OSAMA BIN LADEN ANNOUNCED DEAD BY OBAMA (renamed thread)

[8bitagent]

8bit, you and I are birds of a feather. I always enjoy what you have to say, because as you say, you step on limbs that, like me, are emotionally driven first and then you let the logic, ethics and whatnot in. First came for me at the outset of all this bullshit was the guttural repulsion to what was happening and always, all of my life hating those who glom to racism and just so, pat explanations for anything. My pops was in the airforce and he brought me up with an understanding that "I would never fit in to militarism". I simply do not do what I am told to do and by the same token I am also very emotional. I accept nothing from anybody and I never have. Sure, as I've grown older, you take your lumps.

So what I mean, is that, I often wonder what it is that sets those of us who don't buy this shit apart from the rest. How the fuck can myself, be completely impervious, completely curious, etc? I think, honestly, is because I was a fucking good liar growing up. I lied and lied and lied and my mom was good at seeing through it. Though there are a few lies that spring to mind she never discovered. Same goes here. At one point in my life, I decided to use lying as a tool in which I could use should the need arise to get me or someone else out of a bind, this I will always utilize, but only when called upon and used ethically. I know I can lie and bullshit with the best, with the better than the best. But I decided to use honesty as my never ending, never sinking buoy -- I consciously always tell the truth. Consciously. I go out of my way to tell the truth. Dishonesty makes me anxious. It's all part and parcel with my sometimes debilitating case of OCD I have. I could never get a job doing something that required of me to lie in any which way.

This shit, this O(BS)ama shit, my time spent working with the filthy rich and connected, my ability to spot a lie, my ability to get extra super pissed when I get fucked with, connects me to the nexus that is well, just me and others like me. There are many good people who are falling for this song and dance. The only thing I can think of is this song "NO" by the subhumans, that you must listen to at the age of 13 in order to not fall for any of it again and blast on your walkman.

Wow that's a good song. You know me, I love everything from Leonard Cohen and Laibach to Death in June and Roxy Music. But fucking ay, that was a beautiful song. Short, but man...makes me wish I could time travel to not only 1968 for the counter culture, but also the late 1970's/early 80's for the real punk movement. There's such a wonderful raw intensity. I don't see a single molecule of that emotion or magic in 90's or modern "punk".

Where are the punk banks today exposing the system? I miss listening to Dead Kennedys, Buzzcocks, Black Flag, Anti Flag, etc in high school during the early-mid 90's. Where's the protest music?
Shoot Dixie Chicks were more protest music than most the "anti authority" stuff in recent memory. Being told to shut up, wave my flag, etc by virtually every liberal and right winger since Sunday has really rekindled my activist side almost more than during Bush. I think because it's not popular. Being a liberal against Obama for reasons completely contrary to the Tea Party side is taboo, it's edgy...but it goes back to authority. Being told to be quiet, be a good little quiet asian kid in an all white school. I look like a kid so I still get no respect, but I feel like I still have that rebel spirit. For me it was never about drugs, getting into trouble...I was pretty innocent most my life. To me rebellion was speaking out and saying unpopular things because of a belief in decency.

I think I've mentioned my "trip" down this lane. I was sent to the principle's office in kindergarten, shit I think it was the second week...all because I refused to put my hand on my chest and pledge to the flag.
I called this country Satanic and said I won't worship it, and he threatened to bend me over and paddle my bare ass. Apparently, in 1983 that shit was acceptable. I became paralyzed with absolute fear from a US invasion of America. I would hear choppers and not want to get out of a car, or I'd hide under bushes. I just had this paralyzing fear of soldiers taking over, partly because I had seen ET a few times. To me it wasn't the alien that was scary, but the government putting people in bio camps. When I was 9 I sat watching so much of Iran Contra...yes, wondering why Transformers wasn't on, but still mezmerized. I seemed to be the only kid in 4th grade knowing what the names of the people involved were.

Yet sadly, that was it. I briefly flirted with conspiracy research in 1996 when TWA 800 crashed and seemed so mysterious, but was scared off by altavista/webcrawler searches turning up white supremist and fringe "ZOG" sites. I then thought "all that conspiracy stuff is racist militia crap talking about black helicopters and new world order". The entire 1990's was all about conspiratainment as safe family friendly memes. Area 51, Men In Black, the film "Conspiracy Theory", Roswell, the hugely popular Xfiles, even JFK.

Then came November 1999, Seattle WTO protests. I really got into globalization awareness, WTO/IMF/WB information, and got into the activist spirit. By Novemeber 2000 I was seeing Shepard Farey posters with "OBEY" that showed both Gore and Bush. I was upset about how many civilians Clinton killed in Iraq and Kosovo. But I know I also did not like the Republicans. People were pissed at both sides. Rage Against the Machine performed at the DNC outside where tons of leftist protesters were. I knew the Florida election was totally rigged.

Then came 9/11/2001. I was waking up, getting ready for college classes. I was classes were cancelled, and to turn on the tv...that terrorists had just destroyed the twin towers, attacked the pentagon and more were in the air. I turned pale, I felt surreal...I turned on the tv. "America Under Attack". Holy fuck. Tom Clancy was on NBC, saying he wouldnt be surprised if 50,000 had died. I was mesmerized. I set up all three tvs to be on NBC, CBS and ABC. It was like I was now in a movie...the big summer action Bay/Bruckheimer movie was now live on tv. I stayed glued to the tv for three whole days.
Then the anthrax, and everything was in chaos. Little old ladies in podunk towns being interviews "We're afraid, they might hit us next!"

But I was now asleep. I saw nothing wrong with invading Afghanistan ...tho, it was more of a "whoah, this is wild" than a "yeah USA! lets kick ass" feeling.
In 2002 I learned on the news that the NSA had recordings of chatter on 9/10/2001 that the attacks were about to happen. But I didnt get it. The buildup to Iraq was happening. DC Sniper event happened. Holy crap. I knew the buildup to Iraq was feeling forced, weird. But I didn't speak up. I thought "well, Saddam is a bad person". Shock and awe tho..that bothered me
Fall 2003 I bought an album that talked about the evil of war and nwo stuff. I saw "Aftermath: Truth and Lies of 9/11" online. 2004 I started to read theories about 9/11, started reading about corporations, covert ops, etc. Saw the documentary "The Corporation", got into Chomsky. Saw Fahrenheit 9/11. All downhill from there:)

Now it's 2011, and the fog we've been in since 9/11 seems thicker than ever. Franklin, 9/11, BCCI, Gladio, all of it. I feel like encyplopedic bratanica when it comes to this...I crossed that threshold and can't go back to that naive liberal state. I guess thats why I shouldnt get upset when I debate the left, because they just don't see it. As cliche as it sounds, it is like The Matrix. And people will fight to retain their ignorance. I wish I could live in Portland, Austin, etc where people are more artsy. Hell I try and focus on my art, music, writing, media projects but this stuff keeps pulling me in. Bottom line is I just have not only always questioned things(eventually), but have issue with groupthink and being told what to think.
Also, I know OCD all too well:)

[8bitagent]

Ann Curray insisting to Pakistan officials, why they had to be working with bin Laden. MSNBC is really hyping the "Pakistan is in on it" angle,
yet the clip ends with people in the neighborhood of the compound saying "America, we're not stupid!" NOONE in the neighborhood believes bin Laden was there or any of these
lies. And Pakistan is clearly be setup.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp ... 6#42923439

And the other big news: the experimental new prototype stealth helicopter got exposed for all to see, with children carrying away parts. Oops. Or...was this part of the reveal?
Whats the real story behind this weird craft? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp ... 6#42923522


and Anwar al Awlaki now the head of al Qaeda? Also, will compound files reveal main al Qaeda money men?(ooh boy, i bet they wont be letting that info come out..)
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20 ... d-al-qaeda

This is so scripted. I remember in 2007 writing about Anwar al Awlaki, about how he was protected by intelligence despite being crucial to the 9/11 hijackers in San Diego and virginia, as well as recruiting for bin Laden in 1999. Then Fort Hood-Underoo Xmas bombing-Time Square-etc. It's all so transparent...then oopsy, he dined at the pentagon 3 months after sept 11th

Anwar al Awlaki of AQAP, the new bin Laden! Pakistan, the new evildoer country! They need to get SNL and WWE wrestling scriptwriters for this stuff.

[IanEye]

.



''That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.

And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities,
which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out.

We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

.

[tazmic]

"Al-Qaeda statement on jihadist website says they'll release recording of Bin Laden, made before he was killed. Reuters"

This should clear things up. (I like the 'made before he was killed' bit.)

[barracuda]

Maybe he's going to confirm his own death or something.

[American Dream]

http://www.counterpunch.org/hallinan05062011.html

Bin Laden and the Great Game

By CONN HALLINAN


According to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director Leon Panetta, the U.S. never informed Pakistan about the operation to assassinate al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Ladin because it thought the Pakistanis could "jeopardize the mission" by tipping off the target.

Maybe, and maybe not. This is, after all, the ground over which the 19th century "Great Game" was played, the essence of which was obfuscation. What you thought you saw or knew was not necessarily what was.

The "official" story is that three CIA helicopters—one for backup—took off from Jalalabad, Afghanistan and flew almost 200 miles to Abbottabad, most of it through Pakistani airspace. Pakistan scrambled jets, but the choppers still managed to land, spend 40 minutes on the ground, and get away.

Is it possible the helicopters really did dodge Pakistani radar? During the Cold War a West German pilot flew undetected through the teeth of the Soviet air defense system and landed his plane in Red Square, so yes. Choppers are slow, but these were stealth varieties and fairly quiet. But at top speed, the Blackhawks would have needed about an hour each way, plus the 40 minutes on the ground. That is a long time to remain undetected, particularly in a town hosting three regiments of the Pakistani Army, plus the Kakul Military Academy, the country's equivalent of West Point. Abbottabad is also 35 miles from the capital, Islamabad, and the region is ringed with anti-aircraft sites.

Still, it is possible, except there is an alternative scenario that not only avoids magical thinking about what choppers can do, but better fits the politics of the moment: that Pakistan's Directorate of Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) knew where Bin Ladin was and fingered him, estimating that his death would accelerate negotiations with the Taliban. Why now? Because for the first time in this long war, U.S. and Pakistani interests coincide.

Gen. Hammad Gul, former head of the ISI, told the Financial Times on May 3 that the ISI knew where he was, but regarded him as "inactive." Writing in the May 5 Guardian (UK), author Tariq Ali says that a "senior" ISI official told him back in 2006 that the spy organization knew where bin Ladin was, but had no intention of arresting him because he was "The goose that laid the golden egg." In short, the hunt for the al-Qaeda leader helped keep the U.S. aid spigot open.

Indeed, bin Ladin may have been under house arrest, which would explain the absence of trained bodyguards. By not allowing the al-Qaeda leader a private militia, the ISI forced him to rely on it for protection. And if they then dropped a dime on him, they knew he would be an easy target. As to why he was killed, not captured, neither the U.S. nor Pakistan wanted him alive, the former because of the judicial nightmare his incarceration would involve, the latter because dead men tell no tales.

As for the denials: the last thing the ISI wants is to be associated with the hit, since it could end up making the organization a target for Pakistan's home-grown Taliban. If the ISI knew, so did the Army, though not necessarily at all levels. Did the Army turn a blind eye to the U.S. choppers? Who knows?

What we do know for certain is that there is a shift in Pakistan and the U.S. with regards to the Afghan war.

On the U.S. side, the war is going badly, and American military and intelligence agencies are openly warring with one another. In December the U.S. intelligence community released a study indicating that progress was minimal and that the 2009 surge of 30,000 troops had produced only tactical successes: "There remains no clear path toward defeating the insurgency." The Pentagon counter-attacked in late April with a report that the surge had been "a strategic defeat for the Taliban," and that the military was making "tangible progress in some really key areas."

It is not an analysis agreed with by our NATO allies, most of which are desperate to get their troops out of what they view as a deepening quagmire. A recent WikiLeak cable quotes Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Union, saying "No one believes in Afghanistan anymore. But we will give it 2010 to see results." He went on to say Europe was only going along "out of deference to the United States." Translation: NATO support is falling apart.

Recent shifts by the Administration seem to signal that the White House is backing away from the surge and looking for ways to wind down the war. The shift of Gen. David Petraeus to the CIA removes the major U.S. booster of the current counterinsurgency strategy, and moving Panetta to the Defense Department puts a savvy political infighter with strong Democratic Party credentials into the heart of Pentagon. Democrats are overwhelmingly opposed to the war but could never get a hearing from Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, a Republican.

The last major civilian supporter of the war is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, but Gates, her main ally, will soon be gone, as will Admiral Mike Mullen, head of the Joints Chiefs of Staff. The shuffle at the top is hardly a "night of the long knives," but the White House has essentially eliminated or sidelined those in the administration who pushed for a robust war and long-term occupation.

A surge of sanity? Well, at least some careful poll reading. According to the Associated Press, six in 10 Americans want out of the war. Among Democrats 73 percent want to be out in a year, and a USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 72 percent of Americans want Congress to address an accelerated withdrawal. With the war now costing $8 billion a month, these numbers are hardly a surprise.

Pakistan has long been frustrated with the U.S.'s reluctance to talk to the Taliban, and, from Islamabad's perspective, the war is largely being carried out at their expense. Pakistan has suffered tens of thousands of civilian and military casualties in what most Pakistanis see as an American war, and the country is literally up in arms over the drone attacks.

The Pakistani Army has been deployed in Swat, South Waziristan, and Bajaur, and the U.S. is pressing it to invade North Waziristan. One Pakistani grumbled to the Guardian (UK), "What do they [the U.S.] want us to do? Declare war on our whole country?" For the 30 million Pashtuns in the northwest regions, the Pakistani Army is foreign in language and culture, and Islamabad knows that it will eventually be seen as an outside occupier.

A poll by the New America Foundation and Terror Free Tomorrow of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in Pakistan's northwest—home and refuge to many of the insurgents fighting in Afghanistan—found some 80 percent oppose the U.S. war on terror, almost nine in every 10 people oppose U.S. attacks on the Taliban, and three quarters oppose the drone attacks.

The bottom line is that Pakistan simply cannot afford to continue the war, particularly as they are still trying to dig themselves out from under last year's massive floods.

In April, Pakistan's top military, intelligence and political leadership decamped to Kabul to meet with the government of Harmid Karzai. The outcome of the talks is secret, but they appear to have emboldened the parties to press the U.S. to start talking. According to Ahmed Rashid, author of "Taliban" and "Descent into Chaos," the White House is moving "the fledgling peace process forward" and will "push to broker an end to the war." This includes dropping "its preconditions that the Taliban sever links with al-Qaeda and accept the Afghan constitution before holding face-to-face talks."

Given that in 2008 the Taliban agreed to not allow any "outside" forces in the country and pledged not to pose a danger to any other country, including those in the West, this demand has already been met. As for the constitution, since it excluded the Taliban it will have to be re-negotiated in any case.

While there appears to be a convergence of interests among the major parties, negotiations promise to be a thorny business.

The Pentagon will resist a major troop drawdown. There is also opposition in Afghanistan, where Tajik, Uzbek, and Hazara minorities are deeply suspicious of the Taliban. The Karzai government also appears split on the talks, although recent cabinet shuffles have removed some of the more anti-Pakistan leaders.

Then there is the Taliban, which is hardly a centralized organization, especially since U.S. drone attacks and night raids have effectively removed more experienced Taliban leaders, leaving younger and more radical fighters in charge. Can Taliban leader Mullah Omar deliver his troops? That is not a given.

Both other insurgent groups—the Haqqani Group and Hizb-i-Islami—have indicated they are open to negotiations, but the Americans will have a hard time sitting down with the Haqqanis. The group has been implicated in the deaths of numerous U.S. and coalition forces. To leave the Haqqani Group out, however, will derail the whole process.

The U.S. would like to exclude Iran, but as Rashid points out, "No peace process in Afghanistan can succeed without Iran's full participation." And then there is India. Pakistan sees Indian involvement in Afghanistan as part of New Delhi's strategy to surround Pakistan, and India accuses Pakistan of harboring terrorists who attack Indian-controlled Kashmir and launched the horrendous 2008 attack on Mumbai that killed 166 people.

Murphy's Law suggests that things are more likely to end in chaos than reasoned diplomacy. But self-interest is a powerful motivator, and all parties, including India, stands to gain something by ending the war. India very much wants to see the 1,050-mile TAPI pipeline built, as it will carry gas from Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to Fazilka, India.

A lot is at stake, and if getting the peace process going involved taking out Osama bin Ladin. Well, in the cynical world of the "Great Game," to make an omelet, you have to break eggs.

Back in the Victorian era the British Army marched off singing a song:

We don't want to fight but by jingo if we do
We've got the ships, we've got the men, and we've got the money too

But in the 21st century most our allies' armies don't want to fight, ships are useless in Afghanistan, there aren't enough men, and everyone is broke.



Conn Hallinan can be reached at: ringoanne@sbcglobal.net

[tazmic]

Maybe he's going to confirm his own death or something.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2011/05/201156125729467729.html

[Bruce Dazzling]

This world has walls and those walls need to be protected by people with guns, and whatnot.

Sometimes there's just no other option and even the good guys are forced to go on the offensive and kick a little ass.

Priest

Tagline: "Even good has a dark side."



Hugh Manatee Wins, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Edited to indicate sarcasm...

[Luther Blissett]

So now there's a third (?) turn, and it sounds like OBL was actually shot in the back as he attempted to flee.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/ ... bsCarousel

[2012 Countdown]

(embedded links at original)

GHOSTS OF SEPTEMBER 11TH
by Michael C. Ruppert

© Copyright 2011, Collapsenet, Inc. Please Distribute Widely

May 5, 2011, 1400 PST, SEBASTOPOL – I have personally interrogated underage criminal suspects who could lie better than White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. It has been four days since the P.T. Barnum (“There’s a sucker born every minute”) proclamation of the death of Osama bin Laden (OBL). President Obama’s account of the firefight has had zero credibility from the outset and it continues to fray and wear thin as each day passes.

First, bin Laden was shooting. Then he wasn’t. Now, no pictures are going to be released. Ridiculous arguments on CNN, by House members stating that releasing photos would inflame and invite retaliation, flatly contradict what I suspect every grunt who ever earned a Combat Infantry Badge would say:

“Release the damn pictures. Give us some to hand out to the “indigs”. We got our man and that’s a message to anyone who would mess with us…Hoo Ah!”

However, as with 9-11, in order to fully appreciate the stupidity of the Obama Administration’s ploy it is only necessary to focus on one glaring inconsistency. With our focus on this inconsistency, demand an answer to it and bring down a house of cards that is already falling. This approach is essentially the same path I have taken with the War Game exercises that were being conducted on September 11th. The issue that follows is to focus on what to do with this inconsistency.

This also raises a fair question: Is 9-11 back on the table for me?

The answer is yes and no. Especially when “no” applies to any expectation that a competent, trustworthy court with jurisdiction would act with a budget and full approval of the U.S. Congress and the American people to actually reveal the truth and take action.

It is yes when, as you will hear below, responsible and credible academics and journalists see the direct connection between September 11,2001 and where we are today… and where we are headed as a planet.

This is because it is not possible to accurately understand or respond to Collapse without “seeing” all the criminality that led to it. Moreover, it is not possible to effectively deal with Collapse until the criminal behavior has been identified, addressed, and effectively terminated. Otherwise, the human race is left to confront Collapse as it is now; on an ad hoc basis, without any participation of sincere, honest and focused governmental bodies.

There is a massive awakening-taking place globally. However, the difference between this and what could be accomplished if governments were actively and helpfully involved is… maybe three billion human lives.

Now, back to Osama bin Laden.

Let’s start with what I consider the most-obvious proof that the Obama administration is lying. It comes from a world-class microbiologist who allowed me to use this quote on condition of anonymity. The simple proof of his accuracy is to just ask any microbiologist experienced in DNA sequencing about his statement. There are tens of thousands of them around the world.

Here is what he wrote me:

I am a molecular biologist and I've built a lucrative career in human genetics. I have run one of the world's largest and most productive DNA genotyping facilities and now I am helping to build the global market for clinical whole human genome sequencing for the world's largest human genome sequencing facility. I have worked with the absolute best genome scientists from the military, academia, medicine, and industry from around the world. I know DNA. And, one thing I know about DNA is that you cannot, repeat CANNOT: take a tissue sample from a shot-in-the-noggin-dead-guy in a north central Pakistan special forces op, extract the DNA, prepare the DNA for assay, test the DNA, curate the raw DNA sequence data, assemble the reads or QC the genotype, compare the tested DNA to a reference, and make a positive identity determination…. all in 12 hours- let alone transport the tissue samples all the places they'd need to have gone in order to get this done.

Some might try to argue that ruggedized, field ready kits could test a DNA sample- which is true if one is attempting to determine the CLASS of a bacteria. It is not true if one is trying to determine the specific identity of an individual. Any way you slice it, the real work would require days, and I find it unlikely (although not impossible) that an aircraft carrier would have a laboratory outfitted for this kind of work… it is not the Starship Enterprise out there.

So, maybe they did get Osama. But there is no fucking way they had any genetic proof of it by the time they dumped the body over the side. What is it that we are not supposed to see with all this distraction? I think the French call it "legerdemain".

The only things necessary to prove or disprove this statement is to question anyone who is an expert on DNA identification.

Two more examples illustrate the lack of credibility enjoyed by the U.S. government. The first is from Tuesday’s (5-3-2011) World News Desk. The second is from today’s (5-5-2011).

Example 1

White House backtracks on how Osama bin Laden died in US raid -- Telegraph

"Claims that the al-Qaeda leader had died while firing an automatic weapon at commandos were withdrawn, with President Barack Obama’s spokesman admitting “he was unarmed”. A dramatic description of bin Laden using his wife as a “human shield” and forcing her to sacrifice her life also proved to be false. The woman was still alive and was taken into custody with several of the terrorist’s children.

In an embarrassing climb-down, Barack Obama’s press secretary, Jay Carney, admitted that the previous version of events — which came mostly from the chief US counter-terrorism adviser, John Brennan — had been put out “with great haste”.

The about-turn left the US open to accusations of a cover-up and led to calls for video footage of the raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and images of bin Laden’s body to be released to end conspiracy theories."

Example 2

Even the Pentagon is staying away from the White House circus. Here’s a quote from a DoD publication. The story’s title? “The Bin Laden Information Drought”.

No one is complaining that bin Laden is dead. But every time Washington has to change details about what happened, it damages its credibility on the whole story. And instead of continuing to feed the ravenous reporters clamoring for information, officials are starving them: The Pentagon today cancelled its regular briefing for the second day in a row, even as the White House refers some questions about the bin Laden story to the Defense Department.

Now I am not going to do what we found necessary to do after 9-11, by making a huge (ever-growing) list of the galaxy of inconsistencies available. I am not going to repeat the work of myself and others, like Michel Chossudovsky and Paul Thompson, on the mythological intelligence construct that was the legend of OBL. That is all meticulously documented in “Crossing the Rubicon”.

But as the world continues to ask the obvious questions and the story continues to fray, I note that the indignant refusal by Barack Obama to produce a photo is really setting off alarms. In the past, it was an essential foreign requirement to produce death photos of Josef Goebbels, Herman Goering and Saddam Hussein. No one thought that unseemly. Granted their bodies were all intact, but I should probably note that the credibility of the United States Government was – like the dollar – more intact then.

I saw a “crawl” on CNN stating that George W. Bush declined to appear at Ground Zero with President Obama for a planned extravaganza today. Even W has got enough sense to avoid that black hole. And today we see that apparently the plans for a PR extravaganza were quashed by someone telling the President to “Shut the f*** up” and keep it simple. Obama laid a wreath, shut his mouth and got the Hell out of Dodge.

The more Barack Obama beats the 9-11 drum, the more he is going to invite a bitch slap from people and even governments around the world who understand that the 9-11 story has been a lie since before the attacks occurred.

The following interview, which I gave to a German radio station catering to intellectuals and academics, about a week before the announcement of OBL’s death, is real evidence that much of the world is waiting to pounce on 9-11 anyway, especially as the rubble threatens to bury us.

You see people will accept lies if their lives get better. As their lives get worse, they will inevitably ask questions. And as their lives disintegrate, they will start looking for both answers and suspects. That was and is the swimming pool full of gasoline that Barack Obama is lighting matches in.

If the United States of America does not immediately announce a massive drawdown in Afghanistan, the world will keep asking questions about OBL because our lives will be getting worse, not better, by the day. And every time Mr. Obama opens his mouth about 9-11, he pours more gasoline into the pool and asks for another box of matches.

It was not my choice. Barack Obama has placed 9-11 back on the table again. Mainstream media, of course, can't say Jack Diddly about this theater of the absurd, even though they’ve been cornered into asking a few pseudo-hardball questions. They are, after all, criminally culpable for the endorsement and concealment of something they damn well knew was a lie, murder, and high treason ten years ago.

----------

The German radio interview which follows was recorded approximately a week before Barack Obama announced the killing of OBL. Within a few days, we will be bringing you an interview with Radio New Zealand that adds more to the picture.

MIKE RUPPERT DISCUSSES 9-11 A IN DETAIL FOR THE FIRST TIME IN SEVEN YEARS – ACADEMIC PANEL SEES CLEAR CONNECTION TO CURRENT COLLAPSE

Thank you for posting. I really enjoyed the Ruppert & group interview.

[Stephen Morgan]

Al Qaeda Confirms Bin Laden’s Death

Al Qaeda released a statement on militant Web sites Friday confirming the death of Osama bin Laden, according to the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors jihadi Web sites. The lengthy statement, dated May 3 and signed by Al Qaeda’s General Command, warned of new attacks and called on the Pakistani people to rebel against their government to protest its relations with the United States.

I'm sure I remember "SITE" turning up before with apparently fake videos.

[Stephen Morgan]

[Luther Blissett]

8bit, you and I are birds of a feather. I always enjoy what you have to say, because as you say, you step on limbs that, like me, are emotionally driven first and then you let the logic, ethics and whatnot in. First came for me at the outset of all this bullshit was the guttural repulsion to what was happening and always, all of my life hating those who glom to racism and just so, pat explanations for anything. My pops was in the airforce and he brought me up with an understanding that "I would never fit in to militarism". I simply do not do what I am told to do and by the same token I am also very emotional. I accept nothing from anybody and I never have. Sure, as I've grown older, you take your lumps.

So what I mean, is that, I often wonder what it is that sets those of us who don't buy this shit apart from the rest. How the fuck can myself, be completely impervious, completely curious, etc? I think, honestly, is because I was a fucking good liar growing up. I lied and lied and lied and my mom was good at seeing through it. Though there are a few lies that spring to mind she never discovered. Same goes here. At one point in my life, I decided to use lying as a tool in which I could use should the need arise to get me or someone else out of a bind, this I will always utilize, but only when called upon and used ethically. I know I can lie and bullshit with the best, with the better than the best. But I decided to use honesty as my never ending, never sinking buoy -- I consciously always tell the truth. Consciously. I go out of my way to tell the truth. Dishonesty makes me anxious. It's all part and parcel with my sometimes debilitating case of OCD I have. I could never get a job doing something that required of me to lie in any which way.

This shit, this O(BS)ama shit, my time spent working with the filthy rich and connected, my ability to spot a lie, my ability to get extra super pissed when I get fucked with, connects me to the nexus that is well, just me and others like me. There are many good people who are falling for this song and dance. The only thing I can think of is this song "NO" by the subhumans, that you must listen to at the age of 13 in order to not fall for any of it again and blast on your walkman.

Wow that's a good song. You know me, I love everything from Leonard Cohen and Laibach to Death in June and Roxy Music. But fucking ay, that was a beautiful song. Short, but man...makes me wish I could time travel to not only 1968 for the counter culture, but also the late 1970's/early 80's for the real punk movement. There's such a wonderful raw intensity. I don't see a single molecule of that emotion or magic in 90's or modern "punk".

Where are the punk banks today exposing the system? I miss listening to Dead Kennedys, Buzzcocks, Black Flag, Anti Flag, etc in high school during the early-mid 90's. Where's the protest music?
Shoot Dixie Chicks were more protest music than most the "anti authority" stuff in recent memory.

Let me think for a moment on what contemporary music is speaking truth to power. Obviously the music (punk, reggae, Billy Bragg, hip hop, etc) of the latter half of the 70's and the first half of the 80's contains the standard against which we measure all other music that could still unabashedly and comfortably discuss the issues of the day and attack power.

That the notion of anti-fascism could be seen as passe today is of course regrettable. A lot of it is because the style it's couched in is just broadly seen as "cheesy" or attractive only to a small portion of the population. This was certainly the case in the mid-90's, when I listened to a lot of "political" broadly anti-racist "traditional rocksteady / skinhead reggae" stuff, like the Adjusters, Version City, the Stubborn All-Stars, Ocean 11, etc. Using a highly restrictive "genre" I think it was easy for these bands to have a clear anti-fascist message, but was it enjoyed by large swaths of the population? Does it hold up the way the Buzzcocks do? No to both.

The Adjusters were a fabulous band though. Democratic Socialist northern soul reggae based out of Chicago, fronted by Daraka Larrimore-Hall:
[youtube]v=8zYZro-NoAs[/youtube]

I LOVE music in 2011, but again, I don't get that same kind of emotional, activist feeling from much of it anymore. Maybe with musicians trying to sound timeless these days, they end up avoiding tackling very serious contemporary issues - I know that Jello wrote about this - they had many songs that cover topics which found short-term resolutions, which no one remembers anymore. Not much value in a song like that from 1984 today, other than to set an example. Was overt political music always naive, and it is only through the cloud of nostalgia that we approve of it? I don't support this position, but I've heard it argued before.

There are certain acts that I like today, who through perhaps subtle ways send out a progressive message. Arcade Fire's last album is a concept album about empire and the police state. Very effective, I think. LCD Soundsystem's music is more of a rebuttal against modern culture, but through that were able to say a lot of important things. One of my favorite bands is Yo La Tengo - the members are all certainly progressive individuals, but does simply covering Sun Ra's "Nuclear War" really count as dangerous? I tend to not think so.

Is Kanye West a little dangerous? Sure, a little. However, I think that he might be worthy of a little suspicion due to ties to the establishment.
Are Gorillaz dangerous? The last album was also sort of a concept album about the Pacific trash gyre, so maybe. I thought the message there was sort of effective. A lot of anti-consumerist jingo.
The newest Broken Social Scene album covers a TON of contemporary social issues. My main problem with it is that it's a little hopeless and pessimistic.

As far as "punk" is concerned, a lot of the stuff closest to that sound that I like coming out today (No Age, Fucked Up, Wavves) are just druggy, nonsensical, fuzzy noise. Not very dangerous.

If I were a gambling man, I would actually put my money on electronic dance music as being the new torchbearers of punk ethos. I hear a lot of anti-authoritarian themes being blasted out of the newer genres. A lot of it is dumb fun but a lot of it is very smart fun too. Unfortunately that's not my expertise so I can't give great examples there. Perhaps someone else could.

[elfismiles]

RE: "today's music" ...

It weirds me out how "New Metal" (and the hardest core metal of old) is now Pop music. But I have a soft spot for all kinds of genres, even one's that I "don't like" ...

This song isn't representative of their "New Metal" songs but it surprised me...

HERO OF WAR - RISE AGAINST

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DboMAghWcA

EDIT: more my style...

WMD featuring WISE INTELLIGENT - JEL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzVPdml7eqc

[82_28]

Since we're off the topic for a sec, here's a an epic by the Subhumans. This song informed me perhaps more than any other.



I went to quite a few Rise Against shows in the early aughts. Suddenly they flipped to semi-corporate at some point around 2004(?) and I lost interest. That's a good song though, elfismiles, first I've heard it. Hopefully it will do some good. Lately I've been liking the "singer songwriter" generation especially while I work and I get to think about the lyrics and iconic melodies from an "inside the LC" angle.

Whatever happened to Anti-Flag?

From the Subhumans song, the final stanza:

Cos your father will tell you "Sonny, you must do as you are told"
And you'll say the same thing to your kids when you're 32 years old
And unless you can react against the brainwash from the start
Your government will rule your mind and your mind will rule your heart
You'll conform to every social law and be the system's slave
From birth to school to work to death, from the cradle to the grave.....

Good shit for any kid to listen to.