Monday, August 1, 2011

US borrowing to surge after debt cap raised

US borrowing to surge after debt cap raised
The US Treasury said Monday that it will step up borrowing after the debt ceiling is raised, expected this week if a highly contentious legislation crafted over the weekend clears Congress.

In its quarterly funding plans, the Treasury said it expected to issue $331 billion in net debt in the July-September quarter, up from $190 billion in the previous period.

But the third-quarter forecast was $74 billion lower than originally forecast in May.

During October-December, the Treasury will borrow another $285 billion, it said. The projections assume it will have a cash balance of $100 billion at year-end.

The forecast came as Democratic and Republican Party leaders in Congress both strained to get rank-and-file support for a bill on spending cuts that would also raise the country's statutory $14.3 trillion borrowing ceiling, allowing the government to continue to meet its spending commitments.

Since May 16 the Treasury has been operating at the $14.3 trillion level, unable to increase borrowing despite mounting spending pressure.

It has repeatedly warned that if the ceiling is not raised by August 2, the country will have to renege on some commitments, including possibly defaulting on its debt.

But Republicans refused to agree to an increase unless they could get a long-term deficit reduction plan they could agree on, sparking a grinding political battle that was still not resolved Monday afternoon, one day before the deadline.

Israel 'ready to negotiate borders with Palestinians'

Israel 'ready to negotiate borders with Palestinians' - Telegraph

Israel 'ready to negotiate borders with Palestinians'

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, has bowed to US pressure by agreeing for the first time that a Palestinian state should roughly follow the contours of the 1967 ceasefire lines separating the West Bank from Israel.

Benjamin Netanyahu and a masked Palestinian youth standing on top of a demolished building waves in the West Bank
Benjamin Netanyahu and a masked Palestinian youth standing on top of a demolished building waves in the West Bank

But They Pledged! Debt-Limit Vote Breaks GOP Pledge to Post Bills Online for 3 Days Before Vote

Debt-Limit Vote Breaks GOP Pledge to Post Bills Online for 3 Days Before Vote |
Monday, August 01, 2011

John Boehner

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (AP Photo/Kathy Willens)

( - When the House of Representatives voted this evening on legislation to increase the limit on the federal debt by as much as $2.4 trillion, House Republicans broke a promise included in their 2010Pledge to America to post the text of bills online “for at least three days” before bringing them up for a vote.

“We will ensure that bills are debated and discussed in the public square by publishing the text online for at least three days before coming up for a vote in the House of Representatives,” said the Pledge to America. “No more hiding legislative language from the minority party, opponents, and the public. Legislation should be understood by all interested parties before it is voted on.”

This Pledge to America was released on Sept. 23, 2010, in the midst of the 2010 congressional campaign season, which ended with the Republicans taking back control of the House of Representatives from the Democrats.

Explaining the Republicans’ vision in a response to President Obama’s radio address on Oct. 30, 2010—just before the election—Rep. John Boehner explained that “Americans should have three days to read all bills before Congress votes on them.”

“The American people are in charge of this country, and they deserve a Congress that acts like it,” said Boehner. “Americans should have three days to read all bills before Congress votes on them--something they didn't get when the 'stimulus' was rushed into law. We should put an end to so-called 'comprehensive' bills that make it easy to hide wasteful spending projects and job-killing policies. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view--not written in the Speaker's office, behind closed doors.”

The promise to post bills online for three days before voting on them was included in a section of the Pledge to America that focused on reforming Congress.

“Americans have lost trust with their government, which has too often ignored the will of the people in favor of party loyalty and a desire to pass partisan bills at any cost,” said the introduction to that part of the Pledge to America. “Backroom deals, phantom amendments, and bills that go unread before being forced through Congress have become business as usual. Never before has the need for a new approach to governing been more apparent than under Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership. Americans are demanding change in the way Congress works, and we are fighting to bring much-needed sunlight to the process and give the American people a greater voice in their Congress.”

Curiously, a summary of how the Republican Congress has fulfilled thePledge that is included on the House Republican Conference’s Web sitequalifies the language of the promise to post legislation online three days before voting on it. This summary headlines the Pledge’s section on the three-day rule: “A Three Day Waiting Period on all Non-Emergency Legislation.”

The words “non-emergency” or “emergency” do not appear anywhere in the text of the original Pledge for America as published by the House Republicans, and as still available in full-text form on the Republican Conference’s Web site.

However, it might be problematic for House Republicans to call the debt-limit bill a piece of “emergency” legislation. The House has been aiming to pass debt-limit legislation by an Aug. 2 deadline ever since May 16, when Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the Treasury had bumped up against the statutory debt limit and that the accounting measures legally available to the Treasury in such a situation could keep the debt below that limit only until Aug. 2.

The House Republican Conference did not immediately respond to an inquiry from about the origin of the language on the conference’s website that says the three-day pledge applies to “non-emergency legislation.”

The Budget Control Act, the proposed legislation that would raise the debt limit by as much as $2.4 trillion, was posted on the website of the House Rules Committee at 1:45 a.m. on Monday morning.

A vote is expected on it imminently.

Back at the Sept. 23, 2010 press conference, when House Republicans announced the GOP Pledge to America, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) spoke about the three-day pledge as Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio)—now speaker of the House--looked on.

“The process, in order to get the right results, the process is paramount,” Chaffetz said. “We are taking a pledge today to do a number of things. It starts with all pieces of legislation be available online for 72 hours--at least 72 hours--so that the public has a chance to review the legislation and so that members of Congress can actually read the bill.” asked several leading House Republicans via e-mail and by telephone how a vote on the debt-limit legislation less than 72 hours after it was posted online fits with their Pledge to America.

Those asked included House Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), House Republican Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), Vice Chairman of the Conference Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), Conference Secretary John Carter (R-Texas), and Rep. Chaffetz. None of these House Republicans responded to the question.

The Missing Security Tapes From The World Trade Center :

The Missing Security Tapes From The World Trade Center :

The Intel Hub
By Susan LindauerContributing Writer
August 1, 2011

Late on the night of August 23, 2001, at about 3 a.m. security cameras in the parking garage of the World Trade Center captured the arrival of two or three truck vans.

Visual examination determined the vans were separate and unique from trucks used by janitorial services, including different colors and devoid of markings.

More curious, all the janitorial trucks had pulled out of the Towers by about 2:30 a.m—about half an hour before the second set of vans arrived.

According to my high level State Department source with a top security clearance, who disclosed the unusual nightly activity, no vans matching that description had entered the World Trade Center at such an hour in any of the weeks or months prior to that date. It was a unique event.

Security cameras caught the vans leaving the Towers at approximately 5 a.m—before the first wave of AAA personality types on Wall Street, driving Mercedes and BMWs, arrived to track the markets.

For the next 10 to 12 nights, the same mysterious truck vans arrived at the World Trade Center at the same mysterious hour— after the janitorial crews had left the building and before the most fanatic robber barons on Wall Street showed up for work.

The vans appeared at the World Trade Center from approximately August 23, 2001 until September 3 or 4, 2001. After that last night, they never appeared at the Towers again.

The vans were never heard of again, either. The 9/11 Commission was never informed of their surprising presence in the Towers three weeks before the 9/11 attack. Most of the 9/11 Truth Community has no knowledge of this extraordinary nightly activity, either.

For all the public’s ignorance, video from the security cameras could be the most significant missing part of the 9/11 puzzle. This State Department source was convinced the mysterious trucks were used to transport explosives into the building, and that an unidentified orphan team wired the World Trade Center for a controlled demolition in those late night hours.

He has stayed quiet to protect his job, his retirement pension and his reputation—knowing that others who spoke up have gotten fired or thrown in prison (myself included).

Controlled Demolition

Other evidence supports a controlled demolition of the Towers, as a supplement to the hijackings. Firefighters and maintenance crews reported hearing explosions popping through the Towers on 9/11. And previous reports indicate that dust from the World Trade Center tested positive for “thermate explosives–” a derivative of a thermite bomb.

A thermite reaction involves a mixture of iron oxide and aluminum, while thermate adds an element of sulfur. When the iron oxide-aluminum mixture is ignited, a super vigorous reaction occurs, creating molten metal—and dust, in the case of thermate. The reaction is extremely exothermic, meaning that a great deal of heat is given off, making for an incredibly powerful reducing agent.

Even so, as the 10 year anniversary of the 9/11 attack approaches, the majority of Americans continue to be confused as to how a controlled demolition scenario fits with the airplane hijackings and aerial strike on the World Trade Center—which the whole world witnessed on play back over and over in the media, until the image was seared like a brand on our collective consciousness.

Until now, there has been a false dichotomy that only one or the other style of attack could have occurred, but never both together. Some parts of the 9/11 Community itself vigorously dispute that both could have occurred as synchronized events. And most of the corporate media refuses to acknowledge the controlled demolition theory whatsoever.

When the public understands 9/11 as a series of Real Time events throughout the month of August, 2001, the unfolding sequence of this tragedy makes a lot more sense.

The difficulty is throwing out everything the public has been taught about 9/11—created for the convenience of politicians and corporate media, who simplified the story for public consumption.

First and foremost, contrary to all media reports and official claims, U.S. and foreign intelligence absolutely expected the 9/11 attack to occur— citing airplane hijackings and a strike on the World Trade Center. Even the time frame was identified precisely—known to be late August through mid-September.

I relate here my own experience as evidence. It has been corroborated in courtroom testimony by Parke Godfrey, a computer science professor at York University in Toronto. He delivered his statement under oath in the Federal Courthouse of the Southern District of New York—1000 yards from where the World Trade Center once graced the skyline.

On August 2, the date of Robert Mueller’s Senate confirmation hearings to become Director of the FBI, my CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz warned me not to travel to New York because the attack on the World Trade Center involving airplane hijackings was “considered imminent,” with the potential for “mass human casualties” and a “possible miniature thermo-nuclear device” (thermite).

Our team aggressively tried to block the conspiracy. But not everyone was on board.

Threats to Iraq

As far back as April and May of 2001, a decision had been made at the top levels of the government that War with Iraq would be in play in the aftermath of a 9/11 scenario.

As the primary Asset covering the Iraqi Embassy in New York, I myself was ordered to threaten Iraqi diplomats with War, if it was determined that Iraq possessed actionable intelligence about the airplane hijacking conspiracy and failed to hand it over through my back channel.

After initially balking at the message, I was informed the threat originated at the highest level of government, above the CIA Director and Secretary of State. That could only be President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

Iraqi diplomats threw up their hands: They had nothing to give us, they said. But go ahead, they told me. “Send your FBI. They are welcome in Baghdad. We want peace with America. And maybe they will find something.” For all the brouhaha after 9/11, the fact remains that George Bush took no action on Iraq’s invite.

There was chatter about the 9/11 conspiracy throughout the Intelligence Community all summer long. The greatest part of the Intelligence Community abhorred the scenario. My own Intelligence team, triangulating the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency pushed and pushed for actionable intelligence from Baghdad.

However, though we could not understand what the hell was going on, our efforts kept running into a wall of interference from the Justice Department, with only superficial outward support.

For the integrity of history, Americans and the world community have a fundamental right to understand what actions the Intelligence Community did undertake prior to the attack—because it exposes the high level opposition running interference.

August Timeline

* On Thursday, August 2, 2001— my CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz and I discussed over the telephone our belief that the attack would be imminent.

* On Saturday, August 4– I visited the Iraqi Embassy in New York for the final time before 9/11, pushing for any fragment of actionable intelligence from Baghdad that could pinpoint the conspiracy.

On the weekend of August 4-5—spooky NSA types “visited” the office where I had a part time consulting job. Of course the office was closed for the weekend, and I won’t speculate how they got inside. However, while snooping, they took a “proof of life,” for want of a better expression.

It is a physical copy of the Wall Street Journal dated July 30, 2001—the same week as my conversation with Dr. Fuisz— addressed to the company, with the street address and name of the man I had been working for.

The copy of the July 30, 2001 Wall Street Journal surfaced on my desk at home—Nine Years after the attack— while I was traveling in Japan on a speaking tour for the advance release of my book, “Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq,” which features a detailed analysis of our team’s 9/11 warnings, the 9/11 investigation and a comprehensive peace framework developed with Iraqi diplomats.

Given the upheaval in my life throughout the intervening decade—including a year’s stint in prison on a Texas military base, while the government covered up my team’s 9/11 warnings and the true facts of Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence— there’s no way a copy of the Wall Street Journal could have survived as desk clutter.

Advertisement – Special 25% Off!
Thyroid Energy Package

Other Intelligence officers will recognize the significance at once. That hard copy of the Wall Street Journal proves beyond any question that other spooks were tracking our team’s conversations about the conspiracy in “real time” fully 6 weeks before 9/11 occurred.

A newspaper would have been thrown out of an office weeks before the attack. Somebody had to grab it up almost immediately after my conversation with Dr. Fuisz.

See? Other teams tried to put together the attack scenario, too.

All of it points to the frenetic activity in advance of 9/11. There was a lot of action behind the scenes. And Intelligence folk are anything but passive individuals. Quite the opposite, there’s a lot of creative risk-taking and proactive problem solving. None of these people sit on their hands.

Americans still don’t know that:

* On Monday, August 6, I met with Dr. Fuisz and we hammered out a plan of action for alerting the White House that this hijacking conspiracy should move to “emergency status.”

* That same Monday, August 6, the CIA handed President Bush a memo warning about an expected terrorist conspiracy involving Al Qaeda. Though I could be mistaken, I have always believed Dr. Fuisz contributed to that report. If not, it proves again that a broad spectrum of U.S. intelligence was moving to high alert status, far enough in advance to block the attack.

* Following instructions from Dr. Fuisz, on Tuesday, August 7 or Wednesday, August 8, I placed an emergency call to the private staff of Attorney General John Ashcroft. Identifying myself as the Chief U.S. Intelligence Asset covering Iraq and Libya at the United Nations, I delivered our warning about a conspiracy involving airplane hijackings and a targeted strike on the World Trade Center.

I requested an emergency broadcast alert through all Federal Agencies seeking any fragment of intelligence involving airplane hijackings and a strike on the World Trade Center. I warned the attack was “imminent” with expectations of “mass casualties,” and that it should be regarded as Emergency Status.

* Attorney General John Ashcroft’s private staff immediately gave me a telephone number at the Office of Counter-Terrorism, and told me to repeat what I had just told them to the person at that number. Immediately I complied.

* Later that week on August 9 or 10, I drove over to the Arlington, Virginia home of my second cousin, Andrew Card— Chief of Staff to President George Bush— ready to deliver the same message. I waited two hours in my car outside of his home.

Occasionally neighbors peeked outside their curtains, while I chain smoked cigarettes in the hot car. (Yes, I have quit smoking.) Driving away, I remember thinking that I might be making the greatest mistake of my life.

My Own Private Hell during the Cover Up

I am extremely proud of our team efforts before 9/11 and throughout the 9/11 investigation. For all that, Americans are learning about this very late because I got into great big, bad trouble with the Feds when I tried to talk.

I suffered five (5) years of indictment on the Patriot Act and one year of prison on a military base without a trial, when Republicans decided to reinvent the facts about 9/11 and Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence, denying Iraq’s contributions to the 9/11 investigation and the existence of a comprehensive peace framework.

Our relationship soured as I became convinced Republicans at the top echelons allowed 9/11 to happen, killing thousands of innocent Americans and international citizens, so they could build a phony case for War against Iraq and Afghanistan.

I was outraged that the American government has done this to itself—as a pretext for military aggression and massive deficit spending in support of the military industrial complex, which is bankrupting the Middle Class. And I was quite vocal in expressing my belief that Americans have a right to full disclosure about our activities before 9/11 and the Iraqi War. And the devil take politicians!

Without question I posed a grave threat to political grandstanding on 9/11 and the myth of Washington’s “outstanding leadership performance on terrorism.” Many times I have thought of myself as Dorothy in the Land of Oz pulling back the curtain on the Wizard, and exposing his deceit before the hapless, trusting Munchkins.

In truth, the spooks did a great job before 9/11. Everything moved with lightning speed ahead of the threat. We could have stopped 9/11 easily if the Justice Department had fulfilled requests for inter-agency cooperation. There was plenty of time to alert NORAD or post an anti-air craft battery on top of the World Trade Center buildings.

That’s why the GOP leadership had to take me out—because I refused to back off that point. If I had been free, the American people and the world community would have learned the truth much sooner.

Controlled Demolition

Unhappily for all of us, because of private conversations with sources like my State Department colleague, I have reached additional conclusions that our team was not the only one at work before 9/11.

Though none of us expected this to happen, I have come to believe that our efforts collided with a force of equal resistance, in the form of an orphan team also watching the events unfolding like us.

As a long-time participant in multiple terrorism investigations, I have personal knowledge that most terrorist attacks are noisy, smoky and chaotic— without achieving maximum destruction of the target. The 1993 World Trade Center attack by Ramzi Youseff and Sheikh Abdul Rahmon of Egypt killed 5 people.

The bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in the Port of Aden, Yemen killed 12 people. Without extra push, this 9/11 attack would never have killed so many people either—100 people at the very most.

Add to that a recipe of incompetent pilots— who functioned as Intelligence Assets themselves in a few cases— Again from personal experience, I know that Assets are heavily scrutinized at all times by handlers from multiple agencies. I am convinced that an inner circle anticipated the event, and saw that their boys flying those planes could not achieve maximum damage sufficient to achieve their War agenda in Iraq.

I cannot blame Americans for feeling overwhelmed, even heart-broken by these revelations. But bottom line jet fuel fires could not have collapsed both of those Towers, or Building 7, pretty much evaporating the entire steel frame of the buildings into dust and molten steel.

Add to that the CIA’s urgent reports that a miniature thermo-nuclear device would be used in the attack—and that’s why I had to stay out of New York City.

The strange nightly activity at the World Trade Center three weeks before the attack clinched it for me. I am 100 percent convinced those Towers were wired for explosives.

Yes, hijacked airplanes struck the towers. But bringing down the Towers to secure War with Iraq required some extra umph.

I cannot speculate who wired the towers with explosives. I could make a guess, but my training as an Asset requires me to stay focused on what I have observed first-hand, and to recognize my own limitations.

So why should the world care? At this point, it is most critical for Americans to stop politicians in Washington from using 9/11 for grandstanding and personal ambitions. The War on Terrorism has perpetrated a fraud on all of us.

Those who support the War on Terror are destroying our fiscal economy and our Middle Class.

That’s why Americans must learn the truth about 9/11.

It’s reached a crisis point where we must get off this merry-go-round of defense spending. We must end the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Otherwise this fraud of 9/11 is going to ruin our great country for all time.

I only hope it isn’t too late already.


Susan Lindauer is a former U.S. Asset, 9/11 Whistleblower, frequent Intel Hub contributor, and the author of“Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq.”

Veteran is victim of agents at the wrong address

Veteran is victim of agents at the wrong address

Ramsey Tossa, a former Army translator, woke to the sound of over-anxious DEA agents pounding on his door of his home near Detroit, according toDetroit’s Fox2;

“As soon as I opened the door, somebody grabbed me and took me outside and put me on the grass,” Tossa said. “The first thing I thought was they were terrorists who want to kill me because I served in Iraq.”

Apparently, the agents were looking for Tossa’s landlord’s son. Nice recon work, there, DEA.

Agents Raid Wrong House in Sterling Heights:

While DC scum talk " Crisis" we live it..............

China blames Muslim extremists for attack in Xinjiang

China blames Muslim extremists for attack in Xinjiang - Yahoo! News

BEIJING (Reuters) - China said on Monday that Islamic militants had mounted an attack that left 11 people dead in the restive western region of Xinjiang, which announced a crackdown on "illegal" religious activities at the start of the Muslim fasting month.

The attack in Kashgar city on Sunday afternoon was the latest violence to rattle the region where Muslim Uighurs have long resented the presence of Han Chinese and religious and political controls imposed by Beijing.

It came less than 24 hours after two small blasts hit the city, which is dominated by Uighurs.

"The malign intention behind this violent terror was to sabotage inter-ethnic unity and harm social stability, provoking ethnic hatred and creating ethnic conflict," the Kashgar government said on its website (

Captured suspects confessed that their ringleaders had earlier fled to Pakistan and joined the separatist "East Turkestan Islamic Movement," and received training in making firearms and explosives before infiltrating back into China, the Kashgar government said.

"The members of this group all adhere to extremist religious ideas and adamantly support Jihad," said the statement, referring to the Arabic term for struggle used by advocates of militant Islam to describe their cause.