-in-chief to attack Libya, even though he admits that Libya did not attack the United States nor did it pose any direct military threat.
Instead, Obama contends that the civil war currently underway there threatens regional stability and thus endanger U.S. national interests in the region. Obama also contends that his administration has sufficiently consulted with Congress by briefing key members on the details of the operation, arguing that in doing so he has secured congressional consent for the attacks.
Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) told Panetta that while there was no question about the president’s authority to defend the country in case of an attack or to fulfill treaty obligations, a “unilateral” military decision such as Obama’s attacks on Libya “needs to be subject to the review and direction of the Congress.”
Panetta said it was “very important” for the president to consult with Congress after he takes military action, saying that “hopefully” Congress will agree that military action is necessary.
“[O]nce those [military] decisions are made, in order for those decisions to be sustained, that it’s very important to work with the Congress and seek the best advice and counsel of the Congress and hopefully get the Congress’ support for those actions,” said Panetta.
Critics of American involvement in the NATO-led attacks on Libya have argued that Obama lacks the constitutional authority to commit U.S. forces there, claiming that while the president is commander and chief, he must first seek congressional authorization before deploying any military forces, except in the case of an attack on the United States.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Knowing there would be disbelievers, the U.S. says it used convincing means to confirm Osama bin Laden’s identity during and after the firefight that killed him. But the mystique that surrounded the terrorist chieftain in life is persisting in death.
Was it really him? How do we know? Where are the pictures?
Already, those questions are spreading in Pakistan and surely beyond. In the absence of photos and with his body given up to the sea, many people don’t believe bin Laden – the Great Emir to some, the fabled escape artist of the Tora Bora mountains to foe and friend alike – is really dead.
U.S. officials are balancing that skepticism with the sensitivities that might be inflamed by showing images they say they have of the dead al-Qaida leader and video of his burial at sea. Still, it appeared likely that photographic evidence would be produced.
“We are going to do everything we can to make sure that nobody has any basis to try to deny that we got Osama bin Laden,” John Brennan, President Barack Obama’s counterterrorism adviser, said Monday. He said the U.S. will “share what we can because we want to make sure that not only the American people but the world understand exactly what happened.”
In July 2003, the U.S. took heat but also quieted most conspiracy theorists by releasing graphic photos of the corpses of Saddam Hussein’s two powerful sons to prove American forces had killed them.
So far, the U.S. has cited evidence that satisfied the Navy SEAL force, and at least most of the world, that they had the right man in Abbottabad, Pakistan.
The helicopter-borne raiding squad that swarmed the luxury compound identified bin Laden by appearance. A woman in the compound who was identified as his wife was said to have called out bin Laden’s name in the melee.
Officials produced a quick DNA match from his remains that they said established bin Laden’s identity, even absent the other techniques, with 99.9 percent certainty. U.S. officials also said bin Laden was identified through photo comparisons and other methods.
Tellingly, an al-Qaida spokesman, in vowing vengeance against America, called him a martyr, offering no challenge to the U.S. account of his death.
Even so, it’s almost inevitable that the bin Laden mythology will not end with the bullet in his head. If it suits extremist ends to spin a fantastical tale of survival or trickery to gullible ears, expect to hear it.
In the immediate aftermath, people in Abbottabad expressed widespread disbelief that bin Laden had died – or ever lived – among them.
“I’m not ready to buy bin Laden was here,” said Haris Rasheed, 22, who works in a fast food restaurant. “How come no one knew he was here and why did they bury him so quickly? This is all fake – a drama, and a crude one.”
Kamal Khan, 25, who is unemployed, said the official story “looks fishy to me.”
The burial from an aircraft carrier in the North Arabian Sea was videotaped aboard the ship, according to a senior defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity because a decision on whether to release the video was not final. The official said it was highly likely that the video, along with photographs of bin Laden’s body, would be made public in coming days.
The swiftness of the burial may have raised suspicions but was in accord with Islamic traditions. Islamic scholars, however, challenged U.S. assertions that a burial at sea was an appropriate fate for a Muslim who had died on land.
The act denied al-Qaida any sort of burial shrine for their slain leader. Once again, bin Laden had vanished, but this time at the hands of the United States and in a way that ensures he is gone forever.
If that satisfies U.S. goals and its sense of justice, Brad Sagarin, a psychologist at Northern Illinois University who studies persuasion, said the rapid disposition of the body “would certainly be a rich sort of kernel for somebody to grasp onto if they were motivated to disbelieve this.”
Also expected to come out is a tape made by bin Laden, before U.S. forces bore down on him, that may provide fodder to those who insist he is alive.
Pakistan, for one, is a land of conspiracy theorists, and far-fetched rumors abound on the streets and in blogs throughout the Arab world. But that’s not just a characteristic of the Islamic pipeline. Many ordinary Americans – and one billionaire – persistently questioned whether Obama was born in the U.S. despite lacking any evidence that he wasn’t.
Sagarin said most people will probably be convinced bin Laden is dead because they cannot imagine the government maintaining such an extraordinary lie to the contrary in this day and age.
Yet, he said, “as with the birther conspiracy, there’s going to be a set of people who are never going to be convinced. People filter the information they receive through their current attitudes, their current perspectives.”
To be sure, even photos and video, subject to digital manipulation, may not provide the final word to everyone. But Seth Jones, a RAND Corp. political scientist who advised the commander of U.S. special operations forces in Afghanistan, said the administration should do all it can to minimize doubts.
“There are always conspiracy theories,” he said. “There are individuals who believe that bin Laden wasn’t involved in the 9/11 attacks.”
We were knowingly told verified lies to invade and occupy Iraq. We were lied to entirely about the “spontaneous” “Arab Spring” later admitted to by the US State Department as a preplanned operation years in the making. We were knowingly told verified lies regarding Libya to engage in military operations in North Africa and we are currently being told verified lies about US-fueled uprisings in Syria.
Now we are told the notoriously deceptive CIA has “killed” “Osama Bin Laden” in Pakistan. This is the same CIA that planned to create fake videos of Saddam depicting him as a homosexual, and actually did make fake videos of Osama Bin Laden depicting him drinking liquor and consorting with boys. Washington Post’s “CIA unit’s wacky idea: Depict Saddam as gay,” stated, “The agency actually did make a video purporting to show Osama bin Laden and his cronies sitting around a campfire swigging bottles of liquor and savoring their conquests with boys, one of the former CIA officers recalled, chuckling at the memory. The actors were drawn from “some of us darker-skinned employees,” he said.”
Is there any reason at all for us to suddenly start believing our degenerate criminal government now, in light of their habitual, continuous, murderous campaign of lies and deception directed at both the American people and the world as a whole? The answer is not only unequivocally “no,” but we must try to understand why such a “rabbit” has been pulled from the globalists’ hat at this point of time. It smacks of almost cartoonish desperation as the US Dollar is crashing and the world’s opinion turns sharply against an overtly aggressive NATO carrying out a Hitlerian campaign of military invasion in North Africa.
We must continue to focus on real issues. Not birth certificates of a man who has not made a single decision or spoken a single word of his own since taking office, and not the alleged death of the already long dead Osama Bin Laden who, to this day, has had zero evidence linking him to the attacks of 9/11. 9/11 was an inside job, the subsequent wars were built on a fraudulent foundation of malicious lies – and as Americans celebrate in the streets over the death of this ultimate bogeyman, they seem oblivious to the fact that US air support is aiding and abetting real, admitted terrorists in Libya’s east who undeniably have American blood staining their hands.
Let us quickly sweep this stunt under the rug of irrelevancy where it belongs, and continue undermining the efforts of this degenerate empire as we remove and replace their strangling, parasitic tentacles. Let us stand vigilant against false flag attacks fashioned as “acts of retribution” for the now allegedly dead, former CIA agent Osama Bin Laden. It is time Americans seize back their destiny and stop living their lives as a series of knee-jerk reactions to infantile propaganda and the constant parade of manufactured threats brought before us.
By Andy Greenberg – Forbes
Giving Transportation Security Administration agents a peek under your clothes may soon be a practice that goes well beyond airport checkpoints. Newly uncovered documents show that as early as 2006, the Department of Homeland Security has been planning pilot programs to deploy mobile scanning units that can be set up at public events and in train stations, along with mobile x-ray vans capable of scanning pedestrians on city streets.
The non-profit Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) on Wednesday published documents it obtained from the Department of Homeland Security showing that from 2006 to 2008 the agency planned a study of of new anti-terrorism technologies that EPIC believes raise serious privacy concerns. The projects range from what the DHS describes as “a walk through x-ray screening system that could be deployed at entrances to special events or other points of interest” to “covert inspection of moving subjects” employing the same backscatter imaging technology currently used in American airports.
The 173-page collection of contracts and reports, acquired through a Freedom of Information Act request, includes contracts with Siemens Corporations, Northeastern University, and Rapiscan Systems. The study was expected to cost more than $3.5 million.
One project allocated to Northeastern University and Siemens would mount backscatter x-ray scanners and video cameras on roving vans, along with other cameras on buildings and utility poles, to monitor groups of pedestrians and assess what they carried. In another program, the researchers were asked to develop a system of long range x-ray scanning to determine what metal objects an individual might have on his or her body at distances up to thirty feet.
“This would allow them to take these technologies out of the airport and into other contexts like public streets, special events and ground transit,” says Ginger McCall, an attorney with EPIC. “It’s a clear violation of the fourth amendment that’s very invasive, not necessarily effective, and poses all the same radiation risks as the airport scans.”
Tip helped head off potentially devastating series of plane explosions
WASHINGTON — A Saudi tip about a possible al-Qaida effort to bring down airplanes was relayed to U.S. authorities in early October, nearly three weeks before the group’s Yemen affiliate tried to ship mail bombs to the U.S. in cargo planes, U.S. intelligence officials said Friday.
The Saudi intelligence tip helped to head off what could have been a devastating series of plane explosions. Western officials credit the Saudis with playing a crucial role in finding two mail bombs recovered last week in Dubai and Britain before they reached the U.S.
On Friday, the Yemen-based al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula claimed responsibility for sending the two bombs and threatened more attacks on civilian and cargo planes. The group also said it had a role in the crash of a UPS cargo plane in Dubai in September, but investigators so far have insisted an accident was at fault.
Saudis warned U.S. 3 weeks before attack Updated 75 minutes ago 11/6/2010 4:58:12 AM +00:00 A Saudi tip about a possible al-Qaida effort to bring down airplanes was relayed to U.S. authorities nearly three weeks before a Yemen group tried to ship mail bombs, officials say. Full story
- Al-Qaida claims responsibility for cargo bombs
- Cuban airline pilot died as hero to villagers
- Bomb targets mosque of anti-Taliban elders
- Indonesia volcano burns whole villages
The Saudi tip in October contained no mention of cargo planes, or any details of the plot carried out last week, said U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss classified matters. But they said it gave the U.S. and other Western officials enough of a warning to know what to look for when another Saudi tip arrived last week.
A CIA spokesman Friday night cited several allies that have provided key intelligence about terrorist activities.
“Over the past several months, we received intelligence — which was shared across our government — from our foreign partners about threats from AQAP and other terrorist groups,” said CIA spokesman George Little. “The United States receives this kind of information from other governments on a regular basis, as you would expect. Last week, we received specific intelligence that allowed the United States and our allies to disrupt the cargo plot. Our actions were swift and aggressive.”
Another U.S. official said the Yemeni terror group’s interest in plane attacks has been apparent since its failed Christmas Day attempt last year to bring down a Detroit-bound plane with explosives hidden in the underwear of a suicide bomber. Both the Christmas Day attack and the mail bombs sent last week used a powerful industrial explosive PETN, and the AQAP’s top bomb maker is considered a top suspect in both attempts.
But although the tip relayed in October did raise alarms about a plane attack, it did not mention cargo planes or where the plot might originate or even who the attackers might be, the official said.
U.S. intelligence had been monitoring steady intelligence on a possible attack such as this since early September, one U.S. official has said. And in late September, authorities also intercepted a group of packages shipped to Chicago which in retrospect is now seen as a likely test run by the terror group to gauge the logistics of shipping bombs by air to the U.S.
The report on the Saudi tip in October was first reported Friday by The New York Times and the German news magazine Der Spiegel.
On Friday, AQAP said it would continue to strike American and Western interests and specifically said it would target civilian and cargo aircraft.
“We have struck three blows at your airplanes in a single year,” the group said in a message posted on a militant website. “And God willing, we will continue to strike our blows against American interests and the interests of America’s allies.”
The authenticity of Friday’s claim could not be immediately verified. A U.S. intelligence official said authorities are not surprised to see this claim now.
Authorities in the U.S. and the UAE have said the Sept. 3 crash of the UPS plane in Dubai shortly after takeoff was caused by an onboard fire, but investigators are taking another loStart Slide Show with PicLens Lite
Published on 10-22-2010
Source: Washington’s Blog
Everyone knows that only Muslim-lovers and left-wing peaceniks want to stop the wars in Afghanistan and other Muslim countries, that terrorism is caused by Muslim ideology, and that we’re fighting them “over there” so we don’t have to fight them here.
In fact, as University of Chicago professor Robert A. Pape – who specializes in international security affairs – points out:
Extensive research into the causes of suicide terrorism proves Islam isn’t to blame — the root of the problem is foreign military occupations.
Wait, what? That can’t be right!
But as Pape explains:
Each month, there are more suicide terrorists trying to kill Americans and their allies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other Muslim countries than in all the years before 2001 combined.
New research provides strong evidence that suicide terrorism such as that of 9/11 is particularly sensitive to foreign military occupation, and not Islamic fundamentalism or any ideology independent of this crucial circumstance. Although this pattern began to emerge in the 1980s and 1990s, a wealth of new data presents a powerful picture.More than 95 percent of all suicide attacks are in response to foreign occupation, according to extensive research [co-authored by James K. Feldman - former professor of decision analysis and economics at the Air Force Institute of Technology and the School of Advanced Airpower Studies] that we conducted at the University of Chicago’s Project on Security and Terrorism, where we examined every one of the over 2,200 suicide attacks across the world from 1980 to the present day. As the United States has occupied Afghanistan and Iraq, which have a combined population of about 60 million, total suicide attacks worldwide have risen dramatically — from about 300 from 1980 to 2003, to 1,800 from 2004 to 2009. Further, over 90 percent of suicide attacks worldwide are now anti-American. The vast majority of suicide terrorists hail from the local region threatened by foreign troops, which is why 90 percent of suicide attackers in Afghanistan are Afghans.
Israelis have their own narrative about terrorism, which holds that Arab fanatics seek to destroy the Jewish state because of what it is, not what it does. But since Israel withdrew its army from Lebanon in May 2000, there has not been a single Lebanese suicide attack. Similarly, since Israel withdrew from Gaza and large parts of the West Bank, Palestinian suicide attacks are down over 90 percent.
Some have disputed the causal link between foreign occupation and suicide terrorism, pointing out that some occupations by foreign powers have not resulted in suicide bombings — for example, critics often cite post-World War II Japan and Germany. Our research provides sufficient evidence to address these criticisms by outlining the two factors that determine the likelihood of suicide terrorism being employed against an occupying force.
The first factor is social distance between the occupier and occupied. The wider the social distance, the more the occupied community may fear losing its way of life. Although other differences may matter, research shows that resistance to occupations is especially likely to escalate to suicide terrorism when there is a difference between the predominant religion of the occupier and the predominant religion of the occupied.
Religious difference matters not because some religions are predisposed to suicide attacks. Indeed, there are religious differences even in purely secular suicide attack campaigns, such as the LTTE (Hindu) against the Sinhalese (Buddhists).
Rather, religious difference matters because it enables terrorist leaders to claim that the occupier is motivated by a religious agenda that can scare both secular and religious members of a local community — this is why Osama bin Laden never misses an opportunity to describe U.S. occupiers as “crusaders” motivated by a Christian agenda to convert Muslims, steal their resources, and change the local population’s way of life.
The second factor is prior rebellion. Suicide terrorism is typically a strategy of last resort, often used by weak actors when other, non-suicidal methods of resistance to occupation fail. This is why we see suicide attack campaigns so often evolve from ordinary terrorist or guerrilla campaigns, as in the cases of Israel and Palestine, the Kurdish rebellion in Turkey, or the LTTE in Sri Lanka.
One of the most important findings from our research is that empowering local groups can reduce suicide terrorism. In Iraq, the surge’s success was not the result of increased U.S. military control of Anbar province, but the empowerment of Sunni tribes, commonly called the Anbar Awakening, which enabled Iraqis to provide for their own security. On the other hand, taking power away from local groups can escalate suicide terrorism. In Afghanistan, U.S. and Western forces began to exert more control over the country’s Pashtun regions starting in early 2006, and suicide attacks dramatically escalated from this point on.
The first step is recognizing that occupations in the Muslim world don’t make Americans any safer — in fact, they are at the heart of the problem.
But surely Pape and his team of University of Chicago researchers are wrong. Surely other security experts disagree, right?
The top security experts – conservative hawks and liberal doves alike – agree that waging war in the Middle East weakens national security and creates increases terrorism. See this, this, this, this, this and this.
As one of the top counter-terrorism experts (the former number 2 counter-terrorism expert at the State Department) told me, starting wars against states which do not pose an imminent threat to America’s national security increases the threat of terrorism because:
One of the principal causes of terrorism is injuries to people and families.
(Take another look at the painting above).
And its not only war in general as an abstract concept. The methods we’re using to wage war are increasing terrorism.
As one example, torture reduces our national security and creates new terrorists.
Unfortunately, we are continuing to indiscriminately kill civilians using drone strikes, and we are continuing to torture innocent people (see this, this and this).
This is not a question of being a “Muslim-sympathizer”. I am not a Muslim (personally, I and the rest of my family go to Church, albeit a non-dogmatic one). This isn’t about religion at all.
Its all about being practical in protecting our national security.
It might feel good to have guns a blazing. But unfortunately, instead of doing what will protect us, we keep shooting ourselves in the foot.
And in doing so, we are bankrupting our country.
10.10.10 Illusionati Ships from the Doc to Begin to See Beyond the Veil and Expose the World Wide Mind Control System
Check out the Official Illusionati Website Click the Banner BelowStart Slide Show with PicLens Lite
10.10.10 Illusionati Ships to begin to de veil the mind control system Check out this article entitled “Art as a Weapon”by AberyJane inspired by a pre-screening of the new film by Matthew Kazee
AberyJanes Thoughts on Protesting
Before Reading this, I want people to understand that I am not inciting violence. However there is always a time and a place for that. Im encouraging people to get organized and stand up for themselves. Im tired of seeing protesters getting their asses kicked and not doing a damn thing about it. So READ ON!
After having watched the documentary “Illusionatti” by Matt Kazee, it was the ending that shocked me the most. The last hour and 45 minutes had footage from the G20 summit in Pittsburg. Many clips showed protesters who were peacefully rallying against the summit and marching down the street. Then all hell breaks loose when the Riot Police show up.
Now, Riot Police have been around for a very long time. We have seen clips and video of their tactics, weapons, and intimidation. Once these men turned cattle ranchers show up on the scene, it becomes a confusing herd mentality amongst the protesters. Nobody knows what to do, how to act, or even follow their directions until the police start clubbing on their shields for their battle call. That battle call sends emotional trauma to those protesting as the noise is intimidating and fearful. Think of it as a battle drum. Something is defiantly coming and its big.
Eventually it’s the Riot Police who incite the riots and not the protesters. They use confusion tactics in order to justify beating on innocent people. The days of flowers in guns is no longer probable as these people are trained to reign you in. Remember that they are doing their job. I don’t like it any more than you do, but it’s the truth. They don’t care who you are or how many children you have or what you fight for.
I ask that people who are planning on protesting do a very large research project. First, start with Ghandi. He was the KING of protesting. Watch his tactics and his moves. He was a very smart man. Why? Because he studied his enemy. Almost every part of his tactics will still work today. When you protest, the people you are protesting against aren’t actually getting touched by you. You are being vocal. That’s the important thing. Another important aspect about protesting is your numbers! We were taught at a very young age that theres safety in numbers. If theres 1000 riot police and 6000 of you, You out number them 6 to 1. So ask yourself, who can be the real bully? Yes, they may have rubber bullets and man sticks and shields, but one person verses six aren’t good odds if youre that one person.
Organization is absolute key during a protest. For every 1000 people, you need 10 leaders for that group. This is mainly communication. Remember, you are going into battle. A police scanner is also needed. You need to keep track of your enemy. The only thing that stands between you and protesting is the police. Know their positions at all times and know the gear that they carry. Most of the time theyre in their riot gear. It’s the usual helmet, shield, rubber bullet gun, clubs, pepper spray and tear gas. General rule for winning a battle, is dress like your enemy. Protective gear is sold all over the place at military surplus stores and at a good price. So go get your armor. Plus its easy to wear under your clothes.
So everybody who reads this understand, the riot police are there to protect themselves, and you should do the same. There is no violent attempt perceived by using protective gear. Besides, youre there for a peaceful protest and these idiots show up like Darth Vader at a Trek Fest. NOT COOL. I would also go as far as to carry essentials in your back pack. These include, ear plugs, goggles for that nasty tear gas and pepper spray, your own pair of handcuffs and yes, a club. Now you ask why handcuffs and a club. The reasoning is very simple, Darth Vader wants your soul. His perception is that he’s looking for a fight and he will start one himself. How many protesters have we seen just get randomly clubbed? Fight fire with fire. Remember your numbers? Any one of those riot police get out of hand, its called Citizens Arrest. Use it! Take said Jango Fett clone to a safe location. If he struggles, make him uncomfortable and have somebody stay with him so he doesn’t reach for said weapons. This is where your club comes in handy. Its also a way to fend off said police. Once you start, it’s a domino effect. I know what you are thinking. You came for a peaceful protest, but its also your job to keep others from harm. Is it okay for the Vader Police to beat up on somebody who’s just standing there? Really? HELL NO! Youre already there to have your voice heard, these idiots show up on your scene even though you have that permit to protest. Don’t stand there like a tard wondering what the hell to do! Vader made the first move, you do the rest. Its called standing up for yourself.
Study their riot tactics. We have this wonderful thing called the internet now. Videos, booklets, and even their gear is for sale online. Watch these clips over and over and ask yourself, how certain situations could have been prevented. Your police scanner comes in handy so you KNOW what their plans are, where theyre heading, and what your next move will be. Its like having an electric crystal ball in your pocket. Tell your other leaders whats up. The next thing you know, you’re being herded into a park surrounded by idiots in riot gear without these small items to help you along.
Fear. People don’t stand up for themselves and expect somebody else to make a bold move so they feel more comfortable. Fear is a pain in the ass and guess who has that on their side? The Riot Police. Remember that they are the ones geared out and not you. They have more to fear from your protesters, than you do from them. Always stand 10 to 20 feet back from them. Look them in the eye and let them know you mean business. What we’re doing here is turning the tables. You are intimidating them and not the other way around. You wanna freak out riot police, stay as quiet and calm as possible. Stand still, don’t talk to them, don’t talk amongst each other, just stand there. Its like the long awkward silence while youre on a date with that hot chick you’ve been working on for three months. You have nothing to say and neither does she. Heres the trick, to this, make sure the group is big and compact. Stay close to eachother. If the riot police start to move in on you with their battle rabble, you cant turn around. Start moving FORWARD. That’s right, I wrote it and its on the internet. This is also a good time to put in your ear plugs because the sound weapons are near at hand. Be prepared to be hit. Yes, men with clubs want to use those things. But again, safety in numbers. You have your own defence weapons in your backpack and numbers on your side. You are a tightly packed and motivated group. We as Americans have already lost our country to CEO’s and a corrupt government. What do you have left to loose when you have so much to gain. Fuck the government, fuck the police, youre here protesting and you are one pissed off American. Show those assholes that you will no longer be pushed around by brainwashed douchebags and take control of your own destiny. If you want to protest, do it right for gods sake! Drop that fear and drop that policeman on his ass. If he isn’t part of the solution he’s part of the problem.
This is the part where I recap. Small protests you aren’t going to need all this stuff. However, G20 summit is a big deal. You will need to prepare for something like this months in advance. Anybody who is planning on going should be in constant contact with a protest leader. This is the person who acquired the permit to protest.. Usually the person who got the permit to protest is the smartest as they knew how to aquire it. Its common sense. You must always be prepared for the worst. Contain your calm. Im going as far as saying lose the bullhorns. Silent protest is the scariest of protests because riot police cant hear slience. Signs will do. They state your intentions. Be prepared for the worst. Just because YOU think it cant happen to you, it can. Heres your checklist:
1. Ear plugs
2. Goggles or protective eyewear
4. Video camera (get as much on video as possible, the camera doesn’t lie)
5. Body armor (wear this under your clothes
6. Pepper spray
8. Form of communication
9. Police scanner
So protesters, if youre going to protest, please do it right. When you protest something as huge as the G20 summit or Bilderberg meetings, the world is watching you. Hopefully not watching you get your asses kicked. Im tired of seeing people make an attempt to stand up for themselves and fail miserably by making the same mistakes over and over again. The power is in the people and youre there to prove it. Show the world that you are one massive organized NWO ass kicking machine. There are more of you than there are of them. With organization and preparedness, maybe you will get that face to face meeting with the worlds douchebag elites The government and their “bodyguards” are the ones who are the home grown terrorists. Remember this one important fact, the victors write the history books.
This entry was posted on Friday, September 3rd, 2010 at 10:35 am and is filed under Abery’s Articles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite
2010 Cyber Storm III global cybersecurity exercise concludes on 10.01.10: All of at this coinsides with Mossad release of ‘Stuxnet Virus’
In places like Arlington, Va.; Washington, D.C.; across the U.S. and around the world, a global cybersecurity exercise is underway designed to test the limits not only of the “network of networks,” but the ingenuity of the people charged with protecting it.
Welcome to Cyber Storm III.
This is the third time that the Department of Homeland Security, in conjunction with other federal agencies, is holding this global cybersecurity exercise. Previous Cyber Storm exercises were conducted in 2006, and again in 2008. For the first time, DHS will manage its response to Cyber Storm III from its new National Cybersecurity and Communications and Integration Center.
Normally, this facility, located in a nondescript office building in Arlington is classified and closed to the public. But the NCCIC recently opened its doors for an inside look to let DHS officials brief the media on Cyber Storm III, a worldwide cybersecurity response exercise that has been underway since late Monday.
Brett Lambo, the director of the Cybersecurity Exercise Program with DHS’s National Cybersecurity Division, is the architect, or game master for this global cybersecurity exercise.
“The overarching philosophy,” he told reporters in a recent briefing at the NCCIC, “is that we want to come up with something that’s a core scenario, something that’s foundational to the operation of the Internet.”
Cyber Storm III includes many players in places across the U.S. and around the world:
* Seven federal departments: Homeland Security, Defense, Commerce, Energy, Justice, Treasury and Transportation.
* Eleven states: California, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington, plus the Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (ISAC). This compares with nine states that participated in Cyberstorm II.
* Twelve international partners: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom (up from four countries that participated in Cyber Storm II).
DHS officials also say 60 private sector companies will participate in Cyber Storm III, up from 40 who participated in Cyber Storm II. Firms include banking and finance, chemical, communications, defense industrial, information technology, nuclear, transportation and water.
Lambo said to preserve the exercise’s value as a vigorous test of cybersecurity preparedness, exact details of the scenario which participants will deal with over the next three days are secret. However, he did share some of the broad parameters of the scenario he helped write, and which he will administer.
“In other exercises, you do have specific attack vectors; you have a denial of service attack, you have a website defacement, or you have somebody dropping a rootkit,” he said. “But we wanted to take that up a level to say, ‘All of those things can still happen, and based on what you do, if you’re concerned about the availability of infrastructure, we can look at what happens when the infrastructure is unavailable.’”
Lambo said another way to look at the scenario is that it builds upon what they learned from previous exercises.
“In Cyber Storm I, we attacked the Internet, in Cyber Storm II, we used the Internet as the weapon, in Cyber Storm III, we’re using the Internet to attack itself,” he said.
Lambo added under normal circumstances, the Internet operates based on trust that a file, or a graphic, or a computer script is what it says it is, and comes from a trusted source. But what if that source was not what it said it was, or the source has a malicious intent?
“What we’re trying to do is compromise that chain of trust,” he said, in further explaining in broad strokes of the Cyber Storm III exercise scenario.
Lambo and his colleagues at the Cyber Storm control center also will introduce new, and hopefully unexpected conditions to the scenario to further test participants.
“We have the ability to do what we call dynamic play,” he said. “If we get a player action coming back into the exercise that is either different from what we expected it to be, if it’s something we’d like to chase down further, or if it’s something we’d like to pursue, we have the ability to write injects on the fly.”
He said those injects could include new attacks.
The Cyber Storm exercise will be conducted primarily using secure messaging systems like e-mail or text messages to relay intersects to participants and that the simulated attacks are not being conducted over a live or a virtual network now in operation on the Internet, he said.
For the U.S. government, Cyber Storm III also offers the opportunity to test the DHS’ National Cyber Incident Response Plan.
“We want to focus on information sharing issues,:” he said. “We want to know how all of the different organizations are compiling, acting on, aggregating information that they’re sharing, especially when you’re thinking about classified lines coming into the unclassified domain. There’s a concept called tearlining, in which we take classified information, and get it below the tearline, so that those without security clearances and get it, and act on it.”
The Cyber Storm III exercise is expected to conclude by 10.01.10
Was Stuxnet Built to Attack Iran’s Nuclear Program?
By Robert McMillan, IDG News
A highly sophisticated computer worm that has spread through Iran, Indonesia and India was built to destroy operations at one target: possibly Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactor.
People who read this also read:
That’s the emerging consensus of security experts who have examined the Stuxnet worm. In recent weeks, they’ve broken the cryptographic code behind the software and taken a look at how the worm operates in test environments. Researchers studying the worm all agree that Stuxnet was built by a very sophisticated and capable attacker — possibly a nation state — and it was designed to destroy something big.
Though it was first developed more than a year ago, Stuxnet was discovered in July 2010, when a Belarus-based security company discovered the worm on computers belonging to an Iranian client. Since then it has been the subject of ongoing study by security researchers who say they’ve never seen anything like it before. Now, after months of private speculation, some of the researchers who know Stuxnet best say that it may have been built to sabotage Iran’s nukes.
Last week Ralph Langner, a well-respected expert on industrial systems security, published an analysis of the worm, which targets Siemens software systems, and suggested that it may have been used to sabotage Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactor. A Siemens expert, Langner simulated a Siemens industrial network and then analyzed the worm’s attack.
Experts had first thought that Stuxnet was written to steal industrial secrets — factory formulas that could be used to build counterfeit products. But Langner found something quite different. The worm actually looks for very specific Siemens settings — a kind of fingerprint that tells it that it has been installed on a very specific Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) device — and then it injects its own code into that system.
Because of the complexity of the attack, the target “must be of extremely high value to the attacker,” Langner wrote in his analysis.
Langner is set to present his findings at a closed-door security conference in Maryland this week, which will also feature a technical discussion from Siemens engineers. Langner said he wasn’t yet ready to speak to a reporter at length (“the fact of the matter is this stuff is so bizarre that I have to make up my mind how to explain this to the public,” he said via e-mail) but others who have examined his data say that it shows that whoever wrote Stuxnet clearly had a specific target in mind. “It’s looking for specific things in specific places in these PLC devices. And that would really mean that it’s designed to look for a specific plant,” said Dale Peterson, CEO of Digital Bond.
This specific target may well have been Iran’s Bushehr reactor, now under construction, Langner said in a blog posting. Bushehr reportedly experienced delays last year, several months after Stuxnet is thought to have been created, and according to screen shots of the plant posted by UPI, it uses the Windows-based Siemens PLC software targeted by Stuxnet.
Peterson believes that Bushehr was possibly the target. “If I had to guess what it was, yes that’s a logical target,” he said. “But that’s just speculation.”
Langner thinks that it’s possible that Bushehr may have been infected through the Russian contractor that is now building the facility, JSC AtomStroyExport. Recently AtomStroyExport had its Web site hacked, and some of its Web pages are still blocked by security vendors because they are known to host malware. This is not an auspicious sign for a company contracted with handling nuclear secrets.
Tofino Security Chief Technology Officer Eric Byres is an industrial systems security expert who has tracked Stuxnet since it was discovered. Initially he thought it was designed for espionage, but after reading Langner’s analysis, he’s changed his mind. “I guessed wrong, I really did,” he said. “After looking at the code that Ralph hauled out of this thing, he’s right on.”
One of the things that Langner discovered is that when Stuxnet finally identifies its target, it makes changes to a piece of Siemens code called Organizational Block 35. This Siemens component monitors critical factory operations — things that need a response within 100 milliseconds. By messing with Operational Block 35, Stuxnet could easily cause a refinery’s centrifuge to malfunction, but it could be used to hit other targets too, Byres said. “The only thing I can say is that it is something designed to go bang,” he said.
Whoever created Stuxnet developed four previously unknown zero-day attacks and a peer-to-peer communications system, compromised digital certificates belonging to Realtek Semiconductor and JMicron Technology, and displayed extensive knowledge of industrial systems. This is not something that your run-of-the-mill hacker can pull off. Many security researchers think that it would take the resources of a nation state to accomplish.
Bushehr is a plausible target, but there could easily be other facilities — refineries, chemical plants or factories that could also make valuable targets, said Scott Borg, CEO of the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit, a security advisory group. “It’s not obvious that it has to be the nuclear program,” he said. “Iran has other control systems that could be targeted.”
Iranian government representatives did not return messages seeking comment for this story, but sources within the country say that Iran has been hit hard by the worm. When it was first discovered, 60 percent of the infected Stuxnet computers were located in Iran, according to Symantec.
Now that the Stuxnet attack is public, the industrial control systems industry has come of age in an uncomfortable way. And clearly it will have more things to worry about
“The problem is not Stuxnet. Stuxnet is history,” said Langner in an e-mail message. “The problem is the next generation of malware that will follow.”
If you go to this link and listen to it 3 times in a row…. you tell me why the church banned this ghost band?
Please leave your comments on the original page… and wait to see what happens….guess what the church was scared off???
lets see who posts the right answer before October 31 2010
Banned by the Catholic Church
Categories: Sound Oddities
Sound Clip: Shepard Tone by Roger Shepard
This is a classic sound oddity and illusion. Or is it? There are some corrections to this post with much discussion, see below and follow the trail of comments to clarify the inaccuracies.
“It is rumored to be called the “devil’s tone” by the Catholic church. The Shepard tone is a sound consisting of a superposition of sine waves separated by octaves. When played with the base pitch of the tone moving upwards or downwards, it is referred to as the
Shepard Scale. This creates an auditory illusion that continually ascends or descends in pitch, yet which ultimately seems to get no higher or lower.”
Corrections here and below in comments from Brent Williams:
“Baned by the Catholic Church“, about a Shepard-Risset Glissando. This post contained links to certain webpages, but when the post went up (even before it was moderated) the links were missing. Just in case you want to put them up for your readers, here they are:
The original source page for this sound file is here . It is in French.
You can find the Wiki source page here . This contains a little more info on the sound. This is where I confirmed that the sound is a minor chord of synchronised Shepard-Risset glissandi.
Read about Diana Deutsch here . She is currently a Professor at UCSD.
All the best, and please continue with your excellent website.
Categories: Sound Oddities -