False Flag Attacks, Fake Terrorism & Engineered Wars
History has proven that both localised and global circumstances and events may be successfully manipulated by small groups with vested interests. Most human wars are testament to this fact.
The same tried-and-true methods and techniques have been used over and over again and perfected throughout the last few hundred years. Only now are the masses awakening to the manipulation that has been used to divide and conquer the many by the few for so many generations.
'If you think it's simply not possible for the human race to have been duped by the machinations of an elite who will stop at nothing to play out their agendas using the most incomprehensibly evil tactics - you are either in denial or patently stupid.'
As the world now stares down the barrel of another engineered war - World War 3 - we must do all that we can to spread the word so that the people of the world are not once again (and for the last time) led into manipulated, murderous and genocidal oblivion.
Did The Judges Lie: New Report Finds 72 Terrorists Came From Countries Covered By Trump Ban + State Department Revolts Against Trump For Securing Border February 15 2017 | From: Zerohedge / Infowars
The federal judge who halted President Donald Trump's travel ban was wrong in stating that no one from the seven countries targeted in Trump's order has been arrested for extremism in the United States since the 2001 terrorist attacks.
In fact, as a new report finds, 72 individuals from the seven 'mostly Muslim countries' covered by President Trump's "extreme vetting" executive order have been convicted of terrorism since 9/11.
As AP first reported, during a hearing in Seattle last week, Judge Robartasked a Justice Department lawyer how many arrests of foreign nationals from the countries have occurred since 9/11. When the lawyer said she didn't know, Robart answered his own question:
"Let me tell, you, the answer to that is none, as best I can tell. You're here arguing on behalf of someone that says we have to protect the United States from these individuals coming from these countries and there's no support for that."
"A review of information compiled by a Senate committee in 2016 reveals that 72 individuals from the seven countries covered in President Trump's vetting executive order have been convicted in terror cases since the 9/11 attacks.
In June 2016 the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, then chaired by new Attorney General Jeff Sessions, released a report on individuals convicted in terror cases since 9/11.
Using open sources (because the Obama administration refused to provide government records), the report found that 380 out of 580 people convicted in terror cases since 9/11 were foreign-born. The report is no longer available on the Senate website, but a summary published by Fox News is available here.
The Center has obtained a copy of the information compiled by the subcommittee. The information compiled includes names of offenders, dates of conviction, terror group affiliation, federal criminal charges, sentence imposed, state of residence, and immigration history.
The Center has extracted information on 72 individuals named in the Senate report whose country of origin is one of the seven terror-associated countries included in the vetting executive order: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The Senate researchers were not able to obtain complete information on each convicted terrorist, so it is possible that more of the convicted terrorists are from these countries.
The United States has admitted terrorists from all of the seven dangerous countries:
According to the report, at least 17 individuals entered as refugees from these terror-prone countries. Three came in on student visas and one arrived on a diplomatic visa.
At least 25 of these immigrants eventually became citizens. Ten were lawful permanent residents, and four were illegal aliens.
These facts stand in stark contrast to the assertions by the Ninth Circuit judges who have blocked the president's order on the basis that there is no evidence showing a risk to the United States in allowing aliens from these seven terror-associated countries to come in."
Finally, we reminder readers that while Charles Kurzman, a sociology professor at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, says his research shows no Americans have been killed in the U.S. at the hands of people from the seven countries - Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen - since Sept. 11, it's not quite right to say no one from those nations has been arrested or accused in an extremist-related plot while living in the U.S.
23 percent of Muslim Americans involved with extremist plots since Sept. 11 had family backgrounds from the seven countries.
So Judge claims ZERO but in fact the number is 72... Those darn 'alternative facts' are such trouble... or is it racist, sexist, mysoginist, and bogoted when the liberal judiciary is fact-checked?
For many Americans, Trump, made famous for his “You’re Fired” approach to his “Apprentice” reality TV show, has just been given a once-in-a-lifetime repeat performance of that line now that he is president.
Those federal employees feeling secure that civil service rules assure them permanent State Department employment in DC despite their open opposition to Trump’s foreign policies might be well advised to start thinking twice about how well they could adapt to a presidential reassignment to a remote outpost in Alaska, or at the southernmost tip of the United States in Texas, along the Mexican border.
This week a State Department “dissent channel” memo surfaced, objecting to President Trump’s Executive Order issued Jan. 27, temporarily suspending travel for 90 days from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. By Friday over 1,000 State Department employees had put their signatures to the resistance statement.
“A policy which closes our doors to over 200 million legitimate travelers in the hopes of preventing a small number of travelers who intend to harm Americans from using the visa system to enter the US will not achieve its aim of making our country safer,” the State Department dissent memo reads, in language that clearly asserts the bureaucrats in the State Department have a superior lock on foreign policy wisdom than does the president.
Given Trump’s history as a highly successful multi-billionaire CEO, dissenting State Department employees are making a dangerous bet expressing their opinion that they know better than their boss.
The New York Times reported that the State Department currently has 7,600 Foreign Service officers and 11,000 civil servants. This means some 5% (the 1,000 signing the dissent memorandum) of current State Department employees are in open revolt against the newly-inaugurated Chief Executive of the US.
The State Department’s open revolt invites Secretary Tillerson to put under scrutiny for discipline, reassignment, and/or outright dismissal the 1,000 employees signing the dissent memo.
This, plus the “mass exodus” of top State Department policy and management officials that resigned in response to Trump’s election and his selection of Tillerson to be secretary of state, gives President Trump and Secretary Tillerson an extraordinary opportunity to “clean house” with a decision to fire for insubordination all State Department policy officials that signed the dissent memorandum expressing their open disdain for the border security objectives central to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
The depth of the State Department revolt is not fully appreciated until we examine the extent to which leftist State Department officials went to flood into the US a disproportionately large number of refugees from the seven terror-supporting countries specified in the Trump executive order – acting almost as if it were the State Department’s job to get as many refugees into the Untied States as possible from these seven terror-supporting countries before the window closed.
The Washington Times has reported the State Dept. has more than doubled the refugee inflow from the seven terror-prone nations since U.S. District Court Judge James Robart in Seattle imposed a temporary restraining order on the enforcement of President Trump’s executive order imposing the temporary travel ban.
“A staggering 77 percent of the 1,100 refugees let in since Judge James L. Robart’s Feb. 3 order have been from the seven suspect countries. Nearly a third are from Syria alone - a country that President Trump has ordered be banned altogether from the refugee program,” the Washington Times noted.
“Another 21 percent are from Iraq. By contrast, in the two weeks before Judge Robart’s order, just 9 percent of refugees were from Syria and 6 percent were from Iraq.”
But the State Department open rebellion against President Trump does not stop there.
The ConservativeTreeHouse.com argued that a CNN report on Thursday claiming the Russians were trying to influence the election in France so as to insure a win for anti-globalist Marine Le Pen, president of the National Front – a strong opponent of the European Union with a Trump-like “France First” message.
“In essence, CNN -and by extension the progressive State Department officials remaining within the shadow deep state construct- is trying to influence the French Presidential Race,” the ConservativeTreeHouse.com story stressed. “Blaming the Russians in advance is an attempt to weaken Marine Le Pen.”
The article went on to comment only difference between November 2016 and today is that this time CNN is attempting to get out ahead of an election rather than inventing the back-story “the Russians did it” to explain why Hillary Clinton lost an election her leftist supporters presumed she had won from the moment she declared her candidacy for president.
Predictably, Twitter on Friday morning in the aftermath of the Ninth Circuit’s Court of Appeals decision to leave Judge Robart’s decision in place has nothing about the issue trending, despite numerous tweets being posted by Americans angry at the appellate court’s decision and demanding that President Trump clean house at the State Department.
First of all, objections to Trump’s ban were entered into the court by the States of Washington and Minnesota, as the “injured parties.” But Judge Robart announced his decision would affect all States - the whole country - because immigration law must be applied “uniformly” across the board. Perhaps, but nowhere is it stated that a temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by a judge must be applied uniformly across the whole country.
Since when is a TRO the same as a law? Speaking of law, no final legal/constitutional decision has been rendered re Trump’s Executive Order on immigration. It’s still up for grabs. The Judge is just writing script to suit his bias.
The Judge may not like Trump’s ban; clearly, he does not. The Judge may believe the ban will be overturned by a higher court because it is unconstitutional. The Judge may think Trump is committing an immoral act. But all that is beside the point. The only thing Judge Robart was empowered to do was issue a TRO or not issue a TRO. Period.
Why should he have the right to apply his TRO, not a law, to the whole of the United States? Maybe he’s a god we haven’t been told about. If so, I’d like to see the evidence.
Next point: The judge made a number of comments to justify issuing his the TRO: “The States are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of [my] preliminary relief [restraining order].”
That is absurd on its face. Irreparable harm? This means harm that can never be fixed? Come on. The Judge may as well have said, “I’m biased. I don’t like Trump’s EO and I don’t like him. So when I said ‘irreparable’, I exaggerated by a few thousand miles. Ha-ha.”
The Judge wrote:
“The EO [Trump’s Executive Order limiting immigration] adversely affects the States’ residents in areas of employment, education, business, family relations, and freedom to travel.”
More fluff, nonsense, and outright deception. Does the Judge seriously expect us to believe that the banning of 35,000 more refugees than the 2016 federal cap is going to decimate the States?
“I hereby proclaim that the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017 would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I determine that additional admissions would be in the national interest.”
An NPR political editor stated: “For 2016, the cap was 85,000.” The difference is 35,000.
Judge Robart wrote:
“In addition, the States themselves are harmed by virtue of the damage… inflicted upon the operations and missions of their public universities… as well as injury to the States’ operations, tax bases, and public funds.”
Same objections as above. Judge Robart is stretching the truth to the breaking point. His definition of “harm” and “irreparable harm” are coming from his private dictionary of exaggerations. He’s winging it.
Case closed. Except it isn’t.
A Judge who can take powers not granted to him, who can invent, out of whole cloth, dire consequences where none exist, is hustling the system he’s sworn to defend.
Trump’s White House Blasts Bibi For Approving New Israeli Settlements
A recent statement from the White House has shocked the Israeli hierarchy when it said not to continue building new settlements, or any unilateral actions from both sides that would undermine the two-state solution that the United States has been advocating for the last 50 years.
Trump warns Israel: Stop announcing new settlements
White House official tells ‘Post’ all parties should cease ‘unilateral actions,’ affirms two-state solution.
The White House warned Israel on Thursday – in a surprising statement – to cease settlement announcements that are “unilateral” and “undermining” of President Donald Trump’s effort to forge Middle East peace, a senior administration official told The Jerusalem Post.
For the first time, the administration confirmed that Trump is committed to a comprehensive two-state solution to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict negotiated between the parties.
The official told the Post that the White House was not consulted on Israel’s unprecedented announcement of 5,500 new settlement housing units over the course of his first two weeks in office.
“As President Trump has made clear, he is very interested in reaching a deal that would end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and is currently exploring the best means of making progress toward that goal,” the official said.
“With that in mind, we urge all parties to refrain from taking unilateral actions that could undermine our ability to make progress, including settlement announcements,” the official added. “The administration needs to have the chance to fully consult with all parties on the way forward.”
Trump plans to bring up the peace process in his meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House scheduled for February 15.
Trump looks forward to those discussions, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said in response to this report.
“The American desire for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians has remained unchanged for 50 years,” Spicer said. “While we don’t believe the existence of settlements is an impediment to peace, the construction of new settlements or the expansion of existing settlements beyond their current borders may not be helpful in achieving that goal.”
On Thursday, Netanyahu reiterated his support for the settlement enterprise and said, during a visit to Ariel, that in the last week alone he had announced the advancement and authorization of 900 homes in that city.
Until now, Israeli officials have not known what to make of Trump administration policy on the issue of settlements specifically and, more generally, on the challenge of Middle East peace: Under Trump’s leadership, reference to a two-state solution was removed from the Republican Party platform over the summer, and the president’s envoy to Israel has publicly supported the settlement enterprise.
Trump has, however, repeatedly called peace between Israel and the Palestinians the “ultimate deal” – one that he has tasked Jared Kushner, a top adviser and his son-in-law, with moderating.
“I think it’s designed to chill some of the exuberance of those on the Israeli Right who think they have a blank check,” Dennis Ross, a senior Middle East diplomat and veteran of the George H.W. Bush, Clinton and Obama administrations, told the Post. “I think that exuberance got their attention. I just don’t think they want any announcements that will surprise them, and they’re still in the process of formulating what their policy is going to be.
“It sounds like they want to convey a pretty blunt message,” Ross added.
The Trump administration official did not go as far as to explicitly condemn Israel’s settlement activity as “contrary to the pursuit of peace,” as the Obama administration had over the course of its tenure. But the White House does appear to believe that settlement activity, at the very least, “undermines” and complicates Trump’s efforts to bring both sides to the negotiating table.
“The United States remains committed to advancing a comprehensive final-status agreement between Israel and the Palestinians that results in two states living side-by-side in peace and security,” the official said."
The question whether he will issue a blank check for Israeli abuses against the real landlord of the Palestinian lands, has been answered.
Now, we wonder how the protesting Sheeples would react to this one, if they really understand what they are doing.
‘You Think Our Country Is So Innocent?’ * Trump Asks After O’Reilly Calls Putin ‘A Killer’
The US is not as innocent as it may seem, according to President Donald Trump. When Fox News host Bill O’Reilly called Vladimir Putin “a killer,” Trump responded: “We’ve got a lot of killers.”
In an interview to be aired ahead of the Super Bowl later on Sunday, Bill O’Reilly asked if Trump respects Russian President Vladimir Putin, to which the he replied, “I do respect him. Well, I respect a lot of people, but that doesn’t mean I’ll get along with them.”
Seemingly surprised, O’Reilly goes on to ask him why.
“He is the leader of his country. I say it’s better to get along with Russia than not, and if Russia helps us in the fight against ISIS – which is a major fight – and the Islamic terrorism all over the world, that’s a good thing,” Trump answered.
“Will I get along with him? I have no idea.”
O’Reilly then challenged Trump, calling the Russian president “a killer.” Trump shrugged the comment off, saying:
“There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country is so innocent?”
Related: President Trump Will Not Betray You
It is not the first time that Trump has made such comments when journalists question his stance regarding the Russian leader.
At the end of 2015, the host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe told Trump that Putin “kills journalists,” to which the unfazed then-presidential candidate replied,
“I think that our country does plenty of killing, too, Joe.”
“I’ve always felt fine about Putin. He’s a strong leader. He’s a powerful leader,” Trump added.
At the end of January, Putin and Trump held their first official phone call, which, according to the Kremlin, was “good and constructive.”
“Over the past years, the lack of mutual respect became the main reason for the deterioration of relations,”Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov added.
Another important thing is that Washington is prepared for dialogue, the spokesman concluded.
“This is what President Putin called for rather consistently but where unfortunately he did not see reciprocity over the past years,”Peskov said.
Earlier in January, however, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov emphasized that the first meeting between Putin and Trump may “happen in months to come,” not “in a matter of weeks.”
Peskov also said;
“It is maybe the biggest mistake on the part of Western analysts to think that Trump is ‘our man.’ He is an American man.”
Former Deputy Speaker of the Belgian Parliament Lode Vanoost told RT that it is way too early to be overly optimistic about Trump.
“To me, he remains as unpredictable and unreliable as he was before. We didn't see the full interview yet, and the follow-up questions that came after this very astonishing remark.
Basically, what Trump is doing is he is applying the same moral principles to the US as he applies to other countries. That is indeed without precedent in US political culture.”
Also, he expressed concern over forces that could interfere with Trump's mending ties with Russia.
“If he remains on the path of improving relations with Russia, it could be quite dangerous: my fear is that all conservative governments in the EU, NATO, will create provocations to force him back into line.”
President Trump Defends 'Killer' Putin In Super Bowl Interview: 'Do You Think Our Country's So Innocent?'
Here’s a short compilation of the US CIA assassinations since 1945:
Countries where the US has assassinated or attempted to assassinate a movement leader
The US has made more than 50 attempts to assassinate political party leaders according to William Blum in his 2003 book [[Killing Hope|”Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions since World War II”.
Noam Chomsky called this book “Far and away the best book on the topic”. Former CIA officer John Stockwell called the same book “The single most useful summary of CIA history.”
All such operations are illegal and almost all such killings are aimed at geopolitical objectives. In almost no cases can any clear humanitarian benefit be identified, even if the target is/was indeed tyrannical.
While bombings with aircraft leave evidence in many cases, covert operations may be difficult to prove.
In June 1960, Patrice Lumumba became the Congo’s first prime minister after independence from Belgium. Calls for the nation’s economic liberation and is branded a communist. Eleven days later, the mineral rich Katanga province, owned by Belgium and prominent Eisenhower administration officials, seceedes. Lumumba dismissed in September at the instigation of the United States, and in Jan 1961 assassinated at the express request of Dwight Eisenhower. Several years of civil conflict and chaos end in the CIA backed deposing of President Joseph Kasavubu and the 1965 accession to power of the CIA linked Mobutu Sese Seko. Mobutu ruled and robbed the country for more than 30 years (a “kleptocracy”) while the Zairian people lived in abject poverty.
Australian Actor Impersonated Family Of Bourke St Victims In Calls To Hospitals February 7 2017 | From: TheContrail / Various
An Australian actor has repeatedly impersonated and vilified the friends and family of a little girl killed in Melbourne’s Bourke St massacre via a series of phone calls and public videos.
Neighbours and Underbelly bit-part actor Peter Kusznir, who has more than 18,000 subscribers to his YouTube channel, was reportedly instructed by police to pull down at least three lengthy videos where he vilified several victims who were killed and injured in the tragedy.
In one video Mr Kusznir can be heard calling the Royal Melbourne Hospital and telling a receptionist he is an old friend of Thalia’s mother, Nathalie Hakin, who was severely injured in the Bourke St attack on January 20.
No one was hurt or killed in Melbourne.
Please watch the video below for info on Kuwait that some may not be aware of. Peekay Makes Headlines for Melbourne 'Hoax' Peter's Peekay Truth channel is on a two week holiday. His Peekay22 channel is still running if you want to send a message.
RussianVids also has some good coverage on the Melb event. The videos Peter made, including the flowerless, grey room funeral footage have been taken down.
Anaconda has several short vids explaining how Peter was contacted by police while at a friend's place. His ex wife was also contacted at her work place.
Much hysteria was had. This all happened after a commenter on Peter's videos had been goading him into exposing the jews by claiming he didn't go far enough with the truth telling by not exposing them. Then this happens.
It may seem like something that comes as a total surprise to some who know the history of the United States. But apparently, there are reports that Hitler and Germany were financed early on by the United States and the Bank of England.
How is this possible when the United States was on of the leading powers to take down the 3rd Reich during World War II?
Well, perhaps it should come down to not knowing just who you were dealing with. Much of these financial investments happened in the early to late 1920s.
Which was before the Nazi regime started to show it's true colors and before the outbreak of World War II. Yes, there is no denying that these countries were on opposite sides during the first World War, but perhaps this was a way to try to fix the global economy.
Whatever the reason there is now reports that both the Federal Reserve of the United States and the Bank of England made investments with Germany.
This included investing in Gold Reserves in that country during the era of the Twenties. But as many know the bottom fell out of the stock market in the United States leading the Great Depression in 1929.
Was this a result of these investments and perhaps a plot by Hitler to take down the United States financially?
It is certainly something to ponder about if this is indeed true. Here is a list of some of the events as they took place that has now been documented: 1919 to 1924 - There was a huge American financial investment in the German economy; 1924 to 1929 - financial support for national socialism; 1929 to 1933 - Financial hardship in the United States which resulted in Germany gaining more financial power.
For many it may seem hard to swallow that the United States or Europe for that matter would even contemplate investing in the 3rd Reich and Hitler, but again what did they know at that time. No one had a crystal ball telling them what Hitler was truly about.
There also was no such thing as the Internet at this time, and we sure weren't as connected as we are now. So maybe these reports do have truth to them.
Many say that Hitler was a man who could be quite influential, which could explain the control he had over the Nazi Regime. In any case, this was a decision that the United States and Europe no doubt lived to regret some time later.
Reports Suggest That Hitler Was Financed By Banks In The US And The UK
The large-scale manslaughter and brutal violation of human rights by Hitler will not be forgotten by mankind. However, only a few know that Hitler was reportedly supported throughout with finance from the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England.
According to historian Yuri Rubtsov’s recent write-up that was published in Fort Russ, Rubtsov explained how Germany came to power and why the main culprits should be identified before they embark upon something similar yet again.
In the latest parliamentary assembly of the OSCE, Hitler’s actions were compared to that of the Soviet Union in the 21st Century. Rubtsov says that this is nothing more than a tactic to extort money from Russia on the premise that some weaker economies are affected, and to prevent Russia from speaking out against this decision.
What remains a mystery is, how did the Nazis gain so much power? Where did their finances come from? The main pillars, which controlled development in the West in the post-war period were the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve System.
The plan was to establish absolute control over the German economy and consequently gain control over political happenings in central Europe.
This was achieved in four stages:
1919 to 1924 – Preparations for major American financial investment in Germany
1924 to 1929 – Establishing control over the German financial system and offering support for German National Socialism to develop
1929 to 1933 – Ensuring the Nazis come to power by creating a deep financial crisis in Germany
1933 to 1939 – Providing financial support to the new Nazi government and standing by its expansionist policy, all aimed at starting a new World War
American finance entered Germany with the latter’s war debts and reparations. The U.S., after entering the First World War granted loans to ally countries, especially England and France which amounted to nearly $8.8 billion. In order to make up for this money, debtor countries imposed extremely difficult terms for paying reparations, mostly at the expense of Germany.
Rubtsov explains that the resulting Ruhr crisis only worsened the situation. England and America then waited for France to admit that they aren’t being able to resolve this issue effectively.
English banker Montagu Norman ordered the formation of J.P. Morgan. Hand in glove with Norman, Dresdner Bank Representative Hjalmar Schacht was consequently made the manager of Reichsbank (central bank of Germany from 1876 until 1945).
He was instrumental in bringing the Anglo- American and German financial circles closer. Germany was then given a huge loan of $200 million, half of which came from J.P Morgan. This gave Anglo-American forces power over the German economy and its credit system too, says Rubtsov.
Soon the results were evident. Germany faced a mountain of perpetual debt. Between 1924 and 1929, 70% of revenue in Germany was provided by the U.S. Therefore, even though German industries achieved the second position in the world, it remained in American hands.
“Interessen-Gemeinschaft Farbenindustrie”, the main producer of German war machines was controlled by Rockefeller “Standard oil”.
General Electric controlled the German electrical industry and radio. Aircraft, automobile and other such manufacturing sectors were also controlled by American companies.
By 1933, the major banks of Germany were all under American capital control. The Nazi Party and Hitler were being financed and prepared simultaneously. German Chancellor Brüning wrote about large sums that Hitler received since 1923 through Swedish and Swiss Banks.
Where that money was used is still unknown. In 1922, a meeting took place between Hitler and US army officer Captain Truman Smith in Munich. Smith introduced him to German businessman Ernst Franz Sedgwick Hanfstaengl (Putzie) who played a crucial role in helping Hitler become a strong politician and ensured he got financial support from Britain.
The American stock exchange collapsed in autumn 1929 and both England and the U.S. stopped sending financial aid to Germany.
However, notorious industrialist Fritz Thyssen and German chemical industry conglomerate I.G. Farben donated large sums to the Nazi party in 1930 and as the party won, international funding started to come in again.
Two years later, in a secret meeting, Hitler, M. Norman- the largest English financier and German nobleman- von Papen decided on further financing the Nazi Party.
A year later, on January 14th, Hitler’s program received complete approval in yet another meeting where Schroder and Kepler (two key businessmen supporting the Nazi Party) were also present. Hitler was appointed as the Chancellor on January 30th.
A sympathetic attitude was taken with the new government and their inability to pay reparations was forgiven. Further investments and policies for financial aid were signed between Germany and England. Standard Oil acquired 730,000 acres of land in Germany to build oil refineries, which would supply the Nazis with oil.
Other American firms such as Douglas, Pratt and Whitney and many others offered financial aid too.
A total American investment of $475 million worth of American investment was keeping Germany afloat when the Second World War was on.
These are histories forgotten by many, but the role of the financial elite in crimes against mankind needs to be recalled, explains Rubtsov.
International Red Cross Report Confirms The Holocaust Of Six Million Jews Is A Hoax
Red Cross exposes “Jewish” HolocaustHoax: International RedCross (IRC) document confirms 271 thousand not 6 million died in concentration camps.
This appeared in Ireland in the Kilkenny Journal and was sent to me by a friend. Here is the link to the original article which I have pasted in full here below:
Official International Red Cross Records Released
Sealed and guarded since the end of WWII at Arolsen, Germany, the Official IRC records reveal the actual Concentration Camp total death toll was 271,301
For years, people around the world – “the West” in particular – have been told that “six million Jews were systematically murdered by Germans in ‘Concentration Camps’ during World War 2.”
Thousands of honest people disputing this claim have been viciously smeared as a hateful anti-Semite. Several countries around the world have jailed and heavily fined people for disputing the claim that “6 Million” Jews were killed.
Provided here is a scanned image of an Official International Red Cross document, proving the so-called “Holocaust” [the long-and-often-claimed-6-million Jews] is just plain wrong. Jews around the world have intentionally exaggerated and perpetually lied for the purpose of gaining political, emotional and business advantages for themselves.
They committed willful, criminal FRAUD upon millions of trusting people around the world!
Please NOTE that the truth has been known since long before 1979!!! The above compiler, replying to a letter, had to rely on information that was already in existence!!!
Tax-payers of Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Latvia, Poland and other nations have had multiple millions of dollars taken from their wages to be paid out to “holocaust survivors” and their descendants for something that DID NOT HAPPEN.
The tax-payers of these United States of America spend Billion$ each year in direct, indirect and military support of the State of Israel (which is not Biblical Israel).
This is intentional, criminal fraud on a scale so massive as to be almost incomprehensible.
Red Cross and East German government figures put the total deaths at every camp as 272.000, and 282,000 respectively which includes homosexuals, communists, gypsies, murderers, paedophiles etc. The 6 Million figure is a Kabbalist number, a magickal figure which featured in news papers in the early 1900’s.
Where do the innocent Germans, Americans and others go to get a refund?
I call for criminal prosecution of individuals and groups who filed false lawsuits to obtain holocaust reparations and financial damage awards and perpetrating deliberate fraud upon Courts. I call for the removal of Holocaust references in History books and educational materials. I call for the removal of Holocaust Memorials worldwide.
It is long overdue that this intentional fraud be halted and those who perpetrated it be brought to justice for over 60 years of National Blood Libel against Germany and other nations through vicious lies and financial fraud.
Two of the most important surveys of the Jewish question in Europe during World War II are David Irvings examination of the Russian archives after the wall came down. Irving published his findings in his book, “Hitler’s War” and said not one word about gas chambers.
When question about this omission he said that there was no reference to gas chambers in the archives and therefore he did not discuss the question of gas chambers. Irving was arrested in several countries for hate speech for his scholarly omission.
The International Red Cross published their analysis in a three volume “Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War” published in Geneva in 1948.
This analysis expanded findings of two previous publications: “Sur L’activite’ du CICR en faveur des civils detencus dans les camps de concentration en Allemagne 1939-1945 (Geneva, 1946) and “Inter Arma Caritas: The Work of the ICRF during the Second World War” (Geneva, 1947).
In 1949 the International Red Cross interviewed prisoners in the German camps. They were not allowed to interview prisoners in the Russian camps which were far more harsh. The German camps held both political prisoners (Schutzhaflinge) and those convicted of crimes. The Germans allowed the Red Cross to distribute food, medicine and clothing to the prisoners.
Grateful prisoners sent letters of thanks from Dachau, Buchenwalk, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Fibha, Ravensbruck, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen and others.
“The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians, Poles and stateless Jews”
(Vol. III, p. 83.
Regarding Theresienstadt, the Red Cross said, “”where there were about 40,000 Jews deported from various countries, was a relatively privileged ghetto”
Vol. III, p. 75.
“The Committee’s delegates were able to visit the camp at Theresienstadt (Terezin) which was used exclusively for Jews and was governed by special conditions … From information gathered by the Commmee, this camp had been started as an experiment by certain leaders of the Reich … These men wished to give the Jews the means of setting up a communal life in a town under their own administration and possessing almost complete autonomy … two delegates were able to visit the camp on April 6, 1945.
They confirmed the favourable impression gained on the first visit”
Vol. I, p. 642.
The ICRC also had praise for the regime of Ion Antonescu of Fascist Rumania where the Committee was able to extend special relief to 183,000 Rumanian Jews until the time of the Soviet occupation.
The aid then ceased and the ICRC complained bitterly that it never succeeded “in sending anything whatsoever to Russia” (Vol. II, p. 62). The same situation applied to many of the German camps after their “liberation” by the Russians.
The ICRC received a voluminous flow of mail from Auschwitz until the period of the Soviet occupation, when many of the internees were evacuated westward. But the efforts of the Red Cross to send relief to internees remaining at Auschwitz under Soviet control were futile.
However. food parcels continued to be sent to former Auschwitz inmates transferred west to such camps as Buchenwald and Oranienburg.
One of the most important aspects of the Report of the ICRC is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps towards the end of the war.
Says the Report:
“In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims.
Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1, 1945 … In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results.
Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp .I.”
Vol. III, p.83
Clearly, the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able.
The Red Cross are quite explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15, 1944 against “the barbarous aerial warfare of the Allies” (Inter Armet Caritns, p. 78).
By October 2, 1944, the ICRC had warned the German Foreign Office of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout Germany were becoming inevitable.
In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatsoever of ‘gas chambers’.
The original 1946 edition did not even talk of ‘extermination’ or ‘death camps’ but after the emotional impact of the Nuremberg trials the Red Cross felt compelled to introduce into the expanded 1948 Report several, very cursory references to ‘death camps’ (Vol. 1 p. 641) and ‘extermination camps’ (Vol. I p. 645).
However, no means of’extermination’ is indicated.
In all its 1,600 pages the three-volume Report does not even mention such a thing as a ‘gas chamber’. It acknowledges that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but’ its complete silence on the subject of’gassings’ is ample refutation of the ‘Holocaust’ legend.
Not All Were Interned
Volume III of the Report of the ICRC, Chapter 3 (I. Jewish Civilian Population) deals with the “aid given to the Jewish section of the free population” and this chapter makes it quite plain that by no means all of the European Jews were placed in internment camps but remained, subject to certain restrictions, as part of the free civilian population.
This conflicts directly with the “thoroughness” of the supposed “extermination programme”, and with the claim in the forged Hoess memoirs that Eichmann was obsessed with seizing every single Jew he could lay his hands on, In Slovakia, for example, where Eichmann’s assistant Dieter Wisliceny was in charge, the Report states that:
“A large proportian of the Jewish minority had permission to stay in the country, and at certain periods Slovakia was looked upon as a comparative haven of refuge for Jews, especially for those coming from Poland.
Those who remained in Slovakia seem to have been in comparative safety until the end of August 1944, when a rising against the German forces took place.
While it is true that the law of May 15, 1942 had brought about the internment of several thousand Jews, these people were held in camps where the conditions of food and lodging were tolerable, and where the internees were allowed to do paid work on terms almost equal to those of the free labour market”
Vol. I, p. 646
Not only did large numbers of the three million or so European Jews avoid internment altogether, but the emigration of Jews continued throughout the war, generally by way of Hungary, Rumania and Turkey.
Ironically, post-war Jewish emigration from German-occupied territories was also facilitated by the Reich, as in the case of the Polish Jews who had escaped to France before its occupation.
“The Jews from Poland who, whilst in France, had obtained entrance permits to the United States were held to be American citizens by the German occupying authorities, who further agreed to recognise the validity of about three thousand passports issued to Jews by the consulates of South American countries”
As future U.S. citizens, these Jews were held at the Vittel camp in southern France for American aliens. The emigration of European Jews from Hungary in particular proceeded during the war unhindered by the German authorities.
“Until March 1944,” says the Red Cross Report, “Jews who had the privilege of visas for Palestine were free to leave Hungary”
Vol. 1, p. 648
Even after the replacement of the Horthy Government in 1944 (following its attempted armistice with the Soviet Union) with a government more dependent on German authority, the emigration of Jews continued.
The Committee secured the pledges of both Britain and the United States:
“To give support by every means to the emigration of Jews from Hungary, ” and from the U.S. Government the ICRC received a message stating that “The Government of the United States… now specifically repeats its assurance that arrangements will be made by it for the care of all Jews who in the present circumstances are allowed to leave”
- Vol. 1, p. 649
Official International Red Cross Records Released Sealed And Guarded Since The End Of WWII At Arolsen, Germany.
The Official IRC Records Reveal The Actual Concentration Camp Total DeathToll Was 271,301
The Source of the six million figure is a Talmudic (Jewish Talmud) reference to a future holocaust in which six million Jews die.
The reason why they are claiming six million deaths in Nazi camps, even though that number vastly exceeds the number of Jews in Europe at the time, is because this reference in their scripture is something they fear deeply and wish to prevent at all costs.
The Ashkenazi Jews, which I have experience with honestly believe that prophecy is real, but can be manipulated.
They believe that prophets see into the future, and see what was believed and said, and then write that down as much as they reveal the word of GOD.
SO there is a group of Ashkenazi Jews who wish to make the six million figure HISTORY to prevent it from ever happening in the FUTURE by repeating this number over and over and over into the social concience, in the hope that prophets of old will also latch onto this, and report it as a factual event in the future, which would now be history.
In other words, they believe they can lie themselves a new future. I don’t think so – I think their hardest days are ahead and one thing is certain, the genie is out of the bottle and through the word, the real truth of Fukushima may be like silly putty slowly sinking into the carpet, eventually it will be TOTALLY sunk in the carpet and nothing will get it out.
THIS could cause the six million Jewish deaths the prophecy speaks of, and No, I do not believe they can lie their way out of it.
As a matter of simple mathematics, if there were less than 5,000 Jews in the whole of Europe at the time, and lets guess that one third relocated, that leaves a remainder of around 3 million – not 6 million.
I have a book called “Germany” published by Lonely Planet, ISBN: 1740594711 4th Edition published in MAY 2004 and I quote from page 34 which states: (bottom paragraph)
“ …Another 165 work camps provided labour for big industry including IG Farbendinustrie AG, producer of the cyanide gas Zyclon B that was used in gas chambers to murder over three million Jews.”
How exactly did we get from 3 million to 6 million? and how did we get to either number when the Red Cross official death record states 271,301?]
Evidence Points To Ft. Lauderdale Shooter Being “Jason Bourned” With Mind Altering Psychiatric Drugs And ISIS Video Indoctrination By U.S. Intelligence Operatives January 26 2017 | From: NaturalNews / Various
The playbook of the globalists is so obvious now that it’s all right out in the open.
After a parade of false flag shootings enhanced with completely faked (staged) elements - such as professional actors playing the roles of grieving parents - most of the informed people in the world now know that everything is faked in the mainstream media.
The polls are faked, the news is faked, and even “crisis” is often either faked outright or overlaid with staged elements to heighten the emotional impact of the entire operation.
For example, in many so-called “mass shootings,” the real deaths of innocents may be augmented by staged crisis actors, green screen “on location” reporting faked by CNN, and even faked SWAT operators who are actually professional actors. (See videos below for actual examples.)
Search GoodGopher.com for the term “crisis actors” by clicking here. You’ll be astonished at what you learn.
Case in point: The “sloppy sniper” from the Sandy Hook event. This “sniper” was actually a professional actor named David Wheeler. He also played the role of a grieving parent for CNN’s camera.
Hilariously, he carried around a sniper rifle by clutching the magazine… something no real sniper would ever do (but few people who aren’t familiar with sniper rifles would ever notice). It’s all so hilarious: Even the AR-15 on his chest is flipped around backwards, for a leftie.
Anyone familiar with actual firearms can look at this guy and know he has no clue how to handle firearms.
Sandy Hook 'Dad' Caught Playing Two Roles: Crisis Actor Parent and Swat Team Member
We Can All Now Agree That Almost All the High-Impact Stories are Faked in the Mainstream Media
This entire topic of fake news, staged events and false flag shootings was considered “loony conspiracy theory” just two years ago. But now, after watching the depths of fakery, false news and total fabrication of events being pulled off by the Washington Post, NYT, CNN, MSNBC, etc., everybody is waking up to the realization that the “news” is just another name for the wool that’s being pulled over our eyes to blind us from the truth.
In both cases - and many more - the WashPost literally just “made s##t up” and printed it as fact.
When it comes to gun control or domestic terrorism, there’s nothing the corporate controlled media won’t fake, stage, distort or fabricate to push their agenda of disarming the citizens (an obvious prelude to totalitarian government control of the citizenry). To provide the narratives to the media, the deep state runs gun control false flag operations to give the faked media something to “whip up” as a form of journo-terrorism (to terrorize the American people).
So how do they pull off gun control false flag operations? First, they have to train people to carry out the shootings. And that’s where our Ft. Lauderdale shooter, Esteban Santiago, enters the picture.
US Intelligence Forced Him to Watch ISIS Propaganda Videos, Says Santiago in His Own Words
“Estaban Santiago, the 26-year-old airline passenger accused of shooting up a baggage claim area at the Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood airport Friday, leaving five dead and eight injured, visited the FBI Anchorage field office and told officers he was being forced to watch ISIS videos,” reports Fox News:
Santiago told agents that US intelligence had infiltrated his mind and were forcing him to watch ISIS propaganda videos.
"In November 2016, Esteban Santiago walked into the Anchorage FBI Field Office to report that his mind was being controlled by a U.S. intelligence agency,” a senior federal law enforcement official said.
It’s no coincidence that this is one of the first phases of creating a “Manchurian Candidate” type of human pawn… a “Jason Bourne” mind control subject who can be used by the deep state as a weapon to carry out executions, mass shootings, suicide bombings or other forms of mayhem that achieve a political or social purpose.
It is very common, by the way, for intelligence mind control operatives to choose U.S. military veterans as their subjects. That way, if anything goes wrong, they can blame it on PTSD or various “veteran afflictions.”
As Fox News reports:
"Santiago was born in New Jersey and his family was originally from Puerto Rico–where he served in the Puerto Rico National Guard. He was in the Army Reserves prior to serving in the Alaska Army National Guard.
According to reports, he was honorably discharged four months ago from his last post at Fort Greely, Alaska, and his military rank at that time was E3 (Private First Class)."
Heavily Wosed With Psychiatric Drugs to Eliminate Distinction Between Reality vs. Hallucination
Typically, “Jason Bourne” candidates are heavily drugged with psychiatric drugs in order to blur the lines between fiction and reality. Often, the drugging begins with selected soldier candidates even before they are discharged from the military. This is done for all the obvious reasons:
The psychiatric drugging takes place offshore, out of the domain of U.S. medical ethics oversight, and the military has no requirement to heed such boundaries in the first place.
“His maternal aunt, Maria Ruiz, who lives in Union City, told reporters in New Jersey that he wasn’t the same when he came back from Iraq,” reports ABC News channel 10:
""He lost his mind,” Ruiz said in Spanish, as she referred to a psychiatric hospitalization that occurred after he allegedly suffered from hallucinations.
After Santiago’s military service in Puerto Rico and Alaska from Dec. 14, 2007 to August 2016, the former Army private first class was still undergoing psychological treatment, according to relatives."
How to Build a Jason Bourne Mind Controlled Puppet to Carry Out Executions, Suicide Bombings or Mass Shootings
This is exactly how the deep state builds a Jason Bourne: They pick an obedient soldier, drug him into oblivion, force him to watch ISIS propaganda videos, indoctrinate him with images and directives to carry out mass killings, and then keep him drugged with ongoing “psychological treatment” until he’s needed for a desired mission.
Once the mission is approved, the mind controlled puppet is unleashed onto the public to commit the mass murder, then is immediately arrested or executed to make sure the narrative is controlled and concluded.
If taken alive, he is then heavily drugged into a state of insanity, making sure he can never utter a coherent thought again. Or, if he is somehow allowed to talk to reporters or appear on camera, he will appear completely insane due to the relentless drugging. All court proceedings are handled in a secretive manner to make sure no real investigations can take place.
This is precisely what happened to the “Batman theater shooter” James Holmes, who reportedly carried out a mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado, at the height of the Obama regime’s gun control hysteria.
As always happens, a judge quickly slapped a gag order on the Holmes legal case, preventing anyone from discovering details about how Holmes was handed a scripted blueprint of the attack while being drugged into obedient compliance.
As Jon Rappoport writes, the Aurora shooting was almost certainly a planned “covert op” using a Manchurian candidate / Jason Bourne mind control approach.
Furthermore, James Holmes’ apartment was staged with the most elaborate systems of tripwires, booby traps and sabotage bombs that law enforcement in the area had ever witnessed. James Holmes, an academic researcher, had no knowledge or skills to construct such bombs. It was obviously done for him.
"Holmes has little or no experience with guns. He knows nothing about explosives. He isn’t a professional in any sense of the word. He has never committed a crime before. If he has any qualification for the heinous operation, it is his vulnerability. He is adrift in his life.
Never as brilliant a student as others thought him to be, he is failing in graduate school. He has no job and no prospects. What began as a potential career has dissolved.
His interest in arcane aspects of neuroscience (temporal delusion – the possibility of changing the past), once a fascinating field of inquiry for him, now only contributes to his increasingly shaky grip on reality.
The planning is rather simple and direct. The actual killer(s) will enter the theater, while Holmes, who is drugged into a stupor and is sitting in his car, waits in the parking lot of the theater, among weapons and other gear that matches the killers’.
Once the killers leave the theater, they’ll deposit their guns with him, as he lies in a semi-conscious blurred state. They’ll deposit gun residue on his body.
When the police find Holmes in his car (not at the the theater exit or outside the car), he will surrender. Perhaps, under prior hypnosis, he was instructed to say his apartment is wired with explosives.
Of course, the hired professionals did that intricate construction. And perhaps Holmes never tells the police about his apartment and explosives, and this information has really come from a tip."
Eyewitness Reports of Multiple Shooters Now Being Eliminated From the Official Media Narrative
Although this isn’t being widely reported, the Ft. Lauderdale shooting featured eyewitness reports of multiple shooters, too. As Fox News reports:
"In the ensuing panic, the TSA received two separate, unconfirmed reports of a separate active shooter, a law enforcement official close to the investigation told Fox News. However, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said Friday afternoon there was no indication any additional shots were fired."
Fox News also reports that law enforcement claimed the shooter was on a Canadian Air flight:
"Broward County Commissioner Chip La Marca posted on Facebook that Santiago was a “passenger on a Canadian flight with a checked gun. He claimed his bag and took the gun from baggage and went into the bathroom to load it. Came out shooting people in baggage claim. There were 13 total shot, 5 dead, 8 transported to hospital.”
But Santiago didn’t fly Canadian Air. He flew on Delta Air Lines. Via ABC News:
"On Friday, Santiago checked a bag with a firearm before boarding a Delta Air Lines flight from Alaska to Minneapolis. His final destination was Fort Lauderdale."
Don’t Believe the Official Narrative… It’s Always Part of the Cover Story If you continue to follow this story, you’ll easily spot all sorts of contradictions, false narratives and faked news coverage from the “fakestream media.” The correct interpretation of all this to reject everything the mainstream media tells you by default. They are known, deliberate liars.
Although we can’t yet prove it, the far more likely explanation of what happened is as follows:
Santiago was a “Jason Bourne” mind control subject of the deep state. Recruited from the military, he was subjected to intense psychiatric drugging combined with intense mental programming by deep state operatives to transform him into a human weapon who could be obediently controlled.
Once he deplaned at Ft. Lauderdale and pick up his checked bags, another person walked up to him and uttered an “activation” phrase into his ear. (It’s not science fiction. This is exactly how hypnosis can really work with enough programming reinforcement in an individual’s mind.) He then walks into the bathroom, loads his firearm and proceeds to carry out his mission by shooting people.
Once his firearm is empty, he spreads eagle on the floor, having completed his mission. This is exactly what he did, and it’s how law enforcement found him.
Facts You Need To know About Syria & Syrian President Bashar Al Assad Fields Questions From French Media And Defends Alternative Media January 12 2017 | From: AustralianNationalReview / 21stCenturyWire The Assad family belongs to the tolerant Islam of Alawid orientation. Syrian women have the same rights as men to study, health and education.
Syrian women are not forced to wear the burqa. The Sharia (Islamic law) is unconstitutional.
Syria is the only Arab country with a secular constitution and does not tolerate Islamic extremist movements.
Roughly 10% of the Syrian population belongs to one of the many Christian denominations, all fully integrated in Syrian political and social life.
In other Arab countries the Christian population is less than 1% due to sustained hostility.
Syria has banned genetically modified (GMO) seeds, stating his decision was made in order “to preserve human health,”
Syria has an opening to Western society and culture like no other Arab country.
Its media and universities openly debate the global power elite’s influence in things. This means that they fully grasp the fact that real power in the West lies not in the White House but rather with the complex and powerful grid of elite think-tanks and central banks.
Throughout history there have been five popes of Syrian origin. Religious tolerance is unique in the area.
Prior to the current civil war, Syria was one of the only peaceful countries in the area, having avoided major wars or internal conflicts.
Syria was the only country that admitted Iraqi refugees without any social, political or religious discrimination.
Syria clearly and unequivocally opposes Zionism and the Israel government.
Following a massive oil find in Syria’s Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967, Netanyahu recently asked Obama to recognize its annexation of the territory. To consolidate its hold, plans are afoot to quadruple Israeli settler numbers to 100,000.
And The Most Two Important Points:
Syria is one of the only countries in the Middle East without debts to the International Monetary Fund (Pre-invasion Libya & Iran the only others)
Syria is the only Mediterranean country which remains the owner of its oil company, with an oil reserve of 2,500 million barrels, the operation of which has avoided privatization and is reserved exclusively for state-owned enterprises.
So now ask yourself, why are we truly attempting to overthrow yet another government?
What are we hoping to fix here?
If the recent invasions and illegal assassinations of Presidents like Qaddafi and Saddam have taught us anything, it should be the understanding of the blowback effect of such lawless actions by the West and the vacuum of chaos that always supersedes it.
Debt Conquer. Invent a reason to invade and destroy, then offer $Trillions in IMF funding to rebuild… conveniently paid back by control of your oil fields and the free access to build gas pipelines to the west.
Syrian President Bashar Al Assad Fields Questions From French Media And Defends Alternative Media
Recently we reported on the targeting of a French delegation to Syria, led by politician, Thierry Mariani, by the US backed FSA (Free Syrian Army) Company 23.
Aleppo airport was shelled by this group of primarily US supported “moderate rebels” led by a defected Syrian Arab Army colonel, Hassan Rajoob, just prior to the planned take off of the plane ferrying the delegation back to Damascus.
”We always have hopes that the next (French) administration, or government, or president will want to deal with the reality, to disconnect themselves from the disconnected policy from our reality. That is our hope..and they can work for the interests of the French people.
The question now, after six years, as a French citizen, do you feel safer? I dont think the answer is yes. The immigration problem, has it made the situation in your country better? […]
This is the question the next administration, government, president should deal with in order to deal with our reality not what is in their imagination as has been happening for the last six years.
(Fillon’s) rhetoric regarding the terrorists, or lets say the priority to fight the terrorists and not meddling in the affairs of other countries are welcome, but we have to be cautious, because what we have learned in this region, during the last few years, is that many officials would say something and do the opposite.
I am not saying M Fillon would do this, I hope not, but we have to wait and see because there is no contact. But so far, what he is saying, if it is implemented, that will be very good.
If I want to send (a message to French politicians) I would say the self evident thing, that we have to work for the interests of the Syrian citizens, and for the last six years the situation is going in the opposite direction. The French politics harmed the French interests.
For the French people, I would say the mainstream media has failed in most of the west, the narrative has been debunked because of the reality and you have the alternative media, you have to look for the truth.
Truth was the main victim of the events in the Middle East, including Syria.
I would ask any citizen in France, please search for the reality, for the real information, through the alternative media. When they search for this information, they can be more effective, in dealing with their government, or at least not allowing some politicians to base their politics on lies. ”
American Pravda: How The CIA Invented "Conspiracy Theories" January 10 2017 | From: UNZ / ActivistPost / Various
With the sudden, bizarre rise of the “Fake News” accusations throughout the entire Corporate Media megaphone and the equally bizarre and totally unsubstantiated CIA allegations that the Russians had stolen the election for Donald Trump, this topic is highly pertinent.
A year or two ago, I saw the much-touted science fiction film Interstellar, and although the plot wasn’t any good, one early scene was quite amusing. For various reasons, the American government of the future claimed that our Moon Landings of the late 1960s had been faked, a trick aimed at winning the Cold War by bankrupting Russia into fruitless space efforts of its own.
This inversion of historical reality was accepted as true by nearly everyone, and those few people who claimed that Neil Armstrong had indeed set foot on the Moon were universally ridiculed as “crazy conspiracy theorists.” This seems a realistic portrayal of human nature to me.
Obviously, a large fraction of everything described by our government leaders or presented in the pages of our most respectable newspapers - from the 9/11 attacks to the most insignificant local case of petty urban corruption - could objectively be categorized as a “conspiracy theory” but such words are never applied.
Instead, use of that highly loaded phrase is reserved for those theories, whether plausible or fanciful, that do not possess the endorsement stamp of establishmentarian approval.
Put another way, there are good “conspiracy theories” and bad “conspiracy theories,” with the former being the ones promoted by pundits on mainstream television shows and hence never described as such.
I’ve sometimes joked with people that if ownership and control of our television stations and other major media outlets suddenly changed, the new information regime would require only a few weeks of concerted effort to totally invert all of our most famous “conspiracy theories” in the minds of the gullible American public.
The notion that nineteen Arabs armed with box-cutters hijacked several jetliners, easily evaded our NORAD air defenses, and reduced several landmark buildings to rubble would soon be universally ridiculed as the most preposterous “conspiracy theory” ever to have gone straight from the comic books into the minds of the mentally ill, easily surpassing the absurd “lone gunman” theory of the JFK assassination.
Even without such changes in media control, huge shifts in American public beliefs have frequently occurred in the recent past, merely on the basis of implied association.
In the initial weeks and months following the 2001 attacks, every American media organ was enlisted to denounce and vilify Osama Bin Laden, the purported Islamicist master-mind, as our greatest national enemy, with his bearded visage endlessly appearing on television and in print, soon becoming one of the most recognizable faces in the world.
But as the Bush Administration and its key media allies prepared a war against Iraq, the images of the Burning Towers were instead regularly juxtaposed with mustachioed photos of dictator Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden’s arch-enemy.
As a consequence, by the time we attacked Iraq in 2003, polls revealed that some 70% of the American public believed that Saddam was personally involved in the destruction of our World Trade Center.
By that date I don’t doubt that many millions of patriotic but low-information Americans would have angrily denounced and vilified as a “crazy conspiracy theorist” anyone with the temerity to suggest that Saddam had not been behind 9/11, despite almost no one in authority having ever explicitly made such a fallacious claim.
These factors of media manipulation were very much in my mind a couple of years ago when I stumbled across a short but fascinating book published by the University of Texas academic press. The author of Conspiracy Theory in Americawas Prof. Lance deHaven-Smith, a former president of the Florida Political Science Association.
Based on an important FOIA disclosure, the book’s headline revelation was that the CIA was very likely responsible for the widespread introduction of “conspiracy theory” as a term of political abuse, having orchestrated that development as a deliberate means of influencing public opinion.
During the mid-1960s there had been increasing public skepticism about the Warren Commission findings that a lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been solely responsible for President Kennedy’s assassination, and growing suspicions that top-ranking American leaders had also been involved.
So as a means of damage control, the CIA distributed a secret memo to all its field offices requesting that they enlist their media assets in efforts to ridicule and attack such critics as irrational supporters of “conspiracy theories.”
Soon afterward, there suddenly appeared statements in the media making those exact points, with some of the wording, arguments, and patterns of usage closely matching those CIA guidelines.
The result was a huge spike in the pejorative use of the phrase, which spread throughout the American media, with the residual impact continueing right down to the present day. Thus, there is considerable evidence in support of this particular “conspiracy theory” explaining the widespread appearance of attacks on “conspiracy theories” in the public media.
But although the CIA appears to have effectively manipulated public opinion in order to transform the phrase “conspiracy theory” into a powerful weapon of ideological combat, the author also describes how the necessary philosophical ground had actually been prepared a couple of decades earlier.
Around the time of the Second World War, an important shift in political theory caused a huge decline in the respectability of any “conspiratorial” explanation of historical events.
For decades prior to that conflict, one of our most prominent scholars and public intellectuals had been historian Charles Beard, whose influential writings had heavily focused on the harmful role of various elite conspiracies in shaping American policy for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many, with his examples ranging from the earliest history of the United States down to the nation’s entry into WWI.
Obviously, researchers never claimed that all major historical events had hidden causes, but it was widely accepted that some of them did, and attempting to investigate those possibilities was deemed a perfectly acceptable academic enterprise.
However, Beard was a strong opponent of American entry into the Second World War, and he was marginalized in the years that followed, even prior to his death in 1948. Many younger public intellectuals of a similar bent also suffered the same fate, or were even purged from respectability and denied any access to the mainstream media.
At the same time, the totally contrary perspectives of two European political philosophers, Karl Popper and Leo Strauss, gradually gained ascendancy in American intellectual circles, and their ideas became dominant in public life.
Popper, the more widely influential, presented broad, largely theoretical objections to the very possibility of important conspiracies ever existing, suggesting that these would be implausibly difficult to implement given the fallibility of human agents; what might appear a conspiracy actually amounted to individual actors pursuing their narrow aims.
Even more importantly, he regarded “conspiratorial beliefs” as an extremely dangerous social malady, a major contributing factor to the rise of Nazism and other deadly totalitarian ideologies.
His own background as an individual of Jewish ancestry who had fled Austria in 1937 surely contributed to the depth of his feelings on these philosophical matters.
Meanwhile, Strauss, a founding figure in modern neo-conservative thought, was equally harsh in his attacks upon conspiracy analysis, but for polar-opposite reasons.
In his mind, elite conspiracies were absolutely necessary and beneficial, a crucial social defense against anarchy or totalitarianism, but their effectiveness obviously depended upon keeping them hidden from the prying eyes of the ignorant masses.
His main problem with “conspiracy theories” was not that they were always false, but they might often be true, and therefore their spread was potentially disruptive to the smooth functioning of society.
So as a matter of self-defense, elites needed to actively suppress or otherwise undercut the unauthorized investigation of suspected conspiracies.
Even for most educated Americans, theorists such as Beard, Popper, and Strauss are probably no more than vague names mentioned in textbooks, and that was certainly true in my own case. But while the influence of Beard seems to have largely disappeared in elite circles, the same is hardly true of his rivals.
Meanwhile, the neo-conservative thinkers who have totally dominated the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement for the last couple of decades often proudly trace their ideas back to Strauss.
So, through a mixture of Popperian and Straussian thinking, the traditional American tendency to regard elite conspiracies as a real but harmful aspect of our society was gradually stigmatized as either paranoid or politically dangerous, laying the conditions for its exclusion from respectable discourse.
By 1964, this intellectual revolution had largely been completed, as indicated by the overwhelmingly positive reaction to the famous article by political scientist Richard Hofstadter critiquing the so-called “paranoid style” in American politics, which he denounced as the underlying cause of widespread popular belief in implausible conspiracy theories.
To a considerable extent, he seemed to be attacking straw men, recounting and ridiculing the most outlandish conspiratorial beliefs, while seeming to ignore the ones that had been proven correct.
For example, he described how some of the more hysterical anti-Communists claimed that tens of thousands of Red Chinese troops were hidden in Mexico, preparing an attack on San Diego, while he failed to even acknowledge that for years Communist spies had indeed served near the very top of the U.S. government.
Not even the most conspiratorially minded individual suggests that all alleged conspiracies are true, merely that some of them might be.
Most of these shifts in public sentiment occurred before I was born or when I was a very young child, and my own views were shaped by the rather conventional media narratives that I absorbed. Hence, for nearly my entire life, I always automatically dismissed all of the so-called “conspiracy theories” as ridiculous, never once even considering that any of them might possibly be true.
To the extent that I ever thought about the matter, my reasoning was simple and based on what seemed like good, solid common sense. Any conspiracy responsible for some important public event must surely have many separate “moving parts” to it, whether actors or actions taken, let us say numbering at least 100 or more.
Now given the imperfect nature of all attempts at concealment, it would surely be impossible for all of these to be kept entirely hidden. So even if a conspiracy were initially 95% successful in remaining undetected, five major clues would still be left in plain sight for investigators to find.
And once the buzzing cloud of journalists noticed these, such blatant evidence of conspiracy would certainly attract an additional swarm of energetic investigators, tracing those items back to their origins, with more pieces gradually being uncovered until the entire cover-up likely collapsed.
Even if not all the crucial facts were ever determined, at least the simple conclusion that there had indeed been some sort of conspiracy would quickly become established.
However, there was a tacit assumption in my reasoning, one that I have since decided was entirely false. Obviously, many potential conspiracies either involve powerful governmental officials or situations in which their disclosure would represent a source of considerable embarrassment to such individuals.
But I had always assumed that even if government failed in its investigatory role, the dedicated bloodhounds of the Fourth Estate would invariably come through, tirelessly seeking truth, ratings, and Pulitzers. However, once I gradually began realizing that the media was merely “Our American Pravda” and perhaps had been so for decades, I suddenly recognized the flaw in my logic.
If those five - or ten or twenty or fifty - initial clues were simply ignored by the media, whether through laziness, incompetence, or much less venial sins, then there would be absolutely nothing to prevent successful conspiracies from taking place and remaining undetected, perhaps even the most blatant and careless ones.
In fact, I would extend this notion to a general principle. Substantial control of the media is almost always an absolute prerequisite for any successful conspiracy, the greater the degree of control the better.
So when weighing the plausibility of any conspiracy, the first matter to investigate is who controls the local media and to what extent.
Let us consider a simple thought-experiment. For various reasons these days, the entire American media is extraordinarily hostile to Russia, certainly much more so than it ever was toward the Communist Soviet Union during the 1970s and 1980s.
Hence I would argue that the likelihood of any large-scale Russian conspiracy taking place within the operative zone of those media organs is virtually nil.
Indeed, we are constantly bombarded with stories of alleged Russian conspiracies that appear to be “false positives,” dire allegations seemingly having little factual basis or actually being totally ridiculous.
Meanwhile, even the crudest sort of anti-Russian conspiracy might easily occur without receiving any serious mainstream media notice or investigation.
This argument may be more than purely hypothetical. A crucial turning point in America’s renewed Cold War against Russia was the passage of the 2012 Magnitsky Act by Congress, punitively targeting various supposedly corrupt Russian officials for their alleged involvement in the illegal persecution and death of an employee of Bill Browder, an American hedge-fund manager with large Russian holdings.
However, there’s actually quite a bit of evidence that it was Browder himself who was actually the mastermind and beneficiary of the gigantic corruption scheme, while his employee was planning to testify against him and was therefore fearful of his life for that reason.
Naturally, the American media has provided scarcely a single mention of these remarkable revelations regarding what might amount to a gigantic Magnitsky Hoax of geopolitical significance.
To some extent the creation of the Internet and the vast proliferation of alternative media outlets, including my own small webzine, have somewhat altered this depressing picture.
So it is hardly surprising that a very substantial fraction of the discussion dominating these Samizdat-like publications concerns exactly those subjects regularly condemned as “crazy conspiracy theories” by our mainstream media organs.
Such unfiltered speculation must surely be a source of considerable irritation and worry to government officials who have long relied upon the complicity of their tame media organs to allow their serious misdeeds to pass unnoticed and unpunished.
Indeed, several years ago a senior Obama Administration official argued that the free discussion of various “conspiracy theories” on the Internet was so potentially harmful that government agents should be recruited to “cognitively infiltrate” and disrupt them, essentially proposing a high-tech version of the highly controversial Cointelpro operations undertaken by J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI.
So perhaps Beard was correct all along in recognizing the respectability of “conspiracy theories,” and we should return to his traditional American way of thinking, notwithstanding endless conspiratorial propaganda campaigns by the CIA and others to persuade us that we should dismiss such notions without any serious consideration.
False Flag Terrorism: Murdering The Innocent In Order To Support The Lie + 15 Ways To Detect A False Flag Operation January 9 2017 | From: PaulCraigRoberts / ActivistPost / Various
As my readers know, I reported, factually, on the Boston Marathon alleged bombing case. I interviewed carefully the pro bono attorney, John Remington Graham, who intervened in behalf of the Russian aunt, a lawyer in the Russian Federation, in behalf of the falsely convicted younger Tsarnaev brother, Dzhokhar, the older brother having been murdered by the FBI.
Graham conclusively proved that the FBI’s own evidence proved beyond any doubt that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was innocent, which means so was the older brother.
It is clear beyond reasonable doubt that there was no real bombing at the Boston Marathon and that the alleged terrorist event, using crisis actors, was an orchestration designed to convince dumbshit Americans that they really were under a “Muslim threat.” The entire foreign policy of the United States in the 21st century is based on an orchestrated “Muslim threat.”
The orchestrated threat was also used for a practice exercise in closing down one of America’s largest cities in order to manhunt with intent to kill a young man chosen as the villain for the orchestrated event.
American citizens were forced at gunpoint out of their homes while Homeland Security, a Nazi reminiscent name from the Hitler era, disrupted the life of an entire city and its airport service in behalf of this orchestrated event that murdered American civil liberty.
The entire exercise was based on a lie, an event that never happened, like Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Assad’s use of chemical weapons, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and so forth. Just another lie in behalf of the “exceptional people.”
A number of websites have disproved the false case against the Tsarnaev brothers. Attorney John Remington Graham has brought the case to the justice authorities, but the US Department of Justice (sic) has no interest whatsoever in justice.
Now comes forward an attorney, Mary Maxwell with a book. It is available online free. I read the first eight chapters, which was sufficient to comfirm me in my independent conclusion that there was no Boston Marathon bombing by terrorists.
I recommend to you Mary Maxwell’s account. However, I will say that I believe that she uses irony excessively and that on occasions her irony gets in the way of the factual message. Knowing this, stick with it, and read her account.
Irony is the style that she has chosen, and we must respect a person prepared to stand up to the murderous American establishment and to challenge one of the founding myths of the American Police State and Washington’s wars against the world.
Read her book Marathon Bombing - Indicting the Players here.
Any US citizen that believes the falsified case of the Boston Marathon bombing is a dangerous and direct threat to American civil liberty and to the lives of millions of people on planet Earth.
If Americans do not wake up to the orchesrations to which they are subjected, they will forfeit their freedom. The Russians and the Chinese are individually and together more powerful than Washington, and they are not going to put up with the lies with which insouciant Americans are content.
If Americans cannot take back their country from self-serving oligarchs, Americans are doomed.
A false flag formula is becoming readily apparent in the face of so many mass shootings and bombings in the US. The phenomenon has become so commonplace in the last 3 years that it’s becoming more American than apple pie.
According to ShootingTracker.com, there have been 353 mass shootings in the USA for 2015 so far. However, as scary as that number is, the good news is that you don’t have to be afraid of them like you may think. A very large number of them - and all of them with any mass media significance and attention – are false flag staged terror events.
Some have real victims, some do not, but either way, the most criminal of all institutions – the Government – is the orchestrating force behind them.
They are scripted, pre-planned operations which are definitely not the result of random gun violence. Just as Obama stated (by hiding the truth in plain sight), there is a pattern behind these mass shootings. The Controllers are following a definite false flag formula.
Below is a list of the top 15 elements of this formula, which you can now use to detect a false flag operation as it occurs:
False Flag Formula #1: Drill at the Same or Nearby Time and Place
The exercise or drill – at the same time, at the same place – has became the sine qua non or indispensable element of the recent false flag operation. Sometimes there are slight variations on this when the Government plans a drill nearby (a few miles away) rather than at the exact place, or plans a drill earlier on in the day, so it can just coincidentally “go live”.
There was a twist in the case of the recent San Bernardino shooting: the Government planned regular drills in the building where the shooting took place every month! (Think about it – what are the chances of a real mass shooting occurring in a building used for mass shooting drills?)
As Captain Eric H. May, a former US Army military intelligence officer, stated:
“The easiest way to carry out a false flag attack is by setting up a military exercise that simulates the very attack you want to carry out."
What’s the point of having a drill at the same time and place? Here are a few of its purposes:
1. Distract and remove key personnel who would otherwise be at the scene to contain and investigate it;
2. Confuse other personnel who will treat the whole event in a different way if they think it is a drill rather than a real event;
3. Slow down, reduce or eliminate an effective response, especially of police and other law enforcement, given the removal and confusion of personnel;
4. Distract and confuse witnesses, the media and the public in general;
5. Provide a great cover and period of lower defenses and security to carry out an attack, which would otherwise be difficult or impossible if defenses were at their usual or optimal operating level.
False Flag Formula #2: Foreknowledge
Another way you can tell that a mass shooting is a false flag op is if you find proof of foreknowledge of the event. As it so happens, all of the notorious and publicized mass attacks of late have had evidence of foreknowledge. Going way back in time, there was foreknowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack of 1941 that got the US into World War 2.
False Flag Formula #3: Eyewitnesses Have Conflicting Accounts
You can also spot a likely false flag operation when you see or hear of multiple conflicting witness accounts. In the case of the Aurora Colorado “Batman” mass shooting, eyewitnesses claimed they saw an entire team of shooters, rather than the single shooter James Holmes of the official narrative.
With Sandy Hook, we saw multiple scenes of law enforcement chasing men into the surrounding forest, yet the official narrative declares the only shooter was Adam Lanza. In San Bernardino, too, witnesses stated they saw 3 white athletic men, not the 2 brown husband-and-wife team we were told did the shooting.
Conflicting eyewitness accounts can destroy the official narrative no matter what the detail is. On 9/11, various fireman told us there were bombs in the building, contradicting the official story that planes alone took down the Twin Towers. With Sandy Hook, Gene Rosen’s testimony itself was full of holes and was contradicted by that of the school bus driver and the official report.
False Flag Formula #4: MSM Quickly Name and Demonize the Patsy
Have you ever wondered how quickly the MSM (Mainstream Media) discovers the name of the patsy? They had somehow deduced that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11 just hours after the attacks.
Have you ever wondered why the Government is so good at telling us who supposedly executed these attacks right after they happen, with almost no time to investigate, yet can’t seem to manage to actually stop these alleged terror attacks?
Without any evidence, the MSM endlessly repeated “bin Laden” like a crazy mantra after 9/11, despite the fact bin Laden himself denied involvement in the attacks and that in the end he was never formally charged by the FBI.
Have you ever wondered why many of the patsies, or sorry, deranged mass shooters, are Muslim? That wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that the Zionist Government and MSM are trying to paint all Muslims as crazy and scary, would it? Nothing like a good dose of Islamophobia to take your freedom away …
False Flag Formula #5: Patsy Has No Military Training, Yet Shoots Extremely Fast and Accurately
Another element of the false flag formula is the skilled and lethal patsy.
According to the official narrative of false flag ops like Sandy Hook and Aurora, we are supposed to believe that skinny and non-muscular youths, without any discernible military training, were able to acquire expensive military gear (including armor, guns, ammunition and more), wear that gear without getting bogged down in speed, and shoot incredibly fast and accurately.
In San Bernardino, we are supposed to believe that a young mother was strong and skilled enough to participate in killing 14 and injuring 17 people while she was strapped up with body armor and holding heavy weaponry!
In these cases and more, the official story would have you believe that it’s no big deal or just a coincidence that the patsy can acquire all this high-end gear and use it so well.
False Flag Formula #6: Patsy Gets Killed, Drugged or “Suicided”
It is also part of the false flag formula to ensure that the patsy, who is earmarked before the event to take the fall, cannot speak out to rationally defend themselves. This is achieved in a number of ways. The simplest is to have the patsy kill himself or herself by committing “suicide”.
Another favorite way is to take the patsy out in a thrilling high speed chase, which has the added benefit of drawing clueless people in through the MSM and gushingly promoting the police state. Sometimes a patsy is killed in plain sight, just because it’s so important to suppress his testimony (e.g. Lee Harvey Oswald in the JFK assassination).
A third way is to mind control and drug the patsy to such an extent that they become a zombie vegetable unable to articulate anything, as was the case with James Holmes.
False Flag Formula #7: Shooter Leaves Manifesto
In this day and age, writing a manifesto is a strange and anachronistic thing to do. Yet, for some strange reason, shooters’ manifestos seem to crop up an awful lot after mass shootings.
Conveniently for the Controllers, these manifestos provide a perfect explanation for the official narrative, and help fill in the missing (non-existent) motive for the attack – which probably pushes those on the fence over into believing the Government’s version of the event.
While the manifesto is not an element in every false flag operation, it is present in enough of them to be regarded as part of the false flag formula.
False Flag Formula #8: Evidence Gets Conveniently Destroyed
Another element of the false flag formula is the deliberate destruction of evidence, so that the Controllers can cover their tracks.
False Flag Formula #9: No Obvious Motive for the Mass Attack
Have you ever wondered why there is no obvious motive in any of these mass shootings? Crimes are supposed to be solved on the merit of motive and opportunity, yet to hide the reality of a false flag op, the MSM just lies about the motive part, and chalks it up to a deranged shooter.
Other times we are offered the flimsiest of motives, such as people going on an all-out rampage because they had a grievance with a co-worker. In San Bernardino, we were told the young mother, with a 1-year-old child, was aggressive and psychotic enough to help kill 14 and injure 17 people – at the risk of never seeing her child again!
Meanwhile, the real purveyors of these operations profit immensely from the ensuing fear, yet somehow the majority of people don’t seem to see that motive...
False Flag Formula #10: Immediate Calls for Gun Control
Gun control is obviously one of the key agendas behind all of these false flag mass shootings, since a disarmed population is far easier to exploit and manipulate than an armed one. It is an obvious aspect of the false flag formula. Sometimes gun control is even pushed in the immediate aftermath of the event when people are still in a highly emotional and suggestible state.
Take a look at the behavior of Andy Parker, who we were told was the father of a victim killed in the Virginia mass shooting of 2015.
Within hours of hearing the news of the death of his child, Parker had already contacted and talked with the Governor of Virginia, and then appeared on TV saying he would be devoting his entire life to gun control.
In a similar fashion, Richard Martinez, the alleged father of a Santa Barbara mass hooting victim, appeared on TV right after the death angrily pleading for more gun control. In both cases, the political agenda of gun control angrily dominated their reactions, rather than grief or other emotions.
False Flag Formula #11: Fake “Victims” = Crisis Actors
The above 10 points are a useful outline of the false flag formula as it pertains to mass shootings with real victims, i.e. where real people die. However, ever since the surreal Sandy Hook event, which still contains many unanswered questions, we have entered the twilight zone of the false flag hoax.
This is a term used to describe the false flag mass attacks where no one dies – where fake bodies, fake blood and fake victims are used instead. In this way, the entire operation is more tightly controlled and less messy. A hallmark of the false flag hoax is that the authorities never produce a credible piece of evidence showing an actual dead body of a victim.
Is this the same girl crying at all three massacres - Aurora, Sandy Hook and Boston?
The following 5 points relate to false flag hoaxes, and specifically to the people employed to pull them off – crisis actors. It is truly a testament to just how utterly fake our normal world is (the Matrix) that false flag ops have now descended to the level where we have to question whether the event even happened at all.
There are organizations of crisis actors in the US (such as the IIF), and there is clear evidence crisis actors were used at Sandy Hook, Boston Marathon and many others.
Government officials have been caught using the word “actor” to describe various players in these dramas; the MSM has even resorted to calling them actors too (it was one of the buzzwords of the recent San Bernardino mass shooting).
False Flag Formula #12: “Victims” Get Killed Twice
The surreal quality of the false flag hoax reached point of absurdity when it was discovered that one of the “victims” was reportedly killed twice!
We were told that Noah Pozner was one of the victims of the Sandy Hook shooting, yet his picture was also among those killed in a Pakistan Taliban attack.
Apparently the recycling of fake victims is another part of the false flag formula.
False Flag Formula #13: Families of “Victims” Have Elite or Acting Backgrounds
Is it just a coincidence that the families of mass shooting “victims” have either elite or acting backgrounds? At the Sandy Hook event, local CEO of the Newtown bank John Trentacosta (whose house was next to the Lanzas and had a lot of unusual activity occurring there the day of Sandy Hook) was connected to the New York Federal Reserve (and thus the international banking elite).
Francine Wheeler was formerly the personal assistant of former chief Democratic National Committee fundraiser Maureen White whose husband Steven Rattner is a Wall Street investment banker and member of the Rockefeller CFR (Council on Foreign Relations)!
It was also noteworthy at Sandy Hook how acting showed up in the resumes of so many of the key players there. Gene Rosen, David and Francine Wheeler (both professional actors) and others all had a background in acting. Father of Virginia mass shooting “victim” Andy Parker is an actor (and a politician too). This fact supports the idea that another element of the false flag formula is to watch for people with elite connections and acting backgrounds.
False Flag Formula #14: Families of “Victims” Show Little to No Emotion, and Even Snigger and Laugh
Luckily for truth seekers, the majority of crisis actors used in these false flag events are poor actors who are utterly unconvincing in the roles they play. The majority display little or no emotion after an alleged tragedy like losing a family member child to a random and violent mass shooting.
It is true that humans do vary widely with emotional response and expression. However, with many of the crisis actors, judging by their reactions, it simply strains credibility too much to believe that they have just have been through a harrowing and traumatic ordeal.
Given the range of possible reactions to a tragedy like losing a loved one in a mass shooting, what are the chances that many of the “victims’” family members are so non-emotional, or so understanding, or so quick to forgive?
It’s shameful enough that the crisis actors playing these roles are perpetrating a monumental deception on the public, tugging at the average person’s heartstrings solely to trick them.
However, on top of that, these actors have the gall to actually laugh – to smile, snigger and giggle – while pulling off their atrocious stunts. The only conclusion to draw from this is that it must be pretty funny to get a paid gig like this fooling millions of people…
False Flag Formula #15: Families of “Victims” Receive Millions in Federal Payoffs
In the US, the land of the lawsuit, people are generally pretty fast to initiate a lawsuit if they feel they have been wronged. It is highly strange, therefore, that none of the alleged parents of the Sandy Hook event decided to sue the Government for negligence or to demand redress for any other grievance.
The Federal Government just gave it over to them without asking! Ask yourself: is is more likely the Government would just do this out of the goodness of its heart, or that the money was more like a bribe/blackmail/payout all rolled into one, awarded to actors playing a part in a role and being sworn to silence?
Conclusion: Use the 15 Elements of the False Flag Formula to Be More Aware
These are 15 elements I noticed forming the false flag formula. There may well be more.
Meanwhile, use the knowledge you have of the false flag formula to become more aware, wise and hip to the deception, so that the next time it unfolds (as it surely will), you will be among those that spot the fakery, rather than among those who are too scared, shell-shocked and gullible to do anything other than buy the official narrative.
What Is The Obama Regime Up To? + Seven Ways Obama Is Trying To Sabotage The Trump Administration January 5 2017 | From: PaulCraigRoberts / Breitbart / Various
Obama has announced new sanctions on Russia based on unsubstantiated charges by the CIA that the Russian government influenced the outcome of the US presidential election with “malicious cyber-enabled activities.”
The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued a report “related to the declaration of 35 Russian officials persona non grata for malicious cyber activity and harassment.”
“Tools and infrastructure used by Russian intelligence services to compromise and exploit networks and infrastructure associated with the recent U.S. election, as well as a range of U.S. government, political and private sector entities.”
The report does not provide any evidence that the tools and infrastructure were used to influence the outcome of the US presidential election.
The report is simply a description of what is said to be Russian capabilities.
Moreover, the report begins with this disclaimer: “DISCLAIMER: This report is provided ‘as is’ for informational purposes only. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within.”
In other words, the report not only provides no evidence of the use of the Russian tools and infrastructure in order to influence the US presidential election, the report will not even warrant the correctness of its description of Russian capabilities.
Thus the DHS report makes it completely clear that the Obama regime has no evidential basis for its allegations on the basis of which it has imposed more sanctions on Russia.
What is going on here?
First there is the question of the legality of the sanctions even if there were evidence. I am not certain, but I think that sanctions require the action of a body, such as the UN Security Council, and cannot legally be imposed unilaterally by one country. Additionally, it is unclear why Obama is calling the expulsion of Russian diplomats “sanctions.”
No other country has to do likewise. During the Cold War when diplomats were expelled for spying, it was not called “sanctions.” Sanctions imply more than unilateral or bilateral expulsions of diplomats.
Second, it is clear that Obama, the CIA, and the New York Times are fully aware that the allegation is false. It is also clear that if the CIA actually believes the allegation, the intelligence agency is totally incompetent and cannot be believed on any subject.
Third, President Trump can rescind the sanctions in 21 days, a third reason that the sanctions are ridiculous.
So why are President Obama, the CIA, and the New York Times making charges that they know are false and for which they have not produced a shred of evidence?
One obvious answer is that the neoconized Obama regime is desperate to ruin US-Russian relations past the point that Trump can repair them. As the New York Times puts it;
“Mr. Obama’s actions clearly create a problem for Mr. Trump.” The question the New York Times says, is whether Trump “stands with his democratic allies on Capitol Hill or his authoritarian friend in the Kremlin.”
Can Trump’s foreign policy be controlled by false allegations?
According to the New York Times, Trump has relented and agreed to being briefed by the CIA about the Russian hacking now that Republicans such as Paul Ryan, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham have lined up with Obama and the CIA in accepting charges for which no evidence has been presented.
However, a briefing without evidence would seem simply to further discredit the CIA in Trump’s eyes.
As I have emphasized in my columns, facts no longer have a role in the United States and its empire. Allegations alone suffice, whether in court cases, interrogation centers, foreign and domestic policies, or classrooms.
The US even bases its military invasions on false allegations - “weapons of mass destruction.” Indeed, the entirely of US foreign policy since the Clinton regime has been based on nothing but false allegations.
The Russian government should have learned by now, but perhaps Moscow still thinks that facts matter in Washington’s decisions.
Possibly we should consider that more is going on than meets the eye. Perhaps the propaganda about the Russian cyber threat to democracy is being used to prepare American and/or European populations for an incident.
The CIA has morphed into a “deep state” that uses disinformation and propaganda to align decisions of Congress, the executive branch, and foreign governments with secret behind-the-scenes agendas. Many books, such as Stephen Kinzer’s The Brothers and Douglas Valentine’s CIA As Organized Crime have described some of these secret agendas.
In order to deter Trump from restoring normal relations with Russia, an incident would have to be severe and irreversible. Rather than accept defeat for their agenda of US world hegemony, the neoconservatives are prepared to take high risks. The willingness to take risks is demonstrated by the public effort of the CIA Director to discredit the president-elect.
As expected, Putin’s response to the latest provocation is low key as the “sanctions” appear to be meaningless on the surface.
1. Betraying Israel at the United Nations:Obama’s refusal to block a United Nations vote against Israel, his administration’s shadowy machinations to bring that ugly motion to the floor, and Secretary of State John Kerry’s long-winded broadside against Israel will leave President Trump with a massive political crisis in the Middle East, and quite possibly a security crisis, if terror groups and their “political wings” are emboldened by the rebuke of Israel.
Obama’s Israel maneuver also damages American credibility, teaching would-be allies that the United States is not the best friend to have. America’s erstwhile battlefield allies in Syria can teach the same lesson, assuming any of them are left alive to take the podium.
This comes at the very moment aspiring hegemons in China and Russia are showing their allies how Beijing and Moscow will go to the mat for them.
Obama’s team thinks it was clever to saddle Trump with an international edict the U.S. president cannot easily reverse. They might not have thought this all the way through, because some of the options that are available to Trump could leave internationalists, and Palestinian leaders, cursing Barack Obama’s memory.
Note that even some commentators friendly to Obama, and sources within the Obama Administration itself, have described the Israel vote as a deliberate act of sabotage aimed at Trump, because Obama is “alarmed” by some of Trump’s appointees.
2. A New Cold War With Russia: After eight years of relentlessly mocking anyone who said Russia was a major geopolitical threat to the United States (most famously including his 2012 presidential opponent, Mitt Romney) Barack Obama suddenly realized: “You know what? Russia is a major threat!”
He also awoke to the dangers of cyber-warfare, after an entire presidency of treating electronic espionage as a purely political problem to be minimized and spun away, because taking it seriously made him look bad. Who can forget how Obama left victims of the OPM hack twisting in the wind for weeks, because the administration didn’t want to admit how serious the attack was?
But then a top Democrat political operative fell for a crude phishing scam, and the Democratic National Committee got hacked, so Obama… well, he still didn’t take cyber-espionage seriously.
He slapped the snooze bar again, because as one anonymous official put it, they thought Hillary Clinton was a cinch to win the 2016 election, “so they were willing to kick the can down the road.”
No, it was Hillary Clinton’s loss in the election, and the desperate push to damage President-elect Trump’s legitimacy, that made the president who politely ignored China hacking 25 million American citizens’ private data get tough on information security.
Until now, states involved in cyber-espionage never got anything worse than a few carefully-chosen words of sour disapproval from the expiring administration, but the Russkies received a sprinkling of sanctions, and 35 diplomats were expelled.
Russia responded by unleashing an army of ducks and trolls from the depths of the Kremlin. The New Cold War is only a few days old, and it’s already weirder than the old one was.
Presumably Obama thinks he’s maneuvered Trump into a position that will make whatever rapprochement he might have entertained with Moscow more difficult, or at least more politically costly for the new President.
The end result might be easier relations between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and a lingering memory of how little Barack Obama cared about cybersecurity until it was politically expedient for him to freak out.
3. Ban on Oil Drilling: An overt act of sabotage directed at the American economy itself, leaving an especially heavy bootprint on Alaska. Smug administration flacks spent the past couple of weeks assuring media talking heads that Obama’s unprecedented abuse of an obscure law was impossible for his successor to reverse.
It’s like they stayed up all night, looking for executive actions that can’t be undone by the new President four weeks later.
(Amusingly, Obama dropped this bomb on our energy sector just a few weeks after publicly advising Trump not to abuse executive orders.)
It’s likely that legions of lawyers will battle throughout 2017, and perhaps beyond, to determine if Obama’s “latest poke at Trump” (as Politico put it) really is irreversible. What a lovely parting gift from the departing President to the country that elected him twice: a pile of gigantic wealth-destroying lawsuits!
4. National-Monument Land Grab: The other theoretically irreversible presidential edict discovered by Obama’s munchkins is the ability to designate national monuments. Another 1.65 million acres in Utah and Nevada was yanked off the market in the last week of December, bring Obama’s Antiquities Act acreage up to an unprecedented 553 million acres.
"This arrogant act by a lame duck president will not stand. I will work tirelessly with Congress and the incoming Trump administration to honor the will of the people of Utah and undo this designation,” thundered Senator Mike Lee of Utah.
Sixty-five percent of his state is now under the wise and compassionate environmental protection of the same government that turned the Colorado River into a toxic-waste dump.
5. Eliminating the National Immigration Registry: Just in case Trump got any ideas about using it as the basis for the “enhanced vetting” he has promised for immigrants from terrorist-infested regions, the Obama administration killed a long-dormant program called NSEERS that once committed the unforgivable politically-incorrect sin of tracking military-age males from violently unstable Muslim-majority countries.
It’s highly debatable whether the NSEERS program was of any practical use. When it pulled the plug, the Department of Homeland Security noted that the post-9/11 program called for collecting data that is now routinely collected for most foreign visitors, along with more sophisticated biometric information.
Almost everyone saw the elimination of these roles as a purely symbolic act - i.e. political sabotage directed at the incoming President.
6. The Great Guantanamo Jailbreak: After paying little more than lip service to his promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison for much of his presidency, Obama went into overdrive in his last years, transferring over 150 detainees. A shocking number of them ended up back on the battlefield.
Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA) of the House Foreign Affairs Committee wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed this week to sound the alarm about Obama’s “midnight push to empty out Guantanamo.”
“The White House has repeatedly released detainees to countries it knew lacked the intent and capability to keep the detainees from returning to terrorism. The results have been deadly,” Royce wrote, challenging the wisdom of such Obama administration brainstorms as dropping al-Qaeda’s top bomb maker into Bosnia, a country with “limited security services” but plenty of radical mosques and unemployed military-age males.
Royce’s committee has been investigating allegations the administration tried to pay the bomb-maker $100,000 to refrain from passing his deadly skills along to eager apprentices. Hunting down the rest of the transferred prisoners who transferred themselves right back into the global jihad will be a job for the Trump administration.
7. Depicting Trump’s Election as a Disaster: Let’s not forget Obama’s acts of rhetorical sabotage, such as describing Trump’s presidential campaign as a crime against American class and racial harmony, or his wife wailing that all hope was lost for America’s children. Trump himself has taken note of the “many inflammatory President Obama statements and roadblocks.”
It’s hard to remember a previous instance of the outgoing president attacking the legitimacy of his successor this way, especially during the transition, before the new chief executive has actually done anything.
And it’s probably not over yet. The time for big executive orders is growing short, but Obama is always just one day away from calling a press conference and saying something else that will make the transition more difficult.
Of course he can still talk all he wants after January 20th, and he’s given every indication he won’t follow the dignified path of his predecessors and allow the new president time to chart his own course, but there’s no substitute for the bully pulpit of the presidency.
The timber of Barack Obama’s political voice will be very different on January 21st than it was on January 19th. More likely than not, he’ll use it before he loses it.
Erdogan Says He Has "Confirmed Evidence" The US Supports ISIS + US Senator Says ISIS Used As Tool By Saudis, US & Turkey When It Suits Their Interests January 4 2017 | From: Zerohedge / RT
One year after this website demonstrated that Turkey was cooperating with the Islamic State, in the very least trading cash in exchange for crude oil sold to various Turkish outposts (a trade which was subsequently ended by the Russian air force), Turkey has flipped the tables and on Tuesday Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said he has uncovered evidence that US-led coalition forces have helped support terrorists in Syria - including Isis.
"They give support to terrorist groups including ISIS" Erdogan said during a speech in Ankara on Tuesday, adding that US coalition forces "give support to terrorist groups including Daesh, YPG, PYD. It's very clear. We have confirmed evidence, with pictures, photos and videos."
Nevertheless, the "pot calling the kettle black" comes at a sensitive time for both the US and Turkey, which are both pivoting aggressively, one internally from Obama to Trump, while the other is shifting its foreign geopolitical allegiance from the US to Russia, which may also explain today's outburst by Erdogan.
Saying that the US have accused Turkey of supporting IS, speaking at a press conference on Tuesday the Turkish leader blamed the US-led coalition for assisting terrorists themselves. Apart from IS, he also mentioned Kurdish People's Protection Units in northern Syria (YPG) and Democratic Union Party (PYD) as groups supported by the coalition.
Earlier on Tuesday, Moscow accused Washington of "sponsoring terrorism" in Syria.
Commenting on the latest National Defense Authorization Act signed into law by President Barack Obama, the Russian Foreign Ministry pointed out that the new bill "openly stipulates the possibility" of delivering more weapons to Syria, and added that those arms "will soon find their way to the jihadists," which Russia would view as a "hostile act."
Erdogan's comments echoed those from the Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan, who told RT that Washington appears unready to play a serious role in fighting Islamic State, as it has fostered terrorists itself and now wants them to remain in the Middle East.
"The Western coalition is of a formal nature, they have no real intention to fight neither in Syria nor in Iraq. We don’t see any readiness on their part to play a truly useful and meaningful role in fighting IS, because it’s them who have raised terrorists and they are interested in keeping them there,” Dehghan said.
According to the Iranian defense minister, Tehran has never coordinated its operations with the Americans and “will never collaborate with them.”
He then slammed the US' motives behind the "war on ISIS' saying that:
"Maybe the coalition forces would like to see terrorists weakened, but certainly not destroyed, because those terrorists are their tool for destabilizing this region and some other parts of the world.”
One wonders how long before Putin is blamed for this latest political scandal, because if indeed Erdogan does provide proof of US support for the Islamic State, then the Pentagon will need a back story very fast, and what better scapegoat than the Russian president.
US Senator Says ISIS Used As Tool By Saudis, US & Turkey When It Suits Their Interests
Speaking to RT on the advance of ISIS militants from Mosul toward Palmyra, Virginia Senator Richard Black (R) expressed doubt that the US-led coalition could have overlooked such a regrouping, pointing to possible interests of the US and regional players.
Given that the territory between areas occupied by Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) and Palmyra is a “very barren” rocky desert, “it is unconceivable that the American-led collation could not have seen this massive army moving towards Palmyra,” Senator Black told RT.
"The Western coalition is of a formal nature, they have no real intention to fight neither in Syria nor in Iraq. We don’t see any readiness on their part to play a truly useful and meaningful role in fighting IS, because it’s them who have raised terrorists and they are interested in keeping them there,” Dehghan said.
“I was surprised that ISIS was able to attack Palmyra. It’s important to recognize that the distance from ISIS-held territory [to] Palmyra is approximately 100 miles,” added the senator, who has repeatedly voiced support for Syrian President Bashar Assad in battling the jihadists.
The fact that the US-led coalition seemingly turned a blind eye to the imminent terrorist threat to the UNESCO world heritage site is not a coincidence, he argues, but rather a part of the foreign policy strategy employed by the current White House administration towards Islamic State.
“Unfortunately, I believe, under the Obama administration, I think there have been great deal of coordination between terrorist forces and the US-led coalition,” Black said.
While the US, as well as other western countries and major regional players, do not share the same goals as the terrorists, they have been seemingly sparing Islamic State if airstrikes against the terrorist group could have resulted in disadvantage to Turkey, the key NATO member in the region and a US ally, which Black alleges, has engaged in economic relations with terrorists.
“There [the terrorists] have not been loved by anyone, but they have been a major trading partner of Turkey, and the United States withheld any attack when they first seized Palmyra travelling a hundred miles over open territory, and, I confirm, there was not a single bomb dropped by the American-led coalition,” he said.
This very selective approach to fighting terrorists gives reason to suggest that the US-led coalition is battling jihadists only when it does not interfere with the narrow interests of its members, Black suggests, dubbing the coalition’s efforts under such circumstances as “disastrously unproductive.”
“I think ISIS is often used as a tool between Turkey and the United States and as long as they are useful to one of those parties they are protected and when they are not useful they are not protected,” Black said, arguing that ISIS served as “tool of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United States and NATO forces…from the very beginning” of the conflict in Syria.
At the same time, the senator commended the US-led offensive in Iraq, which has centered on liberating its second largest city, Mosul, from militants, saying that the coalition was “doing some very good work in Mosul” and seems to be genially poised to “drive ISIS forces from Mosul.”
However, US President Barack Obama’s recent decision to lift restrictions on the delivery of weapons to:
"Foreign forces, irregular forces, groups or individuals,” who are supported by US military in Syria, plays into the hands of terrorists and looks like “a desperate last attempt” by the outgoing administration, Black said.
The senator said that the looming change of commander-in-chief in the United States will be marked by a U-turn in Syria, with the US cutting all its ties with militants.
“When Donald Trump comes in, the support is going to be cut for the terrorists. We are not going on to the side of the terrorists anymore,” he said.
Sen. Black has been known as a fierce critic of the current US policy towards Syria, calling it “insane” in comments to the Washington Post in April, when he argued that “it is within our power” to stop the bloodshed.
In April, Black traveled to Palmyra and met with Syrian government officials. He has said that Syria being entrapped in the military conflict is not the result of domestic issues but of a plot contrived by foreign intelligence, including that of the western countries, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
“The government and people in Syria want peace, but regional countries don’t,” Black told Homs Governor Talal Barazi at the time, as cited by the Syria Times.
New Zealand's Israel Resolution: Peacemakers Seldom Win Friends December 26 2016 | From: MSN
A UN Security Council resolution, calling for a ban on illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, has passed, with NZ taking a major role. Phil Smith outlines the background and the blowback.
New Zealand has dared to go where even Egypt's strongman, President el-Sisi, feared to tread.
President el-Sisi said he wanted to let Trump's incoming administration have first crack at the issue. It was obviously an excuse. Trump's nomination for Ambassador to Israel is a hardliner who wants more settlement construction and who has compared Jews who advocate for a 'two-state peace' to Capos (Jews who assisted in Nazi death-camps).
When el-Sisi retreated, New Zealand stepped up. Together with Venezuela, Malaysia and Senegal, New Zealand called for a vote on the resolution, and for the first time since the Carter administration, the US declined to veto a rebuke over illegal Israeli settlements.
The US noted that settlement construction had accelerated since the US vetoed a similar resolution in 2001, and that the Obama administration has been warning Israel for eight years that this 'trend-line' was both making peace more difficult and isolating Israel from the international community.
The Foundations of the Settlements
Settling population in militarily-occupied territory is contrary to the Geneva Convention, to international law and previous United Nations rulings.
Settlement building is usually strategic. Settlements create 'facts-on-the-ground', making it more difficult to give back captured territory (in this case, territory captured during the 1967 Six Day War). Hardliners believe the territory is theirs by God-given right, but its return, at least in part, would be necessary for a lasting peace based on a two-state solution.
The tracts that are currently Palestinian controlled areas are an unworkable, disconnected patchwork of territories.
Settlements also increase local conflict by expropriating land and resources to construct and sustain the townships. Moderate Israeli administrations have tended to restrict or demolish settlements, while hawkish governments look the other way, or - like the current one - are gung-ho on expansions which push Palestinians into an ever-diminishing corner.
Former US President Jimmy Carter has repeatedly stressed that peace in Israel/Palestine is only likely when the Palestinians also have a viable state, where middle class citizens have a reason to hope and work for a future. Some form of two state solution has been American policy for decades.
Seeing this may be about to change, and after significant antagonism from Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, President Obama apparently believes it is time to allow a line in the sand.
A few years ago, after the successful Bougainville peace talks, New Zealand imagined a role for itself as an international peace broker. It was a nice idea that turned out to be harder than it sounded, but it marked an increased New Zealand confidence to act independently, for good purpose.
This week's action is a further brave step from New Zealand. It has no obvious ulterior motives, but instead seems an attempt to simply do the right thing and bugger the consequences.
A nation like New Zealand cannot throw its feather-weight around internationally in order to win friends. Frequently, the opposite is achieved. A friend won with one action is alienated with the next, and nations often remember sleights more strongly than support.
New Zealand was already in Israel's bad books. In 2014 Israel refused to accept New Zealand's ambassador because he was also to act as an envoy to the Palestinian Authority. In October 2015, Israeli officials reprimanded our Ambassador after New Zealand dared propose a Security Council resolution that dared encourage a return to peace negotiations. Palestinian supporters were equally upset, seeing the wording as supporting Israel.
But this time is worse. Israeli-New Zealand relations haven't been so poor since 2004, when New Zealand imprisoned 'Mossad spies' for attempting to fraudulently obtain a New Zealand passport. After a year, Israel apologised and relationships were slowly mended.
This new rift may take longer. Much of the anger is being directed at the US, where President Obama could have chosen to veto the resolution.
But Netanyahu's conservative government will not take kindly to us fronting a resolution that pointedly calls East Jerusalem "occupied Palestinian territory".
New Zealand's government will have known blowback was likely. It has decided that, if you ask to be on the Security Council you need to appear from behind the parapet and take a stand.
In an era where the world's mood seems to be trending towards resentment, aggression and extremism, a country wins few friends by calling for tolerance or asking for restraint. But that doesn't mean that working for peace and goodwill isn't the right thing to do.
Fear, Bloodshed And Human Sacrifices Before Winter Solstice December 22 2016 | From: VigilantCitizen
The killing of an ambassador in Turkey on live television and the attack of a Christmas market in Berlin occurred at a crucial time of year.
The Russian ambassador with his killer standing behind him, moments before the gunshot
On December 19th 2016, Donald Trump was officially confirmed as President of the United States by the Electoral College. Media coverage of this event was however eclipsed by attacks that ironically confirm why he was elected in the first place. And these attacks will most likely greatly influence upcoming elections in Germany, France and the Netherlands. A drastic change in political scenery is in the horizon, and it is fueled by fear, bloodshed and rejection of globalism.
The assassination of a Russian ambassador on live television and the violent attack of a Christmas market in Germany are events that are not only violent, but charged with intense symbolism meant to shock the public mind.
Whether this was coincidental or not, these events occurred right on the brink of the winter solstice a period that is historically prone to blood sacrifices as it is a minor Sabbath in the occult calendar. Before Christmas, there was Saturnalia.
“The origins of Christmas predate Christianity through the Pagan holiday called Saturnalia, which was a week-long of lawlessness from December 17th through December 25th that honored Saturn and included human sacrifice, intoxication, naked caroling and rape. During these seven days, there were no punishments for breaking any laws, according to Roman law.”
- In5d, Esoteric Meaning of Christmas
“It was traditional to offer gifts of imitation fruit (a symbol of fertility), dolls (symbolic of the custom of human sacrifice), and candles (reminiscent of the bonfires traditionally associated with pagan solstice celebrations). A mock king was chosen, usually from a group of slaves or criminals, and although he was permitted to behave in an unrestrained manner for seven days of the festival, he was usually killed at the end.
The Saturnalia eventually degenerated into a week-long spree of debauchery and crime – giving rise to the modern use of the tern saturnalia, meaning a period of unrestrained license and revelry.”
- Time and Date, “Holidays and Traditions around the December solstice”
On December 19th, the entire world witnessed a live murder, a carefully planned sacrifice.
The Russian Ambassador
Andrey Karlov, Russia’s ambassador to Turkey was shot dead on Monday evening as he delivered a speech at a photo exposition. The killer, identified as Mert Altintas, was an off-duty member of Ankara’s police force.
The entire scene was extremely surreal because, beyond the violence, it was “visually perfect”. It was a set piece made for mass media.
Mert Altintas stood behind the ambassador, wearing a stylishly tailored black suit, which sharply contrasted with the immaculate white background adorned with pictures of Russia. Several gunshots then wring out and the ambassador falls on his back, suddenly lifeless. The gunman then walks around the body, yelling “Allahu Akbar” and “Don’t forget Aleppo” until police finally manages to reach him and shoot him down.
As one reviews this surreal scene, one wonders: How was this even allowed to happen? How come this 22-year-old, off-duty cop, who is part of the riot squad, was the only person standing behind Karlov this entire time? Reports are now saying that the gunman refused security check.
“The off-duty police officer who assassinated Russia’s ambassador to Turkey refused to go through an X-ray security check before the shooting - but was let into the event anyway, according to a report.
The Hurriyet Daily News reported Tuesday that the assassin, Mevlüt Mert Altintas, simply flashed his police ID to enter Ankara’s Contemporary Arts Center - where Russian Ambassador Andrey Karlov was scheduled to speak at a photo exhibition.”
- Daily News, Assassin of Turkey’s Russian ambassador refused security check before ambushing event
Also, all signs point to the attack being ordered from above, Mert Altintas being the proverbial patsy.
“It had been determined Tuesday if Altintas, 22, was part of a wider plan to take out the Russian ambassador. But a senior Turkish official told the Associated Press Altintas likely did not act alone. The official, speaking anonymously, called the killing “fully professional, not a one-man action.”
Turkish authorities suspect that Altintas was under the influence of Fetullah Gulen, a Turkish preacher who is currently based in the United States, in Pennsylvania. He is suspected of being a CIA operative conducting operations meant to destabilize Erdogan’s government.
Although some draw comparisons between this event and the assassination that lead to WWI, it is unlikely that the killing will cause significant change. It will most likely justify the Russian-Turkish involvement in Syria.
The truck used to conduct the attack with Christmas decorations stuck on the windshield. Sadly symbolic
Around the same time the assassination occurred in Turkey, a horrific attack took place in Berlin killing 12 people and 48 others.
“What authorities can say for certain is that a tractor-trailer with Polish license plates and laden with steel rods jumped a sidewalk around 8 p.m. Monday and plowed into the market near the Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church, a symbolic Berlin site whose spire, jagged from bomb damage, was intentionally left unrepaired after World War II.”
- NY Times, Berlin Christmas Market Was Target of Terrorist Attack, Angela Merkel Says
This event was also charged with symbolic meaning. It was not simply about killing people, it was an attack on German culture, history and tradition. Christmas markets are a German tradition originating from the Middle Ages where locals shop for various goods while getting into the Christmas spirit.
The market that was attacked is situated near the Kaiser Wilheml Memorial church, a symbolic piece of German history.
The truck and the wreckage it caused at the foot of the Church. Although not all Germans are religious, the building remains a piece of local history.
This bloody attack is therefore custom-built to anger the German population who have to witness a beloved tradition being turned into a bloodbath by terrorists.
This anger might very well translate into votes against Merkel (and her open-door policy to refugees) in the upcoming elections. It might also influence the French elections where Le Pen is gaining traction.
At the time of writing this article, Berlin police detains a suspect who is said to be a refugee from Pakistan. However, police also stated that they might have the wrong person and that the true culprit might still be on the run. No matter who finally gets arrested, ultimate losers will be citizens who will have to suffer through even more scrutiny, monitoring and surveillance for more “security”.
The elite’s motto is Ordo Ab Chao (Order Out of Chaos) and Merkel’s policy brought to Germany great deal of chaos. Now people will crave for order. And that order might come at a terrible price.
The two events described above were not only about killing people. They were about sending a message. They were charged with symbolic meaning custom made for mass media and social networks.
These events occurred at a sensitive time of the year, the winter solstice, a minor Sabbath, historically celebrated with human sacrifice. Whether this date was intentionally selected or not, the entire world was forced to witness a planned killing, a ritual sacrifice carried out methodically as the killer screamed “God is Great”.
“Fake News” Hysteria Hinges On The Laughable Assumption That Corporate-Run Media Has A Divine Monopoly On “Facts” + US Lawmakers Move To Criminalize ‘Fake News, Propaganda’ On The Web December 14 2016 | From: NaturalNews / Sputnik/ Various
The insidious assumption behind the “fake news” accusations being flung far and wide by the fakestream media (CNN, NPR, WashPost, NYT, MSNBC, etc.) is that somehow the corporate media has a divine monopoly on “facts.”
The Cabal Establishment is in Panic Mode as Alternative Media Blasts the Controlled-Mainstream Media Out of the Water - the Corporate Media Lies are Being Exposed Virally, Worldwide.
The assumption is ludicrously demonstrated when MSNBC rolls out “convicted” liar Brian Williams to decry “fake news.”
“As long as the government engages in intelligence activities that violate our rights secured by our Constitution, any Intel Authorization bill should be opposed,” Justin Amash told Sputnik News.”
“Williams also made up stories about Seal Team 6, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Pope, Hurricane Katrina, quitting college, rescuing a puppy from a house fire, and more,” Breitbart continues.
If the Media Establishment Only Tells the Truth, Why are so Many of Their News Reports Obviously Faked?
If the corporate-run media really had some sort of divine monopoly on “facts,” then none of us would be able to find examples of laughably fake news on their websites, would we? Yet even the Washington Post has now been exposed for, if you can believe it, faking a news story about fake news!
Any honest investigation can go right down the list: CNN, NYT, WashPost, HuffPost, LA Times, USA Today, NPR, MSNBC, Fox News and so on… every one of these “news” organizations has run genuinely fake news while claiming it was “fact.”
It’s not even difficult to find examples of these organizations deliberately fabricating fake news in order to alter the outcome of the recent election.
Nearly all of them reported, for example, some variation of the absurd claim that “Donald Trump can’t win the election.”
These are also the same fake news organizations that obediently and enthusiastically repeated Obama’s fabricated claims about Obamacare. Remember “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor?”
Another way the Media Fakes the News: Censorship of Important Stories they Don’t Want you to Learn
And then there are the stories the entire fakestream media censors because they don’t want anyone to learn about actual facts. As a particularly egregious example, it is an established fact that CDC scientist Dr. William Thompson publicly admitted to falsifying scientific data at the CDC to obscure the statistical link between vaccines and autism in African-Americans. That is not only indisputable, it’s also an incredibly important piece of news for the health of all Americans.
Did the fakestream media cover that story? Not by a long shot: They censored it.
Every single fakestream media organization across the country obediently blackballed the story. The censorship was obviously coordinated, deliberate and malicious. Remember, censorship of important facts is another way the insidious corporate-run media lies to its misinformed viewers.
Hilarious Videos of CNN Staging Fake Locations, Fake Missile Attacks and Fake Seafaring
CNN has forever used fakery, theatrics and false reporting to influence public opinion rather than report the news. Perhaps the most hilarious example of dishonest CNN fakery is the Charles Jaco video from the first Gulf War.
In order to pretend to be covering the Gulf War from a live set in Saudi Arabia, CNN built a “Saudi stage” in the USA and faked a SCUD missile attack on its news anchor Charles Jaco.
Hilarious, as the video shows below, while Charles Jaco grabs a gas mask, his co-anchor grabs a helmet (see the 7:00 mark in the video below). It’s funnier than a really bad SNL skit!
Remember, this was all broadcast as “CNN Live,” where CNN literally pretended this was all real and true.
Faking the news is a specialty of CNN, and there are countless examples of the network going out of its way to stage fake sets, fake locations and even use “actors” following mass shootings to make sure the proper narrative is delivered to the public.
For example, this video interview reveals a comprehensive collection of CNN news fakery such as the “bizarre moment when CNN anchors try to pretend they are not in the same parking lot.”
That incident, detailed in this UK Daily Mail article, involved a CNN anchor and guest desperately trying to pretend they were broadcasting live from distant locations when, in reality, they were in the exact same parking lot. (This is evidenced by the simple fact that the exact same vehicles pass behind them, in the exact same sequence…)
CNN frequently uses green screens to fake locations.
The hilarious video below shows CNN building an entire fake ship on a green screen set to try to create the illusion that their reporter is on the scene in the Black Sea, covering US war ships near Ukraine.
During the hilariously bad “fake set” report, the CNN journalist even points off in the distance behind him to try to make the green screen illusion more convincing:
You’ll discover another jaw-dropping compilation of fake, scripted news from the mainstream media in this next video, covering media fakery involving the Gulf War, the defamation of Ron Paul, 9/11 attacks, Bin Laden and more:
The entire Sandy Hook mass shooting narrative was deeply layered in all sorts of CNN fakery, including the use of “actors” who were told to read lines to the cameras while sobbing uncontrollably for maximum effect.
In one case, a cheerful white man is laughing it up in the background, then when signaled to approach the microphone to speak on camera, starts hyperventilating and crying while reading his obviously scripted lines. (The guy turns out to be a professional actor.)
In the same video, shown below, another actor is caught on a hot mic asking, “Do you want me to read the card?” right before sobbing on camera, playing the part of a “grieving parent.”
Yet another Sandy Hook theatrical “fake news” hoax was the use of David Wheeler, a professional actor, as both a “grieving parent” and a SWAT team sniper.
As with all the other actors rolled out for CNN’s cameras, this professional actor performed a scripted role in order to evoke a powerful emotional response with the sole purpose of repealing the Second Amendment (a necessary step before America can be overrun and controlled by radical leftist communists).
The way he carries his sniper rifle (upside down, by the magazine) makes it laughably obvious to anyone familiar with firearms that he has absolutely no clue how to carry a rifle…
The Corporate-Run Media has Done Nothing but Fake the News for Decades
Search YouTube for terms like “CNN green screen” or “crisis actors” or “Sandy Hook” or “faked news” and you can spend hour and after watching clear examples of outlandish news fakery by the mainstream media. It doesn’t take long for any intelligent, clear thinking individual to realize the mainstream media has been faking the news for decades.
CNN, in fact, can be best described as a “fake news theater organization” pretending to be engaged in legitimate journalism.
I even recorded a podcast on this very subject, discussing all the news fakery we’ve all been subjected to over the years by the deliberate fabrications of the corporate-controlled media.
Come to think of it, you probably need to go back and revisit what you think is really true about many historic events covered by the lying media: Oklahoma City, 9/11, Sandy Hook, the assassination of JFK and even the nuking of Japan in World War II.
In every case, what was reported by the lying mainstream media was a scripted narrative, not a serious investigation into what really happened.
US Lawmakers Move To Criminalize ‘Fake News, Propaganda’ On The Web
The witch hunt for “fake news” and “Russian propaganda” has been kicked up a notch, after the House passed a bill quietly tucked inside the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, designed to crack down on free speech and independent media.
Under "Title V - Matters relating to foreign countries,” the bill seeks to "counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence … carried out in coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly.”
It lists media manipulation as:
Establishment or funding of a front group
Disinformation and forgeries
Funding agents of influence
Incitement and offensive counterintelligence
“It is easy to see how this law, if passed by the Senate and signed by the president, could be used to target, threaten, or eliminate so-called ‘fake news’ websites, a list which has been used to arbitrarily define any website, or blog, that does not share the mainstream media’s proclivity to serve as the Public Relations arm of a given administration,” - Global Research reported.
The frightening attack on speech and independent media was opposed by only 30 members of the House, including Tulsi Gabbard, Thomas Massie, and Justin Amash - who stated that he fought against it.
“As long as the government engages in intelligence activities that violate our rights secured by our Constitution, any Intel Authorization bill should be opposed,” Justin Amash told Sputnik News.”
The bill must now pass through Senate, though a senior Rand Paul aide has told Sputnik News that the Senator is currently holding the intelligence bill for several reasons - and that they are looking at this specific issue very closely.
“Curiously, the bill which was passed on November 30, was introduced on November 22, two days before the Washington Post published its Nov. 24 article citing ‘experts’ who claim Russian propaganda helped Donald Trump get elected,” Zero Hedge noted.
The ‘experts’ the newspaper cited was a group called “PropOrNot,” although it have refused to name the experts behind the operation. The organization has promoted a Ukrainian hacker group on their Twitter feed.
PropOrNot also listed over 200 websites that they accuse of peddling Russian propaganda, including extremely popular news websites on all sides of the political spectrum, including The Drudge Report, Zero Hedge, TruthOut, Sputnik News, and even WikiLeaks.
Former presidential candidate Ron Paul’s website is also mentioned in many of the articles on so-called fake news, an issue that should be concerning to those who believe in free speech, including his son, Senator Rand Paul.
The elder Paul has long been a vocal supporter of freedom of speech, as it is enshrined in the Constitution of the United States, and he and his supporters have repeatedly been the target of finger pointing and demonization.
In 2012, a risk-assessment report from a Missouri-based fusion center stated that support for Ron Paul's presidential bid was a sign of membership in a “domestic terrorist group."
“For purposes of this definition it does not matter whether the sites listed here are being knowingly directed and paid by Russian intelligence officers, or whether they even knew they were echoing Russian propaganda at any particular point: If they meet these criteria, they are at the very least acting as bona-fide ‘useful idiots’ of the Russian intelligence services, and are worthy of further scrutiny,” the so-called experts cited by PropOrNot state.
Many of those listed on censorship hit lists are speaking out against the attempt to stop independent media.
“Information is dangerous and with this new reactionary shift of people making ban lists of so called ‘fake news,’ it shows us how afraid they are of knowledge and differences of opinion that spur people to have an open mind,” Luke Rudkowski, the owner of We Are Change, one of the sites on the blacklist, previously told Sputnik News.
“Information is very dangerous for the establishment status quo that tried to keep things the way they are.”
The bill, Zero Hedge notes, will soon proclaim much of the internet to be “criminal Russian propaganda if it is allowed to pass.
Rothschild’s Greater Israel Plan Is Effectively Defeated December 12 2016 | From: Geopolitics
On the eve of the complete recovery of Aleppo City, Rothschild puppet Obama issued a rather strange last minute attempt at saving the anti-Assad operation by granting a waiver for military restrictions on the nature of war materiel aid to its proxies, i.e. “moderate rebels” and Al-Nusra terror operatives.
A White House press release Thursday announced that foreign fighters in Syria supporting US special operations “to combat terrorism in Syria” would be excused from restrictions on military assistance.
“I hereby determine that the transaction, encompassing the provision of defense articles and services to foreign forces, irregular forces, groups, or individuals engaged in supporting or facilitating ongoing U.S. military operations to counter terrorism in Syria, is essential to the national security interests of the United States,”President Obama affirmed in the presidential determination and waiver.
The order delegates responsibility to the US secretary of state to work with and report to Congress on weapons export proposals, requiring 15 days’ notice before they are authorized.
Obama announced a similar waiver of the Arms Export Control Act in September 2013, following the Ghouta chemical attack in August of that year.
That order facilitated the transfer of US military weaponry to “select vetted members” of opposition forces battling Syrian President Bashar Assad, while Thursday’s order appears less narrow in scope.
Why would he issue such 11th hour executive order after he admitted the US incapacity to topple the Talibans in Afghanistan?
The most probable reason would be that once Aleppo is completely liberated, the full degree of US involvement on the ISIS misadventures in Syria and Iraq would be exposed for all the world to see.
“Civilians who escaped from terrorists talk about new crimes committed by militants of the so-called moderate opposition in eastern Aleppo. Cases of torture, public executions and massacres of the population have been confirmed.”
There wasn’t any Plan B in Syria because there wasn’t any need for it if only Hillary Clinton won the White House for the Cabal.
All they could do now is to keep on imposing all sorts of sanctions against all Syrian allies as if they still control everything just like before. Yet, while Russia and China have been buying more gold and other physical assets, the West keeps losing on the economic front, and they just don’t care because they, the policymakers, are all insulated from these crises.
While the politicians are barking at the Russian-led operations, US and EU companies are expressing their interest in getting back to the Russian market.
Carter Page, a former adviser to US President-elect Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, told Sputnik that US and European companies are interested to “get back” to the Russian market.
“There is a high level of interest amongst US as well as European companies to get back to the Russian market. This interest cuts across a diverse array of sectors,” Page told Sputnik.
He also commented on the recent Rosneft privatization deal. Page believes that efforts to punish the Russian oil giant have backfired and primarily hurt Western companies:
“The hostile efforts to punish Rosneft and their senior management team through Western sanctions have primarily hurt Western companies, rather than their intended target. This week’s innovative transaction underscores these constraints, as many other potential strategic investment partners were excluded,” Page said.
The Obama desperate countermeasures to salvage the dire Daesh situation in Syria, and the expression of unwillingness on the part of the business sector in the West are proof enough that the people are tired of wars and sanctions.
Still, tangible actions beyond the choice of “lesser evil” need to be done by the Europeans. The rise of the Pirate Party in Iceland is a good template.
Elsewhere in Asia, the Khazarian Empire continues to lose some of its cooperative regimes. South Korean President Park is impeached.
South Korean lawmakers voted overwhelmingly on Friday to impeach President Park Geun-hye over an influence-peddling scandal, setting the stage for her to become the country’s first elected leader to be expelled from office in disgrace.
The impeachment motion was carried by a wider-than-expect 234-56 margin in a secret ballot in parliament, meaning more than 60 of Park’s own conservative Saenuri Party members backed removing her. The votes of least 200 members of the 300-seat chamber were needed for the motion to pass.
The Constitutional Court must now decide whether to uphold the motion, a process that could take up to 180 days.
Russia and Japan are also inching closer to a settlement of the Kuril Islands dispute.
Andrei Fesyun, an expert at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow, said that setting up joint ventures on the islands was a highly complicated issue.
“There was an idea to build a spa hotel there and other things but there are more to this than just economic gain for business. For the Japanese the Kuril Islands are a very sensitive issue and what Prime Minister [Shinzo] Abe is now doing is nothing short of a heroic feat.
He is the first Japanese Premier to openly say that he wants to have better relations with Russia. I can imagine how much resistance he has to deal with, that’s why I don’t think we should expect any quick breakthroughs here. One thing is clear: we are now ready to meet and talk things over,” he said.
… Fumio Kishida arrived in Moscow on December 3 for a two-day visit ahead of President Vladimir Putin’s planned official trip to Japan later this month.
Lavrov said that Kishida’s meeting with President Putin on Friday showed directions in which Japanese-Russian relations should progress.
Meanwhile, Japan’s Foreign Ministry has expressed hope that President Vladimir Putin’s visit to Japan on December 15-16 would further strengthen relations between the two countries. According to the statement, Putin will meet with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Nagato and in Tokyo.
The fall of the South Korean puppet government, and Japan’s peaceful re-engagement with Russia, will make it impossible for the installation of the US THAAD missile system, in both countries.
We are hoping that all of these positive developments should not make way for any desperate attempt at pushing the red button, as predicted by multiple sources.
Putin’s Compelling Exposure Of The Egregious Lawless Behaviour Of The Western Dark Cabal In The Wake Of The True Revolution Of The Masses November 5 2016 | From: StankovUniversalLaw / Kremlin / Various Speech at the Valdai International DiscussionClub, October 27, 2016.
Tarja, Heinz, Thabo, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen,
It is a great pleasure to see you again. I want to start by thanking all of the participants in the Valdai International Discussion Club, from Russia and abroad, for your constructive part in this work, and I want to thank our distinguished guests for their readiness to take part in this open discussion.
Our esteemed moderator just wished me a good departure into retirement, and I wish myself the same when the time comes. This is the right approach and the thing to do. But I am not retired yet and am for now the leader of this big country. As such, it is fitting to show restraint and avoid displays of excessive aggressiveness. I do not think that this is my style in any case.
But I do think that we should be frank with each other, particularly here in this gathering. I think we should hold candid, open discussions, otherwise our dialogue makes no sense and would be insipid and without the slightest interest.
I think that this style of discussion is extremely needed today given the great changes taking place in the world. The theme for our meeting this year, The Future in Progress: Shaping the World of Tomorrow, is very topical.
Last year, the Valdai forum participants discussed the problems with the current world order. Unfortunately, little has changed for the better over these last months. Indeed, it would be more honest to say that nothing has changed.
The tensions engendered by shifts in distribution of economic and political influence continue to grow. Mutual distrust creates a burden that narrows our possibilities for finding effective responses to the real threats and challenges facing the world today.
Essentially, the entire globalisation project is in crisis today and in Europe, as we know well, we hear voices now saying that multiculturalism has failed.
I think this situation is in many respects the result of mistaken, hasty and to some extent over-confident choices made by some countries’ elites a quarter-of-a-century ago. Back then, in the late 1980s-early 1990s, there was a chance not just to accelerate the globalisation process but also to give it a different quality and make it more harmonious and sustainable in nature.
But some countries that saw themselves as victors in the Cold War, not just saw themselves this way but said it openly, took the course of simply reshaping the global political and economic order to fit their own interests.
In their euphoria, they essentially abandoned substantive and equal dialogue with other actors in international life, chose not to improve or create universal institutions, and attempted instead to bring the entire world under the spread of their own organisations, norms and rules.
They chose the road of globalisation and security for their own beloved selves, for the select few, and not for all. But far from everyone was ready to agree with this.
We may as well be frank here, as we know full well that many did not agree with what was happening, but some were unable by then to respond, and others were not yet ready to respond.
The result though is that the system of international relations is in a feverish state and the global economy cannot extricate itself from systemic crisis. At the same time, rules and principles, in the economy and in politics, are constantly being distorted and we often see what only yesterday was taken as a truth and raised to dogma status reversed completely.
If the powers that be today find some standard or norm to their advantage, they force everyone else to comply.
But if tomorrow these same standards get in their way, they are swift to throw them in the bin, declare them obsolete, and set or try to set new rules.
Thus, we saw the decisions to launch airstrikes in the centre of Europe, against Belgrade, and then came Iraq, and then Libya. The operations in Afghanistan also started without the corresponding decision from the United Nations Security Council.
In their desire to shift the strategic balance in their favour these countries broke apart the international legal framework that prohibited deployment of new missile defence systems.
They created and armed terrorist groups, whose cruel actions have sent millions of civilians into flight, made millions of displaced persons and immigrants, and plunged entire regions into chaos.
We see how free trade is being sacrificed and countries use sanctions as a means of political pressure, bypass the World Trade Organisation and attempt to establish closed economic alliances with strict rules and barriers, in which the main beneficiaries are their own transnational corporations.
And we know this is happening. They see that they cannot resolve all of the problems within the WTO framework and so think, why not throw the rules and the organisation itself aside and build a new one instead. This illustrates what I just said.
At the same time, some of our partners demonstrate no desire to resolve the real international problems in the world today.
In organisations such as NATO, for example, established during the Cold War and clearly out of date today, despite all the talk about the need to adapt to the new reality, no real adaptation takes place.
We see constant attempts to turn the OSCE, a crucial mechanism for ensuring common European and also trans-Atlantic security, into an instrument in the service of someone’s foreign policy interests. The result is that this very important organisation has been hollowed out.
But they continue to churn out threats, imaginary and mythical threats such as the ‘Russian military threat’.
This is a profitable business that can be used to pump new money into defence budgets at home, get allies to bend to a single superpower’s interests, expand NATO and bring its infrastructure, military units and arms closer to our borders.
Of course, it can be a pleasing and even profitable task to portray oneself as the defender of civilisation against the new barbarians. The only thing is that Russia has no intention of attacking anyone.
This is all quite absurd. I also read analytical materials, those written by you here today, and by your colleagues in the USA and Europe.
It is unthinkable, foolish and completely unrealistic. Europe alone has 300 million people. All of the NATO members together with the USA have a total population of 600 million, probably.
Putin Warns Americans: You're Being Distracted!
Of all the internal problems the Presidential candidates could solve - Clinton harps on about "Russian aggression" and mainstream media goes into Russophobic overdrive.
But Russia has only 146 million. It is simply absurd to even conceive such thoughts. And yet they use these ideas in pursuit of their political aims.
Another mythical and imaginary problem is what I can only call the hysteria the USA has whipped up over supposed Russian meddling in the American presidential election.
The United States has plenty of genuinely urgent problems, it would seem, from the colossal public debt to the increase in firearms violence and cases of arbitrary action by the police.
You would think that the election debates would concentrate on these and other unresolved problems, but the elite has nothing with which to reassure society, it seems, and therefore attempt to distract public attention by pointing instead to supposed Russian hackers, spies, agents of influence and so forth.
I have to ask myself and ask you too: Does anyone seriously imagine that Russia can somehow influence the American people’s choice? America is not some kind of ‘banana republic’, after all, but is a great power. Do correct me if I am wrong.
Putin expressed hopes that a new US president will work with him to rectify the dangerous deterioration in relations between the US and Russia. Obviously, this cannot happen if the new president is Hillary.
The question is, if things continue in this vein, what awaits the world? What kind of world will we have tomorrow? Do we have answers to the questions of how to ensure stability, security and sustainable economic growth? Do we know how we will make a more prosperous world?
Sad as it is to say, there is no consensus on these issues in the world today. Maybe you have come to some common conclusions through your discussions, and I would, of course, be interested to hear them.
But it is very clear that there is a lack of strategy and ideas for the future. This creates a climate of uncertainty that has a direct impact on the public mood.
Sociological studies conducted around the world show that people in different countries and on different continents tend to see the future as murky and bleak. This is sad. The future does not entice them, but frightens them. At the same time, people see no real opportunities or means for changing anything, influencing events and shaping policy.
Yes, formally speaking, modern countries have all the attributes of democracy: Elections, freedom of speech, access to information, freedom of expression. But even in the most advanced democracies the majority of citizens have no real influence on the political process and no direct and real influence on power.
People sense an ever-growing gap between their interests and the elite’s vision of the only correct course, a course the elite itself chooses.
The result is that referendums and elections increasingly often create surprises for the authorities.
People do not at all vote as the official and respectable media outlets advised them to, nor as the mainstream parties advised them to. Public movements that only recently were too far left or too far right are taking centre stage and pushing the political heavyweights aside.
At first, these inconvenient results were hastily declared anomaly or chance. But when they became more frequent, people started saying that society does not understand those at the summit of power and has not yet matured sufficiently to be able to assess the authorities’ labour for the public good.
Or they sink into hysteria and declare it the result of foreign, usually Russian, propaganda.
Friends and colleagues, I would like to have such a propaganda machine here in Russia, but regrettably, this is not the case. We have not even global mass media outlets of the likes of CNN, BBC and others. We simply do not have this kind of capability yet.
As for the claim that the fringe and populists have defeated the sensible, sober and responsible minority - we are not talking about populists or anything like that but about ordinary people, ordinary citizens who are losing trust in the ruling class. That is the problem.
By the way, with the political agenda already eviscerated as it is, and with elections ceasing to be an instrument for change but consisting instead of nothing but scandals and digging up dirt – who gave someone a pinch, who sleeps with whom, if you’ll excuse me.
This just goes beyond all boundaries. And honestly, a look at various candidates’ platforms gives the impression that they were made from the same mould – the difference is slight, if there is any.
It seems as if the elites do not see the deepening stratification in society and the erosion of the middle class, while at the same time, they implant ideological ideas that, in my opinion, are destructive to cultural and national identity.
And in certain cases, in some countries they subvert national interests and renounce sovereignty in exchange for the favour of the suzerain.
This begs the question: who is actually the fringe? The expanding class of the supranational oligarchy and bureaucracy, which is in fact often not elected and not controlled by society, or the majority of citizens, who want simple and plain things – stability, free development of their countries, prospects for their lives and the lives of their children, preserving their cultural identity, and, finally, basic security for themselves and their loved ones.
People are clearly scared to see how terrorism is evolving from a distant threat to an everyday one, how a terrorist attack could occur right near them, on the next street, if not on their own street, while any makeshift item – from a home-made explosive to an ordinary truck – can be used to carry out a mass killing.
Moreover, the terrorist attacks that have taken place in the past few years in Boston and other US cities, Paris, Brussels, Nice and German cities, as well as, sadly, in our own country, show that terrorists do not need units or organised structures – they can act independently, on their own, they just need the ideological motivation against their enemies, that is, against you and us.
The terrorist threat is a clear example of how people fail to adequately evaluate the nature and causes of the growing threats. We see this in the way events in Syria are developing. No one has succeeded in stopping the bloodshed and launching a political settlement process.
One would think that we would have begun to put together a common front against terrorism now, after such lengthy negotiations, enormous effort and difficult compromises.
But this has not happened and this common front has not emerged. My personal agreements with the President of the United States have not produced results either.
There were people in Washington ready to do everything possible to prevent these agreements from being implemented in practice.
This all demonstrates an unexplainable and I would say irrational desire on the part of the Western countries to keep making the same mistakes or, as we say here in Russia, keep stepping on the same rake.
We all see what is happening in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and a number of other countries. I have to ask, where are the results of the fight against terrorism and extremism? Overall, looking at the world as a whole, there are some results in particular regions and locations, but there is no global result and the terrorist threat continues to grow.
We all remember the euphoria in some capitals over the Arab Spring. Where are these fanfares today?
Russia’s calls for a joint fight against terrorism go ignored. What’s more, they continue to arm, supply and train terrorist groups in the hope of using them to achieve their own political aims.
This is a very dangerous game and I address the players once again: The extremists in this case are more cunning, clever and stronger than you, and if you play these games with them, you will always lose.
Colleagues, it is clear that the international community should concentrate on the real problems facing humanity today, the resolution of which will make our world a safer and more stable place and make the system of international relations fairer and more equal.
As I said, it is essential to transform globalisation from something for a select few into something for all. It is my firm belief that we can overcome these threats and challenges only by working together on the solid foundation of international law and the United Nations Charter.
Today it is the United Nations that continues to remain an agency that is unparalleled in representativeness and universality, a unique venue for equitable dialogue. Its universal rules are necessary for including as many countries as possible in economic and humanitarian integration, guaranteeing their political responsibility and working to coordinate their actions while also preserving their sovereignty and development models.
The NSA leaked the DNC emails because they hate Hillary - Judge Napolitano
We have no doubt that sovereignty is the central notion of the entire system of international relations. Respect for it and its consolidation will help underwrite peace and stability both at the national and international levels.
There are many countries that can rely on a history stretching back a thousand years, like Russia, and we have come to appreciate our identity, freedom and independence.
But we do not seek global domination, expansion or confrontation with anyone.
In our mind, real leadership lies in seeing real problems rather than attempting to invent mythical threats and use them to steamroll others.
This is exactly how Russia understands its role in global affairs today.
There are priorities without which a prosperous future for our shared planet is unthinkable and they are absolutely obvious. I won’t be saying anything new here.
First of all, there is equal and indivisible security for all states. Only after ending armed conflicts and ensuring the peaceful development of all countries will we be able to talk about economic progress and the resolution of social, humanitarian and other key problems.
It is important to fight terrorism and extremism in actuality. It has been said more than once that this evil can only be overcome by a concerted effort of all states of the world. Russia continues to offer this to all interested partners.
It is necessary to add to the international agenda the issue of restoring the Middle Eastern countries’ lasting statehood, economy and social sphere.
The mammoth scale of destruction demands drawing up a long-term comprehensive programme, a kind of Marshall Plan, to revive the war- and conflict-ridden area. Russia is certainly willing to join actively in these team efforts.
We cannot achieve global stability unless we guarantee global economic progress. It is essential to provide conditions for creative labour and economic growth at a pace that would put an end to the division of the world into permanent winners and permanent losers.
The rules of the game should give the developing economies at least a chance to catch up with those we know as developed economies.
We should work to level out the pace of economic development, and brace up backward countries and regions so as to make the fruit of economic growth and technological progress accessible to all.
Particularly, this would help to put an end to poverty, one of the worst contemporary problems.
It is also absolutely evident that economic cooperation should be mutually lucrative and rest on universal principles to enable every country to become an equal partner in global economic activities.
True, the regionalising trend in the world economy is likely to persist in the medium term. However, regional trade agreements should complement and expand not replace the universal norms and regulations.
Russia advocates the harmonisation of regional economic formats based on the principles of transparency and respect for each other’s interests. That is how we arrange the work of the Eurasian Economic Union and conduct negotiations with our partners, particularly on coordination with the Silk Road Economic Belt project, which China is implementing.
We expect it to promote an extensive Eurasian partnership, which promises to evolve into one of the formative centres of a vast Eurasian integration area. To implement this idea, 5+1 talks have begun already for an agreement on trade and economic cooperation between all participants in the process.
An important task of ours is to develop human potential. Only a world with ample opportunities for all, with highly skilled workers, access to knowledge and a great variety of ways to realise their potential can be considered truly free.
Only a world where people from different countries do not struggle to survive but lead full lives can be stable.
A decent future is impossible without environment protection and addressing climate problems. That is why the conservation of the natural world and its diversity and reducing the human impact on the environment will be a priority for the coming decades.
Another priority is global healthcare. Of course, there are many problems, such as large-scale epidemics, decreasing the mortality rate in some regions and the like. So there is enormous room for advancement.
All people in the world, not only the elite, should have the right to healthy, long and full lives.
This is a noble goal. In short, we should build the foundation for the future world today by investing in all priority areas of human development.
And of course, it is necessary to continue a broad-based discussion of our common future so that all sensible and promising initiatives are heard.
Colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, I am confident that you, as members of the Valdai Club, will actively take part in this work.
Your expertise enables you to understand all angles of the processes underway both in Russia and in the world, forecast and evaluate long-term trends, and put forward new initiatives and recommendations that will help us find the way to the more prosperous and sustainable future that we all badly need.
Clinton’s Leaked Emails Confirm Libya Plunder By Killing Gaddafi + Libya: From Africa’s Richest State Under Gaddafi, To Failed State After NATO Intervention October 29 2016 | From: Geopolitics / Various
It was broad daylight robbery and murder when US , France, and the rest of NATO, hunted down Muammar Qaddafi, and destroyed the most prosperous nation in Africa, i.e. Libya., in 2011.
The above picture is taken during the G8 Summit Italy, in 2009. Libya used to be one of few countries with sovereign central banks.
Muammar Qaddafi, President of the African Union at that time, was planning to issue gold denominated African dinar to replace Francs in Francophone Africa, to help his African brothers from centuries of economic plunder.
But that’s not all.
The West just hated Muammar Qaddafi’s internal policies which were kept from the rest of the world by Rothschild controlled mainstream media.
Here are some examples:
There is no electricity bill in Libya; electricity is free for all its citizens.
There is no interest on loans, banks in Libya are state-owned and loans given to all its citizens at zero percent interest by law.
Having a home considered a human right in Libya.
All newlyweds in Libya receive $60,000 dinar (U.S.$50,000) by the government to buy their first apartment so to help start up the family.
Education and medical treatments are free in Libya. Before Gaddafi only 25 percent of Libyans were literate. Today, the figure is 83 percent.
Should Libyans want to take up farming career, they would receive farming land, a farming house, equipments, seeds and livestock to kickstart their farms are all for free.
If Libyans cannot find the education or medical facilities they need, the government funds them to go abroad, for it is not only paid for, but they get a U.S.$2,300/month for accommodation and car allowance.
If a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidizes 50 percent of the price.
The price of petrol in Libya is $0.14 per liter.
Libya has no external debt and its reserves amounting to $150 billion are now frozen globally.
If a Libyan is unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession, as if he or she is employed, until employment is found.
A portion of every Libyan oil sale is credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens.
A mother who gives birth to a child receive U.S.$5,000.
40 loaves of bread in Libya costs $0.15.
25 percent of Libyans have a university degree.
Gaddafi carried out the world’s largest irrigation project, known as the Great Manmade River project, to make water readily available throughout the desert country.
These things Qaddafi was doing while the West maintains its exceptionalist mindset of being the epitome of freedom and democracy throughout the globe. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
These are the faces of the people that would murder him more than a year later.
Now, with the fall of CIA Daesh Islamic State in Syria, Libya is hosting the highest population of ISIS terrorists, and added itself to a growing number of failed states in the region.
ISIS Massacred Over 300 West African Migrants In Libya
The Khazarian Nazionist agenda in the Middle East, and the methods being used against the Arabs and Africans, are still the same methods that were used by Western pirates not too long ago in the Pacific, which includes:
Bribery of local overlords to help them loot the country; Saudi Arabia is a perfect example; Leaders in Latin America were also subjected to the same attacks by “economic hitmen”;
Removal of uncooperative leaders through color revolutions;
Total destruction of the State through divide and conquer by pitting clans and warlords against each other;
For the last 400 years, another resource rich country like the Philippines fall victim to all three methods.
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) has a “hit list” of Arab nations to conquer obviously with little regard for Arab casualties. Such hit list includes a total of seven countries beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan.
A high ranking official on the National Libyan Council states that factions have developed within it. In part this reflects the cultivation by France in particular of clients among the rebels. General Abdelfateh Younis is the leading figure closest to the French, who are believed to have made payments of an unknown amount to him. Younis has told others on the NLC that the French have promised they will provide military trainers and arms.
So far the men and materiel have not made an appearance. Instead, a few “risk assessment analysts” wielding clipboards have come and gone. Jabril, Jalil and others are impatient. It is understood that France has clear economic interests at stake. Sarkozy’s occasional emissary, the intellectual self-promoter Bernard Henri-Levy, is considered by those in the NLC who have dealt with him as a semi-useful, semi joke figure.
Rumors swept the NLC upper echelon this week that Qaddafi may be dead or maybe not.
Qaddafi has nearly bottomless financial resources to continue indefinitely, according to the latest report we have received:
On April 2, 2011 sources with access to advisors to Saif al-Islam Qaddafi stated in strictest confidence that while the freezing of Libya’s foreign bank accounts presents Muammar Qaddafi with serious challenges, his ability to equip and maintain his armed forces and intelligence services remains intact.
According to sensitive information available to this these individuals, Qaddafi’s government holds 143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver.
During late March, 2011 these stocks were moved to SABHA (south west in the direction of the Libyan border with Niger and Chad); taken from the vaults of the Libyan Central Bank in Tripoli. This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar.
This plan was designed to provide , the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA). (Source Comment: According to knowledgeable individuals this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7 billion.
French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05785522
Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya. According to these individuals Sarkozy’s plans are driven by the following issues:
A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production,
Increase French influence in North Africa,
Improve his internal political situation in France,
Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world, address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi’s long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in, Francophone Africa. )
On the afternoon of April 1, an individual with access to the National Libyan Council (NLC) stated in private that senior officials of the NLC believe that the rebel military forces are beginning to show signs of improved discipline and fighting spirit under some of the new military commanders, including Colonel Khalifha Haftar, the former commander of the anti - Qaddafi forces in the Libyan National Army (LNA). According to these sources, units defecting from Qaddafi’s force are also taking a greater role in the fighting on behalf of the rebels.
They were monitoring where the gold is heading, and they got what they wanted.
Fortunately for us, they were interrupted in Syria and Iran as the BRICS, and 180 more allied countries, decided to standup to these few old men and women with kleptocratic and eugenics tendencies.
But it is extremely important to remind ourselves that the United Nations and mainstream media were complicit to all of these high crimes committed against the sovereign people of Libya, and other countries.
We cannot afford to lower our guards however the covert NWO geopolitical game is played.
Libya: From Africa’s Richest State Under Gaddafi, To Failed State After NATO Intervention
It has been five years since the Western-backed assassination of Libya’s former president, Muammar Gaddafi, and the fall of one of Africa’s greatest nations.
In 1967 Colonel Gaddafi inherited one of the poorest nations in Africa; however, by the time he was assassinated, Gaddafi had turned Libya into Africa’s wealthiest nation. Libya had the highest GDP per capita and life expectancy on the continent. Less people lived below the poverty line than in the Netherlands.
After NATO’s intervention in 2011, Libya is now a failed state and its economy is in shambles. As the government’s control slips through their fingers and into to the militia fighters’ hands, oil production has all but stopped.
The militias variously local, tribal, regional, Islamist or criminal, that have plagued Libya since NATO’s intervention, have recently lined up into two warring factions. Libya now has two governments, both with their own Prime Minister, parliament and army.
On one side, in the West of the country, Islamist-allied militias took over control of the capital Tripoli and other cities and set up their own government, chasing away a parliament that was elected over the summer.
On the other side, in the East of the Country, the “legitimate” government dominated by anti-Islamist politicians, exiled 1,200 kilometers away in Tobruk, no longer governs anything.
The fall of Gaddafi’s administration has created all of the country’s worst-case scenarios: Western embassies have all left, the South of the country has become a haven for terrorists, and the Northern coast a center of migrant trafficking. Egypt, Algeria and Tunisia have all closed their borders with Libya.
This all occurs amidst a backdrop of widespread rape, assassinations and torture that complete the picture of a state that is failed to the bone.
America is clearly fed up with the two inept governments in Libya and is now backing a third force: long-time CIA asset, General Khalifa Hifter, who aims to set himself up as Libya’s new dictator.
Hifter, who broke with Gaddafi in the 1980s and lived for years in Langley, Virginia, close to the CIA’s headquarters, where he was trained by the CIA, has taken part in numerous American regime change efforts, including the aborted attempt to overthrow Gaddafi in 1996.
In 1991 the New York Times reported that Hifter may have been one of “600 Libyan soldiers trained by American intelligence officials in sabotage and other guerrilla skills…to fit in neatly into the Reagan Administration’s eagerness to topple Colonel Qaddafi”.
Hifter’s forces are currently vying with the Al Qaeda group Ansar al-Sharia for control of Libya’s second largest city, Benghazi.
Ansar al-Sharia was armed by America during the NATO campaign against Colonel Gaddafi. In yet another example of the U.S. backing terrorists backfiring, Ansar al-Sharia has recently been blamed by America for the brutal assassination of U.S. Ambassador Stevens.
Hifter is currently receiving logistical and air support from the U.S. because his faction envision a mostly secular Libya open to Western financiers, speculators, and capital.
Perhaps, Gaddafi’s greatest crime, in the eyes of NATO, was his desire to put the interests of local labour above foreign capital and his quest for a strong and truly United States of Africa.
In fact, in August 2011, President Obama confiscated $30 billion from Libya’s Central Bank, which Gaddafi had earmarked for the establishment of the African IMF and African Central Bank.
In 2011, the West’s objective was clearly not to help the Libyan people, who already had the highest standard of living in Africa, but to oust Gaddafi, install a puppet regime, and gain control of Libya’s natural resources.
He may not have been a Saint, but for over 40 years, Gaddafi promoted economic democracy and used the nationalized oil wealth to sustain progressive social welfare programs for all Libyans. Under Gaddafi’s rule, Libyans enjoyed not only free health-care and free education, but also free electricity and interest-free loans.
Now thanks to NATO’s intervention the health-care sector is on the verge of collapse as thousands of Filipino health workers flee the country, institutions of higher education across the East of the country are shut down, and black outs are a common occurrence in once thriving Tripoli.
One group that has suffered immensely from NATO’s bombing campaign is the nation’s women. Unlike many other Arab nations, women in Gaddafi’s Libya had the right to education, hold jobs, divorce, hold property and have an income. The United Nations Human Rights Council praised Gaddafi for his promotion of women’s rights.
When the colonel seized power in 1969, few women went to university. Today, more than half of Libya’s university students are women. One of the first laws Gaddafi passed in 1970 was an equal pay for equal work law.
Nowadays, the new “democratic” Libyan regime is clamping down on women’s rights. The new ruling tribes are tied to traditions that are strongly patriarchal.
Also, the chaotic nature of post-intervention Libyan politics has allowed free reign to extremist Islamic forces that see gender equality as a Western perversion.
Five years ago, NATO declared that the mission in Libya had been “one of the most successful in NATO history.”
Truth is, Western interventions have produced nothing but colossal failures in Libya, Iraq, and Syria.
Lest we forget, prior to western military involvement in these three nations, they were the most modern and secular states in the Middle East and North Africa with the highest regional women’s rights and standards of living.
A decade of failed military expeditions in the Middle East has left the American people in trillions of dollars of debt. However, one group has benefited immensely from the costly and deadly wars: America’s Military-Industrial-Complex.
Building new military bases means billions of dollars for America’s military elite. As Will Blum has pointed out, following the bombing of Iraq, the United States built new bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Saudi Arabia.
Where in the World is the US Military?
Following the bombing of Afghanistan, the United States is now building military bases in Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.
Following the recent bombing of Libya, the United States has built new military bases in the Seychelles, Kenya, South Sudan, Niger and Burkina Faso.
Given that Libya sits atop the strategic intersection of the African, Middle Eastern and European worlds, Western control of the nation, has always been a remarkably effective way to project power into these three regions and beyond.
NATO’s military intervention may have been a resounding success for America’s military elite and oil companies but for the ordinary Libyan, the military campaign may indeed go down in history as one of the greatest failures of the 21st century.
False Flag Attacks, Fake Terrorism & Engineered Wars