This video defines and resumes everything we have failed to do as a society.
It is a wakeup call
This video defines and resumes everything we have failed to do as a society.
It is a wakeup call
In the courts of Law, a person giving a testimony will have to undergo an oath taking ritual and made to utter – “I swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God”
Upholding the Truth seems important and withholding it is perjurious and in Malaysia one could be charged under the Malaysian Penal Code
Outside the courts however, the Truth is not as popular and telling it is virtually an act of crime.
Lies and deceits abound especially so within the govern-ment, revealing or telling the truth is not encouraged, in fact forbidden and anyone who chooses to do so could end up in trouble with the authorities.
It is very very clear that the Truth is heavily discouraged for everyone to engage in as can be seen through the numerous enactments by the govern-ment:
The Sedition Act, Official Secrets Act, POTA, COTA , etc., etc…
Here comes the corny part. When a person is dragged into a court under these Acts for revealing the Truth, what does he do? He is now in the territory where the Truth is to be upheld…and he was charged for doing just that?
“When stupidity is considered patriotism, it is unsafe to be intelligent” – Isaac Asmiov
Malaysian police said on Monday a special task force set up to probe reported transfers involving a state investment fund to Prime Minister Najib Razak is now itself under investigation to see if its members leaked classified information.
The Wall Street Journal reported on July 3 that investigators had discovered nearly $700 million had moved through government agencies, banks and companies linked to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) before ending up in Najib’s personal accounts.
The report created a storm of controversy in Malaysia with the prime minister dismissing the WSJ report as “political sabotage” and threatening possible legal action, while 1MDB denied any wrongdoing, saying it had not transferred any funds to the premier.
Police chief Khalid Abu Bakar in a statement released Monday said that after the publication of the report, on July 8, the Attorney-General instructed the police to launch an investigation into “the criminal act of leaking classified documents to foreign nationals.”
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” – George Orwell
by Rupert Stone
The BBC is supposed to be an “impartial”, “honest” and “independent” news outlet, but today its US Editor, Jon Sopel, showed very clearly whose side he is on. In a short post, “A whiff of hypocrisy about CIA report?”, he regurgitates some staple Republican talking-points and makes arguments eerily similar to those presented by former CIA and Bush officials in their various self-exculpatory media appearances this past week.
His piece bears the revealingly Cheney-esque tagline: “America has not come under serious attack since 9/11 on its home soil – so you would think that would be a source of celebration.” Then, just like CIA Director Brennan at his press conference last Thursday, Sopel kicks off with the September 11 attacks. He speculates that there might eventually be two versions of 9/11, one in which “a war on terror was declared, and those responsible were hunted down and detained, and there were no further attacks on US soil”, another in which “the torture tactics used to hunt down and detain those responsible brought condemnation and America lost its moral authority in the world”.
Both of these versions are inaccurate. His assumption is that the CIA’s interrogation and rendition program was the only factor involved in capturing terrorists. Of course there were other departments of the US government at work – most importantly the FBI (which did not use torture). And there were other methods, besides human intelligence, which yielded information (for example, signals intelligence was crucial to the hunt for Bin Laden).
Sopel also implies that every single person captured and detained was involved in 9/11, despite the fact Abu Zubaydah (once heralded as the “number 3 in Al Qaeda”, and whose torture is recorded in gruesome detail in the Senate’s summary) is now recognized by the US government to have played no role in 9/11 and to have never even been a member of Al Qaeda. Moreover, the Senate’s report documents 26 cases of prisoners who were held mistakenly by CIA (note that the report excludes victims of extraordinary rendition to 3rd countries for torture and all those held by the US military). Interestingly, he seems to assume that the torture worked (note that, in his second version of 9/11, he writes that the torture brought “condemnation”, not false intelligence). But the Senate’s report has produced page after page of detail refuting that assumption, and there is plenty of other evidence to support its thesis. To take one example among many, Col. Morris Davis – the former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo, who was familiar with the intelligence gained from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other high-value detainees – told CNN last week that he was not aware of a “single plot” stopped by the torture program.
Sopel then claims that most Democrats “think that there are NO circumstances EVER when coercive interrogation techniques can be condoned”. Note the use of capitals to underscore the absolute nature of their position, as if they’re extremists – but this view simply reflects the law, as embodied in the UN Convention Against Torture, which insists that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever” can be used to justify torture. Anyway, it is presumptuous to say that “most Democrats” are absolutely opposed to torture. Obama’s own CIA Directors Panetta and Petraeus have both testified to Congress that extreme techniques might be considered in ticking-bomb scenarios if conventional methods failed. That being so, he is possibly right in the next paragraph when he implies that a Democrat administration would have responded in similar fashion after 9/11, and that their indignation at the report is somewhat hypocritical. But so what? This report does not need to be read and assessed through a party-political prism. If the Democrats are being hypocritical, that does not alter the evidentiary record of gross torture and war crimes assembled in the summary. As law professor Stephen Vladeck said on C-Span’s Washington Journal last weekend: “The facts in the report speak for themselves. What we did was illegal.”
Sopel then advances a tired jingoistic argument made by Dick Cheney, George W Bush and Barack Obama himself. “Weren’t the overwhelming majority of CIA operatives at that time just driven by one thing – a patriotic duty to keep America safe, by whatever means?” He seems to be suggesting that most CIA operatives involved in the torture program should be excused because they were patriots: not an apology he would likely make for Syrian or North Korean torturers. Besides, the Senate’s summary contains page after page of meticulously-assembled evidence documenting unprecedented criminal brutality, and there is no exception in the applicable laws for patriots trying to “keep America safe”. In fact it seems that many CIA officials objected to the savagery they were being asked to participate in – a point omitted by Sopel, who associates patriotism with protecting America by “whatever means” (hat-tip to Dick Cheney) – while of course true patriotism entails obeying, not breaking, long-standing legal prohibitions against cruelty and barbarism. As Jane Mayer writes in a recent piece at the New Yorker, “There have been a number of true “torture patriots,” many of them at the C.I.A….They are the officers who blew the whistle on the program internally and externally, some of whom have paid a very high price for their actions.”
Sopel’s next paragraph is, quite simply, risible, and deserves to be cited in full:
“Of course I can sit here at my keyboard and pronounce that torture can never be justified. It is an absolute. I do totally believe that. But what if a child of mine had been kidnapped, and the police arrest the kidnapper, but say to me, “Well we’ve got the guy who took your kid, but despite us asking him really politely where he’s being kept, he’s not telling us… However there are these things called enhanced interrogation techniques – we could give them a go.” Would I say no? I’m really not sure.”
So, he’s absolutely against torture, but might support it: a glaring paradox. Sopel’s trying to oppose torture categorically, like any good BBC journalist, while making excuses for the torturers. Respect for civilized values and the rule of law must always be balanced with obedient deference to state power, even when the state in question has ridden roughshod over those very values and laws. Is that what the BBC means by impartiality and independence? Or are war crimes just fine provided they come wrapped in the stars and stripes?
As a brave member of the fourth estate, forever holding the government to account for its abuses, Sopel is “uncomfortable” that CIA should be held “publicly accountable for their actions”. As Brennan snapped at the Wall Street Journal’s Siobhan Gorman on Thursday, there’s been enough “transparency” with the release of this report. Sopel scoffs, a la Cheney: “This is not the highways department where the road maintenance programme is under debate. This is national security.” But transparency is not the same thing as accountability: the former involves disclosure of information, the latter involves punishment for wrongdoing. This is a crucial distinction. If there were to be serious legal accountability, members of the CIA and Bush administration could find themselves in very hot water, indeed, given the abundant evidence of criminality detailed in the report.
And this is the most revealing aspect of Sopel’s piece. Nowhere does he acknowledge that the CIA broke the law, even though Ben Emmerson, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counterterrorism, last week described the CIA program as a “vast criminal enterprise” and a “criminal conspiracy” at the highest levels of government, emphasizing that, under international law, the ban on torture is absolute and admits of no extenuating circumstances whatsoever (a view echoed by numerous rights groups, along with Morris Davis, who in the interview cited above described the CIA’s actions as “war crimes” and advised the culprits to “vacation domestically”). That “enhanced interrogation techniques” constitute torture was obvious to any rational person even before the release of this report, and is now entirely indisputable (the European Court of Human Rights had already ruled earlier this year, before the Senate’s summary was disclosed, that the CIA had tortured prisoners on Polish soil). In his earlier reporting on the summary, Sopel again echoed Brennan when referring to the CIA’s “mistakes”. But these were no “mistakes”: they were cruel, calculated crimes devised at the highest-levels of government.
Sopel ends with yet another Republican talking-point. “I just wonder whether in 10 years’ time, when my successor is sitting at this desk, whether he or she will be writing a blog on the just-released Republican-led intelligence committee report laying into the drone programme from when President Barack Obama was in the White House.” There is no reason to believe the Republicans would produce such a report, given they’ve supported drone strikes throughout Obama’s presidency. Even if they did, the (hypothetical) report should be judged on its own terms: you cannot just dismiss a report because it was produced by this or that party. That the summary is a partisan effort by Democrats, is yet another argument advanced by former CIA and Bush officials to discredit the Senate’s conclusions. And it’s a poor argument: the report is based on millions and millions of CIA records, its findings corroborated by numerous other reports, sources and news stories. And it is not entirely partisan: after all, the Obama administration held up the summary for months arguing over redactions, and tried to stall it at the last-minute when John Kerry called Diane Feinstein to warn her, with standard CIA scare tactics, that the disclosure might provoke violence abroad (it hasn’t). Fox News has made much of Obama’s hypocrisy, using drone strikes which kill people and opposing torture which doesn’t, and that point is reflected here, like so many other utterly partisan and vacuous Republican, CIA arguments.
Why can’t Sopel condemn, in clear terms, a spy agency that has so clearly violated the law? The CIA did not act alone: Britain, along with many other foreign countries, was involved in the rendition program, permitting flights to pass through its airports and possibly allowing a black site to operate on Diego Garcia. The Senate’s report could provide damning new evidence of UK complicity, and some MPs have already called for a judge-led inquiry into British participation. But, as Sopel writes, there’s been enough transparency. I’m sure Tony Blair, Jack Straw, David Miliband and others would agree.
A 15-year-old girl from Southern California who attends a public high school tells the story of how she recently became aware of questions concerning the holocaust. After hearing the establishment’s version of the ‘shoah’ in her history class for weeks along with persistent rumors that Obamacare included provisions for microchipping all Americans, she was very upset at all the frightening and traumatizing details. But then she had an encounter which led her to question what she had been taught, and decided to conduct her own investigation.
Upon completion of her research, she decided to submit a report for a school project in an elective class she was taking for extra credit. She titled it ‘Holohoax,’ and got an A on the report! Unfortunately for the regime, the widely accepted version of the ‘holocaust’ which has been passed down for generations and constantly promoted through Hollywood propaganda films is not enough to brainwash the youth, who are increasingly thinking for themselves, outside the box.
Here is Jazzy’s report as well as a brief video introduction.
A lie known worldwide, spreading to clueless people and creating disaster everywhere, has caused so many German lives to be spitefully taken. The “Holocaust”, an alleged story of millions of Jews being tortured in concentration camps, has been proven time and time again to be inaccurate, For the acclaimed number of murdered Jews to be true is impossible, proven so not only by logic, but also the fact that the “survivors” of these evens have been known to and even admitted to being paid to lie about it. This in itself should be proof enough of this act of misleading propaganda being false, but there is indeed more evidence.
One reason to believe that the Holocaust is a lie is that the Jews claimed to have been murdered in gas chambers, groups as a time. However, no evidence of such occurrences has been shown or documented. According to scientists who were assigned to study the bodies of the victims of World War 2, “Most of them died from typhus epidemics. Most of the rest of them died from starvation and lack of medical supply care resulting from allied bombing raids against food and medical supply lines. (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=holohoax) The Jews show pictures of hair and clothing of women and children, claiming that they were used for soap and rugs after their owners being stripped of them and brutally killed. However, the truth lies in the fact that “The Germans were against typhus, which was the real reason for shaving heads, fumigating buildings, and cremating corpses.” (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=holohoax) Also, heads were shaved and people were gathered top be treated not with lethal gases in order to commit genocide, but with repellant, to stop the epidemic of head lice spreading throughout the camps.
Another thing that contradicts the lies of faulty “survivors” is that the number of Jews said to be killed in the camps was inaccurately stated. Six million Jews were supposedly killed in the Holocaust, when not even such an amount existed in Europe entirely, let alone Germany. “In 1939, there were nearly 15,700,000 Jews in the world. After the Second World War that number had risen to over 18,000,000 Jews. What this means is that of the 15,000,000 original Jews on the planet, 6,000,000 were gassed, leaving only some 9,000,000-plus. Then, the world Jewish population rebounded and doubled to over 18,000,000 in less than nine years – an astronomical feat, which astounded biologists and baby doctors everywhere!” (http://exposing-the-holocaust-hoax-archive.blogspot.com/2009/09/fun-facts-holohoax-for-dummies.html) Not only were the Jews not murdered, but were give a choice. “For that we must go back to one Ilea Ehrenburg,* chief Soviet propagandist during the Second World War and later on to die in Israel, who coined the mythic number on Dec. 22, 1944 – BEFORE tens of thousands of Jewish internees, given the choice of staying to be “liberated” by the Communists or going with their German captors, did not hesitate to choose the latter option!” (http://exposing-the-holocaust-hoax-archive.blogspot.com/2009/09/fun-facts-holohoax-for-dummies.html) Thus proving that the Jewish population was not forced to concentration camps to be scalped and gassed.
Not only do we have visible proof of the holocaust being a lie, but also some very trustworthy witness: The American Red Cross. The Red Cross was asked to do an investigation and search of the camps and corpses, and make accurate reports on their findings. “Says the Report: ‘In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 … In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results. Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorized to stay in each camp …’ (Vol. III, p. 83).” (http://www.ihr.org/books/harwood/dsmrd01.html) In reading this, one may conclude that the Germans did not intentionally kill the Jews, but strove to maintain lives. Many of the allegations against the Germans made by Jews involved gas chambers, which they claimed to be stripped, shaved, and gathered into for a mass killing. However, in order for a gas chamber to exist on a premise, there must be airtight doors and high chimneys, neither of which was found at the former “death camps.” Also, there is no proof of the gassed Jews except for allegations made by hired phony witnesses. According to the Red Cross, “Though six million Jews supposedly died in the gas chambers, not one body has ever been autopsied and found to have died of gas poisoning. We have been shown piles of bodies from World War II, but most of these persons died of typhus or starvation or Allied bombings and a great many of those were murdered Germans – the equivalent of ten football fields should be packed full of gassed bodies to present as evidence, yet not one body has ever been discovered.” (http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/holohoax.htm) If this is not proof enough, what else is needed? What excuse can be made in retort?
This is not to say that the Holocaust did not take place. It is only to prove that it did not happen as it was told according to the Jews. Not only in the camps, but all over the world, people died; suffered from starvation, typhus and bombing raids in World War 2. Lastly, without being given the evidence that it did happen as it is told, we are shown clues that the effects on Europe of World War 2 was much different; not a story that would benefit the Jews, giving them compensation each month for some thing that was simply a hyperbole.
Martin Hill is a Catholic paleoconservative and civil rights advocate. His work has been featured in the Los Angeles Daily News, San Gabriel Valley Tribune, Contra Costa Times, Pasadena Star News, Silicon Valley Mercury News, Long Beach Press Telegram, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, L.A. Harbor Daily Breeze, Whittier Daily News, LewRockwell.com, WhatReallyHappened, Infowars, PrisonPlanet, Economic Policy Journal, FreedomsPhoenix, Veterans Today, Educate-Yourself.org, The Wayne Madsen Report, Devvy.com, Rense, Antiwar.com, IamtheWitness.com, The Dr. Katherine Albrecht Show, Jonathan Turley blog, National Motorists Association, RomanCatholicReport.com, Republic Broadcasting Network, WorldNetDaily, Dr. Kevin Barret’s Truth Jihad radio show, The Orange County Register, KNBC4 Los Angeles, Los Angeles Catholic Lay Mission Newspaper, KFI 640, The Press Enterprise, Redlands Daily Facts, BlackBoxVoting, Strike-The-Root, David Icke, and many others. Archives can be found at LibertyFight.com and DontWakeMeUp.Org.