Archives for category: false flag

Green Cheese - 1

When the Moon is Made of Green Cheese

Alternatively, this essay could be titled ‘The Intercept Takes a Deep, Deep Dive’ and is a continuation of the series on Russophobe Pierre Omidyar’s and his associate Glenn Greenwald’s flagship publication inserting either incredibly incompetent or, alternatively, false flag journalism into the public discourse. Parts one & two linked HERE [1] and HERE [2]

Now, before we delve into The Intercept’s most recent misapprehension of reality, it should be pointed out it doesn’t matter whether the endeavor is result of incompetence or a deliberate misinformation, the result is the same; constructing a false perception for those many liberals and progressives who trust The Intercept, a trust based largely on the reputation of Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald should aggressively address this misinformation because known facts correcting the record, however those facts may be uncomfortable, are there. And I have informed Greenwald by providing those very facts via email (he hasn’t responded.) What are those facts? It is beyond ‘the preponderance of the evidence’ the Russians did not ‘hack’ the DNC mails, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt. It was an insider leak and that leaker was almost certainly Seth Rich, with the leaker’s identity only waiting the speaking out of former United Kingdom Ambassador Craig Murray, who has met with the DNC insider who leaked the mails:

murray_wikileaks-1

Screenshot from Craig Murray’s website ^ of a screenshot quoting Murray at The Guardian: “I know who leaked them, and they certainly are not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

I’ve also emailed Murray on more than one occasion, including this occasion, when I’d stated to him:

“Your silence on the DNC leaker’s identity only reinforces and grows the utter contempt you’re deserving of; considering the damage the western propaganda machine is causing to international relations with the ongoing information operation”

When the moon is made of green cheese is when The Intercept publishes ‘the Russians did it’ propaganda lie in flat contradiction of known facts:

Binney’s claim that the email theft was committed by an insider at the DNC also helps fuel one of the more bizarre conspiracy theories that has gained traction on the right: that the murder of a young DNC staffer last year was somehow connected to the data theft. Binney said he mentioned the case of Seth Rich to Pompeo during their meeting.

“The meeting raises questions about Pompeo’s willingness to act as an honest broker between the intelligence community and the White House, and his apparent refusal to push back against efforts by the president to bend the intelligence process to suit his political purposes. Instead of acting as a filter between Trump and the intelligence community, Pompeo’s decision to meet with Binney raises the possibility that right-wing theories aired on Fox News and in other conservative media can now move not just from conservative pundits to Trump, but also from Trump to Pompeo and into the bloodstream of the intelligence community”

Binney, who independently came to a conclusion, with forensic analysis, matching the statement of Craig Murray, is somehow construed to be poisoning an intelligence agency with a long history of poisoning the media. In other words, when an intelligence professional, William Binney, at odds with ‘the Russians did it’ disinformation pervading American media, and Binney, no matter we all know Donald Trump is a mobster associated douche-bag, points out the facts are on Trump’s side in the DNC mails story, The Intercept claims the moon is made of green cheese and that makes us, all of us following the actual facts that is, right wing conspiracy theorists. Small wonder the CIA invented and promoted ‘conspiracy theory’ as a disinformation method; considering how this sordid business of lies sifts out:

The article is co-authored, and we begin with James Risen who, if you need reminding, was showered with his journalism awards following having blown an espionage story so badly, his employer, the New York Times, had to settle with the injured party. Well, that makes perfect sense in a ‘Christian’ society that rewards its’ losers. Following crucifixion, Risen was rewarded with journalism heaven (forgive the pun on his name, but you should by now know this author.) But then, there is a further odor to Risen; past whistle-blowers have, on occasion, pointed to the NYT (pronounced ‘nit’) bending over to ‘service’ the CIA in its National Security stories. So, it follows, one wonders how James Risen could have a career at NYT and write books on the CIA without smelling like a disinformation asset. The short answer is, he can’t. Especially now that Risen has ignored the most credible witness, Ambassador Murray, in effort to discredit intelligence professional William Binney, and keep ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ media hysteria alive. What a f**k.

“the Times ’ lead articles are not only contentious, if not fabricated, but are virtually devoid of actual news, consisting instead of claims made by US government and other official sources, who are usually unnamed. Bearing headlines such as “More Enemies Of the Kremlin End Up Dead,” “Russian Spies Said to Hack Systems Used in Clinton’s Run,” “Spy Agency Consensus Grows That Russia Hacked DNC,” and “Seeing in Email Breach a Trump-Putin Alliance,” these articles make sweeping and unsubstantiated assertions in order to present a slanted narrative aimed at justifying the reactionary foreign policy machinations cooked up by the US intelligence agencies and the State Department”

I do believe that is exactly what we see now, in the concerned article at The Intercept. Does anyone reading remember “Project Mockingbird”?

Now, recalling this site is about satire, we move on to the other author: Gay celebrity gossip columnist, er, I meant “investigative journalist, author, consultant, and television producer specializing in privacy, civil liberties, and surveillance issues”, Duncan Campbell, who had to have told Glenn Greenwald something like ‘let me slip you a bone(r), and we’ll take down the carrot-top President Moron (bless his little orange head) with a sexed-up story’ … Greenwald: YES! …

boner |ˈbōnər|
noun
N. Amer. informal a stupid mistake.
ORIGIN early 20th cent. (originally US): from bone + -er1.

So, ok, this is a president anyone in their right mind could despise, but ‘stupid mistake’ was lost in translation, because, being British and using the Oxford, Campbell didn’t realize ‘boner’ means something altogether different in American dialect these days. Or maybe it’s Campbell is old enough to be entering senility, the real origin of his stupid mistake. In any case, no matter how this Scots twit partnered with Risen and pitched what is Obama era Central Intelligence media poison with a post-Obama ‘Never Trump’ life of its own, to Greenwald’s Intercept, we have to look at another scenario, a scenario different to The Intercept Omidyar’s Russophobia, and Risen’s incompetence in a career associated with the NYT (pronounced ‘nit’), a known CIA disinformation outlet.

First, recall why America elected Trump, it’s not only what folk on the right could see, Bernies’ progressives and much of the ‘formerly sane’ center were put off by as well:

Hillary oinks - 1

Then, look at what the consequence had been, it’s not only folk on the left looking at this, it is much of the ‘formerly sane’ center can clearly see who the finger on the nuclear trigger belongs to:

It could be as simple as there is little sane insight these days, or that is to say no lie to oneself is too great, when it comes to The Intercept’s embrace of Central Intelligence Agency ‘lifers’ (a bureaucracy no director can control) post-Obama agenda to depose Trump; no matter ethics, morality, democratic principles, none of these, primarily because of the logic behind the American vote:

Some toilet paper is scented. Most toilet paper is flushed. It follows, some flushed toilet paper will smell good:

gag 1 |gag|
noun
a joke, especially one forming part of a comedy act.

or

gag 2 |gag|
verb
choke or retch: he gagged at the septic tank’s aroma.

Either definition is apropos to the candidates of either party, in what amounts to a duopoly case of ‘you can have your joke and we’ll force feed it to you too.’ Subsequently, in American politics, the expression ‘gag me’ should primarily be a case of:

double entendre |ˌdo͞obl ˌänˈtändrə|
noun (pl. double entendrespronunc.same)
a word or phrase open to two interpretations, one of which is usually risqué or indecent.
ORIGIN late 17th cent.: from obsolete French (now double entente), ‘double understanding.’

End

For those unfamiliar with ‘GLADIO’, this is the name assigned a known history of western democracies intelligence agencies unleashing terror on their own citizens for purpose of influencing or manipulating public opinion to the advantage (historically-typically) of the right wing in politics. In the history developed since GLADIO first spilled into the open in Europe in 1990, we see the Central Intelligence Agency was central to setting up the original cells. Although exposed for mass murders falsely blamed on left wing political movements, the initial GLADIO actors were never prosecuted and the apparatus behind GLADIO never shut down. There is a video documentary of GLADIO  (NATO’s secret armies) farther down this page, followed by more print information. Meanwhile, presented here are the holes in the stories of several USA mass shootings, raising the specter of ongoing GLADIO operations –

Most recent update 10 October 2017:

Gunshot victim testimony of what went on from inside the venue matches the previous analysis of multiple shooters:

Las Vegas, gunfire from at least two automatic weapons, analysis:

2nd, 19 second recording, clearly two automatic weapons:

All for the ‘fact’ of a lone shooter who must simultaneously work two automatic weapons like Rambo (and then conveniently commit suicide.) BUT, What I clearly hear is two separate calibers, two rates of fire, the heavier caliber a lower rate of fire at distance but steady, indicating it is belt fed. The lighter caliber with higher rate of fire is much closer and in bursts. It’s been 45 years but you never forget the nature of the noise, in fact you need to learn to accurately interpret the noise because it can give you critical information in a fluid combat circumstance. These are 2 separate weapons without question, employed from distinct locations.

Then, the Las Vegas Sheriff (going ‘off script’, read on) says the shooter had to have had help, at least in pulling the act together (setting it up)

If you follow the Sheriff over the entire (longer, following) interview, what becomes clear is, in his own words, the ‘facts’ he reports are coming from the FBI. Is the FBI corrupt? Oh yes. So, when we hear two automatic weapons discharging from separate locations, you have to look for openings in the ‘lone shooter’ story the FBI is feeding us.

Interesting ‘facts’ are 1) the ‘hero’ security guard is sent packing before the room is breached by the police team. Is this sanitizing witnesses? The other interesting fact is, the Sheriff states there was a second team hauled a large, heavy bag of weapons to the location in the midst of the operation. Is this opportunity to swap out weapons used? Did large quantities of ammo and, spent brass with associated weapons come up to the room and, a belt fed machine gun and associated ammo and spent brass & belt links go back down in that bag? 3) It has been reported there was a full hour passed after the shooting had stopped, with police on location, before the police forced their way into the ‘shooters’ room. This, coupled with ‘the adjacent room’ (adjoining suite) spoken of by the Sheriff, provides plausible separate entry and exit, with ample time to swap out the evidence.

Also, the Sheriff’s investigators don’t have access to the ‘shooters’ girlfriend, all this information will be fed via the FBI who appear have total control over all information.

An interesting aside, the ‘gentlemen’ (includes FBI ‘investigative’ leader) standing behind the Sheriff like minders, while giving very close attention to every reporter and every question asked, pass a note from one to the other at minute 32:17. What couldn’t wait to be known at that moment? These two guys seemed more interested in the reporting than the crime.

The full interview:

Prior ‘gladio’ updates:

Updated 23 July 2016:

GLADIO returns to Munich: “A Munich police spokesman says witnesses have reported seeing three shooters with “long guns” who attacked a McDonald’s in a city mall”

Munich_3_Shooters.jpg - 1

Three gunmen then magically morph into a single shooter who commits suicide: “A teenage German-Iranian gunman who killed nine people in a shooting spree at a busy Munich shopping centre and then committed suicide had likely acted alone, German police said Saturday”

Munich_3_Shooters_(2).jpg - 1

This preceding would appear to be the more recent USA GLADIO model re-exported to Europe; recalling there has never been a satisfactory explanation for how a recently sold in the USA military grade assault rifle was reported to be employed in the Paris Bataclan massacre: “Milojko Brzakovic of the Zastava arms factory told The Associated Press that the M92 semi-automatic pistol’s serial number matched one his company delivered to an American online arms dealer in May 2013. It was not clear how the gun got back to Europe”

As well at the Bataclan, a member of the band stating: “When I first got to the venue and walked in, I walked past the dude who was supposed to be the security guard for the backstage. I immediately went to the promoter and said: ‘Who’s that guy? I want to put another dude on. Eventually I found out that six or so [band security detail] wouldn’t show up at all.”

Moving on to the USA and the recent killing of police in Dallas, immediately, it is apparent the reporting is problematic; with initial reports of multiple snipers firing from elevated positions, which would be consistent with an initial high rate of police casualties. Most of the police appear to have been gunned down in the first minutes. It was also reported the fire (from multiple snipers) was “triangulated” or a professionally set up, coordinated ambush. Former CIA officer & clandestine service Afghanistan veteran William Hurd stated: “When gunfire started exchanging, you had folks in cross positions that were moving towards the target,” the Texas Republican told Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” program. “Usually, most folks that have never been in that situation are going the opposite direction. The level of coordination, there seemed to be some type of triangulation”

This information is also stated by the Dallas Chief of Police: “We believe these suspects were positioning themselves in a way to try to triangulate against officers,” Brown said”

But within 48 hours the narrative had dramatically changed; it is now a ‘lone gunman’ whom the police took care to blow up with a robot after they had him cornered (never-mind they’d initially reported he’d shot himself.) Question: Why, after cornering the suspect, instead of holding out for a negotiated surrender and possible critically important intelligence gains, would they take him out with an explosive device?  How could  the professional police of Dallas, many of them military veterans qualified  to make an accurate first assessment, get it all so wrong as to have to change the entire story?

At San Bernardino; three shooters, tall with athletic build: eye witness account. Of course we all are subsequently informed this was a (conveniently dead) lone gunman…

 

Orlando nightclub shooting; eyewitnesses claim more than one shooter and accomplices preventing escapes, blocking exit doors from the outside, while shooting went on. Of course this morphed into a single, dead shooter…

Orlando eyewitnesses part 1:

Orlando eyewitnesses part 2:

 

The Navy Yard shootings generated initial reports of multiple gunmen at more than one location, but ultimately a single lone gunman is dead at the scene. But this one gets a little stickier; a swat team on location was ordered not to intervene and leave scene of the ongoing shooting: “A tactical response team from the force was told by a supervisor to leave the scene instead of aiding municipal officers, police sources told the BBC”

BBC_Navy_Yard_SWAT.jpg - 1

Aurora: The evidence covered up by law enforcement and the court in the ‘Batman’ theater shooting is nothing short of overwhelming. Video of close eyewitness accounts (<preceding link is expanded witness accounts) clearly detail the shooter(s) had inside help and this evidence is suppressed:

The only difference between the old domestic Gladio which had been western intelligence agencies engineering terror and the current version of domestic Gladio (Gladio B) is the label put on the enemies supposedly responsible; today’s boogeyman is radical Islam whereas previous to the fall of the Soviet Union the terror boogeyman was communism. A fifty minutes documentary of social engineering via GLADIO terror cells employed by intelligence agencies in Europe is a good place to start:

A postscript observation would be concerning historian Daniele Ganser’s otherwise excellent conclusions in his 2004 book NATO’s Secret Armies:

‘Prudent Precaution or source of Terror?’ the international press pointedly asked when the secret stay-behind armies of NATO were discovered across Western Europe following the Gladio revelations in Italy in late 1990.

After more than ten years of research and investigation the answer is now clear: Both. The secret stay-behind armies of NATO were a prudent precaution, as the available documents and testimonies amply demonstrate. Based on the experiences of the Second World War and the rapid and traumatic occupation of most European countries by the German and Italian forces, military experts feared the Soviet Union and became convinced that a stay-behind army could be of strategic value when it came to the liberation of the occupied territory. Behind enemy lines the secret army could have strengthened the resistance spirit of the population, helped in the running of an organised and armed national resistance, sabotaged and harassed the occupying forces, exfiltrated shot down pilots, and gathered intelligence for the government in exile.

Based on the fear of a potential invasion after the Second World War highly placed officials in the national European governments, in the European military secret services, in NATO as well as in the CIA and the MI6 therefore decided that a secret resistance network had to be set up already during peacetime. On a lower level in the hierarchy citizens and military officers in numerous countries of Western Europe shared this assessment, joined the conspiracy and secretly trained for the emergency. These preparations were not limited to the 16 NATO member countries, but included also the four neutral countries in Western Europe, namely Austria, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland, on which the author is preparing a second publication. In retrospect it has become obvious that the fear was without reason and the training had been futile for the invasion of the Red Army never came. Yet such a certainty was not available at the time. And it is telling that the cover of the network, despite repeated exposures in many countries during the entire Cold War, was only blown completely at exactly the same moment when the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed. The secret stay-behind armies of NATO, however, were also a source of terror, as the evidence available now shows. It has been this second feature of the secret war that has attracted a lot of attention and criticism in the last decade, and which in the future will need more investigation and research. As of now the evidence indicates that the governments of the United States and Great Britain after the end of the Second World War feared not only a Soviet invasion, but also the Communist Parties, and to a lesser degree the Socialist Parties. The White House and Downing Street feared that in several countries of Western Europe, and above all in Italy, France, Belgium, Finland and Greece, the Communists might reach positions of influence in the executive and destroy the military alliance NATO from within by betraying military secrets to the Soviet Union. It was in this sense that the Pentagon in Washington together with the CIA, MI6 and NATO in a secret war set up and operated the stay-behind armies as an instrument to manipulate and control the democracies of Western Europe from within, unknown to both European populations and parliaments. This strategy lead to terror and fear, as well as to “humiliation and maltreatment of democratic institutions’, as the European press correctly criticised.

Experts of the Cold War will note that Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies cast a new light on the question of sovereignty in Western Europe. It is now clear that as the Cold War divided Europe, brutality and terror was employed to control populations on both sides of the Iron Curtain. As far as Eastern Europe is concerned, this fact has long been recognised, long before it had been openly declared. After the Red Army had in 1968 mercilessly crushed the social reforms in Prag, Soviet leader Leonid Breschnew in Moscow with his infamous ‘Breschnew doctrine’ had openly declared that the countries of Eastern Europe were only allowed to enjoy ‘limited sovereignty’. As far as Western Europe is concerned the conviction of being sovereign and independent was shattered more recently. The data from Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies indicates a more subtle and hidden strategy to manipulate and limit the sovereignty, with great differences from country to country. Yet a limitation of sovereignty it was. And in each case where the stay-behind network in the absence of a Soviet invasion functioned as a straightjacket for the democracies of Western Europe, Operation Gladio was the Breschnew doctrine of Washington. The strategic rationale to protect NATO from within cannot be brushed aside lightly. But the manipulation of the democracies of Western Europe by Washington and London on a level which many in the European Union still today find difficult to believe clearly violated the rule of law and will require further debate and investigation. In some operations the secret stay-behind soldiers together with the secret military services monitored and filed left-wing politicians and spread anti-Communist propaganda. In more violent operations the secret war led to bloodshed. Tragically the secret warriors linked up with right-wing terrorists, a combination that led – in some countries including at least Belgium, Italy, France, Portugal, Spain, Greece and Turkey – to massacres, torture, coup d’etats and other violent acts. Most of these state-sponsored terrorist operations, as the subsequent cover-ups and fake trials suggest, enjoyed the encouragement and protection of selected highly placed governmental and military officials in Europe and in the United States. Members of the security apparatus and the government on both sides of the Atlantic who themselves despise being linked up with right-wing terrorism must in the future bring more clarity nd understanding into these tragic dimensions of the secret Cold War in Western Europe.

If Cold War experts will derive new data from NATO’s stay-behind network for their discourse on limited sovereignty during the Cold War, then international legal experts and analysts of dysfunctions of democracies will find data on the breakdown of checks and balances within each nation. The Gladio data indicates that the legislative was unable to control the more hidden branches of the executive, and that parliamentary control of secret services is often non-existing or dysfunctional in democracies on both sides of the Atlantic. Totalitarian states have long been known to have operated a great variety of largely uncontrolled and unaccountable secret services and secret armies. Yet to discover such serious dysfunctions also in numerous democracies comes as a great surprise, to say the least. Within this debate of checks and balances military officials have been correct to point out after the discovery of Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind network that there can never be such a thing as a ‘transparent stay-behind army’, for such a network would be exposed immediately in case of invasion and its members would be killed by the invasion force. Parliamentarians and constitutional lawyers meanwhile have been equally correct to emphasise that both the armed forces and the secret services of a democracy must at all times be transparent, accountable, controlled and supervised closely by civilian representatives of the people as they represent the most powerful instruments of the state.

This clash between mandatory secrecy and mandatory transparency, which lies at the heart of the Gladio phenomenon, directly points to the more general question of how much secrecy should be granted to the executive branch of a democracy. Judged from the Gladio evidence, where a lack of transparency and accountability has lead to corruption, abuse and terror, the answer is clear: The executive should be granted no secrecy and should at all times be controlled by the legislative. For a secret government, as it manifested itself in the United States and parts of Western Europe, can lead to abuse and even state terrorism. The growth of Intelligence abuses reflects a more general failure of our basic institutions’, US Senator Frank Church had wisely noted after a detailed investigation of CIA covert operations already in the 1970s. Gladio repeats this warning with a vengance.

It can hardly be overemphasised that running a secret army and funding an unaccountable intelligence service entails grave risks every democracy should seek to avoid. For the risks do not only include uncontrolled violence against groups of citizens, but mass manipulation of entire countries or continents. Among the most far-reaching findings on the secret war, as seen in the analysis, ranges the fact that the stay-behind network had served as a tool to spread fear amongst the population also in the absence of an invasion. The secret armies in some cases functioned as an almost perfect manipulation system that transported the fears of high-ranking military officers in the Pentagon and NATO to the populations in Western Europe. European citizens, as the strategists in the Pentagon saw it, due to their limited vision were unable to perceive the real and present danger of Communism, and therefore they had to be manipulated. By killing innocent citizens on market squares or in supermarkets and blaming the crime on the Communists the secret armies together with convinced right-wing terrorists effectively translated the fears of Pentagon strategists into very real fears of European citizens.

The destructive spiral of manipulation, fear and violence did not end with the fall of the Soviet Union and the discovery of the secret armies in 1990, but on the contrary gained momentum. Ever since the vicious terrorist attacks on the population of the United States on September 11, 2001 and the beginning of the ‘War on Terrorism’ fear and violence dominate not only the headlines across the globe but also the consciousness of millions. In the West the ‘evil Communist’ of the Cold War era has swiftly been replaced with the ‘evil Islamist’ of the war on terrorism era. With almost 3,000 civilians killed on September 11, and several thousands killed in the US-led war on terrorism so far with no end in sight, a new level of brutality has been reached.

Such an environment of fear, as the Gladio evidence shows, is ideally suited to manipulate the masses on both sides into more radical positions. Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaida terror network manipulated millions of Muslims, above all young male adults, to take up a radical position and believe in violence. On the other side also the White House and the administration of George Bush junior has fuelled the spiral of violence and fear and lead millions of Christians and seculars in the United States and in Europe to believe in the necessity and justice of killing other human beings in order to enhance their own security. Yet human security is not being advanced, but on the contrary decays, as the atmosphere is drenched with manipulation, violence and fear. Where the manipulation and the violence originate from and where they lead to, is at times very difficult to dissect. Hitler and the Nazis had profited greatly from manipulation and the fear in the wake of the mysterious Reichstagsbrand in Berlin in 1933, whereupon the Third Reich and Second World War followed. In 2001 the war on terrorism began, and once again radical critics have argued that the White House had manipulated 9/11, the largest terrorist attack in history, for geostrategic purposes.

As people across the globe share a vague sensation ‘that it cannot go on like that’ many search for an exit strategy from the spiral of violence, fear and manipulation. In Europe a consensus is building that terrorism cannot be defeated by war, as the latter feeds the spiral of violence, and hence the war on terrorism is not part of the solution but part of the problem. Furthermore also more high-tech – from retina scanning to smart containers – seems unable to really protect potential targets from terror attacks. More technology might even increase the challenges ahead when exploited for terrorist purposes and asymmetric warfare, a development observable ever since the invention of dynamite in the nineteenth century. Arguably more technology and more violence will therefore not solve the challenges ahead. A potential exit strategy from the spiral of fear, manipulation and violence might have to focus on the individual human being itself and a change of consciousness. Given its free will the individual can decide to focus on non-violent solutions of given problems and promote a dialogue of understanding and forgiveness in order to reduce extremist positions. The individual can break free from fear and manipulation by consciously concentrating on his or her very own feelings, thoughts, words and actions, and by focusing all of them on peaceful solutions. As more secrecy and more bloodshed are unlikely to solve the problems ahead the new millennium seems a particularly adequate time to begin with such a shift in consciousness which can have positive effects both for the world and for oneself.

Following on his excellent deconstructive analysis of GLADIO, Ganser’s epic fail is in the last paragraph where…

A potential exit strategy from the spiral of fear, manipulation and violence might have to focus on the individual human being itself and a change of consciousness. Given its free will the individual can decide to focus on non-violent solutions of given problems and promote a dialogue of understanding and forgiveness in order to reduce extremist positions. The individual can break free from fear and manipulation by consciously concentrating on his or her very own feelings, thoughts, words and actions, and by focusing all of them on peaceful solutions

…naively presuming the class of psychopaths risen to rule from the shadow will somehow magically correct the organic deficit in their personalities. What’s more and what’s worse is, on top of ‘leopards don’t shed their spots’ or criminals do not voluntarily surrender their business models, utterly missing is the ‘how’ that will be required; to weed out a pervasive criminal ‘deep state’ apparatus rooted in every branch and at every level across western democratic institutions. This septic infection of western democratic institutions has become the world’s largest and most entrenched organized crime family, where military-industrial corporate boards are fused with rogue intelligence agencies and ‘terror’ is essential to their bottom line: PROFIT. The stark reality is, generating terror has become a money making venture of such magnitude, were the symbiotic relationship between deliberately generated terror, and the armaments and related industries that derive immense profits from the same, were interrupted, the western culture’s economic engine would collapse.

Insofar as Genser’s ‘non-violence’ proposal, that is well and good, provided it is not manipulated akin to the Gene Sharp model where Ghandi’s moral and ethical principles had been suborned to amoral utilitarian ends based in ‘color revolutions.’ This evil, and those who’ve perpetrated it, must be put away. As well, Genser’s last paragraph should not be construed to allow the GLADIO criminal elements forgiveness along the lines of a ‘truth and reconciliation’ process, which is inconsistent with accountability and the rule of law. If the criminals were to walk free, the principle of deterence is not only rendered meaningless, recidivism would reinfect every institution.

The cycle of revolution attending the ‘rise and fall’ phenomena of the western civilized hierarchies throughout history demonstrates a failed model. At the end of the day, that required going forward will be more along the lines of a ‘reverse’ Social Darwinism where decentralization is the habit and the rule, and all those aspiring to the rise of hierarchy are speedily and effectively squelched; demanding an entirely new social perspective. The impediments to this are formidable.

Example given, rather than initiate a program to convert eastern Europe’s small farmers to organic production, when expanding, the European Union has forced tens (perhaps hundreds) of thousands of small farmers off the land with required equipment and farm to market ‘upgrades’ these small farmers could not afford or had no access to where the infrastructure did not exist, effectively handing ‘food security’ to multinational conglomerates such as Monsanto and Syngenta. Already a new generation is coming up having lost critical knowledge in community self-sufficiency. There have been few less criminal and anti-democratic acts in the annals of democracy; where the actual facts demand surrender of a community right to self-sufficiency. On the pretext of ‘sanitation’ the EU took away the largest source of clean, community produced foodstuffs and has positioned the likes of Monsanto and Syngenta to replace this vanished community produce with product that, were it labelled honestly, would sport a skull and crossed bones.

Every day that passes with these sort of events left unchecked, reduces the chances of intelligent dismantling of a system gone horrendously wrong; sans violence and escalated social trauma. Everyday that passes under the current criminal class of leadership, those GLADIO false flag actors represented in Obama, Cameron, Merkel, Hollande & company, who either cannot or will not look and act beyond the amorality of ‘Realpolitik’ and move on behalf of people rather than a corporate system which feeds on people, compounds the problem.

Each day of deferred action determines increased gravity in coming, inevitable, social collapse. It is the undeniable repeat history of western civilization. Short of intelligent dismantlement, a radical event in the age of the most lethal weapons the world has ever seen, there almost certainly will be no ‘phoenix’ rise from the western civilization’s ashes, this time. C’est la mort.

*

Related:

Deep State IV NATO & Gladio

Deep State V Economics & counter-insurgency

*

Ron10

In any democracy, ethics, self restraint, tolerance and honesty will always take a second seat to narcissism, avarice, bigotry & persecution, if only because people who play by the rules in any democracy are at a disadvantage to those who easily subvert the rules to their own advantage (Ronald’s Maxim)

Jews in the News

“We have become stupidly politically correct, which is the death of comedy. It’s not good for comedy. Comedy has to walk a thin line, take risks, comedy is the lecherous little elf whispering in the king’s ear, always telling the truth about human behavior” -Mel Brooks, 21 September 2017

Now, this preceding famous Jew’s quote via an anti-anti-Semitic website…

Jews_in_the_News - 1

…is linked to Breitbart:

Jews_in_the_News - 1 (1)

So, I already should be confused; Bannon’s allegedly anti-Semitic website (which has at least one ‘self-hating Jew’ columnist) gets a bone toss from an anti-anti-Semitic watchdog while the (accused) anti-Semitic Breitbart and Bannon are roundly warned against by The Times of Israel. Jesus! Could Mel Brooks sort that with comedy?

Mel Brooks very much appreciates the court jester tradition, a tradition under assault from all directions.

Now, what brought out this rant is, former Central Intelligence Agency officer Valerie “of Jewish descent” Plame is racked and pilloried for ‘tweeting’ former CIA officer Phil Giraldi’s column at Unz Review: America’s Jews Are Driving America’s Wars

What we have here is similarly ludicrous to my introduction; A Jew, Ron Unz, is providing a platform, the Unz Review, to an accused anti-Semite, Phil Giraldi, and when Valerie Plame points to Giraldi lambasting the same ‘usual suspects’ unloaded on by famous self-hating Jew Glenn Greenwald…

Jews_in_the_News - 1 (2)

…the press unloads on Plame with what amounts to a ‘journalistic’ rapid fire cannon (HERE, HERE and the academic ‘usual suspect’ HERE.)

‘The Hill’ includes this language:

“The article the former CIA operative linked to argues that the neoconservative foreign policy establishment is largely beholden to American Jews with an attachment to Israel. The article’s author, Philip Giraldi, says American Jews shouldn’t be allowed to make decisions related to Middle East policy”

Glenn Greenwald might argue it is the WRONG Jews allowed to make foreign policy. And that’s where Giraldi ‘stepped on his dick’ (a military expression) and I suspected from the moment I saw the title of his article he’d get blasted, because Giraldi didn’t (and mostly doesn’t) give attention to the manifold traps, where if you’re not watching where you walk, the all-encompassing term ‘Jew’ can lead to; because the word Jew is sort of like the La Brea tar-pit of nouns: whether self-hating Jews, apostate Jews, kinda Jews (not of a Jewish mother, also known as wild oats Jews), agnostic Jews, atheist Jews, Marxist Jews, Reform Jews, Reform-Jews-aren’t-Jews-Jews (hyper-Orthodox Israeli Rabbinate designated Jews), quit screwing over the world Jews (also known as Tikkun Olam Jews), Jews screwed over our world Jews (Sephardic Jews), waiting to be saved from themselves Jews (Bibi Netanyahu and his ilk), evangelizing Jews (also known as Jews for Jesus or cover for MOSSAD assassin Jews), J Street Jews, AIPAC Jews, neocon Jews, neo-liberal Jews (Soros), Jews on the Left, Jews on the right, stand up, sit down, Fight! Fight! Fight! It’s a pity Celebrity Death Match never pitted Glenn Greenwald against Alan Dershowitz, it’d be platinum at youtube:

As much as I’d have preferred a ‘Perfected Jew’ Ann Coulter versus ‘Kinda Jew’ Gloria Steinem death match (with no survivor), there’s no authentic center survives in today’s politically correct world lamented by a real hero: Mel Brooks (may he forever be blessed for Blazing Saddles.)

This brings us back to Giraldi and his ‘platform’ run by Ron Unz. Why is it ‘mainstream’ media fries Plame over Giraldi but neglects to mention Unz is Jewish? Is it because,  example given, Unz Review also hosts ‘Über-Zionist’ and historical revisionist Llana Mercer who states:

“Libertarians err in mistaking the 2,000-year-old Jewish right to the land for a biblically-based, religious claim. The claim is first and foremost historical, although naturally, the Hebrew community’s claim to its ancient homeland can’t be reduced to a title search at the deeds office. Jewish rights to Israel proceed from the original ownership of the land: The original and rightful owners were Jews. The fact that they were killed and exiled by the Romans doesn’t nullify their ownership”

Setting aside the upcoming potential evidence for hypocrisy, in case where Llana doesn’t seem to have read Jewish history from whence Israel had been created by exterminating the Canaanites, this recalls cartoonist Stan Lynde’s joke attributed to a Crow tribal chief:

“This has been Crow land from time immemorial, it was always Crow land, there has never been a time it was not Crow land, that is, ever since we took it from the Shoshones!

Considering:

Canaanite is by far the most frequently used ethnic term in the Bible. In the Book of Joshua, Canaanites are included in a list of nations to exterminate, and later described as a group which the Israelites had annihilated”

One would think a Jew, that is Llana Mercer, would get her own book right, what a shame Louis Black didn’t notice her commonality with certain televangelist Christians:

In fact Israel’s right to exist as a modern state is due solely to certain United Nations acts Arab states are bound by for the very fact the Arab states joined the United Nations and contracted themselves to the western standard of international law. Certainly a case of ‘it sucks for Palestinians’ (particularly going to the Israeli middle finger put to subsequent UN acts) but that’s the shit which actually matters.

And so it is, relating to Plame read Giraldi, an act worthy of politically correct firing squad, no one in ‘mainstream’ notes Ron Unz is a Jew who hosts a Paleo Zionist (read pro-Israel propagandist) who deliberately doesn’t get her history right. Mainstream press would leave the impression Giraldi is hosted by an anti-Israel/anti-Semitic website.

Now again back to Giraldi: I read Giraldi because he’s a spook. Likely Plame read Giraldi because she’s a spook. Now, if Greenwald, far out on the liberal-left, and Giraldi, far out on the conservative-right, finger the same neocons who happen to be Jews, that should inform you they’re onto something. Would it matter if Giraldi were anti-Semitic in the case of his noticing an accurate fact? Or does the fact die to conform Plame to a politically correct history of events? Considering the media phenomenon of ‘hasbara‘ and certain outcome in western press resembling this, professional spy Giraldi’s accusations against western media should merit further investigation:

“Hasbara is a form of propaganda aimed at an international audience, primarily, but not exclusively, in western countries. It is meant to influence the conversation in a way that positively portrays Israeli political moves and policies, including actions undertaken by Israel in the past”

Meanwhile, let’s look at a couple cases of historical, however highly politically incorrect, exemplary causes of anti-Semitism:

The Nakba

“For refugees, camps were shelters for the reconstruction of personal and social life, but were also seen as sites of great political significance, the material testimony of what was destroyed and ‘all that remains’ of more than four hundred cities, towns and villages forcefully cleansed throughout Palestine in the Nakba of 1947-9. This is the reason refugees sometimes refer to the destruction of camps as ‘the destruction of destruction.’ The camp is not a home, it is a temporary arrangement, and its destruction is but the last iteration in an ongoing process of destruction.

“This rhetoric of double negation – the negation of negation – tallies well with what Saree Makdisi, talking about the Israeli refusal to acknowledge the Nakba, has termed ‘the denial of denial’, which is, he says, ‘a form of foreclosure that produces the inability – the absolutely honest, sincere incapacity – to acknowledge that denial and erasure have themselves been erased in turn and purged from consciousness.’ What has been denied is continuously repeated: Israel keeps on inflicting destruction on refugees and keeps on denying that a wrong has been done” –Eyal Weizman: ‘The Least Of All Possible Evils’ (Humanitarian Violence From Arendt To Gaza)

Following on this preceding act, Cairo’s Sephardic Jewish population dropped from 75,000 to less than 100. The Arab world had become anti-Semitic practically overnight (overlooking oxymoron in the term anti-Semitic, Arabs are a Semitic people.)

Meanwhile, about the time indigenous Jews had been abandoning the Arab world on account of blow-back due  to ‘Jewish State’ behavior, Alan Ginsberg had revolted conservative America with exploits disgustingly glorified, in detail, by Jack Kerouac in his ode to debauchery ‘On the Road.’ Ginsberg, his behavior lauded by the New York Times via Kerouac and subsequently his own ‘howl‘, is the one American responsible for more USA anti-Semitism than the entirety of whatever other reasons exist taken together. How this shit is generated and real, is buried within political correctness. Never did a ‘free press’ fuck over more people who happen to be Jews, by generating hate at a single pop with glorifying the personage of Ginsberg, but HEY! that’s ‘free speech’ in America.

If my despise for Ginsberg is anti-Semitic (as a non-Jew, am I entitled to hate a single Jew?), then not only is Giraldi anti-Semitic but so would be Paleo-Zionist Llana Mercer.

If you care to wade through the sewer of anti-Semitism in  the comments at Giraldi’s columns at Unz Review, you’ll see Giraldi, on occasion, show his temper at anti-Semitic accusations, and also you’ll notice those comments bashing the anti-Semite morons who cling to Giraldi’s work like flies attracted to stink, are also allowed to post.

Whether Giraldi is an anti-Semite is probably a matter of interpretation. He doesn’t do well at separating out Jews of differing persuasions is the kinder interpretation, as his terminology is often all too inclusive. But this kinder interpretation could be correct. A big step he could take in the right direction would be to clean up his ‘forum’ (article comments) with disallowing the hate-mongers’ posts. But then, that’s an ‘in principle’ violation of ‘free speech’ in the conservative American tradition. An ACLU case of  ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ or ‘it sucks for Phil.’

Insofar as Ron Unz, a read through a chapter of his American Pravda reveals a self-honesty rare in today’s world; leading one to possibly understand his willingness to entertain spooks, kooks and pukes from across the spectrum of what would otherwise be largely suppressed voices. Clearly, Unz coined the term ‘American Pravda’ for a reason. Beyond this, there are numerous innate political enemies juxtaposed at the Unz Review and that should speak to something.

At the end of the day (and hopefully not the world), Jews are like anyone else; there are good and bad among them, they have their bright and they have their ugly. That just makes us all equal in a geopolitic where everyone uses everyone and certainly the Israelis both use and get used (too willingly) in concert with those Christian Zionist allies fully intending at the end, all Jews will be either converted or dead and a crusader banner flying from the Temple Mount. That’s amazing to me but nobody seems to have a trademark protection on self destructive behaviors.

I have to close this diatribe, and considering the underlying current of the entire business has to do with 3rd parties allegedly fighting Israel’s wars, with spooks in the spotlight, I’ll close with an Israeli spook:

“I am a humbler man today than I was in the 1970s when I joined Israeli intelligence. I’ve learned the hard way that everyone makes mistakes, some of them so big that they are irrevocable. I’ve also changed my view of Israel and the Jewish people. When I was young, I shared with many Israelis a deep nationalistic feeling — the self-righteous and arrogant belief that we were right and everyone else was wrong, that it was more important for Jews and Israel to survive than others, that we were — as the Bible says — the chosen people. I still believe that Jews are chosen. But no longer can I accept the premise on which the Iranian arms deals were based: ‘Better that their boys die than ours.’ People are people. We are all chosen”Ari Ben-Menashe

*

Giraldi’s rebuttal to the controversy in ‘mainstream’ (external link)

Related at this site:

Christian anti-Semitism

Friedman and the ‘Narrative’

Comic story of a ‘kinda Jew’ girlfriend

16 September 2017 update: Antiwar.com reports:

“Under this deal, which was reported by the Wall Street Journal, Assange would provide conclusive proof that Russia was not the source of hacked emails WikiLeaks published. In return, he would be offered a pardon, or some other assurance that he wouldn’t be prosecuted by the US for involvement in WikiLeaks.

“Rohrabacher brought this deal to the White House Wednesday [13 September 2017], but Chief of Staff John Kelly not only apparently didn’t like the offer, but didn’t tell President Trump that the offer had been made, instead telling Rohrabacher to take the proposal to the intelligence community.

“The intelligence community almost certainly wouldn’t be in a position to offer any sort of amnesty for Assange, which likely means the end of the proposal. Rohrabacher offered to set up a meeting between Assange and a Trump representative, but that too appears to have been dismissed by Kelly”

So, the generals keep Trump sequestered like the Vatican keeps a rampant pedophile priest under wraps; away from any real work and responsibilities (in this case, kept from knowledge of what’s actually going on in the world.) But now, with the Wall Street Journal blowing the whistle, Ivanka should soon be whispering in her daddy’s ear; and what will tell you everything is, what happens next. Suppose Trump keeps his mouth shut and says nothing? This will indicate the absolute completion of the Pence aligned generals capture of the Oval Office.

But the real news here is, Assange provides evidence of his belief that he is personally more important than any unconditional release of information which should stop the Pentagon and NATO’s pursuit of a war footing directed at Russia in its tracks.

Narcissism? Is there a stronger word? Julian Assange, who fancies himself ‘Jesus of the Digital Age’ would appear to be tired of bearing his cross. The Roman’s puppet, King Herod, hasn’t been authorized to provide the pardon and Pontius Pilate’s (read Mike Pompeo’s) people will deliver Jesus of the Digital Age to crucifixtion on behalf of the ‘duopoly’ mob, to satisfy their blood lust. Good luck with the world’s biggest ‘deal-maker’ (read loser) Wikileaks, because you blew it by waiting too long.

The entire sand-castle (a product of Obama CIA Director John Brennan’s imagination) the “Russians hacked the election” is finally washing away with an incoming tide. How this plays out is anyone’s guess.

The open question is, how the new information will be leveraged, if it were to actually break into the open widely, with the bad boy Trump essentially captured by the surreal evil that surrounds him. Other than pure evil (e.g. Pence), only a narcissist or a fool would ever desire to be president of this particular republic. In ‘The Donald’, we have both.

1 August 2017 an audio tape is leaked in which Seymour Hersh states the FBI knows it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails:

“What the [FBI] report says is that some time in late Spring… he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that’s in his computer. Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents — of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC” -Seymour Hersh

On 9 August 2017 The Nation magazine publishes a column on a group of independent experts…

“Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year”

…demonstrating the DNC mails were leaked, not hacked.

On 18 August 2017 Antiwar.com reports Congressman Dana  Rohrabacher has met with Assange concerning the DNC mails and [the article] further credibly suggests Assange is holding the DNC leak evidence hostage as a bargaining chip to possibly acquire a pardon for himself and leverage wikileaks into legitimacy with a President of the United States who at this point is owned by the USA’s intelligence agencies, a hare-brained scheme destined to fail. Assange & company waited too long.

But this would fit Julian Assange’s self-centered, persecuted-savior complex which never ceases to amaze, this guy (as well, Craig Murray) has allowed the idiots surrounding Trump to push us towards the brink with Russia, for months. All because Assange is tired of his embassy confinement in London, a circumstance that is entirely his own fault for the fact he didn’t have the self-discipline to keep his dick in his pants (whether Assange’s admitted intercourse was a case of rape or not.)

What’s more is, this blog pointed to strong circumstantial evidence it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails this past January, and recalling this, it still stretches the imagination a former UK ambassador would make an amateur espionage move worthy of a cub scout playing spy. But that’s what Craig Murray had done in the case of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

Seymour Hersh states Seth Rich is the source of the DNC mails. Craig Murray states he had met with the source of the DNC mails. A + B = C:

Craig Murray met with Seth Rich

That Murray would be a high value target for American counter-intelligence to monitor for the reason of his high profile association with WikiLeaks is beyond obvious. For Murray then to state

murray_wikileaks-1

“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

…goes to the practically bizarre when coming from a former United Kingdom ambassador to Uzbekistan. The UK is little different to the USA in the case of embassies providing cover for spies; in which case Murray should at least have some rudimentary espionage understanding such as YOU DO NOT MEET YOUR SOURCE DIRECTLY WHEN YOU ARE A HIGH PROFILE TARGET OF YOUR ADVERSARY’S COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE HUNTING YOUR (in this case, WikiLeaks) SOURCE(S)

Then, we had WikiLeak’s Assange giving what amounts to a ‘Glomar’ ‘I will neither confirm or deny’ response concerning the murder (assassination) of Seth Rich after appearing to suggest Rich was the source of the DNC emails leak:

Beyond this, WikiLeaks offering a $20,000 reward for the solving of the Seth Rich murder is laughable, that’s what an American west coast upscale community would offer for the arrest of a serial killer of the neighborhood’s cats. Two million dollars might get two seconds’ attention of a corruptible counter-intelligence agent with knowledge of a professional hit on Seth Rich, twenty million might even net an inside the agency sucker willing to take the exceedingly high risk to one’s life (almost certain death) that would attend selling out an agency hit man for substantial lucre. In truth, the WikiLeaks reward offer amounted to little more than a tabloid publicity stunt.

Narcissism is a blinding thing; and a self-righteous narcissism is no exception. Ambassador Murray could have every good intention but on the face of it, he had seriously screwed up. Murray and WikiLeaks should have immediately come clean, there was little to lose. Seth Rich was the source, Murray had met with him, and much could have been gained by stating so; there would be nothing given up any intelligence agency involved did not already know. It have been the right thing to do.

Craig Murray stating ‘I had a serious lapse of professional judgement and this resulted in the death of Seth Rich’ would be the most responsible and newsworthy move WikiLeaks could have taken; to counter the CIA’s ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ propaganda lie, in which there is much invested by the agency; and the consequent damage to relations with Russia, and growing threat to what little world peace yet exists, is immense. WikiLeaks should have done the right thing a long time ago and they have not. Why not? Because Assange and WikiLeaks believes Assange’s comfort is more important than world peace. What fucks. This is beyond inexcusable, it’s criminal. But for Murray, there’s more at stake here than just a hit to ego & image.

Murray’s likely role in the DNC leaks case? A personal meeting with Rich to confirm for WikiLeaks Seth Rich was a bona fide insider with authentic material prior to a WikiLeaks cash payment to Rich and arrangements completed for the mails transfer.

Now, it is a question of ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ release the evidence because WikiLeaks waited too long, and let the criminals surrounding Trump consolidate their power while investing deeply in the myth of the Russians hacked the election; a criminal cabal that will up the ante on the world stage to any level necessary to avoid accountability. WikiLeaks Idiots. WikiLeaks Morons.

Meanwhile, Murray subsequently barred from the United States (except that he applies for a visa, typically unnecessary for a British citizen) appears to have been, in a  manner of speaking, a deep state message to Murray: ‘thank you very much for the lapse of judgement, we have taken full advantage with the assassination of Seth Rich and we won’t be requiring your services after this’ (he’d be smart to stay away.)

The really sticky problem for WikiLeaks in this scenario is, Seymour Hersh asserts in the  recorded call WikiLeaks had paid Rich for the leaked documents, damaging or reducing to element of pretense WikiLeaks claims of journalism & providing rationale for deep state prosecutors & judges to find this had been straightforward espionage. But they won’t do it if the Rich-Murray meeting stays buried, a LOT is invested in ‘the Russians did it’ for the public consumption. If it DOES break open, Murray’s ‘goose is cooked.’ It’s now not only WikiLeaks problem in a larger sense, but Murray’s, whether he does or doesn’t admit the assassinated Seth Rich had been the DNC mails source.

Murray’s reputation? C’est la mort.

*

A prime candidate for assassin of Seth Rich HERE

Related articles at: On Wikileaks

 

I watched the second plane strike live on tv, and since, had seen zoomed in footage (from much closer & different angle) of a cargo model jet dressed up (painted) like a passenger jet hitting the building. This plane had a ‘pod’ attached to its underside, I’ve not seen in any commercial plane model, passenger or cargo, before or since. For myself, when it comes to our government’s ‘stories’ and the same endlessly repeated in the western democracies commercial news, nothing will ever be seen the same; meanwhile a couple thousand trained architects and engineers see things differently too:

“On September 11, 2001, the three worst structural failures in modern history took place when World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7 suffered complete and rapid destruction.

“In the aftermath of the tragedy, most members of the architecture and engineering community, as well as the general public, assumed that the buildings’ destruction had occurred as a result of the airplane impacts and fires. This view was reinforced by subsequent federal investigations, culminating in FEMA’s 2002 Building Performance Study and in the 2005 and 2008 reports by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

“Since 9/11, however, independent researchers around the world have assembled a large body of evidence that overwhelmingly refutes the notion that airplane impacts and fires caused the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7. This body of evidence, most of which FEMA and NIST omitted from their reports, instead supports the troubling conclusion that all three skyscrapers were destroyed in a process known as “controlled demolition,” where explosives and/or other devices are used to bring down a building”

Key Evidence

  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.

The preceding (italicized) from Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth. Follows is my own article from 2013:

Fear of Minor Debris

If you can wrap your head around the fact over 2,200 certified architects & engineers have directly disputed the official report on 9/11, that’s a good start. Now, consider what happened to a 47 story steel & concrete modern structure on the afternoon of 9/11.

No plane hit Building 7, only minor debris

Building 7 is the only modern steel structure in the world purportedly brought down by minor fire, compared to other steel structures surviving much larger & more intense fires.

The 1,500 professionally trained architects & engineers who dispute the government’s WTC Building 7 collapse explanation (above video) has grown to 2,200 professionally trained architects & engineers who dispute the government’s WTC Building 7 collapse explanation (below video)

And an entirely independent BYU scientist draws identical conclusion:

And the highest ranking former intelligence officer yet to speak out on what’s wrong with the 9/11 picture, Major General Stubblebine:

Then,  a five minute explanation of about 10% of what’s wrong with the ‘official’ 9/11 account:

If that gets your interest, at Asia Times there is an exclusive investigative report on 9/11 related ‘put options’ or “insider trading” based on advance knowledge of the attack.

With this evidence, people should look more closely at what had happened on 9/11:

http://architects-engineers.org/

And a big question has remained swept under the rug; how is it several of the supposed ‘hijackers’ subsequently appear to have turned up alive?

“Of the 19 identities assigned by the FBI to the alleged suicide hijackers of the four commandeered jetliners, at least six have been disputed”

Did stolen passports provide their identity? We now know this has been an Israeli method, since a blown operation in Dubai:

“Six more innocent Britons were thrust into the international murder plot of a Hamas leader after it emerged yesterday that their identities had also been stolen. The revelation means at least 12 British identities were cloned to carry out the audacious hit on Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai. Dubai police yesterday identified 15 new suspects over the attack at a luxury hotel, bringing the total number to 26. The assassination, which bears all the hallmarks of a spy novel, is widely believed to be the work of Israel’s feared secret service Mossad”

Perhaps the preceding article is too friendly to MOSSAD with ‘suspected’, it could be stated with some clarity we know most certainly a fake passport scheme was utilized by MOSSAD, on account of a case in Germany:

“The man, using the name Uri Brodsky, is suspected of working for Mossad in Germany and helping to issue a fake German passport to a member of the Mossad operation that allegedly killed Hamas agent Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai in January, a spokesman for the German federal prosecutor’s office told The Associated Press”

In fact, with intelligence agencies using stolen or fraudulently acquired passports for operations, and with strong circumstantial evidence of 9/11 accused hijackers turning up alive, evidence swept under the carpet rather than thoroughly investigated, the identity of every alleged hijacker can be said to be in doubt. And then we have:

“They [FBI] feel the higher echelons torpedoed the investigation into the Israeli New Jersey cell. Leads were not fully investigated”. Among those lost leads was the figure of Dominik Suter, whom the U.S. authorities apparently never attempted to contact. Intelligence expert and author James Bamford told me there was similar frustration within the CIA: “People I’ve talked to at the CIA were outraged at what was going on. They thought it was outrageous that there hadn’t been a real investigation, that the facts were hanging out there without any conclusion”

And:

“What is perhaps most damning is that the Israelis’ [MOSSAD] celebration on the New Jersey waterfront occurred in the first sixteen minutes after the initial crash, when no one was aware this was a terrorist attack. In other words, from the time the first plane hit the north tower, at 8:46 a.m., to the time the second plane hit the south tower, at 9:02 a.m., the overwhelming assumption of news outlets and government officials was that the plane’s impact was simply a terrible accident. It was only after the second plane hit that suspicions were aroused. Yet if the men were cheering for political reasons, as they reportedly told the FBI, they obviously believed they were witnessing a terrorist act, and not an accident”

With just these few preceding tidbits of verifiable information, the official explanation for 9/11 suddenly seems more far-fetched than those claims of some so-called ‘conspiracy’ theorists:

‘War by Deception’

On top of inaccurate identities, the accepting what appears to be a government claim WTC Building 7 died of fright, and uninvestigated [by law enforcement] insider trading of ‘put options’ demanding 9/11 be pulled off as presently written into the record to make a profit, what more is needed to understand the 9/11 Commission engaged in a whitewash?

Fear, nothing more, prevents solving the mystery of Building 7. Every western industrialized national leader who sits silent on Building 7 intelligence reports contributes to a culture of deceit & cowardice

**

My Updated Analysis (notes)

The most likely criminal cabal behind 9/11 finds its roots in the 1980s, when Shimon Peres, with CIA complicity, sought to open a competing channel to arm Iran via the Iran-Contra business model, as noted by Ari Ben Menache’s ‘Profits of War’, and accomplished little more than provide a screen for the 1st (LIKUD aligned MOSSAD) channel; in the event the CIA-MOSSAD joint venture was to spill into the open. It is my opinion this is why George H.W. Bush and Robert Gates’ CIA allowed the 2nd (Peres-Labor) channel to set itself up in business (Reagan’s Vice President Bush had been career CIA and Robert Gates was running the CIA for Bill Casey.) From their point of view, it was a prescient move on account of the difficulty of keeping something as big as this had become, under wraps. In fact, Iran-Contra’s 1st channnel never missed a beat and went on as though the scandal had never broken into the news. What is important to note is, profits from Iran-Contra were funding corrupt political leadership and their programs, in the 1980s, on the Israeli side, Iran Contra was propping up LIKUD and West Bank settlement expansion. On the USA side, Iran-Contra profits was bankrolling the criminal enterprise of the Bush dynasty and associated politics. The cooperation between the intelligence assets on the political right has been longstanding between the American and Israeli entities.

Robert Parry’s journalism notwithstanding, the authentic facts of Iran-Contra were never reported on in mainstream. What had been reported as the most salient facts were essentially a smokescreen. This is reinforced by the fact Newsweek had virulently attacked Ari Ben-Menache’s narrative on publication; not long after presenting Robert Parry’s reporting on Iran-Contra as fact. These are irreconcilable phenomena except in the case of Ben-Menache’s considerably expanded account, undermining the limited picture spoon fed to the public by the press, is correct. The Iran-Contra ‘cover’ story had to be protected, investigations were ongoing and the CIA had engineered damage control. North and Poindexter et al, as complicit and stupid as they were, were nonetheless patsies. Robert Parry’s reporting over the ensuing years reinforces the idea his role, all along, has been that of a disinformation asset, whether willing or unwitting, for the CIA. Parry has moved on to pervert American constitutional history in contradiction of (one could say smearing) the anti-federalists intentions relating to checks on a central government, he had put a lot of energy into being an apologist for the inexcusable Obama (laying blame on neo-cons working for Obama as though Obama were not complicit) and, not least, Parry denies the incontrovertible fact the official 9/11 report white-washed the actual circumstance of the collapse of the twin towers and the several hours later destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 (in the afternoon) of 11 September, 2001.

Recalling Robert McFarlane, Ronald Reagan’s National Security Adviser, had been working for Israeli intelligence, there is practically no position in American government cannot be construed to be at risk of penetration and compromise via AIPAC. How this might play in the events of 9/11 is open to conjecture; Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister on 9/11, was a man possessed of the necessary character to murder three thousand people in a gambit to get the USA to fight Israel’s wars, this much is clear. Whether MOSSAD had co-opted enough key people in the USA security apparatus to bring it off, is not. At odds with the Israelis’ initiating the attacks is the fact of Dick Cheney ordering the New York area air defense shut down for the morning of 11 September, while a ‘coincidental’ exercise was to be run simulating a ‘terrorist attack’ with jet liners crashing into New York sky-scrapers. Could Cheney’s team all have been Israeli assets? It seems unlikely. On the other hand, it is classic Israeli style to use their enemies, wherever possible, to take care of their most dirty work. And America is LIKUD’s enemy in a cold political calculation. Related to this, however MOSSAD and Saudi intelligence might cooperate in common geopolitical interests, most certainly Israel and Saudi Arabia are not friends. Utilizing al-Qaida as a front to initiate the attacks, or utilizing Saudis as patsies for a false-flag ‘terrorist’ attack, either one, is consistent with Israeli style; in the past MOSSAD has laundered operations through the Palestine Liberation Organization for purpose of everything from terrorism for propaganda purposes, to political murders.

An alternative possibility is the Israelis duping the USA’s people into assisting with their operation. The Israelis may have/had the necessary access and certainly the motivation; whereas the Americans have repeatedly demonstrated they are guilty of that particular brand of hubris that is blinding.

Another possible scenario is the USA’s geopolitical intelligence engineers having penetrated an Israeli operation and opened doors for the 9/11 actors, basically rolling out the red carpet for an Israeli run operation, unbeknownst to the Israelis, a covert co-option if you will.

A fourth possibility is a joint venture.

A fifth possibility is the Bush criminal syndicate responsible for 9/11, taking care to frame the Israelis in case the operation were to unravel.

In any of these hypothesis, Rudy Guiliani having located his disaster headquarters in WTC Building 7, is key. Building 7’s demolition can been seen as obliteration of evidence; as it ‘fell down’ on the afternoon of 9/11 and profiles as a deliberately demolished command center.

My own estimation is, based on a history of CIA/MOSSAD cooperation, the fourth and fifth possibilities are most likely, with elements of both integrated to the actual facts. Backstabbing is a common phenomenon in geopolitical dirty play.

What’s almost certain is, the Saudis, no matter how dirty and complicit, were cynically used and Al-Qaida was a minor actor, a dupe and cover story, and was not primarily responsible for 9/11.

Insofar as responsibility & accountability, there is none. These agencies or actors, with the possible exception of al-Qaida, would have access to tactical nuclear weapons or ‘suitcase nukes’ for purpose of false-flag terrorism, were it to come to the likes of a Bibi Netanyahu, or Bush crime syndicate and minions, in effect the associated Doug Coe cult, determinated to up the ante as opposed to face accountability.

That’s where you have Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, and Jeff Sessions, examples given, in the shoes of Dick Cheney, Robert Gates, and John Ashcroft in today’s politic –

*

What follows should be viewed as a more honest ‘part two’ of the preceding post authored by Andreago Ferreira of Akamai Tree blog, noting Andreago Ferreira is a pseudonym, the author does not publish under his authentic identity –

I’d moved on to read part two of the Akamai Tree assessment, part one being on Snowden, part two being on Wikileaks, and one should never be surprised at a second result at seeming cross-purposes with a first result. I spotted several ‘weaknesses’ (read mistakes) in the 2nd article and when I touched on those mistakes with a comment, the ‘mistakes’ morphed into disinformation with the author’s reply.

Akamai - 1

My comment:

There has been a growing ‘preponderance of the evidence’ the DNC mails were leaked by Rich. You can find that in the title ‘incompetent espionage and wikileaks’ at my blog, if interested. Also, the article disappoints in its’ missing ‘the other family’ which Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions (and more) belong to (of ‘C Street’ infamy, exposed by Jeff Sharlet.)

The Snowden piece (part one) is much stronger

Was met with this reply:

As far as I can tell, there is virtually no even remotely compelling evidence that Rich leaked the DNC emails. The ‘forensicator’ report is highly misleading and many of the claims in it are outright false (particularly the claims regarding data transfer rates/download speeds).

Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions are way outside the scope of this blog post as well as the two-part series as a whole, so I really don’t feel as though their exclusion is of any consequence at all or that including them would have added anything to the core points being made here

Clearly, while throwing Snowden (probably deservedly/accurately) and Assange (deservedly but very inaccurately) under the bus, the blog author appears to be shielding Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions, and covering for the assassins of Seth Rich. Oops.

I will address self-labeled “propagandist” Andreago Ferreira’s (I have a screenshot of his old Blogspot ‘about me’) rebuttals to my comment in reverse order, dealing with his following, first:

Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions are way outside the scope of this blog post as well as the two-part series as a whole, so I really don’t feel as though their exclusion is of any consequence at all or that including them would have added anything to the core points being made here

Well, I’m not really certain how Ferreira expects he can drive that particular square peg into this round hole:

Akamai - 1 (1)

If Trump were truly a dire threat to the deep state and the media was entirely in the pocket of the Clinton crime family as the altmedia goons suggest, subtle orders filtered down through media executives and top editors (nearly all of whom play ball with the power-elite and have intelligence connections) would have made sure that Trump be utterly blacked out in the media and treated as a mere nuisance as opposed to a legitimate threat to democracy, guaranteeing that he be relegated to obscurity, as for example Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan were. Political outsiders are simply not given full control of the news cycle. The truth is that Donald Trump, contrary to both the alternative and mainstream media, is a long-time political insider who’s throughout his life had intimate ties to some of the most powerful men in the world and installed into the Oval Office by very same kinds of people his base loathes; he’s the latest in the line of phony political outsiders which includes Ross Perot, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Ted Cruz, etc. and has been thrust into power by an alliance of the American conservative/defense establishment and the international Zionist syndicate under former CIA director and top neoconservative Zionist James Woolsey. These groups are vying for power within the administration as well as consorting and scheming with the liberal “globalist” establishment, which has managed to install numerous members in the administration

His preceding is actually a somewhat astute observation but cannot be squared with excluding Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions as “way outside the scope of this blog post” as Ferreira maintained in his comment/rebuttal of myself. How’s that? It is as simple as his paragraph’s last sentence:

These groups are vying for power within the administration as well as consorting and scheming with the liberal “globalist” establishment, which has managed to install numerous members in the administration

There is no group “vying for power in the administration” more successfully than the group represented in Mike Pence (whose role model is Dick Cheney), the administrations highest ranking member of the Coe cult, also known as ‘The Fellowship’ and ‘The Family’ which now holds the office of the Vice Presidency. Who’re these people? Here’s a small sampling:

Men under the Family’s religio-political counsel include, in addition to Ensign, Coburn and Pickering, Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham, both R-S.C.; James Inhofe, R-Okla., John Thune, R-S.D., and recent senators and high officials such as John Ashcroft, Ed Meese, Pete Domenici and Don Nickles. Over in the House there’s Joe Pitts, R-Penn., Frank Wolf, R-Va., Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., Ander Crenshaw, R-Fla., Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., Jo Ann Emerson, R-Mo., and John R. Carter, R-Texas. Historically, the Family has been strongly Republican, but it includes Democrats, too. There’s Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, for instance, a vocal defender of putting the Ten Commandments in public places, and Sen. Mark Pryor, the pro-war Arkansas Democrat responsible for scuttling Obama’s labor agenda. Sen. Pryor explained to me the meaning of bipartisanship he’d learned through the Family: “Jesus didn’t come to take sides. He came to take over.” And by Jesus, the Family means the Family

Other than Vice President Pence, known top ‘family’ members in the  administration include Jeff Sessions who neatly abandoned Trump, resulting in special counsel Robert Mueller’s ‘the Russians did it’ coming travesty of Justice (Mueller should be famous for what he DID NOT investigate when heading up the FBI, like CIA narcotics trafficking and related money laundering), as well Dan Coats, the Director of National Intelligence, plugging ‘the family’ into American intelligence across the spectrum.

My source closely investigating these people states Mike Pompeo is a suspected member and it would appear Betsy DeVos is aligned and closely collaborating.

Who was present when then president-elect Trump was introduced to the movement’s leader? Mike Pence, who is responsible for General Mike Flynn’s departure from the administration.

coe_trumo_meet-1

Every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1953 has spoken at the breakfast, a point made at the meeting to Trump by the evangelical lay minister Douglas Coe, a leader in The Fellowship religious organization, according to Coons. Also attending the meeting with Trump was Boozman, Vice President-elect Mike Pence, and several of Trump’s faith advisers

Now, somehow these people are outside the purview of Ferreira’s “groups … vying for power within the administration” with his “Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions are way outside the scope of this blog post” despite they’ve not only fired Flynn, and have undermined Trump with stepping out of the  way of appointing Robert Mueller special counsel, they seem to have mostly brought Tillerson to heel (if indeed Tillerson was ever ‘friendly’ towards the Russians) and they’re likely behind having rid Trump of Bannon, related to Pence aligned generals consolidating control; recalling it was General Kelly sent Bannon packing:

Akamai - 1

Now, going to the ‘vying for control’, lets have a look a little closer at who’s actually doing the ‘vying.’ Would you believe Bannon’s nationalists versus the Coe Cult’s (read Pence’s) internationalists?

Akamai - 1 (2)

Khan, meanwhile, told me he was sought out by Doug Coe, head of The Family, the secretive fundamentalist group which, as Jeff Sharlet reported in his book The Family and C Street, facilitates prayer and meetings for the elite politicians and businessmen that group considers to be Jesus’s “key men”

So, we have Coe’s people (preceding) locked into a fight with (Bannon aligned) Islamophobes:

Akamai - 1 (3)

And May’s Sharia panel, which featured former CIA director James Woolsey

Huh. Why does Woolsey ring a bell? Probably because he’s a main bad guy (he TRULY IS bad) picked on by Ferreira, recalling his claiming accurately:

Donald Trump, contrary to both the alternative and mainstream media, is a long-time political insider who’s throughout his life had intimate ties to some of the most powerful men in the world and installed into the Oval Office by very same kinds of people his base loathes […] and has been thrust into power by an alliance of the American conservative/defense establishment and the international Zionist syndicate under former CIA director and top neoconservative Zionist James Woolsey

WHY, then, would self-labeled “propagandist” Ferreira use the classic disinformation technique of simply making a false and unsupported assertion (he’s too savvy not to  know better) of…

Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions are way outside the scope of this blog post

…when Pence and Sessions are clearly big-league players in his:

groups […] vying for power within the administration”

This brings us to the other portion of his comment/rebuttal of my short remarks at his blog:

As far as I can tell, there is virtually no even remotely compelling evidence that Rich leaked the DNC emails. The ‘forensicator’ report is highly misleading and many of the claims in it are outright false (particularly the claims regarding data transfer rates/download speeds)

Because if you were a Clintonista…

Akamai - 1 (1)

^ Ferreira’s old Blogspot ‘about me’

…and Ferreira most certainly is, you’d have a lot invested in ‘the Russians hacked the election’ (a Hillary mantra, and Hillary, by the way, has more than flirted with the Coe cult in the past) and this requires not only supporting the aligned (through pretending they are outside the scope of discussion) Doug Coe cult’s Pence, whose people are also deeply invested in ‘the Russians did it’ bullshit, but also requires covering for the assassins of Seth Rich, the leaker who accordingly needed removed from every sense of reality, not only this life. But first, let’s go to his…

The ‘forensicator’ report is highly misleading and many of the claims in it are outright false (particularly the claims regarding data transfer rates/download speeds)

…and then have a look at what the supporting and dissenting experts say.

Akamai - 1 (4)

Given that the Snowden leaks didn’t really reveal much that we didn’t already know from William Binney, Tom Drake, James Bamford as well as whistleblowers from other agencies and exposes from the ’70s onward about the “Five Eyes”/ECHELON comprehensive electronic surveillance network

Noting Ferreira tossed a bone to both William Binney and Thomas Drake in his part one (the very good Snowden piece), the reader can examine how these two came down on opposite sides of the ‘forensicator report’ Ferreira claims is patently falsified in his comment to me at his Wikileaks article:

Drake’s group, in its challenge on interpretations of evidence, also maintains there is no verifiable evidence the ‘Russians did it’ (the Guccifer claims promoted by Ferreira) but maintain a ‘hack’ (as opposed to a leak) cannot be ruled out:

However, this VIPS memo could have easily raised the necessary and critical questions without resorting to law-of-physics conclusions that claim to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that it was an inside-network copy only and then asserting the “fact” that the Russians (or anybody else for that matter) did not hack the DNC

Binney’s group, in it’s rebuttal, says the Drake group dropped the ball:

Many of the points raised suggest the authors do not fully understand the analysis

Moreover, Binney’s group seems more strongly credentialed in the cyber world of intelligence whereas Drake’s group is more of a straightforward military and/or intelligence background. There’s a bit of crossover in both groups but they appear to be weighted just as stated. One can read the backgrounds of each group at the respective links. In any case, there is clearly a hung jury, but solely reflecting on the technical aspect, bringing us to the HUMIT (human intelligence.) Here is where I have to come down solidly on the side of Binney’s group because they’ve noted the statements of former UK ambassador Craig Murray:

Akamai - 1 (2)

An associate of Assange, former UK ambassador Craig Murray, has said the WikiLeaks source was a leak from an insider. “To my certain knowledge,” said Murray, “neither the DNC nor the Podesta leaks involved Russia.” Oddly, Murray has not been questioned by any US official or journalist

What do you know about that. Wikileaks has pulled some good people into its web, notably Baltsar Garzon who ordered the arrest of Pinochet and hardly could be sympathetic to Clinton or Trump, it was on Obama’s watch he was forced off the bench in Spain via USA pressure for his ‘crusading’ against among other international crimes, the USA’s renditions and assassinations. Another misled soul sucked into the Wikileaks web is Craig Murray, who notably tied (the likely MI6 assassinated) Russian FSB anti-corruption officer Livenenko to uncovering the NATO export of heroin from Afghanistan:

My knowledge of all this comes from my time as British Ambassador in neighbouring Uzbekistan from 2002 until 2004. I stood at the Friendship Bridge at Termez in 2003 and watched the Jeeps with blacked-out windows bringing the heroin through from Afghanistan, en route to Europe. I watched the tankers of chemicals roaring into Afghanistan. Yet I could not persuade my country to do anything about it. Alexander Litvinenko – the former agent of the KGB, now the FSB, who died in London last November after being poisoned with polonium 210 – had suffered the same frustration over the same topic

This Murray guy cannot be ignored. Contrary to honorable, when Ferreira states…

As far as I can tell, there is virtually no even remotely compelling evidence that Rich leaked the DNC emails

…he’d had to ignore not only Murray but my drawing his attention to Murray:

There has been a growing ‘preponderance of the evidence’ the DNC mails were leaked by Rich. You can find that in the title ‘incompetent espionage and wikileaks’ at my blog, if interested

Because this follows is verbatim what I’d drawn propagandist Ferreira’s attention to; what more would one need to know to understand the Akamai Tree blog’s author has not only covered for The Coe cult’s Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions but has covered for the likely assassins of Seth Rich? Not only Craig Murray, but Seymour Hersh has weighed in and they’re the ones who truly can’t get any press:

Incompetent Espionage and Wikileaks

The entire sand-castle (a product of Obama CIA Director John Brennan’s imagination) the “Russians hacked the election” is finally washing away with an incoming tide. How this plays out is anyone’s guess.

The open question is, how the new information will be leveraged, if it were to actually break into the open widely, with the bad boy Trump essentially captured by the surreal evil that surrounds him. Other than pure evil (e.g. Pence), only a narcissist or a fool would ever desire to be president of this particular republic. In ‘The Donald’, we have both.

1 August 2017 an audio tape is leaked in which Seymour Hersh states the FBI knows it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails:

“What the [FBI] report says is that some time in late Spring… he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that’s in his computer. Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents — of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC” -Seymour Hersh

On 9 August 2017 The Nation magazine publishes a column on a group of independent experts…

“Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year”

…demonstrating the DNC mails were leaked, not hacked.

On 18 August 2017 Antiwar.com reports Congressman Dana  Rohrabacher has met with Assange concerning the DNC mails and [the article] further credibly suggests Assange is holding the DNC leak evidence hostage as a bargaining chip to possibly acquire a pardon for himself and leverage wikileaks into legitimacy with a President of the United States who at this point is owned by the USA’s intelligence agencies, a hare-brained scheme destined to fail. Assange & company waited too long.

But this would fit Julian Assange’s self-centered, persecuted-savior complex which never ceases to amaze, this guy (as well, Craig Murray) has allowed the idiots surrounding Trump to push us towards the brink with Russia, for months. All because Assange is tired of his embassy confinement in London, a circumstance that is entirely his own fault for the fact he didn’t have the self-discipline to keep his dick in his pants (whether Assange’s admitted intercourse was a case of rape or not.)

What’s more is, this blog pointed to strong circumstantial evidence it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails this past January, and recalling this, it still stretches the imagination a former UK ambassador would make an amateur espionage move worthy of a cub scout playing spy. But that’s what Craig Murray had done in the case of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

Seymour Hersh states Seth Rich is the source of the DNC mails. Craig Murray states he had met with the source of the DNC mails. A + B = C:

Craig Murray met with Seth Rich

That Murray would be a high value target for American counter-intelligence to monitor for the reason of his high profile association with WikiLeaks is beyond obvious. For Murray then to state

murray_wikileaks-1

“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

…goes to the practically bizarre when coming from a former United Kingdom ambassador to Uzbekistan. The UK is little different to the USA in the case of embassies providing cover for spies; in which case Murray should at least have some rudimentary espionage understanding such as YOU DO NOT MEET YOUR SOURCE DIRECTLY WHEN YOU ARE A HIGH PROFILE TARGET OF YOUR ADVERSARY’S COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE HUNTING YOUR (in this case, WikiLeaks) SOURCE(S)

Then, we had WikiLeak’s Assange giving what amounts to a ‘Glomar’ ‘I will neither confirm or deny’ response concerning the murder (assassination) of Seth Rich after appearing to suggest Rich was the source of the DNC emails leak:

Beyond this, WikiLeaks offering a $20,000 reward for the solving of the Seth Rich murder is laughable, that’s what an American west coast upscale community would offer for the arrest of a serial killer of the neighborhood’s cats. Two million dollars might get two seconds’ attention of a corruptible counter-intelligence agent with knowledge of a professional hit on Seth Rich, twenty million might even net an inside the agency sucker willing to take the exceedingly high risk to one’s life (almost certain death) that would attend selling out an agency hit man for substantial lucre. In truth, the WikiLeaks reward offer amounted to little more than a tabloid publicity stunt.

Narcissism is a blinding thing; and a self-righteous narcissism is no exception. Ambassador Murray could have every good intention but on the face of it, he had seriously screwed up. Murray and WikiLeaks should have immediately come clean, there was little to lose. Seth Rich was the source, Murray had met with him, and much could have been gained by stating so; there would be nothing given up any intelligence agency involved did not already know. Not only would it have been the right thing to do, the only thing at stake here for Murray was a hit to ego & image.

Craig Murray stating ‘I had a serious lapse of professional judgement and this resulted in the death of Seth Rich’ would be the most responsible and newsworthy move WikiLeaks could have taken; to counter the CIA’s ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ propaganda lie, in which there is much invested by the agency; and the consequent damage to relations with Russia, and growing threat to what little world peace yet exists, is immense. WikiLeaks should have done the right thing a long time ago and they have not. Why not? Because Assange and WikiLeaks believes Assange’s comfort is more important than world peace. What fucks. This is beyond inexcusable, it’s criminal. But for Murray, there’s more at stake here than just a hit to ego & image.

Murray’s likely role in the DNC leaks case? A personal meeting with Rich to confirm for WikiLeaks Seth Rich was a bona fide insider with authentic material prior to a WikiLeaks cash payment to Rich and arrangements completed for the mails transfer.

Now, it is a question of ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ release the evidence because WikiLeaks waited too long, and let the criminals surrounding Trump consolidate their power while investing deeply in the myth of the Russians hacked the election; a criminal cabal that will up the ante on the world stage to any level necessary to avoid accountability. WikiLeaks Idiots. WikiLeaks Morons.

Meanwhile, Murray subsequently barred from the United States (except that he applies for a visa, typically unnecessary for a British citizen) appears to have been, in a manner of speaking, a deep state message to Murray: ‘thank you very much for the lapse of judgement, we have taken full advantage with the assassination of Seth Rich and we won’t be requiring your services after this’ (he’d be smart to stay away.)

The really sticky problem for WikiLeaks in this scenario is, Seymour Hersh asserts in the recorded call WikiLeaks had paid Rich for the leaked documents, damaging or reducing to element of pretense WikiLeaks claims of journalism & providing rationale for deep state prosecutors & judges to find this had been straightforward espionage. But they won’t do it if the Rich-Murray meeting stays buried, a LOT is invested in ‘the Russians did it’ for the public consumption. If it DOES break open, Murray’s ‘goose is cooked.’ It’s now not only WikiLeaks problem in a larger sense, but Murray’s, whether he does or doesn’t admit the assassinated Seth Rich had been the DNC mails source.

Murray’s reputation? [and in this case, Ferreira’s] C’est la mort.

 

 

16 September 2017 updated article HERE

 

The entire sand-castle (a product of Obama CIA Director John Brennan’s imagination) the “Russians hacked the election” is finally washing away with an incoming tide. How this plays out is anyone’s guess.

The open question is, how the new information will be leveraged, if it were to actually break into the open widely, with the bad boy Trump essentially captured by the surreal evil that surrounds him. Other than pure evil (e.g. Pence), only a narcissist or a fool would ever desire to be president of this particular republic. In ‘The Donald’, we have both.

1 August 2017 an audio tape is leaked in which Seymour Hersh states the FBI knows it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails:

“What the [FBI] report says is that some time in late Spring… he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that’s in his computer. Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents — of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC” -Seymour Hersh

On 9 August 2017 The Nation magazine publishes a column on a group of independent experts…

“Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year”

…demonstrating the DNC mails were leaked, not hacked.

On 18 August 2017 Antiwar.com reports Congressman Dana  Rohrabacher has met with Assange concerning the DNC mails and [the article] further credibly suggests Assange is holding the DNC leak evidence hostage as a bargaining chip to possibly acquire a pardon for himself and leverage wikileaks into legitimacy with a President of the United States who at this point is owned by the USA’s intelligence agencies, a hare-brained scheme destined to fail. Assange & company waited too long.

But this would fit Julian Assange’s self-centered, persecuted-savior complex which never ceases to amaze, this guy (as well, Craig Murray) has allowed the idiots surrounding Trump to push us towards the brink with Russia, for months. All because Assange is tired of his embassy confinement in London, a circumstance that is entirely his own fault for the fact he didn’t have the self-discipline to keep his dick in his pants (whether Assange’s admitted intercourse was a case of rape or not.)

What’s more is, this blog pointed to strong circumstantial evidence it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails this past January, and recalling this, it still stretches the imagination a former UK ambassador would make an amateur espionage move worthy of a cub scout playing spy. But that’s what Craig Murray had done in the case of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

Seymour Hersh states Seth Rich is the source of the DNC mails. Craig Murray states he had met with the source of the DNC mails. A + B = C:

Craig Murray met with Seth Rich

That Murray would be a high value target for American counter-intelligence to monitor for the reason of his high profile association with WikiLeaks is beyond obvious. For Murray then to state

murray_wikileaks-1

“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

…goes to the practically bizarre when coming from a former United Kingdom ambassador to Uzbekistan. The UK is little different to the USA in the case of embassies providing cover for spies; in which case Murray should at least have some rudimentary espionage understanding such as YOU DO NOT MEET YOUR SOURCE DIRECTLY WHEN YOU ARE A HIGH PROFILE TARGET OF YOUR ADVERSARY’S COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE HUNTING YOUR (in this case, WikiLeaks) SOURCE(S)

Then, we had WikiLeak’s Assange giving what amounts to a ‘Glomar’ ‘I will neither confirm or deny’ response concerning the murder (assassination) of Seth Rich after appearing to suggest Rich was the source of the DNC emails leak:

Beyond this, WikiLeaks offering a $20,000 reward for the solving of the Seth Rich murder is laughable, that’s what an American west coast upscale community would offer for the arrest of a serial killer of the neighborhood’s cats. Two million dollars might get two seconds’ attention of a corruptible counter-intelligence agent with knowledge of a professional hit on Seth Rich, twenty million might even net an inside the agency sucker willing to take the exceedingly high risk to one’s life (almost certain death) that would attend selling out an agency hit man for substantial lucre. In truth, the WikiLeaks reward offer amounted to little more than a tabloid publicity stunt.

Narcissism is a blinding thing; and a self-righteous narcissism is no exception. Ambassador Murray could have every good intention but on the face of it, he had seriously screwed up. Murray and WikiLeaks should have immediately come clean, there was little to lose. Seth Rich was the source, Murray had met with him, and much could have been gained by stating so; there would be nothing given up any intelligence agency involved did not already know. It have been the right thing to do.

Craig Murray stating ‘I had a serious lapse of professional judgement and this resulted in the death of Seth Rich’ would be the most responsible and newsworthy move WikiLeaks could have taken; to counter the CIA’s ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ propaganda lie, in which there is much invested by the agency; and the consequent damage to relations with Russia, and growing threat to what little world peace yet exists, is immense. WikiLeaks should have done the right thing a long time ago and they have not. Why not? Because Assange and WikiLeaks believes Assange’s comfort is more important than world peace. What fucks. This is beyond inexcusable, it’s criminal. But for Murray, there’s more at stake here than just a hit to ego & image.

Murray’s likely role in the DNC leaks case? A personal meeting with Rich to confirm for WikiLeaks Seth Rich was a bona fide insider with authentic material prior to a WikiLeaks cash payment to Rich and arrangements completed for the mails transfer.

Now, it is a question of ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ release the evidence because WikiLeaks waited too long, and let the criminals surrounding Trump consolidate their power while investing deeply in the myth of the Russians hacked the election; a criminal cabal that will up the ante on the world stage to any level necessary to avoid accountability. WikiLeaks Idiots. WikiLeaks Morons.

Meanwhile, Murray subsequently barred from the United States (except that he applies for a visa, typically unnecessary for a British citizen) appears to have been, in a  manner of speaking, a deep state message to Murray: ‘thank you very much for the lapse of judgement, we have taken full advantage with the assassination of Seth Rich and we won’t be requiring your services after this’ (he’d be smart to stay away.)

The really sticky problem for WikiLeaks in this scenario is, Seymour Hersh asserts in the  recorded call WikiLeaks had paid Rich for the leaked documents, damaging or reducing to element of pretense WikiLeaks claims of journalism & providing rationale for deep state prosecutors & judges to find this had been straightforward espionage. But they won’t do it if the Rich-Murray meeting stays buried, a LOT is invested in ‘the Russians did it’ for the public consumption. If it DOES break open, Murray’s ‘goose is cooked.’ It’s now not only WikiLeaks problem in a larger sense, but Murray’s, whether he does or doesn’t admit the assassinated Seth Rich had been the DNC mails source.

Murray’s reputation? C’est la mort.

*

Related:

Agent Assange

Litmus Test

WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies

 

%d bloggers like this: