It’s for the elections, Dummy

President Obama’s administration’s constant reassurances to the American people starting last month is starting to look a lot like what I suspected they would be – a ploy.  A ploy for the Obama admnistration to show that it “has leadership qualities”.  But I was right when I said if there would be a terrorist attack before the November elections, just call me the prophet.  And this was pretty damn close…well, we still have until Tuesday.

“The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” wrote Shapiro, adding, “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”

Paul Joseph Watson
Friday, October 29, 2010

UPDATE: As this contrived scare unravels, Obama has given a press conference reversing earlier announcements that there were no explosives in the packages found on the planes. Obama claimed that the packages “did apparently contain explosive material,” completely contradicting earlier reports which quoted authorities as saying that both the package found in the UK and the two found in the U.S. were all duds and contained no explosive material.

A few hours ago CNN reported, “Investigators examined two UPS planes that landed at Philadelphia International Airport and another at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey, said Mike Mangeot, a UPS spokesman. Authorities later gave the “all-clear” at the airport in Newark, U.S. and U.K. officials said,” and yet now CNN is running with the headline, Suspicious packages ‘contain explosive material,’ Obama says. This stinks to high heaven. Obama is directly contradicting the announcements of his own federal security apparatus.

Obama also said that the events were a scare tactic designed to shake up Americans before the elections. On this point he’s correct, but all the evidence points to his White House being behind the scare. Obama was informed last night of the events as the packages were discovered and even after it was known that the UK package contained no explosive material, he issued a full security alert anyway.

As we predicted on four separate occasions would happen, the Obama White House has deliberately contrived a fake terror scare on the eve of the mid-term elections in an effort to subdue the rampaging political appetite for anti-big government candidates that threatens to sweep aside establishment incumbents next week.

Despite the fact that the so-called suspicious package discovered on a flight in the United Kingdom tested negative for any explosive material, President Obama, after being informed of the apparent “threat” yesterday, “directed U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the Department of Homeland Security” to launch a full-scale security alert, according to a White House press release, which in turn was helpfully elevated to levels of hysteria by the corporate media today.

The scaremongering was focused around two UPS planes that landed at Philadelphia International Airport and another at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey, but just like the incident in the UK, both were soon given the “all clear,” reports CNN, and no bombs were found.

Despite the fact that no explosives at all were found on any of the planes, the establishment media is still feverishly running with the story that this was a “mail bomb” plot targeting the United States and that it was run out of Yemen, which coincidentally is also the US Military-Industrial Complex’s number one target for attack.

Quite how a “mail bomb plot” can succeed without any actual bombs is something the hysterical press has failed to properly explain. Like every other single major terror scare targeting the United States that we have covered, this smacks of an engineered political ploy.

As the video at the top of this article highlights, the terror scare also arrives just days after British Airways Chairman Martin Broughton attacked US authorities for the continuation of “completely redundant” airport security checks. It also comes amidst an increasing backlash against naked body scanners.

Just as former Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge admitted that fake terror alerts were issued by the Bush administration for political gain, Obama is taking a leaf out of the Neo-Con’s playbook – and his timing couldn’t be better – just four days before the mid-term elections on Super Tuesday.

Over the last few months, on four separate occasions, we warned that the Obama White House would pull a terror stunt on the eve of the election in an effort to corral an increasingly resentful and angry electorate into acquiescence. As we reported back in July, former Clinton advisor Robert Shapiro wrote that Obama was relying on an October surprise in the form of a terror scare to rescue his presidency.

“The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” wrote Shapiro, adding, “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”

 Last month we reported on how the Obama administration’s threat that a “small scale terror attack” was on the cards was just another political ploy to instill fear within Americans. In another subsequent article we again highlighted the probability of the government contriving a terror scare for political grist.

We repeated our warning about Obama seeking to exploit terror earlier this month in the aftermath of the supposed airport lobby bombing plot, which again turned out to be nothing but hot air.

We’d be loathe to forget that the media and the government have been totally discredited over and over again by their complicity in issuing phony terror alerts designed to manipulate elections and frighten the public into slavish obedience, accepting naked body scanners, an intensification of the police state and any other indignity in the name of the government protecting them from terrorists like Christmas Day bomber Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was allowed to board the airliner he tried to attack by order of the US State Department.

Within hours of this new terror scare breaking every indication, most notably the fact that Obama was informed last night and decided to go ahead with a full security alert despite the UK package being a dud, screams out that this is a contrived political stunt designed to sway the many key undecided voters in anticipation of next week’s mid-terms.


The Mystery of FDR Unravelled

Here is a great article about a President who has become something like a pillar in Amercian politics.  Remember, the FDR was the one to call the Constitution “quaint” and the Soviet constitution was the “model constitution of the future.”  Plus, under guise of fear and loathing; FDR was the one with the swipe of a pen to place more than 100,000 Japanese-Americans in internment camps.  Sixty-two percent of those would be revealed to be American citizens.

By Lew Rockwell

Great Depression through the horrific World War II.

Normalcy did not return until after his wartime controls were repealed and the budget was cut. Lasting economic recovery began in 1948.

And the guy that made all that happen is a hero? His picture is on the (depreciated) dime.

Libraries of books have appeared about his presidency, most celebrating his cockamamie schemes, and this is the example that has inspired the whole of American political culture. Everyone tries to be like him, and the way they try to be like him is by ramming through even more cockamamie schemes using high-blown rhetoric. Bust the budget and be “great”: this is the lesson of FDR.

George W. Bush was a case in point. After 9-11, he did the best impersonation he could, but in the end he was completely discredited. Clinton tried something similar with his goofy health-care plan, but he failed. Obama took some steps in this direction, but they never amounted to much.

The problem here is the example of FDR and the lessons that the American political class has learned from it. The big-government left loves the example, and urges everyone to go thou and do likewise. The neoconservatives have taken the approach that we should just stop fighting about FDR and learn to love the New Deal. Newt Gingrich and his friends have pushed the most implausible thing of all: heralding the greatness of the New Deal while also proclaiming their opposition to big government. Huh?

In the end, it turns out that everyone has learned the wrong lesson, and not only stemming from the mistaken view that the New Deal somehow got us out of the economic Depression. The main wrong lesson here might be political.

As Mark Thornton has shown, the big legislative change that FDR made at the start of his presidency, the decision that affected every single American citizen from one coast to the other, was the repeal of the thirteen-year Hell of Prohibition. He campaigned to repeal Prohibition (which Hoover supported) and cut government (which Hoover expanded). He kept his main promise merely two weeks after the inauguration. Later that year, he basked in the glory of an amendment to the Constitution that repealed the Prohibition amendment of 1920.

These actions had an immediate effect that dramatically changed life for everyone, drinkers and nondrinkers alike. The speakeasies and their corruptions came to an end. The cops cleaned up their act as bribes and payoffs were no longer the main part of the daily grind. Local government budgets were suddenly flush with revenue. There were new markets for grains. There were meeting places for people. The young were no longer lured into the drunken underworld with its forbidden-fruit attractiveness. For heavens sake, people could have a glass of wine with dinner!

If you think that this is no big deal, consider the absolute despotism of the 18th Amendment that FDR killed:

Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
Section 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Yeah, sure, this is the land of the free! FDR’s response was the 21st Amendment:

Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Here is drama. Here is greatness. Here is what it means to set people free. By comparison, everything else that FDR did — nefarious and awful — paled by comparison, at least from the point of view of the average person. Having taken credit for repealing Prohibition, FDR had tremendous legislative leeway, which he used to the maximum extent for one, two, three, four terms in office. This is what big actions on behalf of human liberty can bring.

Since then, we’ve had a long string of politicians who tried to emulate FDR’s horrible programs without having done anything positive for the cause of liberty. It doesn’t work. They keep going down in flames. And why is this? Because, for the most part, the main impulse of American politics was always and still is essentially libertarian.

The songs we sing, the pledges we make, the stories of our founding, all have liberty as the main theme. Despite all the horrors of the presidencies and the vast expansion of government power, liberty remains the overriding impulse of American political culture. The welfare and warfare states are out of control, and yet, it remains true that the most politically effective themes in American life revolve around liberty. Liberty is what unites us. Liberty is what we want.

FDR understood this. This is why he changed his position from dry to wet to get the nomination. This is why he made the repeal of Prohibition a priority.

So why haven’t we seen this before? We tend to separate economic and social policy and forget the way they play off each other. Good economists have condemned the New Deal, but they might forget how the repeal of Prohibition had a huge economic aspect. The other thing is that the historians are liars. They want us to believe that FDR was loved for all the horrible things that he did. This is why they keep pounding into our brains the glories of the New Deal.

The results of this misconstruing of history have been disastrous for human liberty. Now with a new understanding of why so many people loved him, we have a better example of political success. The next president, from whatever party, should learn. Bring the troops home. Cut taxes. Legalize marijuana. Eliminate restrictions on any and every industry.

Reagan understood this, which is why he immediately cut taxes and broke the power of a government union — and this is also why his catastrophic deficits, later tax increases, and government expansions were not regarded as the betrayals they were.

Freedom is the theme. The president who pushes it succeeds. The cautionary aspect of this story is that not even the president should be trusted. FDR used his great action as an excuse to get away with many evil actions. The first lesson for politicians is to push freedom first. The lesson for the rest of us is never put your trust in a president, even one that has done something good.

Minority of Americans Believe in Two Party Scam

Paul Joseph Watson
Monday, October 25, 2010

Only a minority of American voters now have faith in either Democrats or Republicans according to a new Rasmussen poll out today, with favorability toward a third party surging amidst a wave of anti-incumbent success.

“43% of Likely U.S. Voters believes that neither Democrats nor Republicans in Congress are the party of the American people, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Nearly as many see a need for a new third party,” according to Rasmussen Reports. Only 35 % – a minority – still believe that Republicans or Democrats represent the American people.

In addition, 38% now think that it is somewhat likely a third party candidate will be elected as US President within the next 10 years.

A massive 72% of Republican voters say the GOP has lost touch with its party base over the past few years compared with 61% who believe the same of Democrats.

The poll numbers suggest that confidence in the two party scam continues to collapse as the mid-terms near, offering hope that voters are finally beginning to understand that continually re-electing establishment Republican or Democrat presidents changes nothing.

Despite the GOP’s best efforts to hijack the Tea Party movement, candidates like David Ryon are pushing populist issues that genuinely address the real problems behind America’s decline. Ryon, who is running for Ohio’s 15th District Congressional seat under the Constitution Party banner, recently called for an audit of the Federal Reserve in line with Ron Paul’s efforts to initiate a full audit of the Fed.

Meanwhile, Sharron Angle, who has pulled ahead of establishment Democrat Harry Reid despite Barack Obama himself endorsing Reid in a desperate attempt to save his Senate seat, advocates a number of policies shared by the majority of Americans, including a full repeal of Obamacare, lower taxes, properly securing the border, and even removing sodium fluoride from public water supplies.

Rand Paul also continues to enjoy a comfortable lead over Democrat Jack Conway, despite the fact that Bill Clinton was called upon to campaign against him and in addition to an endless series of contrived smears run by the establishment media.

The new poll confirms that anti-incumbency fever is still directing the course of the mid-terms, with 62% of the country believing it will be better for America if most congressional incumbents are defeated in November.

The survey also reveals that nearly a third of all likely voters now consider themselves to be Tea Party movement advocates, a truly gargantuan voting bloc considering the modest beginnings of the Tea Party as a small but vocal affiliation of anti-tax protesters just a few years ago.

To have 29% of likely voters consider themselves to not be aligned with either Republicans or Democrats represents a massive threat to the establishment and could be the seed that grows into a truly powerful third party movement. Whether this anti-establishment political revolution turns into effective long term success for third party candidates depends on how successful the GOP is in infiltrating and subverting the Tea Party in the build up to 2012.

Christains In America Just Don’t Care

As news spreads about Muslims in Paris, France taking to the streets and praying, and as Americans learn of this; fear creeps in and the one thought that creeps into their minds is: What if that happens here?  So…what if that does happen here?  What would be the reaction?  Would Christians take to the streets as well?  Would there be revolt?  A new age in social war?

As I’ve pointed out earlier; not all Muslims are bad.  Not all of them are terrorists.  And not acts of terrorism are committed by Muslims.  What can be said of KKK/Nazi groups in America preparing for a “culture war”?  Look, we can go all through history and see our own riddled past, but the main question remains: What would Christians do?

I was in church not long ago and the Pastor of our church showed a video of people saying that they don’t take the Bible literally; even Christians are saying this.  Thanks to the anti-homosexual rhetoric; homosexuals feel alienated.  Christianity, and therefore God, does not love them.  It thanks to the moonbat crazy members of Westboro Baptist Church going around and protesting dead soldiers funerals in the face of grieving family members,  and saying that due to homosexuality that our soldiers are dying, and on top of that; saying the “AIDS cures fags”; it is because of all of this that people today hate Christians.

I can bet that a majority of Americans – without the controversy this year and Google – cannot name the date on which the National Day of Prayer falls on.  Most Christians would be happy to sit in church and let the pastor tell them how to live their lives.  Live like a bastard all week and be a saint on Sunday.  We sit, we listen, and when the preachin’ is done and the songs have been sung, we leave the church feeling better; at least for one day.  We’re all guilty of this.

The decredationg that America finds itself in is thanks to the American people.  About a month ago; my church held a twenty-four hour prayer vigil to be held over the weekend.  I participated, but a majority of the church did not.  Why?  Because they don’t care.  Less and less people go to the altar for the pastor to pray over them at our church.  They’re either too stubborn to move or too embarrassed to be seen going forward.

If tomorrow Muslims would rally in New York City and pray in the streets; Christians would have a fit.  But how many times have we seen Christians do the same thing?  How many christian marches do we see on Capitol Hill?  If one day out of the year is all we have to “offer” to God as a “national day of prayer”, then we are in big trouble.  How many churches that read this post can say that their church went to the court house lawn and prayed?  Or held a parade?  How many?

Churches today have become too comfortable with the lost finding them, instead of the church finding the lost.  At my church we have a biker mission group that used to go out into the city and raise money for charities, and since the president of that group left, they don’t do it anymore.  And in the words of the former president of that group, “they’re nothing.”

I know a pastor down in St. Louis who goes out into the ghetto and meets with hookers, strippers, addicts, and the homeless, and homosexual.  He doesn’t try to ram the Bible down their throats.  Instead, he takes a different approach; he becomes their friend.  Once he asked a porn addict/alcholic/stripper fan if he could say a short dicreet prayer with him, and do know what the man’s reaction was?  “Pastor, you’re gonna have to say a long indiscreet prayer for me!”

Christianity isn’t about shedding the light on people’s sins so the whole world can see.  It is shedding the light of Christ on the people so the dark will run in terror.

If the theory holds true that Muslims want to come into this country and “change” our culture, then the complacent church is only to blame.

Abortion, Barack Obama, and John P. Holdren

Since its start into the American society; abortion has murdered more than fifty million babies.  Now before I get into the news, here is my take on the issue of a “woman’s right”.  It’s disgusting.  It’s murder.  It’s legalized genocide.  We spend all of these trillions of dollars funding corrupt governments around the world because our politicians and television sets tell us that if we don’t send one penny, someone will die.  If we don’t invade this country and that country, someone will die.  If we didn’t take out Saddam Hussein, he would have unleashed an un-Godly plague upon the world.  And yet, Americans can go to sleep at night knowing that while we are “so concerned” with the welfare of some bureaucrat in a third-world nation, a million babies will die this year in the United States, without taking a single breath.

In his book The Revolution: A Manifesto; Ron Paul outlined his opposition to abortion.  Keep in mind I don’t have the book on me or else I would copy down word-for-word, but as it is, I will just have to paraphrase.  This will be subject to later correction.

In his book Congressman Ron Paul (who is also an O.B. doctor) said that he was working at a hospital and he walked into a room without having full knowledge of what was going on.  Doctors and nurses were performing an abortion.  Anyway, they pulled the small baby out and placed it in a bucket, setting it off to the side of the room.  Now here is the real sick part: they comforted the woman having he abortion.  And that baby that knows no sin, no strife, no pain, only love; had to die.  For what?

In case you did not know; here is how a partial birth abortion is conducted:

1) Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby’s legs with forceps.

2) The baby’s leg is pulled out into the birth canal.

3) The abortionist delivers the baby’s entire body, except for the head.

4) The abortionist jams scissors into the baby’s skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the skull.

5) The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child’s brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.

Like myself, are you disgusted?  It’s a pretty terrible world to think that someone would think of their own selfish future instead bringing life to an unborn child.  Of course, like most things in this life, there are extenuating circumstances; like threat to the mother’s life.  But outright abortion encourages one thing above all: a promiscuous lifestyle.  Have sex, get pregnant, have an abortion, no worries, right?

For someone who doesn’t believe God speaks condemning of abortion, consider the following:

They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons; they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters… and the land was polluted with blood. Then the anger of the lord was kindled against his people, and He abhorred his heritage; he gave them into the hands of the nations, so that those who hated them ruled over them. Their enemies oppressed them, and they were brought into subjection under their power.” (See Psalm 106:37-43)

With that being said, let’s get to the news.

Population control by forced Abortion…

As if it weren’t bad enough that the Obama administration is infested with Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission members (TC), and Bilderberg members; there seems to be an untold member – John P. Holdren.  It should be no secret that Barack Obama is for abortion.  In fact, he has voted for it time and time again.  He even thinks that partial birth abortion should stay legal.  So why is it too far out of the American people’s mind to think that he would have an elitist who condones “forced abortion” to curtail the “exploding world population”.

In his 1977 book Ecoscience, Holdren advocated forced abortion:

On page 837, Holdren and his co-authors write, “Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

He then advocates having single mothers, especially minors, having their babies put up for adoption or forced to have an abortion.

One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.”

Holdren’s scary and atrocious support of abortion gets even worse:

From page 787-8, ““Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.”

“The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”

Something such as this should come as no surprise.  After all, this is a presidency that does not know the meaning of the word transparency.  Our liberties are becoming more and more limited, and, we as Americans, have the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Einstein’s Definition of Insanity – Israel

As early as this month the Israel Aerospace Industries announced that they have signed as deal with Russia to the tune of $400 million dollars.  Russia wil buy the drones over a period of three years and they will be assembled in Russia.

“This is a huge step toward deepening cooperation between IAI and Russian industry. This agreement will also strengthen the bilateral relationship between Israel and Russia,” the two companies said in the statement.

Einstein’s theory on insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. 

Now without using big words and going smart on everyone; can anyone say that this will go well?  Russia?  A nation that has recently been selling weapons to Iran.  A nation that has historically been opposed to Israel.  Does anyone remember the Six Day War?

Now Russia’s military is obsolete and these weapons will greatly enhance their already floundering war policy.  

Just recently the Obama administration proposed $2 billion multi year deal to fund Pakistan in the “fight” against terrorism. 

I think I agree with Ron Paul when he said, “what’s going on here?”

Hopefully Wikileaks can bring the Empire down

Hillary Clinton: Pioneer, Hero, Winner
Image by Tony the Misfit via Flickr

President John F. Kennedy once said that “the word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society.”  Hillary Clinton has said that we “should condemn in the most clear terms” any “disclosure” of classified documents.

I can about bet the Obama administration is hoping the American people, while they are worried about making their bills, will let this go over their heads.  In the meantime; anti-war Patriots like myself; hope that Wikileaks brings the Empire down.

In my mind; I don’t see how anyone can ignore the atrocious history the United States has had with Iraq.  The CIA gave Saddam Hussein biological weapons, Bush Sr. encouraged the deaths of thousands, sanctions killed 500,000 innocent people, and now torture.  What’s terrifying the most is that we are doing it all over again.

DUBAI (AFP) – Al-Jazeera on Friday released what it called “startling new information” from US documents obtained by WikiLeaks, alleging state-sanctioned Iraqi torture and the killing of hundreds of civilians at US military checkpoints.

It said that the major findings included a US military cover-up of Iraqi state-sanctioned torture and “hundreds” of civilians deaths at manned American checkpoints after the US-led invasion of 2003 that ousted Saddam Hussein.

The Qatar-based satellite broadcaster also said the leaked papers, dating from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009, show the United States kept a death count throughout the war, despite US denials.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemned “in the most clear terms” the leaks of any documents putting Americans at risk.

Speaking to reporters in Washington, she declined to discuss the specifics of the WikiLeaks disclosures.

“But I do have a strong opinion that we should condemn in the most clear terms the disclosure of any information by individuals and or organisations which puts the lives of United States and its partners’ servicemembers and civilians at risk,” she said.

Al-Jazeera’s English channel told AFP in a statement that from 2100 GMT on Friday it would broadcast a series of programmes “that reveal startling new information about the operations of US forces during the Iraq War.”

It said the programmes are based on files from WikiLeaks “who gained access to over 400,000 documents regarding the War in Iraq making it the largest document leak in US history.

“The secret materials are more than four times larger then Wikileak?s Afghanistan files,” the broadcaster said in a statement issued in English.

WikiLeaks infuriated the Pentagon in July by publishing 77,000 classified US military documents on the war in Afghanistan.

“Although one of the stated aims of the Iraq War was to close down Saddam Hussein?s torture chambers, the Wikileaks documents show many cases of torture and abuse of Iraqi prisoners by Iraqi police and soldiers,” Al-Jazeera said.

“In addition, the documents reveal the US knew about the state sanctioned torture but ordered its troops not to intervene.”

It said “hundreds of civilians” were killed at US manned checkpoints.

“According to the documents, many Iraqi civilians were killed during the war at checkpoints in contrast to the official US position,” the channel said.

Al-Jazeera said the leaked documents also provide new information on the killing of civilians by US private security firm Blackwater.

“The secret US files reveal new cases of Blackwater (a company now known as XE) opening fire on civilians. No charges were ever brought,” the statement said.

The broadcaster’s Arabic-language service reported that the civilian death toll in Iraq was “much higher than officially announced.”

It reported that at least 109,000 people were killed, 63 percent of them civilians, between the invasion in March 2003 and the end of 2009.

“The confidential documents obtained by WikiLeaks reveal that the American forces had compiled a register of dead and wounded Iraqis, even if they deny it publicly,” it said.

“They show 285,000 victims of the conflict, of whom at least 109,000 were killed” between 2003 and the end of last year, it said, adding that 63 percent of the dead were civilians.

Al-Jazeera said that included in the papers obtained by WikiLeaks was information on what the station’s statement in English called the “secret involvement” of Iran in financing Shiite militias in Iraq.

“The files detail Iran?s secret war in Iraq and discuss Iran?s Revolutionary Guard acting as an alleged supplier of arms to Shia insurgents,” it said.

It said the papers also included US Army reports about Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki “and allegations of his association with death squads” in Iraq.

The Pentagon warned on Friday that releasing secret military documents could endanger US troops and Iraqi civilians.

“By disclosing such sensitive information, WikiLeaks continues to put at risk the lives of our troops, their coalition partners and those Iraqis and Afghans working with us,” Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said.

He said the documents were “essentially snapshots of events, both tragic and mundane, and do not tell the whole story.”

Amnesty International urged Washington to investigate how much US officials knew about ill-treatment of detainees in Iraq.

“We have not yet had an opportunity to study the leaked files in detail but they add to our concern that the US authorities committed a serious breach of international law when they summarily handed over thousands of detainees to Iraqi security forces who, they knew, were continuing to torture and abuse detainees on a truly shocking scale,” Malcolm Smart, Amnesty?s Middle East director, said in a statement.