The Ferris Conspiracy Forum
Sign up  |   |   |  Calendar

  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 7      1   2   3   4   Next   »

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 19
Reply with quote  #1 

Second US soldier admits Iraq rape

Five soldiers were charged in the gang rape and murder of Abeer Qassim al-Janabi [GALLO/GETTY]

A second US soldier has pleaded guilty to raping and killing a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and murdering her family, a crime for which three others still face charges.
A military judge read out the plea agreement on Tuesday to Sergeant Paul Cortez, 24.
Cortez described how he held the girl down and acted as a lookout so other men could rape the teenager before she and her family were killed.
He could face life in prison without possibility of parole for the rape and four counts of murder committed in Mahmudiya in March 2006.

In all, four current and one former soldier were charged with gang raping Abeer Qassim al-Janabi and murdering her and her family, a crime that outraged Iraqis and ratcheted up tension in the war zone.


The Mahmudiya case was one of several killings and abuses involving US soldiers. It prompted Iraqi officials to call for a review of foreign troops' immunity from prosecution in Iraq.


Specialist James Barker pleaded guilty in November and was sentenced to 90 years in a military prison.


Plea agreement


In the plea agreement, Cortez said he held the girl's hands while Barker raped her, then he raped her himself.


The suspected ringleader, Steven Green, shot to death the girl's father, mother and six-year-old sister. He then raped the girl while Cortez acted as a lookout. Green finally shot the girl dead, according to the plea agreement.


Cortez, wearing a dress green uniform and flanked by his civilian lawyer and his military lawyer, showed little reaction to the judge's recitation of the crime. Fewer than two dozen spectators attended the trial in a tiny courtroom inside a Kentucky military base.


Despite his guilty plea, Cortez did not agree that the rape and murder were premeditated. His lawyer, William Cassara, said prosecutors will try to prove on Wednesday that the crime was planned ahead of time.


Alex Pickands, the prosecuting lawyer, said the soldiers "gathered together over cards and booze" last year in Baghdad and came up with a plan to rape and murder the girl.


Other charges


Even if premeditation is not proven, the sentencing options are the same: a maximum of life in prison without parole or a minimum of life in prison with the possibility of parole. Barker and Cortez both avoided the death penalty by pleading guilty. Sentencing is expected on Wednesday or Thursday.


The trial was adjourned after less than three hours so that lawyers could discuss Cortez's involvement in the burning of the girl's body in an attempt to cover up the attack. Cortez pleaded guilty to arson and breaking into the girl's house.


The suspected ringleader, Green, was discharged from the army for a "personality disorder" and is in a Kentucky prison awaiting civilian trial.


Cortez also pleaded guilty to helping get rid of the murder weapon, an AK-47, which was thrown into a canal. He also admitted to drinking whisky prior to the attack, a violation of army rules against alcohol in that area of Iraq.


The other soldiers accused in the case are Private Jesse Spielman and Private Bryan Howard.

revolution is the birth of equality

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,111
Reply with quote  #2 

Room where rape and killing took place
The house in Mahmudiya where the rape and killings took place
A second US soldier's plea of guilty to the gang rape of a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and the killing of her and her family has been accepted by a judge.

Sgt Paul Cortez admitted four murders, rape and conspiracy to rape. His plea means he will avoid the death penalty.

In November, Specialist James Barker, 24, admitted rape and murder over the killings and was jailed for 90 years.

Cortez broke down as he confessed to raping the girl as her parents and sister were shot dead in another room.

The case is one of several in which US troops are accused of killing Iraqis.

According to the plea agreement, Cortez admitted conspiring with three other soldiers, Private First Class Jesse Spielman, Specialist Barker and Steven Green, a now discharged soldier, to rape Abeer Qassim al-Janabi.

Card game

Pte Spielman and another man, Bryan Howard, are awaiting court martial on charges related to the attack.

Mr Green is being tried as a civilian because he was discharged from the army before his superiors knew of his suspected involvement. He denies the charges against him.

All five belonged to the 101st Airborne Division based at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, which is also where the hearing took place.

In court, Cortez admitted the plan was hatched as they played cards and that the girl had been targeted because there was only one male in her house, making it an easy target.

Family murdered

He said: "During the time me and Barker were raping Abeer, I heard five or six gunshots that came from the bedroom.

"After Barker was done, Green came out of the bedroom and said that he had killed them all, that all of them were dead."

Cortez added: "Green then placed himself between Abeer's legs to rape her. When Green was finished, he stood up and shot Abeer in the head two or three times."

The entire crime took about five minutes and the girl knew her parents and sister had been shot while she was being raped, the hearing heard.




US soldier pleads guilty in Iraq rape, murders.

Web posted at: 2/22/2007 9:37:4

FORT CAMPBELL • A second US soldier pleaded guilty yesterday to the rape and murder of a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and the killing of her family, a crime for which three others still face charges.

Sgt Paul Cortez, 24, chewed gum and responded with the occasional “yes, sir,” as a military judge read his plea agreement in a courtroom inside a Kentucky military base.

Cortez could face life in prison without possibility of parole for the rape and four counts of murder committed in Mahmudiya, south of Baghdad, in March 2006.

In all, four current and one former soldier were charged in the gang rape of Abeer Qassim al-Janabi and the murders of her and her family, a crime that outraged Iraqis and ratcheted up tension in the war zone.

Spc James Barker pleaded guilty in November and was sentenced to 90 years in a military prison.

In the plea agreement, Cortez said he held the girl’s hands while Barker raped her, then he raped her himself.

Meanwhile, the suspected ringleader, Steven Green, shot to death the girl’s father, mother and 6-year-old sister. He then raped the girl while Cortez acted as a lookout. Green finally shot the girl dead.

The soldiers then attempted to burn the bodies in the culmination of the March 12, 2006, attack.

Green was discharged from the Army for a “personality disorder” and is in a Kentucky prison awaiting civilian trial.

Though Green did all the killing, Cortez, of Barstow, California, and the others were also charged in the murders.

Cortez also pleaded guilty to conspiring to get rid of the murder weapon, an AK-47, which was thrown into a canal. In addition, he admitted to drinking whiskey prior to the attack, a violation of Army rules against alcohol in that area of Iraq.

In addition to Cortez and Barker, the other soldiers accused in the case are Pvt Jesse Spielman and Pvt. Bryan Howard.


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #3 
24 February 2007

A US SOLDIER has been given 100 years in prison for his part in the gang rape and murder of an Iraqi girl and the killing of her family.

But Paul Cortez, 24, will be eligible for parole in 10 years because of plea agreement.

Cortez, of Barstow, California, admitted raping 14-year-old Abeer Qassim al-Janabi in Iraq last year.

The girl, her parents and a younger sister were all then killed.

The TRUTH is out there...........

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,111
Reply with quote  #4 

A computer search engine (file image)
Arizona has the toughest child abuse laws in the US
The US Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by a high school teacher from Arizona sentenced to 200 years in jail for possessing child pornography.

Morton Berger had claimed the sentence was so disproportionate to his crime it breached the constitution.

If the 52-year-old had been tried in a federal court or lived elsewhere he would have received a lighter sentence.

But he was living in Arizona when he was caught with thousands of images of child abuse on his computer.

Stark differences

The state has the nation's toughest laws on child abuse and exploitation.

Indeed, the prosecutor had asked for a 340-year sentence but the trial judge imposed the minimum of 10 years for each of 20 images - to be served consecutively for a total of 200 years without the possibility of probation, early release or pardon.

Mr Berger's lawyers asked the Supreme Court to hear an appeal.

They argued the sentence was wildly disproportionate - much longer than that for rape or even second degree murder and claimed it amounted to cruel and unusual punishment.

The state of Arizona argued each image of child abuse was a separate crime so the sentences had to run consecutively.

The Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal and gave no reason but the case has highlighted stark differences in sentencing policy across the US.


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,111
Reply with quote  #5 

JFK Online

JFK Assassination Resources Online



Feature articles

Reports and documents

The Jim Garrison investigation

Oliver Stone's JFK

Nigel Turner's The Men Who Killed Kennedy

JFK assassination book reviews

JFK assassination films

JFK assassination links

The literature

Critical thinking

Adventures in Conspiracy Land


A note on researcher Jonathan Hawthorne


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #6 

The BIG Hit...


How could other snipers hide at the crime scene to shoot Kennedy and escape without being found? I would explain this with my knowledge on the invisibility technology and invisible personnel's capabilities.

After using invisibility technology on these assassins with their guns, these snipers will become invisible, tiny (as tiny as small ant) and can levitate. Thus, wearing propulsion devices on their backs, they can fly like mosquitos/bees (see details invisibility technology on ). Thus, these involved agents/police and their operatives would use their car to transport a few invisible assassins/snipers to important places (e.g. building, bridge, hill, etc.). These tiny invisible assassins can use their propulsion devices to leave the car and fly into any important building/bridge/hill After shutting down their generators, these assassins/snipers would return to normal size snipers from the invisible electromagnetic field. So, these snipers can secretly position themselves in any important place/building/bridge and wait to assassinate their target These important places are where the political leader's motorcade would pass by and the snipers would have very good view. Thus, the snipers would have their target in their sight for up to ten seconds. So, if one of these snipers didn't miss his shots, the target would be definitely assassinated at the scene. After shooting the target, other invisible personnel would use invisibility technology on these snipers then take (or help) these snipers to leave the crime scene.

Why would I state that these invisible personnel must had been involved in the assassination of JFK? There are eight reasons:

1. The invisibility technology had been secretly used in surveillance system since 1950s. SInce then, US (FBI Director Hoover) secretly cooperated with many foreign countries (including Taiwan) to develop an underground intelligence and life control network to advance their (intelligence chiefs' and involved agents/police's (who use invisibility technology) personal interests/power (see details on http:/ ).

These US invisible personnel secretly spy on anyone since 1950s and should have prior knowledge of this assassination. Thus, these involved agents/police (who use invisibility technology) should have warned President Kennedy or stopped him from going to Dallas, if these invisible personnel were not involved in this assassination. Since FBI Director Hoover and other invisible personnel who worked in Secret Service didn't warn President Kennedy in advanced and didn't stop the assassination, it proves that the invisible personnel group had been deeply involved in the JFK's assassination. Now, I would further explain it with supporting information and evidences.

(Source)- A 1989 book, High Treason: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy : What Really Happened, by Robert J. Groden and Harrison Edward Livingstone,

What about J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI? What role did they play in the events leading up to the assassination? According to James Hepburn [pen name of Herve Lamarre in the book, Farewell America], "In 30 years on the job, J. Edgar Hoover has developed an intelligence system [by using invisible personnel to spy and collect intelligence - alan Yu note] which nothing - no racket, and certainly no conspiracy - can escape. Through its extensive network of informers, the FBI knows everything worth knowing that goes on in the United States even in areas that lie outside its legal jurisdiction. The Dallas conspiracy was born and took root in places where the FBI was well represented... By mid-October, Hoover had been informed of the existence of a plot and was familiar with many of the details... The week before the President's departure for Texas, Hoover knew exactly what was going to happen. Why did the FBI fail to intervene?" (see page 265 on HIGH TREASON)


Why must this information in 1968 book, Farewell America, be true? There are four reasons:

(1). According to, James Hepburn is the pen name of Herve Lamarre and the true sources of his book, Farewell America, included Andre Ducret of the Surete; Interpol; and, among others in French intelligence, Philippe Vasjoly, the chief French petroleum agent in the United States. According to Herve, "In 30 years on the job, J. Edgar Hoover has developed an intelligence system which nothing - no racket, and certainly no conspiracy - can escape. Through its extensive network of informers, the FBI knows everything worth knowing that goes on in the United States even in areas that lie outside its legal jurisdiction." This assessment must be correct because it was based information from many insiders of many intelligence agencies/units and Interpol.

(2). At the local level, former Philadelphia Mayor Frank Rizzo said in 1971, back when he was Philadelphia's police chief, "We know everything about the troublemakers. And we know who comes into the town, we know who's going to leave it. when they're going to leave it" (Uncloaking The CIA, p.181, published by The Free Press, 1978). Since local level (police chiefs) knew everything about the troublemakers, federal level (FBI Director Hoover) would also know everything about the troublemakers (who would cause trouble to federal government).

How can a city's police chief like Rizzo know everything about the troublemakers in his city? How can he know when they come into town, know what they are going to do and when they are going to leave in 1971?

This can only happen under two circumstances.

(A) Totalitarian regime: the entire population is under surveillance and the population's mobility is restricted. Thus, everybody is forced to stay within a fixed community. So, everybody, including the police, knows exactly who the trouble-makers are. It is like living in a small town where everybody knows one another. Thus, if any stranger enters the town, everyone in town will immediately recognize the stranger as an outsider. Also, in small town, someone is always snooping around. Under such of environment, what a person is up to and doing cannot go unnoticed. However, this situation does not apply to a large city like Philadelphia. (B). The police chief and FBI uses invisible personnel as part of the surveillance system and these personnel enter people's homes/offices/vehicles/etc for close surveillance. If there were no invisible personnel in surveillance system to secretly enter people's homes/offices/vehicles/etc. to keep a close watch on these troublemakers, a police chief of a large city certainly cannot know everything. So, Rizzo's claim shows that the invisible personnel have been secretly used against Americans by involved local police/agents before 1971. Otherwise, the police chiefs cannot know everything about the troublemaker

(3). Based on inside information from former Taiwan President Chiang Kai-Shek, the invisibility technology had been developed successfully by US and secretly used in surveillance system after WWII. The invisibility technology had been transferred to Taiwan along with illness/death inducing methods and both has been used secretly in Taiwan's surveillance system since 1950s. This invisibility technology, which uses electromagnetic field (EMF), has some very unique characteristics. It makes the person and his/her equipment inside the field invisible, float (like astronaut in zero gravity) and become tiny as size of small ant. Each tiny invisible personnel control their movements by wearing propulsion device on their backs and fly like small flying ant.

By equipping invisible personnel with psychotronic weapons (e.g. radio-frequency weapon, stun stick, etc.) to apply illness/death inducing methods and mind control devices (mind machine and microwave voice devices developed after 1974), these tiny invisible personnel can secretly enter anyone's home/office/vehicle/etc to spy on anyone's activities, to read anyone's mind and find his/her secrets, to drive them mad with microwave voices, and/or even control anyone's life with their weapons (for proof on Invisibility technology, please see ).

Under this circumstance, nobody can hide his/her secrets/plans from them and his/her life will also be secretly controlled. So, this inside information confirms the statement in Farewell America is true that J. Edgar Hoover has developed an intelligence system which nothing - no racket, and certainly no conspiracy - can escape. Through its extensive network of informers, the FBI knows everything worth knowing that goes on in the United States even in areas that lie outside its legal jurisdiction."

Furthermore, this inside information also explain that why nothing - no racket, and certainly no conspiracy - can escape from J. Edgar Hoover's intelligence system. This is also why Rizzo (when he was Philadelphia's Police Chief) can claim that he knows when the troublemakers come in town and when they will leave. This is because FBI Director Hoover and police chiefs secretly used the invisibility technology and the underground intelligence and life control network since 1950s.

(4). In a book written by two recognized experts on international spying (John Lofus and Mark Aarons), they revealed that during WWII, FBI Director Hoover had secretly cooperated with foreign country's (e.g. UK) involved agents to collect intelligence information on American citizens in foreign countries (see details on ). Also, there is INTERPOL. Thus, US did secretly cooperate with foreign countries' involved agents/police to collect intelligence and secretly spy on their citizens living abroad.

However, if FBI didn't use the invisibility technology and international invisible personnel group (secret network), FBI Director Hoover certainly could not achieve that "no racket, and certainly no conspiracy - can escape and knows everything worth knowing that goes on in the United States even in areas that lie outside its legal jurisdiction." So, US had shared the invisibility technology and illness/death inducing techniques with foreign countries' involved agents/police for surveillance purpose and secretly control everyone's life for several decades.

So, this information from FAREWELL AMERICA also confirm alan Yu's report that by using the invisibility technology, these involved agents/police had secretly cooperated with foreign involved agents/police to kept all important people ( from the US President to civilians) under secret surveillance, read their minds and secretly control their lives/health (see ).

(Source) - about James Hepburn


Information on "James Hepburn" from's listing for:

Farewell America (originally published in Europe in 1968) : The Plot to Kill JFK by James Hepburn and William Turner

About the Author Herve Lamarre, the publisher of the original edition of Farewell America, admitted that the author of record, James Hepburn, was fictitious and that the true sources included Andre Ducret of the Surete; Interpol; and, among others in French intelligence, Philippe Vasjoly, the chief French petroleum agent in the United States. William Turner is an authority on the Kennedy assassinations, the FBI and the CIA, and the author of nine books, including his recent memoirs, Rearview Mirror: Looking Back at the FBI, the CIA and Other Tails.


2. According to HIGH TREASON, "Former Colonel Fletcher Prouty, who handled Secret Service details for President Eisenhower. Prouty says that Kennedy was deliberately stripped of his security, and the plotters were aware that he would have no protection that day in Dallas." (HIGH TREASON, page 128)

The Secret Service had changed the Dallas Police Department Captain Lawrence's original motorcycle plan to reduce some motorcycles and the President car's driver didn't speed off at first shot as Secret Service procedure required. .

Based on HIGH TREASON, "[Captain] Lawrence said there would be four motorcycles on either side of the motorcade immediately to the rear of President's vehicle. Secret Service Lawson stated that this was too many, that he thought two motorcycle on either side would be sufficient. [...]. The Secret Service's alteration of original Dallas Police Dept. motorcycle deployment plan prevented the use of maximum possible security precaution. (HIGH TREASON, page 131)."

"The time between the first admitted shot and the last shot was not just six seconds. It was actually 8.3 seconds (From the first to the last of six actually recorded shots. 10.5 second elapsed.) What did Secret Service driver Bill Greer do during that time? Did he speed off at the first shot as Secret Service procedure required? No! In fact, Greer all about stopped the car and let the shooting go on." (HIGH TREASON, page 127)

"There were only four motorcycle policemen at Dallas and all were following President Kennedy's car, making them totally ineffective. The role of a motorcycle policeman in this case is 1) to make it difficult to fire at the President from the crowd, and 2) to stop anyone who tries approaching car." (HIGH TREASON, page 128-129)

3. Beside involved police/agents who else would clearly know (the detail information about) what route JFK's motorcade would take? The snipers clearly had prior knowledge of the motorcade route and well-positioned themselves at the scene for assassination. Why would these snipers have prior knowledge on the route and have enough time to find good location to assassinate JFK? Why didn't Secret Service agents check these buildings' windows in advanced (as required) if JFK's motorcade would pass there as planned? Can anyone explain it?

4. On November 24, 1963, the suspected assassin, Lee Oswald was suddenly killed at the basement of Dallas police station. He was under police's custody and being transported to the county jail. How could this happen? Most people would think that somebody or some organization was trying to silence Oswald.

After JFK was assassinated on November 22, 1963, Dallas Police had arrested a suspect/sniper (Lee Harvey Oswald). Two days later, this suspect was suddenly killed by another man (Jack Ruby) at the basement of Dallas Police Department.

Also, no civilian would be allowed to enter the basement of the police station.. However, Ruby suddenly appeared in front of Oswald at the basement of police station and shot Lee Oswald. The question is that how could Ruby be allowed to enter the basement of police station and killed Oswald when Oswald was under police's custody and under many police officers' watch.

Obviously, without involved police/agents' help, Ruby could not easily walked into the basement of Dallas police station and knew where Oswald was. Furthermore, without involved police's help, Ruby could not closely approach Lee Oswald then easily kill Oswald when he was under police's custody (and under many police officers' watch).

Why would Ruby kill Lee Oswald?

Most people would think that somebody or some organization was trying to silence Oswald. Then he could easily label as the lone gunman who plotted the JFK assassination. Under such kind of situation, Ruby was only used to silence Oswald then Ruby's life would be also in danger after Oswald died. Unfortunately, this judgment is true. Why?

This is because when Chief Justice Warren and Congressman Gerald Ford (later US President) met Jack Ruby for testimony, Ruby admitted that ".. I am used as a scapegoat. But if I am eliminated, there won't be any way of knowing. Right now... I am the only one that can bring out the truth to our President."

According to HIGH TREASON: Earl Warren and Gerald Ford, who later succeeded Nixon and pardoned him, came to Dallas after the assassination to see Jack Ruby in jail. Ruby was closely watched during the interview by the Dallas authorities and begged, "I may not live tomorrow to give any further testimony. I can't say it here. it can't be said here. It can be said, it's got to be said amongst people of the highest authority... and following that, immediately give me the lie detector test after I do make that statement... Gentlemen, if you want to hear any further testimony, you will have to get me to Washington soon, because it has something to do with you, Chief Warren... I want to tell the truth, and I can't tell it here." Of course Sheriff Bill Decker was right there. Ruby begged many times during the interview, "Gentlemen, unless you get me to Washington, you can't get a fair shake out of me."

Warren told him that they couldn't take him to Washington: "Well, the public attention that it would attract, and the people who would be around. We have no place there for you to be safe when we take you out, and we are not law enforcement officers, and it isn't our responsibility to go into anything of that kind." [....]

Representative Ford asked: "Is there anything more you can tell us if you went back to Washington?" [Ruby:] "Yes, are you sincere in wanting to take me back?" [Ford:] "We are most interested in all the information you have." [Ruby:] ".. I am used as a scapegoat... But if I am eliminated, there won't be any way of knowing. Right now... I am the only one that can bring out the truth to our President.. I know that your hands are tied; you are helpless," Ruby said with resignation. How did he know this? Warren's interview with Ruby was just for show. If he had wanted to let Ruby talk, he certainly had the power to take him to Washington.

Joe Tonahill spoke up. "Who did you think is going to eliminate you, Jack?" It was Tonahill who talked Ruby into using the cover-story that Ruby had shot Oswald to spare Mrs. Kennedy the strain of coming to testify against Oswald.

"I Have been used for a purpose, and there will be a certain tragic occurrence happening if you don't take my testimony and somehow vindicate me..." he answered. "But we have taken your testimony," the Chief Justice told him. "We have it here. It will be in permanent form for the President of the United States and for the Congress of the United States, and for the people of the entire world. It is there. It will be recorded for all to see. That is the purpose of our coming here today.. We feel that you are entitled to have your story told."

"You have lost me though. You have lost me, Chief Justice Warren." "Lost you in what sense?" "I won't be around for you to come and question me again." And he wasn't. He developed a fast case of cancer ... and died. Ruby himself believed he contracted cancer by injection. (HIGH TREASON, p.254 to 256)

Based on the content of Ruby's testimony to Chief Justice Warren (with Congressman Ford) and the results that later Ruby quickly developed illness of cancer (Ruby himself believed he contracted cancer by injection) and died in jail, these facts all support the judgment that Ruby was used to silenced Oswald to prevent other criminals' involvement from being exposed. He was a scapegoat to cover-up other's involvement.

This is because CIA had successfully developed death inducing methods (including heart attack, cancer, etc.) in 1950s. Originally, they used chemical methods to induce cancer. So, the invisible personnel might secretly use drugs in Ruby's food in jail to induce him to develop cancer.

Source) "Assassination by 'Natural Causes' - CIA Considered Inducing Death", WASHINGTON POST, 4/2/79


At the height of cold war, the Central Intelligence Agency looked into ways to knock -off key guys through such "natural causes" as cancer and heart attack, it was disclosed yesterday.

Heavily censored CIA documents from a quarter-century ago (1952) show the Agency considered performing experiment on terminal cancer patients under the guise of "legitimate medical work.

The memo referred to studies by the Office of Strategic Services, the World War II predecessor of the CIA. "knock off key people," the heavily censored document said, "How knock off key guys ...natural causes....

The next pertinent document was a Feb. 4, 1952, "draft memorandum from "Chemical Branch, Research & Development. The paper reported Inspecting a lab for possible use in "medical research involving physiologically active chemical compounds.

According to HIGH TREASON, "Miss Oliver was an employee of the Colony Club, which was next door to Jack Ruby's Carousel. She knew Jack Ruby well, and it seems more than strange that she was filming the motorcade and the assassination. She was one of several witnesses who said that Ruby and Oswald knew each other well. She said that she saw CIA contract agent David Ferrie at Ruby's club so often, she thought he was one of the managers. (HIGH TREASON, page 105)" [...]

"A mystery witness has sworn to congressional investigation that a CIA agent introduced him to Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas three months before Oswald gunned down President John F Kennedy. (HIGH TREASON, page 167)"

The above information also prove that Ruby and Oswald knew each other well and had relationships with CIA agents. Thus, it further shows that Ruby's testimony to Justice Warren (with Congressman Ford) was true that he was used as a scapegoat (to silence Oswald) and he would be eliminated if Chief Justice Warren didn't bring him to Washington. Then Ruby suddenly developed cancer and died (based info in HIGH TREASON) when he was a prisoner. This fact not only fit Ruby's concern of being eliminated (his testimony to Justice Warren) and his cancer also fit these invisible personnel's death inducing method.

Some TV documentary claimed that Jack Rush had connection with the Mafia.  So, the JFK's assassination were result of the Mafia's conspiracy. This claim is used to mislead the publics.  Why?  Assassinating the US President is a high profile incident and would be thoroughly investigated.  If the mob were found to be involved, the entire US law enforcement's might would be used to crush the mob.  The mobs would not risk their entire organization to commit this crime.
Furthermore, many countries' intelligence agencies and law enforcement (especially those agents/police who use invisibility technology) frequently have "working relation" with criminal organization. They have paid informants, undercover agents working in the criminal organizations.  Sometime, the involved agents/police (who use the invisibility technology) would also recruited criminals from those criminal organization as their secret operatives. Thus, the corrupted agents/police could use these kinds of criminals to kill some opponents whom the involved agents/police disliked. .If the murder case did not attract a lot of media attention, the involved agents/police would let the criminal (operatives) on the loose. If the murder caused a lot of media attention, the involved agents/police would either secretly kill the criminal operative to cut the relation, or secretly offer a lot of money to the criminal operative then sent him in jail.   So, by using a criminal
(who was in criminal organization) to commit crimes (or murder) is also a frequent tactic of many countries' corrupted officers in intelligence agencies and law enforcement.  For example, in 1984, Taiwan's intelligence agency secretly recruited some members of Taiwan's criminal organization as the hit man. These recruited operatives from criminal organization had been arranged to US in 1984 and used gun to kill a US citizen Yi-Lian Liu (who was immigrated from Taiwan). He was killed because he wrote a biography about Taiwan's President Chiang Ching-Kuo and severely criticized him.  After Mr. Liu was killed, some people suspected that murderer would come from Taiwan and be arranged by Taiwan's intelligence units.  However, Taiwan government denied and claimed that the murder might be caused by organized criminals.  Then in November 1984, Taiwan's law enforcement arrested a lot of members of organized crime (including those recruited criminal operatives who killed Mr. Liu in US). Publicly, this was done to reduce serious crime; however, it was also used to indirectly claim that Taiwan's officials had no relation with those criminals (one of them killed Mr. Liu with gun).  However, the boss of Taiwan's criminal organization had left a audio-recording to a friend in US.  The content in audio-recording was that they killed Mr. Liu Yi-Lian because it was a order from Taiwan intelligence Agency and they had been secretly recruited as operatives.  The criminal organization's boss left this information in US because he was afraid of being silence after they killed Mr. Liu Yi-Lian.  This audio-recording was openly reported to media in US by the boss's friend after they were arrested in Taiwan. So, the reality finally came out. Based on the content of audio-recording, Mr. Liu's wife sued Taiwan's government (intelligence agency) for directing criminals to kill her husband in US.  After a few years, Taiwan government paid about two million US dollar to Mr. Liu's wife as an out of court settlement.   Taiwan's military court also arrested two officials (one was the Director of the intelligence agency and another one was a deputy) and sentence them to several years in jail.

This fact proves that many countries' intelligence agencies and law enforcement would secretly recruited some criminals from criminal organization in order to use them to do some special events.  The real reason is that if the recruited criminal operatives commit crimes for corrupted officials and didn't attract a lot of media attention, the corrupted official would not go to solve the case. If the recruited criminal operative commit murder for corrupted officials and attract a lot of attention, the corrupted officer would
secretly silence him then denied anything was involved him.   So, Jack Ruby was most likely a recruited operatives from criminal organization. After Ruby was silence, these invisible personnel certainly would deny that the JFK's assassination was involved with them.

Obviously, only these involved agents/police (who use invisibility technology and is an international group), whose members working in every government agency/unit (including CIA, FBI, Secret Service, and police department, prison, etc.), could get/collect all intelligence information (which they need) and got the opportunity to assassinate JFK on street. Obviously, with above manpower and the ability to collect intelligence information (that they need), these invisible personnel could also use a person (Ruby) to immediately kill/silence the suspect assassin (Oswald) in a police station when suspect Oswald was under police's custody.

5. To fit lone gunman theory, the total amount of six to seven shots (record at crime scene) had been intentionally reduced to four shots.

How many shots had been fired in the JFK's assassination case? According record, there were at least six to seven shots.

According to HIGH TREASON "Robert Blakey, who for a time was the Chief Counsel of the Assassination Committee, has often said. "There are six or seven shots on the tape. (Two of the shots are nearly simultaneous, which causes some confusion regarding the number of shots fired). "(see page 208).

However, when FBI presented their findings to the Warren Commission, they claimed that only four shots could be counted. Why would FBI's investigation only admit four shots? The reason must be that Director Hoover wanted to close this case with the lone gunman theory. Why?

This theory allowed the case to be quickly closed because the "lone suspect", Lee Oswald, had been arrested by Dallas Police Department then was quickly killed by Jack Ruby in Dallas police station's basement on 11-24-1963. So, if FBI can successfully make the public to accept the lone gunman (who plot the JFK's assassination) theory then they can easily and quickly close the JFK's assassination case and cover-up the truth (that some invisible personnel would have involved in this case).

So, a lone gunman who plotted the assassination theory was very important to this case. Once this theory is accepted, FBI could easily claim that it was unnecessary to search for other suspect because the targeted victim (JFK) and the lone assassin (Lee Oswald) already died. Based on this goal, the six - seven shots had been intentionally reduced to four shots. Thus, it can fit the theory that a lone gunman plotted/committed the JFK assassination. However, it is obviously a cover-story to fit FBI Director Hoover's desire to cover-up the truth that some invisible personnel would have involved in the JFK's assassination.

There seems to be a pattern in FBI investigation dealing with politically sensitive cases. It was in the JFK assassination case and also in OKC Bombing case.

How can I make such kind of statement? I would use following information to prove that my statement is true.

According to HIGH TREASON (page 219-220): "The FBI, in fact, did not examine or listen to original Dictabelt, the original tape copy or any other recorded version of Channel 1, or at least has not publicly admitted doing so. They ignored all recordings altogether in their review of the Assassinations Committee findings. They conducted "a review of the written findings and oral testimony" only, in their own words. There were so no laboratory tests. They did not use the test firing recordings made in Dealey Plaza for comparison. In fact, they could not understand the data produced by the tests at all. They did not study the actual wave form of the Grassy Knoll shot, but instead relied on the fuzzy reproduction in 8 HSAC and decided it was of poor quality, "Probably due to the recording process."

The FBI used the public testimony of the scientists before the hearings of the Committee, when in each case the data was incomplete and later modified. The secret FBI report which they would not release but we have obtained, said that a microscopic analysis of the grooves of the recordings should have been performed to determine whether there were bubbles or scratches. The FBI was clearly unaware that such a scratch or defect would produce no echo-like pattern, which is what was in fact recorded. The FBI and the Warren Commission admitted long ago that the Dictabelt was badly worn from many playings. BBN used the "original" taped copy of a Dictabelt, and there was no way to study that because tapes have no grooves that can scratch.

The FBI at no time speculates as to what else the impulses on the tape might be, if they were not shots. The FBI merely tried to deduce their result, and it is a faulty exercise in deductive reasoning, Mack writes. The FBI "is trying to give us the appearance of a solid product of investigative research but the conclusion are not supported by the facts. The media then reported it as fact. The same thing happened with the NSF study." (see page 219-220 on HIGH TREASON)

Now, I would further use another incident (1995 OKC Bombing case) as example of FBI destroying evidences to support incorrect judgment in order to quickly close an important case. Their goal is to use part of facts to cover-up the truth that some invisible personnel had been involved in this case.

In 1995 OKC Bombing case, according to a laboratory nearby, the seismic reading showed two blasts. This reading fit the report of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Air Force explosive expert General Partin's investigation.

(Source) "Building Performance: Oklahoma City Bombing" FEMA BPAT REPORT

=== The focus of this report is on the nine-story portion of the Murrah Building, which incurred significant damage and partial collapse as a result of the April 19, 1995, bombing. The blast was equivalent to the detonation of approximately 4,000 pounds of TNT. =


The 4,000 pounds of TNT is equal to 14,920 pounds of ammonium nitrate (ANFO). However, according to FBI's representative, Tim McVeigh's truck-bomb was only 4,800 pounds/lbs. of Ammonium Nitrated mixed with fuel oil.

Obviously, based on FEMA's report, the explosive force that destroyed the OKC federal building is much larger (3 times) than the explosive force of Tim McVeigh's truck-bomb.

This conclusion is in agreement with explosive expert General Partin's professional judgment that the observed damaged must be caused by column-demolition charge placed inside of the building. Furthermore, dynamite had been found on the side of column (inside the Murrah Building). So, a laboratory's (nearby OKC federal building) seismic reading showed two blasts, FEMA report and explosive expert General Partin's investigation all support that there was other explosives beside McVeigh's ANFO truck bomb.

However, FBI had determined that Tim McVeigh's truck-bomb were the only explosive force that destroyed the OKC federal building. Why? It is similar reason, FBI wanted to quickly close this case to cover-up the truth that some invisible personnel would have been involved in the OKC Bombing case. Why? Because the involved agents/police would have used invisibility technology to secretly enter OKC federal building and returned to normal human size to place the column-demolition charge inside the federal building (one night before 3/19/1995). The goal is to use Tim McVeigh's crime to increase public's fears on terrorists' attack then increase manpower, funding for involved police/agents and can request the US Congress to authorize police/agents to censor the Internet's information (see details on http;// ).

Thus, FBI used their influence on some scientists to find a way to deny the second blast reading. So, some scientists claimed that the second seismic reading of blast at OKC Federal Building could have been caused by the supersonic shock wave of the first blast. FBI also quickly destroyed the evidence of crime scene (OKC federal building). This OKC federal building was destroyed in a week after General Partin reported to 50 Congressmen that the observed damaged must be caused by column-demolition charge placed inside of the building. After FBI destroyed the crime scene (OKC federal building), FBI dismissed General Partin's report and never mentioned FEMA's report disputed their opinion. Thus, FBI concluded that Tim McVeigh's truck bomb were the only explosive force that destroyed the OKC federal building. McVeigh didn't deny his crime to destroy OKC federal building because he intentionally did it and didn't know that other explosives force had been placed inside OKC building. FBI wanted to reduce two blasts to one blast because people would not believe that another explosive force inside building were also planted by McVeigh. FBI's conclusion obviously didn't tell full truth.

The 1995 OKC bombing case proves that even during Clinton Administration, FBI was still corrupted and unwilling fully tell the truth to publics in some important cases to prevent the facts (that some involved agents/police secretly used invisibility technology in this case) from being exposed.

In the JFK's assassination, similar situation occurred that some involved agents/police (who used invisibility technology) had been involved in the JFK's assassination and secretly delivered several snipers to crime scene to kill JFK. So, FBI Director Hoover had determined that to quickly close the case with a lone gunman (who plot the JFK assassination) theory to prevent the invisibility technology from being exposed. Based on this goal, FBI would have used their influence on many official doctors and scientists to mislead publics. Thus, they claimed that only four shots could be counted and all shots came from same direction where (the building) Lee Oswald was staying. But, many eyewitness doctors testified that the wound on JFK's back head was exit of a bullet but not entrance. So, how can anyone believe that all shots came from back (a same direction) and fired by a same assassin?

Since FBI Director Hoover determined that Oswald were the lone gunman who plotted the JFK assassination, every evidence against this conclusion would be denied.

According to HIGH TREASON, The FBI "is trying to give us the appearance of a solid product of investigative research but the conclusion are not supported by the facts. (page 220)"

Obviously, FBI intentionally reduced the six-seven shots to four shots because no one would believes that Oswald fired all six shoots in such of short time (6-8 seconds) without aiming and shot so accurately .

6. Beside Texas Governor Connally's wound was shot from back, JFK had been shot twice (one shot was from back through the throat and the other shot on his head from front), but evidence had been altered.

The first shot that hit Kennedy went through Kennedy's throat and came from behind him. The second shot was from front which killed Kennedy hit him on the head. According to HIGH TREASON (page 389-391), the real photo of autopsy on JFK's head, it shows a large hole on the back of JFK's head (it looked like the exit wound, caused by a bullet fired from the front of Kennedy). "Dr. Gene Akin was an Anesthesiologist at Parkland at the time. He told the Warren Commission that "the back of the right occipital-parietal portion of (Kennedy's) head was shattered, with brain substance extruding." "I assume that the right occipital parietal region (right rear) was the exit." Akin reaffirmed this to the [Boston] Globe team and basically did not accept the official picture. (HIGH TREASON, page 38). So, how could a single sniper who was hiding at a fixed position, in 6-8 seconds, fire a shot that hit JFK's throat from JFK's back and fire another shot on Texas Governor Connally, then fire another shot that hit JFK's head from the front.

Obviously, FBI's lone gun man theory could not explain away the two bullet wounds on Kennedy in which one was caused by a bullet fired from the front of Kennedy and the other fired from behind. Nor would the American publics and the world accept it because two bullets fired from two different locations caused Kennedy's wounds. Thus, FBI would use their influence on government employees to alter the official autopsy report. Although many eye-witness doctors and nurses told Warren Committee that the wound on back of JFK's head was large and massive opening (exit wound), Warren Committee compromise this important point and accept the official autopsy photograph (that the wound on back of JFK's head were a small hole). Thus, FBI could conclude that all shots came from behind Kennedy and fired by a same gunman (Lee Oswald). However, beside Dr. Gene Akin's testimony to Warren Committee, following witnesses' testimonies all prove that official autopsy's photograph was fake.

According to HIGH TREASON, Dr. Fouad Bashour, an Associate Professor of Medicine in Cardiology at the time, was the subject of an article in the Texas State Journal of Medicine in January, 1964, along with some of the other doctors present in the Emergency Room. Livingstone interviewed Dr. Bashour in 1979 in his office in the presence of his secretary, Lee, and others. He was most insistent that the official picture was not representative of the wounds, and he continually laid his hand both on the back of Livingstone's head and his own to show where the large hole was. "Why do they cover it up?" he repeated numerous times. "This is not the way it was!" he kept repeating, shaking his head no. [...]

On the same day in 1979, Livingstone interviewed Dr. Charles Baxter in a lengthy taped conversation. He told the Warren Commission that there was a "large gaping wound in the back of the skull." He told Livingstone that without question, the back of the head was blown away: "It was a large gaping wound in the occipital area." He did think it might have been a tangential wound of some kind. But he could not have been more clear when he rejected the official picture." [...]

Dr. Perry, now a professor of Surgery and a General Surgeon at the time, performed the tracheotomy on the President when he was brought into the Emergency Room. He appeared twice before the Warren Commission and described "a large wound of the right posterior parietal area in the head exposing lacerated brain," and "a large avulsive wound of the right occipital parietal area in which both scalp and portions of skull were absent, and there was sever laceration of underlying brain tissue..." The Associated Press dispatch on November 22 stated that Dr. Perry "said the entrance wound was in the front of the head." This is a long way from the cowlick. All the AP wires that day stated that the President had a large hole in the "back" of his head. (see page 39-41 of the book HIGH TREASON)."

Why would official's autopsy photograph be faked? The reason must be that after Oswald died, FBI Director Hoover only wanted a single sniper to quickly close the case and cover-up the truth (that some invisible personnel would have involved in the case). This is just like the 1995 OKC Bombing case. FBI had determined that Tim McVeigh's ANFO truck were the only explosive force that destroyed OKC federal building then dismiss and destroyed other evidences. Why would they alter the evidence of JFK's wounds? This is because Texas Governor Connally was also shot from back at crime scene and he survived. Obviously, a surviving victim's wound is the evidence that could not be denied. However, JFK already died; so, he could not testify on the direction which these bullets cam from. Thus, they would have altered the evidence of JFK's wounds in order to compromise the lone gunman theory. Thus, they determined that JFK's wounds all came from back.

7. Facts/evidences prove that a lone gunman theory was wrong. The locations of wounds on JFK and Texas Governor (who was sitting in front of Kennedy) prove that there were at least three snipers shooting at the crime scene. However, to quickly close the case to cover-up the the invisible personnel's crimes and prevent the invisibility technology from being exposed, FBI Director Hoover determined that Oswald were the lone gunman who plotted the JFK's assassination.

According to HIGH TREASON, "Ten hours after the assassination, Secret Service Chief James Rowley knew that there had been three gunmen, and perhaps four, firing in Dallas that day. (page 128)" "The FBI report after the autopsy insisted that Governor Connally had been hit with a separate shot, which meant two snipers from the rear, since the rifle could not be reloaded quickly enough to hit both men with different bullets.( page 232)" "Senator Richard Russell reportedly said that he would not sign a report which concluded that both men [JFK and Texas Governor] were hit by the same bullet. (page 58)"

According to HIGH TREASON, author-researcher Harold Weisberg, Russell was satisfied that there had been a conspiracy; that no one man have done the known shootings, and said that " we have not been told the truth about Oswald" by federal agencies. Russell encouraged Weisberg to challenge and disprove the Committee's findings. "Senator John Cooper said, "I, too, objected to such a conclusion there was no evidence to show both men were hit by the same bullet." Representative Hale Boggs said, "I had strong doubts about it (the single bullet theory)," adding that he felt the question was never resolved." (page 59).

Beside original FBI agent's report tell that at least two sniper fired from back, many newspapers reports tell that official evidences didn't mention some bullets.. Washington Post said: "We have evidence of still other bullets not mentioned in the official evidence."

According to HIGH TREASON: The newspapers reported that a bullet had lodged in the President's back, and the Washington Post said that the FBI claimed that the bullet was found deep in his shoulder. We have a receipt from the FBI men present at the autopsy.... This is, of course, one bullet too many. We have evidence of still other bullets not mentioned in the official evidence.

"Again the pathologists cannot be faulted in this deception. They were caught in a maelstrom created by ruthless men who had the power and lack of morals that permitted them to manipulate history." (Medicallegal Investigation of the President John F Kennedy's murder, Charles ; Charles Wilber p. 103). [...]

"The FBI report after the autopsy insisted that Governor Connally had been hit with a separate shot, which meant two snipers from the rear, since the rifle could not be reloaded quickly enough to hit both men with different bullets. The secret autopsy photographs and X-rays are fabricated. They wouldn't be secret if no-one had any doubts about their authenticity and they supported the government's case.

The pattern of conflicting testimony, the autopsists' and other medical witnesses' refutation of the autopsy photographs, the evidence of forgery and tampering in the backyard photos, the indications of perjury and subornation of perjury and the long list of missing or destroyed evidence make it clear that far more is involved in the assassination of President Kennedy than a mere second gunman on the Grassy Knoll. The above evidence points clearly to conspiracy and high treason" (HIGH TREASON, page 231-232).

The TRUTH is out there...........

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #7 

'Friendly fire' killing unlawful...
Matty Hull
Four other soldiers were injured in the attack near Basra
The death of a UK soldier when a US pilot fired on his convoy in Iraq was unlawful, a coroner has ruled.

The "friendly fire" incident near Basra in March 2003 which killed Lance Corporal Matty Hull, 25, amounted to a criminal act, Andrew Walker said.

Video footage from the cockpit of the US A-10 "tankbuster" plane was shown to his family during the inquest, but was not shown at the Oxford inquest.

The coroner said the death was "entirely avoidable".

He said: "I believe that the full facts have not yet come to light."

No American witnesses gave evidence at the inquest, despite Mr Walker's requests to them to co-operate more fully with his investigation.

He said the US pilots should have flown lower to confirm identities before opening fire.

"I don't think this was a case of honest mistake," he said.

Recording a narrative verdict, Mr Walker, Oxfordshire assistant deputy coroner, added: "The attack on the convoy amounted to an assault.

"It was unlawful because there was no lawful reason for it and in that respect it was criminal."

The Ministry of Defence had refused to let the tape be shown, but changed its mind after the footage was leaked to the Sun newspaper.

How the attack on Matty Hull's convoy happened

The deputy coroner ruled it could be seen by the Hull family, who could then ask questions, but it could not be shown in open court.

The inquest heard from another British soldier, Corporal of Horse Stuart Matthews, who said he believed the incident would not have happened if American troops had as strict rules as the British on opening fire.

'Lightly armoured'

L/Cpl Hull, who was from the Household Cavalry, died from multiple injuries inside his blazing Scimitar tank despite efforts by colleagues to save him.

Four other soldiers travelling in the convoy of light armoured vehicles were also injured in the incident on 28 March 2003 near Basra.

Still of 'friendly fire' cockpit footage

L/Cpl Hull's widow Susan had said she wanted the coroner to record a verdict of unlawful killing "only if that's the right verdict".

The Hull family believes key information was blacked out of a US Friendly Fire Investigation Board Report given to the coroner investigating his death.

And Susan Hull directly appealed US President George W Bush to give the coroner the information.

Deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in London, David Johnson, said investigations into such incidents were "extremely thorough".

He added that if anyone had been to blame for the incident, "that culpability would have been pursued".

The TRUTH is out there...........

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #8 

Police indicted over NY shooting...
Sean Bell with fiancee Nicole Paultre
Sean Bell was shot dead by police officers on 25 November
Three New York policemen face charges over the shooting of an unarmed man on his wedding day, lawyers say.

Sean Bell, a 23-year-old black man, was killed last November when police fired 50 bullets into his car as he left a club after celebrating his stag night.

The shooting prompted outrage in the city and triggered accusations of racism against police.

The police officers were indicted by a grand jury. The charges are due to be revealed on Monday.

Lawyers for officers Mark Cooper, Gescard Isnora and Michael Oliver confirmed that their clients had been indicted.

Two other police officers present at the time of the shooting will not face charges, reports said.

'Lasting legacy'

The BBC's Guto Harri in New York says there is relief in the city that the officers will be prosecuted.

Three of the officers involved that night were black, two were white. Two of Mr Bell's friends, both black, were injured in the shooting.

But, our correspondent says, the killing was widely seen as a disturbing sign of racism within the New York Police Department, which is why the legal process about to take its course will be watched extremely carefully.

Lawyer Peter St George Davis, who is representing Mr Bell's parents, said that they "pray every day that somehow, out of their son's death will come a message or lasting legacy".

But Michael Palladino of the Detectives' Endowment Association said the indictments sent a "chilling message to all New York City police officers".

"You can act in good faith and there is no margin for error," he said.

Police have said they shot at the car because they feared an armed "altercation".

The TRUTH is out there...........

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,111
Reply with quote  #9 
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates
Mr Gates said the Guantanamo prison had become "tainted".

The US Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, has said that Congress should look for ways to close the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba.

He said the military trials of terror suspects at the prison lack credibility because they have been tainted by the harsh treatment of detainees.

But he said that some detainees who have vowed to attack the US should never be released from custody.

The US has started the military trials of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay.

Mr Gates told a House of Representatives committee that "my own view is that because of things that happened earlier at Guantanamo there is a taint about it."

'Hard core detainees'

He said he wanted the Guantanamo prison to be closed and the trials moved to the US "because I felt that no matter how transparent, no matter how open the trials, if they took place in Guantanamo, in the international community they would lack credibility."

Australian David Hicks pleaded guilty on Monday to providing material support for terrorism in the first case under a new law authorising the military trials.

The chief prosecutor for the military tribunals said on Thursday the prosecution will seek a sentence of "substantially less" than 20 years for him, AP news agency reported.

Prisoner in cell at Guantanamo Bay
About 385 detainees are still held at Guantanamo Bay
The US has faced international criticism over its continued detention of suspected al-Qaeda and Taleban militants.

About 385 people are being held at Guantanamo Bay. Some of them have been there for years without facing trial.

"The reality is there are people at Guantanamo we would like to turn back to their home countries, and their home countries won't take them," Mr Gates said.

There were about 100 "hard core" prisoners, he said, who should never be released from custody.

"I don't know if the military prison system provides the capacity to keep them, but I know that there are some people down there who if we release them have made very clear they will come back and attack this country."

He said how to move the "hard core" detainees while ensuring they do not have access to a legal system where they might be released was "an area where frankly I think there needs to be some dialogue between the Congress and the administration."


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,111
Reply with quote  #10 

Detainees upon arrival at Camp X-Ray, January 2002

Detainees upon arrival at Camp X-Ray, January 2002.
A Camp Delta recreation and exercise area at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The detention block is shown with sunshades drawn on December 3, 2002.
A Camp Delta recreation and exercise area at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The detention block is shown with sunshades drawn on December 3, 2002.

Guantanamo Bay detainment camp serves as a joint military prison and interrogation camp under the leadership of Joint Task Force Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO) and has occupied a portion of the United States Navy's base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba since 2002.[1] The prison holds people suspected by the executive branch of the U.S. government of being al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives, as well as those no longer considered suspects who are being held pending relocation elsewhere. The prisoners were captured in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world.

The detainment areas consist of three camps in the base: Camp Delta (which includes Camp Echo), Camp Iguana, and the now-closed Camp X-Ray. The facility is often referred to as Guantanamo, Gitmo (derived from the abbreviation "GTMO" ), or Camp X-Ray.[2]

The camp has drawn strong criticism both in the U.S. and world-wide for its detainment of prisoners without trial, and allegations of torture. The detainees held by the United States were classified as "enemy combatants". The U.S. administration had claimed that they were not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against this interpretation on June 29, 2006.[3] Following this, on July 7, 2006 the Department of Defense issued an internal memo stating that prisoners will in the future be entitled to protection under the Geneva Conventions.[4][5][6]

Most of the detainees still at Guantanamo are not scheduled for trial. As of November 2006, according to, out of 775 detainees who have been brought to Guantanamo, approximately 340 have been released, leaving 435 detainees. Of those 435, 110 have been labeled as ready for release. Of the other 325, only "more than 70" will face trial, the Pentagon says. That leaves about 250 who may be held indefinitely.[7]



Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,111
Reply with quote  #11 

A 70-year-old US woman has been left bruised and bloody after an unexpected clash with police who came to arrest her because her lawn was dry and brown.

Trouble flared when Utah pensioner Betty Perry, 70, refused to give her name to an officer trying to caution her for not watering her lawn.

She says the officer hit her with handcuffs, cutting her nose, although police insist she slipped and fell.

Ms Perry said she was "distraught" after the incident.


She denied that she was resisting arrest, maintaining that she turned to go inside to call her son to fix the confusing dispute.

"I tried to sit down and get away from him," she told Utah newspaper the Daily Herald.

"I don't know what he's doing. I said: 'What are you doing?' And he hit me with those handcuffs in my face," she said.

"He's just trying to cover his tracks, as far as I'm concerned."

The officer had judged that Ms Perry's "sadly neglected and dying landscape" breached an Orem city guideline and was attempting to issue a formal caution when the 70-year-old was injured.

She was treated in a local hospital for the cut to her nose and for other bruises before being taken to jail.

But she was let go when police realised there were "other ways" of finding out her identity without taking her to jail, a police spokesman said.

The arresting officer has not been named but has been placed on administrative leave, he added.

Ms Perry, who says she has never had a run-in with police in the past, has been offered help by local church leaders to clean up her garden.

"I'm very distraught over all this," she said.

"I can't believe this happened. Do you ever just wish you could start your day over and it would all be different?"


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 1,601
Reply with quote  #12 

George Bush defensive over US torture claims.

George W Bush has been forced to defend his administration’s treatment of terror suspects after claims that the justice department secretly approved apparently illegal interrogation methods.

  • In a hastily convened appearance at the Oval Office, the president insisted that “the US doesn’t torture” and that investigative techniques used by the CIA were legal.

    Bush on defensive over torture
    Last year Mr Bush admitted the existence of secret CIA prisons overseas

    He was reacting to a report in Thursday’s New York Times on two secret memos written in 2005 that authorised extreme interrogation tactics against terror suspects, despite a declaration by the Justice Department in December 2004 that torture was “abhorrent” and similar statements by the White House.

    The first 2005 opinion authorised the use of a barrage of painful physical and psychological tactics including head slaps, exposure to freezing temperatures and most controversially of all simulated drownings, known as “waterboarding”.

    It explicitly allowed using painful methods in combination.

    The second Justice opinion was issued later in 2005 as Congress was working on an anti-torture bill banning “cruel, inhuman and degrading” treatment of detainees.

    That opinion declared that none of the CIA’s interrogation practices would violate the new legislation.

    Both memos were signed by Steven Bradbury, acting head of the elite Office of Legal Counsel at the department, which was then headed by the president’s friend Alberto Gonzales.

    The report brought angry criticism from both Democrats and Republicans and demands to see the memos from the Senate Intelligence Committee.

    The president maintained that “We stick to US law and international obligations”, and took no questions after making the short statement.

    He noted that “highly trained professionals” conduct any questioning.

    “And by the way,” he added, “we have gotten information from these high-value detainees that have helped protect you.”

    Following a US supreme court ruling Mr Bush was last year forced to admit the existence of secret CIA prisons overseas and to order that CIA interrogators comply with international Geneva Conventions against torture.

    But officials told the New York Times that the 2005 opinions are still in force and show how the White House has succeeded in preserving the broadest possible legal latitude for harsh tactics.

    They could not say if such methods were still being used.

    In response to the Sept 11 attacks the administration originally approved harsh interrogation methods as long as they stopped short of producing pain equivalent to experiencing organ failure or death.

    But from late 2004 onwards it was obliged to begin stating it did not condone harsh interrogation practices, as opposition rose in Congress, the US judiciary and around the world.

    It is widely believed that secret prisons still exist after the Pentagon earlier this year said an al-Qa’eda suspect was transferred to the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba after months in CIA custody.

  • __________________
    Judge yourself before judging others.

    Avatar / Picture

    Posts: 8,395
    Reply with quote  #13 

    Doughnut theft could land man in prison...

    It's a story that would make Homer Simpson shudder: one hungry man's unlawful desire for a doughnut may prove to be the most costliest snack ever.

    In an unbelievable episode which many may feel highlights the absurdities of the American legal system, a man who stole a paltry doughnut today faces up to 30 years in jail.

    Just one of these could land Scott Masters in jail for a lengthy 30 years
    Just one of these could land Scott Masters in jail for a lengthy 30 years...

    Scott Masters, 41, is accused of surreptitiously putting the sweet, circular pastry into his sweatshirt without paying, then pushing away a female store worker who tried to stop him fleeing the store in Farmington, Minnesota.

    US authorities said the push was being treated as a minor assault, which transforms a simple shoplifting charge into the more serious demeanour of strong-arm robbery, an offence which fetches a potential prison term of five to 15 years.

    And as Mr Masters already has a criminal record, prosecutors are entitled to double his sentence, meaning a maximum 30-year stint behind bars is a possibility, however ridiculous it may seem.

    Mr Masters admits he tried to steal the doughnut but denies having assaulted the clerk.

    Speaking from jail, he told the St Louis Post-Dispatch: "Strong-arm robbery? Over a doughnut? That's impossible. There's no way I would've pushed a woman over a doughnut."

    To make matters worse, Mr Masters said he did not even get the chance to savour the snack - he threw it away as he fled the scene.

    Farmington Police Chief Rick Baker said state law treats the shoplifting and assault as forcibly stealing property - and the amount of force and value of the property does not matter.

    "It's not the doughnut," Mr Baker said. "It's the assault."

    The TRUTH is out there...........

    Posts: N/A
    Reply with quote  #14 
    H, That is unreal, i have heard of some states using the three strikes system.


    Avatar / Picture

    Posts: 8,395
    Reply with quote  #15 

    The Lapeer County sheriff compares them to Bonnie and Clyde. But unlike the legendary crime duo, who never got married, these modern bank robbery suspects have an offer from Ron Kalanquin to help them tie the knot.

    "I'll volunteer to marry them in the jail if they surrender," the sheriff said Monday. Kalanquin said he wanted the Lapeer couple off the streets before their cash ran out and they attempted another robbery.

    The suspects — Harold "Aaron" Holt, 24, and Elizabeth A. Bruman, 23 — are suspected of taking about $5,000 in the Sept. 19 robbery of a Lapeer County Bank & Trust branch in Deerfield Township, about 60 miles north of Detroit.

    Detectives determined that the robbery money was used to buy wedding rings, pay back rent and pay the woman's attorney for work done in a child custody case, The Flint Journal reported.

    The couple met after the man was released from the county jail and was introduced to her by another ex-inmate, Kalanquin said.

    "We believe they could still be in the area, but could also be somewhere in Michigan or beyond," Kalanquin said. He appealed to the couple's relatives and friends to alert police to their whereabouts.

    According to an official FBI account, Bonnie Parker was 19 and married to a convicted murderer when she met the unmarried, 21-year-old Clyde Barrow in Texas in 1930. Barrow escaped from jail in 1932 using a gun smuggled to him by what the FBI called his "paramour," and they embarked on a murder and robbery spree that ended when they were shot to death in a 1934 ambush in Louisiana.

    The TRUTH is out there...........
    Previous Topic | Next Topic

    Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.