http://www.infowars.com/why-couldnt-healthcare-gov-validate-obamas-identity/
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Bloomberg%3A_Trans_Pacific_Partnership_Is Corporatist_Power_Grab As_Democratic_And_Transparent_As_A_One-Party_State_Shrouded_Big_Brother-Like_Secrecy.html
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/25/2013 09:19 -0500
http://nypost.com/2013/12/23/do-the-saudis-really-control-the-terrorists-they-court/
Why couldn’t Healthcare.gov validate Obama’s identity?
The White House appears to have dropped a bombshell when it explained to the press why White House staff in Washington enrolled President Obama in Obamacare instead of Obama himself.
Officials said it was because HealthCare.gov could not verify Obama’s identity.
Here is what Ed Henry, Fox News White House correspondent, reported on air:
http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/why-couldnt-healthcare-gov-validate-obamas-identity/?cat_orig=us
( key snippets.. )
***
The Fox News report, noted by the Gateway Pundit, set off a round of speculation on the Internet.
What information was so sensitive for Obama that it had to be excluded from government databases?
Clearly, the information was not his Social Security Number or his birth records, because the White House has claimed to have made public both.
On May 5, 2010, WND published a report documenting that WND researchers were able to find, through an ordinary search of the Social Security database online, the Social Security Number Obama has been using.
In the same article, WND also reported Obama was using a Social Security Number set aside by the Social Security Administration for applicants with addresses in Connecticut. Public records, meanwhile, provide no evidence Obama ever had an address in the state.
***
E-Verify ‘flagged’ Obama SSN
On Sept. 12, 2011, WND reported the Social Security Number being used by Obama did not pass a check with E-Verify, the electronic system the U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security created to verify whether or not prospective employees have the required authorization to work legally in the United States.
In that article, WND published the “Self-Check” page from E-Verify that clearly listed a “Notice of Mismatch with Social Security Administration (SSA) Records.”
As seen below, Obama’s Social Security Number produced a mismatch that warranted a visit to the Social Security Administration to investigate the discrepancy.
***
WND obtained a copy of an affidavit from Linda Jordan, a private citizen who entered Obama’s Social Security Number into the “Self Check” section of the E-Verify website and found it to be flagged as likely being fraudulent.
“Eight of the Special Indicators have to do with fraud of some kind,” Jordan said. “It looks to me like the SSN Obama is using has been flagged with a Special Indicator suggesting fraud.”
WND’s request for comment in September 2011 to the media office of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security went unanswered.
Whose Social Security Number is Obama using?
As seen below, U.S. Air Force Col. Gregory Hollister, retired, obtained from the Social Security Administration verification that the Social Security Number currently being used by Obama is a number that was never issued to him.
***
Yet, WND has independently verified that Obama is using the Social Security Number in question.
As seen below, WND confirmed in an article published Feb. 2, 2011, that Obama’s Social Security Number links to Obama in the online records maintained by the Selective Service system. Inserting Obama’s Social Security Number into the online Selective Service search engine produces a valid Selective Service Number identified with Obama.
****
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/push-of-a-button-this-is-how-fast-they-can-lock-down-the-entire-banking-system_12242013
Push of a Button: This Is How Fast They Can Lock Down the Entire Banking System
Late last week it was learned that some 40 million charge cards were obtained using physical processing systems located in Target retail locations nationwide. Though no details of the how the hack attack was executed have been released by Target, the FBI or other agencies investigating the breach, it is likely that the processing machines themselves were compromised. Target claims that the hack was sophisticated, but on the technical side, once hackers found a way into the credit card processing machines, probably via remote entry from servers somewhere in Eastern Europe or Russia, the theft of credit card data itself would have been fairly straight forward by using scripts or applications that simply capture the data and send it off to servers owned by the hackers.
This was probably one of the largest credit card thefts in history, though it is not at all surprising. Two years ago we noted that cyber attacks would soon be targeting America’s e-commerce systems and just a few months ago it was noted that rogue terrorist groups were specifically working on sabotage operation to bring down the U.S. economy. While this latest attack on Target stores and their customers fell far short of crashing our economy or financial system, it proves, as did recent breaches of Pentagon military networks, that even the most highly secured systems in the world can be compromised.
Furthermore, what this attack highlights is that with the right type of “event” the economy and financial system of the United States can be shut down… almost instantly.
If you are a JP Morgan Chase banking customer and happened to use your debit card at Target stores between November 27th and December 15th, then you got a first-hand taste of what a shutdown of the banking system might feel like and how fast in can happen.
It was done with the push of a button and impacted some two million holiday shoppers:
JPMorgan Chase has notified card holders impacted by the Target breach that their cards will be restricted to $100 ATM cash withdrawals and $300 card purchases until replacement cards can be issued. The new limits impact nearly 2 million debit card accounts, but not credit card holders.
Chase bank made no announcement to their customers of the coming restrictions just days before Christmas. They simply obtained a list of the potentially compromised cards, uploaded them into their system, and with the flick of a finger shut down electronic access to customers’ funds. Whether Chase’s actions were a bad business move is not necessarily at issue, though it was probably quite inconvenient for those affected.
What is at issue is what many in alternative media have been warning about for some time – that the entire financial system of the United States can be shut down within a matter of minutes should the right set of events be realized.
Most Americans don’t believe it can happen. Likewise, most people didn’t think that American domestic security agencies could shut down our borders and put transportation across the country on lock-down within a few hours – until it happened on September 11, 2001.
Former national security coordinator Richard Clarke has warned that America’s cyber infrastructure is so fragile that it could literally be brought down by a coordinated cyber attack in a matter of 15 minutes. It sounds absurd to suggest that our country could potentially be crippled that quickly, until you realize that China, Russia, and Iran have long been mapping our entire utility, commerce and communications grids, all of which would be the first targets in any large-scale confrontation.
Because cyber space is now considered a national asset, the President of the United States has the authority to completely shut down the internet (and all of the components attached to it) with what experts call a “kill switch.” If this executive action is ever implemented the President would need very little justification to shut it all down – the financial system, commerce systems, and all personal web surfing – for a period of up to four months, and then indefinitely if he can provide a justifiable reason to Congress.
We live in a world that is, for those paying attention, completely out of our control. Our entire way of life could change overnight for any number of reasons.
A war with a foreign power, a rogue terrorist attack, or a false flag event could all be a trigger event for something so debilitating that it would cause pandemonium from coast to coast.
Former Department of Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano recently said that a massive and serious attack on the homeland is imminent. It makes no difference why it happens. Only that it does.
And when it does, you’d better be ready for it.
SOURCE: WASHINGTON’S BLOG
The U.S. Trade Representative – the federal agency responsible for negotiating trade treaties – has said that the details of the Trans Pacific Partnership are classified due to “national security”.
Image: Trans-Pacific Partnership (Wikimedia Commons).
A Congressman who has seen the text of the treaty says:
There is no national security purpose in keeping this text secret … this agreement hands the sovereignty of our country over to corporate interests.
It will increase the cost of borrowing, make prescription drugs more expensive, destroy privacy, harm food safety, and – yes - literally act to destroy the sovereignty of the U.S. and the other nations which sign the bill.
To give an idea of what would happen to American law if TPP passes, just look at Equador …
It’s courts awarded billions against Chevron for trashing huge swaths of rainforest. But then a private arbitration panel simply ignored the country’s court system.
If TPP passes, American courts will be sidelined as well. (Conservatives might want to read this and this.)
William Pesek writes at Bloomberg:
The Big Brother-like secrecy enshrouding the treaty on the U.S. side [is stunning.]***WikiLeaks did what Barack Obama’s White House refuses to: share portions of the document with the public. The draft of the intellectual-property rights chapter by Julian Assange’s outfit validated the worst fears — that TPP is a corporatist power grab. Rather than heed the outcry, the U.S. doubled down on secrecy, refusing to disclose more details.***You know you have a transparency problem when citizens of a democracy need to rely on WikiLeaks for details on changes to laws on Internet use, labor, environmental and food-safety standards, and the cost and availability of drugs. It’s worth considering something Google Inc. Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt told CNBC in December 2009: “If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.” So why is the Obama administration behaving as if it runs a closed Communist Party state? The answer can only be, To circumvent the legislative process.***Last month, 151 House Democrats, members of Obama’s own party, sent a letter to the White House stating their opposition to granting him fast-track authority to negotiate trade agreements, citing a lack of congressional consultation.***What would America’s founders make of this process?***Asians should say no to a trade deal that’s as democratic and transparent as a one-party state.
Edward Snowden's Alternative Christmas Message To The World
Edward Snowden's Christmas message, conveyed to the world courtesy of the UK's Channel 4, from his Russian exile is simple: "end mass surveillance." Alas, in a world in which social media exhibitionism is the norm, is his message increasingly falling on deaf ears? After all, there is a Duck Dynasty scandal, or a Justin Bieber retirement at any given moment, both of which are far more important than the loss of all personal privacy and the supreme reign of Big Brother.
http://nypost.com/2013/12/23/do-the-saudis-really-control-the-terrorists-they-court/
Do the Saudis really control the terrorists they court?
Modal Trigger
Prince Bandar meets with Vladimir Putin earlier this year, promising that Saudi Arabia can make the Winter Olympics safe from terrorists.Photo: RUSSIA/RIA Novosti/Alexei Druzhinin
In a 2003 Rose Garden press conference, a reporter asked President Bush why he was sealing a congressional report “incriminating the Saudi government when it comes to 9/11.”
Bush, without denying the description of the report’s contents, argued he had to seal it “so that those who are being investigated aren’t alerted.”
Only, the Saudi suspects named in the report weren’t really “being investigated.” Several months earlier, then-FBI Director Robert Mueller admitted as much during a closed hearing with the 9/11 Joint Inquiry staff on the Hill. Mueller sheepishly acknowledged the only people aggressively investigating the Saudi connections were sitting there across the table from him.
This was beyond odd. At both the FBI and CIA, there were files thick with memos and other documents detailing connections between the Saudi hijackers and Saudi officials and agents in at least seven US cities coast-to-coast. They revealed a vast Saudi support network spanning from Los Angeles and San Diego in the West to Washington, DC, Falls Church, Va., and Herndon, Va., in the East; and from Sarasota, Fla., in the South to Paterson, NJ, in the North.
Yet the only people connecting the dots were congressional staffers, as case agents and detectives assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Forces in San Diego and Washington complained of being frustrated by brass in their attempts to run down Saudi leads, particularly ones that led back to the Saudi Embassy.
There was so much Saudi-related evidence that it took 28 pages just for Hill investigators to summarize it all.
In fact, there arguably was more evidence for the Justice Department to indict Omar al-Bayoumi, the suspected Saudi intelligence agent who aided two of the hijackers in San Diego, than there was to indict Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker. The attorney general could just have easily thrown material support of terrorism charges at Bayoumi. But he did not. The only real difference is Bayoumi’s a Saudi.
If Bush’s objective really was to avoid tipping off subjects of ongoing investigations, he could have carefully redacted the names of Bayoumi and other Saudis cited in the 28-page section. Instead, he elected to censor the entire section, scrubbing out anything and everything Saudi.
The day before he did that, he met with the Saudis in the White House to discuss that secret Saudi section, which remains classified today. Walking away from that hour-long meeting, the Saudis no doubt felt reassured their secrets were safe. Confident Bush would never release the 28 pages, Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar made a show of demanding they be released, arguing the Saudis have nothing to hide.
It was an obvious, if effective, ploy.
The congressional report safely sealed up, the Saudis had only the 9/11 Commission Report to worry about — and, lo and behold, it cleared the Saudis (even though the commission director never let investigators see the 28 pages from the earlier congressional report). Upon its release, Bandar clucked that the panel exonerated the Kingdom, not to mention himself, conveniently.
The report curiously leaves out evidence tying Bandar and his wife to the hijackers through a Saudi bag man, Osama Bassnan, who received personal checks from the Bandars while handling the hijackers in San Diego. Bandar appears a few times in footnotes, and only in passing.
The Bandars claim the checks were “welfare” for Bassnan’s supposedly ill wife, and that they did not know what Bassnan was really up to.
Maybe so. The Saudis have a history of turning a blind eye to the extremists among them, funding radical mosques as a way of placating their population and keeping themselves in power.
But even if you take Bandar’s ignorance at face value, as he sows the wind, we reap the whirlwind.
Last year, Bandar was promoted to chief of Saudi intelligence. Saudi Arabia very much wants to see Bashar al-Assad removed from power in Syria. Bandar, frustrated with Obama’s inaction, has been letting Saudi jihadists cross the border to fight in the civil war — and has been funneling arms and support to the Islamic Front rebel group, according to the Daily Beast, weapons that can easily end up in the hands of al Qaeda.
Bandar also has pushed Russia to drop its backing of Assad. In August, according to the Telegraph, he gave President Vladimir Putin both a carrot — oil deals — and a stick:
“I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year,” Bandar allegedly said. “The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us.”
By Chechen groups, he means Islamic terrorists — just like the ones who bombed the Boston Marathon. It’s a startling, shocking admission.
Which is the more scary scenario? That members of the Saudi government provide funding to al Qaeda and other terrorist groups but can’t control them — or that they can?
Either way, we can’t find out the full story without an investigation. And the necessary first step is declassifying those 28 pages. Let’s finally connect those dots.
No comments:
Post a Comment