Rayzur

I was waiting for the Brazilian guys to upload some footage. Finally found it. It's in Spanish, so here's the back story. There are estimated to be at least 77 un-contacted tibes in Brazil and another 40 along its borders. Of course the tribes don't recognize or understand borders. Many un-contacted tribes from Peru are making first contact with the Brazilian side as the Peruvian government is doing little if anything to protect their indigenous people from illegal logging, drug trafficking, and oil exploitation of their land and homes This tribe, likely the Rio Xinane of Peru came out of isolation and made contact with the outside world for the first time this summer.... Yes,... first initiated contact 26 June 2014. This piece was filmed 4 days after they made first contact with members of the Ashaninka village in Brazil . Members of the Ashaninka village 4 days later brought two translators speaking a dialect similar to that of the Rio Xinane people to aid in communicating with them. The Rio Xinane filmed here, decided to make contact with the outside in seeking weapons, and allies in hopes of fighting back against the illegal logging and destruction of their village (on Peru side) by those who attacked and killed many of them. Contact with the outsiders who attacked them brought further death to many of their tribe who subsequently died from the flu and diphtheria....diseases which have wiped out entire tribes in the past..... In the event a hungry world demands more oil and turns to this area (which it already has Standard oil redefined their borders years ago) but if it expands beyond ability to control ......and the play book is once again pulled out to characterize the inhabitants as warring tribal savages murdering one another and all who trespass on their homeland.... You will at least have the advantage of knowing that is not even remotely the truth.

There are people in the world about whom the world knows nothing. And there continues to be new “discoveries” of groups, with some of them very recent. I for one am glad about the emergent commitment of contact /explorations to keep the coordinates of these groups confidential. This particular footage though shot in like 1967 or 68, was just recently uploaded in the past few years. As I recall it's some of JPD's raw footage, though I don't know if it any of it was ever edited into a commercial release. This footage captures literally, the first time these people have seen a white man and/or have come in contact with anything of modern “civilization”

I respect your right to freely express your thoughts and opinions absent any need to characterize you one way or the other for having done so. And at the same time, some of that suggested offends the national pride in that which makes this country so great. I don't know much about the origins or foundation upon which your country was created, however, in America, there is a very strong foundation of Declared rights which are Constitutionally protected. Many of us here on DV have served in uniform on the fields of combat in defending the Constitutional protection of those Declared rights. It is unacceptable to breach this fundamental foundation in service to fear be it real, imagined or simply one possibility of many. One's right to safety will never be guaranteed by violating another's fundamental human rights..... rights in America that are declared ...and constitutionally protected at the core of that defining us. A fundamental core that will not allow, nor ever tolerate the seeds of fascism to sprout as if they were normal. That is unacceptable. This is not Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia, or even Chavez's Venezuela. Having dedicated my life in service to this country, I cannot now but defend, in an uncompromising fashion, the right to privacy of individuals and their declared right to the “self-evident truth that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. The tactics suggested in this thread are nothing short of Fascist tyranny striking at the heart of those fundamental rights. In the absence of the right to privacy, there can be no true freedom of expression and opinion, and therefore no effective democracy as was intended in the formation of this country. In the absence of the respect for individual privacy, there is no basis for cohesive relationship between people seeking the common good of all. The instilled fears about individual safety have for too long driven the national backbone of this nation, leaving its people drenched in the helpless belief that oppressive regulation is the only thing that will save them. History has time and again shown us the destructive results ultimately obliterating all that is sacred within the fundamental core of our inalienable rights when choosing that path. That is unacceptable. I am not naive, there are bad people with bad intentions who would do harm to others. And the means for combating all that is bad will not ever succeed by sacrificing all that is good about that which makes this America....

Instead of passing more draconian legislation playing on the fears of the unknown/what if .... and taking even more liberty interests/rights away from us all, while funding yet one more definition of "terrorist"....... deal with what you know, and the individual who is known. ... Legislation to target the individual making the choice to participate in armed aggression to the US and/or it's allied national interest. Target the choice to participate as a choice to surrender their US citizenship.... if you have to breach liberty interests... do it with those who chose to serve under the flag/interest of of another country.... and leave me and my rights the hellll alone in this country... If someone goes to another country to fight as a part of ISIL/ISIS, be straight up that they may want to apply for citizenship as well because their US is revoked. If we can identify them that clearly enough that legislators are freaking out, then stop using my tax dollars to build some kind of freak out structure so these guys can continue to roam...Instead of filling the news with some new version of freaking out, use that air time to publish the clear message, if you go, you are gone, and don't get to come back as a US citizen. Whatever we do, I'm really over the "what if" histrionics, the boat load of money we throw at histrionics, the free pass to empty the US treasury of my tax money cause you use the words fighting terrorism and the tragic perpetuation of fear to the point that every person of possible mid-east descent is seen as the next possible killer. Mr. Bishop, get a grip, calm down, focus and do something meaningful to target the individual instead of holding this entire day'um country hostage to the fear of possibility......

I was kind of wondering why WF would send a banker who believes that a specific currency from a specific country should have its "own" account, when each currency would be converted / exchanged for USD before its placed in said US account.... Wonder how the banker missed the memo that US banks (with one exception), do not hold foreign currency as foreign currency in US banks..... And apart from that, is there some kind of infection we should worry about if our different currencies mingle??? Whatever the case, you can be darn sure I'm going into WF on Monday and light em up for not opening up my accounts without me having to be there, or open them up BEFORE I signed any docs and how come Georgia doesn't have to adhere to Patriot Act rules like we do??!!.... And while I'm there someone better be able to explain why the helllll I have to put money in ANY of them when they do all those bookkeeping accounting and management services in Georgia on multiple accounts with zero balance. Granted I don't have to pay any type of banking service fees, but it would nonetheless frost the hellll out of me to find out Georgia also tosses in free checks for those zero balance accounts..... I love these banking stories... its such a fascinating window into the assumptions people have about how it works, juxtaposed with their imaginative little stories playing out consistent with those assumptions.... .

Oh dear, that's why I do dislike dragging president's names into things, it risks taking attention off the main target of focus with distractions about who to blame..... and Red I am not saying you specifically.... we all can come off guard and get caught up in it..... Hope you are cool with me correcting the record just so we all have an accurate context with which to view this... First my personal analysis/opinion.... ISIL/ISIS is a morphed hybrid cumulation of several major screw-ups by way of several international attempts to overcome infra-structures that do not serve the architecture desired by those national interests.... the US among them. (e.g., the last time we covertly gave money to fund the FSA, al-Nusera overcame that structure & really screwed things up... after which we then started talking about the air strikes a summer ago.... in a really simplified nutshell)... Of course the comman man Sunni with their own agendas of annoyance, joined en masse...and it continued spinning and morphing into ... whatever it is today. What I can't tell you with any certainty is how much if any controlled fanning of the flames is in place.. or who the exact players are in the fanning department... Saudis are right there in the game... with a clear endgame mission in sight... and I'm not definitively clear if ISIL/ISIS is not still a morphed means to an end... and that's probably a whole other discussion... As far as our departure, Obama was following the signed contract with Iraq in leaving when we did. He did not sign that initial contract, he did try to modify it, with the mandatory proviso that any troops remaining after 31 Dec 2011 be under US jurisdiction versus Iraqi judiciary (i.e., extend the SOFA or establish a new agreement) The latter was denied, there was no eye to eye in re-negotiating the contract and we left (nutshell) The reason we left when we did was because Bush signed the SOFA in 2008 (Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq). Most certainly when Bush signed it in 2008, he had no crystal ball,.... that was the then best guess advice he was given. And while we once again underestimated the cultural and tribal aspects of the culture (among other things), Bush really had no way of knowing that at the time, and it seemed relative to the advice, a plausible workable date. To blame Bush for agreeing to that date of absolute withdrawal as being foolish, or wrong, or a bad idea, would probably be as inappropriate as blaming Obama for honoring that contract in withdrawing when we did. In preserving the integrity of the US, our only choice was to attempt to extend, re-negotiate, or honor the existing contract. We the US were left with the latter as the only choice. Obama just happened to be the president representing the US in honoring our contractual relationship with Iraq.

I love it when someone says what I'm trying to say so poetically.... so succinctly

Hopefully if you picked up frustration on my part, you got it had nothing to do with the President and is totally with the game... Generals a few days ago made the decision that ground troops are necessary. They are correct. As I said in a different post, if the objective is to "win" (and I'm not sure how "win" is defined), but to terminate the ISIL movement and re-install our shot callers in their place while implementing the US design for that region.... then we need to put troops over there to do that. It is not a war of technology. It is a war of insurrection and therein ground forces. Furthermore, forces in enough numbers to overwhelm. The decision has been made we need to send troops. Of course it will be said they are troops of support... But frankly, if you want my advice, I can give it to you remotely while watching the actual zone of conflict play out hundreds of miles away.... If you want training, I can provide that in our Jordan training camp..Special Ops has been there for .. I guess now 3 to 4 months gathering intelligence.... You want my command advice, I can take that information and give you the strategic matrix accordingly, ... in video conference... hundreds of miles away.... Whatever the case is, I'm wondering if people actually believe that because its called support, that no US folk will be in the zone, or that we won't lose lives, or that those going are removed from risk. Ir might not be our fight in terms of having the larger number of troops with overall command of the the organized troops engaged.... but to be sure, there will be Americans shooting and being shot in combat... and those numbers will grow to whatever it takes to "win" Speaking of which, has anyone defined what win would look like? Seriously. I know its to overcome ISIL. Does that mean ISIL in Iraq, or in every country we determine they exist? Does that mean we kill all of them or most of them or how many of them to we have to kill.... The estimates can't even agree on how many exist, how will we know if we have killed enough and what number is enough... and how will we know we have reached that number? If their leader "surrendered" tomorrow, would that be the end of it? Have we won because their leader put down arms... or do we have to kill a certain number of his command structure as well? Will we "follow" ISIL into other countries? What if that country does not want us to breach their borders? Will we stop... or have we assumed the right to proceed until.... when? After Assad's regime is toppled? Has anyone defined the terms of engagement? Or have Kerry and McCain et. al. waved enough banners, tossed enough buzz words and spewed enough emotional platitudes that the ship of fools will steer the US boat toward their favor, throwing money and young lives at this absent consciousness about where the helllll they are taking us..... I was a whole lot more at ease about this before I came across all the documents detailing the Cheney/ Biden plan for the ME hatched years ago. It's a little discomforting that it reads like the play book for exactly what is unfolding in front of us...Not to mention a little annoyed (frustrated) that the elected are treating this like some big surprise we now have to deal with... . .

Oh for heaven's sakes.... don't try to confuse me with facts.... Its much easier to draw a line in the sand and then pretend that everyone falls clearly on one side or the other of every single issue on the planet, .... thereby eliminating the possibility of a collective group of people forming with enough mass and strength to do something about our liberties circling the drain..... Living in Oz these days its much easier to keep your eyes on the man behind the curtain, as the perpetrator of all illusions....and wear yourself out all twisted up about that, so you can have an excuse about why you don't have energy left to do anything about it. Though if you get really good at the game, you can pretend that getting all twisted up about it ... IS doing something.... ..

I'm not so sure I read his statements as necessarily consistent with the title of this thread...... Not that the title matters, but I don't think the message is quite exactly that.... . (Oy I can't believe the USAF guy standing on the left is still wearing tiger stripe at a USSOCOM, SOCCENT HQ base. Must be a CENTCOM guy, though I thought they resolved that last year with everyone going to OCP... oh well, I digress) So looking at the quoted sentence.... I see the red message.... = yeah boots are on route, but they wont be fighting, they will be supporting... “I want to be clear,” the president said at an Air Force base in Tampa, near CENTCOM. “The American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission. They will support Iraqi forces on the ground as they fight for their own country against these terrorists Can someone define "support" . And this one was a bit disappointing.... Obama’s plan to arm Syrian rebels heads to Senate: House lawmakers voted 273 to 156 Wednesday to support the president’s strategy for confronting the Islamic State Talk about the attention span of a fruitfly..... Last time we did that, we had to invent this elaborate chemical weapons were deployed by Assad story in hopes of getting the green light to go in and take out the last faction of that same group that spun out of control... Though at least this time, everyone seems to be upfront about sending money to them....

What a great way to throw open the doors of Syria...One way or the other... Mark those words.... 16 Sep 2013 Bin Laden said he intentionally goaded America in to a war in the middle east to "bleed America to the point of bankruptcy." Well, as it turns out, ISIL and Saudi Arabia are trying to goad America into another war in the middle east and they've enlisted John McCain and Lindsey Graham to sell us that war. An August 2013 the Wall Street Journal reports that Saudi Arabia's Foreign Policy includes overthrowing Syrian government, which is Shiite, to put in place their own Sunni government so they, Saudis, can ultimately control Damascus. That's a hefty goal the Saudis have -- control Damascus. And they want 'who' to fight for 'their' goal to control Damascus? You guessed it, none other than the U.S. Military.The Saudi plan is to steadily strengthen carefully selected groups of rebel fighters not in the radical Islamist camp, with the goal of someday seeing them in control in Damascus. The WSJ go on to write: "found early support from Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina." Surprise, surprise.The Saudi Ambassador, Adel al-Jubeir, has long been courting members of Congress who could pressure the [Obama] Administration to get more involved in Syria. He found early support from Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. The Wall Street Journal reported that Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan had been appointed by Saudi King Abdullah to lead Saudi Arabia's efforts to control Damascus by toppling Syrian President Bashar Assad. Saudi Prince Bandar was working hard to build support to topple Assad.Officials inside the Central Intelligence Agency [CIA] knew that Saudi Arabia was serious about toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad when the Saudi king named Prince Bandar bin Sultan al-Saud to lead the effort. In January, 2014, Senator John McCain praised Prince Bandar on CNNPrince Bandar has largely stayed out of Washington but held meetings with U.S. officials in the region. One was in September 2012. Sens. McCain and Graham, who were in Istanbul, met him in an opulent hotel suite on the banks of the Bosporus. JOHN McCAIN: “Thank God for the Saudis and Prince Bandar,” At the Munich Security Conference in February 2014 Senator John McCain praised Prince Bandar again, So, Saudi Arabia's Prince Bandar enlisted Senator John McCain, Senator Lindsey Graham, and probably a host of other Senators, to goad America back into a middle east war so that Saudi Arabia can use the U.S. Military in securing Saudi Arabia's ultimate goal, control of Damascus, Syria.JOHN McCAIN: “Thank God for the Saudis and Prince Bandar, and for our Qatari friends,” Saudi Prince Bandar Prince Bandar was Saudi Arabia's Ambassador to the United States from 1983 to 2005, was head of Saudi General Intelligence between 2012-March, 2014 and Saudi National Security Council Secretary General from 2005-Present. 1980s Saudi Prince Bandar & Ronald Reagan Prince Bandar helped President Ronald Reagan's Administration illegally sell U.S. Weapons to Iran. The Wall Street Journal reported. 2001: Saudi Prince Bandar's Desire For Genocide Against ShiitePrince Bandar was involved in the 1980s CIA program of secretly financing the Contras in Nicaragua against a leftist government. The covert program led to criminal convictions for U.S. operatives and international rebukes. In 2001, the Saudi Ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, told the British Intel Officer, Sir Richard Dearlove about his, Prince Bandar's, desire for Sunnis to commit genocide on all Shiites. Recently, in light of ISIL slaughtering Shiites, Sir Richard Dearlove recalled Prince Bandar's threats of genocide against Shiites as "chilling."~ Prince Bandar to British Intel Officer, Sir Richard DearlovePRINCE BANDAR SULTAN: "The time is not far off in the Middle East, Richard, when it will be literally 'God help the Shia'. More than a billion Sunnis have simply had enough of them." Sir Richard Dearlove says the years 2012-2014, when Prince Bandar was head of Saudi General Intelligence, were the crucial two years when al-Qaeda in Iraq (ISIL) took over the Sunni armed opposition in Iraq and Syria. Sir Richard Dearlove "a chilling comment that I remember very well indeed". 2006: Saudi Prince Bandar Threatens Terrorist Attacks Against Britain In 2008, the Guardian news paper reported that secret documents reveal Saudi Prince Bandar threatened a terrorist attack inside London unless Britain stopped their investigations into Saudi arms deals. The incident on 7/7/2005, which Prince Bandar referenced in his Terrorist threat, is when al-Qaeda killed 56 people and injured more that 700 in a series of bombs exploding in London. At around 8:50am, there were 3 simultaneous explosions in London. Then, at 9.47am, there was a fourth explosion on the upper deck of a no 30 bus in Tavistock Square. [Prince Bandar] was accused in yesterday's high court hearings of flying to London in December 2006 and uttering threats which made the prime minister, Tony Blair, force an end to the Serious Fraud Office investigation into bribery allegations involving Bandar and his family. ... The judge said he was surprised the government had not tried to persuade the Saudis to withdraw their threats. He said: "If that happened in our jurisdiction [the UK], they would have been guilty of a criminal offence".Previously secret files describe how investigators were told they faced "another 7/7" and the loss of "British lives on British streets" if they pressed on with their inquiries and the Saudis carried out their threat to cut off intelligence. Saudi Arabia Funds al-Qaeda, including ISIL Wikileaks documents show Saudi Arabia was the largest bankroller for worldwide Sunni Terrorist groups: al-Qaeda, including ISIL, Hamas and the Taliban. Even though Saudis said they would stop funding Sunni Terrorist groups, wikileaks documents show they did not stop and that Saudis continued to fund al-Qaeda, including ISIL, Hamas and the Taliban throughout the Bush Administration's "war on terror."wikileaks documents(wikileakes) U.S. Secretary of State Clinton: "Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide" Saudi Arabia Suspected of Expanding ISIL in Syriawikileaks documents(wikileaks) U.S. Secretary of State Clinton: The USG [united States Government] engages regularly with the Saudi Government on terrorist financing. The establishment in 2008 of a Treasury attache office presence in Riyadh contributes to robust interaction and information sharing on the issue. Despite this presence, however, more needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qa'ida, the Taliban, LeT, and other terrorist groups, including Hamas, which probably raise millions of dollars annually from Saudi sources..." As a reminder, in Syria there are three main groups fighting Assad's army. Free Syrian Army -- also called FSA, considered moderate Sunni. al-Qaeda in Iraq -- also called ISIL, not moderate Sunni. al-Qaeda in Syria -- also called "Front" led by Jabhat al-Nusra, not moderate Sunni. In June 2014, Steve Clemons wrote in the Atlantic reported that Saudi Prince Bandar (Sunni) created a covert operation to help ISIL to expand into Syria from Iraq. Qatar did not deny they fund both al-Qaeda groups, ISIL and Front, but they told Steve Clemons of the Atlantic that ISIL is a covert project of Saudi Arabia's Prince Bandar.[T]wo of the most successful factions fighting Assad’s forces are Islamist extremist groups: Jabhat al-Nusra [al-Qaeda in Syria] and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the latter of which is now amassing territory in Iraq and threatening to further destabilize the entire region. And that success is in part due to the support they [iSIL] have received from two Persian Gulf countries: Qatar and Saudi Arabia. "Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra, to the point that a senior Qatari official told me he can identify al-Nusra commanders by the blocks they control in various Syrian cities. But ISIS is another matter. As one senior Qatari official stated, “ISIS has been a Saudi project.” Naturally, Saudi Arabia denied ISIL was their covert project.Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra, to the point that a senior Qatari official told me he can identify al-Nusra commanders by the blocks they control in various Syrian cities. But ISIS is another matter. As one senior Qatari official stated, “ISIS has been a Saudi project.”. Steve Clemons writes that the White House neither confirms nor denies Saudi Prince Bandar's role in helping ISIL expand in Syria.ISIS, in fact, may have been a major part of Bandar’s covert-ops strategy in Syria. The Saudi government, for its part, has denied allegations, including claims made by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, that it has directly supported ISIS. I should note here, after allegations came out that ISIL was a Saudi covert operation, the Saudi King accepted Prince Bandar's resignation as head of Saudi General Intelligence. However, Prince Bandar is still Secretary General of Saudi National Security Council.Senior White House officials have refused to discuss the question of any particular Saudi officials aiding ISIS and have not commented on Bandar’s departure. But they have emphasized that Saudi Arabia is now both supporting moderate Syrian rebels and helping coordinate regional policies to deal with an ascendant ISIS threat. It is al-Qaeda groups like ISIL and Front that caused Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to encourage restraint in arming Syrian rebels. Saudi's Quest to Topple Assad and Gain Control of Damascus. In 2013, The Wall Street Journal reported that American Officials and Arab Officials said the King of Saudi Arabia would (quoting) To Summarize... do whatever was needed to bring down Mr. Assad Saudi Arabia's ultimate goal is to control Damascus, Saudi Prince Bandar appears to go to any length, including threats of terrorist attacks, to get his way, Saudis are the largest bankroller for worldwide Sunni Terrorist groups: al-Qaeda, including ISIL, Hamas and the Taliban, At one point, Saudi Prince Bandar expressed a desire for genocide against Shiites, QUOTE ISIL is committing genocide against Shiites, Suspicions that ISIL is a covert operation by the Saudis, 2 years after Prince Bandar was put in charge of toppling the Syrian (Shiite) government, al-Qaeda in Iraq (ISIL) expands into Syria with lightening speed and as the most well-funded Terrorist group, Saudi Prince Bandar enlisted Senator John McCain, Senator Lindsey Graham, early on, to goad America back into a middle east war so that Saudi Arabia can use the U.S. Military in securing Saudi Arabia's ultimate goal: control of Damascus, Syria. Saudi Prince Bandar enlisted Senator John McCain, Senator Lindsey Graham, early on, to goad America back into a middle east war so that Saudi Arabia can use the U.S. Military in securing Saudi Arabia's ultimate goal: control of Damascus, Syria. Steve Clemons of the Atlantic wrote his opinion regarding John McCain and Lindsey Graham sucking up to Saudi Prince Bandar and their willingness to let Saudi Arabia use the US Military to gain control of Damascus. John McCain’s desire to help rebel forces toss off a brutal dictator and fight for a more just and inclusive Syria is admirable. But as has been proven repeatedly in the Middle East, ousting strongmen doesn't necessarily produce more favorable successor governments. Embracing figures like Bandar, who may have tried to achieve his objectives in Syria by building a monster [iSIL], isn't worth it. Other than Saudi Arabia funding ISIL, the Taliban, al-Qaeda and Hamas, I don't know how deep the ISIL-Saudi connection goes. I do know, however, that both ISIL and Saudi Arabia are simultaneously trying to goad America into jumping headfirst into another war in the middle east. They do not want America to carefully design an operation that would have greater success. They want us to just jump in headfirst. They've enlisted John McCain and Lindsey Graham to sell us that war.John McCain’s desire to help rebel forces toss off a brutal dictator and fight for a more just and inclusive Syria is admirable. But as has been proven repeatedly in the Middle East, ousting strongmen doesn't necessarily produce more favorable successor governments. Embracing figures like Bandar, who may have tried to achieve his objectives in Syria by building a monster [iSIL], isn't worth it. Yes, I think America and Britain etc., should eradicate ISIL but we should do it at a time and manner we choose and not just jump in when Saudi Arabia and ISIL tell us to. .[End Article] . (I need to go dig out that article from May 2001 where Colin Powell reports we paid 45 million to the Taliban... for eradicating the poppy fields... the war on drugs played pretty heavily in funding the players of this impending war)

The 5 Minute Version of What Happened on 9/11 Which probably deserves it's own thread title less someone misses this cut and dry summation:

Here is the video Anonymous put forth. Its done by the same people however, (can't remember who) it was narrated by an actor. It is different with footage, news broadcasts and different approach in looking at the historical events leading up to this one,..... as well as looking at some of the specific details officially reported, which in turn were not accurate. It also shows some of the military exercises leading up to this event, which parallel this event (in contrast to reports such an event was unimaginable)... In watching this unfold, its perhaps important to note that the Internet was still very very young at that time. (hard to imagine huh) and like everyone else, politicians live so deeply in their own specific bubble. I really believe at that time... it did not even remotely occur to anyone in executive positions, that the Internet would have such tremendous power in unraveling scenarios that heretofore were impenetrable... bullet proof... Many senior execs were still living in a mental age wherein there was so much control over the information that was available to the public.... The public only knew what they were told in the news... and the news was delivered in press briefings.... At the time of this event, few if any senior agency exes were using,.... familiar with,... or factoring in the Internet as a major player in the world of information.... (in 1998 26% of homes had internet, in 2000 it raised to 41% of homes with internet). In any event, here is info on those factors leading up to and surrounding the event. For what it's worth, I personally would prefer that the blaming of any administration or individual (well maybe except for Rumsfeld), should be left out of these discussions. Its distracting and in all probability isn't unlike that done before the eyes of the internet sat in the middle of Executive decision making ... .

This is about an hour and a half long. Fortunately, its put together for those among us who are ADHD and wastes no time in hitting point after point after point, with no fluff filler... and before you know it, an hour has passed..... There have been seriously weak and in some cases almost embarrassing attempts to dispute one or two points, I was never sure if those debaters thought we were that stupid.... or they were that stupid.... then again I have the advantage of being related to one of the recognized top experts in detonation applications, who was in turn consulted on this and other such events (and in the event there are spook eyes reviewing... don't worry boyz... there was not nor will be a compromise, the only discussion ever engaged was between 2 T/S cleared folk and its over). To my knowledge there has never been a credible debate of every single specific detail noted in this video in the 10 years since it first came out, either in large parts or in whole. In any event, those with questions will either find answers in here....or more questions depending upon where you were when you started down this rabbit hole... PS I haven't watched this particular version, but for those interested there is also the original and subsequent edits of this specific video, and over the past 10 years or so since it first came out. Its been interesting watching the evolution of information analysis and response to the straw dogs presented to refute it.... .... . PPS, I just started watching this.... they really snazzed up the sound track relative to the original...Its also kind of like watching the evolution of computer technology in video production.... interesting.. though I personally think the sound track overlay is way too loud.... but no worries, it drops off soon into the video

There are a number of really good sites out there monitoring the attempted regulation of the internet on many levels, as well as use of electronics in the transmission of information in general. Below is a sampling of todays commentary from the Electronics Frontier Foundation which can be found here: https://www.eff.org/ Deeplinks September 18, 2014 - 10:39am | By Parker Higgins Tell Governor Brown: No Warrantless Drones For California Cops Surveillance Drones An important California bill that would require warrants for law enforcement use of drones is currently sitting on Governor Jerry Brown’s desk. Unfortunately, there’s no guarantee that Gov. Brown will sign AB 1327, which passed the California legislature this August. EFF has long held that a warrant requirement is an essential component of any drone legislation, so while some of the bill’s language is imperfect, we encourage the Governor to sign the bill and ask concerned Californians to do the same. One way the Brown administration gauges public support for a bill is through Twitter, so we've made it easy for you to send him the following message: Read full post September 18, 2014 - 9:37am | By Danny O'Brien 13 Principles Week of Action: Human Rights Require a Secure Internet International Surveillance and Human Rights Read full post September 18, 2014 - 9:15am | By Adi Kamdar and Maira Sutton Support Diego Gomez, Join the Global Open Access Movement Fair Use and Intellectual Property: Defending the Balance Open Access Colombian master's student Diego Gomez faces up to eight years in prison and crippling monetary fines for sharing another academic's master's thesis with his colleagues online. He recently attended his first preliminary hearing for this case, where the paper's author is pressing charges against Diego under Colombia's stringent criminal copyright provisions. Read full post September 18, 2014 - 8:00am | By Root Jonez 13 Principles Week of Action: Five Eyes’ Quest For Security Has Given Us Widespread Insecurity International Surveillance and Human Rights This is a guest post from Aaron Gluck Thaler, Privacy International.* If you have comments on this post, you can contact Privacy International on Twitter. Read full post September 17, 2014 - 2:45pm | By Parker Higgins New Company Transparency Reports Help Quantify DMCA Abuse DMCA Transparency It's a sign of the times that online companies’ transparency reports are starting to include a new section: the Hall of Shame. Automattic, the company behind WordPress, is the latest to do so, highlighting examples of copyright and trademark overreach by prominent figures like Janet Jackson, as well as more local businesses, organizations, and individuals attempting to silence criticism and other noninfringing speech. It even highlighted one example we've written about—and even dedicated a short video to—in which a baked goods company misused trademark to go after bloggers talking about derby pie, a common regional dessert in the Southern U.S. Read full post September 17, 2014 - 10:38am | By Parker Higgins EFF to Congress: Get Rid of DMCA's "Anti-Circumvention" Provisions DMCA DMCA Rulemaking Fixing Copyright? The 2013-2014 Copyright Review Process At a congressional hearing this morning, EFF Intellectual Property Director Corynne McSherry urged lawmakers to abandon the failed “anti-circumvention” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)—provisions that harm researchers, innovators, and technology users of all kinds. Read full post September 17, 2014 - 9:21am | By Katitza Rodriguez 13 Principles Week of Action: ¡Que No Te Chuzen el Correo, Tu Privacidad Es Primero! International Surveillance and Human Rights Between 15th-19th of September, in the week leading up the first year anniversary of the 13 Necessary and Proportionate Principles, EFF and the coalition behind the Principles will be conducting a Week of Action explaining some of the key guiding principles for surveillance law reform. Every day, we'll take on a different part of the principles, exploring what’s at stake and what we need to do to bring intelligence agencies and the police back under the rule of law. You can read the complete set of posts at: https://necessaryandproportionate.org/anniversary. The Principles were first launched at the 24th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva on 20 September 2013. Let's send a message to Member States at the United Nations and wherever else folks are tackling surveillance law reform: surveillance law can no longer ignore our human rights. Read full post September 17, 2014 - 9:01am | By Yana Welinder 13 Principles Week of Action: Wikipedia Is Built On Transparency International Surveillance and Human Rights This is a guest post from Yana Welinder and Stephen LaPorte, Legal Counsel at the Wikimedia Foundation.* If you have comments on this post, you can contact Yana and Stephen on Twitter. Read full post And here is a little piece they did on our buds over at NSA: The US government, with assistance from major telecommunications carriers including AT&T, has engaged in a massive illegal dragnet surveillance of domestic communications and communications records of millions of ordinary Americans since at least 2001. Since this was first reported on by the press and discovered by the public in late 2005, EFF has been at the forefront of the effort to stop it and bring government surveillance programs back within the law and the Constitution. History of NSA Spying Information since 2005 (See EFF’s full timeline of events here) News reports in December 2005 first revealed that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been intercepting Americans’ phone calls and Internet communications. Those news reports, combined with a USA Today story in May 2006 and the statements of several members of Congress, revealed that the NSA is also receiving wholesale copies of American's telephone and other communications records. All of these surveillance activities are in violation of the privacy safeguards established by Congress and the US Constitution. In early 2006, EFF obtained whistleblower evidence (.pdf) from former AT&T technician Mark Klein showing that AT&T is cooperating with the illegal surveillance. The undisputed documents show that AT&T installed a fiberoptic splitter at its facility at 611 Folsom Street in San Francisco that makes copies of all emails web browsing and other Internet traffic to and from AT&T customers and provides those copies to the NSA. This copying includes both domestic and international Internet activities of AT&T customers. As one expert observed, “this isn’t a wiretap, it’s a country-tap.” Secret government documents, published by the media in 2013, confirm the NSA obtains full copies of everything that is carried along major domestic fiber optic cable networks. In June 2013, the media, led by the Guardian and Washington Post started publishing a series of articles, along with full government documents, that have confirmed much of what was reported in 2005 and 2006 and then some. The reports showed-and the government later admitted -that the government is mass collecting phone metadata of all US customers under the guise of the Patriot Act. Moreover, the media reports confirm that the government is collecting and analyzing the content of communications of foreigners talking to persons inside the United States, as well as collecting collecting much more, without a probable cause warrant. Finally, the media reports confirm the “upstream” collection off of the fiberoptic cables that Mr. Klein first revealed in 2006. (See EFF’s How It Works page here for more) EFF Fights Back in the Courts EFF is fighting these illegal activities in the courts. Currently, EFF is representing victims of the illegal surveillance program in Jewel v. NSA, a lawsuit filed in September 2008 seeking to stop the warrantless wiretapping and hold the government and government officials behind the program accountable. In July 2013, a federal judge ruled that the government could not rely on the controversial ‘state secrets’ privilege to block our challenge to the constitutionality of the program. This case is being heard in conjunction with Shubert v. Obama, which raises similar claims. Also in July, 2013, EFF filed another lawsuit, First Unitarian v. NSA, based on the recently published FISA court order demanding Verizon turn over all customer phone records including who is talking to whom, when and for how long—to the NSA. This so-called “metadata,” especially when collected in bulk and aggregated, allows the government to track the associations of various political and religious organizations. The Director of National Intelligence has since confirmed that the collection of Verizon call records is part of a broader program. In addition to making the same arguments we made in Jewel, we argue in Unitarian First Unitarian v. NSA that this type of collection violates the First Amendment right to association. Previously, in Hepting v. AT&T, EFF filed the first case against a cooperating telecom for violating its customers' privacy. After Congress expressly intervened and passed the FISA Amendments Act to allow the Executive to require dismissal of the case, Hepting was ultimately dismissed by the US Supreme Court.

Ewwwwww nice find WHN.... Thanks! ......and thanks for W/B TankDude I was so in and out, I couldn't even figure out where I was half the time... Now that George Bush Int'l handles most west of the Mississippi hops to SA, it was just as easy to go in and out from up there, as anywhere else.. especially the commercial aspects of the journey. I was kind of surprised midst these jaunts, to find out Bozo is the busiest airport in the state... I would have thought it to be the first or second largest city... but no. I'm pretty sure I wasn't there during most of the stuff you probably would have come down for.... work has such a pesky way of messing up play.... I'll get in touch with ya once I figure out where I am and maybe we can work on firming up 2015 Which of course means you will have to check NO for another stint in the sand and hell frickin NO for jungle duty in a Haz Mat suit

Wellll its not that I would call you a liar... as much as I would probably call you delusional marked by a healthy dose of grandeur.... Which is really when you get down to it.... something totally different.... To call you a liar would imply you actually know what the truth is. That in turn would imply you have some kind of inside relationship with some inside person, who unlike any other real person, actually believes they know more than 99% of the elected body in either country.... That, or no such person exists and you believe you're the one that knows more than 99% of the elected body in either country.... which... I think would pretty much put you back in the delusional category.... I actually don't think you know enough truth to be able to lie about it.... Calling you a liar would be pretty much inappropriate therein....

Hummmm I think it was Rayzur who said yesterday to TD that the "Stars" were chatting yesterday and we're all but there in terms of ground troop deployment... Here's the deal, Generals do NOT start wars, politicians do....what Generals do is analyze the mission and respond with advice in addressing the actual variables toward accomplishing the mission relative to the parameters set.... Frankly I would said "stop asking me the f*ing question if you don't want the f*ing answer in terms of what it will take to do what YOU f*ing want done.... (yes people that is exactly how I talk... ask my XO)... The reality is, this war is a war of insurgence.... it is not a war of technology and we will not win it with technology... That is the reality.... And like it or not, given the decision that Iraq was an engagement that we wanted to "win" (whatever that means).... when Bush sent in all those troops in the late 2000's that is exactly what was needed to get ahead of this thing..... Given the parameters of the mission.... a massive number of troops was demanded in order to "win"..... And of course we know that ISIL is being funded by the Saudis.... and that's kind of so what in terms of what is needed to accomplish the mission of defeating ISIL... There are too many corporate interests for that factoid to ever come to the surface or be acknowledged as a real player and determinant in the game.... And that's not simply what I think.... it's what has been playing out for years... and not a peep of acknowledgement.... Naw... lets sanction Iran to get out "feel goods" cause they have less of what we need right now.... Not to mention that is not the deal we made oh so long ago... There is so much covert crap bred into inter-linked financial profiting, you'd get dizzy trying to follow the threads in tracking it all down... National interests have become permanently fused with international profiting... Not saying that's good or bad.... though am saying its almost impossible to distinguish between the two until we get to the foundation of all of this.... which will likely never happen... History gets revised almost as soon as its made, apart from all legal rat holes codified to protect against such disclosure.... . And it is just beyond annoying that this Dempsey guy is asking rhetorical questions together with making statements that the General clearly cannot contradict.... though you will notice he lost his bearing enough to say he knows of Arab nations that fund ISIL.... ya, that would be our Saudi buddies..... That's not unknown in the higher ranks.... The real mystery is how to keep a straight face in hiding the desire to slap the living hell out of politicians who demand you hide the real truth in answering their straw dog questions.... .

Thanks so much guys for the great welcome back! Good to see everyone. Was gone a bit longer than I anticipated, learned more than I want to know, and now back at the waterfront am still decompressing. Then on to the next phase.... I'm a little over the constant packing and unpacking thing right now... military gear got to be a little heavy toward the end, but its still the best... and so far the exceptionally fragile pieces I brought out of the jungle are all intact.... Though getting home and looking around.... I got way way too much stuff I really need to jettison.... Maybe if I put on khaki pants with a blue shirt and walk up and down in front of my house people will think they're at Wal-Mart, come in and take some of this stuff off my hands...... Is this the store with the flashing blue light?... I think I saw one at the warehouse I could sign out... then I could wire it up to the front yard wall and flash people... Great to see everyone and thanks again for the great welcome.... .

Ohhhh you meant "THAT" Tuesday...not THIS Tuesday.....

Don't forget dancing in the streets.... those poor people were dancing for at least a month straight... and as I recall danced especially hard in front of those big screens...

Wow, that one just frickin rocks all over the place.... and I love Tagalog on top of it... Thanks

Oh good grief, what did WM do, hire a new PR team.... This is Wal-Mart for heaven's sake, not Neimen Marcus. I guess you can put lipstick on a pig, but for heaven's sake, its still a pig.... A functional pig to be sure and of course it has its place and serves it well and provides all kinds of cheap 2nd and 3rd tier brand name things, which is cool cause lots of people want to buy those things...and can't afford 1 level production.,.....but can afford that stuff...So everyone's happy cause WM gets to make money and people get to buy things they want. But for the love of pete, its still frickin Wal-Mart. Its like going into the underground of the Coliseum and because the gladiators are now wearing the same outfit, you somehow think you're at the Imperial Palace?? It's frickin Wal-Mart I would love to know what genius spawned this idea and the level of boredom that led to it. .... If Wal-Mart really wanted to improve things, they would insist upon a dress code for the shoppers.....

Wow, that's pretty cool... thanks!

Please tell me this is not even remotely a surprise to anyone.... The mineral content on the moon alone would make someone a trillionaire... that's well known... (I hope)... So we do musical chairs, introduce commercial participation and profit making like we did with our health care... then the government steps back in and with corporate participation and profit making potential fully in place, act like its some big announcement that the "US" is going back into space. We never left, we just had to get profit making on board such that once again the government, ....us, pays for the infra structure for someone other than most of us.... to reap the profits from a "US" endeavor.... It was so frickin obvious that even the worst psychic could have written this script word for word.... unfortunately.... .