Not ONE word of official account of raid that killed Bin Laden is true, claims award-winning journalist Seymour Hersh

• The Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist says that raid which killed Osama Bin Laden in 2011 is ‘one big lie’
• He says the US media is too 'afraid' to pick on Obama
• Hersh, 76, says the solution is to shut down news networks like NBC and ABC
  
• He also suggested the firing of 90 per cent of mainstream editors

A Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist says that the official account of the raid which killed Osama Bin Laden in 2011 is ‘one big lie’.

Seymour Hersh, 76, said that ‘not one word’ of the Obama administration’s narrative on what happened is true.

In an interview with The Guardian published today, Hersh savages the US media for failing to challenge the White House on a whole host of issues, from NSA spying, to drone attacks, to aggression against Syria.

'Not true': Journalist Seymour Hersh says the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden in 2011 was all a fabrication

Sucking up: Hersh said the American press spends 'so much more time carrying water for Obama than I ever thought they would'

'Lying': Hersh says 'not one word' of the Obama administration's account of the raid that supposedly killed Osama Bin Laden is true. The government has never released pictures of Bin Laden's dead body to the public

The compound: The Pakistan home of the al Qaeda leader was in flames after it was attacked by Navy Seals

He said the Navy Seal raid that supposedly resulted in the death of the Al-Qaeda terror leader, Hersh said, ‘not one word of it is true’.

According to Hersh - who first gained worldwide recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai Massacre and its cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting - the problem is that the US media is allowing the Obama administration to get away with lying.

‘It’s pathetic. They are more than obsequious, they are afraid to pick on this guy [Obama].’

The White House has refused to publicly release images of Bin Laden’s body, fuelling suspicion they are withholding information.

President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and members of the national security team watch the raid live from the White House's Situation Room on May 1, 2011

Aftermath: Part of a damaged helicopter is seen lying near the compound after US Navy SEAL commandos supposedly killed bin Laden

Destroyed: The grounds of the Bin Laden's compound after the raid

Although the White House said the corpse was immediately ‘buried at sea’ within 24 hours of his death in line with Islamic tradition, it quickly emerged that this was not standard practice.

It has also been suggested that the White House has changed its story multiple times, according to infowars.com.

They initially claimed that pictures from the ‘situation room’ show Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Hilary Clinton and the rest of the security team watching the raid live, when in fact there was a blackout on the feed.

Neighbours close to the Pakistani compound in Abbottabad also said they had never seen Bin Laden in the area.

'Afraid': Hersh claims the US media is too scared of challenging Obama

'Shut them down': Hersh says the solution is to close ABC and NBC and fire 90 per cent of editors

Hersh said the American press spends ‘so much more time carrying water for Obama than I ever thought they would’.

In his opinion, the solution would be to shut down news networks like NBC and ABC and fire 90 per cent of mainstream editors and replace them with ‘real’ journalists who are not afraid to speak truth to power.

‘The republic’s in trouble, we lie about everything, lying has become the staple,’ he said.

Source: The Daily Mail

Facebook’s Zuckerberg Lap Dog for Surveillance State

Peer-to-Peer Economy Thrives as Activists Vacate the System

The Occupy Movement recently celebrated its second anniversary with very little fanfare leaving many to wonder where all the activists went. It seems they, and many anti-establishment activists, are vacating the system rather than occupying it.

Progressives may call it the "sharing economy" while Libertarians may refer to it as Agorism -  a "society in which all relations between people are voluntary exchanges by means of counter-economics, thus engaging in a manner with aspects of peaceful revolution."

Whatever it's called, together, they're opting out of the current socioeconomic matrix and creating a new alternative economy where trading occurs peer-to-peer and increasingly without government-issued currency.

It's a space where mutual trade occurs without burdensome taxes, regulations, or licenses. Simply put, it's an underground black market enabled by the Internet and regulated by social feedback mechanisms -- and it's growing exponentially.

Websites like Ebay and Craigslist first made it possible for individuals to sell things or offer services online. Then there was Elance to sell our skills and Freecycle to recycle unused items. And now there are new services that allow users to sublet their stuff; like AirBnB which allows you to rent out a room in your house, Lyft for car pooling or Relay Rides to rent out your car for an hour, or Snap Goods to rent out idle tools or anything else.

In addition to "sharing" stuff, people are shunning banks by using crowdfunding and peer-to-peer lending platforms for raising capital, and digital currencies like Bitcoin are enabling the under-the-table sale of a swelling number of goods and services.

It's also important to acknowledge the growth of passionate silver barterers and the explosion of local food co-ops, which should be considered part of the same movement to opt out of the broken corporate-government system and they're similarly expanding due to the internet. Local Harvest allows small farmers to sell blueberry pies nationwide or pair up with local customers for cowshares or farmshares.

The Economist describes this movement as follows:

Just as peer-to-peer businesses like eBay allow anyone to become a retailer, sharing sites let individuals act as an ad hoc taxi service, car-hire firm or boutique hotel as and when it suits them. Just go online or download an app. The model works for items that are expensive to buy and are widely owned by people who do not make full use of them.

Tarun Wadhwa of the Singularity Hub writes "The growth of the "sharing economy," a loosely defined term generally referring to the internet-enabled peer-to-peer exchanges of goods, has brought with it a shift in the way we think about consumption. Its rise has been fast, and loud. What started with a few enterprising individuals willing to let complete strangers sleep in their homes and use their possessions has now developed into a formidable economic force that threatens to upend several different industries."

This new decentralized economic model is an obvious threat to the command-and-control economy.  It's shifting billions of dollars out from traditional industries undermining government regulation and tax collection. As such, governments are clamoring to regulate voluntary person-to-person barter.

Authorities claim that these services are in some way unsafe and must be regulated. Yet as the Economist video above explains, surprisingly few cases of fraud are reported.

What's more, Wired points out that reputation is replacing regulation in the peer-to-peer economy and is proving to be much more effective:

By making both product and trader quality instantly transparent, this approach reduces the risks that often lead to market failure. It also provides a first digital safeguard against much of what regulators aim to protect consumers from. 

After all, profit is a much more powerful driver for quality than regulatory compliance. If your last customer – one who has been vetted by others and has built reputation credibility – complains about the hygiene levels of your shared lodging, your future business prospects on Airbnb are pretty bleak.

The technology for transaction-by-transaction feedback from buyers and sellers provides more than enough trust for participants to be comfortable without oversight by government regulators. This fact makes any attempt by authorities to disturb this market seem protectionist or extortionist.

Sharing economy leaders are forming a lobby group called PEERS in an attempt to combat potential regulations:


The PEERS video above does a nice job explaining this new economy from a personal perspective, however the organization was founded by some establishment figures who are calling for "smart regulations".

Why do we need any regulations for volunteering at a garden cooperative or choosing the best childcare provider as recommended by our peers? Surely any possible dispute could be handled within the community or a civil court, right? Additionally AirBnB and Relay Rides offer insurance to mitigate foreseeable problems. As such, this market is rendering government regulations obsolete.

There may be many different motivations for those participating in this marketplace, but activists seem to all agree, as Buckminster Fuller said, "You never change things by fighting the existing reality.To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."

Source: Activist Post

News Anchor Completely Loses It For The Best Possible Reason

'Occupy' affiliate claims Intel bakes SECRET 3G radio into vPro CPUs

Intel has apparently turned up one of the holiest of holy grails in the tech sector, accidentally creating an zero-power-consumption on-chip 3G communications platform as an NSA backdoor.

The scoop comes courtesy of tinfoil socialist site Popular Resistance, in this piece written by freelance truther Jim Stone, who has just discovered the wake-on-LAN capabilities in vPro processors. He writes:

“The new Intel Core vPro processors contain a new remote access feature which allows 100 percent remote access to a PC 100 percent of the time, even if the computer is turned off. Core vPro processors contain a second physical processor embedded within the main processor which has it’s own operating system embedded on the chip itself. As long as the power supply is available and and in working condition, it can be woken up by the Core vPro processor, which runs on the system’s phantom power and is able to quietly turn individual hardware components on and access anything on them.”

A little background: Popular Resistance was formed in 2011 and was part of the 'Occupy' movement, having done its bit in Washington DC. It now promotes an anti-capitalist agenda.

Back to Stone, who says Intel can do all the stuff vPro enables thanks to an undocumented 3G radio buried on its chips apparently extends wake-on-LAN to wake-on-mobile:

“Core vPro processors work in conjunction with Intel’s new Anti Theft 3.0, which put 3g connectivity into every Intel CPU after the Sandy Bridge version of the I3/5/7 processors. Users do not get to know about that 3g connection, but it IS there,” he writes, “anti theft 3.0 always has that 3G connection on also, even if the computer is turned off” (emphasis added).

No evidence is offered for the assertions detailed above.

And with that, El Reg will now happily open the floor to the commentards … ®

Source: The Register

Cannabis Cures Cancer with Rick Simpson

The People Triumph Over Biotech: Monsanto Protection Act Defeated in Senate

Finally, it seems like we have the attention of some of the members of Congress. As the result of an enormous outcry, the Senate voted down the rider that was recently approved by the House of Representatives. The rider would have continued Big Biotech’s immunity against prosecution resulting from their toxic farming practices and questionable crops.

As of September 30th, the so-called Monsanto Protection Act will be dead. This is a major victory for anti-GMO activists as it is the first time that Congress has decided in favor of the constituents as opposed to companies like Monsanto, Sygenta, Bayer, and Dow.

“That provision will be gone,” said Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), confirming the change to POLITICO. The Center for Food Safety, a Washington-based non-profit, welcomed the decision as “a major victory for the food movement” and “sea change in a political climate that all too often allows corporate earmarks to slide through must-pass legislation.” 

“Short-term appropriations bills are not an excuse for Congress to grandfather in bad policy,” said Colin O’Neil, director of government affairs for the Center. (source)

The Monsanto Protection Act was passed last spring as a rider sneakily put into place by Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri (Monsanto’s home base, incidentally.) It was passed by both the House and the Senate (see who voted for it HERE), and then signed into law in a final act of betrayal by President Barack Obama, despite public outcry that the rider made the biotech industry untouchable and not subject to legal action regardless of the damage caused.

The biotech rider “could override any court-mandated caution and could instead allow continued planting. Further, it forces USDA to approve permits for such continued planting immediately, putting industry completely in charge by allowing for a ‘back door approval’ mechanism,” the Center for Food Safety said earlier this month upon news the House was reviving the measure. (source)

As the rider is due to expire at the end of this month, a renewal of the policy was written in and passed by the House last week, slipped into an important bill related to the federal budget, the FY14 Continuing Resolution (CR) spending bill.

Monsanto and its allies have argued that what the company sought was no more than what some federal courts have done themselves in the past: Allow farmers to continue to use GMO seed –under environmental guidelines—while the court review continues. 

Monsanto successfully expanded support among farm groups also interested in some such stewardship program. But the language itself was unusually strong in that it directed Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in no uncertain terms about how he should respond in future court cases impacting GMO seeds. 

The secretary “shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law… immediately grant” temporary permits to continue using the seed at the request of a farmer or producer wanting such a stewardship program, the provision reads. And while Vilsack has been a big champion of the biotech industry, he was uncomfortable with what he saw as an effort to “pre-empt judicial review.” 

“We have all known this rider’s days were numbered,” O’Neil told POLITICO. “But given the recent GMO contamination episodes of wheat and alfalfa in Oregon and Washington it is clear that our nation’s safeguards, in particular those of the federal courts, should not be under attack from policy riders like this.” (source)

Source: Activist Post