#1 Source for Leaks Around the World!

Archive for the ‘Other Leaks’ Category

Leaked Document Reveals Egyptian Army’s Role in Torture, Disappearances and Killings

In Egypt, Egypt, News, Other Leaks, World Revolution on April 13, 2013 at 9:00 AM

04/10/2013

Egypt’s armed forces participated in forced disappearances, torture and killings across the country – including in Cairo’s Egyptian Museum – during the 2011 uprising, even as military leaders publicly declared their neutrality, according to a leaked presidential report on revolution-era crimes.

The report, submitted to President Mohamed Morsi by his own hand-picked committee in January, has yet to be made public, but a chapter seen by the Guardian implicates the military in a catalogue of crimes against civilians, beginning with their first deployment to the streets.

The chapter recommends that the government investigate the highest ranks of the military to determine who was responsible.

More than 1,000 people, including many prisoners, are said to have gone missing during the 18 days of the revolt. Scores turned up in Egypt’s morgues, shot or bearing signs of torture.

Many have simply disappeared, leaving behind desperate families who hope, at best, that their loved ones are serving prison sentences that the government does not acknowledge.

The findings of the high-level investigation, implicating Egypt’s powerful military, will put pressure on Morsi, who assumed power from the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces after his election in June and has declined to prosecute any officers, despite allegations that some participated in abuse.

They could also figure in the retrial of the toppled president Hosni Mubarak and his former interior minister Habib al-Adly, who are set to return to court on Saturday to face charges – perhaps supported by new evidence from the report – that they were responsible for killing protesters during the revolt.

Hossam Bahgat, director of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, said: “This chapter sheds light on new and extremely disturbing incidents that implicate the military in serious human rights violations. It uncovers new details on one of the most secret aspects of the 18 days of revolt that ended with theousting of Mubarak: the role played by the armed forces in supporting Mubarak against protesters from the date they were deployed on 28 January 2011, until the first military statement was issued in support of the protesters on 10 February.”

Egypt Torture Leak 7

Among the incidents explored in the chapter, which focuses on the fate of those who went missing or were forcibly disappeared, investigators found that members of the armed forces detained an unknown but probably large number of civilians at a checkpoint on a road south of Cairo who have not been seen again; detained and tortured protesters in the Egyptian Museum before moving them to military prisons, killing at least one person, and delivered to government coroners in the capital at least 11 unidentified bodies, believed to be former prisoners, who were buried in paupers’ graves four months later.

Egypt Torture Leak 8

“The committee found that a number of citizens died during their detention by the armed forces and that they were buried in indigent graves, as they were considered unidentified,” the report says, adding that authorities did not investigate, despite evidence of injuries and severe torture.

“The committee recommends investigating the leaders of the armed forces about the issuance of orders and instructions to subordinates who committed acts of torture and enforced disappearance,” it states.

Egypt Torture Leak 1

One woman who gave testimony to the committee, Radia Atta, told the Guardian that her husband, Ayman Issa, disappeared after being held at a military roadblock near the pyramids of Dahshour. He was on his way to work on 30 January 2011, after leaving their home in Ashment, a village in the governorate of Beni Suef. Issa was probably arrested some time between 7.30am and 8am, Atta said, during a curfew set by the military.

When Atta arrived at the checkpoint that afternoon, after receiving a call from a neighbour who saw Issa being arrested, she said she saw a staggering number of detained civilians lying on the ground with their hands and feet bound. Officers at the checkpoint sent Atta to a police station in Giza, the capital’s western district, that had been commandeered by the military. There, Atta saw soldiers frisking and beating detainees as they arrived from the checkpoint. One soldier handed Atta her husband’s passport and said he had been charged with “rioting” against the army and referred to military prosecutors.

When Atta obtained permission from the prosecutors to visit her husband in Hykestep, a large military base with a prison on Cairo’s eastern outskirts, he could not be found. Her complaints to the defence and interior ministries, as well as civilian and military prosecutors, have failed to turn up any trace of her husband.

The military declined to comment on the report, saying it could take up to three weeks to respond. A source at the president’s office said Morsi had not seen the findings, which were being investigated by the prosecutor general. “As soon as results appear, they will be made public,” the source said. “The findings you mentioned are speculative, and not authentic. We haven’t received the findings from the committee, and the investigations are still ongoing.”

Protesters and opposition politicians have long called for the military to be held accountable for scores of alleged incidents of torture and killings during the uprising and 16 months of military rule that followed. The military has prosecuted at least four people, including three low-level conscripts, for incidents that occurred later in 2011, but no member of the armed forces is known to have faced charges for abuse or killings during the revolution.

Human rights lawyers say Egypt’s new constitution, which was passed at Morsi’s urging in December and gives the military sole authority to investigate its own members, made prosecuting soldiers impossible.

The constitution is “a bar forever”, said Heba Morayef, Egypt director for Human Rights Watch.

“We’ve been arguing from the start that there will never be military accountability within the military judiciary. It’s just never going to happen in Egypt,” she said.

The 16-member fact-finding committee, appointed by Morsi last July, investigated 19 violent incidents and submitted a roughly 800-page report to Morsi and the prosecutor general, Talaat Abdallah, but neither has released or publicly responded to the report’s findings and recommendations.

Despite calls from some human rights lawyers, including the committee member Ahmed Ragheb, to set up a special authority to prosecute crimes committed by both civil and military authorities, no new charges have been filed. An office under Abdallah for the “revolution protection prosecution”, approved by Morsi in November, says it is investigating new cases, but it will not be able to charge military officers.

Ragheb said: “The committee reached important findings, but unfortunately Morsi didn’t do his role in declaring the report to public opinion and did not take serious steps with the security apparatus that was involved in crimes against demonstrators.”

Egypt has not created a national database to track those who disappeared and has not set up a ministry to assist their families, as Libya did after its revolution. The National Council for Care of the Revolution Martyrs’ Families and Wounded, established in December 2011, claims to have paid out millions of pounds in compensation but does not track missing people.

Disappearances are particularly difficult to investigate, human rights activists say. Egyptian authorities may intentionally fail to keep records, and ordinary missing-person cases can be impossible to distinguish from forced disappearances at the hands of by security forces.

Cover-Up

Mohsen Bahnasy, a human rights lawyer and member of the fact-finding committee, said the military and interior ministries had refused to provide the names of soldiers or officers working at checkpoints, police stations and ad-hoc detention centres where civilians disappeared. The failure to turn over the names “is in itself an indication of a criminal cover-up”, Bahgat said.

Bahnasy said he intended to sue the armed forces and the government to compel them to reveal the officers’ names and a definitive list of who they arrested.

Bahnasy and others said they could not reliably estimate how many people disappeared during the revolt. Nermeen Yousry, who in 2012 helped found an independent advocacy campaign for the disappeared called We Will Find Them, said Egypt’s military-appointed cabinet reported in March 2011 that 1,200 missing-person cases had been filed during the revolution.

The fact-finding committee, after collecting witness statements, testimonies from relatives of the disappeared and data turned over by Cairo prosecutors and the Forensic Medical Authority, could only confirm 68 disappearances. Bahnasy said he believes there are hundreds more.

“This is a very small number, of course. The real numbers are much higher,” said Hassan el-Azhari, a lawyer with the Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression, who has also filed a case to force the government to turn over the names of those arrested.

The military, interior ministry and General Intelligence Service – Egypt’s top spy agency – did not provide the committee with any information about civilians who may have been detained without identification, and Bahnasy said many families of the disappeared had not come forward.

But evidence compiled by the committee points to a wave of arrests, torture and deaths.

Egypt Torture Leak 6

As well as at least four civilians, though probably many more, who disappeared after being detained at the roadblock near the Dahshour pyramids, it also found that the military detained protesters in and around Tahrir Square and transferred them to military prisons during the revolt.

Investigators found that armed military intelligence officers with cameras booked rooms in a major hotel next to the square on 25 January, the first day of protests, and observed and recorded subsequent events, Bahnasy said. “Military intelligence had evidence of what happened and hid it from the committee and the judiciary,” he said.

The committee found evidence that at least one protester who disappeared from Tahrir Square during the revolt and was later found dead – a young lawyer from the governorate of Monofeya, about 45 miles (75km) north of Cairo – was detained and tortured by the military.

Abducted

Egypt Torture Leak 2

Osama Abdel Hamid travelled to Cairo with colleagues from his local lawyers’ association on 1 February 2011 to participate in the protests, his father told the committee. Karim al-Gharbali, a friend who joined Abdel Hamid in the square, told investigators that the lawyer was fluent in English and helped foreign journalists translate painted banners and the slogans being shouted.

Some time after the 2 February assault on the square by Mubarak loyalists that became known as the Camel Battle, Abdel Hamid was abducted by men in civilian clothes and detained in the basement of the nearby Egyptian Museum, Gharbali said.

Another witness, Hani al-Azab, told the committee that he and Abdel Hamid were taken in armoured vehicles to the museum at about 6am on 3 February and were tortured and photographed with weapons and money. Before dawn on 4 February, Azab said, he and Abdel Hamid were transferred to a military prison run by a unit he named as Military Intelligence Group 75, where they were tortured and forced to confess to crimes. Finally, Azab said, the two were moved and held for three days in Hykestep, where Abdel Hamid died from the torture and beatings.

Abdel Hamid’s father, Abdel Moneim Allam, found his son’s body 12 days later, after receiving a tip from a lawyer who said it was being stored in Cairo’s Zeinhom morgue. It was “misshapen” by torture, bore signs of beatings, and had a fractured skull, he told the committee.

Bahnasy and Azhari said that the hundreds of people who they believe disappeared during the uprising were probably killed. In addition to protesters who vanished and civilians who were arrested from the streets, thousands of prisoners remain lost, and the two lawyers believe many of them are dead.

Little is known about the violent events that wracked Egypt’s prisons in the days following 28 January, when the police fled their posts. According to the interior ministry, about 24,000 prisoners escaped, and 21,000 have since been re-arrested. Taqadum al-Khatib, a political activist who worked with the fact-finding committee, has said that several prisons came under co-ordinated attacks by unidentified men and that guards used teargas and live ammunition in failed attempts to repel the assaults and subdue rioting prisoners.

Other reports allege that security forces may have intentionally allowed prisoners to escape from certain prisons, while guards at other jails opened fire and killed shot dozens of inmates who rioted when they heard that prisons were being opened. Witnesses claimed that during the chaos, some prisoners were left abandoned and locked inside, while others who escaped were later arrested by security forces and disappeared.

In February 2011, Amnesty International found that inmates who were released from Fayoum prison on 28 January and detained on 30 January at the Dahshour checkpoint were later found dead.

Officers told two men whose brothers were among the detained that they could inquire at the interior ministry about where their siblings would be taken. Instead, the men found their brothers’ corpses, bearing signs of torture, nine days later in a Cairo morgue with 68 other bodies identified as Fayoum prison inmates.

According to data provided to the fact-finding committee by the prosecutor general’s office, the Forensic Medical Authority officially recovered 19 unclaimed bodies during the revolution, 11 of whom had been delivered to coroners by military prosecutors, and 10 of whom were identified as inmates from Fayoum prison. All were turned over between 2 and 8 February.

Other disappearances detailed in the committee’s report remain harder to explain.

Egypt Torture Leak 3

Sabah Abdel Fattah, the mother of 26-year-old Mohamed Seddik, told the Guardian that her son, a member of the opposition Dignity party, disappeared after leaving home to protest on 28 January. On 11 February, the day Mubarak resigned, Seddik texted his cousins, saying: “Talk to me.” When Abdel Fattah reached him on his mobile phone, Seddik was surrounded by voices and car horns, as if in a crowded vehicle.

“Yes mum, I’m mo …” he said, before the line was cut. Abdel Fattah believes he was either saying his name, Mohamed, or “mahbous“, the Arabic word for arrested.

When Abdel Fattah reached Seddik’s phone later that night, a man answered and swore at her. No one answered for another three months, when finally another man picked up and said he had bought the line. A month later, a third man answered and explained that his brother, a soldier in the army, had found the sim card near Al-Jabal al-Ahmar, or Red Mountain, a well-known riot-police camp in Cairo. When Abdel Fattah visited the Red Mountain area, residents told her that prisoners had been held in the camp during the revolution but had been released.

Azhari says that a number of families who continued to call their disappeared relatives’ phones were answered by residents of the area who said they had found the sim cards in piles of rubbish outside the camp.

Terrified

Abdel Fattah said she thought the military had secretly detained civilians during the revolution, some of whom had been sentenced. She claims to have been told by family friends in the intelligence services that her son was given a three-year sentence and is probably in a military jail.

Morayef and other human rights advocates say that such a scenario is highly unlikely, since the thousands of civilians known to have been brought before military trials since 2011 are transferred to civilian prisons after their case is decided and can usually contact their families.

Abdel Fattah believes her son will return to the family’s flat, down an unpaved back alley in Cairo’s Zeitoun district, where his framed portrait sits on top of a bookshelf, when he completes his sentence. Human rights lawyers, however, say most will never return.

Yousry, of We Will Find Them, said the security forces had tried to disappear those who died in their custody “to make it harder for the families to ever find their kids, so they don’t convict themselves”.

“Actually me, myself, I used to chant: ‘The army and the people are one hand,’ but now, yes, maybe we will realise that the army was never on our side,” Yousry said. “I guess they were trying to break down the revolution. They wanted to contain it and make people scared, terrify people from going to the square.”

Via TheGuardian

WikiLeaks Was Just a Preview: We’re Headed for an Even Bigger Showdown Over Secrets

In News, Other Leaks, WikiLeaks on March 23, 2013 at 7:40 AM

manning

03/23/2013

I went yesterday to a screening of We Steal Secrets, Oscar-winning director Alex Gibney’s brilliant new documentary about Wikileaks. The movie is beautiful and profound, an incredible story that’s about many things all at once, including the incredible Shakespearean narrative that is the life of Julian Assange, a free-information radical who has become an uncompromising guarder of secrets.

I’ll do a full review in a few months, when We Steal Secrets comes out, but I bring it up now because the whole issue of secrets and how we keep them is increasingly in the news, to the point where I think we’re headed for a major confrontation between the government and the public over the issue, one bigger in scale than even the Wikileaks episode.

We’ve seen the battle lines forming for years now. It’s increasingly clear that governments, major corporations, banks, universities and other such bodies view the defense of their secrets as a desperate matter of institutional survival, so much so that the state has gone to extraordinary lengths to punish and/or threaten to punish anyone who so much as tiptoes across the informational line.

This is true not only in the case of Wikileaks – and especially the real subject of Gibney’s film, Private Bradley Manning, who in an incredible act of institutional vengeance is being charged with aiding the enemy (among other crimes) and could, theoretically, receive a death sentence.

Did the Mainstream Media Fail Bradley Manning?

There’s also the horrific case of Aaron Swartz, a genius who helped create the technology behind Reddit at the age of 14, who earlier this year hanged himself after the government threatened him with 35 years in jail for downloading a bunch of academic documents from an MIT server. Then there’s the case of Sergey Aleynikov, the Russian computer programmer who allegedly stole the High-Frequency Trading program belonging to Goldman, Sachs (Aleynikov worked at Goldman), a program which prosecutors in open court admitted could, “in the wrong hands,” be used to “manipulate markets.”

Aleynikov spent a year in jail awaiting trial, was convicted, had his sentence overturned, was freed, and has since been re-arrested by a government seemingly determined to make an example out of him.

The Brilliant Life and Tragic Death of Aaron Swartz

And most recently, there’s the Matthew Keys case, in which a Reuters social media editor was charged by the government with conspiring with the hacker group Anonymous to alter a Los Angeles Times headline in December 2010. The change in the headline? It ended up reading, “Pressure Builds in House to Elect CHIPPY 1337,” Chippy being the name of another hacker group accused of defacing a video game publisher’s website.

Keys is charged with crimes that carry up to 25 years in prison, although the likelihood is that he’d face far less than that if convicted. Still, it seems like an insane amount of pressure to apply, given the other types of crimes (of, say, the HSBC variety) where stiff sentences haven’t even been threatened, much less imposed.

A common thread runs through all of these cases. On the one hand, the motivations for these information-stealers seem extremely diverse: You have people who appear to be primarily motivated by traditional whistleblower concerns (Manning, who never sought money and was obviously initially moved by the moral horror aroused by the material he was seeing, falls into that category for me), you have the merely mischievous (the Keys case seems to fall in this area), there are those who either claim to be or actually are free-information ideologues (Assange and Swartz seem more in this realm), and then there are other cases where the motive might have been money (Aleynikov, who was allegedly leaving Goldman to join a rival trading startup, might be among those).

But in all of these cases, the government pursued maximum punishments and generally took zero-tolerance approaches to plea negotiations. These prosecutions reflected an obvious institutional terror of letting the public see the sausage-factory locked behind the closed doors not only of the state, but of banks and universities and other such institutional pillars of society. As Gibney pointed out in his movie, this is a Wizard of Oz moment, where we are being warned not to look behind the curtain.

What will we find out? We already know that our armies mass-murder women and children in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, that our soldiers joke about smoldering bodies from the safety of gunships, that some of our closest diplomatic allies starve and repress their own citizens, and we may even have gotten a glimpse or two of a banking system that uses computerized insider trading programs to steal from everyone who has an IRA or a mutual fund or any stock at all by manipulating markets like the NYSE.

These fervent, desperate prosecutions suggest that there’s more awfulness under there, things that are worse, and there is a determination to not let us see what those things are. Most recently, we’ve seen that determination in the furor over Barack Obama’s drone assassination program and the so-called “kill list” that is associated with it.

Weeks ago, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul – whom I’ve previously railed against as one of the biggestaggrandizing jackasses in politics – pulled a widely-derided but, I think, absolutely righteous Frank Capra act on the Senate floor, executing a one-man filibuster of Obama’s CIA nominee, John Brennan.

Paul had been mortified when he received a letter from Eric Holder refusing to rule out drone strikes on American soil in “extraordinary” circumstances like a 9/11 or a Pearl Harbor. Paul refused to yield until he extracted a guarantee that no American could be assassinated by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime.

He got his guarantee, but the way the thing is written doesn’t fill one with anything like confidence. Eric Holder’s letter to Paul reads like the legal disclaimer on a pack of unfiltered cigarettes:

Dear Senator Paul,

It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: “Does the president have the additional authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?” The answer is no.

Sincerely,

Eric Holder

You could drive a convoy of tanker trucks through the loopholes in that letter. Not to worry, though, this past week, word has come out via Congress – the White House won’t tell us anything – that no Americans are on its infamous kill list. The National Journal’s report on this story offered a similarly comical sort of non-reassurance:

The White House has wrapped its kill list in secrecy and already the United States has killed four Americans in drone strikes. Only one of them, senior al-Qaida operative Anwar al-Awlaki, was the intended target, according to U.S. officials. The others – including Awlaki’s teenage son – were collateral damage, killed because they were too near a person being targeted.

But no more Americans are in line for such killings – at least not yet. “There is no list where Americans are on the list,” House Intelligence Chairman Mike Rogers told National Journal. Still, he suggested, that could change.

“There is no list where Americans are on the list” – even the language used here sounds like a cheap Orwell knockoff (although, to be fair, so does V for Vendetta, which has unfortunately provided the model for the modern protest aesthetic). It’s not an accident that so much of this story is starting to sound like farce. The idea that we have to beg and plead and pull Capra-esque stunts in the Senate just to find out whether or not our government has “asserted the legal authority” (this preposterous phrase is beginning to leak into news coverage with alarming regularity) to kill U.S. citizens on U.S. soil without trial would be laughable, were it not for the obvious fact that such lines are in of really being crossed, if they haven’t been crossed already.

This morning, an Emory University law professor named Mary Dudziak wrote an op-ed in the Times in which she pointed out several disturbing aspects to the drone-attack policy. It’s bad enough, she writes, that the Obama administration is considering moving the program from the CIA to the Defense Department. (Which, Dudziak notes, “would do nothing to confer legitimacy to the drone strikes. The legitimacy problem comes from the secrecy itself — not which entity secretly does the killing.”) It’s even worse that the administration is citing Nixon’s infamous bombing of Cambodia as part of its legal precedent.

But beyond that, Obama’s lawyers used bad information in their white paper:

On Page 4 of the unclassified 16-page “white paper,” Justice Department lawyers tried to refute the argument that international law does not support extending armed conflict outside a battlefield. They cited as historical authority a speech given May 28, 1970, by John R. Stevenson, then the top lawyer for the State Department, following the United States’ invasion of Cambodia.

Since 1965, “the territory of Cambodia has been used by North Vietnam as a base of military operations,” he told the New York City Bar Association. “It long ago reached a level that would have justified us in taking appropriate measures of self-defense on the territory of Cambodia. However, except for scattered instances of returning fire across the border, we refrained until April from taking such action in Cambodia.”

But, Dudziak notes, there is a catch:

In fact, Nixon had begun his secret bombing of Cambodia more than a year earlier. (It is not clear whether Mr. Stevenson knew this.) So the Obama administration’s lawyers have cited a statement that was patently false.

Now, this “white paper” of Obama’s is already of dubious legality at best. The idea that the President can simply write a paper expanding presidential power into extralegal assassination without asking the explicit permission of, well, somebody, anyway, is absurd from the start. Now you add to that the complication of the paper being based in part on some half-assed, hastily-cobbled-together, factually lacking precedent, and the Obama drone-attack rationale becomes like all rationales of blunt-force, repressive power ever written – plainly ridiculous, the stuff of bad comedy, like the Russian military superpower invading tiny South Ossetia cloaked in hysterical claims of self-defense.

Why Rand Paul’s Filibuster Matters

The Wikileaks episode was just an early preview of the inevitable confrontation between the citizens of the industrialized world and the giant, increasingly secretive bureaucracies that support them. As some of Gibney’s interview subjects point out in his movie, the experts in this field, the people who worked on information security in the Pentagon and the CIA, have known for a long time that the day would come when all of our digitized secrets would spill out somewhere.

But the secret-keepers got lucky with Wikileaks. They successfully turned the story into one about Julian Assange and his personal failings, and headed off the confrontation with the major news organizations that were, for a time, his allies.

But that was just a temporary reprieve. The secrets are out there and everyone from hackers to journalists to U.S. senators are digging in search of them. Sooner or later, there’s going to be a pitched battle, one where the state won’t be able to peel off one lone Julian Assange or Bradley Manning and batter him into nothingness. Next time around, it’ll be a Pentagon Papers-style constitutional crisis, where the public’s legitimate right to know will be pitted head-to-head with presidents, generals and CEOs.

My suspicion is that this story will turn out to be less of a simplistic narrative about Orwellian repression than a mortifying journey of self-discovery. There are all sorts of things we both know and don’t know about the processes that keep our society running. We know children in Asia are being beaten to keep our sneakers and furniture cheap, we know our access to oil and other raw materials is being secured only by the cooperation of corrupt and vicious dictators, and we’ve also known for a while now that the anti-terror program they say we need to keep our airports and reservoirs safe involves mass campaigns of extralegal detention and assassination.

We haven’t had to openly ratify any of these policies because the secret-keepers have done us the favor of making these awful moral choices for us.

But the stink is rising to the surface. It’s all coming out. And when it isn’t Julian Assange the next time but The New York Times, Der Spiegel and The Guardian standing in the line of fire, the state will probably lose, just as it lost in the Pentagon Papers case, because those organizations will be careful to only publish materials clearly in the public interest – there’s no conceivable legal justification for keeping us from knowing the policies of our own country (although stranger things have happened).

When that happens, we’ll be left standing face-to-face with the reality of how our state functions. Do we want to do that? We still haven’t taken a very close look at even the Bradley Manning material, and my guess is because we just don’t want to. There were thousands of outrages in those files, any one of which would have a caused a My-Lai-style uproar decades ago.

Did you hear the one about how American troops murdered four women and five children in Iraq in 2006, including a woman over 70 and an infant under five months old, with all the kids under five? All of them were handcuffed and shot in the head. We later called in an airstrike to cover it up, apparently. But it barely registered a blip on the American consciousness.

What if it we’re forced to look at all of this for real next time, and what if it turns out we can’t accept it? What if murder and corruption is what’s holding it all together? I personally don’t believe that’s true – I believe it all needs to come out and we need to rethink everything together, and we can find a less totally evil way of living – but this is going to be the implicit argument from the secret-keeping side when this inevitable confrontation comes. They will say to us, in essence, “It’s the only way. And you don’t want to know.” And a lot of us won’t.

It’s fascinating, profound stuff. We don’t want to know, but increasingly it seems we can’t not know, either. Sooner or later, something is going to have to give.

wikitruth

Via RollingStone

Iraq & WMDs: The Spies Who Fooled The World

In Britain, News, Other Leaks, Politics, UK, USA, Viral Videos on March 19, 2013 at 2:04 AM

 

03/18/2013

On the eve of the tenth anniversary of the Iraq War, Panorama reveals how key aspects of the secret intelligence used by Downing Street and the White House to justify the invasion were based on fabrication, wishful thinking and lies. Peter Taylor tracks down some of those responsible and reports on the remarkable story of how, in the months before the war, two highly-placed sources – close to Saddam Hussein – talked secretly to the CIA and MI6. Their intelligence said Iraq did not have an active WMD programme – but it was simply dismissed.

Related Link: MI6 & CIA Were Told Before Invasion That Iraq Had No Active WMD

White House Petition: Broadcast United States vs. Pfc. Bradley Manning’s Trial on C-Span

In Bradley Manning, News, Other Leaks, USA, USA, WikiLeaks, World Revolution on March 13, 2013 at 2:06 AM

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Broadcast United States vs. Pfc. Bradley Manning’s trial on C-Span

The trial of United States v. Pfc. Bradley Manning is expected to begin on June 3, 2013. C-SPAN should be granted access to show the proceedings on television and the Internet, live or with a short delay to appease security concerns. No matter your opinion on this case, the fact remains that it is of very high interest to the public and should be made available for all, not just those who can attend. Bradley Manning is facing life in prison for an “Aiding the Enemy” charge, yet he has been nominated for 3 Nobel Peace Prizes. Being the largest government leak trial in our history, this is a highly controversial case with opinions of Manning ranging from traitor to hero. This would be a great resource for lawyers, law students, journalists, and those with limited access or means of travel.

SIGN PETITION HERE

 

www.BradleyManning.org/

Related Link: Leaked Audio of Bradley Manning’s Providence Inquiry Statement

Leaked Document: Military Internment Camps in U.S to be Used for Political Dissidents

In NDAA, News, NWO, Other Leaks, Police State, Politics, USA, USA, Viral Videos, World Revolution on March 5, 2013 at 9:39 PM

 

Internment camps for political dissidents in the U.S. aren’t a conspiracy theory. The Department of Defense document entitled “INTERNMENT AND RESETTLEMENT OPERATIONS” or FM 3-39.40 proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Army hiring for these internment camps: http://www.goarmy.com/careers-and-jobs/browse-career-and-job-categories/legal-and-law-enforcement/internment-resettlement-specialist.html