Archive | September 1st, 2013

Vladimir Putin’s Message To Obama

Posted in USA, Russia, SyriaComments Off on Vladimir Putin’s Message To Obama

Ancient Aliens Debunked – (full movie) HD


[ed notes;had to post it,if i hear another person cite ancient alien show from history channel i swear ill %hoke them lol this almost 2 hour long documentary clearly exposes stitchens and his minions…i enjoyed it very much…

p.s. not saying aliens dont or might not exist,but clearly ancient alien series and its creators are dishonest to say least…oh snap see how my font changed drastically and radically?ancient aliens must have subliminally made me do it lmaoo jk of course

Posted in EducationComments Off on Ancient Aliens Debunked – (full movie) HD

Syria Stunner: Rebels Admit They Mishandled Chemical WMD’s From Saudi Causing The Deaths

I thought everyone would enjoy the Slide Show before the next War Crime commences on Sunday.

The last photo is of St. Stephanos church in Iranian Azerbaijan, where I attended the Armenian Festival of St. Thaddeus in 1974.  I wish I could go again.  Thaddeus (Jude), one of the Apostles of Christ, is believed to be buried beneath the church.  It’s time to let Obama and Kerry hit it with a Tomahawk Cruise Missile, in the name of Jesus and John Hagee, and the protection of our Many Freedoms, including the Freedom to Sign Off on another Israeli False Flag Operation, and to completely ignore Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.  . . .

Sunday:  UN inspectors out (without any ultimate conclusions as to who really did this), followed by bombing.


1) Repeated statements of Israeli leaders that we needed Regime Change in Syria (before attacking Iran).

2) Obama says Assad’s use of chemical weapons would constitute the “Red Line.”

3) Many of us were on public record as saying there would be a chemical attack in Syria falsely assigned to Assad, as the only way to militarily save the Al-Qaeda and Al-Nusra Sunni Wahabic extremists we were employing to overthrow him.

4) Sunni news agencies supporting the Al-Qaeda insurgency in Syria [also being supported by the United States, Israel, and the Sunni states led by Saudi Arabia] and the pro-Zionist Reuters news agency, post video and news spin showing “Assad’s Chemical Attacks on Civilians”—-24 hours in advance of the actual occurrence of the incidents in question.

5) Carla Del Ponte, former Swiss attorney general and UN inspector indicates that all the available evidence points to—the Sunni rebels as the culprits behind the chemical attacks in question.

6) The American intelligence community admits it doesn’t have evidence of Assad’s complicity.

7) Zionist John Kerry says today we have all the evidence in the world–although he doesn’t produce any, and cites “methods and sources” that would prove his case that can never be shared or cited in support of the war we are getting ready to launch.

8) And we are supposed to believe these guys, after the bogus “Weapons of Mass Destruction” claim regarding Saddam in 2003, later absolutely disproven and the work of a discredited Ahmad Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress.

9) Let’s celebrate the Sabbath with a renewed commitment to mass murder and Netanyahu’s victory in Eretz Yisrael.

10) And the death of the American Republic.

All of you have been working to avoid this moment, for the last 12 years or longer.  We are now at the water’s edge.

Whatever happens, we all did our best.  God will honor that.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Syria Stunner: Rebels Admit They Mishandled Chemical WMD’s From Saudi Causing The Deaths

President Obama Should Listen to US and UK Public: Don’t Strike Syria


Obama has less legitimacy and popular support for the proposed bombing than almost any US military action in recent history

Even before the British vote, the Obama team had less legitimacy and popular support for its proposed bombing than almost any US military action has had in recent history.” (Photo: Getty images)President Obama’s proposed “humanitarian” bombing of Syria, which seemed like a done deal just a few days ago, is now running into serious trouble both at home and abroad. This is a great thing for those who care about human life, and increases the chances that Washington and its allies may eventually be forced to support a negotiated solution to Syria’s bloody civil war.

In a major blow to both Prime Minister David Cameron and President Obama, the UK parliament voted on Thursday to reject a military attack on Syria, and Cameron pledged to respect their decision.

Now we can see why the Obama administration has been in such a hurry to lob cruise missiles at Syria, that it didn’t want to wait even a couple of days for the UN inspectors to do their job. No one had put forth any military or security reason for the rush to attack; no one claimed that speed was essential or even relevant to saving any lives. Rather, it now seems, the urge to shoot first and ask questions later was driven by the need to carry out this illegal attack before the public, and their representatives in national and international bodies, could weigh in.

The US public has been deeply suspicious because of what the New York Times politely calls the botched intelligence leading up to the Iraq war, which most Americans would more plainly refer to as “lies.” Then the Associated Press reported that “the intelligence linking Syrian President Bashar al-Assad or his inner circle to an alleged chemical weapons attack that killed at least 100 people is no “slam dunk,” and that this “uncertainty calls into question the statements by Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden”.

Time is not on the side of the “humanitarian” would-be bombers. Here in Washington, at least 162 members of the US. House of Representatives have publicly demanded a Congressional debate and vote before the US takes any military action against Syria. This is, of course, alegal requirement in the United States, under our Constitution and the 1973 War Powers Resolution. The Republicans lost their majority in Congress in 2006 largely because of the Iraq war; so there are political risks here that will be more noticed as the debate widens.

Even before the British vote, the Obama team had less legitimacy and popular support for its proposed bombing than almost any US military action has had in recent history. No UN Security Council resolution, which would be the requirement for legality under international law; no support from the Arab League, nor even one Arab government, which Washington had for the bombing of Libya; not even NATO, which Washington can generally count on for almost any war. And now the UK has refused to join Obama’s “coalition of the willing”, leaving him with an unprecedented level of international isolation if he chooses to carry out his threat to bomb Syria.

Americans are against the intervention by a 60% majority; similar or larger majorities inGermany, France, the UKTurkey, Egypt, and what looks like most of the world are also against it.

Then there is the problem of even defining what the objectives are. Obama has insisted that his goal is not regime change, and that is probably the most believable part of his story. Unfortunately, the implications of this pledge turn out to be even uglier than an attempted overthrow. Much uglier. War advocate Edward Luttwak described in the New York Times what is very likely official policy: bleed both sides indefinitely, and then maybe pick up the pieces when there is not much left of either. This makes sense from a ruthless, imperial point of view, since the strategic objective for years has been to weaken Bashar al-Assad; but now that al-Qaida-type forces are the bulk of the military opposition, their victory is not very appealing.

The strategy is reminiscent of (then senator) Harry Truman’s statement about the second world war on 23 June 1941:

If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible.

So there you have it. A government that has long lost the moral high ground through military interventions that have slaughtered vastly more civilians than al-Assad’s forces could ever kill, seeking support for an effort to prolong a hideous civil war. No wonder Obama’s PR campaign is not working. And no wonder there are worries about greater involvement (pdf) from military officials like US Army Chief of Staff Martin Dempsey – the military, for its part, likes to have a clearer objective than trying to prolong a war.

The Russians, who are widely condemned for supplying arms to the Syrian government, look reasonable by comparison to the US. Unlike Washington and its allies, who have insisted on Assad’s resignation as a starting point for talks, the Russians have at least pushed for a negotiated solution to the civil war. This could possibly have saved tens of thousands of lives if Washington and its allies had only been interested in negotiating. Despite the ugly mess that western intervention has helped create, it is still the only solution to the conflict going forward.

Posted in USA, SyriaComments Off on President Obama Should Listen to US and UK Public: Don’t Strike Syria

Obama Determined To Strike Syria, Putin Speaks Out


President Obama is determined to send the Syrian Government and the rest of the world a message about chemical weapons.

WASHINGTON, DC - Obama (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON, DC – Obama (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)


By Shepard Ambellas

WASHINGTON — As things heat up with the Syrian chemical weapons situation, we notice the same rhetoric that got us into all of the other illegal wars. As you likely remember, they have previously told us things like, ‘don’t worry, we won’t send any troops in’, or ‘we will not be there too long’, and then there was the weapons of mass destruction story former President George W. Bush, told so well. However, now in 2013, people just aren’t buying it.

In fact, recently Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Foreign Ministry even chimed in. Will England reported, “The Foreign Ministry said a U.S. attack would be a “gross violation” of international law.

Speaking out for the first time since an alleged chemical weapons attack near Damascus on Aug. 21, Putin called on President Obama to find a nonviolent way out of the crisis.

“I would like to address Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate: Before using force in Syria, it would be good to think about future casualties,” Putin told Russian news agencies in Vladivostok during a tour of the country’s flood-stricken Far East.

“Russia is urging you to think twice before making a decision on an operation in Syria,” he said.”[1]

President Obama stated in a White House press meeting Saturday, “The world has an obligation to make sure that we maintain a norm against the use of chemical weapons”. Obama continued by adding, “We are not considering any open-ended commitments. We are not considering any boot on the ground approach”.


Link to this page

According to a recent piece, “Syria’s prime minister appeared unfazed by the saber-rattling. “The Syrian Army’s status is on maximum readiness and fingers are on the trigger to confront all challenges,” Wael Nader al-Halqi said Saturday during a meeting with a delegation of Syrian expatriates from Italy, according to a banner on Syria State TV.

But planning for a possible military response is well under way in Washington. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, Vice President Joe Biden and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin E. Dempsey arrived Saturday morning at the White House.

Obama said he’s determined to hold Syria accountable for what U.S. intelligence experts have concluded were chemical weapons attacks against Syrian civilians.”[2]

Expect the situation to escalate as the U.S. seems pre-determined to strike Syria.



[1] Russia sharply steps up criticism of U.S. over Syria –

[2] Syrian samples to be tested for chemical weapons as Obama weighs military action –

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI, SyriaComments Off on Obama Determined To Strike Syria, Putin Speaks Out

Judgment Day


By Jafar M Ramini

Every ‘heavenly’ religion warns us of the day we meet our maker and have to answer for our deeds. We call it Judgment Day.

What made me latch onto this word ‘judgment’ was because it was used many a time yesterday by our own Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron, during the afternoon debate in the House of Commons, trying to justify direct military intervention in Syria.

Never mind evidence; forget the truth; ignore the UN inspectors and bypass the United Nations. Just use your judgment. He was frothing at the mouth and chomping at the bit to unleash yet more mayhem, suffering and destruction on the Syrian people.

That was in the afternoon. In the evening when the matter was put to the vote our parliament rejected it. A very much-needed shot in the arm for the reputation of this old parliament, if not to say of democracy itself. Mr. Cameron, begrudgingly admitted defeat so the juggernaut of war that was hurtling towards Syria has been considerably slowed down.

As that old, wily Labour politician Harold Wilson once said, “ A week is a long time in politics.” It would seem that when politicians do what they were elected to do, representing their constituent’s wishes, a few hours can do the trick.

As to where the intelligence regarding the use of chemical weapons in Syria came from, it’s not a well kept secret. We all know it’s Israel’s intelligence service, the Mossad. And when you also know that the motto of Mossad is , ‘By Way Of Deception Thou Shalt Wage War’, then the picture becomes a little bit clearer.

Add to that, the well-established policy of fragmentation and subjugation of the Middle East that Israel adopted,
** The Oded Yinon’s plan, “A Strategy For Israel in the 1980s”.

It has been edited and translated by Israel Shahak and published by the Arab-American Graduates Inc. of Belmont, Massachusetts, USA. This is the publisher’s summary of the aim of the plan.

“To survive, Israel must:

1) Become an imperial regional power
2) Must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states.
‘Small’ here will depend on the ethnic or
sectarian composition of each state.
Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based
states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its
source of moral legitimacy.”

The notes are comprehensive and continue:

“The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units, occurs again and again in Israeli strategic thinking. For example, Ze’ev Schiff, the military correspondent of
Ha’aretz (and probably the most knowledgeable in Israel, on
this topic) writes about the “best” that can happen
for Israeli interests in Iraq: “The dissolution of Iraq
into a Shi’ite state, a Sunni state and the separation
of the Kurdish part” (Ha’aretz 6/2/1982). Actually, this aspect of the plan is very old. “

The role of their mighty supporters, the USA is also clear.

“ The strong connection with Neo-Conservative thought in the USA is very prominent, especially in the author’s notes.
But, while lip service is paid to the idea of the “defense of the West from Soviet power”, the real aim of the author, and of the present Israeli establishment is clear:
To make an Imperial Israel into a world power. In other words, the aim
of Sharon is to deceive the Americans after he has deceived all the rest.”

A handful of Americans have not been deceived. Just listen to what four star General; Wesley Clark had to say in 2007:

General Wesley Clark’s career took a nose-dive after that speech so the plan is still working and the results are there for everybody to see. Iraq is fragmented on sectarian and ethnic grounds; the same goes with Libya, Egypt, Lebanon and now Syria.

And where are the Arabs in all of this? They are just serving their own narrow, tribal interests, exacerbating their rivalry and obeying orders from Tel Aviv via Washington.

The Oded Yinon plan describes them very accurately.

“All the Gulf principalities and Saudi Arabia are built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil..”

As for the Palestinians, they are used, abused and cast aside. According to the notes on the Yinon Plan, while they are not the sole target of Zionist expansionism they are the primary target.

“The Zionist policy of displacing the Palestinians from Palestine is very much an active policy, but is pursued more forcefully in times of conflict…”

Hence, the Syrian conflict must be inflamed at every opportunity, so the theft of Palestinian land and resources will go un-noticed.

None of this could have happened if the USA, since the 1950s did not turn a blind eye to the excesses of Israel aggression and war crimes and not given Israel billions of dollars in actual aid and state-of-the-art machinery of war. I am reminded, yet again, of what Moshe Dayan once said, “Our American friends offer us money, arms and advice. We take the money, we take the arms and we decline the advice.”

Is there any hope of the USA changing course? I doubt it. Congress is not the British parliament. It won’t be an exaggeration to say that the whole of Washington is an Israeli colony. They are part and parcel of the Zionist plan for the Middle East and they sell it to their constituents as ‘safe-guarding the national interest of America’.

As Arial Sharon said, when asked to be careful not to upset the Americans by his then foreign minister, Shimon Peres, “ We, the Jewish people control America and the Americans know it.”
October 3 2001.

So, do not be surprised when America, France and maybe even Britain, attack Syria within the next 48 hours. It will be done under the pretext of “yes, we are coming to bomb the life out of you, but it’s for your own good.”

As Voltaire said, “It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.”

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Judgment Day

‘Rebels’ Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack

  By Syrianetwork

terrorist pimp in the Sheikh Maqsoud district of Aleppo_2

Zio-NATO Rat's tell AP reporter they mishandled Saudi-supplied chemical weapons, causingaccident

Paul Joseph Watson –

Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which Western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak(back up version here).

Rebels told Gavlak that they were not properly trained on how to handle the chemical weapons or even told what they were. It appears as though the weapons were initially supposed to be given to the Al-Qaeda offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra.

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” one militant named ‘J’ told Gavlak.

His claims are echoed by another female fighter named ‘K’, who told Gavlak, “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them. We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of an opposition rebel, also told Gavlak, “My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” describing them as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.” The father names the Saudi militant who provided the weapons as Abu Ayesha.

According to Abdel-Moneim, the weapons exploded inside a tunnel, killing 12 rebels.

“More than a dozen rebels interviewed reported that their salaries came from the Saudi government,” writes Gavlak.

If accurate, this story could completely derail the United States’ rush to attack Syria which has been founded on the “undeniable” justification that Assad was behind the chemical weapons attack. Dale Gavlak’s credibility is very impressive. He has been a Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press for two decades and has also worked for National Public Radio (NPR) and written articles for BBC News.

The website on which the story originally appeared – Mint Press (which is currently down as a result of huge traffic it is attracting to the article) is a legitimate media organization based in Minnesota. The Minnesota Post did a profile on them last year.

Saudi Arabia’s alleged role in providing rebels, whom they have vehemently backed at every turn, with chemical weapons, is no surprise given the revelations earlier this week that the Saudis threatened Russia with terror attacks at next year’s Winter Olympics in Sochi unless they abandoned support for the Syrian President.

“I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” Prince Bandar allegedly told Vladimir Putin, the Telegraph reports.

The Obama administration is set to present its intelligence findings today in an effort prove that Assad’s forces were behind last week’s attack, despite American officials admitting to the New York Times that there is no “smoking gun” that directly links President Assad to the attack.

US intelligence officials also told the Associated Press that the intelligence proving Assad’s culpability is “no slam dunk.”

As we reported earlier this week, intercepted intelligence revealed that the Syrian Defense Ministry was making “panicked” phone calls to Syria’s chemical weapons department demanding answers in the hours after the attack, suggesting that it was not ordered by Assad’s forces.

UPDATE: Associated Press contacted us to confirm that Dave Gavlak is an AP correspondent, but that her story was not published under the banner of the Associated Press. We didn’t claim this was the case, we merely pointed to Gavlak’s credentials to stress that she is a credible source, being not only an AP correspondent, but also having written for PBS, BBC and

Facebook @
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @


Source at:

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for and Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.


this page at



Posted in SyriaComments Off on ‘Rebels’ Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack



By Gilad Atzmon

As we are marching towards an imminent American attack on Syria, a conflict that can easily escalate into a regional disaster, it is embarrassing to recall that just four months ago some of our ‘leading’ political scientists were clumsy enough to lend their names to a pro interventionist petition. On April 8th we found out that Tariq Ali, Norman Finkelstein and Ilan Pappe, amongst others, demanded “that Bashar al-Asad leave immediately without excuses so that Syria can begin a speedy recovery towards a democratic future.”

I learned today that Tariq Ali confessed to friends that he regretted signing this interventionist petition, bless him.  However, I wonder where Ilan Pappe and Norman Finkelstein stand on the issue? Is the looming American attack what they had in mind?

Posted in SyriaComments Off on ON IMMORAL INTERVENTIONISM

US Prepares For Syria Intervention Without UN Approval


Civilians will be the biggest loser in possible US strike on Syria

“…the use of force for the United States is going to have the opposite effect of supporting or helping to bring about a negotiated settlement. And, of course, that means that all the Syrian people will suffer, and particularly those who suffer the results of government offensives will suffer from the continued war.”—Gareth Porter, historian and investigative journalist

Posted in SyriaComments Off on US Prepares For Syria Intervention Without UN Approval

How the FBI Secretly Denies Muslim Immigrants Their Citizenship


When foreign-born US residents apply for citizenship they painstakingly jump through every legal hoop, fill out endless forms, hand over wads of cash, and nervously await a response from the government for months and sometimes years.

They rightly expect their applications to be processed by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which is a part of the Department of Homeland Security. They do not expect to have their citizenship application decided by a law enforcement agency like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

But, for many Muslim applicants, we now know thanks to the ACLU, that the USCIS secretly consults the FBI to exercise a discretionary authority seemingly designed with Muslims in mind, to indefinitely postpone or deny applications if they deem the applicants “suspicious.”

The FBI does this through a secret program known obscurely as the Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program (CARRP). What’s shocking is that these immigrants who are either Muslim or perceived to be Muslim, never know why or for how long their applications are delayed. They are rarely, if ever, investigated for wrong-doing, and hence, have no opportunity to make their case for citizenship.

In 2009, I was an applicant for US citizenship who faced a similar mysterious delay.

After nine years of living in the US as a student, I married an American citizen and obtained my “Green Card” residency. Five years later I was finally eligible for citizenship. My application passed all the prescribed stages. Then, I undertook the second-to-last step – the dreaded citizenship exam – and passed with flying colors.

At this point I would normally have been handed a form telling me when and where to appear for the final step: my swearing-in ceremony. But the officer who administered the exam simply told me that the FBI was conducting a “background check” on me and that it could take a few days or a few months to complete. I was puzzled – I had already been fingerprinted and had no criminal record, nor had I ever broken any immigration laws.

So I waited. And waited. And waited.

USCIS is supposed to adjudicate applications within 6 months, but years went by. I wrote letters to no avail. In the mean time I refrained from traveling abroad to visit my family. I held back from covering protests as part of my journalism work for fear of being arrested and jeopardizing my citizenship application. I was unable to apply for residency for my younger sister who finished college and wanted to remain here. I couldn’t vote in the historic 2008 Presidential elections. My hardships were minor compared to what an undocumented immigrant faces. However, I fit the bill of the immigrant that “follows all the rules” and still, I was thwarted.

Finally, after contacting some immigrant advocacy organizations, I learned of a class-action lawsuit led by the ACLU and the National Immigration Law Center, representing people just like me – hundreds and thousands of people who had had their citizenship applications mysteriously and indefinitely delayed at the very last stage, most likely because of post-9-11 policies. I was not alone! Which was both a relief and a revelation of just how widespread the practice was.

I was named the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit and in 2009 the US government finally settled, forcing USCIS to hand me and hundreds of my fellow plaintiffs our citizenship. I dutifully waved an American flag, relieved that the process was finally over even though there was never any explanation given about the delay.

Although I am not Muslim, I am South Asian and was born and brought up in the United Arab Emirates, a Muslim Gulf Arab nation (and close US ally). I had traveled in 2005 to Afghanistan to research a book about the US war. I ran an organization that supported an Afghan women’s group critical of the war. I worked for a community radio network, Pacifica, known for being critical of the government. Perhaps it was some combination of these factors that led an FBI agent sitting at a desk somewhere to circle my name and put it on a pile of similar applications that would never get processed. I will never know.

And even though I and most others named in the lawsuit were given our citizenship, it turns out the FBI never really stopped delaying other applicants their citizenship. In fact, even among the class that I represented, there were some who were denied for no obvious reason.

Jennie Pasquarella is an ACLU attorney who worked on the class action lawsuit that I was part of and who authored a report on CARRP. She told me in an interview that although the US government settled our lawsuit in 2009 and was ordered to complete delayed applications like mine, the secret CARRP program had gone into effect a year earlier, in 2008, and it remained in effect, delaying applications for many other immigrants.

Pasquarella said this new FBI program is “effectively designed to identify people that they say are national security concerns. But of course the way they define national security concerns is heavily reliant on racial profiling, religious profiling, and is looking at people who are Muslim immigrants, members of our community.”

Pasquarella’s report on CARRP, just published by the ACLU, is based on declassified documents obtained through lawsuits and Freedom of Information Act Requests. The report profiles Muslims like Tarek Hamdi, an Egyptian, and Mahdi Asgari, an Iranian, who have had their applications delayed even though they have broken no laws.

The CARRP documents also reveal exactly how the USCIS transfers decision making over applications of people like Hamdi and Asgari to the FBI, asking the agency if they should be denied, approved, or simply delayed indefinitely. If the FBI decides that a certain application should be denied, the USCIS is authorized under CARRP, to search for a reason – even the most minor technical one such as reporting an erroneous date or address – to turn down an application when they ordinarily would not have.

The criteria for suspicion are predictably vague: people who are from or who travel to certain “suspicious” countries, who may be distantly affiliated with other “suspicious” people or institutions, people who have once upon a time given money to certain “suspicious” charities, and so on.

The US has a long history of discrimination in immigration, going back to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. In 1952 the Immigration and Nationality Act was finally passed, prohibiting discriminatory immigration policies. Yet the FBI’s CARRP program, under the guise of post-9-11 suspicion of all persons Muslim being guilty of terrorism before they are proven innocent, does exactly that – it discriminates based on religion and nationality, and according to Pasquarella, returns to our immigration process “the discrimination that we long ago abolished.”

CARRP doesn’t just flag “suspicious” people in order to deny or delay their citizenship. The FBI has also used the program to dangle citizenship as a carrot for Muslims that it would like to turn into informants. The story of Hassan Razmara, an Iranian national, sordidly illustrates this: in February 2009 after years of waiting for his application to be processed, Razmara was approached by the FBI to become an informant in exchange for expediting his application. He could have agreed and after all, who would have blamed him?

Pasquarella says “[Razmara] had been attending a mosque [in Southern California] that the FBI had been surveilling so his application provided a great opportunity for them to say, ‘Hey Hassan, you know that citizenship application that … you’ve been waiting for a decision on for so long? We can make sure that you get a decision and that it’s favorable if you agree to work with us.’”

Hassan Razmara called the ACLU to find out if it was even legal for the FBI to do this. When Jennie Pasquarella told him it was absolutely not legal, he decided to follow his conscience and refused the FBI’s offer of being an informant in exchange for citizenship. As a result Hassan continues to wait year after year to become a US citizen.

It is not yet known how many people the CARRP program affects – not even those whose applications have been denied or delayed know for sure, because they are never informed of the reasons behind denial or delay – only the FBI and USCIS know. The ACLU has launched a lawsuit to force USCIS to reveal the numbers of people affected and it remains to be seen what will emerge.

Secret programs like CARRP give lie to the right wing rhetoric that undocumented immigrants simply need to get in line to legally obtain their papers just like everyone else. The problem is that, depending on where you come from, what your name sounds like, or what religion you are, the immigration system is set up to thwart you. And worst of all, you may not even realize it.

Posted in USAComments Off on How the FBI Secretly Denies Muslim Immigrants Their Citizenship

Shoah’s pages


September 2013
« Aug   Oct »