117 days left to shut down the FBI

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Mon Jul 21, 2014 9:37 pm

see link for full story

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/cri ... story.html


D.C. man exonerated in 1982 killing; DNA reveals FBI error in conviction

Shadow of lab scandal grows

Kevin Martin becomes emotional while talking to reporters after leaving the D.C. Superior courthouse on Monday. Martin was exonerated for a crime he didn’t commit. (Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post)
By Keith L. Alexander and Spencer S. Hsu July 21 at 11:34 AM

A D.C. Superior Court judge concluded Monday that DNA evidence exonerates a man who spent 26 years in prison in the 1982 killing of a Washington woman.

Kevin Martin’s case marks the fifth time in as many years that federal prosecutors in the District have acknowledged that errors by an elite FBI forensic unit had led to a conviction that should be overturned.

U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Machen Jr. joined defense calls to vacate Martin’s conviction and declare him innocent of the attack on Ursula C. Brown. Machen cited DNA evidence that contradicts a previous finding by forensic experts linking Martin to a hair collected at the crime scene.

Martin, who had long professed his innocence in the killing, left the D.C. courthouse with his name cleared. He was paroled in 2009 and lives in San Francisco.

“I am free at last. I am humbled. I never gave up,” Martin said, hugging and high-fiving his attorneys. Martin’s younger sister, his fiancee, his 6-year-old niece and other family members gathered around.
Five men wrongly convicted and imprisoned in the 1989 beating and rape of a Central Park jogger have agreed to settle with New York City for about $40 million. The proposed settlement would give the "Central Park Five" about $1 million for each year of imprisonment. Here are seven other notable exoneration cases. (Kiratiana Freelon, Natalie Jennings and Tom LeGro/The Washington Post)

“I just want to live,” said Martin, 50.

The hearing came as Machen’s office nears the end of a 21 / 2-year review of all local convictions involving FBI hair matches that was launched after demands by the D.C. Public Defender Service. Since 2009, the service has cleared four other men convicted by such matches.

And the troubling problems exposed in the FBI lab’s methods have led the FBI and Justice Department to undertake a nationwide review of more than 2,100 convictions in the 1980s and 1990s.

Martin’s is the first wrongful conviction uncovered by prosecutors in the District review, and they said it is the only problem case they have found. The public defender’s office praised the effort to exonerate Martin but criticized the U.S. attorney’s office’s review as secretive and the disclosure of the results as incomplete and overdue.

Brown, 19, was abducted Nov. 1, 1982, after her car was struck from behind on the Anacostia Freeway during a rash of what authorities called “bump-and-rob” assaults. Her partially clothed body was later found near a dumpster next to an elementary school in Southeast Washington. She had been sexually assaulted, shot in the head and stabbed.

Martin, then a 17-year-old PCP addict, was arrested and pleaded guilty to a series of similar armed robberies that occurred one week later, but, from the start, maintained that he knew nothing about Brown’s death.

As they built a case, prosecutors told the defense that an FBI examiner was prepared to testify that a pubic hair found on Brown’s sneaker was a match to Martin. In March 1984, Martin, who faced multiple life sentences if the case went to trial, entered an Alford plea to manslaughter. Under such a plea, a defendant acknowledges that prosecutors have sufficient evidence for a conviction but does not admit guilt.

Kevin Martin, center, exits DC Superior courthouse with his son Kevin Staton, right. (Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post)

Martin was sentenced in 1984 to 35 years to life in prison for manslaughter and robbery. He wrote letters to the judge and defense attorneys claiming his innocence in the slaying.

Lawyer Bernard Grimm, and later the Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project, began to look into the case.

Martin sought DNA tests in 2001, but D.C. police said evidence in his case had been lost. Police subsequently moved evidence into a new facility, and boxes from the investigation into Brown’s killing turned up last November, according to court papers. While the hair was not located, other genetic evidence was.

In March, as first reported by WTTG (Channel 5), Martin learned that new DNA testing excluded him as a source of biological evidence collected from the victim.

Prosecutors said the DNA matched William D. Davidson, who is serving a sentence of 65 years to life for multiple offenses related to “bump-and-rape” cases, including the killing of Brown, in which he said he was only the lookout.

In court papers, Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael T. Ambrosino and Grimm wrote that “DNA testing conducted at the expense of the government along with other factors . . . conclusively establish that Kevin Martin is innocent of the rape and murder of Ursula Brown.”

The first of the D.C. exonerations occurred in December 2009, when Superior Court Judge Fred B. Ugast ordered the release of Donald E. Gates, then 60, after DNA results cleared him of a rape-murder for which he had spent 28 years in prison.

The D.C. Public Defender Service, which represented Gates, also found that prosecutors failed for many years to disclose that the Justice Department’s inspector general had identified problems with work done by the FBI agent who linked Gates’s hair to the crime.

Ugast ordered Machen’s office to review all cases handled by the agent, Michael P. Malone. In 2012, facing continued demands by the public defenders, Machen ordered a review of all convictions that relied on FBI hair analysis.

Since then, Superior Court judges have exonerated two more public defender clients — Santae A. Tribble of murder and Kirk L. Odom of rape — after DNA tests contradicted claims by FBI hair examiners.

The murder conviction of a third client, Cleveland Wright, was vacated, and he continues to ask the court to declare him innocent. The three men collectively spent nearly 80 years in prison.

Their cases were featured in The Washington Post, and the FBI and Justice Department in 2012 announced they would review FBI testimony in all convictions involving FBI hair matches in the 1980s and 1990s.

Machen’s office said its inquiry identified 122 District convictions before 2000 that included an FBI hair match, completed reviewing 106 of them and found only one case, Martin’s, in which prosecutors believed the conviction depended on the FBI finding or in which DNA testing would yield a “viable” claim for innocence, Machen spokesman Bill Miller said.

Grimm praised Machen’s office, saying, “Had the U.S. attorney’s office not reviewed these cases, Kevin Martin never would have found out that evidence could be retested, and he still would be on parole for rape and homicide.”

Miller said prosecutors will begin notifying defendants’ last counsel in the 106 cases — it started Monday with the Public Defender Service — and notify the Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project for defendants with other counsel, in case those lawyers had retired, moved or died.

The Public Defender Service said prosecutors’ approach may not have led to the reversal of Gates, Tribble or Wright’s convictions because public defenders were not their last counsel.

They said that for more than four years, prosecutors refused repeated requests to release the names of all defendants whose convictions relied on FBI hair evidence to the public defender’s office and the standards for their review or to disclose cases as reviews were completed.

On Wednesday, a new report by the Justice Department inspector general’s office criticized the department and FBI for failing to give proper and timely notice to defendants in cases affected by problems with hair evidence.

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office appears to have learned very little from the errors devastatingly portrayed in [the] OIG report. This report shows that delay is inexcusable and that it can have tragic consequences,” said Sandra Levick, chief of special litigation for the Public Defender Service.

Machen’s office said that it did not have all of the names four years ago and that it took great effort to identify cases based on FBI lab reports.

The office devoted thousands of hours to the review and asked leaders of the local defense bar, including public defenders, to alert the office to post-conviction innocence claims, Miller said.
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Tue Jul 22, 2014 11:55 am

Posted: July 22, 2014
Is Apple Leaving an iOS ‘Backdoor’ Open For Government?


http://www.inquisitr.com/1366625/is-app ... overnment/


Is somebody watching me? The question that has been brought to you by George Orwell and Rockwell. Thanks to Edward Snowden, we now realize the fears of the past were in fact true. There is someone watching you. After the Edward Snowden documents leaked the US government’s massive spying operation, we have been getting steady drips of information as to who, what, where, and why. In August, Google users had to worry about the FBI snooping. Last September, Spiegal reported the U.S. National Security Agency had slides listing Steve Jobs as “Big Brother” and outlining a cooperation between Apple and the NSA. Following that report, The Daily Dot reported that a program called “DROPOUTJEEP,” a program that was meant to provide a “backdoor” into Apple’s iOS, existed exclusively for the agencies spying activities. Essentially, a backdoor is a hidden remote access from an outside source to the accessed device that allows the outside source to have near full access to the device with little detection. Apple denied the allegations.

Forensic Scientist and Apple iPhone jailbreak expert Jonathan Zdziarski recently attended Hackers On the Planet Earth, or Hope/X, and performed a presentation of how Apple intentionally installed several backdoor security mechanisms. These backdoors allow Apple, and government agencies, to have covert data collection access, ZDnet reports. Though Mr. Zdziarski confirmed that iOS is still “reasonably secure” from outside sources, it contains multiple “design omissions” and “forensic services” that allow forensic tools to access iOS’s encrypted user backup data. The service’s files that allow the covert access are “lockdownd,” “pcapd,” and “mobile.file_relay.” Mr. Zdziarski stated these services can be accessed via Wi-Fi and USB. According to MacRumors, Jonathan Zdziarski stated he is not a “conspiracy theorists,” but says:

“I am not suggesting some grand conspiracy; there are, however, some services running in iOS that shouldn’t be there, that were intentionally added by Apple as part of the firmware, and that bypass backup encryption while copying more of your personal data than ever should come off the phone for the average consumer. I think at the very least, this warrants an explanation and disclosure to the some 600 million customers out there running iOS devices. At the same time, this is NOT a zero day and NOT some widespread security emergency. My paranoia level is tweaked, but not going crazy. My hope is that Apple will correct the problem. Nothing less, nothing more. I want these services off my phone. They don’t belong there.”

MacRumors stated Apple released a statement to the Financial Times, in regards to the iOS backdoor issue detailed by Jonathan Zdziarski, and the statement read:

“We have designed iOS so that its diagnostic functions do not compromise user privacy and security, but still provides needed information to enterprise IT departments, developers, and Apple for troubleshooting technical issues. A user must have unlocked their device and agreed to trust another computer before that computer is able to access this limited diagnostic data. The user must agree to share this information, and data is never transferred without their consent.

As we have said before, Apple has never worked with any government agency from any country to create a backdoor in any of our products or services.”

Unfortunately, it is hard to know what to make of it all. It seems hard to believe so many would lie about it. It has officially come from three different sources alleging similar accusations. Two of them
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Fri Jul 25, 2014 12:34 am

http://www.mediachannel.org/meet-the-on ... -to-block/


Meet the Online Tracking Device That is Virtually Impossible to Block
July 22, 2014

By Julia Angwin via ProPublica

A new, extremely persistent type of online tracking is shadowing visitors to thousands of top websites, from WhiteHouse.gov to YouPorn.com.

First documented in a forthcoming paper by researchers at Princeton University and KU Leuven University in Belgium, this type of tracking, called canvas fingerprinting, works by instructing the visitor’s Web browser to draw a hidden image. Because each computer draws the image slightly differently, the images can be used to assign each user’s device a number that uniquely identifies it.

Like other tracking tools, canvas fingerprints are used to build profiles of users based on the websites they visit — profiles that shape which ads, news articles, or other types of content are displayed to them.

But fingerprints are unusually hard to block: They can’t be prevented by using standard Web browser privacy settings or using anti-tracking tools such as AdBlock Plus.

The researchers found canvas fingerprinting computer code, primarily written by a company called AddThis, on 5 percent of the top 100,000 websites. Most of the code was on websites that use AddThis’ social media sharing tools. Other fingerprinters include the German digital marketer Ligatus and the Canadian dating site Plentyoffish. (A list of all the websites on which researchers found the code is here).

Rich Harris, chief executive of AddThis, said that the company began testing canvas fingerprinting earlier this year as a possible way to replace “cookies,” the traditional way that users are tracked, via text files installed on their computers.

“We’re looking for a cookie alternative,” Harris said in an interview.

Harris said the company considered the privacy implications of canvas fingerprinting before launching the test, but decided “this is well within the rules and regulations and laws and policies that we have.”

He added that the company has only used the data collected from canvas fingerprints for internal research and development. The company won’t use the data for ad targeting or personalization if users install the AddThis opt-out cookie on their computers, he said.

Arvind Narayanan, the computer science professor who led the Princeton research team, countered that forcing users to take AddThis at its word about how their data will be used, is “not the best privacy assurance.”

Device fingerprints rely on the fact that every computer is slightly different: Each contains different fonts, different software, different clock settings and other distinctive features. Computers automatically broadcast some of their attributes when they connect to another computer over the Internet.

Tracking companies have long sought to use those differences to uniquely identify devices for online advertising purposes, particularly as Web users are increasingly using ad-blocking software and deleting cookies.

In May 2012, researchers at the University of California, San Diego, noticed that a Web programming feature called “canvas” could allow for a new type of fingerprint — by pulling in different attributes than a typical device fingerprint.

In June, the Tor Project added a feature to its privacy-protecting Web browser to notify users when a website attempts to use the canvas feature and sends a blank canvas image. But other Web browsers did not add notifications for canvas fingerprinting.
How You Can Try to Thwart Canvas Fingerprinting

Use the Tor browser (Warning: can be slow)
Block JavaScript from loading in your browser (Warning: breaks a lot of web sites)
Use NoScript browser extension to block JavaScript from known fingerprinters such as AddThis (Warning: requires a lot of research and decision-making)
Try the experimental browser extension Chameleon that is designed to block fingerprinting (Warning: only recommended for tech-savvy users at this point)
Install opt-out cookies from known fingerprinters such as AddThis (Warning: fingerprint will likely still be collected, companies simply pledge not to use the data for ad targeting or personalization)

A year later, Russian programmer Valentin Vasilyev noticed the study and added a canvas feature to freely available fingerprint code that he had posted on the Internet. The code was immediately popular.

But Vasilyev said that the company he was working for at the time decided against using the fingerprint technology. “We collected several million fingerprints but we decided against using them because accuracy was 90 percent,” he said, “and many of our customers were on mobile and the fingerprinting doesn’t work well on mobile.”

Vasilyev added that he wasn’t worried about the privacy concerns of fingerprinting. “The fingerprint itself is a number which in no way is related to a personality,” he said.

AddThis improved upon Vasilyev’s code by adding new tests and using the canvas to draw a pangram “Cwm fjordbank glyphs vext quiz” — a sentence that uses every letter of the alphabet at least once. This allows the company to capture slight variations in how each letter is displayed.

AddThis said it rolled out the feature to a small portion of the 13 million websites on which its technology appears, but is considering ending its test soon. “It’s not uniquely identifying enough,” Harris said.

AddThis did not notify the websites on which the code was placed because “we conduct R&D projects in live environments to get the best results from testing,” according to a spokeswoman.

She added that the company does not use any of the data it collects — whether from canvas fingerprints or traditional cookie-based tracking — from government websites including WhiteHouse.gov for ad targeting or personalization.

The company offered no such assurances about data it routinely collects from visitors to other sites, such as YouPorn.com. YouPorn.com did not respond to inquiries from ProPublica about whether it was aware of AddThis’ test of canvas fingerprinting on its website.

Update: A YouPorn.com spokesperson said that the website was “completely unaware that AddThis contained a tracking software that had the potential to jeopardize the privacy of our users.” After this article was published, YouPorn removed AddThis technology from its website.

Julia Angwin is a senior reporter at ProPublica. From 2000 to 2013, she was a reporter at The Wall Street Journal, where she led a privacy investigative team that was a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize in Explanatory Reporting in 2011 and won a Gerald Loeb Award in 2010.
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:16 pm

Greg Burnham+
Looking at the Tippit Case from a Different Angle
A Theory

by Staffan H Westerberg and Pete Engwall

The killing of Dallas police officer JD Tippit is one of the undying questions in the JFK research community. To think one could solve the murder is perhaps a bit optimistic after all these years. Tippits death has always been surrounded with mystery and disinformation: Did a jealous husband kill him, or was it a random killing that happened by accident? JD Tippit as a narcotics dealer or a getaway driver for Oswald to the Red Bird Airport? The murder on 10th and Patton is not short of theories, but we think that the Dallas policeman had an important function that day – he was scheduled to die with the sole purpose of becoming the vehicle with which JFK’s killer was to be caught. As it were, before Tippits death the Dallas Police didn’t have any hard evidence to be able to explain to the American people how they were able to arrest Oswald for the murder of the President.

We believe the conspirators planned the details and the chain of events. Nothing happened by accident. Young intelligence officer Lee Harvey Oswald, 24, had secretly been chosen to be the patsy. It’s easy to see traces of how they used him and how they set him up to take the fall for both murders of John F. Kennedy and police officer JD Tippit. The Warren Commission’s final image of Oswald was that of a loner, a communist and arrogant radical and these characteristics had been skillfully crafted and planted together with the evidence to match the crime. Many astute researchers will say this was a plot created by hardcore professionals who had experience in the demise of various heads of state around the world.
J.D. Tippit's Car After His Shooting

J.D. Tippit’s Car After His Shooting
Fake Reality

The events that took place before the actual killing of JFK were likely very carefully planned and executed. However, there must also have been an escalation of intensity as soon as JFK was shot and until they arrested the patsy – the time between 12:30pm and 1:51pm. After the shots in Dealey Plaza, many things had to fall into place and properly work to cover up the crime. A new reality, a fake reality, had to be created, one that was good enough to fool all the observers and a shocked nation. Just think about it, they had killed the President but not yet completely gotten away with it.
“Operation Control Oswald”

First of all, they had to be able to control Lee Harvey Oswald, and they had to control him the entire time and then at the exact moment, apprehend him. With Dallas Police under their control, the men behind the coup could always fix the time on events to fit the final verdict. For instance, if Tippit was killed at 1:04 in reality, they could easily change it to 1:16 without any real opposition. But Oswald running around the streets and perhaps being seen by a bus full of senior citizens three miles away could be very hazardous to the chain of events, not to mention the fact that he could get into a random accident or disappears altogether. For those reasons alone, they had to control him every step of the way.

So when Deputy Sheriff Roger Dean Craig told the Warren Commission he saw Oswald get into a Nash Rambler station wagon on Elm Street at 12:40-45 outside the Book Depository, that’s when the moment of final control started. From then on they made sure they knew Oswald’s exact position and even took him to the place of his arrest. Consequently Oswald couldn’t be allowed to remain in the Book Depository. The murder of JFK lacked hard evidence against him; it didn’t materialized until the following Monday. Because of this we will argue that Officer Craig most certainly saw Oswald leave in the Rambler.
Patsy No 2

Meanwhile, since they had to create the image of a fleeing killer, they set up police officer JD Tippit to be ambushed in Oswald’s neighborhood. Right after Kennedy was killed, Tippit drove to the Oak Cliff area, which was not his regular patrol area. That means Tippit was directed to go to an area closely connected to Lee Harvey Oswald, where he would soon meet his death. The President was killed outside of Oswald’s work place and 30 minutes later a police officer killed near his home, this would pave the way to an open and shut case – one that would of course never go to trial.

JD Tippit didn’t know what was coming. He had been ordered to be on the lookout for Oswald. Later his wife, Marie Tippit, would learn this from a fellow policeman, according to author Joseph McBride in the book “Into the Nightmare”. This would actually mean that Tippit looked for Oswald before the Dallas Police arrested him and officially knew who Oswald was. Most likely Oswald wasn’t the only patsy that day. JD Tippit was sacrificed and his wife was financially well taken care of.
Which Oswald?

Oswald got out of the Nash Rambler at the Texas Theatre; a building owned by Howard Hughes, who had close ties to the CIA – and even used Robert Maheu, a major CIA operator as his chief of security. Oswald walked into the foyer around 1:00-07pm and bought a ticket, according to ticket collector Warren ”Butch” Burroughs.

Wait a minute, what about Oswald going home and being seen by his landlady Mrs. Earlene Roberts at approximately 1:00-04pm? Both these can’t be right since it was a mile apart between Oswald’s rented room and the theatre.

We are convinced that Butch Burroughs kept time well since the movie “War is Hell” started at 1:20, and keeping track of time was part of his job. Therefore we don’t think Mrs. Roberts saw the real Oswald. After reading the Warren Commission testimony of Earlene Roberts, we are even more certain of this as a plausible scenario. It is abundantly clear that she was heavily exposed to leading questions when confronted by people from the Secret Service and the FBI. The whole interrogation was about “Oswald’s revolver and the fact he changed into a jacket with a zipper”. Then in June of 1964 Joe Ball of the Warren Commission did much of the same thing and wouldn’t let go of the jacket and revolver that she had told them over and over again she never saw. Mrs. Roberts had not either seen a holster in Oswald’s room. Still Ball kept pounding on it.

Mr. Ball: Then, when you saw him, did you see any part of his belt?
Mrs. Roberts: No.
Mr. Ball: There is some suspicion that when he left there he might have had a pistol or a revolver in his belt; did you see anything like that?
Mrs. Roberts: No, I sure didn’t.

However, Mrs. Roberts did say Oswald didn’t speak to her when he came home that day. (Maybe that was due to the simple fact that the imposter knew he did not sound like Lee.) Oswald paid the rent on time, sure, but he hardly ever said a word. According to Mrs. Roberts’s testimony, Oswald was not a nice person, more of a loner who used the false name of OH Lee.

Oswald getting home to his rented room, passing Mrs. Roberts, is a scene almost carved in stone. There are not many – if any – researchers who question it.

We do, because we think this could be a staged scene with an imposter acting the part of Oswald – a second Oswald. All the imposter had to do was to make a fast entry, (just like Mrs. Roberts remembered it), pass behind her back while she was occupied with watching the news about the shots in Dealey Plaza, (just like Mrs. Roberts remembered it), then either stand silent outside Oswald’s door for a minute, or go in with a key and then after 30 seconds to 4 minutes return out and pass by Mrs. Roberts back, (just like she remembered it) and proceed out to the bus stop, (just like Mrs. Roberts remembered it). The jacket could have been under the imposter’s shirt while he went in. Hours later the two plain-clothes men from Will Fritz office could have planted the holster in Oswald’s room, if the second Oswald couldn’t do it.

We suspect that many researchers can have a problem with this scene. But just think of how easy it would be to fool an old lady who was nearly blind, worked up over the shocking news from Dealey Plaza and preoccupied with a TV screen that gave her constant trouble. For the conspirators to get a key to Lee’s room cannot have been a difficult task.

No, the planners had way too much that depended on Lee being perceived to have picked up a gun and a jacket in his room. Picking up the jacket made it possible to sneak out with the gun, tossing the jacket made it clear that the murderer wanted to change appearance in order to not be recognized. This was in reality not a hard scene for the imposter to pull off: All he had to do was to make sure he didn’t show his face clearly to Mrs. Roberts. Considering her poor eyesight, with only one functioning eye, together with the chocking news on TV that consumed her attention; it is very possible she didn’t get a good look at him. Had he been recognized as someone else than Oswald, we are sure that would never have been known to the public. Mrs. Roberts never signed her testimony, so we don’t really know whether her statement was subject to alteration or not.
Why Oswald Didn’t Go Home

So what was needed for this scene, why was this important? Well, it gave the impression of a fleeing Oswald who was in a hurry to arm himself and pick up a jacket to hide the gun –
exactly what you would expect from a man who just committed murder and was about to kill anybody who got in his way. An innocent man had no need to change clothes and get a weapon. If Oswald was seen at his rented room and Mrs. Roberts was right, then that would definitely incriminate him and put him close to the spot where Tippit was killed, and could thus be accused. Tippit was shot with a revolver or a pistol. He was not killed by rifle. In order to become Tippits murderer Oswald therefore had to have a revolver or a pistol. The Dallas Police later found a jacket tossed between the murder scene and the Texas Theatre. So they created five things that pointed to Lee Harvey Oswald as the killer:

Tippit was shot dead in Lee Harvey Oswald’s neighborhood.
Mrs. Roberts confirmed that Oswald was in the area at the critical time.
Oswald picked up a revolver that could have been used to kill Tippit.
Oswald changed clothes – got a jacket with a zipper that the police later found tossed along the way to the Texas Theatre.
Oswald was already a killer since he had killed the President.

But today we know all evidence shows Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent. Thus all this had to be a deception, a creation of the plotters. About the jacket that the Dallas Police found: It was a white cotton jacket. No one had ever seen Oswald in a white cotton jacket. About the revolver: Researcher John Armstrong has proven that Lee Harvey Oswald did not own the revolver in question.
Staged Killing

Officer JD Tippit had to die in order to create a false logical chain of events that eventually would lead to the arrest of Oswald in the theatre. Tippit was shot dead execution style with four shots. It happened on 10th Street and Patton Avenue around 1:04-06pm, according to reliable witnesses and Deputy Roger Craig who looked at his watch when he heard over the police radio of what had happened. At the time Craig was in the Book Depository in search for a weapon.

Many witnesses claimed they saw someone in the area who looked like Oswald. But all those witnesses had in some way ties to Jack Ruby, according to Joseph McBride. McBride felt there were two sets of witnesses since he also points out that several other witnesses said the killer didn’t look like Oswald at all – and that there actually were two shooters.

If there were two shooters, then it’s hard to imagine it could have been anything but a planned contract killing. A planned hit strongly indicates that Tippit was meant to be sacrificed. Jim Marrs is in on the same line of thinking:

“Whatever he (Tippit) was told, it appears his real role was to be killed to point suspicion at Oswald and make him a target as a ‘cop killer’.”

Joseph McBride reveals another stunning fact about the witnesses:

“Dallas oil and gas attorney Dick Loomis had his office in the same building as Lamar Hunt. Within ninety days of the assassination, Loomis bought the five houses on East 10th Street, the same side of the street where Tippit was shot, and immediately east of the driveway where the shooting occurred. This would have had the effect of removing possible witnesses from the neighborhood. It must have taken some doing to get everybody to agree to sell within such a short time. Loomis had the homes razed, and built an apartment complex in their space.”

Was this purchasing a vital part of the overall plot? One can’t help but wonder if it was. Buying up real estate could mean one would never be able to recreate the physical murder scene in search for the truth. Not to mention the legal effect it could have on attempts to re- open the murder case. Maybe this form of action-strategy is similar to the one of taking out

witnesses? The same MO can be seen in all the assassinations of political leaders in the 1960s: In Dealey Plaza they didn’t buy the entire area, but they moved lampposts and traffic signs to change the landmarks. In Memphis they turned the Lorraine Motel into a Civil Rights Museum and sold off the estate across the street where the sniper’s firing position most likely was. In Los Angeles they tore the entire Ambassador Hotel to the ground and built a school for children with special needs, named after Robert F. Kennedy. It definitely looks suspicious and part of a thought out plan.
“Operation Second Oswald”

If they were going to create a patsy – as we all believe they did – then they couldn’t rely on Oswald’s actions to promptly play the part; they must have had an imposter to follow a script. That’s the only way to be sure they could blame Oswald for the crime. So, if the imposter stepped outside Oswald’s rented room at 1:01-04 and Oswald walked into the theatre at 1:00- 07, while Tippit was killed at 1:04-06, there are ample (circumstantial) evidence of three simultaneous scenes a mile apart.

Let’s follow the imposter. His identity is not really important, but besides suggested imposters such as Larry Crafard, Michael Paine, Thomas Masens and others, there was one who looked surprisingly much like Lee Harvey Oswald and who went by the name of Don Norton.

(By the way: We are not sure about Armstrong’s idea of one Harvey and one Lee who were created by the CIA in the early 1950s, only to grow up looking very much the same thru the years. How CIA would know how to pick two boys who they knew would grow up to look the same thru the years is beyond our comprehension. We simply think that evidence points to a naval intelligence operation that perhaps was created in conjunction with CIAs defector program in the late 1950s.)

When researcher John Judge met Don Norton, he asked what he did on the 22nd of November 1963. Norton mysteriously said he wasn’t going to talk about that. Instead he was satisfied with sponsoring JFK researcher Mae Brussells radio program. Norton called it his “conscious money”.

We don’t know if Don Norton was the guy who went into Oswald’s rooming house, or if he was the person Bernard Haire and Butch Burroughs saw being arrested on the balcony and brought out in the back of the theatre shortly after Oswald was taken into custody? Whoever it was, we think it was the same man who a little later was spotted by auto mechanic TF White outside of Mack Pate ́s garage at a time when the real Oswald was interrogated. We do think the imposter was one and the same thru all these events; also the same person that later was seen by Sergeant Robert G Vinson on a military flight out of Dallas. Given the fact that Norton easily could be mistaken for Oswald, and considering the answer he gave John Judge, it is entirely possible that Norton was in Dallas that day. And if he was there, it sounds like he was used and felt bad about it.

So, while Oswald was under control and driven to the theatre, we believe the imposter did the following:

He went to 1026 North Beckley Avenue around 1:00pm and was seen by Mrs. Roberts, maybe he went there by bus and cab, maybe in a red Ford Falcon.
He then walked to the area near the Tippit scene, only to move in the direction of Jefferson Boulevard, Hardy’s Shoestore and the Texas Theatre.
He threw away the jacket on the way to the theatre.
He hid from the police in the shoe store and was noticed by Johnny Brewer, who closed the store and followed him. (We think Brewer could be an asset, since he, among other things, pointed out Oswald – the wrong man – to the police.)
The imposter then snuck into the theatre at 1:45pm without paying. (The real Oswald had already been there for 40 minutes.)
He then moved up to the balcony and kept a low profile.
After the commotion downstairs when Oswald was arrested, the imposter was brought out in the back of the theatre and was consequently seen by storeowner Bernard Haire, who said the man never wore a jacket.
Later, TF White saw the same man. (The imposter sat in a red Ford Falcon that had a license plate number which could be traced to a Carl Mather, a Collins Radio employee, who had close ties to – none other than JD Tippit.)
The red Ford brought him then to the Trinity River and the waiting military aircraft where Sergeant Vinson noticed him.

We could be wrong of course; these actions could have been the result of several imposters. Either way we can be sure it wasn’t the doings of an innocent man. Another indication of Oswald’s innocence was the alleged struggle with the revolver in the theatre. Did it really happened the way they said?
Oswald’s Arrest

There was something very peculiar going on when a ticket cashier 3 miles away from the crime scene could call the police at a moment when the phone lines to the Dallas Police must have been overloaded, only to have them send between 20-30 cops including the second assistant D.A. Bill Alexander to the movie theatre because a suspicious person walked in without paying for a ticket. Especially when the police modus operandi was totally different as they arrested three armed men in the railroad yard close to Elm Street at approximately the same time. That arrest was handled by two police officers that behaved extremely casual.

The day after, Dallas Chief of Police, Jesse Curry, described to reporters that several police officers had closed in on Oswald inside the theatre. At that moment Oswald had allegedly said: “This is it” or “Well, it’s all over now” and then pulled a revolver from his belt. We assume Chief Curry with this wanted to indicate that Oswald meant to kill one or more approaching officer. However, Officer Nick McDonald told a slightly different story: Oswald first hit McDonald with a right fist over the head. When McDonald then hit back, Oswald pulled a revolver from his pants, aiming to kill. As Oswald was about to fire, McDonald grabbed the gun over the cylinder and the hammer, with the part of his hand in the firing mechanism. As they fell into the seats Oswald pulled the trigger but the firing pin got stuck on McDonald’s hand – thus preventing a shot to be fired.

Seconds later four policemen apprehended Oswald, at which time he shouted out loud:

“I’m not resisting arrest! I’m not resisting arrest!”

The policemen had Oswald locked up in a firm grip. He had a black eye. Hours later when a reporter asked him about his injury Oswald looked sincerely upset: “A policeman hit me!” He definitely didn’t act like someone who had started the altercation.

What kind of logic is this? First consider committing suicide by going for “OK Corral” in the theatre. Then seconds later, shout out something that would prevent the police from killing him on the spot. To come up with this kind of solution, it had to have been on his mind before anyone moved in on him. Then complain about getting hit in the eye when he allegedly threw the first punch?

This indicates that Oswald never threw the first punch – or any punch at all. One could even question if he had a revolver in his hand. There is no way to really know if he had a gun or not. But since we believe he was innocent of both killings, why would he have a gun, a revolver John Armstrong have proven he never owned or got the way they say he got it? This entire episode had to be full of lies. And those types of lies could also be detected in Chief Jesse Curry’s poor acting the day after the murders.
Lee Harvey Oswald's Arrest

Lee Harvey Oswald’s Arrest
Weak Explanations

On Saturday morning on the 23rd of November Dallas Police Chief invited a group of reporters to a quick press conference in the hallway of the Court building. Here it became obvious that Jesse Curry lied thru his teeth. One reporter tried to get answers as to what lead the police to arrest Oswald. This reporter wanted to know what information the police had. It was the most important question any reporter could ever ask. The answer Curry gave was awfully thin; obviously the Chief didn’t know what to say, because there was no official information that would sound sufficiently logical. For a brief moment Curry tried to answer the question. In the middle of his stumbling he was saved by another reporter, Bob Clarke of the ABC, who cut in and asked a seemingly harmless question.

Reporter: Chief Curry, could you detail for us what lead you to Oswald?
Curry: Not exactly, except uh… in the building we… when we went to the building why he was observed in the building at the time, but the manager told us that he worked there… And the officer passed him on up then because the manager said he is an employee.
Reporter: Was that before the shooting or after the shooting?
Curry: After the shooting.

As we all know there were a lot of people that worked in the Book Depository and the description going out over the Dallas police radio was a general description and didn’t necessarily match Oswald’s description: “White slender male, dark hair, in his 30s, weight 165 lbs, height 5’10”, was of course a description that would fit a lot of people.

Later, they tried to say Oswald was missing from an employee head count held around 1:00pm. If this head count was ever held, there were many people missing from it; remember the building was sealed off at the same time. The next head count was held at 2:00pm, according to a reporter colleague of Jim Marrs. At that time the only one missing was Lee Harvey Oswald. That is of course a stupid argument since Oswald was arrested nine minutes prior to the count.

The reporter that asked the important question was not satisfied and asked again with a little different angle. Jesse Curry then used the killing of Tippit as the reason they caught on to Oswald. The problem is the witnesses that identified Oswald in the lineups, after they got Oswald into custody, surely couldn’t have told the police about Oswald before they arrested him. It is very much like the case of the buggy getting home before the horse.

Reporter: After this happened, what was done in terms of getting the trail back to Oswald?
Curry: The next thing we knew is when he turned up as a suspect in the murder of a police officer (JD Tippit). And then the connection was made between the two. Reporter: Chief, did anyone see him shoot the police officer?
Curry: Yes.
Reporter: Who was that?
Curry: I don’t know the name. I think there were three witnesses… I understand.

If Oswald was a suspect in the Tippit killing, that wasn’t something the Dallas Police could use in the pursuit of the Presidents killer, as we mentioned. What is essential is what information
they had after 12:30pm and before 1:51pm. So, this whole line of thinking is pure disinformation. It simply has to be. It all comes down to the ticket cashier Julia Postal’s phone call to the Dallas Police. Shoe salesman Johnny Brewer told her to call the police since the mysterious man who didn’t pay for a ticket did in fact fit the description. A big problem with that is that Oswald still didn’t fit any description. Another is that it wasn’t Oswald who entered the theatre at 1:45pm without paying, it was the “Oswald look-alike” that was arrested in the balcony after the real Oswald had been brought out to the police car in front of the theatre.

Reporter: What lead you to the theatre?
Curry: I understand it was the ticket taker from the theatre that called about the suspicious action of this person.

The reporter who asked the important question was not satisfied; he still couldn’t understand how they got to Oswald, no matter what Curry tried to explain. In order to be able to lie like Curry obviously did, he had to know the truth. Otherwise he couldn’t have given so many wrong answers, unless he knew the correct ones.

Reporter: Chief, can you tell us in summary what directly links Oswald to the killing of the President?
Curry: Well, the fact that he was on the floor where the shots were fired from immediately before the shots were fired, the fact that he was seeing carrying a package to the building, the fact that…
Reporter: Who could place him there in the building?
Curry: My officer could place him there at the time of the shooting.
Reporter: The officer (Marion Baker) who was told by the manager that he worked there?
Curry: Yes…

No one placed Oswald on the sixth floor. We know that today. And only Wesley Frazier and his sister claimed they saw Oswald carrying a package of “curtain rods” to work that morning. No, that is not quite right, refrigerator repairman Ralph Leon Yates drove a “hitch hiker” who looked like Oswald to the School Book Depository two days earlier with a package of “curtain rods”. Since Oswald only had one window in his room on Beckley it is perhaps one too many curtain rods for the story to be believed. Finally, Officer Baker had no clue if Oswald had shot anyone or not, how could he? If Chief Curry didn’t present a bunch of lies to the reporters, then he would have acted otherwise. For instance, an honest person who didn’t know the answer to a question, would likely say so and perhaps check it out and get back to the reporter with an answer. This never happened with Curry.
“Operation Killing Tippit”

If you think the killing of JD Tippit was not planned, it sure had a big pay off, since it was the crime that – officially – lead the police to arrest Oswald. Curry used the Tippit killing as the reason to get to Oswald, even if he – not even the next day – could tell the press what information had led to the arrest. But by then he must have known that Oswald missing from the 2:00pm head count could not be the reason to arrest him earlier than 2:00pm. The only way Curry would keep using that was if it was decided as the official reason why they picked him up. Clearly they messed up in the timing.

Today we know Lee Harvey Oswald most likely was a completely innocent man. There is just too much evidence that exonerates him. The nitrate test, the FBI fingerprint test, the arrest report, the HSCA firearms tests, John Armstrong’s research on the revolver and the Mannlicher Carcano – it all show someone fabricated evidence against him. The evidence that was meant to finger Oswald actually points back to the conspirators. Fact is – a President killed outside of Oswald’s work place and then a police officer killed close to his home, are two circumstances that are very logical if Oswald was guilty, especially if they are timed so that the picture of an escapee emerges. But if he was innocent, those two murders become absurd in a logical sense.

Two shooters is the key to the murder of JD Tippit, we believe. If Aquila Clemons and several other witnesses are right in that they saw two culprits near Tippit, that would be the smoking gun that reveals “they” had already decided long before that Tippit was not meant to live thru the day.
So, Who Killed Tippit?

There has been talk about fellow officers Harry Olsen or Roscoe White, while other information suggests Jack Ruby and a rogue agent by the name of Gary Marlowe. The sad answer is nobody knows. How they guided him into an ambush on 10th Street could possibly be thru Collins Radio, perhaps controlled from a moving vehicle with communication onboard. Or maybe it was the 488th Military Intelligence Detachment who used its radio central in the Dallas Civil Defense Emergency Operation Center, situated in the basement under Science Place Planetarium Building in Fair Park. The leader of the 488th was Jack Crichton, a CIA associate with George Bush, who both recruited for Operation 40 – the unit first designed to assassinate Fidel Castro. We know there were many men from Operation 40 present in Dealey Plaza that day. Crichton’s 488th numbered a total of 100 men, 50 of them worked for the Dallas Police Department. On the other hand have we seen the shadow of Collins Radio when a Dallas reporter with the local FBI put a trace on the license plate number of the red Ford Falcon and found out its owner was a Collins Radio employee who was a friend of JD Tippit. It was of course Collins Radio who directed the radio communication from the White House to Air Force One going back to Washington and Bethesda Naval Hospital with the body of JFK.
Who Knows How the Murder was Organized

Most researchers are convinced Tippit was on a mission that day. It started minutes after Kennedy was killed; at 12.40pm Tippit acted with a sudden frenzy and drove fast to the local Gloco gas station in Oak Cliff. There he was intensely observing traffic coming from downtown Dallas via Houston Street. Ten minutes later he drove south on Lancaster Avenue. Soon he stopped off at a record store to borrow a phone. The employees at the store thought he didn’t get thru, that nobody answered Tippits call. After 1:00pm Tippit pulled over a James Andrews, only to take a quick look inside of Andrews car and then get back into the patrol car and continue west on West 10th Street. At 1:03pm the Dallas police radio operator tried to get in touch with Tippit, who didn’t answer.
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:19 pm

Report says surveillance is hampering journaliists



http://www.scnow.com/entertainment/arti ... l?mode=jqm

July 29 2014

NEW YORK — Revelations over the past few years about how U.S. security officials have the ability to track people through phone, email and other electronic records are making it harder for journalists to report on what the government is doing, two human rights groups say.

Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union said in a report issued Monday that access to data as detailed in leaks by former National Security Agency systems analyst Edward Snowden, coupled with the Obama administration's prosecution of people for leaking classified information, is having a chilling effect on reporters.

The groups are calling on the administration to be more upfront about the data it is collecting and how the information is used, and to increase protections for journalists and whistleblowers.

The same government access to information is eroding the ability of lawyers to protect the confidentiality of its contacts with criminal defendants, the report concludes.

Ninety-two people, including 46 journalists, 42 lawyers and some present or retired national security officials, were interviewed for the report.

Justice Department spokesman Marc Raimondi said officials are constantly trying to balance national security needs with respect for freedom of the press.

"Unfortunately, this report relies more on opinions and less on facts or statistics to bolster its claims," Raimondi said.

Alex Sinha, the report's author, said that while journalists are not being prosecuted for doing their jobs, news about the scope and type of information available to the government has forced many journalists to change how they work. Several say that fewer sources are willing to talk to them because they fear the consequences, he said.

Reporters are turning to encryption technology that scrambles electronic communication with sources, although they worry the mere fact the government knows they are using encryption will raise suspicions. To counter monitoring of cellphones, some say they use throwaway phones. One reporter said he calls many sources at the time of a big story, just to protect the identity of the ones he used. Face-to-face contact is increasingly preferred.

One reporter, ABC's Brian Ross, said he's been tipped to say, "I'm a U.S. citizen, are you?" at the beginning of cellphone conversations because of a legal prohibition against monitoring calls by citizens.

It all contributes to drying up the flow of information, journalists said. "People have to work harder, it takes longer, and you ... won't have as many stories," Kathleen Carroll, senior vice president and executive editor of The Associated Press, said in the report.

An AP story in 2012 on a U.S. operation in Yemen led to a federal investigation in which the government seized AP phone records in its search for the source of information.

The administration's efforts to go after leakers and require government workers to report colleagues they suspect of releasing sensitive material make it less likely that potential sources will want to speak to reporters, Sinha said.

Security officials interviewed for the report stressed the need for the government to keep up with new technology to protect citizens in a dangerous world, and expressed some skepticism about how much journalists are being hurt.

"The First Amendment seems quite alive and well in America today," a senior FBI official told the organizations.

Well-publicized leaks by Snowden and Chelsea Manning undoubtedly leave people in national security with the impression that sensitive information is getting out to reporters, but that's deceptive, Sinha said
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Tue Jul 29, 2014 10:18 am

100 days left now, yeah?

I wonder if you'll hit your Kickstarter goal.

If you don't, does this thread get closed or just keep acculumulating along with the rest of your data dumps?
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Wed Jul 30, 2014 12:05 pm

Just remind you that as voters and taxpayers you fund the electronic cesspool called the FBI which you inherited from your parents and
have no say whether you want to co-enable and continue funding
this corporate death squad.


You do know what to do?

see link for full story

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/cri ... story.html

Federal review stalled after finding forensic errors by FBI lab unit spanned two decades

Cleveland Wright has asked a D.C. Court judge to clear his name after new DNA test results in 2012 exonerated his co-defendant in two similar 1978 murders. (Alexandra Garcia/The Washington Post)
By Spencer S. Hsu July 29 at 7:49 PM


Nearly every criminal case reviewed by the FBI and the Justice Department as part of a massive investigation started in 2012 of problems at the FBI lab has included flawed forensic testimony from the agency, government officials said.

The findings troubled the bureau, and it stopped the review of convictions last August. Case reviews resumed this month at the order of the Justice Department, the officials said.

U.S. officials began the inquiry after The Washington Post reported two years ago that flawed forensic evidence involving microscopic hair matches might have led to the convictions of hundreds of potentially innocent people. Most of those defendants never were told of the problems in their cases.

The inquiry includes 2,600 convictions and 45 death-row cases from the 1980s and 1990s in which the FBI’s hair and fiber unit reported a match to a crime-scene sample before DNA testing of hair became common. The FBI had reviewed about 160 cases before it stopped, officials said.

The investigation resumed after the Justice Department’s inspector general excoriated the department and the FBI for unacceptable delays and inadequate investigation in a separate inquiry from the mid-1990s. The inspector general found in that probe that three defendants were executed and a fourth died on death row in the five years it took officials to reexamine 60 death-row convictions that were potentially tainted by agent misconduct, mostly involving the same FBI hair and fiber analysis unit now under scrutiny.

“I don’t know whether history is repeating itself, but clearly the [latest] report doesn’t give anyone a sense of confidence that the work of the examiners whose conduct was first publicly questioned in 1997 was reviewed as diligently and promptly as it needed to be,” said Michael R. Bromwich, who was inspector general from 1994 to 1999 and is now a partner at the Goodwin Procter law firm.

Bromwich would not discuss any aspect of the current review because he is a pro bono adviser to the Innocence Project, which along with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers is assisting the government effort under an agreement not to talk about the review. Still, he added, “Now we are left 18 years [later] with a very unhappy, unsatisfying and disquieting situation, which is far harder to remedy than if the problems had been addressed promptly.”

Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole this month ordered that reviews resume under the original terms, officials said.

According to the FBI, the delay resulted, in part, “from a vigorous debate that occurred within the FBI and DOJ about the appropriate scientific standards we should apply when reviewing FBI lab examiner testimony — many years after the fact.”

“Working closely with DOJ, we have resolved those issues and are moving forward with the transcript review for the remaining cases,” the FBI said.

Emily Pierce, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said: “The Department of Justice never signed off on the FBI’s decision to change the way they reviewed the hair analysis. We are pleased that the review has resumed and that notification letters will be going out in the next few weeks.”

During the review’s 11-month hiatus, Florida’s Supreme Court denied an appeal by a death-row inmate who challenged his 1988 conviction based on an FBI hair match. James Aren Duckett’s results were caught up in the delay, and his legal options are now more limited.
1 of 0

Revelations that the government’s largest post-conviction review of forensic evidence has found widespread problems counter earlier FBI claims that a single rogue examiner was at fault. Instead, they feed a growing debate over how the U.S. justice system addresses systematic weaknesses in past forensic testimony and methods.

“I see this as a tip-of-the-iceberg problem,” said Erin Murphy, a New York University law professor and expert on modern scientific evidence.

“It’s not as though this is one bad apple or even that this is one bad-apple discipline,” she said. “There is a long list of disciplines that have exhibited problems, where if you opened up cases you’d see the same kinds of overstated claims and unfounded statements.”

Worries about the l ...
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby MacCruiskeen » Wed Jul 30, 2014 12:09 pm

STOP SPAMMING THIS BOARD

ffs
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." - Max Liebermann,, Berlin, 1933

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." - Richard Feynman, NYC, 1966

TESTDEMIC ➝ "CASE"DEMIC
User avatar
MacCruiskeen
 
Posts: 10558
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:47 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Sat Aug 02, 2014 12:41 pm

Dear friends,
For the month of August, you can watch Doug Horne's historic interview with Dino Brugioni about the Zapruder Film for free online in the 85-minute feature The Zapruder Film Mystery: vimeo.com/e2films/zapruder
While serving as chief analyst of military records at the Assassination Records Review Board in 1997, Horne discovered that the Zapruder Film had been examined by the CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center on the Sunday evening after the assassination. In this interview, legendary NPIC [soundcloud]photo[/soundcloud] interpreter Dino Brugioni speaks for the first time about his examination of the film at NPIC on Saturday evening. Brugioni was never told about a second examination by a completely different team on Sunday evening and believes the Zapruder Film in the archives today is not the film he saw on the day after the assassination.
Drawing on Volume 4 of his book "Inside the ARRB", Doug Horne sets the scene for the interview with Brugioni and presents his conclusions. Whatever you feel about Zapruder Film alteration, Brugioni's testimony about two NPIC events that weekend - presented here in HD video for the first time, thanks to Doug Horne and Peter Janney - is fascinating.
The film was made as an extra feature to Killing Oswald and is also now available on the DVD: www.killingoswald.com
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby Grizzly » Sun Aug 03, 2014 1:19 pm

If you don't, does this thread get closed or just keep acculumulating along with the rest of your data dumps?

Wow, nice sarcasm there. While we're expressing personal opinion, I happen to appreciate the fruhmenschen's posts. While perhaps, it should have been in the data dump, section. Isn't it the mod's job to suggest that and or help place it there? What is it with mods or ex mods berating and attacking posters here? Like Willow denigrating SLAD? Now W Rex, belittling fruhmenschen. And you guys wonder why your closed loop clique fails to thrive nostalgically like the olden days??
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Sun Aug 03, 2014 3:45 pm

MediaOne Services - Richard Gage: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2zY9HfwzGPg
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:10 pm

http://www.latinpost.com/articles/18680 ... leaker.htm


The Intercept & Spying 2014: Website Finds New Leaker?



By Anjalee Khemlani (staff@latinpost.com)
First Posted: Aug 06, 2014 11:40 AM EDT
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:07 pm

Merryl Mass MD is a friend who lives in Ellsworth Maine
She had her Freeport Maine home burnt down by FBI agents
after her groundbreaking work on the Anthrax Vaccine.

Her research article exposed Rhodesia as the 1st country
to use biological weapons against its own people in the 1980's

She is doing great work on the Ebola crisis

must see
http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/

Friday, August 8, 2014
International Travel: 679 people per day enter the US from Nigeria/ NY Times
According to the NYT, there are "243,000 international travelers to United States airports each day... including an average of 679 from Nigeria and 145 from the other three countries, (Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone) according to the C.D.C."
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Tue Aug 12, 2014 12:56 pm

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent ... ly-ov.aspx


Former head of information authority in the Egyptian General Intelligence, Major General Hossam Khairallah believes that what Habib El-Adly claimed in court on Saturday concerning Egypt's warning to the United States about 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks ‘lacked objectivity’.

Former interior minister Habib El-Adly claimed that he warned the Americans in 2001 about a terrorist attack twice but that they both ignored his warnings and plotted against his security apparatus in January 2011.

“There was cooperation in counterterrorism efforts between Egypt and the United States, there were warnings from Cairo that something may happen but we did not know what it was or how it would be or who would do it , nobody could have known then,” the former major general told Ahram Online.

In his speech in front of the court, El-Adly said that "In May 2001, we got a tip at the interior ministry in Egypt from a very well-connected informant inside Al-Qaeda that the terrorist group was planning for a huge attack inside the United States," Habib El-Adly said in statement during his retrial for killing protesters in the early days of the 25 January revolution on Saturday.

"I told president Mubarak after confirming this tip and he told us to inform the Americans so we told the CIA and FBI that there would be a terrorist attack in the United States soon," he added, saying that the Americans thanked him for the tip.

"Then in August 2001 we got a tip that Al-Qaeda’s attack for the United States was in process, again we informed the Americans and they thanked us for the information," he said.

According to Mubarak's longtime interior minister, when Mubarak was visiting the United States in 2002 he asked President Bush why the US ignored the tips allegedly given to American intelligence regarding Al-Qaeda’s threat. El-Adly claimed that Bush denied knowing that he was informed of such tips.

“He then confronted the CIA and FBI and they responded saying that the information was not communicated in a memo. What memo were they talking about?” he said in the court.

Khairallah on the other hand, questions whether Egypt really knew any details about 9/11 and whether the US would ignore such information even if it did. If Egypt truly had details on the attacks, he assumed it would have informed Germany where Egyptian Mohamed Atta was staying.

Khairallah also wondered why the former minister did not mention this earlier in the previous trial in front of the judge.

El-Adly accused the United States of orchestrating the 2011 Revolution to bring down the Egyptian state as well as his security apparatus.

"I warned you about a huge terrorist attack twice and you ignored it, yet you plot against my security apparatus and against my country," El-Adly said.

He also said that the Arab spring was a plot by the West to destroy Islam.

“El-Adly is using the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood were ousted and that people are still angry with them to claim whatever he wants without anyone paying attention.” Hossam Khairallah told Ahram Online.

Former interior minister, Habib El-Adly was sentenced to life in prison in May 2012 for killing protesters during the early days of 25 January revolution.

In March 2013 the conviction was overturned by the court of cassation and a new retrial was requested.
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 117 days left to shut down the FBI

Postby fruhmenschen » Fri Aug 15, 2014 11:00 am

see link for full story

Putting a 9/11 Mystery on the Ballot



By Russ Baker on Aug 14, 2014


http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/08/14/puttin ... he-ballot/


I was standing blocks from Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex and staring directly at it when it collapsed.

Working for the Los Angeles Times, I arrived that morning just in time to see an enormous cloud of dust and people running away. I had not yet known of the rapid and deadly descent of the South and North towers. That afternoon, I called in a series of reports to a staffer in the New York bureau.

I was literally on the phone with the office at 5:21 p.m., describing the fires burning in the structure as the building began—and completed

— its remarkably fast, smooth descent to the ground. I described the building neatly pancaking, and the Pulitzer Prize winner on the other end taking my dictation declared: “That sounds like a controlled demolition.”
Controlled Demolition

Controlled Demolition

In fact, I have seen controlled demolitions before and since—and indeed, that was exactly what the destruction of Building 7 looked like, except perhaps for a marginally slower collapse of the top portion

As with most people, I was baffled by how Building 7—a smaller, 47-story tower that had not been hit by a plane and was separated from the Twin Towers by low-rise buildings–would come down at all. It just made no sense.

How exactly the building did come down has never been properly explained. An investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology concluded that the building was hit by debris from the collapsing North Tower that started fires. However, it ruled out diesel fuel, structural damage from the debris and structural elements (trusses, girders, and cantilever overhangs) as causes of the collapse. It said the lack of water to the sprinkler system was an important factor in allowing fires to rage all afternoon. But the panel declined to state how the fires could bring down the building—and in such a rapid manner.

Reasonable Doubts

For many years, those who have been troubled by things that did not make sense regarding the 9/11 attacks have been marginalized as kooks. To be sure, some entertain enormously elaborate, complex scenarios that assume unspeakable evil carried out by a bewildering number of individuals, nations, and institutions.

However, fair-minded people who have carefully studied the evidence are troubled by the “official story,” just as they are troubled by the official explanations of the assassinations of American leaders over half a century, and other traumas ranging from the Oklahoma City bombing to the Boston Marathon bombing.

There is a reason so many people don’t trust the security apparatus and its allies in government, academia and the media, or the reassuring stories they tell us time after time that “there’s nothing to see here, folks.”Or to allow even the most reasonable question into the public discourse.

That kind of question hasn’t been possible with the mystery of Building 7. Until now.

123A small group, NYC Coalition for Accountability Now (NYC CAN), run and largely staffed by a young man named Ted Walter, has come up with a solution: Get the public to legislate a formal inquiry into building collapses.

Noting that no high-rise building has ever collapsed as a result of fire, and seizing on the official position that the destruction of Building 7 cannot be definitively explained, Walter’s group has proposed that the city explore all building collapses since and including 9/11. The proposed inquiry pointedly excludes Buildings 1 and 2, the collapses of which have been much investigated and debated. It does not explicitly mention Building 7—but then it does not have to. Building 7 is unique in that it was not hit by a plane. Any serious investigation of building collapses would start with Building 7.

The mechanism for this is to seek to have New Yorkers vote on a ballot measure, the High-Rise Safety Initiative. Its supporters face a tough challenge ahead, and have already hit some formidable road blocks. Still they persevere.

Not Your Run-of-the-Mill “Kooks”

Ted Walter does not fit the caricature of the unshaven, grumpy, shouting activist. He’s a calm, thoughtful, precise fellow. He grew up in Wisconsin and Mozambique, where his father was an official of a private aid group, got a BA at New York University and a Masters in Public Policy at UC Berkeley, and then worked for San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors.

He’d arrived in New York from Mozambique at age 19 to attend college two weeks before the attacks. “9/11 was essentially my introduction to New York,” he says.

The first thing that struck him was to wonder why, so long after the first planes hit the World Trade Center, another plane was unimpeded in hitting the Pentagon. Where were the U.S.’s vaunted defenses?

He also found it odd that a building collapse would involve entire structures virtually vaporizing in the air.

It was not until the spring of 2006 that Walter began determinedly researching the events. “During the course of a couple months of reading everything I could find, I came to the conclusion that the official account of 9/11 was false,” he says.

In 2008, others launched something called the NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative. Walter volunteered as a petitioner, then managed paid canvassers. The next year, he founded a group, NYC CAN, along with some family members of 9/11 victims, and assumed control of the ballot initiative. Although they submitted 80,000 signatures, more than the required number, the city successfully challenged the initiative in court and kept it off the ballot.

This was hardly surprising. In certain parts of the country, especially in many Western states and municipalities, major policy is often legislated directly at the polls. Not so in New York City, which has long made it virtually impossible to qualify such a measure for the ballot. In fact, New York City voters have only seen two of them in half a century.

123Nonetheless, in the spring of 2013, Walter and his group talked with a top New York City election attorney, decided there might be a chance at prevailing despite the long odds, and began moving forward with another attempt. It became the High-Rise Safety Initiative.

Between May 1 and July 31, they gathered more than 100,000 signatures, far more than the 30,000 required to gain a place on the ballot. They submitted the first 67,000 of those on July 3, and plan to submit the remaining 33,000 on Sept. 4, which is more than double what’s required to override the City Council.

As anticipated, the City challenged the petition—claiming that not enough signatures are valid, and that the petition language is not legally valid. Walter and company filed suit against the City to have that determination annulled, and were due to go into court on Aug. 14.

The group believes that it has overcome the usual issue of invalid signatures by filing so many—and because even in its 2009 effort, it was able to prove that enough signatures did pass muster. Now, it must pass the arcane statutory hurdles the city created exactly to prevent such measures. Walter thinks they have a chance.

The case should be decided by mid-September. If the initiative is successful, it will be on the November ballot.

Officials Mortified

The mayor, a liberal named Bill DeBlasio, has not had kind things to say about the effort—presumably not unlike what his predecessors, Michael Bloomberg and Rudy Giuliani, might have had to say. As reported by Crain’s New York Business:

“From what I’ve heard it’s absolutely ridiculous,” a peeved Mr. de Blasio said in response to a reporter’s question. “And it’s inappropriate, after all the suffering that went on 9/11 and since. It seems to be this is a very insensitive and inappropriate action.”

Crain’s itself couldn’t help referring to the group as “conspiracy theorists,” an unfortunate term that instantly assumes no credibility to those asking what may in fact be legitimate—if uncomfortable—questions.

The speaker of the New York City Council, Melissa Mark-Viverito, a close ally of the mayor, lashed out: “Instead of wasting New Yorkers’ time and hard-earned taxpayer dollars humoring conspiracy theorists with wild fantasies, the City Council will continue to focus on passing sound legislation.”

A Skilled Communicator

Walter is very much a creature of the Internet Age. On the heels of Mark-Viverito’s statement, he was quick to put out an “Action Alert” email to his supporters:

Now we and the High-Rise Safety Initiative are calling on you to tell Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito that there are no wild fantasies here. The only wild fantasy is the one she chooses to believe—namely, that a 47-story skyscraper collapsed symmetrically, at free-fall acceleration, from small isolated fires.

Please take five minutes today to email the Speaker’s office with this message: The only “wild fantasy” is a skyscraper collapsing from fire. Explain to the Speaker and her staff why a 47-story steel-frame skyscraper cannot collapse from fire, and ask them to watch the 15-minute video Solving the Mystery of WTC 7, which features more than a dozen experts, who harbor not wild fantasies, but irrefutable scientific evidence.

If Walter and his group succeed in forcing a serious inquiry into the building collapse, they will have achieved what almost no one else in the 9/11 movement has: transforming a chaotic debate infused with powerful emotions and anger into a sober, methodical exploration of one portion of this sprawling, dark saga
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests