Visit BATR News the compliment to BREAKING ALL THE RULES News
news you won't find in the mainstream media
US Plays Decisive Role in Israel’s Attack on Gaza
Two reporters for major US TV channels were summarily "removed" last week from covering Israel’s attack on Gaza, moments before Israel launched a ground invasion.
NBC pulled out Ayman Mohyeldin, who has been widely praised for the even-handedness of his reporting from Gaza, just as he landed a harrowing scoop. He had kicked a football with four boys who were killed moments later by an Israeli missile.
Mohyeldin managed a few tweets before being removed, allegedly on "security" grounds. But why then did NBC immediately send in a replacement? After a public outcry, Mohyeldin was reinstated, but no proper explanation of the decision has been provided.
Shortly afterwards, CNN "reassigned" its reporter in Israel, Diana Magnay, after a tweet in which she labelled as "scum" an Israeli mob that threatened her with violence as she filmed them celebrating missile explosions in Gaza. The tweet was deleted within minutes, followed by her rapid departure.
The impression left by these incidents and the generally deferential tone towards Israel in US coverage is that, faced with huge pressure from the Israel lobby, media executives are frantically policing their correspondents’ output, including on social media.
That view was confirmed to Max Blumenthal by an NBC producer after the channel axed Rula Jebreal, a Palestinian contributor, following her on-air complaints about the massive over-representation of Israeli officials in US coverage. The producer said there was a "witch-hunt" being conducted by NBC executives, led by the media corporation’s president, Phil Griffin.
Feds Hijack Silk Road Case To Convert Web Into Totalitarian Control Machine
Malaysian Airlines MH17 Was Ordered to Fly over the East Ukraine Warzone
On the matter of MH17’s flight path, Malaysian Airlines confirms that the pilot was instructed to fly at a lower altitude by the Kiev air traffic control tower upon its entry into Ukraine airspace.
”MH17 filed a flight plan requesting to fly at 35,000ft throughout Ukrainian airspace. This is close to the ‘optimum’ altitude.
However, an aircraft’s altitude in flight is determined by air traffic control on the ground. Upon entering Ukrainian airspace, MH17 was instructed by Ukrainian air traffic control to fly at 33,000ft.”
Deviation from the “Normal” Approved Flight Path
With regard to the MH17 flight path, Malaysian airlines confirms that it followed the rules set by Eurocontrol and the International Civil Aviation Authority (ICAO) (emphasis added):
I would like to refer to recent reported comments by officials from Eurocontrol, the body which approves European flight paths under ICAO rules.According to the Wall Street Journal, the officials stated that some 400 commercial flights, including 150 international flights crossed eastern Ukraine daily before the crash. Officials from Eurocontrol also stated that in the two days before the incident, 75 different airlines flew the same route as MH17.MH17’s flight path was a busy major airway, like a highway in the sky. It followed a route which was set out by the international aviation authorities, approved by Eurocontrol, and used by hundreds of other aircraft.
A group of Palestinian boys is playing on the beach in Gaza, kicking a soccer ball around in the bright sunshine. But not for long: an Israeli missile hits a nearby shack, where their family members keep their fishing boats: it bursts into flames and the boys take off running. But they can’t run fast enough to evade the second shot: four are instantly killed, and several wounded. Ahmed Abu Hassera, who was with them, told Reuters:
“The kids were playing football on the beach. They were all … under the age of 15. When the first shell hit the land, they ran, but another shell hit them all … It looked as if the shells were chasing them."
The shells were fired from an Israeli ship patrolling off the coast, which was no doubt equipped with the highest hi-tech monitoring system American tax dollars can buy. There isn’t any doubt that the Israelis knew just what they were doing and who they were targeting. The Israeli side practically admits this, albeit sotto voce. A New York Times account of the incident reports:
"Alon Ben-David, a well-sourced Israeli military affairs analyst, said on Israeli television that the first beach blast targeted a structure that Israel believed was used by Hamas. He said the second blast might have been aimed at the running children, perhaps mistaken for militants. He added that given the military’s technologically advanced surveillance equipment, ‘it is a little hard for me to understand this, because the images show that the figures are children.’"
Ben-David sounds like he’s seen the images, and he probably has. The Israelis have the technology and the acumen to know who and what they are targeting. It certainly is "hard to understand" how Israel’s "precision bombing" could’ve gone so wrong. What’s easier to understand, however, is that it wasn’t a "mistake" at all, but a deliberate act, just one example of a general policy of terror carried out by the Israelis against the people of Gaza.
Speaking to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Albuquerque in 2001, George W. Bush declared that, as Mexico was a friend and neighbor, “It’s so important for us to tear down our barriers and walls that might separate Mexico from the United States.”
Bush succeeded. And during his tenure, millions from Mexico exploited his magnanimity to violate our laws, trample upon our sovereignty, walk into our country and remain here.
In 2007, supported by John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Teddy Kennedy and Barack Obama, Bush backed amnesty for the 12 million people who had entered America illegally.
The nation thundered no. And Congress sustained the nation.
The latest mass border crossing by scores of thousands of tots, teenagers and toughs from Central America has killed amnesty in 2014, and probably for the duration of the Obama presidency.
Indeed, with the massive media coverage of the crisis on the border, immigration, legal and illegal, and what it portends for our future, could become the decisive issue of 2014 and 2016.
But it needs to be put in a larger context. For this issue is about more than whether the Chamber of Commerce gets amnesty for its members who have been exploiting cheap illegal labor.
WARNING! U.N. SEEKS TO INTERVENE IN U.S. BORDER CRISIS!
Blatant Israeli propaganda blasting away on CNN
On July 9, before making his obligatory trip to Jerusalem to cover the latest uneven Israeli-Palestinian military confrontation where Israeli “revenge killings” of innocent Palestinians is state policy, CNN Washington Bureau Chief Wolf Blitzer had an all-too-expected comment as he was seeing Israeli war planes bomb a crowded building in Gaza. Blitzer’s comment was, “Wow! Look at that!” Blitzer’s comments should come as no surprise. His career began as the public relations spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the right-wing Zionist organization that has managed over the years to bring the U.S. Congress to its knees. Blitzer paraded his true colors during his numerous interviews of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu by calling him “Bibi” on air. Every time a glorified bottle rocket is fired from Gaza into Israel, Blitzer, a former correspondent for the ultra-Zionist Jerusalem Post, flies off to his old paper’s hometown, to provide “on air” descriptions of life in a “besieged” Israel, air raid sirens wailing in the background. Blitzer’s reports are pure theater, designed to pull at the heart strings of Americans whose knowledge of Middle Eastern affairs could fit into a thimble. Blitzer’s rapid rise from reporter to Washington bureau chief took place after CNN founder Ted Turner lost control of his company to Gerald Levin of Time Warner. WMR has learned that Levin and News Corporation owner Rupert Murdoch met with other prominent international Zionist leaders secretly in Australia in 1995 and discussed wresting control of CNN from Turner and turning the network, considered to be relatively unbiased on Middle East issues, into an echo chamber for Israel and its U.S. Lobby. After its merger with Time Warner in 1996, CNN rapidly laid off all of its unbiased reporters and producers. Longtime CNN Middle East correspondent Octavia Nasr ran afoul of the new ownership when she sent the following Twitter in 2010 on the death of Lebanese Shi’a leader Hussein Fadlallah; “Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah. . One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot . . .” In fact, Fadlallah was a giant of Lebanese religion and politics and one that often urged moderation. But New Jersey Zionist Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, a Republican politician from New Jersey who supports Greater Israel settlements in the West Bank, presided over a Jewish lynch mob that succeeded in getting Nasr fired. Read the entire article
Obama's Border Solution: Build FEMA Camps
The Emperor’s New Clothes: The Naked Truth About the American Police State
It’s vogue, trendy and appropriate to look to dystopian literature as a harbinger of what we’re experiencing at the hands of the government. Certainly, George Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm have much to say about government tyranny, corruption, and control, as does Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and Philip K. Dick’s Minority Report. Yet there are also older, simpler, more timeless stories—folk tales and fairy tales—that speak just as powerfully to the follies and foibles in our nature as citizens and rulers alike that give rise to tyrants and dictatorships.
One such tale, Hans Christian Andersen’s fable of the Emperor’s New Clothes, is a perfect paradigm of life today in the fiefdom that is the American police state, only instead of an imperial president spending money wantonly on lavish vacations, entertainment, and questionable government programs aimed at amassing greater power, Andersen presents us with a vain and thoughtless emperor, concerned only with satisfying his own needs at the expense of his people, even when it means taxing them unmercifully, bankrupting his kingdom, and harshly punishing his people for daring to challenge his edicts.
For those unfamiliar with the tale, the Emperor, a vain peacock of a man, is conned into buying a prohibitively expensive suit of clothes that is supposedly visible only to those who are smart, competent and well-suited to their positions. Surrounded by yes men, professional flatterers and career politicians who fawn, simper and genuflect, the Emperor—arrogant, pompous and oblivious to his nudity—prances through the town in his new suit of clothes until a child dares to voice what everyone else has been thinking but too afraid to say lest they be thought stupid or incompetent: “He isn’t wearing anything at all!”
Much like the people of the Emperor’s kingdom, we, too, have been conned into believing that if we say what we fear, if we dare to suggest that something is indeed “rotten in the state of Denmark,” we will be branded idiots and fools by the bureaucrats, corporate heads, governmental elites and media hotshots who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo—or who at least are determined to maintain the façade that is the status quo. Yet the truth is staring us in the face just as surely as the fact that the Emperor was wearing no clothes.
For decades, conservative evangelical Christians have been among the most fervent backers of the terroristic, rogue nuclear, apartheid Zionist occupation government in the Holy Land, known as Israel. They typically also have failed, knowingly or not, to acknowledge even basic human rights for the oppressed native Palestinians—Muslim and Christian—who face racial extinction at the hands of the region’s Jewish overlords. But that seemingly impregnable mountain of support has started to erode. A growing minority of ministers and younger believers have begun to challenge the established doctrine and practice, asserting that Zionism is contrary to God’s teaching in the Bible, and that continued persecution of Palestinians is a gross violation of fundamental morality. Evangelical Protestants are not monolithic in their theological views about modern Israel and the Jews, but nearly all share a belief in a key religious role for both, preceding the return of Jesus Christ. This—frequently combined with an ardent American exceptionalism—has made them easy marks for the warped parallel political ideology promoted by Jewish-funded shills, like Hal Lindsay and Pat Robertson. Some 80% of evangelicals have thus become not only major contributors to Zionist causes, but primary promoters of American wars and black operations on behalf of Israel and the Jews. These people act in accordance with what they consider is an ordinance from God and often believe blindly that the Jews can do no wrong. Some are so superstitious as to claim that even simple criticism of the Jews will bring down God’s curse. The Zionists, of course, have exploited this to the extreme. Members of the New Evangelical Movement and others, however, have become increasingly vocal in questioning this longstanding bias. They believe Christian Zionism—which is more pronounced than even Jewish Zionism—has misinterpreted the Bible, leading to faulty theology and destructive, deadly politics.
Exemplary of this is the “Christ at the Checkpoint” conference held last March at Bethlehem Bible College in Palestine. The Jewish Daily Forward reported that the group “strongly condemns ‘all forms of violence’ and warns against the ‘stereotyping of all faith forms that betray God’s commandment to love our neighbors and enemies.’ It also rejects ‘any exclusive claim to the land of the Bible in the name of God’ and states that ‘racial ethnicity alone does not guarantee the benefits of the Abrahamic Covenant.’”
World Vision, the Christian children’s relief organization, and the George Soros-backed Telos Group have given significant support to efforts exposingthe evils of Zionism. Theological heavyweights,like William Wilson, the president of OralRoberts University, Professor Gary Burge of WheatonCollege and Reverend Stephen Sizer in England areamong proponents seeking a realignment of valuesto bring about peace in the Holy Land for all. TheTelos Group sponsors frequent trips for evangelicalsto meet both Israelis and Palestinians. The pilgrimsare often astonished to learn that there arecountless Christian Palestinians, also persecuted by Zionists.
Obama Disbands Congress: Orders DHS to Bus In More Illegals
238 Years Later, Would Americans Still Choose Freedom Over Slavery?
Imagine living in a country where armed soldiers crash through doors to arrest and imprison citizens merely for criticizing government officials. Imagine that in this very same country, you’re watched all the time, and if you look even a little bit suspicious, the police stop and frisk you or pull you over to search you on the off chance you’re doing something illegal. Keep in mind that if you have a firearm of any kind while in this country, it may get you arrested and, in some circumstances, shot by police. If you’re thinking this sounds like America today, you wouldn’t be far wrong. However, the scenario described above took place more than 200 years ago, when American colonists suffered under Great Britain’s version of an early police state. It was only when the colonists finally got fed up with being silenced, censored, searched, frisked, threatened, and arrested that they finally revolted against the tyrant’s fetters. No document better states their grievances than the Declaration of Independence. A document seething with outrage over a government which had betrayed its citizens, the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776, by 56 men who laid everything on the line, pledged it all—“our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor”—because they believed in a radical idea: that all people are created to be free. Labeled traitors, these men were charged with treason, a crime punishable by death. For some, their acts of rebellion would cost them their homes and their fortunes. For others, it would be the ultimate price—their lives. Yet even knowing the heavy price they might have to pay, these men dared to speak up when silence could not be tolerated. Even after they had won their independence from Great Britain, these new Americans worked to ensure that the rights they had risked their lives to secure would remain secure for future generations. The result: our Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Imagine the shock and outrage these 56 men would feel were they to discover that 238 years later, the government they had risked their lives to create has been transformed into a militaristic police state in which exercising one’s freedoms is often viewed as a flagrant act of defiance. Indeed, had the Declaration of Independence been written today, it would have rendered its signers terrorists, resulting in them being placed on a government watch list, targeted for surveillance of their activities and correspondence, and potentially arrested, held indefinitely, stripped of their rights and labeled enemy combatants.