This is absolutely outrageous. Look people and pay attention to who will terrorize you. They will come with guns and attack dogs. They will gang up on you with intimidation tactics. No matter how small or non-threatening you try to be, it will not matter. In fact, your attempts to appear non-threatening will likely trigger their psychopathic predator impulses. Yet if you fight they will surely attack you, too. They will hit and push you down from behind when your hands are in your pockets as you try to walk home from work. They will stand there and not help you as your heart pounds with fear. They will blame innocent people for their own appalling criminal behavior when you collapse and die of a heart attack after being terrorized by them. What a sickening display of a police state in action.

You know something? Stand tall and look these thugs square in the eyes. If they’re going to do something to you, let them do it to your face. Cowards.

Ian Tomlinson, the man who died at last week’s G20 protests in London, was attacked from behind and thrown to the ground by a baton-wielding police officer in riot gear, dramatic footage obtained by the ­Guardian shows.

Moments after the assault on ­Tomlinson was captured on video, he ­suffered a heart attack and died.

The Guardian is preparing to hand a ­dossier of evidence to the police ­complaints watchdog. It sheds fresh light on the events ­surrounding the death of the 47-year-old newspaper seller, who had been on his way home from work when he was confronted by lines of riot police near the Bank of England.

The submission to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) includes a collection of testimonies from witnesses, along with the footage, shot at about 7.20pm last Wednesday, which shows ­Tomlinson at Royal Exchange ­Passage. The film reveals that as he walks, with his hands in his pockets, he does not speak to the police or offer any resistance.

Nothing of substance was addressed at the G20 meeting. It was a show for the pathetic media’s consumption. The participants smiled, enjoyed themselves, ate great food, pranced around in very expensive clothes, mugged for the cameras, and talked about the New World Order over which they expect to preside. Outside the police abused people.

With permission from Christopher Story, an excerpt from his latest report:

If we step back for a moment to reflect on the staged propaganda delivered to the world by Messrs Brown and Obama in recent days, we can short-circuit queries about the bona fides of these two characters quite simply. The elementary way to establish whether Obama and Brown are genuine or controlled (a simple test that applies to everyone else on the stage as well), is to ask (even though we all know the answer):

• Has President Obama ordered the CIA to get out of drug trafficking?

• Has Prime Minister Gordon Brown ordered Government Operations-2 (GO-2) within MI6 to get out of drug distribution via its control of the two drug cartels distributing drugs in the United Kingdom, and its financing of the main political parties using drug money proceeds?

Of course the answer to both questions is no. By extension, we can further ask the subsidiary question: are they serving the interests of the American/British peoples, or not? And again the answer has to be: they can’t be, otherwise this would be their top priority, wouldn’t it. In that case, if they aren’t serving the interests of their populations, they must be serving some other interest – namely, of course, the internationalist One World Agenda, operating CONTRARY to the interests of the nation state, which it seeks to obliterate. Since the nation state is the natural human condition and has been found to serve the preferences and interests of human beings best, it follows that the One World Agenda does not meet the requirements of human beings, and can never do so.

France, Germany, China, the ‘former’ Soviet Union, Israel and other countries are also in the drug business: but that’s not the point. The issue is: do our leaders serve our interests?

And clearly, since they preside over Governments that are engaged in satanic operations (drug-trafficking and distribution) the purpose of which is to make money out of destroying people’s lives, they most certainly do not.

If Brown and Obama had stood on that Canning Town platform and condemned drug-trafficking and the participation of their own structures in this heinous activity, one might have been excused for perhaps taking them seriously.

And there are plenty of other devilish government-sanctioned activities to which they should be opposed, as well. But since neither of these ‘leaders’ condemned them – making no mention of any of the foregoing fundamental causes of the criminal finance crisis, which is degrading the whole world, in their pompous globalist dirges – neither of these two operatives should command our respect: except that President Obama is Head of State and, as previously mentioned, whatever the personality occupying this position, he or she must command a degree of deference because he or she represents the people who are, or ought to be (but are not), sovereign.

Illegal drug money makes our high finance world go around. It would be so nice if people could just stop using illegal drugs, but of course many of them cannot because they are addicted. Besides that, life is ever more stressful for all of us, and we medicate or self-medicate to deal with the stress. Might this feed the drug addiction mill? Yes it might. A coincidence? Of course not. The politicians can’t legalize drugs or do anything useful to improve our lives and reduce our stress because then the corrupt world of high finance would grind to a halt. So in other words, people needing to get high works quite nicely for those in power. It doesn’t bother them a bit.

Today is Palm Sunday, the day Catholics around the world recall Jesus entering Jerusalem on a donkey while adoring crowds waved palm branches and sang hosannas to him. Later in the week they would call for his crucifixion.

The Passion according to Mark begins like this (Chapter 14):

It was two days before the Passover and the festival of Unleavened Bread. The chief priests and the scribes were looking for a way to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him; for they said, “Not during the festival, or there may be a riot among the people.”

While he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at the table, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very costly ointment of nard, and she broke open the jar and poured the ointment on his head. But some were there who said to one another in anger, “Why was the ointment wasted in this way? For this ointment could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii, and the money given to the poor.” And they scolded her. But Jesus said, “Let her alone; why do you trouble her? She has performed a good service for me. For you always have the poor with you, and you can show kindness to them whenever you wish; but you will not always have me. She has done what she could; she has anointed my body beforehand for its burial. Truly I tell you, wherever the good news is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in remembrance of her.”

This woman’s name has been lost to history, but she has been vindicated nonetheless. She believed Jesus was who he said he was, and she covered him head to toe in a gesture of love and adoration, surely knowing that the people present would mock her for her foolishness. Jesus defended her, and every word he spoke was true. He died later that week, the poor are still with us, the story has been retold countless times, and billions and billions of people throughout history have heard what this woman did out of love for her king. She was no fool.

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009, sponsored by Senators John Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe, would give Obama the power to shut down domestic internet traffic during a state of emergency. Just about everything is left undefined, naturally. Maybe they consulted with John Yoo to draft this legislation? It’s got that unitary executive thang going on.

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

Rockefeller made cybersecurity one of his key issues as a member of the Senate intelligence committee, which he chaired until last year. He now heads the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which will take up this bill. [How convenient is that?!]

“We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs—from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records—the list goes on,” [and on and on and on...] Rockefeller said in a statement. Snowe echoed her colleague, saying, “if we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina.”

Oh please. A cyber-Katrina. Who thinks this shit up?

The elites must be getting very, very nervous. It’s almost time to protect the criminal infrastructure at all costs.

Terri Gross and Sy Hersh, both inside the machine while pretending to be outside the machine, have a little ’scoop’ here.

Speaking with NPR’s Terri Gross, Hersh revealed that the former Vice President — who he characterized as “really smart” — has individuals that report back to him from key positions in government. He called these individuals “stay-behinds,” an intelligence term generally applied to insiders left behind in foreign governments after the occupying power is driven out.

“He’s put people back,” Hersh said. “They call it a stay-behind. It’s sort of an intelligence term of art. When you leave a country and, you know, you’ve driven out, you know, you’ve lost the war. You leave people behind. It’s a stay-behind that you can continue to contacts with, to do sabotage, whatever you want to do.

“Cheney’s left a stay behind,” Hersh continued. “He’s got people in a lot of agencies that still tell him what’s going on. Particularly in defense, obviously. Also in the NSA, there’s still people that talk to him. He still knows what’s going on. Can he still control policy up to a point? Probably up to a point, a minor point. But he’s still there. He’s still a presence.”

…”Cheney has enormous influence with a lot of the senior officers in the Pentagon,” he added. “So I have been told to put the word — it was the word that I was told about, what they call “stay-behinds.” He has people he can count on to keep him informed of what’s going on. That doesn’t necessarily mean he has much influence on policy. But he, certainly in the Pentagon. And I think because certainly at the National Security Council for weeks and weeks after the Obama Administration took over, there was a long delay in getting staff turned over. So there were a lot of people around in the first few weeks, in the first months of this administration that had served very closely with the Cheney/Bush operation.”

WTF? Is Hersh saying he was told to put the word out? That looks like a little slip to me.

You know, Sy Hersh has done some great stuff over the years, but Winter Patriot really flayed him alive a couple of weeks ago, and justifiably so.

The best and the brightest don’t join the militarization of America. They fight against it. The best and the brightest didn’t get all hyped up after 9/11 and decide to go kill people. The best and the brightest could see, on the day itself, that the government/media story was hogwash. The best and the brightest have been working for years — decades in some cases — to counteract the very propaganda Hersh is so fond of spewing.

But for all his inside connections, Hersh cannot see it any other way. By his own admission, he has no outside connections.

Hersh insists [...] that his close ties with the underside of the defense world are the reason he’s so confident about his understanding of that reality. “I’m not working with guys outside the system,” he tells me. “You do understand that, don’t you? I’m not outside the system in what I do. I’m really not.”

And don’t get me started on Terri Gross. The day I heard her voice choking up like she was personally stricken while she had a guest on discussing Israel’s crimes against humanity in Gaza, in particular the use of white phosphorous, that was the last day I listened to NPR. The way I heard it, she was not choking up about the Palestinians, she was horrified that she was forced to discuss Israel’s crimes against humanity on her damn show. Exposing the dirty laundry for all to see.

What does it mean when people with impeccable liberal credentials like Sy Hersh and Terri Gross report that Dick Cheney has moles inside the Obama government? Seems like a little Hegelian mind-fuck to me — blame Dick give a pass to Obama — but what do I know. What do you guys think?