The American Dream is a 30 minute animated film that shows you how you've been scammed by the most basic elements of our government system. All of us Americans strive for the American Dream, and this film shows you why your dream is getting farther and farther away. Do you know how your money is created? Or how banking works? Why did housing prices skyrocket and then plunge? Do you really know what the Federal Reserve System is and how it affects you every single day? The American Dream takes an entertaining but hard-hitting look at how the problems we have today are nothing new, and why leaders throughout our history have warned us and fought against the current type of financial system we have in America today. You will be challenged to investigate some very entrenched and powerful institutions in this nation, and hopefully encouraged to help get our nation back on track.

In 2006 Citizen Investigation Team launched an independent investigation into the act of terrorism which took place at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. This exhaustive three-year inquest involved multiple trips to the scene of the crime in Arlington, Virginia, close scrutiny of all official and unofficial data related to the event, and, most importantly, first-person interviews with dozens of eyewitnesses, many of which were conducted and filmed in the exact locations from which they witnessed the plane that allegedly struck the building that day.


More information is available at the Citizen Investigation Team website: here

Obama ignores Israel's chemical weapons abuse while targeting Syrian government that may not be responsible for recent chemical attacks

Few major mainstream American news outlets exposed the sordid details of a 2009 United Nations (UN) fact finding report that revealed how Israel's military illegally aimed chemical missiles at a United Nations Relief & Work Agency (UNRWA) for Palestinian refugees in a 22-day invasion of the Gaza strip that began in 2008 called "Operation Cast Lead."

As the U.S. and world media watch to learn if claims that President Barack Obama will execute a military strike against Syria, without a vote of Congress or the support of the UN, the same media outlets are burying information that suggests preparation for war could be premature. Little media attention is being paid to claims from a UN commission that Syrian rebels, not government soldiers under President Bashar al-Assad's control, were responsible for recent chemical weapons attacks that killed over 300 Syrians.

"During our investigation for crimes against humanity and war crimes, we collect some witness testimony that has made to appear that some chemical weapons were used. In particular, nerve gas," said Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria. "What appears to our investigation is that this was used by the opposition, by the rebels. We have no indication at all that the Syria government have used chemical weapons."

What's also questionable is why Obama has drawn a "line in the sand" over highly questionable allegations that Syrian soldiers used chemical weapons when the Israeli military was proven, and officials have admitted, to using chemical warfare to attack a United Nations relief compound. The facility provided shelter and medical attention to Palestinian refugees in 2009.

To the list of skeptics who question the need for airstrikes against Syria, add an another unlikely group - many U.S. servicemembers.

A Military Times survey of more than 750 active-duty troops this week found servicemembers oppose military action in Syria by a ratio of about three to one.

The survey conducted online Monday and Tuesday found that about 75% of troops are not in favor of airstrikes in response to reports that the Syrian government used chemical weapons to kill its civilians.

A higher percentage of troops, about 80%, say they do not believe getting involved in the 2-year-old civil war is in the U.S. national interest.

The results suggest that opposition inside the military may be more intense than among the U.S. population at large. About 64% of Americans oppose airstrikes, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll published Monday.

A court indictment by the Turkish prosecutors into the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian rebels has once again highlighted fears this week that sarin toxic gas was used by the opposition and not the Assad government.

The prosecutor in the Turkish city of Adana has issued a 132-page indictment, alleging that six men of the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front and Ahrar ash-Sham tried to seek out chemicals with the intent to produce the nerve agent, sarin gas, a number of Turkish publications reported.

The main suspect in the case, 35-year-old Syrian-national Hytham Qassap has been charged with "being a member of a terrorist organization" and "attempting to acquire weapons for a terrorist organization." The other 5, all Turkish nationals are being charged with "attempting to acquire weapons for a terrorist organization."

The indictment alleges that Qassap tried to setup a network in Turkey in order to obtain chemical materials for the al-Nusra Front and Ahrar al-Sham Brigades. Citing telephone calls made by the cell, the prosecution believes that the group ordered at least ten tons of chemicals, Al-Alam News Network reports.

The prosecution also dismissed claims that the suspects were unaware of their wrong doing. "The claim that the suspects didn't know about the possibility of producing sarin nerve gas from the chemicals they tried to buy is not true which was established when they were testifying," the document reads.

Meanwhile all six suspects have pleaded not guilty. "The suspects have pleaded not guilty saying that they had not been aware the materials they had tried to obtain could have been used to make sarin gas. Suspects have been consistently providing conflicting and incoherent facts on this matter," the indictment said.

If convicted, Qassab faces a 25 year prison sentence, while his accomplices face 15 years prison terms.

The six men were a part of a group of 11 people arrested in their safe house in Adana on May 23, 2013. Their apprehension came about after surveillance by Turkish police who'd received a tip that Syrian jihadists were trying to acquire two government-regulated military-grade chemical substances. Five of the detained were released from custody after questioning, background checks and after lab tests proved that chemicals seized during the arrest were not sarin gas.

Geneva - The United States and Russia agreed Saturday on an outline for the identification and seizure of Syrian chemical weapons and said Syria must turn over an accounting of its arsenal within a week.

The agreement will be backed by a U.N. Security Council resolution that could allow for sanctions or other consequences if Syria fails to comply, Secretary of State John F. Kerry said.

Kerry said that the first international inspection of Syrian chemical weapons will take place by November, with destruction to begin next year.

Senior administration officials had said Friday the Obama administration would not press for U.N. authorization to use force against Syria if it reneges on any agreement to give up its chemical weapons.

The Russians had made clear in talks here between Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Kerry that the negotiations could not proceed under the threat of a U.N. resolution authorizing a military strike. Russia also wanted assurances that a resolution would not refer Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to the International Criminal Court for possible war-crimes prosecution.

The strong reaction that the US has had towards Syria's use of chemical weapons seems incongruous to many advocates of arms control. While certainly these groups abhor chemical weapons, they tend to be more worried about weapons of war that are used much more often, cluster bombs. The Department of Defense or DOD has recently announced that it will be building and selling 1300 cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia.

Cluster bombs are explosives that break open shortly before impact and release dozens of submunitions - adorably called "bomblets" - that scatter and explode individually. However, because many of the bomblets fail to detonate, they have created an exploded ordnance crisis that is at least as dangerous as landmines, if not more so.

While the focus at the G-20 and in Washington remains on the Syrian regime's alleged use of chemical weapons, concerns grow over the continued deployment - both by Syria and the U.S. - of deadly cluster munitions

U.S. Congress debates on Monday whether to authorize a punitive strike on Syria for crossing President Barack Obama's "red line" and using chemical weapons. But as the threat of war looms, another controversial weapon is coming into the spotlight. When rumblings of a U.S. strike emerged last month, the Cluster Munition Coalition (CMC) issued a strong warning: the international community must not let the U.S. use cluster munitions in an attack.

"It makes absolutely no sense to use banned weapons to retaliate for the use of another banned weapon," Sarah Blakemore, director of the international civil-society campaign, said in the public letter on Aug. 28.

While reports suggest the U.S. military is more inclined to use sea-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles, the U.S. is, along with Syria, one of only a handful of countries in the world to have used the weapon since 2009, according to the Cluster Munition Monitor 2013 report released by CMC last week. Most of the world condemns cluster munition for its potential, like chemical weapons, to indiscriminately harm civilians. The bomb splits into dozens of dispersed explosives that, if they fail to explode, turn effectively into land mines long after the attack.

Today the United States is waking up to news that the first publicly acknowledged shipment of lethal aid has made its way to Syria. It comes as part of President Obama's efforts to support the Syrian Opposition, and punish Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the alleged use of chemical weapons, which violates a 1925 International Proclamation.

Before the 9/11 terror attacks, the United States was actively engaged in training and arming radical Islamist groups in the Middle East in order to undermine our enemies and supposedly support our national interests. After the Towers fell, the Pentagon was damaged, and Flight 93 was downed, the United States realized that they could not support such extremist groups anymore. Instead, America began a global campaign to combat terrorism, and punish those responsible for the September 11 attacks.

12 years later, we are back to arming radical Muslims, having forgotten, with stunning speed, the lessons of the previous 30 years.

12 years later we have come full circle.

We all understand that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It served as the basis of our Cold War foreign policy stance towards revolutions and civil wars around the globe.

But when the enemy of my enemy, is also my enemy, it would seem as though choices for options range between "absolutely not" and "this is a terrible idea."

The fastest growing "newspaper" in America is based in Manchester, England. The Internet analytics firm Compete.com found that the number of visitors to the website of The Guardian grew by 1111.75% in August and an astounding 671,389.51% over the past year, signifying the desire for Americans to find real information about what's going on.

The main word that people going to The Guardian were searching for was "Syria," according to Compete's blog. That would indicate Americans appreciate The Guardian's skepticism of President Obama's plans to attack Syria and its reputation for honest reporting. It also indicates that average Americans no longer trust their own media and are increasingly turning to a foreign news source.

In polls previously reported by Anthony Gucciardi on Storyleak, it was found that the mainstream media has virtually lost all trust from the American people.

It's no coincidence that The Guardian has seen such explosive growth over the past year. It was Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald who broke the story about the NSA documents Edward Snowden was leaking. The Guardian has been willing to print all the details of NSA surveillance and not bow to political pressure.