Tag Archives: John Brennan

Obama’s CIA spies on U.S. Senate

Spy vs Spy

The Voice of America reports (via Global Security) that on March 5, 2014, Senator Diane Feinstein (D-Calif) told reporters that the Central Intelligence Agency has launched an internal review into allegations that its officers had improperly monitored congressional staffers assigned to investigate the agency’s interrogation program.

In so doing, Feinstein confirmed earlier reports by The New York Times and McClatchy Newspapers.

Feinstein is the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which conducted a four year investigation into the CIA’s now-defunct terrorist detention and interrogation program, which began under former President George W. Bush.

In December 2012, the committee approved a 6,000-page report that concluded the CIA’s detention and interrogation program, which held suspected terrorists in secret overseas prisons and engaged in harsh interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, yielded little or no significant intelligence.

Under an agreement between the committee and the CIA, the spy agency had provided computers for the Senate Intelligence Committee’s staff members so they could review millions of pages of classified documents. But CIA officers allegedly conducted unauthorized searches of those computers to monitor the staffers’ activities, which lawmakers say violated the agreement. Some lawmakers have suggested the alleged monitoring may have also violated federal law that prohibits unauthorized access to a computer.

CIA Director John Brennan said he was “deeply dismayed” by the committee’s “spurious” allegations.

Both the Times and McClatchy said the CIA’s inspector general, who is handling the internal probe, has referred the matter to the Justice Department.

Of course, since both the CIA and the so-called Justice Department are in Obama’s pockets, I seriously doubt anything will come of either’s “investigation.”

Call me a cynic. Smirk.

~Eowyn

Memo to Obama from intel officials calls claim about Syrian chemical attack a FRAUD

VIPS1The Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), formed in January 2003, is a group of current and former officials of the United States intelligence agencies that include the CIA, the U.S. State Department‘s Intelligence Bureau (INR),  and the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The VIPS’ Steering Group is comprised of:

  • Richard Beske
  • Gene Betit, Arlington, VA
  • Ray Close
  • Patrick G. Eddington, former CIA imagery analyst
  • Larry C. Johnson, former CIA analyst
  • David MacMichael, former CIA analyst
  • Raymond McGovern, retired CIA officer who had served under 7 U.S. presidents and presented the morning intelligence briefings at the White House to many of those presidents.
  • Greg Theilmann, former State Department intelligence official

On September 6, 2013, twelve members of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity — all former or retired officials of various U.S. intelligence agencies including the CIA, FBI, DIA, NSA, State Department, U.S. Army, and U.S. Marine Corps — wrote a letter to Obama stating that the information they’ve gathered disputes the White House’s claim that Syria’s Assad regime had perpetrated the chemical weapon (sarin nerve gas) attack that allegedly killed hundreds of civilians in a suburb of Damascus on August 21.

More than that, the VIPS letter states that the claim is a fraud by CIA Director John Brennan.

President Lucifer, his three henchmen, and the warmongers in Congress (most notably John McCain) are using the alleged Assad chemical attack to justify a U.S. “military strike” war on Syria, in the name of “humanitarian intervention” — never mind that in so doing, America precisely will inflict untold human pain and suffering on exactly those same Syrian civilians, as a heart-rending letter from Trappist nuns in Syria points out.

First published on ConsortiumNews.com, here is the VIPS memo in its entirety. For the love of God, please help disseminate this to as many people as you can, via Facebook, Twitter, email, etc.

Thank you,

~Eowyn

world-on-fire

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: Is Syria a Trap?

Precedence: IMMEDIATE

We regret to inform you that some of our former co-workers are telling us, categorically, that contrary to the claims of your administration, the most reliable intelligence shows that Bashar al-Assad was NOT responsible for the chemical incident that killed and injured Syrian civilians on August 21, and that British intelligence officials also know this. In writing this brief report, we choose to assume that you have not been fully informed because your advisers decided to afford you the opportunity for what is commonly known as “plausible denial.”

We have been down this road before – with President George W. Bush, to whom we addressed our first VIPS memorandumimmediately after Colin Powell’s Feb. 5, 2003 U.N. speech, in which he peddled fraudulent “intelligence” to support attacking Iraq. Then, also, we chose to give President Bush the benefit of the doubt, thinking he was being misled – or, at the least, very poorly advised.

The fraudulent nature of Powell’s speech was a no-brainer. And so, that very afternoon we strongly urged your predecessor to “widen the discussion beyond …  the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic.” We offer you the same advice today.

CIA Director John Brennan

CIA Director John Brennan

Our sources confirm that a chemical incident of some sort did cause fatalities and injuries on August 21 in a suburb of Damascus. They insist, however, that the incident was not the result of an attack by the Syrian Army using military-grade chemical weapons from its arsenal. That is the most salient fact, according to CIA officers working on the Syria issue. They tell us that CIA Director John Brennan is perpetrating a pre-Iraq-War-type fraud on members of Congress, the media, the public – and perhaps even you.

James ClapperJames Clapper

We have observed John Brennan closely over recent years and, sadly, we find what our former colleagues are now telling us easy to believe. Sadder still, this goes in spades for those of us who have worked with him personally; we give him zero credence. And that goes, as well, for his titular boss, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who has admitted he gave “clearly erroneous” sworn testimony to Congress denying NSA eavesdropping on Americans.

Intelligence Summary or Political Ploy?

That Secretary of State John Kerry would invoke Clapper’s name this week in Congressional testimony, in an apparent attempt to enhance the credibility of the four-page “Government Assessment” strikes us as odd. The more so, since it was, for some unexplained reason, not Clapper but the White House that released the “assessment.”

This is not a fine point. We know how these things are done. Although the “Government Assessment” is being sold to the media as an “intelligence summary,” it is a political, not an intelligence document. The drafters, massagers, and fixers avoided presenting essential detail. Moreover, they conceded upfront that, though they pinned “high confidence” on the assessment, it still fell “short of confirmation.”

Déjà Fraud: This brings a flashback to the famous Downing Street Minutes of July 23, 2002, on Iraq, The minutes record the Richard Dearlove, then head of British intelligence, reporting to Prime Minister Tony Blair and other senior officials that President Bush had decided to remove Saddam Hussein through military action that would be “justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD.” Dearlove had gotten the word from then-CIA Director George Tenet whom he visited at CIA headquarters on July 20.

The discussion that followed centered on the ephemeral nature of the evidence, prompting Dearlove to explain: “But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” We are concerned that this is precisely what has happened with the “intelligence” on Syria.

The Intelligence

There is a growing body of evidence from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian opposition and its supporters — providing a strong circumstantial case that the August 21 chemical incident was a pre-planned provocation by the Syrian opposition and its Saudi and Turkish supporters. The aim is reported to have been to create the kind of incident that would bring the United States into the war.

[See “Article cited by Limbaugh on Syrian chemical attack being a U.S. false flag,” Sept. 4, 2013. ~Eowyn]

According to some reports, canisters containing chemical agent were brought into a suburb of Damascus, where they were then opened. Some people in the immediate vicinity died; others were injured.

We are unaware of any reliable evidence that a Syrian military rocket capable of carrying a chemical agent was fired into the area. In fact, we are aware of no reliable physical evidence to support the claim that this was a result of a strike by a Syrian military unit with expertise in chemical weapons.

In addition, we have learned that on August 13-14, 2013, Western-sponsored opposition forces in Turkey started advance preparations for a major, irregular military surge. Initial meetings between senior opposition military commanders and Qatari, Turkish and U.S. intelligence officials took place at the converted Turkish military garrison in Antakya, Hatay Province, now used as the command center and headquarters of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their foreign sponsors.

Senior opposition commanders who came from Istanbul pre-briefed the regional commanders on an imminent escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development,” which, in turn, would lead to a U.S.-led bombing of Syria.

At operations coordinating meetings at Antakya, attended by senior Turkish, Qatari and U.S. intelligence officials as well as senior commanders of the Syrian opposition, the Syrians were told that the bombing would start in a few days. Opposition leaders were ordered to prepare their forces quickly to exploit the U.S. bombing, march into Damascus, and remove the Bashar al-Assad government

The Qatari and Turkish intelligence officials assured the Syrian regional commanders that they would be provided with plenty of weapons for the coming offensive. And they were. A weapons distribution operation unprecedented in scope began in all opposition camps on August 21-23. The weapons were distributed from storehouses controlled by Qatari and Turkish intelligence under the tight supervision of U.S. intelligence officers.

Cui bono? [Who stands to gain? ~Eowyn]

That the various groups trying to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have ample incentive to get the U.S. more deeply involved in support of that effort is clear. Until now, it has not been quite as clear that the Netanyahu government in Israel has equally powerful incentive to get Washington more deeply engaged in yet another war in the area. But with outspoken urging coming from Israel and those Americans who lobby for Israeli interests, this priority Israeli objective is becoming crystal clear.

Reporter Judi Rudoren, writing from Jerusalem in an important article in Friday’s New York Times addresses Israeli motivation in an uncommonly candid way. Her article, titled “Israel Backs Limited Strike Against Syria,” notes that the Israelis have argued, quietly, that the best outcome for Syria’s two-and-a-half-year-old civil war, at least for the moment, is no outcome. Rudoren continues:

For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective, seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad’s government and his Iranian backers or a strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadis.

“‘This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don’t want one to win — we’ll settle for a tie,’ said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. ‘Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that’s the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there’s no real threat from Syria.’”

We think this is the way Israel’s current leaders look at the situation in Syria, and that deeper U.S. involvement – albeit, initially, by “limited” military strikes – is likely to ensure that there is no early resolution of the conflict in Syria. The longer Sunni and Shia are at each other’s throats in Syria and in the wider region, the safer Israel calculates that it is.

That Syria’s main ally is Iran, with whom it has a mutual defense treaty, also plays a role in Israeli calculations. Iran’s leaders are not likely to be able to have much military impact in Syria, and Israel can highlight that as an embarrassment for Tehran.

Iran’s Role

Iran can readily be blamed by association and charged with all manner of provocation, real and imagined. Some have seen Israel’s hand in the provenance of the most damaging charges against Assad regarding chemical weapons and our experience suggests to us that such is supremely possible.

Possible also is a false-flag attack by an interested party resulting in the sinking or damaging, say, of one of the five U.S. destroyers now on patrol just west of Syria. Our mainstream media could be counted on to milk that for all it’s worth, and you would find yourself under still more pressure to widen U.S. military involvement in Syria – and perhaps beyond, against Iran.

Iran has joined those who blame the Syrian rebels for the August 21 chemical incident, and has been quick to warn the U.S. not to get more deeply involved. According to the Iranian English-channel Press TV, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javid Zarif has claimed: “The Syria crisis is a trap set by Zionist pressure groups for [the United States].”

Actually, he may be not far off the mark. But we think your advisers may be chary of entertaining this notion. Thus, we see as our continuing responsibility to try to get word to you so as to ensure that you and other decision makers are given the full picture.

Inevitable Retaliation

We hope your advisers have warned you that retaliation for attacks on Syrian are not a matter of IF, but rather WHERE and WHEN. Retaliation is inevitable. For example, terrorist strikes on U.S. embassies and other installations are likely to make what happened to the U.S. “Mission” in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012, look like a minor dust-up by comparison. One of us addressed this key consideration directly a week ago in an article titled “Possible Consequences of a U.S. Military Attack on Syria – Remembering the U.S. Marine Barracks Destruction in Beirut, 1983.”

For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

Thomas Drake, Senior Executive, NSA (former)

Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan

Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

W. Patrick Lang, Senior Executive and Defense Intelligence Officer, DIA (ret.)

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)

Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)

Todd Pierce, US Army Judge Advocate General (ret.)

Sam Provance, former Sgt., US Army, Iraq

Coleen Rowley, Division Council & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)

Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret); Foreign Service Officer (ret.)

******

The VIPS also wrote a memo on August 30, 2013, to General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on “Syria and Our Oath to Defend the Constitution.” Here’s the link to that memo.

FBI director admits drones used for surveillance of Americans

A quadrocopter drone equipped with a camera stands on display at the Zeiss stand on the first day of the CeBIT 2012 technology trade fair on March 6, 2012 in Hanover, Germany. (credit: Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

More than a year ago, FOTM first posted on the Obama regime’s admission (only because of a Freedom of Information Act request) that unmanned spy drones are deployed not just over war zones like Afghanistan, but also over the United States, and that the government was “considering” arming those drones. In fact, there are 63 active drone sites in 20 states scattered across America.

.

We were told at the time that those drones in the sky over our heads are really for border patrol and to combat terrorism.

Lies.

All lies.

Jordy Yager reports for The Hill that yesterday, June 19, 2013, testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, FBI Director Robert Mueller admitted that the FBI uses drones for surveillance within the United States.

But never fear!

Mueller says the drones are used “infrequently” and only to watch “specific targets” “in isolated instances” in regards to “specific investigations” of “particularized cases,” which “is the principle of privacy limitations we have.”

Mueller said, “Our footprint is very small. We have very few and have limited use,” and that the FBI is in “the initial stages” of developing privacy guidelines for how the agency balances civil liberty concerns with security threats.

Mueller made the revelation amid a debate over National Security Agency programs used to collect U.S. phone records and overseas Internet data.

While Mueller told lawmakers that the FBI uses drones domestically only for surveillance purposes, members of Congress have had growing concerns over the use of armed drones.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) made headlines in the lead-up to CIA Director John Brennan’s confirmation earlier this year when he delivered a 13-hour talking filibuster aimed at delaying the vote until the administration told him that it could not legally kill U.S. citizens on American soil using a drone strike, which Attorney General Eric Holder ultimately did.

The use of drones by the American military and the CIA to attack terrorists began under former President George W. Bush, but President Obama has increased the use of the armed, unmanned aerial vehicles dramatically — largely in the Middle East — to target individuals his administration suspects are carrying out acts of terrorism.

Obama laid out the administration’s policy and rationale for the increased use of drone strikes abroad in a speech last month, saying that the U.S. “does not take strikes when we have the ability to capture individual terrorists.”

In a letter to Congress the day before Obama’s speech, Holder said that four Americans suspected of terrorism had been killed abroad in “counterterrorism” operations since 2009. In all four instances, drones have been reported as being used. The most widely known case, which initially prompted congressional concern, came in 2011 when U.S. officials targeted and killed American-born Anwar al-Awlaki in a drone strike. Al-Awlaki was known for inciting attacks against the United States, such as the 2009 Fort Hood mass shooting, the thwarted “underwear” bombing of a U.S.-bound plane the same year and the failed Times Square bombing in 2010.

It was last year in a speech at Northwestern University that Holder first laid out the Obama regime’s justification for targeting U.S. citizens abroad  last year. He said that the regime’s definition of a person who posed an “imminent threat” consisted of three criteria:

  1. There was a limited open window for attacking the person;
  2. A grave possible harm that not attacking the target could have on U.S. civilians; and
  3. A strong likelihood that targeting the person would head off a future attack against the United States.

So when we wake up some morning to the news that someone in the United States had been killed by a drone strike, you’ll know that Pres. Lucifer’s “reasons” for the murder assassination.

Just my humble Public Service Announcement heads-up!

See also “FBI director not sure if Americans can be assassinated on U.S. soil,” March 13, 2012.

~Eowyn

Mr. Paul Goes to Washington – Watch Live

mr-smith-goes-to-washington-1

Remember Jimmy Stewart in the Frank Capra classic movie, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington?

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) is doing the same thing RIGHT NOW on the Senate floor.

Rand Paul

Sen. Paul is filibustering the POS regime’s appointment of John Brennan as CIA Director because the administration won’t disavow drone killing American citizens on US soil without due process. In fact, the POS’s attorney general Eric Holder three-times refused to answer the question whether it is constitutional for the the United States to use a drone to kill an American citizen on U.S. soil, even if said citizen does not pose an “imminent [national security] threat”.

This is unconstitutional and Sen. Paul said he’s had a enough of unconstitutional actions by this regime and will talk until he can’t do it any more.

Sen. Paul is getting great support from Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah), John Barrasso (R-Wyoming), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

Will any other senators step in when Paul has to quit? Flood your senators’ phone lines with that question.

This is democracy in action, folks!

Sen. Paul and other supporting speakers are also using this occasion to give the American people an excellent crash course on the threats posed to our liberty by the Obama regime’s drones, as well as the fundamentals of the U.S. government as designed by our Founding Fathers — separation of powers into three co-equal branches, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights (especially the Fourth Amendment), and the importance of due process.

Read more in the Washington Times.

Watch Senator Paul live on CSPAN here.

H/t my friend Robert K. Wilcox

~Eowyn

A Muslim CIA Chief

John Brennan, converted to Islam years ago in Saudi Arabia

WND EXCLUSIVE

SHOCK CLAIM: OBAMA PICKS MUSLIM FOR CIA CHIEF

Former FBI expert claims John Brennan converted to Islam

Published: 22 hours ago

author-image by DREW ZAHN

 

“Are you kidding me?” Trento balked at Guandolo’s allegations. “The head of the CIA is a Muslim? For real? … Are you sure?”

One of the FBI’s former top experts on Islam has announced that President Obama’s pick to head the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan, converted to Islam years ago in Saudi Arabia.

As WND has reported, former FBI Islam expert John Guandolo has long warned that the federal government is being infiltrated by members of the radical Muslim Brotherhood. But Guandolo now warns that by appointing Brennan to CIA director, Obama has not only chosen a man “naïve” to these infiltrations, but also picked a candidate who is himself a Muslim.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/shock-claim-obama-picks-muslim-for-cia-chief/#ZOeQcMebOblBVzPs.99

TSA naked protestor faces civil investigation

Interference…

John Brennan, Naked Protestor, Faces TSA Civil Investigation

Seattle Weekly: Naked TSA protestor John Brennan Portland man recently beat the indecent exposure charges standing against him stemming from his clothes-less act of civil disobedience. But that’s only one of the many difficulties Brennan has faced because of his now-infamous protest. Included on that list of difficulties Brennan has been dealt since taking his clothes off: a civil investigation into his actions launched by the TSA.

As you’ll recall, in April Brennan made national headlines by stripping naked at Portland International Airport in protest of a protracted TSA search. Brennan was subsequently arrested by airport police and charged with indecent exposure in Multnomah County. After a three-month court ordeal, Brennan beat those charges last week.

But according to a letter from late April addressed to Brennan and recently provided to Seattle Weekly, the TSA launched an investigating into “an alleged violation of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § Part 1540, Section 109,” following Brennan’s infamous naked protest. In layman’s terms, Brennan is accused of messing with TSA’s screening process, to the determent of the process and other travelers. The letter, which notifies Brennan of the investigation and gives him an opportunity to provide “information regarding this matter,” describes the code Brennan may have broken:

Title 49 CFR § 1540.109 states: no person may interfere with, assault, or intimidate screening personnel in the performance of their screening duties under this subchapter.

Assault…

Given the fact his naked protest was directed at the TSA, it’s no surprise Brennan stands strongly opposed to the way the agency has handled the situation.”They’re going to continue their policies that aren’t working for me, and I don’t think they’re working for most people in the United States, given the support I’ve had for my protest,” says Brennan. “People are angry at the TSA, and there’s no need for that.”

Intimidation…

While Dankers declined to comment on specifics of the TSA investigation into Brennan’s naked protest, saying it’s “not a public process,” she was able to offer a statement on the indecent exposure charges Brennan was found not guilty of last week.

“TSA respects the decision of the Multnomah County Circuit Court judge in this case regarding a Portland, Ore., city ordinance. We continue to focus our attention on TSA’s primary mission of keeping our nation’s transportation system safe from security threats.”

For his part, Brennan fears the possible monetary penalty facing him whenever the TSA investigation concludes. While not listed as a standard punishment for the infraction he’s accused of, Brennan says he also fears that TSA could restrict his ability to fly because of the flap.

“Not to be conspiratorial about it, but the U.S. government, with the loss of habeas corpus under Bush, and renewed under Obama, allows the American government to identify people as terrorists without judicial review, and disappear them,” says Brennan. “If people don’t think we’re headed in that direction, they’re stupid. I don’t want our government to have that power.”

UPDATE: Dankers responded to an inquiry this afternoon seeking clarification about whether Brennan could be barred from flying by TSA as an outcome of the civil investigation against him. She notes that TSA does not maintain the “No-Fly List,” it’s actually operated by the FBI, and says Brennan, despite the investigation, would be “screened just like anyone else.”

“Right now, the process we’re involved in is a civil process,” says Dankers of the investigation. “The only sanction is monetary as a result of a civil investigation.”

DCG

TSA doesn’t want to see you naked…

Portland man goes naked at PDX to protest TSA search

NWCN.com: Frequent flying businessman John Brennan set off an explosives wand at Portland International Airport Tuesday and stripped naked to show TSA screeners he was not carrying a bomb.

John Brennan stripped off his clothes at the TSA security station and stood there naked, as waiting passengers and their families looked on, took photos or looked away.

Brennan told KGW as he left jail Tuesday night that removing all his clothes was not premeditated. The frequent traveler who had heard of many TSA issues while on prior business travels was just fed up as he set off the detector at PDX.

“And the machine went off, and I asked what it was and he said ‘nitrates’ which I know from Oklahoma City is one of the explosive ingredients,” Brennan told KGW, “and I was not interested in being hassled so I took off my clothes to show them I was not carrying any explosives.” 

Brennan says he hopes his actions will start a trend.  “I don’t think Americans can sit around and put up with this anymore. TSA needs to just do their job and not intimidate people.

A Port of Portland Police report said Brennan was asked several times to put his clothes back on. Two screening lanes were closed for a short time til Brennan was wrapped in a towel and arrested. Alcohol and drugs were not a factor in the incident, police said.

He was taken to the Multnomah County Jail and booked on misdemeanor charges of disorderly conduct and indecent exposure. He was then released on his on own recognizance.

So TSA doesn’t want to see you naked….they just want to x-ray your naked body and feel you up. 

While I applaud Mr. Brennan for his “protest”, I won’t be participating in that manner! 

DCG

1 in 5 Don’t Believe Osama bin Laden is Dead

The killing and death of Osama bin Laden (OBL) is shaping up to be the mother of all conspiracy theories.

As the Obama White House continues to refuse to release the OBL death photos, a Zogby poll finds that 1 in 5 (19%) likely American voters don’t believe Osama is dead. [Take our poll on this, HERE!]

Among those 19% is former Navy SEAL and Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura who is skeptical of Obama’s official narrative regarding the raid on the Osama compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Ventura also questions whether the man seen flicking between TV channels in the video released by the White House last Saturday was actually OBL.

As reported by Paul Joseph Watson of Prison Planet.com, May 10, 2011, Jesse Ventura said: “I’ve been lied to so much I question everything the government tells me. I don’t know what to believe, that’s the disturbing thing about being a United States citizen.” Ventura noted how the media has for the most part simply regurgitated everything the White House claimed about the raid. He is also troubled by the Defense Department’s cover-ups lies about Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman , which have made him suspect the official account of the OBL raid.

Ventura also echoed the sentiments of a number of intelligence professionals and heads of state who publicly expressed their contention that OBL had been dead for many years before Obama’s announcement of his death in a live speech on national television. “This guy was supposedly on a dialysis machine way back 10 years ago, how does he survive that long if he was on a dialysis machine?” asked Ventura.

Residents of Abbottabad share Ventura’s doubts, with one telling a BBC reporter that the man in the video was actually his neighbor and the owner of the compound, a man called Akhbar Han.

Another skeptic is psychiatrist Dr. Steve Pieczenik, MD, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and a State Department official in three different administrations. Pieczenik maintains that the alleged raid on Bin Laden’s compound was a fable because Osama had already been dead for the best part of a decade, but that our government was waiting for the most politically expedient time to roll out his corpse.

Dr. Pieczenik’s outspoken views have earned him the “honor” of Wikipedia threatening to delete its entry on him. [See here]

In his exclusive-to-subscribers report of May 8, 2011, “Wag the Dog’ is a Training Film for Obama White House,” investigative reporter Wayne Madsen points out the many inconsistencies in the White House’s narrative on the OBL raid and killing, and outright calls the narrative “a series of lies and half-truths.” Among “the lies of Abbottbad” are the following:

  1. Senior administration officials gathered in the White House Situation Room were shown intently looking at scenes of the attack on a video screen. Later, it was revealed that the live video feed had gone down prior to the photograph being taken.
  2. OBL, or the man who may have served as his double in U.S. intelligence-produced video tapes since 2001, was first said to have resisted with weapons, but later it was revealed that he had not resisted. Later still, it was revealed that “OBL” had offered to surrender before he was shot and killed.
  3. OBL was said to have been buried at sea in accordance with Islamic traditions. Yet, Islamic scholars and clerics said if someone dies on land, they must be buried on land.
  4. Obama administration officials stated that Pakistan was not informed of the operation beforehand. Yet Abbottabad residents reported that Pakistani government officials ordered residents of the military cantonment town to turn off their lights and remain indoors at the same time U.S. and Pakistani helicopters were first spotted by residents in the area.
  5. Navy SEAL team members and the CIA were not able to get a voice recording of the man alleged to be Osama bin Laden before he was killed. Nor could his height be determined because the strike force had no tape measure. Maybe that’s why Obama refuses to release photos of OBL’s burial at sea from a lower deck of the USS Carl Vinson because his height could be determined from the length of the enshrouded corpse.
  6. Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan first said there was a 99.9% certainty that from DNA and other forensics that the man killed was Osama bin Laden. But then a military official at Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan, where the “OBL” body was transported, said the degree of certainty was 95%. Facial recognition technology used on OBL’s corpse at Bagram drove the degree of certainty down to 90%. In other words, certainty decreased, not increased, after a more thorough post-mortem examination at Bagram.
  7. The comparative DNA used to identify Bin Laden was said to have been obtained from OBL’s sister, after she died from cancer. However, Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the house Intelligence Committee, later said DNA samples were used from “a number” of OBL’s relatives.
  8. Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan stated that US forces also killed Bin Laden’s son Khalid in the attack. The White House later said it was another Bin Laden son, Hamza, who was killed.
  9. Bin Laden’s wife, Amal al-Sadeh, was reported by the White House to have been shot and killed while trying to shield OBL. The story was later changed to her being shot in the leg while lunging at one of the SEAL team members.
  10. The compound was originally reported to have been a $1 million mansion. The photographs after the attack instead show a squalid ramshackle abode, one that has been estimated at worth $250,000 or less.
  11. Local residents reported they never heard the occupants of the compound speak OBL’s native Arabic but only Pashto. Pashto is an Eastern Iranian language spoken in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden was born and grew up in Saudi Arabia, where the official language is Arabic and the spoken languages are Arabic and English.
  12. Why would a primarily Pashto-speaking household have a cable or dish satellite television feed that offered only Arabic-language news channels in a primarily Urdu- and Pashto-speaking community? A close look at the elderly “Bin Laden” channel surfing his television shows only Arabic language stations being offered for favorite selection, except for the rock music station DJTV from France, BBC World, and Al Jazeera English.

H/t beloved fellows Tina, Joseph, May, Steve.

~Eowyn