Eleven Killed, 18 Injured in Shooting at Nigerian Church

At least eight people died and another 18 were injured in a shooting Sunday at a church in southern Nigeria. Photo courtesy Anambra State Police Command Awka/Facebook

By Allen Cone  

UPI -- At least eight people died in a shooting Sunday at a church in southern Nigeria apparently by a lone gunman, police said.

Another 18 worshipers were wounded in the attack at St. Philip's Catholic Church in Ozubulu near the city of Onitsha in the state of Anambra, the Police Command in Awka said in a post on Facebook.

Initially, witnesses said the attack was carried out by gunmen at 5:45 a.m., but police now say it likely was carried out by one man, the Premium Times in Nigeria reported.

Garba Umar, commissioner of police in the state, said they believe the attack was carried out by a native of the area.

Umar said the shooting related to an argument between Nigerians from Ozubulu who live abroad, including one who built the church in which the attack occurred.

"A gunman dressed in black attire covering his face with a cap entered the church and moved straight to a particular direction and opened fire," Umar said. "The man after shooting at his targeted victims still went on a shooting spree, killing and wounding other worshipers."

Umar said the attack was not linked to Boko Haram.

Boko Haram does not operate in southern Nigeria.

From Daily-Mail:

At least 11 killed in 'barbaric' Nigeria church shooting

At least 11 worshipers were shot dead at a church in southeast Nigeria on Sunday, with authorities suggesting the bloodshed was due to a local feud.

"The information at the disposal of the police is that the gunman had been hired to kill a particular family person believed to be among the worshipers," he said.

He said the governor of the state visited the scene and promised to pay the medical bills of the injured.

Local rights activist Emeka Umeagbalasi said his information about the motive largely concurred with that of the police version.

The gunmen had gone to kill the son of a local chief but failed to find him at his home, Umeagbalasi said.

The attackers then went to the church to hunt for him, but could not find the intended target and became angry, he said.

They opened "fire on parishioners and shot indiscriminately," he said, adding that the father of the intended target was shot and wounded.

Totalitarian Tendencies of Climate Change Activists Destroying Canada’s Economy

Most climate change activists have nothing but goodness in their hearts and are genuinely trying to save the planet. They, largely, are being duped by a few people, dare I say, Deep State people, who greatly influence scientists and media and have created the near-hysterical attitude that is not justified in real science. These people have ulterior motives in what they do and should not be trusted. There is very little truth and very questionable science in climate change hyperbole.

Another Eminent Scientist Laughs Off Man-Made Climate Change

Surprising Divide Over Human Role in Climate Change - Study

Tens of Thousands Of Scientists Declare Climate Change A Hoax

The Real Science and Politics Behind Climate Change

USA's Own Climate Change Rep Ominously Threatens US

How MSM and the Climate Change Lobby Distort the Debate

One-World Government if Harper Loses Election - Margaret Thatcher Advisor

With activists harassing banks financing Kinder Morgan pipeline and vows by recently elected BC NDP government to block the approved Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, Canada’s economy is being destroyed by a ‘no fossil fuels’ mentality, says Friends of Science.

The “No Pipeline” mentality of anti-oil activists and Canada’s drastic GHG reduction targets will shutter virtually all economical drivers of the Canadian economy

CALGARY, ALBERTA, CANADA 

As reported in the National Observer of July 21, 2017, a coalition of aboriginal and environmental activists claiming climate catastrophe, are harassing the banks financing the approved Trans Mountain pipeline expansion in an attempt to block construction. Friends of Science says that this totalitarian approach of "No Pipelines" is unrealistic and destructive to the Canadian economy and democracy.

National Observer: Canada's "big five" banks are the largest backers of Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline project, according to the company's financial documents.

In total, 26 banks from Canada, the United States, Japan, Europe, and China have committed about $7.25 billion through a combination of share purchases and loans.

Canadian banks have made the largest investments. TD Bank has committed about $731 million, and RBC $714 million. Scotiabank and CIBC have each committed roughly $639 million while Bank of Montreal came in at $446 million, and National Bank at $407 million. Smaller Canadian commitments include ATB Financial at $150 million and Canadian Western Bank at $50 million.

Desjardins pledged $145 million towards the project. The company has since announced a temporary suspension of any future support for pipelines.

The Trans Mountain pipeline is facing renewed questioning because B.C.'s new premier, John Horgan, has promised to "use every tool available" to block its construction. The new government hasn't specified what actions it will take but has a number of options available.

In the prospectus for its 2017 IPO, Kinder Morgan acknowledged that the project could be "inhibited, delayed or stopped" by a variety of forces, including rising sea levels, Indigenous legal action, and governmental or community opposition.

In June, a coalition of Indigenous and environmental groups launched campaigns targeting the banks backing Kinder Morgan Canada. Lead signatories included Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, and Grand Chief Serge Simon of the Mohawk Council of Kanesatake in Quebec.

Dutch bank ING responded by announcing that it would no longer finance pipelines from the Canadian oil sands. ING had previously withdrawn its involvement in the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline. The move followed an announcement by Sweden's pension fund AP7 that it was divesting from pipeline company TransCanada and five other companies because their activities are not compatible with the Paris climate agreement.

Kinder Morgan Canada's president, Ian Anderson held a quarterly earnings report on July 19 and assured investors that the company is on track to begin construction in September of 2017.

In past public statements, BC’s Premier Horgan has vowed to stop Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, though this would violate Canadian Rule of Law. In the National Post of July 25, 2017, BC’s Green Party leader, former climate science modeller, Andrew Weaver is quoted as saying: “B.C.’s future does not lie in chasing yesterday’s fossil fuel economy.”

Andrew Weaver might be more convincing if he put his climate models into public domain so they can be peer reviewed. Most climate modellers will not - that is not science!

Friends of Science says this is misleading as the International Energy Agency reports that today’s economies run almost entirely on fossil fuels and that is not expected to change any time soon: 

“In 2014, the shares of primary energy supply by energy source were: 

oil, 31.3%; 

coal, 28.8%; 

natural gas, 21.0 %; 

biofuels and waste, 10.3%; 

nuclear, 4.8%; 

hydro, 2.4%; 

and “other”, including all renewables energy sources, 1.4%.“

Commentator Marian L. Tupy calls out the “Totalitarianism of Environmentalists” in his July 19th, 2017 blog post.

Canada appears to be moving toward being less competitive all the time with demands for additional environmental and regulatory reviews, as discussed in a July 20, 2017 post by Ottawa energy policy consultant Robert Lyman.

Additional demands for aboriginal consultation in resource development based on ‘traditional knowledge’ is a concept disputed by Lyman in this post of July 26, 2017.

The recently released 2-part study of “The Changing World of Energy and the Geopolitical Challenges” by EU energy expert Samuele Furfari, Ph.D., professor at the Free University of Brussels, shows that fossil fuel use and exports proliferate world-wide.

As expressed in his May 9th, 2017 presentation to Friends of Science Society, Robert Lyman, explained that Canada cannot survive the present climate change policies. The “No Pipeline” mentality of anti-oil activists and Canada’s drastic GHG reduction targets will shutter virtually all economical drivers of the Canadian economy. Furthermore, Lyman points out that such one-sided demands are not democratic. Presentation posted on YouTube: youtu.be/acjGXJvgTBs

The absurdity of it all is that the world needs energy and they will get it from fossil fuels because renewable energy sources are not nearly developed enough to replace them. If they don't get fossil fuels from Canada, they will get them from elsewhere, and the only real effect is that Canada is out tens, if not hundreds of billions of dollars. That is a lot of unemployed people! Since we have a government that spends money like it grows on trees, there will be little left in government coffers to invest or even encourage investment in renewable energies.

But, alas, we won't need much energy when half the country is out of work. Is that the plan?

Friends of Science Society dispute the anti-oil activist climate catastrophe claims, saying that human influence on climate change is nominal compared to natural influences, such as the interactions of solar cycles driving ocean oscillations, among other factors.

Friends of Science is celebrating 15 years of reviewing a broad spectrum of literature on climate change and have concluded the sun is the main driver of climate change, not carbon dioxide (CO2).

Venezuela's New Assembly, 1st Order - Remove Honest Bureaucrat

Venezuela assembly ousts attorney general

after guards swarm her office

By Daniel Uria  

Dozens of uniformed guards stood outside of Luisa Ortega Diaz's office in Caracas, Venezuela as the country's newly implemented National Constituent Assembly voted to remove her from the office of attorney general.Photo by Luisa Ortega Diaz‏/Twitter

UPI -- Venezuela's newly elected National Constituent Assembly voted unanimously to remove Attorney General Luisa Ortega Diaz from office.

The assembly voted to permanently remove Ortega Diaz from her Supreme Court position and replaced her with Tarek William Saab, Venezuela's human rights ombudsman and supporter of President Nicolas Maduro.

Prior to the vote on Saturday Ortega Diaz tweeted photos showing dozens of uniformed guards standing outside, in what she called a "siege" and an "arbitrary act" on her office in Caracas.

About three dozen troops stood outside the building and apparently stopped Ortega Diaz and others from moving in and out of the building.

Her office also tweeted that the department's employees were "victims of abuse" by the guards.

Ortega Diaz was a supporter of Maduro's predecessor Hugo Chavez, but clashed with Maduro about repression against street protesters and announced on Wednesday she had opened an investigation into the election that created the Maduro-backed National Constituent Assembly.

The London-based company that handled the election's polling technology has said they are sure "without any doubt" that the vote was manipulated.

A human rights commission of the Organization of American States asked that Venezuela's government guarantee the safety of Ortega and her family from prosecution following her removal from office.

'Pharma Bro’ Martin Shkreli Guilty of Fraud

© Spencer Platt / AFP

Eccentric former pharmaceutical CEO Martin Shkreli, dubbed “the most hated man in America,” has been convicted of fraud for deceiving investors in a pair of failing hedge funds. His defense team argued that his investors made hefty profits.

A New York jury deliberated for five days before finding Shkreli guilty of three out of eight counts against him. He was found guilty of securities fraud but not of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud, AP reported.

Prosecutors in the five week trial accused Shkreli of repeatedly misleading investors about what he was doing with their money.

Shkreli, 34, told “lies upon lies,” including claiming he had $40 million in one of his funds at a time when it only had about $300 in the bank, Assistant US Attorney, Alixandra Smith said in closing arguments, reported AP.

Prosecutors said he kept making horrible stock picks which forced him to cook up schemes to recover millions in losses.

The federal trial “exposed Martin Shkreli for who he is really is – a con man who stole millions,” said another prosecutor, Jacquelyn Kasulis.

Shkreli, who comes from an Albanian family in Brooklyn, was arrested in 2015 on charges he looted Retrophin, another drug company he founded, of $11 million in stock and cash to pay back hedge fund investors.

Investors took the witness stand to accuse Shkreli of keeping them in the dark as his scheme unfolded.

Complicating the case however, was testimony from some wealthy financiers in Texas, who conceded that Shkreli’s scheme made them richer, in some cases doubling and even tripling their money on his company’s stock when it went public.

"Who lost anything? Nobody," defense attorney Ben Brafman said in his closing argument.

Some investors had to admit on the witness stand that partnering with Shkreli was "the greatest investment I've ever made," he added.

Shkreli came to national attention after he purchased rights to a life-saving drug, Daraprim, in 2014, where he promptly raised the price from $13.50 to $750 per pill, leading him to be referred to as “the most hated man in America” and “pharma bro.”

He faces as much as 20 years in prison.

USA Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

In a memo to President Trump, a group of former U.S. intelligence officers, including NSA specialists, cite new forensic studies to challenge the claim of the key Jan. 6 “assessment” that Russia “hacked” Democratic emails last year. 

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: Was the “Russian Hack” an Inside Job?

Executive Summary

Forensic studies of “Russian hacking” into Democratic National Committee computers last year reveal that on July 5, 2016, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computers, and then doctored to incriminate Russia.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper (right) talks with President Barack Obama in the Oval Office, with John Brennan and other national security aides present. (Photo credit: Office of Director of National Intelligence)

After examining metadata from the “Guccifer 2.0” July 5, 2016 intrusion into the DNC server, independent cyber investigators have concluded that an insider copied DNC data onto an external storage device, and that “telltale signs” implicating Russia were then inserted.

Key among the findings of the independent forensic investigations is the conclusion that the DNC data was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack. Of equal importance, the forensics show that the copying and doctoring were performed on the East coast of the U.S. Thus far, mainstream media have ignored the findings of these independent studies [see here and here].

Independent analyst Skip Folden, a retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US, who examined the recent forensic findings, is a co-author of this Memorandum. He has drafted a more detailed technical report titled “Cyber-Forensic Investigation of ‘Russian Hack’ and Missing Intelligence Community Disclaimers,” and sent it to the offices of the Special Counsel and the Attorney General. VIPS member William Binney, a former Technical Director at the National Security Agency, and other senior NSA “alumni” in VIPS attest to the professionalism of the independent forensic findings.

The recent forensic studies fill in a critical gap. Why the FBI neglected to perform any independent forensics on the original “Guccifer 2.0” material remains a mystery – as does the lack of any sign that the “hand-picked analysts” from the FBI, CIA, and NSA, who wrote the “Intelligence Community Assessment” dated January 6, 2017, gave any attention to forensics.

NOTE: There has been so much conflation of charges about hacking that we wish to make very clear the primary focus of this Memorandum. We focus specifically on the July 5, 2016 alleged Guccifer 2.0 “hack” of the DNC server. In earlier VIPS memoranda we addressed the lack of any evidence connecting the Guccifer 2.0 alleged hacks and WikiLeaks, and we asked President Obama specifically to disclose any evidence that WikiLeaks received DNC data from the Russians [see here and here].

Addressing this point at his last press conference (January 18), he described “the conclusions of the intelligence community” as “not conclusive,” even though the Intelligence Community Assessment of January 6 expressed “high confidence” that Russian intelligence “relayed material it acquired from the DNC … to WikiLeaks.”

Obama’s admission came as no surprise to us. It has long been clear to us that the reason the U.S. government lacks conclusive evidence of a transfer of a “Russian hack” to WikiLeaks is because there was no such transfer. Based mostly on the cumulatively unique technical experience of our ex-NSA colleagues, we have been saying for almost a year that the DNC data reached WikiLeaks via a copy/leak by a DNC insider (but almost certainly not the same person who copied DNC data on July 5, 2016).

From the information available, we conclude that the same inside-DNC, copy/leak process was used at two different times, by two different entities, for two distinctly different purposes:

-(1) an inside leak to WikiLeaks before Julian Assange announced on June 12, 2016, that he had DNC documents and planned to publish them (which he did on July 22) – the presumed objective being to expose strong DNC bias toward the Clinton candidacy; and

-(2) a separate leak on July 5, 2016, to pre-emptively taint anything WikiLeaks might later publish by “showing” it came from a “Russian hack.”

*  *  *

Mr. President:

This is our first VIPS Memorandum for you, but we have a history of letting U.S. Presidents know when we think our former intelligence colleagues have gotten something important wrong, and why. For example, our first such memorandum, a same-day commentary for President George W. Bush on Colin Powell’s U.N. speech on February 5, 2003, warned that the “unintended consequences were likely to be catastrophic,” should the U.S. attack Iraq and “justify” the war on intelligence that we retired intelligence officers could readily see as fraudulent and driven by a war agenda.

Secretary of State Colin Powell addressed the United Nations on Feb. 5. 2003, citing satellite photos which supposedly proved that Iraq had WMD, but the evidence proved bogus

The January 6 “Intelligence Community Assessment” by “hand-picked” analysts from the FBI, CIA, and NSA seems to fit into the same agenda-driven category. It is largely based on an “assessment,” not supported by any apparent evidence, that a shadowy entity with the moniker “Guccifer 2.0” hacked the DNC on behalf of Russian intelligence and gave DNC emails to WikiLeaks.

The recent forensic findings mentioned above have put a huge dent in that assessment and cast serious doubt on the underpinnings of the extraordinarily successful campaign to blame the Russian government for hacking. The pundits and politicians who have led the charge against Russian “meddling” in the U.S. election can be expected to try to cast doubt on the forensic findings, if they ever do bubble up into the mainstream media. But the principles of physics don’t lie; and the technical limitations of today’s Internet are widely understood. We are prepared to answer any substantive challenges on their merits.

You may wish to ask CIA Director Mike Pompeo what he knows about this. Our own lengthy intelligence community experience suggests that it is possible that neither former CIA Director John Brennan, nor the cyber-warriors who worked for him, have been completely candid with their new director regarding how this all went down.

Copied, Not Hacked

As indicated above, the independent forensic work just completed focused on data copied (not hacked) by a shadowy persona named “Guccifer 2.0.” The forensics reflect what seems to have been a desperate effort to “blame the Russians” for publishing highly embarrassing DNC emails three days before the Democratic convention last July. Since the content of the DNC emails reeked of pro-Clinton bias, her campaign saw an overriding need to divert attention from content to provenance – as in, who “hacked” those DNC emails? The campaign was enthusiastically supported by a compliant “mainstream” media; they are still on a roll.

“The Russians” were the ideal culprit. And, after WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange announced on June 12, 2016, “We have emails related to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication,” her campaign had more than a month before the convention to insert its own “forensic facts” and prime the media pump to put the blame on “Russian meddling.” Mrs. Clinton’s PR chief Jennifer Palmieri has explained how she used golf carts to make the rounds at the convention. She wrote that her “mission was to get the press to focus on something even we found difficult to process: the prospect that Russia had not only hacked and stolen emails from the DNC, but that it had done so to help Donald Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton.”

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton at the third debate with Republican nominee Donald Trump. (Photo credit: hillaryclinton.com)

Independent cyber-investigators have now completed the kind of forensic work that the intelligence assessment did not do. Oddly, the “hand-picked” intelligence analysts contented themselves with “assessing” this and “assessing” that. In contrast, the investigators dug deep and came up with verifiable evidence from metadata found in the record of the alleged Russian hack.

They found that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 was not a hack, by Russia or anyone else. Rather it originated with a copy (onto an external storage device – a thumb drive, for example) by an insider. The data was leaked after being doctored with a cut-and-paste job to implicate Russia. We do not know who or what the murky Guccifer 2.0 is. You may wish to ask the FBI.

The Time Sequence

June 12, 2016: Assange announces WikiLeaks is about to publish “emails related to Hillary Clinton.”

June 15, 2016: DNC contractor Crowdstrike, (with a dubious professional record and multiple conflicts of interest) announces that malware has been found on the DNC server and claims there is evidence it was injected by Russians.

June 15, 2016: On the same day, “Guccifer 2.0” affirms the DNC statement; claims responsibility for the “hack;” claims to be a WikiLeaks source; and posts a document that the forensics show was synthetically tainted with “Russian fingerprints.”

We do not think that the June 12 & 15 timing was pure coincidence. Rather, it suggests the start of a pre-emptive move to associate Russia with anything WikiLeaks might have been about to publish and to “show” that it came from a Russian hack.

The Key Event

July 5, 2016: In the early evening, Eastern Daylight Time, someone working in the EDT time zone with a computer directly connected to the DNC server or DNC Local Area Network, copied 1,976 MegaBytes of data in 87 seconds onto an external storage device. That speed is many times faster than what is physically possible with a hack.

It thus appears that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 (the self-proclaimed WikiLeaks source) was not a hack by Russia or anyone else, but was rather a copy of DNC data onto an external storage device. Moreover, the forensics performed on the metadata reveal there was a subsequent synthetic insertion – a cut-and-paste job using a Russian template, with the clear aim of attributing the data to a “Russian hack.” This was all performed in the East Coast time zone.

“Obfuscation & De-obfuscation”

Mr. President, the disclosure described below may be related. Even if it is not, it is something we think you should be made aware of in this general connection. On March 7, 2017, WikiLeaks began to publish a trove of original CIA documents that WikiLeaks labeled “Vault 7.” WikiLeaks said it got the trove from a current or former CIA contractor and described it as comparable in scale and significance to the information Edward Snowden gave to reporters in 2013.

No one has challenged the authenticity of the original documents of Vault 7, which disclosed a vast array of cyber warfare tools developed, probably with help from NSA, by CIA’s Engineering Development Group. That Group was part of the sprawling CIA Directorate of Digital Innovation – a growth industry established by John Brennan in 2015.

Scarcely imaginable digital tools – that can take control of your car and make it race over 100 mph, for example, or can enable remote spying through a TV – were described and duly reported in the New York Times and other media throughout March. But the Vault 7, part 3 release on March 31 that exposed the “Marble Framework” program apparently was judged too delicate to qualify as “news fit to print” and was kept out of the Times.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at a media conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. 

(Photo credit: New Media Days / Peter Erichsen)

The Washington Post’s Ellen Nakashima, it seems, “did not get the memo” in time. Her March 31 article bore the catching (and accurate) headline: “WikiLeaks’ latest release of CIA cyber-tools could blow the cover on agency hacking operations.”

The WikiLeaks release indicated that Marble was designed for flexible and easy-to-use “obfuscation,” and that Marble source code includes a “deobfuscator” to reverse CIA text obfuscation.

More important, the CIA reportedly used Marble during 2016. In her Washington Post report, Nakashima left that out, but did include another significant point made by WikiLeaks; namely, that the obfuscation tool could be used to conduct a “forensic attribution double game” or false-flag operation because it included test samples in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi.

The CIA’s reaction was neuralgic. Director Mike Pompeo lashed out two weeks later, calling Assange and his associates “demons,” and insisting, “It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is, a non-state hostile intelligence service, often abetted by state actors like Russia.”

Mr. President, we do not know if CIA’s Marble Framework, or tools like it, played some kind of role in the campaign to blame Russia for hacking the DNC. Nor do we know how candid the denizens of CIA’s Digital Innovation Directorate have been with you and with Director Pompeo. These are areas that might profit from early White House review.

Putin and the Technology

We also do not know if you have discussed cyber issues in any detail with President Putin. In his interview with NBC’s Megyn Kelly, he seemed quite willing – perhaps even eager – to address issues related to the kind of cyber tools revealed in the Vault 7 disclosures, if only to indicate he has been briefed on them. Putin pointed out that today’s technology enables hacking to be “masked and camouflaged to an extent that no one can understand the origin” [of the hack] … And, vice versa, it is possible to set up any entity or any individual that everyone will think that they are the exact source of that attack.”

“Hackers may be anywhere,” he said. “There may be hackers, by the way, in the United States who very craftily and professionally passed the buck to Russia. Can’t you imagine such a scenario? … I can.”

Full Disclosure: Over recent decades the ethos of our intelligence profession has eroded in the public mind to the point that agenda-free analysis is deemed well nigh impossible. Thus, we add this disclaimer, which applies to everything we in VIPS say and do: We have no political agenda; our sole purpose is to spread truth around and, when necessary, hold to account our former intelligence colleagues.

We speak and write without fear or favor. Consequently, any resemblance between what we say and what presidents, politicians and pundits say is purely coincidental. The fact we find it is necessary to include that reminder speaks volumes about these highly politicized times. This is our 50th VIPS Memorandum since the afternoon of Powell’s speech at the UN. Live links to the 49 past memos can be found at https://consortiumnews.com/vips-memos/.

FOR THE STEERING GROUP, VETERAN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR SANITY

William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center

Skip Folden, independent analyst, retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US (Associate VIPS)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

Larry C Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

Michael S. Kearns, Air Force Intelligence Officer (Ret.), Master SERE Resistance to Interrogation Instructor

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)

Lisa Ling, TSgt USAF (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Edward Loomis, Jr., former NSA Technical Director for the Office of Signals Processing

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst

Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA

Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)

Cian Westmoreland, former USAF Radio Frequency Transmission Systems Technician and Unmanned Aircraft Systems whistleblower (Associate VIPS)

Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA

Sarah G. Wilton, Intelligence Officer, DIA (ret.); Commander, US Naval Reserve (ret.)

Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat

Woman Sentenced to 2.5 Years in Jail for Text Messages Urging Boyfriend to Kill Himself

© Glenn C. Silva / Global Look Press

A Massachusetts woman who texted her boyfriend with relentless insistence that he kill himself, is to spend at least 15 months behind bars after he ended his life inhaling carbon monoxide through a portable water pump he let into in his car.

Juvenile Court Judge Lawrence Moniz in Bristol County ruled Thursday that Michelle Carter, 20, serve two and a half years in jail, but stated only 15 months will be mandatory. Moniz previously ruled in June that Carter was guilty of involuntary manslaughter for telling her boyfriend Conrad Roy III, to kill himself. Roy committed suicide at the age of 18 in July 2014.

Carter’s lawyer, Joseph P. Cataldo, successfully petitioned to have the sentence stayed, which means Carter will not go to jail until her state appeals are exhausted. The judge ordered that Carter remain free on bail for now, but that she have no contact with the Roy family.

If Carter’s sentence isn’t overturned on appeal, it will begin on August 22, 2022, when she will serve at least the mandatory 15 months, according to Buzzfeed.

Carter was 17 years old at the time when Roy was discovered dead in his Ford F-150 pickup truck in a parking lot near Boston.

One of Carter’s more straightforward text messages to Roy urging him to end his life was used as evidence in the case.

"You can't think about it. You just have to do it. You said you were gonna do it. Like I don't get why you aren't," she wrote, NBC News reported.

Carter tried to tell Roy in another text message how much better it would be if he committed suicide. "You’re finally going to be happy in heaven. No more pain. It’s okay to be scared and it’s normal. I mean, you’re about to die," according to NBC News.

During a 47-minute call with Carter shortly before his death, Roy exited his truck because the carbon monoxide was “working and he got scared.” Carter “told him to get back in,” during the call, according to court documents. It was this specifically, Moniz said, that led him to find Carter guilty.

Moniz continued with his reasoning for the guilty verdict. He elaborated that Carter became responsible when she told Roy to re-enter the vehicle because she knew the man was entering into "a toxic environment inconsistent with human life," NBC News reported.

Further, Moniz said Carter did not contact Roy’s family when she knew his location before his death, and had a responsibility to do something to stop a life-threatening risk.

Written statements from family members of both parties involved in the case were delivered to the judge outlining how they felt about Carter.

"I don’t believe she can be helped. I don’t believe she could even give one single **** about what she’s done," Roy’s aunt, Kim Bozzi said in a written statement to Moniz on Thursday. "I believe she should be kept far away from society,”according to NBC News.

Carter’s father pleaded with the judge to understand that Carter was a troubled teenager at the time and wanted a lenient sentence for the woman.

"I pray to God you will take into consideration that Michelle was a troubled, vulnerable teenager in an extremely difficult situation and made a tragic mistake," David Carter wrote in a statement to Moniz. "I am 100% sure she was only trying to do what in her mind what was right for Conrad," NBC News reported.

The defense argued that Carter was not of sound mind when she perpetrated the acts against Roy. They stated the teen was on the drug Celexa at the time of the suicide. Celexa is prescribed to treat depression that can have side effects, including irrational thinking, irritability and poor impulse control.

Prosecutors argued that days before Roy took his life, Carter went through with a “dry run,” telling classmates that Roy was “missing” even though she was in contact with him throughout those days.

“She begins to get the attention she craved for,” assistant district attorney Maryclare Flynn said of Carter’s messages to her classmates, according to NBC News.

Months after Roy’s death, Carter began to panic when authorities set out to investigate the suicide and she realized the police would read her texts. “I just got off the phone with Conrad’s mom, and she told me … [police] have to go through his phone and see if anyone encouraged him to do it on texts and stuff. Sam, they read my messages with him I'm done. His family will hate me and I can go to jail,” Carter wrote to a friend in a message.

Monsanto Leaks Suggest It Tried to ‘Kill’ Cancer Research about Notorious Weed Killer

© Yves Herman / Reuters

Controversial agricultural giant Monsanto attempted to ‘kill’ research on Roundup weed killer, which is suspected of causing cancer, leaked documents show. The company also reportedly influenced EPA officials to conceal information about the cancer risks.

A trove of documents was released by LA-based plaintiff firm Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman earlier in August. The company is representing people who claimed that they or their relatives got cancer due to Monsanto products. 

In particular, the case concerns the notorious Roundup, a non-selective herbicide which kills weeds that compete with agricultural crops. Its active ingredient is called glyphosate.

The documents, mostly emails between Monsanto executives and researchers working for or connected with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), are dated between 1999 and 2016.

For example, in one email Donna Farmer, a Monsanto scientist, insists to an expert that “glyphosate and Roundup cannot be used interchangeably.”

“For example you cannot say that Roundup is not a carcinogen ... we have not done the necessary testing on the formulation to make that statement,” she wrote.

In another set of emails Monsanto Executive William Heydens edits a manuscript on the effects of Roundup from an expert consultant.

The majority of the edits concern theories and speculation of possible links between glyphosate and cancer.

“This is a look behind the curtain,” attorney Brent Wisner said. “This show[s] that Monsanto has deliberately been stopping studies that look bad for them, ghostwriting literature and engaging in a whole host of corporate malfeasance.

“They [Monsanto] have been telling everybody that these products are safe because regulators have said they are safe, but it turns out that Monsanto has been in bed with US regulators while misleading European regulators,” he added.

Monsanto said that the plaintiffs’ legal team committed a “flagrant violation” of confidentiality by releasing the trove, and has asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit as a result. The corporation also says that the documents misrepresent its modus operandi.

The EPA’s Report of the Cancer Assessment Review Committee on glyphosate from 2015 addressed the cancer risks of the substance in a neutral way. The committee concluded that the substance has no connection with many types of tumors, and cautiously said that “there is conflicting evidence” that glyphosate causes non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL), a type of blood cancer. 

NHL is a primary concern for glyphosate as Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman plaintiffs claim that they got this exact type of cancer after exposure to the substance.

According to the group, more than 900 people across the US who have been diagnosed with NHL are suing Monsanto.

The description of glyphosate on the EPA website still appears to be positive, saying that it has “low toxicity for humans.”

The biotech corporation, which on its website claims to help farmers “grow food more sustainably,” has been at the center of scandals in recent years. There have been scores of anti-Monsanto petitions and stories of people who claimed to have been affected by the company’s products.

The corporate giant has been also at the center of reports claiming it has influence with the US government and, thus, avoids lawsuits.

The anger with the corporation went global with the start of the March Against Monsanto movement in 2013. The initiative launched rallies against ‘Monsanto poison’ across the globe, with thousands of people joining. “Keep GMOs out of your genes,” says the slogan of the movement, whose Facebook page has gathered 1.4 million likes so far. 

Europe appears to be “a force of resistance” against the corporation. In June, more than 1 million people signed a petition calling to ban glyphosate, according to the European Citizens Initiative, which launched the campaign.  The document was submitted to 28 national European authorities.

"European citizens aren’t fooled by the pesticide industry’s lobbying efforts or the faulty science it’s peddling,” David Schwartz, ECI coordinator at WeMove.EU, said. 

The rising criticism of Monsanto also resulted in a 2014 documentary, claiming that the company has contributed to over 290,000 suicides by Indian farmers over the last 20 years. Farmers were allegedly forced to grow GM cotton instead of traditional crops, agricultural scientist Dr. G. V. Ramanjaneyulu, of the Center For Sustainable Agriculture, told a team from RT’s documentary channel, RTD, which traveled to India to learn about the issue. The seeds were so expensive and demanded so much more maintenance that farmers often went bankrupt and killed themselves.

The idea here is that Monsanto is trying to get control of the 'seed market' for the entire world whereupon they can charge anything they like for the seeds.They sell their GM products as being the salvation of the world and attempt to convince governments to force all farmers to use their products. GM wheat was an obvious disaster for India and India should sue Monsanto although the authorities would have to have clean hands which is a little unlikely.

One of the recent scandals around Monsanto involves its alleged hiring, through third parties, of an army of internet trolls to counter negative comments. These trolls were reportedly tasked with citing positive “ghost-written” pseudo-scientific reports which downplay the potential risks of Monsanto products, including Roundup.

Monsanto even reportedly targeted all online materials and even social media comments that indicate potential dangers of its products, according to several plaintiffs’ lawsuits. 

One of Monsanto’s most well-known attempts to seemingly hush-up “wrong” science concerns was in March 2015, when the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) released a report which classified glyphosate as a possible carcinogen.

Monsanto promptly said that it “strongly disagrees with IARC’s classification of glyphosate” and demanded it be retracted with its “erroneous classification”.  

No scientific report has definitively concluded that Roundup, which has been on the market since 1974, causes cancer. This fact is especially noted in every Monsanto press release on the issue. The statements are usually supported by a pile of scientific articles claiming the harmless effects of glyphosate. One of the positive facts around the herbicide is that it helps to tackle climate change, the company claims.

By reducing the surplus population?