An arab foreigner CIA agent made dual citizen with a fraudulent white citizen personality created by the FBI staging false flag terror attacks against America with a full media circus to hype it.
Jihad Jane was given a deal by Eric Holder to stage a fake terror threat on the internet so Eric Holder and Obama could look like good terrorism fighters and create a diversion from the trillions in wealth being given away free to insiders.
I covered this story well on one of my older suspended accounts. It was an obvious fake FBI job from the start, they admitted she worked for almost a year with them before her “arrest”. They forgot to tell us she was Nada. I have videos of her mental patient FBI patsy fake mom actor. Her fake boyfriend said she just disappeared. It was all an act, fake. Fake with fake media lies on top of it. She was in an FBI office getting va paycheck for months before we heard of it all over CBS and ABC as a real deal. We were conned and the news never said a word. I would not trust this CIA FBI actor trying to sell a book after stabbing her country in the back with a fake false flag terrorism scare that was used to steal real taxdollars. The FBI stages fake terrorism and the fake is used as a real attack for political and financial gain. Its extortion, Eric Holder runs Al-Qaeda in America, planning the next fake FBI attack to scare you into giving up your rights and wealth. Obama ran this whole operation, he is Al-Qaeda, literally. They dont exist without him running fake Mohammed cartoon, underwear, and Portland Christmas tree attacks on you. This was timed with the MUmbai David Headley trial in Chicago, both accused of fake cartoonist scares. They staged a fake Mohammed scare trial to protect Headley from a real trial in India and summary execution for the attacks he planned. Eric and Obama protected the Mumbai mastermind in a fake show trial tied to Jihad Janes fake cartoon internet scare. All timed coinciding with policy or budget needs in DC. Fake terrorism against Americans is planned in the White House. Did I say fake enough times? Obama is staging terror attacks against America, period. He is using the fear from the attacks for political gain, a terrorist by the purest definition of the word.
Uploaded [Youtube] by IranContraScumDid911 on 14 Nov 2011
A conference call between Scotland Yard and the FBI has been intercepted and published by a member of the computer hacking group Anonymous.
By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent
The conversation concerned a young member of another hacking collective who was cooperating with the police in Britain but also involved officers joking about cheese and Sheffield.
The hacker apparently managed to access the call after getting into an FBI email which gave details of the call. The email was also posted online.
Writing on the Twitter account, AnonymousIRC, one hacker said: “The FBI might be curious how we’re able to continuously read their internal comms for some time now.”
The email referred to an investigation on both sides of the Atlantic into a number of hacking groups. It read: “A conference call is planned for next Tuesday (January 17, 2012) to discuss the on-going investigations related to Anonymous, Lulzsec, Antisec, and other associated splinter groups.”
The recording refers to the on-going court case against Ryan Cleary, arrested last June for his alleged role in the group LulzSec, and reveals legally sensitive information.
It also refers to a 15-year-old listed as a member of CSLSec – meaning “can’t stop laughing security”– a copy-cat group of hackers with just three members.
British police officers explain that the young man was arrested before Christmas for an incident involving his school and that he claimed to have taken part in a hacking incident called “Operation Mayhem.”
“Basically he’s doing all this for attention, he’s a bit of an idiot,” one officer says. They add that he has written a confession through his school that runs to two sides of A4 and one officer says he writes about “how he got involved, whet he’s done, almost clearing the slate now he’s come to the notice of the police.”
“A smack from mum and dad is behind it all,” the officer adds, saying he is “just another juvenile, another wannabe character.”
One anonymous member tweeted: “Man you’re f*****g dumb. It’s a conversation discussing anonymous/lulzsec and your wanna-be ass. your UK agent calls you an idiot.”
The young man, who is not being named by the Daily Telegraph for legal reasons, has sent out a number of tweets responding to the posting saying: “lol [laughs out loud] I’m UK not USA, no FBI can touch me. Idiot…why wud FBI talk about me? I’m not even US & haven’t been arrested. I’m still here ain’t I? lol…I haven’t heard it yet…& I haven’t got a UK agent lol.”
At the beginning of the conversation, the British officers discuss cheese and the merits of Sheffield.
One officer appears to refer to the city as a “khazi” slang for toilet – and tells an American colleague: “You’ve missed nothing, it’s not exactly a jewel in England’s crown.”
They also refer to a colleague as an “old school detective but mad as a box of frogs” and seem to think the Bullring shopping centre in Birmingham is actually in Sheffield.
The FBI confirmed hackers had intercepted a confidential phone call, and said it was hunting those responsible.
An FBI spokesman said: “The information was intended for law enforcement officers only and was illegally obtained. A criminal investigation is under way to identify and hold accountable those responsible.”
Scotland Yard said: “We are aware of the video, which relates to an FBI conference call involving a PCeU [Police Central e-crime Unit] representative.
“The matter is being investigated by the FBI. At this stage no operational risks to the MPS have been identified; however, we continue to carry out a full assessment.”
Anonymous is a loosely-organised group of hackers which has claimed responsibility for attacks against corporate and government websites all over the world.
One former FBI agent is finding out firsthand that freedom of speech isn’t something guaranteed to every American. Colleagues at the CIA are keeping him from printing some of his own personal accounts in an upcoming book about the 9/11 attacks.
In his upcoming book “The Black Banners: The Inside Story of 9/11 and the War Against Al Qaeda,” Ali H. Soufan wants to write that the Central Intelligence Agency could have had a chance at keeping the September 11 terror attacks from happening. Soufan says that the CIA knew about two of the hijackers involved in the al-Qaeda plot, and while that information might have been of great interest to the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency withheld the crucial information.
Specifically, Soufan says that the CIA had detailed information on 9/11 hijacker Abu Zubaydah as early as January 2000 but neglected to act on it.
Also in his memoirs, Soufan writes detailed accounts of CIA interrogations tactics that he saw brutally executed firsthand by agents, which he were unnecessary and counterproductive. The agency is asking the author to remove the pronouns “I” and “me” from that chapter as if to discredit his personal accounts from specific incidents.
Unfortunately, Soufan’s stories might never make it to print if the CIA has their say. The former agent says that he is being told to take out key parts from his tales, and he believes it isn’t because of a national security scare, but because the CIA doesn’t want to be reflected poorly to the public.
As if that was even possible!
In a report released yesterday by The New York Times, Soufan’s attorneys that they received word that the CIA could end up “embarrassed” by the author’s allegations. Soufan responded to the Times that it is “ridiculous” that they are redacting so much material from his book, but that he will rally to have the information published in further editions.
Much of the material found in Soufan’s book has been available online and in print in the decade since 9/11, but the CIA says that doesn’t mean he can go ahead and talk about it. “Just because something is in the public domain doesn’t mean it’s been officially released or declassified by the U.S. government,”CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood said in a statement.
Upon originally sending a proof of the 600-page manuscript to the Bureau, Soufan was told to prove that dozens of names listed in the document were not classified. He opted simply to substitute aliases for many of the names, but meanwhile the CIA sent the FBI a copy. Their response? Nearly 200 pages of suggested cuts.
With a deadline approaching, Soufan’s “The Black Banners” will hit the printing press this week, with the first edition using all of the cuts demanded by the FBI.
A federal grand jury in Chattanooga has returned a 19-count indictment against a Turkish man in connection with a $12 million Ponzi scheme.
Salih Acarbulut, a Turkish national who formerly lived in Chattanooga, is being charged with wire fraud and money laundering, according to a U.S. Attorney’s Office news release.
Authorities believe Acarbulut has left the United States. He is a fugitive.
The indictment alleges he devised a “so-called Ponzi scheme,” headquartered in Chattanooga, from as early as 2005 through May 2008.
Acarbulut represented himself as an “experienced and successful foreign currency trader.” He guaranteed up to a 48- percent annual return, paid monthly, on investments, according to the release.
The indictment also states that he “promoted the scheme by conducting financial transactions with funds from his crime” — money laundering.
Information about Acarbulut can be shared with the U.S. Secret Service at 423-752-5125 or the Internal Revenue Service at 423-855-6081.
In an Exclusive Interview, Talk of Antisemitism and Betrayal
By Nathan Guttman
Speaking Out: Larry Franklin, the former Pentagon analyst at center of AIPAC case, tells his side of the story to the Forward.
WASHINGTON — Former Pentagon Iran analyst Larry Franklin recently quit his job cleaning the restrooms at his local church in West Virginia. He still keeps his weekend job, mopping the floors at a nearby Roy Rogers restaurant. In recent years, Franklin also has gained experience in parking cars, digging trenches and cleaning cesspools. In between, he has been searching for a publisher for his book — a manual for saving America from the Iranian threat.
On June 30, Franklin marked the fifth anniversary of his meeting with FBI agents, in which he first learned he was a suspect in what would later be known as “the AIPAC case,” referring to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Along with Franklin, two of the Washington lobby’s senior officials were charged with violating the seldom-used federal Espionage Act of 1917.
Although charges against the two other key players, former lobbyists Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, were ultimately dropped in May, Franklin pleaded guilty early on as part of a plea agreement and is preparing to serve his reduced sentence of 100 hours of community service and 10 months in a halfway house.
Franklin’s narrative of his ordeal, which started off with him being described on national news as the “Israeli mole” in the Pentagon, reflects a mixture of naiveté, frustration with government bureaucracy and a deep belief that his views must be heard, even if it meant breaking the rules. In retrospect, it was a practice in humility for the devout Catholic military analyst.
“I’ve learned a lot by crawling on the ground,” the 62-year-old father of five said in his first interview since the affair began in 2004. The lessons that Franklin has learned from his experience include the capacity by his colleagues and partners for — as he sees it — betrayal, and the persistence, he has concluded, of deep-rooted antisemitic sentiment in certain quarters of America’s intelligence community.
“I was asked about every Jew I knew in OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense], and that bothered me,” Franklin said. His superiors at the time were both Jewish: Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense, and Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, whom Franklin believes was a target of the investigation. “One agent asked me, ‘How can a Bronx Irish Catholic get mixed up with…’ and I finished the phrase for him: ‘with these Jews.’” Franklin answered, “Christ was Jewish, too, and all the apostles.” “Later I felt dirty,” he added.
Bound until recently by a plea agreement that barred him from speaking to the press, Franklin has refrained until now from telling his side of the story. But in the Washington office of his attorney, Plato Cacheris, Franklin seemed eager to share his experience. Cacheris, who took on Franklin’s case pro bono, intervened time and again to warn his client against revealing information that is either classified or under a seal imposed by the court. Franklin was quick to agree, calling Cacheris his “angel” who saved him from prison.
In exchange for his cooperation with federal prosecutors, Franklin was initially sentenced to 12.5 years in prison as part of his plea agreement. But before entering his plea in 2005, he was approached by two people who suggested he fake his suicide and disappear to avoid testifying in court. At the request of the FBI, to which he immediately reported the encounter, Franklin had several follow-up conversations on the phone with one of them. “I thought I was in a movie,” Franklin said of the episode. Details of the event are still under court seal, and Franklin declined to identify the individuals who approached him or to offer further details.
Franklin, who speaks seven languages and holds a doctorate in East Asian studies, tends to weave historical references easily into his discourse, from ancient Greece to the modern days. His concern is intense.
Some in the government, he believes, “had some fantasy of a conspiracy” that had continued, unabated, after the 1985 arrest and 1987 conviction of Pentagon intelligence analyst Jonathan Pollard on charges of spying for Israel.
According to Franklin, the investigators he dealt with believed “that Pollard had a secret partner, a mole, probably in the OSD.” This quest to expose the mole, Franklin said, was, in part, “energized by a more malevolent emotion — antisemitism.”
In part, it was also fed by a deep suspicion toward Israel. “In the intelligence community,” he said, “you refer to Israelis as ‘Izzis’ and it doesn’t have a pleasant connotation. They can’t get away with kikes, so they say Izzis.” This suspicion became clear to Franklin as he learned of the way investigators viewed activists of the pro-Israel lobby.
He said it was made clear to him by the FBI that Rosen, then AIPAC’s foreign policy director, was the target of the investigation and had been followed by the FBI for years. “The bureau told me Rosen was a bad guy,” he said. Believing that he himself had “done wrong,” Franklin agreed to cooperate with the FBI investigation.
This cooperation culminated in a June 26, 2003, meeting at an Italian restaurant in Arlington, Va., where Franklin was sent by the FBI to carry out a sting operation against the AIPAC lobbyists. Before his meeting with Weissman, agents wired Franklin with microphones and transmitters and provided him with a fake classified document alleging there was clear life-threatening danger posed to Israelis secretly operating in Iraq’s Kurdish region. Passing on the information would help seal the case against the AIPAC staffers.
“At the time, I believed they were guilty,” Franklin said of Weissman and Rosen. Yet he still came to the meeting with mixed feelings. He put the document on the table, but hoped Weissman would not reach out for it. “And when he did not take the document, I did breath a silent sigh of relief,” he recalled. In retrospect, Franklin sees that moment as “one I am not proud of.”
Though Weissman didn’t take the document, he read its content, which was allegedly classified, and the sting operation succeeded. Weissman hurried back to AIPAC headquarters with the supposedly classified information disclosed it to Rosen, who subsequently relayed it to an Israeli diplomat. Even without Weissman taking the actual paper, prosecutors, who were wiretapping all the players, felt they had enough of a case to press charges against both Rosen and Weissman for communicating national defense information.
Franklin said he felt betrayed by the two former AIPAC staffers. He believed that he was sharing information with them so that they could pass it to other government officials, and was disappointed to learn they conveyed it to Israeli diplomats and to the press. “I do think they crossed a line when they went to a foreign official with what they knew was classified information,” Franklin said.
Rosen told the Forward in response: “Franklin did not expect us to warn the Israelis that they would be kidnapped and killed? That’s like telling officials of the NAACP that there is going to be a lynching, but don’t warn the victims, because it is a secret.”
For Franklin, ties with Rosen and Weissman were instrumental. He had grown frustrated with decisions made by his Pentagon bosses on Iraq and Iran, believing that regime change in Iran was the course America should pursue.
Franklin warned that Americans “would return in body bags” from Iraq because of Iranian intervention, and called for a preliminary show of force against Iran before invading Iraq, but got no response. Viewing the AIPAC lobbyists as well connected, Franklin bypassed his superiors and asked Rosen to convey his concerns on Iran to officials at the National Security Council, to whom he believed the influential lobbyist had access.
“I wanted to kind of shock people at the NSC,” he said, “to shock them into pausing and giving another consideration into why regime change needed to be the policy.” Franklin’s attempt to reach out over the heads of his bosses was unsuccessful and eventually got him in trouble. In the June 11 sentencing session at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Judge T.S. Ellis showed little sympathy for Franklin’s explanation of the reasons that led him to disclose the information. “Secrets are important to a nation. If we couldn’t keep our secrets, we would be at great risk,” Ellis said.
