MM: WE ask the DOD – So Whatchu Gon Do Now ?

PE Asks, So Whatchu Gon Do Now

“The largest and most active domestic terrorist groups who are specifically anti-U.S. government are often characterized as white supremacists, white nationalists, and right-wing militias. These groups are likely to pose a greater threat through infiltration of the U.S. military than are Militant Jihadist.”

10/14/09 – Veterans Today

This Post Has Written Itself – because we all watch the news and have seen this scenario playing out everyday.  we are not unable to comprehend the possible harm that could be all around us every moment of the day; from the most highly trained military on the planet.  American Troops are the real potential Internal Terrorists so says the DOD in the Bush ADM Report.

These Friends of Rush and Glenn are absolutely the real threat and we must not ignore it or pretend we don’t understand. it’s real and it’s here, now.

Just So You Know – We Found it Easily on Google, Still.. Why New Yorker ?

this cover from one of the most respected US Conservative Magazines appeared in 2008; before President Obama was elected.  the truth of it is, this is what is feeding our “Rush to be Glenn“.  in other-words, why are they not being charged with being a danger to the peace and harmony of regular Americans, who don’t agree with their lies and divisiveness.  there is a line and these two have jumped over it long ago.

eachtime we see Glenn Beck on television skewing the truth and Rush Limbaugh in the news doing the exact same thing, we wonder why any sensible person would spend a second listening to them and their obviously error filled rhethoric.  this hate speech is fueling a civil war and they will be the cause.  there needs to be a clarification of the facts about who these homegrown terrorists are, so we went to the best source – the Department of Defense.  they train em, and they turn em loose; on US.

the entire report unedited is below the video for your ” Sunday shock and awe”  this is after all Chuuch, and We All up in this Fire and Brimstone Mess.

Very Special Thanks to Horace Coleman – our Military Affairs Coorespondant and one of the Choppers.


This is our Music Monday Submission; and Our Weekly PSA. please feel free to recirculate freely

2005 Pentagon Report on U.S. Domestic Terrorists
Date: October 14, 2009
Topic: Armed Forces

UNAUTHORIZED MILITIAS,CONSTITUTIONALISTS,DOMESTIC TERRORISM,HOME GROWN TERRORISM,MILITIAS,NOT NATIONAL GUARD,RIGHT-WING,RIGHT-WING EXTREMISTS,RIGHT-WING NATIONALISTS,U.S. NATIONALISTS,WHITE NATIONALISTS This is the last part and follow up on how the Military Provides Training On Extremists Preying on Service members.

The Department of Defense sponsored a study during the Bush administration, on Screening for Potential Terrorists in the Enlisted Military Accessions Process (April 2005).

They came to similar conclusions as the Department of Homeland Security and FBI did during both the Bush and Obama administrations to wit Obama Secretary of Homeland Security was forced to apologize for hurting a few right-wing Veterans feelings.

Below are the Pentagon findings and are just as true today as they were in 2005, or when Homeland Security released its assessment of extremists groups recruiting Veterans and active duty personnel.

ROBERT L. HANAFIN
Major, U.S. Air Force-Retired
Veteran Advocacy Editor
Veterans Today News Network &
Our Troops News Ladder

Screening for Potential Terrorists in the Enlisted Military Accessions Process
Approved for Public Distribution: Distribution Unlimited
Research Conducted by Defense Personnel Security Research Center
“To the extent there is an insider threat, the opinion of active duty personnel and counterterrorism and counterintelligence experts and the evidence from case studies examined for this report suggest that it is not from new recruits. Rather, the threat derives from active duty persons being recruited or converting to radical ideologies out of religious conviction or after becoming disaffected with a commander, a fellow soldier, an assignment, or military service in general. Or, the threat could be manifest in individuals who engage in bad conduct for purely self-interested reasons such as money, ego, addiction, or revenge and then attempt to dignify their actions, after the fact, as being motivated by some higher religious value.”

RIGHT-WING NATIONALISTS,RIGHT-WING NATIONALISTS,CONSTITUTIONALISTS,DOMESTIC TERRORISM,HOME GROWN TERRORISM,MILITIAS,NOT NATIONAL GUARD,WHITE NATIONALISTS,UNAUTHORIZED MILITIAS

The largest and most active domestic terrorist groups who are specifically anti-U.S. government are often characterized as white supremacists, white nationalists, and right-wing militias.


I felt dismayed that the various federal government reports tended to focus on right-wing groups as being unfair or imbalanced. However, this finding by the Pentagon made me realize why there is more attention paid to the right-wing than left. [VT.Ed.]

“These groups are likely to pose a greater threat through infiltration of the U.S. military than are Militant Jihadist.”


Screening for Potential Terrorists in the Enlisted Military Accessions Process (April 2005).


This report identifies the many steps in the enlisted accessions process that have been implemented to help identify individuals who belong to or are sympathetic of groups that are disloyal and hostile toward the U.S. government.


Preface


In early 2004, the Office of the Secretary of Defense Accession Policy Directorate asked the Defense Personnel Security Research Center (PERSEREC) to identify what the Armed Forces are doing to screen for terrorists in the enlistment process. The purpose of this report is to present the results of that effort, reflecting a comprehensive approach to many dimensions of personnel screening in the Armed Forces enlistment process. The report also provides recommendations for additional steps that could be taken to make enlistment screening either more efficient or effective. Some of these bear directly on counterterrorism issues. Others are recommendations formulated as byproducts of the study’s intensive review of military enlistment procedures. All findings and recommendations have been vetted with Armed Forces Recruiting Commands, United States Military Entrance Processing Command, and basic training personnel throughout the life of the project. In fact, many of the findings and recommendations were provided by the Recruiting Commands and the United States Military Entrance Processing Command (USMEPCOM), who have been a great source of
expertise in this effort.

ABSTRACT

In early 2004, PERSEREC was tasked to (a) reviewed recent literature and intelligence reports to identify and understand active anti-American groups of concern for military enlistment, (b) reviewed all relevant executive orders, DoD directives, and Armed Forces instructions and regulations, and (c) visited recruiting and military entrance processing facilities across the U.S., interviewing personnel at each. The report focuses primarily on individuals joining the enlisted ranks rather than on those entering the U.S. Army’s 09L Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), officers, and direct commissions (chaplains, nurses, lawyers, engineers, etc.). In many ways, however, findings from the study bear on these other groups as well. Findings in the report are presented within the following areas:

- arriving at a working definition of a terrorist;
- characterizing the threat;
- suspicion indicators of potential terrorist allegiances;
- policies;
- screening procedures;
- suspicious incident reporting procedures;
- and training and education.


The research found some evidence of small numbers of persons enlisting in the Armed Forces who are sympathetic to or participants in terrorist groups. At the same, the Armed Forces have implemented many policies and practices designed to specifically, or by default, enable detection of and response to such individuals.

Recommendations are made for improving information exchange between DoD, law enforcement, and the intelligence community and for enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of relevant DoD accessions policies.

To understand the terrorist threat, contemporary literatures on groups associated with the attacks on the U.S. on September 11, 2001, were reviewed as well as literature pertaining to domestic terrorist groups. Military criminal investigations personnel were consulted and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), state, local, and military law enforcement intelligence reports were monitored throughout the project to identify indications of terrorist activity by U.S. military enlisted personnel.


Definition of Terrorist

RIGHT-WING EXTREMISTS,UNAUTHORIZED MILITIAS,RIGHT-WING,MILITIASIn our meetings with recruiting and USMEPCOM personnel, we found it effective to conceptually frame the “terrorist” in “screening for terrorists” as anyone who was sympathetic to, or a member of, a group that could be characterized as both disloyal and hostile toward the U.S. government. Effectively, anyone who is antagonistic toward the U.S. government and who would be willing in any way to support the efforts of a specific group in working against the U.S. government, its citizens, and entities would qualify as someone whom we are interested in detecting and excluding from military service and from possible access to sensitive information and facilities.


Characterizing the Threat


CONSTITUTIONALISTS,MILITIAS,NOT NATIONAL GUARD,RIGHT-WING,RIGHT-WING EXTREMISTS,RIGHT-WING NATIONALISTS,U.S.  NATIONALISTS,WHITE NATIONALISTSThis section briefly describes the main foreign (Militant Jihadists) and domestic groups (White Supremacists, White Nationalists, and domestic militias) whose past and recent actions and current ideologies render them particularly hostile and disloyal toward the U.S. government. Several data sources were consulted and Recruiting Commands, MEPS, and military law enforcement personnel were interviewed to surface indications of attempted or actual enlistment of disloyal and hostile persons.


The sources accessed for this report did surface some currently or formerly enlisted persons with terrorist or extremist group associations. While their presence in the military is significant in its own right, the actual numbers are extremely small relative to the denominator representing the millions of personnel who have been enlisted in the Armed Forces. Smaller still is the number of personnel who enlisted specifically for purposes of furthering their extremist causes. Most intelligence, information, and history of events suggest that more significant is the threat from outsiders waging attacks against military personnel, some of whom may be employed at RS and MEPS. Additionally, the fact that the insider cases we did find were documented is indicative of the diligence the Recruiting Commands and USMEPCOM have towards these issues.


Policies and Regulations Restricting Extremism in Military Service

The U.S. government, DoD, and the Armed Forces have established numerous policies defining and restricting participation in extremist organizations and activities, which would include participation in terrorist groups and activities. The DoD and Armed Forces have also established policies regarding how to define and respond to persons and activities that appear to be inconsistent with defense of national security. This section lists these policies, along with key components of them that directly and indirectly define and regulate participation of and response to military personnel in extremist and terrorist groups and activities.

At least since 2005, if not before, each recruit joining the Armed Forces is asked these questions prior to taking the Oath of Enlistment. Below is the format used by the military recruiter.

The following questions pertain to your participation in extremist and terrorist organizations and activities.


Note: First, define for each applicant what “extremist or terrorist organizations or activities” mean: People who support or agree with extremist organizations think it is OK to use force or violence or to discriminate against other people based on their race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, national origin, or support for U.S. government policy. Or they may try to disrupt, sabotage, overthrow, or commit espionage or terrorism against the U.S. government, or any of its State or local governments.


a. Have you ever advocated or practiced discrimination or committed acts of violence or terrorism against individuals based on their religion, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, disability, gender, or loyalty to the U.S. government? (YES/NO)
b. Have you posted or distributed literature or participated in public demonstrations to show your allegiance to or to promote an extremist organization or philosophy? (YES/NO)
c. Have you ever provided labor, money, or other resources to extremist individuals or organizations? (YES/NO)
d. Have you ever received training from or recruited or provided training for extremist organizations or causes? (YES/NO)
e. Have you ever attended any meetings, participated in any Web sites or on-line discussions, or exchanged information in any way with individuals
involved in extremist organizations or causes? (YES/NO)
f. Are there any groups (such as countries, political groups, or religious groups) who you would feel obligated to defend if they claimed they were under attack by the United States Government? (YES/NO)

If you answered “yes” to any of question (a) through (f) above, please explain.


U.S. Domestic Terrorists

DOMESTIC TERRORISM,HOME GROWN TERRORISM,MILITIAS,UNAUTHORIZED MILITIAS

The largest and most active domestic terrorist groups who are specifically anti-U.S. government are often characterized as white supremacists, white nationalists, and right-wing militias. These groups are likely to pose a greater threat through infiltration of the U.S. military than are Militant Jihadists. Many of these domestic extremist groups operating today and their ideologies were well described in an earlier study that looked at screening for extremists in the military (1998 in response to the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995).


The essential ideologies of these groups have not changed since 1998. The following excerpt, taken from a Web site, characterizes the extremist components of the White Nationalist ideology : The problem, as any White Nationalist knows, isn’t in the Black Nationalists, who are really potential allies, but rather in the corrupt criminal regimeists [sic], who are the real enemies. Given their criminal nature, it is a waste of time to negotiate with them for our freedom, just as it is undesirable for us to leave them alive to corrupt our future White Nationalist nations. These regime criminals have usefully segregated themselves into professions such as lawyers, politicians, bankers, and police. So now that they have made themselves known as oppressors to the people by their conduct, it is an easy thing to identify them for.

Similar sentiments to the above statement can be found in more recent postings on white supremacist [and Constitutionalists] Web sites.


The following demonstrates the threat from the right-wing militia types in the U.S.:

Mr. [X], a 38-year-old who last made a living renting out snowmobiles here in this spectacularly beautiful nook of northwestern Montana had a terror plan that made Osama bin Laden’s look rinky-dink. Not content merely to kill a few thousand people, Mr. [X]’s nine-member militia was planning a violent revolution and civil war to overthrow the entire U.S. government. The plan, according to Sheriff James Dupont, was for the militia to use its machine guns, pipe bombs and 30,000 rounds of ammunition to assassinate 26 local officials (including Mr. Dupont), and then wipe out the National Guard when it arrived. After the panicked authorities sent in NATO troops, true American patriots would rise up, a ferocious war would ensue, and the U.S. would end up back in the hands of white Christians. [Sound familiar? Vigilance as in Vigilante! VT.Ed.]


The above news excerpt captures the essence of the right-wing militia movement in the U.S.; many of its supporters overlap with White Nationalists [Constitutionalist] and Supremacists. Some members of these groups act on their beliefs merely through personal separatism, a benign form of protest. Other militia members have been indicted and convicted for planning to bomb federal buildings, attacking military bases, robbing armories, and igniting propane storage facilities.

In Florida, a militia planned to destroy a nuclear power plant. Enlistment of individuals with these ambitions is justifiably of concern to the Armed Forces. The common denominator in the Militant Jihadists and the above domestic groups is their advocacy of violence to achieve their anti-U.S. government ideological ends.


As one author states:

In fact, militia members and Al-Qaeda members are remarkably similar. Both are galvanized by religious extremism (America’s militias overlap with the Christian Identity movement, which preaches that Jews are the children of Satan and that people of color are sub-human), both see the U.S. government as utterly evil, and both are empowered by the information revolution that enables them to create networks, recruit disciples and trade recipes for bio- and chemical weapons.


Other Militant Activists on the Left


Other militant activists such as the Environmental Liberation Front (ELF), the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), the Animal Rights Foundation (ARF), and anarchists engage in violence to achieve their particular objectives. For animal rights activists, common targets include factory farms, cosmetic manufacturers, and labs that use animals in scientific experiments. Anarchists may target Wal-Mart and other big chain stores. Environmental activists have been known to sabotage land developments and vandalize car dealerships and personal SUVs.


The disqualifiers for military service for militants described in this paragraph would be their propensity for or history of criminal conduct, not their disloyalty and hostility toward the U.S. government. Since these groups are not targeting the U.S. government per se, they are not considered further in this report.

Evidence Indicating Prevalence of Involvement of Hostile and Disloyal Groups in the Military at the Time of Enlistment


To find evidence of involvement of hostile and disloyal groups in the military at the time of enlistment, the following sources were consulted:
- open-source digital newspaper articles,
- law enforcement sensitive intelligence reports available on the FBI’s LEO
- Online, postings on electronic message boards hosted by extremist groups,
- decisions of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces,
- “yes” responses to associations-related questions on the SF 86/EPSQ,
- reports of investigation (ROIs) for subjects under the age of 35 undergoing initial security clearance investigations,
- leadership in each of the Recruiting Commands, and personnel from the Army Criminal Investigation Division, the Navy Criminal Investigation Service, and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations.

The following describes the findings from these sources.


Message Boards


Federal investigators access message board searches using terms associated with extremist groups and military enlistees yielded some of the strongest evidence of disloyal and hostile persons enlisting in the military, and, in some cases, possibly for the express purpose of carrying out an anti-American agenda. Almost all of these were white supremacists or nationalists, and most were found in www.stormfront.org forums. The online search is for a cross-section of the kind of rhetoric demonstrating both presence and intolerability of potentially disloyal and hostile persons in the accessions process.


Note: Relative to the population of military enlistees, the numbers suggest the involvement of a handful of isolated cases, or at most, very small cadres. The presence of these individuals in the military does not necessarily indicate, however, grave deficiencies in the enlistment screening system process. It more likely reflects the ability of some individuals without derogatory records to both satisfy enlistment standards and withhold information about extremist ideologies and associations throughout the process. For example, the responses of some message board members to white supremacists contemplating enlistment indicate that some do enlist, but that many are separated once their white supremacist or white nationalist loyalties become known.


All Official Reports of Investigation (ROIs) stored in the Defense Security Service (DSS) Case Control Management System (CCMS) from 1999 through 2003 (approximating a million and a half cases) were searched for presence of terms that indicated that issues pertaining to extremism had surfaced in DoD security clearance background investigations. [Note: readers must assume that the same procedures are used today. VT. Ed.]


Examples of terms that yielded relevant cases are as follows:

neo-nazi
anti-american
anti-establishment
anti-government
arabic
aryan
Bigot
Blacks
brainwash

confederate flag
conspiracy theories
converted
david koresh
disloyal
extremist
Fanatic
Forged
Driver
fundamentalist
hates the U.S.
hitler
islam
jews

KKK
Militant
Mosque
Muslim
Nazi
[racial slur]
right wing
Sabotage
Semitic
Skin head

Skinhead
Supremacy
Swastika
to forge
ultra conservative
Vengeance


The terms were not case-sensitive. All cases containing these terms that pertained to military subjects under the age of 35 who were undergoing an initial security clearance were reviewed. Whether these soldiers were officers or enlisted personnel was not known. Data were also not available to indicate how long subjects of these cases had been in the military. Nonetheless, they give some approximation of the extent, or lack of extent, of extremists in the military.


Conclusions about the Threat of Terrorists Infiltrating the Military  through the Enlisted Accessions Process (That was 2005???but the Obama Administration has been cowed into downplaying this threat so that right-wing militias can continue to flourish and recruit Veterans as they did during the Bush administration. VT. Ed]

This article comes from Veterans Today – News for U.S. Military Veterans Jobs, VA Benefits, Home Loans, Hospitals & Administration
http://www.veteranstoday.com

The URL for this story is:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=8940

Google Buzz
Did you like this? If so, please bookmark it,
tell a friend
about it, and subscribe to this blog RSS feed.
  • Share/Bookmark

Rihanna wants jewels from police

Now I’m sorry for making this a sunday story – but it’s better than a monday story so police, give the girl back the peoples jewelry, and get on with the get on. more on these two blackeyed susans after the trial on the 28th of April – Wednesday. Stay Tuned, cause they’re still not done; we sure of that.

Rihanna

Rihanna had been wearing the jewellery to a pre-Grammys party

Singer Rihanna has asked the LA police to return jewellery taken as evidence the night she was allegedly attacked by her boyfriend Chris Brown.

Police took earrings and three rings from the singer hours before the Grammy Awards ceremony in February.

The items, which were on loan from a shop, are worth over $1.4m (£1m).

Lawyer Donald Etra, who represents the 21-year-old star, said the detective overseeing the case did not object to the return of the items.

The shop which owns the jewellery has asked Rihanna to give the goods back as soon as possible.

‘Photographs’

Mr Etra told the BBC: “Apparently, initially, the police felt that it would be needed as evidence. Now the belief is that photographs would be more than sufficient.

“That being the case, we’re asking the District Attorney to return the pieces.”

The request for the return of the jewellery states that lawyers for Mr Brown are also happy for the pieces to be released.

Mr Brown, 19, was arrested after rowing with Rihanna in a parked car. Both singers cancelled their scheduled appearances at that evening’s Grammy awards.

Later Mr Brown said he was “sorry and saddened” by the incident and had already sought counselling.

He also withdrew his name from Nickelodeon’s Kid’s Choice Awards after coverage of the events “shifted the focus from the music”.

Last month Mr Brown was charged with assault and making criminal threats and is next due to appear in court on 29 April. He denies the charges.

US to issue ‘prison abuse’ photos

These photos should have been released with the torture memos.. Don’t You Think that would have helped us to understand why they did what they did in their secret prisons?

Photo purportedly taken at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, Iraq (Courtesy of Guy L. Womack)

Photos purporting to show prisoner abuse in Iraq were published in 2004

The Pentagon is about to release “hundreds” of photographs showing the alleged abuse of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan, US officials say.

The alleged abuses by US personnel are said to relate to President George W Bush’s time in office.

The photos are being made public in response to a Freedom of Information lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) five years ago.

The court order had been contested by the Bush administration.

The US defence department said the Pentagon had agreed to release a “substantial” number of previously unseen photographs by May 28.

“I think it will be in the hundreds,” added a Pentagon official, who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity.

‘Visual proof’

The images relate to around 60 criminal investigations of US military personnel suspected of abusing detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan from 2001 to 2006.

The ACLU says the photos show that the much-publicised abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq amounted to a specific policy.

“These photographs provide visual proof that prisoner abuse by US personnel was not aberrational but widespread, reaching far beyond the walls of Abu Ghraib,” said ACLU lawyer Amrit Singh.

But a Pentagon spokesman downplayed allegations of widespread abuse, saying it had acted swiftly to discipline some 400 personnel found to be involved in abuses.

The release of the photos will increase pressure on the Obama administration to consider prosecuting Bush-era officials for alleged complicity in torture and maltreatment of terrorist suspects, says the BBC’s North America Editor Justin Webb.

It follows the publication last week by the Obama administration of four sensitive memos outlining harsh interrogation techniques approved for use by the CIA by the Bush government.

Rights groups have called for CIA personnel involved in any torture cases to be prosecuted, while critics say the move would endanger national security.

This Woman in the white is a Mother who’s son was murdered by the Police in Barbados. so if you think the Islands are so nice, read this story of how they treat their own citizens. and look at how long it took to come out with this absolutely ridiculous decision. Please Judge,

Marguerita Maloney (right) with a friend before the verdict was announced. This scene changed dramatically after the verdict was announced as Marguerita fell to the ground and wailed.

Coroner’s verdict into death of I’Akobi Maloney: Death by misadventure

4/25/2009

TO screams of “Murderer”, “You kill my son”, “Dis is just de beginning”, was how the Coroner’s verdict of “death by misadventure” was greeted yesterday by Marguerita Maloney, mother of I’Akobi Tacuma Maloney, and other relatives and friends.

It was minutes before 5 o’clock when Coroner Faith Marshall-Harris delivered her verdict at the Coroner’s Court, Roebuck Street, St. Michael, packed with Maloney’s relatives and friends including his mother and brother, Mandela.

After the Coroner left the courtroom and returned to her chambers, Maloney’s mother and others re-joined the Rastafarian brethren in the courtyard which included his father, David. Dozens had earlier lined the courtyard but had to remain outside during the verdict for lack of space.

Pointing and calling the names of the two officers who were first on the scene at Landlock, St. Lucy, where the 23-year-old chemical engineer died on June 17, 2008, Marguerita told Sergeant Wingrove Headley and Police Constable Wendell Walkes… “De inquest end, but dis is just de beginning. De Rasta brethren gine get you.”

Dressed in white, in stark contrast to the others who wore red shirts and black pants, Marguerita fell to the ground and wailed her son’s name, as well as those of Sojourner Truth, Marcus Garvey, and Malcolm X and the Rastafarian community.

She was eventually lifted up and left with the group, some of whom carried flags and placards.

Barbados: What happened to I’Akobi Tacuma Maloney?

I’Akobi Tacuma Maloney, by any standard, was a high achiever .

The 23-year-old, a devout Rastafari, was a recent graduate of the University of the West Indies, with a degree in engineering. Before that, he was valedictorian at his high school, where his classmates voted him “most likely to succeed.” He won a scholarship from the Barbados government that paid for his university education, and he was chosen by the Barbados Ministry of Social Transformation as a youth delegate at the 5th Ministerial Meeting on Children and Social Policy in the Americas. He had a black belt in martial arts and was an accomplished public speaker. He had just joined the Barbados Association of Professional Engineers, and was a summer intern at a cement factory. He seemed to be on a clear path to success.

On 17 June, 2008, everything changed. In circumstances that have not yet been fully explained, Maloney died in an encounter with the Barbados police. According to a police statement , at 5.30 that afternoon officers responded to a report of a “drug landing” at Cove Bay , near the northern tip of the island of Barbados. There they saw Maloney wandering near the top of a steep cliff overlooking the sea. They approached and interviewed him.

“Initial investigations reveal that Maloney suddenly ran and jumped off a cliff, landing on a ledge below. Shortly after this he was washed off this ledge by the pounding waves, which took him out into the sea,” public relations officer inspector Barry Hunte said.

Later, the assistant commissioner of police suggested that Maloney was “depressed” at the time of the incident:

According to the crime chief, police also discovered a note entered in his personal diary which suggested he could have been contemplating suicide.

But Maloney’s family was immediately suspicious of this version of events. His mother pointed out that the police claimed Maloney landed face down on rocks at the foot of the cliff, yet there was a prominent wound at the back of his head. Further, Maloney was reported to have jumped with his haversack on his back, and his body was in the sea for eight hours before it was retrieved — yet when the haversack was returned to his mother, there was no sign of water damage to its contents.

Within two days of the incident, the Ichirouganaim Council for the Advancement of Rastafari (ICAR) , a Barbadian Rastafari advocacy group, had set up a blog, AfriKa CRY BLOOD , to “promote, protect and defend the Ras Tacuma case.” ICAR began collecting evidence of possible foul play, disputed police allegations of Maloney’s involvement in drug smuggling, and made an urgent call for a full investigation of his death. The blog documented a protest held in Bridgetown, the capital of Barbados, as well as questions raised by members of the Barbados parliament.

The police responded that an investigation was under way , but some Barbados bloggers were unconvinced. “There will be no public inquest into his death,” said Barbados Free Press .

There will be no public process to examine the circumstances of how he died while “in the company of” Barbados police. Eventually, the local news media will quietly let the story fade into the past, and people will say “Well, there was some sort of inquiry and it showed…” BUT THAT WILL BE A LIE.

BFP went on to remind its readers of a previous case in which a young man mysteriously died after an encounter with police. Meanwhile, Barbados Underground posted the full text of a statement by the People’s Democratic Congress, a political party.

… we in PDC ask that NOT ONLY must there be a Coroner’s Inquest into the circumstances of this death as soon as possible , BUT that ALSO the Attorney General allow his department to carry out their own fair and impartial investigations into this grievous affair.

“This case frightens me,” wrote Caribbean Lionesse :

I’Akobi was just like me. Young, intellectual, UWI graduate, ambitious, good job and with locks. You want to think that our society has advanced to such a point that all your other accomplishments mean something….

She linked to a thread at the Rastafari Speaks forum, in which Sis Ali suggested Maloney was the victim of police profiling: “someone saw Rasta up there and called the police.”

With Maloney’s family and the Barbadian Rastafari community still waiting for answers, ICAR has organised another protest march on Friday 1 August — the day when the end of slavery is commemorated across the Anglophone Caribbean — and launched an online petition calling for justice.

Levees ‘cannot save New Orleans’

And We Are Still Talking about What To Do, In New Orleans – Why ??  Fix The Damn Levees so the city can be a city again, ACE You Asses. you know that the Mr Go made this problem, so undamn the shit and let the wet lands come back to life; and the natural reefs regenerate to save Nola.

People walk through floodwater in New Orleans (29/08/2005)

Much of New Orleans was flooded by Hurricane Katrina

Building bigger, stronger levees in New Orleans will not be enough to save the US city from another Hurricane Katrina, a report has said.

The risks of severe flooding in the city could “never be fully eliminated”, said an independent panel of experts.

The report said the authorities should consider raising the level of buildings and even abandoning flood-prone areas.

More than 1,800 people died in the devastating 2005 hurricane, and about 80% of the city was flooded.

New Orleans has about 563 km (350 miles) of barriers, levees and other structures intended to protect the city.

But in August 2005, large sections of this system failed and much of the city was inundated by the storm surges brought by Katrina.

The report, from the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) and the National Research Council (NRC), said the disaster had exposed the “many weaknesses in the hurricane protection and preparedness systems” for New Orleans and surrounding areas.

It said there had been “undue optimism” about the ability of the protection systems to withstand the impact of a storm on the scale of Katrina.

Voluntary relocation

FLASHBACK TO KATRINA
Flooded streets in New Orleans (13/09/2005)
Katrina struck US Gulf Coast in August 2005 as a Category Three storm, killing more than 1,800 people
New Orleans was 80% flooded after storm surge breached protective levees
US government was blamed for slow, botched response that exacerbated disaster
Hundreds of thousands of people were displaced

The report said improvements made to the flood protection system since Katrina had “reduced some vulnerabilities”.

But, it said that “the risks of inundation and flooding never can be fully eliminated by protective structures, no matter how large or sturdy those structures may be”.

The authors advised that as there can be no absolute protection against storm surges and flooding, the authorities should consider encouraging people to move away from areas at risk.

Where this is not possible, “significant improvements in flood-proofing measures will be essential”.

This would include raising the standard height for ground floors of properties, strengthening critical infrastructure such as power and telecommunications and improving evacuation plans.

The report also found that there had been “limited understanding and appreciation of the risks of living behind levees”.

It advised that these risks needed to be communicated more clearly and consistently to those in affected areas.

Hurricane Katrina was one of the deadliest storms in US history, causing billions of dollar of damage and leaving tens of thousands of people homeless.

The US government was heavily criticised for the extent of the damage and for what was perceived to be a slow response to the disaster.

Czechs throw out ex-Klan leader

What We Want to know is, Why would he be in Czechoslovakia anyway ? and who would read anything this asswipe put out ? obviously the leftists are reaching deep into the shit bins to put this type of filth out for circulation. thankfully the plot was stopped before it caught them off guard.

Former Ku Klux Klan leader, David Duke

Duke once held a seat for Louisiana in the House of Representatives

Czech authorities have ordered a former Ku Klux Klan leader, David Duke, to leave the country.

The 59-year-old American was invited to the Czech Republic by a local far-right group and had planned to give lectures and promote a book.

But on Friday he was arrested and questioned by police on suspicion of denying the Holocaust, an offence under Czech law.

Mr Duke has not been charged, but was ordered to leave the country.

He has reportedly been given a deadline of midnight on Saturday.

His lawyer was quoted in local media as saying she would lodge a complaint against the police on his behalf.

The Czech interim prime minister-designate, Jan Fischer, appeared on Czech television to say the opinions expressed in Mr Duke’s book were “simply unacceptable, incomprehensible”.

David Duke is a former Grand Wizard of the notorious white supremacist Ku Klux Klan group. He once held a seat for the Louisiana state House of Representatives, and made an unsuccessful bid for the US presidency.

By Rory Cellan-Jones
BBC News technology correspondent

Screengrab of IWF homepage, IWF

The IWF was set up in 1996 to police access to images of child abuse.

The BBC goes behind the scenes at the Internet Watch Foundation to see how its researchers cope with the psychologically demanding job of policing sites peddling images of child abuse.

The watchdog that blocked a Wikipedia page last year over a rock album cover says it still believes that the image at the heart of that controversy was illegal.

But the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) says it has moved on after the row in December 2008, and claims its quest to eradicate child abuse images from the web is now having real success.

Critics have accused the organisation of being both unaccountable and ineffective. This week the BBC was given unique access to the work of the IWF, as the watchdog tries to fight back.

It’s in a house in a quiet village north of Cambridge that the Internet Watch Foundation runs a hotline for reports of child abuse images. It’s a job the self-regulatory body was given in 1996, as the internet industry sought to avoid direct control by the police or government.

Upstairs at its HQ there is a door marked “IWF staff only – image viewing in progress”. I was allowed in, to find four analysts at work, sifting through reports that have arrived overnight from members of the public.

The analysts, who mostly have backgrounds in IT, prefer to remain anonymous, but one of them, Karen, agreed to tell me about her work.

She showed me a list of the reports she had to deal with that day, some from members of the public who said they had been looking for adult sites but had been shocked to come across child abuse images.

Some callers fear they may be accused of downloading illegal images.

Her first task is to try to determine whether the images are in fact illegal under UK law. “My next step would be to chase that image or website to the country where it is located,” she said.

In almost all cases, the offending sites are abroad, and Karen contacts one of the IWF’s 35 sister organisations – if there is one in the country concerned – and informs the UK police.

I put it to Karen that it must be difficult to do such emotionally draining work, especially when some feel that it’s not even worthwhile. “There are times when I questioned my own sanity for doing this,” she admitted.

“However, I’m a mother with two children, I feel that it’s an important job and someone needs to do it. That’s how I get through the day.”

Karen sees some sites cropping up time and again, with the criminals moving them from country to country, trying to stay one step ahead.

She said: “We’re also finding a trend towards sexual abuse images of younger and younger children, and more severe forms of abuse.”

She explains that most of the sites operate a pay-per-view system, charging $80-100 (£55-68) per month for access to images and videos.

The offending sites are also added to the blacklist compiled by the IWF for internet service providers, which then block access.

There are times when I questioned my own sanity for doing this
Karen, IWF researcher

It was this process which led to the blocking of a Wikipedia page about a 1970s album cover featuring an image of a naked young girl. That ruling, reversed within days, threw a spotlight on the IWF, and the transparency of its procedures.

David Gerard of the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia and other similar projects, says the incident showed the IWF to be “ham-fisted and incompetent at every level”.

He maintains that there is no way to block illegal content “without massive collateral damage to speech, communication, learning and society”.

Dr Richard Clayton , a computer scientist at Cambridge University, has a different criticism – that the watchdog suffers from confusion about its aims.

Browse The Internet In Privacy using Vidalia Tools

His research shows that, while banks manage to get phishing sites taken down within hours, the IWF takes an average of 28 days to get child abuse sites removed. “‘Are they trying to get sites removed from the internet?’ he asks, if so they’re doing a poor job.

“Alternatively, if they think their aim is to catch the criminals putting up this material, then they should become part of the police.”

Wikipedia homepage, Wikipedia

The IWF censored an image that appeared on a Wikipedia page

Peter Robbins, chief executive of the IWF, says the various critics are ignoring the fact that the watchdog’s mission is proving a success.

He says the IWF has learned from the Wikipedia controversy, though he still believes the image on the album cover was illegal. “Was that an image of a pre-pubescent girl? Yes. In our view it’s not OK,” he says.

But he accepts that it was not realistic to ban an image that was widely available in shops and on the internet. “I don’t want to dwell on this incident. The fact is that we are dealing with some horrendous content on a daily basis and we’re working really hard with hotlines and law enforcement bodies to try to stop the distributors of these images.”

Google Buzz
Did you like this? If so, please bookmark it,
tell a friend
about it, and subscribe to this blog RSS feed.
  • Share/Bookmark

Yes WE KLAN, Yes WE KLAN !! Sweet Minty Jesus ..

President Obama recently did his first official video to the country, as President. he spoke on the Economy.

we thought that since he spends so much time in front of the camera, we’d spend a few minutes looking at the “OTHA Barack” Flix. yes I am SMH. This is a Parody that deserves to be seen..

This is Barack Obama Doing Beyonce’s “Single Ladies”

Laugh Now, because this is some funny stuff and somehow I think its going to start to drop off.

and while we’re at it, don’t leave out his TI Joint – “Whatever I Like

do you remember when he did YouTube Live ?

This is ASA The Comic,He Is Sarcastic and Snarky, but truth prevails, that’s why we watched till the end. Uh HUH. Sho You Riteee My Brotha,,

Then we ran up on this piece of scary black comedy; No Oh Hell No that’s all we can say, because when we played the video and heard them saying – Yes We KLAN, Yes We KLAN !! we wanted to slap the monitor. Sweet Minty Jesus is Right; I need some tums quick, cause I can feel the gas bubble forming.

This is where Obama wins over the KKK, Amazing and somehow I believe it’s actually closer to the truth than most of us want to admit.

But seriously now, we know that the KKK Have Plans for Our New President. just take a look at this video, which was made several months ago; detailing the plans the KKK wants to put into action.

the Secret Service is apparently aware of these threats. we just hope that they take them ALL Seriously.

No One tells you they want to do something if they’re not already looking for your attention – sight ?

Go Away Nigga We’re Gettin Bigger“..
now if that ain’t a threat, I ain’t neva heard one.
somebody pass me my bible, I feel a touch of exodus comin on..

This is our Hope – The Truth, check out CunninLynguists – K.K.K.Y

Google Buzz
Blog Widget by LinkWithinDid you like this? If so, please bookmark it,
tell a friend
about it, and subscribe to this blog RSS feed.
  • Share/Bookmark
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes