As far as can be determined from the available evidence, NO ONE DIED that night in Tiananmen Square.” What?! Who would make such a blatant propagandist claim? China’s communist party? Nope. It was Jay Mathews, who was Washington Post’s Beijing Bureau Chief in 1989. He wrote this for Columbia Journalism Review.

Here are a few more examples of what western journalists once said about what happened in Tiananmen Square in June 1989:

CBS NEWS: “We saw no bodies, injured people, ambulances or medical personnel — in short, nothing to even suggest, let alone prove, that a “massacre” had occurred in [Tiananmen Square]” — thus wrote CBS News reporter Richard Roth.
7 hours ago
Here’s why 5G is NOT allowed in Israel where it was developed 5G is Part of Sterlizing the Goyim — Not Allowed in Israel Robert David Steele
Smart meters and mandatory vaccinations/pesticides are the “Final Solution” to the cattle goyim…especially the white anglo saxon protestants! 1G, 2G, 3G and 4G use between 1 to 5 gigahertz frequency. 5G uses between 24 to 90 gigahertz frequency. Within the RF Radiation portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, the higher the frequency the more dangerous it is to living organisms. 5G, developed in Israel, is exported — it is FORBIDDEN in Israel.

The safety of 5G technology is finally being brought into serious question

Genetic sequencing science breakthrough just proved that measles “outbreaks” are caused by the measles vaccine

RELATED (Long Input from Alert Reader):

*The most referred to site for these studies is
https://www.emf-portal.org/en – Univ of Aachen. I corresponded with the
director of this site, asking how many of their current 27,000+
published NIR studies show harm? She said for an advocacy rule of thumb
use 20,000. David Carpenter was copied in and also estimates 20,000.
Moskowitz doesn’t seem to object. As everyone knows who has even a
little familiarity with the EMR field, Carpenter (SUNY Albany, co-author
of /Bio-initiative Report/, a summary of several hundred of the best of
these studies) and Moskowitz (U Cal Berkeley) are the most influential
scientists in EMR in N. America.

*Carpenter’s site is the Bio-Initiative site, updated 2017:

*with Henry Lai’s Research Summaries:

*Moskowitz’s site: * *https://www.saferemr.com<https://www.saferemr.com/>/*

*Here are links to many of those 20,000 or so studies*



*Obviously if there are about 20,000 published studies showing harm from
EMR, there are going to be thousands of scientists who have done those
studies who are aware of the acute dangers of childish, impulsive,
obsessive, and superficial dive into cell phones, smart meters, wifi,
and 5G (led by the US, and potentially prevented mainly by the IAA).
Here is a list of most of the visible scientists who know how dangerous
EMR can be, many of whom are warning about it (Maharishi warned about
it, and said not to use cell phones, and told all the Rajas to tell all
their Governors not to use cell phones):*


*The reason for many studies showing no harm from cell phones and other
EMR is: there are many poor studies, for two reasons: *

*1. Political and financial influence on the studies: Industry funded
studies are of lower quality, seemingly designed to show no harm (short
term, small sample, and incorrect EMR measuring)*

*2. Poor research method: two initial studies in 1976 showed harm but
were poorly done (they got lucky) but many studies were done after that
using that same poor research design and did not show harm (due to poor
research methods). *

*Political and financial influence: The three primary documents are:*

*1. **Hertsgaard and Dowie’s landmark expose in **/The Nation/ magazine:

*revised and published in /The Guardian/:

*2. Norm Alster’s landmark Harvard paper on FCC corruption:

*3. Henry Lai’s survey EMR research showing that 2/3 of the research
funded by industry shows no harm, and 1/3 does not show harm – and in
research /_not_/ funded by industry, 2/3 shows harm and 1/3 does not
show harm, showing the high influence of who funds the research
(resulting in study designs of differing quality)*


*2. Initial poorly done studies: Dr. De Kun Li (MD, PhD, MPH, Kaiser
Permanente) in the second of three 15 minutes presentations on a webinar
about a year ago describes what happened, mentioning some of his
research (strapping EMR measuring devices to the abdomens of pregnant
women and finding 250-500% increase in still births, infant ADHD, infant
obesity, and infant thyroid problems): *


*So stating that ‘all EMR is harmless because some of it is good’ is
ridiculous, and solidly established and massively documented as invalid.
I suggest not continuing to reduce your credibility ever lower in the
community by continuing to use invalid arguments to oppose Maharishi’s
knowledge (yes, he made it firmly part of his knowledge) and the
thousands of good scientists who see through what is going on. *

*Made it firmly part of his knowledge? Yes, I spoke at length with a
Governor from Europe who Maharishi had go through every single room in
Vlodrop, including all private quarters, and regardless of any opposition, *

*1. remove all wifi*
*2. replace all CFL bulbs*
*3. rewire all appliances to ground them all*

*Maharishi told him to meet with him every day until he was done, and he
did, it took him a year. This was around 2006. *

*Saying that since light is beneficial, all EMR is beneficial or
harmless is like saying, since apples and hemlock are both plant
substances, and apples are good or OK to eat, so is hemlock. And that
would be similar to what would happen if people take your advice. *

*Although Alliant’s smart meter program is about 1% as dangerous as it
is being portrayed by FF Safe Meters. Alliant’s SM program is unique in
the country for only half a dz signals/day, that has been confirmed by
Dave Stetzer, the most reputable electrical engineer in the world
opposing smart meters and dirty electricity. He told me he left the Iowa
hearing because, “I’m not going to lie.” FF Safe Meters is vastly
exaggerating the health risk of Alliant’s program. Alliant disclosed it
had “2-4 malfunctioning meters signaling 3,000-11,000 times/week,” and
FF Safe Meter broadcast they had gotten Alliant to admit they had meters
signaling that amount but /_hid the fact it was only from 2-4
malfunctioning meters._/*

*Good to avoid both phase transition emotional extremes of ‘EMR is all
fine’ and ‘Alliant’s SMs are deadly.’ Both are quite invalid. It’s good
to opt out, it is not good to be highly concerned about Alliant’s smart
meter program for health reasons. It is good to be highly concerned
about the health risk from 5G (and all its other problems). There also
huge privacy and cyber security issues with smart meters and 5G, as well
as major local control and rights/freedom issues with both smart meters
and 5G. *

5G  5G~MASTERlinks  Israel 
Wahhabism Is Not Islam
Islam encourages all faiths to intermingle and integrate among themselves. Islam teaches respect and love between all communities and religions. Islam encourages peace and advancement

by Imtiaz Thaha

The shattering of peace

Easter Sunday seemed to be another peaceful day in Sri Lanka. Then suddenly there was pandemonium as five bombs exploded and a carefully-planned ISIS-oriented bombing resulted in nearly 300 lives being lost to the deadly bombs with scores of people injured. The ISIS had struck in Sri Lanka this time.

The killers were suicide bombers and of Sri Lankan ethnicity. In a matter of hours, the authorities identified the killers as Sri Lankan Muslims belonging to the National Thawheed Jamaat. Suddenly the Sri Lankan Muslims who were hitherto a very peaceful people were now looked upon as merciless killers. Every Muslim was now a suspect and was fearful of communal backlash and riots. A very scary time for them as the majority community looked at them with suspicion and hatred.....
SaudiArabia  Wahhabism  Islam 
Marxism in 800 words May 1, 2018 Written by Alex Snowdon
As we approach Karl Marx's 200th birthday, Alex Snowdon summarises Marx's key ideas in as few words as possible
Marx famously wrote that philosophers have interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it. He provided powerful analysis and critique, but also wanted to guide political action. On Saturday activists and writers will be gathering to discuss Marx and the revolutionary tradition at Why Marx Was Right. We thought we’d repost this brilliant attempt by Alex Snowdon in 2011 to summarise Marx’s ideas in as few words as possible - so here’s around 800 words on the ABC of Marxism.

Capitalism now dominates the world. It emerged from the 1500s or 1600s onwards in northern Europe, and represented a new kind of society. It is one based on a division into two main classes: ruling class (a tiny minority) and working class (the great majority in modern industrial societies).

Workers need to work in order to survive, as the ruling class owns and controls the means of production. It is exploitation of the vast majority by a tiny minority. This division into classes is a key feature of capitalism.

Another key feature of capitalist society is competition. Different companies or businesses compete with each other. Profit comes before all else - there is a race to the bottom in workers’ pay and conditions as competing employers chase maximum profit at the expense of those who do the work.

This also means there is little planning in the economy - instead there is the anarchy of the market. So, the key features of capitalism economically are the division into classes (inequality, exploitation) and competition (pursuit of profit, market anarchy).

The ruling class also owns the means of ‘mental production’ - it controls education, media, etc. The ruling ideas of any age, as Marx said, are the ideas of the ruling class. Economic control brings ideological domination, whether directly (for example by owning newspapers) or indirectly (through the state reflecting dominant interests).

But that doesn't mean capitalist ideas dominate completely and no resistance is possible. Alternative ideas circulate. The dominant ideas clash with people's lived experiences: people revolt and fight back, perhaps because they are forced to by necessity, or they see a drop in living standards due to a crisis in the system, or in response to injustice. The ruling class doesn't have it all its own way.

The system grows and expands. It colonises new areas of society and new lands. Imperialism in its modern form emerges from capitalism - rival national capitalisms fight for greater power, land and wealth.

War is thus endemic to capitalism. So are racism, nationalism and all the other divisions and prejudices that divide working class people against each other, therefore weakening the working class and strengthening our rulers' power.

But the system's huge expansion since 1848 - a year of revolution in Europe, and the year Marx wrote his Communist Manifesto - means capitalism is now a truly global system, with a global working class capable of resistance.

The revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, and revolts in other Arab countries, are revolts against capitalist neoliberal policies as well as struggles for democracy. The system is unstable, crisis-ridden and generates revolt. We have seen many revolutions, uprisings and general strikes - plus a mass of action on a lower scale - in response to global capitalism.

Socialism is the political expression of the working class resisting the system, and organising a response. There are different strands in socialist thought - there are a number of variants of socialism from above (reformism) and socialism from below (revolution).

Marx was a revolutionary. We build revolutionary organisations today - in the context of wider movements and struggles - in his tradition. This revolutionary tradition is founded on Marx’s conviction that the emancipation of the working class is the act of the working class. We have to liberate ourselves, through collective resistance.

Reformism reflects workers' desire for protection against many elements of the system, and their contradictory ideas. But it ultimately offers no solution because we have to change society ourselves, not rely on others, and it can only modify the worst excesses of capitalism not overturn the system entirely and create a different society.

Transforming society is only possible if we seize control of the means of production, i.e. if we control our workplaces and the resources our economy depends upon, as well as political institutions, to create a truly democratic and equal society. That is the beginnings of socialism.

If the ruling class retains economic control then poverty and inequality remain. The current wave of revolutions and popular uprisings in the Middle East and Africa indicate how people, exploited for generations, can move swiftly into action. They show what is possible through mass action, how people can overcome divisions and unite.

But it is ultimately necessary to extend revolution to the economic sphere: the working class, as the majority in society, must take control of our shared resources. Socialism is co-operation in place of competition, bringing equality where there was inequality. We can create - through the collective mass action of the great majority in society - the potential for realising justice and liberation for the whole of humanity.
KarlMarx  Marxism  Capitalism  Academia  ColorRevolutions  Revolution 
3 days ago
Barbara Honegger’s “Eyewitnesses for and Evidence of Explosives at the Pentagon” March 10, 2019
Barbara Honegger, M.S.
Presentation to the International Hearings on The Events of September 11, 2001
Toronto, Canada
Chapter 13 in The Toronto Hearings Report


This paper presents compelling evidence that the central fact of the Pentagon attack on September 11, 2001, is the same as at the World Trade Center: inside-the-building explosives which no foreign terrorists could have had the access to plant, making the official narrative of what happened on 9/11 impossible. Physical evidence and eyewitness testimony converge to show that internal as well as external explosions went off just after 9:30 a.m., when the official narrative claims Flight 77 was still dozens of miles from Washington and did not approach the building until 9:37:46, and that these primary explosions went off at locations far removed from the official story “plane penetration path” in Wedge One, including in Wedge Two and in the innermost rings well beyond the alleged C Ring “exit” hole....
911BarbaraHonegger  911PentagonNoPlane  911KevinBarrett  911PentagonBarbaraHonegger 
5 days ago
Black 9/11: Money, Motive, Technology, and Plausible Deniability
Special thanks to Michael C. Ruppert, Mark H. Gaffney, and Kevin Ryan for their dedicated research in bringing this information out of the shadowy black operations underworld from which it came. This video is a compilation of evidence they have uncovered.

"Inside Job" Documentary on the Financial "Crisis" of 2008

"Crossing the Rubicon" - The Decline of American Empire at the end of the age of oil

"Black 911" by Mark H. Gaffney:

Was 9/11 an Inside Job?

A guide to 9/11 Whistleblowers

Project Hammer


SEC Act Section 12(k)2:

Richard Grove's testimony (complete transcript)

"Collateral Damage" by E.P. Heidner

The CIA's forty-year complicity in the narcotics trade by Alfred W. McCOY

Executive Order 12333 created an agreement between the CIA and Justice Department (DEA) to look the other way on Government Drug Trafficking: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-...

AIG and Drug Money

Maurice Greenberg's report for the CFR

Richard Armitage, Frank Carlucci, Herbert Winokur, and company

Post 9/11 Promotions:

9/11 Gold Theft and other smoking guns:

Kevin Ryan's landmark article on who had "Demolition access to the WTC Towers":
Clean Up:

Kevin R. Ryan, et al, Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials, The Environmentalist, Volume 29, Number 1 / March, 2009, http://www.springerlink.com/content/f...

Kevin R. Ryan, The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nanothermites, Journal of 9/11 Studies, July 2008, http://www.journalof911studies.com/vo...

Website for In-Q-Tel, http://www.iqt.org/technology-portfol...

Wikipedia page for Jerome Hauer, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_H...

Peter Jennings interview with Jerome Hauer, ABC, on 9/11, 14:53, available on You Tube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj0Rz9...

Taku Murakami, US Patent 5532449 - Using plasma ARC and thermite to demolish concrete, http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/553...

Albert Gibson et al, Integral low-energy thermite igniter, US Patent number: 4464989, http://www.google.com/patents/about?i...

Michael C. Ruppert, Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading Lead Directly into the CIA's Highest Ranks, October 9, 2001, http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free...

Kevin R. Ryan, Mahmud Ahmed's itinerary from his Washington DC visit the week of 9/11, 911blogger.com, 11/27/2009, http://www.911blogger.com/node/21978

The agreement between LLNL and Savannah River can be found here - https://www.llnl.gov/str/News597.html

Savannah's reference to developing sol-gels can be found here - http://srnl.doe.gov/mat_sci.htm

SEC document for Washington pre-payments - http://www.secinfo.com/dRqWm.4G1Vx.c.htm

The Ties That Bind, Descended from family business empires, six huge business groups dominate the Japanese economy, Multinational Monitor, October 1983 - http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper...

Securacomm Consulting Inc. v. Securacom Incorporated, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, January 20, 1999, 49 U.S.P.Q.2d 1444; 166 F.3d 182, http://altlaw.org/v1/cases/1099498

Wikipedia page for Stratesec, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratesec

SEC filing for Stratesec, May 2, 1997, http://www.secinfo.com/dS7kv.82.htm

Kroll Inc website, http://www.kroll.com/about/
911Securities  911WTC1-NorthTower  911WTC2-SouthTower  911WTCFloorsHit  911WTCCantorFitzgerald  911DanicaNiketic  DanicaNiketic  911WTCMarsh  911Comprehensive 
6 days ago
The Falling Man An unforgettable story. BY TOM JUNOD SEP 9, 2016
Do you remember this photograph? In the United States, people have taken pains to banish it from the record of September 11, 2001. The story behind it, though, and the search for the man pictured in it, are our most intimate connection to the horror of that day.
911TheJumpingMan  911Jumpers 
7 days ago
The NED Strikes Again: How Neocon Money is Funding the Hong Kong Protests by Mnar Muhawesh September 09th, 2019
The West has more to do with the Hong Kong protest movement than it would like us to know. It’s the ugly face of Washington’s long-standing foreign policy directed at destabilizing one of its long-standing economic foes: China....
A closer look actually gives us a clear answer — that the West has more to do with this movement than it would like us to know. It’s the ugly face of Washington’s long-standing foreign policy directed at destabilizing one of its long-standing economic foes: China.

Gone are the days where the CIA would directly overthrow foreign governments it didn’t like, such as Iran in 1953 or Brazil in 1964.

Today regime change is achieved through front organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy, or NED, that influences thought and culture through covert means.

Washington uses the NED as a “soft power” tool to influence and interfere in the politics and society of foreign countries in order to bring about governments that are conducive to the interests of big business. The NED does this under the guise of being a charitable organization promoting democracy and human rights.

The idea is to create a buffer, 3rd-party organization to distance the U.S. government from funding political parties and groups and organizing regime-change operations.

The NED was founded in 1983, following a series of scandals that exposed the CIA’s blood-soaked covert actions against foreign governments that resisted U.S. economic and political bullying.

In 1986, NED President Carl Gershman told the New York Times, “It would be terrible for democratic groups around the world to be seen as subsidized by the CIA. We saw that in the Sixties, and that’s why it has been discontinued.”

One of the NED’s founders, Allen Weinstein, was more blunt. He told the Washington Post, “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”

In recent years, the NED has trained, supported and funded demonstrations and regime-change ops in Venezuela, Ukraine and Nicaragua, designed to look like grassroots uprisings.

It’s not surprising considering the NED’s board of directors includes two infamous war criminals: Elliott Abrams, who helped funnel weapons and funds to right-wing contras in Nicaragua that terrorized civilians through torture, rape and murder, then tried to cover up these war crimes; and Victoria Nuland, who directed the U.S. policy in Ukraine to fund and arm a right-wing insurgency that engineered the overthrow the democratically elected government — an insurgency that has committed countless war crimes against civilians.
HongKong  NED  MnarMuhawesh 
8 days ago
Venezuela, Ukraine, Hong Kong, … : Color Revolutions and Regime Change, A Modern Scourge Spawning Economic Destabilization and Civil War Three Case Studies By Carla Stea Global Research, September 02, 2019

There are innumerable examples throughout the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, but three of the most notorious demonstrations of Washington, and its European cohorts incubating massive human tragedy and/or civil wars can be exemplified by Washington’s cultivation, indeed creation of toxic opposition movements whose goal is the destabilization and destruction of progressive governments and egalitarian economic and social structures. Currently, one of the most venal is Washington’s latest inamorata, or inamorato, Juan Guaido, the teflon Quisling of Venezuela, whose attempt to usurp the Presidency from democratically elected Nicolas Maduro would be comic in its ineffectiveness, were it not so tragic in its destruction of the lives of Venezuelan citizens. Venezuela, which controls the world’s largest oil reserves, among other coveted resources, is currently one of the most viciously targeted victims of imperialism, (cosmetically now described as “democracy development,” the latest rhetorical politically correct name for plunder). Yet, Venezuela, contrary to mainstream media disinformation, seems to be enduring, with a loyal populace who are evidently capable of detecting and resisting economic, social, and cultural manipulation, and a military who are so far unwilling to prostitute themselves.

This is a phenomenally heroic example of human integrity, and the success of socialism. President Maduro has assembled a team of brilliant leaders to represent his government, in particular, his Foreign Minister, Jorge Arreaza, an intellectual aristocrat of the highest order, his expert Ambassador Samuel Moncada, and many others of remarkable sophistication, whose capacity to see beyond the idiocies of bourgeoise propaganda is admirable, and indeed, enviable. (There are, after all, other things in life beyond designer handbags and plastic surgery, as the young women of South Korea discovered at the arrival of Kim Yo Jong, the DPRK envoy at the Winter Olympics in Seoul, who dazzled the West by her elegant simplicity and eschewal of conspicuous consumption.)

But, as Jeffrey Sachs demonstrated, in his excellent recent essay (“Economic Sanctions as Collective Punishment”), Washington’s sanctions are designed and determined to devastate and destroy the very fabric of the lives of the Venezuelan people, while making a mockery of U.S. “concern for human rights.” And all this is being done in the name of “democracy,” which, as a result, is acquiring a putrid odor. These sanctions are a form of economic genocide.

Yesterday’s New York Times reports Elliot Abrams offering President Maduro amnesty if he resigns office, which is in staggering contrast to recent threats by U.S. Senator Marco Rubio that Maduro will suffer the same fate as Libya’s Khadafi, who was sodomized with a bayonet among other tortures prior to his murder by the opposition. President Maduro might understandably conclude that the inmates have taken over the asylum.


In his famous book, “The Grand Chessboard,” the late Zbigniew Brezezinski, (the architect of the US policy of training, funding and arming of the savage Islamic jihadists to overthrow the socialist government of Najibullah in Afghanistan,) stressed, at length, the necessity of severing all relations between Russia and Ukraine, to completely isolate Russia from Europe, and force it to become an Eurasian state. Brzezinski’s policies were carried out during the Obama Administration, and this was implemented by State Department officials, led by Victoria Nuland.

If the history of US efforts to destabilize and overthrow the democratically elected presidency of Victor Yanukovich in Ukraine is written, one of the central figures is the US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, Victoria (“Fuck the EU”) Nuland. And in all likelihood, she will be remembered for that famous expletive, which reveals her (and her cohorts) attitude toward illegal intervention in the sovereign affairs of another country. The BBC published the leaked transcript of the Nuland-Pyatt phone call, which reveals the scandalous details of Nuland and Pyatt’s masterminding the overthrow of a democratically elected government, which they replaced with a neo-nazi regime more to their liking, and which has resulted in a virtual civil war in Ukraine, glorification of Ukranian Nazis such as Stefan Bandera, and ethnocide of the Russian-speaking Ukranians which bears striking similarity to the early stages of Hitler’s extermination of the Jews, which began with destroying their cultural identity.


“I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the…what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside…..I just think Klitsch going in…he’s going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it’s just not going to work.”


“….I think you reaching out directly to Klischko helps with the personality management among the three and it gives you also a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn’t like it.”


“….when I talked to Jeff Feltman (UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs) this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry did I write you that this morning? OK. He’s now gotten both Serry and (UN Secretary-General) Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.”

BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus notes:

“An intriguing insight into the foreign policy process with work going on at a number of levels: Various officials attempting to marshal the Ukranian opposition, efforts to get the UN to play an active role in bolstering a deal; and the big guns waiting in the wings – US Vice-President Biden clearly being lined up to give private words of encouragement at the appropriate moment.”

Every year at the United Nations, the Russian Federation submits a resolution prohibiting the glorification of Nazism. Every year the Resolution is adopted by a majority vote, and the Resolution has consistently been opposed by only one country: the U.S. In recent years Ukraine has joined with the U.S. in opposition to the anti-nazi resolution.

Today, conditions in Ukraine are appalling, and the horrific event in Odessa, recently, where workers were trapped in a building deliberately set on fire, and were burned to death, while neo-nazis circled the building chanting neo-nazi slogans is only one among innumerable such events, in a country which had previously known peace and stability.

Perhaps, the most moving and accurate description of the destruction of the democratically elected Presidency of Victor Yanukovich was delivered in a speech by Russia’s late Ambassador Vitali Churkin on March 27, 2014 at the UN General Assembly, and it bears quoting in large part here:

Ambassador Churkin:

“The crisis was to a large extent provoked by the adventurous actions of the current political forces, which sought to break the centuries-old ties of Russia and Ukraine, by giving Kiev a false choice between either the European Union and the West or Russia. That policy was carried out with unprecedented bluntness. They could either sign a Ukraine-European Union association agreement, as demanded of the Ukranian Government, or they could face sanctions. Within the ranks of anti-Government demonstrators were representatives of the European Union and the United States, who openly marched alongside them and called on them to openly carry out anti-Government actions.”

“The central square of the city –Maidan Nezalezhnosti—was turned into a militarized camp. Well-trained and equipped units of militants carried out violent attacks against law enforcement bodies and seized administrative buildings. In one of those buildings, the trade unions building, the so-called common diversion of the Maidan was organized. On the seventh floor of that building was a permanent staff member of the United States Embassy. By the way, it is from that building that snipers were shooting at police and demonstrators; that action was clearly aimed at provoking a violent overthrow of the government. At some point, it appeared that it would be possible to stop before the situation became worse….However, someone thought that such a scenario was not sufficiently radical. The violence continued. Under the threat of death, President Yanukovich had to leave Kiev and then Ukraine. The legitimate Government stopped operating in Kiev. Violence became the rule of politics. In the Verkhovna Rada, the parties that supported the Yanukovich majority became victims of that violence. As a result, the Rada was reshuffled, and instead of a Government of national unity, a so-called Government of victors emerged. The shots were called by those who conducted an armed coup, national radicals who –according to the definition of the European Parliament—preached racist, anti-semitic and xenophobic views and seemed to hate everything that was Russian and did not conceal that they considered the Ukranian allies of Nazis as their ideological ancestors.”

Violence and hatreds fester today in Ukraine, xenophobia, Russophobia, neo-nazism are the “new normal” in this “democracy?”

Hong Kong

Several years ago, Syrian Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari told me, personally, that each year recently Saudi Arabia invites at least 5,000 moslem Uighurs from the northwest of China to the pilgrimage in Mecca. The Saudis pay all their expenses, and extend their stay there for one month after all other pilgrims have left. The Saudis train the Uighurs in religious extremism and jihad, and then return these newly minted jihadist to their homes in Xingjiang, China, where they have been primed to destabilize the region, and promote jihad, … [more]
ZbigniewBrzezinski  ColorRevolutions  China  HongKong  Venezuela  Ukraine  Russia 
8 days ago
Hong Kong: Can Two Million Marchers Be Wrong? By Kim Petersen Global Research, June 28, 2019
In February 2003, protest organizers estimated that nearly 2 million people took to the streets of London in opposition to going to war against Iraq. United States president George W. Bush came across as dismissive of the protestors, likening them to a “focus group.” [1] The number of protestors did not deter Bush and United Kingdom prime minister Tony Blair from their path.

The aftermath was that the US, UK, and other allies initiated a lopsided war based on “intelligence and facts [that] were being fixed around the policy” of military action. [2] Iraq did not possess weapons-of-mass destruction; it was as United Nations weapons inspector had warned beforehand that Iraq was “fundamentally disarmed.” What transpired was an act of aggression — which the Nuremberg Tribunal described thusly:

To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.

Furthermore, the US-led debacle against a sanctions-weakened Iraq is compellingly argued, by lawyers Abdul Haq al-Ani and Tarik al-Ani, as an act of genocide by the US, UK, allies, and the UN Security Council. [3]

Two Million Demonstrators Take to the Streets of Hong Kong

On 27 June, the Hong Kong Free Press reported about 200 people protesting outside secretary for justice Teresa Cheng’s office. On the following day, a counter demonstration of around 200 people made the rounds of 19 foreign consulates demanding that foreign countries not interfere in the internal affairs of Hong Kong

Just days earlier, however, crowds estimated at one and two million people took to the streets to protest in Hong Kong. Protest against what?

Fingers point to a gruesome incident that occurred between a Hong Kong couple while on vacation in Taiwan. A young, pregnant woman was murdered, allegedly by her boyfriend. The boyfriend was jailed for the theft of her money and personal effects, but a trial for the killing outside of Hong Kong’s jurisdiction is prevented. And there is no extradition agreement between Hong Kong and Taiwan.

The possibility of a release as early as October of 2019 has been provided as a reason for the expedited passing of an extradition bill.

What was unexpected was that so many Hong Kongers would oppose it.

The protests have been effective in first having amendments made to the bill, and subsequently sidelining the bill, but it may be resurrected for a vote at a later date. The Hong Kong government amended the extradition law to serious criminal offenses only, those carrying a minimum sentence of 7 years’ jail time, for those who committed a crime elsewhere and returned to Hong Kong. A person who commits an offense in Hong Kong would not be extradited to mainland China.

The Boogeyman of Fear

Why the hullabaloo over an extradition bill when Hong Kong already has extradition agreements with 20 countries, including the UK and US?

Why should an extradition agreement with other countries cause such a ruckus? If one peruses the corporate-state media, a clear answer emerges: fear; it is a perceived fear of what China may do to a person extradited to the mainland. Is this a rational or justifiable fear?

The South China Morning Post states, “[C]ritics fear Beijing may abuse the new arrangement to target political activists.”

Germany’s DW cites critics who say China “has a poor legal and human rights record.”

“Protests have been raging in Hong Kong against a controversial extradition bill, which, if approved, would allow suspects to be sent to mainland China for trial.”

Al Jazeera writes that people in Hong Kong fear China’s encroachment on their rights.

The Guardian highlights a Hong Konger who was “waving a large Union Jack flag, a tribute to the British colonial era before the city was handed back to China’s rule, and implicit attack on Beijing.”

The Guardian article claims, “The alarm over the bill underscores many Hong Kong residents’ rising anxiety and frustration over the erosion of civil liberties that have set the city apart from the rest of China.”

The New York Times downplayed Chinese sovereignty over the semi-autonomous Hong Kong by pointing to a large, white banner which read, “This is Hong Kong, not China.”

The Financial Times writes, “Critics fear the law would allow Beijing to seize anyone it likes who sets foot in the territory — from a normal resident to the chief executive of a multinational in transit — and whisk them off to mainland China on trumped up charges.”

What about Edward Snowden?

Back in 2013, ex-CIA employee Edward Snowden left the US for Hong Kong with a thumb-drive stash of secret NSA documents, which he turned over to some hand-picked journalists. Snowden was not beyond the reach of the US in Hong Kong, and the American government sought his extradition. Snowden, however, was allowed to depart Hong Kong for Moscow. Apparently, the Americans “had mucked up the legal paperwork.”

Hong Kong had no choice but to let the 30-year-old leave for “a third country through a lawful and normal channel.”

Those refugees in Hong Kong who helped Snowden elude apprehension have not fared as well as Snowden. Human-rights lawyer Robert Tibbo described the situation bluntly: “Refugees are marginalized to such an extent, that they are Hong Kong’s own version of Untouchables.”

Yet, despite what is transpiring in their own backyard, Hong Kongers are in the streets saying they fear what might happen to those who might be extradited to mainland China.

What about Julian Assange?

Hong Kongers and the state-corporate media are expressing fear about what China may do. But what about two countries that Hong Kong has an extradition agreement with — the US and the UK? One only need point to the current egregious abuses meted out to Julian Assange to dispel any notion of justice. And why is Assange’s extradition being sought? For exposing US war crimes!

Relations with Mainland China

China’s chairman Xi Jinping is unremitting in his battle against corruption, but also his political platform includes “promot[ing] social fairness and justice as core values.” [4] Is this something to fear?

There is the case of the disappearance of Hong Kong booksellers. There is also concern about the arrest of human rights lawyers in China. I am not about to state that the application of the law in China is perfect. But where is justice perfect? China does practice censorship, but freedom to speak has limits. One instance of when censorship is justified: to prevent the dissemination and spread of disinformation. Consider the image at left, while the actual size of the demonstrations were massive, the image was “heavily edited — cropped and mirrored — to multiply the size of the crowd.” It has gone viral with subsequent republications failing to mention the editing and cropping.

What’s Really Going on in Hong Kong?
Then there is the omission of information, such as the purported funding of the protests in Hong Kong by the US government and a notorious CIA-affiliated NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy. This is backed by various western governments expressing sympathy for the Hong Kong protestors.

The often bandied-about criticisms concerning China are of authoritarianism, lack of democracy, and lack of freedom.

Is China authoritarian? China, through the Communist Party of China, defines itself as a state practicing socialism with Chinese characteristics. It promotes as its core values: prosperity, democracy, civility, harmony, freedom, equality, justice, the rule of law, patriotism, dedication, integrity, and friendliness. China practices utilitarianism aiming its policies at what best benefits the majority of its citizens. China promotes peace and harmony; it emphasizes diplomacy and avoidance of war.

To allay fears, Xi said in a speech in Berlin:

As China continues to grow, some people start to worry. Some take a dark view of China and assume that it will inevitably become a threat as it develops further. They even portray China as being the terrifying Mephisto who will someday suck the soul of the world. Such absurdity couldn’t be more ridiculous, yet some people, regrettably, never tire of preaching it. This shows prejudice is indeed hard to overcome….

The pursuit of peace, amity and harmony is an integral part of the Chinese character which runs deep in the blood of the Chinese people. This can be evidenced by axioms from ancient China such as: “A warlike state, however big it may be, will eventually perish.” [5]

Democracy? Wei Ling Chua in his book, Democracy: What the West Can Learn from China, sought to compare and contrast the effectiveness of western and Chinese political systems scientifically. The assumption is that the well-being of the citizenry is the raison d’être of a government. To determine this, Chua gauged government responsiveness to the needs of the people during a disaster. The response of the Australian and American governments compared unfavorably with the Chinese government’s response to disasters. Chua writes this is because “… the culture and beliefs of the Communist Party in China is more people-oriented than those of the capitalist elites in the West.” [6] Besides, what democracy did Hong Kong enjoy under British until the time of a handover approached? Is not the imposition of colonial status through war to facilitate opium exports a total abnegation of democracy and freedom? [7]

I have lived in China for a number of years, and I feel just as free here as anywhere. Of course, I wouldn’t stand on a soapbox with a megaphone and shout anti-China slogans, but I wouldn’t do that anywhere about that country’s government. The right to peaceful protest, however, should be respected. The Chinese people around me do not complain of feeling unfree. As already stated, there… [more]
12 days ago
What’s Really Going on in Hong Kong? By Reese Erlich Global Research, July 16, 2019 Common Dreams 14 July 2019
For more than three months, people in Hong Kong massed in the streets to protest a proposed extradition law. Critics say it would allow China to extradite dissenting students, journalists, and business people to the mainland, where they could face prison for their views. Rallies and marches of tens of thousands grew to perhaps almost two million at their peak.

“I was very angry about the proposed law,” says Adrian Leong, a former Hong Kong resident and political activist in San Francisco. “Everyone could see themselves getting in trouble.”

But supporters of the Beijing government say the proposed law would only allow extradition of people accused of serious crimes, not political dissidents. Western governments and media use the phony extradition issue to foment rifts between Hong Kong and the mainland, they argue.

“They want China to splinter and die,” says Nathan Rich, an American YouTube blogger living in China.

To sort out these competing claims, we have to understand some Hong Kong history.

Opium Wars

Starting in the late 1700s, the British East India Company illegally sold opium to China. By the 1830s, British and American entrepreneurs became fabulously wealthy selling opium, while addicting millions of Chinese. When the Chinese government ordered the sales to stop, the British sent gunboats to Chinese ports and fought the first Opium War from 1839-1842.

The Qing dynasty lost the war and was forced to cede Hong Kong island to the British, along with parts of other port cities. The British launched the Second Opium War from 1853-1858, in which they seized more Chinese territory and forced China to legalize opium.

For centuries, China had the world’s largest economy, selling far more goods overseas than it imported. The opium wars were fought in the name of “free trade,”—i.e., the right of British and American drug barons to open up the Chinese market.

Modern day imperialism

Selling addictive drugs to China didn’t end in the nineteenth century. During the reign of President Ronald Reagan, for example, the US forced China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan to buy US made cigarettes—all in the name of opening their markets to free trade.

But by the 1980s, the People’s Republic of China was emerging as a major world power, and Britain agreed give up Hong Kong. In 1997, Britain returned Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty with an agreement that it would maintain two different political and economic systems. It became known as “one country, two systems.”

One country, two systems was a bold step, something never tried before. China would keep its socialist economy; Hong Kong would remain capitalist. Hong Kong would maintain governing institutions established by the United Kingdom, including independent courts but also indirect election of top political leaders. The one country, two systems would last for 50 years.

The Communist Party of China hoped that, given time, Hong Kong residents would come to see the advantages of socialism and voluntarily join the mainland. They hoped Hong Kong could be a model for integrating Taiwan into China.

But Hong Kong had existed as a separate entity for well more than 100 years, and reunification wasn’t going to be easy. Many Hongkongers seek to maintain their capitalist institutions for as long as possible. They want direct election of political leaders and a judiciary that tilts their way in case of disputes with Beijing.

Hong Kong: Can Two Million Marchers Be Wrong?
Hongkongers have developed their own identity, notes Tom Fowdy, a China analyst who attended university in Hong Kong.

“On paper they are the same ethnic group, but they are culturally different.”

Extradition law

The roots of the current protests can be traced to the case of Chan Tong Kai. In February, he flew to Taiwan with his girlfriend, strangled her, stuffed her body in a suitcase, dumped her in a field, and flew back to Hong Kong. Although he confessed, he couldn’t be sent to Taiwan because Hong Kong had no extradition treaty. (Hong Kong has extradition agreements with 20 countries but not China, Macao, and Taiwan.)

Hong Kong authorities couldn’t charge Chan with a murder that took place elsewhere. So a Hong Kong court convicted him on a lesser charge and sentenced him to a few months in jail.

Outrage over the Chan case led Hong Kong legislators to draft a law that would allow extradition to any country on a case by case basis. Taiwan later indicated it would not seek Chan’s extradition, making the murder case moot. But the extradition issue remained on the table.

Critics claim the proposed law would enable China to extradite and imprison political dissidents from Hong Kong. However, the bill’s supporters point out that an extraditable offense must be a crime in both China and Hong Kong, which protects Hongkongers from arbitrary arrest. And the law specifically prohibits extradition for political crimes.

In addition, the bill granted Hong Kong’s chief executive the ability to review extradition requests and allows for two separate judicial review processes. And according to the chief executive’s office, extradition would “only cover 37 offenses punishable with imprisonment for seven years or above, and none of them prohibits the exercise of the right to freedom of expression.”

But many people in Hong Kong simply don’t trust Beijing. They cite examples when China remanded Hong Kong residents without following judicial procedures.

“The Communist Party of China no longer respects the two systems,” says activist Leong. “It only respects the one country.”


On March 31, Hongkongers marched and rallied against the proposed legislation. By June, the mostly peaceful protests grew to hundreds of thousands. On June 9, organizers said two million people marched, while police put the number at 338,000.

2019 Hong Kong anti-extradition law protest on 7 July 2019 in Tsim Sha Tsui.

2019 Hong Kong anti-extradition law protest on 7 July 2019 in Tsim Sha Tsui. (Photo: Studio Incendo, Flickr, cc)

Then, in a preplanned action on July 1, hundreds of militants smashed their way into Hong Kong’s legislative offices, where they destroyed furniture and sprayed anti-communist graffiti on the walls. They draped the union jack flag over the speaker’s podium.

Analyst Fowdy says displaying the British flag doesn’t mean protestors want a return to British rule. Rather, they want Hong Kong to “remain a special administrative region under Chinese sovereignty. They don’t want Hong Kong to be just another Chinese city.”

Whatever the militants’ intention, in my opinion, raising the British flag leaves the impression that they favor independence. That plays into the hands of Western powers who have long sought to divide China.

It’s no coincidence that most mainstream media unabashedly support the protestors and seek to excuse the violent actions. An opinion article in the Wall Street Journal urged readers to see the vandalism as “an act of desperation after years of frustration.” I’ve yet to see the Journal apply that logic to Black Lives Matters protestors in the U.S.

Here’s the bottom line: Hong Kong is Chinese; it’s not an independent country. Any effort towards independence angers mainland Chinese, not just the government in Beijing.

Contrary to the impression left by the mainstream media, Hong Kong opinion is divided on the extradition law. On June 30, tens of thousands gathered for a rally supporting extradition and backing the Hong Kong government. Legislators say they collected 700,000 verified signatures on a petition supporting the proposed law.

For now, however, the momentum is with the anti-government forces. Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam suspended the bill from consideration and on July 9 declared it “dead.” Critics say that isn’t enough. They want her to withdraw the legislation completely and to resign.

So demonstrations are likely to continue. China and Hong Kong will be struggling for many years to determine exactly what “one country, two systems” really means.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Reese Erlich‘s syndicated column, Foreign Correspondent, appears every two weeks. His book The Iran Agenda Today: The Real Story from Inside Iran and What’s Wrong with US Policy ­will be published in October. See his website or follow him on Twitter: @ReeseErlich

Featured image is from NEO

The original source of this article is Common Dreams
Copyright © Reese Erlich, Common Dreams, 2019
HongKong  HongKongProtests 
12 days ago
What is a “Color” Revolution?
The colour revolutions are notable for the important role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and particularly student activists in organising creative non-violent resistance.These movements have been successful in Serbia (especially the Bulldozer Revolution of 2000), in Georgia’s Rose Revolution (2003), in Ukraine’s Orange Revolution (2004), in Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution and (though more violent than the previous ones) in Kyrgyzstan’s Tulip Revolution (2005), in Kuwait’s Blue Revolution (2005), in Iraq’s Purple Revolution (2005), and in Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution (1989), but failed in Iran’s Green Revolution (2009–2010) . Each time massive street protests followed disputed elections or request of fair elections and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered by their opponents to be authoritarian. Tunisia’s “Jasmine Revolution” of 2010–2011, is the first Color revolution in North Africa and the Second in the Middle East and it launched the 2011 Middle East revolutionary wave.
ColorRevolutionsSummary  ColorRevolutions  Egypt  Ukraine  Serbia  GeorgeSoros  NED 
13 days ago
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IN HONG KONG OR US COLOR REVOLUTION ATTEMPT? By Stephen Lendman from his website. August 14, 2019
Note: Readers may have noticed that we have not been reporting on the Hong Kong protests with intensity. It is not because the protests are not impressive, they are. The problem for us is that we cannot tell the level of US influence over the protests. We have seen impressive protests in many parts of the world and sometimes only after they are over, is the US involvement evident.

China is the top priority of US foreign policy and it has been for quite some time. The US has changed it national security strategy from the failed ‘war on terror’ to ‘great power conflict’ with China and Russia as the top two powers with which the US is concerned.

When we see protests against countries the US is targeting, we first look to see overt US involvement. Among the places we look is funding from the National Endowment for Democracy. NED is the overt regime change organization funded by the United States. As Le Monde Diplomatique reported in 2008: “The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was created in 1983, ostensibly as a non-profit-making organisation to promote human rights and democracy. In 1991 its first president, the historian Allen Weinstein, confessed to The Washington Post: “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA”

Through its four core organisations: the American Center for International Labour Solidarity led by the AFL-CIO now known as the Solidarity Center, the Center for International Private Enterprise, led by the US Chamber of Commerce; the National Republican Institute; and the National Democratic Institute, led by leaders of the two big business parties, NED has developed a much more sophisticated regime change operation. NED invests in non-governmental organizations, youth leaders and media to gradually build opposition to the target government. NED has been doing this in Hong Kong for many years.

This video from Russia Today, specifically discusses how the groups behind the current Hong Kong protests have been funded by NED....
HongKong  HongKongProtests  NED  ColorRevolutions  CIA  StephenLendman 
13 days ago
Israel’s Secretive Nuclear Facility Leaking as Watchdog Finds Israel Has Nearly 100 Nukes by Whitney Webb
Israel is one of only five nations in the world that refuse to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, an international treaty aimed at ending the proliferation of nuclear weapons and achieving global nuclear disarmament.
...The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) — an international watchdog organization focusing on conflicts, the arms trade and nuclear proliferation — released a new report on Monday that claimed that Israel has nearly a hundred nuclear warheads, more than previously thought.

The SIPRI report described Israel’s nuclear arsenal as follows: 30 gravity bombs capable of delivering nuclear weapons by fighter jets; an additional 50 warheads that can be delivered by land-based ballistic missiles; and an unknown number of nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missiles that would grant Israel a sea-based second-strike capability.

In total, the SIPRI report estimated that Israel possesses between 80 and 90 nuclear weapons, an increase over previous years. SIPRI was unable, however, to confirm those estimates with Israel’s government, which has a long-standing policy of refusing to comment on its nuclear weapons program — a policy it describes as “nuclear ambiguity.”
IsraelNuclearArsenal  IsraelNUKES  Israel  Iran 
14 days ago
COVERUP The Epstein case: Media still giving you the grand bum steer
The Epstein case: Media still giving you the grand bum steer
August 28, 2019
Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Bob Steffens

It’s obvious by now that the corporate media (read: the media owned by the same type of plutocrats involved in the Epstein blackmail op) has no intention of ever telling you the truth about this sordid crime. Like the JFK lingering “mystery” this one will go into the state secrets bin and never emerge from that black hole, at least not on any major media platform. Meanwhile, these same media, so transparently in cahoots with the actual perps, are busy blowing smoke in our eyes. As we reported earlier, two main lines of disinformation are being circulated with the cooperation of witting disinformers and/or an army of dunces:

Epstein committed suicide because the prison bureaucrats and guards failed in their duty to keep him from killing himself;
A growing battalion of women is coming to the fore clamoring for their day in court as a result of Epstein’s myriad crimes and sins of seduction and sex trafficking, all such victims well armed with greedy and attention grabbing lawyers, and everyone hoping to get a piece of Epstein’s substantial estate.

What these stories have in common is that,
(a) They are both insultingly absurd in view of existing evidence;
(b) They are very minor footnotes to the real story, with #1 being a complete fabrication using the old fall guy technique;
(c) They all reaffirm—without actual evidence—that Epstein committed suicide. That’s their misleading departure point, just like the “Russians did it”, in the case of the Russiagate hoax.
(d) They are cynical distractions from the real “meat” of the case, a bum steer to cover the tracks of the real culprits.
We say they are minor footnotes, and mendacious at that, because Epstein simply did not kill himself. He could and would not have. He was so afraid he would be killed (a prior botched attempt had taken place just a few days before) that he had asked his lawyer to stay with him as long a spermitted each day. No, the actual perps, those who took him out, are likely in the service of the same agencies whose goals Epstein also served so well through his decades-long blackmail ring, a honey trap designed to catch influential men in the political, media, military, and corporate spheres of Western nations, starting with the US itself. Credible analysts and journalists are suggesting that both the CIA and the Mossad were central to this scheme, with either entity operating jointly or separately in these schemes, as the situation might require. Epstein’s library of secretly filmed videos depicting guys in highly compromising situations was the blackmail mallet. As Reporter Whitney Webb has shown, this is hardly a new technique; J Edgar Hoover was apparently a believer in it, and he was both a user of the method, Hoover’s secret files kept presidents from firing him— and probably a victim, too, as all available evidence, such as it is, points to a heavily closeted gay life. In fact, longstanding hostility to gays serving in the miltary and security apparatus has long been justified by their supposed higher than normal likelihod of being blackmailed.

For professional assassins operating in all continents and with total impunity, rubbing out Epstein was probably a piece of cake. The CIA, Mossad and quite probably the UK’s and France’s spooks, too, have plenty of “assets” to get rid of an inconvenient witness. Any of these entities could have done the job. Epstein’s strength for many years—his life insurance as he may have seen it—was also his greatest vulnerability. He literally knew too much. His was a high wire act. As a high-stakes pimp delivering guilty pleasures to influential politicians and bureaucrats (generals, admirals, judges, etc.) in the world’s most powerful nations (and probably smaller ones, too), Epstein was a gambler who chose to ride the tiger for a fortune. But Epstein also risked being devoured in an instant should he find himself momentarily on the ground. Once Epstein fell from favor, or began to be regarded as an intolerable risk, his fate was sealed.

So yes, killing him was the easy part. Shut-off from the outside world in a maximum security prison, and kept invisible by a deliberate media blockade that delivered heat but no light, Epstein was a sitting duck.

Epstein’s real crime, the one that the media and politicians fronting for the global plutocracy are so anxious to rub out, and run interference for (and they are succeeding!) was one of organised, state-backed blackmail at the highest levels of the Western power elites. Nothing more and nothing less. Now that you know, watch the video(s) below and laugh, and hopefully get pissed, too, at the audacity of these media whores in taking you for a sucker. Do the protagonists of these sleights of hand (like the complaining women and their attorneys) realise they are being used to cover up something a million times more important, and sinister, than Epstein’s criminal debauchery, or their own harms, painful as they may be? That is indeed a good questions, but, as usual, do not expect the media to delve into such matters. (See Whitney Webb’s Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad: The Spy Story at the Heart of the Jeffrey Epstein Scandal.)
LolitaGate  JeffreyEpstein  JeffreyEpstein"Suicide" 
14 days ago
Beware The Vengeance Of The Afghans By Eric S. Margolis August 31, 2019
After 18 years of war in Afghanistan– America’s longest – US and Taliban negotiators are said to be close to an agreement that may see the withdrawal of many of the 14,000 US soldiers in that remote nation.

That’s the official version. President Donald Trump keeps changing his mind about the number of US troops to be withdrawn. The latest version from the White House has 5,000 US troops remaining in Afghanistan as a permanent garrison to guard the major air bases at Bagram and Kandahar and protect the US-installed puppet Afghan government in Kabul.

Without US troops to defend it, the Afghan regime of Ashraf Ghani would be swept away in days. Even Trump has admitted this. Keeping the Ghani regime safe in Kabul would at least provide a fig leaf to claim the US-backed government was still in charge.

American Raj: Liberati...
Eric Margolis
Best Price: $4.18
Buy New $20.97
(as of 11:10 EDT - Details)

The pro-war right in Washington is crying to high heaven at this prospect. Senators and congressmen who never heard a shot fired in anger are ready to fight to the last 18-year-old American soldier and keep the trillion-dollar war sputtering on.

To date, 2,426 American soldiers have been killed in combat in Afghanistan, with some 20,000 wounded, many of them permanently maimed.

Thousands of US-paid mercenaries and foreign troops dragooned into this conflict have been killed or wounded. Heavy Afghan civilian casualties, mostly caused by air strikes, are covered up by US occupation authorities. Without 24/7 US air support, American forces would have long ago been driven from Afghanistan, as were their British and Soviet predecessors.

Proponents of the Afghan War insist that ‘terrorists’ will take over if US troops withdraw. By now, it’s unclear who the so-called ‘terrorists’ really are. Previously, the US branded Taliban as terrorists. But now that the US is negotiating with Taliban to end the war, Washington claims the threats are the Islamic State from Iraq and something called ‘the Khorasan Group,’ a figment of Washington’s imagination.

The US warns that if Taliban wins, it will turn Afghanistan into a base for international terrorism. This is absurd. Taliban today controls more than half the nation by day, and 80% by night. There is plenty of room left for anti-US groups.

War at the Top of the ...
Eric Margolis
Check Amazon for Pricing.

Contrary to US claims, Taliban was never a terrorist group. I was in Afghanistan and Pakistan when Taliban was created. Civil war in Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out led to wide scale banditry, rapine and anarchy. A preacher named Mullah Omar, a veteran of the anti-Soviet war, cobbled together a force of ethnic Pashtun (Pathan) fighters and students to attack the bandits, rapists, and opium-producing Communist forces causing mayhem. This rag-tag movement came to be known as ‘talibs,’ or religious students. Thus was born Taliban.

Mullah Omar and his Pashtun fighters went on to drive the Communists from Kabul and take most of the country. According to the UN, Taliban eliminated 90% of Afghanistan’s opium production and brought a rough justice to the nation.

Washington demanded Taliban turn over bin Laden. But the Afghan mountain warriors held to their tradition of defending guests and refused, claiming bin Laden would never have gotten a fair trial in the US. But they offered to send him for trial in another Muslim nation like Turkey or Egypt. The US spurned this offer and invaded Afghanistan, oblivious to its title ‘Graveyard of Empires.’

And so, under the banner of the faux War on Terrorism, the US bombed and rocketed Afghanistan, one of the world’s poorest but proudest nations, for 18 years, using B-1 heavy bombers and fleets of killer drones against mountain tribesmen armed with old rifles and fierce courage.

America faces historic defeat in Afghanistan. By not winning, it loses. How this loss would affect the rest of America’s empire remains to be seen. But the sooner America ends this shameful colonial war the better.
Afghanistan  AfghanistanWar  TheTaliban  Taliban 
16 days ago
The Problem with China by Gearóid Ó Colmáin ~ August 31, 2019
What is the significance of the Hong Kong protest movement and how should one understand China’s role in the emerging world order? What geopolitical interests are at stake in Hong Kong?

Chinese totalitarianism is back in the news. Not since the Tiananmen Square uprising in 1989 has the People’s Republic of China been the subject of much media scrutiny and condemnation for its “brutal crackdown” on “peaceful protesters”.

Ah yes, we love to hear about brutal crackdowns on peaceful protesters when they don’t wear yellow vests and are not protesting against our own leaders!

The recent protests in Hong Kong started when Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam proposed to amend the law to allow the extradition of criminals to the Chinese mainland after a Chinese girl was brutally murdered by her Hong Kong boyfriend. The murderer was jailed by the Hong Kong government on other offences and is due to be released in October. That is an intolerable situation for the family of the murdered girl and it is also intolerable for Beijing.

Would the British government accept it if a British citizen could be murdered in Gibraltar and the murderer could not be extradited to Britain for trial? Would the US tolerate a similar situation in Puerto Rico? The extradition proposal is perfectly normal and reasonable; but not in the eyes of US foreign policy.

Uncle Sam quickly intervened to protect the murderer on the pretext that Beijing was using the incident to gain totalitarian control over Hong Kong. When did the US ever really care about the individual freedoms of any citizens anywhere? In the United States, jaywalking or stealing a biscuit could land you with a life sentence and there are far more prisoners per capita in the United States than China. In fact, the crime rate in Hong Kong reached a 36 year low in 2015. That means citizens in Hong Kong do not need to fear being raped, mugged, robbed and murdered as much as they do in US cities like Los Angeles or Baltimore. There are also many things you will not be prosecuted for saying in China. You can criticise UN immigration policies in China. The Chinese understand why Trump wants to build a wall: China was founded on one!

So what is really going on in Hong Kong? Why has it become the focus of international media attention and what agenda is really driving the protest movement?

The 2014 Umbrella Movement

The protest movement in Hong Kong first kicked off in 2014 and was referred to as the Umbrella movement, as thousands of protesters held umbrellas. The contention was that Beijing was pre-screening candidates for the upcoming 2017 Chief Executive elections.

The Chinese authorities accused the US of inciting the protests for geopolitical reasons.US top advisor and strategist on China, Micheal Hillbury confirmed to Fox News that the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED)was indeed behind the protest movement. The NED is a front organisation for the CIA.

Micheal Hillbury had helped launch the National Endowment for Democracy in 1983. A fluent Mandarin speaker, Hillbury is the architect of current US policy towards the People’s Republic of China. The US has five main geopolitical strategies in China which are essential to outline if we are to understand why there is now a major protest movement there.

1 Support for Tibetan separatism

The Dalai Lama has been a CIA agent for many years and the US has supported violent uprisings in Tibet against the Chinese government. The US and European media wage information war on Tibet by ignoring the fact that:

a) Lamaist Tibet was the most despotic and tyrannical regime the world had ever seen, where most of the population were serfs.

b) The Communist Party of China’s (CCP) policy of “land to the tiller” in the 1950s meant that thousands of Tibet’s poorest serfs got to till their own land for the first time.

c) The CCP put an end to torture in Tibet which was widely used before the liberation by the People’s Liberation Army in 1952. One of the most common forms of torture was skinning people alive. There is ample historical evidence to prove this.

d) Tibet has been part of China for over a thousand years and enjoys certain privileges in comparison to other parts of China. For example, the one-child policy did not apply to Tibet as China sought to increase the sparse population there.

e) The real reason for Western support to Tibetan separatists is to cut off China’s water supply. China gets 80% of its water from Tibet. An “independent” Tibet would rely on NATO for security. That would give the Western military alliance a foothold in China and access to its rich resources. The Dali Lama is and always has been a stooge of Western imperialism.

2 Support for Uighur independence

The Western Chinese province of Xinyang or East Turkestan is populated by Uighurs who are a Turkish people. A minority of Uighurs want independence from China. Many of them are radicalised Jihadis who have fought in the war in Syria and elsewhere. In 2010, they organised a violent uprising against the Chinese state. The Western media called the uprising “peaceful”, ignoring the fact that Jihadis were terrorising the local population. Since then, the Xinyang province has been the subject of much Western media attention. Wild, baseless and absurd claims have been made against the Chinese authorities– with the usual lack of verification. They have been accused of deliberately forcing Muslims to eat pork etc.

The Chinese military has handled the situation with a high degree of professionalism and has succeeded thus far in quelling a the Uighur Jihad. The World Uighur Congress is based in Germany. Its leader Rebiya Kadeer is on record stating that the Han Chinese are racially inferior to Uighurs. She has the full support of the European Union and the United States. An independence Xinyang depend on the West for security. That is why no objectivity is ever required in Western media reporting on the conflict there.

3 Support for Taiwanese independence

In the 19th century, China came under the control of the Western powers. British, Portuguese (who had been there far earlier), Germans, Russians and French all dominated the Middle Kingdom. During the Second World War, the US opposed Mao’s communist forces and supported the nationalist Kuomingtang.

When the Communists seized power in 1948, the nationalists fled to Formosa or Taiwan, where they established a military dictatorship under US supervision. As the US imposed a blockade on Maoist China, the war-torn country had to rely on the USSR for its post-war development. With the death(murder?) of Joseph Stalin in 1953, however, the Soviet revisionists under Nikita Khrushchev dealt with China on a capitalist basis, which led to a souring of relations with the USSR.

Mao Zedong 1963 (cropped).jpg
The People’s Republic of China found itself having to develop on its own. There were many catastrophes due to bad-weather and incompetence which led to the starvation of millions of people. Mao stated that the Party aimed to develop capitalism in China and that the country would have to go through capitalist development for a long time before transitioning to socialist production.

But the country was held back by an over-emphasis on democracy which resulted in the Great Proletarian, Cultural Revolution. As Albania’s leader Enver Hoxha astutely pointed out: the revolution was neither great nor cultural nor proletarian; it was an attempt by Mao and the comprador bourgeoisie to maintain power against more nationalist elements in the party such as Liu Shaoqi.

Meanwhile, Taiwan industrialised under sweatshops and slave-like labour. By the mid-eighties, Taiwan had nonetheless, produced an affluent middle class. But the authoritarianism of the military regime was seen by Washington as an obstacle to global finance capitalism.

So the CIA launched a regime-change operation in Taiwan under the guise of a pro-democracy movement. The movement led to the student-led uprising in 1986. The US wanted the lift tariffs on imports and liberalise the country’s moral codes so as to encourage consumerism. Feminist and sexual liberation movements played a key role in the destabilisation, which was modelled after the US-regime change operation which has just been successfully completed in the Philippines.

Today, Taiwan is heavily armed by the United States and is considered a paragon of democracy and human rights. The country recently approved gay marriage and hosts Asia’s largest LGBT parades. Taiwan is China in America’s image. But mainland China is difficult to change.

4 The militarization of the South-China Sea

The United States has military bases all around China. The aim of US foreign policy is to prevent Chinese sovereignty. The US claims China is attempting to become a global thalassocracy but the reality is that Chinese military expansion is really about protecting the country’s sovereignty against increasing US militarism in the area.

5 Hong Kong Protests

In 1989, the United States attempted to overthrow the Chinese government, through a student-led uprising.

The Chinese protesters wanted a free-market consumerist society like the United States and they had sack-loads of dollars from the US embassy and US agencies to help them achieve their goals. The 1989 riots were extremely violent; soldiers were set on fire and hanged from buses.

The iconic image of a student facing a row of army tanks was pure CIA propaganda. What was really taking place was a CIA-funded regime change operation. Pentagon consulatant Gene Sharpe, the architect of “people power” protest movements, was in Beijing directing the movement.

The Chinese government were forced to send in tanks to quell the foreign-backed insurrection. Had the insurrectionists succeeded, it is unlikely China would have become the power it is today. The key to China’s success has been the capacity of the bureaucratic state to control the commanding heights of the economy and to scupper every pathetic attempt by US “… [more]
GearóidÓColmáin  China  HongKong  Chinese-USrelations  TiananmenSquare1989  ColorRevolutions 
16 days ago
How to start a revolution - Joaquin Flores, Herland Report TV
Herland Report TV: "Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Ukraine were all planned revolutions", says political scientist, graduate from California State University, accomplished journalist and editor-in-chief of Fort Russ News, Joaquin Flores. SUBSCRIBE to the Herland Report TV: https://www.youtube.com/user/HanneNab...

"With the Color Revolutions, all roads lead back to Belgrade. Many of the current events were rolled out in proto type form in Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia had one of the most dynamic and growing economies in Europe and it was certainly a planned revolution. From the early 1970's, when it was clear that eventually Tito was going to pass away, the plan was to break the country apart from the inside, into smaller pieces."

"It is a science - it is an art - how to aquire an understanding and the unravelling of the socio-political, ethnological dimensions of a society and use it to break the nation apart. Because you can always take a country and break it further apart, you could take the French and break the south from the north with separatism. Or Spain, Italy."

"In Yugoslavia, this was a planned process. This is important for people to understand today, whether it was Yugoslavia in the 1990's or Libya, Syria or Ukraine, these were not spontaneous uprisings of people. These are planned revolutions, with graphs and charts and war rooms. Thousands of people just don't show up, it has to be organized."

"That is the great mythology that they are teaching now in the West about "democracy", is that these uprisings are spontaneous. That is not to say that people do not have legitimate concerns, grievances, but they do not simply manifest on October 1st, in Central Square, without millions and millions of dollars spent to plan it, hundreds and hundreds of professional organizers on full-time salaries to make that happen. It is a really interesting process and you see it happening everywhere."

This is the first program in a series with Fort Russ News editor-in-chief, Joaquin Flores.

The Herland Report is a Scandinavian news site and TV channel on YouTube, reaching millions yearly, presenting leading intellectuals' view on foreign policy, current affairs, religion, the Middle East, Western decadence - free from the censoring political correctness that now permeate Western media and its political propaganda.

The Herland Report believes in freedom of speech and its editorial policy resides above the traditional Left vs Right paradigm which we believe has lost its relevance and ability to describe the current driving forces in Western politics.
We regularly feature a variety of opinion and analysis from a number of commentators from across the political spectrum.

The Herland Report is founded and hosted by Hanne Nabintu Herland, a Scandinavian historian of comparative religions, bestselling author, commentator and TV producer, known from the media for sharp analysis and fearless speech. .

Clothes HNH: Farmhouse Design, Oslo.

TWITTER: https://twitter.com/HanneNabintuHer

ALSO FOLLOW THE HERLAND REPORT NEWS SITE and pick up articles from leading intellectuals, authors, journalists and activists: http://www.theherlandreport.com
JoaquinFlores  HerlandReportTV  ColorRevolutions  HanneNabintuHerland  HongKong 
16 days ago
Only one-third of Americans believe Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide—so why does the New York Times? By David Walsh 31 August 2019
According to Emerson College Polling, only one-third of Americans believe that financier and alleged sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide August 10 at the Metropolitan Correction Center (MCC) in New York City. The survey, conducted August 24-26, found that 34 percent of those contacted believed Epstein was murdered, 33 percent believed he committed suicide and 32 percent were unsure.
The new poll essentially jibes with the results of a Rasmussen Reports poll carried out in the immediate aftermath of Epstein’s unexplained death. On August 14, Rasmussen indicated that 42 percent of Americans thought Epstein “was murdered to prevent him from testifying against powerful people with whom he associated,” while 29 percent thought he had killed himself and 29 percent were undecided.
Three weeks of US media propaganda to the effect that anyone who has doubts about the death is under the influence of “conspiracy theories” has only had a limited effect. A stubborn percentage of the population continues to be skeptical about the “official story.” As the German writer Bertolt Brecht wrote under very different circumstances, “Would it not be easier / In that case for the government / To dissolve the people / And elect another?”
In any event, even as portions of the media, out of one side of their mouths, so to speak, have worked assiduously to convince everyone that Epstein’s death was “indisputably” a suicide, out of the other, they have acknowledged important details that only serve to undermine the preferred version of events.
The latter include the fact that Epstein suffered multiple broken bones in his neck more frequently associated with strangulation than hanging, that strict instructions stipulating the financier should not be left in his cell alone were ignored by numerous prison staffers immediately prior to his death, that guards assigned to check in on him every half-hour were allegedly asleep at the time of his death, that he was taken off suicide watch and his mental condition treated with suspiciously cavalier indifference, that at least one camera outside Epstein’s cell had footage deemed unusable, etc.
Moreover, we learned this week from Epstein’s lawyers that their client, deludedly or not, was in a relatively upbeat mood. His legal team was about “to pursue an appeal regarding some of the preliminary decisions made before trial. They thought they had a high chance of success because … lawyers involved in the original 2008 non-prosecution agreement that largely let Epstein off the hook for the full measure of the allegations levied against him said it was ‘global,’ meaning that New York prosecutors would not be allowed to pursue this case. … Given their faith in the strength of this argument, they allege, Epstein’s decision to take his own life was somewhat inexplicable.”
“Portions of the media” continue to report on inconvenient and troubling aspects of the Epstein case. The New York Times for the most part is not among them. The newspaper has “crime beat” and other investigative reporters on its payroll, and the death of Epstein occurred under their jurisdiction, New York City. Evidently, the word has come down from on high—this is not a story to be covered.
There must be some reporters in the Times newsroom angered that it has been left to the Washington Post to get the scoop on a number of startling developments, including the abovementioned fact that at least “eight Bureau of Prisons staffers knew that strict instructions had been given not to leave multimillionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein alone in his cell, yet the order was apparently ignored in the 24 hours leading up to his death, according to people familiar with the matter.” The Times has not commented on this.
Likewise, the revelation that the camera or cameras located outside Epstein’s cell were not functioning properly has been covered widely. That information even prompted one of Epstein’s attorneys to comment, “There are conspiracy theories galore. … What if the tapes only broke down on the day he was killed or he died?”
The Times merely carried an item on its website from Reuters on the broken cameras. (In passing, one of Epstein’s lawyers shed light on the brutal character of the American prison system, noting that, according to a “person with knowledge,” defendants awaiting trial at the MCC were kept in more “dreadful” conditions than suspected terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay).
Since Jeffrey Epstein’s apprehension in July, the Times has been regularly weighing in on the need to shut down any serious investigation of the circumstances surrounding his activities and then, later, his death. It editorialized in July that Congress’s looking into Epstein’s 2008 plea deal would be “a poor use of lawmakers’ limited time and resources.” This was addressed to a legislature swollen with millionaires that spares no time or expense when it comes to prosecuting enemies or rewarding itself.
The Times jumped on the medical examiner’s conclusion August 16 that Epstein had committed suicide to argue that the terse statement from New York City’s chief medical examiner, Dr. Barbara Sampson, “refutes conspiracy theories that he may have been murdered.....
JeffreyEpstein  JeffreyEpsteinMurder  JeffreyEpsteinSuicide  LolitaGate  NewYorkTimes 
17 days ago
The Saker interviews Max van der Werff about the MH-17 conspiracy > August 28, 2019
Introduction: MH17 is to Novorussia, what the Markale (also see here) has been to Bosnia and Racak (also see here) has been to Kosovo: a typical false flag operation which pursued two goals: first, of course, to justify a military aggression and, second, to force everybody to chose one of two options: first, either pretend to believe the official narrative or, second, be vilified and discredited. From this perspective, the MH17 false flag has been a tremendous success, mostly due to the extremely successful lobotomy inflicted by the legacy Ziomedia on the western public opinion (I would argue that the Skripal fairy tale is even more self-evidently ridiculous than the MH17 fairy tale, and yet that was also swallowed hook line and sinker by most western “experts”). But then, we live in a post-9/11 world, in which neither facts nor logic matter much anymore, except for a rather small amount of people, including Max van der Werff who has proven to be one of the most tenacious and courageous investigative journalists. I am most grateful for his time and answers!

The Saker


The Saker: First, a question about yourself: why and how did you get involved in this topic of MH17? What did were you doing before you got involved in this topic?

Max van der Werff : The very moment the news of the shoot down of the Malaysian Boeing broke on July 17th 2014, I immediately realized this tragedy would have long term geopolitical implications. What further struck me was the fact most passengers were citizens of my country, The Netherlands.

Since childhood I have an interest in geopolitics and history. The fact my father was an immigrant from Indonesia surely contributed and as a teenager I read a lot about Dutch colonial history.

After Japan surrendered and World War II ended 150,000 Dutch troops were sent to restore Pax Hollandia in the old colony and the main motive was to restore the exploitation of the ‘wingewest’ (area for profit) as soon as possible. The Dutch elite had the opinion that the Japanese rule over the Dutch Indies was merely a short interruption and that Dutch colonial rule would be reinstated for generations to come. This fatally wrong perception of reality led to the Indonesian war of independence lasting from 1945 to end 1949 causing hundreds of thousands casualties.

Prior to my MH17 investigations I spent a lot of time in archives and on the ground in Indonesia searching for evidence of Dutch war crimes. There’s a documentary about my work: https://vimeo.com/288088492

The Saker: Now, let’s immediately jump into the core question: after having researched and analyzed the topic of MH17, what personal conclusion did you come to?

What do you believe really happened that day?

Max van der Werff : Having spent thousands of hours researching the case and being interviewed by the official Joint Investigation Team more than once my answer to your core question might be disappointing for some: I don’t know what happened.

Let me elaborate. Depending on political preferences all kinds of ‘experts’ claim to know for sure what happened exactly. One camp is sure it was a false flag, executed by Ukraine. The opposing camp is sure Russia is responsible. There are many variants as to who is an accomplice. On social media you see claims Ukraine was just a proxy for the CIA or Mossad. On the other side Russia just supplied the weapon and rebels shot down the airliner.

Then there are more exotic claims flight MH17 was shot down by a drone, a modernized Georgian SU-25 or by Israeli Python-5 missile(s) fired from the air or from the ground.

I have not encountered any credible evidence supporting any of the theories. This specifically includes the official version. Too many things simply do not add up. I’ve written a lot about the questionable evidence the official investigators have presented to the public so far and was one of the producers of a documentary that already has more than 200,000 views on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkDWwYk4-Ho

The Saker: I outlined my personal guesstimate here where I wrote that in my opinion the Ukronazis used the radar of a Buk battery to guide a Su-25 withing 8 clicks of the MH-17 at which point the Su-25 fired a R-60 IR missile which hit one of the engines which caused the Boeing to go into a sharp turn and lose altitude – the Su-25 easily caught up and finished the Boeing with its 30 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-30-2 autocannon (I explain my reasons in details here: https://thesaker.is/mh-17-one-year-later/). Do you have any elements of proof which would undermine/negate my guesstimate? Specifically, do you consider it as admitted by all sides now that a Buk missile did strike MH-17?

Max van der Werff : President Putin recently said: “We have our own version, we presented it, unfortunately, no one wants to listen to us. And until there is a real dialogue, we will not find the right answer to those questions that are still open”

Link: https://sputniknews.com/world/201906201075985579-russia-has-its-own-version-on-mh17-crash/

For five years I am asking: What exactly is the Russian official version of events?

To my knowlegde the Russian Federation has never claimed the Malaysian Boeing was shot down by a buk missile. You have to be very precise here. Over the years Russian media have presented all kinds of versions about what happened. One version even more exotic than the other.

As most of your readers will know Almaz Antey, the company producing the missile system, gave a press conference and conducted a life experiment detonating a buk missile https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r63cskl08o

During the press conference the Almaz Antey spokesman explained that the observed damage patterns in the hull of the Boeing could not have been caused by a buk missile fired from the location near Snizhne as claimed by the MH17 Joint Investigation Team. If a buk missile caused the damage, it must have been fired from an area southeast of the village Zaroshenskoye. Notice the little word “IF” in the sentence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsohFzbJ-vs

Concerning your assessment a Su-25 fired a R-60 IR missile. You do get some support for your theory from Zahar Omarov, chief researcher at the Central Research Institute of the Air Force of the Russian Ministry of Defense:

“I can say that our results disprove the conclusion that the plane was shot down by a missile from a Buk-type anti-aircraft missile system. Most likely, it was an air-to-air missile with a mass of high-explosive fragmentation warheads not exceeding 33 kg (the mass of the warhead of the Buk missile is 70 kg).”

Link https://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=2720372

Omarov repeatedly attended meetings of Russian delegations with members of the Dutch Safety Board. Here’s a very interesting segment of what he experienced during one of those meetings:


During the first meeting, in which I had to take part, and this was in February 2015, the Dutch reported that the plane, in their opinion, was shot down by a Buk anti-aircraft missile. Moreover, a definite modification of this missile was indicated, and, moreover, even the area from where it was launched was indicated.
I will not hide, we were very surprised. After all, before this, fragments of the aircraft with holes were examined, and there was not a single fragment with cut out sections that would indicate the conduct of any laboratory research.
I want to draw attention to such a dialogue that I had with a speaking expert.
–I asked a question: “Excuse me, did you investigate combat damage on fragments of an airplane?”
–Answer: “No. We are only planning to do this.”
–Question: “But how did you establish that the plane was shot down by Buk missile launcher?”
–Answer: “We found out from the Internet that the aircraft could have been hit either by a GSh-23 type air gun, or a R-60 type air missile, or a Buk anti-aircraft missile. One of the steel pieces found in the wreckage of the aircraft, in our opinion, is somewhat reminiscent of the shape of a “butterfly”. And we know that the warhead of one of the modifications of the Buk missile has damaging elements in the form of a “butterfly”. Therefore, of the three versions, the last was chosen.”
Logic, as they say, is iron. Something reminds me of our school exam. Dutch experts, apparently, have a good university education. However, for such work, education alone is not enough. Of course, experience is necessary, but even this is not the main thing. It is necessary to know, or, in extreme cases, at least conceptually understand the methodology for investigating such aviation events.

Now back to the type of air-to-air missile allegedly used. Omarov claims:

“The warhead was equipped with compact striking elements in an amount of not more than 4000 pieces. The missile most likely had a matrix-type thermal imaging homing head or passive radar. I note that missiles with similar characteristics are not in service with the Russian Aerospace Forces and never have been.”

Source http://www.aviapanorama.ru/2016/02/rejs-mn-17-v-cnii-vvs-minoborony-rossii-oprovergnuty-vyvody-gollandskoj-komissii/

The Saker: Russia and Malaysia were denied the right to participate to the investigation. Can you outline what the legalities are to decide which countries do or do not get the chance to participate? Do Russia and Malaysia not have any legal instruments to invoke to challenge the absolutely ridiculous way the official inquiry was formed and, even more so, the way this commission of inquiry operated (such as using social media sites, but not official Russian data)? Russia is an IATA member, so is Malaysia. Can they not sue?

Max van der Werff : This is a question for legal experts, but I’m quite certain Malaysia would have a strong case. ICAO Annex 13 describes in detail how the composition of an air disaster investigation must be. For sure the country of the operator (in this case … [more]
18 days ago
AUGUST 30, 2019 The Great Cost and Myth of U.S. Defense Spending by MELVIN GOODMAN
U.S. defense spending is out of control, severely undermining our ability to tackle climate change, infrastructure needs, health care, and other national challenges. The mainstream media, particularly the New York Times and Washington Post, contribute to the problem of defense spending by understating the cost of defense.

Journalists and pundits regularly refer to U.S. defense spending as greater than the next seven or eight countries. Nonsense! U.S. defense spending when correctly tabulated exceeds the defense spending of the rest of the global community. Current defense spending is greater than $1 trillion and the bipartisan support for U.S defense spending assures continued increases. Many of the largest spenders on defense, moreover, are our treaty allies.

Most estimates of U.S. defense spending cite only the budget figures for the Pentagon, which points toward $750 billion. However, much of the spending of many agencies, particularly in the intelligence community (more than $70 billion), is devoted to support of the military. The same can be said for the Department of Homeland Security (also around $70 billion) as well as the Department of Energy ($30 billion), which devotes huge sums to nuclear forces. The Veterans Administration (nearly $200 billion), moreover, must be considered part and parcel of U.S. defense spending. At the same time, the Trump administration is cutting the spending of U.S. cabinet agencies to support defense spending, excluding not only the Department of Defense, but the Department of Homeland Security and the Veterans Administration.

When these departments and agencies are taken into account, U.S. defense spending greatly exceeds $1 trillion, which finds very little criticism within the Congress or the various think tanks that address the issue of military spending. With the loss of Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ), there has been no bipartisan scrutiny of defense spending. This is particularly troubling at this time because the various Democratic candidates for the presidency have little background in the field of national security, let alone the abstruse aspects of defense spending, and there is no attention given to the many obvious areas for cutting back allocations for defense.

The trillions of dollars allocated for defense in recent years received insufficient congressional monitoring and internal oversight. Until recently, the Pentagon budget was the only large federal budget that had never been audited, and last year’s audit, which cost nearly $400 million, produced a failing grade for the Pentagon. President Eisenhower’s warning about the military-industrial complex nearly 60 years ago noted that military demands on U.S. spending would become a “cross of iron” that would limit domestic spending. Now, at a time when there are no serious challenges to U.S. security or military supremacy, more than 60 percent of U.S. discretionary spending goes to support defense.

There is no better example of the insidious nature of the military-industrial complex than the industry’s recruitment of retired generals to become executives at defense companies and the Pentagon’s use of these same retired generals to take part in exercises involving weapons systems that their companies are vying to build for the military. Retired generals and admirals are also working as military analysts for television and radio networks, often receiving classified briefings from the Pentagon before their on-air appearances. Nevertheless, a recent Inspector General study found no conflict of interest involving these officers.

Every aspect of the Pentagon’s budget needs to be scrutinized for savings, including procurement, operations and maintenance, and infrastructure. There are hundreds of U.S. military facilities overseas with hundreds of thousands of U.S. military personnel stationed there. By comparison, China has one overseas facility, a small one on the Horn of Africa, and Russia has only modest air and naval facilities in Syria outside the former Soviet space. Procurement boondoggles have robbed the U.S. treasury of hundreds of billions of dollars, particularly for national missile defense and the Army’s Future Combat System, which consists of interconnected vehicles, robots, and sensing devices. Hugely expensive U.S. aircraft carriers are vulnerable to inexpensive sophisticated cruise missiles in the Russian and Chinese inventories.

The excessive spending on the Air Force is the most wasteful of all military expenditures. The Air Force is obsessed with fighter superiority in an era without a threat. Pentagon briefings on Capitol Hill regularly exaggerate the capabilities of foreign air defense. Billions of dollars have been spent on advanced aircraft, such as the B-1 bomber and the F-22 fighter, which have never been deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan or any other combat zone. The F-22 was designed in the mid-1980s to confront Soviet fighter planes that were never built. The F-22 program was eventually killed to make way for the more costly and contentious F-35 program.

Like the Air Force and its dominance of the skies, the Navy has had total dominance at sea for the past six decades. U.S naval ships are deployed in too many areas with too many missions. The Navy, moreover, has its own air force, its own army, and its own strategic weapons. It has greater lethality than all of the navies of the world combined and has a subordinate organization, the Coast Guard, which represents the world’s seventh largest fleet. The U.S. Marines, moreover, have more planes, ships, armored vehicles, and personnel in uniform than the entire British military. The very existence of the Marine Corps is questionable in view of the fact that its last amphibious landing was in the first year of the Korean War nearly 60 years ago.

One of the best kept secrets of the past sixty years has been the high cost of producing and maintaining nuclear weapons somewhere between $5 and $6 trillion, which represents one-fourth to one-third of overall defense spending. The total is roughly equivalent to the total amount of money spent on the Army or the Navy since World War Two. When the United States began to develop and deploy nuclear weapons, the military-industrial complex stressed that the huge investment in nuclear systems would allow a smaller army and navy. Meanwhile, our army and navy have gotten larger and costlier for taxpayers.

In sum, Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump have created the worst of all possible strategic worlds. Bush abrogated the ABM Treaty, the cornerstone of deterrence and one of the pearls of arms control and disarmament policy, and paved the way for the murky world of national missile defense, which costs hundreds of billions of dollars. Trump abrogated the INF Treaty, one of the most successful disarmament treaties in history, and paved the way for a renewed arms race in Europe and Asia. These actions were guided by John Bolton who served as an arms control adviser to Bush and the national security adviser to Trump. As a result, incentives have been created for others to deploy intercontinental missiles, modernize strategic inventories, pursue weapons of mass destruction, and follow the folly of national missile defense. Once again, only the interests of the military-industrial complex are being served.

Cicero said that “endless money forms the sinews of war.” So it is not surprising that the United States has been in conflict for nearly all of the past three decades. At the same time, there has been a withdrawal from the world of diplomacy, which finds that there are fewer Foreign Service Officers than there are members of military service bands.

Join the debate on Facebook
More articles by:MELVIN GOODMAN
Melvin A. Goodman is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and a professor of government at Johns Hopkins University. A former CIA analyst, Goodman is the author of Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA and National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism. and A Whistleblower at the CIA. His most recent book is “American Carnage: The Wars of Donald Trump” (Opus Publishing), and he is the author of the forthcoming “The Dangerous National Security State” (2020).” Goodman is the national security columnist for counterpunch.org.
MilitarySpending  DefenseSpending  NuclearWeapons 
18 days ago
Robert F. Kennedy's son does not believe that Sirhan Sirhan fired the shots that killed his father and has demanded a new investigation into the assassination.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., 64, told The Washington Post that he arrived at the conclusion after reviewing an autopsy and police reports, and spending three hours visiting Sirhan in a California prison, where he is serving a life sentence for the killing.

"I got to a place where I had to see Sirhan,'' Kennedy Jr. said, but would not disclose the specific content of his discussions with Sirhan.

"I went [to the prison] because I was curious and disturbed by what I had seen in the evidence.

"I was disturbed that the wrong person might have been convicted of killing my father. My father was the chief law-enforcement officer in this country. I think it would have disturbed him if somebody was put in jail for a crime they didn't commit."
RobertF.Kennedy  RFKAssassination 
18 days ago
2019/08/10 Robert Steele: Epstein Not Dead, Case Dismissed, Stolen Money Safe — Epstein is Laughing His Ass Off!
DRIBBLES: Nope, no Mossad here folks, move along…

PBI: This looks like a crude photo-manipulation. Unverified.
CNBC: Years after serving jail time, Jeffrey Epstein found a way to meet with Microsoft’s Bill Gates to discuss philanthropy

CNBC: Alan Dershowitz mock trial on child trafficking in the Bible canceled after Epstein suicide

NBC News: American flags on Jeffrey Epstein’s private islands lowered to half-staff

Rasmussen Reports: Americans Say Murder More Likely Than Suicide in Epstein Case

The Cut: Jeffrey Epstein Was the Proud Owner of This Strange Portrait of Clinton in a Dress

The Wrap: Bones in Jeffrey Epstein’s Neck Broken, Autopsy Finds (Report)


Phi Beta Iota: We value alternative perspectives. From where we sit Epstein was a piece of shit being managed by Mossad officer Ghislaine Maxwell to achieve pedophilia (and murderous pedophilia including Satanic Ritual Abuse) blackmail videos. Epstein is, not, to take one illustrious example, the Queen of England, only the queen of Little St. James. The temple and the caverns were serious business (and exist in many other places being ignored by the FBI and the media), but in our view, Epstein was at best the straw boss for others.

ORIGINAL POST of 10 August 2019 — See Updates for Changes to Story

I consider the reports of Epstein being dead to be false. I believe he is on his way to Israel in an accommodation reached between President Trump and his enemies at CIA, FBI, and within the Government of Israel whose Mossad operation this was.

People on suicide watch with a prior suicide attempt simply do not die unless a very high price has been paid for their death OR — more likely — this is the agreed upon exit strategy. “Cremation” tonight.

My Previous Report Setting This False Story Up:

2019/07/25 Epstein On Way to Israel? UPDATE 35 to the Second Greatest Story Ever Told

Overview of This Zionist/CIA/FBI Operation President Is Covering Up:

2019/07/26 SPECIAL: Zionism in America – Murderous Pedophilia Entrapment – The Nine Veils of Evil [Update 36 to the Mossad-Epstein Story]

The Mossad – Maxwell – Epstein Story (Second Greatest Story Ever Told):

2019/07/09 Tom Luongo: Epstein Peak Swamp? Zionist Strike 44 UPDATE 50 Epstein Not Dead On Way to Israel?

Media Headlines Now — Lying Sacks of Shit Have No Clue…

Epstein Dead? @ GoogleSearch

UPDATE 1: CIA Mask on Stand-In or Just Resting?

Our medical experts tell us this man is either very much alive, or he is wearing one of those lovely theatrical masks made when he was alive, and they made a mistake — they forgot to provide for the white palor of a really dead man.

It is noteworthy that he is not in a body bag. This was staged. And the noses don’t match? Need ears and DNA.

People on suicide watch with a prior suicide attempt simply do not die unless a very high price has been paid for their death OR — more likely — this is the agreed upon exit strategy. “Cremation” tonight.

Here is a comparison of ears, hair (both line and direction), and skiin — not matching.

CIA/FBI complicity in a Mossad escape that is either treason or part of a deal that leaves President Trump triumphant. NEW POSSIBILITY: a body double will be cremated tonight and instead of going to Israel, Epstein is now in a special safehouse telling us what we do not know: what each blackmailed person did for Israel. in detail, with the timelines.

Image Source: The Zionist-controlled New York Post

Photos show Jeffrey Epstein as he’s wheeled into Downtown Hospital

OOPS. Noses don’t match? Not 100%. Need ears. And DNA.

And then there is this total trashing of Zionist-owned NYP photo:


State of the Nation: SUICIDED!? How does the most famous and closely watched jail inmate in U.S. history kill himself? That’s right … … … he didn’t!

Jeffrey Epstein did NOT kill himself.

“I was incarcerated as an inmate awaiting trial in a county jail in New York very similar to Jeff Epstein’s situation. For reasons that are too long to explain here, the jail had me under suicide watch because my case was so HUGE at the time. They had me under such close observation that I could not even pee in my cell toilet without the whole jail staff watching my every move. Not only that, but they stripped me of every single possible means of killing myself. They wouldn’t even let me have a short strand of dental floss after eating. Belts were out of the question as was plastic silverware. Look it, I was certainly not a “Jeffrey Epstein” and yet the jail guards and nurses and other administrators were hovering all over me likes flies on a cow-patty. Every single moment on suicide watch was like living the nightmare of the Truman show. What’s the point? Epstein didn’t commit suicide. Either he was murdered by the prison staff like the medical personnel, allowed to be killed by a stealthy CIA assassination setup or he’s been whisked away to Israel where he will continue his Pedogate psyop under the dark cover of Mossad. Case flippin’ closed ! ! !

— Submitted to SOTN by a former New York jail inmate

Alert Reader sounds off:

We did call it, didn’t we?

By now, he is getting resettled as Eric Braverman’s neighbor, somewhere in Israel…

Funny thing though: the lies have come so fast and furious and for so long that very few people buy the “suicide”, even among the sheeples. So, no matter what and whether there will ever be an investigation or not makes very little difference: people are slowly learning to think like Deep State and anticipate its moves.

It’s going to make it increasingly more difficult to force them to do anything they don’t want to, including paying taxes or turning over their guns without a fight. And reading the reactions from prison staff anywhere, law enforcement is taking a hell of a step back from what it believed all along its role to be within society.

So… even if Deep State appears to win on the surface, it is losing to a people rendered increasingly more cynical by the day.

It just makes it more likely that it will end up getting pretty hairy and possibly violent.

Incidentally, I cannot stop but think that the timing of fully “disgraced” Sztrok returning to the FBI is not unrelated to Epstein. Stinks to high heaven.

Call it a gnawing gut feeling. Nah… Epstein was fully debriefed for the past three weeks, he spilled all kinds of beans incriminating all kinds of people and Sztrok is back temporarily to do some very, very dirty work before 1) having a very bad accident, 2) dying a “hero” in the line of duty or 3) becoming some public enemy No.1 and one of the very few actively prosecuted and convicted for treason after having testified against a few people. They’ll keep using him for whatever he is worth. He’s already seriously tainted in the eyes of the public…

They won’t touch Clinton, Wexner or anyone of any international importance. Too many interests at play on the international scene. If heads roll they will be strictly domestic and pretty minor. No one touches Uranium One, drug trade or human trafficking. Way too profitable and Earth entire economy rests on it.

From the Editor of Veterans Today:

Gordon Duff: Is Epstein “Murder” Connected to Bill Richardson Nuclear Thefts and AIPAC Spy Ring?

Medic questions the scene (but assumes death — this could be bad theater):

DRIBBLES: Still not a word about Mossad/CIA/FBI operation, 49+ other cells across the USA (and hundreds more in all other countries)

Phi Beta Iota: every media outlet going with the suicide story should lose its corporate charter or broadcasting license. Profound betrayal of the public.

Bloomberg: Jeffrey Epstein Found Dead in Jail Awaiting Sex-Crimes Trial

CNN: Jeffrey Epstein has died by suicide, sources say

Caitlin Johnstone: Jeffrey Epstein Dies Of “Suicide”

National Public Radio: Jeffrey Epstein Dead From Apparent Suicide At Manhattan Jail

Jon Rappoport: Jeffrey Epstein dead; what happens now?

WebCenter11.com: Source: Epstein taken off suicide watch before death

What Does It Mean: Murder For Hire “Hit Contract” On Child Sex Slaver Jeffrey Epstein Reaches $100 Million

Zero Hedge: A Shocked World Reacts To News Of Epstein’s Impossible ‘Suicide’

Phi beta Iota: Below are the “big picture” on the greatest spy case of the century, and the master post on second greatest story ever told. US media shits. Everyone is desperate to cover up Mossad, CIA, FBI pedophilia entrapment for blackmail — one of over 50 similar cells across the USA.

SPECIAL: Zionism in America – Murderous Pedophilia Entrapment – The Nine Veils of Evil [Update 36 to the Mossad-Epstein Story]

Tom Luongo: Epstein Peak Swamp? Zionist Strike 44 UPDATE 50 Epstein Not Dead On Way to Israel?

1715 10 August 2019: NEW: Chans report he left in a wheelchair front cuffed into military van. Unverified. Image of chan post below.

DRIBBLES: Attorney General, FBI Shocked, Simply Shocked….

The Hill: Jeffrey Epstein’s suicide makes no sense

Zero Hedge: AG Barr “Appalled” By Epstein’s “Suicide”, Orders Inspector General Probe Into Mysterious Death

Zero Hedge: FBI Opens Probe After Jeffrey Epstein Dies In Apparent “Suicide”

UPDATE 2: Dr. Steve Pieczenik on Mossad, CIA, and More

UPDATE 3: Poking the Clintons

OPTION A: Epstein will be taken to a plastic surgery center in Switzerland run by Khazarians to have some work done on his ears, teeth and face. Wexler ran the op and Ghislain was his handler. This is a MEGA run op, one of many. Research MEGA and you will understand. Since MEGA has total control over US LE, the USDOJ, and the CIA and FBI, no real investigation will ever occur.

Full email from insider at … [more]
JeffreyEpstein  NotDead  LolitaGate  RobertSteele 
19 days ago
Ed.’s note: We live in a world where everything is fake. The markets are fake. The news is fake. Epstein’s suicide is fake. He was removed from prison and more than likely taken to Israel. Does this look like Jeffrey Epstein? We’re told the FBI is going to do an investigation. Hope that includes going to Israel for an interview with Jeffrey Epstein himself. That’s it then, the world will never hear of Jeffrey Epstein again. But wait, the files? Want to read more about this sordid vile shit? Nobody is going to try to discern the veracity of this reporting so take what you can and attempt piecing it together. Try this:

Robert Steele: Epstein Not Dead, On His Way To Israel? Or Now in the Presidential Suite in the Deep Underground Military Base (DUMB) at Area 51? We Do Not Make This Shit Up….

Here is another analysis of this fake shit…
Guess we can all be relieved now as we finally learn Don the real estate guy didn’t partake in any sex. How remarkable. Epstein is free, yeah baby! Time to party now in Tel Aviv. If you’re a witness you have just been put on notice.

Epstein docs release: Accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre says Trump ‘didn’t partake in any sex with any of us’

Well Bill, what now?

Teenage girl recruited by paedophile Jeffrey Epstein reveals: Bill Clinton Snared In Pedophile Ring: From Kosovo to Iraq

The released court papers can be found via Courthousenews.

Philip, there was an article released of the account of a prisoner who was held in the same jail as Epstein was being held, and from his personal experience, it is impossible to hang yourself in the cell Epstein was held in.

Jeffrey Epstein RIP

Under the premise this Mega Group member Epstein character is actually dead. Ever wonder why it is there are so many Jews involved in the Jeffrey Epstein case? Hell, the first person named in Epstein’s little black book is the Jewish “comedian” Woody Allen.
LolitaGate  JeffreyEpstein  NotDead  BillClinton  DonaldTrump  DonaldBarr 
19 days ago
The Rolling Stone article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is just the latest step in realizing the truth about stolen election 2004.Just so everyone understands, here’s how it all started… National Exit Polls are released periodically throughout election day showing Kerry winning (up through the final poll of the day at just after midnight). We were not supposed to see them but great lawyer, statistician, thinker Jonathan Simon captured the unintentionally released exit polls. He knew there were problems when the vote count contradicted the exit poll results. So did many of us as we reviewed Ohio and the rest of the voter disenfranchisement efforts across the nation. TIA got a hold of the data and noticed something very wrong, outlining the case by Nov. 9, 2004. Simon and Alastair Thompson (althecat) wrote their article in “Scoop” Independent News, Nov. 17, 2004. The truth was out and TruthIsAll, Steve Freeman, Ron Baiman and the rest of the brave “math people” made the case on the exit polls while Bob Fitrakis, PhD, Richard Hayes, PhD, Cliff Arnebeck, and a host of wonderful activists all over America nailed down the rest of the evidence of voter suppression and disenfranchisement. Democratic Underground and its Elections Forum was absolutely central to the process…
2004ElectionFraud  ElectronicElectionFraud  ElectionFraud  RobertFKennedy 
20 days ago
Prior to 9/11: US Covert Support to Al Qaeda in Macedonia, “Financing Both Sides” By Prof Michel Chossudovsky Global Research, August 25, 2019 Antiwar.com 3 April 2001
While Washington supports the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, it is at the same time – behind the scenes – funneling money and military hardware to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) now engaged in a border war with the Macedonian Security Forces. In a cruel irony, Washington is arming and advising both the KLA attackers and the Macedonian defenders under military and intelligence authorization acts approved by the US Congress. Military Professional Resources Inc. (MPRI), a mercenary outfit on contract to the Pentagon, is helping Macedonia – as part of a US military aid package – “to deter armed aggression and defend Macedonian territory.” But MPRI is also advising and equipping the KLA, which is responsible for the terrorist assaults. In this war, the American military-intelligence apparatus is pulling strings “on both sides of the fence.” What is the hidden agenda?

“[The] United States of America and the Kosovo Liberation Army stand for the same human values and principles … Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values.”(Senator Joseph Lieberman, quoted in the Washington Post, 28 April 1999)


The Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) – transformed in September 1999 into the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC) under UN auspices – is behind the terrorist attacks in the Tetovo region of Macedonia as well as in Southern Serbia. In Macedonia, these assaults are waged by the KLA’s proxy: the Ushtira Clirimtare Komtare (UCK) or National Liberation Army (NLA). The terrorists operate from KLA bases inside Kosovo under KFOR protection.

Supported by the US, the KLA and its various proxies are well equipped. According to Carl Bildt (special UN coordinator for the Balkans), the Macedonian Security Forces “are no match” for the rebels: “the guerrillas are a competent military organization… They have a core of very experienced fighters. They are well fortified, evidently well prepared, and in all probability they control substantial parts of the hinterland.”

But where did they get the money? The Western media conveys the impression that the National Liberation Army (NLA) developed into a modern rebel force overnight, spontaneously “out of thin air” and that NATO leaders have no contacts with the KLA.


According to the (London) Sunday Times,

“American intelligence agents have admitted they helped to train the Kosovo Liberation Army before NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia.”1

A review of US Congressional documents would suggest that CIA support was not discontinued after the war.2 Moreover, while the KLA maintains its links both to the CIA and criminal syndicates involved in the Balkans narcotics trade, the paramilitary organisation -renamed the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC) has been elevated to UN status, implying the granting of legitimate sources of funding through UN as well as through bilateral channels.

Procurement of military supplies, training of the KLA and military advisers has been entrusted to Military Professional Resources Inc. (MPRI), a US based mercenary outfit linked to the Pentagon. The pattern is similar to that followed in Croatia and in the Bosnian Muslim-Croatian Federation where so-called “equip and train” programmes were put together by the Pentagon.

MPRI’s training concepts – which had already been tested in Croatia and Bosnia – are based on imparting “offensive tactics… as the best form of defence.”3 In the Kosovar context, this so-called “defensive doctrine” applied in terrorist assaults in Southern Serbia and Macedonia is intent upon transforming the KLA paramilitary into a modern military force which serves the Alliance’s strategic objectives. MPRI listed in 1999 “ninety-one highly experienced, former military professionals working in Bosnia & Herzegovina.”4 The number of military officers working on contract with the KLA has not been disclosed.

There is, however, a consistent thread: KLA Chief of Staff Agim Ceku (previously with the Croatian Armed Forces) has been involved in a long-term relationship with the MPRI. Ceku started working with MPRI in 1995 in the planning of “Operation Storm” in Croatia, which led to ethnic massacres and the expulsion of more than 200.000 Serbs from the Krajina region of Croatia. The fact that Ceku is “an alleged war criminal” – according to the files of the Hague Tribunal (a body reporting to the UN Secretary General) – does not, however, seem to bother anybody in the “international community.”5

Ceku holds a UN passport (Laissez-Passer) which provides him with diplomatic immunity within Kosovo. According to ICTY prosecutor Carla del Ponte, Ceku’s reputation and integrity, however, are unstained because the Hague tribunal’s “inquiries … relate to atrocities committed [by Ceku] in Krajina … between 1993 and 1995. Ceku’s record in Kosovo itself is not thought to be in question.”6

Behind to polite façade of international diplomacy, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has – on Washington’s instructions – knowingly and willfully approved the appointment of “an alleged war criminal” to participate in a UN peacekeeping operation. In other words, the UN system is “financing terrorism,” creating an ugly precedent in the history of a respected international body: “The United Nations is paying the salaries of many of the gangsters,” who are now involved in the terrorist assaults into Macedonia.7


US support to the KLA is only one among several sources of KLA financing. Various Islamic organisations have channeled money and military equipment to the KLA. Prior to the 1999 war,

“German, Turkish and Afghan instructors were reported to be training the KLA in guerilla and diversion tactics.”8

Mujehadeen mercenaries recruited in a number of countries fought against Serb Security forces alongside the KLA in Kosovo. According to the ‘Sunday Times,’ the recent assaults by the KLA’s proxy in the Tetovo region of Macedonia have been “encouraged by mercenaries from Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.”9

Amply documented, the Balkans drug trade is used to finance ethnic warfare with the complicity of the US and NATO. The pattern of covert support – through the recycling of narco-dollars – has been an integral part of CIA covert operations since the Soviet-Afghan war. According to documents of the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), “members of the notorious Albanian mafia have links to a drug smuggling cartel” based in Kosovo’s capital, Pristina. This cartel is allegedly manned by ethnic Albanians who are members of the Kosovo National Front (KNF) whose armed wing is the KLA. The DEA documents apparently show it is one of the “most powerful heroin smuggling organisations in the world” with its profits being diverted to the KLA to buy weapons.10

In the words of former DEA agent and author Michael Levine:

“Ten years ago we were arming and equipping the worst elements of the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan – drug traffickers, arms smugglers, anti-American terrorists…Now we’re doing the same thing with the KLA, which is tied in with every known middle and far eastern drug cartel. Interpol, Europol, and nearly every European intelligence and counter-narcotics agency has files open on drug syndicates that lead right to the KLA, and right to Albanian gangs in this country.”11

While US aid – combined with drug money – is channeled to the KLA, Washington and Brussels perfunctorily condemn the NLA-Tetovo instigated terrorist assaults while casually denying the links of the attackers to the KLA. In the words of former NATO Secretary General Javier Solana: “‘it would be a mistake to negotiate,… the terrorists have to be isolated. All of us have to condemn and isolate them. Nothing can be achieved through violence” …

NATO has pledged to ”starve” the rebels by cutting supply lines from neighboring Kosovo.”12 While condemning the terrorists, NATO – through the UN – has also been “raising the urgent need for restraint by the Macedonian forces.”13

This double talk is of course a form of political camouflage: you say that you are against the terrorists and then support them via the KLA with guns, ammo and military advisers paid by the US public purse.


But there is something else even more terrifying which has not been revealed to public opinion. The guerilla war in the Tetovo region of Macedonia is being financed and therefore controlled by Washington “on both sides” of the border. While Washington pumps money into the KLA, the FYR of Macedonia – which has been an obedient client state – is also the recipient of US military aid and training. Macedonia is a member of NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) and aspires to acquire full NATO membership.

The same group of US military advisers on contract with the KLA is also “helping” the Macedonian Armed Forces. The MPRI – while assisting the KLA in its terrorist assaults – is also present behind enemy lines in Macedonia under a so-called “Stability and Deterrence Program.” The later is intent upon “assisting the Macedonian Armed Forces … to deter armed aggression and, should deterrence fail, defend Macedonian territory….”14 What is happening is that the US mercenary company with a mandate “to defend the border” is also advising the KLA on how best “to attack the border.”

Is this not crystal clear: The military-intelligence ploy is to finance both sides of the conflict, provide military aid to one side and finance the other side. And then “make them fight.” It’s a sinister military-intelligence game, an “insider operation” with US military advisers on both sides from the same mercenary outfit (the MPRI). Macedonia’s “Stability and Deterrence Program” is in fact largely supported by US foreign military sales (FMS), namely MPRI is in charge … [more]
Serbia  BalkansWar  Kosovo  Macedonia  KLA  AlQaeda  MichelChossudovsky  GlobalResearch  September11/2001 
23 days ago
Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad: The Spy Story at the Heart of the Jeffrey Epstein Scandal ~ (Part 3 of 4) by Whitney Webb ~ August 07th, 2019
The picture painted by the evidence is not a direct Epstein tie to a single intelligence agency but a web linking key members of the Mega Group, politicians, and officials in both the U.S. and Israel, and an organized-crime network with deep business and intelligence ties in both nations.
As billionaire pedophile and alleged sex-trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein sits in prison, reports have continued to surface about his reported links to intelligence, his financial ties to several companies and “charitable” foundations, and his friendships with the rich and powerful as well as top politicians.

While Part I and Part II of this series, “The Jeffrey Epstein Scandal: Too Big to Fail,” have focused on the widespread nature of sexual blackmail operations in recent American history and their ties to the heights of American political power and the U.S. intelligence community, one key aspect of Epstein’s own sex-trafficking and blackmail operation that warrants examination is Epstein’s ties to Israeli intelligence and his ties to the “informal” pro-Israel philanthropist faction known as “the Mega Group.”

The Mega Group’s role in the Epstein case has garnered some attention, as Epstein’s main financial patron for decades, billionaire Leslie Wexner, was a co-founder of the group that unites several well-known businessmen with a penchant for pro-Israel and ethno-philanthropy (i.e., philanthropy benefiting a single ethnic or ethno-religious group). However, as this report will show, another uniting factor among Mega Group members is deep ties to organized crime, specifically the organized crime network discussed in Part I of this series, which was largely led by notorious American mobster Meyer Lansky....
LolitaGate  JeffreyEpstein  Me  gaGroup  LeslieWexner  MarcRich  RobertMaxwell  GhislaineMaxwell  ChildTrafficking 
25 days ago
Government by Blackmail: Jeffrey Epstein, Trump’s Mentor and the Dark Secrets of the Reagan Era > (Part 2 of 4) by WhitneyWebb ~ July 25th, 2019
Appalling for both the villainous abuse of children itself and the chilling implications of government by blackmail, this tangled web of unsavory alliances casts a lurid light on the political history of the U.S. from the Prohibition Era right up through the Age of Trump....
Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire who now sits in jail on federal charges for the sex trafficking of minors, has continued to draw media scrutiny in the weeks after his arrest on July 6. Part of the reason for this continued media interest is related to Epstein’s alleged relationship to the intelligence services and new information about the true extent of the sexual blackmail operation Epstein is believed to have run for decades.

As MintPress reported last week, Epstein was able to run this sordid operation for so long precisely because his was only the latest incarnation of a much older, more extensive operation that began in the 1950s and perhaps even earlier.

Starting first with mob-linked liquor baron Lewis Rosenstiel and later with Roy Cohn, Rosenstiel’s protege and future mentor to Donald Trump, Epstein’s is just one of the many sexual blackmail operations involving children that are all tied to the same network, which includes elements of organized crime, powerful Washington politicians, lobbyists and “fixers,” and clear links to intelligence as well as the FBI. ....
JeffreyEpstein  LolitaGate  RonaldReagan  WhitneyWebb  ChildTrafficking  HumanTrafficking  DonaldTrump  RoyCohn 
25 days ago
Hidden in Plain Sight: The Shocking Origins of the Jeffrey Epstein Case > (Part 1 of 4) by Whitney Webb ~ July 18th, 2019
Epstein is only the latest incarnation of a much older, more extensive and sophisticated operation that offers a frightening window into how deeply tied the U.S. government is to the modern-day equivalents of organized crime.
Despite his “sweetheart” deal and having seemingly evaded justice, billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was arrested earlier this month on federal charges for sex trafficking minors. Epstein’s arrest has again brought increased media attention to many of his famous friends, the current president among them.

Many questions have since been asked about how much Epstein’s famous friends knew of his activities and exactly what Epstein was up to. The latter arguably received the most attention after it was reported that Alex Acosta — who arranged Epstein’s “sweetheart” deal in 2008 and who recently resigned as Donald Trump’s Labor Secretary following Epstein’s arrest — claimed that the mysterious billionaire had worked for “intelligence.”

Other investigations have made it increasingly clear that Epstein was running a blackmail operation, as he had bugged the venues — whether at his New York mansion or Caribbean island getaway — with microphones and cameras to record the salacious interactions that transpired between his guests and the underage girls that Epstein exploited. Epstein appeared to have stored much of that blackmail in a safe on his private island....
JeffreyEpstein  LolitaGate  WhitneyWebb  ChildTrafficking 
25 days ago
From “Spook Air” to the “Lolita Express”: The Genesis and Evolution of the Jeffrey Epstein-Bill Clinton Relationship > by Whitney Well (Part 4 of 4) ~ August 23rd, 2019
Far from being the work of a single political party, intelligence agency or country, the power structure revealed by the network connected to Epstein is nothing less than a criminal enterprise that is willing to use and abuse children in the pursuit of ever more power, wealth and control.
On August 10th, and for several days after, speculation swirled after it was announced that Jeffrey Epstein had been found dead in his cell. His cause of death has officially been ruled suicide by hanging.

Epstein, the billionaire pedophile and sex trafficker with a myriad of connections to the rich and powerful in the United States and several other countries, had told those close to him that he had feared for his life prior to his sudden “suicide,” the Washington Post reported, while his defense lawyers claimed that he had planned to cooperate with federal authorities.

Following the controversial conclusion by the New York Medical Examiner that Epstein’s death was a suicide — a conclusion contested by Epstein’s attornies as well as by independent forensic pathologists, given the apparent evidence pointing towards strangulation — corporate media coverage of the Epstein case has slowed to a trickle, save for sensationalist stories about his alleged co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell and new salacious details of his past. Gone from corporate media are any hints of the larger scandal, revolving around the admission that Epstein had “belonged to intelligence.”....
JeffreyEpstein  BillClinton  LolitaGate  WhitneyWebb  ChildTrafficking 
25 days ago
Israel threatens to use nuclear weapons to ‘wipe out’ its enemies August 31, 2018 at 11:27 am |
Standing next to a secretive Israeli atomic reactor earlier in the week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threatened to “wipe out” his enemies. In a speech that many will see as the Jewish state breaking its long silence over the possession of nuclear weapons, the Likud leader warned that it has the means to destroy its enemies.

“Those who threaten to wipe us out put themselves in a similar danger, and in any event will not achieve their goal,” he said on Wednesday during a ceremony to rename the complex, near the desert town of Dimona. The site has long been suspected to be the location where Israel has been developing nuclear weapons.

Iran hit back by describing Netanyahu as a “warmonger”. The threat “atomic annihilation” against the Islamic Republic was denounced as “beyond shameless in the gall”.

Read: Iran resumes talks with Russia to build new nuclear power plant

“Iran, a country without nuclear weapons, is threatened with atomic annihilation by a warmonger standing next to an actual nuclear weapons factory,” Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif wrote on his official Twitter account.
IsraelNuclearWeapons  Israel  NuclearWeapons  Iran 
26 days ago
How Zionism helped create the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Opinion Nu'man Abd al-Wahid on January 7, 2016
The covert alliance between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Zionist entity of Israel should be no surprise to any student of British imperialism. The problem is the study of British imperialism has very few students. Indeed, one can peruse any undergraduate or post-graduate British university prospectus and rarely find a module in a Politics degree on the British Empire let alone a dedicated degree or Masters degree. Of course if the European led imperialist carnage in the four years between 1914 – 1918 tickles your cerebral cells then it’s not too difficult to find an appropriate institution to teach this subject, but if you would like to delve into how and why the British Empire waged war on mankind for almost four hundred years you’re practically on your own in this endeavour. One must admit, that from the British establishment’s perspective, this is a formidable and remarkable achievement.

In late 2014, according to the American journal, Foreign Affairs, the Saudi petroleum Minister, Ali al-Naimi is reported to have said “His Majesty King Abdullah has always been a model for good relations between Saudi Arabia and other states and the Jewish state is no exception.” Recently, Abdullah’s successor, King Salman expressed similar concerns to those of Israel’s to the growing agreement between the United States and Iran over the latter’s nuclear programme. This led some to report that Israel and KSA presented a “united front” in their opposition to the nuclear deal. This was not the first time the Zionists and Saudis have found themselves in the same corner in dealing with a perceived common foe. In North Yemen in the 1960’s, the Saudis were financing a British imperialist led mercenary army campaign against revolutionary republicans who had assumed authority after overthrowing the authoritarian, Imam. Gamal Abdul-Nasser’s Egypt militarily backed the republicans, while the British induced the Saudis to finance and arm the remaining remnants of the Imam’s supporters. Furthermore, the British organised the Israelis to drop arms for the British proxies in North Yemen, 14 times. The British, in effect, militarily but covertly, brought the Zionists and Saudis together in 1960’s North Yemen against their common foe.

However, as this author has previously written, one must return to the 1920’s to fully appreciate the origins of this informal and indirect alliance between Saudi Arabia and the Zionist entity. An illuminating study by Dr. Askar H. al-Enazy, titled, The Creation of Saudi Arabia: Ibn Saud and British Imperial Policy, 1914-1927, has further and uniquely provided any student of British Imperialism primary sourced evidence on the origins of this alliance. This study by Dr. Enazy influences the following piece. The defeat of the Ottoman Empire by British imperialism in World War One, left three distinct authorities in the Arabian peninsula: Sharif of Hijaz: Hussain bin Ali of Hijaz (in the west), Ibn Rashid of Ha’il (in the north) and Emir Ibn Saud of Najd (in the east) and his religiously fanatical followers, the Wahhabis.

Ibn Saud had entered the war early in January 1915 on the side of the British, but was quickly defeated and his British handler, William Shakespear was killed by the Ottoman Empire’s ally Ibn Rashid. This defeat greatly hampered Ibn Saud’s utility to the Empire and left him militarily hamstrung for a year.[1] The Sharif contributed the most to the Ottoman Empire’s defeat by switching allegiances and leading the so-called ‘Arab Revolt’ in June 1916 which removed the Turkish presence from Arabia. He was convinced to totally alter his position because the British had strongly led him to believe, via correspondence with Henry McMahon, the British High Commissioner in Egypt, that a unified Arab country from Gaza to the Persian Gulf will be established with the defeat of the Turks. The letters exchanged between Sharif Hussain and Henry McMahon are known as the McMahon-Hussain Correspondence.

Understandably, the Sharif as soon as the war ended wanted to hold the British to their war time promises, or what he perceived to be their war time promises, as expressed in the aforementioned correspondence. The British, on the other hand, wanted the Sharif to accept the Empire’s new reality which was a division of the Arab world between them and the French (Sykes-Picot agreement) and the implementation of the Balfour Declaration, which guaranteed ‘a national for the Jewish people’ in Palestine by colonisation with European Jews. This new reality was contained in the British written, Anglo-Hijaz Treaty, which the Sharif was profoundly averse to signing.[2] After all, the revolt of 1916 against the Turks was dubbed the ‘Arab Revolt’ not the ‘Hijazi Revolt’.

Actually, the Sharif let it be known that he will never sell out Palestine to the Empire’s Balfour Declaration; he will never acquiescence to the establishment of Zionism in Palestine or accept the new random borders drawn across Arabia by British and French imperialists. For their part the British began referring to him as an ‘obstructionist’, a ‘nuisance’ and of having a ‘recalcitrant’ attitude.

The British let it be known to the Sharif that they were prepared to take drastic measures to bring about his approval of the new reality regardless of the service that he had rendered them during the War. After the Cairo Conference in March 1921, where the new Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill met with all the British operatives in the Middle East, T.E. Lawrence (i.e. of Arabia) was dispatched to meet the Sharif to bribe and bully him to accept Britain’s Zionist colonial project in Palestine. Initially, Lawrence and the Empire offered 80,000 rupees.[3] The Sharif rejected it outright. Lawrence then offered him an annual payment of £100,000.[4] The Sharif refused to compromise and sell Palestine to British Zionism.

When financial bribery failed to persuade the Sharif, Lawrence threatened him with an Ibn Saud takeover. Lawrence claimed that “politically and militarily, the survival of Hijaz as a viable independent Hashemite kingdom was wholly dependent on the political will of Britain, who had the means to protect and maintain his rule in the region.” [5] In between negotiating with the Sharif, Lawrence made the time to visit other leaders in the Arabian peninsula and informed them that they if they don’t tow the British line and avoid entering into an alliance with the Sharif, the Empire will unleash Ibn Saud and his Wahhabis who after all is at Britain’s ‘beck and call’.[6]

Simultaneously, after the Conference, Churchill travelled to Jerusalem and met with the Sharif’s son, Abdullah, who had been made the ruler, “Emir”, of a new territory called “Transjordan.” Churchill informed Abdullah that he should persuade “his father to accept the Palestine mandate and sign a treaty to such effect,” if not “the British would unleash Ibn Saud against Hijaz.”[7] In the meantime the British were planning to unleash Ibn Saud on the ruler of Ha’il, Ibn Rashid.

Ibn Rashid had rejected all overtures from the British Empire made to him via Ibn Saud, to be another of its puppets.[8] More so, Ibn Rashid expanded his territory north to the new mandated Palestinian border as well as to the borders of Iraq in the summer of 1920. The British became concerned that an alliance maybe brewing between Ibn Rashid who controlled the northern part of the peninsula and the Sharif who controlled the western part. More so, the Empire wanted the land routes between the Palestinian ports on the Mediterranean Sea and the Persian Gulf under the rule of a friendly party. At the Cairo Conference, Churchill agreed with an imperial officer, Sir Percy Cox that “Ibn Saud should be ‘given the opportunity to occupy Hail.’”[9] By the end of 1920, the British were showering Ibn Saud with “a monthly ‘grant’ of £10,000 in gold, on top of his monthly subsidy. He also received abundant arms supplies, totalling more than 10,000 rifles, in addition to the critical siege and four field guns” with British-Indian instructors.[10] Finally, in September 1921, the British unleashed Ibn Saud on Ha’il which officially surrendered in November 1921. It was after this victory the British bestowed a new title on Ibn Saud. He was no longer to be “Emir of Najd and Chief of its Tribes” but “Sultan of Najd and its Dependencies”. Ha’il had dissolved into a dependency of the Empire’s Sultan of Najd.

If the Empire thought that the Sharif, with Ibn Saud now on his border and armed to the teeth by the British, would finally become more amenable to the division of Arabia and the British Zionist colonial project in Palestine they were short lived. A new round of talks between Abdulla’s son, acting on behalf of his father in Transjordan and the Empire resulted in a draft treaty accepting Zionism. When it was delivered to the Sharif with an accompanying letter from his son requesting that he “accept reality”, he didn’t even bother to read the treaty and instead composed a draft treaty himself rejecting the new divisions of Arabia as well as the Balfour Declaration and sent it to London to be ratified![11]

Ever since 1919 the British had gradually decreased Hussain’s subsidy to the extent that by the early 1920’s they had suspended it, while at the same time continued subsidising Ibn Saud right through the early 1920’s.[12] After a further three rounds of negotiations in Amman and London, it dawned on the Empire that Hussain will never relinquish Palestine to Great Britain’s Zionist project or accept the new divisions in Arab lands.[13]In March 1923, the British informed Ibn Saud that it will cease his subsidy but not without awarding him an advance ‘grant’ of £50,000 upfront, which amounted to a year’s subsidy.[14]

In March 1924, a year after the British awarded the ‘grant’ to Ibn Saud, the Empire announced that it had terminated all discussions with Sharif… [more]
SaudiArabia  Wahhabism  IsraelSaudiArabia  Israel  BritishImperialism  BalfourDeclaration  Zionism 
26 days ago
Israel Is Not A U.S. Ally > By If Americans Knew
onstantly referring to Israel as our “most cherished ally” promotes an illusion of common interest that does not actually exist.

Andrew Sullivan comments on the U.S.-Israel relationship and the role of “pro-Israel” lobbying groups in our politics in a new essay. There are several things that I think Sullivan gets wrong, but perhaps the most significant and pervasive error in the piece is his repeated description of the relationship an “alliance.” He notes that the U.S. gets nothing in return for the extensive military and diplomatic support that it provides, he acknowledges that the U.S. “suffers internationally” on account of its close relationship with Israel, and he marvels at how badly its government under Netanyahu has behaved towards the U.S. Nonetheless, he writes, “I would defend the alliance despite this, because of my core belief in a Jewish state.”

The trouble with all this is that there is no alliance and Israel is not our ally. Its government does not behave as an ally does, it has never fought alongside U.S. forces in any of our foreign wars, and its interests are not aligned with ours as an ally’s should be. There is no formal treaty and no binding obligations that require our governments to do anything for the other.....
The exaggeration in Israel’s case is greatest of all because it is routinely called our “most important ally” in the region, or even our “most cherished ally” in all the world. These are ideological assertions that are not grounded in any observable reality. Dozens of other states all over the world are better allies to the United States than the “most cherished ally” is, and they don’t preside over an illegal occupation that implicates the U.S. in decades of abuses and crimes against the Palestinian people living under that occupation, but none of them enjoys the lockstep, uncritical backing that this one state does.

The effect of this constant repetition is to make the U.S.-Israel relationship seem extremely important to U.S. interests when it is not, and that serves to promote the “illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists.” It is this illusion as much as anything else that prevents a serious reassessment of the relationship….
Israel  IsraelUSrelations  BDSmovement  Palestine 
27 days ago
Century of Enslavement: The History of The Federal Reserve > The Corbett Report Published on 6 Jul 2014
TRANSCRIPT AND RESOURCES: http://www.corbettreport.com/federalr...

What is the Federal Reserve system? How did it come into existence? Is it part of the federal government? How does it create money? Why is the public kept in the dark about these important matters? In this feature-length documentary film, The Corbett Report explores these important question and pulls back the curtain on America's central bank.
FederalReserve  JamesCorbett 
4 weeks ago
About the Internet Archive
The Internet Archive, a 501(c)(3) non-profit, is building a digital library of Internet sites and other cultural artifacts in digital form. Like a paper library, we provide free access to researchers, historians, scholars, the print disabled, and the general public. Our mission is to provide Universal Access to All Knowledge.

We began in 1996 by archiving the Internet itself, a medium that was just beginning to grow in use. Like newspapers, the content published on the web was ephemeral - but unlike newspapers, no one was saving it. Today we have 20+ years of web history accessible through the Wayback Machine and we work with 625+ library and other partners through our Archive-It program to identify important web pages.

As our web archive grew, so did our commitment to providing digital versions of other published works. Today our archive contains:

330 billion web pages
20 million books and texts
4.5 million audio recordings (including 180,000 live concerts)
4 million videos (including 1.6 million Television News programs)
3 million images
200,000 software programs
Anyone with a free account can upload media to the Internet Archive. We work with thousands of partners globally to save copies of their work into special collections.

Because we are a library, we pay special attention to books. Not everyone has access to a public or academic library with a good collection, so to provide universal access we need to provide digital versions of books. We began a program to digitize books in 2005 and today we scan 1,000 books per day in 28 locations around the world. Books published prior to 1923 are available for download, and hundreds of thousands of modern books can be borrowed through our Open Library site. Some of our digitized books are only available to the print disabled.

Like the Internet, television is also an ephemeral medium. We began archiving television programs in late 2000, and our first public TV project was an archive of TV news surrounding the events of September 11, 2001. In 2009 we began to make selected U.S. television news broadcasts searchable by captions in our TV News Archive. This service allows researchers and the public to use television as a citable and sharable reference.

The Internet Archive serves millions of people each day and is one of the top 300 web sites in the world. A single copy of the Internet Archive library collection occupies 45+ Petabytes of server space (and we store at least 2 copies of everything). We are funded through donations, grants, and by providing web archiving and book digitization services for our partners. As with most libraries we value the privacy of our patrons, so we avoid keeping the IP (Internet Protocol) addresses of our readers and offer our site in https (secure) protocol.

You can find information about our projects on our blog (including important announcements), contact us, buy swag in our store, and follow us on Twitter and Facebook. Welcome to the library!

Recent foundation funding generously provided by::

Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
Council on Library and Information Resources
Democracy Fund
Federal Communications Commission Universal Service Program for Schools and Libraries (E-Rate)
Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS)
Knight Foundation
Laura and John Arnold Foundation
National Endowment for the Humanities, Office of Digital Humanities
National Science Foundation
The Peter and Carmen Lucia Buck Foundation
The Philadelphia Foundation
Rita Allen Foundation
InternetArchive  Internet  Archives 
4 weeks ago
Conspiracy Theories: Jeffrey Epstein’s Uniquely American Death in Jail > August 13th, 2019 By Kevin Gosztola
Over the last five years, based upon over 400 lawsuits filed over alleged abuse of inmates, the AP found 40 percent of the lawsuits involved suicides in local jails—135 deaths and 30 suicide attempts.

“Of the 165 jail suicides and attempts, about 80 percent of inmates were awaiting trial,” the AP report stated.

Federal statistics from 2014 showed 372 suicides had occurred in 3,000 jails that were surveyed.

Epstein was found with injuries to his neck on July 23 and placed on suicide watch. That required a check every 15 minutes but his attorneys apparently requested he be taken off suicide watch and was downgraded to “special observation status.” Two guards would check on him every 30 minutes.

Elie Honig, a CNN legal analyst and former prosecutor for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) for over eight years, recalled how his office housed “thousands of defendants” at the Metropolitan Correctional Center. He could not recall any suicides during his tenure.

An MSNBC legal analyst, Mimi Rocah, also worked as an assistant U.S. State’s Attorney in SDNY from 2001 to 2017. She remembered “defendants/targets who committed suicide but usually when at home or about to be apprehended.” While suicides are common in jails, Rocah insisted suicides typically do not happen at a federal facility like MCC.
JeffreyEpstein  LolitaGate  MetropolitanCorrectionsCenter 
4 weeks ago
Epstein May Be Just One Part of an Intricate Network of Sex and Power August 15, 2019
Journalist Whitney Webb's series looks at the sordid history tying together mobsters, oligarchs, and government intelligence agencies in a web of blackmail, exploitation, and profit ....
MARC STEINER: Welcome to The Real News Network. I’m Marc Steiner. Great to have you all with us.

Jeffrey Epstein is at the top of every news cycle, and dominates our digital social media world. His trafficking of young girls, children to satisfy his and the sexual preferences of so many of the rich and powerful, are at the center of all this, as are his connections to that dark world of the unseemly side of the interaction between government, business, and the intelligence world allegedly.

Using sex as blackmail is nothing new. It goes back to the early mob, the CIA, and seems to connect the dots to Epstein. That was the story we’re going tell today written by our guest, who wrote this for Mint Press in the three-part series called “The Jeffrey Epstein Scandal: Too Big to Fail.” The three parts were “Hidden in Plain Sight;” “Government by Blackmail: Jeffrey Epstein, Trump’s Mentor and the Dark Secrets of the Reagan Era;” and “Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad: The Spy Story at the Heart of the Jeffrey Epstein Scandal.” Whitney Webb is a Mint Press News journalist based in Chile who has written and contributed to many, many outlets and joins us now from her home there. Welcome. Good to have you with us, Whitney.

WHITNEY WEBB: Hi. Thanks so much for the opportunity.
JeffreyEpstein  LolitaGate 
4 weeks ago
Epstein: Gateway to the Global Cesspit by David Icke who has been exposing elite paedophiles and S
Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad: The Spy Story at the Heart of the Jeffrey Epstein Scandal -
DavidIcke  JeffreyEpstein  LolitaGate 
4 weeks ago
2019/04/07 > The ideology of postmodernism is to present all existing injustice as an effect of discrimination; Robert Pfaller tells ILNA
The ruling ideology since the fall of the Berlin Wall, or even earlier, is postmodernism. This is the ideological embellishment that the brutal neoliberal attack on Western societies' welfare (that was launched in the late 1970s) required in order to attain a "human", "liberal" and "progressive" face.

Robert Pfaller is one of the most distinguished figures in today's radical Left. He teaches at the University of Art and Industrial Design in Linz, Austria. He is a founding member of the Viennese psychoanalytic research group ‘stuzzicadenti’. Pfaller is the author of books such as "On the Pleasure Principle in Culture: Illusions Without Owners", "Interpassivity: The Aesthetics of Delegated Enjoyment", among others. Below is the ILNA's interview with this authoritative philosopher on the Fall of Berlin Wall and "Idea of Communism".

ILNA: What is the role of “pleasure principle” in a world after the Berlin Wall? What role does the lack of ideological dichotomy, which unveils itself as absent of a powerful left state, play in dismantling democracy?

Until the late 1970s, all "Western" (capitalist) governments, right or left, pursued a Keynesian economic policy of state investment and deficit spending. (Even Richard Nixon is said to have once, in the early 1970ies, stated, "We are all Keynesians"). This lead to a considerable decrease of inequality in Western societies in the first three decades after WWII, as the numbers presented by Thomas Piketty and Branko Milanovic in their books prove. Apparently, it was seen as necessary to appease Western workers with high wages and high employment rates in order to prevent them from becoming communists. Ironically one could say that it was precisely Western workers who profited considerably of "real existing socialism" in the Eastern European countries.

At the very moment when the "threat" of real existing socialism was not felt anymore, due to the Western economic and military superiority in the 1980ies (that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall), the economic paradigm in the Western countries shifted. All of a sudden, all governments, left or right, pursued a neoliberal economic policy (of privatization, austerity politics, the subjection of education and health sectors under the rule of profitability, liberalization of regulations for the migration of capital and cheap labor, limitation of democratic sovereignty, etc.).

Whenever the social democratic left came into power, for example with Tony Blair, or Gerhard Schroeder, they proved to be the even more radical neoliberal reformers. As a consequence, leftist parties did not have an economic alternative to what their conservative and liberal opponents offered. Thus they had to find another point of distinction. This is how the left became "cultural" (while, of course, ceasing to be a "left"): from now on the marks of distinction were produced by all kinds of concerns for minorities or subaltern groups. And instead of promoting economic equality and equal rights for all groups, the left now focused on symbolic "recognition" and "visibility" for these groups. Thus not only all economic and social concerns were sacrificed for the sake of sexual and ethnic minorities, but even the sake of these minorities itself. Since a good part of the problem of these groups was precisely economic, social and juridical, and not cultural or symbolic. And whenever you really solve a problem of a minority group, the visibility of this group decreases. But by insisting on the visibility of these groups, the policies of the new pseudo-left succeded at making the problems of these groups permanent - and, of course, at pissing off many other people who started to guess that the concern for minorities was actually just a pretext for pursuing a most brutal policy of increasing economic inequality.

ILNA: The world after the Berlin Wall is mainly considered as post-ideological. Does ideology has truly decamped from our world or it has only taken more perverse forms? On the other hand, many liberals believe that our world today is based on the promise of happiness. In this sense, how does capitalism promotes itself on the basis of this ideology?

The ruling ideology since the fall of the Berlin Wall, or even earlier, is postmodernism. This is the ideological embellishment that the brutal neoliberal attack on Western societies' welfare (that was launched in the late 1970s) required in order to attain a "human", "liberal" and "progressive" face. This coalition between an economic policy that serves the interest of a tiny minority, and an ideology that appears to "include" everybody is what Nancy Fraser has aptly called "progressive neoliberalism". It consists of neoliberalism, plus postmodernism as its ideological superstructure.

The ideology of postmodernism today has some of its most prominent symptoms in the omnipresent concern about "discrimination" (for example, of "people of color") and in the resentment against "old, white men". This is particularly funny in countries like Germany: since, of course, there has been massive racism and slavery in Germany in the 20th century - yet the victims of this racism and slavery in Germany have in the first place been white men (Jews, communists, Gypsies, red army prisoners of war, etc.). Here it is most obvious that a certain German pseudo-leftism does not care for the real problems of this society, but prefers to import some of the problems that US-society has to deal with. As Louis Althusser has remarked, ideology always consists in trading in your real problems for the imaginary problems that you would prefer to have.

The general ideological task of postmodernism is to present all existing injustice as an effect of discrimination. This is, of course, funny again: Since every discrimination presupposes an already established class structure of inequality. If you do not have unequal places, you cannot distribute individuals in a discriminating way, even if you want to do so. Thus progressive neoliberalism massively increases social inequality, while distributing all minority groups in an "equal" way over the unequal places.

Interview by: Kamran Baradaran
RobertPfaller  Postmodernism  ClassAnalysis  Class 
5 weeks ago
Ben Swann went to far
Buddy Huggins
Published on 25 Feb 2017

"PizzaGate" has been thrust back into the spotlight for the first time since the election thanks to reporter Ben Swann of CBS46 in Atlanta - only this time, it's not a puff piece labeling it a conspiracy theory, or another New York Times article going out of it's way to defend Comet Ping Pong. Swann lays out the players, including Comet Ping Pong owner James Alefantis (who was in a relationship with CTR-mastermind David Brock), as well as pedophile terminology, logos, and some of the pedo-friendly musical acts featured at the restaurant. Swann even mentions John Podesta's close relationship with convicted pedophile Dennis Hastert, as well as the creepy Podesta art.
Pizzagate  BenSwann  JohnPodesta 
5 weeks ago
SEPTEMBER 7, 2016 Has Israel Effectively Colonized the United States? by BADRUDDIN KHAN
We normally think of colonizers as large countries, and the colonized as smaller and weaker nations. But this is not always the case. Colonization does not require occupation. It merely requires the subjugation of the colonized. With ambition, superior information and calculation, and the right mindset, smaller nations can (and have in the past) colonized and dominated larger and nominally more powerful countries.

India was successfully colonized by tiny Britain in the 18th century. The vehicle for colonization was the East India Company. It was only after the Indian mutiny that Britain acted directly and sent in troops to establish the British Raj. For the next 200 years India was drained of its wealth, its economy was restructured to support England’s needs and global ambitions, and its people militarized to fight and die on behalf of the British crown. The Indian leaders who remained were willing participants in this venture; those who felt otherwise were destroyed or marginalized.

In a similar vein, Israel today is in the process of colonizing the United States, which is vital to its global projection and exercise of power. The steps Israel is taking are visible to all (as was the case with British designs on India) and yet it is remarkably difficult to connect the dots while such a takeover is in process. Or, to do anything about it.

Colonization does not mean total control of everything

It means total control of what matters. The British were interested in Indian wealth, and a standing army of Indians willing to die for their wars. They couldn’t care less about India’s internal petty politics that did not directly or indirectly impact their mission. An effective “divide and conquer” strategy pit Indians against each other and discouraged any kind of coordinated response, or sedition. The British leveraged their “outsider advantage” to objectively collect data with which to calculate and coordinate which Indian princes to support in battles, and which to connive with. Like pieces on a chessboard, Indian leaders exhausted themselves through internal battles, and were prevailed to seek cover provided by the British. Small amounts of leverage can change outcomes (as the Israeli lobby AIPAC has shown, in its path to dominating Congress and regional/local US politics), and over the years the British were able control and align India to the British crown. Less than 10,000 English controlled colonial India, which at that time had a population of 300 million.

It is instructive to note that while there were relatively few white Englishmen, a class of local “brown sahibs” was developed, to actually run things. This elite class was educated in English ways, and rewarded monetarily and through social stature. Britain was too small a country to ultimately matter by itself, but by leveraging India the English could pursue their global ambitions. India was the “Jewel in the (British) Crown”.

Today, Israel has effective control of US policy in the Mideast, and similar goals. Much has already been written about Israel’s control of Congress. Israel is now edging towards control over the US Executive Branch, with both presidential candidates supported by billionaires whose #1 agenda is Israel (Saban and Adelson). The Supreme Court will be one-third Jewish, and justices have community ties and families. As Israel demonstrated through its successful intimidation of Judge Goldstone, jurists are human and everyone has their price.

Israel’s “occupation force” in the US has long included AIPAC as well as the dense network of community organizations at the State and local levels. Through relationships that have been developed over years and with unlimited funds at their disposal, the “Israel Lobby” ensures that votes go the right way, and that opponents are squashed when Israel demands unity. In 2003 at the onset of George Bush’s Iraq war this occupation force was multiplied through the inclusion of Christian Zionists.

Critics of the Israel Lobby are marginalized by whatever means available, including being called anti-Semitic. The Lobby has been effective in securing massive aid packages for Israel even though Israel’s per-capita GDP exceeds that of several European nations. Israeli insiders permeate the US government, and it is US policy that there be “no light” between the countries so that where Israel is concerned there is no debate. Israel’s top priorities are the top priorities of the US. There are of course instances where this does not happen (such as, Iran) but the direction points to a tighter colonial noose in the years ahead.

The media matters: establishing beliefs and narratives

The colonizer must be a “Sacred Object” above criticism or objective review, and dangerous critics must be either destroyed or marginalized. No Englishman in India spoke of the mother country and its ways with anything other than reverence, even though during periods of the British Raj England was in turmoil. Within England there was a free press and active debate; but this was not permitted in India, about Britain. The only acceptable posture was that of reverence.

Today Israel has a free press, and it is easy to read translations of the Hebrew language press. Israeli commentators compare Netanyahu to Hitler, Israel is called a racist apartheid state based on evidence, and the extreme violence against and ongoing abuse of Palestinians is well documented. But, these same conversations are forbidden in the US. No newspaper would report them, nor are they permitted in polite company. Transgressors are labeled anti-Semitic, whether Jewish or not.

In the US today, boycotts are seen as a permitted non-violent form of free speech. Citizens have the right to boycott whatever they want from wherever they want without risk of penalty. The sole exception is Israel.


The British conquests were “for God and country”, and therefore justified. The British were superior, the natives inferior. This setup the moral justification for the mayhem wrought by the British as they colonized Asia and the Mideast. At that time, all men were not born equal, and it took the US Constitution to establish that self-evident fact.

Israel is seeking to revert to those days, by acting as though Arab lives are inferior, and (more recently) promoting Islamophobia to serve their Christian Zionism wing. In 2003, uber Zionist Bernard Lewis posed as “Arab expert” and advised president Bush that the only language Arabs understood was force. This helped to justify the attack on Iraq, as part of a neocon plan to “creatively destroy” the sovereign Arab states in Israel’s neighborhood, to facilitate Israel’s dominance. The Nazis at Nuremberg were shown greater respect than Saddam and his Ba’at leadership, and the contempt for Arabs was in full display.

Today, Israeli Jews are in the process of destroying Palestinian society and erasing Palestinian culture, with impunity. Churches and mosques are both being destroyed, though Israel would prefer to keep the spotlight on mosques, to fan a religious war between Islam on one side, and Christians and Jews on the other.

While the Israeli press records and debates Israel’s bad behavior, Americans are forbidden to publicly debate Israeli behavior critically.

Three Recent Examples:

1/ During the Congressional debate around the Iran deal president Obama had negotiated, Senator Chuck Schumer said he would vote “against”…not because of any independent analysis, but because this is what Netanyahu wanted. In other words, he publically said that he would follow the Israeli prime ministers’ direction, over that of his own president. Because, as he said, he was “guardian of Israel”.

A sitting US senator proclaimed allegiance to a foreign country, and nobody asked him to resign!

2/ The Israeli Prime Minister addresses the full US Congress to lobby against the Iran nuclear deal. When the deal does go through, Israel demands more US aid! And, is likely to get it. One can try various definitions of “blackmail” to see which one fits.

The US president is impotent in dealing with Israel. The so-called “pro Israel lobby” effectively functions like an agent of Israel. The Israel lobby is playing the role of the East India Company, in Britain’s colonization of India.

3/ The Israel Lobby interferes massively in US foreign policy in the region. The “mainstream” media such as NYT spins events to reflect Israel’s views (bureau chiefs are typically Jewish and resident in Israel). The Iraq war cost $1 trillion+ and cost thousands of US lives, created ISIS, and was pushed by the Lobby. Israel benefits from the distraction.

The colonization of the US by Israel is becoming increasingly explicit. It is now increasingly seen as “normal” to have a double standard: one for Israel, another for the rest of the world. The boycott-Israel movement is an example of that: you can boycott anything or anyone, but not Israel. This is true power, and the face of colonization.
IsraeliColonizationUS  Israel 
5 weeks ago
Death of Free Speech: Criticizing Israel Will Land You in Prison By Kurt Nimmo Global Research, April 18, 2019
Soon, this blog will be illegal.

No, I’m not selling drugs or peddling child pornography. I write about America’s wars and the primary objective of those illegal and immoral wars—to make Israel the hegemon of the Middle East along with Saudi Arabia. All US foreign policy in that region centers on those two nations.

The following may soon be classified as hate speech and anti-semitism (as increasingly criticism of the Jewish state and its Zionist political ideology are considered crimes).

Jewish neocons found their way into the Reagan administration and later the Bush Junior White House and Pentagon. Huddled under the wing of Vice President Dick Cheney, they plotted to attack and destroy Israel’s enemies. Neocon ideologues strategized and published papers on these manufactured wars, most notably a paper presented to then Israeli president Bibi Netanyahu. It called for taking out Iraq and Syria. Israeli academics have written on this subject for decades. The nation’s early leaders engineered border provocations and false flag attacks (the Lavon Affair) to destabilize the region. Southern Lebanon is considered a valuable asset primarily for its water resources (e.g. “Operation Litani”) and the Golan Heights in Syria was occupied for its strategic value.

Israel, of course, is unable to destroy its enemies, so that task is left to America and its neocons. The American people were lied into a war on Iraq. Both Israel and the US knew Saddam Hussein didn’t have the capability to threaten Israel militarily. Beyond its oil, Iraq held little strategic value for the US and its corporatocracy. However, it did have the ability to cause trouble, especially in regard to the Palestinians.

Syria’s relationship with its Lebanese neighbor and its stubborn refusal to simply handover the occupied Golan to the Israelis is also a problem. It was one of several objectives behind a manufactured color revolution in Syria under the aegis of the “Arab Spring,” an objective that has thus far resulted in the murder of around 600,000 Syrians.

The Bush era neocons (including John Bolton, now national security adviser, and Elliot Abrams, a key Bush coconspirator) had an ambitious laundry list of nations to be destroyed—Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and importantly Iran, the only serious challenger to Israel. The Obama administration added Libya and began covert operations in Africa.

End Forever War? Divest Zionism. US Congress Passes Resolution which Violates Constitution
Trump took the baton from Obama after he told us he wasn’t into “nation-building” and was a populist “America First” noninterventionist. The American people were lied to again, but then this is now normal behavior.

After 9/11 and years of aggressive war propaganda, it is now common for the American people to believe these lies. Meanwhile, endless diversion in the form of super-hyper and potentially violent partisanship between factions of the establishment political class keep most Americans distracted from larger issues—war and the bankster-rigged economy. It should be noted that criticism of central banks and monetary policy are also considered hateful antisemitism.

In short, US foreign policy, directed by high-level neocons, is not conducted in the interest of the American people. It benefits Israel, which also takes billions every year from the American taxpayer.

Bush the intellectual midget was unable to provide and explanation why nuclear and biological weapons were not found in Iraq—instead, he made a comedy routine out of this “intelligence failure” and the systematic murder of eventually well over a million Iraqis. In truth, WMDs were not the reason for the invasion and occupation. The real objective was to produce violent sectarianism and division, thus making sure Iraq was preoccupied with its own serious problems and not calling for Palestinian justice. The same basic plan was reproduced in Libya, another oil-rich nation with a strong sense of pan-Arab nationalism, thus aligned with the Palestinians and regarding Israel as a renegade Zionist apartheid state.

Donald Trump’s sycophantic fawning over Israel—undoubtedly under the influence of his Orthodox Jewish son-in-law—has opened the floodgates: the US embassy moved to Jerusalem, Trump signed off on Israel’s theft of Syria’s Golan Heights, and of most value for Israel, the US under Trump is ramping up rhetoric, imposing additional sanctions, and promising military action against Iran. The latest move: Trump has designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization (and the Iranians in turn designated the US Central Command as a terrorist organization).

Such criticism of Israel will soon be illegal. Democrats and Republicans are working together to make criticism of Israel a criminal offense. South Carolina passed a law making it illegal to boycott Israel, while Florida passed legislation outlawing antisemitic thoughtcrime. Tennessee worked to pass what it calls the Anti-Semitism Awareness Bill. After this failed to gain traction, Tennessee passed a resolution declaring unequivocal support for Israel. At the same time, the US House enacted a resolution “condemning anti-Semitism” following remarks made by House freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar’s criticism of AIPAC and the influence of Israeli-American lobbying.

Now that criticism of Zionism and the Israeli state is criminal —according to the propaganda media and a manipulative ruling elite—we can expect any principled discussion of Israel, its treatment of the Palestinians, and its effort in unison with the neocons to get a shooting war going with Iran, to be punished by muzzle, fines, and possible prison time.

Remarkable or not, this situation—most prominently the disassembly of the First Amendment and another devastating war—is hardly even a minor concern for many Americans. The criminalization of speech is something that happened in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, and East Germany under the watch of the Stasi, and we were told it was impossible in America with our bounty of rights.

Those rights—rights we are born with—are now increasingly denied by law. In the near future, such laws may be used to shutdown any number of websites and social media accounts that dare criticize Israel, as that criticism—that speech—is now equivalent to violence.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site: Another Day in the Empire.

Kurt Nimmo is a frequent contributor to Global Research
KurtNimmo  Israel  BDS  BDSmovement  IsraelFirstAmendment 
5 weeks ago
Epstein Documents Released, Revealing Depths of Convicted Pedophile's Alleged Sex Trafficking Operation > Published on Friday, August 09, 2019 byCommon Dreams
This is a developing story and may be updated.

Thousands of pages of documents related to convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's trafficking of young girls were released Friday, opening the floodgates on one of the biggest scandals of 2019.

"Excellent," tweeted producer Andy Lassner. "Shine that light as bright as possible on all of it."

The documents (pdf) (pdf) (pdf), which were still being published at press time, detail years of abuse from Epstein and an alleged wide-ranging conspiracy spanning multiple countries and state, involving powerful people around the globe.

Friday's document release caps a week of news around Epstein, the reclusive money manager whose friendships with President Donald Trump, former President Bill Clinton, Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz, England's Prince Andrew, and others have fueled interest in the case. Epstein is being held in New York City.

On Wednesday, L Brands CEO Les Wexner, whose company owns Victoria's Secret and other brands and who was long connected to Epstein, claimed that Epstein had misappropriated large sums of money from Wexner and that the two had not been close since 2007.

"We discovered that he had misappropriated vast sums of money from me and my family," Wexner wrote in a letter to his charitable Wexner Foundation Community. "This was, frankly, a tremendous shock, even though it clearly pales in comparison to the unthinkable allegations against him now."

The next day, a woman who claims Epstein raped her when she was 15 asked a Manhattan court to force Epstein to reveal the name of the woman who recruited her. The recruiter's identity is needed, lawyers for Jennifer Araoz argued, because Araoz wishes to include her in a suit against Epstein.

The order came from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in July, as Courthouse News reporter Adam Klasfeld reported at the time. The ruling (pdf), written by Circuit Judge Jose Cabranes, determined that the release of the documents was in the public interest.

"We have long noted that the press plays a vital role in ensuring the public right of access and in enhancing 'the quality and safeguards the integrity of the fact-finding process,'" the July opinion reads. "When faithfully observing its best traditions, the print and electronic media 'contributes to public understanding of the rule of law' and 'validates [its] claim of functioning as surrogates for the public.'"

Documents are still being uploaded for public perusal.

But they're sure to have at least some people feeling nervous, as Klasfeld reported:

Epstein separately faces sex-trafficking charges that have heaped scrutiny on two U.S. presidents, Prince Andrew of England, and other titans from the legal, finance, scientific and business elite known to have been linked to him.

And, as Klasfeld noted on Twitter, today's dump isn't everything.

"What's been released today isn't the entire tranche that the Second Circuit ordered unsealed last month," said Klasfeld. "The majority of the unsealing will be performed by U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska on remand, but make no mistake, this is quite a flood today."
JeffreyEpstein  LolitaGate  MargaretThatcher  PedophilaNetworks 
5 weeks ago
Did Donald Trump Expose Jefferey Epstein To Florida Police Because Of A Personal Vendetta? By Scotty T. Reid 07.29.19
As the Jefferey Episten human trafficking case is in the preliminary stages of his criminal prosecution on charges related to running an alleged sex trafficking ring that preyed on unsuspecting vulnerable teens, the US press has been busy filing speculative reports about everyone ever associated with him. This includes the current US President Donald J. Trump and former US President Bill Clinton. Both men seem to have enjoyed personal relationships with Epstein that went beyond the intersection of finance and politics. It seems that Epstein and Trump shared an interest in real estate and there is chatter that a real estate deal was the source of their falling out.

Jefferey Epistien has suffered some sort of an attack while in custody that left him bruised and unconscious on the floor and given the high profile nature of case, it seems awfully suspicious to some who speculate that perhaps there are some powerful and politically connected people who want to silence Epistien hoping perhaps the prosecution would die with him.

However, a report has been filed by Chris Spargo for the DailyMail.com that according to author Michael Wolff, an associate of both men in the early 80s, the first investigation by Florida law enforcement into Jeffery Epistien’s alleged activities was on a tip from Donald Trump or someone within his employ. Perhaps this detail is shared in Fire & Fury, the book by Michael Wolff but Palm Beach police have neither confirmed nor denied thus far on what’s being reported.

President Trump in the past has hinted at having knowledge of Epistien’s alleged activities back as far as 2002 when he said in an interview with New York Magazine who was profiling Epstein,

It’s “even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,”. It is important to note that when Trump made this comment in 2002, he remained friends and a close associate of Jefferey Epstein, a relationship being revealed in articles about who the two from time to time indulged in their common liking of “beautiful women”.

However, the two would fall out with on another hard over a real estate deal. Wolff writes in Fire and Fury, Just as the enmity between the two friends increased over the house purchase, Epstein found himself under investigation by the Palm Beach police,’ writes Wolff.

Epstein apparently had informed Trump about a mansion that was going on auction and that he planned to purchase it. It is said that Epstein told Trump because he did not believe Trump had the cash flow to compete in the auction of the multimillion-dollar home. What Epstein did not know is that Trump went to Deutsche Bank to secure 41 million dollars in financing which allowed him to outbid Epstein and buy the home out from under his friend. Epstein reportedly was incensed over the matter and threatened to expose Trump’s source of finances.

After hearing of the threat, it is alleged that Trump decided to report Epstein to police over his love for beautiful women, “on the younger side”.

Spargo writes,

Trump likely had knowledge of the alleged criminal enterprise due to the fact that Epstein recruited from his private club. Two Epstein victims claim they were approached while employees of the spa at Mar-a-Lago. President Trump in turn banned Epstein from the club, but according to Wolff did not sever the friendship entirely until years later.

Was it Trump who first reported Epstein to the Palm Beach Police resulting in the criminal investigation that led to Epstein getting a sweetheart deal from the prosecution and special treatment that allowed Epstein to go to and from the jail he was to do his short sentence at will? According to Wolff, he did and that would mean Trump was not concerned about the alleged crimes committed by Epstein and rather than to turn him in to protect young women and girls, Trump turned in his friend over a personal vendetta.
JeffreyEpstein  DonaldTrump  LolitaGate 
5 weeks ago
When does the Age of Aquarius begin? Posted by Bruce McClure and Deborah Byrd in HUMAN WORLD | January 9, 2019
Astronomers and astrologers may agree that the Age of Aquarius starts when the vernal equinox point moves out of constellation Pisces and into Aquarius. But when will that be? There’s no definitive answer.
AquarianAge  PrecessionOfTheEquinoxes  LostCityExplorer 
5 weeks ago
Russiagate Is Deader Than Ever A judge has ruled it was actually fine to publish material stolen by the Russian intelligence – even if the Trump campaign had done it By Leonid Bershidsky 1 August 2019,
The ruling by U.S. District Judge John Koeltl to dismiss the Democratic National Committee’s lawsuit against Russia, the Trump campaign and others on Tuesday may look like something of an afterthought now that Robert Mueller, the special counsel, has failed to find evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Russia and Trump’s team. It is, however, anything but anticlimactic: It contains some hard truths for those still hanging on to the Trump-Russia story.

The DNC sued in April 2018, painting a picture of collusion between a Russian government eager to get Trump elected and a Trump campaign that was “a willing and active partner in this effort.” This picture, unlike Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s eventual report, was based on “connecting the dots” – an exercise in which many commentators have happily engaged since Trump won the 2016 election.

Even at the time it was filed, the DNC lawsuit was widely dismissed as a political stunt. But it also followed the example of the Democrats’ legal action against President Richard Nixon’s re-election committee after Watergate, which ended in a $750,000 settlement when Nixon resigned. Koeltl refused to penalize the DNC for suing frivolously: Indeed, the case helped him clarify some important points.

In his ruling, Koeltl, who once worked for Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox, first explained that Russia cannot be sued in a U.S. court for government actions planned in Moscow. That seems obvious, but the DNC disputed it in the lawsuit, and there’d been a lot of public indignation about Russia’s actions on U.S. soil that contravene U.S. laws. The Russian government, of course, isn’t bound by these laws any more than the U.S. government is bound by Russian laws. As things stand, the two are adversaries, and as such, they’ll do to each other what they feel they can get away with, not what the other side deems legal. Retaliation is a matter of policy rather than law.

So when Trump called on Russia to hunt for missing Hillary Clinton emails, he wasn’t really condoning illegal action, since this concept doesn’t apply to the Russian government; he was merely hinting that as president, he wouldn’t retaliate against Russia for trying to unearth the emails. From a legal point of view, it appears safer to call on Russia to do some hacking than to ask the same of a specific American hacker. One can find Trump’s call unpalatable, or accept his logic that whatever helps him win is good, but this is a political choice, not a legal dilemma.

Another point Koeltl makes is that, though it’s not OK to steal documents such as personal and work-related emails, it’s perfectly OK to disseminate and publish them under the First Amendment – as long as the disseminator isn’t also the thief. This has important implications for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, whom neither Mueller nor anyone else has accused of actually stealing the emails of DNC operatives and Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta – or, indeed, any of the classified documents WikiLeaks has published. It can be argued that he helped some of the whistle-blowers to steal files and that constitutes a crime, but in general, he shouldn’t be held responsible for publishing pilfered material.

Moreover, according to the ruling, it’s fine to ask a thief for information he’s known to have stolen. And even if Russia’s military intelligence service had sent the stolen emails directly to the Trump campaign, the campaign wouldn’t have been legally liable for publishing it.

As the 2020 presidential election approaches, any foreign government can obtain, by whatever means, compromising information about any of the candidates, hand it to the media or to the candidate’s competitors, and the media or the competitors can publish it – all without anyone being legally liable.

I can see why that can make some people uncomfortable. But there it is. Countries will spy on each other, and they’ll get their hands on information of public interest in the process. If this information is genuine, the public should get access to it. (But of course the publisher should first make sure it's not fake). And the foreign government that stole the information should suffer the consequences – for example, in the form of sanctions – unless there are political reasons not to retaliate.

The Democrats should accept the reality and play by the same rules as their opponents – who, in this case, appear to have played by the rules, such as they are.

As for Trump-Russia, the Democratic candidates appear to have made the right decision about it. During Tuesday’s debate, the word “Russia” was heard exactly twice, from Senator Amy Klobuchar, who criticized Trump for pulling out of an arms control agreement. Perhaps the story will float up again as the campaign goes on – but it should stay buried. There are more legitimate reasons to push back against President Vladimir Putin’s regime: His aggression against neighboring countries, his ruthless suppression of protest, his support of other murderous regimes, and so on. In U.S. elections, it’s the voters who decide, regardless of whether Putin helps a candidate by sharing some kompromat.
RussiaGate  DNC 
6 weeks ago
I am a Syrian Living in Syria: “It Was Never a Revolution nor a Civil War. The Terrorists Are Sent by Your Government” American People, Please Help Us > By Mark Taliano Global Research, Global Research 9 September 2016 & August 06, 2019
Two years ago, “Majd” wrote these words on a Facebook posting:
” I am Syrian… living in Syria in the middle of everything. We have seen horrors. It was never a revolution nor a civil war. The terrorists are sent by your goverment. They are al Qaeda Jabhat al Nusra Wahhabi Salafists Talibans etc and the extremist jihadists sent by the West, the Saudis, Qatar and Turkey. Your Obama and whoever is behind him or above him are supporting al Qaeda and leading a proxy war on my country.
We thought you are against al Qaeda and now you support them.
The majority here loves Assad. He has never committed a crime against his own people… The chemical attack was staged by the terrorists helped by the USA and the UK, etc. Everyone knows that here.
American soldiers and people should not be supporting barbarian al Qaeda terrorists who are killing Christians, Muslims in my country and everyone....
6 weeks ago
Bill Binney: NSA Has 32 Pages of Communications Between Seth Rich and Julian Assange 21 APR Richard Charnin April 21, 2019
From Mark F. McCarty in Medium.com: About six months ago, a blogpost by “Publius Tacitus” appeared regarding attorney Ty Clevenger’s FOIA request regarding Seth Rich:
“But now there is new information that may corroborate what the human sources quoted in the Fox article claimed about Seth’s role in getting the DNC documents to Wikileaks. Borne from a FOIA request filed in November 2017 by attorney Ty Clevenger, who requested any information regarding Seth Rich and Julian Assange. The NSA informed Clevenger in a letter dated 4 October 2018 that:

Your request has been processed under the provisions of the FOIA. Fifteen documents (32 pages) responsive to your request have been reviewed by this Agency as required by the FOIA and have found to be currently and properly classified in accordance with Executive Order 13526. These documents meet the criteria for classification as set forth in Subparagraph © of Section 1.4 and remains classified TOP SECRET and SECRET.”

Here’s what Binney says: “Ty Clevenger has FOIAed information from NSA asking for any data that involved both Seth Rich and also Julian Assange. And they responded by saying we’ve got 15 files, 32 pages, but they’re all classified in accordance with executive order 13526 covering classification, and therefore you can’t have them. That says that NSA has records of communications between Seth Rich and Julian Assange. I mean, that’s the only business that NSA is in — copying communications between people and devices”.

If Binney is interpreting this correctly — and bear in mind that, not only is he extraordinarily bright, but he is sometimes referred to as “the father of the NSA” — this provides strong support for the hypothesis that Seth was indeed Wikileaks’ source for the DNC emails it published. Assange has strongly hinted at this.
WilliamBinney  BillBinnie  Russiagate  JulianAssange  Wikileaks  SethRich 
6 weeks ago
Russiagate: The Great Tragic Comedy of Modern Journalism > Matt Bivens, MD Follow Mar 25
In its Russiagate coverage, The New York Times has repeatedly offered a graphic accusing the President’s retinue of “more than 100 contacts with Russian nationals.” This decision to question the loyalty of people who have had contact with a Russian national — so, for just knowing or meeting a Russian — has been a staple of New York Times coverage.
“More than 100 contacts with Russian nationals.” It’s incredible that this can even be an allegation — in our paper of record — there in explainer graphics almost every day, for more than two years now. It smacks of the famous Senator Joseph McCarthy speeches in the 1950s: “I have in my hand a list of 205 [or 57, or 81]…”
And yet no one ever seemed to mind.
After all, as former intelligence chief (and liar to Congress) James Clapper has asserted on television, “Russians are almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor.” Worse, I may have already been co-opted and penetrated without even knowing it! As Clapper said recently on CNN when asked if Trump could be “a Russian asset,” it is “a possibility, and I would add to that a caveat, whether witting or unwitting.”
RussiaGate  NewYorkTimes 
6 weeks ago
Lawsuit claims US aid to Israel violates nuclear pact > By JTA 12 August 2016, 7:31 pm
Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy says atomic powers who don’t sign NPT aren’t legally eligible for American money
A lawsuit filed in a US district court claims that American aid to Israel is illegal under a law passed in the 1970s that prohibits aid to nuclear powers who don’t sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Grant Smith, director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy, who filed the lawsuit Monday with a Washington DC court, said the United States has given Israel an estimated $234 billion in foreign aid since Congress in 1976 passed the International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act, with its stipulation regarding countries that did not sign the NPT, according to Courthouse News.
IsraelNUKES  Israel  NuclearWeapons 
6 weeks ago
Russian Hacking: The CIA Never Lies? By Joe Clifford December 22, 2016
Be honest now. Did you believe the US intelligence agencies when they claimed it was a “Slam Dunk” Iraq had WMD? That bit of propaganda cost 5,000 American lives, and more than a million Iraqi lives. To make matters even more horrible, 600,000 children under 5 years old died because of brutal sanctions.

They sold that war using fake, distorted evidence, and outright lies, to support their need for a war. They even introduced “forged” documents from Niger to sell the war. Tragically the US public bought it, hook line and sinker, even though there were knowledgeable people who saw through the ruse. Experts who knew the intelligence was baseless, were ignored by mainstream media, and the propaganda by government and its mouthpiece, mainstream media, went unchallenged. These intelligence agencies were the very same who did not foresee the fall of the Berlin wall until it was on the ground in pieces, nor did they see the destruction of the WTC until it too, was on the ground. And this would be the same CIA who this week, submitted a written apology to the Turkish government for making “false claims” about Turkey” oil trading with Daesh.

Now we are told the Russians interfered with our elections, but this time it is different. They don’t offer any evidence or proof whatsoever, let alone fake evidence. Their claims are based on anonymous sources, unnamed sources, and terms like “consensus view”, with not a shred of absolute proof. Based on the Iraq lies, they learned you can sell the US public anything, if you just keep repeating the lie. The “Big Lie” theory is alive and well today. If you repeat something enough, it becomes fact. The intelligence agencies refused to brief congress, and they refused to brief the electors before voting for President. Why
RussianHackers  RussiaGate  CIA 
6 weeks ago
Big Tech Massive Influence on 2016 Election 20 JUL Richard Charnin 7/20/19
Big Tech Massive Influence on 2016 Election

Dr. Robert Epstein exposes Google’s role in America’s elections. His analysis indicates that from 2.6 to 10.4 million votes were shifted to Clinton in the 2016 election by using search engine manipulation and other techniques.

Epstein has been a Research Psychologist for 30 years, He received his PhD from Harvard. His focus has been on Google and its ability to manipulate the thinking of people. Google’s search algorithm supported Clinton in 2016. In 2020, up to 15 million votes could be shifted.

Epstein is working on a system to counter Big Tech. He states that Congress needs to end the Google monopoly by declaring its database to be public.




RussiaGate  RichardCharnin  Google 
6 weeks ago
The Russian Hackers Who Didn’t Hack Anything By JIM GERAGHTY July 26, 2019 10:10 AM
Making the click-through worthwhile: A shocking New York Times headline about Russian hackers and the 2016 presidential election doesn’t quite live up to the hype; another PAC with shady spending is discovered; an important argument about college education and what kind of people society values; and an interview about writing novels and cultural paranoia....
RussiaGate  NewYorkTimes  RussianHackers 
6 weeks ago
'Russian election hack impossible': NSA veteran & whistleblower
NSA veteran and whistleblower Bill Binney says that it is technically impossible for Russia to have hacked the election and that behind-the-scenes forces within the US have fabricated the “Russian hackers” narrative from the very beginning.
Russiagate  BillBinney  RussianHackers 
6 weeks ago
Lying Bigot James Clapper Assures World The Russia Narrative He Built Is Legit > Caity Johnstone July 18, 2018
Russiagate is so weird. I went weeks without writing anything about it so I’d forgotten how breathtakingly bizarre it is. A new “BOMBSHELL” Russia story comes out every few hours (all coincidentally right before or right after the Helsinki summit, which is perfectly normal and not at all suspicious), never containing anything other than unsubstantiated assertions by the known liars and manipulators of the US intelligence community. And every time without fail my social media mentions light up with another wave of people screaming “Okay, now you definitely have to admit this is real, Caitlin Johnstone!”

If you point out that no, those are still just unsubstantiated assertions from the same secretive, shady cast of characters who’ve recently organized the decimation of Iraq, Libya and Syria based on lies, you get called a “bot” and accused of conducting psyops for the Kremlin.

“But read the indictment!” they say. “These assertions are really, really detailed!”
RussiaGate  JamesClapper 
6 weeks ago
Here Are 5 Big Holes in Mueller's Work > Here Are 5 Big Holes in Mueller's Work
Robert Mueller’s two-year, $25.2 million investigation was supposed to provide the definitive account of Donald Trump, Russia and the 2016 election. Yet even after he issued a 448-page report and testified for five hours before Congress, critical aspects remain unexplained, calling into question the basis for the probe and the decisions of those who conducted it.

Time and again in his report and his testimony, Mueller refused to address a wide range of fundamental issues, claiming they were beyond his purview. Some of the issues Mueller and his team did not clarify include whether the FBI had a sound predicate for opening a counterintelligence probe of the Trump campaign; whether the FBI knowingly relied on false material; and the links between U.S. government agencies and key figures who fueled the most explosive claims of an illicit Trump-Russia relationship. Mueller claimed that he was prevented from answering critical questions due to ongoing Justice Department reviews, one by Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham and the other by Inspector General Michael Horowitz. In the meantime, here are some of the biggest mysteries that Mueller’s team left hanging in the air.

Who Is Joseph Mifsud, and Was He the Actual Predicate for the Russia Investigation?

Mueller's pointed refusal to answer questions about Mifsud underscored that his team did not provide a plausible explanation for the incident that supposedly sparked the Russia investigation in July 2016. Mifsud is the mysterious Maltese professor who reportedly informed Trump campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos that the Russian government had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. Their conversation took place in April 2016, before the alleged hacking of Democratic Party emails was publicly known.

Joseph Mifsud: "not a Russian spy but a Western intelligence cooperator," lawyer says.
Juan Manuel Herrera/OAS via AP
About a week later, Papadopoulos reportedly mentioned Mifsud's claim to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer over a drink in London – not, as the New York Times reported, after “a night of heavy drinking.” Downer took little note of the conversation until WikiLeaks released the stolen Democratic National Committee emails in July, after which he relayed his conversation with Papadopoulos to the U.S. Embassy in London. Downer's tip made its way to the FBI, which used it to launch the "Crossfire Hurricane" probe on July 31, 2016.

Mifsud has been widely portrayed as a Russian intermediary to the Trump campaign. In a May op-ed, former FBI Director James Comey referred to him as "a Russian agent." Mueller's report did not go that far. But it insinuates that Mifsud has suspicious Russian ties by claiming he "had connections to Russia" and "maintained various Russian contacts." A close reading of that ambiguous language reveals nothing – connections to whom or what? Missing from Mueller's account – and adding to the mystery -- is the complicating fact that, as Lee Smith reported for RealClearInvestigations, Mifsud's "closest public ties are to Western governments, politicians, and institutions, including the CIA, FBI and British intelligence services."

Stephan Roh, a Swiss lawyer who has previously represented Mifsud, confirms this, saying his former client "is not a Russian spy but a Western intelligence cooperator." In a recent interview with The Hill, Roh suggested that Mifsud got involved with Papadopoulos as part of an unspecified "intel operation" to find out "whether Papadopoulos was an 'agent provocateur' seeking foreign contacts."

Even without Mifsud's suspicious – and as yet un-explained – Western ties, the FBI's origin story for Crossfire Hurricane is suspect. The tip that the FBI received from Downer was vague and devoid of any claims that Russia had obtained Hillary Clinton's emails. In a 2017 interview, Downer recalled only that Papadopoulos "mentioned the Russians might use material that they have on Hillary Clinton in the lead-up to the election, which may be damaging." (Italics added for emphasis.) Papadopoulos "didn’t say dirt; he said material that could be damaging to her. … He didn’t say what it was." Given that the FBI opened its investigation on the basis of Downer's claim about what Papadopoulos said, this is a critical admission. If Downer's memory is accurate, that means the FBI opened a nearly unprecedented counterintelligence probe of a presidential campaign on the second-hand report of a rumor that Russians – not the Trump campaign – possessed unspecified "material that could be damaging to [Clinton]."

The Mueller report acknowledges the tenuous nature of the Downer tip with qualified, ambiguous language that fails to mention the stolen emails at the heart of the Russia probe. It describes the "information [that] prompted the FBI" to open the Trump-Russia investigation as follows (italics added for emphasis):

Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of that foreign government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Putting aside the report’s misleading conflation of Papadopoulos and the Trump campaign to imply a wider web of actors, the vagueness of Mueller’s language raises the question: Is that all the FBI had? Given that Mueller did not, in fact, find evidence of a Trump-Russia conspiracy, understanding the real reasons the probe was launched seems crucial to understanding the events of 2016. But Mueller punted.

Instead of settling the question, Mueller’s failure only fueled speculation: Did the FBI egregiously overreact by launching its Trump-Russia probe on vague and ultimately fruitless information or is Mifsud himself evidence that the Russia investigation was itself a set-up launched for still unknown reasons?

What Was the Role of the Steele Dossier?

Mueller also refused to address another key driver of the Trump-Russia probe – the series of unverified and salacious opposition research memos against Trump secretly financed by the Clinton campaign and the DNC and compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele. Some Republicans believe the dossier was the real trigger of the FBI probe and that Mifsud was later used as an excuse by the FBI to cover that up once the dossier’s partisan origins were revealed. As he did with Mifsud, Mueller, who was FBI Director between 2001 and 2013, stonewalled the many Republican efforts to press him on this topic.

Christopher Steele: described as "Source #1" and "credible."
Victoria Jones/PA via AP
Although the full extent of the FBI's reliance on the Steele dossier remains unclear, what has already been publicly confirmed is damning. In the fall of 2016, the FBI cited the Steele dossier to obtain a surveillance warrant on Carter Page, giving it a “two-hop” surveillance window into the Trump campaign. In Page's FISA warrant, the FBI said it "believes that [Russia's] efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with" the Trump campaign. Steele is then described as "Source #1" and "credible." A footnote in the FISA application states the “FBI speculates” that Steele was hired by people “likely looking for information that could be used to discredit [Trump's] campaign” but did not disclose that Trump's political rivals – the DNC and the Clinton campaign – were paying him.

The fact that the FBI did not tell the court everything it knew about the dossier’s origins and that it relied on salacious claims paid for by Trump's opponent to spy on a member of Trump's campaign is a scandal in itself. But that did not interest Mueller. Nor did Mueller and his team address the bizarre intersection between the firm that hired Steele, Fusion GPS, and one of the key Russian figures who fueled claims of a Trump-Russia conspiracy, Natalya Veselnitskaya. On the days before and after she attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting in June 2016 – based on the false offer of Russian dirt on Clinton -- the Russian attorney had dinner with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson. Veselnitskaya worked for the Russian gas firm Prevezon, which had hired Fusion GPS to help it fight the Magnitsky Act sanctions against some highly placed Russians allegedly connected to the death of a Russian whistleblower. The Mueller report omits Veselnitskaya's relationship with Fusion GPS and instead describes her as someone who "previously worked for the Russian government and maintained a relationship with that government throughout this period of time."

When several Republican lawmakers pressed Mueller on whether he investigated the Fusion GPS-Veselnitskaya connection, he responded that it was "outside my purview."

Why Did the Mueller Team Invent the Polling Data Theory About Konstantin Kilimnik, and Omit His U.S. Ties?

Konstantin Kilimnik: Mueller team was well aware of countervailing information.
AP Photo
Mueller also refused to answer critical questions about his report's portrayal of Konstantin Kilimnik. The longtime business associate of Trump’s one-time campaign manager, Paul Manafort, became central to the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory as a result of the Mueller team's own innuendo. In January 2019, Mueller accused Manafort of lying about sharing Trump campaign polling data with Kilimnik during the 2016 campaign. According to Mueller, the FBI had assessed that Kilimnik has an unspecified "relationship with Russian intelligence." In court, Mueller deputy Andrew Weissmann repeated that ambiguous claim and tacked on a piece of tantalizing flourish: "This goes to the larger view of what we think is going on, and what we think is the motive here. This goes, I think, very much to the heart of what the special counsel’s office is investigating." Weissmann's comments fueled widespread speculation – and even confident assertions – that Kilimnik had passed … [more]
RussiaGate  RussianHackers  RobertMueller 
6 weeks ago
JULY 19, 2019 All Seemed Possible When the Sandinistas Took Power 40 years Ago by PETE DOLACK
This week marks the 40th anniversary of the Sandinistas taking power in Nicaragua, a milestone that merits celebration regardless of our opinions on how the Sandinista Revolution evolved. Nor should the hand of United States imperialism in distorting that revolution be ignored — the huge cost exacted by the U.S.-directed and -funded Contras totaled more than four years of Nicaragua’s gross domestic product.

Just as many of the tactics the U.S. government and those on its payroll are using in its all-out economic war against Venezuela replicate what was done to Chile during the era of Salvador Allende (including blowing up power plants to cause widespread blackouts), there are parallels with U.S. tactics against the Sandinistas. Pressuring opposition parties to boycott elections, then declaring those elections fraudulent, was a tactic used by the Reagan administration in 1984, just as the Trump administration is doing in Venezuela today following the attempts to delegitimize the Bolivarian Revolution by the Bush II/Cheney and Obama administrations.

Another parallel between the Bolivarian Revolution of the past 20 years and the Sandinista Revolution of the 1980s is the creation of a mixed economy. The intention of the Sandinistas was to build a mixed economy, one with socialist elements but that would leave much of the economy in the hands of Nicaragua’s big capitalists. The Bolivarian Revolution, although intended to progress toward a not necessarily strongly defined “socialism for the 21st century,” has struggled to advance beyond a stage of ameliorating the conditions of capitalism, although by any reasonable standard Venezuela does considerably more there than any so-called “social democratic” government has done.

The bottom line, however is this: Even when political power is taken out of the hands of a country’s capitalists, if economic power is left in those hands, that economic power will eventually enable the holders of that power (industrialists and bankers) to wrest control of the economy and ultimately force the government to bend to their will. That happened in Nicaragua — ultimately, the devastation wrought by the Contras, the financial blockade imposed by the U.S. and the contradictions arising from the Sandinistas giving ever more concessions and subsidies to Nicaragua’s capitalists resulted in the Sandinista government imposing an austerity program reminiscent of those imposed by the International Monetary Fund, excepting the dubious value of the IMF or World Bank loans.

All of that would be years in the future after the takeover. On July 17, 1979, dictator Anastasio Somoza Debayle fled the country after years of waging war on his country and muscling in on so many businesses that even some of Nicaragua’s bourgeoisie wanted him gone. Years of tireless work by Sandinista militants, often at the risk of their lives, led to that day. Two days later, on July 19, the Sandinistas marched triumphantly into Managua, the capital, having already captured control of much the country in the late stages of the insurrection.

Nonetheless, in the early years the Sandinistas made good on most of the promises they had put forth in their 1969 Historical Program. Nor should the vast array of problems left behind by the Somoza dictatorship be forgotten. The following excerpt from It’s Not Over: Learning From the Socialist Experiment discusses the new revolutionary government’s struggles with restarting a shattered economy, meeting the expectations of its millions of supporters and attempting to keep industrialists from stripping their businesses of assets while seeking to create a democracy deeper than what is possible in capitalist countries and simultaneously preparing to defend itself against the inevitable counterattack from the U.S. government.


New government begins process of rebuilding, with strains showing early

The nature of the enormous problems the Sandinistas faced had similarities to what the young Soviet Union faced in the early 1920s. A revolution had succeeded at enormous cost, with a civil war fought savagely by the revolution’s opponents wreaking staggering economic damage; the revolution faced hostile, much stronger foreign powers; the country was dependent on agricultural exports and could adjust that dependency only with difficulty and at the risk of potentially wrenching changes internally; expanding a small industrial sector was desirable but a goal for which the fulfillment would be partly in contradiction to its agricultural base; and a population that had lived in miserable poverty expected its material needs and wants to be met faster than the country’s shattered material base was capable of doing. Somehow these problems had to be solved by men and women with energy and determination but a lack of administrative experience.

Nicaragua’s militants who had participated in the revolution and found themselves in responsible positions upon the revolution’s victory had no experience in the affairs of state, because they had been shut out of public participation, and if their attempts at organizing became known to Somoza’s authorities, the prisons and torture chambers of the National Guard awaited.

So mistakes, many of them, were made in the early days of the revolution. How could it be otherwise? It is not remarkable that the Sandinistas made mistakes; what it remarkable is their willingness to learn from them and often correct them, sometimes effecting sharp reversals of bad policies.

The early Bolshevik cadres, similarly, couldn’t help but make mistakes when they were placed in responsible positions, having also been shut out of societal participation. But that is enough comparison; it would be too easy to overgeneralize and there were more differences than commonalities between the Soviet Union of the early 1920s and Nicaragua at the end of the 1970s. And the Sandinistas certainly carried out policies drastically different than did the Bolsheviks, having the experience of many revolutions from which to learn, but also having carried out a revolution on their own terms, with a mix of ideologies and strategies rooted in their own and their country’s historical experience. They could not have led a successful revolution otherwise.

And the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) did it with much help from inside the country, and very little from outside the country.

The Soviet Union’s theorists had consistently held the position that conditions were nowhere near ripe for a revolution in Central America, and because challenging official dogma in the Soviet Union was anathema, that viewpoint could not in those years be challenged. Indeed, the Soviet Union, since Stalin’s assumption of power, had opposed revolutions everywhere. True, it did use the Red Army to impose régimes in Central Europe, but that, too, went against the spirit of Marxism that believes revolutions can only be made by a people themselves, not imposed from outside. Stalin opposed home-grown communist revolutions in China, Yugoslavia and Greece — counseling revolutionary leaders to stop and instead back their nationalist capitalists in the first two and refusing to lift a finger for the third when its revolution was drowned in blood by the United Kingdom. All of Stalin’s successors held fast to this refusal to back revolutions elsewhere; partly this was out of ideological rigidity tinged with a lack of confidence in other peoples, but perhaps more it reflected a desire to maintain peace with the capitalist West at any cost.

Tomás Borge, the only FSLN founder who lived to see the revolution, spoke frankly during an interview conducted eight years after the Sandinistas took power. “Since it was not easy to see the prospects for such a change — even revolutionary forces in the world had not grasped the imminence of victory and had adopted a rather indifferent attitude — we did not receive support during the war from any of the socialist countries, except Cuba,” Borge said, without judgment.

“The Soviet Union and others did not support us because they believed that only the Latin American Communist parties were the representatives of revolutionary changes, and it was not possible for them to think otherwise at that time. They had been through a whole series of experiences, developing ideas in distant countries that divorced them from particular realities. … I am not blaming those countries, simply pointing out an objective fact. … It cannot be said — in that idiotic language that is sometimes used — that Nicaragua’s revolution was the fruit of Moscow gold. Not even the Soviets, the Soviet revolutionaries, believed in revolutionary change in Nicaragua. So how were they going to help us!”

Official commentary in the Soviet Union’s leading theoretical journal stressed the prevailing viewpoint that armed struggle was hopeless and that Latin Americans should use peaceful tactics while participating in broad coalitions — a view echoed by the head of the El Salvador Communist Party, who went so far as to call those who advocated armed struggle “nihilists.”

The behavior of the Moscow-aligned Nicaraguan Socialist Party can best be explained in this context. The party was a participant in the Sandinista governing structure, but less than two months after the FSLN took power, it issued a formal resolution calling on the FSLN to

“be sensitive to the demands and interests of the capitalist class allies. Putting aside or neglecting those interests, in the name of excessive revolutionary radicalism, will not only lead to losing those allies but will strengthen the counter-revolution. … [T]his revolution must be conducted in such a way as to prevent the influence of tendencies seeking to skip stages or leap arbitrarily over the necessary stages and their corresponding transformations.”

Overall, a statement quite consistent with the Nicaraguan Socialists’ long-standing resistance to revolution. The … [more]
SandinistaRevolution  Nicaragua  RussianRevolution  Cuba  TomasBorge 
7 weeks ago
Play New MH17 Doc Reveals Evidence Tampering, Dutch Cover-up of Forged Recordings, Hidden Ukrainian Radar Records John Helmer Dances with Bears Sun, 21 Jul 2019
A new documentary film by Max van der Werff, the leading independent investigator of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 disaster, has revealed breakthrough evidence of tampering and forging of prosecution materials; suppression of Ukrainian Air Force radar tapes; and lying by the Dutch, Ukrainian, US and Australian governments. An attempt by agents of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to take possession of the black boxes of the downed aircraft is also revealed by a Malaysian National Security Council official for the first time.

The sources of the breakthrough are Malaysian — Prime Minister of Malaysia Mohamad Mahathir; Colonel Mohamad Sakri, the officer in charge of the MH17 investigation for the Prime Minister's Department and Malaysia's National Security Council following the crash on July 17, 2014; and a forensic analysis by Malaysia's OG IT Forensic Services of Ukrainian Secret Service (SBU) telephone tapes which Dutch prosecutors have announced as genuine.

The 298 casualties of MH17 included 192 Dutch; 44 Malaysians; 27 Australians; 15 Indonesians. The nationality counts vary because the airline manifest does not identify dual nationals of Australia, the UK, and the US.

The new film throws the full weight of the Malaysian Government, one of the five members of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT), against the published findings and the recent indictment of Russian suspects reported by the Dutch officials in charge of the JIT; in addition to Malaysia and The Netherlands, the members of the JIT are Australia, Ukraine and Belgium. Malaysia's exclusion from the JIT at the outset, and Belgium's inclusion (4 Belgian nationals were listed on the MH17 passenger manifest), have never been explained.

The film reveals the Malaysian Government's evidence for judging the JIT's witness testimony, photographs, video clips, and telephone tapes to have been manipulated by the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU), and to be inadmissible in a criminal prosecution in a Malaysian or other national or international court.

For the first time also, the Malaysian Government reveals how it got in the way of attempts the US was organizing during the first week after the crash to launch a NATO military attack on eastern Ukraine. The cover story for that was to rescue the plane, passenger bodies, and evidence of what had caused the crash. In fact, the operation was aimed at defeating the separatist movements in the Donbass, and to move against Russian-held Crimea.

The new film reveals that a secret Malaysian military operation took custody of the MH17 black boxes on July 22, preventing the US and Ukraine from seizing them. The Malaysian operation, revealed in the film by the Malaysian Army colonel who led it, eliminated the evidence for the camouflage story, reinforcing the German Government's opposition to the armed attack, and forcing the Dutch to call off the invasion on July 27.

The 28-minute documentary by Max van der Werff and Yana Yerlashova has just been released. Watch it in full here.
MH17Shootdown  Malasia  Ukraine  JohnPaolillo 
8 weeks ago
What Is The “Croatian Scenario” And Why Russia Will Never Let It Happen (DISTRESSING IMAGES)
Ever since the start of the war in Ukraine in 2014, Ukrainian officials have been talking about the vaunted “Croatian scenario”. But what is the “Croatian scenario” and why are there so many parallels drawn between Ukraine and Novorussia on one hand, and between Croatia and Republic of Serbian Krajina on the other?

To answer this question, we have to go back to the root cause – the rise of Fascism and Nazism and their immediate consequence – the Second World War.

Croatia during the Second World War
Croatia  WorldWar2  Ukraine  Russia 
8 weeks ago
Jul 20, 2019 79 The 2001 Anthrax Deception An Overview of the Book by Graeme MacQueen Antony C. Black
If the notion that, ‘truth always lies 180 degrees opposite to the direction pointed by the corporate media’ is not yet a modern maxim, it should be. A useful corollary might be added to the effect that, ‘the depth to which an event is consigned to the establishment memory hole is inversely related to its actual significance’.

Such an event is the occasion of the October, 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, for coming close upon the heels of those of 9/11, the anthrax attacks of early October seemed to stamp with the imprimatur of destiny itself the coming of a new age, a new ‘clash of civilizations’, and, of course, a new conflictual modality, ‘The Global War on Terror’. It is ironic then that barely a decade later the entire episode should be so completely forgotten as almost never to have happened.

So what did happen?

The bald facts – as detailed by author Graeme MacQueen – are these:

From early October until November 20, some twenty-two people became infected by anthrax spores contained in letters sent through the US public mail system. Of these five died. A number of letters containing the spores were sent to several major news organizations and two were sent to the offices of US Senators Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy.

The US Administration immediately laid blame for the attacks at the door of Al Qaeda – and, significantly, Iraq, even though the latter had in no way been implicated in the 9/11 attacks themselves.

A number of crude ‘Islamic’ propaganda letters also accompanied some of the anthrax mailings. As it turned out, these proved so crude as to convince virtually no one, but rather as to suggest blatant fraud. Even more problematic was that the ordained authorities chose early on to push the notion that the spores had physical characteristics whose provenance could only be that of Iraq....
911AnthraxAttacks  911GraemeMacQueen 
8 weeks ago
Prosecutor in 2009 Epstein Case Said Donald Trump Was the ONLY ONE Who Helped Him Joe Hoft by Joe Hoft July 7, 2019
Prosecuting attorney Bradley Edwards was interviewed in December 2018 in Palm Beach, Florida shortly after settling a court case he had with billionaire Jeffrey Epstein.
Question from reporter: Our current President has had relationships with Epstein in the past and there are those, Katy Johnson and maybe other victims who’ve accused Trump of being involved in things like this.

In my experience, Trump supporters will not listen to anything along those lines. Obviously we’re not in the court of law here right now, but are those claims, although that case was dropped, it was dropped before it went to court. In your opinion as a lawyer, in your experience is there anything you can say as to the validity of those claims and whether there will be anything more about that?

Edwards: Nothing at all. The only thing that I can say about President Trump is that he is the only person who, in 2009 when I served a lot of subpoenas on a lot of people, or at least gave notice to some pretty connected people, that I want to talk to them, is the only person who picked up the phone and said, let’s just talk. I’ll give you as much time as you want. I’ll tell you what you need to know, and was very helpful, in the information that he gave, and gave no indication whatsoever that he was involved in anything untoward whatsoever, but had good information. That checked out and that helped us and we didn’t have to take a deposition of him in 2009.

Reporter: Do you have any information on James Patterson’s claims that Trump had Epstein kicked out of Mar-a-logo?

Edwards: I definitely have heard that. I definitely have heard that and I don’t know if it was Trump himself as opposed to a manager…
JeffreyEpstein  DonaldTrump  BradleyEdwards  LolitaGate 
8 weeks ago
What Mueller won't find Submitted by Bob In Portland on Tue, 06/12/2018 - 2:23pm
In the 1950s, when the science fiction genre started making itself felt in movies, there was always the pivotal scene where the protagonist discovers the dark secret but no one will believe him: a flying saucer hidden under the sand in a field, truckloads of pod people to replace real people, or that the friendly aliens' book "To Serve Man" wasn't a guide to helping humans, but a cookbook. It's that moment of sudden realization that no one will believe the hero because it sounds too crazy to believe.

Granted, to the uninitiated, coming to a realization so shocking and threatening to your current mental construction of the world can appear like paranoia. It becomes a question of the discoverer's knowledge and senses over what everyone else believes. Everyone else seems to be allowing him or herself to be absorbed into the great growing evil.

Today many of us, certainly readers here at Caucus99, are finding ourselves in similar positions. Our political structure is a lie, the people who are supposed to represent us and our interests don't, our law enforcement protects the property of the rich, not our lives, and often are in cahoots with the criminals from whom we are supposed to be protected. I am sure that many of our old friends and acquaintances have been alienated from some of us here when we began talking about Hillary's track record during the Presidential campaign, for example. In our current pasteboard world, if you are a Republican or Democrat you must assume that your designated political party, maybe with a couple of exceptions, are there to look after you.

And there that crazy friend goes, yelling about cookbooks.

I suppose my introduction to the corruption of those in power, at thirteen, was the assassination of JFK. Not actually the assassination, but the murder of Oswald two days later, in the basement of the Dallas police headquarters. I had slept overnight at a friend's and we came back from shooting basketballs to watch the transfer of Oswald to another facility. That was the moment that I realized all wasn't what it seemed. But, like most kids my age, the Beatles came along in a month or so and I was swept into the world of rock and roll, which kept me occupied until I began noticing girls. Until 1968. I was still noticing girls and rock and roll, but I was also noticing the number of progressives being gunned down by "lone nuts". And I was noticing Vietnam.

I'm not sharing this to explain to you how I became (that loathsome term) a "conspiracy theorist". I just want to explain to you that the democracy of the United States, and all the characters running across the stage in Washington, D.C., are the cookbook.

I wrote an essay here back in April of 2017 explaining how the Russiagate scandal had been designed to give Hillary Clinton a casus belli for her future war against Russia, and that what we were seeing since she lost has been a recycling of it to get Trump in line with the goals of the Deep State. So far nothing much has happened that has moved me from that belief. Now that the Deep State seems to have persuaded our Dear Leader that he can go on being himself as long as he understands the actual hierarchy and doesn't get in the way the Deep State, everything seems to be back on track. At least until Donald's next tweet.

But in order to understand the depth of criminality in our system one has to understand how things are done. After World War II a lot of social awareness began putting pressure on the old system that had driven the world into the Great Depression. FDR had demonstrated that the government could look out for the poor, could give them jobs when there were no other jobs to be had. The GI Bill sent millions of vets to college and helped to create the middle class we used to have. Unions had real power in negotiating wages and terms of service. Government could create a system to help the elderly. The African Americans, coming back home from fighting a war against fascism, refused go to the coloreds only water fountains. In short, the United States were in for some growing pains.

What happened? As I mentioned above there was a rash of murders of progressive political candidates and leaders in the sixties. But in order for the forces behind a return to the old rules to keep a lid on any revolutions there had to be something better than shooting every progressive who raised his head above the lectern. Thus the wave of recruitment of agents and assets in the late sixties by the CIA, FBI and other agencies. Although I didn't know it directly at the time, arriving on campus in 1968 it was evident that there was a "presence" of people looking over the shoulders of student activists.

Which brings me to another great revelation. It's not just politicians and political parties that are serving the Deep State. Any agency that can be corrupted by power will be, eventually.

Which brings us to the courts.

There are certain things that must be preserved for a ruling class to remain legitimate in the eyes of the public. Some people don't think much beyond the flag. But there are other things. The media is better than ever at keeping uncomfortable truths from the majority of Americans. But what happens where the criminality of the Deep State collides with our judicial system?

Let me introduce you to the man of the hour in Washington, Robert Swann Mueller III. Robert was born into the upper crust in our American class system. At one point in his education in private schools John Kerry was a classmate. (Kerry was also a fellow Bonesman with the Bushes.) Mueller met his eventual bride, Ann Cabell Standish, at one of the dances they attended. They married in 1966, three years after John Kennedy's assassination. If you have read much about the JFK assassination you would recognize her middle name. Her grandfather, Charles Cabell, had been second in command at the CIA when John Kennedy was elected President. In the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs fiasco, Kennedy fired three men from leadership positions at the CIA: Director Allen Dulles, Cabell and Richard Bissell. Charles Cabell was Ann's grandfather. Her grand uncle, Earle Cabell, was the mayor of Dallas at the time of Kennedy's murder there. Recently declassified JFK documents revealed that Mayor Cabell was also an asset of the CIA at the time. Small world. You could say that Mueller married into the CIA, except that his great uncle was Richard Bissell. So between his family and his wife's family Mueller had two of the three people that Kennedy fired before he was assassinated by a "lone nut", as well as the mayor who hosted the assassination. The third man fired was Allen Dulles, who sat on the Warren Commission and managed to keep the CIA out of the investigation into JFK's murder. Perhaps Dulles was a guest at the wedding.

Soon thereafter Mueller decided to go to Vietnam because, he said, a classmate had died there and patriotism and so forth. He became an officer and eventually ended up as an aide-de-camp for the 3rd Marine Division's commanding general, General William K. Jones. Something else was going on in Vietnam. The CIA had installed its Phoenix Program. I cannot do justice to the Phoenix Program and won't considering Doug Valentine's work on it is available for everyone, but the Phoenix Program was the CIA's attempt to totally control the Vietnamese population. Besides massacres of villages, the program assassinated suspected leaders and spies for the Vietcong, coerced others into being their agents, and kept up files on all the relevant Vietnamese down to the village level. Like in later wars, the CIA incorporated torture, murder and psychological techniques in order to control their targets. As an aide-de-camp to a commanding Marine general, there is no way that Mueller didn't know about the Phoenix Program. He probably saw daily briefings.

When he came back to the US he studied law and quickly became a federal prosecutor.

One of the things to mark his career was to deny a pardon to Patty Hearst for her part in the whole Symbionese Liberation Army's "terror" campaign. What did the SLA have to do with anything? A short history: Donald DeFreeze, a small-time criminal in Los Angeles agreed to become an informant for the LAPD in order to stay out of jail. After awhile he got tired of ratting out others and asked to get out of the program. Instead, DeFreeze was incarcerated at the Vacaville Medical Facility for criminally insane prisoners in the California penal system. There DeFreeze met Colston Westbrook who gave classes for the "Black Cultural Association", an experimental behavior modification unit inside the prison. Who was Westbrook? He was a CIA agent, trained in psychological warfare and part of the Phoenix Program. DeFreeze was modified by Westbrook and company for two years. Soon thereafter, he was transferred to Soledad Prison, from which he "escaped" and became the infamous "Cinque". Then came the Symbionese Liberation Army, a caricature of a black militant group filled with mostly white people with military backgrounds. The murder of Marcus Foster, a progressive black leader in the San Francisco East Bay, was done by white men in blackface, according to eyewitnesses. The SLA claimed credit for it. The SLA kidnapped Hearst, subjected her to torture, rape, sensory deprivation and mind control tactics, just like the CIA did in the Phoenix Program in Vietnam. Then came the bank robberies.

I bring up the Patty Hearst case because, in 2000, decades after her prison sentence had been commuted, Mueller still opposed her pardon. Guess what he didn't notice when he rejected her pardon? This has been his pattern throughout his career. We'll return to Patty Hearst shortly.

Mueller has presided over many cases where it's been important for the prosecutor to overlook the fingerprints of the CIA. He prosecuted what was known in the San Francisco Bay Area as the "drug tug" case which had connections to an island in Panama. It was a drug smuggling case and had tentacles into things like … [more]
RobertCarlMiller  RobertMueller  JFKassassination  PanAm103  Libya 
8 weeks ago
The complete list of alternatives to all Google products Parallel universe for the super security conscious By Sven Taylor on June 29, 2019
With growing concerns over online privacy and securing personal data, more people than ever are considering alternatives to Google products. After all, Google’s business model essentially revolves around data collection and advertisements, both of which infringe on your privacy. More data means better (targeted) ads and more revenue. The company pulled in over $116 billion in ad revenue last year alone – and that number continues to grow.
Editor’s Note:
Guest author Sven Taylor is the editor behind Restore Privacy, a blog dedicated to inform about best online privacy practices, secure your electronic devices, unblock restricted content and defeat censorship.
But the word is getting out. A growing number of people are seeking alternatives to Google products that respect their privacy and data. This guide aims to be the most exhaustive resource available for documenting alternatives to Google product. So let’s get started (in no particular order or preference)...
GOOGLEalternatives  SearchEngines  Email  CHROMEalternatives 
10 weeks ago
Master Coop Directory Service Listing
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
West Virginia
Northern Ireland
United Kingdom
FoodCo-ops  FoodCooperatives  GreenStarCoop 
11 weeks ago
The truth about Israel, Zionists & the Khazarian Rothschild banking dynasty December 7, 2017 by The truth about Israel, Zionists & the Khazarian Rothschild banking dynasty December 7, 2017by Michael Aydinian
If only people realised just how ludicrous the accusation of being anti-Semitic is. The dawning realisation quickly reveals the ungodly level of media complicity & the fact media barons have a vested interest to keep the public oblivious. The continued success of Zionists & those wishing to establish a New World Order depends on maintaining outrageous deceptions like this. You can be sure there are a whole host of them but this one’s about as gut-wrenching as it gets. The truth is, around 80% of Israelis, including each & every one of their Prime Ministers, originated from KHAZARIA. Since this region is in Eastern Europe, it remains unequivocal – these people are void of Hebrew blood & so have no ancestral rights whatsoever to any land in the Middle East....
Khazaria  Khazars  AshkenaziJews  Israel  Judaism  Anti-Semitism 
11 weeks ago
Silverglate: How Robert Mueller Tried To Entrap Me > By Harvey Silverglate October 17, 2017
Is special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, appointed in mid-May to lead the investigation into suspected ties between Donald Trump’s campaign and various shady (aren’t they all?) Russian officials, the choirboy that he’s being touted to be, or is he more akin to a modern-day Tomas de Torquemada, the Castilian Dominican friar who was the first Grand Inquisitor in the 15th Century Spanish Inquisition?

Given the rampant media partisanship since the election, one would think that Mueller’s appointment would lend credibility to the hunt for violations of law by candidate, now President Trump and his minions.

But I have known Mueller during key moments of his career as a federal prosecutor. My experience has taught me to approach whatever he does in the Trump investigation with a requisite degree of skepticism or, at the very least, extreme caution.

When Mueller was the acting United States Attorney in Boston, I was defense counsel in a federal criminal case in which a rather odd fellow contacted me to tell me that he had information that could assist my client. He asked to see me, and I agreed to meet. He walked into my office wearing a striking, flowing white gauze-like shirt and sat down across from me at the conference table. He was prepared, he said, to give me an affidavit to the effect that certain real estate owned by my client was purchased with lawful currency rather than, as Mueller’s office was claiming, the proceeds of illegal drug activities.

My secretary typed up the affidavit that the witness was going to sign. Just as he picked up the pen, he looked at me and said something like: “You know, all of this is actually false, but your client is an old friend of mine and I want to help him.” As I threw the putative witness out of my office, I noticed, under the flowing white shirt, a lump on his back – he was obviously wired and recording every word between us.

Years later I ran into Mueller, and I told him of my disappointment in being the target of a sting where there was no reason to think that I would knowingly present perjured evidence to a court. Mueller, half-apologetically, told me that he never really thought that I would suborn perjury, but that he had a duty to pursue the lead given to him. (That “lead,” of course, was provided by a fellow that we lawyers, among ourselves, would indelicately refer to as a “scumbag.”)

This experience made me realize that Mueller was capable of believing, at least preliminarily, any tale of criminal wrongdoing and acting upon it, despite the palpable bad character and obviously questionable motivations of his informants and witnesses. (The lesson was particularly vivid because Mueller and I overlapped at Princeton, he in the Class of 1966 and me graduating in 1964.)

Years later, my wariness toward Mueller was bolstered in an even more revelatory way. When he led the criminal division of the U.S. Department of Justice, I arranged in December 1990 to meet with him in Washington. I was then lead defense counsel for Dr. Jeffrey R. MacDonald, who had been convicted in federal court in North Carolina in 1979 of murdering his wife and two young children while stationed at Fort Bragg. Years after the trial, MacDonald (also at Princeton when Mueller and I were there) hired me and my colleagues to represent him and obtain a new trial based on shocking newly discovered evidence that demonstrated MacDonald had been framed in part by the connivance of military investigators and FBI agents. Over the years, MacDonald and his various lawyers and investigators had collected a large trove of such evidence.

The day of the meeting, I walked into the DOJ conference room, where around the table sat a phalanx of FBI agents. My three colleagues joined me. Mueller walked into the room, went to the head of the table, and opened the meeting with this admonition, reconstructed from my vivid and chilling memory: “Gentlemen: Criticism of the Bureau is a non-starter.” (Another lawyer attendee of the meeting remembered Mueller’s words slightly differently: “Prosecutorial misconduct is a non-starter.” Either version makes clear Mueller’s intent – he did not want to hear evidence that either the prosecutors or the FBI agents on the case misbehaved and framed an innocent man.)

Special counsel Mueller’s background indicates zealousness that we might expect in the Grand Inquisitor, not the choirboy.

Why Special Prosecutors Are A Bad Idea

The history of special counsels (called at different times either “independent counsel” or “special prosecutor”) is checkered and troubled, resulting in considerable Supreme Court litigation around the concept of a prosecutor acting outside of the normal DOJ chain of command.

The Supreme Court in 1988 approved, with a single dissent (Justice Antonin Scalia), the concept of an independent prosecutor. Still, all subsequent efforts to appoint such a prosecutor have led to enormous disagreements over whether justice was done. Consider Kenneth Starr’s obsessive four-year, $40-million pursuit of President Bill Clinton for having sex with a White House intern and then lying about it. Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald’s 2006 pursuit of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby is not as infamous, but it should be. Fitzgerald indicted and a jury later convicted Libby, a top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, for lying about leaking to the New York Times the covert identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson. Subsequent revelations that there were multiple leaks and that Wilson’s CIA identity was not a secret served to discredit Libby’s indictment. Libby’s sentence was commuted. Libby’s relatively speedy reinstatement into the bar is seen by many as evidence of his unfair conviction. Considered in tandem, the campaigns against Democrat Clinton and Republican Libby raise disturbing questions about the use of special or independent prosecutors.

Yet despite the constitutional issues, the most serious problem with a special counsel is that when a prosecutor is appointed to examine closely the lives and affairs of a pre-selected group of targets, that prosecutor is almost certain to stumble across multiple actions that might be deemed criminal under the sprawling and incredibly vague federal criminal code.

In Mueller’s case, one can have a very high degree of confidence that he will uncover alleged felonies within the ranks of the inner circle of the President’s men (there are very few women to investigate in this administration). This could well include Trump himself.

I described this phenomenon long before Trump began his improbable rise, in my 2009 book “Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent” (Encounter Books, updated edition, 2011). I explained how federal “fraud” statutes were so vague that just about any action in the daily life of a typically busy professional might be squeezed into the elastic definition of some kind of federal felony. Harvard Law Professor (and, I should note, my former professor and subsequent longtime friend and colleague) Alan Dershowitz has beaten me to the punch, making the case in a raft of articles and on TV and radio that none of the evidence thus far leaked to or adduced by investigative reporters constitute federal crimes.

But Mueller’s demonstrated zeal and ample resources virtually assure that indictments will come, even in the absence of actual crimes rather than behavior that is simply “politics as usual”. If Mueller claims that Trump or members of his entourage committed crimes, it doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily so. We should take Mueller and his prosecutorial team with a grain of salt. But a grain of salt seems an outmoded concept in an age when both sides – Trump and his critics – seem impervious to inconvenient facts. The most appropriate slogan for all the combatants on both sides of the Trump wars (including, alas, the reporters and their editors) might well be: “Don’t confuse me with the facts; my mind is made up.”

Harvey Silverglate, a criminal defense and First Amendment lawyer and writer, is WGBH/News’ “Freedom Watch” columnist. He practices law in an “of counsel” capacity in the Boston law firm Zalkind Duncan & Bernstein LLP. He is the author, most recently, of Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent (New York: Encounter Books, updated edition 2011). The author thanks his research assistant, Nathan McGuire, for his invaluable work on this series.
RobertMuellerEntrapment  Entrapment  MuellerReport 
11 weeks ago
Are Jews The Israelites Of The Bible? By Biblicism Institute
The number one biblical verse used by Zionist Jews and Zionist Christians alike to justify dispossessing the Palestinians of their land is this one:

“On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, ‘To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates….'” Genesis 15:18

By descendants God definitely meant the same biological bloodline, the same DNA, actual grandchildren of Abram/Abraham. Not spiritual progeny. As even a cursory study would show, those today who are known as Jews are not remotely bloodline descendants of Abraham.

They are in fact the non-Semitic and non-Israelite Ashkenazim and Sephardim, who in later times joined small numbers of other races that converted to Judaism/Pharisaism: Polish, Russians, Ukrainians, Germans, etc. These latter ones form a minority known as European Jews who, when coupled with the Ashkenazim, constitute a majority against the darker-skinned Samaritan, Sephardic, and African Jews; and none of these groups can claim to be of Abraham’s bloodline.

However, it is very important to understand what the bible and history have to say about the majority of converted Jews, the people known as Ashkenazim and Sephardim, while bearing in mind that 1) Abraham was a descendant of Shem – hence the term Semite or Shemite; 2) his scion Jacob and his twelve sons were the true biblical Hebraic Israelite nation with whom God had the Old Covenant (not with converted Jews); 3) the true Israelite nation no longer exists, and their land inheritance expired with them.

“The LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight… And the LORD rejected all the seed of Israel, and afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of spoilers, until he had cast them out of his sight.” 2 Kings 17:18,20


This is what the Bible has to say about the Ashkenazim in Genesis 10:

1 “Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood. 2 The sons of Japheth: Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras. 3 And the sons of Gomer: ASHKENAZ, and Riphath, and Togarmah. 4 And the sons of Javan: Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.” (Emphasis Added)

Today’s Ashkenazi Jews, or descendants of Ashkenaz, are some of the GENTILES (Goyim) the bible speaks of. Why then do Ashkenazim call Christians and other non-Jews Gentiles, while pinning on themselves the term Chosen People? Is it ignorance or deception? It’s definitely not ignorance. And if to those outside it looks like deception, to them it’s pure re-branding. The ultimate Chutzpah!

Consider the terrible irony!

Ashkenazic (and Sephardic) Jews are themselves the Gentiles that many rabbis warn their congregations not to marry. To further the re-branding, they also call themselves Semites or Shemites when they’re JAPHETITES, which means they’re not Hebrews either. This re-branding is much like the way most of them – if not the majority of them – keep changing their last names every time they settle in a new country. The reason is simple and quite pragmatic. It’s a survival mechanism.

The Ashkenazim are a resilient, roaming Turkic people. They have a knack for reinventing themselves. They first surfaced in world annals as the notoriously barbaric Scythians or Sakadeans, depending on regional phonetic.

“Here there is no Gentile or Judahite, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.” Colossians 3: 11

The word Scythian or Sakadean comes from the word Saka – with its Iranian verbal root Sak, meaning to roam.

The Scythians settled Central Eurasia which they conquered with their Gentile brother Togarmath and various other cousins, expanding across a vast track of land that encompassed but was not limited to parts of present-day Turkey and Iran. Their Gentile brother Riphath along with their uncle Javan’s descendants settled in Greece.

Later on, they reinvented themselves and settled a land they would call Khazaria – from the word Qasar, with its Turkic root Qaz, meaning to roam – following the break-up of the western Turkish Steppe Empire. Then the country converted en masse to Judaism/Pharisaism, sometime between 740 and 920 AD, just so they could remain independent of the two competing empires of that time, Christianity and Islam.

“Judaism was the most actively proselytizing religion,” explained Jewish historian Shlomo Sand. “The most significant mass conversion occurred in the 8th century, in the massive Khazar kingdom between the Black and Caspian seas.” ....
Khazars  Israel  AshkenaziJews  Anti-Semitism 
11 weeks ago
David Blume Alcohol Can Be A Gas
With alcohol fuel, you can become energy independent, reverse global warming, and survive Peak Oil in style. Alcohol fuel is "liquid sunshine" and can't be controlled by transnational corporations. You can produce alcohol for less than $1 a gallon, using a wide variety of plants and waste products, from algae to stale donuts. It's a much better fuel than gasoline, and you can use it in your car, right now. You can even use alcohol to generate electricity. Alcohol fuel production is ecologically sustainable, revitalizes farms and communities, and creates huge new opportunities for small-scale businesses. Its byproducts are clean and valuable. Alcohol has a proud history and a vital future.
AlcoholFuel  DavidBlume  Alcohol 
11 weeks ago
Tinea Versicolor SKIN RASH
Tinea Versicolor
Signs and Symptoms of Tinea Versicolor
How Tinea Versicolor Is Diagnosed
How Tinea Versicolor Is Treated
Lifestyle Tips for Managing Tinea Versicolor
Tinea versicolor is a fungal infection of the skin. It's also called pityriasis versicolor and is caused by a type of yeast that naturally lives on your skin. When the yeast grows out of control, the skin disease, which appears as a rash, is the result.

The infection can happen for any of the following reasons:

You have oily skin
You live in a hot climate
You sweat a lot
You have a weakened immune system
Because the yeast grows naturally on your skin, tinea versicolor is not contagious. The condition can affect people of any skin color. It's more likely to affect teens and young adults.
Versicolo  SkinRash  Skin  IthacaDermatology 
11 weeks ago
George Washington's Blog > Interview with April Gallop > Thursday, July 13, 2006
Me: Do you have any theory about how a Boeing 757 could have hit such a secure building without any anti-aircraft defenses being activated or any warning alarms sounded?

AG: I have thought about this very question numerous times. And then I realized I needed to rephrase the question. The real question is what is the probability or likelihood that no anti-aircraft defense, warning alarms or additional security mechanism functioned on that particular day?

And then we need to think how likely is it then there was a glitch in all the security mechanisms, anti-aircraft defense and warning alarms?

Me: I know that you have previously been quoted about things like thinking that a bomb had exploded in the Pentagon, and that you did not see any plane debris in the Pentagon. I do not want to misquote you or twist your words. Is there anything you wish to state about these topics?

AG: I have been misquoted on numerous occassions. That happens when individuals have ulterior motives. But here is my statement for the record.

I was located at the E ring. From my inside perspective, with no knowledge of what had actually happened on the outside, it did sound like a bomb. And we had to escape the building before the floors, debris etc collapsed on us.

And I don't recall at anytime seeing any plane debris. Again, I don't know what plane debris would look like after hitting a building. But I would have recalled unusual looking pieces similar to plane parts.

I have many flashbacks being inside the mouth of death. The images from being inside that building on that day are forever etched in my mind.
911PentagonExplosions  911PentagonBomb  911AprilGallop  911PentagonAprilGallop 
june 2019
Frequently Asked Questions » If Flight 77 did not hit the building what happened to its passengers and crew?
Let's be clear: we have never claimed that the low-flying plane seen by all of the witnesses that we interviewed was actually American Airlines Flight 77, nor do we believe that to be the case. Even the 9/11 Commission Report acknowledges that AA77 was completely lost from radar as early as 8:56. On p. 8-9 they write:

The transcript of alleged radio communications with AA77, published by The New York Times in October of 2001, tells the same story: AA77 makes its final transmission just before 8:51, after which time it is never heard from again, despite repeated attempts by personnel at both Indianapolis Center and American Airlines to re-establish contact.[5]

There is no independent or verifiable evidence in the public domain, official or otherwise, proving what happened to AA77 after 8:56-8:57. The plane that eventually appeared in the airspace over Arlington and Washington D.C. shortly after 9:30, which is falsely alleged to have crashed into the Pentagon, was never positively identified. This too is repeatedly acknowledged by the 9/11 Commission:

Front cover of the 9/11 Commission Report
At 8:51, American 77 transmitted its last routine radio communication. ... At 8:54, the aircraft deviated from its assigned course, turning south. Two minutes later the transponder was turned off and even primary radar contact with the aircraft was lost. The Indianapolis Air Traffic Control Center repeatedly tried and failed to contact the aircraft. American Airlines dispatchers also tried, without success.[1]
This occured near the Kentucky-Ohio border, almost 300 miles west of the Pentagon, as depicted in the following image released shortly after 9/11 by Flight Explorer, a Virginia-based company whose commercial software uses FAA air traffic control reports, which are updated as often as every 10 seconds, to track airplanes' locations, speed, altitude and more in near real-time.[2][3][4]
911CitizenInvestigationTeam  911PentagonNoPlane 
june 2019
« earlier      
2004stolenelection 2012electionfraud 2012presidenialelection 2016electionfraud 2016presidentialelection 911 911aprilgallop 911aprilgallopcourtproceedings 911architects&engineersfor911truth 911blogger.com 911books 911christopherbollyn 911citizeninvestigationteam 911commission 911conspiracytheories 911controlleddemolitions 911dancingisraelis 911davidchandler 911davidraygriffin 911debunkingtheories 911documentaries 911documentaryfilms 911dust 911explosions 911falseflagattack 911falseflagoperation 911fbi 911flight77 911flight93 911georgewalkerbush 911hijackers 911insidejob 911israel 911jeffprager 911jimhoffman 911judywood 911kendoc 911kevinbarrett 911kevinr.ryan 911kevinryan 911leftistgatekeepers 911moltensteel 911mossad 911nanothermite 911neilsharrit 911nist 911noamchomsky 911norad 911nuclearweapons 911osamabinladen 911osamabinladendead 911overview 911pentagon 911planes 911popularmechanics 911richardgage 911stevene.jones 911videoclips 911videos 911websites 911wtc-7 911wtc-attacks 911youtubevideos afghanistanwar alexjones anti-semitism arthritis astrologers astrology astrologywebsites astronomy barackobama baseball bdsmovement berniesanders blogs bobfitrakis books bostonmarathonbombing bostonmarathonbombings boycottisrael cancer cancerhealing cancertreatments cannabinoids cannabis cannabishealing cannabisoil cannabisoilproduction capitalism censorship cia cleopatra climatechange composting conspiracyjournalism conspiracytheories costarica danerudhyar deepstate delicious democraticparty documentaries documentarylibraries donaldtrump ecuador edmistongenealogy egypt electionfraud electronicelectionfraud electronicvotefraud exitpolls facebook falseflagoperations fascism federalreserve financialcorruption gaza georgehwbush glenngreenwald greece haarp healing hemp herbalists herbalmedicinemaking herbalmonographs herbalsuppliers herbs hiking hillaryclinton humor hydrofracking imperialism internationalliving iphone7+ iran iraqwar isis islam israel israellobby ithaca ithacajournal jamescorbett japan jeffreyepstein jfkassassination jonirisherbals judaism julianassange kevinbarrett leftgatekeepers lolitagate lostcityexplorer marcantony marijuana mastercomposterprogram media medicalmarijuana mexico mossad music musicvideos naturalhealing news&analysis newyorktimes noamchomsky nutrition occult palestine paulcraigroberts paulgaylon pedophilia philadelphiaphillies photos pizzagate politics portugal propaganda prostate psyops reference revolution richardcharnin ricksimpson romanempire russia russiagate russianhackers sanmigueldeallende sports superelixir! syria syriawar torture travel ukraine vaporizers videos vietnamwar votefraud war warfare websites wikileaks youtubemusic zionism

Copy this bookmark: