9500 People Missing In ONE Japanese Coastal Town

Oh the heights of irony...

Supposed experts interviewed by ABC News claim it is unethical to refuse the vaccine. “Does Americans’ right to determine what is best for themselves and their families trump the federal government’s efforts to head off what it believes could be a flu pandemic?” writes Patrick Jonsson for ABC News. “The US government says it has no intention of forcing vaccinations, but its entire flu strategy could be undermined – endangering public health, they say – if a substantial portion of the US population opts out of the $3 billion program.”

The corporate media’s own polls reveal that around two-thirds of parents have serious reservations about the vaccines’ effectiveness and safety. Millions of people simply distrust the government and do not buy into the propaganda.

“Many of the concerns by parents are based on the perception that this vaccine has been rushed into production and may not be safe,” Tom Skinner, a CDC spokesman, told Fox News. “We understand parents’ concerns – they want what is best for their children. We often tell people the best antidote for fear is information. And we ask them to really seek out sound and reliable information from sources they trust.”

According to the CDC, parents need to stop listening to a large number of doctors and virologists who say the vaccines are dangerous and instead get their information exclusively from the corporate media.

Corporate Media: Is Not Taking the Vaccine Unethical?
Kurt Nimmo, Infowars, October 12, 2009

I honestly don't even know where to begin... So the same media outlets that for years have been lying about things they did report on while covering up other things they had an obvious ethical obligation to report on are now trying to tell me what's ethical and what is not. The same people who have no problem quoting unnamed anonymous sources as if their words were the Gospel are now trying to teach me ethics.

Hey, ABC, where were you for Ellen Mariani? Because, see, your viewers may have cared to know that some of the victims of the crime of the century were less than happy about the story they were told about that crime. They may have also cared to know that the most serious post-9/11 terror attack on the US soil was planned not by a Muslim group but by American-born White anti-government extremists. Or those of your viewers who are concerned about their finances -and who isn't? - might want to know what their money is really worth. To that end would be nice of you to try and give them an idea as to what the Federal Reserve is all about. Strangely, I can not recall you ever covering the topic.

Just to clarify things a bit - this rant is not exclusively directed at the ABC News as pretty much all the major news outlets in the US and in much of the Western World act rather similarly. Well, they seem to be owned by pretty much the same group of players so why should that not be so?

Be that as it may - I would very much rather have an old whore extol the virtues of chastity to me than have mainstream media tell me what is or is not ethical for the simple reason that I expect the former to be far more entertaining than the latter. OK, mainstream media, now that you've heard this little rant - carry on. Keep on doin' Pravda and Der Sturmer proud!

Is there something you are not telling us, Mr Santorum?

"Between now and November, a lot of things are going to happen, and I believe that by this time next year, the American public’s going to have a very different view of this war, and it will be because, I think, of some unfortunate events, that like we’re seeing unfold in the UK. But I think the American public’s going to have a very different view," said the former senator from Pennsylvania.

Is Santorum expressing foreknowledge of some coming atrocity or is he merely using a tactic familiar to the leadership of his party - exploiting the fear of terror for the purposes of political rhetoric?

Santorum Suggests New Terror Attacks Will Change View Of War, Prison Planet, July 7, 2007

I don't know about you but I for one am quite curious as to where Mr Santorum draws his prophetic powers from. While expectation of terrorism as a general possibility is fairly mundane it must be noted that Mr Santorum predicts terrorist events with a rather high degree of specificity, at least as far as their timeframe.

A good cop should get suspicious here. Are our counter-terrorism officials good cops? Well, if they are they ought to call Mr Santorum in for a little chat and ask him a few questions. Espeically so if those events he is talking about start becoming reality.

Oklahoma City Bombing: live local TV coverage soon after the event

from disinfo.com

Disinformation: After the bombing, while the rescue attempts were going on, the Oklahoma TV News stations were reporting that the police and ATF officials were saying that there were more undetonated bombs found in the building. The TV newsmen kept reporting this for hours. Police logs confirmed undetonated bombs were found, and so did FEMA reports. Even Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating, on the morning of the bombing, said, "The reports I have is that one device was deactivated, and apparently, there's another device." But since then the government has claimed that all these reports and sightings of other bombs were wrong. That there was only the one McVeigh truck bomb. Does that make sense? Do you believe that?

Charles Key: Yes, the information is just very strong, and to me it's too strong to be able to try to discount it. We have affidavits in our report from paramedics and other rescuers at the scene who say they heard law enforcement people stating there were other bombs found in the building. And then you had bomb experts who had time to drive to a TV station, and sit there, and talk about the un-detonated bombs they had, bombs that were found in the building. You know, it's just too much competent information that can't be reasoned away as mistakes.

Disinformation: In that same TV interview, Governor Keating, who is an ex-FBI agent, said, ". . . obviously, whatever did the damage to the Murrah Building was a tremendous, very sophisticated explosive device." But explosives experts have made it clear that an ANFO bomb is an extremely rudimentary bomb. If someone blew up the building by placing charges on different columns inside the buildings, then that would take a sophisticated knowledge of explosives, right?

Charles Key: Yes. Authorities have said that an ANFO bomb is a very simple, crude bomb.

Disinformation: What might be the most intriguing information you put out in your Final Report is that the most preeminent experts on explosives--people like Sam Cohen and General Partin--have said an ANFO truck bomb could not have possibly done the damage to the Murrah Building. You've said that the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee tried very hard to find an expert or authority who would say that an ANFO bomb could have done the damage, but you weren't able to, right?

Charles Key: That's true. Yes. We couldn't find anybody who would put their name, put their opinion in writing, that an ANFO truck bomb could have done this. If somebody wants to claim that it could have been done, then they need to put in writing, show how it could work, and give examples of that. And nobody I know of has been able to do that. Not even the witnesses the government used in the trial could do it. They didn't do it...

http://www.disinfo.com/arch...
www.prisonplanet.tv

www.st911.org

YouTube link


See also:
The Oklahoma City Bombing

And now back to Oklahoma City and all those years and events since...

Terrorism charges collapse like house of cards

Originally published by The Real Fair & Balanced News. Reprinted here due to the fact that The Real Fair & Balanced News does not seem to be using permanent links.

I had to take the opportunity today to email that other website that calls itself "fair and balanced". You know the one. Today, they have a story with the headline "FBI: No Indication of Terror Ties for Men in Cell-Phone Arrest". On the same page, just to the right of the article is a link titled "3 Men Arraigned in Michigan on Terror Charges" that links to a story dated Saturday. Morons. You can't have it both ways, FOX.

In a separate case, Ohio prosecutors admitted they do not have enough evidence to charge two men who were in possession of of 12 cell phones with any terrorism related charges. No shit. In both cases, the alleged terrorist's story is that they purchased the phones in bulk with the intent of resale at a profit. You know, free enterprise. Capitalism. The American way. Doesn't get any more patriotic than that. William Kowalski, assistant special agent in charge of the FBI's Detroit field office, said there is nothing unlawful about buying cell phones in quantity, but that profits from that kind of activity can be suspicious. Who knows what they may have done with the profit? Pay some bills? If I had known there was money to be made by doing what they did, I would have been all over it. I don't think I'm the only one that could use a little extra money these day, what with the price of gas and the general condition of the economy that the government has run into the ground.

According to the Caro, Michigan Chief of Police, the brand of cell phones in the men's possession (TracFones) are untraceable and that any cell phone can be used as detonators for explosives. I expect now that anyone who buys a TracFone is a terrorist suspect. Initially the authorities thought that Michigan's Mackinac Bridge was the intended target because the men had pictures of the bridge on a digital camera in their possesion. If that's the case, I guess I'm guilty of planning to blow up the Washington coast and some deer that were in my yard yesterday.

If you believe that there are terrorists plotting at this moment to do real harm to America, remember that the FBI is wasting their time investigating two men from Ohio and three from Michigan who were probably just looking to make a buck instead of tracking down real enemies.

I also liked Michael Rivero's comment to this article:

Terrorism charges collapse like house of cards

Initially the authorities thought that Michigan's Mackinac Bridge was the intended target because the men had pictures of the bridge on a digital camera in their possesion.

Posted Aug 14, 2006 11:08 PM PST
Category: COVER-UP/DECEPTIONS

I guess that means I am planning to blow up...

1. The USS Arizona

2. The neighbor's dog

3. My wife

4. The dent in my Honda

5. A pineapple

6. The moon

Because those are all pictures I have had in my digital camera.

Tags:terrorism, law, deception

"Three Days In Israel"

YouTube link

This short film by Dori Kario of Stage.co.il shows three different terror attacks in Israel over a period of just a few days. I must warn you that some of the images are very graphic and, as the author narrates, it is not a horror movie, rather a depiction of the "horror reality" - a description which is unfortunately all too accurate.

The blast in Manhattan and the ever-present shadow of terror

Yesterday morning, at about 8:40 AM a gas explosion caused a building on Upper East Side to collapse. There were no fatalities in the blast though several people sustained injuries of various degrees of severity.

I first heard about this event from Marc Parent who also asked, "Will a sudden announcement be made that an Iranian suicide bomber did it?" So far that has not happened and by now I doubt it will. However, some very peculiar happenings are associated with this situation, and I definitely think they are worth a mention.

The New York Times published a detailed article about this event today (Blast Levels Manhattan Town House; Inquiry Focuses on Injured Owner, July 11, 2006). The prevalent version of the events according to the authorities appears to be that one of the destroyed building's occupants, Dr. Nicholas Bartha, was going through a difficult divorce and experiencing bouts of severe depression, and that this could have been a suicide attempt on his part. If so that attempt failed; it appears that Dr. Bartha is the most severely injured of all the victims. "He had second- and third-degree burns over 30 percent of his body, one law enforcement official said."

And this version of the events could be true. It could also be a case of a genuine gas leak and subsequent spontaneous explosion, even though that is a little harder to fathom given an e-mail Dr. Bartha sent out earlier that morning that reads a lot like a suicide note:

Law enforcement officials said the explosion rocked the neighborhood less than two hours after Dr. Bartha had addressed a disjointed, erratically punctuated e-mail message to his former wife, Cordula, with copies sent to Gov. George E. Pataki and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, and to the Fox News personalities Sean Hannity and Brit Hume, among others.

In the message, he told her: "“You always wanted me to sell the house. I always told you, 'I will leave the house only if I am dead.' You ridiculed me. You should have taken it seriously."

He also wrote, "When you read this lines your life will change forever. You deserve it. You will be transformed from gold digger to ash and rubbish digger."

He sent the message at 7:30 a.m. Twenty-one minutes later, Con Edison received a call from employees of the private club next door, the Links Club organized early in the 20th century to promote golf saying they smelled gas. Michael S. Clendenin, a spokesman for Con Edison, said it sent a mechanic, who arrived at 8:20.

Mr. Clendenin said the mechanic called in at 8:45 to report the explosion. The mechanic was not injured.

So the situation seems to be reasonably clear - a psychologically unstable man going through a difficult phase in his life decides to self-destruct taking some of his surroundings with him. However, there are still questions to be asked. According to the same New Your Times article,

In a sign of the concern the blast generated, the first official word came from the White House, which announced that it did not appear to have been the work of terrorists. And detectives began piecing together a New York story of real estate and divorce, anger and money— and a house valued at $6.4 million.

I would certainly be curious to know how the White House could determine that the situation was devoid of the tell-tale signs of a terror attack even before the local police officers working the scene had a chance to make their own conclusions. It almost makes it sound like the detectives began to "piece together" their investigation after the White House gave them directions to follow in their work.

Here Marc Parent expresses incredulity at the fact that the building was pretty much completely flattened. That does seem curious but in my opinion it is possible that a gas explosion - especially in the basement of the building - could have brought it down. I have once seen consequences of an oxygen tank explosion and it does create some massive devastation, destroying brick assembly structures and bending metal ones. I have no relevant expertise but would imagine a gas explosion could wreak similar type of destruction. And if this was a terrorist attack - whether a genuine one or of the false flag variety - it would be a very inefficient one. All the perps would have had to do was wait another hour for all the office workers to arrive and they would have had lots of victims to show for their effort. That alone makes it doubtful that this was a terrorist attack.

It is unmistakably clear, however, that the management of terrorism-related news has become completely politicized and largely divorced from the real life. When the hapless terrorist wannabes like the "Miami seven" make front-line news whereas William Krar, a man prepared to launch a major terror strike and only stopped by a chance arrest, remains in obscurity you start wondering if the real-life events matter to those who are supposed to inform us of them. And both the government and the media seem to be carefully editing the terrorism-related news to formulate a certain message, not to present the situation as it really is.

Targeting Civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki

In his article Anthony Gregory makes a number of important points. I certainly agree with him that if suicide bombings of buses or the events of 9/11 are to be considered acts of political terrorism, so must the intentional mass killings of civilians in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Drezden, Leningrad, Rotterdam and many other places whose civilian populations were likewise intentionally eviscerated by various warring parties during the World War II.

It certainly reflects favorably on the US as a society that eventually Americans showed themselves capable of taking a critical view on those events of which they were part such as nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is also true that in today's wars the US attempts to minimize civilian casualties. However, it is worth noting that that is mostly possible due to advances in technologies which have taken military precision to a whole new level.

But I think we need to acknowledge that terrorism is not something that just came out of the blue and plunged us into the "age of terror" on 9/11/2001. Terrorism is a military tactic, it has been used in many wars,- including by us in some of the wars we have fought.