Corbett Report Radio - World Government and You

Source: Corbett Report
James Corbett

From “R2P” to “Peacekeeping” to “global governance,” the globalists love to dress up their worldwide tyranny as something good. But under the veneer is all manner of debauchery, atrocities and the specter of total dictatorship. Join us tonight as we explore the global government agenda and those who are promoting it.

The War to Reign In the Internet Has Begun

Source: Giza Death Star
Dr. Joseph Farrell

Yesterday I blogged about the problems confronting the financial elite seeking to walk the precarious fine line between the breakup of the EU and maintaining it, and implementing middle-class destroying financial policies. The fly in the ointment, of course, is information and its control, i.e., the internet. Once again, The Daily Bell has come forward with a very observant article on this new phase of warfare against the world’s middle class:

Yes, The War for the Internet Has Begun
The problem, as Anthony Wile sees it – and I wholeheartedly concur with his evaluation – is this:

“There is no doubt, in my view, that the elites practiced directed history in the 20th century, setting up wars and economic catastrophes designed to consolidate world government. But in the 21st century, with so many understanding and evaluating the mechanisms of the elites, this is a considerably harder trick to pull off.”

But there is an additional problem for the elite, and I hope you caught it:

US Intel Director Prepares Public for False Flag Event

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

Desperate for war, US prepares to blame Iran for false flag attack.

"...it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. (One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.) "

-US foreign policy makers in the Fortune 500 funded Brookings Institution's "Which Path to Persia?" report, pages 84-85.

Considering the the Gulf of Token incident was a deliberate fabrication to escalate the Vietnam War, one many members in Congress are shown to have acknowledged and debated even at the time, or the more recent Iraqi WMD hoax, there is certainly a historical precedence to create such provocations when targeted nations refuse to provide them.

With this in mind, and noting an overt, ongoing series of bold acts of war carried out by the US and Israel inside of Iran, along with sanctions and planned blockades, also acts of war, the corporate-financier oligarchs have been confounded by what seems to be infinite Iranian patience to endure such provocations. US foreign policy makers have noted for years now that Iran in actuality poses no threat to US or Israeli national security and their acquiring of nuclear weapons serves more of a deterrence against future military incursions against the Islamic Republic by the West, than a means to launch unprovoked attacks against nations that each possess nuclear deterrents of apocalyptic scale.

While Iran endures an increasing torrent of unprovoked attacks, they steadily advance their defensive capabilities to ward off what seems like an inevitable invasion by the West, who has already invaded and occupied for years nations to its east and west on false pretenses, and have for the past year fueled foreign-funded revolutions across the Middle East and North Africa. Time is on the Iranians' side, as Western attempts to destabilize and destroy Syria drag on, and an increasing number of people around the world begin to understand the true source of instability behind the so-called "Arab Spring."

While behind closed doors US policy makers admit Iran is driven by self-preservation and protecting the influence it is steadily gaining throughout the Middle Eastern region it borders, the message they desperately seek to relate to the public is one of an irrational apocalyptic theocracy eager to usher in Armageddon.

Disgraceful Reporting by the Boston Herald and Others on Iran

Source: LRC
Michael S. Rozeff

The best way to get news is to read actual testimony, reports, transcripts, and speeches. The worst way is to read headlines, unless you like to be subjected to distortions and misunderstandings. In between, one can read news reports and then blogs, comments, and editorials about news reports.

No matter what one reads, the next step is to think about the matter and place it in perspective based on important factors, past events, past news, past communications, history, and so on.

Case in point: the testimony of Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper today. See here for his actual testimony in written form. Most important is that he said clearly that Iran is not building nuclear weapons and CIA chief David Petraeus said the same thing, and the latter said he had met with the head of Mossad to convey his view. This portion of his testimony was not reported in the Boston Herald article. Instead, it pieced together two unconnected parts of his testimony and left the impression that Iran was making enriched uranium in order to conduct an attack on the U.S.!! See here. This is disgracefully poor reporting and utterly misleading.

Google provides headlines. Many of these, that I will not cite, are disgraceful too. They leave the impression that Iran has bolstered its threats unilaterally and is suddenly more willing to attack the continental U.S. This is not at all what Clapper said. He said that Iran is "now more willing to conduct an attack on the United States" in the case of a "real or perceived" threat by the U.S. to the regime. In other words, an attack on them or a U.S. threat on them that they considered deadly serious might possibly be met by their attacks on American soil. That's his opinion, but even that doesn't get reported accurately. For example, the Washington Post says, according to Google, "launch terrorist attacks inside the United States in response to perceived threats from America and its allies..." Notice that they added the word "terrorist" to Clapper's testimony and they left out the part about a real threat. This is really pitiful and biased reporting.

US Transit Hub-Base in Kyrgyzstan for Afghan Heroin

Source: Boiling Frogs Post

“A Nazi and a Drug Lord in Charge of Police in Osh?”

Today Turkish Weekly ran an investigative piece on the newly appointed chief of police in Osh-Kyrgyzstan. The new police chief Suyun Omurzakov, who used to be a deputy minister of interior, has been known as a highly influential drug lord, a leader of organized criminal groups, and he was the subject of a criminal investigation in the past:

In October 2009, the Kyrgyznews.com published an article pointing to a direct link between the then Osh city deputy chief of police S. Omurzakov and organized criminal groups engaged into drug trafficking, referring to this person as one of the most influential drug lords in the south of Kyrgyzstan.

Another report that investigates the June 2010 events developed by a coalition of Kyrgyz and Uzbek human right defenders “Oshskaya Initsiativa” (Osh Initiative) speaks of Omurzakov as a leader of an organized Kyrgyz criminal group, along with the mayor of Osh Melis Myrzakmatov, and crime bosses Almanbet Manapiyaev and Kadyr Dusanov (“Jengo”), etc., who were directly involved into plotting, leading, financing and participating in anti-Uzbek pogroms and distributing arms and ammunition among Kyrgyz militia.

Since 2001 Kyrgyzstan has been hosting the Transit Center at Manas (formerly Manas Air Base) as the transit point for US military personnel coming and going from Afghanistan, and pays 200 million for continued use of the facilities. For years the base has been riddled with scandals and fiascos.  Last December Boiling Frogs Post EyeOpener Investigative Report took a closer look at “The Manas Question: Drugs, Revolution & Terrorism on the Road to Afghanistan”:

National Security Letters: Eviscerating the Constitution Since 1978

Source: Boiling Frogs Post and Corbett Report
James Corbett


TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES:

The passage of the Patriot Act in October 2001 is by now an all-too-familiar story. The American people, already suffering from the trauma of 9/11, were pushed into outright panic by the anthrax attacks, a series of anthrax-laced mailings that killed five, injured 17 and shut down congress for the first time in modern history. The Act itself was introduced on a Tuesday and signed into law on Friday, before anyone had read let alone understood the sweeping changes it would introduce to American law.

One of those changes were amendments to a little-known and little-used FBI instrument called National Security Letters.

Currency Warfare: What are the Real Targets of the E.U. Oil Embargo against Iran?

Source: Global Research
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

Against whom is the European Union’s so-called “oil embargo on Iran” really aimed at?

This is an important geo-strategic question. Aside from rejecting the new E.U. measures against Iran as counter-productive, Tehran has warned the member states of the European Union that the E.U. oil embargo against Iran will hurt them and their economies far more than Iran.

Tehran has thus warned the leaders of the E.U. countries that the new sanctions are foolish and against their national and bloc interests. But is this correct? At the end of the day, who will benefit from the chain of events that are being set into motion?

 Are Oil Embargoes against Iran New?

Oil embargos against Iran are not new. In 1951, the Iranian government of Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh with the support of the Iranian Parliament nationalized the Iranian oil industry. As a result of Dr. Mossadegh’s nationalization program, the British militarily blockaded the territorial waters and national ports of Iran with the British Royal Navy and prevented Iran from exporting its oil. They also militarily prevented Iranian trade. London also froze Iranian assets and started a campaign to isolate Iran with sanctions. The government of Dr. Mossadegh was democratic and could not be vilified easily domestically by the British, so they began to portray Mossadegh as a pawn of the Soviet Union who would turn Iran into a communist country together with his Marxist political allies.

The illegal British naval embargo was followed by regime change in Tehran via a 1953 Anglo-American engineered coup d’état. The 1953 coup transformed the Shah of Iran from a constitutional figure head to an absolute monarch and dictator, like the monarchs of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Qatar. Iran was transformed overnight from a democratic constitutional monarchy into a dictatorship.

Today, a militarily imposed oil embargo against Iran is not possible like it was in the early 1950s. Instead London and Washington use the language of righteousness and hide behind false pretexts about Iranian nuclear weapons. Like in the 1950s, the oil embargo against Iran is tied to regime change. Yet, there are also broader objectives that go beyond the boundaries of Iran tied to the Washington’s project to impose an oil embargo against the Iranians.

The Secret History of the International Bond Market

A secret history of the International bond market from katz ray on Vimeo.

Libyan Oil Infrastructure Assets Seized by US Special Ops Forces?

Source: Oriental Review
Alexander Krymov

The unexpectedly quick EU consent to take immediate sanctions against Iran “coincided” with seizure of Libyan oil terminals. To certain extent the negative affect of expected oil shortage for European economy could be minimized in case the utmost is done to boost the Brega and Ras-Lanuf production capacities till the complete cessation of contacts with Iran is in force. 

The article should have been called “Which was to be demonstrated.” The facts and trends described here have been foretold a really long time ago by impartial observers who didn’t just believe the allegations the main reason for Nato’s actions in Libya was establishment of democracy.

Since January 18 information agencies started to broadcast interesting facts supposedly based on the data initially reported by the oldest “international” Arabic Asharq Alawsat newspaper, based in London since 1978. It was reported that a 12000 men strong US ground force supposedly landed in the vicinity of Marsa el-Brega. The formal pretext — “preserving stability in the region and security of peaceful population”. The Israeli web sites added the US infantrymen were transferred from Malta. They said the actual mission of this relocation was to maintain permanent flow of Libyan oil to the European markets to be sold at low prices. Though the US embassy in Malta denies allegations such a transfer of servicemen has ever taken place.

US troops landed in the eastern oil port city of Brega

It’s noteworthy Marsa el-Brega is one of the core elements of Libyan oil industry infrastructure, where oil refineries, loading facilities, and a liquefied gas processing plant are situated. No matter the before the war population was only 15000 dwellers, the place is a “key point” of oil industry. One of two acting export terminals is located in Brega. The second one is in Ras-Lanuf, situated about 70 km from el-Brega. Thus landing troops in this key location of the shore is the most logical action for someone who’s interest is to secure Libyan hydrocarbons uninterrupted flow. If it were population safety it would have been reasonable to land somewhere more near to big cities. 

Boosting cheap oil flows to the market doesn’t look like a mission impossible. It a beaten path tried in Iraq when it provided the victors with energy supplies for symbolic prices as one of numerous compensations for “rescue” from Saddam Hussein. It’s noteworthy the unexpectedly quick EU consent to take immediate sanctions against Iran “coincided” with the seizure of Libyan oil terminals. To certain extent the negative affect of expected oil shortage for European economy could be minimized in case the utmost is done to boost the Brega and Ras-Lanuf production capacities till the complete cessation of contacts with Iran is in force.

WAR OR NO WAR IN IRAQ? Drones Over Iraq: When is a Pullout not a Pullout?

Source: Global Research
Felicity Arbuthnot

First the world was sold imaginary weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, General Colin Powell, at the United Nations in February 2003, asserting: “My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”

Now it seems the world is sold a withdrawal from Iraq which was not quite what it seemed, as presented by the Panetta-Obama-fest in the Baghdad, Fort Bragg speeches of just six weeks ago. At Fort Bragg: "The war in Iraq will soon belong to history …” said the President. 

Well, not quite. 

In an interesting sleight of hand, the State Department, rather than the Pentagon, is operating a fleet of surveillance drones over Iraq. 

In: “ … the latest example of the State Department’s efforts to take over the functions in Iraq that the military used to perform.”(i) 

Further, the near Vatican City sized US Embassy in Baghdad is protected by five thousand mercenaries and has a further staff of eleven thousand, a large number, seemingly in a “military advice” capacity, training Iraqi forces – a nation that, ironically, nine years ago the US and UK cited as having a military capability not alone a threat “to the entire region”, but to the West. 

Little noticed has been that the State Department has been operating drones in Iraq since last year. Additionally when “Embassy” staff travel, they are escorted by helicopters, frequently with machine gun toting mercenaries “tethered to the outside.” Another Nisour Square massacre (176h September 2007) waiting to happen. 

The Pentagon-operated drones, it seems, went out by the front door and returned through the State Department back door. 

Corbett Report Radio - A Violation of Trust with Howard Cohen

Source: Corbett Report
James Corbett

Howard Cohen of Actors and Artists for 9/11 Truth joins us to discuss his forthcoming feature film, “A Violation of Trust.” Set to star veteran Hollywood actors Ed Asner, Woody Harrelson, Daniel Sunjata, Michele Phillips, and more, “A Violation of Trust” dramatizes the first day of a new presidential investigation into 9/11.

Lawsuit Slams "All Natural" Snack Makers for Containing Harmful GMO Ingredients

Source: Activist Post
Anthony Gucciardi

Does the term ‘all natural’ really mean anything when it comes to food labeling? Increasingly, the evidence says absolutely not.

A new lawsuit launched from New York highlights the real lack of meaning behind the ‘all natural’ marketing stunt, stating that Frito-Lay’s popular ‘all natural’ snack foods like Tostitos and SunChips are actually made with genetically modified ingredients.

Chris Sakes leads the suit against the mega snack corporation, filing a class-action lawsuit that sheds light on the ‘all natural’ labeling scam.

Shake said that Frito-Lay products are not natural at all, as they contain corn oils and genetically modified plants. What is this phony ‘all natural’ claims worth? About 10 cents more than competing brands that do not claim to be all natural, which contain virtually the same ingredients.

The lawsuit reported that independent testing actually confirmed the presence of corn and vegetables oils as well as GMOs within the popular snack brands. 

Genetically Modified Ingredients -- Far From Natural

In response, a Frito-Lay spokesman stated that the ‘all natural’ statement on its packaging “complies with all regulatory requirements.”

Of course genetically modified ingredients are quite far from natural. The suit states:

Genetically modified organisms are created artificially in a laboratory by swapping genetic material across species to exhibit traits not naturally theirs. Since a reasonable consumer assumes that seeds created in such a way are not ‘all natural,’ advertising Tostitos and SunChips as natural is deceptive and likely to mislead a reasonable consumer.

It is interesting to note that Frito-Lay is a unit of PepsiCo Inc., a company that was recently hit with a similarly-large lawsuit.  After reportedly finding a mouse in a Mountain Dew can in 2009, Ronald Ball from Illinois launched a lawsuit against the soft drink giant. In response, Pepsi Co. stated that the drink is so acidic the mouse would have disintegrated before he opened it.

As the suit against Frito-Lay gains publicity, it demonstrates just how deeply GMOs have infiltrated the food supply. Far from natural, it is time that corporations begin removing these harmful ingredients from their food products and stop claiming their products to be what they are not.

Explore More:

1. New Lawsuit Filed Over GMO Alfalfa
2. India Slams Monsanto with Unprecedented ‘Biopiracy’ Charges
3. Report Finds ‘Natural’ Cereal Products Loaded with GMOs, Pesticides
4. FDA Targets ‘Unproven’ New Supplements While Allowing Harmful GMOs
5. Wendy’s Natural Cut Fries Are Far From Natural
6. Lawsuit Launched to End Mislabeling of “Organic” Personal Care Products

Please visit Natural Society for more great health news and vaccine information.

Did you know? Nearly all corn and soy products purchased at grocery stores are genetically modified and may place your health at risk

Source: Natural News

More than 90 percent of all soybeans grown in the United States are genetically modified (GM) for herbicide resistance and are consequently sprayed with massive quantities of those toxic chemicals. Fully 85 percent of all corn grown in the country is also genetically engineered, either for herbicide resistance or to produce pesticides within its tissues. Since farmers sell their corn and soy to large distributors who mix the product together for processing, this essentially means that 100 percent of non-organic corn and soy products on the US market are GM.

And since soy and corn derivatives are so ubiquitous in packaged food, the Grocery Manufacturers of America has estimated that as much as 80 percent of processed food on US shelves contains GM ingredients. This includes breakfast cereals and other products labeled "natural" or "all natural." (http://www.naturalnews.com/033838_breakfast_cereals_GMOs.html)

GM crops are simply unsafe. They expose people to novel and potentially dangerous allergens and to higher levels of pesticides. Animals grazing on GM crops have died from ruptured internal organs. Yet this is the type of food making up 80 percent of packaged food today, and the only way to avoid it is to buy organic food or grow your own.

Tip: Foods labeled USDA Organic do not contain any substantial level of genetically engineered ingredients, but due to cross-contamination of crops, even organic products almost always contain trace levels of GMOs.

Source: 25 Amazing Facts About Food, authored by Mike Adams and David Guiterrez. This report reveals surprising things about where your food comes from and what's really in it! Download the full report (FREE) by clicking here. Inside, you'll learn 24 more amazing but true facts about foods, beverages and food ingredients. Instant download of the complete PDF. All 25 facts are documented and true.

Additional Sources:
http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/agri_biotechnology/gmo_planting/341.ge...
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_18445.cfm
http://www.calgefree.org/facts_on_ge.html
http://www.ResponsibleTechnology.org
http://www.naturalnews.com/NoGMO.html

China Faces Tough Call in Iran Showdown

Source: Global Times

The Iran situation remains unpredictable as the country considers suspending oil exports to EU countries. China faces a tough diplomatic challenge.

Image: Iranian students hold photos of assassinated nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan and his son as they protest at the Imam Khomeini Airport in Tehran Sunday during the arrival of the team of International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors. Photo: AFP

Despite these twists and turns, the general direction is clear. The US and Europe are determined to unseat the current Iranian regime. An oil embargo, aimed at choking Iran's economic lifeline, has been adopted. Overall oil embargoes will start in six months whether Iran stops oil exports to the EU or not.

It's the gamble that will decide the political fate of this major Middle East oil producer with a population of 60 million. Equally at stake is the future global geopolitical landscape. China will be deeply involved in the process, of which it should be under no illusion.

A showdown between the West and Iran will partly be turned into a West-China showdown, namely whether China should comply with the West's geopolitical decision. In previous major world political conflicts, China has sought to avoid direct confrontation with the US and Europe. The tradeoff is a relatively mild policy from the West toward China. Now the West has the same expectations of China.

But the Iran issue involves so much of China's interests that no other previous international conflict is comparable in this regard. Ten percent of China's oil is imported from Iran, and China cannot stay aloof from the affair.

While there is no other choice for China, it should have the courage to drop minor details and focus on the biggest realistic interests of China on this issue and China's diplomatic principles that need to be protected most. The former is continuing to import oil from Iran while the latter is opposing external forces to change a country's regime, particularly with threats of war.

The two basic stands are against EU and US policies toward Iran. But this opposition is inevitable due to the importance of the Iran issue for China. It is obvious that eventually the resolution of the problem will come to the point of forcing China to pull back from its stance. China should consider how to handle it when the time comes. China needs to prepare to face it squarely once the conflict becomes impossible to avoid.

U.S. to Send Floating Base to Mideast for Quick Strikes

Source: WSJ
Nathan Hodge and Julian Barnes

WASHINGTON—Within the president’s defense-budget plan is funding for an intriguing new item: a floating drone base that also could be used as a launching pad for commandos.

The vessel—called an “afloat forward staging base”—would be a platform that could be configured to carry and refuel small patrol boats, helicopters or pilotless aircraft.

Within the president’s new defense budget plan is funding for an intriguing new item: a floating drone base that also could be used as a launching pad for commandos. Nathan Hodge has details on The News Hub.

 

It would also give the U.S. military the ability to stage a small strike force offshore—without obtaining a permission slip from another country for access to a land base.

Details are still emerging, but the project offers insight into how the Obama administration envisions a military that in some ways is more lethal even as it contracts.

Plans for the specialized vessel fit neatly with the Obama administration’s plans to grow special-operations forces, while slimming down conventional forces such as the Army and Marine Corps.

Senior officials want to provide military commanders with affordable sea-base options without necessarily sending a big-deck aircraft carrier and a full complement of escort ships.

A defense official said the floating staging base was more like a freighter that would be outfitted for different kinds of missions, from countering mines to launching remotely piloted aircraft. It also could be used as a platform for launching commando operations.

The official said one option for the ship is a version of the Mobile Landing Platform, a logistics ship that is being built by General Dynamics NASSCO, a San Diego-based shipyard owned by General Dynamics Corp. General Dynamics didn’t respond immediately to requests for comment.

Threats of Nuclear Sabotage Against Pakistan – Analysis

Source: Eurasia Review

Muhammad Jawad Hashmi

As a nuclear weapons’ state, Pakistan faces a number of challenges, which if  unaddressed could cause a severe damage to Pakistan’s international image as well as to the safety and security of nuclear weapons of Pakistan.

It is acknowledged secret that Pakistan has a robust command control system with its weapons kept unassembled and dispersed at different places with multilayered security arrangements. As a result potential terrorists would have to toil a lot to obtain access to those weapons. These are extremely complex challenges and next to impossible for the terrorists to cross all the thresholds and layers of security undetected. Thus, the strict security arrangements around nuclear facilities and lack of nuclear knowledge may hinder terrorists to steal fissile material and attempt to manufacture a workable nuclear weapon. In a more plausible scenario it could be that terrorists may assemble an RDD (radiological dispersal devices) or dirty bombs.1 For the said purpose, terrorists would need fissile material and a lot of technical know-how to fabricate such device.

A Case Building Scenario: Threats of Nuclear Sabotage against Pakistan

Immense hype by global media, presence of agents like Raymond Davis and private forces like Blackwaters and DynCorp in Pakistan are the crucial reasons to forecast the alarming scenario vis-à-vis security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. The literature reveals that US opinion makers like David Albright, David Sanger, Frederick Kagan and Michael O’Hanalon, Thomas Ricks and Peter Wonacott has raised the same kind of queries over the safety and security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets.2 The following discussion reveals the western efforts and covert agenda by the different tactics to discard Pakistan’s security arrangements. Thus, the prospects of filing a case of nuclear material’s theft/transfer or sabotage against Pakistan could be built.

Global Media Hype over Insecurity of Pakistan’s Nuclear Assets

Osama Bin Laden episode and PNS Mehran attack has added fuel in the ongoing crisis in Pakistan. The global media started raising questions about the role of Pakistan in WOT as dual or suspicious. There had been number of evidences which reveal that global media is creating sensational hypes to tag Pakistan as rogue state. For instance Mariot Leslie, who was the director general of Defence and intelligence at the Foreign Office but is now Britain’s ambassador to NATO said that recent intelligence indicates that Pakistan is not going in a good direction. He believed that “The UK has deep concerns about the safety and security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, and China could play a big role in stabilizing Pakistan.”3 According to Wikileaks, UK, USA, and France have raised high concerns that Pakistani nuclear assets may fall into the hands of terrorists. The leaked documents revealed that in 2008, the US ambassador to Islamabad, Anne Patterson, cabled to Washington that a rogue scientist in the Pakistani nuclear programme could gradually smuggle enough material out to eventually make a weapon for a terrorist group.4 In another cable released by the Wikileaks, concerns has been raised that two main sources from which nuclear materials or a weapon could be obtained are Pakistan and the states of the former Soviet Union.5

Third Aircraft Carrier Group Coming To Iran

Source: Zero Hedge

For months now we have been following US naval developments and deployments in the Arabian Sea, which serve one purpose and one purpose only - to demonstrate US military strength in the Straits of Hormuz region and to keep Iranian 'offensive passions' subdued. Yet never has the US had a total of three aircraft carrier groups in the vicinity, always topping out at 2 in the Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet, most recently these being the CVN-70 Vinson and CVN 72 Lincoln, with a third boat present merely until a rotation in or out of the theater of operations was complete. That is about to change, and with it the prevailing price of Brent, which we are confident is about to take a new step wise price higher as the US makes it all too clear what the endgame is, because as Naval Today reports, the "US navy to deploy third carrier group to Persian Gulf", probably the CVN-77 George H.W. Bush which departed Norfolk two weeks ago according to the most recent naval update, or any other Norfolk-stationed aircraft carrier: there is a wide selection to chose from.

Source: Naval Today

The carrier group based in Norfolk, VA will also include a guided missile cruiser and three guided missile destroyers, reports Interfax.

USS Abraham Lincoln had already entered the Persian Gulf via the Strait of Hormuz on Jan 22. She is escorted by a guided missile cruiser and two destroyers (USN), one British and one French warships.

Meanwhile, another US Navy’s carrier strike carrier group headed by USS Carl Vinson is stationed eastward the Strait of Hormuz, in northern part of the Arabian Sea washing southwest coast of Iran.

At present, the US has 15,000-men force deployed in Kuwait, expeditionary marine battalion, and amphibious landing group.

Iran, Gold and Oil - The Next Bankster War

Source: BATR

Remember the real reason why Moammar Gadhafi is dead. He dared to propose and started creating an alternative currency to the world reserve U.S. Dollar. The lesson learned in Libya is now ready for teaching in Iran. Forget all the noise about going nuclear, the true message is that the banksters rule and nation states serve their ultimate masters. The hype and disinformation that surrounds the push for war is best understood by examining the viewpoint of Iranian MP Kazem Jalali. The Tehran Times quotes him in saying,

"The European Union must be aware that it can never compel the Islamic Republic to succumb to their will and undermine the Iranian nation’s determination to achieve glory and independence, access modern technologies, and safeguard its rights, through the intensification of the pressure."

"The European Union is seeking to politicize the atmosphere ahead of nuclear talks with Iran and is aware that sanctions on Iran’s oil exports cannot be implemented since the world is not limited to a number of European countries"

Many political commentators warn that an embargo is an act or war. Chris Floyd provides this observation of the recent oil embargo against Iran.

"This week, the warlords of the West took yet another step toward their long-desired war against Iran. (Open war, that is; their covert war has been going on for decades -- via subversion, terrorism, and proxies like Saddam Hussein.) On Monday, the European Union obediently followed the dictates of its Washington masters by agreeing to impose an embargo on Iranian oil.

The embargo bans all new oil contracts with Iran, and cuts off all existing deals after July. The embargo is accompanied by a freeze on all European assets of the Iranian central bank. In imposing these draconian measures on a country which is not at war with any nation, which has not invaded or attacked another nation in centuries, and which is developing a nuclear energy program that is not only entirely legal under international law but is also subject to the most stringent international inspection regime ever seen, the EU is "targeting the economic lifeline of the regime," as one of its diplomats put it, with admirable candor."

The most important aspect of the Iranian response lies in the way that changes oil settlement for delivery and the futile effect of the US/Anglo/EU imperialist dictates have in the marketplace.

Yet Again U.S. Department of Defense Can’t Account for Billions in Iraq

Source: End The Lie
Madison Ruppert

Two new audits conducted by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) have discovered that the United States Department of Defense (DOD) cannot account for a whopping $2 billion it was given to fund the reconstruction of Iraq.

To make matters even worse, the DOD is not even providing Iraq with a complete record of the construction projects funded by the United States, making the accounting even more difficult, if not impossible.

Back in 2004, Iraq provided $3 billion to the DOD to fund selected construction projects, but only about one third of those funds have been tracked according to the inspector general’s “January Quarterly Report and Semiannual Report” which was released recently and can be located here (along with other reports released by the inspector general).

The DOD claims that they have “internal processes and controls” in place to track the flow of money, yet they admit the “bulk of the records are missing,” and claim that they are in the process of searching for them.

Claiming you have internal controls while $2 billion is missing is laughable and shows just how ludicrously incompetent our government can be.

However, there is the very real possibility that this has nothing to do with incompetence and instead is yet another example of individuals in government conspiring to cash in.

This very well might be the case given that other documents including monthly reports which document the expenses have mysteriously gone missing as well.

Another indicator that this is something more than mere incompetence is the fact that in June of last year, the New York Federal Reserve refused to disclose details about the billions of dollars the Fed sent to Iraq during the beginning of the invasion.

The inspector general claimed it was not the fault of the New York Fed but instead the Iraqis since “They haven’t been sufficiently responsive.”

Furthermore, earlier that month it was reported that $6.6 billion in fresh $100 bills was sent by plane to Iraq and then could not be accounted for by the DOD.

Big Brother Internet

Source: Institute for Political Economy
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Do you remember the Safe-Cyber instructions they taught you in the mandatory Computer Ed class (operated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology)? First you fire up your Secured Computing Device (SCD) and its hardware token authenticator.

Then you enter the six-digit algorithmically generated password displayed (a new one flashes every 60 seconds) and are asked to supply your biometric identifier. You place your thumb on the built-in fingerprint pad, click, and wait for the Internet connection to begin. But it doesn’t.

Instead, the screen goes black for a second before the dreaded words appear: “Malware has been detected on this SCD. As mandated by federal law, it has been placed in quarantine.” Then the machine shuts down.

This is not just conjecture, but an imminent scenario.

Policies, such as the White House proposed “National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace,” which will transform the character, culture and freedom of the Internet, are already in place. The 20 cybersecurity-related bills introduced in the Senate in 2011, and the dozen introduced in the House of Representatives, have wound their way through committees and, according to Senator Harry Reid, are scheduled to be voted on in the first quarter of 2012. Almost all of them, with the blessing of the White House, would make the Department of Homeland Security the overseer of private-sector networks.
  

Considering the apocalyptic rhetoric coming from Washington and the ranks of cybersecurity experts – echoed by media reports that portray every picayune data breach as Armageddon – it would appear that the vulnerability of the Internet has been underplayed for many years.

In the Internet’s start-up decades, both industry and government were committed to establishing an atmosphere of trust that would draw the public into conducting more and more digital business. Though data breaches, theft of trade secrets, identity theft and bank robbery have been a fact of Internet life since its beginnings, there were few laws requiring disclosure. Banks and credit card firms ate their losses as a cost of doing business, and the giant corporations kept mum rather than roil the public. Recently, the pendulum has swung in the other direction and a raucous alarm has been sounded regarding the great danger posed by the Internet.