Airports Trying to Adopt Whole Body Imaging Scanners

December 29, 2009

NBC – DFW

By Scott Friedman

Only 19 U.S. airports have received sophisticated imaging machines that can detect explosives hidden in clothing.

Security experts say the scanners may be the best defense in stopping attacks such as an attempt to bomb a Detroit-bound aircraft Christmas Day.

The Transportation Security Administration wants to install more of the devices, known as whole-body imaging scanners, but the agency has met resistance from civil liberties groups, passengers and some members of Congress.

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, the nation’s third busiest, has just two of the machines.

The scanners are able to detect weapons and explosives in places security screeners are not allowed to touch in physical pat-down searches, such as the groin area and even body cavities where items could be concealed.

Government investigators say they believe Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the man accused of attempting to blow up a Northwest Airlines flight on Christmas Day, hid the explosives he used inside his underwear.

The Associated Press reported Monday that Abdulmutallab did not pass through a whole-body imaging scanner before boarding the Northwest flight in Amsterdam, Netherlands. European airports are using the imaging machines only in limited cases.

Dallas-based aviation security consultant Clive Miskin said whole-body scanners may be the best technology to prevent the terrorists from personally carrying explosives onto planes.

“That’s one piece of technology that can help and it will help apprehend bad people with bad intentions,” said Miskin, managing director of International Security Defense Systems LLC.

Miskin’s partner, Chaim Koppel, said recent events may push governments to install the machines at more airports.

“Slowly, we’re going to see more them in the States, in Europe, in South America,” he said.

The American Civil Liberties Union has opposed the imaging machines, arguing that the body images they produce are too revealing.

And some members of Congress have supported legislation that would limit their use, allowing passengers to opt out and submit to a pat-down search instead.

In an effort to increase privacy, the TSA screeners who read the images are placed in a separate room so they are not able to see the passenger who is being shown on the imaging screen. Travelers at DFW Airport were divided.

“It’s not like you’re taking a picture and posting it on the Internet or selling it in a magazine,” said Paul LeBon. “It’s just a scan that lasts for 10 seconds.

“I am going to take issue with people being able to look at my children’s bodies and my body,” said Tamara Haddox, another traveler.

The TSA currently has 150 additional body imaging devices machines on order. But that’s not nearly enough to cover all of the nation’s airports.

Click here for the full report

Climate Change Scare Tactics Won’t Work

December 28, 2009

Express.co.uk

By Emily Garnham

A leading researcher into attitudes on climate change has claimed Government scare tactics are only increasing public scepticism about global warming.

Dr Lorraine Whitmarsh, who has carried out extensive research into public mistrust on the issue, says scaremongering to convey environmental messages is not effective.

Instead she argues low carbon lifestyles – that can save people money and have long term health benefits as well as helping slow climate change – should be heavily incentivised.

She told Express.co.uk: “The Government have tried to communicate climate change but they haven’t done it well.

“Using scare tactics such as in the latest campaign with a drowning dog helps to raise the issue but it also suggests we are all doomed and there is nothing else we can do.”

She added: “The Government isn’t a very trusted or credible source of information for the public. Politicians need to do more to provide rewards and incentives for people who lead low carbon lives.

It’s about more than educating people on climate change. Low carbon lifestyles should be made much more attractive, and not so that people immediately think of green weirdos. It’s about changing the whole image of being green.”

Green Party spokesman Spencer Fitzgibbon agreed, saying: “The Labour Government has always been a good decade behind where it ought to be. Scare tactics will work with some people but it’s much better to empower the general public with appropriate policies instead. If you haven’t got a good public transport system for example, using your car is the only option.”

He added: “There is a certain point at which everybody had to acknowledge that the world is round and the flat earth society just had to shut up. There has been for many years an effective consensus amongst scientists that the world is getting warmer.

To continue reading this report, click here.

Walmart Sued For Videotaping Employees and Customers in Bathroom

December 28, 2009

ABC News

By Nathalie Tadena

A Pennsylvania Walmart Supercenter videotaped employees and customers in a unisex bathroom, several former and current Walmart employees alleged in a lawsuit filed this week.

Seven former and current employees from the Tire and Lube department at the Walmart in Easton, Pa., filed a lawsuit in county court against the Arkansas-based corporation and four local managers Dec. 21.

Several employees discovered an “off-the-shelf” video camera in a store bathroom March 31, 2008, according to the court filing. The unisex bathroom, which also served as a changing room, was used by employees and customers. Customers and employees were not notifed of the surveillance, according to the court filing.

“I am incredulous that anyone would think that it’s appropriate conduct for any reason to photograph people in a changing room and bathroom,” said Erv McLain, the plaintiffs’ attorney.

Walmart said two workers were responsible for the camera.

“Two associates were terminated for placing a camera in an associate dressing room bathroom,” Walmart spokesman Greg Rossiter said. “When store management learned of the camera, it was immediately removed.”

The company declined further comment.

According to the court filing, the camera was installed by Walmart’s loss-prevention unit.

The camera was used to monitor employees for possible theft and it is unclear how long the surveillance took place, McLain said. None of the plaintiffs, however, were accused of stealing from the store.

A store manager acknowledged the existence of the surveillance camera only after employees produced a photo of the camera, McLain said.

“The filming of anyone, including employees, is not something that is unheard of in the industry,” McLain said. “But to do it in a changing room and bathroom is totally unprecedented and it could border on criminal activity.”

The retailer’s “Security and Privacy” policy states that at “some stores and clubs [Walmart] may record your presence on security monitors for safety and security purposes,” according to court documents.

Fired After Complaining?

McLain said some of his clients are “still clearly shaken by what occurred.”

Three of the plaintiffs were terminated after complaining to store management about video surveillance, McLain said.

Of the remaining plaintiffs, one worker has quit and three men continue to work at the store.

Walmart declined to comment on the three terminations.

The lawsuit, which is seeking more than $50,000 in damages, was filed after the parties failed to reach an out-of-court agreement, McLain said.

Among its allegations, the suit claims violations of federal and state wiretapping laws, invasion of employees’ and customers’ privacy, wrongful discharge and violation of worker and civil rights practices.

Click here for the full report.

Obamacare to Cost Middle Class Families $15,000 a Year

December 28, 2009

Info Wars

By Paul Joseph Watson

Families struggling in the midst of a deep recession who earn a combined total greater than $88,200 and don’t have their health care covered by their employer will be hit with a mandatory annual fee of about $15,000 according to the Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of the final Senate Obamacare bill.

As we highlighted yesterday, the health care bill would introduce a raft of new taxes that would inevitably lead to higher costs that would be passed on to the public. A Boston Globe analysis revealed that there were at least 19 new taxes contained in the legislation which is set to be passed on Christmas Eve.

On top of this, a CBO analysis identifies five facts about the bill that will financially devastate families with an annual income greater than 400 percent of the federal poverty level.

Under Obamacare, Americans will be forced to buy government-approved health insurance and anyone earning a middle class wage will have to pay for it out of their own pocket. Federal subsidies will only be provided for people who are not offered coverage by their employer and earn below the 400 percent poverty level.

Employers will not be required to offer their workers coverage, being subject to a $750 annual penalty if they fail to do so, a figure most analysts say is not high enough to prevent employers from dropping their plans, meaning that more people will be forced to buy government health care.

“The Senate health care bill gives employers two powerful incentives to stop offering health insurance coverage to their workers,” writes Terry Jeffrey. “First, if an employer does offer coverage, its lower-wage workers will lose the federal insurance subsidy they would otherwise get. Secondly, if an employer does not offer coverage, the $750-per-worker fine it faces will be far less than the premiums it would pay if it did offer coverage.”

Costs are also set to soar as a result of insurance companies being hit with federal mandates that increase their risk.

“Policies purchased through the exchanges (or directly from insurers) would have to meet several requirements: In particular, insurers would have to accept all applicants, could not limit coverage for pre-existing medical conditions, and could not vary premiums to reflect differences in enrollees’ health,” according to the CBO.

This will inevitably force insurance companies to pass higher costs on to the public.

As a consequence of all these factors, families whose employers drop their plan will be forced to buy it on their own – at a cost of over $15,000 dollars a year.

“Average premiums per policy in the nongroup market in 2016 would be roughly $5,800 for single policies and $15,200 for family policies under the proposal,” states the CBO.

Jeffrey predicts that families being hit with a federally mandated $15,000-per-year insurance bill will provoke a “rebellion”.

“When that happens, the liberals will not say: We made a mistake. We never should have forced families out of their employer-based health insurance and required them to purchase a $15,000 policy,” he writes. “They will say: We told you so. We cannot trust these greedy insurance companies. We need a single-payer system so the government can provide everyone with health care. Just like they did in the Soviet Union.”

Click here for the full report.

Obamacare Income Tax Surcharge Is Unconstitutional

December 28, 2009

NewWithViews.com

By Phil Hart

The current attempt by today’s White House Administration to impose more big government on the American People by way of the “single payer option” for healthcare is as unconstitutional as gun confiscation or the elimination of free speech. Obamacare will be funded with a health care surcharge on the today’s income tax, which constitutes an unapportioned direct tax on the wages and salaries of the American People, not allowed by our Constitution.

How so you might ask? Good question. In order to answer that question, we must first review “Constitutional Taxation 101” a course that no lawyer ever took, nor has any judge, member of Congress nor has any PhD candidate in constitutional law. Law schools do not teach courses about the Constitution; they teach courses about litigated cases about the Constitution. The American People are nearly 100 percent illiterate, at all levels, when it comes to constitutional taxation. The higher the level of ignorance among the American people, the greater the amount of fleecing that takes place. t

To understand constitutional taxation, we must first understand the terms of the Constitution’s Framers. What is a direct tax? And what is an indirect tax? In 1787, those terms were widely used by the Framers as they debated and drafted our Constitution. These framers knew the meaning of these to terms. Very simply, a direct tax taxes a “noun”, and an indirect tax taxes a “verb”.

What is a tax on a noun? It is a tax on something that exists. A house exists. A tax on a house is a direct tax. The tax is levied on the house, and the tax must be paid. There is no getting out of paying a direct tax. Either the tax gets paid, or the house is eventually seized by the taxing authority. “Labor” is a noun too; and a tax on labor is a direct tax; it is a capitation tax, which must be apportioned.

The next question that begs to be answered is, “What is a tax on a verb?” This is a tax on the happening of an event. It is a tax on a choice a person makes. It is a tax that can be avoided, or the burden of the tax can be shifted to another. If you choose to buy gasoline, you choose to pay the excise tax on each gallon of gas. You could, of course, choose to ride your bicycle and avoid the tax. You pay the indirect tax because of choices you make.

If you are a bus company, you have to pay this excise tax when you put fuel into the fuel tank of your bus. However, you pass on the cost of the tax by charging more for the bus tickets; and the customers of the bus company pay the tax “indirectly”. Again, this tax can be avoided if the bus patron chooses not to travel, or to travel by some other means. An indirect tax is also a tax on a privilege, like operating a business in a corporate form. One chooses to do business as a corporation, and in doing so, chooses to pay the tax levied on the government granted privilege of limited liability and indefinite corporate existence.

We refer to Adam Smith, author of Wealth of Nations (1776), to support our above definitions. Adam Smith began writing his timeless work in 1765. By the time the Constitution was written, in 1787, Wealth of Nations was in its sixth edition. Every one of the Framers of the Constitution was familiar with Smith’s work. Here is what Adam Smith, the eighteenth century guru of economics, had to say about direct and indirect taxes:

“The impossibility of taxing the people, in proportion to their revenue, by any capitation, seems to have given occasion to the invention of taxes upon consumable commodities. The state not knowing how to tax, directly and proportionally, the revenue of its subjects, endeavors to tax it indirectly by taxing their expense, which, it is supposed, will in most cases be nearly in proportion to their revenue. Their expense is taxed by taxing the consumable commodities upon which it is laid out.” Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, book V, pg. 541 (Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 1991) (1776).

We also find the following Adam Smith quote in Wealth of Nations, “Capitation taxes, so far as they are levied upon the lower ranks of people, are direct taxes upon the wages of labor.” Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, id. at pg. 540.

A Capitation tax is a tax on wages and salaries, so says Adam Smith. Such a tax must meet the constitutional requirement that it be apportioned among the people, such that each person pays the same amount of tax.

To continue reading this report, click here.

Foiled Terrorist Bombing In Detroit Is An Excuse To Expand War On Terror

December 28, 2009

Info Wars

By Kurt Nimmo

The explosion of what witnesses describe as a firecracker on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas arrives at an opportune time for the Obama administration. The alleged perpetrator, Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, like shoe bomber Richard Reid before him, appears to be an incompetent patsy. Mutallab told investigators he was on a mission from al-Qaeda and he got the explosive materials for the botched attack in Yemen.

Associated Press report on the botched bombing places blame on al-Qaeda

Yemen is a new front in the war against the manufactured enemy al-Qaeda. Not only is the United States providing assisstance to the Yemeni government to bomb supposed al-Qaeda bases in the southern part of the country, but Saudi Arabia conducted airstrikes against targets in the north. Mohamed al-Anisi, the Yemeni national security chief, told told the Saudi Arabian newspaper Okaz that his forces were cooperating with Washington on attacks and accused Iran of aiding Houthi Shiite rebels. Earlier this week, a Saudi Ministry of Defense official said 73 Saudis were killed fighting the Houthi rebels, according to Deutsche Presse-Agentur.

Earlier this week al-Qaeda exploited an anti-government rally in Sanna. “Al Qaeda militants made a rare public appearance in restive south Yemen on Monday, telling an anti-government rally that the group’s war was with the United States and not the Yemeni army, residents said,” Reuters reported on December 23. “The West and Saudi Arabia fear al Qaeda will take advantage of the Yemeni government’s focus on a Shi’ite rebellion in the north and rising secessionist sentiment in the south to spread its operations to the kingdom, the world’s top oil exporter.” An explosion during the demonstration killed three people.

The Yemeni government raids killed 23 children and 17 women, not al-Qaeda, according to a report filed by AlJazeera.

The failed bombing of Flight 253 provides an excuse to expand the GWOT into Africa. “The alleged bomber’s nationality and his apparent origination in Nigeria raised immediate questions about airport security in Africa’s most populous country, where corruption, organized crime and crumbling infrastructure have long hobbled an otherwise oil-rich government,” reports The Wall Street Journal. “The alleged attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound jet by a Nigerian national Friday raises new concern over possible extremist Islamic activity in Nigeria and West Africa, a corner of Africa where al Qaeda so far hasn’t put down significant roots.”

Ethiopian and U.S. intervention in Somalia was justified to the international public under the pretext of fighting terrorism and al-Qaeda. “Ethiopia has become a regional surrogate or proxy for the United States and Britain. This is evident from the coordination of the U.S. military and Ethiopian troops in Somalia,” Global Research noted in January, 2007.

“America’s renewed interest in the Horn of Africa dates to November 2002 when the US military established its joint taskforce in Djibouti, now the base for 1,800 troops, including special operations forces,” The Guardian reported on January 13, 2007. “By then, the west had good reason to fear that Africa had become an arena for al-Qaida, and that the failed state of Somalia could become a haven for the organization’s operatives.”

Ethiopia invaded Somalia with US encouragement and military assistance after the Islamic Courts Union (ICU), an Islamist militant group that ruled much of the country, made military advances. On January 5, 2007, al-Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri — the notorious CIA operative in Afghanistan who was shepherded by the western intelligence asset the Muslim Brotherhood — issued a message urging Somalis to fight against the Ethiopian invaders.

To continue reading this report, click here.

Arrest of Detroit Plane Bomber Raise Questions

December 28, 2009

Info Wars

By Abayomi Azikiwe

On December 25 the United States authorities arrested a 23-year-old Nigerian Farouk Umar Abdul Mutallab aboard a Delta Airline flight from Amsterdam that landed in Detroit. News reports emanating from the U.S. indicate that it was an attempted terrorist attack that resulted in the fire and that Abdul Mutallab was either connected with Al-Qaida or sympathetic to its aims.

However, this incident raises a number of serious questions about the character of the attack. First of all why was Abdul Mutallab granted a multiple-entry visa into the United States in June 2008? In November, his father, Alhaji Umaru Abdul Mutallab, 70, a prominent and wealthy Nigerian banker who recently retired as Chairman of the First Bank Plc of Nigeria, warned the American embassy in Nigeria about concerns related to his son’s behaviour. The senior Mutallab also served as Minister of Economic Development and Reconstruction during the mid-1970s in the Federal Nigerian Government that was under military rule at the time.

Consequently, why was Farouk Umar Abdul Mutallab allowed to maintain his U.S. visa status and board a plane bound for the United States? There have been reports that he had spent time in the United Arab Emirates and Yemen and implying that this may indicate a connection with Al-Qaida. However, there has been no specific evidence that he has links with Islamic organizations including Al-Qaida.

In addition, corporate media reports claim that the substances Mutallab had and attempted to ignite could have done substantial damage to the aircraft. This allegation is largely unsubstantiated and raises further questions about the nature of the incident. If these chemicals could have never caused any real damage to the aircraft and in fact the suspect was the only person seriously injured, then this may reveal that the incident is something other than what is being widely reported by media outlets in the U.S. and internationally.

Although U.S. intelligence and media spokespersons have stated that Yemen is a base for Al-Qaida, they do not make the claim that it is also major field of operations for the American Central Intelligence Agency which is working closely with the Yemeni government to fight the Islamic organizations that are in a military struggle with the government in this country that is divided politically and regionally.

In an Associated Press report on December 25 it stated that “Yemen’s military hit suspected al-Qaida hideouts for the second time in a week, killing at least 30 militants in a remote area of the country–a fragmented, unstable nation the U.S. fears could turn into an Afghanistan-like refuge for the terrorist network.

“The strikes on Thursday, which were carried out with U.S. and Saudi intelligence help, hit a gathering of top leaders and other targets in a remote mountain valley, officials said. The newly aggressive Yemeni campaign against al-Qaida is being boosted by a dose of American aid, a reflection of Washington’s concerns about al-Qaida’s presence in a highly strategic location on the border with oil-rich ally Saudi Arabia.” (AP, December 25)

This same AP article goes on to point out that “The Pentagon recently confirmed it has poured nearly $70 million in military aid into Yemen this year–compared with none in 2008. The U.S. military has boosted its counterterrorism training for Yemeni forces and is providing more intelligence, according to U.S. officials and analysts. The result appears to be a sharp escalation in Yemen’s campaign against al-Qaida, which previously amounted to scattered raids against militants, mixed with tolerance of some fighters who made vague promises they would avoid terrorist activity.”

To continue reading this report, click here.

Government Allowed Plane Bomber to Attempt Attack

December 28, 2009

Info Wars

By Paul Joseph Watson

A passenger who boarded Northwest Airlines Flight 253 in Amsterdam with attempted plane bomber Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab says the would-be terrorist had no passport and was aided by a sharp-dressed man who claimed Mutallab was a Sudanese refugee, just one of a plethora of startling inconsistencies surrounding an incident that has led to ramped up security and increased levels of harassment in airports.

Every single fact that has come to light since the attempted bombing on Christmas Day directly indicates that the bomber was deliberately allowed to board the plane and that his attack would have succeeded if not for the alert and brave reactions of the passengers and flight crew.

According to Kurt Haskell, an attorney with the Haskell Law Firm in Taylor, Michigan, “He and his wife were sitting on the ground near their boarding gate in Amsterdam, which is when they saw Mutallab approach the gate with an unidentified man.”

Mutallab was a poorly dressed, young looking individual, but he was accompanied by a man in an expensive suit, Haskell told MLive.com.

“He says the suited man asked ticket agents whether Mutallab could board without a passport. “The guy said, ‘He’s from Sudan and we do this all the time.’”

Although Mutallab is Nigerian, Haskell said the well-dressed man portrayed him as a desperate Sudanese refugee in an attempt to elicit sympathy and as a way of bypassing his lack of documents.

“The ticket agent referred Mutallab and his companion to her manager down the hall, and Haskell didn’t see Mutallab again until after he allegedly tried to detonate an explosive on the plane,” states the report.

Crucially, Haskell said that after the plane landed he saw another man being taken into custody by the FBI along with Mutallab. However, the FBI later said that Mutallab was the only individual taken into custody.

Were the feds retrieving their own agent, the sharp dressed man who ensured that Mutallab boarded the plane despite his overwhelmingly suspicious circumstances?

Mutallab was a known security threat who was on the terror watch list. He is barred from entering Britain after being refused a new visa due to applying for a fake university course. Separate reports said that he did hold a valid visa, which begs the question, how can someone on a terror watch list be allowed to fly?

“On the one hand, it seems he’s been on the terror watch list but not on the no-fly list,” he said. “That doesn’t square because the American Department for Homeland Security has pretty stringent data-mining capability. I don’t understand how he had a valid visa if he was known on the terror watch list,” Dr Magnus Ranstorp of the Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies told the London Independent.

It has also been revealed that Mutallab’s father contacted U.S. intelligence officials a month ago and warned them that his son was a threat, but nothing was done.

The bomber’s father, Alhaji Umaru Mutallab, was a a former minister and chairman of First Bank in Nigeria. The bomber does not fit the image of a disgruntled, rag-tag terrorist. His considerable wealth allowed him to live in luxury at an imposing London mansion.

As a result of the failed attack, new security directives have been introduced for anyone traveling into America. Intense body and hand-luggage searches and sniffer dogs have been beefed up at departure gates and passengers have been ordered not to stand during the final hour of the flight and are not allowed access to any of their hand luggage during the final hour.

However, if you’re a suspicious looking man on a terror watch list with no passport carrying explosives, you should breeze through security with no questions asked, just be sure to have a sharp-dressed man with you at all times.

Click here for the full report.

Sharp Dressed Man Helped Detroit Plane Bomber Board Without Passport

December 28, 2009

MLive

By Sheena Harrison

A Michigan man who was aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 says he witnessed Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab trying to board the plane in Amsterdam without a passport.

Kurt Haskell of Newport, Mich., who posted an earlier comment about his experience, talked exclusively with MLive.com and confirmed he was on the flight by sending a picture of his boarding pass. He and his wife, Lori, were returning from a safari in Uganda when they boarded the NWA flight on Friday.Haskell said he and his wife were sitting on the ground near their boarding gate in Amsterdam, which is when they saw Mutallab approach the gate with an unidentified man.

Kurt and Lori Haskell are attorneys with Haskell Law Firm in Taylor. Their expertise includes bankruptcy, family law and estate planning.

While Mutallab was poorly dressed, his friend was dressed in an expensive suit, Haskell said. He says the suited man asked ticket agents whether Mutallab could board without a passport. “The guy said, ‘He’s from Sudan and we do this all the time.’”

Mutallab is Nigerian. Haskell believes the man may have been trying to garner sympathy for Mutallab’s lack of documents by portraying him as a Sudanese refugee.

The ticket agent referred Mutallab and his companion to her manager down the hall, and Haskell didn’t see Mutallab again until after he allegedly tried to detonate an explosive on the plane.

Haskell said the flight was mostly unremarkable. That was until he heard a flight attendant say she smelled smoke, just after the pilot announced the plane would land in Detroit in 10 minutes. Haskell got out of his seat to view the brewing commotion.“I stood up and walked a couple feet ahead to get a closer look, and that’s when I saw the flames,” said Haskell, who sat about seven rows behind Mutallab. “It started to spread pretty quickly. It went up the wall, all the way to ceiling.”

Haskell, who described Mutallab as a diminutive man who looks like a teenager, said about 30 seconds passed between the first mention of smoke and when Mutallab was subdued by fellow passengers.

“He didn’t fight back at all. This wasn’t a big skirmish,” Haskell said. “A couple guys jumped on him and hauled him away.”

The ordeal has Haskell and his wife a little shaken. Flight attendants were screaming during the fire and the pilot sounded notably nervous when bringing the plane in for a landing, he said.

“Immediately, the pilot came on and said two words: emergency landing,” Haskell said. “And that was it. The plane sped up instead of slowing down. You could tell he floored it.”

As Mutallab was being led out of the plane in handcuffs, Haskell said he realized that was the same man he saw trying to board the plane in Amsterdam.

Passengers had to wait about 20 minutes before they were allowed to exit the plane. Haskell said he and other passengers waited about six hours to be interviewed by the FBI.

About an hour after landing, Haskell said he saw another man being taken into custody. But a spokeswoman from the FBI in Detroit said Mutallab was the only person taken into custody.

Click here for the full report

Corporate Media Says Detroit Plane Bomber is Tied to Al-Qaeda

December 28, 2009

Info Wars

By Kurt Nimmo

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says there is no indication that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is “part of anything larger” and there is no evidence he is associated with al-Qaeda, but this has not prevented the corporate media from claiming the foiled attack was hatched by the nefarious phantom terror group.

Obama seconded Napolitano’s motion. “US investigators are trying to piece together any terrorism connections of Abdulmutallab, who was charged Saturday with attempting to blow up the jetliner after reportedly confessing that he had been trained by Al-Qaeda in Yemen,” reports the Sydney Morning Herald. “But Obama’s top security official said Sunday there was ‘no indication’ that Abdulmutallab was acting as part of a larger plot and warned against speculating that he had been trained by Al-Qaeda.”
This AP report says the foiled attack was the work of al-Qaeda.

If history is any indication, it is only a matter of time before the administration connects the botched attack to the mythical terror group.

“Unnamed administration officials told US media in the aftermath of the thwarted attack that Abdulmutallab had confessed to traveling to Yemen and receiving training by Al-Qaeda there,” reports AFP.

According to “counterterrorism experts” cited by Time Magazine, the Christmas day attack is “suggestive” of al-Qaeda involvement. “It’s worrisome, because it fits into the jihadist vision of a war between Islam and Christianity,” Georgetown University terrorism expert Bruce Hoffman told the magazine.

The Times Online made a direct link between al-Qaeda and the “war” (invasion and occupation) in Afghanistan. “Colonel Richard Kemp is a former counterterrorism official who has advised the government’s joint intelligence committee. He said if the Detroit operation had been even partly planned in Yemen, it would indicate that UK and US military operations in Afghanistan were helping to displace and disrupt Al-Qaeda planning.” (Kemp was also Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan in 2003.)

“Federal officials have strongly suggested to lawmakers that the Nigerian man who attempted to blow up a Northwest Airlines flight has connections to the al Qaeda terrorist network in Yemen, according to a senior member of Congress in the House,” the Washington Post reported on Saturday. “Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on intelligence, said Saturday that a federal official has briefed lawmakers about ’strong suggestions of a Yemen-al Qaeda connection and an intent to blow up the plane over U.S. airspace.’”

You may recall that Ms. Harman sponsored the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. Fortunately, the bill failed to become law during the 110th congress.

A blog on The Weekly Standard website wasted little time connecting al-Qaeda to the botched attack. “One of the key pieces of evidence investigators are reportedly exploring is the type of explosive Mudallad [Mutallab] tried to detonate. In the past, al Qaeda has repeatedly used TATP (Triacetone Triperoxide) explosives in its attacks and plots against airliners. This is the type of explosive that the infamous shoe bomber, Richard Reid, used in late 2001. If Mudallad tried to use a similar device, then this is a pretty good indication (although not necessarily conclusive) that al Qaeda showed Mudallad how to go about blowing up a plane.”
Sky News mentions the mental deficient Richard Reid in connection to Mutallab.

Richard Reid attended the notorious Finsbury Park mosque in London where Abu Hamza al-Masri preached. Abu Hamza al-Masri is described as the leader of the Islamist movement in Britain, never mind that he was on the payroll the police’s Special Branch and MI5, the domestic counterintelligence service.

The central cast of figures in the 9/11 drama sport such associations, from training on U.S. military bases to participating in the CIA’s covert wars in Afghanistan and the Balkans.

The fact the dimwit Reid hero-worshiped another dim bulb, Zacarias Moussaoui, and both attended a mosque run by an MI-5 operative, should be evidence enough that there are big time problems with the al-Qaeda story as proffered by the government and corporate media.

“Stripped of exaggeration, romanticism, demonization and myth making, the picture of Al Qaeda which has emerged from the trial in the United States of Zacarias Moussaoui is of a fractious organization that has been a magnet for bewildered martyrdom-seeking fantasists,” writes Tom Porteous.
The BBC has debunked the al-Qaeda myth.

To continue reading this report, click here.

« Previous Page — Next Page »