NATO | Hip-Hop and Politics

What’s Jumping Off in Mali and Why We Should All Be Concerned?

January 18, 2013 By mrDaveyd

Dawud Walid

There’s a been a lot of drama going on over in Mali and its spread over to Algeria..In the past few days, we’ve heard conflicting reports about hostages, retaliatory strikes to clandestine operations.. Everyone from Al Quada to NATO to our own military here in the US to France’s military are all in the mix.. With so much of our collective attention on scandals involving Lance Armstrong and Notre Dame player Manti Teo’d its hard to get a grasp of whats going on..

We sat down w/ Dawud Walid of Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR )-Michigan who’s been monitoring this ordeal and is very familiar with the country and many of its main players.. He described what’s going on as a proxy war with all sorts of countries from China to France to the US via its Africom policy all positioning themselves to raid the resources in Mali and in Africa in general.

He painstakingly details those connections and explains how the recent upheavals in Libya have now reverberated and impacted to what’s currently going on in Mali.

Lastly, Walid also talks to us about the importance of Mali historically and currently.. There’s a lot more than natural resources that are at stake and its such that every African-American and people in the world in general should be concerned. Timbuktu’s historic libraries are being raided and destroyed by extremists.. It’s serious and while its good the US media is paying some attention to the region, what they will leave out is the looting of Timbuktu.. Check out the conversation below..

Mali

Below is a recent briefing from and resource guide of sorts from the Green Party about Mali. Hopefully folks will find this useful..

Green Party of the US opposes military intervention in Mali, urges withdrawal of AFRICOM

• The Mali rebellion is blowback from the U.S./NATO ouster of Gaddafi from Libya; efforts to gain control of African resources (oil, uranium, etc.) and competition with China are driving miltiary policies disguised as War on Terrorism, say Greens

• Green Party Speakers Bureau: Greens available to speak on foreign policy: http://www.gp.org/speakers/speakers-foreign-policy.php

WASHINGTON, DC — The Obama Administration is pursuing policies in Africa that threaten regional stability and innocent populations, including military intervention in Mali and establishment of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), said Green Party leaders.

“AFRICOM represents a continuing escalation of U.S. military presence in Africa, imposing economic dependence, political domination, and control over the continent’s mineral and other resources. The U.S./NATO attack on Libya opened the door to further U.S. military actions in Africa. The African Union, which has 17,000 African troops in Somalia, is working for the U.S., under CIA direction. Meanwhile, the war in Congo continues, in which military forces on the Pentagon payroll have perpetrated the worst slaughter since World War II, while the U.S. has blocked efforts to hold the Rwandan government accountable for war crimes in the conflict,” said _______. (See “US Drones over the D.R.C.?” Ann Garrison interviews Maurice Carney, Executive Director of Friends of the Congo, KPFA, January 13, 2013, http://www.anngarrison.com/audio/us-drones-over-the-drc)

Under current plans, troops from the 1st Infantry Division will be sent to Africa to contain al-Qaeda in Mali, but also to conduct training programs, exercises, and operations in 35 countries and set the stage for future military intervention. The troops will have the capability to deploy drones in Africa, if given permission.

“The Obama Administration is using the situation in Mali as an opportunity to bring Africa under the U.S. sphere of influence — to block Chinese influence and win control over precious resources, which include oil, petroleum, diamonds, copper, gold, iron, cobalt, uranium, bauxite, silver, certain kinds of wood, and fruit. U.S. operations are justified by the White House as an extension of the War on Terror and fight against al-Qaeda. Unfortunately, the terror is suffered by Africans who face internal conflicts that are aggravated by U.S. meddling, funding for extremists and oppressive and corrupt regimes, and in some cases air assaults on their homes,” said _______.

Greens noted that the U.S./NATO assault on Libya and aid for Libyan rebels empowered radical Islamic movements to threaten neighboring countries. These include the Wahabi rebels in Mali, which are supported by the corrupt Wahabist royal family of Saudi Arabia, which is allied with the U.S. The north African rebel movements are receiving aid from countries outside Africa, including the U.S. France has its own neo-colonial interests in the region, especially access to uranium for French nuclear reactors.

The Obama Administration is thus playing a dangerous and reckless game with the lives of innocent Africans, with blowback that may threaten U.S. security. (See “Mali, Wahabis and Saudis; Following the Money Trail” by Thomas C. Mountain, Black Agenda Report, January 8, 2013, http://blackagendareport.com/content/mali-wahabis-and-saudis-following-money-trail).

The Green Party of the United States opposed President Obama’s military campaign in Libya, opposes intervention in Mali, and continues to promote constructive and humane engagement with African nations instead of imperial policies like AFRICOM, which was authorized by President Bush in 2007.

“The resistance to al-Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb — which gained more beachheads in Africa as a result of the U.S.-led ouster of Gaddafi — must take place in Africa, led by Africans, without U.S. interference, which will only cause greater damage,” said _______.

“Instead of exercising military might, the U.S. should work with African leaders to promote self-determination and independence and reverse the devastating effects of the West’s racist colonial legacy in Africa. A Green foreign policy regarding Africa would include closing of military bases, increased humanitarian assistance for developing countries, especially aid for the fights against AIDS and other diseases, trade pacts that encourage workers’ rights and a clean environment, and promotion of greenhouse gas emissions reductions that are parallel with reductions in the U.S., since many of the worst effects of climate changes will be felt in Africa,” said SAME PERSON.

10 Outrageous Tactics the Police Are Using and getting Away With

December 8, 2012 By mrDaveyd

This is a recent article by John Knefel that first appeared in Alternet... It’s called 10 Outrageous Tactics Cops Get Away With. This will probably be one of the most sobering and important pieces you read all year.. I hope folks will take heed and truly understand whats happening right now.. There’s been a serious power grab right before us and very little push back, because folks are distracted or feel it won’t happen to them. many others have grown cynical and see the possibility of change as useless.. Whats useless is believing you can’t change things.. The first step in that is awareness followed by action.. That actions takes many forms.. It ranges from organizing and advocating to voting to harsh refusals to allow business to go on as usual..

As you are reading the article, below you may want to listen to this speech given in August 2008 by former political prisoner and Black Panther Dhoruba Bin Wahad, where he talks about the rise of the police state..

Below is the article explaining whats going on..

-Davey D-

Talk to someone who has never dealt with the cops about police behaving badly, and he or she will inevitably say, “But they can’t do that! Can they?” The question of what the cops can or can’t do is natural enough for someone who never deals with cops, especially if their inexperience is due to class and/or race privilege. But a public defender would describe that question as naïve. In short, the cops can do almost anything they want, and often the most maddening tactics are actually completely legal.

There are many reasons for this, but three historical developments stand out: the war on drugs provided the template for social control based on race; 9/11 gave federal and local officials the opportunity to ensnare Muslims (and activists) in the ever-increasing surveillance and incarceration state; and a lack of concern from the public at large means these tactics can be applied, often controversy-free, to anyone who resists them.

What follows are 10 of the innumerable tactics the police can use against a population often incapable of constraining their behavior
1. Infiltration, informants and monitoring. The NYPD’s Demographics Unit has engaged in a massive surveillance program directed at Muslims throughout the entire Northeast region, ignoring any jurisdictional limitations and acting as a secret police and intelligence gathering agency – a regional FBI of sorts. The AP’s award-winning reports [3] on the Demographics Unit helped bring some information about the program to light, including the revelation that its efforts have resulted in exactly zero terrorism leads. [4]

Although a lawsuit from 1971, the Handschu case, [4] “resulted in federal guidelines that prohibit the NYPD from collecting information about political speech unless it is related to potential terrorism,” legal experts worry that privacy rights have been so diminished that Muslims who are spied on may not be able to seek recourse. The AP quoted [5] Donna Lieberman in November 2011, who said, “It’s really not clear that people can do anything if they’ve been subjected to unlawful surveillance anymore.”

Muslims are not the only group that has been targeted. The AP reported [6] that the NYPD has also infiltrated liberal groups and protest organizers. Other cases of entrapment of activists, such as the NATO 5 [7] and the Cleveland 5, are also troubling. [8]

2. Warrantless home surveillance. Just in case you still think there must be some limit on how the authorities can surveil you, there’s this — a federal agency, not the police, but the larger point stands. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that it is legal for a law enforcement agent [9] to enter your house and videotape you without your consent. The case, United States v. Wahchumwah, revolved around a U.S. Fish and Wildlife undercover agent who recorded Wahchumwah without a warrant. The Ninth Circuit found the search to be “voluntary,” which led the EFF to write on its Web site: “The sad truth is that as technology continues to advance, surveillance becomes ‘voluntary’ only by virtue of the fact we live in a modern society where technology is becoming cheaper, easier and more invasive.”

The Ninth Circuit isn’t the only one who thinks warrantless video surveillance is perfectly OK. [10]

“CNET has learned that U.S. District Judge William Griesbach [11] ruled that it was reasonable for Drug Enforcement Administration agents to enter rural property without permission — and without a warrant — to install multiple ‘covert digital surveillance cameras’ in hopes of uncovering evidence that 30 to 40 marijuana plants were being grown.”

During the Bush years, Congress had to grant retroactive immunity to giant telecoms that engaged in warrantless wiretapping. It seems, the judicial branch wants to save Congress the trouble.

3. Preemptive visits and harassment. One of the favorite tactics of police departments is targeting activists a day before a large event. We saw this on May Day in New York City, as cops descended on several activists’ apartments before the day of action, [12] and in Chicago before the massive No NATO protests. [13] The Cleveland 5 were also arrested before May Day, and back in 2008 the RNC8 were also preemptively arrested. [7]

4. Creating call logs from stolen phones. If you lose your phone in NYC and report it to the police, they’ll help you find it. So far, so good. Where the agreement turns pear-shaped, however, is what they do with your call logs. The NYPD subpoenas your call log from the day it was stolen onward, under the logic that the records could help find your phone.

But — and here’s the kicker — they get info for the calls you made on the day it was swiped, and possibly even info from your new cell phone if you keep your number. The information is added to a database called the Enterprise Case Management System, and the numbers are hyperlinked for cross-referencing. The call logs, all obtained without a court order and often without the victim’s permission or knowledge, could “conceivably be used for any investigative purpose,” according to the New York Times. [14]

5. Consent searches. Sometimes a cop gives you a command, but phrases it as a question, like, “Would you open your bag so I can look inside?” If you’re anything like the vast majority of people in the United States, you have no idea that you’re under no lawful obligation to answer in the affirmative. You can, legally speaking, ask if you are being detained, and if the answer is no, you are free to walk away. Or at the very least, not open your bag.

Cops are aware that they can intimidate someone they decide to search, and once they obtain “consent” – e.g. “Yes, man with a gun who is towering over me, you can look in my bag” – any evidence of criminality they find can be used in court. This method of searching people was developed, like several other tactics on this list, during the early 1980s when the Reagan administration ramped up the so-called war on drugs.

Many critics argue that the very idea of a “consensual” interaction between police and the public is impossible, if the police initiate contact. As Justin Peters writes [15], “[Police] know the average person doesn’t feel they’re in a position to decline a conversation with a cop.” A common tactic [16] is for officers to say they’ll let someone off with a warning, then proceed to ask a bunch of questions, even though the person is technically free to go.

6. Stop and frisk. You’ve probably heard about stop and frisk by now, but for years this odious tactic – and close cousin to consent searches – went woefully underreported in establishment media. The NYCLU released staggering statistics for the year 2011 detailing the massive size of the program in New York City. One particularly memorable figure was that the NYPD stopped more young men of color than there are men of color in NYC. [17] (More information at stopmassincarceration.org [18].)
7. Pretext stops (Operation Pipeline). The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that cops are free to use minor traffic violations as a pretext to pull over people they suspect of committing drug crimes. Once pulled over, the police obtain “consent” – “Would you get out of the car and empty your pockets?” – and can go on fishing expeditions.

In the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ohio v. Robinette, “The Court made clear to all lower courts that, from now on, the Fourth Amendment should place no meaningful constraints on the police in the War on Drugs,” writes Michelle Alexander in The New Jim Crow. The Court determined [19] that cops don’t have to tell motorists they’re free to leave before getting “permission” to search their car.

In the mid-1980s, the DEA rolled out Operation Pipeline, a federal program that trained city cops in the shady art of leveraging pretext stops into consent searches. The discretionary nature of many of these searches resulted in massive amounts of racial profiling, so much so that some officials say [20] “the reason racial profiling is a national problem is that it was initiated, and in many ways encouraged, by the federal government’s war on drugs.”

8. Police dogs. Don’t consent to cops searching your bag? If you’re in a car or an airport, police can bring in the dogs to smell your stuff, and if the dog responds, they have probable cause to search you without your consent. “The Supreme Court has ruled that walking a drug-sniffing dog around someone’s vehicle (or someone’s luggage) does not constitute a ‘search,’ and therefore does not trigger Fourth Amendment scrutiny,” Michelle Alexander writes.

But if a dog barks or sits, shouldn’t we be comfortable with that triggering probable cause? Radley Balko has reported on the phenomenon of drug dogs giving false positives after reading cues from their handlers [16]:

The problem isn’t that the dogs aren’t capable of picking up the scent; it’s that dogs have been bred to please and interact with humans. A dog can easily be manipulated to alert whenever needed. But even with conscientious cops, a dog without the proper training may pick up on its handler’s body language and alert whenever it detects its handler is suspicious.

This is called the “Clever Hans effect,” [21] named after the horse who could do arithmetic by tapping his hoof. In reality, the horse could recognize the shift in his owner’s body language when he had arrived at the right number.

9. Surveillance drones. The drones are coming, and the few illusions of privacy we cling to will soon disappear. The domestic market for drones in the next decade is estimated in the billions, [22] and police departments are chomping at the bit to implement this new technology. Drones already patrol the US-Mexico border, [23] and cities such as Seattle are moving toward using surveillance drones [24]. In August, a North Dakota court ruled [25] that the first-ever drone-assisted arrest was perfectly legal.

In our ever more authoritarian society, [26] expect politicians and the lobbyists who fund their campaigns to justify increased incursions into privacy in the name of security. The short-term incentives to value privacy have been all but forgotten, as “if you’re not doing anything wrong you’ve got nothing to fear” has gone from self-evidently absurd cliché to national motto.

10. Enlist the private sector. The comedian Chris Laker says of privatization: “You can’t privatize everything. Learned that from RoboCop.” But it seems police departments haven’t learned that lesson. In Arizona, police enlisted the help of the Corrections Corporation of America, a private, for-profit prison corporation, in a drug sweep of a public school. PRWatch reports: [27]

“To invite for-profit prison guards to conduct law enforcement actions in a high school is perhaps the most direct expression of the ‘schools-to-prison pipeline’ I’ve ever seen,” said Caroline Isaacs, program director of the Tucson office of the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), a Quaker social justice organization that advocates for criminal justice reform.

The privatization of nearly all aspects of public life, from education to law enforcement, is a trend we should all find disturbing, not least of all when a company that profits from locking humans in cages is directly involved in the arrest process.

The larger point here is obvious. In the last decade, the Bill of Rights has been shredded at the federal level and the local level. There are few constraints on police, FBI, NSA, and private intelligence companies when it comes to surveillance of the public. That many of these programs and tactics are discretionary exacerbates and magnifies conscious and subconscious racist and classist attitudes among those who carry them out.

written by John Knefel of Alternet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKHsGh-y8d8

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Filed Under: 2012 Daily News Tagged With: Drug Enforcement Administration, NATO, New York City Police Department, NYPD, Police, Police brutality, Police spying, police surveillence, polkice surveillence

Why are All Eyes on the David Patraeus Infidelity Saga, But Complete Silence on Military Rapes?

November 13, 2012 By mrDaveyd

David Patraeus

The recent shake up in amongst military leaders has evolved into the ultimate soap opera. First we have General David Patraeus being forced to retire from the CIA last week for cheating on his wife and now we have General John R Allen under investigation who took Patraeus’ place in Afghanistan.

The person who blew the whistle on Patraeus was a family friend named Jill Kelley. She was being harassed by Patraeus’ lover and biographer Paula Broadwell who thought that Kelley was somehow romantically linked to the general. The truth of the matter is that Kelley and her husband have been longtime friends with the Patraeus’. This was not known to Broadwell who resented the close relationship she perceived Kelley had with the general. She responded by stepping to Kelley and sent off a bunch of threatening emails warning Kelly to stay away.

Late yesterday, the story took a new twist when it was announced that General Allen who was recently nominated to head the U.S. European Command and NATO forces in Europe may have some involvement. His nomination has been put on hold while he’s being investigated for sending 20-30 thousand pages of emails to Jill Kelley over the past two years. Everyone wants to know whats going on with those two. They have not said if there was some sort of romantic hook up or if he had been revealing government secrets. Right now the word from Leon Panetta is Allen had ‘inappropriate communications‘ with Kelley..

General John R. Allen

Thus far damn near every news agency is on top of this story as folks are seemingly eager to see heads roll. It’s the big talk all on Capitol Hill with lawmakers like Senator Diane Feinstein and Congressman Peter King demanding further investigation. They are furious that they were ‘left in the dark’. Today there will be hearings.

It’s good to see that the military brass and people sitting in the halls of power have stepped up to hold folks accountable. If having an affair is a big ‘no-no’ in military circles, then I say right on for being hard-nosed in enforcing the rules. We should expect more from our men and women in uniform.

With that being said, what’s confusing, ironic and quite sad is the lack of media fan fare and the lack zeal to see heads roll around the fact that the military is the scene to tens of thousands of rapes every year. Very few are demanding to know why in 2010 we had close to 20 thousand rapes on military bases? Yes, you read that right,. America’s dirty little secret is that we have horrifically high number of female soldiers being raped by their male counterparts.. Some of you reading this may think I’m trying to be sensational with my numbers, but rest assured I’m not. I’m quoting stats from Department of Defence. There’s an Academy nominated heart wrenching documentary called The Invisible War that unearth’s this under reported story.

Jill Kelley

One would think more of us would be outraged especially after we had several months of discussion about ‘legitimate rape’ during the Presidential campaign. One would’ve thought that we as a society would be moving quickly to purge not only those responsible for these sexual assaults but also the military leaders whose watch in which these rapes occurred. Why aren’t we having news conferences about someone like Patraeus, Allen or some other high-ranking general being kicked out and investigated because thousands of rapes have occurred under their leadership?

Sadly most of us have remained oblivious to the rapes on military bases or have simply turned a blind eye. Others have the nerve to rationalize an explain how the military has strict rules around officers having affairs while remaining dead silent on the rapes epidemic…Explain that one..

More importantly explain what steps we intend to take to eradicate rapes in the military. Why is our mainstream media focusing on the Generals but silent as a church mouse on a horrific act that’ll leave many severely scared for a lifetime? I guess we as a society are comfortable with the War on Women continuing.

Something to think about..

written by Davey D

PS.. Wanna give some additional food for thought about this case..We have a couple of things going on here.. First is the cover ups and silence of the high number of rapes in the military. Second we have the fallout around Patraeus.. Here’s an article that breaks down who Paula Broadwell is..she was more than just a biographer..

A Covert Affair: Petraeus Caught in the Honeypot?

By Justin Raimondo

November 12, 2012 “Information Clearing House” – The outing of Gen. David Petraeus as an adulterer, and his subsequent resignation as CIA Director, was carried out by an unknown FBI “whistleblower” who leaked the facts of the FBI investigation into the General’s private life to Rep. Eric Cantor. The New York Times reports:

“Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, said Saturday an F.B.I. employee whom his staff described as a whistle-blower told him about Mr. Petraeus’s affair and a possible security breach in late October, which was after the investigation had begun.

“’I was contacted by an F.B.I. employee concerned that sensitive, classified information may have been compromised and made certain Director Mueller was aware of these serious allegations and the potential risk to our national security,’ Mr. Cantor said in a statement.

“Mr. Cantor talked to the person after being told by Representative Dave Reichert, Republican of Washington, that a whistle-blower wanted to speak to someone in the Congressional leadership about a national security concern. On Oct. 31, his chief of staff, Steve Stombres, called the F.B.I. to tell them about the call.”

The FBI probe apparently started in late spring, when several people associated with Petraeus — not just the one woman, as has been reported elsewhere — received harassing emails. The emails were traced to 40-year-old Paula Broadwell, national security analyst, military intelligence veteran, and author of a biography of Petraeus. Authorities believed his email account may have been hacked, and this led to a remarkable irony: the CIA chief’s emails were monitored, without his knowledge, whereupon it was discovered Broadwell may have either had access to his account or tried to obtain access. In any case, in the course of their spying, FBI monitors discovered a large volume of emails to and from Broadwell. Looking for evidence of a security breach, all they found was evidence of a “human drama,” as one anonymous FBI official put it: an illicit affair between Petraeus and Broadwell.

Petraeus was only informed of the investigation on October 25 or 26. So here we have the astonishing fact of the CIA’s head honcho being spied on for a period of months by our own law enforcement officials.

Or maybe it wasn’t a simple case of complaints about “harassing” or threatening emails. Fox News avers:

“The FBI had been investigating an unrelated and much broader case before stumbling on the affair. Fox News has learned that during the course of this investigation, the name of biographer Paula Broadwell came up. The FBI followed that lead and in doing so, uncovered his affair with her.”

What was this “much broader case”? Almost certainly it was a counterintelligence investigation, i.e. a pushback against efforts by some foreign entity to penetrate or otherwise compromise US secrets. We can only guess at the specifics, however we do know that in the course of that investigation Broadwell’s name “came up.”

On the surface, at least, Broadwell is not the sort of person whose name would come up in a counterintelligence investigation: a West Point graduate, where she earned degrees in political geography and systems engineering, she seems like the veritable embodiment of All-American
red-white-and-blue super-patriotism. This biographical account on her high school website says

“Paula pursued a military intelligence career abroad, serving in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. During her service, especially after 9-11, Paula’s intensity was directed toward the war against terror; her contributions and efforts to thwart terrorism have been commended by the U.S. Army and by Europe’s Special Operations Forces Commanding General. In this arena, she has planned counter-terrorism initiatives presented to NATO and worked on transnational counter-terrorism issues with foreign and domestic agencies, U.S. Special Forces, and the FBI.”

Graduate studies at the University of Denver in Middle East studies enabled her to travel to “Jordan and Israel,” and make a swing through the Persian Gulf and Europe where she spoke at various conferences. This triumphal tour was capped by a Harvard fellowship “for study in Syria and Iran.”

While Broadwell’s current academic affiliation is with Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, her previous post was deputy director of the Jebsen Center for Counter-Terrorism Studies at Tufts University’s Fletcher School. The Center, according to its self-description, “distinguishes itself by a philosophy that maintains counter-terrorism should be predictive, preventive and preemptive, with the latter being a last resort.” Founded in 2005, the Jebsen Center was made possible by the generous donation of one Jan Henrik Jebsen, heir to the Norwegian shipping fortune, who gave $1.3 million to set it up. Jebsen, a former investment banker with Lazard Freres, is the principal of Gamma Applied Visions Group, an international octopus with tentacles all over the place: part arms dealer and weapons developer, part “green” energy company. As one might expect from someone who has so much of his multi-billion dollar fortune invested in making and selling armaments, Jebsen is on the board of directors of the distinctly warlike Hudson Institute, where Scooter Libby, Douglas Feith, Michael Ledeen, and practically every neocon you’ve ever heard of have found refuge.

While, in true neocon fashion, Hudson scholars conjure a wide diversity of imminent “threats” to the US, includingChina and Russia, their main focus is the threat of Islamist radicalism, especially as it impacts Israel. Indeed, Hudson operates inside Israel, where it pushes the far-rightist views of the most extreme elements in Israeli society: the settler movement, and the faction of Likud angling for war with Iran. It has also focused its attention onpurging universities of academics who don’t toe the right-wing ultra-nationalist Likudnik line.

More recently, former Hudson president and “trustee emeritus” Max Singer — who has since moved to Israel, where, as a “public policy consultant” at Bar Ilan University, he spends his time inciting violence against Palestinians — is on a mission to protect Israel from the alleged threat posed by the President of the United States.

The Jebsen Center has been equally useful to the neocons. Richard H. Schultz, head of Tufts’ International Studies program (of which the Center is a part) was a signatory to the Project for a New American Century’s “open letter” to President Bush urging war with Iraq and a number of other Middle Eastern actors in the wake of 9/11. Here he is recommending the importation of Israeli “anti-terrorist” techniques to pacify the restless natives of Iraq. Here is another Jebsen Center scholar describing alleged terrorist actions engaged in by Iran worldwide. And then there’s the testimony of this guy:

“The idea of overthrowing the Iranian government through covert but peaceful means is not original. The project was first brought to my attention in August 2006 when I worked as an intern research assistant at Tufts University’s Fletcher School of Diplomacy’s Jebsen Center for Counter-terrorism. I worked for the then director of the center Brigadier General Russell Howard (Ret.) on a project titled Bringing Down Iran Without Firing A Shot. I wasn’t very experienced in the world of covert operations in the field or in the academic realm but I was very interested in becoming involved in it. General Howard, on the other hand, was not only a counter-terrorism strategist but a veteran Special Forces officer, an academic, and a tutor. It was General Howard who introduced me to the idea of targeting factors specific to Iran in order to adapt to the country’s specific needs. He had six factors which he believed were important: The military use of ongoing insurgencies within Iran, political strife, economic strife, declining oil revenues, demographics, and deteriorating infrastructure.”

Interestingly, in November of 2006, during her tenure at the Jebsen Center, Broadwell led a group of Fletcher School students on a trip to New York City to meet with then Iranian UN representative Javad Zarif. Both arealumni of the Josef Korbel School of International Studies at the University of Denver.

All this establishes a context that goes far beyond the titillating details of the alleged affair between Petraeus and Broadwell — and this is no doubt what set alarm bells ringing in the intelligence community when it was revealed. Is there really any need to point out the uses of the “honeypot” in intelligence-gathering and other covert activities regularly engaged in by spooks of all nations? From Mata Hari to the Mossad agent who lured Israeli nuclear scientist Mordecahi Vanunu, sex is a time-honored weapon in the war of spy-vs-spy. A secret affair with the CIA Director is the equivalent of the Honeypot Olympics, and we have to ask: was the remarkably fit Ms. Broadwell a lure? If so, she’s won a Gold Medal.

Broadwell’s actions — sending emails that were bound to be traced back to her — appear to make little sense on the surface. But if the goal of luring a 60-year-old geezer into an affair with a much younger woman was to expose him, and get him fired, then surely her antics succeeded in accomplishing that goal.

So who would have an interest in getting rid of Petraeus? Here’s where the Cantor connection comes in. The tip by an anonymous “FBI employee” that wound up in Cantor’s office two weeks ago came through Rep. David Reichert, Republican of Washington state, who has a friend who knows the whistleblower. Cantor then spoke to the whistleblower directly, who put him in touch with FBI Director Mueller.

Cantor is a great friend of Israel, and Petraeus — not so much. The General was attacked, as you’ll recall, by partisans of the Lobby, including Abe Foxman, when he delivered testimony before Congress citing Israel as a strategic liability in the Middle East. As the executor of the new Obamaite policy of sidling up to Islamists, not only in Libya but also in Syria and Egypt, Petraeus was no doubt seen by the Israelis as an enemy to be neutralized.

Broadwell’s affiliation with the Jebsen Center, and the Center’s connection to the neoconservative network, sets the scene: a young, attractive woman with impeccable national security credentials throws herself at Petraeus, and he takes the bait. Whether she’s been recruited by a foreign intelligence agency at this point or not is irrelevant: he’s already put himself in a vulnerable position, and there are any number of actors on the international stage more than willing to press their advantage.

Will we ever know the full story? At this point, the story is so hot that it may burn the cover story — “it’s all about sex” — right off the wrapper. Because there’s more — a lot more — here than meets the eye. When Cantorpledged to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he and his fellow Republicans “will serve as a check on the administration” in regard to the President’s policy toward Israel, he was clearly aligning himself with a foreign leader against American interests as perceived by the White House. But would he really go this far — deliberately taking down a key figure, one beloved by Republicans, in order to keep his promise to Netanyahu?

Stay tuned to this space, because this story is moving fast….

Update: This morning [11/12/12] the New York Times reports:

“F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Broadwell for the first time the week of Oct. 21, and she acknowledged the affair, a government official briefed on the matter said. She also voluntarily gave the agency her computer. In a search, the agents discovered several classified documents, which raised the additional question of whether Mr. Petraeus had given them to her. She said that he had not. Agents interviewed Mr. Petraeus the following week. He also admitted to the affair but said he had not given any classified documents to her. The agents then interviewed Ms. Broadwell again on Friday, Nov. 2, the official said.”

Bingo!

Filed Under: 2012 Daily News Tagged With: Central Intelligence Agency, chetaing, David Petraeus, Department of Defence, Jill Kelley, Kelley, NATO, Paula Broadwell

HKR: What’s Behind the Unrest in Libya-Is It Really Over an Offensive Film?

September 13, 2012 By mrDaveyd

Yesterday (HKR) Hard Knock Radio sat down w/ Dawud Walid who heads up the CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) chapter in Michigan to talk about the tragic events that have unfolded in Libya. The death of ambassador Chris Stevens and 3 other state department officials has made headlines all over the world. In this interview we sought to answer, ‘Is all the hoopla really about an obscure offensive movie or is there more to the puzzle’? As offensive as this film may be why would demonstrations against it turn to deadly violence?

Walid gives us a brief history and context about the events that have transpired in Libya over the past year. He notes the intervention by NATO and the US wasn’t a humanitarian effort as was stated, instead it was more along the lines of Regime Change.. With that in mind, what ever attacks levied on the US Embassy has got to be seen from that perspective.. Walid explains this in greater detail.

Walid also gives us a run down of the forces that may be behind the offensive film. He notes it’s not just one lone film director (Sam Bacile) with an axe to grind against Islam, nor is this the first time an inflammatory film has been released trashing Islam. Walid points out the extremist anti Muslim pro-Occupation Zionist forces who in the past have deliberately sought to inflame tensions in the region and have long used propaganda pieces like this movie to achieve that end.. He suspects that connection exists here..Below is a trailer to this film which was shot in California.. It should be noted that the several of the actors in this film have spoken out condemning the film stating they had no idea of the offensive contents. The script given to them did not add up to the final product.

The other question raised is why didn’t the State Department get out ahead of this film and distance itself and give folks a heads up? The film’s trailer was posted on line back in July..Given the sensitivity and diplomatic experience we have with folks in the region, why wasn’t there a pre-emptive briefing?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAiOEV0v2RM

In listening to this interview and seeing the events further unfold, what’s not lost on me was being at the DNC in Charlotte a couple of weeks ago and seeing that large crowd of political leaders cheer over and over and chant USA USA as everyone from Vice President Joe Biden to Senator John Kerry emphasized how they killed Osama Bin Laden. We’ve long been told and as a country have often insisted that we not cheer death even if we feel that death was justified. It’s bad seed to plant especially when at look at the latest uproar and this incident and believe the updated information from the state department that the attacks on the Embassy were planned and came from al-Qaeda.

Here’s our HKR interview with Dawud Walid..

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Filed Under: 2012 Daily News, Hard Knock Radio Intv Tagged With: Al Qaeda, CAIR, Council on American-Islamic Relations, Davey D, Dawud Walid, hard Knock radio, HKR, Islam, Libya, NATO, Sam Bacile

Categories

What’s Jumping Off in Mali and Why We Should All Be Concerned?

10 Outrageous Tactics the Police Are Using and getting Away With

Why are All Eyes on the David Patraeus Infidelity Saga, But Complete Silence on Military Rapes?

HKR: What’s Behind the Unrest in Libya-Is It Really Over an Offensive Film?