IRS scandal evolving too fast for reporters to ignore

posted at 10:41 am on June 26, 2014 by Noah Rothman

Lois Lerner – Internal Revenue Service

A handful of former IRS executive Lois Lerner’s emails released by the House Ways and Means Committee seem to be serving as a Rorschach test for political actors and members of the press alike. For some, the early reaction to those emails revealed more about an individual’s thinking about the IRS scandal, and the Republican-led House committees, than it did about the alleged misconduct of one of the country’s most powerful law enforcement agencies.

On Wednesday, the House Ways and Means Committee released emails sent by Lois Lerner to a colleague reveal that she received information about Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) which led her to inquire about referring him and an unnamed organization soliciting him for a paid speech for an audit. After somehow receiving an event invitation meant for Grassley in which the event planners offered to pay for the senator’s wife to attend, Lerner asked her colleague if she could take action on the apparent infraction.

“Looked like they were inappropriately offering to pay for his wife,” Lerner observed in a message to her colleague, Matthew Giuliano.

Giuliano replied by informing Lerner that, not only was it not an infraction but that the incident she wanted to investigate had not yet even occurred. Partisan conservatives and liberals jumped on the email exchange, each using it to support their preconceived conclusions about the IRS scandal. But the emails inspired more questions than they provided answers.

Powerline Blog’s John Hinderaker cautioned conservatives to keep their powder dry. He wrote that Lerner did not appear to be looking to target Grassley specifically, but rather the organization which was holding the event to which he was invited. “Maybe this is an instance of Lerner being trigger-happy when it comes to going after conservative c3s and c4s,” he wrote, noting that the organization’s name was redacted from the released emails. “We can’t judge that without knowing more about the organization.”

“I don’t see any indication that she wanted to throw a Republican senator in jail, and in the absence of more information, I don’t see any evidence that she wanted to persecute a conservative organization, either,” Hinderaker continued.

This is not to say that there is nothing curious about this email exchange. It does suggest that Lerner had what you might call an itchy trigger finger, particularly when it comes to conservatives. Furthermore, in conjunction with the revelation that Lerner half-joked with colleagues about taking a position with the repurposed Obama campaign organization Organizing for Action, it does indicate that Lerner frequently deferred to her partisan instincts.

Over at The Federalist, Sean Davis expressed frustration at those members of the political media establishment who were dismissing the relevance of this disclosure. He specifically cites Slate’s David Weigel who seemed unconcerned about the revelations in this email in part because Lerner did not act on her apparent desire to audit either Grassley or the unnamed group that corresponded with him.

“Intimidation is only wrong once its threats are carried out,” Davis wrote sarcastically. “Abuse of power only counts as abuse when you can find a visible bruise.”

It is hard to fault Davis here for expressing his indignation over some prominent reporters’ seemingly boundless ability to extend those in positions of authority the benefit of the doubt. It becomes more difficult to attribute Weigel’s instinctive dismissal of the latest revelations about the IRS to the languid cynicism that so often accompanies proximity to Washington when one sees that his colleagues in the political press do not share his indifference.

“This does not help her case, which is already pretty bad to begin with,” CNN’s John King observed on Thursday.

“It fuels the speculation that there was actually a political witch-hunt which was motivated by politics,” Politico’s Manu Raju agreed. “It’s exactly what the administration does not want.”

“Makes it hard for the White House to say ‘This is Republicans trying to make a big partisan issue out of a mistake,’” King noted.

“And it raises the question of if this is something that’s in the emails that we have, what’s in the emails that have disappeared, that don’t exist anymore?” Associated Press reporter Julie Pace observed. “And it provides some actual tangible fodder for these hearings that are going to be happening on the Hill.”

Pace’s point is the most important. The emails themselves are not especially damning, but they support the central narrative surrounding the IRS scandal; namely, that political considerations came into play in the application of tax law. Moreover, this email exchange validates the concerns of those who wonder whether Lerner’s missing emails contain information critical to the investigation into this scandal.

It is events like these lead nearly three quarters of the country to support the congressional investigation into the IRS’s alleged abuses. Those in the press like Weigel who reacted with reflexive nonchalance to the latest emails now appear to be out on a limb. The slow drip of developments surrounding the IRS scandal is growing into a torrent, and events are happening faster than they can be explained away.


Since the IRS took an ax and gave the hard drive forty whacks there’s noting left but to waterboard Lois Lerner…

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Supreme Court unanimously rejects Obama recess appointments

June 26, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

The Supreme Court dropped a huge bomb on the Obama administration, unanimously rebuking the President for arrogating to himself the determination of when Congress is in session for the purpose of making recess appointments. According to reports on the opinion, the court may have taken a middle path on what a recess actually is, toning down one appellate court ruling that only allowed for recess appointments between formal sessions:

The US Supreme Court today limited a president’s power to make recess appointments when the White House and the Senate are controlled by opposite parties, scaling back a presidential authority as old as the republic.

The case arose from a political dispute between President Obama and Senate Republicans, who claimed he had no authority to put three people on the National Labor Relations Board in January 2012 when the Senate was out of town.

He used a president’s power, granted by the Constitution, to “fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate.” But the Republicans said the Senate was not in recess at the time the appointments were made, because every three days a senator went into the chamber, gaveled it to order, and then immediately called a recess.

By a unanimous vote, the Supreme Court agreed that the Senate was not in recess, holding that it’s up to both houses of Congress to define when they’re in session or in recess. As a result of the decision, the Senate can frustrate a president’s ability to make recess appointments simply by holding periodic pro forma sessions, a tactic used in recent years by both political parties.

According to NBC’s Pete Williams, the opinion provides a timeframe for Congress and the White House to follow in the future:

That will certainly make it easier to play keep-away from the President. A minority on the court wanted to limit the recess power to strictly the period between sessions, as did one appellate court, but in the end a 5-4 majority decided to allow for a looser interpretation of “recess.” Certainly, if Congress wants to stop recess appointments from being made, it will be fairly easy to gavel into session every nine days.

The question will now be what happens to the NLRB rulings during the period when recess appointments provided a quorum. The answer appears to be that they can be successfully challenged and set aside. That was the context of the challenge to the recess appointments in the first place — lawsuits against regulation created in that period that alleged they were illegitimate. This ruling means that the Supreme Court unanimously agrees on that point, a severe rebuke to the “constitutional scholar” President and his abuse of power. More practically, though, the recent appointments to the NLRB can reconstitute that regulation if they wish, so the victory may be short lived for the plaintiffs.

Update: The decision in NLRB v Noel Canning et al can be found here.

Supreme Court decision


A unanimous indictment of Obama’s abuse of power. – Obama Inc. won’t care. He’s been ignoring Congress (the people’s reps) for years. Now he’ll just ignore the Supreme Court.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

The Chaos In Iraq Is By DESIGN

The Real History of the American Strategy for Iraq and the Middle East

The Chaos In Iraq Is By DESIGN

Image Credits: Ijanderson977 via Wikimedia Commons

by Washington’s Blog | June 26, 2014


Neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz planned regime change in Iraq more than 20 years ago … in 1991.

But the goal wasn’t just regime change (or oil).

The goal was to break up the country, and to do away with the sovereignty of Iraq as a separate nation.

The Guardian noted in 2003:

President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt predicted devastating consequences for the Middle East if Iraq is attacked. “We fear a state of disorder and chaos may prevail in the region,” he said.


They are probably still splitting their sides with laughter in the Pentagon. But Mr Mubarak and the [Pentagon] hawks do agree on one thing: war with Iraq could spell disaster for several regimes in the Middle East. Mr Mubarak believes that would be bad.The hawks, though, believe it would be good.

For the hawks, disorder and chaos sweeping through the region would not be an unfortunate side-effect of war with Iraq, but a sign that everything is going according to plan.


The “skittles theory” of the Middle East – that one ball aimed at Iraq can knock down several regimes – has been around for some time on the wilder fringes of politics but has come to the fore in the United States on the back of the “war against terrorism”.

Its roots can be traced, at least in part, to a paper published in 1996 by an Israeli thinktank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Entitled “A clean break: a new strategy for securing the realm”, it was intended as a political blueprint for the incoming government of Binyamin Netanyahu. As the title indicates, it advised the right-wing Mr Netanyahu to make a complete break with the past by adopting a strategy “based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism …”


The paper set out a plan by which Israel would “shape its strategic environment”, beginning with the removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad.

With Saddam out of the way and Iraq thus brought under Jordanian Hashemite influence, Jordan and Turkey would form an axis along with Israel to weaken and “roll back” Syria. Jordan, it suggested, could also sort out Lebanon by “weaning” the Shia Muslim population away from Syria and Iran, and re-establishing their former ties with the Shia in the new Hashemite kingdom of Iraq. “Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them”, the paper concluded.


The leader of the “prominent opinion makers” who wrote it was Richard Perle – now chairman of the Defence Policy Board at the Pentagon.

Also among the eight-person team was Douglas Feith, a neo-conservative lawyer, who now holds one of the top four posts at the Pentagon as under-secretary of policy.


Two other opinion-makers in the team were David Wurmser and his wife, Meyrav(see US thinktanks give lessons in foreign policy, August 19). Mrs Wurmser was co-founder of Memri, a Washington-based charity that distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers portraying Arabs in a bad light. After working with Mr Perle at the American Enterprise Institute, David Wurmser is now at the State Department, as a special assistant to John Bolton, the under-secretary for arms control and international security.

A fifth member of the team was James Colbert, of the Washington-based Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (Jinsa) – a bastion of neo-conservative hawkery whose advisory board was previously graced by Dick Cheney (now US vice-president), John Bolton and Douglas Feith.


With several of the “Clean Break” paper’s authors now holding key positions in Washington, the plan for Israel to “transcend” its foes by reshaping the Middle East looks a good deal more achievable today than it did in 1996. Americans may even be persuaded to give up their lives to achieve it.

(Before assuming prominent roles in the Bush administration, many of the same people – includingRichard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, John Bolton and others – advocated their imperial views during the Clinton administration via their American think tank, the “Project for a New American Century”.)

Thomas Harrington – professor of Iberian Studies at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut – writes:

[While there are some good articles on the chaos in Iraq, none of them] consider whetherthe chaos now enveloping the region might, in fact, be the desired aim of policy planners in Washington and Tel Aviv.


One of the prime goals of every empire is to foment ongoing internecine conflict in the territories whose resources and/or strategic outposts they covet.


The most efficient way of sparking such open-ended internecine conflict is to brutally smash the target country’s social matrix and physical infrastructure.


Ongoing unrest has the additional perk of justifying the maintenance and expansion of the military machine that feeds the financial and political fortunes of the metropolitan elite.

In short … divide and rule is about as close as it gets to a universal recourse the imperial game and that it is, therefore, as important to bear it in mind today as it was in the times of Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, the Spanish Conquistadors and the British Raj.

To those—and I suspect there are still many out there—for whom all this seems too neat or too conspiratorial, I would suggest a careful side-by side reading of:

a) the “Clean Break” manifesto generated by the Jerusalem-based Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS) in 1996


b) the “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” paper generated by The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) in 2000, a US group with deep personal and institutional links to the aforementioned Israeli think tank, and with the ascension of George Bush Junior to the White House, to the most exclusive sanctums of the US foreign policy apparatus.

To read the cold-blooded imperial reasoning in both of these documents—which speak, in the first case, quite openly of the need to destabilize the region so as to reshape Israel’s “strategic environment” and, in the second of the need to dramatically increase the number of US “forward bases” in the region ….

To do so now, after the US’s systematic destruction of Iraq and Libya—two notably oil-rich countries whose delicate ethnic and religious balances were well known to anyone in or out of government with more than passing interest in history—, and after the its carefully calibrated efforts to generate and maintain murderous and civilization-destroying stalemates in Syria and Egypt (something that is easily substantiated despite our media’s deafening silence on the subject), is downright blood-curdling.

And yet, it seems that for even very well-informed analysts, it is beyond the pale to raise the possibility that foreign policy elites in the US and Israel, like all virtually all the ambitious hegemons before them on the world stage, might have quite coldly and consciously fomented open-ended chaos in order to achieve their overlapping strategic objectives in this part of the world.

Antiwar’s Justin Raimondo notes:

Iraq’s fate was sealed from the moment we invaded: it has no future as a unitary state. As I pointed out again and again in the early days of the conflict, Iraq is fated to split apart into at least three separate states: the Shi’ite areas around Baghdad and to the south, the Sunni regions to the northwest, and the Kurdish enclave which was itching for independence since well before the US invasion. This was the War Party’s real if unexpressed goal from the very beginning: the atomization of Iraq, and indeed the entire Middle East. Their goal, in short, was chaos – and that is precisely what we are seeing today.


As I put it years ago:

“[T]he actual purpose was to blow the country to smithereens: to atomize it, and crush it, so that it would never rise again.

“When we invaded and occupied Iraq, we didn’t just militarily defeat Iraq’s armed forces – we dismantled their army, and their police force, along with all the other institutions that held the country together. The educational system was destroyed, and not reconstituted. The infrastructure was pulverized, and never restored. Even the physical hallmarks of a civilized society – roads, bridges, electrical plants, water facilities, museums, schools – were bombed out of existence or else left to fall into disrepair. Along with that, the spiritual and psychological infrastructure that enables a society to function – the bonds of trust, allegiance, and custom – was dissolved, leaving Iraqis to fend for themselves in a war of all against all.

“… What we are witnessing in post-Saddam Iraq is the erasure of an entire country. We can say, with confidence: We came, we saw, we atomized.”

Why? This is the question that inevitably arises in the wake of such an analysis: why deliberately destroy an entire country whose people were civilized while our European ancestors were living in trees?

The people who planned, agitated for, and executed this war are the very same people who have advanced Israeli interests – at America’s expense – at every opportunity. In “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” a 1996 document prepared by a gaggle of neocons – Perle, Douglas Feith, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was urged to “break out” of Israel’s alleged stagnation and undertake a campaign of “regime change” across the Middle East, targeting Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Iraq, and eventually Iran. With the exception of Iran – and that one’s still cooking on the back burner – this is precisely what has occurred. In 2003, in the immediate wake of our Pyrrhic “victory” in Iraq, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared to a visiting delegation of American members of Congress that these “rogue states” – Iran, Libya, and Syria – would have to be next on the War Party’s target list.


And Michel Chossudovsky points out:

The division of Iraq along sectarian-ethnic lines has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than 10 years.

What is envisaged by Washington is the outright suppression of the Baghdad regime and the institutions of the central government, leading to a process of political fracturing andthe elimination of Iraq as a country.

This process of political fracturing in Iraq along sectarian lines will inevitably have an impact on Syria, where the US-NATO sponsored terrorists have in large part been defeated.

Destabilization and political fragmentation in Syria is also contemplated: Washington’s intent is no longer to pursue the narrow objective of “regime change” in Damascus. What is contemplated is the break up of both Iraq and Syria along sectarian-ethnic lines.

The formation of the caliphate may be the first step towards a broader conflict in the Middle East, bearing in mind that Iran is supportive of the al-Maliki government and the US ploy may indeed be to encourage the intervention of Iran.

The proposed re-division of both Iraq and Syria is broadly modeled on that of the Federation of Yugoslavia which was split up into seven “independent states” (Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia (FYRM), Slovenia, Montenegro, Kosovo).

According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, the re division of Iraq into three separate states is part of a broader process of redrawing the Map of the Middle East.


The above map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006).

Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers”. (See Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a “New Middle East” By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, November 2006)

Notes: While a senior Bush adviser said that the Iraq war was launched to protect Israel, that is too simplistic an explanation. The architects of foreign policy in both the U.S. and Israel are either literally one and the same – e.g. Richard Perle – or see things identically….Washington’s Blog  


Balkanizing countries leave them easier to control…

Global Destabilization: Directed Discontent in Egypt and Beyond

The Biggest Lies of Our Time: Serbia versus The New World Order

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

SWAT Team Refuses Public Records Request, Says ‘We’re Not a Government Agency’

“Either it is a public entity subject to public records laws, or what it is doing is illegal”
SWAT Team Refuses Public Records Request, Says 'We're Not a Government Agency'

by Mikael Thalen June 26, 2014

A regional SWAT team in Massachusetts is refusing to release information on raid statistics due to its belief that it is a private organization.

After being petitioned by the ACLU, the North Eastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council (NEMLEC), the group that overseas the SWAT team, claimed it was not subject to public records laws.

“When we asked NEMLEC for records about their SWAT policies and deployments, we were startled to receive this response: we don’t have to give you documents because we aren’t government agencies,” the ACLU blog, PrivacySOS, revealed.

Although claiming to be a private entity, the group seemingly has no issue with using government grants and public funds to purchase and maintain armored vehicles and military equipment.

“NEMLEC can’t have it both ways,” said Jessie Rossman, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Massachusetts. “Either it is a public entity subject to public records laws, or what it is doing is illegal.”

The ACLU immediately responded by filing suit against NEMLEC, asking the Suffolk County Superior Court to order the group to release all relevant documents including training materials, incident reports and deployment statistics.

“The public deserves to know about law enforcement operations that are taking place in their communities with their money and in their name,” said ACLU of Massachusetts executive director Carol Rose. “If police agencies hide behind a wall of secrecy, the public cannot judge for itself whether officials are acting appropriately or whether policy changes are needed.”

According to, Wilmington Police Chief Michael Begonis, the current president of NEMLEC, has declined media requests for comment.

The records request was part of a nation-wide effort by the ACLU to document the rapid militarization of police as tools of war make their way onto American streets. The report, entitled “War Comes Home: The Excessive Militarization of American Policing,” examined more than 800 SWAT deployments from 2011 to 2012.

“Our analysis shows that the militarization of American policing is evident in the training that police officers receive, which encourages them to adopt a ‘warrior’ mentality and think of the people they are supposed to serve as enemies, as well as in the equipment they use, such as battering rams, flashbang grenades, and APCs,” the report states.

Although 2013 produced the “lowest level of law enforcement fatalities in six decades” according to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, police agencies continue to claim that violence is increasing, even as overall violent crime hits the lowest levels since World War II.

Despite this, SWAT raids have increased from 3,000 a year to more than 80,000 in just the last three decades. The increase in raids, primarily against drug offenders, continues to produce horrific outcomes for innocent bystanders caught in the crossfire.

Just last May, a 19-month-old toddler was placed in a medically-induced coma after a SWAT team’s flashbang grenade landed in his crib. After finding absolutely no drugs in the residence, the child was taken to a local hospital where doctors are working to close the massive hole in his chest.

Similarly, a 12-year-old girl in Billings Montana suffered second degree burns in 2012 from a flashbang grenade after police mistakenly claimed the residence was home to a meth lab.

That same year, police in Lebanon, Tennessee shot a 61-year-old man to death in a raid on the wrong home.  infowars


Do they swear on the Constitution?




Honest men and women do not wear face masks in the conduct of their normal daily business, other than maybe respirators in areas with dust or hazardous chemicals in the atmosphere, or when it is super-cold outside.

Honest men and women are not afraid to be seen going about their daily routines. They have no need for disguises.

Yet, here we have what probably passes for a typical SWAT team:

Black helmets, black uniforms, masked faces. Where have we seen that before?

 ABACA An image taken from a video that allegedly shows militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) executing a group of Iraqi soldiers. (Propaganda? One wonders did they execute the soldiers or enlist them.)


Other then the weapons, the main difference between a SWAT team and the SS seems to be that the SS saw no need to hide their faces.


Note: I’ve never been a great fan of the ACLU but I fully support this recent endeavor.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Iraq’s ‘Sunni’ rebellion shows splits between ISIS, others

Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (R) is decorated with a medal presented to him by his then-deputy Izzat al-Duri in Baghdad, May 12, 1999. (photo by RETUERS)

Reports about the June 21 clashes between the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and fighters from the Naqshbandi Order organization, led by former Iraqi Vice President Izzat al-Duri, have surprised no one.

In fact, a battle among the armed factions fighting the Iraqi army in Sunni cities and towns was expected to break out as soon as things relatively settled down and the gunmen’s influence in Iraq’s Sunni areas was established.

Although news reports indicate that the latest battles in the neighborhoods of al-Riyadh, al-Rashad and Hawija (all in Kirkuk province) happened because those areas refused to pledge allegiance to ISIS, well-informed sources told Al-Monitor that the conflict arose because ISIS sought to kill a number of tribal leaders who have deep connections in the region, most prominently the al-Asi family, which leads the al-Obaida tribe in Hawija.

This incident suggests that the temporary alliance between ISIS and the armed Sunni factions, which revived their role in the Fallujah battles earlier this year, is fragile and can explode at any moment.

There is one central goal common among ISIS, the Sunni factions, the clans, the clerics and the politicians: ending control by the central Iraqi government on Sunni cities and towns. Uniting these disparate groups are the grievances expressed in the Sunni demonstrations, which went on for more than a year, regarding the practices of the Iraqi government.

But after those forces achieved this goal, with victory spreading gradually from Fallujah, Mosul and Tikrit tp areas in Diyala and Kirkuk, the future has become very complex.

A prominent figure in the military council formed in April 2013 after the Hawija massacre and including fighters from Sunni groups and tribes admits that the differences between Sunni fighters and ISIS may explode. However, the essence of these differences is not ideological but related to the objectives of the latest military move. According to observers, the Sunni groups, though in agreement on the need to impose change by force, have many different aims:

  • ISIS seeks to establish a state stretching from Iraq to Syria. It will not allow any political solution that preserves the borders of present-day Iraq, nor will it allow armed and political parties to take over the Sunni areas of Iraq. ISIS will be ready to fight a bloody war to defend its interests, a war no different from the one being fought against Syrian Sunni factions such as Jabhat al-Nusra and the Free Syrian Army.
  • Salafist factions such as the Mujahideen Army and the Ansar al-Sunna may agree with ISIS’ goals but are closer to adopting a Sunni solution inside Iraq that doesn’t involve expanding into Syrian territory. The Salafists may support a solution that ensures the establishment of an independent Sunni state.
  • Groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood (the Iraqi Hamas) have close ties to the Islamic Party and support forming a Sunni province, like the Kurdistan Region, linked to the central government in Baghdad but independent from it in terms of the military, laws and managing the economy.
  • Mixed factions, which include Salafists, nationalists and former officers of the previous military (such as the Islamic Army, the “1920 Revolution Brigades” and tribal fighters), reject Iraq’s division and the formation of a Sunni province. They want a political change in Iraq that ensures the identity of the Sunni areas.
  • Baathist factions linked to the Baath party (such as the Army of the Naqshbandi Order) seek to restore Baath rule in Iraq. They believe that Iraq is currently being ruled by Iran and that there is no solution but toppling the current rule and establishing a new order.

Forces with such disparate goals can never agree on a final settlement. But they can unite, like they are today, on the idea of an armed rebellion, which is actually happening on the ground.

The differing goals point to the inherent complexities of any settlement that could be adopted politically, regionally and internationally on the mechanisms of dealing with the Sunni areas, whether they become an independent region, they form a state with a confederal relationship with Baghdad, all provinces become regions, broad powers are granted to decentralized provinces without declaring them separate regions or the situation remains as it is now and political, legal, and constitutional reforms are implemented in Baghdad to address the demands of the Sunni population.

The question that will be raised in the coming weeks in Iraq, particularly by regional and international parties concerned with the effects of the current Iraqi crisis, is the following: With whom are we going to close the deal?

Of course, ideas for a settlement will become clearer with the participation of traditional Sunni politicians, especially those who have found themselves seats in parliament as legitimate representatives of their cities.

But the crisis has moved beyond the scope of Sunni politicians. They are very far from controlling the Sunni situation, which is expected to spawn new leaders that reflect the map of the armed factions on the ground. These leaders will fight to represent the Sunnis in any talks, and may fight land battles over the shape of the outcome.

Today, there is another fundamental question that can be raised: Will there be a prolonged conflict between the different armed Sunni factions and ISIS before the emergence of a regional, international and Iraqi political vision? The answer depends on the Sunni-Sunni understandings that preceded the military action. Was there an agreement on how to manage the next stage, or was the ultimate goal to start a rebellion?

Most likely, the Sunni political, tribal and religious forces, to which the armed factions are linked, may have agreed early on about how to conduct the dialogue after the rebellion. If so, they can reach an agreement on the formula for the solution, but they are unlikely to have made such an agreement with ISIS. Even less likely is that ISIS, the military force with the biggest presence on the ground, would reach an agreement with the other Sunnis in the future.


ISIS are heavily armed mercenary death-terror squads streaming in from NATO terriroty in Turkey and funded by the Sauds, Qatar, and Kuwait. heavily armed sectarian militants streaming from NATO territory in Turkey and edging ever closer to Baghdad.
Obama should have nipped all of this in the bud when informed by  by intelligence prior to establishing a safe haven (they also have one in Syria where they can pop back and forth when things get too hot). Now these mercenaries are in the middle of populations of people and as much more difficult to kill. Meanwhile Christians and other ethnic minorites are being cleased by fleeing their homes, business’, or by death. The only entity left untouched is Oil….the same thing happened in the Balkans where the first thing these mercenaries did was to protect the oil and the mines….and speaking of Balkanization…


Read Seymour Hersh’s 2007 New Yorker article titled, “”The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Forbes: Why That Story About Irish Babies “Dumped In A Septic Tank” Is A Hoax

6/09/2014 @ 12:12PM

Few of us are inclined to look a gift horse in the mouth, and that applies in spades to journalists running with a sensational news story. But even by normal media standards, recent reports about the bones of 796 babies being found in the septic tank of an Irish orphanage betray a degree of cynicism and irresponsibility rarely surpassed by allegedly reputable news organizations.

Although the media attributed the “dumped in a septic tank” allegation to Catherine Corless, a local amateur historian, she denies making it. Her attempt to correct the record was reported by the Irish Times newspaper on Saturday (see here) but has been almost entirely ignored by the same global media that so gleefully recycled the original suggestion. That suggestion, which seems to have first surfaced in the Mail on Sunday, a London-based newspaper, reflected appallingly on the Sisters of Bon Secours, the order of Catholic nuns at the center of the scandal.

An image was created of satanic depravity: wicked-witch nuns shoveling tiny human forms into a maelstrom of excrement and urine. In reality the odds that anything like this happened are vanishingly small.

Today the Irish Times has published a reader’s letter that has further undercut the story. Finbar McCormick, a professor of geography at Queen’s University Belfast, sharply admonished the media for describing the children’s last resting place as a septic tank. He added: “The structure as described is much more likely to be a shaft burial vault, a common method of burial used in the recent past and still used today in many part of Europe.

“In the 19th century, deep brick-lined shafts were constructed and covered with a large slab which often doubled as a flatly laid headstone. These were common in 19th-century urban cemeteries…..Such tombs are still used extensively in Mediterranean countries. I recently saw such structures being constructed in a churchyard in Croatia. The shaft was made of concrete blocks, plastered internally and roofed with large concrete slabs

English: Irish Celtic Cross

Celtic cross: Some get a better send-off than others. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“Many maternity hospitals in Ireland had a communal burial place for stillborn children or those who died soon after birth. These were sometimes in a nearby graveyard but more often in a special area within the grounds of the hospital.”

For anyone familiar with Ireland (I was brought up there in the 1950s and 1960s), the story of nuns consciously throwing babies into a septic tank never made sense. Although many of the nuns may have been holier-than-thou harridans, they were nothing if not God-fearing and therefore unlikely to treat human remains with the sort of outright blasphemy implied in the septic tank story.

So what are we left with? One fact seems beyond dispute: conditions in Irish orphanages up to the 1960s (when the orphanage at the center of the uproar was shut down) were positively Dickensian. Certainly the death rate at many was shockingly high. But who should be blamed? A major part of the problem would appear to have been the pervasive poverty of the time. Because they were so desperately underfunded, Irish orphanages were disgracefully overcrowded, which meant that when one baby caught an infection, they all caught it. Not the least of the hazards was tuberculosis, a then incurable disease that spread like wildfire in overcrowded conditions.

The nuns who ran the orphanage have long since gone to their reward but if they could speak they would no doubt claim they were doing their best in appalling conditions. Certainly it is reasonable to suggest that Irish society generally had much to answer for. As for the nuns, they were so young when they entered religious life — typically in their late teens or early 20s — that they had little understanding of the secular world and were evidently short on managerial skills. Less forgivably, however, they took a highly puritanical attitude to the “fallen women” who had the misfortune to come under their purview. Allegedly they even — in some cases at least — banned the use of anesthetics in childbirth, the better to ensure that mothers would atone for the “sin” of having an out-of-wedlock child.

At the end of the day, the verifiable facts that have emerged so far amount merely to a strong story for the media of one small country.

The one “fact” that turned all this from a disturbing national story into a screaming global sensation is one that is almost certainly false.

There is a moral here for those who are increasingly bewildered by the modern world: the global media are becoming less and less accountable. Sometimes the truth eventually does come out, or at least some of us have sufficient knowledge to suspect the facts are misstated. But very often readers do not have the experience and worldly wisdom to see through the nonsense, particularly in interpreting reported developments in nations whose cultures diverge sharply from those of the West (I am thinking in particular of East Asia, a region about which on the basis of 27 years of residence I can claim some knowledge ).

While we are constantly assured that we live in an Information Age, in reality the noise to signal ratio in our media has probably never been higher. This is an age of disinformation.

Postscript, June 12

Even by the normal standards of internet discourse, this commentary has elicited an extraordinary outburst of vituperation and incivility. Some reader responses have been overtly mendacious and many have been malevolently misleading. In an effort to discredit me, one interlocutor has even attributed to me the absurd view that there is no evidence of human remains at the site in Tuam where the orphanage was located. Do I have to state that I have always believed the media are reliable in reporting such evidence? The larger question is why would anyone make up something out of whole cloth if he or she is sincerely concerned to promote some larger truth? (Incidentally I am in general agreement with the mainstream press on most other aspects of the story, most notably the point that the death rate at Tuam was disgracefully high. This is merely to state the obvious but where internet commentary is concerned if you don’t state the obvious you can count on someone — probably someone hiding behind a cloak of anonymity — to pop up to accuse you of denying the obvious.)

Let’s sum up. The accuracy of the facts I reported remains unquestioned (Professor McCormick and Catherine Corless have been quoted accurately, as can be established by checking out the two Irish Times links included above).

Now let’s consider my interlocutors’ contributions. Although they have a point when they say that Catherine Corless’s comments have been inconsistent, they cannot gainsay the fact that her settled position as of today is the one I have quoted above.

 My interlocutors have done little to challenge Finbar McCormick’s expert testimony. True, they have produced a map on which a sewage tank is marked but contrary to their contention this proves nothing. Given that an institution – a so-called workhouse for the indigent – already existed at the site as far back as the nineteenth century, the existence of a cesspit in close proximity to the building was entirely to be expected.

Basically we are still left with a totally confused picture. But even if we are to assume that the babies’ last resting place was a disused sewage tank, this does not justify the sensational “dumping babies bodies in a septic tank” allegation that made this story a global sensation. On the whole I agree with Andrew Brown, a commentator on religious matters, who has written a thoughtful and balanced commentary for the London Guardian. As he points out, for those who want to dismiss the nuns as wicked witches, the problem is chronology. He comments: “If the bodies were placed in a sewage tank long after it had been drained and disused, this would seem much less shocking. That less shocking story is at least plausible.”

In defending the global headlines, the media have to prove that the nuns consciously shoveled babies’ bodies into a hell-brew of human waste. This sets the evidential bar rather high:

  1. The media have to show that the bodies were “dumped.”
  2. They have to show that the place where these bodies were “dumped” was indeed a sewage tank.
  3. They have to show that the sewage tank was still being use for its original purpose at the time the bodies were placed in it.
  4. They have to show that the nuns were conscious of the utterly blasphemous nature of what they were allegedly doing.

My point remains that though many of the nuns may have been holier-than-thou harridans, blasphemy is unlikely to have figured in their agenda. No one has come even close to substantiating the implied charge of blasphemy and I don’t think anyone ever will.

My case rests. The image of nuns consciously dumping babies in a septic tank is one of the most irresponsible press hoaxes of modern times.




Same Media That Ignored Kermit Gosnell Pushed Hoax of Babies Buried in Mass Grave in Septic Tank

by Wesley J. Smith | Washington, DC | | 6/21/14

Remember when the media ignored en masse the mass murderers/late term abortions of the monster Kermit Gosnell? Remember the empty seats at the trial? Remember the important stories that were never written?

In that highly newsworthy circumstance, the media knew what it didn’t want you to know.










But notice how quickly this same media spread the word–nay, ​breathlessly reported one unsubstantiated local Ireland story–that the bodies of long-dead babies were found discarded in a septic tank at a long closed home for unwed mothers run by nuns.


Example, the Washington Post...


In a town in western Ireland, where castle ruins pepper green landscapes, there’s a six-foot stone wall that once surrounded a place called the Home. Between 1925 and 1961, thousands of “fallen women” and their “illegitimate” children passed through the Home, run by the Bon Secours nuns in Tuam. Many of the women, after paying a penance of indentured servitude for their out-of-wedlock pregnancy, left the Home for work and lives in other parts of Ireland and beyond.

Some of their children were not so fortunate. More than five decades after the Home was closed and destroyed — where a housing development and children’s play ground now stands — what happened to nearly 800 of those abandoned children has perhaps now emerged: Their bodies were piled into a massive septic tank sitting in the back of the structure and forgotten, with neither gravestones nor coffins.

One itty-bitty problem: It isn’t true.

From a commentary in Forbes by Eamonn Fingleton

Today the Irish Times has published a reader’s letter that has further undercut the story. Finbar McCormick, a professor of geography at Queen’s University Belfast, sharply admonished the media for describing the children’s last resting place as a septic tank. He added: “The structure as described is much more likely to be a shaft burial vault, a common method of burial used in the recent past and still used today in many parts of Europe…

The one “fact” that turned all this from a disturbing national story into a screaming global sensation is one that is almost certainly false.

The Post (which ran two stories on the “septic tank” babies) and other outlets have been forced to issue correctives.

So we are left with an interesting question: Why would real murders of babies–that took place in the present day–be all but ignored, while a false report of disrespectfully discarded bodies from many decades ago be reported high profile internationally?

Answer: The former story reflected badly on abortion, so beloved by most in the media, while the latter validated their anti-Catholic bigotry–particularly their disdain for that church’s views toward sexual morality and pro-life activism.

This is one example of why the public’s trust in the media is in the, well, septic tank. They earn every ounce of our disdain. Note: Wesley J. Smith, J.D., is a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture and a bioethics attorney who blogs at Human Exeptionalism.


Original English Newspaper Source w/ pictures that didn’t fit the reporters biased story-line:



  • The person originating the story, Catherine Corless, denies making any references to a septic tank and never used verbiage like “dump the bodies”.
  • Other locals prayed at and decorated the graves for years, and apparently did not find anything shocking about the mass graves apart from the fact that it is, well, a grave.
  • The shocking aspect of the story comes specifically and singly from the idea that someone found a septic tank an appropriate burial method. Remove that, and all you have is a mass grave in a country where misery was common, properly cared for by the locals.

The average number of deaths over the period in question was 18-20 per year. That is about 1-2 per month, in depression and war years, in one of Europe’s poorest countries, in institutions where “TB was rife?” And that’s a scandal? I would say the nuns did a pretty good job under very difficult conditions. Try looking at the number of people who die from Cross Infection in hospitals, not decades ago, but today! That’s if they recorded them as well as this Children’s Home did…

The Irish News (sourced in Forbes article) every baby in question had a certificate of death. They were registered and recorded with the Government authorities of the time. Does that sound like dead bodies being secretly and unceremoniously dumped?


I grew up in Ireland (like the Forbes author) and knew many people who walked a mile or more to school in the fifties – hail rain or snow with no shoes and that was after milking the cows at the crack of dawn. We got free education from the nuns. Many people, especially the media, tend to write from a perspective of life today. The reality is that Ireland was a former English colony until the 1920’s – the horrific conditions of the indigenous Irish Catholics was “beyond the pale” – one can thank the Royal Crown and their aristocratic absentee Land Lords for a history of raw and naked callousness and cruelty.  Ireland has 32 counties. It was only between 1922-1939 that 26 counties of Ireland became a Free State and a Republic much later. 6 counties in the North still belong to the Royal Crown.ression – Beyond the Pale: Around 1450 the English control in Ireland was reduced to a 20 mile wide strip around Dublin (didn’t last long), known as the Pale. The English defended the area, and as such the Irish were unable to completely drive the English off the island. The Pale was surrounded with a fence to keep out the Irish. The 3 major English Lords whose estates were within the Pale formed alliances with some of the neighbouring Irish and became very powerful. Outside the Pale (particularly Munster), former Norman Lords had practically become Irish, and many of them joined with the native Irish in their hatred of the English (this was stopped by the statue of kilkenny, penal laws etc. because if we all got along where would that have left the kings/queens and their treasury…these globalists need strife and destabilization in order to survive in their ongoing land grabs and mining deals.  To travel outside of the boundary, beyond the pale, was to leave behind all the rules and institutions of English society, which the English considered synonymous with civilization itself. IOW, to live outside or beyond the pale was, in their opinion, to be outside of civilization,  that is, uncivilized and with no expectation of civilized treatment. Use the search engine here and type in Irish Famine and Irish Slavery only two of the many atrocities committed by the English against the Irish. It’s only in the past 30 yrs that Ireland has become modernized. Only those people who have lived under the English Empire can really understand what I’m talking about…the history books are much too kind to these parasites.


Note: They could have just sent them babies to be incinerated for fuel at a local hospital with other medical waste and avoided burying their tiny bodies at all – Aborted babies incinerated to heat UK hospitals , right? And hardly a word about it – any word of the investigation one might wonder. And were we given the names of the babies? Death certificates? Were the deaths of little babies reported to the local government to be registered? No!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Time Running Out on Nevada Crime Boss – Sheldon Adelson Looking at Options (Harry Reid)

Published: Saturday, 26 April 2014 Written by Chip Tatum 

Las Vegas – Federal authorities have been placed on alert as a Secret Federal Grand Jury has convened somewhere in the U.S. to consider charges that Sands CEO, Sheldon Alderson, has personal involvement of crimes admitted to by the Sands Corporation.

Sands is a group of Nevada based, International gaming companies.

The possibility of this scenario came to my attention while being held in Miami Federal Detention Center. The Federal prisoner in the cell next to mine came to me for advice. He had been approached by the Las Vegas FBI with the requirement to testify against his former associate, Sheldon Adelson, or face additional prosecution which could land him in Federal Prison for an additional 25 years. He further explained that his other former associates were being summoned to testify. He feared for his life and the life of his wife. Alderson is known for biting when cornered. And he has a very long reach.

I advised my neighbor that to spend 25 years more in Federal prison was a death sentence for him as his health was poor to begin with and the health care system was very poor in prison.

I received a message early this week that the process has begun. My friend, since released from Federal Prison after serving his term, was taken back into federal custody by authorities. His wife has been placed in the Federal Witness Protection Program to protect her from any attempts to silence her and her husband by the Adelson Organization.

A little history concerning the Adelson Organization is appropriate here for those of you who are unaware of his empire.

Federal Money Laundering charges where settled by the Sands Corporation in August 2013. Sands Corporation agreed to repay the federal government more than $47 million to resolve a money-laundering investigation which cast an unwanted glare on Mr. Adelson and his gambling empire. See Article

However, during the course of the investigation, numerous references to additional activities by the Gaming Boss and his staff led prosecutors to open investigations into those and other activities. His involvement in the Payday Loans arena and processing of internet gaming proceeds came into focus. Credible sources from within the Department of Justice have stated that investigations have proven fruitful to the point that a Federal Grand Jury has been convened in secret.

At the Federal level, Grand Juries can, and do, investigate criminal activity, especially organized crime.

Due to the Gaming Bosses purported past activities and tie into organized crime, Grand Jury witnesses have been entered into the Witness Protection Program, and stepped-up surveillance of the targets is in place.

Sources from within the Adelson organization have stated that, “There is a lot of movement going on. Attorneys and political contacts are involved in moving monies, selling assets, and preparing a backup to move them to a safe jurisdiction”. It is reported that the Adelson organization is using Israeli contacts to arrange flight to one of nine destinations. Negotiations with those countries are currently underway. These actions on the part of Adelson’s employees indicate that there may be an attempt to flee prosecution on the Adelson organization’s part.

Federal officials have beefed up surveillance of the members of the Adelson organization. “He has the contacts and ability to move quickly”, a Federal source has stated. Adelson has a fleet of Boeing 747’s and other aircraft with the ability to fly to hundreds of international destinations, including the destination on the top of Adelson’s amnesty list, China

Sources tell us that among Federal criminal violations currently being considered are:

  • 18 U.S.C. § 201 Bribery 18 U.S.C. § 1961–1968 RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act,)
  • 18 U.S.C. § 1956 Money Laundering• 18 U.S. Code § 1343 Wire Fraud
  • 18 U.S.C. § 158 et seq. Human Trafficking
  • 22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq. Violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA)
  • 26 U.S. Code § 7201 - Attempt to evade or defeat tax


But the goings on behind the closed doors of the grand jury room have remained a secret.

Grand juries — first recognized in the Magna Carta, the English legal charter, in 1215 — have been around for centuries. But their procedures are unfamiliar to most people outside the legal system. The concept of the grand jury was so firmly established in the law that the Founding Fathers provided for grand juries in the Bill of Rights. The Fifth Amendment says that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury…”

There are several reasons why grand jury proceedings are a secret. Witnesses appearing before a grand jury have a right to an attorney, but the lawyer must stay outside the room. Like trial juries, grand jury deliberations are conducted in secret. Only the grand jury, the prosecutor, the witness under examination, the court reporter and an interpreter (if one is required) may be present in the grand jury room. But unlike a trial jury, a grand jury does not determine guilt or innocence — only whether there’s probable cause to believe a person or persons committed a crime. Whereas a trial jury reaches a verdict on whether the accused is convicted or acquitted, a grand jury can decide whether to bring charges via a written indictment. The federal grand jury hears evidence presented by a federal prosecutor. Download the Federal Grand Jury Handbook

The grand jury has no investigative staff of its own, so it relies on the prosecutor’s information and expertise. The prosecutor shapes the case before the grand jury, deciding which witnesses will be called and what evidence to present. The grand jury may ask to call additional witnesses if necessary. It is customary for the prosecutor to question a witness first, followed by a grand jury foreperson. Then, other members of the grand jury may question the witness. Often the jurors will ask the prosecutor to ask a question, rather than asking it themselves. A witness may ask to leave the room to speak with their attorney but the lawyer is then at a disadvantage, having not heard the proceedings. A witness may also invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and refuse to answer a question.

Federal grand juries are composed of 16 to 23 individuals selected at random “from a fair cross section of the community” in the district in which the grand jury convenes, according to the Federal Grand Jury Handbook. The names are generally drawn from lists of registered voters. Twelve of the minimum 16 members required to be present must vote in favor of an indictment before it can be returned.

The Grand Jury is set to hear testimony from a large number of witnesses. The witnesses being brought in from around the world include former associates of Adelson. Many former associates are serving time in Federal Prison, State Prison and/or are in the Witness Protection Program. On specific information received, the U.S. has summoned foreign and domestic officials who were found receiving monies for favors from Adelson and his special interest group. Several foreign law enforcement officers and politicians involved with Adelson in various illegal activities have also been summoned.


He reads just like the typical common-or-garden Global Bankster-Gangster from the Syndicate we all know and love…

I’ve noticed in the past that a variety of people in the news – for some reason or another – had frequented these “gaming rooms” prior to their notoriety. The thought crossed my mind a while back, that these gaming rooms were perhaps recruiting spots for the CIA, seeking a specific profile aka easily influenced, controlled and manipulative profiles. It was only a fleeting thought at the time…



Harry Reid’s Curious Soft Spot for Sheldon Adelson

May 8, 2014

The Senate Majority Leader has been blasting the Koch brothers and their mega-donations. Just don’t pick on his home-state casino magnate.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid takes regular swipes at multibillionaire brothers David and Charles Koch, but Nevada’s top political figure hasn’t mustered a whisper of protest for a Republican mega-donor standing in his own front yard: outspoken casino king Sheldon Adelson. It turns out the two are friends—at least that’s how Adelson described their relationship Monday at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas during an hourlong chat as part of the William F. Harrah College of Hotel Administration’s “Conversations on Being Successful” series.

With approximately 1,000 students and others filling Artemus W. Ham Concert Hall, Adelson held forth on his business philosophy and rise to power as a casino titan. When the topic briefly turned to partisan politics, staunch Republican Adelson raised eyebrows when he expressed affection and respect for Reid.

“Believe it or not, I’m a Republican but I’m still very friendly with Harry Reid,” Adelson said, adding that he had “great respect” for the Senate majority leader.

That respect, of course, hasn’t kept Adelson from dumping approximately $100 million into the unsuccessful Republican presidential campaigns of Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.

In an interview this week with MSNBC, Reid attempted to separate his disdain for the Kochs from his affection for Adelson.

“I know Sheldon Adelson,” Reid said. “He’s not in this for money… He’s in it because he has certain ideological views. Sheldon Adelson’s social views are in keeping with the Democrats on all kinds of things. So Sheldon Adelson, don’t pick on him. He’s not in it to make money.”

If Reid treats Adelson with kid gloves, the Kochs haven’t been as lucky. In a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday following the release of a report on the effects of global warming, Reid said, “Charles and David Koch are waging a war against anything that protects the environment. Now I know that sounds absurd, but it’s true,” he said. “These two billionaire oil barons are actively campaigning now, spending tons of money against anything that seeks to curb pollution, limit our dependence on fossil fuels, or lower our energy costs for working families.”

When asked recently why the senator appears to have been so hesitant to criticize Adelson, a Reid spokesperson said the Kochs were a special case. They were funding misleading attack ads.

In one of several media blasts last month, Reid chided, “The Koch brothers are trying to use their immense wealth to buy their way around the laws and regulations of this nation to make themselves even richer. Because for them, being fourth and fifth on the list of the world’s richest people isn’t enough. Here’s the rules they play by: They should be allowed to say false and misleading things about Obamacare, but we’re not allowed to criticize them for it.”

When asked recently why the senator appears to have been so hesitant to criticize Adelson, a Reid spokesperson said the Kochs were a special case. They were funding misleading attack ads.

Not that Adelson’s money hasn’t helped fund third-party attacks of dubious accuracy on Democrats. You would think Adelson, with his gargantuan donations to GOP presidential candidates and down-ticket political players, his staunch opposition to the Reid-supported legalization of Internet gaming and the casino titan’s nutty talk about nuking Iran, would at least rate a mention from the powerhouse senator.

Not a peep.

But there’s still time for Reid to find his voice.

Adelson, 80, says he plans to be even more politically active in future campaigns, and is willing to spend “whatever it takes” to see the Republicans prevail.

Does that mean Adelson might contribute to his friend Harry’s 2016 opponent?

Don’t bet on it.


Harry Reid has his investments in the Casino’s and Global Warming Scams – the latter being a front for all sorts of cattle land grabs from the people and sold for pennies to foreign agents.


The Koch Brothers are into oil which is taking money out of Harry’s pocket – land grabs for heavy metals, water etc…schemes he has with the Chinese….Rothchilds w/ Lord John Kerr acting as a Rothchild agent.

According to Harry –  Oil, Coal etc., bad for the environment but tax-money losing green projects and protecting the “turtle” are good, which is why he approved the BLM National Police FORCE agents as opposed to our local police officers.


As for headline and Syndicate Bankster-Gangster Sheldon looking for options – it appears he’s chosen the college speaking tour route…up to last month anyway.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment