The 'New World Order'
 
Digital ID Or Digital Prison
Home Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 God's Plan
The New World Order
It's An Evil And Sinister Conspiracy That Involves Very Rich And Powerful People Who Mastermind Events And Control World Affairs Through Governments And Corporations And Are Plotting Mass Population Reduction And The Emergence Of A Totalitarian World Government!   By Using Occult Secret Societies The ILLUMINATI Will Bring All Of The Nations Of This World Together As One.   We'll Have No Recourse But To Submit And Be Under Their Control Utilizing Their Digital Central Bank Currency Or To Reject This Ill-Fated Digital Identification.   The Goal Is UN Agenda 2030!   This Is The Beginning Of The End!
We'll wave Palestinian flag in east Jerusalem

After being recognized by 138 states, Palestinians are certain this is just the beginning. Prime Minister Fayyad says PA is in "final stage before becoming an independent state,' while Hamas leader Mashaal believes this is outcome of recent 'victory' against IDF


By Elior Levy

The Palestinian leadership is in a state of euphoria following its success in Thursday's United Nations General Assembly vote. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas congratulated the Palestinian people on Friday for their "victory in the UN."

Abbas thanked the Arab and Islamist states, which he said had always stood by the Palestinians and the Palestinian issue.

The Palestinian president promised to continue the national struggle, "until we wave the Palestinian flag over east Jerusalem."

According to Abbas, the UN resolution was a victory for peace, freedom and international law.

Shortly after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the eight countries which voted with Israel against the Palestinian bid, Abbas thanked the 138 countries that voted in favor of upgrading the status of Palestine. Forty-one countries abstained in the General Assembly vote.

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad expressed his satisfaction with the diplomatic move as well, saying that "this achievement has greatly benefitted the efforts invested by the PA on all levels in order to prepare for the establishment of a state."

He noted that the international community must implement what the international law requires in order for the Palestinian people to obtain their rights, freedom and independence.

"The PA is in the final stage before becoming an independent state capable of providing services to its people."

Hamas counting on 'heroic resistance'

Hamas politburo chief Khaled Mashaal told Reuters that the de facto recognition of a sovereign Palestinian state should be seen alongside Gaza's latest conflict with Israel as a single, bold strategy that could empower all Palestinians.

"I told Abu Mazen (Abbas) we want this move to be part of a national Palestinian strategy" that includes "the (armed) resistance which excelled in Gaza and gave an example of the ability of the Palestinian people to resist and steadfastly confront the occupier," a confident Mashaal said.

Mashaal, who will visit the Gaza Strip next week, said the short war which claimed 162 Palestinian lives and five Israelis was concluded on terms set by the Palestinian Islamist movement and ended its isolation, creating a new mood that could lead to reconciliation with Abbas' Fatah.

He compared Israel's mood of dejection with the jubilation of Palestinians in Gaza and across the West Bank led by Abbas, insisting that "for the first time a ceasefire was achieved on conditions set by Hamas, and in the presence of the Americans."

The Hamas prime minister in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, praised the "diplomatic victory," linking the Israeli operation in Gaza to Thursday's vote.

"What happened at the General Assembly is the height of the resistance and sacrifice of the Palestinians, and confirms the victory in Gaza. We must persist with the resistance and jihad."

Izzat Rishaq, a senior Hamas figure in exile, said he welcomed the UN vote as an achievement, but that Hamas counted on "heroic resistance" to create a Palestinian state – underlining the group's deep ideological rift with Abbas who opposes violence.

The Islamic Jihad chose to downplay the resolution. Several hours before the vote, when the results were already known, the organization's Secretary-General Ramadan Salah said his movement did not welcome the Abbas plan but would not lash out at it.

"What Palestine are we talking about? If we were talking about the whole Palestinian homeland from the river to the sea, we would naturally welcome it, but if we are talking about setting a ceiling for the Palestinian rights (the 1967 borders), then as we said sincerely to the PA and our bothers in Egypt – we don't welcome this plan but won't act against it."






France Says It Will Vote in Favor of Palestinians’ U.N. Bid



PARIS — France will vote in favor of the Palestinians’ request to heighten their profile at the United Nations, the French foreign minister told Parliament on Tuesday, embracing a move that Israel and the United States oppose.
The support of France, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, is the most significant boost to date for the Palestinians’ hopes to be granted nonmember observer status and thus greater international recognition. Russia and China, two other permanent members, have also thrown their support behind the Palestinian bid.
The French support appeared calculated to strengthen the position of the Palestinian Authority’s president, Mahmoud Abbas, whose party governs the West Bank, after clashes with Israel in the Gaza Strip this month that left Hamas, the Islamic militant organization that oversees Gaza, ascendant.
It is also a blow to Israel, whose diplomats have been working feverishly to try to ensure what they call a “moral majority” in the United Nations vote, meaning that even if a majority of nations vote in favor of the Palestinian bid, the major world powers will not.
Speaking before the lower house of Parliament, Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said, “Next Thursday or Friday, when the question is asked, France will reply, ‘Yes.’ ”
Muhammad Shtayyeh, the Palestinian special envoy for the United Nations bid, issued a statement from New York saying: “We are very thankful to France, and we call upon other European governments to announce their support for Palestinian freedom. This is long overdue.”
The two other permanent members of the Security Council are the United States and Britain. In a statement last week, the British foreign secretary, William Hague, said the Palestinian bid jeopardized the Mideast peace process. “While there is any chance of achieving a return to talks in the coming months,” he said, “we continue to advise President Abbas against attempts to win Palestinian observer state status at the United Nations through a vote in the U.N. General Assembly. We judge that this would make it harder to secure a return to negotiations, and could have very serious consequences for the Palestinian Authority.”
However, The Guardian reported Tuesday, citing unnamed government sources, that Britain “is prepared to back a key vote recognizing Palestinian statehood at the United Nations if Mahmoud Abbas pledges not to pursue Israel for war crimes and to resume peace talks.”
Ilana Stein, a spokeswoman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, said Israel was “not surprised” by the French declaration, adding, “Of course, we remain in our opinion that this is a very harmful initiative by the Palestinians; our opinion has not changed.”
Last year, the Palestinians submitted an application to the Security Council to become a full member state of the United Nations, but the United States made it clear that it would veto the request.
The draft resolution “reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their state of Palestine on the basis of the pre-1967 borders,” according to a version that circulated earlier this month. It also expresses “the urgent need for the resumption and acceleration of negotiations within the Middle East peace process” and states that the permanent borders of a Palestinian state are “to be determined in final status negotiations.”
The Palestinians believe that broader recognition of their presence in the United Nations is a crucial step to a two-state solution with Israel, given the absence of any other progress. While the Palestinians are fractured, any vote supporting greater Palestinian status at the United Nations could help Mr. Abbas, a moderate. The Israelis are concerned that the Palestinians could use enhanced status to try to join other international bodies, like the International Criminal Court, where they could pursue legal claims against Israel.
Israeli officials also say the Palestinians are trying to bypass negotiations. “This is in stark contrast to their commitment to resolve issues through negotiations,” said Mark Regev, an Israeli government spokesman.
Just over a year ago, France voted in favor of full Palestinian membership in Unesco, despite a mandated cutoff of American money to the organization. On Tuesday, Mr. Fabius called France’s position a point of “coherence,” saying, “The constant position of France has been to recognize the Palestinian state.”
President François Hollande, who has met with the leaders of both sides, has said France would support anything that would promote direct talks on a peace settlement. For that reason, before the latest Gaza clashes, France was reluctant to vote for Palestinian recognition, in part because the United States and Israel were so vehemently opposed to it as a sideshow.
But eight days of clashes, which left 160 Palestinians and 6 Israelis dead, also strengthened Hamas and further weakened Mr. Abbas, the head of the Palestine Liberation Organization, and French officials clearly decided to reinforce him. The P.L.O., which does not include Hamas, remains the sole legal negotiating authority for the Palestinians, and if there is to be a peace settlement, it is Mr. Abbas and the P.L.O. who must pursue it.
“The moment when this question will be proposed is a very delicate moment,” said Mr. Fabius, referring to the timing of the vote, soon after the recent fighting in the Gaza Strip. “At once because the cease-fire is extremely fragile, because there are Israeli elections, because there is a change in the composition of the American administration.”
Though recognition at the United Nations would be viewed by many as an implicit recognition of statehood, the “concrete expression of a Palestinian state” can come only through negotiations “without conditions” between Palestinians and Israel, Mr. Fabius added.
Husam Zumlot of the Fatah Foreign Relations Commission, which has been very active in lobbying in Europe in recent months, said, “We hope other European countries will follow.” He added that he believed that more than half of the countries of the European Union would vote in favor of the Palestinians.
Switzerland and Portugal have said they will vote for the measure, but Germany is among the countries that have opposed the bid, The Associated Press reported. Australia has said it will abstain, the Australian news media reported.



Homeland Security Uses Local Police to Set Up Surveillance Buffer Zones

 
By  Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

In order to sweeten the pot of federalization, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is giving gifts of expensive gadgets to local police forces.

Cops in North Jersey, for example, were showered with gifts from their would-be overseers. As reported by The Record: Oradell, Emerson, Closter and Harrington Park police have car-mounted night-vision technology and video and recording equipment that can watch over the Oradell Reservoir and dam — and the hikers and anglers entering it. West Milford can do the same around the Newark watershed. Wayne police are scanning ... the license plates of vehicles outside the Willowbrook Mall, while East Rutherford officers patrol hotel parking lots near the Meadowlands and the Federal Reserve building off Route 17.
How is all this new technology being used? Who is being watched? Why are they being targeted for surveillance? Neither law enforcement nor federal agents are talking.
When contacted by The New American, the DHS representative in New Jersey refused to answer these questions, saying that revealing what information is being collected, how long it will be stored, or who will have access to it would threaten national security. Of course.
The web of surveillance being woven by the Department of Homeland Security among local law enforcement agencies is part of the secretive effort known as the Buffer Zone Protection Program. According to DHS:

The Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP) is a Department-administered infrastructure protection grant program to help local law enforcement and first responders identify and mitigate vulnerabilities at the highest-risk critical infrastructure sites. A buffer zone is the area outside a facility that an adversary can use to conduct surveillance or launch an attack. The term is associated with identified critical infrastructure and key resources (CIKR).

BZPP provides funding to local law enforcement for equipment acquisition and planning activities to address gaps and enhance security capabilities. The program brings together private sector security personnel and first responders in a collaborative security planning process that enhances the buffer zone.
Local police who participate in the program will have access to a shockingly broad array of personal information of citizens. Facial recognition technology, license plate readers, and stop light camera video feeds will all be funneled to a Regional Operations Intelligence Center where FBI, police, and DHS agents can watch the live feeds. These hubs are part of a larger operations complex known as a Fusion Center. 
The following information is taken from a fact sheet on fusion centers posted on the DHS website: “A fusion center is a collaborative effort of two or more agencies that provide resources, expertise and information to the center with the goal of maximizing their ability to detect, prevent, investigate, and respond to criminal and terrorist activity.”
A description of the functioning of these incubators for the forthcoming federal police force is also provided on the DHS site:

State and major urban area fusion centers (fusion centers) serve as primary focal points within the state and local environment for the receipt, analysis, gathering, and sharing of threat-related information among federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) partners.... Fusion centers conduct analysis and facilitate information sharing, assisting law enforcement and homeland security partners in preventing, protecting against, and responding to crime and terrorism.
The literature promoting the acceptance of fusion centers lists several ways the new federal agency will impose its will on the formerly autonomous and accountable police chief or county sheriff.
First, the feds will decide where and when to deploy local police department personnel. The chief, if he still exists, will be no more than a functionary required to make sure that the orders of the federal government are carried out. More likely than not, these new missions, in addition to preventing crime in the city or county, will engage in the collection of information about and apprehension of those local citizens identified by a committee in Washington as posing a threat to national security. Consider the revelation in 2009 that Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis released a document entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalism and Recruitment,” which listed war veterans, anti-abortion activists, small-government advocates, and those concerned about immigration as terrorist risks.

Second, DHS (or whichever one of the federal agencies eventually takes over law-enforcement duties) will train new recruits. Policies, procedures, and purposes will not reflect traditional (and constitutional) goals of law enforcement, but will be tailored to training officers to perform those duties associated with the new, national emphasis of the force, with a slant toward federalism.

Finally, funds for this conversion from local police department to outpost of the federal law-enforcement agency will be provided by the bureaucrats on Capitol Hill. This carrot will be tied to the stick of federal control.

So far, the DHS has marked 1,849 locations scattered throughout the 50 states that will serve as regional surveillance collection centers. As part of the department’s 2010 budget $48 million was spent establishing the centers. As The Record reports, “in Bergen and Passaic, 18 police departments have received federal grants totaling nearly $1.4 million since 2005 for equipment to watch over more than a half-dozen North Jersey locations.”
There is a major constitutional obstacle to such constant monitoring of citizens — the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment reads:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Such sweeping surveillance technology does not conform to the constitutional requirement that all searches be reasonable and be conducted with warrants based on probable cause.
Given the power of the tools being brought by DHS into cities and towns as they take effective control of local law enforcement, it is difficult to determine who is being watched, why they are being watched, and who is doing the watching.
Again, The Record reports:

State officials won't say how long the surveillance information is kept, but the ACLU [American Civil Liberties Union] argues that license plate scans, for example, could be kept indefinitely. In late July, the group filed public records requests with 21 New Jersey police departments seeking information on how they are using automatic license plate readers.
"The American people have a right to know whether our police departments are using these tools in a limited and responsible manner, or whether they are keeping records of our movements for months or years for no good reason," the ACLU said in a statement.
Apparently, the people’s elected representatives are being kept in the dark, as well. An investigation by The Record discovered that DHS officials preferred preventing local elected leaders from discovering the full extent of the surveillance being carried out by the Fusion Centers as part of the Buffer Zone Protection Program. Freedom of Information Act petitions requesting such information have been rebuffed by the DHS.
The Record reports on the futile efforts by town leaders to pull back the shroud covering the covert federal/local law enforcement collaboration:

In West Milford, the police chief asked the Township Council last fall to authorize spending for a covert surveillance camera program, funded through the Homeland Security grant. When council members asked about its purpose, Chief Gene Chiosie said the project was meant to be secret and something "civilians shouldn't know."

"You know what concerned me: When I asked how the cameras were going to be used, I was just told 'It's part of Homeland Security,'?" said former Councilman Daniel Jurkovic, who resisted the purchases. "Not everything that is right for the federal government is right for the citizens of West Milford."
From the DHS, to the NSA, to the federal courts, every branch of the federal government is stretching the surveillance net to cover all Americans and to place us under the never-blinking eye of Big Brother so that no act of defiance will escape recognition and reprisal.
And now, with the Buffer Zone Protection Program and the Fusion Centers, the Obama administration is bribing local law enforcement to participate in the unconstitutional undertaking by giving the struggling agencies high-tech gifts and bags of cash, all tied like juicy carrots to the end of the stick of federalization.



Russian expert warns of possibility of large-scale war in Middle East
By  Moscow Time




Turkey has asked NATO to deploy “Patriot” missiles on the Turkish side near the Turkish-Syrian border.

In an interview with the Voice of Russia, Russian analyst Konstantin Sivkov said: “Deploying these missiles in Turkey will be dangerous for Syrian military planes – this is obvious. A lesser obvious thing is that Turkey is getting ready for a war against Syria. If an attack on Syria from the territory of Turkey does take place, this will most likely be an attack not of the Turkish army, but of NATO’s forces.”
“The Middle East is getting ready for a large-sale battle which will very likely affect the Russian part of the Caucasus, and this, in its turn, will be reflected on the entire Russia,” Mr. Sivkov added.
The planned deployment by NATO countries of Patriot air defence systems on Turkey’s Syria border will actually amount to the imposition of a no-fly zone for Syrian aircraft in circumvention of the UN Security Council.
The opinion has been voiced by the leading research fellow of the Russian Institute for Oriental Studies, Vladimir Kudelev.
He feels that Patriot systems may drastically influence the fighting between the government troops and the opposition in the north of Syria, since the militants will thus get a 200 kilometre - to 250 kilometre-wide “umbrella” all along the Syrian-Turkish border.
The deployment of Patriots would also undermine the role of the UN Security Council, which, experts feel, would hardly authorize any proposal to impose a no-fly zone for Syrian aircraft.
Plans for the deployment of the Patriot Missile Air-Defence Systems on the Turkish-Syrian border are defensive in character, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in a telephone talk with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Earlier Moscow voiced its concern over the militarization of that region.
The above-mentioned telephone talk was held on the initiative of the NATO Secretary General. Moscow says that Rasmussen wanted to clarify the situation with the deployment of the Patriot Missile Air-Defence Systems on the Turkish territory. Ankara filed a relevant request to NATO on November 21st. The information that appeared in the press more than once last month said that Turkey was making preparations for appealing to Brussels. Possibly, acting in this way Ankara wanted to indirectly put pressure on its NATO allies. As you know, till recently NATO was strongly against getting involved in a conflict between Turkey and Syria, a political analyst, Stanislav Tarasov, says.
"They started asking NATO to interfere in the conflict, using the Alliance’s Clause No.5 – the defence of territories. Which means that they wanted to drag NATO into the conflict and thus, to ensure its military presence in the region. NATO said “No”. Then they resorted to Clause No. 4 – the provision of help".
NATO said that it would consider Turkey’s request without any delay. And Germany’s Foreign Ministry said that Turkey’s request should be met without any delay. Media reports even said that Berlin was ready not only to provide the Patriot Missile Air-Defence Systems to Turkey but also to send 120 Bundeswehr soldiers to the region. Turkey has not only moved its forces to its border with Syria but has also approved a law enabling it to bring its troops into the territory of its neighbor in case of a military threat. The reason for such a large- scale militarization was firing missiles into the Syrian territory, which official Damascus called an accident. Any escalation of this conflict is inadmissible, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on November 23rd. Moscow is well aware of Turkey’s concern as well as of NATO’s arguments but what is important in this case is the potential, not intentions – that is why any militarization on the Turkish-Syrian border may lead to an uncontrollable turn of events, the Russian minister said.
"Any accumulation of arms creates certain risks and urges all those who would like like to resort to the exterior factor of force to finally use it. We believe that this will not happen, and that all outside players will display maximum responsibility in assessing the on-going developments in the region'.
In the diplomatic language this means that the events in Syria may start developing according to the Libyan Scenario, experts say. As you know, the opposition is losing its support, and Assad has a military superiority in Syria now, an Oriental studies expert, Azhdar Kurtov, says.
"The Syrian-Turkish border has a sophisticated mountain relief. Under such conditions, combat aviation is a very effective method of fighting against the rebels. Thus, if Turkey deploys the Patriot Missile Air-Defence Systems on its territory, it will be able to block Syria using its own aviation in the border regions on its own territory, which may change the turn of military developments in the region. When the overthrowing of the Gaddafi regime was under way, a no-fly zone was established over Libya. Something like that may be created near the Turkish-Syrian border".
Moscow’s fears may also be caused by something that is not directly linked with the crisis in Syria, a Turkish political analyst, Barysh Adybelli, says.
"Moscow believes that in case the Patriot Misslile Air-Defence Systems are deployed in Turkey, they can be used as one of the elements of the early warning system - that is, as one of the elements of the European missile defence system which the USA is ardently defending by now".
Official Ankara reacted to Moscow’s statements on November 23rd. Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan called Moscow’s reaction to a possible deployment of the Patriot Missile Air-Defence systems erroneous, adding that Russia is trying to present Turkey’s domestic issue as its own problem. Fears remain though.
NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen assured Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov that plans of the alliance to deploy Patriot air defense missiles in Turkey are of purely defensive.
Mr. Rasmussen and Mr. Lavrov had a phone conversation on Friday initiated by NATO chief.
A statement released by the Russian Foreign Ministry after the talks says that Mr. Lavrov expressed his concerns over NATO`s plans to place Patriot air missiles on the Turkish-Syrian border.
He mentioned Russia’s initiative to help Ankara and Damascus be able to discuss all differences directly amid the increasing military potential in the region in order to avoid incidents.
Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said that Russia’s reaction to the deployment of the Patriot air defense systems on the border with Syria, which Ankara requested from the NATO on Wednesday, was "erroneous".
Answering the question about the Moscow's reaction to Turkey’s request to NATO, the official representative of the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation Alexander Lukashevich noted on Thursday that Russia considered the militarization of the Syrian-Turkish border to be an alarm signal. "I believe Russia’s statement to be very erroneous", - the Turkish Prime Minister said in this regard to accompanying journalists on his return from Pakistan from the summit of the "Islamic group of eight".
Russia has expressed its concern over the militarization of the Turkish-Syrian border, the VoR correspondent Polina Chernitsa has cited the Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich who commented on Turkey’s request to deploy Patriot missiles on the Syrian border.
Moscow would like Turkey to contribute to the beginning of the inter-Syria dialogue rather than flex its military muscles, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said on Thursday.
“The militarization of the Syrian-Turkish border is a dismal signal,” Lukashevich said, referring to Turkey’s recent request to deploy Patriot anti-missile systems to protect its border with Syria.
He urged Turkey to interact more with the Syrian opposition so as to help start the inter-Syria dialogue as soon as possible.
Turkey already hosted the complex twice. in 1991 and 2003 during the two Iraqi campaigns but never used it.
Northwestern University engineer Yonggang Huang said the patch was "as soft as the human skin."



Electronic skin tattoo has medical, gaming, spy uses

Breitbart.com


This device contains a RFID chip and will be able to transfer information wirelessly to various networks. To get people interested and excited by the electronic skin tattoo, news articles describe its usefulness in health monitoring and…um…video games. What is however not advertised is how easily this device could be used to track, spy and monitor people. 

A hair-thin electronic patch that adheres to the skin like a temporary tattoo could transform medical sensing, computer gaming and even spy operations, according to a US study published Thursday. 

The micro-electronics technology, called an epidermal electronic system (EES), was developed by an international team of researchers from the United States, China and Singapore, and is described in the journal Science. 

"It's a technology that blurs the distinction between electronics and biology," said co-author John Rogers, a professor in materials science and engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 

"Our goal was to develop an electronic technology that could integrate with the skin in a way that is mechanically and physiologically invisible to the user." 

The patch could be used instead of bulky electrodes to monitor brain, heart and muscle tissue activity and when placed on the throat it allowed users to operate a voice-activated video game with better than 90 percent accuracy. 

"This type of device might provide utility for those who suffer from certain diseases of the larynx," said Rogers. "It could also form the basis of a sub-vocal communication capability, suitable for covert or other uses." 

The wireless device is nearly weightless and requires so little power it can fuel itself with miniature solar collectors or by picking up stray or transmitted electromagnetic radiation, the study said.

Less than 50-microns thick -- slightly thinner than a human hair -- the devices are able to adhere to the skin without glue or sticky material. 

"Forces called van der Waals interactions dominate the adhesion at the molecular level, so the electronic tattoos adhere to the skin without any glues and stay in place for hours," said the study. 

Northwestern University engineer Yonggang Huang said the patch was "as soft as the human skin."



Rockets from Gaza fired on Tel Aviv and Jerusalem


By NBC News staff and wire reports  November 16, 2012


Updated at 2:15 p.m. ET: On the third day of escalating violence between Israel and Gaza, air raid sirens cried out in Israel’s two largest cities, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, as residents moved into underground shelters, NBC reporters on the scene said.

At least one rocket fired from Gaza toward Jerusalem landed outside the city, which is more than 60 miles from the Gaza Strip, according to NBC's Martin Fletcher. There were no injuries or damage. This was the first Palestinian rocket to reach the vicinity of Jerusalem since 1970.

Earlier, at least one rocket fired toward coastal Tel Aviv fell into the sea.

Wake-up call for Israel's city that never sleeps

"The rocket landed off the shores of Tel Aviv," a police spokesman told Reuters. This was the second attack on Tel Aviv in as many days, with rockets nearly hitting the city on Thursday.

The attacks, which Israel considers to be a major escalation, could lead to an Israeli ground invasion of Gaza.

Israel's military is considering waging a ground campaign. It started drafting 16,000 reserve troops on Friday, as Israel's cabinet authorized the mobilization of up to 75,000 reservists. Troops are massing on the border, and witnesses said they could see Israeli ships off Gaza's coast, NBC News' Ayman Mohyeldin reported.

The rocket attacks came just hours after Egypt’s prime minister visited the Gaza Strip to show support for Palestinians amid a cross-border conflict with Hamas militants that risks spiraling into an all-out war.

"Egypt will spare no effort ... to stop the aggression and to achieve a truce," Prime Minister Hesham Kandil said.

"Palestine is the heart of the Arab and Muslim world and the body is not healthy while the heart is sick," he added.

Kandil held the bloodied body of a child at a hospital before leaving the Gaza Strip.

But even as Kandil made his three-hour visit to the coastal enclave, a temporary cease-fire declared by Israel at Egypt’s request collapsed, with both sides accusing the other of violating it.

NBC's Ayman Mohyeldin answers questions about the Israel-Gaza conflict

At least 19 Palestinians, including seven militants and 12 civilians, among them six children and a pregnant woman, have been killed in Israeli airstrikes. A Hamas rocket killed three Israelis in the town of Kiryat Malachi on Thursday.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he is prepared to “take whatever action is necessary,” but Israel has also expressed a strong desire to preserve its peace with the new Egyptian leadership.

Overnight, the military said it targeted about 150 of the sites Gaza gunmen use to fire rockets at Israel, as well as ammunition warehouses, bringing to 450 the number of sites struck since the operation began Wednesday.

The new propaganda: Israel, Hamas take war to Twitter in Gaza conflict

Hamas chief killed

The latest upsurge of violence in the long-running conflict began Wednesday when Israel killed Hamas' military mastermind, Ahmed Jabari, in a precision airstrike on his car. Israel then began shelling Gaza from land, air and sea.

Israel says its offensive was in response to increasing missile salvos from Gaza. Its bombing has not yet reached the saturation level seen before it last invaded Gaza in 2008, but Israeli officials have said a ground assault remains possible.

“We are going to continue hitting Hamas hard and we will continue to strike hard at the missiles targeted at Central and South Israel," .

An Israeli ground offensive could be costly to both sides. In the last Gaza war, Israel devastated parts of the territory, setting back Hamas' fighting capabilities. But Israel also payed the price of increasing diplomatic isolation because of a civilian death toll numbering in the hundreds.

This week’s fighting has widened the instability gripping the region, further straining Israel-Egypt relations.






From CIA assassination to Illuminati involvement: The MH17 conspiracy theories are doing the internet rounds


Was MH17 shot down by militants trying to assassinate Vladimir Putin?


Was it work of secret societies or the Illuminati to establish the New World Order?


Were MH17 and MH370, which went missing in March, actually same plane?


Theorists ask why victims' pictured passports in such 'pristine' condition


Theories fueled by fact MH17 came down 17 years to day since maiden flight

By MATTHEW BLAKE

As the world continued to search for answers over the downing of Flight MH17, the internet came alive with conspiracy theories.

Was whoever shot down MH17 actually trying to assassinate Vladimir Putin?

Russia Today sparked a fever of speculation after publishing a report that claimed the doomed flight was flying almost the exact same path as Putin's presidential plane did less than 40 minutes later.

It quoted a source as telling Interfax news agency: 'I can say that Putin’s plane and the Malaysian Boeing intersected at the same point and the same echelon.

Within minutes of the report, there were claims the shooting was a botched assassination attempt.

Some even took it to mean US president Barack Obama ordered the C.I.A. to carry out the alleged hit.

'OBAMA TRYING TO KILL PUTIN Putin's plane was following 'almost same route' as crashed MalaysianAirlines MH17,'


Another theory blamed banking dynasty the Rosthchild Family.

'ROTHSCHILDS TRIED TO KILL PUTIN & HIT WRONG PLANE TODAY - ALL BECAUSE OF BRICS BANK & USD END 


Or was it in fact the nefarious work of occult secret societies or The Illuminati?

Many have claimed that The Illuminati carried out the attack as part of its longstanding masterplan to trigger a third world war and thus establish a New World Order ... chiefly because of the plane's links to the number seven.

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was a Boeing 777 and made its maiden flight on July 17, 1997 - 17 years ago to the day, many theorists point out.

On top of that, July is the seventh month of 2014. Adding up the year's numbers (2+0+1+4) makes seven.

A writer on conspiracy website Before It’s News claimed the tragedy was 'clearly' an attempted false flag to launch a new global war.

They wrote: 'The occult/illuminati connection to this plane crash are absolutely stunning as the NWO (New World Order) attempts to start WW3 as their grip on power falls apart as the US dollar dies and on the same day TWA Flight 800 was shot down in 1996.'

The number seven is a figure that has long been associated with the clandestine group, who are said to view it as the essence of perfection.

Many modern conspiracy theories propose that world events are being controlled and manipulated by the Illuminati, a secretive and ancient society blamed by proponents for a string of world events including the Battle of Waterloo, the French Revolution and President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

There have even been suggestions that the group is in fact a Communist pressure party hellbent on creating a new world order by infiltrating the Hollywood film industry.

MH17 was shot down 17 years to the day since its maiden voyage ...

The group's involvement was further bolstered by a New York Times journalist who revealed the plane was shot down 17 years to the day since its maiden voyage.

A coincidence or not, it was enough proof for many that a sinister plot was to blame.

Did Israel mastermind the shoot down to divert world's gaze from its assault on Gaza?

Some people even took to MailOnline's own comment section to expound their hypotheses.

'World attention and media coverage has been diverted from that to this MH17 incident. Could Israel be behind it so they can launch their attack on Palestine, and the inevitable deaths of hundreds of civilians that is likely to come with it, without international media and governmental scrutiny?'


Do 'Pristine' passports prove it was all a hoax?




'How could the passports found at the #MH17 crash site be so pristine? 


Could MH17 have actually been the same Malaysian Airlines plane that disappeared in March?

This argument appeared a little less-well researched than some of its counterparts.

But a lack of hard evidence didn't stop theorists sharing their views that MH17 was in fact MH370 - the plane that disappeared over the Indian Ocean in March.


Was International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde in fact the mastermind behind the atrocity?

The IMF Managing Director gave a speech to the National Press Club in Washington D.C. about the power of the number seven.

In the speech she used numerology to make a series of forecasts for 2014 based around the 'magic seven'.


'Now I'm going to test your numerology skills by asking you to think about the magic seven,' she told the audience.

She went on to point out that 2014 will 'mark the 7th anniversary of the financial market jitters', and will be the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, 25th (2 + 5 = 7)'.

She made a series of further references to the number seven that inspired a glut of blog posts and tweets accusing her of sinister occult dealings.

'Was Christine Lagarde trying to give a message about the MH17 tragedy in her bizarre speech about numerology?'
Color Revolutions: Argentina Next?

Tony Cartalucci    November, 2012

Western media agencies have begun enthusiastically covering demonstrations in Argentina’s capital, Buenos Aires. CNN, AP, and the BBC have all covered the protests in equally vague terms, failing to identify the leaders and opposition groups behind them, while BBC in particular recycled “Arab Spring” rhetoric claiming that, “opposition activists used social networks to mobilise the march, which they said was one of the biggest anti-government protests in a decade.”

The Western media claims the protesters are angry over, “rising inflation, high levels of crime and high-profile corruption cases,” all the identical, vague grievances brought into the streets by Wall Street-backed opposition groups in Venezuela. Underneath these unsubstantiated claims, lies the International Monetary Fund, and threats of sanctions aimed at Argentina’s turning away from the US Dollar and the Wall Street-London dominated international financial order.

And like in Venezuela, a coordinated campaign against the Argentinian government, led by President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchne, has begun in op-eds across the Western media.

The Chicago Tribune in an op-ed titled, “A wrong turn in Buenos Aires: Argentina’s populist economic policies court disaster,” stated:

What a shame to see a country of such great economic promise swerving off the road to prosperity again.

The latest in a history of unforced errors began in 2007. National elections ushered in populist President Cristina Fernandez, who has led her nation to the brink of disaster by refusing to play by the rules of global finance. She restricted international trade, violated contracts and pumped out phony data to disguise the soaring inflation her policies brought about. All the while she scored cheap political points by blasting the rich countries of the north for their supposed economic imperialism.

Argentina took a grave step in May when it nationalized YPF, its main energy company. The takeover, condemned around the world, forced out Spain’s Grupo Repsol, which owned a majority stake in YPF. Repsol was providing the engineering know-how and financial investment to develop Argentina’s massive energy reserves—including the huge Vaca Muerta oil-and-gas find.

Negotiations to compensate Repsol for Argentina’s asset-grab will end badly for Argentina. The European Union is likely to impose sanctions. Repsol wants $10 billion, and it has sent the message to rival energy companies that it will not permit others to profit from its confiscated assets. Argentina will have a hard time finding partners to help it develop what should be a lucrative resource.

The financial coup against Repsol won strong national support. The approval ratings of Fernandez temporarily shot up. Even opposition parties backed the move. Government officials talked about how they had restored Argentina’s dignity by standing up to foreigners exploiting its natural bounty. Meantime, Fernandez kept the once-hot economy going by nationalizing private pension funds, redirecting the money into housing loans, and expanding welfare programs by decree.

Now Argentina has to pay the price.

What is likely to follow will be coordinated attacks including sanctions, isolation, political attacks, currency attacks, and of course US-engineered unrest in the streets, which can range from protesters merely clogging traffic, to escalating violence triggered by the now notorious “mystery gunmen” used in US unconventional warfare to destabilize, divide, and destroy nations.

But also like in Venezuela, if enough awareness can be raised in regards to what the West is doing, and the disingenuous intentions and interests driving opposition groups into the streets, these efforts being used to coerce Argentina back into the Western dominated “world order” articulated by US think-tank policy makers like Robert Kagan as serving “the needs of the United States and its allies, which constructed it,” can ultimately be thwarted.








Sandy Refugees Complain of Prison-like Conditions at FEMA Tent Camp


Adan Salazar  November 2012

Residents of New Jersey, whose homes were ravaged by superstorm Sandy and are now having to endure yet another wintery storm, are revealing through first-hand accounts that at least one tent camp FEMA is providing more strongly resembles a prison.


Photo taken by Brian Sotelo of the tent city set up at Monmouth Park in Oceanport by FEMA for victims of Sandy.

According to the Asbury Park Press, some displaced New Jersey residents have had to relocate to FEMA tent camps in the northeastern part of the state in efforts to secure better shelter, running hot water and washing machines, but members of at least one camp are saying that none of what was promised is available.

“At (Pine Belt) the Red Cross made an announcement that they were sending us to permanent structures up here that had just been redone, that had washing machines and hot showers and steady electric, and they sent us to tent city. We got (expletive),” distraught Oceanport camp resident Brian Sotelo said.

As if adding insult to injury, the camp is referred to as “Camp Freedom,” however, Sotelo says camp residents feel more like they’re imprisoned: “Everybody is angry over here. It’s like being prison [sic].”

As no media is allowed beyond the fences of the camp, what little news has managed to escape the area is disturbing. Angered residents are revealing that they are intentionally being kept quiet, being denied electricity to charge their phones and suspect surveillance by roving vehicle patrols.

Sotelo also noted that several members of the camp had tried to contact the media regarding the horrendous living conditions, but were met with opposition: “After everyone started complaining and they found out we were contacting the press, they brought people in. Every time we plugged in an iPhone or something, the cops would come and unplug them.”

“As Sotelo tells it, when it became clear that the residents were less than enamored with their new accommodations Wednesday night and were letting the outside world know about it, officials tried to stop them from taking pictures, turned off the WiFi and said they couldn’t charge their smart phones because there wasn’t enough power,” reports Stephen Edelson of the Asbury Park Press.

According to Sotelo, victims are not being allowed to return to their homes, even though, as part of a relief crew, he’s driven past his own rented home several times, noting it had only sustained about a foot’s worth of water damage.

A Department of Human Services spokesperson refuted Sotelo’s claims, saying that “staff at the micro-city are providing for the needs of all the evacuees.”

Reportedly, several FEMA centers in New Jersey and Staten Island were also closed to due to the inclement weather [2] anticipated from yesterday’s nor’easter.

Yesterday, NJ Gov. Chris Christie expressed confidence in his ability to “re-evaluate” the gas rationing system [3] put in place about a week ago after residents were having to wait 3 to 4 hours for gas.

Today, Christie tried to salvage FEMA’s reputation and deflect negative criticism by praising utility crews and labeling the storm as the main perpetrator of all the suffering: “The villain in this case is Hurricane Sandy.”

Also today, FEMA announced that it would grant Governor Christie’s request to provide Disaster unemployment assistance to those unable to work “as a direct result of the damages caused by the storm.”






Israel Drawn Into Syria Fighting For First Time


By Jamal Halaby

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel was drawn into the Syrian civil war for the first time on Sunday, firing warning shots into the neighboring country after a stray mortar shell from across the border hit an Israeli military post.

The Israeli military said the mortar fire caused no injuries or damage at the post in the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in the 1967 Mideast war and then annexed. But in recent weeks, incidents of errant fire from Syria to the north have multiplied, leading Israel to warn that it holds Syria responsible for fire on Israeli-held territory.

"A short while ago, a mortar shell targeted an IDF (Israel Defense Forces) post in the Golan Heights," said army spokeswoman Lt. Col. Avital Leibovich. "We answered with a warning shot toward Syrian areas. We understand this was a mistake and was not meant to target Israel and then that is why we fired a warning shot in retaliation."

The Israeli military also said it filed a complaint through United Nations forces operating in the area, stating that "fire emanating from Syria into Israel will not be tolerated and shall be responded to with severity." Israel returned fire with an anti-tank missile.

Nineteen months of fighting and the mounting chaos engulfing the regime of President Bashar Assad have already spilled across borders with Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. The danger of drawing in Israel as well to a wider regional conflagration is one of the worst-case-scenarios for the civil war.

Violence also flared Sunday on Syria's northern border with Turkey, a common flashpoint. Syrian army forces backed by helicopter gunships and artillery attacked a border area with Turkey after rebels captured a crossing point, activists said.

The Britain-based activist group Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the Ras al-Ayn border area in Syria's northeast was "under siege" as dozens of rebels tried to hold onto the border crossing. The upheaval has largely had no direct impact on Syria's bitter foe Israel, and their shared border has remained mostly quiet, as it has been since a 1974 cease-fire.

Still, Israel worries that Syria's civil war could spill across into the Golan — a concern made more immediate by multiple cases of errant fire in recent weeks and Israel's claim that three Syrian tanks entered the demilitarized zone on the plateau this month for the first time in 40 years.

Israeli officials do not see Assad trying to intentionally draw Israel into the fighting, though they have raised the possibility of his targeting Israel in an act of desperation. Israeli officials have repeatedly said it is only a matter of time before Assad's regime collapses.

Over the weekend, Vice Premier Moshe Yaalon said Israel recently conveyed several messages to Syria and Damascus had "conducted itself appropriately." He did not elaborate. On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told his Cabinet that Israel is "closely monitoring" the border with Syria and is "ready for any development."

Earlier, Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned, "If a shell falls, we will respond." Israel fears that if Assad's regime is toppled, the country could fall into the hands of Islamic extremists or descend into sectarian warfare, destabilizing the region.

It also is afraid that Syria's arsenal of chemical weapons and missile could fall into the hands of its Lebanese ally, the Hezbollah guerrilla group, or other anti-Israel militants if Assad loses power.

The aftermath of Egypt's revolution has also provided Israel with reason to worry about its frontier region with Syria: Egypt's Sinai desert on Israel's southern border has turned even more lawless since longtime Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was ousted in February 2011, and Islamic militants are now more easily able to use it as a launching ground for strikes against southern Israel.

Fighting in Syria on Sunday was centered around Ras al-Ayn, in the predominantly Kurdish oil-producing northeastern province of al-Hasaka. An Associated Press cameraman on the Turkish side of the border said he heard explosions and saw plumes of smoke rise on the Syrian side.

On Friday, rebels overran three security compounds in the town, wresting control from regime forces, and the fighting there touched off a massive flow of refugees two days ago. The violence in Syria has killed more than 36,000 people since an uprising against President Bashar Assad's regime began in March 2011. Hundreds of thousands have fled the fighting into neighboring Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq. Another 11,000 escaped Friday into Turkey following the surge of fighting at Ras al-Ayn.

The mayor of the nearby Turkish town of Ceylanpinar, Ismail Aslan, said the number of refugees had slowed significantly on Sunday. But Turkish soldiers at the border turned back some of the refugees who had arrived late last week and wanted to return to Ras al-Ayn, saying the area was not secure.

In Qatar, Syrian opposition groups resumed talks on forging a more cohesive and representative leadership as the U.S. and other Western countries have advocated. Ali Sadr el-Din Bayanouni, a former Syrian Muslim Brotherhood leader, said opposition groups planned to elect a president and other top officials later Sunday to an umbrella group backed by the U.S. and host Qatar. None of the opposition movements backs dialogue with Assad's regime, he said.

The United States has grown increasingly frustrated with the opposition's inability to overcome deep divisions and rivalries, and has called for a leadership that can rally wider support among activists fighting the Assad regime.

The Syrian National Council, the main opposition faction, is dominated by exiles and has been criticized by the U.S. for not including a broad enough representation, especially of those fighting and dying on the front lines. The SNC said it expects to have 22 seats on the new, 60-member council.

"We need unity for the opposition," said George Sabra, the newly elected leader of the SNC. "This is an important step."





The Permanent Militarization of America

IN 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower left office warning of the growing power of the military-industrial complex in American life. Most people know the term the president popularized, but few remember his argument.
In his farewell address, Eisenhower called for a better equilibrium between military and domestic affairs in our economy, politics and culture. He worried that the defense industry’s search for profits would warp foreign policy and, conversely, that too much state control of the private sector would cause economic stagnation. He warned that unending preparations for war were incongruous with the nation’s history. He cautioned that war and warmaking took up too large a proportion of national life, with grave ramifications for our spiritual health.
The military-industrial complex has not emerged in quite the way Eisenhower envisioned. The United States spends an enormous sum on defense — over $700 billion last year, about half of all military spending in the world — but in terms of our total economy, it has steadily declined to less than 5 percent of gross domestic product from 14 percent in 1953. Defense-related research has not produced an ossified garrison state; in fact, it has yielded a host of beneficial technologies, from the Internet to civilian nuclear power to GPS navigation. The United States has an enormous armaments industry, but it has not hampered employment and economic growth. In fact, Congress’s favorite argument against reducing defense spending is the job loss such cuts would entail.
Nor has the private sector infected foreign policy in the way that Eisenhower warned. Foreign policy has become increasingly reliant on military solutions since World War II, but we are a long way from the Marines’ repeated occupations of Haiti, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic in the early 20th century, when commercial interests influenced military action. Of all the criticisms of the 2003 Iraq war, the idea that it was done to somehow magically decrease the cost of oil is the least credible. Though it’s true that mercenaries and contractors have exploited the wars of the past decade, hard decisions about the use of military force are made today much as they were in Eisenhower’s day: by the president, advised by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the National Security Council, and then more or less rubber-stamped by Congress. Corporations do not get a vote, at least not yet.
But Eisenhower’s least heeded warning — concerning the spiritual effects of permanent preparations for war — is more important now than ever. Our culture has militarized considerably since Eisenhower’s era, and civilians, not the armed services, have been the principal cause. From lawmakers’ constant use of “support our troops” to justify defense spending, to TV programs and video games like “NCIS,” “Homeland” and “Call of Duty,” to NBC’s shameful and unreal reality show “Stars Earn Stripes,” Americans are subjected to a daily diet of stories that valorize the military while the storytellers pursue their own opportunistic political and commercial agendas. Of course, veterans should be thanked for serving their country, as should police officers, emergency workers and teachers. But no institution — particularly one financed by the taxpayers — should be immune from thoughtful criticism.
Like all institutions, the military works to enhance its public image, but this is just one element of militarization. Most of the political discourse on military matters comes from civilians, who are more vocal about “supporting our troops” than the troops themselves. It doesn’t help that there are fewer veterans in Congress today than at any previous point since World War II. Those who have served are less likely to offer unvarnished praise for the military, for it, like all institutions, has its own frustrations and failings. But for non-veterans — including about four-fifths of all members of Congress — there is only unequivocal, unhesitating adulation. The political costs of anything else are just too high.
For proof of this phenomenon, one need look no further than the continuing furor over sequestration — the automatic cuts, evenly divided between Pentagon and nonsecurity spending, that will go into effect in January if a deal on the debt and deficits isn’t reached. As Bob Woodward’s latest book reveals, the Obama administration devised the measure last year to include across-the-board defense cuts because it believed that slashing defense was so unthinkable that it would make compromise inevitable.
But after a grand budget deal collapsed, in large part because of resistance from House Republicans, both parties reframed sequestration as an attack on the troops (even though it has provisions that would protect military pay). The fact that sequestration would also devastate education, health and programs for children has not had the same impact.
Eisenhower understood the trade-offs between guns and butter. “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed,” he warned in 1953, early in his presidency. “The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some 50 miles of concrete highway. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.”
He also knew that Congress was a big part of the problem. (In earlier drafts, he referred to the “military-industrial-Congressional” complex, but decided against alienating the legislature in his last days in office.) Today, there are just a select few in public life who are willing to question the military or its spending, and those who do — from the libertarian Ron Paul to the leftist Dennis J. Kucinich — are dismissed as unrealistic.
The fact that both President Obama and Mitt Romney are calling for increases to the defense budget (in the latter case, above what the military has asked for) is further proof that the military is the true “third rail” of American politics. In this strange universe where those without military credentials can’t endorse defense cuts, it took a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Adm. Mike Mullen, to make the obvious point that the nation’s ballooning debt was the biggest threat to national security.
Uncritical support of all things martial is quickly becoming the new normal for our youth. Hardly any of my students at the Naval Academy remember a time when their nation wasn’t at war. Almost all think it ordinary to hear of drone strikes in Yemen or Taliban attacks in Afghanistan. The recent revelation of counterterrorism bases in Africa elicits no surprise in them, nor do the military ceremonies that are now regular features at sporting events. That which is left unexamined eventually becomes invisible, and as a result, few Americans today are giving sufficient consideration to the full range of violent activities the government undertakes in their names.
Were Eisenhower alive, he’d be aghast at our debt, deficits and still expanding military-industrial complex. And he would certainly be critical of the “insidious penetration of our minds” by video game companies and television networks, the news media and the partisan pundits. With so little knowledge of what Eisenhower called the “lingering sadness of war” and the “certain agony of the battlefield,” they have done as much as anyone to turn the hard work of national security into the crass business of politics and entertainment.