NEO – Has the US Nuked Syria?

Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services21

 

Testing next generation energetic materials?

Has the US Nuked Syria?

…  by  Gordon Duff,  VT Sr. Editor,        … with  New Eastern Outlook, Moscow

 -  First published  …  October 28, 2014  -

A massive explosion outside Kobani, the Syrian/Kurdish border town under attack by ISIL/ISIS publicly and to a less public extent, by the Turkish army as well.
Nuclear physicist, Jeff Smith, former IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) investigator and Science Editor for Veterans Today has been examining photographic evidence but is calling for more:
“Someone needs to develop and sell a simple fallout chemical test strip that changes color indicating type of radioactive materials being present in the soil. It would be a big seller. Similar to the chemical weapons test strips.”
Smith spent years investigating nuclear material smuggling and was part of the team that investigated 9/11; helping prepare the 2003 Department of Energy Report on 9/11 leaked by Edward Snowden thus summer.

Experiment at the Sandia National Lab showing a test device wherein all or part of the surrogate radioactive material was converted into ballistic fragments approximately 100- to 500-mu in size.

 _________________________________

Kobani

American Journalist Serena Shim

This week, an American journalist, Serena Shim, from Rochester Hills, Michigan, died in a mysterious accident in Turkey. The Press TV investigative reporter had been threatened by Turkish intelligence only hours earlier, after reporting that ISIL/ISIS was openly receiving military air, weapons, and fighters, through Turkey with the help of an American run NGO. (Non-Governmental Organization)
Last week, 22 members of America’s coalition met in Washington to discuss the ongoing air campaign against ISIL/ISIS. The result was a considerable ramping up of America’s bombing campaign, particularly against ISIL/ISIS outside Kobani.
Jihadist forces of the Islamic Republic had been operating openly, seemingly without fear of attack. That suddenly changed after the October 14, 2014 Washington conference.

_________________________________

New Weapons Over Syria

Media unfamiliar with advanced combat aircraft have recently misidentified American heavy bombers flying over Syria as smaller planes. Only when photos are enhanced are what appear to be F 18 Super Hornets shown to be what they really are — B1B eight-engine heavy bombers flying from Qatar.
Thus, when examining weapons delivery systems — be they cruise missiles, F 16s or carrier based aircraft — the new US base in Qatar, (home to a fleet of heavy bombers, both B 52s and B1B), has added a new aspect to US capabilities in the Middle East. Planes that previously flew from Diego Garcia, well into the Indian Ocean, now fly from Qatar.
These planes, some capable of massive bomb loads, are the ones seen over Syria.

B1B

_________________________________

Has America “Nuked” Syria?

We asked Jeff Smith to analyze photographic evidence from the recent attack. This was his initial response:
“Not normal weapons, for sure.” Maybe thermite, white phosphor, thermobaric or nuke? The fireball and the plasmoids of hot metal fragments are most interesting. A Geiger counter and soil samples are the only way of telling for sure.
Normal explosions don’t have fireballs that last that long or are that big. Also spalding material is from the outer bomb casing. Iron or DU (Depleted Uranium) is red. Aluminum, phosphor, or magnesium is white spalding. Thermobarics are always red. Neutron bombs use aluminum casings and are always white.
The lack of a defined shock wave / blast front is a big clue. Most interesting.”
Smith cited that as a UN investigator he estimates that as many as 50 nuclear weapons have been used since 1945, including those used in Iraq and Afghanistan by US forces. Smith, as an investigator of NNP (Nuclear Non-Proliferation) issues says that Saudi Arabia has long had a nuclear arsenal, along with several other nations, such as Taiwan, South Korea and Brazil.
Our next question involved the estimated size of the Kobani explosion. This attack represents a significant development, as the possible use of advanced weapons inside Syria brings rise to political considerations.
“The weapon used in Kobani was bigger than 10 tons of TNT, up to 1kt if a neutron bomb or some other type of low yield enhanced radiation weapon was used. My guess is it is a test for micro nukes of some type, also called “uranium deuterium triggers.” An F-16 can’t make a bang that big with just one 1200 lb. bomb, unless it is “unconventional”. The same applies with any small missile warhead.”

_________________________________

Election Desperation?

World Trade Center 7 – Two planes, three buildings came down… right…

Beating ISIL/ISIS or at least announcing significant progress is key to the credibility of the Obama administration. America is facing a mid-term election in 2 weeks.
This election could turn America’s legislative branch over to the Israeli-controlled Republican party, which is dedicated to prolonging sanctions against Iran no matter what type of agreement the rest of the world reaches.
This is a major flaw in the US government, as congress has “hijacked” foreign policy from the State Department. The American constitution allows for “advice and consent” by the US Senate on treaties and specific appointments — a power the Israeli lobby has had expanded under Bush (43) allowing them to control American foreign policy.
The American legislative branch, almost totally Israeli-controlled, can block any governmental move by “defunding” or claiming “abuse of executive authority” and begin impeachment proceedings, which is a totally subjective and extrajudicial process.

_________________________________

Atomic Irony

For every minute of media time addressing the threat of ISIL/ISIS, there is equal time spent warning the world of the nuclear threat Iran allegedly represents to the world. One of the rare areas of general agreement between at least the White House, though certainly not the entire US government, and Iran and Syria involves the threat posed by the “Islamic State.”
If, as Jeff Smith indicates, there is a substantial likelihood that the United States is using nuclear weapons in Syria, whatever the justification, when that same government sanctions another for what most accept as unfounded allegations of nuclear proliferation violations, the misuse of “moral authority” defies comprehension.
We do know America has used nuclear weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan, this has been confirmed. Neither nation had attacked the United States. It had long been held as the height of absurdity that Israel, long a nuclear power through trickery and deceit, has openly violated not only international law, but American law as well.
As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, America, in accordance with the 1977 Glenn Amendment, is prohibited by treaty ratified by congress from supplying any aid to nations in violation whether signatory or not. Chief among these is Israel. This is not a “sanction”, but a full treaty within the clear authority of America’s constitution.
Thus we stand, a nation that has used nuclear weapons in wars of aggression, a nation that turns quickly to such weapons almost as though they were a “convenience,” yet standing in judgment unaffected by fact, by reality or accountability.

Pensacola Beach AirShow on July 12, 2002. As USAF B1B, 85-0064, from the 127th BS/184th BW, Kansas ANG made its high speed pass approaching the sound barrier, this photo catches the shock wave.

_________________________________

Gordon Duff is a Vietnam War Marine combat veteran who has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues; and is a senior editor and chairman of the board of  Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Editing:  Jim W. Dean

Moscow

________________________________________________

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=327825

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners and technicians. Legal Notice

Posted by Gordon Duff on Oct 29 2014, With 1674 Reads, Filed under Editor, New World Order War, Syria War, WarZone. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Record Number of Americans Renouncing Citizenship Because of Overseas Tax Burdens

 

By ALI WEINBERGOctober 28, 2014 1:02 PM

• 
• 
• 
• 

Bloomberg

Why Are U.S. Tax Policies Sending Americans Packing



 

• 

  5:58
   
  Why Are U.S. Tax Policies Sending Americans Packing
• 

  0:35
   
  Steve-O -- Cops Investigating SeaWorld Stunt -- Prosecution Likely
• 

  2:08
   
  The Top Ten Stocks for Oct. 29
• 

  1:58
   
  Can Zuckerberg Afford to Keep Betting Big & Spending Big?
• 

  9:52
   
  Venezuela Imports Crude Oil From Algeria
• 

  8:16
   
  Fed Ends QE: What This Says About the Economy
• 

  2:24
   
  How Investors Are Reacting to the Fed Ending QE
• 

  4:48
   
  Software Is Redefining How We Do Our Jobs: BMC CEO
• 

  2:25
   
  Fed Cites Improved Labor Market, Ends QE as Planned
• 

  2:27
   
  AT&T Sued by FTC Over ‘Throttling’ Smartphone Data Speeds

Frustration over taxes is as American as apple pie, but some U.S. citizens are becoming so overwhelmed by the Internal Revenue Service that they’ve decided to stop being Americans altogether.

According to new Treasury Department data, 776 Americans renounced their citizenship over three months ending in September for a total of 2,353 renunciations this year, on pace to surpass the previous year’s record number of 2,999 renouncers.

Experts say this growing number of ex-Americans is a side effect of new tax regulations within the last few years intended to crack down on tax evasion but that also make it harder for all citizens abroad to conduct even routine financial transactions. Chief among them is the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA, passed by Congress in 2010 and in effect since July 2014. FATCA aimed to cut down on the use of secret offshore accounts by requiring foreign banks to report all Americans with accounts over $50,000 or face a 30 percent surcharge on the accounts.

Marylouise Serrato, the executive director of American Citizens Abroad, an advocacy group, said the measure ended up hurting otherwise law-abiding citizens living in foreign countries, of which the most recent estimates say there are 6.32 million. Serrato cited a 2014 poll conducted by the group Democrats Abroad that found an average of 12.7 percent of applicants for various foreign financial services were denied by their banks.

“The problem is not paying taxes or not wanting to pay taxes, the problem is that they’re having an inability to find financial providers and people who are still willing to deal with them as American citizens,” Serrato said.

There’s also the problem of so-called “accidental Americans,” who were born in the United States but have lived most of their lives inCanada. American tax law mandates that citizens pay U.S. taxes regardless of the country in which they reside, meaning that in the last five years, when the U.S. government started cracking down on foreign tax evaders, many Canadians born in the U.S. realized for the first time that they might owe the IRS back taxes.

View gallery

Record Number of Americans Renouncing Citizenship Because of Overseas Tax Burdens (ABC News)

Among them was one man who was born in the U.S. but was brought to Canada right after birth, who insisted on anonymity because he is still in the process of renouncing his American citizenship – which he didn’t even realize he had until, on a 2011 trip south of the US-Canada border, he was told he needed an American passport in order to re-enter the United States.

He was eventually allowed to pass, but upon returning home realized the agent who let him through was correct. “Sure enough, if you are considered a US citizen you can’t travel into the US using anything other than a US passport,” he said.

He learned he could either declare five years of back taxes to the IRS under a new voluntary disclosure program, which he said would have cost him thousands of dollars in legal and accounting fees, or renounce his American citizenship, which so far has taken him more than a year and several trips to his nearest consulate to do.

“I don’t break any laws,” he said. “It’s an accident of birth.”

And when he does renounce his American citizenship, the Canada resident will also have to pay a onetime fee of $2,350 for what the State Department says is the cost of processing a citizenship renunciation.

That fee is more than a five-fold increase from what the cost was before September 2014, when renouncing one’s American citizenship cost $450.

A State Department spokesperson said the fee was increased to reflect the real, unsubsidized cost of providing the service. “In addition to the work done at the embassy or consulate, the case comes back to the department for a final review and decision, which involves additional resources. A renunciation is a serious decision, and we need to be certain that the person renouncing fully understands the consequences,” the spokesperson said via email.

Serrato’s group American Citizens Abroad recommends that Congress add a “same-country exception” to FATCA, which would exempt citizens living in a foreign country from paying a U.S. tax for financial services from a bank in the same country where they live. The intended goal would be for FATCA to affect only the groups it intended to target: potential tax evaders who live in one country but have foreign accounts in others.

“This is a community that’s not tax evaders and living the high life. There’s a real need, if the US is going to be a global player and we want Americans overseas selling products, that people need to have certain tools in order to do that,” she said.

Kwitch Yer Bitchin' : --Police State Targets Dissidents: Government To “Impose Extreme Disruption Orders On Individuals”

The Rumor Mill News Reading Room 

Kwitch Yer Bitchin' : --Police State Targets Dissidents: Government To “Impose Extreme Disruption Orders On Individuals”

Posted By: Watchman
Date: Wednesday, 29-Oct-2014 16:34:21

The battle for hearts and minds is on and the elite are getting fed up with citizen proles who believe it a right to speak freely and openly about their ideologies and criticisms of government policies. Their attempts to control the agenda and conversation have repeatedly been met with protests, both online and off, as traditional mainstream audiences migrate by the millions to alternative media and citizen journalism. But this obvious threat to the establishment’s status quo won’t be allowed to go on much longer. A recent interview with the head of England’s Ministry of Home Security, the British counterpart of America’s Department of Homeland Security, shows just how dangerous open thought and free speech are. Home Secretary Theresa May explains what the freedom-loving people of the United Kingdom can come to expect in the very near future if their online commentary is deemed to be hatred or extremist thought by the government. And this, as you’ll see below, isn’t just about the UK, which has often been used as a petri dish for global regulators who want to see what does or doesn’t work on a smaller scale before introducing their policies and legalese in the United States. The police would also be given new powers to apply to a court to impose extreme disruption orders on individuals, using the same criteria. This could result in those targeted being stopped from taking part in public protests, from being present at all in certain public locations, from associating with named people, from using of conventional broadcast media and from “obtaining any position of authority in an institution where they would have influence over vulnerable individuals or children”. Breach of the restrictions – which would be time limited – would be a criminal offence. (BBC) An interview of Theresa May discussing how these new policies will keep Brits “safe and secure” shows the Secretary repeating the same talking points over and over in defense of her position. When questioned about whether innocent people just speaking their minds could get caught up in the extremist web, May goes to her default answer: What we are looking at is a situation where believe we need to take powers necessary to be able to deal with those people who are preaching hatred on our streets and that is an extremism which can lead others into violent acts. Of course not all extremists are violent and not all violence comes out of that extremism. But there is a link. There is a thread between this. And I believe we need to be able to deal with that if we are going to do the job we want to do, which is keeping people safe and secure. (Video via Steve Quayle and All News Pipeline) But such things like supplanting political thought or the free expression of views only happens elsewhere. Such ludicrous ideas could never be introduced here in America. Unless of course you consider that a bi-partisan Congressional panel is now looking to impose similar restrictions on free speech right here in the good ol’ USA: A key Democrat on the Federal Election Commission called for burdensome new rules on Internet-based campaigning, prompting the Republican chairman to warn that Democrats want to regulate online political sites and even news media like the Drudge Report. Ravel’s statement suggests that she would regulate right-leaning groups like America Rising that posts anti-Democrat YouTube videos on its website. FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman, a Republican, said if regulation extends that far, then anybody who writes a political blog, runs a politically active news site or even chat room could be regulated. He added that funny internet campaigns like “Obama Girl,” and “Jib Jab” would also face regulations. (Washington Examiner) Make no mistake. Such regulatory and legislative policy would not only target conservative web sites. Every single American citizen would be subject to its rules. Want to post a video with political undertones? Banned. Did you mention a political candidate’s name in your social media post? Banned. Did you send an email to friends and family promoting a particular idea that runs contrary to the traditionally accepted government policy? Banned. Are you wearing a T-shirt that upsets the politically correct crowd? Banned. And not just banned. In the United Kingdom you would face criminal repercussions. In the United States, as noted in the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Acts, you could literally be swept up by militarized government SWAT teams and held indefinitely without charge or trial. A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act “”dangerous to human life”” that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism. Source: USA Patriot Act We can see by the broad language how easily one can be accused of “intimidation” or “coercion.” In the end it really just boils down to be a matter of interpretation, and you could bet your bottom dollar that Federal prosecutors and secret terrorism courts will ensure that you fall well within the Patriot Act should you step out of line. In a recent piece penned by Paul Joseph Watson we can see these new regulations already taking shape through a redefining of terms such as “suspicious activity.” Purchasing train tickets with cash, exiting a train before or after other passengers, or appearing calm or nervous are all examples of behavior that Amtrak employees have been told to report as “suspicious activity.” A document entitled Guidelines for Amtrak Customer Service Employees, which was obtained by the ACLU after an FOIA request, lists a number of different behaviors that are “indicative of criminal activity” and should immediately be reported to law enforcement personnel by Amtrak ticket agents. Are you calm when purchasing a ticket? That could mean you’re a terrorist. What about nervous? Do you look at little nervous? Yup, that probably makes you a terrorist, too. This is what the free people of the United States, the United Kingdom and the rest of the world are facing from entrenched elite financial, economic and geo-political organizations who mean to control every aspect of our lives. And be assured, they’re not war-gaming civil unrest scenarios and stockpiling billions of rounds of ammunition just so they can play target practice. Many Americans see what’s coming and are taking steps to prepare for a completely different world. But most don’t even have a clue. Your views and ideas make you an enemy of the state. In fact, the United Nations Charter on Human Rights addresses people like you, and despite the fact that our founders forbade international treaties for this very purpose, our government is a long-time proponent of these ideals and policies. The Charter talks a big game with, among other things, freedom of expression, the right to live peacefully, and protections to ensure you can’t be detained indefinitely without trial until, that is, you reach Article 29, Section 3: These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. So, as long as you tow the party line you can enjoy your “freedom.” For those that don’t, one day soon these international and domestic legislative implements will give them the pretext to come looking for you, as well as those who, as Theresa May stated, have a “thread” that might be connected to you. http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/police-statetargets-dissidents-government-powers-to-impose-extreme-disruption-orders-on-individuals_10272014

BREAKING: Obama Makes Move Against the Bundy Ranch… This Is Tyranny

BREAKING: Obama Makes Move Against the Bundy Ranch… This Is Tyranny

Earlier this year, the topic of federal government control over public land in Western states came to the forefront, as all eyes in America focussed on the Bundy Ranch in southern Nevada, and the heavy-handed, militarized response of federal regulatory agencies to unpaid grazing fees.

Thanks to an immense effort by protestors and supporters, backed up by armed citizen militias, the tyrannical feds backed down from the stand-off they created.

Click here to get a FREE subscription to the Conservative Tribune.

But nobody thought the issue was entirely over, especially after Nevada Senator Harry Reid threatened as much, saying “something will happen” to the Bundy’s and their ranch.

That something may be happening now, as the feds prepare to seize control of millions of acres of land in southern Nevada, placing it off limits to people, according to a post on theBundy Ranch’s Facebook page.

An official notice was recently released by the Federal Registry, proclaiming that upwards of 3 million acres of land in southern Nevada would be declared Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and placed off limits to virtually all human activity.

Some of the restrictions placed upon ACEC land include closing roads and trails to all motorized traffic; closing camping, hunting, and recreation sites; closing all livestock grazing and water access; and even restricting hiking and horseback riding in the area.

This declaration wasn’t a piece of legislation passed by Congress, nor was it agreed upon by the state, or the people, of Nevada.  It was simply decided upon by nameless, unaccountable bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., and imposed against the will of the people.

The Bundy Ranch believes that this move by the feds is in direct retaliation against them and the people of southern Nevada for their stand-off against the Bureau of Land Management.  Although they have no direct proof, they point out that all of the newly declared ACECs are located in southern Nevada, virtually surrounding the Bundy Ranch by off-limits federally-controlled land.

For their part, the Bundy’s say this federal tyranny won’t stop them from continuing to ranch and graze on the same land their family has used for well over 100 years.  They are asking for an outcry from the states and the people so loud  that it can no longer be ignored by the feds.

The states need to stop allowing this type of thing to occur.  It is time for the states to reclaim sovereignty over their own territories and take back control of public lands under the thumb of the feds. States could then either hold it themselves or return it to the people, to whom it really belongs.

Please share this on Facebook and Twitter if you agree that the federal seizure of “public” land and placing it completely off-limits to the “public” needs to stop immediately, and the states must take back control of their land.

• Share on Facebook

People Are Reading These Articles Right Now: