Doctors demand David Kelly inquest

A group of leading doctors will go to the high court next week in an attempt to force an inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly.

The six doctors claim it is not possible to prove that Dr Kelly committed suicide based on the medical information available.

They want to obtain a court ruling that would require Dominic Grieve, the Attorney General, to seek a new inquest. Mr Grieve's request would also need High Court approval.

The doctors, who began their legal action last December, argue an inquest should take place because the medical evidence into the government weapons inspector's death has never been discussed publicly. Although an inquest was opened, it was adjourned due to the Hutton inquiry and has never resumed. Lord Falconer, then the Lord Chancellor, decided not to resume it, arguing that the Hutton Inquiry was sufficient.

Hopes an inquest would finally take place were raised after Dominic Grieve, the Attorney General, asked to review medical documents relating to the death of Dr Kelly.

Mr Grieve said an inquest would only be allowed to take place in the event that new evidence is found.

The doctors appealing for an inquest, all experts in trauma and vascular surgery, are Dr Stephen Frost; Dr Martin Birnstingl; Dr David Halpin; Dr Andrew Rouse; Dr Christopher Burns-Cox; and Dr Michael Powers QC.

Frances Swaine, a solicitor representing all of the doctors except Dr Powers, insisted they were motivated by "professional integrity" and that the Hutton inquiry's verdict that Dr Kelly bled to death after cutting his wrist was not sufficiently proved.

The inquiry, commissioned by then Prime Minister Tony Blair and led by Lord Hutton, found that Dr Kelly committed suicide in woods near his home in Oxfordshire in July 2003.

His death followed the disclosure that he was the source behind claims that the Government "sexed up" a dossier on potential weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

~ more... ~

US 'likely to stay in Iraq beyond 2011'

Despite US announcement of complete withdrawal from Iraq in 2011, Washington will reportedly keep thousands of soldiers in the war-torn nation.

American military experts said the remaining forces are expected to stay in Iraq beyond 2011 as a 'peacekeeping force' for a decade, AFP reported.

Last week, US President Barack Obama declared an end to Washington's combat mission in the war-ravaged country.

However, about 50,000 US troops remain in Iraq supposedly on training and advisory roles until a complete pull out.

Meanwhile, US officials are planning to employ thousands of private contractors to conduct operations formerly performed by US troops.

The report came after Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki last week expressed confidence that "Iraqi security forces are capable of taking full responsibility."

The United States invaded Iraq in 2003 under the pretext of destroying alleged weapons of mass destruction. However, no such weapons were ever found.

Nearly a trillion dollars have been spent and more than 4,400 US soldiers and countless number of Iraqi civilians have been killed since the invasion began.

~ PRESS TV ~

What is “BuildingWhat?”

A Worldwide Campaign to raise awareness of Building 7

More than eight years after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, New York Supreme Court Justice Edward H. Lehner was hearing arguments in a courtroom less than a mile from Ground Zero about a ballot initiative to launch a new investigation of the 9/11 attacks. When the lawyer for the plaintiffs sponsoring the initiative explained that the 9/11 Commission report left many unanswered questions, including “Why did Building 7 come down,” the Judge replied quizzically, “Building what?”

Like Judge Lehner, millions of people do not know or remember only vaguely that a third tower called World Trade Center Building 7 also collapsed on September 11, 2001. In any other situation, the complete, free fall collapse of a 47-story skyscraper would be played over and over on the news. It would be discussed for years to come and building design codes would be completely rewritten. So, why does no one know about Building 7? And why did Building 7 come down?

The answers to these questions have far-reaching implications for our society. The goal of the “BuildingWhat?” campaign is to raise awareness of Building 7 so that together we can begin to address these questions.

Go to http://BuildingWhat.org

CIA money behind Wi-Fi Positioning System (WPS)

How amazing would it be if you could walk into McTaco King and order that mid-morning bacon taco meal with Mountain Dew Big Gulp from your mobile device?  Just imagine… as you approach the restaurant, a menu pops up on your screen, the phone makes suggestions and helps you super-size your order, before you even set foot in the restaurant!

This advertiser's wet dream is about to become reality, thanks to WPS (Wi-Fi Positioning System) infrastructure pioneered by CIA front company Skyhook (formerly Quarterscope) and currently being implemented by several other intelligence-connected companies, including Google, Apple, and Navizon (which is supplying data to Microsoft).

WPS geolocates wireless network devices using a database of known wireless access points, such as in coffee shops.  Since at least 2004, WPS companies like Skyhook and Google have been war-driving for access point data.  More about the technical aspects of this later.


How did you conclude that Skyhook is an intelligence front company?

Follow the money.

In 2008 former CIA director George Tenet became Managing Director of Allen & Company, an investment bank that provided funding for Skyhook's WPS development and Google's IPO (Initial Public Offering) in 2004, while he was still director of the CIA.

Skyhook was also funded by shadowy investment firm Alliance Capital.  Frank Savage, Alliance Capital's former board chairman, also served on the board of Lockheed Martin and Enron. Alliance was Enron's largest shareholder.

Regardless of where the seed money came from, you can now buy this WPS data commercially.  Intelligence agencies are putting a lot of effort into developing new tracking and identification technologies.  Once they turn these technologies loose on society, the corporations exploit them, resulting in even more personal data being exchanged on private networks, which intelligence agencies can snoop on at will with their NSA Internet vacuum cleaners.

~ more... ~

Middle East Loses Trillions As U.S. Strikes Record Arms Deals

The Internet has provided the world with, if nothing else, instantaneous access to news and in-depth information previously available only to governments and think tanks. It has also allowed for the exchange of data and analyses between groups and individuals around the globe, in part by making one tongue, English, the language of the World Wide Web. It remains to be seen whether the keystroke is mightier than the sword.

An illustrative case in point is an August 29 report from China's Xinhua News Agency on a news article by Egypt's Middle East News Agency regarding a study conducted by the Strategic Foresight Group in India. The latter, a report published in a book entitled The Cost of Conflict in the Middle East, calculates that conflict in the area over the last 20 years has cost the nations and people of the region 12 trillion U.S. dollars.

The Indian report adds that the Middle East has recorded “a high record of military expenses in the past 20 years and is considered the most armed region in the world.” [1]

The study was originally released in January of 2009 and was recently translated into Arabic by the Institute for Peace Studies of Egypt. It estimates that in a peaceful environment the nations of the Middle East could have achieved an average annual growth in gross domestic product of 8 percent.

Sundeep Waslekar, president of the Strategic Foresight Group and one of the report's authors, was quoted in January of last year saying of the region's nations, “The choice they have to make is the choice between the danger of devastation and the promise of peace.” [2]

An account of the presentation of the report last year added that the cost of conflict in the region is estimated at 2 percent of growth in gross domestic product.

In regards to specific cases, it stated:

“One conclusion is that individuals in most countries are half as rich as they would have been if peace had taken off in 1991.

~ more... ~