Trooper Claims Dashboard Cam Upholds His Actions

Gretchen Gailey
Fox News
June 15, 2009

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

For more than three weeks an infamous cell phone video showing an Oklahoma highway patrolman and a paramedic getting into a scuffle on the side of a highway has been making its rounds on YouTube.

Now its counterpart — video from the trooper’s dashboard cam — has been released, and some are saying it vindicates a decorated war hero.

“He is not this ogre, this constitutional depriver of people’s rights. He is a good man. This is a man that has been in law enforcement for 15 years. He just got back from Iraq — got back in April of this year after a year tour of duty for the U.S. Navy,” said attorney Mark James, who came to the defense of his client Trooper Daniel Martin, at a press conference Monday afternoon.

Read entire article

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/trooper-claims-dashboard-cam-upholds-his-actions/

Moving Towards Tobacco Prohibition

Ron Paul
Texas Straight Talk
June 15, 2009

Last week, another bill was passed and signed into law that takes more of our freedoms and violates the Constitution of the United States. It was, of course, done for the sake of the children, and in the name of the health of the citizenry. It’s always the case that when your liberty is seized, it is seized for your own good. Such is the condescension of Washington.

featured stories   Moving Towards Tobacco Prohibition
antiwar
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act will give sweeping new powers over tobacco to the FDA.

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act will give sweeping new powers over tobacco to the FDA. It will require everyone engaged in manufacturing, preparing, compounding, or processing tobacco to register with the FDA and be subjected to FDA inspections, which is yet another violation of the Fourth Amendment. It violates the First Amendment by allowing the FDA to restrict tobacco advertising in multiple ways, as well as an outright ban on advertising any cigarettes as light, mild or low-tar. The FDA will have the power of pre-market reviews of all new tobacco products, and will impose new user fees, meaning taxes, on manufacturers and importers of tobacco products. It will even regulate the amount of nicotine in cigarettes.

My objections to the bill are not an endorsement of tobacco. As a physician I understand the adverse health effects of this bad habit. And that is exactly how smoking should be treated – as a bad habit and a personal choice. The way to combat poor choices is through education and information. Other than ensuring that tobacco companies do not engage in force or fraud to market their products, the federal government needs to stay out of the health habits of free people. Regulations for children should be at the state level. Unfortunately, government is using its already overly intrusive financial and regulatory roles in healthcare to establish a justifiable interest in intervening in your personal lifestyle choices as well. We all need to anticipate the level of health freedom that will remain once government manages all health care in this country.

Actions in Congress such as this tobacco bill are especially disconcerting after we thought we were beginning to see some progress in drawing down the wrong-headed and failed war on drugs. A majority of Americans now think marijuana should be legal, taxed and regulated, according to a recent Zogby poll and over 70 percent are in favor of allowing medicinal use of marijuana. Bills like this take us down exactly the wrong path. Instead of gaining more freedom with marijuana, we are moving closer to prohibiting tobacco. Our prisons are already bursting with non-violent drug offenders. How long will it be before a black market in tobacco fills the prisons with non-violent cigarette smokers?

Hemp and tobacco were staple crops for our founding fathers when our country was new. It is baffling to see how far removed from real freedom this country has become since then. Hemp, even for industrial uses, of which there are many, is illegal to grow at all. Now tobacco will have more layers of bureaucracy and interference piled on top of it. In this economy it is extremely upsetting to see this additional squeeze put on an entire industry. One has to wonder how many smaller farmers will be forced out of business because of this bill.

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/moving-towards-tobacco-prohibition/

Proud To Be American? You Should Be Ashamed

The Market Ticker
June 15, 2009

We have seen the largest looting operation in history perpetrated against The American People.

Over $5 trillion dollars in junk securities were marketed and sold.  They had a real value of about $2 trillion dollars; the other $3 trillion, roughly, was pure fiction.

The banks created and sold these throughout the world, with the full knowledge and support of Congress, The Fed, and the banks themselves.

It was pure fraud.

Granting someone a “mortgage” based only on whether they can fog a mirror is proof positive of malfeasance, unless you disclose this fact to the buyers of these securities – a fact that was not disclosed until after the securities blew up.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

Lenders, builders and others pressured appraisers to “hit the numbers” to support these fraudulent deals.  Proof of that is found in the nearly-10-year-old Appraisers Petition bearing thousands of appraiser signatures.

That ratings were a “mistake”, either real or intentional, is a matter of now-known historical fact.

Americans have sat on their butts through all of this, allowed their 401ks and IRAs to be trashed, their supposed “home values” to be pumped and then destroyed, and their hopes, dreams, employment and house have all vanished into the ether of fraud.

When this came to light the banks went to Congress, and supported by The Fed’s intentional draining of liquidity to create an immediate “crisis”, they got a $700 billion bailout bill passed – one that you, your children and grandchildren, will have to pay for.

The government then passed another near-trillion-dollar “stimulus” bill claimed to hold unemployment to 8%.  It did not, because it was yet another “papering over” of the fraud, but that bill your children and grandchildren, along with you, will also pay.

Your savings accounts and CDs now yield an effective zero.

Your credit card interest rates have gone from 11% to 29%, all so that the banks can keep granting ill-advised credit to people who can’t pay.  Those who can pay – the rest of you – are being jacked for 30% a year in interest.

We have seen a few “tea parties” in which a few people showed up and which were immediately panned by “those in power” as “astroturf.”

Contrast with this.

A few days ago, Iran held an election.  It is alleged that there was massive fraud.  The current President claimed victory under less-than-clear circumstances.

The people said “hell no!” in this sort of demonstration:

economic crisis   Proud To Be American? You Should Be Ashamed

That’s about 2 million people, out of 70 million population (roughly), or one in thirty-five Iranians in the entire nation who took to the streets to demand justice in a simple vote.

More strikingly, Tehran has a population of roughly 12 million; this means that one in six citizens of the city are standing in that crowd.

This, despite the fact that the government there has been shooting people, has arrested the opposition party and issued an order to burn the ballots so there can be no recount.

This, despite the fact that the Iranian population does not enjoy a Second Amendment, and thus is forced to fight a rogue government with makeshift molotov cocktails, rocks and clubs, should that rogue government choose to shoot.

And this was about an election.  A President.  One man.

In our nation we have literally had 1/3rd of our GDP – that is, 1/3rd of everything you worked for last year – stolen by a bunch of fraudsters with the explicit cooperation and assistance of the government.

We should be seeing 10 million Americans literally closing Washington DC with peaceful protest in the streets – making the entirety of the downtown inaccessible to vehicles and the normal conduct of business impossible, were Americans to display the same sort of anger over an insult vastly more serious than that served upon the Iranian people.

If one in sixAmericans had enough in America’s big cities, there would be one million people in the Streets of Chicago – enough to fill Chicago’s Loop from Lake Michigan to I-90/94 and from The Chicago River to beyond Soldier Field, rendering the city core impassable.  (Roughly double the crowd that shows up for the 4th of July Fireworks, to put it in perspective.  “Greater Chicagoland” has a population of ~7 million)

The same in NY City would result in a crowd of 3.3 million people.

Where are you America?

In America, if the government turns into a goon squad, you have the constitutionally-protected ability to shoot back.  In Iran you have no such ability as the Iranian government has never recognized the unalienable rights as set forth in our Declaration.

So in Iran the population risks mass death to protest.

In America the population risks loss of some income since you’d have to cut work.

The Iranians take to the streets; we take to our couches and have another beer.

Grow a pair of balls America.

The people of Iran are putting us to shame.

PS: Those threats appear not to have been idle either:

BREAKING NEWS: AP photographer sees pro-government militia fire at protesters, killing at least 1

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/proud-to-be-american-you-should-be-ashamed/

Shots fired at huge Iran protest

BBC
June 15, 2009

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

Huge crowds cheered Mir Hossein Mousavi when he appeared at the rally

Shots have been fired during a massive rally in Iran against last week’s presidential election results, with reports saying one person was killed.

Hundreds of thousands rallied to support candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, but a group of them was fired on from a militia base they had surrounded.

Mr Mousavi has lodged a legal appeal against the result but says he is not optimistic it will succeed.

US President Barack Obama has said he is “deeply troubled” by the violence.

On Monday evening, in his first public comments since the election results, he said that free speech and the democratic process must be respected in Iran.

Read entire article

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/shots-fired-at-huge-iran-protest/

Paul McCartney Calls for Meat-Free Day to Cut Cow Gas

Alex Morales
Bloomberg
June 15, 2009

Paul McCartney, the former Beatle and vegetarian pop star, asked fans to go meatless on Mondays to help slow global warming by reducing the amount of gaseous emissions from farm animals.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

Cows, pigs and sheep bred for human consumption discharge millions of tons of methane, a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Livestock accounts for about 18 percent of greenhouse gases, more than all the world’s cars, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has said.

“If you want to fight climate change, it’s not only about electricity and coal-fired power plants: Agriculture is a huge contributor too and meat consumption is a big problem,” Jan van Aken, a biologist and agriculture campaigner for the Greenpeace environmental group, said today in a telephone interview from Hamburg. It’s “mainly burps” and animal flatulence, he said.

Supported in his cause by celebrity chefs and Hollywood actors, McCartney said in a statement today that skipping meat a day a week is a “meaningful” change everyone can make to their lifestyles to help the environment. Less consumption may lead to fewer animals reared, and so emissions would fall.

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/paul-mccartney-calls-for-meat-free-day-to-cut-cow-gas/

Senior Democrat Says Obama’s Czars Unconstitutional

Ken Klukowski
Townhall
June 15, 2009

Last week President Obama appointed yet another “czar” with massive government power, answering only to him. Even before this latest appointment, the top-ranking Democrat in the Senate wrote President Obama a letter saying that these czars are unconstitutional. President Obama’s “czar strategy” is an unprecedented power grab centralizing authority in the White House, outside congressional oversight and in violation of the Constitution.

As of last week, Czar Kenneth Feinberg has the authority to set the pay scale for executives at any company receiving government money (and how many aren’t, these days?). Czar Feinberg has the power to say that someone’s pay is excessive, and to make companies cut that pay until the czar is pleased.

Congress did not give Czar Feinberg this authority. For that matter, Congress has not authorized any of the czars that President Barack Obama has created. Over the past thirty years presidents have each had one or two czars for various issues, and once the number went as high as five. But now, by some counts President Obama has created sixteen czars, and there may be more on the way. Each of these has enormous government power, and answers only to the president.

Ever since this practice of appointing czars began years ago, it has always been considered possible that they are all unconstitutional. But it never built to a critical mass to elicit a court fight. These czars were few and far between, and rarely did anything that seriously ruffled any feathers. But President Obama has taken this to an unprecedented level, to the point where these appointments are dangerous to our constitutional regime.

This has become too much for the longest-serving senator in U.S. history to stomach. Democratic Senator Robert Byrd is the president pro tempore of the U.S. Senate. Even though Senate rules vest most powers in the Senate majority leader, the president pro tempore is a constitutional officer, and third in line to the U.S. presidency (after the vice president and the Speaker of the House). This office is held by a Democrat, who has been serving in the Senate since before Barack Obama was even born.

Senator Byrd wrote a letter to President Obama in February, criticizing the president’s strategy of creating czars to manage important areas of national policy. Senator Byrd said that these appointments violate both the constitutional system of checks and balances and the constitutional separation of powers, and is a clear attempt to evade congressional oversight. (Didn’t this White House promise unprecedented transparency?)

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

And Senator Byrd is exactly correct. The Constitution commands that government officers with significant authority (called “principal officers”) are nominated by the president but then are subject to a confirmation vote by the U.S. Senate. And principal officers include not only cabinet-level department heads, but go five levels deep in executive appointments, to include assistant secretaries and deputy undersecretaries.

Inferior officers are appointed either by the president, cabinet-level officers, or the courts. But even then, the Constitution specifies that only Congress can authorize the making of such appointments. For these inferior officers, only Congress can create their offices, and also specify who appoints them. And such officers are still answerable to Congress. They are subject to subpoena to testify before Congress, and Congress holds the power of the purse by making annual appropriations for their division or program.

White House officials, by contrast, cannot be compelled to appear before Congress and testify. They are alter-egos of the president himself, and as an agent of the Executive Office of the President they are entirely removed from Congress, and not answerable to Congress in any way. That was why during the Bush administration White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten, Senior Advisor Karl Rove, and Counsel Harriet Miers could not be compelled to testify to Congress when President Bush invoked executive privilege (a battle they may well have won if they pressed their case all the way to the Supreme Court). Senior presidential aides advise the president alone, and the separation of powers forbids congressional interference in that relationship.

But that’s the problem with these czars. The president can have any advisors he wants, people who privately advise him or meet with others on his behalf, but have little or no actual authority to exert government power on anyone. These czars, however, are directly dictating policy, impacting millions of lives in the way that few assistant secretaries or deputy undersecretaries do.

The Founding Fathers specifically wrote the Constitution in a way to deny such absolute power to emanate from one person. That was why they required that no principal officers could exercise any power unless the U.S. Senate decided to confirm them. That was also why they specified that even for inferior officers only Congress could create their positions and could still require them to answer to Congress. The Founding Fathers were specifically blocking the type of centralized power that President Obama is currently exerting.

Fortunately, there is a remedy. Any person on the receiving end of an order from any of these czars has standing to challenge their constitutionality in court. Any person whose pay is deemed excessive by Kenneth Feinberg, or affected by any other czar, could file a federal suit asserting that the order is an unconstitutional exercise of government power, and have a court both invalidate the order and hold that the position itself doesn’t legally exist. Then everyone could just ignore these czars, because they would simply be private citizens, without the authority to order any of us to tie our shoes.

Let the lawsuits begin.

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/senior-democrat-says-obamas-czars-unconstitutional/

Pentagon Multiple Choice: Dissenting Americans are Terrorists

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
June 15, 2009

Last week the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California issued a press release demanding the Department of Defense stop teaching employees that dissent is a form of low-level terrorism. “Teaching employees that dissent on issues of public concern is something to be feared, rather than encouraged, is a dangerously counterproductive use of scarce security resources, making us less safe as a democracy,” Northern California ACLU Staff Attorney Ann Brick and ACLU Washington National Security Policy Council Michael German wrote in a letter to Gail McGinn, Acting Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.

featured stories   Pentagon Multiple Choice: Dissenting Americans are Terrorists
featured stories   Pentagon Multiple Choice: Dissenting Americans are Terrorists
In the 1970s, the Pentagon, the CIA and the FBI, the National Guard, and various state and local police agencies worked in unison to snoop on and subvert the antiwar and civil rights movements.

A multiple choice question included on a Level 1 Antiterrorism Awareness training course required for all DoD personnel asks the following question: “Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorist activity?” The correct answer is “protests.” The ACLU wants the question removed.

“For the DoD to instruct its employees that lawful protest activities should be treated as ‘low-level terrorism’ is deeply disturbing in and of itself,” write Brick and German of the ACLU in the letter to Gail McGinn. “It is an even more egregious insult to constitutional values, however, when viewed in the context of a long-term pattern of domestic security initiatives that have attempted to equate lawful dissent with terrorism.”

Brick and German underscore documented military snooping on hundreds of legal anti-war and military protests, the FBI’s surveillance of protests at the RNC, and state police and sheriff departments covert surveillance of peace groups. “Policing ideas, rather than criminal activities, runs counter to our nation’s core principles, undermining the very foundations of the free society that the Department of Defense is dedicated to preserving.”

In fact, the Department of Defense is dedicated to preserving the criminal activity of the banksters and undermining the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

“I spent 33 years in the Marines. Most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism,” wrote the most decorated Marine in U.S. history, Smedley Butler, in his 1935 book, War Is a Racket. “Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints.”

Since Butler’s days, the Pentagon has vastly upgraded its Mafia techniques and has expanded its war to include the American people.

As Episcopal priest and activist Frank Morales notes, the Pentagon has declared war on America:

The “domestic war on terrorism” hinges upon the Pentagon’s doctrine of homeland defense. Mountains of repressive legislation are being enacted in the name of internal security. So called “homeland security”, originally set within the Pentagon’s “operations other than war”, is actually a case in which the Pentagon has declared war on America. Shaping up as the new battleground, this proliferating military “doctrine” seeks to justify new roles and missions for the Pentagon within America. Vast “legal” authority and funds to spy on the dissenting public, reconfigured as terrorist threats, is being lavished upon the defense, intelligence and law enforcement “community.”

“Here in America, all distinction between the military and police functions is about to be forever expunged with the looming repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act,” continues Morales. It is a “New World Law and Order” based on the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act that requires a system of domestic and global counterinsurgency led by the Pentagon. “The objective is to centralize all intelligence gathering under one roof, the Department of Homeland Security and to widely cast the net over all of us, making certain that we all fall in line with the Pentagon Inc. agenda.”

In the 1970s, the Pentagon, the CIA and the FBI, the National Guard, and various state and local police agencies worked in unison to snoop on and subvert the antiwar and civil rights movements. “Back in the late 1960s and early ’70s the FBI, the military, local police and campus police had their own bailiwicks and limited powers” says Christopher Pyle, a former investigator for Senator Frank Church’s Select Committee on Intelligence in the 1970s. “But operating today through the JTTFs and the combined intelligence and fusion centers, which join military analysts with law enforcement specialists, they are all part of one big club, effectively destroying the Fourth Amendment against unlimited search and seizure.”

The “Big Club” and “Pentagon Inc” has sharpened its treasonous tools immeasurably since the day in 1969 when it opened a new war room in the basement of the Pentagon and created the headquarters of the Directorate for Civil Disturbance Planning and Operations. “In the fall of 1968, there were more Army Counter-lntelligence Analysis Branch personnel assigned to monitor domestic citizen protests than were assigned to any other counter-intelligence operation in the world, including Southeast Asia and the Vietnam War,” write Morton Halperin, Jerry Berman, Robert Borosage, Christine Marwick in their study on the crimes of U.S. intelligence agencies.

With the exception of the FBI, the military intelligence services collected more information on American politics in the sixties than any other federal agency. The army conducted a full-scale Pentagon operation within the United States, and the figures and attitudes reflect this approach. Where a civilian agency might have opened a hundred files, the military created a thousand; the army established CONUS and CONARC intelligence commands, and then reorganized and reinitiated them as USAINTC, the Directorate of Civil Disturbance Planning, and the Division of Military Support. They ran operations with such code names as GARDEN PLOT, ROSE BUSH, PUNCH BLOCK, STEEP HILL, LANTERN SPIKE, QUIET TOWN, GRAM METRIC, and CABLE SPLICER; and they developed intelligence “compendiums,” a “mug book,” daily, weekly and monthly intelligence summaries, special reports, “city packets,” contingency and alternative contingency plans, computerized filing systems, and crossover index files to information. All were based on agent spot reports, radio intercepts, incident and personality files, newspaper clippings and data from numerous civilian sources. Each level of the military hierarchy tried to placate its superiors by collecting as much or more information than the task required, whether it was of any importance or not. The attitude pervading these army operations was best stated by Robert E. Jordan III, general counsel to the army: “the people on the other side were essentially the enemy. The army conducted a de facto war against all citizen protest, legitimate and illegitimate, violent and peaceful, white and black.

Jordan’s remark is as pertinent today as it was 30 some odd years ago — the American people are the enemy and the de facto war is to be waged against all citizen protest. Index files have been replaced by quasi-supercomputing and DARPA’s Total Information Awareness, now deemed Terrorist Information Awareness.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

In the 1960s and early 70s, the enemy was largely the anti-war movement. The government did a smashing job of subverting and hobbling that movement — thanks to multifarious Pentagon operations and the FBI’s COINTELPRO — and the so-called anti-war movement is today a pale reflection of its former self. In fact, much of that movement today is financed and controlled by globalist foundations, thus rendered absurdly ineffective, a fact revealed by Bush’s comment that the splintered and factional movement opposed to the Iraq invasion and occupation was nothing more than a “focus group.”

For the Pentagon and its globalist overlords, today’s enemy consists of the so-called patriot movement, recently characterized as purveyors of “rightwing extremism” by the Department of Homeland Security.

It is no mistake the Fox News disinfo operative Glenn Beck has sidled up to constitutionalists and libertarians while characterizing 9/11 activists as a dire threat to the homeland in league with the CIA contrivance al-Qaeda. It is no mistake the corporate media and scribes working for George Soros have put in overtime to malign Alex Jones — largely considered the leader of the 9/11 movement — and attach him to a demented cop killer and a white supremacist who killed a security guard at a Holocaust museum.

It should come as no surprise a DoD Antiterrorism Awareness training course characterizes dissidents as “low level” terrorists. Such indoctrination and brainwashing will make it easier for soldiers and DHS paramilitaries — including “public-private partnership” (fascist) shock troops such as InfraGard and soon enough Obama’s “public service” Jugendbewegung — to not only round-up and intern dissidents but shoot them down in numbers as they were shot down in their millions by Stalin and Mao in the blood-soaked 20th century.

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/pentagon-multiple-choice-dissenting-americans-are-terrorists/

CIA rehired, then fired, contractors involved in torture

John Byrne
The Raw Story
June 15, 2009

Weeks after President Barack Obama took office, the Central Intelligence Agency renewed a contract with a firm that helped orchestrate the torture of American-held detainees during the Bush Administration, The New Yorker revealed Sunday.

Two months later, according to the magazine, the agency fired them.

The contractors’ firings came in April, around the time the Senate Armed Services Committee fingered the role of James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen in developing “countermeasures to defeat” detainees’ resistance in interrogations. It raises questions of whether the terminations only came after the contractors’ role was exposed.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

“Mitchell and Jessen, who run the firm, had worked on a Pentagon program that taught U.S. service members how to survive harsh enemy interrogation methods,” veteran Washington Post intelligence reporter Walter Pincus wrote Monday. “They relied on elements of that training in proposing an interrogation program for the CIA. It included methods such as sleep deprivation and other actions based on “theories of ‘learned helplessness,’” according to the New Yorker.

The New Yorker’s Jane Meyer wrote: “In April, [Obama CIA Director Leon] Panetta (above right) fired all the C.I.A.’s contract interrogators, including the former military psychologists who appear to have designed the most brutal interrogation techniques: James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen. The two men, who ran a consulting company, Mitchell, Jessen & Associates, had recommended that interrogators apply to detainees theories of “learned helplessness” that were based on experiments with abused dogs. The firm’s principals reportedly billed the agency a thousand dollars a day for their services. “We saved some money in the deal, too!” Panetta said. (Remarkably, a month after Obama took office the C.I.A. had signed a fresh contract with the firm.)”

Panetta told Mayer he “didn’t support these methods that were used, or the legal justification for why they did it.”

Remarkably, Panetta also claims in the article that he “at one time” supported a truth commission to investigate Bush administration abuses — but that he reversed his position after President Obama indicated he wouldn’t support such a move.

He “didn’t want to spend a lot of time dealing with the past and what mistakes were made,” Mayer writes.

“Most of the individuals who managed the secret interrogation program have since left the agency,” she adds, “though CIA Deputy Director Stephen R. Kappes, whom Panetta told senators in February would be his “full partner,” held at least a nominal role in oversight of the program.”

Read Mayer’s full New Yorker story here

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/cia-rehired-then-fired-contractors-involved-in-torture/

Defiant Iran opposition stages rally amid world outcry

Agence France-Presse
June 15, 2009
  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

Defeated Iranian presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi appeared in public on Monday for the first time since an election that has divided the nation, joining thousands of supporters who defied a ban to stage a mass rally in Tehran.

Mousavi addressed the crowds from atop a car at the opposition march staged in protest at President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s landslide election win that the wartime premier has branded a rigged “charade.”

“Mousavi we support you! We will die but retrieve our votes!” shouted the crowds of thousands, young and old, who poured into central Tehran in defiance of an interior ministry ban on the march.

Read entire article

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/defiant-iran-opposition-stages-rally-amid-world-outcry/

Up ↑