Congressman Has Written An Official Letter To The Navy Demanding Answers On UFOs

Joseph Trevithick
The Drive

The letter says that the unexplained sightings could reflect emerging threats to American airspace and domestic security.

member of the House of Representatives says the recent uptick in news regarding what many would call unidentified flying objects, or UFOs, something The War Zone has been a leading investigative source of, could reflect emerging threats to U.S. national airspace and homeland security, rather than simply military and intelligence concerns. Mark Walker, a Republican from North Carolina, has now written an open letter to Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer asking for more details about what that service is doing to record and assess sightings of what are increasingly referred to as unidentified aerial phenomena, or UAP.Walker, who is a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security and the ranking Republican on its Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism, wrote the letter to Spencer on July 16, 2019. He subsequently made it public on his website on July 29, 2019, three days after he went on Fox News' "Tucker Carlson Tonight" to voice his concerns.

"The reports mention the existence of these encounters both domestically and abroad during various [U.S. military] missions and trainings," Walker wrote in his letter. "Additionally, there have been reports of significant investments in advanced aerospace technologies like the recorded UAP encounters by China."

"If the accounts are true, the unidentified crafts could pose a serious security risk to our military personnel and defense apparatus," he continued. "As a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security and the Ranking Member for the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism, these reports are concerning from a national airspace and domestic security perspective."

You can read the full letter below.

Read more

Congress Blasts Labor Secretary for Letting Billionaire Child Trafficking Pedophile "On the Loose"

Free Thought Project

On Wednesday, Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta appeared before a budget appropriations subcommittee to testify about the effectiveness of the Labor Department’s 2020 budget which calls for a 10 percent cut in programs affecting millions of workers. When it came time for Acosta to testify whether or not he could safeguard children from illegal labor practices and combat human trafficking, multiple lawmakers grilled him over the sweetheart deal he gave convicted billionaire pedophile Jeffery Epstein who is also suspected of running a massive child sex trafficking ring.

During the testimony, Acosta defended his cuts to multiple programs, noting that the new budget provides “greater investment in programs that work, eliminates programs that do not, and generally bolsters opportunities for working Americans through common-sense reforms.’’

However, some of these cuts are to programs designed to stop child trafficking which makes very little “common sense” given the administration’s ostensible view on the matter. When the cuts to these programs designed to prevent human trafficking were brought up, lawmakers were given the green light to bring up the Epstein conspiracy.

“This is not the first time you have ignored human trafficking,’’ said Massachusetts representative Katherine Clark.

As TFTP has reported on multiple occasions, Epstein is a convicted child molester and sexually abused no less than 40 underage girls. Despite this fact, Acosta protected him while serving as a U.S. Attorney in Florida. Had Acosta actually prosecuted Epstein for his crimes, Epstein would have gone to prison for life.

However, instead of going to prison for life, as he should’ve considering the evidence against him, Epstein only got 13 months and was allowed to stay in the Palm Beach County Jail in his own private cell where he was allowed to leave the prison six days a week for “work release.”

In February, a federal judge made a bombshell ruling which stated that the prosecutors who worked under then-U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta—now Trump’s Labor Secretary—broke the law when handling the case of the billionaire pedophile.

Read more

It's Official: Russiagate is This Generation's WMD

Matt Taibbi
taibbi.substack.com

Nobody wants to hear this, but news that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller is headed home without issuing new charges is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media.

As has long been rumored, the former FBI chief's independent probe will result in multiple indictments and convictions, but no "presidency-wrecking" conspiracy charges, or anything that would meet the layman's definition of "collusion" with Russia.

With the caveat that even this news might somehow turn out to be botched, the key detail in the many stories about the end of the Mueller investigation was best expressed by the New York Times:

A senior Justice Department official said that Mr. Mueller would not recommend new indictments.

Attorney General William Barr sent a letter to congress summarizing Mueller's conclusions. The money line quoted the Mueller report:

[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

Over the weekend, the Times tried to soften the emotional blow for the millions of Americans trained in these years to place hopes for the overturn of the Trump presidency in Mueller. As with most press coverage, there was little pretense that the Mueller probe was supposed to be a neutral fact-finding mission, as apposed to religious allegory, with Mueller cast as the hero sent to slay the monster.

The Special Prosecutor literally became a religious figure during the last few years, with votive candles sold in his image and Saturday Night Live cast members singing "All I Want for Christmas is You" to him featuring the rhymey line: "Mueller please come through, because the only option is a coup."

The Times story today tried to preserve Santa Mueller's reputation, noting Trump's Attorney General William Barr's reaction was an "endorsement" of the fineness of Mueller's work:

In an apparent endorsement of an investigation that Mr. Trump has relentlessly attacked as a "witch hunt," Mr. Barr said Justice Department officials never had to intervene to keep Mr. Mueller from taking an inappropriate or unwarranted step.

Mueller, in other words, never stepped out of the bounds of his job description. But could the same be said for the news media?

For those anxious to keep the dream alive, the Times published its usual graphic of Trump-Russia "contacts," inviting readers to keep making connections. But in a separate piece by Peter Baker, the paper noted the Mueller news had dire consequences for the press:

It will be a reckoning for President Trump, to be sure, but also for Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, for Congress, for Democrats, for Republicans, for the news media and, yes, for the system as a whole...

This is a damning page one admission by the Times. Despite the connect-the-dots graphic in its other story, and despite the astonishing, emotion-laden editorial the paper also ran suggesting "We don't need to read the Mueller report" because we know Trump is guilty, Baker at least began the work of preparing Times readers for a hard question: "Have journalists connected too many dots that do not really add up?"

The paper was signaling it understood there would now be questions about whether or not news outlets like itself made galactic errors by betting heavily on a new, politicized approach, trying to be true to "history's judgment" on top of the hard-enough job of just being true. Worse, in a brutal irony everyone should have seen coming, the press has now handed Trump the mother of campaign issues heading into 2020.

Nothing Trump is accused of from now on by the press will be believed by huge chunks of the population, a group that (perhaps thanks to this story) is now larger than his original base. As Baker notes, a full 50.3% of respondents in a poll conducted this month said they agree with Trump the Mueller probe is a "witch hunt."

Stories have been coming out for some time now hinting Mueller's final report might leave audiences "disappointed," as if a President not being a foreign spy could somehow be bad news.

Openly using such language has, all along, been an indictment. Imagine how tone-deaf you'd have to be to not realize it makes you look bad, when news does not match audience expectations you raised. To be unaware of this is mind-boggling, the journalistic equivalent of walking outside without pants.

There will be people protesting: the Mueller report doesn't prove anything! What about the 37 indictments? The convictions? The Trump tower revelations? The lies! The meeting with Don, Jr.? The financial matters! There's an ongoing grand jury investigation, and possible sealed indictments, and the House will still investigate, and...

Read more

How the 'Illusory Truth Effect' duped millions into believing in Russiagate

Caitlin Johnstone
caitlinjohnstone.com

"Mueller Finds No Trump-Russia Conspiracy", read the front page headline of Sunday's New York Times. Bit by bit, mainstream American consciousness is slowly coming to terms with the death of the thrilling conspiracy theory that the highest levels of the US government had been infiltrated by the Kremlin, and with the stark reality that the mass media and the Democratic Party spent the last two and-a-half years monopolizing public attention with a narrative which never had any underlying truth to it.

There are still holdouts, of course. Many people invested a tremendous amount of hope, credibility, and egoic currency in the belief that Robert Mueller was going to arrest high-ranking Trump administration officials and members of Trump's own family, leading seedy characters to "flip" on the president in their own self-interest and thereby providing evidence that will lead to impeachment. Some insist that Attorney General William Barr is holding back key elements of the Mueller report, a claim which is premised on the absurd belief that Mueller would allow Barr to lie about the results of the investigation without speaking up publicly. Others are still holding out hope that other investigations by other legal authorities will turn up some Russian shenanigans that Mueller could not, ignoring Mueller's sweeping subpoena powers and unrivaled investigative authority. But they're coming around.

The question still remains, though: what the hell happened? How did a fact-free conspiracy theory come to gain so much traction among mainstream Americans? How were millions of people persuaded to invest hope in a narrative that anyone objectively analyzing the facts knew to be completely false?

The answer is that they were told that the Russiagate narrative was legitimate over and over again by politicians and mass media pundits, and, because of a peculiar phenomenon in the nature of human cognition, this repetition made it seem true. 

Read more

Ilhan Omar Is Just Another Victim of Zion’s Politically Lethal Sting

Wayne Madsen

Strategic Culture

Freshman US Representative Ilhan Omar, Democrat of Minnesota and a Somali-American Muslim, is not the first nor will she be the last victim of Zion’s sting. Omar is merely the latest in a long line of US politicians who have faced the onslaught of Israel’s powerful lobbying vise grip in Washington. In fact, long before there was a state of Israel, American presidents and statesmen fell victim to the power of political Zionism to retaliate against those who failed to back the concept of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East.

On March 5, 1891, President Benjamin Harrison received a visitor to the White House bearing a petition signed by 421 influential American citizens urging the president to recognize Palestine as the “restored” homeland of the Jewish people. The bearer of the petition, evangelical Christian clergyman William E. Blackstone was one of the earliest “Christian Zionists” in proclaiming solidarity with certain Jewish Zionists in support of a Jewish state in the Holy Land. 

Blackstone was no different than many of today’s Zionists who ensure total fealty of US administrations to Israeli policy, no matter how reprehensible it may be, especially toward the Palestinian people. Blackstone’s petition had been signed by John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, US Supreme Court Chief Justice Melville Fuller, Speaker of the US House of Representatives Thomas Reed, inventor Cyrus McCormick, co-owner and managing editor of The Chicago Tribune Joseph Medill, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Robert Hitt, and US Representative and future president William McKinley.

Read more

Robert F. Kennedy Jr Explains How Big Pharma Completely Owns Congress

Global Research

Those of you who have been involved in the past in the battle to protect our children from poorly made vaccines or toxic chemicals in our food or in our water know the power of these industries and how they’ve undermined every institution in our democracy that is supposed to protect little children from powerful, greedy corporations. Even the pharmaceutical companies have been able to purchase congress. They’re the largest lobbying entity in Washington D.C.. They have more lobbyists in Washington D.C. than there are congressman and senators combined. They give twice to congress what the next largest lobbying entity is, which is oil and gas… Imagine the power they exercise over both republicans and democrats. They’ve captured them (our regulatory agencies) and turned them into sock puppets. They’ve compromised the press… and they destroy the publications that publish real science. (Robert F. Kennedy Jr, from the video below)
 
Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Chairman of the Board of Directors for Children’s Health Defence (a worthy cause if you’re looking for one to donate to) has been fighting against big corporations that have taken over and undermined American government health regulatory agencies for a number of years. One of the most recent examples is when Robert F. Kennedy Jr represented Dewayne Johnson, a school groundskeeper who successfully brought forward a lawsuit alleging glyphosate caused his cancer. That’s right, he won!

There are currently thousands of cases pending against Monsanto, which is only one of multiple powerful companies influencing agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). And to think, these are the agencies providing us with ‘science’ in order to get the food, medications, and other products produced by these big corporations to be deemed safe. Not only that, but these agencies are providing educational resources to medical schools, which Big Pharma has completely taken over as well.

Read more

Politicians Say They Live In Fear As Threats Against Congress Increase

Comment: And the corrupt majority that is Congress have brought it upon themselves.

--------------------

Marc Slavo
SHTFplan.com

Threats against politicians have been skyrocketing lately. Many in Congress are now living in fear, purchasing body armor and hiring armed guards to protect themselves against the people they should be serving rather than controlling.

One year after the horrific congressional baseball shooting that almost took the life of Representative Steve Scalise and former Hill staffer Matt Mika, members are keenly aware that the continued attempt to control and manipulate the public has finally put a target on their backs. “The true reality is if somebody wanted to do me harm, they could probably do that with relative ease and that is sad,” said Representative Chuck Fleishmann (R-Tenn.), a New York City native.

Mexican citizens have been executing politicians in the country south of the United States’ border.  So far, 113 political elites (or those attempting to become a political master by way of election) have been killed.

The majority of politicians experiencing the threats appear to republican. Which just goes to show that liberals intend to use violence and theft to get people to conform to their ideas rather than use peace and voluntary interaction.

Read more

Watch A Sitting Congresswoman Shred The MSM Narrative In Under A Minute

Zero Hedge

Hawaii Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard appeared on multiple Sunday news shows a day after her state's false ICBM emergency alert sent the islands into a tense 40 minutes of panic before it was revealed to be a message sent in error, where she slammed the mainstream media's reporting on the North Korean nuclear threat, saying, "We've got to understand that North Korea is holding onto these nuclear weapons because they think it is their only protection from the United States coming in and doing to them what the United States has done to so many countries throughout history." 

She further called for Trump to hold direct talks with Kim Jong Un in order to prevent the real thing from ever happening. 

On Saturday Gabbard had immediately criticized President Trump for mishandling North Korea, taking to MSNBC to proclaim that "our leaders have failed us. Donald Trump is taking too long... he's not taking this [nuclear] threat seriously..." During Sunday interviews she elaborated on a plan of action, advising Trump to enter talks with Pyongyang which should “happen without preconditions” and that Trump should “sit across the table from Kim Jong Un” in order stamp out the climate of fear which contributed to the “unacceptable” alert issued on Saturday. 

Read more (+ video)

Media Silent as Fed Committee Quietly Passes Act Allowing Warrantless Searches

Rachel Blevins

 

It has been over one month since the latest dangerous piece of legislation meant to infringe on Americans’ constitutional rights was introduced, and Congress is now moving forward with the bill that will have serious ramifications for all Americans by blatantly violating the freedoms guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment if it becomes law.

The USA Liberty Act has passed the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 27-8, and as Congressman Justin Amash noted, all privacy advocates should be concerned about the overwhelming support the bill is receiving from Congress.

“The Liberty Act passed committee 27-8. It allows the government to search our private data without a warrant—in violation of the 4th Amendment,” Amash wrote on Twitter. “It’s another bill, like the Freedom Act, that furthers violations of our rights under the guise of protecting our rights.”

Read more

Kindergarten on LSD: Sanctions, smoke and mirrors in Washington

The Saker
The Saker

The latest US sanctions and the Russian retaliatory response have resulted in a torrent of speculations in the official media and the blogosphere - everybody is trying to make sense of a situation which appears to make no sense at all. Why in the world would the US Senate adopt new sanctions against Russia when Russia has done absolutely nothing to provoke such a vote? Except for Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders, every single US Senator voted in favor of these sanctions. Why?! This is even more baffling when you consider that the single biggest effect of these sanctions will be to trigger a rift, and possibly even counter-sanctions, between the US and the EU. What is absolutely clear is that these sanctions will have exactly zero effect on Russia and I don't think anybody is seriously expecting the Russians to change anything at all in their policies. And yet, every Senator except Paul and Sanders voted for this. Does that make any sense to you?

Let's try to figure out what is going on here.

First, a simple reminder: like all US politicians, from the county level to the US Congress, Senators have only one consideration when they vote - "what's in it for me?". The very last thing which any US Senator really cares about are the real life consequences of his/her vote. This means that to achieve the kind of quasi unanimity (98%) for a totally stupid vote there was some kind of very influential lobby which used some very forceful "arguments" to achieve such a vote. Keep in mind that the Republicans in the Senate knew that they were voting against the wishes of their President. And yet every single one except for Rand Paul voted for these sanctions, that should tell you something about the power of the lobby which pushed for them. So who would have such power?

The website "Business Pundit: Expert Driven" has helpfully posted an article which lists the 10 top most powerful lobbies in Washington, DC. They are (in the same order as in the original article)

• Tech Lobby
• Mining Industry
• Defense Industry
• Agribusiness Industry
• Big Oil
• Financial Lobby
• Big Pharma
• AARP
• Pro-Israel Lobby
• NRA

Okay, why not? We could probably rearrange them, give them different labels, add a couple (like the "Prison Industrial Complex" or the "Intelligence Community") but all in all this is an okay list. Any name on it jump at you yet?

One could make the case that most of these lobbies need an enemy to prosper, this is certainly true of the Military-Industrial Complex and the associated high tech industry, and one could also reasonably claim that Big Oil, Mining and Agribusiness see Russia as a potential competitor. But a closer look at the interests these lobbies represent will tell you that they are mostly involved in domestic politics and that faraway Russia, with her relatively small economy, is just not that important to them. This is also clearly true for Big Pharma, the AARP and the NRA. Which leaves the Israel Lobby as the only potential candidate.

"Israel Lobby" is, of course, a misnomer. The Israel Lobby has very little interest in Israel as a country or, for that matter, for the Israeli people. If anything, the Israel Lobby ought to be called the "Neocon Lobby". Furthermore, we also have to keep in mind that the Neocon Lobby is unlike any other lobby in the list above. For one thing, it does not represent US interests. Neither does it represent the interests of Israel. Rather, it represents the interests of a specific subset of the US ruling elites, in reality much smaller than 1% of the population, which all share in the one common ideology of worldwide domination typical of the Neocons.

These are the folks who in spite of their 100% ironclad control of the media and Congress lost the Presidential election to Donald Trump and who are now dead set to impeach him. These are the folks who simply use "Russia" as a propagandistic fulcrum to peddle the notion that Trump and his entourage are basically Russian agents and Trump himself as a kind of "Presidential Manchurian Candidate".

Keep in mind that the historical record shows that while the Neocons are fantastically driven, they are not particularly smart. Yes, they do have the kind of rabid ideological determination which allows them to achieve a totally disproportionate influence over US policies, but when you actually read what they write and listen to what they say you immediately realize that these are rather mediocre individuals with a rather parochial mindset which makes them both very predictable and very irritating to the people around them. They always overplay their hand and then end up stunned and horrified when all their conspiracies and plans come tumbling down on them.

I submit that this is exactly what is happening right now.

Read more

National Defense Authorization Act 2017 includes draft for women & indefinite detention of American citizens

Derrick Broze
Activist Post

The U.S. Congress has passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 2017 with provisions that will force women to sign up for potential military draft and continues the practice of indefinite detention.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Senate approved a $602 billion annual defense budget that President Obama has promised to veto because the bill does not allow for the closing of the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Senate Bill 2943, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, passed with a vote of 85 Senators in favor and 13 against.

Before the vote, Senator John McCain tweeted that "It's never been more urgent to give our troops the resources they need to succeed." The majority of Congress have no issue taking money from the American people and redistributing it to fund their empire. The conflict arises when lawmakers begin debating whose pet projects are going to get a boost. The major conflicts in passing the bill stemmed from various amendments dealing with how the military budget will be spent.

One issue the entire Congress seemed to agree on was voting against closing military bases around the world. While the Pentagon called for budget cuts stating that the military has more space than they need, Congress refused to go along with the cuts. "Besides, several lawmakers have argued that the Pentagon has cooked the books to justify its conclusions or at least didn't do the math completely," the Associated Press reports. The Senate also voted against an amendment to close the infamous military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Another contentious area of debate was the mandate to force women who turn 18 on or after Jan. 1, 2018 to register for Selective Service. Males are already required register within 30 days of their 18th birthday. The United States has maintained a volunteer military force since 1973, but through Selective Service the military could reinstate a draft and call upon registered males and females. Those who do not register could face up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000, although the penalty has rarely been enforced.

Read more
  

How the Defense Industry Convinced Congress to Militarize Local Cops

Mother Jones

The Ferguson, Missouri, police department's display of armored cars, officers in riot gear, and assault rifles over the past week shocked Americans who didn't realize how much military equipment is now available to local police departments. But since the 1990's, more than 8,000 federal, state, tribal, and local police agencies across the country have armed themselves with the military's excess gear, free of charge. The inventory includes everything from office furniture and first aid kits to aircraft, armored cars, rifles and bayonets, according to the Defense Logistics Agency, the Department of Defense office that manages the transactions under an initiative called Program 1033.

In June, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) introduced an amendment to de-fund aspects of the program. Grayson's bill would have exempted certain military equipment, including planes and armored cars, from Program 1033. That effort failed; just 62 members of the House of Representatives voted for the measure, with 355 voting no. Maybe the outcome shouldn't have been a surprise: According to a new analysis of campaign finance data, the politicians who voted against Grayson's bill received, on average, 73 percent more campaign donations from defense industry sources from 2011 through 2013 than their peers who voted for it. 

Read more

Syria crisis: Obama asks Congress for $500m for rebels

Comment: Could it get any more surreal?? This administration is the most lurid caricature of democracy I have ever seen. On the one hand they float this idea that there are "good terrorists" and "bad terrorists" and that somehow funding the good terrorists with half a million dollars is also beneficial for everyone. The war hawks desperately want to topple Assad because he's standing in the way of large scale resources and Israel's plan aka: The Yinon Papers. This is an old game indeed. Nothing spontaneous in this propaganda at all. 

Aside from the superficial narrative of "blowback", what this tells us - which should be obvious to any tenth grader who's been paying attention - is that it is part of a long term strategy to balkanize the Middle East by arming and encouraging extremist terror groups so that the Zio-Conservatives can make good on its plan of a Greater Israel. Once these countries are racked with civil war it makes it far easier for Israel with its military might to walk in and take what it wants along with US-NATO interests. Iraq in macrocosm. 

And this pathetic idea that somehow these anti-Assad rebels are "Moderate." Suuuuuure. Have a look at the video below.

-----------------------------------

BBC News

President Barack Obama has asked the US Congress to approve $500m (£294m) to train and equip what he described as "moderate" Syrian opposition forces.

The funds would help Syrians defend against forces aligned with President Bashar al-Assad, the White House said.

The aid would also counter Islamist militants such as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isis), it added. 

Isis's advance in neighbouring Iraq has led some in Congress to press Mr Obama to take action.
Tens of thousands of people have died and millions more have been displaced in three years of civil war in Syria, as rebels fight troops loyal to Mr Assad.

Read more 

And now the reality:

Obama administration launches devious FCC plan to control all news sources in America and FAILS

Natural News

The first amendment of the Bill of Rights states that "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom... of the press." The words are clear and understood, but what if it's not Congress trying to control the press? What happens when the President and departments of the executive branch go around the Bill of Rights and begin controlling the news stories that the free press presents to the people? 

FCC gathering information to 'ascertain the process by which stories are selected'

New documents reveal devious controls to be carried out through the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). In an attempt to control freedom of the press, the FCC has authored an investigation called the "Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs" (CIN) initiative.

Proposed last May, the CIN initiative was proposed to gather information from television and radio broadcasters "to ascertain the process by which stories are selected." Additionally, the information is collected to be used to designate "station priorities" to monitor content production quality and the populations served. Furthermore CIN initiative is designated to eliminate perceived station bias and regulate "perceived percent of news dedicated to each of the eight [critical information needs] and perceived responsiveness to under-served populations." This plan could result in FCC agents visiting newsrooms.

The FCC has identified what they believe are eight critical information needs, or key topics that the government thinks should be covered by news outlets.

The slightest idea that the federal government gets to suggest topics for media news coverage is blood curdling. If the feds control the topics of the press, then the truth can be watered down and discarded, as free press accountability dissolves. 

There's a war going on to control information, to control minds

Massive federal control is real. It's no conspiracy. It's already being witnessed through the implementation of federal common core standards that are being forced into the public education system. The government is gaining control of what is taught to public school children, changing minds, sculpting lives.

Imagine what a takeover of the free press might look like, with agents looking over the shoulders of reporters, deeming what is appropriate to report?

While the FCC claimed that the study is "voluntary," they are the ones who issue licenses to the broadcasters that they seek to monitor. Compelled to comply, media outlets may go along, threatened by the thought of penalties and license revocation. 

Truly free press is rising

This is where the truly free press comes in to keep liberty alive. Using the internet, the new media can completely expose the lies dished out through controlled FCC-regulated media sources. Truth in media is growing fast at places like NaturalNews.com, among others who don't feed the people a bunch of fluff.

Considering that the Department of Justice has been caught tracking the movements of reporters and bugging their phone lines, it's obvious there's a federal goal to control the press with intimidation and coercion.

Watch Judge Andrew Napolitano speak out against the FCC's new plan here. In his words, "If the FCC shows up here... throw them out!" 

Even local reporters intimidated by authoritarian demands

It's apparent that some major media outlets already comply with authoritarian demands and information controls as the truth is twisted and hidden behind curtains of coercion. Even local media can cave to local pressure. A small town reporter may be absolutely frightened to report the truth on how a fellow couple in the community were harassed and targeted by the town's police, for fear that they too may be persecuted, labeled or targeted.

Hopefully more reporters and free media journalist will start standing up to speak the truth of what's really going on in this country. While the FCC was positioning for its next move -- to get in the newsroom and dictate the stories that can be reported to the people, public outcry has halted their devious plans. Free speech and the free press has given the federal government no option but to back down. 

Free speech, free press prevails as controlling FCC plan falters

In the words of commissioner Ajit Pai, who has been a huge critic of the new press - suppression plan, "This study would have thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country, somewhere it just doesn't belong. The Commission has now recognized that no study by the federal government, now or in the future, should involve asking questions to media owners, news directors, or reporters about their practices. This is an important victory for the First Amendment."

He added: "And it would not have been possible without the American people making their voices heard. I will remain vigilant that any future initiatives not infringe on our constitutional freedoms."

Sources for this article include:http://pjmedia.com

http://foxnewsinsider.com

http://www.foxnews.com

A Posthumous Twist in the Story of a Disgraced Senate Aide

The Atlantic

Jesse Ryan Loskarn was an aide to a U.S. senator until last month, when he was arrested for buying child pornography. Disgraced, he committed suicide last week. Politico has a summary of the details that were known at the time of his death. "According to a federal complaint, he made 'several purchases' from November 2010 to March 2011 from a Toronto-based movie production company," it reports. "Court documents said 'the majority of these films featured young nude boys."

But it turns out there's more to the story. His apparent suicide note has been posted online by his family. Its audience should be as wide as the one exposed to his crime. Here's an excerpt:

I’ve hurt every single human being I’ve ever known and the details of my shame are preserved on the internet for all time. There is no escape. My family has been wounded beyond description. My former boss and colleagues had their trust broken and their names dragged through the mud for no reason other than association. Friends’ question whether they ever really knew me.

Everyone wants to know why.

... The first time I saw child pornography was during a search for music on a peer-to-peer network. I wasn’t seeking it but I didn’t turn away when I saw it. Until that moment, the only place I’d seen these sorts of images was in my mind. I found myself drawn to videos that matched my own childhood abuse. It’s painful and humiliating to admit to myself, let alone the whole world, but I pictured myself as a child in the image or video. The more an image mirrored some element of my memories and took me back, the more I felt a connection. 
This is my deepest, darkest secret. As a child I didn’t understand what had happened at the time of the abuse. I did know that I must not tell anyone, ever. Later the memories took on new and more troubling meaning when I became a teenager. They started to appear more often and made me feel increasingly apart from everyone else. In my mind I instigated and enjoyed the abuse—even as a five and nine year old—no matter the age difference.  Discussing what had happened would have meant shame and blame. I always worried someone might look at me and know, so I paid close attention to others for any sign they might have figured it out. No one ever did. By my late teens I reached a sort of mental equilibrium on the matter.  I couldn’t stop the images from appearing altogether, but I generally controlled when they appeared. As an adult I thought I was a tougher man because of the experience; that I was mentally stronger and less emotional than most. I told myself that I was superior to other people because I had dealt with this thing on my own.

There's more.

 

Loskarn concluded, "to the children in the images: I should have known better. I perpetuated your abuse and that will be a burden on my soul for the rest of my life."

 

The ban on child pornography is one of the few prohibitionist policies that I support. Child pornography ought to be illegal. Possessing it ought to be stigmatized as well. But what this letter brings home is the importance of eliminating stigmas against having been abused as a child, and far more controversially, against the unrequited desire to buy child porn. Our charge is to create a society where people with that impulse seek professional help before giving in to it. That would do far more to protect children than mercilessly vilifying the unrequited impulse. Today, someone who announced, "I have this compulsion to watch child pornography and I'm afraid I'll act on it without help!" would be labeled a pervert and shunned. But seeking help would actually be brave and honorable. 

 

Were I confronted with someone seeking help of that sort, I'd probably feel creeped out. I hope I'd also be kind, helpful, and mindful of just how lucky I am: that is to say, mindful that it isn't elevated moral status or choice of any kind that has caused me to only have sexual feelings for people of roughly my own age. It's just luck. So many of us enjoy that particular kind of luck that it's easy to stigmatize those who don't. We'd do better to vilify acts rather than compulsions, so that more people with compulsions seek help and fewer children are victimized.

Millionaires' Club: For First Time, Most Lawmakers are Worth $1 Million-Plus

Open Secrets

For the first time in history, most members of Congress are millionaires, according to a new analysis of personal financial disclosure data by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Of 534 current members of Congress, at least 268 had an average net worth of $1 million or more in 2012, according to disclosures filed last year by all members of Congress and candidates. The median net worth for the 530 current lawmakers who were in Congress as of the May filing deadline was $1,008,767 -- an increase from the previous year when it was $966,000. In addition, at least one of the members elected since then, Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), is a millionaire, according to forms she filed as a candidate. (There is currently one vacancy in Congress.)

Last year only 257 members, or about 48 percent of lawmakers, had a median net worth of at least $1 million. 

Read more

Reality TV Presidential Puppets Used to Distract the Masses With Guest Michael Badnarik

Good interview. 

"The Presidential campaign is designed to be a distraction. The last thing they want to do is talk about issues....For the most part the conclusion has already been predetermined.... of the candiates have been bought and paid for....It's mostly for show."

U.S. politicians get richer despite recession

Ratigan Schools Barack-Loving Progressive: "Obama Works For Goldman Sachs & Wall Street, Get Over Your Nonsense That Democrats Are Any Better Than Republicans!"

Transcript:

DYLAN: “The biggest contributor to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is Goldman Sachs. The primary activities of this president relative to banking have been to protect the most lucrative aspect of that business, which is the dark market for credit default swaps and the like. That has been the explicit agenda of his Treasury Secretary. This president is advocating trade agreements that allow enhanced bank secrecy in Panama, enhanced murdering of union members in Colombia, and the refunding of North Korean slaves.”

DYLAN: “This president and Republicans are both in favor of those trade agreements. And this president renewed the Bush tax cuts for millionaires. Those are actions. Those are not words. This guy’s a great talker. Everybody loves to talk. This is a man who has taken action. Barack Obama has taken action. He has kept the swaps markets dark, no capital requirements for the—“

GUEST: “Let me react. I’m a progressive. I share a lot of the frustrations that my fellow progressives share. When I look at the alternative, I think, well, it sure beats the alternative. But I think you’re onto something in the following sense, Dylan. These things I’ve mentioned, just examples of things that the president can do, while on the edges, they still have an effect. All they do, I think, is illustrate that if we want to see action, okay, it may not be as good as a $500 billion jobs bill, but don’t stop, don’t stop, with asking Congress—“

DYLAN: “But I guess where I take issue is, this president is working for the bad guys. The Democrats are working for the bad guys. So are the Republicans. The Democrats get away with it by saying, ‘Look at how crazy the Republicans are; at the Democrats pretend to care about people.’ BUT THE FACT IS THE 2-PARTY POLITICAL SYSTEM IS UTTERLY BOGUS."

One-fifth of the US Congress is currently in Israel on a free trip as America's economy falters

 

Desert Peace

 

One-fifth of the US Congress is currently in Israel on a free trip sponsored by the American Israel Educational Foundation, an affiliate of the largest Zionist lobby in the US: the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

 

US and Israeli flag intertwined (image from AIPAC.org)

Although accepting free trips from lobbyists is illegal for Congress members under US anti-graft and corruption laws, the trips to Israel have been granted a special exception by the Congress.

The Congress members, led by Representative Steny Hoyer, will receive briefings from Israeli government officials, tour historic religious sites and receive a guided tour around Israel by Israeli tour guides intent on promoting Israeli policies in the region.

Critics of the trips argue that in addition to the issue of graft, the tours are extremely one-sided and may even provide the Congressmembers with factually false information and history, thereby misinforming their perception of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

There is no part of the tour that allows the Congressmembers to travel to the Palestinian side of the Israeli-constructed Wall independently to meet with refugees and others living under Israeli military occupation since 1967. They will, however, meet with the US-supported Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, whose term of office ran out two years ago, but who has thus far refused to hold new elections.

Medea Benjamin, of Code Pink for Peace, one of the groups organizing against the Congressional trips to Israel, wrote, “Going on an AIPAC-sponsored trip to Israel is the moral equivalent of using an Anglo-Boer travel company to visit apartheid-era South Africa.”

She says the tour is extremely biased and one-sided, despite the claim that the Congressmembers will visit leaders ‘across the political spectrum’. Benjamin adds, “They won’t spend time with grieving Palestinians whose homes have been demolished to make way for more Jewish-only housing. They won’t spend a few hours at a checkpoint to witness how Palestinians are detained, abused and humiliated, or how this ‘thriving democracy’ forbids Palestinians from driving on Jewish-only roads. They won’t go to Gaza, where 1.5 million people are suffering under an unbearable siege, unable to travel freely, conduct business transactions across borders or even rebuild their homes destroyed by the Israeli invasion. “

Many Americans have argued that the $3 billion in direct aid and $3 billion in indirect aid provided to Israel each year by the US Congress would be better spent reviving the declining US economy.