For Joe Stack
Case in point: last week the Obama administration treated the disclosure by British judicial officials of the former prisoner’s torture as a security breach and threatened to cut off an intelligence sharing arrangement with the UK government.
In what can only be described as a stunning response to the revelations contained in the intelligence document, White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said “the [UK} court’s judgment will complicate the confidentiality of our intelligence-sharing relationship with the UK, and it will have to factor into our decision-making going forward.”
“We’re deeply disappointed with the court’s judgment today, because we shared this information in confidence and with certain expectations,” LaBolt said, making no mention of Mohamed’s treatment nor even offering him an apology for the torture he was subjected to by the CIA over the course of several years. Mohamed was released from Guantanamo last year and returned to the UK.
This article also mentions the work of Dawn Johnsen (who worked under Clinton’s administration). Obama was supposed to make her head of the White House Office of Legal Counsel. That never happened because she wrote the role of the OLC includes telling the President “No”, and because she was outspoken against the way Bush’s OLC conducted themselves.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.
The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.
Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.
The crazy thing is that while admitting all this, Jones still holds to the notion that the science behind AGW theory is sound. Meanwhile, Obama has decided to set up his own group to promote the man-made global warming myths since the IPCC is being found more and more fraudulent. He’s desperate for the income from cap and trade legislation.
We Are Change LA chapter confronts Bob Kerrey of the 9/11 commission who also admits they were lied to by the Pentagon. the really good stuff starts approximately 5:43 in and ends with a whopper as kerrey says 9/11 is a “30 year old conspiracy”! This is an interesting admission. Ya gotta wonder if he means 30 years old on 9/11/2001 or 30 years old as of today. If the latter, he could be referring to the CIA’s funding of Bin Laden and the Muhajadeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan. If he means 30 years before 9/11/2001, then he might be referring to Rumsfeld and Cheney inside Nixon’s whitehouse. Or he could be meaning something more hidden…or throwing out a red herring. No matter what, it is a very interesting statement from an insider. I would not expect anything else from Kerrey, though. He was likely picked for the 9/11 commission because he has enough skeletons in his own closet (Lawrence King/Franklin Credit Union pedophile ring) to be kept in his place.
Robert Watson, chief scientist at Defra, the environment ministry, who chaired the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from 1997 to 2002, was speaking after more potential inaccuracies emerged in the IPCC’s 2007 benchmark report on global warming.
How could I not be disappointed by the seemingly endless news stories about climate science being – well, less certain than we had previously been assured? By the implication that the sainted IPPC has taken a bit of a punt in arriving at some of its conclusions?
This statement is from Times writer John-Paul Flintoff . He’s been writing as a “green” advocate (still does) and supporter of man-made global warming theory for at least 5 years. The Times has long been a supporter of the theory as “settled science”. However, in Britain the public opinion has shifted dramatically as every revelation comes in, one after the next, showing the flawed and deceptive “science” so wrapped up in politics. The Times has felt the burn. The comments sections are filled with people fed up with being lied to. So The Times is pivoting it’s position–trying to stand back and see where this leads–afraid of losing their own credibility along with the IPCC.