On April 9th, 2013 Senator John McCain appeared on C-SPAN’s live call-in show Washington Journal. Identifying myself under a pseudonym, I asked him the following question:
“The National Institute of Standards and Technology asserts that the collapse of the 47-story World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11 was caused by fire. Yet they acknowledge that the first 100 feet of that collapse took place at free-fall acceleration. Engineers will tell you that fire cannot do this, that the only method by which it can be accomplished is the use of pre-planted explosives.
How do you explain this discrepancy…of a hundred feet of free-fall, without the use of explosives?”
As the video shows, John McCain claimed ignorance, saying, “To tell you the truth, this is an area that I’m not very familiar…and if you would drop me a note and mention that we talked on C-SPAN, I’d be glad to get you a more complete answer. But…honestly, every once in a while I have to plead ignorance about an issue and this is one that I have not been involved in, but I’ll be more than happy to look into it…”
John McCain, of course, is not ignorant of 9/11 Truth. He wrote the forward for the Popular Mechanics book “Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can’t Stand Up to the Facts”. In his essay “9/11 Conspiracy Myths: Truth Under Attack” which was adapted from his foreward for Popular Mechanics’ book, McCain wrote:
“Any explanation for 9/11 must start and end with the facts. The evidence must be gathered and analyzed. Then—only then—can conclusions be drawn.”
Indeed, 100 feet of free-fall acceleration of WTC 7 is a fact, as acknowledged by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which was the government agency tasked with investigating the destruction of the building. NIST was forced to admit to WTC 7′s free-fall after physics teacher David Chandler embarrassed the agency at a technical briefing in August of 2008.
As well, NIST has refused requests to disclose the data used to create its computer models for its WTC7 investigation, claiming that doing so would somehow jeopardize public safety.
It’s likely that John McCain’s plea of ignorance on Washington Journal was in reference to the technical information cited in the question that I asked him and not to 9/11 Truth in general.
In regards to the controversial issue of WTC 7′s destruction, he should be quite familiar with the topic.
In 2008 Blair Gadsby– a religious history professor and constituent of McCain’s– held a hunger strike for 17 days at McCain’s Phoenix office after failing to obtain a personal meeting with the Senator to discuss his concerns about the 9/11 crime. Richard Gage, AIA– CEO and founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth– offered his immediate availability to Senator McCain to discuss the evidence. Though a member of McCain’s staff finally met with Gadsby and other 9/11 activists after nine days into Gadsby’s hunger strike, and the staff member was given materials that laid out the evidence of the Twin Towers and Building 7′s controlled demolition on 9/11, Senator McCain himself refused to meet with the activists personally, stating in a letter to Gadsby:
“I believe these investigations have been conducted in good faith by qualified experts who have approached this daunting task honestly and objectively. My staff and I are always open to new, scientifically substantiated information that helps explain how and why the tragedies of September 11th occurred. I welcome any additional new information you may wish to present on the subject and will make my staff available to listen to your concerns.”
Because NIST’s acknowledgement of WTC 7′s free-fall took place after McCain wrote those words to Gadsby, it qualifies as the “new, scientifically substantiated information” McCain was seeking. McCain promised on Washington Journal that he would try to answer the question that I asked him. Based on his promise and the existence of the new evidence, John McCain’s office should, therefore, be open to a new meeting with supporters of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and a personal re-examination of the evidence.
The founder of a tea party group in Oklahoma was charged with two felonies on Tuesday for allegedly sending threatening emails to a Republican lawmaker after he refused buy in to the notion that the United Nations was conspiring to transform the country into a communist dictatorship.
According to the Oklahoman, 54-year-old Sooner Tea Party founder Al Gerhart faces up to five years in prison for blackmail and violating the state computer crimes act.
The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation determined that Gerhart admitted sending an email to state Sen. Cliff Branan (R) “that was intended to threaten and intimidate him.”
Morbid find suggests murder-obsessed gunman Adam Lanza plotted Newtown, Conn.’s Sandy Hook massacre for years –Law enforcement reportedly discovers a sickeningly thorough 7-foot-long, 4-foot-wide spreadsheet with names, body counts and weapons from previous mass murders and even attempted killings. ‘It sounded like a doctoral thesis, that was the quality of the research,’ an anonymous law enforcement veteran said. [Oh. I thought Adam Lanza 'erased his online footprint.'] 18 Mar 2013 …”We were told (Lanza) had around 500 people on this sheet,” a law enforcement veteran told me [Mike Lupica] Saturday night. “Names and the number of people killed and the weapons that were used, even the precise make and model of the weapons. It had to have taken years. It sounded like a doctoral thesis, that was the quality of the research.” The law enforcement vet attended the International Association of Police Chiefs and Colonels mid-year meeting in New Orleans last week, a conference where state police colonels share information with each other, and learn from each other. The man to whom I spoke, a tough career cop who did not wish to see his name in the newspaper, was in the room when the state cop from Connecticut spoke, said the man was well into his presentation when he began to talk of the spreadsheets that had been found at “the shooter’s” home. [See: Riddle me this: Adam Lanza, 'computer genius,' left no online footprint by Lori Price 16 Dec 2012 According to numerous media reports and witnesses, alleged Newtown, Connecticut shooter Adam Lanza was a 'genius' with computers. And yet, we are told that Lanza apparently left no online footprint. The question must be asked: Was the electronic history of Adam Lanza scrubbed? And, see: Sandy Hook Shooting 'Oddities'.]
Thanks to Legit Gov for links…
The Pentagon’s Cyber Command will create 13 offensive teams by the fall of 2015 to help defend the nation against major computer attacks from abroad, Gen. Keith Alexander testified to Congress on Tuesday, a rare acknowledgment of the military’s ability to use cyberweapons.
The new teams are part of a broader government effort to shield the nation from destructive attacks over the Internet that could harm Wall Street or knock out electric power, for instance.
But Alexander warned that budget cuts will undermine the effort to build up these forces even as foreign threats to the nation’s critical computer systems intensify. And he urged Congress to pass legislation to enable the private sector to share computer threat data with the government without fear of being sued.
As he moves into his eighth year as director of the National Security Agency and his third year as head of the fledgling Cyber Command, Alexander told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the strategic-threat picture is worsening. “We’ve seen the attacks on Wall Street over the last six months grow significantly,” he said, noting there were more than 160 disruptive attacks on banks in that period.
Describing an attack on Saudi Arabia’s national oil company, he said: “Last summer, in August, we saw a destructive attack on Saudi Aramco, where the data on over 30,000 systems were destroyed. And if you look at industry, especially the anti-virus community and others, they believe it’s going to grow more in 2013. And there’s a lot that we need to do to prepare for this.”
The U.S. intelligence community has indicated that the assaults on the banks and Saudi Aramco were the work of Iran in retaliation for U.S. financial sanctions imposed to deter Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
Alexander’s remarks came as U.S. intelligence officials elsewhere on Capitol Hill testified about the growing cyberthreat. At a national security threat hearing, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. called on China to stop its “cyber-stealing” of corporate secrets from U.S. networks.
Alexander said the 13 teams would defend against destructive attacks. “I would like to be clear that this team . . . is an offensive team,” he said.
Twenty-seven other teams would support commands such as the Pacific Command and the Central Command as they plan offensive cyber capabilities. Separate teams would focus on protecting the Defense Department’s computer networks. He said the first third of the forces, which officials have said will total several thousand civilians and uniformed personnel, will be in place by September and the second third a year later.
Some teams are already in place, Alexander said, to focus on “the most serious threats,” which he did not identify.
But he said uncertainty about the budget is affecting the ability to fill out the teams. About 25 percent of the Cyber Command’s budget is being held up by congressional wrangling over the fiscal 2013 budget, he said. And across-the-board cuts that took effect March 1 are forcing civilian furloughs. “By singling out the civilian workforce, we’ve done a great disservice,” said Alexander, noting that one-third of the command workforce is made up of Air Force civilians.
He said some cybersecurity recruits have taken a salary cut to work for the government, only to be faced with a furlough. “That’s the wrong message to send people we want to stay in the military acting in these career fields.”
The attacks hitting the banks are “distributed denial of service attacks” — or barrages of network traffic against Web site servers — that are best handled by the Internet service providers, he said. The issue is “when does a nuisance become a real problem” that forces the government to act, he said. The administration is debating that now, he said.
To detect major attacks on industry, the department needs to see them coming in real time, Alexander said. The Internet service providers are best positioned to provide that visibility, but they lack the authority to share attack data with the government, he said. In particular, he said, the companies need legal protection against lawsuits for sharing the data.
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document seen by Reuters.
The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates.
Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of “suspicious customer activity,” such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN.
The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes.
The planning document, dated March 4, shows that the proposal is still in its early stages of development, and it is not known when implementation might begin.
Financial institutions file more than 15 million “suspicious activity reports” every year, according to Treasury. Banks, for instance, are required to report all personal cash transactions exceeding $10,000, as well as suspected incidents of money laundering, loan fraud, computer hacking or counterfeiting.
“For these reports to be of value in detecting money laundering, they must be accessible to law enforcement, counter-terrorism agencies, financial regulators, and the intelligence community,” said the Treasury planning document.
A Treasury spokesperson said U.S. law permits FinCEN to share information with intelligence agencies to help detect and thwart threats to national security, provided they adhere to safeguards outlined in the Bank Secrecy Act. “Law enforcement and intelligence community members with access to this information are bound by these safeguards,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
Some privacy watchdogs expressed concern about the plan when Reuters outlined it to them.
A move like the FinCEN proposal “raises concerns as to whether people could find their information in a file as a potential terrorist suspect without having the appropriate predicate for that and find themselves potentially falsely accused,” said Sharon Bradford Franklin, senior counsel for the Rule of Law Program at the Constitution Project, a non-profit watchdog group.
Despite these concerns, legal experts emphasize that this sharing of data is permissible under U.S. law. Specifically, banks’ suspicious activity reporting requirements are dictated by a combination of the Bank Secrecy Act and the USA PATRIOT Act, which offer some privacy safeguards.
National security experts also maintain that a robust system for sharing criminal, financial and intelligence data among agencies will improve their ability to identify those who plan attacks on the United States.
“It’s a war on money, war on corruption, on politically exposed persons, anti-money laundering, organized crime,” said Amit Kumar, who advised the United Nations on Taliban sanctions and is a fellow at the Democratic think tank Center for National Policy.
The Treasury document outlines a proposal to link the FinCEN database with a computer network used by U.S. defense and law enforcement agencies to share classified information called the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System.
The plan calls for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence – set up after 9/11 to foster greater collaboration among intelligence agencies – to work with Treasury. The Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.
More than 25,000 financial firms – including banks, securities dealers, casinos, and money and wire transfer agencies – routinely file “suspicious activity reports” to FinCEN. The requirements for filing are so strict that banks often over-report, so they cannot be accused of failing to disclose activity that later proves questionable. This over-reporting raises the possibility that the financial details of ordinary citizens could wind up in the hands of spy agencies.
Stephen Vladeck, a professor at American University’s Washington College of Law, said privacy advocates have already been pushing back against the increased data-sharing activities between government agencies that followed the September 11 attacks.
“One of the real pushes from the civil liberties community has been to move away from collection restrictions on the front end and put more limits on what the government can do once it has the information,” he said.
Rep Steve Stockman (R-TX) made accusations against Barack Obama on Monday over his gun control campaign claiming that is it fraud based with fake messages over Twitter. Stockman claims that Obama is seeking to give the appearance of support greater than what he has for gun control legislation by flooding Twitter with messages from people that don’t exist.
“Obama’s anti-gun campaign is a fraud,” Stockman said. “Obama’s supporters are panicking and willing to do anything to create the appearance of popular support, even if it means trying to defraud Congress,” he added. “I call upon the president to denounce this phony spam campaign.”
When Obama called for people to tweet their congressmen in support of more gun control legislation, Stockman said he received a mere 16 tweets. However, he notes that upon closer examination, only six of the tweets were from six actual people and that the messages were all identical.
“The other 10 are fake, computer-generated spambots,” his office said.
Then, in a press release issued by Stockman, he writes, “The other 10 are fake, computer-generated spambots.”
• They all use the default “egg” avatar.
• They have account names resembling names automatically suggested by Twitter.
• They have engaged in no human interaction.
• They have tweeted almost nothing promotional, sponsored messages pushing real estates websites and other liberal “grassroots” campaigns.
• They follow mostly MSNBC anchors or media outlets, not actual people.
His press release went on to point out, “Reporter Robert Stacy McCain’s investigation of the fraudulent Obama campaign, available at www.theothermccain.com, finds the majority of the Obama-supporting accounts were created in less than 48 hours before contacting members of Congress.”
“Even more interesting, Stockman staff find two accounts happened to tweet Stockman back-to-back,” the press release continued. “Both have only one follower, former Obama digital strategist Brad Schenck. Schenck somehow found and followed them before they ever tweeted anything, followed anyone or followed any real people. Of the six real people who contacted Stockman only one can be verified as a constituent. One lives outside the district and the remaining four do not list where they live.”
“If you are a real person who contacted us about your support for the President’s anti-gun campaign, we are listening. We do not agree with you, but we appreciate your sincere opinions and encourage you to continue to contact us,” said Stockman. “But the vast majority of the President’s supporters have no feelings because they fake profiles from spammers.”
“The White House has some explaining to do. My own staff, and others looking into Obama’s Twitter campaign, find the vast majority of messages are coming from fraudulent accounts. Some of these accounts are linked directly to a former Obama staffer. To what extent is the White House involved in this attempt to defraud Congress,” said Stockman.
Stockman ultimately said that the Obama anti-gun campaign was “using the same scam techniques that sell male enhancement pills.”
BEIJING – A group of hackers linked to the Chinese military has stolen reams of sensitive data from more than 100 prominent American companies and organizations, according to an explosive new report.
“The details we have analyzed during hundreds of investigations convince us that the groups conducting these activities are based primarily in China and that the Chinese Government is aware of them,” U.S. computer-security firm Mandiant Corp. said in a 74-page report released on Tuesday.
Unable to reach a deal with Congress, President Obama plans to use his power to exert executive actions against the will of lawmakers. The president will issue orders addressing controversial topics including cybersecurity.
Although President Obama has issued fewer executive orders than any president in over 100 years, he is making extensive plans to change that, Washington Post reports quoting people outside the White House involved in discussions on the issues. Due to conflicts with a Congress that too often disagrees on proposed legislation, Obama plans to act alone and is likely “to rely heavily” on his executive powers in future, according to the newspaper.
Obama’s first executive order is expected to be issued this week when the president calls for the creation of new standards on what private-sector companies must do to protect their computer systems from a cybersecurity breach.
The order is a direct response to Congress’ refusal to pass the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) last year, which the administration deemed crucial to prevent crippling attacks on the nation’s infrastructure. But members of Congress who opposed the legislation cited serious privacy concerns with giving the government greater access to Americans’ personal information that only private companies and servers might have access to.
World Net Daily
NEW YORK – John Brennan, the Obama counter-terrorism adviser nominated this week to head the CIA, played a controversial role in what many suspect was an effort to sanitize Obama’s passport records. On March 21, 2008, amid Obama’s first presidential campaign, two unnamed contract employees for the State Department were fired and a third was disciplined for breaching the passport file of Democratic presidential candidate and then-Sen. Barack Obama.
Breaking the story, the Washington Times on March 20, 2008, noted that all three had used their authorized computer network access to look up and read Obama’s records within the State Department consular affairs section that “possesses and stores passport information.”
Contacted by the newspaper, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack attributed the violations to non-political motivations, stressing that the three individuals involved “did not appear to be seeking information on behalf of any political candidate or party.” “As far as we can tell, in each of the three cases, it was imprudent curiosity,” McCormack told the Washington Times. The spokesman did not disclose exactly how the State Department came to that conclusion.
By the next day, the story had changed. The New York Times reported March 21, 2008, that the security breach had involved unauthorized searches of the passport records not just of Sen. Obama but also of then-presidential contenders Sens. John McCain and Hillary Clinton. Again, the New York Times attributed the breaches to “garden-variety snooping by idle employees” that was “not politically motivated.” Like the Washington Times, the New York Times gave no explanation to back up its assertion that the breaches were attributable to non-political malfeasance.
Still, the New York Times report indicated then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had spent Friday morning calling all three presidential candidates and that she had told Obama that she was sorry for the violation.
At the time the story came out, both the US and the international media was littered with reports of a “major federal investigation” being carried out, which found dozens of military officials and defense contractors, allegedly buying and downloading child pornography onto private and government computers.
While the shocking case was only leaked to the media in 2010, the Pentagon released investigative reports that spanned almost a decade, implicating employees of government agencies and who handled some of the US’s most top secret issues.
A 2006 investigative report into the Pentagon child pornography stated:
“Defense workers who purchased child porn put the Department of Defense, the military and national security at risk by compromising computer systems, military installations and security clearance.” (1)
Humiliation for the DoD
Driving the DoD into greater humiliation and disgrace and generating an even greater flurry of media excitement, were reports that the child pornography suspects also put the Defense Department “at risk of blackmail, bribery and threats.” (1)
The Huffington Post went on to state that a computer repair company had alerted police after it had found “thousands of possible child pornography images” on the hard drive which had been brought to the shop by a man who was an employee of the Naval Air Welfare Center in California. (1)
The findings instigated a broader federal investigation, which operated under the code name “Operation Flicker”. The project began in 2007 and identified more than 5,200 individuals who had subscribed to child pornography websites. Out of the thousands of individuals who had been identified as subscribing to child porn, many provided Army or fleet zip codes or military email addresses. (2)
Despite dramatic claims of a decade-long federal investigation and the highly hyped top-secret project known as “Operation Flicker”, the investigation into the Pentagon child porn scandal only actually ran for eight months and only cross-checked 3,500 names for Pentagon ties.
Defense Criminal Investigation Service (DCI) documents revealed that in a Freedom of Information Act request, out of the 3,500 names that had been crosschecked, 264 individuals were uncovered as being specifically Pentagon employees or contractors, including staffers for the Secretary of Defense. Only 20 percent of these 264 people were completely investigated and fewer still were prosecuted.
Where the Investigation Fell Short
Despite the operation possibly tying as many as 5,000 individuals to child pornography sites and at least 264 of those people being linked directly to the DoD, 1,700 alleged child porn customers still went unchecked, and at least nine cases were closed because the investigators lacked “current, relevant evidence”. (1)
This begs the question: Why were the 1,700 suspects never investigated or identified? Why did Project Flicker end only eight months after it had started, without there being any charges or convictions, despite the fact that buying child pornography is illegal?
On a CNN report, Senator Grassley confirmed that that there were “no answers” to why the 1,700 suspects of purchasing child pornography were never investigated and that unknown numbers are still committing criminal acts. (3)
Keep in mind that when a priest is associated with this repulsive crime, the media interest in the story lasts for months. Or, even look at the Jimmy Saville child abuse scandal in Britain. It has been going on for the best part of six months and shows little sign of abating.
By comparison when the U.S. government is caught up in similar scandal not only do investigations get halted and suspects get off scott-free, but even the media seems to lose interest somewhat prematurely – augmenting the conspiracy theory that the government has tight control of the media.