A drone being used by the United States Special Forces has the potential to remain airborne indefinitely if engineers can get the science right. Using lasers beamed from the ground to the unmanned aerial vehicle, the military could send a continuous source of power to the drone allowing it to fly without landing for refueling.
The U.S.-backed “rebels” attempting to overthrow the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad are being told by President Obama that they will have to wait until after the November presidential elections to start receiving the arms and intelligence they need to topple the Assad regime.
The foreign-financed armed rebellion and the Western-backed opposition to Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad has been falsely portrayed as a spontaneous uprising of “democracy” activists since violence first broke out more than a year ago. But according to a recent investigation published in the U.K. Guardian, top figures in the “regime-change” coalition — most notably the Syrian National Council (SNC) — have intimate links to the highest ranks of the world elite: the shadowy Bilderberg conference, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Goldman Sachs megabank, billionaire financier George Soros, and, of course, the U.S. government. It is all out in the open, too.
President Obama’s drone fever is contagious and is spreading worldwide, and the American industries that build the drones are slavering over the chance to supply the demand. Christopher Ames, the director of international strategy development for Pentagon contractor General Atomics Aeronautical, was almost gleeful in his statement to Reuters regarding the opening of a potentially lucrative overseas market for his company’s remote control killing machines.
Yet another alleged massacre of civilians by the Syrian regime was in the establishment press headlines this week, supposedly a brutal killing spree by dictator Bashar al-Assad’s forces in the village of Tremseh that left up to 250 people dead. As has become typical, Western governments and mainstream media outlets — the New York Times, the BBC, and others included — parroted anonymous “opposition activists” for the claims. But within days, after foreign powers seeking regime change had their chance to beat the war drums even louder, the carefully constructed tale was already falling apart.
A treaty that gives the United Nations “authority over everything, over, on, in, and under the oceans and seas of the world” (in the words of The John Birch Society’s Larry Greenley) is inching ever closer to defeat in the U.S. Senate. According to The Hill, 30 Republican Senators have now signed a letter being circulated by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) stating that they will “oppose … ratification” of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST). In addition, reports Examiner.com, Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), has indicated that he plans to vote against the treaty, though he has not yet signed DeMint’s letter.
If the definition of the word “terrorist” has seemed somewhat flexible to many Americans in recent years, that state of befuddlement is shared by the U.S. government. The difficulties of defining a “terrorist” were on display on Capitol Hill when a high-ranking State Department official declared that the Nigerian Jihadist group Boko Haram — one of the most violent Islamist organizations in Africa — to be a “terrorist” organization, while explaining that it was not a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).
On Monday, the head of the National Security Agency (NSA) urged Congress to act swiftly to establish workable guidelines and jurisdictional boundaries in the war against destructive computer attacks that might be made against the online infrastructure of the United States.
General Keith Alexander of the U.S. Army delivered an address at the American Enterprise Institute arguing that the need for such congressional action is urgent, and that something has to be done before the nation is hit with a disabling cyberattack. He insisted that the likelihood of such an assault was increasing.