Posts Tagged ‘NWO’

None dare call it TREASON

Thursday, September 24th, 2009

- Northeast Intelligence Network – http://homelandsecurityus.com -

None dare call it TREASON
Posted By Sean Osborne On September 24, 2009 @ 10:48 am In Editorials, Ideological Jihad, Intelligence Analysis, International Terror, Sean Osborne | Comments Disabled

By Sean Osborne, Associate Director, Military Affairs Specialist

24 September 2009: Islam and its non-apostate adherents declared war against anything and everything non-Islamic at its inception in the Arabian heartland in 610 AD, fourteen centuries ago. Islam has always been a theology of hate, violence, wanton bloodshed and war. Islam is an equal opportunity hater because its violence is not only directed against those it considers infidels (kafirs) but those who are fellow Muslims. This is plainly evident in every nation on planet earth where Islam asserted itself through military conquest or remains as the dominant force over the past fourteen centuries. This fact is evident within Islam’s colonies in unconquered nations such as these United States. In no nation on planet earth is Islam a dominant force where violence, wanton bloodshed or wars were not the sole method of achieving that dominance.

It was in the face of these unassailable truths that the President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama declared just a few short months ago in the Egyptian and Turkish capitals, “America is not and never will be at war with Islam.” Have you ever heard a more treasonous statement since September 11, 2001?
Earlier this month President Barack Hussein Obama hosted the now-traditional Iftar feast celebrating the end of what he referred to as the “holy season” of Ramadan.

Raising up a quote from boxing legend Muhammad Ali before all of the Muslim ummah and non-Muslim infidels (kafirs) in attendance, President Barack Hussein Obama gave his seal of approval, indeed his personal view of why Islam is “truth:” “A few years ago he explained this view, and this is part of why he’s The Greatest, saying, ‘Rivers, ponds, lakes and streams, they all have different names, but they all contain water. Just as religions do, they all contain truths.’”

Was it any accident that one of the Muslims invited by the White House to attend the Iftar feast was Muslim convert Dr. Ingrid Mattson, president of the terrorist Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)? ISNA is one of nearly 300 unindicted co-conspirator terrorists identified by federal prosecutors in the U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial. On November 24, 2008, after seven days of deliberation and six weeks of testimony, a jury convicted the HLF and five of its leaders on all counts of providing material support to the Islamic terrorists of HAMAS (?arakat al-Muq?wamat al-Isl?miyyah, or “Islamic Resistance Movement”). As has been stated many, many times before, ISNA, CAIR and a host of other Islamic organizations are nothing more than fronts or associates of the al-Ikhwan al-Muslimuun, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), which itself is nothing more than a front for the Islamic terrorists of HAMAS. Of course this was no accident; these enemies of the United States of America and our Constitutional Republic are President Obama’s friends. Invite one and you have effectively invited them all to the Iftar feast. None dare call this treason?

So, with this emanating from the top of the American chain of command during a time of war should there be any doubt about why other unconscionable things are occurring on a daily basis these days?

Is there any doubt about why this president has continually stabbed our principle Middle Eastern ally in Israel squarely in the back at every opportunity?

How many eyebrows or voices rise in righteous indignation when President Barack Hussein Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton allow the dispatching of representatives of CAIR on overseas diplomatic missions to the Islamic Republic of Iran as representatives of the interests of the United States in return for CAIR intelligence briefings to them upon their return? Is this not absolutely insane in the face of the FBI’s finding that CAIR is a front organization for the terrorists of HAMAS?

Are the American people aware of the fact that while President Barack Hussein Obama speaks grandiose words on how we and our allies need to stick together and work closely in the fight in Afghanistan against the perpetrators of September 11, 2001, he then makes deals with our Russian enemy and pulls the plug on a missile defense system to be deployed on the territory of these same allies.

Yes, the missile defense system was to be deployed on the territory of Poland and the Czech Republic. Its purpose was to defend both the American homeland, as well as our allies, from the potential of nuclear missile attacks launched by Iran. Poland and the Czech Republic have been steadfast allies of America in this war, contributing troops, treasury and blood to the fight against Islam. And how does President Barack Hussein Obama repay our allies for their assistance? He denies them the presence of American troops on their soil who would operate these systems. Is it any wonder then that Poland is the first to respond to this back-stabbing by announcing they will not deploy a large contingent of their soldiers to Afghanistan? I do not for one second blame the Polish government for taking such a decision, particularly in light of the unambiguous statement made by the commander of coalition forces in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, that the failure to deploy more soldiers into the theater of combat operations will result in an all-but-certain condition of “mission failure.” Let that sink in. The American commander telling his commander in chief that failure to surge more troops into the war will result in mission failure in Afghanistan, the origin of the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Who are President Barack Hussein Obama’s friends? Who does he stand with in this war? On page 261 of his book “The Audacity of Hope” our elected President provides us with a precise answer to these questions: “I will stand with them [the Muslims] should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” Wars are declared by politicians. Obama is a politician. Now that you’ve read his words, pay closer attention to his actions. They are not in our best interests. His intent is to allow America and our sons and daughters in harm’s way to simply bleed to death.

And none dare call this treason.

Article printed from Northeast Intelligence Network: http://homelandsecurityus.com

URL to article: http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=3085

Click here to print.

Copyright (c) 2009 Northeast Intelligence Network. All rights reserved.

Obama, world most significant lier

Tuesday, September 1st, 2009

- Northeast Intelligence Network – http://homelandsecurityus.com -

Putting the Obama Puzzle Together
Posted By Randy Taylor On July 8, 2009 @ 11:46 am In Globalist Agenda, Intelligence Analysis, Iran, Iraq, Randy Taylor | Comments Disabled

By Randy Taylor

This has taken some time to put together, yet once you read this piece in its entirety, hopefully the puzzle of Obama will come into clear focus. I’ve been puzzled by his very presence, by his quick, unexplained rise to power, his predetermined placement in the mass of confusion we are experiencing.
The last eight years under Bush created great divides in this country on both sides of the American political spectrum. Most everyone was in favor of war in 2001 especially after we suffered the attacks of 9/11. Yet, as usual, America was quick to forget their initial reactions to 9/11 and as the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq waged on without measurable results, their interest in war diminished. This is understandable, as we are a results oriented society and culture and the results still aren’t clearly visible. We still have not killed or captured Osama bin Laden nor have we put much of a dent in the spread of Islamic terrorism around the world. Any claimable results we may have in Afghanistan and Iraq are overshadowed by the massive spread of Islamic terrorism in other regions of the world, which at best makes these wars a loss with the cost of trillions of dollars and the massive loss of life on US forces, Canadian forces, other coalition forces as well as civilian casualties. The Islamic terrorist are still very active and their presence is growing in Afghanistan, Iraq as well as Somalia, Yemen, Algeria and other countries in Africa and the Middle East. This is where we are today and this is where we stood on November 4, 2008. The entire world blamed Bush for this mess. It was time to put the George W. Bush puppet away and dig out a new one for the White House. Let’s see, the black one, controversial, hint of Muslim loyalty, birth certificate issues, and the polar opposite of Bush on campaign trail. Yep, that’ll work.

Out of obscurity a young, black politician emerges. He was completely opposite of George Bush and John McCain in all his campaign rhetoric. He made promise after promise to his ever growing voting base. He says the wars will be ended, the troops will come home, promises no more big government, says he believes in government transparency, etc. He woos the young voters like a rock star, uses the internet to secure votes and spread his lies. He makes promise after promise, knowing he will not keep any of them.

People were so upset with George Bush, they would have voted for Bozo the Clown if he had run against the Republican Party. This helps insure victory for this young unheard of politician. He takes the election with an estimated 51% of the nation’s vote, which even if the results weren’t exactly accurate; it doesn’t matter as Presidents aren’t elected anymore. They are chosen and the Electoral College insures this. The election process is a dog and pony show, as these decisions are made long before November 4 each election cycle. Even so, there still has to be the appearance that the “most popular” candidate wins so there isn’t an investigative review of the electoral process.

So why was Barack Hussein Obama chosen? This is actually quite obvious when you examine the case. The fact that he is a Muslim was hinted at during the elections yet never proven. This drew the support of the ever growing Muslim population in the US. Groups like CAIR and other Muslim groups very quickly threw their Saudi dollars into campaign support to sell Obama to the US voters. The very fact that he may not have even been born in America, but instead Kenya made him even more popular with Muslims.

The Muslim connection was the key in this process. George Bush wasn’t very popular with Muslims around the world and John McCain was viewed as an extension of George Bush and his policies. McCain never had a chance. Actually most of America was surprised when McCain was placed on the ticket as the Republican nominee. We all asked “Out of all the Republicans available to run, why McCain?” McCain was chosen because McCain would not win. This was predetermined.

Obama was brought in for one reason and one reason only. The scope of work for Obama is make friends with key powers in the Muslim world while crippling America into economic depression to the point that a one world government will appeal to the people. The powers that be, the ones that are behind the scenes and dictate to the White House need to insure the support of all major Muslim countries, except for Iran. He United States is intent on seeing Iran brought down whether by the US or Israel, but brought down either way. The problem with attacking Iran though is the lack of support by the other key nations in the Muslim world. I’ll explain the necessity of either disarming or destroying Iran a bit later.

Bush used to dance around the subject of Islam and made feeble attempts at gaining support of the key Muslim countries by saying that Muslims were a peaceful people and that the religion had been hijacked by a few bad people. However, he was the one that initiated the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq so his credibility was severely damaged in that regard. He could say what he wanted but the bottom line is he signed the orders for war.

Obama on the other hand campaigned against the war. This made him a hopeful in the eyes of the Muslims from the onset. Since he took office he has bent over backwards to appeal to the Muslim world as an ally. Obama is appointing Muslims into key positions within the US government, is speaking out against Israel, is sympathetic to Palestinians and is pulling troops out of Iraq. Why? It is simply to look sympathetic to Muslims and as a gesture to show tolerance and gain their support. Classic bait and switch in progress.

Barack Hussein Obama is a plant, a Manchurian candidate of sorts. He was chosen by the architects and designers of this New World Government. I’m not 100% entirely sure who these people are but there is a group behind the scenes that are orchestrating key governments with the end result being a one world government. George Bush Sr. spoke of this new world government, Bill Clinton spoke of it and George W. Bush spoke of it and even the Pope states that this is the way to save the world economically. It’s not a conspiracy theory anymore, it is fact. The only question is exactly who is running the show. Many speak of the Bilderberg Group as the group behind the scenes and granted, they are behind the scenes but they are a distraction, a decoy. They are too obvious and too easily seen. The Bilderberg Group keeps the conspiracy theorists busy while the real powers operate without an audience. They are the front men for the real powers pulling strings.

Anyone who has studied Islam at all knows that Iran, the seat of hardcore Islam will never agree to a New World Government that isn’t 100% Islamic and under Sharia law. Islam is a religious system that encompasses government and every detail of life. It isn’t just a religion. Their entire political system is built around it. This does not fit in with the New World Government that is planned for us. But if we want to eliminate or disarm Iran, we will need the support of the other key Muslim countries in the Middle East. The countries that we are attempting to gain support from are all recipients of Western dollars and are interested in economic growth for their countries. They would entertain a world government as they would benefit from it. Iran has no interest in this plan. Not that it was ever presented to them, it is a given that they will not accept it. They would push the world into World War III before they would surrender their sovereignty to a New World Government run by non-Muslims.

Iran is a threat to the western world and Israel, make no mistake. The al Qaeda movement and militant Islam are extensions of this Islamic threat. Yet we have a unique situation where we have two huge threats to our freedom and our way of life. We have Iran, the seat of Islamic terrorism worldwide that would like to see us destroyed and at the same time, we have our own government stripping away our rights, systematically destroying our economy and rapidly surrendering our sovereignty as a nation in favor of a New World Government. The other threat is indeed our own government. The worst part is that our western leaders have taken the Islamic threat to western civilization and used it in their favor as a method of stripping away our rights, invading our privacy and surrendering our sovereignty to this New World Government, all under the guise of improving our security. Security at the sacrifice of basic freedoms isn’t really security. Placing Muslims into key government positions doesn’t exhibit clear thinking on security matters either, but it is a measured risk in the eyes of the powers that be.

All the focus is on Iran right now as it has been for the last seven years, immediately after we invaded Iraq. Obama keeps the focus on Iran too, offering to have dialogue with them, yet knowing they won’t accept. But to the Muslim nations, it looks as though Obama is trying. That is why he was brought in. To make the US look Muslim friendly to the Muslim countries that are not as hard core as Iran. He wants to see us merged with these “friendly” Muslim countries under a one world government. He is selling us out to our enemies.

We moved into Afghanistan and Iraq to gain strategic positions on Iran. This was obvious. Iraq didn’t have the weapons of mass destruction to the extent that we claimed. Bush even made several jokes about WMD’s at a speaking engagement when he was President as he knew damn good and well that Iraq wasn’t the threat he made it out to be. But Saddam had to go as he would have never subscribed to a new world government either. We now have airbases in both countries which allows for ground or air movement against Iran when the time comes. Even if we withdraw, we will never fully leave these countries. We will maintain a military presence there just as we have done with every other country we have “withdrawn” from.

Barack Hussein Obama has not kept a single campaign promise and his supporters should take note of this. We are withdrawing some troops from Iraq yet we are beefing up in Afghanistan. He hasn’t done squat for the economy and is instead installing a Socialist agenda within our country. He is signing us up for Cap and Trade Agreements which has Americans being set up to pay taxes or penalties to a central world government body, which is obviously part of this new world government being imposed on us. He doesn’t place any value on any human life that is viewed as a burden or a mistake. He is manipulating the media ferociously and is censoring press conferences at the White House while saying he believes in government transparency. He is a liar and a fraud. That isn’t just my opinion, no, that is fact. Do the research. Go back and look at his campaign and then look at what he has done since he has been in office.

Beware of this person. Beware of all that agree with him or speak in a like manner of a one world government. They are a detriment to mankind as a whole. They are the precursors of the beast.

Be safe. Stay vigilant.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. -Thomas Jefferson

Article printed from Northeast Intelligence Network: http://homelandsecurityus.com

URL to article: http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2900

Click here to print.

Copyright (c) 2009 Northeast Intelligence Network. All rights reserved.

Russia on the move

Monday, August 24th, 2009

- Northeast Intelligence Network – http://homelandsecurityus.com -

Is Russia setting the stage for a nuclear apocalypse?
Posted By Director On August 24, 2009 @ 11:00 am In Arrests/Convictions, Douglas J. Hagmann, Fifth Column, Globalist Agenda, Intelligence Analysis, Iran, Randy Taylor, Russia, Sean Osborne, Special Reports, Weapons of Mass Destruction | Comments Disabled

“I can’t say anything about the roots of this story and I don’t plan to dig further… I need to think about my own skin too. Understand that as you will.” –Mikhail Voitenko, editor of the Russian maritime Bulletin Sovfrakht., speaking about the “hijacking” of the Arctic Sea

By Douglas J. Hagmann, Director, & Sean Osborne, Military Affairs Specialist

24 August 2009: While it might seem like an unusual morphing of the movies Inside Man and The Hunt for Red October, the account of the cargo ship Arctic Sea is far stranger than either fictional account. Based on information developed through our extensive investigation, we can authoritatively state, without hyperbole, that the mysteries surrounding the MV Arctic Sea are as deep as the Atlantic waters where it navigated and its “alleged” secret cargo as potentially dangerous to an unsuspecting, distracted populace as the coastal rip tides produced by a late summer hurricane.
Imagine a 4,000 ton, 100 meter commercial cargo ship, manned by a crew of 15, equipped with an automatic identification system (AIS), a satellite navigation beacon, and state of the art communication equipment, including satellite phones and the cellular telephones of the crew, laden with $1.2 – $1.8 million of cut lumber and manned by a crew of 15, suddenly and inexplicably “disappearing completely off the grid” for two weeks – allegedly at the hands of eight-(8) hijackers or “pirates.” Now, imagine the pirate attack of this low value target taking place in a busy transit area that has not seen an act of piracy since the 17th century.

That’s what reportedly transpired with the Arctic Sea, a Russian managed commercial cargo ship sailing under a Maltese flag and owned by the Finnish company Arctic Sea Ltd. The Russian management is from a sister company based in the Russian city of Arkhangelsk that reportedly provides “technical support” to the company and its sole vessel. Arkhangelsk is also the home of the 15 man crew of the Arctic Sea.

Now imagine a search for the missing vessel launched by numerous assets from the Russian Black Sea fleet in conjunction with NATO, the use of satellites and other forms of surveillance, and a “rescue mission” that ultimately secured the ship, rescued its crew and captured the alleged hijackers or pirates. Except this was no ordinary rescue of the crew and arrest of the hijackers. Some of the crew and all of the hijackers, including one who was later identified as a fisherman who supposedly died three years ago, were transported together by the Russians to a high security Moscow prison where they are being held incommunicado.

Next, imagine an investigation of the incident that has involved law enforcement from 20 countries, 3 intelligence agencies, and British nuclear response team – so far, all of which has been conducted under an unprecedented level of secrecy. Added to that shroud of secrecy are various bits of disinformation – news articles – that have been intentionally seeded to a non-inquiring media through Russian and other diplomatic sources.

Now finally, imagine the majority of those of us in the West having never even heard of this hijacking, the hijacked ship, its recovery, the rescue of crew and the “arrest” of the hijackers. The latter, of course is easier to imagine. The media minimalism can be attributed to a combination of government secrecy and a shortage of journalists willing to investigate an incident that has national and international security implications, rather than the more salacious and better selling celebrity debauchery.

The security implications pertaining to this incident are indeed ominous as they appear to directly relate to either a clandestine program of arming an enemy of the United States and Israel with nuclear weaponry or something far more sinister and conspiratorial. While the final chapter of this intriguing tale of high-stakes international nuclear smuggling has yet to be written, one thing has already been established: a global end-game scenario is being constructed while most of the world sleeps.

The adventures of the MV Arctic Sea

It began in June, when the Arctic Sea underwent about two-weeks of “repairs” at the Pregol shipyard in Kaliningrad, which is a Russian enclave situated between Poland and Lithuania. It is the base of the Russian Baltic Fleet and a notorious area for smuggling of everything from drugs to weapons. According to intelligence reports following the alleged disappearance of the vessel – reports independently confirmed by this author through direct inquiries with U.S. and Israeli intelligence sources, the “repairs” were not repairs at all, but a very extensive project that involved completely dismantling and rebuilding the ship’s bulkhead to special military-like specifications. This was done to accommodate what was described by these intelligence officials as “very expensive and very deadly” cargo.

Following the extensive renovation of the vessel, the Arctic Sea is anchored in Pietarsaari, on the West Coast of Finland to pick up its cargo of sawn timber that is reportedly destined for Algeria. The value of the cargo of timber is reported to be between $1.2 and $1.8 million.

On July 23, 2009, the Arctic Sea, flying the Maltese Flag, departed Pietarsaari with a crew of 15. It is scheduled to arrive at the port of Bejaia, Algeria on August 4, 2009. The ship reportedly has food supplies for a 45-day voyage and enough fuel for 40 days of cruising at sea.

Within 24 hours of its departure, the vessel is reportedly boarded by force in the early morning hours of July 24 near the Swedish island of Gotland. According to various sources, including some open source news reports, the crew was held, beaten and interrogated for 12 hours by eight-(8) armed attackers. Some reports suggest that the masked attackers posed as Swedish drug police who spoke English with an unidentified accent. Other reports indicate that the alleged hijackers, who approached the vessel in an inflatable style boat, did so under the pretext of distress aboard their boat.

What exactly happened aboard the Arctic Sea at this point remains unclear, as both public and private sources offer somewhat differing accounts. Some sources indicate that there were as many as 12 hijackers, with perhaps four leaving the Arctic Sea in the inflatable assault craft. Other sources, including some post-event news accounts, reported that all of these particular the attackers left the Arctic Sea within 12 hours of their initial attack. Based on our independent research, the latter account appears questionable at best.

What is consistent, however, are reports that the vessel’s Automatic Identification System (AIS) was turned off by someone aboard the vessel. A ship’s Automatic Identification System (AIS) is an interactive transponder that provides detailed information about the ship, somewhat similar to the “black box” of an aircraft by comparison.

The fact that the AIS system was switched off is critical to this event. Accounts of the ship’s AIS also comes into play later when sources indicate that is was actually removed from the vessel altogether. While some might contend that disabling this device is not impossible, all agree that it takes quite a bit of knowledge to do so. Removing it and making it functional on another ship requires even more specialized knowledge and ability. Simultaneously, the signal from the Arctic Sea’s satellite navigation beacon disappeared. It is the unanimous opinion of all intelligence sources that only those having very specialized knowledge are capable of incapacitating this beacon.

In any case, news of the incident of alleged “piracy” or “hijacking” and of the ship’s disappearance from the grid would remain a virtual secret for the next 4-5 days. Even more curiously, on July 28, four days after the boarding of the hostiles, the Arctic Sea reportedly made routine contact with the Dover Coastguard as it entered the English Channel.

It appears that the next odd transmission by the Arctic Sea set off alarm bells” of certain British maritime officials. According to both published and private sources, a short time after making the contact with Dover, the Arctic Sea reported the armed boarding of their vessel by the alleged Swedish drug police to the Helsinki police authorities, telling the Helsinki officials that everything was fine and they would follow-up with them after completing their journey.

The alleged boarding of the Arctic Sea by fake Swedish drug police, the subsequent and very delayed reporting of that event and that the crew was fine despite the extended detention and beatings, the disabling of the ship’s AIS, and altogether inconsistent reports from and about the ship sent up “red flags” that something was definitely awry aboard the Arctic Sea.

Suddenly, on July 30, 2009, a brief AIS signal was received from the Arctic Sea. At 1:29 AM Greenwich Mean Time, it was as if someone activated the AIS, only to have it turned off again minutes later. At this point, the ship basically “vanished” from the grid. The signal from the AIS placed the Arctic Sea between southwest England and France at that time.

Although there were no further electronic signals from the Arctic Sea, European maritime officials reported receiving radio calls from the Arctic Sea alleging yet a second attack against the ship off the Portuguese coast between July 31 and August 2, 2009. Intelligence sources interviewed by this author verified the allegation but openly questioned their veracity.

The following day, the company that insures the vessel allegedly received a ransom demand. Vladimir Dushin, vice-president of Renaissance Insurance, alleges that the company was contacted by telephone by an English-speaking caller who demanded $1.5 million or the crew of the Arctic Sea would be shot and the ship sunk. It was at this point that Interpol issued their initial hijacking alert for the Arctic Sea.

On August 4, 2009, the Arctic Sea failed to arrive at Bejaia as scheduled.

It was not until August 12, 2009, and only after public pressure by the families of the crew that Russian President Dmitry Medvedev ordered the Russian navy deployed in the Atlantic to locate the vessel and orders the military to take “all necessary measures” to recover the ship and its crew. On August 14, 2009, with many searching for the missing vessel, the Arctic Sea is reportedly sighted 500 miles off the Cape Verde Islands, west of Africa, according to French defense officials.

The next day, transmissions from the Arctic Sea’s AIS placed the ship in the Bay of Biscay. Despite the AIS “signature” marking its location, France announced that there was no cargo ship in the area. Interestingly and perhaps quite significantly, it was announced that the signal was coming from one of the three Russian Navy ships in that area.

On August 15, 2009, a joint Russia-NATO operation is officially launched to track and locate the Arctic Sea. It is at this point that reports begin to circulate among maritime and intelligence officials that this might not be a hijacking after all, and that the ship could be carrying some type of “special” cargo. Certain maritime security professionals, who have been following this incident closely, suggest that the Arctic Sea could be involved in the transporting of nuclear materials. These reports are immediately dismissed by Finnish authorities and other diplomatic officials.

The Arctic Sea is Located

On Monday, August 17, 2009, (2200 BST August 16), nearly 2 weeks after it was scheduled to arrive in Algeria, the Arctic Sea was located 300 nautical miles off the coast of Cape Verde by the Russian navy frigate Ladny. According to official reports, the eight unarmed hijackers were found aboard the ship along with all of the crew. While published reports of the naval rescue suggest that the hijackers threw their weapons overboard as the Russians approached, intelligence sources have indicated that there is nothing to indicate that the alleged hijackers were armed. Additionally, no evidence was found to suggest that the crew of the Arctic Sea was beaten as initially reported.

The following public statements made at a news conference and reported in Russia Today by Mikhail Voitenko, the editor of the online Maritime Bulletin-Sovfracht on August 17, 2009 therefore appear to make sense when considered through the maze of details surrounding the disappearance and “recovery” of the Arctic Sea:

“The fact is that it was not a criminal assault, it was not an act of piracy, and what exactly it was we don’t know. The vessel had all the necessary modern means of communication and emergency alarms, and was located in waters where regular mobile telephones work. To hijack the vessel so that no one makes a peep – not one alarm goes off – can you imagine how that could be? I can’t.”

Voitenko, whose company Sovfracht specializes in anti-piracy security consulting, also said the hijacking was beyond the means of ordinary pirates.

“The operation cost more than the cargo and ship combined.”

Declining to elaborate any further, Voitenko suggested that the ship’s cargo might not be drugs or arms, “but something much more expensive and dangerous.” He added:

“It seems some third party didn’t want this transit to be fulfilled so they made this situation highly sophisticated and very complicated.”

So, what exactly was on the MV Arctic Sea, what was the intended destination of that secret cargo, and where is it now? Our intelligence sources from the U.S. to the UK and Israel have provided critical and unsettling insight into these questions. Their answers paint a very disturbing picture of state-sanctioned nuclear arms smuggling that will likely set the stage for an apocalyptic, end-game scenario ripped directly from the Book of Revelation. The consequences of such a scenario, allowed to continue without interdiction or exposure, could forever change the balance of power, if not the actual global geographical landscape itself.

Part II will be published tomorrow.

——————————

Reference: Arctic Sea Events Timeline

June 2009: The Arctic Sea undergoes repairs at the Pregol shipyard in Kaliningrad, which is a Russian enclave situated between Poland and Lithuania. It is the base of the Russian Baltic Fleet and a notorious area for smuggling of everything from drugs to weapons. According to intelligence reports following the alleged disappearance of the vessel, the “repairs” were not repairs at all, but an extensive project that involved completely dismantling the ship’s bulkhead to accommodate some type of additional “special” cargo.

20 July 2009: The vessel is anchored in Pietarsaari on the West Coast of Finland to pick up its cargo of sawn timber worth $1.8 million.

23 July 2009: The Arctic Sea, flying the Maltese Flag, leaves Pietarsaari with a crew of 15 for the port of Bejaia in Algeria with a projected arrival date of August 4, 2009. The ship has food supplies for a 45-day voyage and enough fuel for 40 days of cruising.

24 July 2009: According to a number of various sources, the vessel is forcibly boarded in the early morning near the Swedish island of Gotland. Initial reports suggested that the crew was held, beaten and interrogated for 12 hours by eight-(8) armed attackers. Some reports suggest that the masked attackers posed as Swedish drugs police who spoke English with an accent. Some reports indicate that these are the men who have been arrested for the hijacking, although it was previously reported that the attackers left the Arctic Sea within 12 hours of their initial attack.

Other reports indicate that the hijackers forced the crew to change course and turned off the vessel’s navigation equipment (AIS), while others suggest the AIS was remotely turned off. Interestingly, news of this incident would remain a virtual secret for the next five-(5) days. By the time the Swedish report of the attack emerged, the ship had already passed through the English Channel.

28 July 2009: The Arctic Sea reportedly makes routine contact with the Dover Coastguard as it enters the English Channel. A short time later, the same day managers of the Malta flagged and Russian owned ship Arctic Sea report the armed boarding to the Helsinki police authorities.

30 July 2009: The last signal from the vessel’s automatic identification system (AIS) placed the Arctic Sea between southwest England and France. at 1:29 a.m. Greenwich Mean Time on July 30, the ship’s signal vanished.

31 July – 2 August 2009: European maritime officials report receiving radio calls from the Arctic Sea alleging a second attack off the Portuguese coast.

3 August 2009: According to published reports, Vladimir Dushin, vice-president of Renaissance Insurance, alleges that the company was contacted by telephone by an English-speaking caller who demanded $1.5 million or the crew of the Arctic Sea would be shot and the ship sunk. Interpol issues an initial hijacking alert for the Arctic Sea.

Article printed from Northeast Intelligence Network: http://homelandsecurityus.com

URL to article: http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2994

Click here to print.

Copyright (c) 2009 Northeast Intelligence Network. All rights reserved.Idiot # 1

WHAT IF????????

Monday, August 17th, 2009

What would you say if I gave you 11 reasons why the elections in 2010 will be the most important in the history of the United States ?

1. What if I had told you in October 2008, before the last presidential election, that before Barack Obama’s first 100 days in office, the federal government would be in control of both the mortgage and the banking industries? That 19 of America ‘s largest banks would be forced to undergo stress tests by the federal government which would determine if they were insufficiently capitalized, so they must be supervised by the government?
Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America .”

2. What if I had told you that within Barack Obama’s first 100 days in office the federal government would be the largest shareholder in the US Big-Three automakers: GM, and Chrysler? That the government would kick out the CEO’s of these companies and appoint hand-picked executives with zero experience in the auto industry and that executive compensation would be determined, not by a Board of Directors, but by the government?
Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !”

3. What if I had told you that Barack Obama would appoint 21 Czars, without congressional approval, accountable only to him, not to the voters, who would have control over a wide range of US policy decisions. That there would be a Stimulus Accountability Czar, an Urban Czar, a Compensation Czar, an Iran Czar, an Auto Industry Czar, a Cyber Security Czar, an Energy Czar, a Bank Bailout Czar, and more than a dozen other government bureaucrats with unchecked regulatory powers over US domestic and foreign policy.
Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !”

4. What if I had told you that the federal deficit would be $915 billion in the first six months of the Obama presidency – with a projected annual deficit of $1.75 trillion – triple the $454.8 billion in 2008, for which the previous administration was highly criticized by Obama and his fellow Democrats. That congress would pass Obama’s $3.53 trillion federal budget for fiscal 2010… That the projected deficit over the next ten years would be greater than $10 trillion.
Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !”

5. What if I had told you that the Obama Justice Department would order FBI agents to read Miranda rights to high-value detainees captured on the battlefield and held at US military detention facilities in Afghanistan . That Obama would order the closing of the Guantanamo detention facility with no plan for the disposition of the 200-plus individuals held there. That several of the suspected terrorists at Guantanamo would be sent to live in freedom in Bermuda at the expense of the US government. That our returning US veterans would be labeled terrorists and put on a watch list.
Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !”

6. What if I had told you that the federal government would seek powers to seize key companies whose failures could jeopardize the financial system. That a new regulatory agency would be proposed by Obama to control loans, credit cards, mortgage-backed securities, and other financial products offered to the public.
Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !!”

7. What if I had told you that Obama would travel to the Middle East, bow before the Saudi king, and repeatedly apologize for America ‘s past actions. That he would travel to Latin America where he would warmly greet Venezuela ‘s strongman Hugo Chavez and sit passively in the audience while Nicaraguan Marxist thug Daniel Ortega charged America with terrorist aggression in Central America .
Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !!”

8. Okay, now what if I were to tell you that Obama wants to dismantle conservative talk radio through the imposition of a new “Fairness Doctrine.” That he wants to curtail the First Amendment rights of those who may disagree with his policies via internet blogs, cable news networks, or advocacy ads. That most major network television and most newspapers will only sing his phrases like state-run media in communist countries?
Would you say, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !!!”

9. What if I were to tell you that the Obama Justice Department is doing everything it can to limit your Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. That the federal government wants to reinstate the so-called assault weapons ban which would prohibit the sale of any type of firearm that doesn’t require the shooter to pull the trigger every time a round is fired. That Obama’s Attorney General wants to eliminate the sale of virtually all handguns and ammunition, which most citizens choose for self-defense.
Would you say, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !!!”

10. What if I were to tell you that the Obama plan is to eliminate states rights guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment and give the federal government sweeping new powers over policies currently under the province of local and state governments and voted on by the people. That Obama plans to control the schools, energy production, the environment, health care, and the wealth of every US citizen.
Would you say, “C’mon, that will never happen in America !”

11. What if I were to tell you that the president, the courts, and the federal government have ignored the US Constitution and have seized powers which the founders of our country fought to restrict. That our last presidential election may have been our last truly free election for some time to come.
I know, I know what you will say. “That will never happen in America !”

If we don’t do everything in our power to stop this madness in 2010…
May God have mercy on our worthless souls.

The Death of Children

Wednesday, August 12th, 2009

- Northeast Intelligence Network – http://homelandsecurityus.com -

A glimpse into the Islamic mindset
Posted By Director On August 11, 2009 @ 5:42 am In Douglas J. Hagmann, Fifth Column, Ideological Jihad, Legal Jihad | Comments Disabled

By Douglas J. Hagmann, Director

10 August 2009: Lately, people have forgotten that we are fighting a war for the very survival of our nation, our ideals, our culture and our freedom. Most people associate visible terrorism – bombs and bullets – with the war, failing to pay attention to the equally insidious assaults taking place through non-violent means.

Investigation conducted by the Northeast Intelligence Network, as well as other agencies and individuals concerned over the welfare of our great nation, has confirmed that Islamic fundamentalists have made great inroads in the West. Inside many of the Saudi funded mosques and Islamic centers in the U.S. and Canada, Imams are preaching a doctrine of hate and intolerance against all non-Muslims, with specific hatred against Jews and Christians. As clearly illustrated in these videos, they are attempting to import a perverse culture to replace Western values and ideology. It is important that we remind ourselves that the future of our nation is at stake, and attacks are not limited to those of violence.

Three year-old girl on Jews: “They are ‘apes and pigs,’ urged by adult Muslim fundamentalist:

Watch the video at this link.

Grooming young children for martyrdom: Link

Using Mickey Mouse to teach hatred for Israel & the Jews: Video link

Do you know what is being taught at your local mosque?

Article printed from Northeast Intelligence Network: http://homelandsecurityus.com

URL to article: http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2981

Click here to print.

Copyright (c) 2009 Northeast Intelligence Network. All rights reserved.

JUST SAY: “GO TO HELL OBAMA!”

Saturday, July 25th, 2009

Saturday, Jul 25, 2009
Posted on Thu, Jul. 23, 2009
Perry raises possibility of states’ rights showdown with White House over healthcare

By DAVE MONTGOMERY
dmontgomery@star-telegram.com
AUSTIN — Gov. Rick Perry, raising the specter of a showdown with the Obama administration, suggested Thursday that he would consider invoking states’ rights protections under the 10th Amendment to resist the president’s healthcare plan, which he said would be “disastrous” for Texas.
Interviewed by conservative talk show host Mark Davis of Dallas’ WBAP/820 AM, Perry said his first hope is that Congress will defeat the plan, which both Perry and Davis described as “Obama Care.” But should it pass, Perry predicted that Texas and a “number” of states might resist the federal health mandate.
“I think you’ll hear states and governors standing up and saying ‘no’ to this type of encroachment on the states with their healthcare,” Perry said. “So my hope is that we never have to have that stand-up. But I’m certainly willing and ready for the fight if this administration continues to try to force their very expansive government philosophy down our collective throats.”
Perry, the state’s longest-serving governor, has made defiance of Washington a hallmark of his state administration as well as his emerging re-election campaign against U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in the 2010 Republican primary. Earlier this year, Perry refused $555 million in federal unemployment stimulus money, saying it would subject Texas to long-term costs after the federal dollars ended.
Interviewed after returning from a trip to Iraq and Afghanistan, Perry spoke out against President Barack Obama’s healthcare package less than 24 hours after the president used a prime-time news conference Wednesday night to try to sell the massive legislative package to Congress and the public.
‘Not the solution’
“It really is a state issue, and if there was ever an argument for the 10th Amendment and for letting the states find a solution to their problems, this may be at the top of the class,” Perry said. “A government-run healthcare system is financially unstable. It’s not the solution.”
Perry heartily backed an unsuccessful resolution in this year’s legislative session that would have affirmed the belief that Texas has sovereignty under the 10th Amendment over all powers not otherwise granted to the federal government.
In expressing “unwavering support” for the 10th Amendment resolution by state Rep. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, Perry said “federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens and its interference with the affairs of our state.”
Returning to the “letter and spirit” of the 10th Amendment, he said in April, “will free our state from undue regulations and ultimately strengthen our union.”
Perry, in his on-air interview Thursday with Davis, did not specify how he might use the 10th Amendment in opposing the Obama health plan. His spokeswoman, Allison Castle, said that the governor’s first goal is to defeat the plan in Congress and that any discussion of options beyond that would be “hypothetical.”
“I don’t think it’s surprising that the governor is taking a stand against it,” said Anne Dunkelberg, associate director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities, an Austin-based research organization that supports the House version of Obama’s plan. “Unfortunately, the national dialogue on health reform has been extraordinarily partisan and polarized.”
The White House Media Affairs Office, asked to comment on Perry’s statements, did not have an immediate response. In his remarks to the nation Wednesday, Obama restated his midsummer deadline for passage of the bill in Congress, saying it is urgently needed to help families “that are being clobbered by healthcare costs.”
High stakes in Texas
Texas has a higher percentage of uninsured people than any other state, with 1 in 4 Texans lacking health coverage. Dunkelberg, whose organization supports policies to help low- and modest-income Texans, said the House version would create a “predictable and comprehensive benefits package” for thousands of struggling middle-income Texans.
Former Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth of Burleson, a senior fellow for healthcare at the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation, echoed Perry’s assertion that the Obama plan is the wrong approach and could have disastrous financial consequences for Texas.
Under the Senate version of the bill, she said, an expansion of the joint federal-state Medicaid program for the poor could cost Texas $4 billion a year.
“There are good solutions” to the country’s healthcare problems, Wohlgemuth said. “This isn’t it.”
Perry said the plan is another example of the Obama administration’s “massive takeover of the private-sector economy.”
“I hope our leaders will look for solutions that don’t dig our country further into debt,” he said.
Perry called on Texans in the House and Senate to oppose the plan. “I can’t imagine that anyone from Texas who cares about this state would vote for Obama Care. I don’t care whether you’re Democrat or Republican,” he said.
Of those Texans who might consider supporting the plan, he said: “This may sound a little bit harsh, but they might ought to consider representing some other state because they’re sure not representing Texas.”

Bill Gives Attorney General Power To Designate Gun Owners, Tax Protesters As Terrorists

Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

- Infowars – http://www.infowars.com -

Bill Gives Attorney General Power To Designate Gun Owners, Tax Protesters As Terrorists
Posted By admin On July 6, 2009 @ 6:38 pm In Featured Stories | 282 Comments

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, July 6, 2009
Amendments to the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, which has already been passed by the House, would empower the Attorney General Eric Holder to define gun owners, anti-abortion activists and tax protesters as domestic terrorists in light of recent federal reports that classify millions of Americans as “extremists”.

Former impeached Florida judge and now Democratic Congressman Alcee Hastings has introduced amendments to H.R. 2647: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, which would give Holder dictator powers to demonize legitimate protest groups as being affiliated with violent race hate organizations.

The bill is ostensibly aimed at preventing race “extremists” and gang members from joining the Army, but since the Army already hires felons, criminals, racists and gang members, the real purpose behind the legislation is to codify the move to label gun owners, “anti-government” activists and tax protesters as domestic terrorists, a process that has been ongoing since at least the start of the decade.

The bill’s definition of “people associated or affiliated with hate groups” include, “Groups or organizations that espouse an intention or expectation of armed revolutionary activity against the United States Government,” or “Other groups or organizations that are determined by the Attorney General to be of a violent, extremist nature.”

The evidence required to show that such an organization is affiliated with a violent hate group includes people possessing tattoos identifying them with the group, individuals who attend conferences or rallies sponsored by a “hate group,” people who engage in online discussion forums of an “extremist” nature, people who possess documents, books or photographs or simply “related materials as defined by the Attorney General” that represent “hate propaganda.”

The amendments introduced by Hastings were passed by the House and the bill now moves on to the Senate for approval before it is signed by the President.

Since the definition of an “extremist” has already been established by numerous federal documents over the last few years that list law-abiding citizens as domestic terrorists, Hastings’ amendments are simply an attempt to centralize the power to demonize such groups into the hands of the Obama administration.

“This is arguably one of the worst pieces of legislation to come down the pike in a long, long time. In essence Attorney General Eric Holder — a Bill Clinton retread — will have the discretion to label Americans terrorists. Hastings is a dangerous man and should be forced to resign from congress. This amendment is part and parcel of the trend in this country to suppress dissent by patriots by calling them domestic terrorists,” warns writer Mike Baker.

Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) expressed his concern about the amendment on the house floor, noting that under Homeland Security’s very definition of what constitutes an “extremist”, the majority of Americans will be characterized as hate criminals.

“While the amendment seeks to keep gang members and members of violent groups out of the military, the amendment by its language is much more broad. Specifically, it confers upon the Attorney General the ability to categorize groups as hate groups, and this sounds an alarm for many of us because of the recent shocking and offensive report released by the Department of Homeland Security which labeled, arguably, a majority of Americans as “extremists,” warned Franks.

“I take extreme offense that the federal government — through a report issued under the authority of a Cabinet-level official — would dare to categorize people who are “dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition or abortion or immigration” as “right-wing extremists” and it begs the question of whether the Attorney General, under Mr. Hastings’ Amendment, can look to the Napolitano report to decide who is an extremist, or can make the same categorization of the majority of Americans as extremists who may then be kept from joining the military, or who may be discharged,” said Rep. Franks.

As we reported in April, a recent Department of Homeland Security intelligence assessment equates gun owners with violent terrorists and states that radical extremists are “stockpiling” weapons in fear of an Obama administration gun ban.

The document, Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment, states;

“Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

A similar report was also issued by the DHS at the end of March which listed the “alternative media” with other radical extremist groups and implies that people who disagree with the mass media’s version of events are potential domestic terrorists.

Both documents were just the latest in a long sordid line of training manuals in which the federal government characterizes millions of American citizens as potentially violent terrorists who are a threat to law enforcement, and designates them under the umbrella term of “extremists,” in the same context cited in Hastings’ amendments.

As we have exhaustively documented with the MIAC report and a whole host of others, the federal government apparently has very little concern for any perceived terrorist threat to America coming from the MIddle East or Al-Qaeda cells within the country, and indeed if any such threat existed we are only in more danger, because the feds have been busy training law enforcement that law-abiding American citizens who exercise their legal right to purchase firearms or who exercise their first amendment right to discuss politics or run websites, are potential terrorists who want to instigate a violent revolution.

In addition, current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the U.S. constitutes terrorist activity.

Over the last few years we have documented countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists and domestic terrorists.

A d v e r t i s e m e n t
The fact that the government is now treating people who merely criticize its conduct as domestic terrorists is the clearest signal possible that the United States has entered a period in history similar to Germany in the early 1930’s and that it can only be a matter of time before the right “emergency” provides the justification for dissidents to be targeted for round-ups and mass imprisonment.

No one can claim now that this is merely a paranoid delusion – the government itself is training its law enforcement and military arms that protesters and people who use their First Amendment rights are domestic terrorists.

The facilities for round-ups of “extremists” who dare to exercise their First or Second Amendment rights are already being prepared, again with the help of Hastings, who sponsored (HR 645) – the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act.

The bill authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to set up a network of FEMA camp facilities to be used to house U.S. citizens in the event of a national emergency.

Ominously, the bill also states that the camps can be used to “meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security,” an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse.

The bill mandates that six separate facilities be established in different Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions (FEMA) throughout the country.

The camps will double up as “command and control” centers that will also house a “24/7 operations watch center” as well as training facilities for Federal, State, and local first responders.

The bill also contains language that will authorize camps to be established within closed or already operating military bases around the country.

As we have previously highlighted, in early 2006 Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root was awarded a $385 million dollar contract by Homeland Security to construct detention and processing facilities in the event of a national emergency.

The language of the preamble to the agreement veils the program with talk of temporary migrant holding centers, but it is made clear that the camps would also be used “as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency.”

As far back as 2002, FEMA sought bids from major real estate and engineering firms to construct giant internment facilities in the case of a chemical, biological or nuclear attack or a natural disaster.

A much discussed and circulated report, the Pentagon’s Civilian Inmate Labor Program, was more recently updated and the revision details a “template for developing agreements” between the Army and corrections facilities for the use of civilian inmate labor on Army installations.”

Alex Jones has attended numerous military urban warfare training drills across the US where role players were used to simulate arresting American citizens and taking them to internment camps.

Hastings’ efforts to have millions of law-abiding American citizens lumped in with racist gangs and designated as “extremists” arrives on the back of Federal hate crimes legislation, which in reality would criminalize “thought crimes,” that has cleared the House and now faces the Senate as S.909, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (officially, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act).

S.909 is a direct violation of the First Amendment. It allows the federal government to prosecute people involved in “hate speech” transmitted over television, radio, and the internet. The House version of the bill states:

“Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce [radio, TV, internet] any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. (HR 1966, SEC 3, Sec. 881a)”

In other words, if a talk show host engages in “hostile” speech against a person or persons of the above mentioned federally protected group that talk show host will face federal prosecution and the prospect of a two year prison term.

The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act would similarly criminalize free speech on the Internet if it can be deemed in any way to have been “harmful” to an individual. This represents the end of political blogging and free speech on the world wide web.

If both bills are not opposed and thrown out then the First Amendment will become nothing more than a relic of a bygone age.

All of these coordinated moves to demonize informed, armed and pissed off Americans as extremists, terrorists and hate criminals represents the federal government’s final push to brainwash the population into accepting the notion that some Americans are dangerous, that they are enemies of the state, and that they can be targeted in the same way that victims of the “war on terror” are now being targeted across the world – through misappropriation of guilt, torture and indefinite imprisonment.

RELATED: ATTORNEY GENERAL TO CLASSIFY PRO-LIFE, PRO-GUN AMERICANS AS TERRORISTS

Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/bill-gives-attorney-general-power-to-designate-gun-owners-tax-protesters-as-terrorists/

Click here to print.

Copyright © 2008 Infowars. All rights reserved.

Aafia Siddiqui: Deep Ties to Al-Qaida Resurface Yet Again

Monday, July 6th, 2009

Aafia Siddiqui: Deep Ties to Al-Qaida Resurface Yet Again
Posted By Sean Osborne On July 5, 2009 @ 12:31 pm In Domestic Terrorism | Comments Disabled

5 July 2009: According to the U.S. Department of Justice, it was not quite one year ago, on July 17 2008, when the female Al-Qaida terrorist, Aafia Siddiqui, was arrested due to suspicious behavior in Ghazni, Afghanistan by Afghan National Police (ANP). Siddiqui was arrested as she loitered outside the provincial governor’s compound. A search of her handbag revealed documents on the manufacture of explosives in addition to data on chemical, biological and radiological weapons; descriptions of various landmarks in the United States, including New York City, and other unidentified “substances” which were sealed in glass bottles.
The next day a party composed of two FBI special agents and several U.S. Army personnel arrived at the ANP facility where Aafia Siddiqui was being held unrestrained in a second floor room behind a curtain which was directly adjacent to the room where the American’s were meeting with ANP officials. Within moments of the meeting’s commencement Aafia Siddiqui burst through the curtain and grabbed an M4 assault rifle belonging to one of the U.S. Army officers and fired two rounds before being struck by a round fired by another officer’s 9mm side arm. Aafia Siddiqui was finally in American custody.
Since her arrival in the United States to face charges of attempted murder in this incident, Siddiqui has been defended by lawyers who are challenging the charges on the basis of Siddiqui’s mental competency to stand trial. The defense lawyers cite a psychologist’s expert conclusions that this Al-Qaida terrorist suffers from a “delusional disorder and depression.” It is the opinion of this writer that these defense lawyers and their defense psychological experts are totally incompetent when it comes to evaluating the mental state of a committed Al-Qaida terrorist and there is nothing in their formal education which would have even remotely prepared them to make such psychological evaluations.
It is also important to note that the mental competency aspect of this legal charade followed the failure of initial defense tactics which included the claims that U.S. government had planted physical evidence on her and various other “dirty tricks,” and that she had been in the custody of a “foreign military intelligence authorities” for several years and during that time was subjected to “torture, sexual abuse and beatings.” None of these defensive claims have any merit whatsoever. This woman has been and still is a fully committed female Al-Qaida terrorist directly linked into the family of Khalid Sheikh Mohamed (KSM) responsible for the planning and execution of the attacks of September 11, 2001. In fact, her terrorist activities date to the early 1990s when she raised funds for Bosnian jihadi’s in the former-Yugoslavia under the guise of “Islamic charities.”
It is known by the U.S. government that Aafia Siddiqui separated from and divorced her first husband, Mohammed Amjad Khan; also a terrorist directly linked to the Boston, Massachusetts-based Institute of Islamic Research and Teaching, sometime in late 2002 and remarried one of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s nephews, Ammar al-Baluchi (aka Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali), and prior to his capture in April 2003. At the time of his arrest in Karachi, Pakistan in April 2003 al-Baluchi was involved in a plot to bomb the U.S. Embassy there and remains one of a dozen high-value Al-Qaida terrorists being held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He is the cousin of Ramzi Yousef who was one of the terrorists brought to trial and convicted of the World Trade Center bombing of February 1993. Aafia Siddiqui also has direct ties to another Guantanamo terrorist, Majid Khan, formerly of Baltimore. Maryland and for whom Aafia Siddiqui rented a city post office box.
Now it comes to light that Aafia’s 5-year long disappearance from Karachi coincides with the arrest of Ammar al-Baluchi. It has also been entered as evidence in her trial that she admitted to the FBI that she returned to Karachi to work in that city’s Institute of Technology, that she had traveled to Afghanistan and even lived in Quetta, Pakistan for some period of time. So much for the horse hooey being propagated by the terrorists and their dhimmi allies of Aafia Siddiqui’s capture, torture, sexual abuse and beatings between 2003 and 2008. She was free and continued her terrorist activities until caught outside the governor’s compound in Ghazni, Afghanistan and made one last desperate attempt to kill American soldiers at that time. Aafia Siddiqui should receive the same sentence as her husband and his infamous uncle and his other infamous cousin should receive: life in prison, no parole, no islamic martyrdom. May she rot in an American jail cell until her death.
Article printed from Northeast Intelligence Network: http://homelandsecurityus.com

URL to article: http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2894

The TRUTH about the 2009 Iranian Revolution

Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

- Northeast Intelligence Network – http://homelandsecurityus.com -

The TRUTH about the 2009 Iranian Revolution
Posted By Director On June 22, 2009 @ 5:11 am In Douglas J. Hagmann, Iran | Comments Disabled

21 June 2009: It is no longer about the election, which is about electing one of two possible “candidates” poured from the same mold. It’s now about Iranians standing up to 30 years under an oppressive Islamic regime, and being all but abandoned by the West.

Read this site – download the videos and learn the truth about what is taking place in Iran and what the U.S. and Western countries ARE NOT DOING.
IRAN : AHMADINEJAD AND MOUSAVI ARE TWO FACES OF THE SAME REGIME

15.06.2009

SATURDAY 13 JUNE 2009 – As both Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mirhossein Mousavi claimed victory in Friday’s presidential election, Iranian journalist Kaveh Mohseni, based in France, told FRANCE 24 that the two candidates had been carefully selected by the regime.

FRANCE 24 – The Iranian population has voted massively in this presidential election. What do you think is at stake ?

Kaveh Mohseni – I don’t believe in this vote. I think the two candidates are basically the same and have roughly the same programme. It’s the programme of the Islamic Republic.

They offer to negotiate with the Americans if the US abandons its demands and sanctions. They also have the same views on Hezbollah and Israel. These cornerstones of Iran’s policies will remain unchanged.

What is really at stake in this vote is the legitimacy of the system. The mullahs who control the country want to give it a democratic face. An alleged massive turnout will grant the regime the legitimacy it is aiming for, because both of the candidates leading in opinion polls are supportive of the regime.

Ahmadinejad is the tough hardliner figure, and Mousavi is the so-called moderate one, used by the regime to demonstrate its openness.

© WWW.IRAN-RESIST.ORG
FRANCE 24 – So what do you say of all the crowds gathered in rallies and the queues in front of polling stations ?

Kaveh Mohseni – You can’t believe everything the regime wants you to see. In Iran, the population lives in extreme poverty, and it’s very easy for the authorities to set up fake rallies or to send the press to specific polling stations.

Observers I know in Tehran told me many polling stations were empty, in Lorzaedeh Mosque, for example, and in Al Ghadir. As for the youths and women dressed in green rallying in stadiums, this is a typical scene set up for the West to demonstrate a presumed colour movement, just like uprisings in other countries.

It gives the impression of a democratic Islam. But where were these ‘dissident’ crowds when dozens of young people were recently hung by the regime just because they opposed it ?

In Iran, the average salary is of $240. That’s for those lucky enough to have a job. In those conditions, it’s easy to buy off a few people, but you have to read between the lines. And people have other worries than to go vote, and they know none of the candidates will get them out of their misery.

© WWW.IRAN-RESIST.ORG
FRANCE 24 – You don’t believe some Iranians could vote for the more moderate candidate at least to avoid a worst-case scenario ?

Kaveh Mohseni – No, I don’t. Because Mousavi is not a moderate. When he was Prime Minister, 30,000 political prisoners were executed in only three months in the summer of 1988 and buried in a mass grave on the site of Khavaran. Many Iranians may be young but they have parents. No one can believe Mousavi is a moderate. They all have blood on their hands.

Furthermore he ruined the Iranian economy when he was in power by nationalizing many companies.

© WWW.IRAN-RESIST.ORG
FRANCE 24 – Do you agree with some of the analysts who figure that a more moderate president would be a better negotiating partner for the international community ?

Kaveh Mohseni – You Western societies desperately want to believe dialogue is possible. But you just don’t understand the regime wants nuclear power and is not willing to negotiate.

However, I don’t believe that nuclear weapons are the main threat coming from Iran.

Their self-proclaimed technological progress is a pure fabrication. They say they’ve conceived military planes, but at the same time they can’t even maintain their basic passenger carriers. Furthermore, a nuclear weapon wouldn’t represent much compared to the American arsenal.

Their real strength lies in their power to destabilize the region. They have the power to block the Lebanese government, they control Hezbollah, north of Israel. They created radio stations that encourage hostility towards local governments in Morocco and Egypt, moderates in general, and hostility towards Israel.

Change in Iran can only come with support from the outside. Militants from within are just powerless.

Article printed from Northeast Intelligence Network: http://homelandsecurityus.com

URL to article: http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2877

Click here to print.

Copyright (c) 2009 Northeast Intelligence Network. All rights reserved.

The Surrender of American Sovereignty to the Global Oligarchy

Sunday, May 31st, 2009

The Surrender of American Sovereignty to the Global Oligarchy
Posted By Sean Osborne On May 31, 2009 @ 6:10 pm In Domestic Terrorism | Comments Disabled

By Sean Osborne, Associate Director

31 MAY 2009: Good morning America and welcome to your dismal slavish future within the Global Oligarchy. The surrender of the financial sovereignty of the United States of America is now an established fact and occurred on 2 April 2009. That was the day President Barack Hussein Obama surrendered our financial sovereignty to the Globalist G-20 and the European Union.

The unprecedented success of the American experiment in capitalist free enterprise was summarily surrendered to the new Global Oligarchy of world socialist elites, a newly emergent form of global government which is unquestionably led by the European Union. The worst part about it is that this surrender will be paid for by every living American taxpayer, their children and their children’s children for several generations to come – should the nation by some unforeseen miracle last that long. For this we have to thank our elected representatives who allowed it to happen, and ourselves for not keeping an eye on the career politicians who gave away our God-given birthrights.

The traditional American profit motive of our free market economy had been utilized for well over twenty decades by American entrepreneurs to grow prosperous companies into corporations from small town ‘Mom and Pop Shops’ was replaced in a single day by the Global Oligarchy’s consortium of elite bankers known as the Financial Stability Board (FSB) led by an Italian banker named Mario Draghi. The FSB is the vehicle by which the Global Oligarchy will fashion their global superstate. Whatever became of American Constitutional law I cannot say, but I suspect it was unceremoniously buried alive on foreign soil by an sitting American president who still cannot prove he has not usurped the office of chief executive.

You don’t have to take my word for it, simply read any interview or recent book or article written by the “Great One” Mark R. Levin (Levin’s “Liberty and Tyranny” is an instant classic), FoxNews financial expert Stuart Varney or political advisor Dick Morris. In fact, I urge you to seek them out to learn why Lady Liberty is weeping so uncontrollably these days.

Article printed from Northeast Intelligence Network: http://homelandsecurityus.com

URL to article: http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2802