Tuesday, February 24, 2015

ISIS = (I)sraels (S)tatehood (I)s (S)upreme Fear Must Rule The Day!!!



Why does Israel keep lying about Iran’s nuclear program? 

In 1996, Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres said that “in four years, Iran may reach nuclear weapons.”

In 2006, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert tells CNN that Iran is 'months' from making nukes. 

In 2012, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the UN that Iran will make a nuclear bomb within a year.

Monday, February 23, 2015

Cop Chains Innocent Man to Wall, Beats Him, Gouges Eyes After Refusing to Confess to a Crime


Milwaukee, WI — In August of 2013 former detective Rodolfo Gomez savagely beat Deron Love during an interrogation. He was chained to the wall.
Love, 27, was accused of killing his 7-month-old baby, a charge he would not confess to and one that he would eventually beat.
A year after being tortured by Gomez, Love was found not guilty of first-degree reckless homicide and child neglect in the death of his infant son.
Love’s innocence was of no matter to Gomez who repeatedly compelled him to confess.
After becoming tired of being told to confess to a crime that he did not commit, Love became agitated and began screaming in the face of Gomez. Gomez, then “feared for his safety” as the man, who was chained to a wall yelled at him. So he began to beat the restrained man – savagely.
There are two videos of Gomez’s interaction with Love. In the first video, Gomez is seen unleashing multiple punches and knee blows to the face and head of Love.
In the second video, both of Love’s hands are chained to the wall. Seeing the opportunity to inflict more pain, Gomez then began gouging Love’s eyes out. The screams are hard to bare.
Gomez was subsequently fired for this despicable behavior. However, he is now appealing.
Earlier this month, using a controversial tactic of slow-motion video presentation, the defense was somehow able to convince a jury that Gomez actually “feared for his safety.”
The defense broke the video down, frame by frame, and used cherry-picked images to sway the jury into believing their ridiculous self-defense stance.
Sadly, the jury was eventually convinced.
What do you think? Watch the graphic video below and tell us in the comments if you think Gomez’s safety was ever in danger.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/man-refused-confess-crime-commit-cop-chains-wall-beats-him-gouges-eyes/#35GdIvi2B6dOhr2F.99

We Need to “KEEP FEAR ALIVE” FBI Official Explains How Govt Needs You in Fear, to Justify Paychecks

A documentary film, The Newburgh Sting, premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in April of last year. The film set out to expose how the FBI entraps and coaxes otherwise peaceful people into participating in hoax crimes.
In the film, former FBI assistant director Thomas Fuentes defends the tactics used by the FBI to set up poverty-stricken men and offering them large sums of money to commit crimes.
After he had defended the FBI’s role in bribing poor people to get them to commit crimes, he let out a bombshell statement, confirming what many of us already know. In the film, Fuentes stated:
“If you’re submitting budget proposals for a law enforcement agency, for an intelligence agency, you’re not going to submit the proposal that ‘We won the war on terror and everything’s great,’ cause the first thing that’s gonna happen is your budget’s gonna be cut in half,” states Fuentes. “You know, it’s my opposite of Jesse Jackson’s ‘Keep Hope Alive’—it’s ‘Keep Fear Alive.’ Keep it alive.”
Early this month Privacy SOS reported, “In the context of an interview about a case in which a paid FBI informant is alleged to have offered destitute men a quarter of a million dollars to execute an attack, a former assistant director of the FBI admits it’s in the bureau’s best interest to inflate the supposed terror threat. That’s remarkably candid, and profoundly disturbing.”
When the broken down and often mentally diminished participants are arrested by the very people who were going to pay them to commit a crime, we’re told that our flawless law enforcement apparatus has foiled another attack, and kept us safe another day.
As Glenn Greenwald stated in response to this story, “The agency does not disrupt planned domestic terror attacks but rather creates them, then publicly praises itself for stopping its own plots.”
Fear is a normal and crucial part of the human psychological being. Fear has been defined as a typical reaction to a real or imagined threat and is considered to be an integral and adaptive aspect of development with the primary function of promoting survival.
However, our fear can be used against us.
Using fear to control the masses is nothing new. The fact that this tactic has been used for thousands of years makes it all the more disheartening when we witness our fellow humans tremble in fear every time the state names their new boogeyman.
The evolving list of boogeymen in the US has grown quite lengthy over the last couple of centuries. Despite being told that these boogeymen pose an imminent threat, and we should surrender our freedoms to combat said threat, very few times are Americans hurt by these contrived villains.
Nonetheless, the majority of Americans line up to have themselves and their children molested by agents of the state, to keep them “safe.” As his rights are trampled, his freedoms are stripped, and children are slaughtered in his name, Boobus Americanus parrots the words of his tyrannical overlords, “freedom isn’t free.”
As he watches innocent men, women, and children, brutalized by the blue fist of oppression, Boobus Americanus repeats to himself, “they likely did something to deserve it…at least it’s not me.”
However, it is only a matter of time before it is Boobus Americanus who’s killed in a botched raid on the wrong house, or whose child receives a flashbang grenade to the face.
Mainstream media coupled with government fear-mongering about the next boogeyman is helping to create a society of timid and fearful drones who are entirely dependent on the state for their own protection; “protection” that is all but non-existent.
When the next terror threat, beheading video, or justification for killing children is shoved down your throat via FOXSNBCNN, remember that you are far more likely to be killed by a police officer in this, the “Land of the Free,” than by a terrorist.
In fact, you have a better chance of being killed by a bee sting, a home repair accident, medical malpractice, hot weather, tripping, or choking on your vomit. All of these are more likely to kill you than TERRORISM.
Our fear is the only thing that keeps the gears of the police state turning. Once we realize this, we can begin to see the entire picture; we’ve granted a monopoly on the use of violence to a gang of sociopaths who manipulate us for their own personal gain. When the sociopaths refer to this manipulation, however, they call it public service.


Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/keep-fear-alive/#DFBqPisG6Odh1wFL.99

$20 billion racial discrimination lawsuit filed against Comcast, Al Sharpton

A Comcast truck is seen parked at one of their centers on February 13, 2014 in Pompano Beach, Florida. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

In the midst of a coming FCC decision about the proposed merger between telco giants Comcast and Time Warner Cable, a group has filed a $20 billion lawsuit alleging that the two companies discriminate against black-owned media companies by simply not carrying them.
The National Association of African-American Owned Media filed the suit in California last week, echoing their actions against DirectTV and AT&T from late last year. Comcast, however, is not the only defendant targeted — MSNBC show host Al Sharpton and various advocacy groups were named in the suit as well.
The suit alleges that TWC and Comcast intentionally avoid picking up networks that are fully owned by African Americans, and that allowing the two to merge would only compound the problem. Via the Hollywood Reporter:

According to the lawsuit, Comcast and TWC "collectively spend approximately $25 billion annually for the licensing of pay-television channels and advertising of their products and services, yet 100% African American-owned media receives less than $3 million per year."
At the time of Comcast's 2010 acquisition of NBCUniversal, Comcast entered into memoranda of understanding with the NAACP, the National Urban League and the National Action Network, but the lawsuit says the voluntary diversity agreements are "a sham, undertaken to whitewash Comcast’s discriminatory business practices."

The suit goes on the allege that the only “fully owned black-channel” Comcast has is the Africa Channel, which former NBCU/Comcast exec Paula Madison owns. Madsion, the suit says, was involved directly in “obtaining government approval for the Comcast acquisition of NBC Universal, thus creating a serious conflict of interest.” And, what’s more, the suit claims that Al Sharpton accepted $3.8 million through his National Action Network to help put a good face on the NBC Universal acquisition.
The evidence for that rationale ties back to Sharpton’s ratings:

The lawsuit goes on to say that Comcast made large cash "donations" to obtain support for its acquisition. The money includes $3.8 million to Sharpton and his National Action Network. The money, it's charged, was meant to pay Sharpton to endorse the NBCU deal and divert attention away from discrimination. As for Sharpton's MSNBC gig, the complaint says, "Despite the notoriously low ratings that Sharpton’s show generates, Comcast has allowed Sharpton to maintain his hosting position for more than three years in exchange for Sharpton’s continued public support for Comcast on issues of diversity." 

As for the other ostensibly black-owned channels that find themselves on Comcast’s roster, the plaintiffs say that they are ultimately treated as “window dressing” that use African-American icons as “fronts” for “white-owned business.” As a result, the suit claims that Comcast employs “Jim Crow”-style laws in licensing black-owned channels. 

“We’re not trying to create any more Bob Johnsons,” the suit alleges one Comcast exec to have said, speaking of the founder of the enormously successful Black Entertainment Television (BET).
Comcast has since released a statement regarding the lawsuit, stating that the company is "proud of our outstanding record supporting and fostering diverse programming":

“We do not generally comment on pending litigation, but this complaint represents nothing more than a string of inflammatory, inaccurate, and unsupported allegations. We are proud of our outstanding record supporting and fostering diverse programming, including programming from African American owned and controlled cable channels. We currently carry more than 100 networks geared toward diverse audiences, including multiple networks owned or controlled by minorities. 
Diversity organizations from across the country, including numerous diverse programmers, have supported our transaction with Time Warner Cable. That deal will extend our industry-leading commitment to diverse programming to even more homes across America, one of the reasons so many groups in the African American community have supported it. 
Comcast has engaged in good faith negotiations with this programmer for many years. It is disappointing that they have decided to file a frivolous lawsuit. We will defend vigorously against the scurrilous allegations in this complaint and fully expect that the court will dismiss them.” 

Link :  http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/trending/20-billion-racial-discrimination-lawsuit-filed-against-Comcast-Al-Sharpton.html






What Is The Cry For Justice Is All About ?






























Leaked cables show Netanyahu’s Iran bomb claim contradicted by Mossad



Gulf between Israeli secret service and PM revealed in documents shared with the Guardian along with other secrets including CIA bids to contact Hamas


Binyamin Netanyahu’s dramatic declaration to world leaders in 2012 that Iranwas about a year away from making a nuclear bomb was contradicted by his own secret service, according to a top-secret Mossad document.
It is part of a cache of hundreds of dossiers, files and cables from the world’s major intelligence services – one of the biggest spy leaks in recent times.
Brandishing a cartoon of a bomb with a red line to illustrate his point, the Israeli prime minister warned the UN in New York that Iran would be able to build nuclear weapons the following year and called for action to halt the process.
But in a secret report shared with South Africa a few weeks later, Israel’s intelligence agency concluded that Iran was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons”. The report highlights the gulf between the public claims and rhetoric of top Israeli politicians and the assessments of Israel’s military and intelligence establishment.






The disclosure comes as tensions between Israel and its staunchest ally, the US, have dramatically increased ahead of Netanyahu’s planned address to the US Congress on 3 March.
The White House fears the Israeli leader’s anticipated inflammatory rhetoric could damage sensitive negotiations between Tehran and the world’s six big powers over Iran’s nuclear programme. The deadline to agree on a framework is in late March, with the final settlement to come on 30 June. Netanyahu has vowed to block an agreement he claims would give Iran access to a nuclear weapons capability.
The US president, Barack Obama, will not meet Netanyahu during his visit, saying protocol precludes a meeting so close to next month’s general election in Israel.
The documents, almost all marked as confidential or top secret, span almost a decade of global intelligence traffic, from 2006 to December last year. It has been leaked to the al-Jazeera investigative unit and shared with the Guardian.
The papers include details of operations against al-Qaida, Islamic State and other terrorist organisations, but also the targeting of environmental activists.
The files reveal that:
 The CIA attempted to establish contact with Hamas in spite of a US ban.
 South Korean intelligence targeted the leader of Greenpeace.
 Barack Obama “threatened” the Palestinian president to withdraw a bid for recognition of Palestine at the UN.
 South African intelligence spied on Russia over a controversial $100m joint satellite deal.
The cache, which has been independently authenticated by the Guardian, mainly involves exchanges between South Africa’s intelligence agency and its counterparts around the world. It is not the entire volume of traffic but a selective leak.
One of the biggest hauls is from Mossad. But there are also documents from Russia’s FSB, which is responsible for counter-terrorism. Such leaks of Russian material are extremely rare.
Other spy agencies caught up in the trawl include those of the US, Britain, France, Jordan, the UAE, Oman and several African nations.
The scale of the leak, coming 20 months after US whistleblower Edward Snowden handed over tens of thousands of NSA and GCHQ documents to the Guardian, highlights the increasing inability of intelligence agencies to keep their secrets secure.
While the Snowden trove revealed the scale of technological surveillance, the latest spy cables deal with espionage at street level – known to the intelligence agencies as human intelligence, or “humint”. They include surveillance reports, inter-agency information trading, disinformation and backbiting, as well as evidence of infiltration, theft and blackmail.
The leaks show how Africa is becoming increasingly important for global espionage, with the US and other western states building up their presence on the continent and China expanding its economic influence. One serving intelligence officer told the Guardian: “South Africa is the El Dorado of espionage.”
Africa has also become caught up in the US, Israeli and British covert global campaigns to stem the spread of Iranian influence, tighten sanctions and block its nuclear programme.
The Mossad briefing about Iran’s nuclear programme in 2012 was in stark contrast to the alarmist tone set by Netanyahu, who has long presented the Iranian nuclear programme as an existential threat to Israel and a huge risk to world security. The Israeli prime minister told the UN: “By next spring, at most by next summer, at current enrichment rates, they will have finished the medium enrichment and move[d] on to the final stage. From there, it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.”
He said his information was not based on secret information or military intelligence but International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports.
Behind the scenes, Mossad took a different view. In a report shared with South African spies on 22 October 2012 – but likely written earlier – it conceded that Iran was “working to close gaps in areas that appear legitimate, such as enrichment reactors, which will reduce the time required to produce weapons from the time the instruction is actually given”.
But the report also states that Iran “does not appear to be ready” to enrich uranium to the higher levels necessary for nuclear weapons. To build a bomb requires enrichment to 90%. Mossad estimated that Iran then had “about 100kg of material enriched to 20%” (which was later diluted or converted under the terms of the 2013 Geneva agreement). Iran has always said it is developing a nuclear programme for civilian energy purposes.
Last week, Netanyahu’s office repeated the claim that “Iran is closer than ever today to obtaining enriched material for a nuclear bomb” in a statement in response to an IAEA report.
A senior Israeli government official said there was no contradiction between Netanyahu’s statements on the Iranian nuclear threat and “the quotes in your story – allegedly from Israeli intelligence”. Both the prime minister and Mossad said Iran was enriching uranium in order to produce weapons, he added.
“Israel believes the proposed nuclear deal with Iran is a bad deal, for it enables the world’s foremost terror state to create capabilities to produce the elements necessary for a nuclear bomb,” he said.
However, Mossad had been at odds with Netanyahu on Iran before. The former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, who left office in December 2010, let it be known that he had opposed an order from Netanyahu to prepare a military attack on Iran.
Other members of Israel’s security establishment were riled by Netanyahu’s rhetoric on the Iranian nuclear threat and his advocacy of military confrontation. In April 2012, a former head of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, accused Netanyahu of “messianic” political leadership for pressing for military action, saying he and the then defence minister, Ehud Barak, were misleading the public on the Iran issue. Benny Gantz, the Israeli military chief of staff, said decisions on tackling Iran “must be made carefully, out of historic responsibility but without hysteria”.
There were also suspicions in Washington that Netanyahu was seeking to bounce Obama into taking a more hawkish line on Iran.
A few days before Netanyahu’s speech to the UN, the then US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, accused the Israeli prime minister of trying to force the US into a corner. “The fact is … presidents of the United States, prime ministers of Israel or any other country … don’t have, you know, a bunch of little red lines that determine their decisions,” he said.
“What they have are facts that are presented to them about what a country is up to, and then they weigh what kind of action is needed in order to deal with that situation. I mean, that’s the real world. Red lines are kind of political arguments that are used to try to put people in a corner.”

If Anyone Ever Questioned How White Privilege Manifested Itself in America This Is The Perfect Illustration