Source: Nwo Report
On Friday, Japan received its first F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Given that one of the Pentagon’s own models caught fire on the very same day, can Tokyo expect similar setbacks?
Japan’s Air Self Defense Forces (JASDF) received the JSF as part of an elaborate celebration attended by over 400 guests.
“The F-35A has remarkably advanced system. This highly sophisticated 5th generation fighter will bring a great development to air operations as a game changer,” said Gen. Yoshiyuki Sugiyama, JASDF Chief of Air Staff, according to a press release from the aircraft’s developer, Lockheed Martin.
At the same time that the F-35 made its Japanese debut, however, a US Air Force model caught fire, roughly 5,000 miles away.
The incident occurred at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho, with the fire breaking out in “the aft section of the aircraft,” according to a statement from the US Air Force (USAF). No injuries were reported, but an investigation was launched to discover the cause of the malfunction, believed to be related to the aircraft’s engine.
The Pentagon has long known about problems with the Pratt & Whitney engine. Last October, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, head of the F-35 Joint Program Office, made assurances that the problems were fixed.
“We are producing fully capable engines on the production line,” Bogdan said, according to the CT Mirror, adding that the engine problem “was unfortunate, but we are putting it behind us.”
The $1.12 trillion dollar aircraft – the most expensive weapon ever built – has been riddled with problems throughout its development. Last week, Bogdan pointed out that as many as 42 F-35s still on the production line will need to have their fuel tank insulation replaced. This includes models meant for Norway, Italy, Israel, and Japan.
These ongoing issues were not highlighted during Friday’s JASDF roll-out ceremony.
Speaking to Radio Sputnik’s Loud & Clear, F-16 designer Pierre Sprey pointed out that the F-35’s “sophistication” may be overstated, particularly with regard to its stealth capabilities.
“Every Battle of Britain radar would be able to see every stealth airplane today, loud and clear. That’s the irony. Stealth is supposed to be the latest hook that obsoletes everything that came before it, but WWII radar sees it perfectly,” he said.
“So the question is, Should the F-35 be canceled? Of course, it should have been canceled yesterday. Will it be canceled? No. Not until it becomes such a public disgrace because of crashes and failures in combat that the services will have to walk away in embarrassment.”
Given the fire at Mountain Home Air Force Base, the question remains; can the Japanese government expect similar issues with its F-35s? Speaking to Sputnik, Mike Rein, a spokesman Lockheed Martin’s F-35 division, “the answer is simple – NO!”
(CNSNews.com) – At Monday night’s presidential debate, Democrat Hillary Clinton embraced climate change as the crux of her job-creation plan.
“Take clean energy,” she said. “Some country is going to be the clean-energy superpower of the 21st century. Donald thinks that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese. I think it’s real.”
“I think the science is real,” Clinton repeated. “And I think it’s important that we grip this and deal with it, both at home and abroad. And here’s what we can do. We can deploy a half a billion more solar panels. We can have enough clean energy to power every home. We can build a new modern electric grid. That’s a lot of jobs; that’s a lot of new economic activity.
“So I’ve tried to be very specific about what we can and should do, and I am determined that we’re going to get the economy really moving again, building on the progress we’ve made over the last eight years, but never going back to what got us in trouble in the first place.”
Trump, responding, noted that Clinton “talks about solar panels. We invested in a solar company, our country. That was a disaster. They lost plenty of money on that one,” he said, referring to Solyndra, the solar panel firm touted by President Obama. Solyndra received $535 million from taxpayers in 2009, two years before filing for bankruptcy and laying off 11,000 employees.
Trump continued: “Now look, I’m a great believer in all forms of energy, but we’re putting a lot of people out of work. Our energy policies are a disaster. Our country is losing so much in terms of energy, in terms of paying off our debt. You can’t do what you’re looking to do with $20 trillion in debt.”
Trump said it’s important to keep jobs in the U.S. “And we have to do a much better job at giving companies incentives to build new companies or to expand, because they’re not doing it. And all you have to do is look at Michigan and look at Ohio and look at all of these places where so many of their jobs and their companies are just leaving, they’re gone.
“And, Hillary, I’d just ask you this. You’ve been doing this for 30 years. Why are you just thinking about these solutions right now? For 30 years, you’ve been doing it, and now you’re just starting to think of solutions.”
“Well, actually–” Clinton started to say.
“I will bring — excuse me,” Trump said. “I will bring back jobs. You can’t bring back jobs.”
“Well, actually, I have thought about this quite a bit,” Clinton said.
“Yeah, for 30 years,” Trump shot back.
The very first question at Monday night’s presidential debate focused on jobs: “Why are you a better choice than your opponent to create the kinds of jobs that will put more money into the pockets of American workers?” debate moderator Lester Holt asked Hillary Clinton.
“I want us to invest in you. I want us to invest in your future,” Clinton said. “That means jobs in infrastructure, in advanced manufacturing, innovation and technology, clean, renewable energy, and small business, because most of the new jobs will come from small business. We also have to make the economy fairer. That starts with raising the national minimum wage and also guarantee, finally, equal pay for women’s work.
“I also want to see more companies do profit-sharing. If you help create the profits, you should be able to share in them, not just the executives at the top.”
Clinton also called for paid family leave, earned sick days and affordable child care and debt-free college: “How are we going to do it?” she asked. “We’re going to do it by having the wealthy pay their fair share and close the corporate loopholes.”
For his part, Trump said the U.S. has to stop jobs from leaving the country in the first place: “We cannot let it happen,” he said. “Under my plan, I’ll be reducing taxes tremendously, from 35 percent to 15 percent for companies, small and big businesses. That’s going to be a job creator like we haven’t seen since Ronald Reagan. It’s going to be a beautiful thing to watch.
“Companies will come. They will build. They will expand. New companies will start. And I look very, very much forward to doing it. We have to renegotiate our trade deals, and we have to stop these countries from stealing our companies and our jobs.”
(CNSNews.com) – Hillary Clinton has experience, but it’s not the kind of experience Americans can afford to have for another four years.
That was a message Donald Trump seemed keen to underline as the two met in their first presidential debate at Hofstra University in New York on Monday night.
Facing a rival with a hefty political resume, the Republican candidate called into question how successful a secretary of state she had been, citing the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS/ISIL), the Iran nuclear deal, and the serious instability that has plagued Libya since 2011.
After Clinton won applause by listing achievements (in response to his doubting her “stamina”) including travel to 112 countries, negotiating peace deals, and spending “11 hours testifying in front of a congressional committee,” Trump conceded that she does have experience.
“Hillary has experience, but it’s bad experience,” he said.
“We have made so many bad deals during the last – so she’s got experience. I agree. But it’s bad, bad experience. Whether it’s the Iran deal you’re so in love with where we gave them $150 billion back. Whether it’s the Iran deal, whether it’s anything you can name – you almost can’t name a good deal.
“I agree – she’s got experience, but it’s bad experience,” he said. “And this country can’t afford to have another four years of that kind of experience.”
Trump derided the Iran nuclear agreement – which eased sanctions and released tens of billions of dollars in frozen assets in return for restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities – as “one of the great giveaways of all time.”
He also implied that the nuclear deal had thrown a lifeline to an Iran crippled by sanctions, in the process strengthening its position in the region.
“That’s another beauty, where you have a country that was ready to fall, they were doing so badly,” he said. “They were choking on the sanctions, and now they’re probably going to be a major power at some point, the way they’re going.”
Trump accused Clinton, and President Obama, of facilitating the growth of ISIS by creating a “vacuum” in Iraq as a result of leaving no U.S. troops there after the negotiated withdrawal at the end of 2011.
ISIS, he said, “wouldn’t have even been formed if they left some troops behind, like 10,000 or maybe something more than that.”
Trump said ISIS had been “a little infant” at the time, but was now present in dozens of countries.
“Now you’re talking about taking out ISIS? But you were there, and you were secretary of state when it was a little infant,” he said. “Now it’s in over 30 countries, and you’re going to stop them? I don’t think so.”
As for the administration’s policy in Libya, Trump simply called it “another one of her disasters.”
In response to the attacks, Clinton defended the Iran nuclear deal, saying it had put a “lid” on the Iranians’ nuclear program.
What would Trump have done, she asked. “Would he have started a war? Would he have bombed Iran?”
“If he’s going to criticize a deal that has been very successful in giving us access to Iranian facilities that we never had before, then he should tell us what his alternative would be.”
Clinton noted that the Iraq troop withdrawal timetable had been negotiated by President George W. Bush, not Obama.
“The only way that American troops could have stayed in Iraq is to get an agreement from the then-Iraqi government that would have protected our troops,” she said. “And the Iraqi government would not give that.”
(Under a security agreement signed by the Bush administration in late 2008, the end of 2011 was set as the deadline for the final troop pullout. But in 2011 the Obama administration negotiated to retain a 3,000-5,000-strong training and counterterrorism force in the country beyond that date. Disputes over legal protections for U.S. troops eventually scuppered the talks. Al-Qaeda in Iraq regrouped and subsequently morphed into ISIS.)
Clinton’s response to Trump’s Libya comment was brief. She claimed that he had “actually advocated for the actions we took in Libya and urged that [Muammar] Gaddafi be taken out, after actually doing some business with him one time.”
Trump did not respond to those remarks. Last June he told CBS that he had supported intervention in Libya, but that the way it was handled was “a disaster.” He also recalled that he had made a lot of money when Gaddafi needed a place to pitch his tent in New York during a United Nations visit in 2009. “He paid me a fortune, never got to stay there,” Trump said, dismissing the episode as “sort of a big joke.”
Justine Miller Charlotte Observer.
Kae Roberts and Jay Eardly were leaning toward Hillary Clinton before Monday night’s debate.
By the end, they had both pulled away.
John Kokos and Hank Federal were undecided going in, potential Clinton backers.
By the end, they’d ruled her out.
Indeed, while polls said that Clinton won the first general election debate with Donald Trump Monday, she may not have won actual votes. And she may even have lost some, at least in the battleground state of North Carolina.
In a focus group of 21 voters from around Charlotte conducted by McClatchy and the Charlotte Observer, four who were up for grabs before the debate moved away from her by the end.
The racially diverse group included seven Republicans, six Democrats, seven unaffiliated voters and one Libertarian. Their votes are crucial in one of the nation’s key swing states, one in which Trump and Clinton are neck-and-neck in the most recent polls. They live in or around a city rocked in recent days by turmoil over last week’s police shooting of an African-American man.
That the state is pivotal is clear. Clinton will campaign in Raleigh on Tuesday. Trump had planned to make a post-debate trip to Charlotte Tuesday but agreed to reschedule in the wake of the shooting and violence that taxed local authorities. He’s expected in the state soon.
For the four who emerged less impressed by Clinton, it was the seeming familiarity of her proposals for the economy and national security that was a turnoff.
Roberts, who is unaffiliated with a party, wrote in her notes several times during the debate that Clinton offered “pie in the sky” ideas. By debate’s end, she had moved from leaning toward Clinton to undecided.
“The things she says she’s going to do, there’s no substance behind it,” Roberts said.
One potential winner in the focus group was Johnson, who benefited largely because so many voters were annoyed at both Trump and Clinton.
“I was looking for Hillary to convince me, but I’m not getting the Hillary I’m looking for,” particularly on taxes, said Eardly, an unaffiliated voter. By the end of the debate, he’d moved from Clinton to considering Johnson.
Kokos, who works in Hickory, said before the debate he was undecided. Afterwards, he ruled out Clinton and appeared open to either Johnson and Trump. “The things she said were out of an old playbook,” he said of Clinton.
Before the debate, the tally was nine Clinton, three Trump, six undecided and three Johnson. Afterward, it became seven Clinton, three Trump, six undecided and five Johnson.
Johnson, said supporters, was an agent of change, but didn’t have Trump’s bombast. While they didn’t have many specific reasons for moving his way, they are intrigued.
“I wish he’d been at the debate,” said Federal, a Republican who was undecided before the debate.
Many thought Clinton did better on style and debating points, but she didn’t move them. “Hillary was much cleaner in her evasions,” said Federal, who called Trump “bombastic.”
Clinton did get accolades from the four African-American voters in the group. They recoiled at Trump’s notion that their communities are awful places. They praised Clinton for her backing for community policing and promoting dialogue between police and community leaders.
“She has the things we need to change,” said Rev. Ray Shawn McKinnon, who had been a supporter of Clinton Democratic rival Bernie Sanders but is not squarely for her.
Clinton’s challenge among black voters is not necessarily to win more support — polls show her with a huge lead over Trump — but to get them to turn out.
Aisha Dew, who had chaired Sanders’ North Carolina campaign, came away pleased at what she heard Monday. “Sanders was stronger on social justice,” she said, but Clinton convinced her she could be equally strong.
“She checked off a lot of the boxes Bernie had,” added Hiwot Hailu, a Queens University student who had been leaning toward Clinton but found the debate helped solidify her support.
Trump had only three supporters before the debate, but held on to them.
“I agree we’re in a bubble,” said Claire Mahoney, who had supported Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., in the Republican primary over Trump.
She’s now all for Trump, particularly as he argued the nation’s economy is being artificially propped up by historically low interest rates and that the Federal Reserve Board bows to political pressure. Mecklenburg County Commissioner Matthew Ridenour, another Rubio backer, saw Trump’s idea of lowering taxes as an important job creator.
But Trump couldn’t capitalize on the lack of enthusiasm for Clinton. The debate, said James Brown, an unaffiliated voter, “was like a ‘Saturday Night Live’ skit. I got absolutely nothing out of this.” He’s considering Johnson.
“Clinton was more of the same, but Trump presented himself as very rough, unpolished,” said John Fitzgerald, an unaffiliated voter.
Asked whether they could see either Clinton or Trump as president, eight said neither of them qualified.
Yet, most said they would tune in to the next round of debates, including the vice presidential candidates Oct. 4 and Trump and Clinton again Oct. 9 and 19. But before they finally make up their minds, they want specifics and civility.
“I’d like to see each candidate talk about the other side’s issues,” said Marcus Ramos-Pearson, who’s leaning Clinton. “I want to see Donald Trump talk more about social justice.”
Hillary Clinton is HIV positive, according to a shock claim by a Washington D.C. call-girl who says she was diagnosed with the virus after a pay for play fling with former President Bill Clinton in April of last year.
“Bill Clinton visited me one night when he was in town, and he left me with more than a cash payment,” said Mandy Cloud, the pseudonym the former D.C. call-girl chose for her book set to be published next month.
Cloud says she worked as a high-end call-girl in the world’s most powerful city for 14 years, and claims she went for routine STD tests every other week. Bill Clinton was the only client she catered to between tests in April of 2015, meaning she was able to pinpoint the former President as the cause of her positive diagnosis.
Cloud says that a Clinton handler approached her through a mutual friend one week when the former President, who it is claimed favors unprotected sex, was in town on business around the same time his wife was announcing her presidential bid.
The two met at the upmarket Hay-Adams Hotel across from the White House, and at Clinton’s request she returned to see him a few more times during the week.
The former president’s physical appearance has deteriorated rapidly of late, noticed by millions as he makes appearances at campaign events for his wife. Many observers, including former staffers, believe it cannot be a coincidence that both he and his wife Hillary are looking like death.
“I didn’t recognize the character that was on TV,” said former advisor Dick Morris of Bill Clinton’s recent interview with NBC News. “He was washed-out, he was listless, he was apathetic, he was very slow-talking and even slower thinking.”
Mandy Cloud is sure that his haggard look has to do with the fact that she became HIV positive after the week she spent with him, and the former call-girl is convinced Hillary Clinton is HIV+ too.
Your News Wire spoke to a doctor who confirmed Hillary’s well-known symptoms – the seizures, pneumonia, muscle wasting, low energy, and signs of dementia – all point to advanced late-stage AIDS. “If she hasn’t been taking the right medication, her T-cell count is probably virtually non-existent.“
Aidsmap, the internet’s premiere resource for AIDS-related information, states that blackouts and losses of consciousness – like Hillary suffered at the 9/11 memorial earlier this month – are par for the course.
“A blackout is the sudden loss or near loss of consciousness and may be accompanied by dizziness, vertigo, headache or (if due to a fit/convulsion) shaking of the limbs and incontinence.
“Some people with HIV get damage to the adrenal glands, usually caused by CMV, which reduces the production of corticosteroid hormones. Lack of these hormones is another important cause of postural hypotension.
“A potentially more serious cause is a fit or convulsion as this might indicate an acute problem in the brain such as an infection or abscess, possibly a result of toxoplasmosis.”
Could this revelation be the ‘October Surprise’ that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has promised us? There is a shroud of mystery around Hillary’s health – she has been desperate to keep whatever it is that is ailing her under wraps. This is behavior typical of a prominent public figure who has a serious illness they wish to conceal from the public.
However as both Clintons’ health continues to rapidly decline – in full view of the startled public – how long can they continue denying that something is seriously wrong?
Evidence has emerged that militants from Ahrar Al-Sham are planning to use chemical weapons against civilians in Syria and then blame it on President Assad.
UN envoy Bashar Ja’afari says he has uncovered a plot by the terrorist organisation to frame Assad for white phosphorus attacks on civilians, which will be blamed on Syrian troops.
“I have information that Ahrar Al-Sham terrorists intend to mount attacks on civilian population using white phosphorus for the sake of fabricating accusations against the Syrian state and its army,” the diplomat said at an emergency UN Security Council meeting on Sunday.
To falsify the evidence and make their claims sound more credible, the militants plan to pose as Syrian army troops as they deploy the banned substance, Ja’afari said, adding that imposters are going to put on Syrian army uniforms and film the whole incident on camera. He did not elaborate on the source of the intelligence.
White phosphorus is an extremely poisonous toxic agent able to inflict severe burn injuries and is banned from use in civilian areas, according to international law. It is only legitimate to deploy the chemical to create a smokescreen, make signals, or markings for friendly troops. The US has repeatedly used this loophole to use white phosphorus during Middle Eastern campaigns while claiming the indiscriminate weapon is only used as a smokescreen for advancing troops. Most recently, US military deployed white phosphorus shells in Iraq, saying they were used to “obscure” Kurdish fighters’ offensive against Islamists.
Speaking of the alleged upcoming provocation, Ja’afari mentioned the suspicious activity by American experts, who, he claimed, had visited one of the chemical munitions depots in the rebel-held town of Saraqib in the northwestern Idlib province. Upon examining the site, the experts departed Syria for Turkey, he claimed.
For its part, Syria has been acting in full compliance with the UN Charter and international law on warfare, Ja’afari said, repelling accusations of alleged use of incendiary weapons by the Syrian forces.
“We condemn the statements of several UN representatives that we are using banned weapons or targeting the civilian population,” he said, pointing to the fact that the UN, at the same time, is turning a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons by rebels.
In March, Islamist militants of the Ahrar Al group along with a string of other armed opposition groups were accused by shelling the predominantly Kurdish Sheikh Maqsood neighborhood of Aleppo with yellow phosphorus by Kurdish YPG fighters.
Ahrar Al-Sham also committed a bulk of violations that contributed the ceasefire failure in Syria, according to the Russian military. The group, which is believed to be allied with Al-Nusra Front, has rejected the latest ceasefire, but is still not officially recognized as terrorist by US-led coalition despite Russia’s repeated requests.
“Not long ago, the Americans at last sent us a list of organizations which they consider to be part of the ceasefire and which should not be targeted. In one of the first positions there is Ahrar al-Sham,” Russian FM Sergey Lavrov said in interview to Sputnik earlier in September, adding that it “seems the Americans are listing a part of a terrorist structure, which is recognized as such by the UN, as an organization loyal to them.”
While the meeting was focused on the escalation of hostilities in Aleppo, where the Syrian armed forces are conducting a large-scale anti-terror operation in the eastern part of the embattled city, the US, UK and French representatives have demonstratively walked out from the meeting before the Syrian envoy was about to give Syria’s government prospective on the issue.
In his turn, Ja’afari slammed the countries for disrupting the peace process in Syria by carrying out airstrikes at Syrian army positions.
“Several UN member states should stop lying to themselves and to the whole world,” he said.
Despite the repeated violations of the ceasefire by the rebels, Syria is ready to breathe life in the stalled intra-Syrian talks and renew the negotiations but only with those forces who are “genuine patriots of their country and not acting on orders from abroad and receive money there.”
The Syrian envoy pointed out that Syrian government take all possible measures to ensure the civilian population would not suffer from the offensive, asking them to keep away from terrorist positions. However, the militants “do not let the civilians leave Aleppo and use them as [human] shields,” the envoy said.
If you mention things like the New World Order or suggest Barack Obama is actively driving us towards a one-world government, you generally get treated to a roll of the eyes, a deep sigh, and an offhand comment about being a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.
But times are changing, and more and more mainstream folk are starting to wake up and smell the coffee that Obama and the global elites are brewing. Rolling Stone magazine, discussing the New World Order, has even issued an apology to “conspiracy theorists,” admitting that “you were right all along.“
“Conspiracy theorists of the world, believers in the hidden hands of the Rothschilds and the Masons and the Illuminati, we skeptics owe you an apology. You were right. The players may be a little different, but your basic premise is correct: The world is a rigged game.“
And it’s no wonder more and more people are waking up, considering the outrageous abuses of power occurring in 2016, and the staggering amount of “conspiracy theories,” once held up to ridicule, that have been proved true this year.
NSA surveillance, the marriage of banking and government, mainstream media as the propaganda arm of the state, cannabis as medicine, rigged commodity markets, the petrodollar, 9/11, election fraud… The list goes on. Mentioning any of these issues would have earnt you a roll of the eyes, a deep sigh, and an offhand tin foil hat comment in the past. But now they are mainstream facts.
And now our freedom-hating, promised-a-seat-at-the-grown-up-table president, is giving speeches openly declaring that we need to give up some of our personal liberties in order to pave the way for the New World Order “conspiracy theory” to come to life.
Addressing the United Nations in NYC, Obama said:
“…But I am convinced that in the long run, giving up some freedom of action — not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests, but binding ourselves to international rules over the long term — enhances our security. And I think that’s not just true for us…”
Giving up some freedom of action? Binding ourselves to international rules?
Gosh. That really doesn’t work for me at all. Sorry, B.
Now, if you’ve been paying attention, this is going to seem like deja vu, because almost exactly a year ago, September 28th 2015, he said nearly the same thing:
“…The increasing skepticism of our international order can also be found in the most advanced democracies. We see greater polarization, more frequent gridlock; movements on the far right, and sometimes the left, that insist on stopping the trade that binds our fates to other nations, calling for the building of walls to keep out immigrants.”