U.S. MEDIA BLACKOUT — Obama Knows That Turkey Is Buying Oil From ISIS And He Isn’t Doing Anything To Stop It

fft5_mf595212

(by Michael Snyder, EOAD) — At this point, is there anyone that still doesn’t know that ISIS is selling hundreds of millions of dollars of stolen oil in Turkey?  As you will see below, this is very much an open secret, but the mainstream media in the United States is being strangely silent about this.  Why?  Well, because if the truth came out Turkey would have to be kicked out of NATO and Barack Obama would probably be facing impeachment proceedings.  He claims to be fighting ISIS, and yet an endless parade of trucks carrying oil that ISIS has stolen goes back and forth over the Turkish border with his full knowledge and approval.  Barack Obama is very much aware that Turkey is buying oil from ISIS and he refuses to do anything about it.  If the Republicans are looking for a scandal which could completely wreck Obama’s presidency and essentially secure the 2016 election for them, this is it.

Do you want to know why the Turkish government ordered the shooting down of a Russian Su-24 bomber on Tuesday?

It is because the Russians have been bombing the trucks that transport oil from ISIS into Turkey.

The Turks claim that the Russian aircraft violated their airspace for approximately 17 seconds.  But as Paul Craig Roberts has pointed out, in order for the SU-24 to fly only 1.15 miles in 17 seconds would mean that it was flying at stall speed the entire time, which is ridiculous.  Clearly there is something very fishy with the official story, and the Russians say that they never violated Turkey’s airspace at any time.

But no matter who was right and who was wrong, normally countries go out of their way to avoid an international incident.  Instead, it appeared that the Turks were quite eager to shoot down the SU-24, and since that time Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan has refused to apologize.  In fact, he has warned Russia “not to play with fire” and he insists that it is the Russians that need to apologize

“Those who violated our airspace are the ones who need to apologize. Our pilots and our armed forces, they simply fulfilled their duties, which consisted of responding to … violations of the rules of engagement. I think this is the essence.”

Is he insane?

What in the world would cause Erdogan to behave so irrationally?

Well, the truth is that Erdogan has been very upset these days because the Russians have been interfering with the illegal oil smuggling that his family has been conducting.

One of the ways that Russian President Vladimir Putin has responded to the downing of the SU-24 has been to drop “truth bombs” on Turkey.  Just check out some of the comments that he made this week following a meeting with French President Francois Hollande

Commercial-scale oil smuggling from Islamic State controlled territory into Turkey must be stopped, Putin said after meeting Hollande in Moscow.

Vehicles, carrying oil, lined up in a chain going beyond the horizon,” said Putin, reminding the press that the scale of the issue was discussed at the G20 summit in Antalya earlier this month, where the Russian leaderdemonstrated reconnaissance footage taken by Russian pilots.

The views resemble a living oil pipestretched from ISIS and rebel controlled areas of Syria into Turkey, the Russian President stressed. Day and night they are going to Turkey. Trucks always go there loaded, and back from there – empty.

We are talking about a commercial-scale supply of oil from the occupied Syrian territories seized by terrorists. It is from these areas [that oil comes from], and not with any others. And we can see it from the air, where these vehicles are going,” Putin said.

If the Russians can see this very clearly, do you think that the U.S. military and U.S. intelligence agencies can see this too?

Of course we can.  We have even better surveillance capabilities than the Russians do.

Without a doubt, Obama knows exactly what is going on.

The SU-24 was shot down over an area that is used to transport ISIS oil into Turkey.  This is a point that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has been careful to highlight.  The following comes from Sputnik News

Lavrov also pointed to Turkey’s role in the propping up the terror network through the oil trade.

“The Russian Minister reminded his counterpart about Turkey’s involvement in the ISIS’ illegal trade in oil, which is transported via the area where the Russian plane was shot down, and about the terrorist infrastructure, arms and munitions depots and control centers that are also located there,” the statement read.

“Sergei Lavrov specifically said that this act by Turkey will have serious consequences for Russian-Turkish relations and will not go unanswered.”

It would be one thing if everyone was just finding out now that ISIS is selling oil in Turkey.

But the truth is that this has been known about for quite a long time.

For instance, the U.S. uncovered “undeniable” evidence that Turkey was buying oil from ISIS back in July

Western officials have long harbored suspicions about Turkey’s links to the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh. One official told The Guardian’s Martin Chulov in July that a US-led raid on the compound housing ISIS’ “chief financial officer” produced “undeniable” evidence that Turkish officials directly dealt with ranking ISIS members, mainly by purchasing oil from them.

So why didn’t Barack Obama do anything about it?

Why has he continued to allow oil trucks to go back and forth between ISIS and Turkey “day and night” ever since then?

We have clearly been betrayed by Obama.  Even our top military commanders know what is happening.  Just this week, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Wesley Clark went on television and admitted that oil from ISIS is “probably going through Turkey”

Asked whether he agreed with Vladimir Putin that Turkey was aiding ISIS, Clark responded, “All along there’s always been the idea that Turkey was supporting ISIS in some way,” before going on to accuse Ankara of funneling ISIS terrorists through Turkey and buying ISIS’ stolen oil in the black market.

Someone’s buying that oil that ISIS is selling, it’s going through somewhere, it looks to me like it’s probably going through Turkey,” said Clark, before also going on to accuse Putin of supporting terrorists through his allegiance with Bashar Al-Assad.

So why is Barack Obama completely silent about this?

And it isn’t as if the Turkish government is just turning a blind eye to what is going on.

No, the truth is that the Turkish president’s own son is the one buying and exporting the oil.  The following comes from Sputnik News

Turkey downed the Russian Su-24 Fencer bomber over Syria in response to the destruction of hundreds of semi-truck oil tankers sent to Turkey from Syria by the Islamic State, Syrian Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi said.

The information minister said that oil smuggled into Turkey was bought by the Turkish president’s son, who owns an oil company.

All of the oil was delivered to a company that belongs to the son of Recep [Tayyip] Erdogan. This is why Turkey became anxious when Russia began delivering airstrikes against the IS infrastructure and destroyed more than 500 trucks with oil already. This really got on Erdogan and his company’s nerves. They’re importing not only oil, but wheat and historic artifacts as well,” al-Zoubi told RIA Novosti in an interview.

It is Bilal Erdogan that is the head of the company that is buying oil from ISIS, and he is shipping much of it to Japan.  BMZ Ltd. is described as a “family business”, and many of President Erdogan’s “close relatives” hold shares in the company.  The following is an excerpt from an excellent article by F. William Engdahl

The prime source of money feeding ISIS these days is sale of Iraqi oil from the Mosul region oilfields where they maintain a stronghold. The son of Erdogan it seems is the man who makes the export sales of ISIS-controlled oil possible.

Bilal Erdogan owns several maritime companies. He has allegedly signed contracts with European operating companies to carry Iraqi stolen oil to different Asian countries. The Turkish government buys Iraqi plundered oil which is being produced from the Iraqi seized oil wells. Bilal Erdogan’s maritime companies own special wharfs in Beirut and Ceyhan ports that are transporting ISIS’ smuggled crude oil in Japan-bound oil tankers.

Gürsel Tekin vice-president of the Turkish Republican Peoples’ Party, CHP, declared in a recent Turkish media interview, “President Erdogan claims that according to international transportation conventions there is no legal infraction concerning Bilal’s illicit activities and his son is doing an ordinary business with the registered Japanese companies, but in fact Bilal Erdo?an is up to his neck in complicity with terrorism, but as long as his father holds office he will be immune from any judicial prosecution.” Tekin adds that Bilal’s maritime company doing the oil trades for ISIS, BMZ Ltd, is “a family business and president Erdogan’s close relatives hold shares in BMZ and they misused public funds and took illicit loans from Turkish banks.”

Does Barack Obama know all of this?

Of course he does.

Our intelligence agencies would have to be blind, deaf and dumb not to have uncovered all of this by now.

The president of Turkey’s own family is working directly with ISIS, and Obama is doing nothing.

In fact, President Erdogan’s own daughter is even helping to provide “extended medical care” for wounded ISIS militants in Turkish hospitals…

A discontented nurse working clandestinely for a covert medical corps in Şanlıurfa—a city in south-eastern Turkey, close to the border with neighboring Syria— divulges information about the alleged role which Sümeyye Erdoğan plays in providing extended medical care for ISIS wounded militants transferred to Turkish hospitals. Living in a dilapidated apartment in Istanbul’s outskirts along with her two children, a 34-year- old emaciated nurse who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution, disclosed her seven-week agonizing ordeal of working in secret military hospital in Şanlıurfa, 150 km (93 miles) east of Gaziantep and 1,300 km (808 miles) southeast of Istanbul. “Almost every day several khaki Turkish military trucks were bringing scores of severely injured, shaggy ISIS rebels to our secret hospital and we had to prepare the operating rooms and help doctors in the following procedures.”

Clearly, the Turkish government is on the same side as ISIS.  It has also been documented that ISIS fighters have trained in Turkey and that the Turkish government has been funneling weapons into Syria.

But desperate attempts have been made to keep this information away from the public.  In fact, two Turkish journalists that were working to expose the funneling of weapons into Syria have just been arrested and could be facing life in prison…

Two journalists from an opposition Turkish newspaper have been arrested, accused of spying by an Istanbul court following reports that Turkey’s intelligence agency sent weapons to Islamist rebel groups in Syria.

In another case of journalists facing criminal charges and censorship, editor-in-chief Can Dundar and Erdem Gul, the newspaper’s Ankara bureau chief, were taken into custody on Thursday night, Turkish media reported.

The two men are accused of spying and “divulging state secrets”, according to reports, as well as being members of a terror organisation. Another charge included the violation of state security after the release of the footage.

Such charges could see the men face life imprisonment.

And the Turkish government even got Joe Biden to apologize for comments that he made that exposed Turkey’s role in supplying the jihadists in Syria.  The following comes from CNN

“They poured hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad. Except that the people who were being supplied were al-Nusra and al-Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadis coming from other parts of the world,” Biden told students.

We could not convince our colleagues to stop supplying them,” he said.

On Turkey’s alleged role, Biden said, “President (Recep Tayyip) Erdogan told me, he’s an old friend, said, ‘You were right. We let too many people (including foreign fighters) through.’ Now they are trying to seal their border,” he said, according to transcripts.

Biden later “apologized” for saying those things, but were they true?

Of course what Biden said was true.

The government of Turkey desperately wants to see the Assad regime toppled, and so they are training ISIS militants, funneling weapons to them, buying their oil, and tending to their wounded in Turkish hospitals.

This is being done with the full knowledge and complicity of the Obama administration, and it is a betrayal on a level that is almost unspeakable.

Once again, if the Republicans are looking for a scandal that could destroy Obama’s presidency and deliver the 2016 election into their hands, this is it.

Sadly, just like on so many other occasions, the Republicans will probably find a way to fumble this football too.

But the American people deserve to know the truth.  Please share this information with as many people as you can on Facebook, Twitter and through email.  If we can get enough people screaming bloody murder about this, perhaps we can get someone in the mainstream media to take notice of what potentially could be the scandal of the century.

FBI Warns: Terrorists to Attack Fuel Storage Plants Inside U.S.

i-1aa-7d9-4-10

As the men in power prepare to play their next card in-hand, the stage has been set by the FBI to usher in a “new Pearl Harbor” in America just as globalist white papers reveal.

NEW YORK — With all of the media rhetoric and hype about the Syrian situation it’s hard to catch every report. However, this one is important.

According to a recent write-up, the FBI handed out a warning during an energy conference which took place about one week prior to the 12th anniversary of the September 2001, attacks, which in turn prompted the Petroleum Marketers Association of America (PMAA) to release a statement to its members.

Certain people in-the-know take this as a red flag, considering that similar warnings followed by rhetoric circled just before the attacks of 9/11.

Reuters reported, “The PMAA message to members said the FBI warned fuel marketers should be on alert for new customers who are not from the area, drivers who are not familiar with truck or vehicle operations, and people who store fuel in unusual locations or containers.”

This is startling to say the least. And to top it off, it’s an eerie feeling knowing that key power players control the oil and gas industry itself, likely paving the way for a new false flag operation to take place inside U.S. borders. Exactly what the globalists need to get their war inside Syria kicked off.

 Source

HORROR! ‘Syrian Rebels Behead Pro-Gov’t Prisoners In Front Of Children’

Photos have leaked out of Syria that appear to show rebels beheading allegedly pro-Assad government supporters…in front of children. (via in Serbia)

behead1 behead2 behead3

Disgusting culture of death. How much tax payer cash has gone to supply these lunatics with weapons? How come this is what we have been seeing from the rebels and have not seen such things from the Assad “regime” which the media portrays him as the lunatic monster?

Source

12 years after 9/11, Obama sends guns to al-Qaeda

obama-guns

Today the United States is waking up to news that the first publicly acknowledged shipment of lethal aid has made its way to Syria. It comes as part of President Obama’s efforts to support the Syrian Opposition, and punish Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the alleged use of chemical weapons, which violates a 1925 International Proclamation.

Before the 9/11 terror attacks, the United States was actively engaged in training and arming radical Islamist groups in the Middle East in order to undermine our enemies and supposedly support our national interests. After the Towers fell, the Pentagon was damaged, and Flight 93 was downed, the United States realized that they could not support such extremist groups anymore. Instead, America began a global campaign to combat terrorism, and punish those responsible for the September 11 attacks.

12 years later, we are back to arming radical Muslims, having forgotten, with stunning speed, the lessons of the previous 30 years.

12 years later we have come full circle.

We all understand that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It served as the basis of our Cold War foreign policy stance towards revolutions and civil wars around the globe.

But when the enemy of my enemy, is also my enemy, it would seem as though choices for options range between “absolutely not” and “this is a terrible idea.”

The fact that this is an option in the first place is appalling. The fact that there is someone in the government with input on national defense strategy who raised his hand during a meeting in between Angry Bird sessions and cat videos on his phone and said ‘What about arming al-Qaeda?’ Those are the kind of moronic, useless DC government yuppies who travel in packs on H Street looking for a bar with a large enough craft beer selection to jolt them out of their almost permanent haze of perceived self-importance.

We understand that action needs to be taken, and that the Opposition forces are currently losing the war. But at the same time, we are actively engaged in combat operations against al-Qaeda and their allies. We are quite literally handing weapons to the enemy. This would be tantamount to the British government sending guns and ammo to the IRA to help them fight a Civil War in Northern Ireland. It is almost like the Union sending arms to the Confederates in order to combat an Indian uprising.

To quote a popular expression, “that dog just don’t hunt.” Except it does hunt because we just gave it automatic weapons, it can hunt a lot.

Does everyone understand what is going on? The United States, one day after the 12 year anniversary of the 9/11 Terror Attacks, has now contributed arms to the cause of those same people who perpetrated them. We are now actively supporting a terrorist network, not just a terrorist network, THE terrorist network. It has taken 12 years for the United States government to forget the names of those responsible for thousands of American dead, it has taken 12 years for the government to decide that those lives, and the sacrifice of thousands of service members do not matter anymore. This should hurt, and it should hurt a lot.

What should be running through everyone’s mind is that while we are arming al-Qaeda in Syria, we are fighting them in many other areas. Those same weapons we supply the rebels with in Syria, could be used against our forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, or against our allies in Israel.

The potential benefit of this action is far outweighed by the potential harm it could inflict. During his anti-gun campaign several months ago, President Obama declared that any gun law, no matter how stringent, that could save the life of one child was worth trying. The question should be asked of him now; if not sending weapons to the Syrian Opposition saves the life of one American service member, is that worth trying?

Last year on September 11, al-Qaeda reminded the world it is still a threat capable of coordinating global attacks when it organized an assault in Benghazi which resulted in the death of Ambassador Stevens and three others. But the government said it was probably over a video so we shouldn’t worry about it. No matter that the names of the dead flash across the tv screen on CNN every night. No matter that we have spent over half a trillion dollars fighting these terrorists.

It would seem the only thing that matters now is making sure we don’t let the President lose credibility. Our government as it seems, has a memory like a steel trap. Was that steel? Sorry, perhaps pocket lint is more applicable. A trap made of pocket lint.

One would think that we would have learned our lesson by now. What was that? The American people have learned their lesson? The American people have been crying out against arming Syrian rebels?

12 years later, one day after the anniversary, Americans who can still tell you exactly where they were the moment they heard about the first plane hitting the Towers, Americans who still live with the images of falling bodies and burning buildings, Americans who are still afraid to fly, who still send their sons and daughters to war to make sure that it never happens again, are waking up to hear that the President of the United States of America has decided to arm the very people responsible for the worst terrorist attack on American soil.

12 years later, and we have learned nothing.

Source: washington times

‘EITHER YOU CONVERT TO ISLAM, OR YOU WILL BE BEHEADED’

Scenes in Darkoush, Syria - 21 Apr 2013

The village of Maaloula has been taken over by Syrian rebels associated with al Qaeda, who have stormed the Christian center and offered local Christians a choice: conversion or death. A resident of the town said the rebels shouted “Allahu Akhbar” as they moved through the village, and proceeded to assault Christian homes and churches.

“They shot and killed people,” he said. “I heard gunshots and then I saw three bodies lying in the middle of a street in the old quarters of the village. Where is President Obama to see what has befallen us?” Another witness stated, “I saw the militants grabbing five villagers and threatening them and saying, ‘Either you convert to Islam, or you will be beheaded.’”

http://landing.newsinc.com/shared/video.html?freewheel=90085&sitesection=breitbart_nws_wld_sty_vmppap&VID=25131711

The village is located just 25 miles from Damascus, and sites within the village are dedicated as United Nations world heritage sites. Residents still speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus. The rebels who took over the city are associated with the al Nusra Front, an al Qaeda-associated Islamist group. Villagers reported foreign dialects ranging from Tunisian to Libyan, from Moroccan to Chechen.

Source

WW3? Syrian, Iranian Officials Say Israel Will Be “Set On Fire” If US Strikes

World war 3 nuclear background

Senior Syrian and Iranian officials have again warned that should the US pursue military action in Syria, the state of Israel will find itself firmly and immediately in their crosshairs.

“If Damascus comes under attack, Tel Aviv will be targeted too and a full-scale war against Syria will actually issue a license for attacking Israel,” said a Syrian army official in comments to Iran’s Fars News Agency.

“We are rest assured that if Syria is attacked, Israel will also be set on fire and such an attack will, in turn, engage Syria’s neighbors,” the official said, maintaining anonymity during the interview.

The army official also stated that if the US chooses to help Al Qaeda-linked jihadists in Syria, their will be significant blowback in Israel.

“Weakening the central government in Damascus will actually start growing attacks on Israel and will create insecurity for that regime,” he said.

“Thus, a U.S. attack on Syria will herald frequent strikes and attacks on Israel, not just by Damascus and its allies in retaliation, but by extremist groups who will find a ground for staging their aspirations,” the official added.

Senior Iranian officials echoed the comments, with Hossein Sheikholeslam, the director-general of the parliament for International Affairs telling Fars News that “the Zionist regime will be the first victim of a military attack on Syria.”

Iranian Member of Parliament Mansur Haqiqatpur was also quoted as saying that “In case of a U.S. military strike against Syria, the flames of outrage of the region’s revolutionaries will point toward the Zionist regime.”

The fresh threats come in the wake of similar comments made earlier in the week by Syrian Deputy Information Minister Halaf Al-Maftah who warned that Israel will “come under fire” should the United states strike against the Assad regime. He added that the Syrian government has “strategic weapons aimed at Israel,” and warned that “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the region will go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”

Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom quoted Muftah as also warning “It’s possible to say unambiguously that a process of war against Syria could lead to an all-out world war. The responsibility for that will rest on the US and the Zionist entity’s shoulders.”

The Beirut Daily Star quoted a “senior source close to” Hezbollah as saying that in the event of major Western strike against Syria “Hezbollah will fight on various fronts,” and predicting an immediate “inferno of a war with Israel.”

Pro-Hezbollah cleric, Afif Nabulsi, who is closely aligned with the Syrian and Iranian governments, was also quoted as saying that “any [US] strike against Syria will be met by harsh responses against US interests in the region and against Israel directly.”

Lebanese Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour stated in a radio interview that the country would retaliate if Israel “exploits a strike against Syria to attack Hezbollah.”

In response to the threats, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said “The State of Israel is ready for any scenario.” Following a meeting with security officials in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said “We are not part of the civil war in Syria, but if we identify any attempt whatsoever to harm us, we will respond and we will respond in strength.”

According to Israeli intelligence website DEBKAfile, the Israeli security cabinet held another emergency meeting today, ordering the partial mobilization of select, qualitative IDF reserve forces: Rocket, Air Force, missile interception, Home Defense command and intelligence units.

DEBKAfile’s military sources report that an American military operation on Syria is scheduled to start Friday night, early Saturday Aug. 30-31. The report adds that US forces are finalizing a a major buildup at the huge US Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar.

“US air force reinforcements in Qatar will stand ready to rush to the aid of US allies – Israel, Jordan and Turkey – in the event of their coming under Syrian Scud attack.” the report states, adding that on the opposite side the Syrian army has been scattering personnel, weapons and air assets to pre prepared fortified shelters in order to limit damage and losses.

“Syrian army command centers in Homs, Hama, Latakia and the Aleppo region were also being split up and dispersed, after a tip-off to Syrian and Russian intelligence that they would be targeted by the US strike.” the report adds.

The Associated Press also reports that Israel has ordered a special call-up of hundreds of reserve troops to beef up civil defense preparations and to operate air-defense units near the border. Defense officials have confirmed the deployment of Iron Dome and Patriot missile-defense batteries in areas near the Syrian border, stating that they believe a US strike on Syria is imminent.

Israeli security and rescue forces are also engaged in a two-day drill in the Golan Heights along the Syrian border.

The intelligence supposedly handed to the US and its allies suggesting that the Syrian army was involved in the chemical attacks last week is said to have come predominantly via Israeli intelligence agencies.

While Chinese and Russian officials continue to warn of the grave global consequences of a US strike on Syria, Russian citizens are currently being evacuated out of the country.

Meanwhile even firebrand broadcaster Glenn Beck has come out against intervention in Syria, warning that because of China and Russia’s alignment with Iran and Syria, a wider war in the middle east would mean that the US “would not survive”.

Beck warned that “this is World War 3 in the making,” noting the Obama administration is on the exact same destructive warpath that the Bush government set out on 12 years ago.

Beck desperately appealed to his conservative listener base to find common ground with real liberals and hold huge anti-war rallies.

Source

—————————————————————-

U.S. Warned: Al-Qaida Hit-Squads Coming

us_capitol-destroyedaa11

UPDATE: The source informed WND hours after this story was posted that the Islamic regime ruling Iran is in preparation for a major cyber attack very soon on major U.S. facilities – to send a warning to the U.S. that the regime is capable of harming America’s infrastructure. It would be intended as a message to the Barack Obama administration that Iran’s nuclear rights must be accepted and sanctions relieved.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has given the green light to the guard commanders to publicly make statements attacking the U.S. and the current negotiations and the head of the IRGC, Mohammad Ali Jafari, is to make a major speech in this regard.

A senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard commander has warned America and Europe that al-Qaida operatives will soon attack them.

And a source in the Islamic regime’s Intelligence Ministry told WND that another terror team is about to enter the United States. Should the West not accept Iran’s rights to its nuclear program within six months, the terrorists will attack, he said.

The potential targets in the U.S. include high-voltage towers to create blackouts, cell towers, water supplies, public transportation and various buildings belonging to the Defense Department and military.

The source said six U.S. politicians who have promoted tougher measures against the regime are on the hit list, along with such targets as the Washington National Cathedral and Lincoln Memorial in D.C. and the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.

Two days of negotiations between Iran and the 5+1 countries (the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany) have just ended in Kazakhstan over Iran’s illicit nuclear program. The two parties agreed to meet again in March and April.

The source said an April deadline has been set for Iran to resolve issues over its nuclear program, one of which is to halt activity at Fordow and take concrete measures not to resume enrichment there. Iranian media are avoiding mentioning enrichment at Fordow in the wake of reports that explosions occurred there. The source said that proves explosions rocked Fordow and the West is now urging the regime not to restart enrichment at that site, which is deep underground and immune to conventional air strikes.

Read Reza Kahlili’s inside story of Iran, in “A Time to Betray.” Also look at the status of freedom in the repressive nation, in “A Cry From Iran: The Untold Story of Iranian Christian Martyrs.

WND exclusively reported the Jan. 21 explosions at Fordow, which have now dramatically altered the terms of the dialog between the 5+1 and Iran. Subsequent WND reports said dozens of scientists and technicians were killed in the blasts, scores more were injured, and that radiation leaks are sickening rescue workers and security personnel.

According to Fars News Agency, a media outlet run by the Revolutionary Guards, the regime’s armed forces deputy chief of staff, Brig. Gen. Masoud Jazayeri, last Thursday stated that, “Al-Qaida groups and other services which operate for the interest of America will soon change the region of their operations and thereafter create new problems for America and Europe.”

Jazayeri warned that the operatives have technological resources to threaten America and that, “if the people of America and Europe do not confront the aggressive policies of their governments, they cannot then remain far from the possible future events (terror attacks).”

WND reported exclusively on Dec. 11 and Dec. 18 that Islamic regime terror teams are not only ready to attack France and Germany but also the U.S.

Iran has been training, arming and funding al-Qaida elements for years. The regime’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and Quds Force commanders have held several meetings in Tehran with al-Qaida leaders in which a plan was devised to attack the West.

The source told WND that a six-member team, including an explosives specialist, is to join 10 Quds Force commanders who already have a cell of 50 terrorists in the U.S. Collaboration with al-Qaida serves Iranian leaders well, the source added, as al-Qaida attacks will not leave behind a link to Tehran.

This information has been shared with U.S. intelligence agencies, which have followed suspected terrorists through three countries so far. The source is working with U.S. authorities to verify the information, though it has yet to be validated.

While Israel and the West have set their eyes on covert operations and increased sanctions to pressure the regime into ending its illicit nuclear program, the regime has its eyes on completing its nuclear bomb program by overcoming the last obstacle of arming its ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads, according to the source.

The plan is, the source said, that if in the next six months America does not accept Iran’s nuclear program and does not ease sanctions or a military confrontation occurs, the terrorist assets have been ordered to carry out their missions. The regime feels it must act by then because current sanctions, which have already had a serious effect on Iran’s economy, could spark civil riots.

The International Atomic Energy Agency indicated in its Feb. 21 report that not only has Iran refused to allow inspection of several suspected nuclear sites but also has begun installing new-generation centrifuges at Natanz, which currently has 10,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. It said the regime’s Arak heavy-water plant is set to become operational by 2014, which would provide Iran with a second path to nuclear weapons by providing it with the needed plutonium for bombs.

Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of U.S. citizens

capture-20130207-192041aaabbb

The most extremist power any political leader can assert is the power to target his own citizens for execution without any charges or due process, far from any battlefield. The Obama administration has not only asserted exactly that power in theory, but has exercised it in practice. In September 2011, it killed US citizen Anwar Awlaki in a drone strike in Yemen, along with US citizen Samir Khan, and then, in circumstances that are still unexplained, two weeks later killed Awlaki’s 16-year-old American son Abdulrahman with a separate drone strike in Yemen.

Since then, senior Obama officials including Attorney General Eric Holder and John Brennan, Obama’s top terrorism adviser and his current nominee to lead the CIA, have explicitly argued that the president is and should be vested with this power. Meanwhile, a Washington Post article from October reported that the administration is formally institutionalizing this president’s power to decide who dies under the Orwellian title “disposition matrix”.

When the New York Times back in April, 2010 first confirmed the existence of Obama’s hit list, it made clear just what an extremist power this is, noting: “It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing.” The NYT quoted a Bush intelligence official as saying “he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president”. When the existence of Obama’s hit list was first reported several months earlier by the Washington Post’s Dana Priest, she wrote that the “list includes three Americans”.

What has made these actions all the more radical is the absolute secrecy with which Obama has draped all of this. Not only is the entire process carried out solely within the Executive branch – with no checks or oversight of any kind – but there is zero transparency and zero accountability. The president’s underlings compile their proposed lists of who should be executed, and the president – at a charming weekly event dubbed by White House aides as “Terror Tuesday” – then chooses from “baseball cards” and decrees in total secrecy who should die. The power of accuser, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner are all consolidated in this one man, and those powers are exercised in the dark.

In fact, The Most Transparent Administration Ever™ has been so fixated on secrecy that they have refused even to disclose the legal memorandum prepared by Obama lawyers setting forth their legal rationale for why the president has this power. During the Bush years, when Bush refused to disclose the memorandum from his Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that legally authorized torture, rendition, warrantless eavesdropping and the like, leading Democratic lawyers such as Dawn Johnsen (Obama’s first choice to lead the OLC) vehemently denounced this practice as a grave threat, warning that “the Bush Administration’s excessive reliance on ‘secret law’ threatens the effective functioning of American democracy” and “the withholding from Congress and the public of legal interpretations by the [OLC] upsets the system of checks and balances between the executive and legislative branches of government.”

But when it comes to Obama’s assassination power, this is exactly what his administration has done. It has repeatedly refused to disclose the principal legal memorandum prepared by Obama OLC lawyers that justified his kill list. It is, right now, vigorously resisting lawsuits from the New York Times and the ACLU to obtain that OLC memorandum. In sum, Obama not only claims he has the power to order US citizens killed with no transparency, but that even the documents explaining the legal rationale for this power are to be concealed. He’s maintaining secret law on the most extremist power he can assert.

Last night, NBC News’ Michael Isikoff released a 16-page “white paper” prepared by the Obama DOJ that purports to justify Obama’s power to target even Americans for assassination without due process (the memo is embedded in full below). This is not the primary OLC memo justifying Obama’s kill list – that is still concealed – but it appears to track the reasoning of that memo as anonymously described to the New York Times in October 2011.

This new memo is entitled: “Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a US Citizen Who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al-Qaeda or An Associated Force”. It claims its conclusion is “reached with recognition of the extraordinary seriousness of a lethal operation by the United States against a US citizen”. Yet it is every bit as chilling as the Bush OLC torture memos in how its clinical, legalistic tone completely sanitizes the radical and dangerous power it purports to authorize.

I’ve written many times at length about why the Obama assassination program is such an extreme and radical threat – see here for one of the most comprehensive discussions, with documentation of how completely all of this violates Obama and Holder’s statements before obtaining power – and won’t repeat those arguments here. Instead, there are numerous points that should be emphasized about the fundamentally misleading nature of this new memo:

1. Equating government accusations with guilt

The core distortion of the War on Terror under both Bush and Obama is the Orwellian practice of equating government accusations of terrorism with proof of guilt. One constantly hears US government defenders referring to “terrorists” when what they actually mean is: those accused by the government of terrorism. This entire memo is grounded in this deceit.

Time and again, it emphasizes that the authorized assassinations are carried out “against a senior operational leader of AL-Qaeda or its associated forces who poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States.” Undoubtedly fearing that this document would one day be public, Obama lawyers made certain to incorporate this deceit into the title itself: “Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a US Citizen Who is a Senior Operational Leader of AL-Qaeda or An Associated Force.”

This ensures that huge numbers of citizens – those who spend little time thinking about such things and/or authoritarians who assume all government claims are true – will instinctively justify what is being done here on the ground that we must kill the Terrorists or joining AL-Qaeda means you should be killed. That’s the “reasoning” process that has driven the War on Terror since it commenced: if the US government simply asserts without evidence or trial that someone is a terrorist, then they are assumed to be, and they can then be punished as such – with indefinite imprisonment or death.

But of course, when this memo refers to “a Senior Operational Leader of AL-Qaeda”, what it actually means is this: someone whom the President – in total secrecy and with no due process – has accused of being that. Indeed, the memo itself makes this clear, as it baldly states that presidential assassinations are justified when “an informed, high-level official of the US government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the US”.

This is the crucial point: the memo isn’t justifying the due-process-free execution of senior AL-Qaeda leaders who pose an imminent threat to the US. It is justifying the due-process-free execution of people secretly accused by the president and his underlings, with no due process, of being that. The distinction between (a) government accusations and (b) proof of guilt is central to every free society, by definition, yet this memo – and those who defend Obama’s assassination power – willfully ignore it.

Those who justify all of this by arguing that Obama can and should kill AL-Qaeda leaders who are trying to kill Americans are engaged in supreme question-begging. Without any due process, transparency or oversight, there is no way to know who is a “senior AL-Qaeda leader” and who is posing an “imminent threat” to Americans. All that can be known is who Obama, in total secrecy, accuses of this.

(Indeed, membership in AL-Qaeda is not even required to be assassinated, as one can be a member of a group deemed to be an “associated force” of AL-Qaeda, whatever that might mean: a formulation so broad and ill-defined that, as Law Professor Kevin Jon Heller argues, it means the memo “authorizes the use of lethal force against individuals whose targeting is, without more, prohibited by international law”.)

The definition of an extreme authoritarian is one who is willing blindly to assume that government accusations are true without any evidence presented or opportunity to contest those accusations. This memo – and the entire theory justifying Obama’s kill list – centrally relies on this authoritarian conflation of government accusations and valid proof of guilt.

They are not the same and never have been. Political leaders who decree guilt in secret and with no oversight inevitably succumb to error and/or abuse of power. Such unchecked accusatory decrees are inherently untrustworthy (indeed, Yemen experts have vehemently contested the claim that Awlaki himself was a senior AL-Qaeda leader posing an imminent threat to the US). That’s why due process is guaranteed in the Constitution and why judicial review of government accusations has been a staple of western justice since the Magna Carta: because leaders can’t be trusted to decree guilt and punish citizens without evidence and an adversarial process. That is the age-old basic right on which this memo, and the Obama presidency, is waging war.

2. Creating a ceiling, not a floor

The most vital fact to note about this memorandum is that it is not purporting to impose requirements on the president’s power to assassinate US citizens. When it concludes that the president has the authority to assassinate “a Senior Operational Leader of AL-Qaida” who “poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the US” where capture is “infeasible”, it is not concluding that assassinations are permissible only in those circumstances.

To the contrary, the memo expressly makes clear that presidential assassinations may be permitted even when none of those circumstances prevail: “This paper does not attempt to determine the minimum requirements necessary to render such an operation lawful.” Instead, as the last line of the memo states: “it concludes only that the stated conditions would be sufficient to make lawful a lethal operation” – not that such conditions are necessary to find these assassinations legal. The memo explicitly leaves open the possibility that presidential assassinations of US citizens may be permissible even when the target is not a senior AL-Qaeda leader posing an imminent threat and/or when capture is feasible.

Critically, the rationale of the memo – that the US is engaged in a global war against AL-Qaeda and “associated forces” – can be easily used to justify presidential assassinations of US citizens in circumstances far beyond the ones described in this memo. If you believe the president has the power to execute US citizens based on the accusation that the citizen has joined AL-Qaeda, what possible limiting principle can you cite as to why that shouldn’t apply to a low-level AL-Qaeda member, including ones found in places where capture may be feasible (including US soil)? The purported limitations on this power set forth in this memo, aside from being incredibly vague, can be easily discarded once the central theory of presidential power is embraced.

3. Relies on the core Bush/Cheney theory of a global battlefield

The primary theory embraced by the Bush administration to justify its War on Terror policies was that the “battlefield” is no longer confined to identifiable geographical areas, but instead, the entire globe is now one big, unlimited “battlefield”. That theory is both radical and dangerous because a president’s powers are basically omnipotent on a “battlefield”. There, state power is shielded from law, from courts, from constitutional guarantees, from all forms of accountability: anyone on a battlefield can be killed or imprisoned without charges. Thus, to posit the world as a battlefield is, by definition, to create an imperial, omnipotent presidency. That is the radical theory that unleashed all the rest of the controversial and lawless Bush/Cheney policies.

This “world-is-a-battlefield” theory was once highly controversial among Democrats. John Kerry famously denounced it when running for president, arguing instead that the effort against terrorism is “primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world”.

But this global-war theory is exactly what lies at heart of the Obama approach to Terrorism generally and this memo specifically. It is impossible to defend Obama’s assassination powers without embracing it (which is why key Obama officials have consistently done so). That’s because these assassinations are taking place in countries far from any war zone, such as Yemen and Somalia. You can’t defend the application of “war powers” in these countries without embracing the once-very-controversial Bush/Cheney view that the whole is now a “battlefield” and the president’s war powers thus exist without geographic limits.

This new memo makes clear that this Bush/Cheney worldview is at the heart of the Obama presidency. The president, it claims, “retains authority to use force against AL-Qaeda and associated forces outside the area of active hostilities”. In other words: there are, subject to the entirely optional “feasibility of capture” element, no geographic limits to the president’s authority to kill anyone he wants. This power applies not only to war zones, but everywhere in the world that he claims a member of AL-Qaeda is found. This memo embraces and institutionalizes the core Bush/Cheney theory that justified the entire panoply of policies Democrats back then pretended to find so objectionable.

4. Expanding the concept of “imminence” beyond recognition

The memo claims that the president’s assassination power applies to a senior AL-Qaeda member who “poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States”. That is designed to convince citizens to accept this power by leading them to believe it’s similar to common and familiar domestic uses of lethal force on US soil: if, for instance, an armed criminal is in the process of robbing a bank or is about to shoot hostages, then the “imminence” of the threat he poses justifies the use of lethal force against him by the police.

But this rhetorical tactic is totally misleading. The memo is authorizing assassinations against citizens in circumstances far beyond this understanding of “imminence”. Indeed, the memo expressly states that it is inventing “a broader concept of imminence” than is typically used in domestic law. Specifically, the president’s assassination power “does not require that the US have clear evidence that a specific attack . . . will take place in the immediate future”. The US routinely assassinates its targets not when they are engaged in or plotting attacks but when they are at home, with family members, riding in a car, at work, at funerals, rescuing other drone victims, etc.

Many of the early objections to this new memo have focused on this warped and incredibly broad definition of “imminence”. The ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer told Isikoff that the memo “redefines the word imminence in a way that deprives the word of its ordinary meaning”. Law Professor Kevin Jon Heller called Jaffer’s objection “an understatement”, noting that the memo’s understanding of “imminence” is “wildly overbroad” under international law.

Crucially, Heller points out what I noted above: once you accept the memo’s reasoning – that the US is engaged in a global war, that the world is a battlefield, and the president has the power to assassinate any member of AL-Qaeda or associated forces – then there is no way coherent way to limit this power to places where capture is infeasible or to persons posing an “imminent” threat. The legal framework adopted by the memo means the president can kill anyone he claims is a member of AL-Qaeda regardless of where they are found or what they are doing.

The only reason to add these limitations of “imminence” and “feasibility of capture” is, as Heller said, purely political: to make the theories more politically palatable. But the definitions for these terms are so vague and broad that they provide no real limits on the president’s assassination power. As the ACLU’s Jaffer says: “This is a chilling document” because “it argues that the government has the right to carry out the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen” and the purported limits “are elastic and vaguely defined, and it’s easy to see how they could be manipulated.”

5. Converting Obama underlings into objective courts

This memo is not a judicial opinion. It was not written by anyone independent of the president. To the contrary, it was written by life-long partisan lackeys: lawyers whose careerist interests depend upon staying in the good graces of Obama and the Democrats, almost certainly Marty Lederman and David Barron. Treating this document as though it confers any authority on Obama is like treating the statements of one’s lawyer as a judicial finding or jury verdict.

Indeed, recall the primary excuse used to shield Bush officials from prosecution for their crimes of torture and illegal eavesdropping: namely, they got Bush-appointed lawyers in the DOJ to say that their conduct was legal, and therefore, it should be treated as such. This tactic – getting partisan lawyers and underlings of the president to say that the president’s conduct is legal – was appropriately treated with scorn when invoked by Bush officials to justify their radical programs. As Digby wrote about Bush officials who pointed to the OLC memos it got its lawyers to issue about torture and eavesdropping, such a practice amounts to:

“validating the idea that obscure Justice Department officials can be granted the authority to essentially immunize officials at all levels of the government, from the president down to the lowest field officer, by issuing a secret memo. This is a very important new development in western jurisprudence and one that surely requires more study and consideration. If Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan had known about this, they could have saved themselves a lot of trouble.”

Life-long Democratic Party lawyers are not going to oppose the terrorism policies of the president who appointed them. A president can always find underlings and political appointees to endorse whatever he wants to do. That’s all this memo is: the by-product of obsequious lawyers telling their Party’s leader that he is (of course) free to do exactly that which he wants to do, in exactly the same way that Bush got John Yoo to tell him that torture was not torture, and that even it if were, it was legal.

That’s why courts, not the president’s partisan lawyers, should be making these determinations. But when the ACLU tried to obtain a judicial determination as to whether Obama is actually authorized to assassinate US citizens, the Obama DOJ went to extreme lengths to block the court from ruling on that question. They didn’t want independent judges to determine the law. They wanted their own lawyers to do so.

That’s all this memo is: Obama-loyal appointees telling their leader that he has the authority to do what he wants. But in the warped world of US politics, this – secret memos from partisan lackeys – has replaced judicial review as the means to determine the legality of the president’s conduct.

6. Making a mockery of “due process”

The core freedom most under attack by the War on Terror is the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process. It provides that “no person shall be . . . deprived of life . . . without due process of law”. Like putting people in cages for life on island prisons with no trial, claiming that the president has the right to assassinate US citizens far from any battlefield without any charges or trial is the supreme evisceration of this right.

The memo pays lip service to the right it is destroying: “Under the traditional due process balancing analysis . . . . we recognize that there is no private interest more weighty than a person’s interest in his life.” But it nonetheless argues that a “balancing test” is necessary to determine the extent of the process that is due before the president can deprive someone of their life, and further argues that, as the New York Times put it when this theory was first unveiled: “while the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process applied, it could be satisfied by internal deliberations in the executive branch.”

Stephen Colbert perfectly mocked this theory when Eric Holder first unveiled it to defend the president’s assassination program. At the time, Holder actually said: “due process and judicial process are not one and the same.” Colbert interpreted that claim as follows:

“Trial by jury, trial by fire, rock, paper scissors, who cares? Due process just means that there is a process that you do. The current process is apparently, first the president meets with his advisers and decides who he can kill. Then he kills them.”

It is fitting indeed that the memo expressly embraces two core Bush/Cheney theories to justify this view of what “due process” requires. First, it cites the Bush DOJ’s core view, as enunciated by John Yoo, that courts have no role to play in what the president does in the War on Terror because judicial review constitutes “judicial encroachment” on the “judgments by the President and his national security advisers as to when and how to use force”. And then it cites the Bush DOJ’s mostly successful arguments in the 2004 Hamdi case that the president has the authority even to imprison US citizens without trial provided that he accuses them of being a terrorist.

The reason this is so fitting is because, as I’ve detailed many times, it was these same early Bush/Cheney theories that made me want to begin writing about politics, all driven by my perception that the US government was becoming extremist and dangerous. During the early Bush years, the very idea that the US government asserted the power to imprison US citizens without charges and due process (or to eavesdrop on them) was so radical that, at the time, I could hardly believe they were being asserted out in the open.

Yet here we are almost a full decade later. And we have the current president asserting the power not merely to imprison or eavesdrop on US citizens without charges or trial, but to order them executed – and to do so in total secrecy, with no checks or oversight. If you believe the president has the power to order US citizens executed far from any battlefield with no charges or trial, then it’s truly hard to conceive of any asserted power you would find objectionable.

Source: Guardian

3-Suicide car bomber kills seven near Baghdad’s Green Zone

* Suicide bomber attacks fortified government area

* Shi’ite member of parliament wounded

* Insurgents attempt to stoke sectarianism

By Kareem Raheem

BAGHDAD, Sept 17 – A suicide car bomber killed seven Iraqis and wounded 11 others, including a member of parliament, close to an entrance to Baghdad’s fortified Green Zone on Monday, where several Western embassies are located, police sources said.

The attack was close to the July 14th suspension bridge which leads into the central area, known officially as the International Zone, which houses diplomatic missions including the U.S. embassy.

“I was on my way to enter the Green Zone when the blast happened. I was wounded in my shoulder and I’m in hospital now,” Habib al-Turfi, a Shi’ite member of parliament, told Reuters by telephone.

Two of the seven killed were soldiers, the sources said.

“Cars were lining up waiting to be searched at the checkpoint that leads to the Green Zone and suddenly a speeding car exploded nearby,” said one police source whose patrol was stationed near the scene of the attack.

“Some people died inside cars and I saw two soldiers lying on the ground. We immediately closed the area,” said the source, who declined to be named.

The last major attacks in the capital occurred on Sept. 9, when a series of bombs in mainly Shi’ite Baghdad districts ended one of the bloodiest days of the year with more than 100 killed across the country.

“It’s a suicide attack with clear fingerprints of al Qaeda terrorist groups,” a security official said on condition of anonymity.

In August about 164 Iraqis were killed, government figures showed, as security forces clashed with insurgent groups and sectarian violence which has plagued Iraq for almost a decade.

Infighting in Iraq’s delicately balanced cross-sectarian government, and an al Qaeda resurgence, have intensified fears of a return to widespread violence, especially as Iraq struggles to contain spillover from the growing conflict in Syria.

Iraq’s fugitive vice president Tareq al-Hashemi, sentenced to death this month by an Iraqi court, told Reuters that Shi’ite Iran is using Iraqi airspace to fly arms to Syria.

Many Sunnis in Iraq are disgruntled with what they see as Shi’ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s determination to minimise their share in power.

Heightened political tension is often accompanied by a surge in violence as Sunni Islamist insurgents try to capitalise on instability to strike at the government, local security forces and Shi’ite religious targets.

Violence in Iraq has eased since the dark days of sectarian slaughter that erupted a few years after the 2003 invasion to topple Saddam. But insurgents are still carrying out at least one major coordinated attack a month.

QAEDA STILL ACTIVE

Iraqi security officials said that despite stepping up security measures inside and around Baghdad, militants linked to al Qaeda are still launching bold attacks.

“We regrettably admit al Qaeda terrorists are still operating actively. They still receive huge funds and they keep changing their tactics,” said a senior interior ministry official on condition of anonymity.

Iraq’s al Qaeda wing, the Islamic State of Iraq, has claimed recent attacks on Shi’ite targets, as it tries to fuel sectarian tensions and undermine Maliki’s government.

Despite being weakened after years of war with Iraqi and U.S. troops, the group and other Sunni insurgents remain capable of carrying out lethal attacks targeting security forces and Shi’ite targets.

“This attack is seen as a political challenge to the state authority and its reputation. It’s an important Green Zone gate which the prime minister, top officials and lawmakers use,” Ali Al-Haidari, an Iraqi security expert, told Reuters.

Attacks on Shi’ite targets are reviving fears that Iraq will slip back into the broad sectarian slaughter of its recent past, especially as the Shi’ite, Sunni and ethnic Kurdish parties that make up its fragile government feud over sharing power.

“The reason why al Qaeda is still active, despite the killings and the detentions of its elements, is because its cells are renewable, and the financing and support, from inside and outside, is still going on,” Haidari said.

Source

Al-Qaeda Causing Evacuations at Universities Could be First of Many False Flags

Evacuations at several major universities in the US have prompted some mainstream media to plant the question of “Islamic rage” having transpired from US embassies in the Middle East to America.

The impromptu CIA-created al-Qaeda is to blame for an anonymous caller claiming to be a member of the fake terrorist faction making undisclosed threats toward the campus at the University of Texas.

A message posted at 9:53 am on the emergency alert website read: “Immediately evacuate ALL buildings and get as far away as possible. More information to come.”

According to Rhonda Weldon, director of Communication at the University of Texas: “A male with a Middle Eastern accent claiming to have placed bombs all over campus. He said he was with al-Qaeda and that these bombs would go off in 90 minutes.”

According to initial reports , multiple threats to several locations on campus were named in the anonymous caller’s threat.

University of Texas Police Chief Robert Dahlstrom said that an estimated 69,000 users were notified by the online alter system which directed them to evacuate the campus. Dahlstrom explained that university officials also sounded the on-campus alarm to warn others as well as sent messages through email and Facebook.

Students were warned to “get as far away as possible.”

Following the threat in Texas, reports originating in North Dakota stated that students attending t North Dakota State University (NDSU) in Fargo were advised to evacuate the campus due to a call-in bomb threat after a posting on the NDSU website that read: “NDSU is requiring all employees and students to leave campus by 10:15 a.m. This includes residence hall students, who, if necessary, should walk to locations off campus. This also includes the downtown buildings and agricultural facilities. NDSU received a bomb threat, prompting this evacuation. Updates will follow.”

At 11:41 am students were required to vacate the campus in an orderly fashion and meet at locations off the university grounds.

The next university to receive a threat was Valparaiso University in Indiana where an anonymous graggiti message last week produced “an unspecified threat . . . alluding to dangerous and criminal activity” to be carried out during the chapel break on Friday.”

Students were advised to watch for “suspicious behavior and report to the VUPD immediately” so that local law enforcement and the FBI could not only investigate the indiscriminate threat, but find the supposed “terrorists”.

Only two days ago, Senator Dianne Feinstein was warning about the violence witnessed in Arabic nations since the US Embassy bombing in Libya that will spark outrage against Americans and the US. Feinstein said that according to the FBI and DHS these outbursts “could worsen in the coming days.”

The DHS released a Joint Intelligence Bulletin that asserted “the risk of violence could increase both at home and abroad as the film continues to gain attention. Additionally, we judge that violent extremist groups in the United States could exploit anger over the film to advance their recruitment efforts.”

On the 11th anniversary of the false flag attack of 9/11, the US Embassy was bombed and US Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was suffocated and paraded through the streets after an attempt to escape the embassy.

This attack was orchestrated by “a well-armed, well-coordinated event.” House Representative Mike Rogers points out that “it had both indirect and direct fire, and it had military maneuvers that were all part of this very organized attack.”

Protests have erupted in Yemen, Egypt, Tunisia, Gaza City, Tel Aviv, Iran, and Iraq. Most of these demonstrations have involved US Embassies which alerts the Obama administration to increase security surrounding these areas and warn of a coming retaliatory measure by extremist Islamic radicals within the domestic US.

At the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a recent study conducted in February of this year showed that US Muslims are of little threat and would not likely plan and enact an attack within the US. Despite the fear-mongering from the DHS, the advent of “radicalized Muslim Americans has not materialized.”

Charles Kurzman, author of the report for the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, explained that Muslim Americans are “a miniscule threat to public safety.”

In fact, according to the study supported by DHS, not one ethnic group predominated among Muslims charged in terrorism cases in 2011.

Since 2009, terrorism conducted by Muslim Americans had fallen to 47 incidents; 26 in 2010, and 20 in 2011.

The threat of Muslims in America is manufactured as evidenced that Americans are on edge regardless of the reality. David Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center and professor of public policy at globalist-controlled Duke University says that: “While homegrown radicalization is still a problem, the offenders from 2011 were less skilled and less connected with international terrorist organizations than the offenders in the prior two years.”

The RAND Corporation, globalist think-tank and originator of many false flag propaganda, surmise that between 2009 and 9/11, “the U.S. government reported forty-six incidents of “domestic radicalization and recruitment to jihadist terrorism.” RAND went on to claim that Americans are playing a high level operational role in al-Qaeda and aligned groups. The false globalist data continues to incorrectly report that analysts assume that radicalization of the US Muslim population who are involved in domestic terror plots may be low, but that does not mean that the threat is not viable.

Globalists point to al-Qaeda as the origination of radicalization as evidenced with Anwar al-Awlaki who was purported to have opportunities to spread violent Islamic ideology in the US. The use of social media sites and evangelical preachers could cause a boon in terrorist groups as explained by counterterrorism experts.

In a US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs report radicalization of Islam is spreading throughout American prisons. There is also a growing possible movement within the US military wherein active duty soldiers are recruited to commit crimes.

Senator Joseph Lieberman, who is also a supporter of the Christians United for Israel (CUFI) which is a Zionist-controlled organization, maintains that through investigations it has been revealed that “the threat of domestic radicalization and homegrown terrorism inspired by violent Islamist ideology.”

Al-Qaeda apparently uses the internet to recruit new members in the similar fashion as they recruit young radicals in Turkey to be trained at the CIA facility wherein they are then shipped over the Syrian border to fight the proxy war for the US and Israel as the controlled terrorists known as the Free Syrian Army.

The report asserts that homegrown radicalization of al-Qaeda would coincide with domestic incidents of terrorism and it would be at the discretion of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to ascertain if the threat were indicative of al-Qaeda.

Comparisons between evangelical Christianity and extremist Islamic ideology are not lost on the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Citing American Fundamentalists as being the counterpart to Muslim extremists is facilitated with accusations of intolerance of others, separateness in ideology and the demand for encompassing adherence to religious doctrine.

The manufactured attack in Libya and these recent threats at several universities in America are tied as they serve the purpose of setting the stage for a possible larger false flag that may be looming in the distance.

Over 1.8 billion rounds of hollow point bullets have been solicited by the DHS within the last month, as well as 1400 pounds of fertilizer bomb materials. US veterans and political activists are being carted away to psychiatric hospitals. And suddenly, on the anniversary of 9/11, the threat of al-Qaeda is resurrected with the manufactured bombing in Libya.

We may find that more false flag attacks begin to occur, either domestically or internationally involving the CIA-sponsored al-Qaeda, the deniable asset known as the Muslim Brotherhood and the ultimate agendas of the global Elite.

Source