Wikileaks Suspect Wins Battle Over US Documents
By Dan De Luce (AFP) – 13 Hours Ago

FORT MEADE, Maryland — A US military judge has ordered prosecutors to show they are not withholding evidence from WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning after defense lawyers accused them of hiding documents that could potentially help their client's case.

The ruling was a victory for Manning, whose defense team has argued for months that prosecutors are dragging their feet on requests for government files that could prove crucial in the trial of the Army private.

Manning, 24, accused of handing over a massive trove of classified documents to the WikiLeaks website, smiled at his attorneys after the judge read out her decision at a pre-trial hearing at Fort Meade, northeast of Washington.

Judge Denise Lind ruled that prosecutors would have to turn over reports from the CIA, the FBI, the State Department and the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive that assessed the impact of the leaks.

Manning's lawyers believe the assessments will show the disclosures had no major effect on the country's national security and did not "aid the enemy" as the government alleges.

But the judge ruled against a request for documents related to WikiLeaks from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, saying it was not relevant to the case.

Under Lind's decision, the prosecution will have to give a detailed account showing it met legal obligations to share all pertinent evidence with the defense.

In a statement of "due diligence," the prosecutors would have to show when they obtained documents, why they were not shared with the defense and to what extent they had queried dozens of agencies about relevant papers, she said.

The judge imposed a deadline of July 25 on prosecutors but indicated she would be willing to give them more time if necessary.

Manning's civilian attorney, David Coombs, had asked the judge to suspend the proceedings while the prosecutors prepared their "due diligence" statement, but that request was not granted.

Lind did leave open the possibility that the defense could ask for time to review any new evidence that emerges.

Coombs had argued earlier Monday that government prosecutors had displayed a "pattern" of obstruction on document requests that "should cause alarm to the court."

The government's explanation for why some files were unavailable "defies logic" and violated the bedrock legal principle that a defendant must have access to the same evidence as his accusers, Coombs said.

"This is not the way the discovery process works," he added.

Prosecutor Major Ashden Fein denied the government was sitting on evidence that could help Manning and said "the defense is disregarding the complexity of this case," which involves hundreds of thousands of documents.

Manning supporters who attended the hearing at Fort Meade, northeast of Washington, welcomed the decision.

"It's definitely heartening that David Coombs's arguments are resonating with the judge," said Zach Pesavento, a spokesman for the Bradley Manning support network.

"It appears they (prosecutors) may have been essentially lying to the court," about the availability of some documents requested by the defense, he said.

"We believe that truth is ultimately on Bradley's side," he added.

Manning has been condemned as traitors for his alleged role in the worst ever breach of US intelligence, which embarrassed Washington and dismayed US allies.

But his supporters view him as a political prisoner and say WikiLeaks has blown the whistle on government wrongdoing and excessive secrecy.

Manning could spend the rest of his life in prison if convicted of aiding the Al-Qaeda terror network by leaking the documents. He has not yet entered a plea.

Among those watching the proceedings were lawyers for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who faces his own legal drama.

Assange walked into the Ecuador embassy in London last week seeking political asylum in a bid to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he faces questioning on sex crime allegations.

Assange fears that once in Sweden he could be whisked away to the United States, where he believes he will face potential charges.










"Netanyahu Has Decided To Attack Iran Before The U.S. Elections In November."

Senior Israeli officials now confirm that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has, "decided to attack Iran before the U.S. elections in November."

Netanyahu's agenda is much broader than knocking out Iranian nuclear installations for his aim is to reshape the political landscape in the USA and Israel shifting everything to the far, far right in order to create a new comfort zone for religious fundamentalists.

Netanyahu's major backer, Sheldon Adelson, is now firmly behind Mitt Romney, and they are known to believe that an Israeli attack on Iran in September or October will displace Obama and many dovish Democrats in Congress and establish a hawkish regime in Washington.

Israel has agreed to restrain any attack on Iran until after the current round of five talks between Iran and the P5+1 that will come to an end in either late July or August:

"U.S., Israel continue preparations for strike on Iran nuclear facilities.

The website cites U.S. defense contracts and Israel's new military preparations, suggesting that 'all sides are getting ready for whatever may come.'

Israel and the U.S. are pushing forward with preparations to jointly strike Iran's nuclear facilities, the U.S. blog Business Insider reported on Saturday.

"U.S. defense contracts, an Iranian F-16 acquisition, and Israel's new military preparations suggest that all sides are getting ready for whatever may come," the report says.

According to the blog, the U.S navy has recently signed a $338 million contract with defense contractor Raytheon to "provide the Navy with 361 Tomahawk cruise missiles in their most recent configuration. According to the website, the U.S. is either renewing its stock of missiles or planning ahead.

"On May 9," the report added, "the U.S. House of Representatives passed the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, which seeks to "reaffirm the commitment to Israel's security as a Jewish state; provide Israel with the military capabilities to defend itself by itself against any threats... [and] expand military and civilian cooperation."

A senior Israeli official recently told Reuters that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has decided to attack Iran before the U.S. elections in November." (Haretz, June 23, 2012, emphasis added)

Military experts have long agreed that the "sweet spot" for an Israeli attack on Iran will be this coming September or October precisely because of the timing of the US presidential election cycle.

For maximum political impact and minimal diplomatic responsiveness, the time of the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, NC - September 3-6 comes within this window of opportunity as well as the days immediately prior to the US election - say from Halloween till the 6th of November.

It may be instructive to recall that Israel's Operation Cast Lead was timed to coincide with the transition between Obama and Bush and ended abruptly immediately before the Inauguration in January 2009.

Presidential election cycles have played major roles in the design of military timetables.  For only one example, recall the Tet Offensive in early 1968 that drove LBJ out of the race for the White House.

The Loch Ness Monster Is Real; The KKK Is Good: The Shocking Content of Publicly Paid for Christian School Textbooks

Thousands of Louisiana students will receive state voucher money, transferred from public school funding, to attend private religious schools. What will they learn there? READ MORE









WASHINGTON, June 17 (Reuters) - A Senate committee chairman called on Sunday for a special counsel to investigate suspected leaks of U.S. classified information following allegations that the White House made the disclosures to boost President Barack Obama's election chances.

Senator Joseph Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's appointment on June 8 of two federal prosecutors to investigate the suspected leaks did not go far enough.

"We need a special counsel because a special counsel avoids any appearance of conflict of interest," Lieberman said on "Fox News Sunday."

"Special counsels - independent counsels before them - were created for situations exactly like this where people might reach a conclusion that investigators, U.S. attorneys even, working for the attorney general - who was appointed by the president - cannot independently and without bias investigate high officials of their own government."

The secrets, revealed in media stories, have included reports on U.S. cyber warfare against Iran, procedures for targeting militants with drones and the existence of a double agent who penetrated a militant group in Yemen.

Republicans have already demanded an outside special counsel to investigate the leaks. Lieberman is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats in the Senate and usually votes with them.

Holder said the investigation would be headed by U.S. Attorneys Ronald Machen Jr. of Washington and Rod Rosenstein of Maryland, who would be "fully authorized to prosecute criminal violations discovered as a result of their investigation."

Senior White House adviser David Plouffe defended the Obama administration's approach in the leaks investigation.

"This ought to be investigated as thoroughly as anything can and we ought to wait for the results of that investigation," Plouffe said on the same program.

"There's going to be a very thorough investigation," he added.

Plouffe was asked if Obama would sit down with the investigators but declined to answer. Asked if Obama had declassified the information that ended up in published reports, Plouffe said, "No, of course he didn't."

The investigation by the two federal prosecutors is likely to include scrutiny of White House officials, sources have told Reuters.

The issue has spilled into the presidential campaign, with some Republicans charging the leaks appear calculated to boost the Democratic president's re-election prospects on Nov. 6. Obama has said he has "zero tolerance" for these kinds of leaks.

Lieberman said the leaks were "the worst in a long time" and called for stronger U.S. laws to prevent future leaks.

"In my opinion, an enormous amount of damage has been done to our national security," Lieberman said. "In the case of the cyber attack on Iran ... this is the first confirmation of that. Some methods of how it was carried it out were telegraphed to the Iranians. I think there's a danger that it may legitimize an Iranian or terrorist counter-cyber attack on us."

Lieberman said the leaks had also angered the operative who infiltrated Yemen-based al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

"This will discourage people and foreign intelligence services from cooperating with us in the future," Lieberman said.

(Reporting by Will Dunham, Bill Trott, David Brunnstrom and Thomas Ferraro; Editing by David Brunnstrom)





The War on Health: The FDA's Cult of Tyranny: And HPV Vaccines: SaneVax Issues a Medical Consumer Alert   Worldwide Internet Premiere: Gary Null’s Newest Documentary Exposes FDA Tactics SaneVax asks:  Have you begun to wonder exactly who the FDA works for? Is the FDA here to protect your health, or pharmaceutical company interests? Does the FDA suppress natural health alternatives? Should the FDA be allowed to dictate what you may, and may not eat? Why are FDA agents armed? Is the FDA forcing genetically modified foods down your throat? International expert in nutrition and health sciences, and staunch advocate for the natural health movement, Gary Null PhD, has produced a new documentary that may provide the answers to all of these questions and more. The premiere showing of The War on Health: The FDA’s Cult of Tyranny will take place at the New York Society for Ethical culture, June 15, 2012 at 7pm EST, followed by a live question and answer session with Gary Null, victims of the FDA’s failures, and special guests at the forefront of exposing this bureaucratic monstrosity called the FDA. The film promises never before seen footage and never before heard evidence that will SHOCK you into action. For those unable to attend, there will be a one-time LIVE SIMULCAST online of the documentary and Q&A session. Watch the official movie trailer below and follow the instructions to access the simulcast. Remember, YOU MUST RSVP to this event on Facebook in order to receive the live stream code! Go to this link to RSVP:  https://www.facebook.com/events/417685508253978/ HPV Vaccines: SaneVax Issues a Medical Consumer Alert Are Gardasil and Cervarix as safe and effective as industry representatives claim, or are HPV  vaccines the latest in a long line of ‘snake oil’ promotions? Look at the question from a logical point of view. It’s easy for the pharmaceutical industry and government health officials to say, “Large-scale clinical trials have been conducted no safety signals have been identified so far.” Simply distribute millions of doses, don’t mention what percentage of them have not been administered; then compare the rate of adverse reactions to doses distributed. Easy? Yes. Honest? Hardly! On top of that, pharmaceutical companies and government health agencies  add insult to injury by marketing Gardasil and Cervarix as vaccines when they clearly did not meet the definition of ‘vaccine’ at the time they were approved. Is this practice fraudulent? Perhaps, but at least in the United States, the problem was ‘solved’ by the FDA officially altering the definition of vaccine. Let’s Examine A Few Additional Facts: 1.      In the United States, marketing a medical product as a vaccine automatically absolves the manufacturer and those who administer vaccines from product liability issues, shifting the burden to the taxpayers. Never mind that these are the same people using the product. 2.    Should a person experience an adverse reaction from a vaccine, they can receive compensation through the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program – providing their reaction is listed on the vaccine injury table, the injury occurred within a specific time, and no other cause is found. 3.    If your injury is not listed on the table and/or did not occur within the specified time frame allowed, then you must prove the vaccine caused your condition. 4.    HPV vaccines are new enough to the market that there are no specific conditions listed as covered on the vaccine injury table. Nor is there any specified time period in which these vaccines are ‘presumed’ to be the cause. This leaves the victims of adverse reactions post-HPV vaccination on their own to prove the vaccine caused their current health conditions. So much for consumer protection. 5.     Marketing a medical product as a vaccine allows the manufacturer, and anyone they convince their product is viable, to lobby government officials to ‘mandate’ their product for school enrollment. This practice virtually guarantees a captive, quite lucrative market. Is it any wonder vaccine sales are anticipated to reach $34 billion worldwide by 2012? 6.    HPV vaccines were FDA approved using endpoints that are frequently self-reversing and not necessarily predictors of cervical cancer. 7.     Gardasil has been found to contain genetically modified HPV DNA fragments firmly attached to the aluminum adjuvant, the consequences of which are unknown. Does Cervarix have the same problem? 8.    There are many questions about HPV vaccines for which the manufacturers and public health authorities  have no answers. The SaneVax Team would like you to keep all of these things in mind as you take five minutes to watch the following video. Then decide for yourself whether or not HPV vaccines have raised any safety concerns.

HPV Vaccines: SaneVax Issues a Medical Consumer Alert Are Gardasil and Cervarix as safe and effective as industry representatives claim, or are HPV  vaccines the latest in a long line of ‘snake oil’ promotions? Look at the question from a logical point of view. It’s easy for the pharmaceutical industry and government health officials to say, “Large-scale clinical trials have been conducted no safety signals have been identified so far.” Simply distribute millions of doses, don’t mention what percentage of them have not been administered; then compare the rate of adverse reactions to doses distributed. Easy? Yes. Honest? Hardly! On top of that, pharmaceutical companies and government health agencies  add insult to injury by marketing Gardasil and Cervarix as vaccines when they clearly did not meet the definition of ‘vaccine’ at the time they were approved. Is this practice fraudulent? Perhaps, but at least in the United States, the problem was ‘solved’ by the FDA officially altering the definition of vaccine.  Let’s examine a few additional facts: 1.      In the United States, marketing a medical product as a vaccine automatically absolves the manufacturer and those who administer vaccines from product liability issues, shifting the burden to the taxpayers. Never mind that these are the same people using the product. 2.    Should a person experience an adverse reaction from a vaccine, they can receive compensation through the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program – providing their reaction is listed on the vaccine injury table, the injury occurred within a specific time, and no other cause is found. 3.    If your injury is not listed on the table and/or did not occur within the specified time frame allowed, then you must prove the vaccine caused your condition. 4.    HPV vaccines are new enough to the market that there are no specific conditions listed as covered on the vaccine injury table. Nor is there any specified time period in which these vaccines are ‘presumed’ to be the cause. This leaves the victims of adverse reactions post-HPV vaccination on their own to prove the vaccine caused their current health conditions. So much for consumer protection. 5.     Marketing a medical product as a vaccine allows the manufacturer, and anyone they convince their product is viable, to lobby government officials to ‘mandate’ their product for school enrollment. This practice virtually guarantees a captive, quite lucrative market. Is it any wondervaccine sales are anticipated to reach $34 billion worldwide by 2012? 6.    HPV vaccines were FDA approved using endpoints that are frequently self-reversing and not necessarily predictors of cervical cancer. 7.     Gardasil has been found to contain genetically modified HPV DNA fragments firmly attached to the aluminum adjuvant, the consequences of which are unknown. Does Cervarix have the same problem? 8.    There are many questions about HPV vaccines for which the manufacturers and public health authorities  have no answers. The SaneVax Team would like you to keep all of these things in mind as you take five minutes to watch the following video. Then decide for yourself whether or not HPV vaccines have raised any safety concerns.