“What you have just heard; Only a handful of people on earth know, even in classified projects; Is highly compartmented. This is really way past TSSCI – Top Secret Special Compartmented Intelligence.” | Dr. Steven Greer
“What you have just heard; Only a handful of people on earth know, even in classified projects; Is highly compartmented. This is really way past TSSCI – Top Secret Special Compartmented Intelligence.” | Dr. Steven Greer
“I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself… That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. … The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States.”
-Osama bin Laden statement, published by BBC
In essence, this article is about a map, a video, a timeline, and a chart. Please, take a few minutes to carefully examine each.
I have asked dozens, if not hundreds, of Americans to please tell me why, exactly, America is at war with Afghanistan, the longest war in American history. Some say, “Because they attacked us.” Most have no answer, whatsoever, but instead ask me, “Why?” I respond by asking them what large oil-producing nation borders Afghanistan in the west. Some guess, “Iraq.” Nobody knows. I then ask what large oil-consuming nation borders Afghanistan on the East. Nobody knows. I tell them the answers are Iran (Israel’s and Saudi Arabia’s arch enemy) and China.
0 miles: Distance from Afghanistan to Iran
0 miles: Distance from Afghanistan to China
7,477 miles: Distance from Afghanistan to Washington, D.C.
Said a different way, the USA invaded and occupies a nation on the other side of the planet that fucking borders Iran and China, then complains about Persian and Chinese aggressive behavior in the Persian Gulf and South China Sea.
It is highly unlikely that you have seen the interviews in this 4 minute and 13-second video, a compilation of FDNY firefighters talking about the explosions inside the WTC on 9-11-2001. Watch it now, before it is memory holed by The Ministry of Truth.
President Donald J. Trump has expressed his desire to withdraw U.S. forces from Afghanistan.
Watch what they do, not what they say.
On September 7, 2019, President Trump revealed in a series of tweets that he had invited “major Taliban leaders” and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to meet with him separately at Camp David on the following day. He wrote that, because a Taliban attack killed several people, including a U.S. soldier, in Kabul on September 5, he had “immediately cancelled the meeting and called off peace negotiations.”
U.S. air operations have escalated considerably under the Trump Administration, as measured by the number of munitions released (see Figure 2). These operations have contributed to a sharp rise in civilian casualties; the U.N. reported that the third quarter of 2019 saw the highest quarterly civilian casualty toll since tracking began in 2009, with over 4,300 civilians killed or injured from July 1 to September 30.
US Army’s new card decks feature Russian, Chinese & Iranian weapons ‘to learn more about adversaries’
Peace, liberty, love, and truth,
Propaganda is essential to the Deep State’s operation…
The Deep State is the small number of people who control the organizations that donate the majority of the funds which finance the political careers of national officials, such as Presidents, Prime Ministers, and members of the national legislature. Almost always, the members of the Deep State are the controlling stockholders in the international corporations that are headquartered in the given nation; and, therefore, the Deep State is more intensely interested in international than in purely national matters. Since most of its members derive a large portion of their wealth from abroad, they need to control their nation’s foreign policies even more than they need to control its domestic policies. Indeed, if they don’t like their nation’s domestic policies, they can simply relocate abroad. But relocating the operations of their corporations would be far more difficult and costly to them. Furthermore, a nation’s public know and care far less about the nation’s foreign than about its domestic policies; and, so, the Deep State reign virtually alone on the nation’s international issues, such as: which nations will be treated as “allies” and which nations will instead be treated as “enemies.” Such designations are virtually never determined by a nation’s public. The public just trust what the Government says about such matters, like, for example, the US regime’s standard allegation, for decades, that “Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism”, which is clearly a blatant lie.
Iran, of course, is the world’s leading Shia nation, whereas Saudi Arabia is the world’s leading Sunni nation; and the US aristocracy are bonded to the aristocracies of both Saudi Arabia and Israel, against Iran. This allegation against Iran has always been promoted by the royal family who own Saudi Arabia, the Saud family, and also by the billionaires who control Israel, as well as by the billionaires who control the US So: this allegation is by the Deep State, which controls at least these three countries: US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.
But, as was just said, this allegation by the Deep State is false: On 9 June 2017, I headlined “All Islamic Terrorism Is Perpetrated by Fundamentalist Sunnis, Except Terrorism Against Israel” and listed 54 terrorist attacks which had been prominent in US-and-allied media during 2001-2017, and all of them except for a few that were against Israel were attacks by Sunni groups — not affiliated with Iran. Subsequently, Kent R. Kroeger’s 16 May 2019 study “Is Iran the biggest state sponsor of terrorism?” concluded that overwhelmingly the majority of terrorist attacks ever since 1994 have been by Sunni groups, but he attributed the attacks by Yemen’s Shiite Houthis against Sunni Saudi Arabia as being “terrorist” attacks, even though these were instead actually responses to the Sauds’ war against, and to eliminate, Houthis in Yemen. Also, Kroeger attributed those Houthi actions to “Iran,” which is absurd. (The Houthis simply did not like being exterminated. And the US, of course, supplied the weapons and the military planning, for this attempted ethnic cleansing operation.) There were many other methodological flaws. And yet, still, even with its methodological flaws, Kroeger, concluded: “The distorted US propagandized image of Iran’s aggression looming over the Middle East is, frankly, ‘fake news.’” This is how untrustworthy the Deep State’s ‘news’ actually is. The term “fake news” is, in fact, misleading (or itself fake news) if it is not referring to the Deep State’s propaganda. In my 27 November 2017 “How the US Came to Label Iran the Top State Sponsor of Terrorism”, I described specifically the Deep State’s operation that had created the phrase “Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism”. But this is the way the Deep State operates, routinely, on all international issues. It operates by deceit. This is how it achieves the consent of the public, whom it actually rules. This is entirely consistent with the scientific findings about the United States, that it is a dictatorship, not a democracy. All of the evidence is consistent.
The Deep State here is the US-and allied Deep State, no merely national organization. It consists mainly of America’s billionaires, plus of the billionaires in US-allied countries such as UK, France, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Israel — but many more (including, for example, in Honduras, Brazil, etc.). These people number fewer than 2,000 in total, and they do deals together, and their contacts with one-another are both direct person-to-person, and indirect by means of representatives or agents. However, America’s billionaires lead the US-and-allied Deep State. That’s to say, the leaders are among the 607 US billionaires, the people who mainly fund American national political campaigns and candidates — and these 607 individuals determine who will get an opportunity to become a US President or member of Congress, and who won’t. For example: these individuals don’t necessarily select the politician who will become America’s President, but they do select who will get the opportunity to be among the serious contenders for that position. (Basically, what the mullahs do in Iran, these super-rich do in America. Whereas in Iran the clergy rule, in America the aristocracy rule.)
One, in particular, is George Soros, and this article will detail the views of one of his many beneficiaries. Another of these billionaires is Charles Koch, but he will not be discussed here, and inside the United States he is popularly considered to be an enemy of George Soros, only because the two men oppose each other on domestic issues. (Billionaires tend to be much more concerned with, and united about, foreign affairs than about domestic affairs, though they do oppose both their taxation and their regulation — they are for ‘free markets’, both domestically and abroad, and yet they also favor imposition of economic sanctions against countries which resist becoming controlled by them, and so they don’t really favor free markets except to the extent that free markets favor their own increase in power and thus tend toward oligopoly and away from competition.) Both men are much more alike than different, and both represent what’s called “neoliberalism,” which is the universal ideology of billionaires, or at least of all billionaires who donate to (i.e., invest in) politicians. Only few billionaires don’t invest in politicians; and, though politicians disagree with one-another, almost all of them are neoliberals, because politicians who aren’t that are not funded by the Deep State (the billionaires). The foreign policies of neoliberals are called “neoconservative” and this means supporting regime-change in any country that’s labeled by billionaires and their government an “enemy” nation. So, “neoconservative” is merely an extension of “neoliberal”: it favors extending neoliberalism to other nations — it is internationally aggressive neoliberalism; it is imperialistic neoliberalism. It is fascism, but so is neoliberalism itself fascist; the difference between the two is that neoconservatism is the imperialistic extension of fascism — it is the imperialistic fascism that, in World War II, was represented by the three Axis powers — Germany, Italy, and Japan — not by the purely domestic fascism that was represented by Spain. Whereas Spain was merely neoliberal, the Axis were also neoconservative (expansionist neoliberal), and the latter is what the Allies in WW II were warring against. But now the US has emerged as the world’s leading neoconservative regime, invading and occupying country after country, none of which had ever invaded nor even threatened to invade the United States. Propaganda is necessary in order to ‘justify’ doing that. This article will describe how that’s done.
The Deep State doesn’t concern domestic issues, because virtually all of its members control international corporations, and the Deep State is almost entirely about international issues: foreign policies, diplomacy, military issues, and international spying agencies called “intelligence agencies” — extending the empire. The Deep State controls all of that, regardless of what Party is nominally in power. (The public care little about foreign policy, pay little attention to it, and believe the government when it alleges that “national security” is about protecting them, and not about expanding the power and wealth of the billionaires.)
The dictatorship of the US Deep State really is more international than national; it provides the continuity in international relations, when it chooses and defines which nations (which foreign governments) are “allies” (meaning “we sell arms to them”) and which are instead “enemies” (meaning “we should sanction them and maybe even bomb them”). Both allies and enemies are essential in order for the military-industrial-press-government complex (here: “MIPGC”) to thrive, and the Deep State controls the entire MIPGC. In other words: the Deep State is an international empire, and, as such, its supreme aspiration is to conquer (via subversion, sanctions, coups, and/or invasions) all countries that it labels as “enemies.”
The way that the Deep State views things, there is no need for an ‘enemy’ to threaten or invade the United States in order for it to be “an enemy,” but, instead, the United States and its allies possess a God-given right to impose sanctions against, or coups overthrowing, or invasions of, any country they choose, so long as they can criticize that other country for being a ‘dictatorship’, or for ‘violating human rights’, or for otherwise doing what the Deep State itself actually does more than any other government on this planet does (and particularly does it to its selected ‘enemies’ — such as were Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, and any other country that’s either friendly toward, or else an ally of, Russia, which is the other nuclear super-power, and the Deep State’s central target).
However, though those few super-wealthy individuals (in addition to the general public’s taxes) fund its operations, their many operatives are true-believing followers (believers in neoliberalism-neoconservatism), and this is the reason why the masters fund those individuals’ careers. It’s why these masters provide the platforms and personal connections and employment which enable the true-believers to advance, while opponents of the Deep State (i.e., opponents of the billionaires’ collective dictatorship) cannot find any billionaires to patronize them. In a society that has extremely concentrated wealth, this means that there will be virtual penury for opponents of the billionaires’ collective dictatorship. Especially the major politicians need patrons amongst the aristocracy, the billionaires, in order to have successful careers.
The beneficiary of the Deep State who will be exemplified, discussed, and finally quoted, here, will be Jacek Rostowski, who is also known as Jan Anthony, and as Jan Anthony Vincent-Rostowski. Wikipedia’s article on him opens:
Jan Anthony Vincent-Rostowski, also known as Jacek Rostowski (Polish pronunciation: [ˈjan ˈvint͡sɛnt rɔsˈtɔfskʲi]; born 30 April 1951, London) is a British-Polish economist and politician who served as Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Poland.
He was a candidate for Change UK in London at the 2019 European Parliament election in the United Kingdom.
It also says:
From 1995 he has been Professor of Economics and was the head of the Department of Economics at the Central European University in Budapest during the periods: 1995–2000 and 2005–2006. …
Rostowski was a member of Britain’s Conservative Party. In the beginning of 2010, it was announced that two months prior he has become member of the Civic Platform party (PO). In the wake of the Parliamentary Elections of 2011, he became Member of Parliament, being elected from the list of Civic Platform Party (PO).
In late 2015, Prime Minister Ewa Kopacz appointed Rostowski as her top political adviser.
Vincent-Rostowski has published around 40 academic papers on European enlargement, monetary policy, currency policy and the transformation of post communist economies. He is the author of academic books including Macroeconomic Instability in Post-Communist Countries published by Oxford University Press.
On November 3rd, the Ukrainian ‘news’-medium Apostrophe interviewed him, and published the interview in Ukrainian. (The interviewee isn’t fluent in Ukrainian, but the article’s translator into Ukrainian isn’t identified.) What will be posted here is an English translation of that Ukrainian original.
Apostrophe started in August 2014.
The site was aimed to prepare informational and analytical materials, presentations of important events in politics, economics, society and culture. Apostrophe’s editorial policy is based on principles of impartiality, precision and veracity, velocity, objectivity and balance in the presentation of information. Apostrophe sticks to journalism ethical standards. That is why published materials should not propagate violence, cruelty, cause racial, national or religious hatred. Apostrophe is a proponent of the common humanism values, peace, democracy, social progress and human rights.
The project functions with the direct participation and use of the resources of the International Centre for Policy Studies (ICPS). Apostrophe’s idea lies within the framework of synergy between journalists and analysts.
ICPS was founded in 1994 upon the initiative of the Prague-based Open Society Institute (OSI). At that moment, ICPS was the first independent think-tank in Ukraine.
The Open Society Institute was founded by George Soros. He also founded the Central European University in Budapest, where the interviewee was employed for five years.
Those are just the obvious ways in which the interviewee had been funded and advanced by Mr. Soros.
Soros also had helped to fund the overthrow of the democratically elected and internationally non-aligned President of Ukraine in 2014 and to replace him with a nazi anti-Russian regime which serves as a terrific asset for the US-and-allied Deep State, because of Ukraine’s having a 1,625-mile border with the country that the US-installed regime in Ukraine hates: Russia (hates it because the Deep State craves, above all, to control also the other nuclear super-power; so, this is hatred-on-command).
A basic presumption of that interview, both by the interviewer and by the interviewee, is the Russian Government’s being wrong in everything, and the Ukrainian Government’s — the regime which Obama (another of Soros’s beneficiaries) had installed — being right in everything. Here is this interview, as an illustrative example of how propaganda is professionally done:
ORIGINAL OF THIS ARTICLE (in Ukrainian) (now translated here into English):
Apostrophe: How would you describe the current state of security in the European region?
Jan Anthony: Since 2014, military security has become a more important topic of discussion in Europe. After all, the events in Crimea and Donbass caused shock. After a long period of time, when defence issues were put on the back burner, they are now again becoming an important factor in the European security environment. Now there are serious problems requiring high priority and serious solutions. And, of course, there are other problems that relate to the same issue — the fight against terrorism, for example.
The EU and NATO work very closely together to prepare for different types of threats. Now there is a return to a potential military conflict with Russia. In addition, there is an unsustainable security situation in the south, in Africa, because of the conflict in Libya, and in the Sahara. They can also pose a terrorist threat. Therefore, the issue of European security has become more complex than it was 5-10 years ago.
“You specialize in managing military conflicts. How do you think the conflict in Ukraine can be solved?
“Conflict management and conflict resolution are different things. Now I see attempts to create a more positive context in the Donbass issue. We need to return to the Minsk agreements as a basic resolution on the conflict. As you know, discussions are under way on the so-called Steinmeier formula. Therefore, now there is an opportunity to return to the discussion of how the Minsk agreements should be implemented. There are serious questions about the sequence of points — what should be done in the first place. And there is also the question of how to confirm the parties’ compliance with their obligations, because now there is a very low level of trust among the participants. Therefore, everything that will be done, it is necessary to immediately demonstrate — behold, it is fulfilled.
“How about the implementation of Minsk? Especially given that it has not worked for almost 5 years.
“As I see it, no one is discussing any alternatives now. Perhaps among the people discussing ways to implement the agreements, there are other options, but I have no idea what they can be. The Minsk agreements are still in the spotlight.
“Let’s talk about Crimea. What are the threats on the peninsula?
“With Crimea it’s a different story than with Donbass. In Crimea there are facilities that can be a base for Russian nuclear weapons, including the Russian navy, capable of carrying nuclear weapons in the Black Sea. [NOTE HERE: Obama’s takeover of Ukraine was originally aimed at taking over Russia’s naval base in Crimea and installing an even larger US naval base there, against Russia.]
“So the main threat is nuclear weapons?
“Of course, it is an extremely serious threat by its nature. Any use of it would be disastrous.
“Will the Kremlin decide to use these weapons in the near future? Or is it just a way to intimidate the West?
“The primary objective of nuclear weapons is deterrence. This is the main goal with which Russia placed it in Crimea.
“Is it possible to compare the situation with the Cuban crisis?
“I would not say that these two situations are similar. There the crisis came very, very close to escalating into an armed conflict. I don’t think we’re going to get to that level of confrontation. [NOTE HERE: Both the interviewer and the interviewee ignore that instead of the Soviet Union’s 1962 attempt to place nuclear missiles on the island of Cuba 95 miles from America’s border, the US ploy now is to place its nuclear missiles right on Russia’s 1625-mile border with Russia — the discussants’ assumption reverses the actual threat, and thus insults their readers’ — or else their own — basic intelligence.] But now it is a very dangerous situation. We need to find more stable mechanisms that cannot be developed by comparing the situation to the Cuban crisis.
“How can the Western world force Russia to take its weapons from Crimea?
“Of course, the sanctions have had an effect. I’m sure they’ll stay — I don’t see any reason to take them off. International pressure on Russia will continue. Normalization of relations with it is impossible as long as the current situation in Crimea remains. And since Russia has no intention of leaving the peninsula, we will live for a long time in difficult relations with it, including sanctions, as well as cooperation of Western countries, taking into account possible military confrontation.
“Let’s recall the attack on Ukrainian military vessels in the Kerch Strait, which occurred almost a year ago. How can we avoid the threat of further Russian attacks on Ukrainian and foreign ships?
“Ukraine has lost control of part of its navigation, as well as guaranteed access to the Sea of Azov — and this is a complex problem. This issue must therefore remain the focus of international attention. Ukraine should have access to the water area and carry out commercial operations in ports. Georgia faced the same problem — the loss of control over navigation in a certain area. A special mechanism is needed to address these issues. But I have no suggestions on what it should be.
“Russia recently blocked international waters in the Black Sea and thus blocked trade routes. How should the international community respond to such behaviour?
“We must respect the International Convention on Navigation. We must continue to conduct military exercises in the Black Sea and it is important that NATO countries participate in them. Of course, there remains a risk that Russia will also organize its exercises. I think the ships will enjoy the freedom of navigation established by the International Convention. Some issues may need to be discussed more broadly for the sake of a future long-term convention. We need to make it more relevant to modern security requirements. It is important to revise time limits on stay in the Black Sea for NATO ships. Nato’s defence and deterrence plans should also be changed. NATO must have greater access to the Black Sea and its naval forces spend more time there.
“Does the need to renegotiate international agreements on the weakness of international institutions, as well as their unpreparedness for strikes by Russia, speak?
“Many countries have entered into bilateral agreements with Russia to ensure their confidence in the use of the sea. I think such deals need to be modernized, as well as add another agreement, which spells out a mechanism for discussing maritime incidents on the basis of international organizations, for example, under the OSCE umbrella. This will avoid misunderstandings that may arise from disregard for the rules.
In the case of deliberate violations, for example, when military exercises block part of the Black Sea, other measures of influence will have to be used. And in that case, there must be a clear international response. If you look at the 2014 NATO summit at Brussels, there have been decisions that have had a very tough response in the event of any crisis. The only question is what to do to Ukraine, which is not a member of the Alliance and does not obey its decisions.
“Regarding Russian military power. During the “Grom-2019” exercises, which were held recently under the personal guidance of Vladimir Putin, the nuclear submarine cruiser K-44 “Ryazan” fired only one ballistic intercontinental missile R-29R. The other missile just didn’t come out of the mine. This is not the first time that the Russian army has failed. So the question arises, is Russia really a threat to peace, all this is just a demonstration?
“Russia can solve the problems that you have named. But no one doubts that it has an extremely powerful nuclear arsenal. Despite some problems with weapons, Russia is still very strong.
“The Kremlin has promised to develop short- and medium-range missiles and deploy them to confront the West (in fact, they already exist — Iskanders). Does this mean that now the situation in Europe is close to the state of the Cold War, when the USSR and the West deployed iCBM for mutual deterrence?
“Yes, Russia has already developed and deployed the ICBM. We don’t know if they’re all equipped with nuclear weapons. But for the balance of power, NATO must have a significant force with nuclear weapons.
There are differences with the Cold War. Then there was complete separation and no contact between East and West. And now we have significant economic cooperation. It is still possible to hold political discussions, including with the participation of intergovernmental organizations. So now the situation is not quite the same as during the Cold War. But, as I said, the security situation in Europe is very difficult and relations with Russia deteriorate. The absence of signs that this deterioration is coming to an end is worrying. There are no very effective ways to improve relations with Russia. Therefore, there are different reasons for concern.
“The Kremlin sent the S-400 division and the Panzir-S battery to Serbia to the Russian Air Defense Forces. This is, in fact, Russian military exercises near the EU. [NOTE HERE: The problem isn’t that Russia is moving too close to the EU — such as the discussants imply — but that NATO has moved right up to Russia’s borders. Again, the presumption insults readers’ — and/or their own — basic intelligence.] Is this preparation for a strike against the West?
“Serbia’s position is that they want to have good relations with both their neighbors and NATO countries, but also with Russia. Serbia is also training with NATO countries. Serbia wants a balance of power, but in the event of a conflict it will support EU membership. It is politically and economically related to Western countries. Therefore, I do not believe that such exercises are the Kremlin’s preparation for an attack on the EU.
“How would you assess the military threats to Europe in Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova?
“It is difficult to answer because these are three different countries and the situation in each of them is completely different from the other.
“Ukraine and Moldova have similar situations. Russian soldiers are still in Transnistria – the only difference is that the conflict there is frozen.
“Yes, they are there, but they do not fight like in Ukraine.
Do you believe that this frozen conflict can continue?
“Today we think it’s not very likely.
“Is Europe expecting a military strike from Russia?
“No, we don’t expect it and we don’t expect it. But we do not rule it out, we allow it in our defense plans. Preparations are under way for these attacks, which means that their probability is reduced.
“Russia invests heavily in European political parties like the French National Front or the League of the North in Italy. Is there any evidence that the Kremlin is investing in “militia” in EU countries and supplying weapons to Europe to shake up the situation. Perhaps it is funding crime to influence the situation in the EU?
“There have been many investigations into ties with the Kremlin, in particular financial ties from politicians. The EU discusses a lot of cyber threats, the possibility of attacks on infrastructure, as well as information attacks. But I have never seen the Kremlin supply weapons to non-state organizations, especially criminal groups.
“Russia has taken up the settlement of the issue in Syria. What’s going on out there now?
“Officially, Russia is helping Bashar al-Assad’s forces gain control over Syrian territory. But what is happening now is, from the Kremlin’s point of view, the formation of a single strategic space, including the Black Sea and the eastern Mediterranean. Russia has free access to the Black Sea and now the Russian Navy has gained much greater access to the waters of the eastern Mediterranean. They plan to use this strategic space for a possible confrontation with NATO forces.
“How can this affect Europe?
“It’s a very difficult question. One issue of concern is the influx of refugees and temporarily displaced persons to Turkey and Europe. On the other hand, again, Russia’s creation of a single strategic space, interference in the Mediterranean.
“Let’s go back to Ukraine. You are a nuclear safety expert. We have many nuclear power plants, can they pose a threat to the world in the event of full-scale aggression?
“Yes, this is a very big threat, first of all for Ukraine itself, then for the rest of the world. One of the Ukrainian officials stated that this is why there was a significant revision of the concept of Ukraine’s security. It includes so-called “internal threats” to nuclear equipment and the creation of national protection, will protect and defend nuclear reactors. I think that the threat to the infrastructure of the nuclear power plant in Ukraine is real. But the Ukrainian government takes this seriously and takes the necessary measures.
As can be clearly seen there, the basic method of the Deep State’s propagandists is to ask questions which have assumptions that are the reverse of reality, and to answer these questions in ways that confirm those falsehoods.
This is what many millions of people get paid to do.
And it creates “Big Brother” or the Deep State here, just as, in 1948, George Orwell might have been thinking that it would do in 1984. And a good example of how the Deep State ‘justifies’ itself in America, is shown here.
By Chris Hedges
Abridged by Lasha Darkmoon with brief commentary
November 11, 2019
“Trump committed political heresy when he dared to point out the folly of unchecked militarism. He will pay for it. The war between the deep state and Trump began the moment he was elected.” — Chris Hedges
Our democracy is not in peril. We do not live in a democracy. The image of our democracy is in peril.
Trump’s most unforgivable sin in the eyes of the deep state is his criticism of the empire’s endless wars, even though he lacks the intellectual and organizational skills to oversee a disengagement.
The deep state committed the greatest strategic blunder in American history when it invaded and occupied Afghanistan and Iraq. Such fatal military fiascos, a feature of all late empires, are called acts of “micro-militarism.” Dying empires historically squander the last capital they have, economic, political and military, on futile, intractable and unwinnable conflicts until they collapse.
They seek in these acts of micro-militarism to recapture a former dominance and lost stature. Disaster piles on disaster. The architects of our imperial death spiral, however, are untouchable.
The clueless generals and politicians who propel the empire into expanding chaos and fiscal collapse are successful at one thing—perpetuating themselves. No one is held accountable. A servile press treats these mandarins with near-religious veneration. Generals and politicians, many of whom should have been cashiered or put on trial, are upon retirement given lucrative seats on the boards of the weapons manufacturers, for whom these wars are immensely profitable. They are called upon by a fawning press to provide analysis to the public of the mess they created. They are held up as exemplars of integrity, selfless service and patriotism.
LD: The trendy phrase “deep state” appears to be the latest euphemism for international Jewry and their elite non-Jewish collaborators in the big corporations and military-industrial complex. These include the generals, bankers, corporatists, lobbyists, intelligence chiefs, government bureaucrats, technocrats, evangelical Christians, and the fawning presstitutes of the main stream media. All these gentile sycophants of Big Jewry have one thing in common: they are all passionate Zionists for whom the state of Israel is sacrosanct. They would rather see America go up in flames than suffer the loss of a singe acre of stolen land in Occupied Palestine. [LD]
After nearly two decades, every purported objective used to justify our wars in the Middle East has been upended.
The invasion of Afghanistan was supposed to wipe out al-Qaida. Instead, al-Qaida migrated to fill the power vacuums the deep state created in the wars in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen. The war in Afghanistan morphed into a war with the Taliban, which now controls most of the country and is threatening the corrupt regime we prop up in Kabul.
The deep state orchestrated the invasion of Iraq, which had nothing to do with the attacks of 9/11. It confidently predicted it could build a Western-style democracy and weaken Iran’s power in the region. Instead, it destroyed Iraq as a unified country, setting warring ethnic and religious factions against each other. Iran, which is closely tied to the dominant Shiite government in Baghdad, emerged even stronger.
Then there is the fiasco in Syria. The deep state armed “moderate” rebels in Syria in an effort to topple President Bashar Assad, but when it realized it could not control the jihadists—to whom it had provide some $500 million in weapons and assistance—the deep state began to bomb them and arm Kurdish rebels to fight them. These Kurds would later be betrayed by Trump.
Next was Yemen. The “war on terror” spread like a plague from Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya to Yemen, which after five years of war is suffering one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters. The financial cost for this misery and death is between $5 trillion and $8 trillion. The human cost runs into hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded, shattered cities, towns and infrastructure and millions of refugees.
Trump committed political heresy when he dared to point out the folly of unchecked militarism. He will pay for it. The deep state intends to replace him with someone—perhaps Mike Pence, as morally and intellectually vacuous as Trump—who will do what he is told.
The removal of Trump from office would not threaten corporate power. It would not restore civil liberties, including our right to privacy and due process.
It would not demilitarize the police or champion the rights of the working class.
It would not impede the profits of the fossil fuel and banking industries.
It would not address the climate emergency.
It would not disrupt the warrantless surveillance of the public.
It would not end extraordinary renditions, the kidnapping of those around the globe considered to be enemies of the state.
It would not halt the assassinations by militarized drones.
It would not halt the separation of children from their parents and the warehousing of these children in filthy, overcrowded conditions.
It would not remedy the consolidation of wealth and power by the oligarchs and the further impoverishment of the citizenry.
The expansion of our prison system and of black sites throughout the world, sites where we torture, would continue, as would the gunning down of poor, unarmed citizens in urban wastelands.
Most importantly, the catastrophic foreign wars that have resulted in a series of failed states and wasted trillions of taxpayer dollars, would remain sacrosanct, enthusiastically embraced by the leaders of the two ruling parties, puppets of the deep state.
The impeachment of Trump, despite the enthusiasm of the liberal elite, is mostly cosmetic. The entire political and governmental system is corrupt. Corporate lobbyists write the laws. The courts enforce them. There is no way in the American political system to vote against the interests of Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, AT&T, Amazon, Microsoft, Walmart, Alphabet, Facebook, Apple, Exxon Mobil, Lockheed Martin, UnitedHealth Group or Northrop Grumman.
We, the American public, are spectators. An audience. Who will be seated when the game of musical chairs stops?
Will Trump be able to hold on to power?
Will Pence be the new president?
Or will the deep state elevate a political hack like Joe Biden . . . or, God forbid, Hillary Clinton?
And what if the deep state fails?
The war between the deep state and Trump began the moment he was elected. Former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper—both now paid news cable commentators—along with former FBI head James Comey soon would accuse Trump of being a tool of Moscow. Intelligence agencies leaked salacious stories about “pee tapes” and blackmail, plus reports of “repeated contacts” with Russian intelligence. Brennan, Clapper and Comey were quickly joined by other former intelligence officials. Their attacks were then amplified by former senior military leaders.
The Russia conspiracy, after the release of the Mueller report, proved to be a dud. The deep state actors, however, were re-energized by Trump’s decision to pressure the government of Ukraine to investigate Biden. Trump, this time, seems to have given his deep state enemies enough rope to hang him.
The impeachment of Trump marks a new and frightening chapter in American politics. The deep state has shown its face. It has made a public declaration that it will not tolerate dissent, although Trump’s dissent is rhetorical and ineffectual.
The effort to impeach Trump sends an ominous message to the American left. Its resources to destroy those on the left are nearly inexhaustible.
There are no internal or external checks on the deep state.
The deep state will further expand the social inequality that has thrust half of Americans into poverty or near poverty, strip us of our remaining civil liberties and feed the rapacious appetites of the military and the war industry.
The resources of the state will be squandered as the federal deficit balloons. The frustration and feelings of stagnation among a disempowered and neglected citizenry, which contributed to the election of Trump, will mount.
There will come a moment of reckoning, as there has during the last few days in Lebanon and Chile. Social unrest is inevitable. Any population can be pushed only so far.
Trump, in the end, is not the problem. We are.
And if the deep state fails to rid itself of Trump it will, however reluctantly, use him to carry out its dirty work.
“Trump, if he manages to survive, will get his military parades.
We will get, with or without Trump, tyranny.”
— Chris Hedges
(TRI Opinion) — All of us are in danger.
In an age of prosecutions for thought crimes, pre-crime deterrence programs, and government agencies that operate like organized crime syndicates, there is a new kind of tyranny being imposed on those who dare to expose the crimes of the Deep State, whose reach has gone global.
The Deep State has embarked on a ruthless, take-no-prisoners, all-out assault on truth-tellers.
Activists, journalists and whistleblowers alike are being terrorized, traumatized, tortured and subjected to the fear-inducing, mind-altering, soul-destroying, smash-your-face-in tactics employed by the superpowers-that-be.
Take Julian Assange, for example.
Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks—a website that published secret information, news leaks, and classified media from anonymous sources—was arrested on April 11, 2019, on charges of helping U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning access and leak more than 700,000 classified military documents that portray the U.S. government and its military as reckless, irresponsible and responsible for thousands of civilian deaths.
Included among the leaked Manning material were the Collateral Murder video (April 2010), the Afghanistan war logs (July 2010), the Iraq war logs (October 2010), a quarter of a million diplomatic cables (November 2010), and the Guantánamo files (April 2011).
The Collateral Murder leak included gunsight video footage from two U.S. AH-64 Apache helicopters engaged in a series of air-to-ground attacks while air crew laughed at some of the casualties. Among the casualties were two Reuters correspondents who were gunned down after their cameras were mistaken for weapons and a driver who stopped to help one of the journalists. The driver’s two children, who happened to be in the van at the time it was fired upon by U.S. forces, suffered serious injuries.
This is morally wrong.
“What happens to Julian Assange and to Chelsea Manning is meant to intimidate us, to frighten us into silence. By defending Julian Assange, we defend our most sacred rights. Speak up now or wake up one morning to the silence of a new kind of tyranny. The choice is ours.”—John Pilger, investigative journalist
It shouldn’t matter which nation is responsible for these atrocities: there is no defense for such evil perpetrated in the name of profit margins and war profiteering.
In true Orwellian fashion, however, the government would have us believe that it is Assange and Manning who are the real criminals for daring to expose the war machine’s seedy underbelly.
Since his April 2019 arrest, Assange has been locked up in a maximum-security British prison—in solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day—pending extradition to the U.S., where if convicted, he could be sentenced to 175 years in prison.
Whatever is being done to Assange behind those prison walls—psychological torture, forced drugging, prolonged isolation, intimidation, surveillance—it’s wearing him down.
In court appearances, the 48-year-old Assange appears disoriented, haggard and zombie-like.
“In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law,” declared Nils Melzer, the UN special rapporteur on torture.
It’s not just Assange who is being made to suffer, however.
Manning, who was jailed for seven years from 2010 to 2017 for leaking classified documents to Wikileaks, was arrested in March 2019 for refusing to testify before a grand jury about Assange, placed in solitary confinement for almost a month, and then sentenced to remain in jail either until she agrees to testify or until the grand jury’s 18-month term expires.
Federal judge Anthony J. Trenga of the Eastern District of Virginia also fined Manning $500 for every day she remained in custody after 30 days, and $1,000 for every day she remains in custody after 60 days, a chilling—and financially crippling—example of the government’s heavy-handed efforts to weaponize fines and jail terms as a means of forcing dissidents to fall in line.
This is how the police state deals with those who challenge its chokehold on power.
Make no mistake: the government is waging war on journalists and whistleblowers for disclosing information relating to government misconduct that is within the public’s right to know.
Yet while this targeted campaign—aided, abetted and advanced by the Deep State’s international alliances—is unfolding during President Trump’s watch, it began with the Obama Administration’s decision to revive the antiquated, hundred-year-old Espionage Act, which was intended to punish government spies, and instead use it to prosecute government whistleblowers.
Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has not merely continued the Obama Administration’s attack on whistleblowers. It has injected this war on truth-tellers and truth-seekers with steroids and let it loose on the First Amendment.
In May 2019, Trump’s Justice Department issued a sweeping new “superseding” secret indictment of Assange—hinged on the Espionage Act—that empowers the government to determine what counts as legitimate journalism and criminalize the rest, not to mention giving “the government license to criminally punish journalists it does not like, based on antipathy, vague standards, and subjective judgments.”
Noting that the indictment signaled grave dangers for freedom of the press in general, media lawyer Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., warned, “The indictment would criminalize the encouragement of leaks of newsworthy classified information, criminalize the acceptance of such information, and criminalize publication of it.”
[I]t doesn’t matter whether you think Assange is a journalist, or whether WikiLeaks is a news organization. The theory that animates the indictment targets the very essence of journalistic activity: the gathering and dissemination of information that the government wants to keep secret. You don’t have to like Assange or endorse what he and WikiLeaks have done over the years to recognize that this indictment sets an ominous precedent and threatens basic First Amendment values…. With only modest tweaking, the very same theory could be invoked to prosecute journalists for the very same crimes being alleged against Assange, simply for doing their jobs of scrutinizing the government and reporting the news to the American people.
We desperately need greater scrutiny and transparency, not less.
Indeed, transparency is one of those things the shadow government fears the most. Why? Because it might arouse the distracted American populace to actually exercise their rights and resist the tyranny that is inexorably asphyxiating their freedoms.
This need to shed light on government actions—to make the obscure, least transparent reaches of government accessible and accountable—was a common theme for Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, who famously coined the phrase, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”
Writing in January 1884, Brandeis explained:
Light is the only thing that can sweeten our political atmosphere—light thrown upon every detail of administration in the departments; light diffused through every policy; light blazed full upon every feature of legislation; light that can penetrate every recess or corner in which any intrigue might hide; light that will open up to view the innermost chambers of government, drive away all darkness from the treasury vaults; illuminate foreign correspondence; explore national dockyards; search out the obscurities of Indian affairs; display the workings of justice; exhibit the management of the army; play upon the sails of the navy; and follow the distribution of the mails.
Of course, transparency is futile without a populace that is informed, engaged and prepared to hold the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law.
For this reason, it is vital that citizens have the right to criticize the government without fear.
After all, we’re citizens, not subjects. For those who don’t fully understand the distinction between the two and why transparency is so vital to a healthy constitutional government, Manning explains it well:
When freedom of information and transparency are stifled, then bad decisions are often made and heartbreaking tragedies occur – too often on a breathtaking scale that can leave societies wondering: how did this happen? … I believe that when the public lacks even the most fundamental access to what its governments and militaries are doing in their names, then they cease to be involved in the act of citizenship. There is a bright distinction between citizens, who have rights and privileges protected by the state, and subjects, who are under the complete control and authority of the state.
Manning goes on to suggest that the U.S. “needs legislation to protect the public’s right to free speech and a free press, to protect it from the actions of the executive branch and to promote the integrity and transparency of the US government.”
Technically, we’ve already got such legislation on the books: the First Amendment.
The First Amendment gives the citizenry the right to speak freely, protest peacefully, expose government wrongdoing, and criticize the government without fear of arrest, isolation or any of the other punishments that have been meted out to whistleblowers such as Edwards Snowden, Assange and Manning.
The challenge is holding the government accountable to obeying the law.
Almost 50 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in United States v. Washington Post Co. to block the Nixon Administration’s attempts to use claims of national security to prevent The Washington Post and The New York Times from publishing secret Pentagon papers on how America went to war in Vietnam.
As Justice William O. Douglas remarked on the ruling, “The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.”
Almost 50 years later, with Assange being cast as the poster boy for treason, we’re witnessing yet another showdown, which pits the people’s right to know about government misconduct against the might of the military-industrial complex.
Yet this isn’t merely about whether whistleblowers and journalists are part of a protected class under the Constitution. It’s a debate over how long “we the people” will remain a protected class under the Constitution.
Following the current downward trajectory, it won’t be long before anyone who believes in holding the government accountable is labeled an “extremist,” is relegated to an underclass that doesn’t fit in, must be watched all the time, and is rounded up when the government deems it necessary.
Eventually, we will all be potential suspects, terrorists and lawbreakers in the eyes of the government
Partisan politics have no place in this debate: Americans of all stripes would do well to remember that those who question the motives of government provide a necessary counterpoint to those who would blindly follow where politicians choose to lead.
We don’t have to agree with every criticism of the government, but we must defend the rights of all individuals to speak freely without fear of punishment or threat of banishment.
Never forget: what the architects of the police state want are submissive, compliant, cooperative, obedient, meek citizens who don’t talk back, don’t challenge government authority, don’t speak out against government misconduct, and don’t step out of line.
What the First Amendment protects—and a healthy constitutional republic requires—are citizens who routinely exercise their right to speak truth to power.
As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the right to speak out against government wrongdoing is the quintessential freedom.
Be warned: this quintessential freedom won’t be much good to anyone if the government makes good on its promise to make an example of Assange as a warning to other journalists intent on helping whistleblowers disclose government corruption.
Once again, we find ourselves reliving George Orwell’s 1984, which portrayed in chilling detail how totalitarian governments employ the power of language to manipulate the masses.
In Orwell’s dystopian vision of the future, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.”
Much like today’s social media censors and pre-crime police departments, Orwell’s Thought Police serve as the eyes and ears of Big Brother, while the other government agencies peddle in economic affairs (rationing and starvation), law and order (torture and brainwashing), and news, entertainment, education and art (propaganda).
Orwell’s Big Brother relies on Newspeak to eliminate undesirable words, strip such words as remained of unorthodox meanings and make independent, non-government-approved thought altogether unnecessary.
Where we stand now is at the juncture of OldSpeak (where words have meanings, and ideas can be dangerous) and Newspeak (where only that which is “safe” and “accepted” by the majority is permitted). The power elite has made their intentions clear: they will pursue and prosecute any and all words, thoughts and expressions that challenge their authority.
This is the final link in the police state chain.
Having been reduced to a cowering citizenry—mute in the face of elected officials who refuse to represent us, helpless in the face of police brutality, powerless in the face of militarized tactics and technology that treat us like enemy combatants on a battlefield, and naked in the face of government surveillance that sees and hears all—our backs are to the walls.
From this point on, we have only two options: go down fighting, or capitulate and betray our loved ones, our friends and ourselves by insisting that, as a brainwashed Winston Smith does at the end of Orwell’s 1984, yes, 2+2 does equal 5.
As George Orwell recognized, “In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
By John W. Whitehead | Ruthford.org | Republished with permission
The views in this article may not reflect editorial policy of The Mind Unleashed.
Will the American People Rise Against Adam Shit, the Bitch Pelosi, and the Nadler Turd and Save their Country from Ruin, or will the American People Submit to The Rule By Lies? What Confidence Can We Have in the American People?
Many people regard Matt Taibbi as a leftist as he writes for the sometimes foolish Rolling Stone magazine. I regard Taibbi as a vicious truth-teller, who, leftwing or not, has integrity and intelligence far above the Identity Politics American left who are not even worth wiping your ass with.
Taibbi’s truthful account below tells you that the Democrats are incapable of speaking any truth, and so is the whore American media that services the Democrats and the Deep State. The Democrats are serial liars. They are destroying the fragile political stability of the United States. A country–whose unity has been destroyed by Identity Politics, whose middle class jobs have been offshored to Asia by corrupt American corporations kowtowing to corrupt Wall Street, a country whose media on which the Founding Fathers relied to protect American liberty from a rapacious State is the complete and total whore of the oligarchs who control the explanations and the agendas–is no longer a country, no longer a people. Overrun by immigration, America is a Tower of Babel.
In American politics, the oligarchs are accustomed to deciding with their campaign contributions who are the candidates for President, Senate, and House for both Republicans and Democrats. That way they stay in control regardless of which party wins the elections. Trump is an exception to this. Trump is the product of a people’s revolt. It caught the oligarchs off guard. They thought Hillary had it all wrapped up. They are determined to get Trump out because they are fearful of having an outsider in the White House for 8 years.
If the American people allow this, they are destroying themselves. If they believe any of the Democrat-military/security-presstitute propaganda, they are self-destructing.
The question of our time is: Do the American people have enough intelligence to survive?
The Democrats, military/security complex, and presstitutes are betting “No.”
Dear American, if you are so stupid, so indoctrinated and brainwashed that you with your insouciance give yourself over to be made into a total unknowing slave, that is the fate you deserve.
The ‘Whistleblower’ Probably Isn’t
By Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone
09 October 19
It’s an insult to real whistleblowers to use the term with the Ukrainegate protagonist
Start with the initial headline, in the story the Washington Post “broke” on September 18th:
TRUMP’S COMMUNICATIONS WITH FOREIGN LEADER ARE PART OF WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT THAT SPURRED STANDOFF BETWEEN SPY CHIEF AND CONGRESS, FORMER OFFICIALS SAY
The unnamed person at the center of this story sure didn’t sound like a whistleblower. Our intelligence community wouldn’t wipe its ass with a real whistleblower.
Americans who’ve blown the whistle over serious offenses by the federal government either spend the rest of their lives overseas, like Edward Snowden, end up in jail, like Chelsea Manning, get arrested and ruined financially, like former NSA official Thomas Drake, have their homes raided by FBI like disabled NSA vet William Binney, or get charged with espionage like ex-CIA exposer-of-torture John Kiriakou. It’s an insult to all of these people, and the suffering they’ve weathered, to frame the ballcarrier in the Beltway’s latest partisan power contest as a whistleblower.
Drake, who was the first to expose the NSA’s secret surveillance program, seems to have fared better than most. He ended up working in an Apple Store, where he ran into Eric Holder, who was shopping for an iPhone.
I’ve met a lot of whistleblowers, in both the public and private sector. Many end up broke, living in hotels, defamed, (often) divorced, and lucky if they have any kind of job. One I knew got turned down for a waitressing job because her previous employer wouldn’t vouch for her. She had little kids.
The common thread in whistleblower stories is loneliness. Typically the employer has direct control over their ability to pursue another job in their profession. Many end up reviled as traitors, thieves, and liars. They often discover after going public that their loved ones have a limited appetite for sharing the ignominy. In virtually all cases, they end up having to start over, both personally and professionally.
With that in mind, let’s look at what we know about the first “whistleblower” in Ukrainegate:
•He or she is a “CIA officer detailed to the White House”;
•The account is at best partially based upon the CIA officer’s own experience, made up substantially by information from “more than a half dozen U.S. officials” and the “private accounts” of “my colleagues”;
•“He or she” was instantly celebrated as a whistleblower by news networks and major newspapers.
That last detail caught the eye of Kiriakou, a former CIA Counterterrorism official who blew the whistle on the agency’s torture program.
“It took me and my lawyers a full year to get [the media] to stop calling me ‘CIA Leaker John Kirakou,” he says. “That’s how long it took for me to be called a whistleblower.”
Kirakou’s crime was talking to ABC News and the New York Times about the CIA’s torture program. For talking to American journalists about the CIA, our federal government charged Kiriakou with espionage. That absurd count was ultimately dropped, but he still did 23 months at FCI Loretto in Western Pennsylvania.
When Kiriakou first saw the “whistleblower complaint,” his immediate reaction was to wonder what kind of “CIA officer” the person in question was. “If you spend a career in the CIA, you see all kinds of subterfuge and lies and crime,” he says. “This person went through a whole career and this is the thing he objects to?”
It’s fair to wonder if this is a one-person effort. Even former CIA official Robert Baer, no friend of Trump, said as much in an early confab on CNN with Brooke Baldwin:
BAER: That’s what I find remarkable, is that this whistleblower knew about that, this attempt to cover up. This is a couple of people. It isn’t just one.
BALDWIN: And on the people point, if the allegation is true, Bob, what does it say that White House officials, lawyers, wanted to cover it up?
BAER: You know, my guess, it’s a palace coup against Trump. And who knows what else they know at this point.
That sounds about right. Actual whistleblowers are alone. The Ukraine complaint seems to be the work of a group of people, supported by significant institutional power, not only in the intelligence community, but in the Democratic Party and the commercial press.
In this century we’ve lived through a president lying to get us into a war (that caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and the loss of trillions in public treasure), the deployment of a vast illegal surveillance program, a drone assassination campaign, rendition, torture, extralegal detention, and other offenses, many of them mass human rights violations.
We had whistleblowers telling us about nearly all of these things. When they came forward, they desperately needed society’s help. They didn’t get it. Our government didn’t just tweet threats at them, but proceeded straight to punishment.
Bill Binney, who lost both his legs to diabetes, was dragged out of his shower by FBI agents. Jeffrey Sterling, like Kiriakou, was charged with espionage for talking to a reporter. After conviction, he asked to be imprisoned near his wife in St. Louis. They sent him to Colorado for two years. Others tried to talk to congress or their Inspectors General, only to find out their communications had been captured and cc’ed to the very agency chiefs they wanted to complain about (including former CIA chief and current MSNBC contributor John Brennan).
The current “scandal” is a caricature version of such episodes. Imagine the mania on the airwaves if Donald Trump were to have his Justice Department arrest the “whistleblower” and charge him with 35 years of offenses, as Thomas Drake faced. Trump incidentally still might try something like this. It’s what any autocrat of the Mobute Sese Seko/Enver Hoxha school would do, for starters, to mutinying intelligence officials within his own government.
Trump almost certainly is not going to do that, however, as the man is too dumb to realize he’s the titular commander of an executive branch that has been jailing people for talking too much for over a decade. On the off chance that he does try it, don’t hold your breath waiting for news networks to tell you he’s just following an established pattern.
I have a lot of qualms about impeachment/“Ukrainegate,” beginning with this headline premise of the lone, conscience-stricken defender of democracy arrayed against the mighty Trump. I don’t see it. Donald Trump is a jackass who got elected basically by accident, campaigning against a political establishment too blind to its own unpopularity to see what was coming.
In 2016 we saw a pair of electoral revolts, one on the right and one on the left, against the cratering popularity of our political elite. The rightist populist revolt succeeded, the Sanders movement did not. Ukrainegate to me looks like a continuation of Russiagate, which was a reaction of that defeated political elite to the rightists. I don’t feel solidarity with either group.
The argument that’s supposed to be galvanizing everyone right now is the idea that we need to “stand up and be counted,” because failing to rally to the cause is effectively advocacy for Trump. This line of thinking is based on the presumption that Trump is clearly worse than the people opposing him.
That might prove to be true, but if we’re talking about the treatment of whistleblowers, Trump has a long way to go before he approaches the brutal record of the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, as well as the cheerleading Washington political establishment. Forgetting this is likely just the first in what will prove to be many deceptions about a hardcore insider political battle whose subtext is a lot more shadowy and ambiguous than news audiences are being led to believe.
Facing China’s irresistible rise all across the chessboard, and under relentless US pressure, the not exactly democratic EU leadership is on a backbreaking exercise to position itself between a geopolitical/geoeconomic rock and a hard place.
The 28-member EU holds a crucial meeting next week in Brussels where it may adopt a 10-point action plan detailing, in a thesis, the terms of an equitable economic relationship with China going forward.
This will happen as Chinese President Xi Jinping visits Italy and then France – ahead of the very important, annual China-EU summit in Brussels on April 9, to be co-chaired by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang.
That’s the crucial context under which the European Commission (EC) has recommended what it describes as 10 concrete “actions” to the EU Heads of State for their debate at the European Council in March 21 and 22.
The full report, EU-China – A Strategic Outlook, is here.
The EC shows how in 2017 – the latest available figures – the EU was “China’s largest partner with a share of 13% of imports of goods in China and a share of 16% of exports of goods from China.” At the same time, the EC stresses that China is an “economic competitor” and “a systemic rival promoting alternative models of governance.”
Yet the EC’s “contribution” to the European Council debate next week is far from confrontational. It is a balancing act couched in Eurocratic terminology attempting to shape common “resolve” among the 28 member-states.
Predictable real problem
Coming from the EC/EU, support for “effective multilateralism with the United Nations at its core” is the norm – with China fully integrated.
Beijing is praised for its support for the Iran nuclear deal, its role in the denuclearization of North Korea, its upcoming role in the peace process in Afghanistan and tackling the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar. The real problem, predictably, is China’s maritime claims in the South China Sea.
Virtually no one apart from Brussels Eurocrats knows about the existence of an “EU Strategy on Connecting Europe and Asia.” That’s one of those joint communiqués that no one reads, issued late last year, “enabling the Union to seek synergies between the EU and third countries, including China, in transport, energy and digital connectivity, on the basis of international norms and standards.”
Curiously, in the EC report, there’s no mention whatsoever of the New Silk Road, or Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – which happens to be China’s synergy masterplan for the whole of Eurasia. We could define it as Globalization 3.0.
On the other hand, Made in China 2025 is duly referenced – and not demonized, Trump administration-style.
From the EU perspective, the key problem remains “lack of reciprocal market access.” The EU wants greater access for European companies, less Chinese subsidies for Chinese companies and curtailment of technology transfer from European firms to their state-owned joint venture partners in China.
All this should be part of a deal on investment rules to be clinched by 2020.
Action 9 in the EC report is quite revealing:
“To safeguard against potential serious security implications for critical digital infrastructure, a common EU approach to the security of 5G networks is needed.” To deal with it, the EC will issue – what else – another “recommendation.”
A hefty degree of Eurocratic puzzlement seems to be in the cards; one cannot disassociate BRI from Made in China, 5G and Huawei technology; it’s all part of the same package. Yet the EU is under heavy pressure from Washington to ban Huawei and forget about joining BRI, even as nearly 20 EU member-states are already linked or interested in linking to BRI, and a majority are also interested in Chinese 5G technology.
Brussels diplomats confirmed to Asia Times that the EC report was basically authored by Berlin and Paris. And yes, they had to deal with heavy Washington pressure.
The report harbors a subtle, inbuilt element of “Chinese threat” – perhaps not as overtly as in a Pentagon report. This stance is how the Franco-German alliance believes it may influence “recalcitrants” such as the 16+1 group of Central and Eastern European nations doing business with China, as well as soon to be BRI-linked Italy.
Yet that’s already a done deal – as I detailed in the case of Italy.
Beijing is accomplishing, little by little, something that is unbearable for the Beltway; extending its influence not only inside the EU but inside the NATO space.
The US Deep State may have lumped BRI – along with Made in China 2025 and Huawei’s 5G – as part of an “existential threat”; but that’s not the case for most EU latitudes, from Greece and Portugal to German industrialists and the new Lega/Five Stars administration in Rome.
Brussels very well knows that Washington will punish any “ally” who gets too close to Beijing. It’s never enough to be reminded that the list of economic “threats” to the US features, in that order, China, Russia and Germany. And Italy is now caught in the crossfire – because it is committed to good economic relations with both China and Russia.
Rome has already sent a clear message to Brussels; beyond any EU common “resolve” facing China, what matters is the Italian national economic interest in, for instance, linking the ports of Venice, Trieste and Genoa to the New Silk Road. Alarmed Atlanticists are essentially warning that Italians cannot cross a red line; they need to ask permission to act independently. That’s not going to happen – whatever the EC decides to “recommend.”
Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
The Five Eyes is the name given to the British GCHQ-controlled surveillance structure that involves the four primary Anglo-Saxon Commonwealth countries (Britain, Canada, Australian and New Zealand) along with the United States.
In a January 9, 2019 op-ed in Ottawa’s Hill Times, China’s Ambassador to Canada, Lu Shaye did what no other mainstream media outlet has been willing to do since the untimely arrest of Huawei’s CFO Meng Wanzhou occurred while she was boarding a plane in Vancouver on December 1st. Much dispute has arisen over the arrest and China’s response with its own arrest of two Canadians suspected of espionage in Beijing.
In an article entitled Why the double standard on justice for Canadians, Chinese? Ambassador Lu cut through the noise being created by the media and western political class by exposing the over bloated western surveillance state known as the Five Eyes which he properly identified as the outgrowth of the unconstitutional Patriot Act, the Prism surveillance system which has annihilated all semblance of privacy among trans-Atlantic nations.
After describing the double standard applied by Canadian elites who have constructed a narrative that always paints China as the villain of the world while portraying the west as “free and democratic” Ambassador Lu stated:
“these same people have conveniently ignored the PRISM Program, Equation Group, and Echelon—global spying networks operated by some countries that have been engaging in large-scale and organized cyber stealing, and spying and surveillance activities on foreign governments, enterprises, and individuals. These people also took a laissez-faire attitude toward a country that infringes on its citizens’ privacy rights through the Patriot Act. They shouted for a ban by the Five Eyes alliance countries…. on the use of Huawei equipment by these countries’ own enterprises”
For those who may not be aware, the Five Eyes is the name given to the British GCHQ-controlled surveillance structure that involves the four primary Anglo-Saxon Commonwealth countries (Britain, Canada, Australian and New Zealand) along with the United States. This is the deep state that has been dedicated to overthrowing American President Donald Trump since MI6 and their junior partners in America began organising Russia-gate in 2015-when it became apparent that Trump had a serious chance of defeating the Deep State candidate Hillary Clinton.
As many patriotic whistle blowers such as Bill Binney, Ray McGovern, and Edward Snowden have exposed throughout recent years, the Five Eyes system that the Ambassador referenced was formed in the “post-911 world order” as a means of overriding each nations’ constitutional protection of its own citizens’ by capitalising on a major legal loop hole (viz: Since it is technically illegal for American intelligence agencies to spy on Americans without warrant, and for CSIS to do the same to Canadians, it is claimed that it is okay for British/Canadian intelligence agencies to spy on Americas and visa versa).
The Chinese Ambassador didn’t stop there however, but went one step further, ending his op-ed with a controversial claim which has earned him much criticism in the days since its publication. It was in his closing paragraph that Ambassador Lu made the uncomfortable point that the double standards employed against China and the west’s willingness to ignore the Five Eyes “is due to Western egotism and white supremacy”. Is this the “belligerent and unfounded name calling” that his detractors are labelling it, or is there something more to it?
When we look to the origins of the Five Eyes, which goes back MUCH further than September 11, 2001, we can clearly see that Lu Shaye is touching a very deep and truthful nerve.
Cecil Rhodes and the Racist Roots of the Deep State
19th Century spokesman for the British Empire, Cecil Rhodes wrote his infamous “Seventh Will” in 1877 where, speaking on behalf of an empire dying in the midst of the global spread of republican institutions, called for the formation of a new plan to re-organise the Empire, and re-conquer all colonial possessions that had been contaminated by republican ideas of freedom, progress, equality and self-determination. Rhodes stated:
“I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race. Just fancy those parts that are at present inhabited by the most despicable specimens of human beings what an alteration there would be if they were brought under Anglo-Saxon influence, look again at the extra employment a new country added to our dominions gives. I contend that every acre added to our territory means in the future birth to some more of the English race who otherwise would not be brought into existence…. Why should we not form a secret society with but one object the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilised world under British rule for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire…”
The Rhodes Trust was set up at his death in 1902 to administer the vast riches accrued during Rhodes’ exploitation of diamond mines in Africa. Steered by Lord Alfred Milner, it was this Trust which gave birth to the Round Table Movement and Rhodes Scholarship Fund which themselves have been behind the creation of a century’s worth of indoctrinated technocrats who have permeated all branches of government, finance, military, media, corporate and academia- both in America and internationally .
The Round Table Movement, (working in tandem with London’s Fabian Society) didn’t replace the old British Empire’s power structures, so much as re-define their behaviour based upon the re-absorption of America back into the Anglo-Saxon hive. This involved centralising control of the education of their “managerial elite” with special scholarship’s in Oxford and the London School of Economics- then sending the indoctrinated victims in droves back into their respective nations in order to be absorbed into the British Empire’s governance structures in all domains of private and public influence. In Fabian Society terms, this concept is known as “permeation theory”.
Although it sometimes took the early removal of nationalist political leaders from power, via intrigue, coups or assassination, the 20th century was shaped in large measure by the cancerous growth of this British-directed network that sought to undo the republican concept that progress and cooperation were the basis for both sovereignty and international law as laid out in the Treaty of Westphalia of 1648 .
This is the deep state that President Roosevelt warned of when he said in 1936 “The economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain about is that we seek to take away their power.” This is the deep state that outgoing President Eisenhower warned of when he spoke of the “acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex” in 1961 and that John Kennedy fought against when he fired Allen Dulles and threatened to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter into the winds”. It is what Ronald Reagan contended with when he attempted to break the world out of the Cold War by working with Russia and other nations on Beam defense in 1983. It is this structure that owned Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s entire career, from his 1980s railroading of Lyndon LaRouche into prison to his cover up of the Anglo-Saudi role in 911 as CIA director to his efforts to impeach President Donald Trump today .
It is this same complex which is the direct outgrowth of the racist British-run drug wars on China and suppression of India and Africa throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
In Canada, this was the network that destroyed the plans of nationalist Prime Minister John Diefenbaker after he fired the Rhodes Scholar Governor of the Bank of Canada in 1959 during a desperate struggle to take control of the national bank in order to fund his Northern Vision . Earlier, it was this group that Lincoln-admirer Prime Minister Wilfred Laurier warned of after his defeat in 1911 when he said “Canada is now governed by a junta sitting at London, known as “The Round Table”, with ramifications in Toronto, in Winnipeg, in Victoria, with Tories and Grits receiving their ideas from London and insidiously forcing them on their respective parties.”
The lesson to be learned is that the Deep State is not “American” as many commentators have assumed. It is the same old British Empire from which America brilliantly broke free in 1776 and which Cecil Rhodes and Milner led in re-organising on behalf of the monarchy at the beginning of the 20th century. It was racist when Lords Palmerston and Russell ran it in the 19th century and it continues to be racist today.
So when Ambassador Lu says “the reason why some people are used to arrogantly adopting double standards is due to Western egotism and white supremacy – in such a context, the rule of law is nothing but a tool for their political ends and a fig leaf for their practising hegemony in the international arena” he is not being “belligerent or provocative”, but is rather hitting on a fact which must be better understood if the deep state will finally be defeated and nations liberated to work with the new spirit of progress and cooperation exemplified by China’s Belt and Road Initiative which is quickly spreading across the earth.
 By 1876, the American Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia showcased to a world audience the success of the “American System of Political Economy” which asserted that the value and behaviour of money was contingent upon the physical productive growth of the nation rather than “British-system free markets”. Lincoln’s system was being adopted across South American nations, Japan, China, India and many European powers as well (including Russia) which had grown tired of being manipulated by British imperial intrigues.
 For anyone in Canada wishing to learn about this in greater depth, they may wish to ask Canadian technocratic Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland how her experience as a Rhodes Scholar shaped her career.
 The Peace of Westphalia: France’s Defense of the Sovereign Nation by Pierre Beaudry, EIR Nov. 29, 2002
 Robert Mueller Is an Amoral Legal Assassin: He Will Do His Job If You Let Him by Barbara Boyd, October 1, 2017 larouchepac.com. A common denominator among all of the mentioned American leaders is not only that they waged war on the deep state structures but made constant attempts to work constructively with Russia, China, India and other nations for industrial and scientific development. This policy of “win-win cooperation” is antagonistic to all systems of empire and is the reason why the Empire hates China and the potential created with Trump’s intention to work with both China and Russia.
 See John Diefenbaker and the Sabotage of the Northern Vision by the author, Canadian Patriot #4, January 2013
 O.D. Skelton, The Life of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, p. 510
BIO: Matthew J.L. Ehret is a journalist, lecturer and founder of the Canadian Patriot Review. His works have been published in Executive Intelligence Review, Global Resesarch, Global Times, Nexus Magazine, Los Angeles Review of Books, Veterans Today and Sott.net. Matthew has also published the book “The Time has Come for Canada to Join the New Silk Road” and three volumes of the Untold History of Canada (available on untoldhistory.canadianpatriot.org). He has been associated with the Schiller Institute since 2006.
Jan 14, 2019
There are now a number of undeniable signs that the Global Criminal Cabal is going down big time. This is in addition to previous events that saw the panic of the Bushes, Clintons and the Bidens.
The Deep State actors in the US are now running out of options that they are now propping up previously unknown personalities to run for the highest office in 2020. Bernie Standers is still unacceptable for the Democrats.
Anyway, it is interesting to note that the recent resignation of the World Bank president Jim Yong Kim not only coincided with the fall of US Supreme Court Justice Bader Ginsburg and Serena Rothschild, but it also is following along the path of his predecessor ex-Goldman Sachs banker Robert Zoellick, who himself resigned as WB chief along with thousands of other banking CEOs in the early part of 2012, which eventually culminated in the Papal resignation of “Benedict” Ratzinger, the highest racking pedophile coddler of the Roman Empire in his time.
Remember also that this incumbent Catholic Pope Bergoglio has promised early in his indefinite term that there will be some sort of debt forgiveness, only to renege later on because frankly, the Jesuit Rothschild banking dynasty doesn’t own anything of real value, but only on paper as the whole gang of criminal misfits never in their lives worked on a farm. These are occult magicians have been leveraging on the gullibility of the masses for centuries, if not for millennia. But there are natural limits to every imperial ambition.
As everybody knows, the European decadent organization is now being confronted with mass movements of people whore are tired of austerity measures in the midst of opulent royal rituals, and populist leaderships that are directly mocking on the panicky Deep State actors still holding government positions. We are seeing the beginning of the reign of unelected parliamentarians and the end of the European Union itself.
Kings and Queens have also resigned to make way for progressive minded individuals to sign off for the global Collateral Accounts that were preprogrammed to be used for planetary development 80 years ago, but instead systematically siphoned off world, or at least used in massive underground developments in the mid-1950s that had nothing to do with improving human lives on terra.
Before these royal resignations, Paradise, California was devastated by a very obvious directed energy weapon’s attack that melted everything metallic, transmuted glasses into thin air, pulverized housing materials on contact, but plastics. But the real giveaway is the linear and pulsed patterns that the energy weapon swept across the targeted areas.
The pseudo-environmentalists are expected to capitalize on this for their nefarious global warming/climate change mantra that the Trump government happens to refute against.
Today, the Central Bank of Russia indicated that over the last 6 months it has unloaded its dollar reserves further down to 21.9% when it converted $100 billion foreign reserves into Yuan, Yen and Euro, in line with the systematic decapitation of the Rothschild/Jesuit banking empire. The Russians are already preparing for a complete shutdown of Visa and Mastercard with their own Mir payment system.
Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve can’t hide its own bankruptcy anymore.
As most of us know, all private Central Banks are under a common umbrella controlled by the Rothschild banking dynasty.
In the last 72 hours, the US stealth B2 bomber is positioned in Hawaii to make a statement. Russia is responding with its deployment of 30 Poseidon strategic underwater nuclear drones that are designed to create tsunami wave of up to 500 meters, enough to wipe out shoreline vessels and marine bases.
But it is the Chinese space program that is making the tectonic headlines across the world as it successfully landed an unmanned spacecraft and a rover, which beamed each other’s camera showing off the far side of the moon.
This feat is not only politically symbolic, but it gives a real measure in the right direction as it emboldens the Chinese to pursue the construction of a manned space station specifically designed to curtail and neutralize the massive Western weaponization of space that had been already used against China in more than one occasion, i.e. Tianjin Blast, and several earthquakes, not just in China but also in Southeast Asia.
There is one thing left for China to do, i.e. the massive unloading of its US treasury bonds. This will be doubled down with India taking over the current US second economic position at number 2. Hopefully at that situation would unite Americans against their own common enemies that is the Wall Street bankers, the military industrial complex and Big Pharma.
The Russians have been teasing us already with Space Age technologies, not just in the realm of weaponries but positive material transmutations, cold fusion, and portable free energy systems that have been actively suppressed and exploited by Deep State SERCO that is with high probability to be behind the California DEW attacks.
The Border Wall rhetorics, and the government shutdown along with it, are merely shadow boxing. But real actions are being taken care of behind the scenes. There are reports that some personalities are already being hoarded off to the newly renovated Guantanamo prisons.
It is therefore incumbent upon us to continue the pressure by spreading these fundamental knowledge and the true understanding of current events, so that depression is taken over by hope, and apathy by courage and tangible actions inside the halls of power.
Is Russia targeted by a thousand-year-old criminal conspiracy that, so very long ago, built a system of central banks and set monarch against monarch, century after century? Is this the Deep State Trump tells of, a network of “oligarch,” central banks and industrial cabals? Do they now…
Is Russia targeted by a thousand-year-old criminal conspiracy that, so very long ago, built a system of central banks and set monarch against monarch, century after century? Is this the Deep State Trump tells of, a network of “oligarch,” central banks and industrial cabals?
Do they now stage terror attacks, down airliners and own the world’s press?
On Christmas Day, 2018, Israeli planes attacked Syria by hiding behind two civilian airliners, one landing in Damascus. The Lebanese government complained vigorously about the violation of its airspace and the insanity of the Israeli action, only days after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu received a “no confidence” vote that may well remove him from office after charges of broad corruption had been filed against him.
A similar attack was waged on Syrian and Russian forces on September 19, 2018 when Israeli planes following a Russian IL20 military aircraft coming in for a landing, used the Israeli “human shield” ploy leading to the deaths of 15.
Evidence from sources in Kiev now indicate that the downing of MH17 in 2014 involved Israeli teams operating in Kiev, Israeli pilots flying from bases in Ukraine and Azerbaijan and the use of MH17 as a “human shield.”
This time, however, there were no ground targets worthy of attack but rather the incident itself, much like the White Helmets’ fake gas attacks, staged to manipulate opinion and draw NATO and the US into the conflict.
The scenarios go as follows:
At this point, based on the level of this accusation, it is necessary to provide documentation, from the Reuters News Agency:
By Thomas Grove (Reuters) – Israel’s ‘go-it-alone’ option to attack Iran’s nuclear sites has set the Middle East on edge and unsettled its main ally at the height of a U.S. presidential election campaign.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu exudes impatience, saying Tehran is barely a year from a ‘red line’ for atomic capacity. Many fellow Israelis, however, fear a unilateral strike, lacking U.S. forces, would fail against such a large and distant enemy.
But what if, even without Washington, Israel were not alone?
Azerbaijan, the oil-rich ex-Soviet republic on Iran’s far northern border, has, say local sources with knowledge of its military policy, explored with Israel how Azeri air bases and spy drones might help Israeli jets pull off a long-range attack.
That is a far cry from the massive firepower and diplomatic cover that Netanyahu wants from Washington. But, by addressing key weaknesses in any Israeli war plan – notably on refueling, reconnaissance and rescuing crews – such an alliance might tilt Israeli thinking on the feasibility of acting without U.S. help.
It could also have violent side-effects more widely and many doubt Azeri President Ilham Aliyev would risk harming the energy industry on which his wealth depends, or provoking Islamists who dream of toppling his dynasty, in pursuit of favor from Israel.
There is much more behind this story, including complicity by the Georgian government in transiting bombs offloaded at the Georgian Black Sea port of Poti in June 2010, delivered by the USS Grapple, a ship offloaded by personnel who immediately reported the cargo and its destination to Veterans Today Bureau Chief Jeffrey Silverman.
We return to the narrative: The plan, we are told by our sources in Kiev, was to see to it that MH17 was downed, either by a missile placed in the altered flight path of the Kiev regime working with Israeli intelligence or, if that failed, shoot down the plane using the fighters shadowing the plane.
On 21 March 2018, the Ukrainian pilot, Vladyslav Voloshyn, who was wrongly accused of piloting a “low level” SU25, that our sources tell us was really SU27s piloted by Israeli Air Force pilots “killed himself.” Our sources say he was murdered. From the UK Independent:
Russian officials and media had accused Mr. Voloshyn of flying the jet which shot down the Boeing 777 passenger plane, killing all 298 people on board.
However, a two-year Dutch investigation concluded the plane had been destroyed by a Russian Buk missile.
Below is language from a confidential legal communication between a Washington law firm and the Prime Minister of Malaysia regarding this issue:
“Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak
Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia
Main Block, Perdana Putra Building Federal Government Administrative Centre 62502 Putrajaya, Malaysia
9 September 2014
Re: Malaysia, Khazanah and Malaysia Airlines
Dear Prime Minister Tun Najib:
Thank you for considering our proposal to represent Malaysia and assist you in developing domestic and international coalitions on legal and other issues related to Malaysia Airlines.
We appreciate and thank you for your superb diplomacy in resolving the international issues that have defied lesser leaders. We may enable you to achieve even greater success.
We offer to represent Malaysia in the following areas in which we may be of significant value to Malaysia, Khazanah, your national airlines and you:
Legal Counsel on issues linked to MH 17, MH370, MAS and Malaysia Airlines (e.g., restructuring, rebranding, union issues, criminal and civil court cases, etc.); …
If you would like International Criminal Court jurisdiction for MH17 crimes, then we would counsel and assist you in obtaining such jurisdiction and act on your behalf in the United Nations, Ukraine, Russia, China, France, United Kingdom, and the United States of America.
Our attorneys are ready, willing and able to take the lead in obtaining justice for Malaysian and other families and your airlines due to the downing of MH17. We are willing to manage complex multinational litigation required to achieve justice for victim families and your airlines — against Ukraine, rebel assailants, Russia, USA, insurance companies and/or others.”
After private consultations, in which I was personally involved, the Malaysian Prime Minister advised that he had been threatened and would not be “permitted” to see justice. The threats were from sources attributable to our definition of “Deep State.” None of this information has been made public prior to this.
New sources have come forward that places the crash of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 that went down over pro-Russian regions of Eastern Ukraine on 17 July 2014. If correct, and procedures for rating intelligence sources would rate this information as “actionable” with “high confidence,” it puts a new light on events over the last few months.
Intelligence is, as is now portrayed in media as well, a mosaic but seldom involves “dot connecting” as is done on conspiracy blogs or, as has been revealed by President Trump, on the mainstream media as well.
Simply put, Russia is a targeted nation, its vast landmass and endless natural resources, have put the “black spot” on Moscow for hundreds of years. What Hitler and Napoleon failed at, didn’t end. Others have been fighting a political, a propaganda, an economic war on Russia all along.
“Russiagate” is a part of that war, the Skripal incident as well, along with accusations of Russian complicity in chemical weapon attacks in Syria.
Past this, there is strong evidence Russia is targeted by a biological warfare operation run by the United States out of Tbilisi, Georgia, one that may well have recently released, perhaps accidentally, a deadly weaponized influenza pathogen on Georgia itself. These “accidents” have happened before as has a strange and inexplicable Swine Flu epidemic that jumps thousands of miles with no plausible vector.
Today we begin pointing fingers. In order to do so, we need to put a rough definition on what or who the Deep State really is. The term, coined by Trump but in various forms an expression of an “unseen actor” behind super-governmental manipulation that historians only discuss at great personal risk, has a history, real people, real names, a trail through history for not just generations but centuries.
Using the term “international bankers” or “robber barons” is gross understatement. We have a clear history of banking families expelled from England in 1290 by Edward I, expelled from Spain in 1492, and much of their history since.
Were one to look at the recent economic collapse in the US at the hands of the Federal Reserve “Bank,” the same cast of characters, the real Deep State, comes into focus. We can start with Spain prior to 1492, where the Palenzuela banking family was bleeding the nation through high interest loans. Spain’s gold laden empire in the New World was a century away.
The enemy, the Palenzuela banking cartel, who fled to Venice in 1492 taking on the name “del Banco,” or “of the bank,” dropping their name and their criminal history. From there, they moved to the town of Warburg in Germany and changed their name to “Warburg.” If this sounds familiar, it was Paul Warburg who authored the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 and was first Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
First America got an illegal central bank, one outlawed in her constitution and only a few short years later, America found herself at war in Europe. Coincidence?
There are more names, the Astors, really the Astorgas expelled from Spain, and then there were the Cabots, or rather the Cabotas, also expelled from Spain. These were the great American fortunes built on slavery and the opium trade, once run from China but now from Afghanistan by the CIA, still under control of the same families.
This is the deep state and there are more names, some you will know, some you won’t and new names, the “oligarchs” and “kingpins” that sit in the shadows and pull the strings.
Added to the mix are the great manipulators, Google Corporation, Facebook and an unseen army of “Silicon Valley warriors” who have established a stranglehold on politics, commerce, culture and even “human awareness” around the world. They represent a Deep State intelligence, a “world consciousness” and that consciousness is pathologically insane and criminal in nature.
Though a thousand years old or more, they change, they adapt, and their patterns are visible. They are ISIS, they are al Qaeda, they are the CIA and MI6, they buy governments, they wage wars, chaos is their tool and humanity is fodder to them.
Anything not under total control is a threat.
Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. There is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. – JFK
If you suggested to someone a decade ago that secrecy dominates our world, and that transparency on a larger scale really doesn’t exist at all, not many would take you seriously. We, the public, have been kept inside a bubble, and outside that bubble exists a “breakaway civilization,” a term coined by author and historian Richard Dolan to describe the vast amount of knowledge in the form of science, technology, history, etc that’s been amassed by the military industrial complex.
Everything in this area is simply deemed “classified,” receiving absolutely no oversight from Congress. They’re referred to as deep black projects that in 2008 ex-Canadian Defence Minister Paul Hellyer described as projects that the “Commander in Chief has no idea about.”
This information is now coming to light, and it received even more attention when last year, a Michigan State University economist, working with one former government official and multiple graduate students discovered that $21 trillion of “unauthorized” spending had occurred within the Department of Defense and Housing and Urban Development. This is only for the years 1998-2015
For their research, the team used several government websites and made inquiries to multiple U.S. agencies. Much of the time they received no response and the Office of the Inspector General even disabled links to all key documents that revealed unsupported spending, according to the team.
Unfortunately for them, the researchers downloaded and stored the documents, and thus they made their way into the public domain. Regardless, many people still haven’t heard about it.
The name of the Economist from Michigan State is Mark Skidmore. He was sparked to do something when Catherine Austin Fitts, former assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development (where all the missing money is from, including the D.O.D) referred to a report that indicated the Army had $6.5 trillion in unsupported adjustments and spending, in the 2015 fiscal year.
Given the Army’s $122 billion budget, that meant unsupported adjustments were 54 times spending authorized by Congress. Typically, such adjustments in public budgets are only a small fraction of authorized spending….Skidmore thought Fitts had made a mistake. “Maybe she meant $6.5 billion and not $6.5 trillion,” he said. “So I found the report myself and sure enough it was $6.5 trillion.” (source)
Fitts was one of the people involved with Skidmore’s research, they worked together, and found documents indicating a total of $20 trillion of undocumented adjustments had been made, from 1998 t0 2015, as mentioned above. The original government documents and a report describing the issue can be found here.)
They also recently provided an update, as when this information went public, the Pentagon claimed that they were going to do an internal audit.
Several months after beginning the audit, recommendations of the Federal Accounting Standards Board were accepted by the government which stopped the process. https://fas.org/sgp/news/2018/07/fasab-review.pdf (see page 3 for a summary).
Fitts explains how “the statement allows government officials to misstate and move funds around to hide expenditures if it is deemed necessary for national security purposes, and the rule applies to all agencies, not just the black budget.” She then shares an excerpt from the report:
This Statement permits modifications that do not affect the net results of operations or net position. In addition, this Statement allows a component reporting entity to be excluded from one reporting entity and consolidated into another reporting entity, and the effect of the modification may change the net results of operations and/or net position.
Fitts then makes another point that needs to be emphasized, one that I’ve been writing about for years, and it’s the fact that only a few people with high-level security clearances have the authority to determine what exactly a national security issue is. These days, there is so much secrecy in our world that ‘national security’ has simply become a term used to justify extreme and unethical secrecy. This secrecy ultimately benefits a select powerful few, and keeps the dollars rolling into their pockets.
No one but these few people would ever know that expenditures on activity A are hiding in a completely different area of government. What good is an independent audit if authorities are allowed to move expenditures around with no transparency? How can one conduct an evaluation of any portion of the federal budget under such an arrangement? How is this policy in compliance with financial reporting laws or Constitutional requirements for reporting on government spending to the citizens of the United States? -Fitts
In a December. 8th 2017 Forbes column, MSUs Skidmore co-authored with Laurence Kotlikoff, Skidmore said the “gargantuan nature” of the undocumented federal spending “should be a great concern to all taxpayers.”
Taken together these reports point to a failure to comply with basic constitutional and legislative requirements for spending and disclosure,” the column concludes. “We urge the House and Senate Budget Committee to initiate immediate investigations of unaccounted federal expenditures as well as the source of their payment.
Our tax dollars and the level to which we are taxed are going towards black budget programs, that cost far more than our roads and services. If this information was made transparent and open for discovery and use, it leaps all of humanity into the stars and beyond into new discovery and exploration. The implications are huge.
There exists a shadowy government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself. – Senator Daniel Inouye (source)
Fitts has been outspoken on where this money has been going and has stated multiple times that during the investigations and through her work experience within the U.S. Housing and Urban Development sector, ‘Space’ issues were always involved when it came to finding out where this money was going.
It wasn’t long ago when the Pentagon publicly disclosed a ‘UFO ariel threat program’ it had been running, one that cost $22 million. Hal Puthoff, a member of To The Stars Academy, that was involved with this public disclosure from the Pentagon, has stated that it could be one of the multiple programs. You can read more about that here.
This information that was not aggressively disseminated by mainstream media, too much public attention on $21 trillion missing dollars starts to bring up questions about where this money is going.
Having been an avid researcher into the UFO phenomenon for more than a decade, I can tell you that a lot of it is going towards activities in space and other activities that are deemed classified for ‘national security’ purposes. One example I’ve written about before has been the reality of deep underground military bases, and deep under ocean military bases.
Fitts is one of many who has claimed that these black budget operations are being used to build a space economy, and that there is currently a war going on up there. A fight for economic domination between nations of Earth. This doesn’t sound too outlandish when you consider she is one of the multiple credible sources giving this type of interpretation. Sometimes, information like this can be too much for us to handle, at other times it is purposely subjected to ridicule and official smears campaigns to bring less credibility to the topic.
Corporations are currently dominating space. Let’s not forget about Garry Mckinnon, who performed the largest ever military computer hack in human history. This made global headlines, it was too big to conceal, and he gave a telling interview before he was arrested claiming that he found multiple pictures of UFO’s and lists of “off world officers” and “fleet to fleet” transfers. You can see a clip of his interview with Project Camelot’s Kerry Cassidy, here. This interview was conducted before it became public knowledge and before he was arrested for his hack. He hacked into Department of Defence and NASA systems, among others.
The evidence for a clandestine secret space program that is costing tax-payers trillions of dollars is backed up by undeniable evidence, yet it’s shrouded in secrecy, despite the fact that it hides in plain sight.
According to Fitts, we are not alone, this is known, and we too have an ever-growing presence in space. In an interview, she recently did with Dark Journalist, she talks about the Secret Space Program from a historical perspective. She explains how enormous amounts of resources were handed over to covert operations to develop a security system of finance. This then created the CIA and a select group of people who were in charge of UFO technology. “By the time JFK came into office ready to challenge this shadow government and make space program the centrepiece of his administration, the civil war between the Deep State and the public state was in full force.”
Robert Bigelow, CEO of Bigelow Aerospace revealed knowledge of an extraterrestrial earlier this year.
The important thing to remember here is that the UFO phenomenon and extraterrestrial hypothesis have, in my opinion, enormous amounts of credibility and evidence behind them. We’ve been writing about the topic since CE was founded in 2009, you can visit the disclosure section of our website to sift through those articles for more information.
Below is one of the last interviews she did:
Everyone knows America is bankrupt, $21 trillion in debt, adding a trillion a year to that figure under Trump’s voodoo economics. Yet, America is on not just a massive military buildup, but expanding its global military presence at levels not seen since the end of World War II.
Is America controlled by an international cabal of “loan sharks?”
Everyone knows America’s military is beaten, worn down, “in over its head” in Afghanistan, defeated time and time again every time America has entered a battlefield, every conflict since Korea and Vietnam.
Is a game “afoot” as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle would say of his fictional hero, Sherlock Holmes? What is America’s game? “We shall see,” quoting Dr. Watson, Doyle’s fictional “sidekick.”
America under Trump is escalating military confrontations with Russia and China. Global arms races are ramping up as former conventions limiting weapons are tossed aside and even the militarization of outer space is “on the table.”
Why now? Who can win when war can only mean planetary destruction? Can it all simply be fake? Let’s examine these questions and more. We begin with a look at the world we were dealt with the end of the Cold War.
You see, the old paradigms of endless vigilance, endless conflict, great standing armies, economies dependent on irrational defense posturing, not only exist, they define our era.
In order to inject a tone of reality, we must reject, out of hand, the post 9/11 “global war on terror” as contrived. America’s behavior in Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, the CIA’s “ham handed” puppeteering of al Qaeda and ISIS is inexcusable as even third-rate drama.
The Syrian and Russian people aided by Iran and Hezbollah put an end to that neocon farce though Washington and Tel Aviv haven’t yet gotten the message.
Now, something else is going on, a different war, certainly in some ways a world war but one where defining winning and losing isn’t going to be easy. The losers won’t be hanged after fake war crimes tribunals, there will be no occupation armies, no treaties redefining the world map under the watchful guise of Europe’s ancient banking masters as we saw twice during the 20th century.
There will be no world wars, there are no enemies like in the past, no rival royal families, no real democracies left to oppose imaginary tyranny, it’s all memory, nothing more.
Replacing it, and war continues, not just as before but as never imagined, is something very different. Analysts tell us about war as economics, about “globalism” and the new low and medium intensity conflicts that break all the old rules.
Analogous to this is the same old fake “white hat vs black hat” or “East vs West” struggle, as though a real NATO, long a shadow of its former self, and a “communist bloc” still existed. Before that, two world wars killed off generations based on similar coalitions, struggles for world resources overtly, always something darker underneath, hypocrisy, propaganda, leaving the root causes for conflicts unknowable.
There is another question that, though never asked, as we so often note, must be addressed. How can a bankrupt nation keep borrowing and yet keep falling further and further in debt? Why would America’s currency be the world’s primary vehicle of trade, America’s trade protocols the world’s standard when America herself is unable to manage affairs at home?
Were one to examine the visible currency reserves banks claim to hold, including the US Treasury certificates held by three dozen nation states to varying degrees, the wherewithal to underwrite the drowning American economy simply doesn’t exist.
The money isn’t there, no bank has it, no government could, would or should invest in America, so who is paying for America’s war on the world?
Moreover, what if, and this is where we move into more “unspoken ground” as it were, those who underwrite America’s debt, including and especially the trillion-dollar military budget, were those who rig the elections, bribe the congressmen, compromise the corrupt “perfumed princes of the Pentagon, to quote Colonel David Hackworth, what if?
There, we’ve done it, we are looking under rocks for secret cabals, treading on ground that has given way under veritable armies of academics and experts who had trod the same paths we do now.
This opens another door. If America can’t exist as it does, a “fake democracy,” without secret infusions of cash that can’t possible exist under known economic principles, where do we go from here?
One method is to watch, to observe, look for patterns and ask the age-old question, “que bono,” who benefits? Is it a cabal of oil companies and bullet makers?
Then we look at the scope of America’s military moves, pushing NATO into Georgia and Serbia, perhaps to Armenia and Afghanistan. We see new American bases in Poland and Romania, Belarus targeted, Marines in Norway.
Drone bases now dot the African Sahel. American bases dot Syria and American carrier battle groups, all funded with “impossible money” from unknow sources, prowl the seas challenging any and all and we still ask the same question, who benefits?
What resources need to be controlled? What political movements need to be stifled? What tyrannies need to be replaced with an “American branded” version?
After speculation, we must return to what we know, what we observe, what can be safely assumed. We see American confronting China and Russia. What is clear to the most casual observer is how blatantly America is pushing both nations to redirect national resources toward defense.
America generally assumes that the Soviet Union was crushed by Ronald Regan’s massive military spending spree. Reagan’s weapon systems generally never materialized. A trillion dollars was spent on “Star Wars” yielding nothing. America is still two decades behind Russia in missile interception.
The result of the financial collapse of the Soviet Union may well have been a hidden collapse of the US. It is almost as though a bill has become due, but the date of collection has been put off as long as Americans are willing to die in wars around the world on behalf of the international cabal of “loan sharks” who seem to be pulling the strings.
Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
Sep 9, 2016
(ANTIMEDIA) Former congressman Ron Paul is outspoken. When he retired from Congress, he called lawmakers psychopathic authoritarians to their faces. He’s also called Donald Trump an authoritarian and asserted Hillary Clinton could have run as a Republican. And just last week, Paul took aim at the foundational structure of American ‘democracy.’
In a recent episode of his web show, the Liberty Report, Ron Paul discussed the Department of Homeland Security’s decision last month to take a more active role in U.S. elections. Secretary Jeh Johnson said he was “considering whether elections should be classified as ‘critical infrastructure,’ affording them the same kinds of enhanced protections that the banking system and the electrical grid receive,” POLITICO reported.
The potential move came on the heels of the notorious DNC leak in July, which exposed intentions within the Democratic Party to manipulate the primary race against Senator Bernie Sanders. Politicians and the media quickly blamed the hack on Russia, failing to cite conclusive proof of their allegations yet spawning the narrative that the Kremlin and other foreign threats could compromise U.S. elections.
On his show, Paul took issue with the notion that the Department of Homeland Security, an agency riddled with incompetence and failed objectives — case in point, the TSA — is capable of securing U.S. elections.
Speaking on DHS’s decision to become more involved in the process following the DNC hack, Ron Paul offered a scathing indictment of the federal organization, arguing it will capitalize on troubling events to seize power:
“They may have false flags and they may do a lot of things, but no matter how an emergency comes up, they’re going to make use of it. And the use of it isn’t to say ‘Hey, how are we going to protect the American people?’ Are they worrying, when they talk about doing something about rigged elections, [that] the votes are counted? No, they’re making sure that the votes aren’t counted and they’re irrelevant and the government has all this power.”
Ron Paul speaks about rigged elections from personal experience. In 2012, when he ran for president within the Republican Party, he was silenced by the media and the political establishment. Primaries and caucuses in Maine and other states showed irregularities, and at more than one caucus event, the lights were simply turned off when Paul supporters stood up to Republican leadership. At another caucus, police assaulted and arrested them.
“The elections don’t matter. This is a ritual that we go through,” Paul observed last week. Instead, he referenced a seemingly omnipotent power much more influential than the ‘will of the people.’
“My belief is that the control is the Deep State, and people have to realize that,” he said.
Michael Lofgren, a former Republican congressional aide, has written extensively on the Deep State and describes it as “a hybrid entity of public and private institutions ruling the country according to consistent patterns in season and out, connected to, but only intermittently controlled by, the visible state whose leaders we choose.”
“The Deep State does not consist of the entire government. It is a hybrid of national security and law enforcement agencies: the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Justice Department.”
Lofgren notes the financial system is also under the influence of the Deep State and that certain areas of the judicial system, namely, the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, are manipulated by the opaque, shadowy apparatus.
As Ron Paul observed:
“Those powers are already there and I think those individuals who are behind the scenes who really find out what the policies are going to be, regardless of who’s in office, know exactly what we argue: that this place, our country, and our financial system and foreign policy is very precarious and something terrible is going to happen.”
One of those things, he argued, is the continued usurpation of civil liberties:
“This is where the real enemy is right now. Sure, we have to have a national defense. But I don’t agitate and read and study and try to change people’s minds because I think somebody is going to invade us. I want to change foreign policy so we are less in danger. But really, the greatest danger since 9/11 has been the taking away of our liberties. Our civil liberties have been undermined. This will only add fuel to the problems we have already.”
“We do accept the notion that our elections are rigged, but we certainly don’t come down on the side of believing that the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA will unrig our elections.”
“It is a distressing thing to think that — [this is probably a] true statement — no matter what you do [with] your vote, whether you vote or not, the Deep State is in charge and that is what we have to deal with.”
Nevertheless, Paul remained positive:
“But it is good to be politically active, to preach this message, to show people exactly what the government’s doing to us and why we should be involved.”
“But of course, the whole purpose, in the end, has to be that we change our economic philosophy, we change our attitude about protection of our civil liberties, and we change our attitude about getting involved in the internal affairs of other nations, occupying other countries, and being involved in nation-building. If we do those three little things then, believe me, the world would be much more peaceful and we would all be much more prosperous.”
With permission from
I’ve heard and read a great deal about the supposed, upcoming Event in recent years. More and more YouTube channels are saying that the Event is imminent, or is happening now, and will entail a shift from 3D to 5D reality, that there will be a blast of white light that will influence everyone on the planet, that timelines are merging, that the Earth realm will switch from duality to unity, that twin flames will (re)unite, that there will be many high profile arrests in the news, an economic reset, and on and on it goes, in an endless chorus of pseudo-spiritual, pseudo-astrological, pseudo-scientific, pseudo-political, psycho-babble.
At times I wonder if all of this noisy digital confusion is but a complex ruse by the alphabet soup agencies to pull the wool over gullible people’s eyes, the better to implement the next step in whatever nefarious plot they have to strengthen the dark grip they have on humanity and the planet. Other days I wonder if those who are pushing the idea of the Event are simply happily self-deluded cranks who mean well, but who have a tenuous grip on reality and delight in attracting hordes of similarly self-deluded followers to their YouTube channels.
At still other times I am persuaded that the sheer number of people who are having dreams, visions and psychic downloads of information about the approaching Event cannot all be wrong, that something really must be going on.
And then there is the fact that I and many others are vibrating, in my case for the past two years. I don’t know why I am vibrating so much, but I am. The vibrations can sometime be impressively vigorous, though they never hurt or cause any sort of pain or discomfort. My dream state has also changed, become more mysterious and enigmatic in a quirky, hard-to-describe sort of way.
So maybe something really is getting ready to happen. Maybe my almost daily vibrations mean that I am an early warning sensor of the preliminary, energetic bow waves of an immense, indescribable, approaching, ever closer SOMETHING.
It’s apparent that something is going on, something unusual. It’s not just that the weather has been out of the ordinary all over the world, or that the oceans and great forests are being destroyed. or that the tidal wave of global corruption is reaching a furious crescendo, or that craziness of every variety is more and more on public view on every hand — no, it’s all of that and much more.
For example, who would have imagined that Meng Hongwei, the President of Interpol, the international police agency based in Lyon, France, could very publicly disappear, as he did last week, and end up being held incommunicado by the government in China. Someone or something very powerful clearly wanted him out of the way and out of public circulation. This is an unprecedented occurrence.
Or who would imagine that dissident political journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, could walk into the Saudi Arabian consulate in Turkey, as happened last week, and evidently be killed and cut into pieces by a 15 man hit squad flown in from Saudi Arabia especially to murder him and subsequently dismember his corpse. It’s surreal. Clearly someone very powerful wanted him dead and physically obliterated.
And then there is the strange case of the Dutch Wikileaks associate of Julian Assange, Arjen Kamphuis, who abruptly disappeared in Norway several weeks ago, and has not been seen or heard from since. Did he know something that made powerful people nervous?
I am beginning to wonder if perhaps the long-rumored arrests, military tribunals and executions that the alt-right on the Internet in the USSA have been talking about for the last year or two have begun and will play out far differently than most people think.
What if those who are intended to be incarcerated, disappeared, killed and tortured in Guantanamo are, in reality, political dissidents, dissident journalists, political activists and the like, in order to clamp down a global, totalitarian dictatorship?
What if the Chinese Communist Party, the Saudi Arabian government, the USSA government, the U.K. government and more are all secretly in cahoots?
I ask simply because these are unprecedented events.
What if I am on a list to be disappeared? I am a publicly known political dissident. What if you are on a list to be disappeared?
I know that my blog articles are read by people in Hollywood, the City of London, Wall Street, the USSA military, the alphabet soup agencies and by a whole slew of so-called, ordinary people in all walks of life, all over the world. Some of my readers have money and clout, far more money than I have ever had or am likely to have, and far more clout than I have ever had, or am likely to have.
But I am telling you quite plainly that none of that matters. Whether rich and with clout, or an ordinary man or woman in the street, you, too, can be disappeared. It can happen at any time. Indeed, lots of people are disappeared every day, all over the world. Read the above examples again. Men in black, shall we say, show up and say: “We know that you have been disloyal, that you have disloyal thoughts. Would you step this way?” And they wave a gun in your face, or put a knife to your throat.
That is how the CIA rolls, for example. I was a window washer for many years and had many clients from all walks of life, including some who worked for various military and non-military “agencies” in a variety of capacities. I remember well talking with a former military intelligence operative and asking him whether the CIA had ever tried to recruit him. His response was direct and informative: “Yes, they did, but I turned them down. Richard, the CIA even kill their own!”
That’s everything you need to know right there, isn’t it? They’re your buddies, they only want to help, one for all and all for one! — right up until the time they slip a knife blade through your ribs, or put a black hood over your head and take you away by armed force.
When I was in graduate school, one day I was talking with one of my committee members, who was affiliated with two intelligence agencies, and yes, for those who are naive, the universities in the USSA are full of intelligence agency operatives — DHS, CIA, NSA, Mossad, FBI, Air Force Intelligence, Army Intelligence, DOE, NASA, etc. The academic world is a corrupt front for the deep state. Anyway, this “professor” point blank threatened me. He looked at me and calmly said: “One day, years from now, you’ll be walking down the street in another city, and a car will pull up beside you. The door will open and the people inside will tell you to get in the car and you will, because you’ll know them.”
Is that what’s about to happen, for tens of thousands of people, all over the world, to get rid of investigative journalists, dissident academics, political dissidents, environmental activists, human rights campaigners? Has it already started? Has this business of the supposed, coming “Event” been hijacked? Is it being rolled out just to bamboozle and fool the gullible, so as to provide more cover for even greater darkness and violence to come?
I truly do not know.
That is my concern on the one hand.
On the other hand, supposing that Donald Trump and his henchmen really do round up and arrest 60,000 high profile, wickedly “bad” boys and girls, and imprison and/or execute them, that also necessarily implies major societal, political and military upheaval, i.e., a very strong probability of martial law or naked, military dictatorship. There’s no way that county sheriffs and local police departments are going to round up and imprison 60,000 powerful bigwigs with clout and lock them in the county jail. It won’t be like that.
In short, your life will never again be the same. Don’t imagine that it will be thrilling or exciting that Donald Trump is finally draining the Swamp. Oh, no, not at all. He won’t be the one in charge. He’ll merely do and say what his handlers order him to do and say.
There will be armored personnel carriers in the streets, and guys with burp guns and automatic rifles patrolling the cities and highways, and stationed at freeway and interstate highway interchanges and toll booths, with military arrest powers. If they don’t like the way you talk or look at them, you’ll have a serious problem.
That is the way military law is. The generals will run the show. You will have no rights beyond the right to submit to military command without question or complaint.
It will be overt, red-white-and-blue fascism. There will be flags, presidential proclamations, emergency warnings, pledges of allegiance, loyalty tests and more.
And it will all be designed to Make America Great Again. \sarcasm\
So pardon me if I am skeptical about the “Event” that everyone is talking about. It may well be that much better days are coming, but to me it looks like first there will probably be a period of great confusion, chaos and collapse of many economic, political and societal systems, all accompanied by a whole suite of major climatological, geological, ecological, agricultural, hydrological and military events, some of which may possibly be very major, mass mortality incidents with a stunning level of destruction and loss of life.
How The Event May Plausibly Unfold
In the midst of the rising confusion and chaos, which is already visible, by the way, the Event may organically take root and sprout up, one new shoot at a time, until the old falls away, and the new, with a positive, humane, constructive, creative, life-enhancing focus seamlessly takes its place.
I suggest to you that this will occur via human, humane, personal actions that are carried out on a hands on, face to face basis, within the sphere of everyday human interaction.
Indeed, it has already begun. Let me provide you one ordinary example from my everyday life, here in Ecuador. Three weeks ago at midday, I was walking down the sidewalk on one of the major streets in Quito. Cars and buses were coming and going in the street. People were passing me on the sidewalk in front and behind, and suddenly, blocking the sidewalk right in front of me, stood a young man covered in blood. His head was drenched in blood, his neck was bloody, his hands were crimson with blood, his jacket and pants had blood on them. I was stunned. I was even more surprised when he improbably asked me for ten dollars. He blurted out that he had just been been assaulted, which was self-evident, and robbed. He again asked me if I could give him ten dollars. I told him that I couldn’t give him ten dollars, but that he needed immediate medical attention.
I quickly sized him up. He had been savagely slashed with a sharp weapon — a box cutter, a barber’s razor, a switch blade knife, something like that. His scalp had been laid open. I could see his skull. The blood was visibly running from the wound. He had also been slashed on both sides of his neck, and those wounds were also visibly pumping blood. Though his assailant(s) had failed to sever a major artery or vein, in that I couldn’t see blood spurting out with force, he was losing quite a bit of blood. I noted that he was woozy and wobbly from loss of blood. I had no idea if he might not have also been stabbed or cut elsewhere in a less visible place. His clothing had been slashed in a couple of places. It is possible that there were other wounds that I couldn’t see.
He was in shock. He wasn’t thinking clearly. He was not aware of the gravity of his condition.
He was babbling. He told me that he was an engineer. He said that he was not Ecuadorean. I replied that his nationality didn’t matter to me.
No one else had tried to help him. Incredibly, people continued passing by as if nothing were happening. My immediate concern was the very real danger that he might imminently bleed out and die, right there on the sidewalk.
In that brief period he almost stumbled off the sidewalk and in front of a passing bus. He was in extremis.
I had to act. I decided to take advantage of the fact that he was in shock, that his body was instinctively pumping adrenaline. I grabbed him firmly by the upper arm and said: “Let’s go.” There was a public hospital with a 24 hour emergency room a few blocks away. I judged that if I kept him moving and propped him up that he could probably make it there. I abandoned the thought of calling an ambulance — he was in bad shape and might have died before it got there 45 minutes later — or what if the ambulance never came?
So I marched him briskly down the sidewalk toward the hospital. A block away from the hospital, we came upon a couple of policemen directing traffic who noticed his plight and came to his aid. I relinquished control to them. They took him firmly by both arms and accompanied him the final block to the emergency room.
So there you have it. That’s how the Event occurs. It’s very nuts and bolts, and hands on. It’s in your face. It is dirty, gritty and maybe even bloody, with suffering, maybe very great suffering. And you have to concretely decide by your actions which side you come down on. It’s not airy-fairy mysticism.
Parsing what happened, you have the bad guy(s), the worst sort of 3D hell, out to rob and cut and slash and kill, right in front of everyone at midday in a large city. Naked evil. Feral demons on the loose. These bipedal, savage animals are out there, in Chicago, New York, New Orleans, London, Paris, Los Angeles, Quito, Mexico City, Johannesburg, etc. It is the reality of this degraded Earth realm in which we live and breathe. Pretending it is otherwise is a fool’s errand.
Then there is the 5D part, where the victim, who was almost certainly having the very worst day of his entire life up until that juncture, had the blind luck to stumble across someone like me. Now I am not saying that I am a spiritually realized 5D being, because I ‘m just some guy like you; rather, what I am saying is that I consciously chose to initiate an ordinary sequence of common-sense, hands on, human actions that progressively, naturally transformed a violent, criminal, evil, potentially fatal attack into a higher order, life-saving outcome that undoubtedly saved the man’s life, as opposed to simply passing by and permitting him to bleed out on the sidewalk, as people walked around him.
Note the really important part: my very ordinary actions in short order enlisted the aid of two policemen, who then engaged the help of nurses and doctors in the emergency room, who then provided medical assistance to the gravely wounded victim, and in subsequent days and weeks I have noticed more neighborhood police patrols in that immediate sector of Quito, which will serve to prevent others from being similarly attacked, robbed and even potentially killed. My actions set in motion a wider, positive, ripple effect in the victim’s life and beyond. That is 5D. It is very human.
As this chaotic, violent mayhem descends on the world, and the process is already well underway, people everywhere, like you and me, are presented with similar concrete opportunities to act within the sphere of our own daily lives. We don’t have to look very far or hard to identify opportunities to be of human service. They pop up right in front of us.
I had the option of saying to myself: “This looks like way more trouble than it is worth. Who knows what’s going on here? The guy is covered with blood. What if bad guys are lurking nearby and decide to attack me, too? No, it’s better just to walk on by and avoid involving myself in this man’s drama. It’s his problem, not mine.”
Indeed, in that very instant other passers-by were making precisely that calculation. No one did what I did. I acted on the spur of the moment. I didn’t do any mental calculation, beyond deciding that whatever I was on the way to do was nowhere near as important as helping the savagely wounded man in front of me. So I instantly abandoned what I was on my way to do and immediately focused on the pressing need of the man in front of me.
And that is the way that 5D will come to cover this planet with its grace. You will see suffering. You will see blood. You will see violence and evil. Those things are happening now.
You will do something in response. Or not. And what you do, or do not do, has everything in the world to do with whether we will have a grim, violent, hideous 3D world, or a glorious, humane and wonderfully fulfilling 5D world.
No one is coming to magically sprinkle mystical sparkles in the air, as we watch YouTube videos about the Event and obsess about the day that the 5D world arrives. The Event arrives the day that we personally live it out on this planet in our everyday lives and not one minute sooner.
In other words, the Event is a way of being. So how do you want to be? How do you want the world to be?
I’m just some guy in South America, and you’re someone in North America or Europe or wherever. We are the ones we are waiting for.
Welcome to Earth. It is our great privilege and responsibility to create the planet and society that we have always dreamed of.
We are the ones who will do that. If not us, then who?
Using ordinary means, face to face, personal means, we will achieve an extraordinary result. This is the heart and soul of alchemy. It’s not magical woo-woo, it’s daily life, one day at a time.
If you find personal value or meaning in this blog, won’t you please support my continued work? Contact me at: email@example.com for how to donate.
I accept Bitcoin at: 1Dht92qEzCmvuLRKQD2MSJ1JdQ7rFRMVdA
I receive Amazon.com e-gift cards in any amount at firstname.lastname@example.org using the link: https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Amazon-…
Sometimes when I step back from the overwhelming flow of geopolitical insanity I’m reminded of the old adage that coming close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
To which, I always add, “And nuclear war.”
I’ve been watching the build up to the operation to liberate Idlib in Syria which includes the endless neocon and Israeli moral preening warning Assad against using chemical weapons with a sense of detachment. And I keep thinking to myself, “Do they really think we’re that stupid?”
Three times the chemical weapons canard has been used to justify further aggression against Syria and three times a full-blown U.S. invasion has been averted. First by Vladimir Putin’s deft diplomacy and General Dunford’s refusal to implement a ‘no-fly zone’ in 2013 and then during the Trump years with ineffectual air strikes on Syrian airbases.
How much of that ineffectuality of those airstrikes were designed by Defense Secretary James Mattis to avoid a wider conflagration and how much was Russian EW/missile defense is anyone’s guess.
The truth most likely lies somewhere in the middle.
That is why everyone who is worrying about the U.S.’s blustering over Syria’s Idlib campaign needs to take a big step back and think the scenario through.
Because the neoconservatives and Israel are forcing the situation to its crisis point, thinking they can manipulate the headlines and the levers of power to still eke out a victory in Syria that will allow them to continue on their quest to destroy Russia first and conquer the rest of Asia after that.
And they are willing to blackmail us with the threat of WWIII over 50,000 head-chopping mercenaries to get their cookie.
However, when you factor in the men actually in charge of the U.S. military chain of command, Trump and Mattis, and you realize the lengths to which Mattis’ field commanders have gone to avoid direct confrontation with Russian forces, you come to the conclusion that the men who will actually fight this war the neoconservative provocateurs and laptop bombardiers are clamoring for won’t actually pull the trigger.
The reasons for this are manifest.
First, the potential for the conflict to go nuclear is too high for rational men to take that chance. Mattis and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu are hard-bitten, no-nonsense men. Neither underestimates the other’s resolve to defend their men and national interests.
So, once the shooting starts expect it to get ugly quick. Therefore it is unlikely to get to that point.
Second, there is no profit in that kind of escalation for the people who profit from war. The banks and the military weapons makers thrive in low-intensity, frozen conflicts which keep sales flowing and governments indebted to pay for them.
In an age of nuclear weapons, proxy wars fought by mercenaries with drones are far more profitable than any large-scale invasions. I hate to say this but from a discounted cash flow perspective Lockheed-Martin wants predictability to cover their quarterly dividends to shareholders more than they want to bring about the supposed Zionist plan for Greater Israel.
Sorry to burst everyone’s conspiracy theories.
Third and most importantly, the U.S. cannot afford a non-nuclear confrontation with Russia that punctures the illusion of U.S. military superiority. Too much of the world’s confidence in the dollar itself rests in the U.S.’s ability to project power and defend its interests militarily.
This confidence is a mixture of that military capability and the U.S.’s traditional position of a country with an excellent legal framework within which to do business. It is fashionable among geopolitical critics, myself included, to get caught up in the rhetoric and projection of a sclerotic and weakening United States, but legally it is still one of the best places on earth to do business.
But, as Martin Armstrong pointed out recently, Trump’s domestic opposition has openly declared sedition against him this week in the New York Times. Former Secretary of State, John Kerry, is doing the talk show circuit calling for a constitutional crisis over Trump allegedly being unfit for office. And George Soros is paying protesters to disrupt the confirmation hearing of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.
If allowed to run its course to impeachment in the event of the Republicans losing control of the House in November, this would be a death blow to the U.S.’s reputation as a nation of laws rather than a nation of men. The U.S. dollar would not recover from such a blow to its credibility, especially in light of Trump’s nearly-unhinged use of sanctions and threats of tariffs, weaponizing the dollar indiscriminately.
The grey-market appeal of cryptocurrencies, and the finality of every transaction encoded on a blockchain, has made…
And this is why Vladimir Putin openly showed his hand to the world in March. Strategically, he let everyone know that any confrontation between Russia and the U.S. would result in the U.S losing its status as the world’s pre-eminent military power.
This is why the neocons and the U.S./U.K. Deep State have been so adamant in accelerating its provocations against Russia. They have to present us with the Faustian bargain of WWIII before Russia has these weapon systems fully deployed.
It’s also why Trump and Mattis are allowing them to have their head. It feeds Trump’s “Art of the Deal” strategy for negotiations while also allowing him the opportunity to save face after Idlib is liberated regardless of whether another chemical weapons attack is staged.
I think we won’t see one here.
The way out of Syria for the U.S. with its face-saved is to thunder and bluster, threaten fire and brimstone just like Trump did with Kim Jong-un and use that to explain why Assad showed restraint and didn’t use chemical weapons this time.
I can even see Trump tweeting something about three strikes and he would be out.
Once Idlib is liberated Mattis will happily begin pulling vulnerable troops out of al-Tanf and Afghanistan. That’s why I believe he went there to the surprise of the CIA house-organ Washington Post last week.
And then the neocon and Israeli muddying of the waters will move to the Geneva talks, but we’ll cross that Rubicon when it approaches.
Then the next day to consolidate the book’s lurid claims, the New York Times, America’s so-called “paper of record” publishes an oped allegedly by an administration insider essentially “confirming” Woodward’s tell-all account.
What’s more, the sense of paranoia within the Trump administration will now be ratcheted up to levels which make normal staff working and communications almost paralyzed. It’s a perfect psy-ops to explode chaos and mistrust among Trump’s inner circle.
But who really is Bob Woodward? He is famed as one of the Washington Post reporters who exposed the Watergate affair in 1974 which forced then President Richard Nixon to quit office in ignominy. The exposé of Nixon’s wiretapping on Democrat rivals is commonly seen as the high-point of American journalism, and thus Woodward as a paragon of journalistic integrity.
But as Russ Baker contends in his groundbreaking book, Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, the Watergate and Nixon affair is not all that it seems. And neither is Woodward. There is credible evidence that the American Deep State of the military-intelligence apparatus used the Watergate scandal as a way to get rid of Nixon whose febrile mental state was becoming a concern to them. Woodward, who had a background in Navy intelligence was suspiciously a prodigy journalist who rapidly rose to cover what became the scandal that ended Nixon’s presidency.
Woodward’s newly published book on the Trump White House makes a damning case of a president who is allegedly despised and feared by his inner circle. It claims that staff have engineered an “administrative coup” against Trump, preventing him from taking key decisions, and generally portraying him as a farcical figure. The book seeds the concept among the public of a necessary coup against Trump.
This is where Woodward’s prestigious Watergate reputation comes into play. His role in that affair as a supposed champion of truth and of holding power to account is then invoked to give the seal of accuracy to his book on Trump. If Woodward says the president is a basket case, then it must be so, so goes the anticipated general public reaction.
In order to drive the message home, the New York Times follows up with an oped claiming to be written by an anonymous official within the Trump administration who “confirms” what Woodward’s book is claiming.
When the Woodward book came out, there were staunch rebuttals of its claims from senior White House officials. In particular the Defense Secretary James Mattis, who was supposedly one of Woodward’s main sources, saying that Trump was an idiot who wanted to assassinate Syrian President Bashar al Assad. Mattis dismissed the book and its author as having a “rich imagination”. There were also similar putdowns from Trump’s Chief of Staff John Kelly and his ambassador the United Nations Nikki Haley.
Trump himself scorned Woodward’s book, ‘Fear’, as a shoddy “work of fiction”. Thanks to the publicity, the title has become a “best-seller” within days of being published.
The pushback from the Trump White House was of course to be expected, given the claims from such an imminent journalist. That’s why the New York Times oped is a crucial capping on the claims, especially since the oped is supposedly written by a senior administration official.
The New York Times says it knows the name of the official who wrote the piece. But it is not disclosing his or her identity, as the supposed author requests.
The public therefore can’t know the authenticity of the oped. Was it really written by a Trump administration senior official? Or some low-level staff? Or maybe not even an actual member of staff? The author of the oped claims: “I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.”
But the main purpose is the sowing of grave doubt in the public mind and among Trump’s senior staff at the White House. The oped appears to confirm the claims made by Woodward about a dysfunctional president who is being handled by staff working in “resistance” to his “impetuousness” for the “safety of America”. It also goes further by saying that the dysfunction ultimately stems from Trump’s “immorality”.
Ultimately, it is virtually impossible to prove the veracity of Woodward’s book and the subsequent “confirmatory” article in the New York Times. Woodward’s book has been denied by supposedly “key sources”. The authenticity of the author of the New York Times oped is a matter of trust in that newspaper’s editors. The so-called paper of record has lately been a massive purveyor of baseless scare stories slandering Russia. For many critics it is not a reliable nor ethical source, as is claimed.
But the point is that a gravely damaging impact has been inflicted on the Trump presidency. His ability to rebuff critics with his customary braggadocio of slamming “fake news” appears this time to be mortally wounded.
This is not meant to be a defense of the Trump administration nor of this president. Trump’s White House certainly appears to be an unorthodox place, as indicated by the high turnover of senior staff over the past two years since his election.
Trump’s personality certainly comes across as impetuous and petty. His personal also life seems tainted with deceit and lewd scandals.
Nevertheless he is the president that Americans voted for. And so far, he has not done anything out of the ordinary for American presidents. He is the usual run-of-the-mill guardian of big business and the oligarch system of enriching the super wealthy. Trump, like most of his predecessors, should also be prosecuted for war crimes over his bombing of Syria and Yemen. But all those misdemeanors and crimes are par for the course for US presidents.
The one thing that Trump has done out of the ordinary, as far as the Deep State opponents are concerned, is his refusal so far to ramp up aggression with Russia. That has always been the unacceptable problem with Trump as president for the unelected imperial planners of the Deep State.
The so-called “Russiagate” charade has failed to oust Trump due to its embarrassing dearth of evidence on alleged collusion with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. The wider American public have simply not bought into that drama which has been concocted by political and media elites to nix Trump.
Given the futility of those efforts, the Deep State may have now found at last the effective instrument with which to eliminate Trump from the White House. You enlist a “star journalist” with yesteryear’s Deep State operative experience, get the supposed paper of record to quickly “confirm” the salacious details, and then wait for the desired “administrative coup” to become a popularly demanded reality.
The anonymous Op-Ed essay published in the New York Times this week which was attributed to “a senior Trump official” was, in fact, written by the Times itself, according to American economist and author Dr. Paul Craig Roberts.
Dr. Roberts, who was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, made the remarks in an article, titled “I know who the ‘senior official’ is who wrote the NY Times Op-Ed” published on Thursday.
On Wednesday, the New York Times published an Op-Ed by an anonymous “senior official” in the White House. According to the article, many senior members of President Donald Trump’s administration are so alarmed by his “erratic” and “amoral” behavior that they are actively working to undermine him and protect the country from his worst impulses.
In response, Dr. Roberts wrote that the Op-Ed “is an obvious forgery. As a former senior official in a presidential administration, I can state with certainty that no senior official would express disagreement anonymously. Anonymous dissent has no credibility. Moreover, the dishonor of it undermines the character of the writer. A real dissenter would use his reputation and the status of his high position to lend weight to his dissent.”
“The New York Times’ claim to have vetted the writer also lacks credibility, as the New York Times has consistently printed extreme accusations against Trump and against Vladimir Putin without supplying a bit of evidence. The New York Times has consistently misrepresented unsubstantiated allegations as proven fact. There is no reason whatsoever to believe the New York Times about anything,” he added.
The analyst said this “forgery is an attempt to break up the Trump administration by creating suspicion throughout the senior level. If Trump falls for the New York Times’ deception, a house cleaning is likely to take place wherever suspicion falls. A government full of mutual suspicion cannot function.”
He added that the New York Times “serves the interests of the military/security complex to hold on to enemies with whom Trump prefers to make peace.”
“The level of mendacity and evil in this plot against Trump is unequaled in history,” he opined.
The author is a Deep State person: Trump
Meanwhile, President Trump said on Thursday night that the Op-Ed is “very unfair to our country.”
“It’s a very unfair thing,” he told Fox News’ Pete Hegseth in an interview conducted before the crowd at his Thursday night rally in Montana. “It’s very unfair to our country and to the millions of people that voted really for us. They voted for us.”
The president also suggested that the author of the Times article could be a career government employee representing the Deep State — a term deep state refers to a secretive network of influential members of government agencies or the military operating outside the democratic system.
Trump and his political allies have made accusations about a shadowy entity within the US government bureaucracy that is determined to de-legitimize his administration since his inauguration.
“It may not be a Republican,” he said. “It may not be a conservative. It may be a Deep State person that’s been there a long time.”
The unsigned Times piece appeared to reinforce the claims made in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward, excerpts of which were made public Tuesday, that describes a virtual cabal of high-minded White House and cabinet officials scheming to prevent Trump from taking decisions damaging to the US economy and national security.
The Washington Post, which obtained an advance copy of the book by the veteran chronicler of modern presidents, reported Tuesday that Woodward describes Trump manically pressing his staff for actions that could lead to major conflict — leaving them little choice but to disregard his orders.
The White House has condemned Woodward’s book as “nothing more than fabricated stories,” and Trump called it “a work of fiction.”
The Collapse of the American Empire – Lecture Featuring Chris Hedges
[Q&A begins at 46:13 mins in.]
The Deep State Old Media were not able to pin down both leaders during their presser yesterday. This is a positive sign that both Putin and Trump are decisive in their resolve to reestablish a peaceful cooperation for both countries, which is really what the world needs today.
Yes, there were similar summits before this many decades ago, but what makes this one totally different is that it comes on the hell of a successful global effort to pin the Deep State down financially and geopolitically via China’s Belt and Road Initiative spanning multiple continents, including Africa, Latin America, Southeast Asia, most of Eurasia and soon even the United States itself once it is fully restored as a constitutional republic.
Monday’s Helsinki summit will be based entirely on what the two Presidents discuss and agree upon at the outset, purely between the two of them alone, unaccompanied by any aides or officials whatsoever, in a one-on-one meeting with no time-limit, which is another indication that the Deep State is not in on this one.
Here’s the Deep State’s last ditch effort to retard the summit before this day…
(July 13, 2018) Desperate to head off a possible accommodation between President Trump and President Putin, which could result in a principled approach to a viable peace, the British, Robert Mueller, and the “resist” holdover forces in the U.S. intelligence community and news media have staged a trifecta of calculated information warfare operations within the last 24 hours to sabotage the summit.
In the United States, two interrelated events occurred. First, embattled FBI Agent Peter Strzok appeared before a joint House hearing on Thursday to claim that the Republicans on the House Judiciary and Government Oversight Committees were doing “Putin’s work” for him by continuing to examine the British and Obama Administration/Democratic Party origins of Russiagate. Strzok’s charge, obviously choreographed with Congressional Democrats, was greeted by them with Jacobin cheers and endlessly cycled in the news media. The Democrats otherwise sought to obstruct the discredited FBI agent’s testimony by any and all means necessary to the delight of the fawning news media and the “resist” social media universe. Strzok was the lead FBI case agent on both the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the Trump Russiagate investigation. The Justice Department’s independent Inspector General found that Strzok’s prioritization of the Trump Russiagate investigation over the Clinton email investigation was not free from bias, an inconvenient fact largely glossed over in Thursday’s staged event. Strzok and his mistress, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe counsel, Lisa Page, exchanged daily texts vowing to stop Trump’s election, disparaging Trump’s supporters, and declaring themselves the saviors of the nation from the catastrophic danger they saw in Trump.
Less than 24 hours later, Robert Mueller today indicted 12 members of Russia’s GRU military intelligence branch for allegedly hacking the DNC, John Podesta, and various other Democratic Party entities, in order to interfere in the 2016 U.S. elections against Hillary Clinton. Russia’s alleged cyber activities are, of course, the central premise of Robert Mueller’s entire witch hunt against President Donald Trump. Democratic leader Chuck Schumer immediately demanded that Trump cancel his meeting with Putin based on the indictment.
Reached today, after conducting a quick review of Mueller’s indictment, former NSA Technical Director William Binney declared the document to be “a fabrication.” “The only actual forensic investigations performed on available data regarding ‘hacks’ of the DNC are independent investigations assessed and approved by a group of us at the Veterans Intelligence Professionals for Sanity,” Binney noted. (See, Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence, and A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack.) He continued, “the FBI never even bothered to examine the DNC computers, relying instead on the DNC and Atlantic Council cyber contractor Crowd Strike for its evidence. Our analysis demonstrated that the Guccifer 2.0 and DC Leaks personas were created inside the United States. Our analysis also fully demonstrated that the transfer of the information was consistent with a download to a thumb drive, not transmission over the internet. Separate and apart from the VIPS analysis, Ray McGovern and I have consistently said that available data surrounding charges regarding ‘Russian hacking’ suggest that the CIA’s Vault 7 Cyber weapons arsenal enabling false attribution and ‘tell-tale’ signs in Cyrillic and other ‘obfuscation’ may be at work in a least some of this. Former Director of National Intelligence and former CIA Director John Brennan’s benighted views on Russia seem also to be in play over the past several years. Suffice it to add that, despite our assessment of John Brennan’s cyberoperations and false attribution programs at the CIA, Brennan’s geopolitical fixation on Russiagate, and despite our work with independent forensic analysts (or perhaps because of it), we have never been contacted by Robert Mueller or any Congressional investigative committee.”
Since members of the GRU are unlikely to present themselves to the U.S courts, nothing in Mueller’s indictment will ever have to be actually proved in a court of law. The indictment does demonstrate that substantial time was spent in creating a “save the appearances” version of a crime for the credulous after the Obama intelligence community’s initial presentation of an “assessment” of the hack never achieved general credibility beyond very gullible and technically challenged members of the U.S. press corps and the U.S. Congress. Moreover, with all the hullabaloo attached to Robert Mueller’s stunt, the fact remains that the DNC and John Podesta emails revealed a stunning and irrefutable truth: Hillary Clinton and the DNC were rigging the election against her Democratic primary opponent, Bernie Sanders. So much for “interference.”
The third element of this coordinated assault on the prospect of peace was the discovery of a bottle or vial of the so-called Novichok nerve agent allegedly used to poison former British spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. The bottle was discovered at the home of Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess in Amesbury, England. The British went on an international rampage around the March 4, 2018, Skripal poisoning claiming that it was Putin conducting a murder of a long-retired British spy on British territory in some form of retaliatory action, demanding war-like sanctions against Putin and Russia. When their claims failed to achieve substantive credibility, even with the British bioweapons lab, Porton Down, Rowley and Sturgess appeared as new victims of the nerve gas poisoning on June 30 and Sturgess subsequently died. The British press is filled with the imputation that the found vial will somehow be traceable back to Russia, a fact which eluded the original Skripal hoax.
These are desperate ploys and will not survive scrutiny outside their wave-like propaganda effect on the public mind. Strzok’s portrayal of himself as Captain America, hating Putin, hating Trump for being rational about Putin, hating the smell of Trump supporters, deriding the intelligence of every Trump voter, defending the country against the destabilizing destruction represented by Donald Trump, yet somehow able to “follow the facts, wherever, they lead” simply did not sell. As even CNN commented, his own texts, demonstrating both his overt bias and willingness to shape his official actions in that light, were fatally “damning.”
Here’s the key statements made which confirm the close coordination between the two leaders even prior to this summit.
For Trump to admit that the US and Russia possess 90% of nuclear weapons on the planet, thereby acknowledging its insanity because the US could not fly each one of them anyway without being intercepted and neutralized either by Earth-based countermeasures or off-world, suggests that there will be an honest effort to shift away from war-based economy into making this planet conform to the Space Age of infinite frontiers from hereon, as hinted thereto during Trump’s inaugural address.
It is, of course, the American media that is still the problem, including the somewhat pro-Trump Fox News, where Putin is not allowed to enlighten its audience.
And it’s not just the media…
That’s a House Democrat’s call to a US miltiary coup against Trump after the former CIA director John Brennan called US President Donald Trump’s joint news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin “treasonous.”
Assuming that this event is just one of those vaudeville shows to fool the uninitiated, then we are indeed cursed and only a real grassroots effort will rectify the world as it is. But are you ready and willing to put the bill for such a scenario?
The world is moving in for the better because the people wills it. The Deep State will do all it can to preserve its privileged position, but if we continue to enlighten ourselves and do concrete actions that would ultimately undermine its power, then we’ve won.
It’s what you do today that will make a lot of difference tomorrow. We may not live to see that day happening, but the next generation deserves none of what we’ve experienced most of our lives. So, the best time to do a little something is now when we can still coordinate our actions against a common enemy.
“I was very pleased with what went on today,” Paul said. He added that if the two leaders ever had a serious discussion, “I guess it would come out on how much we’ve been involved when we shouldn’t be involved, for instance in Ukraine, and how that occurred.”
“But if they don’t want to concentrate on those problems and they want to look forward I think that is great… I think the next best step ever would be for us to reassess this and say that Trump’s going in the right direction and talk him into getting rid of the sanctions on Russia.”
Paul also addressed the US media, calling it a “big problem” because “they’re almost unanimously endorsing the idea that we have to have an enemy, and at this point – especially for the last 20 years – they’ve been working very hard to make Russia the enemy, and I think this is wrong.”
When asked by RT why the US media already seems angry about the meeting between the two presidents, he said: “It’s hard to say, but we usually describe that there is a secret government that likes to control things and most people know what we talk about when we talk about the ‘deep state.’ And they do have a lot of clout, they are very much involved in the media and the leadership of both parties, so both parties and the media are very, very, annoyed with Trump [being so] independent.”
Paul also addressed the recent indictment of 12 Russian individuals by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, saying there is “an argument why Russia is an enemy and we have to quit talking to them and I think it’s just a propaganda stunt and I think those indictments were more about propaganda than seeking justice.”
The retired Libertarian senator’s comments came just after Trump and Putin met in Helsinki, holding a joint press conference in which they once again reiterated that no meddling or collusion had taken place during the 2016 presidential election.