1547 – Henry VIII of England (b. 1491) dies. His nine-year-old son, Edward VI becomes King, and the first Protestant ruler of England.
1573 – Articles of the Warsaw Confederation are signed, sanctioning freedom of religion in Poland.
1724 – The Russian Academy of Sciences is founded in St. Petersburg by Peter the Great, and implemented by Senate decree. It is called the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences until 1917.
1813 – Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice is first published in the United Kingdom.
1896 – Walter Arnold of East Peckham, Kent becomes the first person to be convicted of speeding. He was fined 1 shilling, plus costs, for speeding at 8 mph (13 km/h), thus exceeding the contemporary speed limit of 2 mph (3.2 km/h).
1902 – The Carnegie Institution of Washington is founded in Washington, D.C. with a $10 million gift from Andrew Carnegie.
1908 – Members of the Portuguese Republican Party fail in their attempted coup d’état against the administrative dictatorship of Prime Minister João Franco.
1909 – United States troops leave Cuba with the exception of Guantanamo Bay Naval Base after being there since the Spanish–American War.
1915 – An act of the U.S. Congress creates the United States Coast Guard as a branch of the United States Armed Forces.
1922 – Knickerbocker Storm, Washington D.C.’s biggest snowfall, causes the city’s greatest loss of life when the roof of the Knickerbocker Theatre collapses.
1943 – Dick Taylor, English bass player, songwriter, and producer (The Rolling Stones, The Pretty Things, and The Mekons) was born.
1945 – John Perkins, American author and activist was born.
1948 – Charles Taylor, Liberian politician, 22nd President of Liberia was born.
1956 – Elvis Presley makes his first US television appearance
1958 – The Lego company patents the design of its Lego bricks, still compatible with bricks produced today.
1960 – The National Football League announced expansion teams for Dallas to start in the 1960 NFL season and Minneapolis-St. Paul for 1961 NFL season.
1965 – The current design of the Flag of Canada is chosen by an act of Parliament.
1977 – The first day of the Great Lakes Blizzard of 1977, that dumped 10 feet (3.0 m) of snow in one-day in Upstate New York, with Buffalo, Syracuse, Watertown, and surrounding areas most affected.
1981 – Ronald Reagan lifts remaining domestic petroleum price and allocation controls in the United States helping to end the 1979 energy crisis and begin the 1980s oil glut.
1982 – US Army general James L. Dozier is rescued by Italian anti-terrorism forces from captivity by the Red Brigades.
1985 – Supergroup USA for Africa (United Support of Artists for Africa) records the hit single We Are the World, to help raise funds for Ethiopian famine relief.
1986 – Space Shuttle program: STS-51-L mission – Space Shuttle Challenger explodes after liftoff killing all seven astronauts on board.
2013 – Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands has decided to abdicate in order for her son Prince Willem-Alexander to take over the crown. She had recorded a televised address to declare her intentions and announced that she would formally step down on April 30th.
Or is this a diversion from why Kyle was really assassinated… He knew too much?
Widow of Famed Sniper Chris Kyle Is Suing Executives at the Company He Started
Less than a year ago, Chris Kyle, the former Navy SEAL known as one of the most lethal snipers in history and famed author of “American Sniper,” was killed at a Texas gun range. Now, his wife is suing executives at the company he helped start, alleging they’ve conspired to “steal” it.
Craft International, a defense and combat training company co-founded by Kyle in 2009, is at the center of the lawsuit launched by Taya Kyle.
The Dallas Morning News reported details of the suit against Craft’s CEO Steven Young and Chief Operating Officer Bo French, which included accusations of shutting Taya out of certain aspects despite her claim to own 85 percent of the company:
The suit says that Young, the company’s CEO, and French, its chief operating officer, had the opportunity to buy Chris Kyle’s ownership “units” following his death, but “did not exercise their respective rights” within 130 days, per the company’s own rules. As such, says the suit, Taya Kyle owns 85 percent of Craft. But the suit alleges that Young and French refuse to make the company’s financial records available to Chris’s widow.
Furthermore, says the suit, “Upon information and belief, Young and French transferred and diverted Craft’s contracts and assets to another entity without the knowledge, consent or authority of Kyle, the majority interest holder of Craft. Upon information and belief, Young and French usurped Craft’s business opportunities for their personal benefit.”
Taya Kyle alleges that Young and French created a company called Craft International Risk Management (CIRM).
“What it looks like from the outside is they pushed the debt to Craft and the income to CIRM,” Friedman says in an interview. “Someone is manipulating the company, and we can’t stand for that.”
When the Morning News reached Young, he declined to issue a comment for both himself and French.
Taya Kyle is looking to access company records and also wants Craft International to stop using the skull logo her husband designed.
By Jack Blood
UPDATE – 12.28.13
In the Summer of 2012, Restaurant chain Chik-Fil-A got into a world of trouble for a religious position on Homosexuality. The LBGT community, and supportive Liberals everywhere where “up in arms” and scheduled a national boycott of the franchise. Result? Three hour lines for days to buy food from Chik-Fil-A as a sign of support for them. When the haze lifted, the stores had received Millions in revenue, and the kind of publicity that money cannot buy.
We support boycotts and strikes as a means to really make your vote count, but since the stores are franchised to local owners who do not make policy, and because their food is incredibly delicious… we did not participate. We are assuming that gays and liberals forgave them too…. Even if its a guilty pleasure.
Duck Dynasty, like it or not, is one of the most popular shows on TV. With over 7 million viewers the money is rolling in. There is every reason to believe therefore that the “actors” have all been vetted, and have signed contracts containing “morality clauses”. The owners, and producers of the show would have full backgrounds on the actors, and would know exactly what they are dealing with. In this case, fairly typical “rednecks”.
You would think that out of the 7 million viewers – all are also of the backwoods type, but it is more likely that many regular viewers watch the show to mock, and look down their noses at Southern Christian Conservatives, and deliverance style “Tea-baggers”. Part of the show’s promotion and success plays into this. The same could be said about the Honey Boo Boo phenomenon.
It is a form of social engineering as far as I am concerned, but hey…. Its TV after all.
So what would be better for ratings than to re-enforce the stereotype just before the new season launches. The new season is already in the can. If Offender Phil Robertson was indeed “fired” or suspended…. It will not matter now. He and the family of Duck caller millionaires will still be on the air. In fact…. A&E network a joint venture between the Hearst Corporation and Disney–ABC Television Group (both of which maintain a 50% ownership interest) will be airing a MARATHON of Duck Dynasty to exhibit their “fear and contriteness” of the boycotting MOB. A&E to Air ‘Duck Dynasty’ Marathon Despite Robertson Suspension
In the end, Phil, the producers and the family will provide a Mea Culpa before the world… and the show will resume stronger, and more popular than ever before.
Some of the outraged will call us “racist” for even suggesting that this whole thing is a sham…. Why does it matter when people’s feelings have been hurt etc…. They will say that it is their job to see that the Mother Duckers are never in the public eye again!!!! Will this be the case?
Maybe we should ask Don Imus.
And then there is THIS:
Read below: Via Godfather Politics
Marketing is everything. You’ve heard the adage that that the only bad publicity is no publicity. Deep throat said, “Follow the Money.” The folks at A&E aren’t stupid. They know Duck Dynasty is a multi-million-dollar property. Would they throw that much money away to placate a segment of the population that does not watch the show?
How much do you want to bet that some smart marketing guy came to the uppity-ups at A&E and said something like this:
“Let’s fire Phil Robertson. We’re all agreed. But let’s do it to make even more money. Let me explain.
“You’ve got a gold mine here. Duck Dynasty is your highest rated show. It’s making you tens of millions of dollars. Do you want to throw all that money away to satisfy a small group of people who probably never heard of Duck Dynasty until two days ago?
“Have you seen the audience reaction? These fans are pulling for this Phil Robertson guy and all the other Duckers. Get on the gravy train. There’s money to be made.
“The blogosphere is going crazy for this bearded patriarch. Whatever they’re selling, you better have it in stock.
“You’ve got another problem on your hands with the openly homosexual A&E stars Chris Morelli and Tad Eaton who just said “man ass beats vagina any day of the week.” Are you going to fire these guys too?
Someone at the table asks a question: “What about GLAAD and other pro-homosexual groups?”
“Let me run the numbers for you. Actually, it’s one number: 14 million viewers! Let that sink in. Do you remember Chick-fil-A? Did the controversy hurt or help the billion-dollar franchise? The stores’ parking lots were filled and the customers were wrapped around the buildings. No more controversy, but lots more money.
“How about Rush Limbaugh and the Flake woman? Limbaugh is more popular than ever. He’s written a book that’s on the best seller list.
“I’ll stake my job on it. If you bring Phil back, apologize, and admit you made a mistake for criticizing the man’s personal beliefs, Duck Dynasty viewership will go through the roof, and you’ll all make more money. It is all about the money, isn’t it?
“You really don’t give a tinker’s dam about what the folks at GLAAD think as long as you’re getting a good size paycheck.
Read more HERE
* We are not saying that the shooting in Arapahoe was an “inside job” or a setup… Its just weird that 90% of these shootings coincide with a drill doing something similar, thus occupying or confusing local authorities.
December 14, 2013 by legitgov
Holy coincidence, Batman! It’s another ‘Drill-Gone-Live’ in unlucky Colorado! Active Shooter Drills in Littleton, Colorado Same Day as School Shooting By Lori Price, www.legitgov.org 14 Dec 2013 In response to the shooting Friday at Arapahoe High School, Peter J. Kuehlen has unearthed two screenshots of ‘security consultants’ conducting active shooter response drills in the same location — and on the same day, no less – of the school shooting in Colorado. Peter noted, “On the anniversary of Sandy Hook, they are conducting a Lone Wolf Active Shooter Drill at the exact same location that they claimed yesterday three people lost their lives. Are you kidding me??? They are even telling you black on white. In your face now! Obvious drill is obvious.”
December 12, 2013 (AE) - Highlighting some of the key events in ‘Reich Central’ (EU) from November 11 to December 11, 2013… ending with details of the attempted coup of Ukraine by the fascist forces of ‘Reich Central’ (EU) and ‘Reich West’ (US) simply because the Ukrainian government made the decision not to sign an EU trade agreement at this time.*
*This is my personal opinion based on long historical research and the current available data provided by various world media news organizations covering these events.
Corbett Report Interview with Jack Blood 12.9.13 – Phoney Revolutions, Syria backfire, 911, John Lennon…
WATCH IT HERE
Jack Blood of DeadlineLive.info joins us once again to go over all the latest news and headlines from around the world. This month we discuss the “revolution” in Ukraine, Seymour Hersh’s Syria expose, Senator Graham’s 9/11 “truth” and the assassination of John Lennon.
This thing stinks to high heaven! The west is standing by doing “nothing” as the country and its people are encouraged to protest against its own Sovereignty. Also at stake is Russia’s influence and who will control the Ukraine’s natural crucial gas supply. – JB
Protesters in Kiev Topple Lenin Statue as Rallies Grow
Ukrainians on Sunday toppled and decapitated a statue of Lenin in Kiev.
KIEV, Ukraine — In the biggest demonstration yet after weeks of growing momentum, hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians filled the streets of Kiev on Sunday, tearing down and breaking up a monument to Lenin in the city center and intensifying their outcry over President Viktor F. Yanukovich’s turn away from Europe.
Sergei Grits/Associated Press
A teenager waved a national flag over a crowd of pro-Europe activists gathered at a rally in Independence Square in Kiev, Ukraine, on Sunday.
Carrying blue-and-yellow Ukrainian and European Union flags, the teeming crowd here filled Independence Square, which has been transformed by a vast and growing tent encampment, and where demonstrators have occupied public buildings, including City Hall.
“Resignation! Resignation!” members of the crowd chanted, reiterating their call for the ouster of Mr. Yanukovich and the government led by Prime Minister Mykola Azarov. Thousands more people gathered in other cities across the country.
The giant rally reflected just how deeply roiled this nation of 46 million people has become in the weeks since Mr. Yanukovich said he would not complete political and free-trade agreements with the European Union that he had been promising to sign for more than a year.
With Western governments urging a peaceful and lawful solution, but no indication of any possibility of a compromise, the continuing unrest seemed likely to confront Mr. Yanukovich with several unpalatable choices, including a crackdown by security officers that many demonstrators say they fear but believe was inevitable.
The president could wait, hoping that increasingly cold weather and demoralization will eventually thin the crowds, but the continuing occupation of a large swath of the capital has already added a patina of weakness and indecision to the government’s growing unpopularity.
Heightening the tension is a severe and urgent economic crisis, along with Ukraine’s need to secure a financial aid package worth $18 billion or more. At the moment, that help seems most likely to come from Russia, but any agreement with the Kremlin is likely to spur further public fury.
Many Ukrainians view the accords with the European Union as crucial to a brighter future, with Western-style rule of law that could combat what many view as deeply entrenched public corruption and cronyism among the country’s wealthy elite. They also see the agreements as eventually offering better economic opportunities.
The accords were also viewed as a way to break free of the grip of Russia, which nearly a quarter-century after the collapse of the Soviet Union continues to exert heavy sway here, including complete control over Ukraine’s natural crucial gas supply.
Mr. Yanukovich’s comments that in retreating from Europe, he planned to restore relations with Russia — where he met on Friday with President Vladimir V. Putin — have only further inflamed the crowds.
On Sunday, the sky over Kiev was gray, but temperatures were comfortably above freezing.
The demonstrators were old and young and middle-aged, from Lviv in the west to Odessa in the south, and from Dnipropetrovsk in the east to the country’s heart, Kiev itself. Parents held children onto their shoulders, students wore blue-and-yellow striped face paint, and volunteers handed out steaming cups of tea and other refreshments. They sang the national anthem and were blessed from the stage by representatives of all of branches of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, save for the Moscow Patriarchate, which is loyal to Russia.
“I think the people have dignity,” said Svitlana Zalishchuk, one of a small coalition of civic organizers who have been leading the protest movement from behind the scenes. “This is why they are here: not because they are against Yanukovich, not because they are for the European Union, but because they have dignity, and they want to live with dignity.”
The protest movement accelerated drastically after a violent and ill-conceived crackdown by the riot police on a small group of demonstrators more than a week ago. Scenes of young protesters being beaten and bloodied with truncheons, some as they lay on the ground offering no resistance, enraged a country that views itself as inherently peaceful.
Ukraine Demonstrators Say They Won’t Relent on Demands for Change (December 8, 2013)
Pro-Government Ukrainians Take to Streets to Denounce European Social Values (December 7, 2013)
For what its worth….
PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome back to To Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay. And welcome back to Reality Asserts Itself with Senator Bob Graham.Senator Graham’s biography is below. If you haven’t watched the previous segments of this interview, you really should, because I’m not going to introduce Senator Graham again. We’re going to get right to it.Thanks for joining us.BOB GRAHAM, FMR. U.S. SENATOR: Good. Thank you.JAY: There’s a lot of discussion and debate about what happened prior to 9/11 and why more wasn’t done. In your book, you suggest–I think it’s a dozen points where if the intelligence agencies and the White House had worked better or more effectively, that this whole conspiracy might not have been successful.You also write about something which I think’s rather important, which is the presidential daily brief. Can you explain why–the brief that became very well known during the 9/11 committee hearings. Why is that so significant?GRAHAM: During August 2001, the president was doing what is standard for presidents and was for him, to take a vacation, in this case to his farm in Texas. But he continued to be briefed as to issues that would require his attention. And in one of those briefings–it’s called the presidential daily brief–he was told that intelligence was sensing that there was something serious occurring which could have dramatically adverse effects against the United States, and that they thought that it could involve the use of airplanes in some attack.JAY: The title of the brief is bin Laden plans to attack the United States.GRAHAM: Yes. So it was a fairly stark and specific call. The president, from all evidence, basically ignored that warning and no steps were taken to try to dig deeper or to disrupt the plot that the intelligence agency–.JAY: And Condoleezza Rice sees the same memo and apparently also–briefing, and apparently also does nothing. And you make–in your book, you lay out several things they could have done. For example?GRAHAM: Well, they could have asked the intelligence agencies–we are very concerned about this; let’s make this the absolute number-one priority for the next period. They could have alerted the federal aviation agency that we have these suggestions that aviation may be used in an attack against the United States; upgrade your security standards. The hijackers who got on the four planes had no more obstruction to them getting on the plane on September 11 than they would have had on June or July or August. They could have alerted the military that it may be necessary to scramble aircraft to intercept commercial planes that we have reason are being used for a terrorist attack. Those were some of the examples of what might have been done had this been taken seriously.JAY: Now, at the 9/11 hearings, Condoleezza Rice is asked about this presidential briefing, and she says, we didn’t think it had anything to do with anything specific; it seemed to be just some general thing that we already knew, that bin Laden had some plans to attack the United States; and we didn’t consider it all that significant. But you point out something in the book I thought was quite interesting I personally hadn’t seen before, which is in something called the SEIB, the senior executive intelligence brief, which is essentially, normally, if I understand correctly, more or less what’s in the presidential brief, but it goes to many more people. That whole memo on bin Laden has been taken out. Well, if they’d consider it not of any great significance one way or the other, why on earth would they take it out?GRAHAM: One explanation would be that they didn’t want there to be a broadcast of the possibility that we might be under specific threat of terrorists using airplanes, part of the broader strategy of reducing the people of the United States’ knowledge and anxiety about what might be occurring. Or it could have just been a judgment by the people who convert the presidential daily briefing, which goes to a very small group, and to the executive briefing, which goes to several hundred if not thousand people, that this was not an appropriate item to make as broadly available.JAY: It seems to me–I know you can’t or may not agree with what I’m saying, but there seems to be a pattern of a culture being created to stop inquiry into possible terrorist attacks. So, Senator Graham, there was a documentary made about Richard Clarke, and we did a story about this, where Clarke says that information about the two al-Qaeda operatives that are living in this house that you talked about earlier, with the Saudi elderly man, who was apparently an FBI informant, Clarke said he didn’t know anything about this at the time, and he should have, because both the FBI knew and the CIA knew and nobody told him. And here’s a little clip in this documentary of him saying that.~~~RICHARD CLARKE, FMR. CHIEF COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER ON THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: You have to intentionally stop it. You have to intervene and say, no, I don’t want that report to go. And I never got a report to that effect.If there was a decision made to stop normal distribution with regard to this case, then people like Tom Wilshire would have known that.~~~JAY: So, Senator Graham, that’s kind of an alarming thing for Richard Clarke to say. The counterterrorism czar is saying that critical information, it was deliberately kept from him.GRAHAM: Well, he wasn’t the only one it was kept from. The first thing that we did when we started our congressional investigation in late 2000, 2001 was to ask all the agencies to hold any information materials they had relevant to al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attack and that we would be asking for that as appropriate. We assumed that the agencies had complied with that.It wasn’t until the summer of 2002, more than halfway through our investigation, that we discovered that there was information in the office of the San Diego FBI about the two hijackers. These are the two men who started in January 2000 in Kuala Lumpur, where some of the basic planning for what became 9/11 was undertaken. They came into the United States undisturbed. Approximately a week later, they have a meeting, at which it just happens that they are sitting in a restaurant close enough to hear each other talk with a Saudi agent who has been dispatched to that restaurant by a Saudi consular official who was the consul of Saudi Arabia in Los Angeles. He, the Saudi agent, overhearing these men speaking Arabic in a Saudi accent, sits with them, engages them, and then invites them to come to San Diego.Now, the FBI says all of that is just coincidence, that it just happened that out of the over 100 Middle Eastern restaurants in Los Angeles, they both ended up, on the same day, the same hour, in the same section of the restaurant. I find that to be incredible. And these two men end up accepting the offer, come to San Diego. And that’s where they begin the process of preparing for 9/11.JAY: We know now that the NSA’s been listening to a lot of conversations for many years. I guess what’s new with the Snowden revelations is how much they’ve been listening to Americans’ conversations. But I think it’s pretty well known the NSA’s been listening to foreign conversations for a long time. And given that bin Laden was number one on the FBI’s most wanted list, given that al-Qaeda had already attacked the embassy and the USS Cole, I mean, you’ve got to assume the NSA was doing everything they could to listen to anything to do with bin Laden, which would include the Saudis. Did you have any access to NSA? And did you try to get access to NSA logs or regulations for someone to come tell you what they might have heard?GRAHAM: Yes. What we found out was that immediately after the two bombings in Africa, there was a person who’d been involved that had survived who was interrogated, and he tipped off the CIA that there was a listening station in Yemen which was sort of the hub of communications for the al-Qaeda network. We immediately started listening to that station. That’s how we found out that there was this meeting of terrorists in Kuala Lumpur. This is how we found out that al-Qaeda was going to attack a U.S. naval ship in the port of Aden. We learned a lot, in fact. We apparently did not learn about the big plot that became 9/11. Maybe bin Laden had a back channel form of communication and didn’t use his main hub to discuss that particular case.JAY: Did you ask to see records of conversations by Saudis that might have been involved in this?GRAHAM: To my knowledge, no.JAY: Would that not be something one would want to see?GRAHAM: The answer is: I don’t know what the evidence was that would have indicated there were conversations that were relevant to what our inquiry was trying to answer.JAY: Well, if the Saudis were involved, they might be talking about it.GRAHAM: Well, I don’t think–at that point I don’t know if there was an issue of whether prior to 9/11, in whatever communications had to take place in the planning and execution of the plot, whether there was a Saudi involvement in that communication network or not.JAY: And also just to find out just how much was known about this prior to 9/11. I mean, the NSA–I mean, did you or would you have had access to whatever you asked for from the NSA? Did the NSA ever turn you down?GRAHAM: No, the only agency to my knowledge that withheld information was the FBI.JAY: So you didn’t ask to see everything they had.GRAHAM: We asked them to hold everything. And we had–our staff was organized around the major intelligence agencies. And we had a group that was the NSA group, made up of people who had had current or previous experience with NSA. So without being able to say precisely what they asked for, I feel comfortable that had they found something that would have been relevant to the question of the plot and who was involved and were there external forces, that we would have known about it.JAY: You’re not concerned this same culture of protecting the Saudis might have acted like a filter there as well. I mean, if the NSA did have anything that implicated the Saudis, if there was a culture had been created not to implicate the Saudis, then maybe they wouldn’t have been so forthcoming.GRAHAM: In a way, that question causes me to wish that we could turn the clock back to 2001 and 2002 and go into that issue. Assumedly, the NSA has maintained the records from that time period. And maybe even 12 years after the fact, there would still be the opportunity to find out what was known through intercepts about the plot.JAY: So that leads me to something you’ve said several times, that you think this should all be reopened, there needs to be another inquiry. So, I mean, if there was another inquiry, what are a few of the most pressing questions or lines of inquiry that should be followed?GRAHAM: I think the basic questions are: was there one or more entities that were assisting the 19 hijackers? Or were they in fact acting alone? Since most of the questions about support have focused on the Saudis–specifically, what do we know or can we learn about the extent of Saudi involvement? Was it limited to San Diego? Or was it more broadcast in terms of its impact? And then why would the Saudis have taken this action? We discussed earlier some of the possible reasons. And then finally, why did the United States go to such lengths to disguise, to conceal the Saudi involvement or the involvement of any other outside force to assist the 19 hijackers? What was the U.S. interest in withholding this from the American people?JAY: And if one takes the logic of what you’re saying, I think then one would think that someone at the level of Prince Bandar might well have known about this. It’s going on in the United States. It’s on his watch. He’s the ambassador here. Do you have any evidence that links Bandar to all of this?GRAHAM: Some of that evidence I can’t talk about.JAY: This is in the redacted pages.GRAHAM: But the fact that he had and exercised as aggressively as he did his special entrée at the White House raises questions about why was he using that special entrée, for instance, to get people who were persons of interest to U.S. intelligence and law enforcement out of the country before they could be interviewed.JAY: So I’m going to say something which I think all you can do is say, I can’t comment on, but I’m going to say it. If you’re right–and I’m going to take what you said even a little further, which–if you are right that Bandar knew this was going on, then he’s sitting meeting with his friend President Bush regularly in the days leading up to 9/11 and either not saying anything or somehow does. I mean, I know you know there’s a lot of theory–and, I think, a lot of evidence that would at least require an inquiry–that there’s a deliberate attempt not to know. It’s not just lack of–just incompetency and–. I mean, to believe that it’s just incompetency, then you have to think it’s like the Keystone Cops of intelligence agencies: they’re just tripping all over each other. But that seems hard to believe.GRAHAM: Well, and also the fact that it was so pervasive that virtually all of the agencies of the federal government were moving in the same direction, from a customs agent at an airport in Orlando who was chastised when he denied entry into the United States to a Saudi, to the president of the United States authorizing large numbers of Saudis to leave the country, possibly denying us forever important insights and information on what happened. You don’t have everybody moving in the same direction without there being a head coach somewhere who was giving them instructions as to where he wants them to move.JAY: So that includes before and after the events.GRAHAM: Primarily before the event. After the event, it shifts from being an action that supports the activities of the Saudis to actions that cover up the results of that permission given to the Saudis to act.JAY: So I’ll put you a little bit on the spot here. Would it be–in this new commission that we hope comes, would it be a legitimate line of inquiry into whether President Bush and/or Vice President Cheney knew something might be coming and didn’t do anything about it, in fact may have actually taken action in the sense of creating a culture of not wanting to know?GRAHAM: Well, without by giving this answer inferring that I believe that they did in fact have reason to believe that this attack was about to occur and made a conscious decision to suppress that information, if there were any evidence–and to my knowledge there is none–of course that would be a line of inquiry that would be central to answering the question of what was the Saudis’ role and why did the United States cover it up.JAY: Thanks very much for joining us, Senator Graham.GRAHAM: Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to talk about some issues that, although it’s been more than a decade ago when this horrific event occurred, I think have real consequences to U.S. actions today.JAY: There is so much detail to all of this, and particularly a lot of detail in Senator Graham’s book. So I urge you to get the book. It’s Intelligence Matters. And you’ll see a lot of the things we couldn’t explore in this interview in the book.
November 27, 2013 by legitgov
Sandy Hook summary report: Two reporters held at gunpoint by police –Two black zip-up sweat jackets found on ground near alleged shooter’s car 27 Nov 2013 The [redacted] summary report of the Sandy Hook shootings was released Monday.
The report, ‘Report of the State’s Attorney for the Judicial District of Danbury on the Shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School and 36 Yogananda Street, Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012,’ can mbe viewed here.
Among the findings: ‘Some people were located in the areas surrounding the school as the searches and evacuations were taking place. Some of those individuals were treated initially as suspects and handled accordingly, including being handcuffed, until their identities and reason for being there could be determined.
Some of these detentions included:
1. The initial unknown male who turned out to be a parent with a cell telephone in his hand; 2. Two reporters located in the woods around SHES, who were held at gun point by Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) police officers until their identities could be determined; and 3. A man from New York who was working in a nearby town and went to SHES after an application on his cell telephone alerted him to the situation at the school… [On] December 14, 2012, there was a concern that there may have been more than one shooter. This was based upon a number of factors: 1. The initial police encounter with the unknown male outside SHES; 2. Reports by school personnel during the shooting on a 911 call of seeing someone running outside the school while the shooting was ongoing; 3. The location of two black zip-up sweat jackets on the ground outside of the shooter’s car; 4. The discovery of an Izhmash Saiga-12, 12-gauge shotgun and ammunition in the passenger compartment of the shooter’s car. A police officer moved this shotgun and ammunition to the car’s trunk for safety purposes; 5. Shell casings that were located outside of the school; and 6. The apparent sound of gunfire coming from outside of the school.’