PsiOp Radio 154 – 111016


PsiOp Radio is LIVE Tonight with Mack White and SMiles Lewis

INACS (Institute for Neuroscience And Consciousness Study) and the Anomaly Archives Present a Free Lecture:

Exploring UFOs and Consciousness with SMiles Lewis

Austin, Texas – Tuesday, October 25th, 7-9pm CST

What can we learn about UFOs from studying such diverse arenas of consciousness exploration as shamanism and drugs like DMT? What about Carl Jung’s collective unconscious and parapsychology? What about near death and out of body experiences? What have human agencies (governmental, corporate, aboriginal and esoteric) discovered about the UFO phenomenon’s effects on consciousness? Has humanity interacted with Alien Others throughout history? Could we be communicating with CryptoTerrestrials or a Gaian Mind? What do we really know about these diverse and exceptional experiences and those who’ve had them? Come discover the fantastic facts about UFOs, Altered States of Consciousness, and Mind-at-Large!

 Tuesday, October 25th at 7pm

Austin Center for Spritual Living
5555 North Lamar, Suite D-117
Austin, TX 78751 /


. . .
“Occupy Wall Street” demonstrators stage a march dressed as corporate zombies during a protest near Wall Street in New York, October 3, 2011. The protestors, speaking out against corporate greed and other issues carried on their occupation of Zuccotti Park, near the New York Stock Exchange, despite mass arrests over the weekend.  TOPSHOTS   AFP PHOTO/Emmanuel Dunand (Photo credit should read EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images)
 . .
 . . .


“Occupy Austin begins in a celebratory mood with music, flower power, teach-ins, and activists from across the political spectrum. Police Chief Art Acevedo and Fire Chief Rhoda Mae Kerr pay a friendly visit. Radio host Jack Blood and other activists are interviewed on the challenges ahead.”


AusTex News

. . . . .

. . . . .

ESD Sex Scandal – SNAP: Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests

Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP)

Originally housed at Saint Michael and All Angels Episcopal Church, ESD grew into three campuses, … It is the largest co-ed private school in Dallas. …

Dallas Morning News (subscription) – Sep 16, 2011
… a civil case against the Episcopal School of Dallas began their deliberations. … The suit contends that ESD officials failed to protect the girl from …

‎D Magazine – Dan Koller – Sep 16, 2011
But closing arguments in the Episcopal School of Dallas lawsuit extended … What is ESD? … but I’ve heard they equip students to do all right on the SAT. …

‎Dallas Observer (blog) – Jim Schutze – Sep 23, 2011
… we learn that the Episcopal School of Dallas has already instituted a number … ESD’s founding rector and headmaster Reverend Stephen B. Swann and the …

D Magazine – Tim Rogers – Sep 21, 2011
A verdict is due any minute on the ESD teacher-student sex trial, … BREAKING NEWS: Jury finds against Episcopal School of Dallas on most counts. …

Dallas Morning News (subscription) (blog) – Mike Hashimoto – ‎Sep 22, 2011‎
The fallout, a Dallas County jury decided, is the overriding issue. ESD basically shoved a girl out the door after she and a teacher, Nathan Campbell, engaged in a sexual relationship. She and her family were given a choice: leave voluntarily or face …

MarketWatch (press release) – ‎Sep 21, 2011‎
DALLAS, Sept. 21, 2011 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ — Following nine weeks of testimony in a packed Dallas courtroom, a six-person jury has awarded a $9.3 million verdict against the Episcopal School of Dallas based on evidence that officials from the …

Dallas Morning News (subscription) (blog) – Mike Hashimoto – ‎Sep 21, 2011‎
Diane Jennings has done an excellent job covering this trial, so I’ll not repeat the many details she has provided. My question: Why was there a trial at all? Part of the school’s defense is that the girl, 16 at the time, was an active participant in …

WTSP 10 News – ‎Sep 21, 2011‎
DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – A Dallas jury awarded a local family millions of dollars today after their daughter’s affair with a teacher. The family sued Episcopal School of Dallas (ESD) following the 16-year-old girl’s affair with a 34-year-old teacher. …

WFAA – ‎Sep 21, 2011‎
DALLAS – Following nine weeks of testimony, the Episcopal School of Dallas was found grossly negligent in how it handled a sexual relationship between a teacher and a 16-year-old student, and has been ordered to pay the girl’s family at least $5 …

Virtue Online – Susy Solis – ‎Sep 22, 2011‎
A former student and her parents were awarded millions of dollars Wednesday in a civil case against the Episcopal School of Dallas. The jury found the school liable in how it dealt with a sexual relationship between a 16-year-old female …

Dallas Morning News (subscription) (blog) – Bruce Tomaso – ‎Sep 21, 2011‎
UPDATE, 12:14 pm Here’s Diane Jennings’ story. The jury awarded the family of the former student at least $8.5 million in compensatory damages and is now hearing evidence about potential punitive damages. A Dallas County jury found that Episcopal …

MyFox Dallas – Tracy DeLatte – ‎Sep 21, 2011‎
DALLAS – A Dallas County jury found the Episcopal School of Dallas grossly negligent for how it handled an improper relationship between a teacher and a 16-year-old girl. The jury awarded the student and her family $9.2 million in actual and punitive …

D Magazine – Claire St – ‎Sep 21, 2011‎
When an exclusive private school discovered a teacher was sleeping with a student, administrators did their best to make the problem vanish. by Claire St. Amant Campbell had the ability to pacify and agitate Emily, often in the same breath. …

Lying U.S. Into Another War Front (Number 7, I think) – Texas Connections


POTUS Interruptus


Wet Your Wiki Whistleblower

China’s Tyranny


AmeriKan Assassinations

The POTUS vs The Plebes

Jake Tapper vs. Jay Carney on President Killing U.S. Citizens

The White House: Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release September 30, 2011 Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

Q Thank you, Jay. On the killings of al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, does the President believe a different standard applies when the target, in this case al-Awlaki, is a U.S. citizen? Does the President view al Qaeda senior operatives in the same vein, or does he have a different standard of proof when the target is an American citizen?

MR. CARNEY: Jim, you heard the President speak today about al-Awlaki’s death and why that is a significant event. He was a principal leader in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the most operational affiliate, if you will, of al Qaeda. And he himself was directly involved in plotting terrorist attacks against the United States and American citizens, including the so-called underwear bomber who attempted to bomb an airliner in December of 2009, and the failed attempt to bomb cargo planes headed to the United States.

So in the overall effort, the sustained effort to continue to put pressure on al Qaeda, this is a significant fact that al-Awlaki is dead. Questions about the circumstances of his death I’m not going to get into. So I think the question that you just asked contains within it assumptions that I just won’t address.

Q The question is, is there a greater burden of proof simply because he’s a U.S. citizen than there would be if you were going after another –

MR. CARNEY: Again, I think that just goes to the assumptions about the circumstances of his death, and I’m not going to address that.

Q Well, is the administration prepared to lay out the evidence that it had against him? You spelled out the instances where you think he was operational, but can you show where that could be –

MR. CARNEY: Separate from, again, the events, the fact of his death today, that he was a leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and was operationally involved in serious attempted terrorist attacks against the United States and Americans is an established fact that we’ve talked about for a long time from here, and we have talked about for a long time about how dangerous AQAP is, and that’s been a focus of ours.

And that’s why our cooperation with Yemen, militarily and with intelligence and diplomatically with Yemen, has been so important. And this is — it certainly reflects on the partnership that we have had in that effort with Yemen and with the Yemeni officials and why that is so important to continue. And that’s the same — in to overall effort that we’ve made there are many components to it. And when we talk, as I did yesterday, about Pakistan and the complicated but important relationship with Pakistan, our cooperation with Pakistan has helped us in the efforts against al Qaeda. And certainly our cooperation with Yemen has done the same.

Q Does the administration make a distinction between his role as an inspirational leader and an operational leader? And was their a tipping point — is there a tipping point that you guys can point to?

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, he certainly — there is no question he was engaged in inspirational efforts, or that he was a recruiter for al Qaeda. But he was also very demonstrably, and provably, involved in operational aspects of AQAP. He was a senior leader. But those are statements of fact, same as I would have said last week if you’d have asked me. But again, in terms of everything relating to the circumstances, I think I’ve said all I can say about that.

Q Getting back to the events in Yemen. Did the President personally order or approve the attack?

MR. CARNEY: I’m going to go back to what I said to Jim. The circumstances of his death I’m not going to address. And what I will say is what I said to Jim about who he was, the threat he posed. The fact that — and this is significant, and it goes to our cooperation both with Yemeni officials and counterparts, but also around the region and why it’s so important — because we cannot forget that the victims, the principal victims of the violence perpetrated by AQAP — al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula — were Muslims, in Yemen. And as a leader of AQAP he was responsible for that.

Again, going into the circumstances of his death is not something I’m going to do from here.

Q Well, his focus was primarily international, though, because of his English language capabilities, his abilities on the net in radicalizing English-speaking Muslims. What effect do you think his death will have on efforts by AQAP to destabilize the governments of Yemen and Saudi Arabia?

MR. CARNEY: Well, there is no question that this is a serious blow to al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. But we remain extremely vigilant. That affiliate, that organization remains very dangerous and very — has proven itself to be operational and capable. So the vigilance continues — as it has in the wake of the successful mission against Osama bin Laden. Obviously al Qaeda remains a threat, and a serious threat, and one that we continue to confront in a variety of ways.

So while this is an important milestone, it is not the end of AQAP and it doesn’t change our posture, if you will, towards that organization.

MR. CARNEY: I mean that he was notified when he was still in the residence. And then this morning, once he came to the Oval, he had his normal PDB daily briefing, intel briefing, and this was obviously a subject there in that discussion.

Q So going back, nobody questions that both this administration and the prior have identified AQAP as a threat. Other U.S. officials have said this was a U.S. drone, and we know this is an American. So don’t the American people deserve to understand our government’s justification for killing — or deciding where and when an American can be killed, in this case someone who is unindicted? Can you speak at least hypothetically to legal justifications for killing Americans?

MR. CARNEY: I’m not going to speak hypothetically, and I’m not going to speak about the circumstances of his death. And I don’t — I’m not aware of anyone by name who has made the kind of statements that you’ve said who is a member of the government.

Q Can you explain then why you won’t get into any of the specifics of what’s gone on here? We know that — we’ve all been reporting that a U.S. drone has been involved, that there’s U.S. involvement in this attack, that this is an American. Help us understand why you’re not sharing any more detail.

MR. CARNEY: Again, I’m not going to get into the circumstances of Awlaki’s death. I would simply say that we are asked questions like that all the time, and our response is the same, which is that we cooperate with partners around the world — whether it’s in Pakistan or Yemen — in taking the fight to al Qaeda, and that cooperation takes many different forms. It’s vital to the success that we’ve had in degrading al Qaeda — and by “we” I mean collectively with our partners. And that effort continues. But I’m not going to get into the specific circumstances of his death.


Q You said that Awlaki was demonstrably and provably involved in operations. Do you plan on demonstrating –

MR. CARNEY: I should step back. He is clearly — I mean “provably” may be a legal term. I think it has been well established, and it has certainly been the position of this administration and the previous administration that he is a leader in — was a leader in AQAP; that AQAP was a definite threat, was operational, planned and carried out terrorist attacks that, fortunately, did not succeed, but were extremely serious — including the ones specifically that I mentioned, in terms of the would-be Christmas Day bombing in 2009 and the attempt to bomb numerous cargo planes headed for the United States. And he was obviously also an active recruiter of al Qaeda terrorists. So I don’t think anybody in the field would dispute any of those assertions.

Q You don’t think anybody else in the government would dispute that?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I wouldn’t know of any credible terrorist expert who would dispute the fact that he was a leader in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and that he was operationally involved in terrorist attacks against American interests and citizens.

Q Do you plan on bringing before the public any proof of these charges?

MR. CARNEY: Again, the question makes us — has embedded within it assumptions about the circumstances of his death that I’m just not going to address.

Q How on earth does it have — I really don’t understand. How does — he’s dead. You are asserting that he had operational control of the cargo plot and the Abdulmutallab plot. He’s now dead. Can you tell us, or the American people — or has a judge been shown –

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, Jake, I’m not going to go any further than what I’ve said about the circumstances of his death and –

Q I don’t even understand how they’re tied.

MR. CARNEY: — the case against him, which, again, you’re linking. And I think that –

Q You said that he was responsible for these things.

MR. CARNEY: Yes, but again –

Q Is there going to be any evidence presented?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have anything for you on that.

Q Do you not see at all — does the administration not see at all how a President asserting that he has the right to kill an American citizen without due process, and that he’s not going to even explain why he thinks he has that right is troublesome to some people?

MR. CARNEY: I wasn’t aware of any of those things that you said actually happening. And again, I’m not going to address the circumstances of Awlaki’s death. I think, again, it is an important fact that this terrorist, who was actively plotting — had plotted in the past, and was actively plotting to attack Americans and American interests, is dead. But I’m not going to — from any angle — discuss the circumstances of his death.

Q Do you know that the Center for Constitutional Rights and the ACLU tried to get permission to represent Awlaki? And his father had asked them to do that. But they needed to get permission from the Treasury Department so that they could challenge his being on this targeted killing list. And the administration, the Obama administration refused to let them represent him, to not even — he couldn’t even have the ACLU representing him.

MR. CARNEY: Well, I would send those questions, or take those questions to Treasury or Justice. I don’t have anything on that for you.

Q What do you think constitutional law professor Barack Obama would make of this?

MR. CARNEY: I think he spoke about it today.


Q Sorry, just one more time on this. Can you just explain more broadly under what legal authority the U.S. government can kill an American citizen abroad?

MR. CARNEY: I think I’ve had that question. It’s not a question, taken out of context, that I would have an answer to. Generally speaking — and I’m certainly not going to answer a question like that in any way that relates to the events of today. I’m not going to talk about the circumstances of Awlaki’s death, and I’m not going to acknowledge or concede or accept premises embedded in questions. And you should take no response that I give here to have done that because I’m not talking about the circumstances.

Q I mean, after 9/11, President Bush gave the CIA, and later the military, the authority to kill a U.S. citizen abroad if they were plotting attacks on the United States. And then, it is correct that President Obama continued that — yes?

MR. CARNEY: That’s a question I would have to take, and I think would probably be best addressed to the Justice Department.

Q Can you explain to us how the U.S. confirmed his death, since there have — he’s been dead before and then found alive. Is it only a Yemeni source, or did the U.S. government –

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have an answer to that, actually. I don’t know.

Q — U.S. government confirmation, but U.S. government is 100 percent sure that he’s dead?

MR. CARNEY: As I understand it, but I don’t have a specific — in terms of whether that came from the Yemenis or –

Q Samir Khan — there has been a report that he was also killed in this strike. Do you have confirmation on –

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have any information on anyone except for Awlaki.

Q And again, you don’t know how that confirmation was — is there a way to get an answer –

MR. CARNEY: I’m not saying I don’t have that confirmation, so I wouldn’t know where others are getting it. I’m just saying I don’t have it to give.

Q So what are the chances of organizing a briefing on these questions today? Could we do that?

MR. CARNEY: Well, actually, I think — what I’m saying here is that we’re not going to address circumstances of his death. So I wouldn’t anticipate a briefing on it.

Q I thought you were making some distinctions between what you can’t answer because you don’t know the answers and maybe –

MR. CARNEY: Well, that’s true. But specifically in terms of notification and things like that, but –

Q Well, can we get a briefing to at least –

MR. CARNEY: We’ll see. I’ll take that question about notification and where it came from.

Q Is there DNA? Because with bin Laden there was DNA.

MR. CARNEY: Again, I don’t have any details on that.

Q Jay, separate from the Awlaki matter, can you say or confirm that the President is able to designate individuals on a CIA capture or kill list?

MR. CARNEY: Mark, I can’t. I don’t have an answer to that. So if there’s anything that we’re able to say about that, I can take your question. But, again, I’m not going to get into backdoor ways to try to discuss the circumstances of that.

Q Didn’t Panetta confirm that earlier in the year?

MR. CARNEY: I would have to — again, I don’t know what discussions have been had about that in the past. I can look at that. But I want to make clear that in doing that I’m not discussing the circumstances here.

Q Again on Awlaki, at Fort Myer, the President said that this operation was a tribute to our intelligence community and to the efforts of Yemen and its security forces. Can we then infer that this was a covert CIA operation without U.S. military involvement?


Q — did not mention the military.

MR. CARNEY: I think the point is, is that we, broadly speaking, have had a cooperative relationship at a variety of levels with our Yemeni counterparts, and that has been the case for a certain amount of time now and continues to be the case today.

Q Well, I’m just — the reason I ask is that obviously in the case of the bin Laden raid where there was a JSOC involvement, that was pretty clear from the outset. Based on what the President says, it appears there is no such JSOC involvement in this operation.

MR. CARNEY: Again, I’m not going to — by parsing his words or anyone else’s — get led down the path of trying to — of discussing details of the circumstances of his death. I’m just not going to do it.

Q And then just one more. You said that the U.S. decision on Saleh and the disposition of Saleh is not related to the Awlaki operation. Does that also mean that the timing of Saleh’s return to Yemen has no connection to what happened with Awlaki? There’s no linkage between that — he arrived one week before Awlaki was killed?

MR. CARNEY: There is no connection to my knowledge.

  • Obama’s Debt Reduction Plan Includes Letting Debt Collectors Robo-Call Cellphones To Collect On Federal Student Loans

  • SWAT Teams in St. Louis Protecting Bank of America; Refusing Customer Withdrawals

The Government’s War on Marijuana


War on Free Speech


Smart Meters

ParaPolitical Covert Ops

Police State / Post-911 Reality

Surveillance Society

SkyNet DroneWars

Weird Science

CryptoZoology News

Check out the original source here
PsiOp Radio

Comments are closed.

Blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: