Suspect had multiple aliases, granted political asylum by Australian government, interviewed by Australian media, spent years as fake pro-Western “Shia’a cleric” condemning Iran and Syria before recently “converting” to Sunni and supporting ISIS.
December 16, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci – LD) – Another embarrassing chapter has unfolded for Western intelligence and security communities in the wake of the so-called “Sydney Siege.” The suspect named by the media as “Man Haron Monis” also has gone by the names “Manteghi Boroujerdi” and “Mohammad Hassan Manteghi” and was an individual now confirmed to have long been on the radar of the Australian government, media, law enforcement, and court system since his arrival on Australian shores almost two decades ago.
Image: Anti-Western ISIS Wahabi terrorist, pro-Western “liberal” Shia’a cleric, and secular common man. As with any long-time actor, the “Sydney Siege” suspect has been cast for many diverse roles, with many different names, and an extensive wardrobe. He had played both the hero and the villain. It is beyond bizarre that he has remained in the spotlight across Australia’s political stage for nearly two-decades with a growing criminal record, increasingly disturbing and disruptive behavior, and yet somehow “eluded” Australia’s indiscriminate and all-invasive surveillance network and multiple terror sweeps made just in the past several months. It appears that this “shape-shifting sheik” played a central role in manipulating the Australian public at integral junctures of the West’s “War on Terror.”
Claiming he was a “lone wolf” attacker whose violence and extremism could not have been foreseen is betrayed by an extensive criminal record including murder, preceded by the suspicious circumstances that brought him to Australia to begin with.
Two-Decades in the Spotlight
He fled Iran in 1996 for unknown reasons, claiming in a 2001 Australian ABC interview that he was formerly of Iran’s “Ministry of Intelligence and Security.” He claimed in the same interview to have been in contact with the UN about “secret information” he had regarding the Iranian government.
The 2001 interview titled, “New Cardinals for Rome, George Bush, Muslims in Australia,” as part of ABC’s “Religion Report,” quoted Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi as claiming:
In Iran, mostly I have been involved with the Ministry of Intelligence and Security.
the Iranian regime wants to make me silent, because I have some secret information about government, and about their terrorist operations in the war. I sent a letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and somebody on behalf of Mr Kofi Anan sent the answer, and they want to do something.
He would also profess his love for the West, and in particular his belief that the US, Canada, the UK, and Australia in particular were “religious societies” claiming:
If we explain about the meaning of the word ‘Islamic’ as a religious society, if we say Islamic society is a religious society, and a society which has a relation with God, and wants to be honest, we can say Australia, Canada, England, USA, so many western countries, they are religious societies. They don’t say ‘We are religious’, but in fact the spirit of religion, we can see the spirit of religion in these societies. And some other countries in the Middle East, in Asia, they say ‘We are Islamic’ they have a name of Islamic, but in fact they are not religious societies and religious governments.
Whenever I walk in the street, whenever I go out in Australia, I feel I am in a real religious society. I don’t want to say it is perfect, we don’t have a perfect society on the earth, but when we compare, if we compare Australia with Iran and other countries in the Middle East, we can say it is heaven.
ABC itself introduced Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi as follows:
People in Sydney walking past the State Parliament buildings on Macquarie Street in recent weeks might have noticed a tall Muslim cleric who has taken up residence in a tent on the footpath outside. He is Ayatollah Manteghi Boroujerdi, a liberal cleric who fled Iran four years ago after being very critical of the Iranian regime. Ayatollah Boroujerdi’s wife and two daughters are now under house arrest in Iran, and he’s hoping the Howard government will put pressure on the regime there to let his family join him here in Australia.
Far from an extremist – Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi instead posed as the perfect poster child for the ongoing anti-Iran, pro-war propaganda building at the time – propaganda that continues to this very day and is an integral part of current efforts to overthrow both the Syrian and Iranian governments.
He was a “liberal Iranian” fleeing the “Iranian regime” who held his family “hostage.” He professed his admiration of Western society and praised it as “heaven.” “Heavenly” could have also described his propaganda value to the West at the time.
The Shape-Shifting Sheik
Over the years, however, Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi would shape-shift, coincidentally along the same unsavory lines Western pro-war rhetoric shifted – first by helping discredit anti-war sentiment in Australia by sending abusive letters to the families of fallen soldiers, then discrediting Islam itself through cartoonish acts of rhetorical extremism. And just like a shape-shifter, the character Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi would don many different costumes.
Image: Hostages in the recent “Sydney Siege” hold up the flag often used by terrorist group “Al Nusra” currently fighting America’s proxy war in Syria against the government in Damascus. Al Nusra has received US anti-tank weapons after front groups the US assured were “vetted” and “moderate” turned them over while pledging allegiance to the Al Qaeda franchise. The UK Independent would also report that the suspect requested specifically an ISIS flag.
At times he would appear as a secular liberal dressed in Western, if not outdated attire, at other times a “Shai’a cleric” wearing traditional robes. Most recently, to help sow ISIS hysteria, he impersonated an ISIS supporter, claiming to have “converted to Sunni Islam” a month ago, wearing Wahabi-inspired terrorist attire. And in his final act amid the “Sydney Siege,” he would produce the flag often carried by Al Qaeda affiliate Al Nusra in Syria – a terrorist front that has in fact drawn many Australian’s from Sydney over the course of the recent Syrian war.
His alleged ideological causes were as contradictory as his attire. First claiming for years to be a pro-Western “liberal Shia’a,” dressed as a Shia’a cleric, his recent shift to supporting ISIS terrorists would mean he was backing a terrorist front of Wahabists – enemies of Iran and the Shai’a communities across the entire Muslim World that depend on Tehran for protection. It would also mean he was adopting an ideology that at least rhetorically claims to stand in complete opposition to the West he had previously claimed to admire.
While Australian authorities seemed perfectly comfortable with Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi’s continuously disruptive behavior, genuine leaders across Australia’s Muslim community implored the Australian government to investigate him. In a 2008 Australian article titled, “Call to probe mystery Shia cleric,” it was reported that:
FEDERAL agents have been urged by the nation’s senior Shia leader, Kamal Mousselmani, to investigate an Iranian man purporting to be a prominent Islamic cleric.
Sheik Mousselmani told The Australian yesterday the mystery cleric – who has been identified as Ayatollah Manteghi Boroujerdi on his website after appearing under the name Sheik Haron – was not a genuine Shia spiritual leader.
He said there were no ayatollahs – supreme Shia scholars – in Australia and none of his fellow spiritual leaders knew who Ayatollah Boroujerdi or Sheik Haron was.
“We don’t know him and we have got nothing to do with him,” Sheik Mousselmani said. “The federal police should investigate who he is. It should be their responsibility.”
What could have possibly motivated the Australian government to continue giving a clear and persistent menace to society free reign?
The Current Narrative Doesn’t Add Up
It could be argued that Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi was mentally unstable, and the New York Times in an article titled, “Gunman in Sydney Had Long History of Run-Ins With the Law,” would even claim Iran itself warned of his mental instability stating:
The state-run Iranian news agency, Fars, quoted a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Marziyeh Afkham, as saying that it had warned the Australian authorities about Mr. Monis.
“The history and mental-psychological conditions of this individual, who sought political asylum in Australia more than two decades ago, had been discussed with Australian authorities many times,” Ms. Afkham was quoted as saying.
However, were that the case, and had Iran warned Australian authorities of this man, one wonders why he would be allowed political asylum in the first place, let alone allowed to occupy the spotlight amid Australia’s divisive political landscape for so long, especially in light of his many alleged criminal offenses.
Considering the global surveillance state Australia finds itself a willing partner in, how is it possible to claim Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi was a “lone wolf” terrorist? Surely if Australians are being surveilled without probable cause, so too was Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi, and yet he was apparently able to obtain weapons, travel freely with them, all while publicly supporting terrorist organizations including ISIS.
Vox Media would report in its article, “Sydney hostage taker Man Haron Monis pledged allegiance to ISIS on his website,” that:
According to a portion of his now-deleted website (which you can see here) … Monis pledged allegiance to ISIS before the attack.
Vox would go on to cite Washington-based Neo-Conservative pro-war, anti-Iranian think-tank, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy (FDD) to claim Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi had no ties to ISIS and that he was simply a “fruitcake.” No evidence was provided.
However, this “fruitcake” was credible enough to be granted political asylum by the Australian government in 1996, credible enough to serve the West’s propaganda campaign against Iran in 2001, and then play along with the West’s coordinated strategy of tension designed to discredit anti-war sentiment during Australia’s participation in the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, and more recently ratchet up anti-Islamic sentiment and help justify continued Western military intervention in nations like Syria and Iran against which both Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi and the FDD are/were clearly opposed to.
Image: Recently, a series of sweeping raids involving hundreds of Australian
police and security agents netted suspected “terrorists” after communications
were “intercepted.” One must wonder why police didn’t also visit the “Sydney
Siege” suspect who openly pledged allegiance to ISIS.
In fact, if unable to convince Australians to back “liberals” like himself in opposition to the Iranian government, perhaps he and his handlers felt posing as an extremist to provoke support for direct military intervention in Syria and in turn, Iran, was the next best bet.
One thing is for sure, for a man in Australia’s political and legal spotlight either for good or for bad for nearly two decades, it is highly unlikely he was able to put together this plot without Australian security and intelligence agents knowing. After several recent “anti-terror” operations carried out across Sydney based on intercepted communication, why hadn’t federal agents also visited a suspected murderer openly pledging allegiance to ISIS?
The Western media’s eagerness to dismiss Boroujerdi/Monis/Manteghi’s actions amid the “Sydney Siege” before a full investigation reeks of a cover-up and whatever the truth may be – what is being insisted upon by the media, government, and corporate-funded think-tanks now certainly isn’t it.
The most important details in Darren Wilson’s grand jury testimony come on pages 77-78 of the transcript. Asked if he had filled out an incident report on the shooting, Wilson explained that the “protocol” in such cases is to “contact your FOP [Fraternal Order of Police] representative and he will advise you of what to do step by step.”
When asked if he had committed his recollections to paper in a diary or journal, Wilson replied: “My statement has been written for my attorney.”
“And that’s between you and your attorney, then?” asked the exceptionally helpful prosecutor, who received an affirmative reply.
“So no one has asked you to write out a statement?” the assistant DA persisted.
“No, they haven’t,” Wilson acknowledged.
Like anybody else suspected of a crime, Wilson was presumed innocent and could not be forced to incriminate himself. Unlike a Mundane suspected of homicide, however, Wilson was given the luxury of crafting his story to fit subsequent disclosures, in consultation with a police union attorney who added the necessary melodramatic flourishes.
Thus we are told that when Wilson grabbed Brown’s forearm through the window of his SUV, “the only way I can describe it is I felt like a five-year-old holding on to Hulk Hogan.”
Although the 18-year-old Brown possessed nearly 300 pounds of unathletic girth, Wilson was no nebbish: Like Brown, he stands 6’4″ and weighs 210 pounds.
After being shot during the altercation in the SUV, Brown displayed the face of a “demon,” Wilson claims. After fleeing from the officer, who continued to shoot at him, Brown could be seen “almost bulking up to run through the shots,” Wilson continued, a line that doubtless reflects the verbal artistry of a well-paid police union attorney.
Like others accused of a crime, Wilson had the right to counsel of his choice. In his case, however, a defense attorney was redundant.
The grand jury transcript from September 26 listed the case as “State of Missouri vs. Darren Wilson,” but the assistant St. Louis County District Attorneys who examined the suspect behaved more like defense attorneys than prosecutors. Their advertised task was to determine if probable cause existed to justify criminal charges against Wilson for the shooting of tardily identified robbery suspect Michael Brown. The actual function they performed was to rationalize the killing in a way that would bring about Robert McCullouch’s intended result, the no-billing of the former police officer.
When a prosecutor actually seeks an indictment, he will not go to the trouble of presenting potentially exculpatory evidence. In fact, as former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell documents in her infuriating new book Licensed to Lie, prosecutors generally go through heroic contortions to withhold, disguise, misplace, or exclude “Brady” material. McCullouch, a prosecutor not known for his solicitude toward the accused unless they are swaddled in the vestments of the State’s coercive caste, made a point of making the case for the defense, which is a function usually carried out during a criminal trial by counsel for the defendant.
At various points in the 92-page transcript, we can see how McCullough’s carefully guided Wilson through his testimony, prompting him to follow the script provided by his police union attorney, and either ignoring or gently correcting him when caught in the kind of contradictions upon which a motivated prosecutor would triumphantly seize. For example: Wilson claimed that at one point, Brown had “complete control” over the officer’s firearm. Under the kind prompting from one of the unusually solicitous assistant DAs, Wilson admitted that the gun never left his hand, and that his was the finger on the trigger.
Wilson states that after he confronted Brown and Johnson (whom he did not identify as robbery suspects until after the initial contact) for jaywalking, Brown’s hostile attitude prompted him to call for backup and then cut them off with his police vehicle. When he tried to leave the vehicle, Brown allegedly shoved the car door shut and glared at the officer with an “intense face” as if intending to “overpower” him. At some point — Wilson isn’t clear on the details — Brown supposedly slugged the officer through the window.
Reciting a well-rehearsed script, Wilson told the jurors that he scrolled through non-lethal options before pulling his gun.
“Get back or I’m going to shoot you,” Wilson says he told Brown. At this point “He immediately grabs my gun and says, `You are too much of a pussy to shoot me,’” the officer claimed. Later in his testimony, Wilson elaborated: “He didn’t pull it from my holster, but whenever it was visible to him, he then took complete control of it.”
Wilson threatened to kill Brown; Brown refused to be shot. This complicates the self-defense claim, which rests on Wilson’s assertion that by this time he had been struck twice by the behemoth, and was afraid that “the third one could be fatal if he hit me right.” Yet despite being repeatedly pummeled by a man-mountain of preternatural strength — a veritable Hulk Hogan, if not an Incredible Hulk — Wilson’s face displayed no visible injuries.
The alleged blows were sufficient to justify lethal force, even against a fleeing, unarmed suspect, Wilson insists.
“My gun was already being presented as a deadly force option while he was hitting me in the face,” he told the jurors, later saying that hurling lead down a residential street was justified in order to “protect” the public from an unarmed suspect who had assaulted an armed police officer.
Michael Brown was apparently a shoplifter and a bully. If this was the case, he should have been compelled to make restitution to the victims. (Interestingly, although Wilson claimed to have seen stolen cigarillos in Brown’s hands during the “assault,” they were never found.) While there’s no clear evidence that Brown ever assaulted Wilson, it is indisputable from Wilson’s testimony that he was the one who escalated the encounter by threatening lethal force. This is problematic even under positivist legal precedents: Per Bad Elk vs. US, Brown — even as a criminal suspect — didn’t have a duty to die simply because Wilson had the means to kill him, and according Tennessee vs. Garner Wilson didn’t have the legal authority to kill Brown simply because he tried to evade arrest.
One needn’t consider Michael Brown to be a winsome innocent in order to believe that Wilson’s conduct in this incident was, at best, thoroughly suspect — and suitable for examination in a genuinely adversarial process of the kind Robert McCullouch was determined to avoid.
Tony Caralucci / NEO
US policy paper reveals desire for construction of full-scale extraterritorial army to invade Syria. Such an army is being built in Iraq and Turkey and it’s called “ISIS.”
The corporate-financier funded and directed policy think tank, the Brookings Institution, has served as one of several prominent forums documenting and disseminating US foreign policy. It would host in part the architects of the so-called “surge” during the nearly decade-spanning US occupation of Iraq, as well as battle plans for waging a covert war against Iran now well under way.
Part of this covert war against Iran involved the arming and backing of listed terrorist groups, and in particular, the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) which has killed US servicemen, American civilians, as well as countless innocent Iranians over the decades. Among those signing their name to this plan found within Brookings’ “Which Path to Persia?” report, was Kenneth Pollack. Now, in efforts to overthrow the government of Syria, also a stated and integral part of undermining, isolating, and destroying Iran, Pollack has revealed another element of the plan – to create a full-scale proxy military force outside of Syria, then subsequently invading and occupying Syria with it.
In the report titled, “Building a Better Syrian Opposition Army: How and Why,” Pollack cites the so-called “Islamic State” or “ISIS” as the ultimate impetus for expanded US intervention. However, upon looking at Pollack’s proposal, it merely looks as if the US is using ISIS as a pretext to more overtly intervene in order to overthrow the government of Syria – not in fact neutralize ISIS.
After a considerable preamble assuring readers that the aim of creating a “better Syrian opposition army” would exclude sectarian extremists and result in the same “success” the US had in training the Iraqi army, the document explains:
…building a new Syrian army is best not done in Syria itself. At least not at first. The program would need the time and sanctuary to perform the necessary training, reorganization, sorting and socialization into a new Syrian army without the distractions and pressures of Syria itself. The Saudi offer to provide facilities to train 10,000 Syrian opposition fighters is one of reasonable possibility, although one of Syria’s neighbors would probably be preferable. Jordan already serves as training ground for America’s current training program and it would be an ideal locale to build a real Syrian army. However, Turkey could also conceivably serve that purpose if the Turks were willing.
Clearly, not only is this already being done as admitted by Pollack himself, it is being done on a scale already eclipsing Pollack’s alleged plan – the only difference is it is being done through the use of sectarian extremists – not the imaginary, nonexistent secular professionals Pollack uses as a marketing gimmick to sell this scheme.
More tellingly, Pollack’s plan continues by stating (emphasis added):
In addition to being armed, trained and officered like a conventional military, a new Syrian army would also have to be equipped like one. That would mean not just small arms and crew-served weapons, such as the United States and its allies are already providing, but heavy weapons and logistical support. Like the Croats and Bosniaks, a new Syrian army will need the wherewithal to defeat both the regime and the Islamist extremists. That will require tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery, surface-to-air missiles and the like to match the regime’s own heavy weapons—and so eliminate the firepower imbalance that the regime’s forces have employed to such advantage so far.
Surely, Pollack’s plan will never materialize in any practical dimension – however it may be possible to use such a marketing ploy to pour more resources into both the ongoing proxy war against Syria and Iran in general, and more specifically into the terrorist battalions already being armed, funded, trained, equipped, and sent off from Jordan and Turkey into Syrian territory. Handing advanced weapon systems into the hands of front groups consisting of intentionally ineffectual, immensely corrupt, incompetent US proxies is as good as handing the weapons directly to ISIS – and of course – this is precisely how the US is building its actual “new opposition army” – namely, in the form of ISIS itself.
ISIS Has Tanks, Missiles, and Aircraft – Everything America’s Dream “Opposition Army” Needs
Removing Pollack’s rhetoric about secular professionals, and inserting “ISIS” reveals Pollack’s paper as the actual already ongoing plan to overrun not only Syria, but pro-Iranian factions in Iraq, and perhaps even Iran itself. ISIS is a massive mercenary army trained and funded abroad by the US with its support laundered via Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, and Turkey, staged along Syria’s borders in both Jordan and Turkey, and acquiring an impressive arsenal just as what is required in Pollack’s plan to enter into and overthrow the government of Syria – minus eradicating extremists of course.
Even a cursory look at ISIS’ holdings across the region reveal ratlines leading into NATO-member Turkey’s territory and all along the Turkish-Syrian border where news outlets like the New York Times and Washington Post have reported for years the CIA had been operating – unloading billions in aid, gear, weapons, and even vehicles to militants fighting within Syria.
Headlines over the past 3-4 years including, “C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition,” “First Syria rebels armed and trained by CIA ‘on way to battlefield’,” “Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.,” and “Official says CIA-funded weapons have begun to reach Syrian rebels; rebels deny receipt,” reveal precisely how ISIS acquired its vast resources.
ISIS is organized on a professional level precisely as described by Pollack, most likely the result of US military advisers and their counterparts in Saudi and Qatari special operations. ISIS is also heavily armed precisely as was required by Pollack’s plan. They now possess an impressive and ever growing arsenal of weapons including tanks, missiles of all kinds, artillery, and even a small collection of aircraft including Russian warplanes and American helicopters.
The New York Times, after years of reporting on the CIA’s delivery of weapon systems to “moderate” militants, now laments of ISIS’ possession of advanced anti-air missiles. In its article, “Missiles of ISIS May Pose Peril for Aircrews in Iraq,” it reports:
Syrian rebels have amassed multiple Manpad models since 2012, and the Islamic State has generally had little trouble acquiring any weapon used by Syrian rebels either through purchase or capture, military analysts say.
Unprepared Iraqi troops – the result of what Pollack claims as an American “success” – have also augmented ISIS with precisely the weapons needed for Pollack’s dream “opposition army.” No less than 30 M1 Abrams main battle tanks have fallen into ISIS’ hands.
Prolific Neo-Conservative propagandist Michael Weiss in the Wall Street Journal attempts to downplay the implications of such weapons falling into ISIS’ hands by stating in his op-ed titled, “Exploiting the ISIS Vulnerabilities in Iraq – The terrorists’ heavy military equipment is hard to maintain, easy to target from the air,” that:
Today, we estimate that ISIS has less than a total of 30 working M1 Abrams tanks and howitzers that are either self-propelled or towed behind trucks (based on our knowledge of how the Iraqi army is equipped and what divisions were in the north). These are the weapons that gave the Islamic State the advantage over the Peshmerga in recent firefights. Yet ISIS does not have the highly trained maintenance crews that are necessary to keep these weapons in good working order. The same problem exists for its armored Humvees and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected personnel carriers. Without maintenance, these captured U.S. vehicles and weapons will break down.
Only, ISIS’ Saudi, Qatari, and Jordanian sponsors most definitely do possess the highly trained maintenance crews necessary to keep these weapons in good working order – since these despotic regimes each in turn possess a large number of exactly these weapon systems purchased from the United States itself. If the Saudis in particular, can fund, train, and arm ISIS with small arms and missiles, how difficult would it be to supply them with spare parts and properly trained maintenance crews? Turkey also maintains a number of US weapon systems, and possesses the ability to maintain modern battle tanks if not the M1 specifically – and is already harboring, supplying, and backing ISIS – another inconvenient truth challenging Weiss’ attempts to mislead readers.
In fact, Pollack’s “proposal” appears more like an after-action report. ISIS is the “better Syrian opposition army” the West has sought all along. That is probably why attempts by the US to “fight” ISIS appear half-hearted and why those the US is supposedly “saving” from ISIS see Western intervention as more of a threat than ISIS itself believing it is designed simply to prolong ISIS’ existence in the face of growing and increasingly more formidable indigenous opposition.
Any provisions to build Pollack’s “army” will undoubtedly end up only bolstering ISIS and its affiliates – just as military aid policymakers like Pollack at Brookings advocated for the arming of “moderates” resulted in the creation of ISIS in the first place. While the US desperately attempts to disown responsibility for ISIS’ creation and perpetuation through an unconvincing propaganda campaign, false flag terror strikes against the “homeland,” and a series of increasingly ludicrous, orchestrated strawman victories in Iraq and Syria – Damascus, Baghdad, and Tehran are leading the real fight against ISIS.
The US apparently plans on protecting ISIS for as long as possible under the guise of being the sole force “fighting it,” while ISIS consolidates and moves on Western designated targets. In the process of “fighting” ISIS, the US is managing to destroy Syrian infrastructure and defenses. The US, however, has failed in attempts to exclude Syrian, Iraqi, and Iranian forces from countering the ISIS threat and now the region is witnessing a race between ISIS’ inevitable destruction and America’s attempts to topple Damascus before ISIS vanishes from its geopolitical toolbox.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.
CNP (red tie) VS CFR (blue tie)
“As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too. Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it. Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests” – Gore Vidal
“A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude.”
― Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
BATR by SARTRE – November 4, 2014
Today the media prognosticators will do their charts, cite their polls and make their assessments on the results from the 2014 midterm elections. How exciting. Another cycle of “Great Expectations” posed for even bigger disappointments. A Congress firmly in the hands of the GOP ready to wage war against a Democrat progressive collectivist may seem promising for the heartland. However, there are very few indications that a monumental battle for a return to a constitutional republic will be the objective of Republican leadership. Fire Reid with a McConnell replacement simply means that deal making might return to the Capital, but forget about a most needed Presidential Appomattox surrender. There is no Court House in America that will allow the treason of Obama to be brought to justice.
Ah, the federalists can relax; their system of bipartisan corruption will remain intact. If there is any doubt what the establishment wants, just examine the graphic chart from the quid essential mouth piece of the NWO, the Economist. Their optimistic vs. pessimistic assessment reveals their Free Trade, Climate Warming, Pro Corporate Immigration agenda.
America has been beaten down for the last quarter century with few brief periods of marginal relief. The historic 2010 Tea Party inspired election provided a GOP majority in the House. After the 2014 count, the kindred of conservative populists became less powerful, since the next Speaker of the House will be able to push legislation friendly to the interests of large donors, who buy the best candidates that will play ball.
John Boehner is their man and taking tea with genuine Republican conservatives is less likely. RINO’s and NeoCons have reserved seats at the table, and populists are reduced to a segregated minority. Mitch McConnell loves to broker deals. Oh, the money interests will rally to the insider arrangement that the Economist so plainly wish will be an era of cooperation.
All hail the return of the filibuster, or so goes the hope of a deliberate and statesmanship Senate. However, the Harry Reid nuclear option may not be as easy as a simple vote to put the genie back in the bottle.
No doubt those principled Republicans will disassemble key components of Obamacare, right? Well, you will see just how much power resides in the insurance companies and how little influence the depressed middle class excretes.
In the essay, The mid-term elections – What they’re all about, that same Economist expounds.
“The mid-terms will decide which party controls the Senate, as well as picking every member of the House of Representatives, 36 state governors (see article) and 45 statehouses. They also offer an opportunity for some political phrenology: a chance to infer something about the country’s mood. Several issues have threatened to dominate only to fade a little: Obamacare, a surge of child migrants into Texas, scandals at the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, the racially-charged riots in Ferguson, Missouri, the beheadings of Americans by jihadists and lately the first cases of Ebola on American soil have all played this role.”
How trite and ignorant of the mechanics of what motivates the electorate. The notion that people vote on the basis of the Ferguson federally approved Eric Holder distraction is an insult to every person who really is concerned about civil liberties. The hubbub over alleged or real beheadings is hardly an issue that powers the selection of a voting lever. Of course in the era of computer counted ballots, chad cards, early mail voting and illegal voting – the notion of selecting a candidate that will ensure that you will keep your head may be just too much to expect.
Nuisance and periphery distractions are the mother’s milk of an ideology, a party or a candidate that is desperate and behind. The Democrats will lose today because of the most basic reason for anyone who votes their own self-interest. Namely, the Obama controlled administration has failed to deliver a brighter future. So much for government of hope . . .
Before the undecided express glee with a Republican Congress, consider the prospects of actual action. Priebus Rallies Base: GOP Will Stop Obama’s ‘Un-American’ Amnesty” If We Win Senate boast as reported by Breitbart. So how did he answer at a town hall meeting when one woman even asked Priebus why the “sergeant at arms hasn’t arrested Obama” for our “wide open borders.”
Priebus handled it with ease.
“I understand there’s a little bit of hyperbole, but I understand your point, which is the president’s role in the Constitution is to enforce the law,” he said. “So the president wants to take Article II and ignore that part to enforce the law. He wants to be Article I, which is the legislature, and write all the laws. And then he’s appointing all of his judges to take care of Article III.”
Coping with a slight of hand is the art of political protection. Never answer the true issue. Why won’t the Republican Party impeach Obama over his treason? Must be that nasty Ferguson psyop factor!
Since the rule of law has been ignored for so long, the invented practice of circumventing plain legal language with the paragon of fiat administrative decrees has become an accepted practice. The politicization of the judiciary and the extortion of honest judges leave a pattern of rule by press release.
Should people be upbeat (not in the same sense of the Economist optimism)? Just what are the market prospects of a GOP victory? According to Kevin Mahn published by Forbes, Midterm Elections Bode Bullishly For U.S. Stocks provides a narrow and arcane viewpoint.
“The first research study I reviewed in this regard was conducted by S&P Capital IQ. The study (summarized in the chart below) concluded that the stock market – which was defined in this study by the S&P 500 index – has gained 15.3% on average in the six months following a mid-term election in the 3rd year of a given term of a presidency, which is this case this year with President Obama – recognizing, of course, that this is the second term of Obama’s presidency. The study also showed that the frequency of advance (“FoA”) for this occurrence was 94% of the overall time period of October 31, 1944 – September 29, 2014 for this research study. Midterm elections are currently scheduled for November 4, 2014, so this would roughly translate to the period of November 2014 – April 2014.”
OK the Federal Reserve has ended QE so that must bode well for equities??? That goes contrary to all the forecasts that conclude that cheap liquid money drives up stock prices, so what is Wall Street saying about a GOP controlled Congress? Financial elites love making money in any economic environment. So working with eager Republicans to expand transnational trade agreements may be the lasting result in the next Congress.
Of course none of these treaties improve the economic plight of ordinary citizens.
The perennial lefty Katrina vanden Heuvel warns of The catastrophes that a GOP-controlled Congress would bring. She is correct on the “free trade” pacts and that Obama will coordinate with the corporatist tools from either party to further their economic stranglehold.
“But a Republican takeover of the Senate is not a threat just because of what Republicans will do. Progressives should also worry about the many areas of potential agreement between the president and a Republican-controlled Senate. It is Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), for example, not Republicans, who is denying the president fast-track authority to force corporate trade deals through Congress. Without Reid in the way, “free-trade” pacts like Trans-Pacific Partnership — which labor leaders have called “NAFTA on steroids” — are likely to become the law of the land. Likewise, President Obama and Republicans could agree to pursue lower corporate tax rates — as opposed to infrastructure investments and job creation — as their primary economic-development initiative. And let’s not forget that Obama has repeatedly floated cuts to Social Security as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Republican leaders. Although we believe that the president has many progressive instincts, he has shown an inclination to seek consensus rather than to fight. If Republicans control both chambers of Congress, any consensus will err to the right.”
Where is the representation for the American constituency of struggling citizens? The last Radical Reactionary essay, 2014 Election Business as Usual explains why savvy observers should not expect the moon. Now that the early voting results have Republicans 10% ahead, start preparing for another Grand Old Party letdown.
All the Obama scandals taint the reputations of incumbent Democrats. The motivation for voting for a Republican candidate is often out of frustration. Intense positive approval is rare among rational and sane voters. Usually the vested interest government minions rally to the Democrat state/capitalism bandwagon. Let’s hope the rank and file see through all the fear and identity politics and vote to retire the failed progressive agenda. However, the duty of every voter is to keep the fire to the feet of any elected representative from both parties.
SARTRE – November 4, 2014
Read the entire article on the “Radical Reactionary” archive page
Subscription sign-up for the BATR RealPolitik Newsletter
Discuss or comment about this essay on the BATR Forum
31st October 2014
By Ethan Indigo Smith
Contributing Writer for Wake Up World
Before serving your country, first learn who your government is serving.
The New World Order is exactly that – it is the same old ‘order’ in the new world. The new world is still contracted to the same old formulation of regimentation, which is achieved by the same violent means of enforced order and patriarchal authority, the same old formulation of the status quo, and the same old oligarchy, instituted in the new petrolithic and nuclear age by the progressive merging of commerce and state.
The only difference now is that there are “new and improved” modes and destructive war, resource and media technologies being used to enforce the rule of the oligarchy. There are new tools and new names. The ‘order’ is packaged in a new sleek design, with new bells and whistles, but at its core, it is the same war-minded pyramid system, controlled by those the system benefits the most. Those “authorities” at the top of the pyramid claim to act for the betterment of mankind, and yet they always seem to get the better of mankind.
Historically speaking, the forced imposition of beneficial authority is as it always was. It is text book oligarchical collectivism; the same formulation of authority used by Empires and Emperors for millennia before us, playing out in a rapidly degrading economic, political and environmental setting, It bears little difference to those societies that have risen and duly fallen before us.
The ‘New World’ Environment
Welcome to the ‘new world’. And with that, welcome to your ‘new world’ environment, one that is poisoned and depleted by the petrolithic and nuclear industries of the oligarchy. And not just poisoned but radiated, measurably changing the quality of our environment for countless generations yet to come, as radiation and chemical pollution levels increase worldwide.
When it comes to humanity’s sustainability, the ‘new world’ is a veritable netherworld. The conditions, confines and consequences of petrolithic era and nuclear age are now layered into every strata of the Earth, its system and its inhabitants. Governed by power/profit-seeking oligarchy, we seem destined for a world of polluted and bereft expanse after expanse, land scoured and mined, water poisoned and air thick with institutional excrement – the scars of over consumption – the consequence of an irrational intent to build ever-growing commercial systems without regard for future ramifications, and of institutional outcomes being prioritised over the rights and needs of living breathing individuals and the planet we call home. And while the netherworld oligarchies profit from environmental exploitation, increased institutionalization and commercial monopolization, a culture of unquestioning acceptance is perpetuated in the name of patriotism by concealing critical information and delivering mis-information via the “news” media they own and regulate.
Thus, amid this theater of democracy, it has become the “norm” in the petrolithic era and nuclear age for large scale commercial enterprises to be initiated without due consideration of consequences. Corrupted commercial regulatory bodies have become veils to the oligarchy, rubber stamping their approval for profitable and dangerous practices in industries as broad as food & agriculture, pharmaceutical, energy, media and mining – as long as they help to achieve their ends. This is clearly evidenced by the rotating cast of oligarchs who regularly and strategically interchange between roles as commercial decision-makers and government regulators (see images).
These conditions have facilitated what is undoubtedly the biggest, most deceptive ‘doublethink’ dynamic there might ever have been — that of global warming. While governments continue to push the manifesto of Agenda 21, the public debate on global warming is, in and of itself, ridiculous. There is no denying humanity needs to change its destructive ways, but that extends far beyond environmental destruction to our collective intellectual decay. For as long as we allow our thoughts and conversation to be steered by the fictions of institutional news/media, we can only be digging our way deeper into the netherworld of the oligarchy.
Our corrupted institutions and the institutionalized alike have brought us to this existence, and to accept this existence, ever on the precipice of our own demise. And yet, in control of the ever-pervasive media, they steer the dynamic of what people talk about, and how they think, to their profit and advantage.
In a community that is led by the wealthy for the wealthy, this continuation of the status quo comes at the direct cost of individuals and their basic rights to freedom, peace, and unimpeded access to the planet’s natural resources – all of which are treated as commodities. We are led to believe our personal freedoms and livelihood depend on adhering to the status quo, without which the rights and richness of our natural world cannot be accessed.
But that is part of the illusion that keeps us playing ball. We know we are heading down a dangerous path, and there is no new planet to move on to, no new island to start fresh on once we learn just how dangerous. So in reality, our livelihood, wellbeing and indeed our future existence depends onstopping the status quo and choosing a new path – fast.
The ‘New World’ Hierarchy
Institutions are made up of individuals, but they do not act as individuals nor on behalf of individuals. Rather they act as portions of the institution, for the purpose of the institution, in the direction determined by institutional heads, no matter the personal or collective expense (after all, we’re all replaceable, right?)
Institutionalized individuals are capable of switching their institutional jargon and actions on and off, as if machines. When speaking to a reporter, one is sometimes off and other times on the record, depending on whether they are telling the truth or “The Truth ®“. When speaking to different groups, the institutionalized individual is capable of spinning different tunes, and at times, different truths – all in the name of progressing the institution.
In our heavily formalized society, we have been led to forgot that institutions are empowered by people, and dependent on the cooperation of individuals. Through commercial, government and media trickery, institutions have instilled a collectivist culture that simultaneously steers individuals to execute the institutional agenda while steering them away from critically understanding and assessing it — or doing anything to change it.
Why do institutions exist if not for people? The idea of working collectively is to mutually benefit the people, whose combined potential should exceed the capability of the lone individual. If institutions today were half as dedicated to the betterment of mankind, as most of them claim to be, there would be more acts of kindness and less need for activism.
Isn’t it time we reclaim our institutions and our natural place in the hierarchy?
Previous articles by Ethan Indigo Smith:
About Ethan Indigo Smith:
Activist, author and Tai Chi teacher Ethan Indigo Smith was born on a farm in Maine and lived in Manhattan for a number of years before migrating west to Mendocino, California. Guided by a keen sense of integrity and humanity, Ethan’s work is both deeply connected and extremely insightful, blending philosophy, politics, activism, spirituality, meditation and a unique sense of humour.
The events of September 11, 2001 inspired him to write his first book, The Complete Patriot’s Guide to Oligarchical Collectivism, an insightful exploration of history, philosophy and contemporary politics. His more recent publications include:
- Tibetan Fusion a book of simple meditative practices and movements that can help you access and balance your energy
- The Little Green Book of Revolution an inspirational book based on ideas of peaceful revolution, historical activism and caring for the Earth like Native Americans
- The Matrix of Four, The Philosophy of the Duality of Polarity on the subject of the development of individual consciousness
- 108 Steps to Be in The Zone a set of 108 meditative practices and steps toward self discovery and individual betterment, including techniques to develop balance, transmute sexual energy and better the self
- and the controversial book, Terra-ist Letters, a work that humorously contrasts the very serious issues of global nuclear experimentation promotion and global marijuana prohibition
For more information, visit Ethan on Facebook and check out Ethan’s author page on Amazon.
by Stephen Lendman
So-called Ukrainian democracy is pure fantasy. Tyranny masquerading as rule by the people.
Sunday’s snap unicameral Verkhovna Rada (parliamentary) elections reflected post-February coup business as usual.
Ukraine is a US-installed fascist dictatorship. Its so-called government has no legitimacy whatever.
A previous article discussed whole families contesting for seats. Future deputies were known in advance. They’re relatives of currently serving politicians.
Including oligarch president Petro Poroshenko’s son, Oleksiy. Running for the same Vinnitsa region’s seat his father held previously. Assured of winning before voting began.
According to Itar Tass:
“…Ukraine’s political class is built on the foundation of nepotism and cronyism, as all the political forces display the tradition of nominating candidates on the grounds of kinship.”
A closely controlled family affair with no legitimacy. Powerful interests control things Ordinary people have no say.
Stop NATO founder/editor Rick Rozoff calls Ukraine “a Nazi-like victory of US/NATO lawlessness.” A US-led takeover of formerly sovereign Ukraine.
Planned and executed by neocons and Zbigniew Brzezinski acolytes, says Rozoff. The driving force behind US unipolarity and quest for unchallenged global dominance.
(T) worst thing…in our lifetime for what it signals,” says Rozoff. “(T)he utter triumph of (Western) gangsterism…”
“(A)nd their gutter-snipes and…punks” serving their interests. Fanatical extremists of the worst kind. Usurpers.
Xenophobic, hate-mongering, ultranationalist anti-Semites. Combined representing mob rule. Gangsterism writ large.
Fascism’s reemergence in Europe’s heartland. Inmates running the asylum. A threat to world peace.
On October 26, Washington’s ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt and US OSCE representative Daniel Baer commented on Sunday’s elections.
“(D)emocracy in action,” they said. Phonier than America’s. A “historic day,” they claimed. “(A)nother step in Ukraine’s democratic journey.”
The road to hell more accurately explains things. Half the country opted out. According to Ukraine’s Central Election Commission, turnout was 52.4%.
Ukrainian Civil Network Opora reported 51.2%. Turnout was especially low in Russian speaking regions.
Fifteen Donbass region districts opted out. Around half a million ex-pats were eligible to vote in 72 countries. Many don’t bother registering. Overall turnout was extremely low.
A total of 6,436 candidates competed. Half according to party lists. Others by individual districts single mandate. Some 450 seats were up for grabs.
Donetsk People’s Republic Deputy Prime Minister Andrei Purgin called Ukrainian elections “farc(cial). They “were not free.”
“People are intimidated.” Ukraine’s Southeast “is not represented. We do not care for the elections results, we are not interested in them.”
“We have our own elections that will make the DPR authorities legitimate.”
Purgin expects less “militaristic hysteria.” Likely post-electoral short-term only.
He doubts Kiev’s’s so-called government can resolve intractable conditions. A combination of political illegitimacy, fascist rule and economic chaos.
“Ukraine is in a deep crisis,”he said. “I doubt that the new Parliament will find a way out of it. They have halted the chemical industry.”
“They have lost the East. Europe is paying for Ukrainian gas…A counter-elite comes to power, which is not interested in solving the crisis.”
Lugansk People’s Republic President Igor Piotnitsky said “(w)e will organize our own elections. Our people will hold (them). Ukraine will be our neighbor.”
According to Russian State Duma lower house Foreign Affairs Committee head Alexei Pushkov:
“After the elections, it will become clear to the Ukrainians: nothing will change for the better. Independence did not change the country, but only provided the redistribution of power.”
Andriy Yermolaev heads the “New Ukraine” Institute for Strategic Research.
“Unfortunately, these elections have substituted the task that we were facing in summer – a new national dialogue and national compromise,” he said.
“If we achieved this balance, this truce in summer, this election campaign would have been the answer to the question about (our) future. But now this problem has been substituted.”
No one talked about East/West convergence. “Everyone talked about their future victories. Here we are now reaping the fruits of this.”
According to British Politics First magazine editor Marcus Papadopoulos:
“Ukraine’s Parliamentary elections were a farce, an insult to democracy and an affront to millions of the Ukrainian population.”
Petroshenko-led governance “use(s) the tactics of violence and fomenting fear to suppress the voice of our community in Ukraine: for example, neo-Nazi parades, not so long ago took place in Kyiv, Odessa and Kharkiv, the collapse of the Soviet/Russian monuments, as well as among them monuments of the Second world war, and physical attacks on Russian-speaking politicians, such as Petro Symonenko.”
US-installed fascists destroyed the former dominant Party of Regions, he said. Ukraine’s Communist party is a shadow of its former self.
“While the West – both governments and media outlets – will recognize the outcome of Ukraine’s ‘elections,’ the reality is that millions upon millions of the Ukrainian population did not vote – through fear and/or because there was no choice for them on the ballot paper,” Papadopoulos said.
Millions of Ukrainians are intimidated for their cultural background. They’re second class citizens. Practically nonpersons in their own country.
According to Russia’s National Institute of Modern Ideology Development deputy director Igor Shatrov:
“Most apparently the Petro Poroshenko Bloc, People’s Front and Batkivshchyna will form a ruling coalition. This will possibly also include Svoboda and the Radical Party. Or radicals will join the coalition as long as this is needed.”
“To my mind, an alarming signal for Kiev should be the success of Samopomoshch (Self-Help) led by (western Ukrainian) Lviv Mayor Andriy Sadovy.”
“The results (at parliamentary elections) for this political force show that Western regions had shaped their own view on the country’s future.”
“Meanwhile, this view differs from what Poroshenko declared, as a voter supported his politician there, but not the president. (A)t this stage, Samopomoshch can also join a ruling coalition.”
“(T)he new Rada will have almost no deputies representing the interests of the country’s south-east, and that will not bring stability to Ukraine.”
Nor will formerly dominant Party of Regions have any influence.
“Meanwhile, it should not be forgotten that anti-Russian vector and ‘European dream’ are probably few things in common that unite a majority of those elected…” said Shatrov. “
“Unity in other issues is not expected in the Ukrainian parliament. It should be taken into account that many political forces used this election as a rehearsal and training for more serious battles.”
“They are just waiting for new mistakes made by Poroshenko and his team to make a claim for everything, including the loss of Crimea and Donbass and to take over reins of power.”
Powerful pro-Western interests are “behind each more or less noticeable politician in Ukraine.” Serious battles remain to be fought. Expect nothing positive from their outcome.
Preliminary results will be announced later on Monday. Final ones are expected by October 30.
On October 28, Reuters headlined “Ukraine leader wins pro-West mandate but wary of Russia” saying:
“Pro-Europe parties will dominate Ukraine’s parliament after an election handed President Petro Poroshenko a mandate to end a separatist conflict and steer the country further out of Russia’s orbit into Europe’s mainstream.”
“Poroshenko planned to start coalition talks on Monday after exit polls and partial results showed most of the groups that were holding up democratic and legal reforms demanded by the European Union had been swept out of parliament on Sunday.”
Early totals showed Poroshenko’s bloc and putschist prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk’s People’s Front each getting over 21 percent of votes cast.
In a field of 29 competing parties. Expect them to form what passes for coalition governance.
Perhaps including other “parties of the Maidan” extremists. Fascists by any other name. Tyranny masquerading as democracy. Shaming the real thing.
After polls closed Sunday, Poroshenko ludicrously thanked Ukrainians for a “democratic, reformist, pro-Ukrainian and pro-European majority.”
Illegitimate by any standard. Dark forces run things. Democracy is nowhere in sight. It’s verboten.
Ordinary Ukrainians have no say whatever. Status quo putschist power runs things. Business as usual continues.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached email@example.com.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.
October 23, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci – LD
) – As warned, after multiple staged incidents used to ratchet up fear and paranoia in the build-up to US and its allies’ military intervention in Syria and Iraq, at least two live attacks have now been carried out in Canada – precisely as they were predicted.
The first attack involved a deadly hit-and-run that left one Canadian soldier dead. AP would report in its article, “Terrorist ideology blamed in Canada car attack,” that:
A young convert to Islam who killed a Canadian soldier in a hit-and-run had been on the radar of federal investigators, who feared he had jihadist ambitions and seized his passport when he tried to travel to Turkey, authorities said Tuesday.
The second, most recent attack, involved a shooting in Ottawa injuring several and killing another Canadian soldier. RT in its article, “Ottawa gunman ‘identified’ as recent Muslim convert, high-risk traveler,” would report that:
While the name of the Ottawa gunman is yet to be announced, a number of officials told numerous media that the shooter is believed to be Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, a recent Muslim convert, allegedly designated as a high-risk traveler.
Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was born in Quebec as Michael Joseph Hall north of Montreal, two US officials told Reuters, claiming that American law enforcement agencies have been advised that the attacker recently converted to Islam.
AP sources also identified the man to be Zehaf-Bibeau. A Twitter account associated with Islamic State militants tweeted a photo they identified as the Ottawa shooter. The Globe and Mail reports that the shooter was designated a “high-risk traveler” by the Canadian authorities with his passport seized.
Clearly, both suspects were under the watch of not only Canadian authorities, but also US investigators, before the attacks.
Canada’s Attacks Were Predictable – Western Security Agencies are Prime Suspects
It was warned last month
after security agencies staged scares in both the US and Australia, that suspects under investigation, being walked through planned terrorist attacks by Western security agencies as part of “sting operations” would inevitably be switched to live terrorist attacks.
In mid-September A Rochester man, Mufid A. Elfgeeh, was accused by the FBI of attempting to provide material support to ISIS (undercover FBI agents), attempting to kill US soldiers, and possession of firearms and silencers (provided to him by the FBI). The FBI’s own official press release stated (emphasis added):
According to court records, Elfgeeh attempted to provide material support to ISIS in the form of personnel, namely three individuals, two of whom were cooperating with the FBI. Elfgeeh attempted to assist all three individuals in traveling to Syria to join and fight on behalf of ISIS. Elfgeeh also plotted to shoot and kill members of the United States military who had returned from Iraq. As part of the plan to kill soldiers, Elfgeeh purchased two handguns equipped with firearm silencers and ammunition from a confidential source. The handguns were made inoperable by the FBI before the confidential source gave them to Elfgeeh.
It was warned that only an inoperable firearm stood between Elfgeeh’s arrest and his successful execution of deadly plans hatched by him and his undercover FBI handlers. This script, written by the FBI to entrap Elfgeeh, would be followed almost to the letter in live attacks subsequently carried out in Canada resulting in the death of two Canadian soldiers. Conveniently, both suspects are now dead and little chance remains of ascertaining the truth of who they were in contact with and how they carried out their deadly attacks.
With both suspects having been on both US and Canadian watch lists – it is very likely undercover agents were involved in either one or both cases. While many possibilities exist, Western security agencies should be among the first suspects considered as potential collaborators.
A Modern-Day Operation Gladio - Inducing Fear, Obedience, and Control
Before Elfgeeh’s entrapment and later live attacks in Canada, US policymakers and pundits had begun in earnest setting the rhetorical stage for eventual staged attacks. With serial beheadings failing to raise Western public support necessary for an expedient intervention in Syria, more insidious provocations appeared to be in the works. Setting the stage, a CBS/Associated Press story titled, “Former Deputy CIA Director: ‘I Would Not Be Surprised’ If ISIS Member Shows Up To US Mall Tomorrow With AK-47,” would claim immediately after the initial James Foley ISIS execution video that:
“The short-term concern is the Americans that have gone to fight with ISIS and the west Europeans that have gone to fight with ISIS could be trained and directed by ISIS to come to the United States to conduct small-scale attacks,” Morell stated. “If an ISIS member showed up at a mall in the United States tomorrow with an AK-47 and killed a number of Americans, I would not be surprised.”
Morell warned that over the long-term the extremist group could be planning for a 9/11-style attack that killed thousands of Americans.
The FBI has a long list of foiled terror plots of its own creation
. More disturbingly are the plots they conceived but “accidentally” allowed to go “live.” One might recall the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. FBI agents, according to the New York Times, were indeed overseeing the bombers that detonated a device killing six and wounding many more at the World Trade Center.
In their article, “Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast,” NYT reported:
Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast.
The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer, Emad A. Salem, should be used, the informer said.
The account, which is given in the transcript of hundreds of hours of tape recordings Mr. Salem secretly made of his talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as in a far better position than previously known to foil the Feb. 26 bombing of New York City’s tallest towers. The explosion left six people dead, more than 1,000 injured and damages in excess of half a billion dollars.
Considering the 1993 bombing and the fact that the FBI literally oversaw the construction and deployment of a deadly bomb that killed 6, it is clear that the FBI can at any time through design or disastrous incompetence, turn one of their contrived entrapment cases into a live terror attack. One can only guess at how many similar FBI operations are currently taking place within the United States involving ISIS sympathizers – any one of which could be turned into a live terror attack provided the weapons handed over to potential terrorists are functioning, just as the bomb was in 1993 when it was driven into the lower levels of the World Trade Center.
It is very likely that the recent attacks in Canada involved at least one “informant” working for the FBI. Because the FBI uses confidential informants to handle suspects, if a plot is switched “live,” the informant will be implicated as an accomplice and the FBI’s covert role will remain uncompromised.
Image: The FBI has an impressive portfolio of intentionally created, then foiled terror plots. Its methods include allowing suspects to handle both real and inoperable weapons and explosives. These methods allow the FBI to switch entrapment cases “live” at any moment simply by switching out duds and arrests with real explosives and successful attacks. Because the FBI uses “informants,” when attacks go live, these confidential assets can be blamed, obfuscating the FBI’s involvement.
Everything from a mass shooting to a bombing, and even an Operation Northwoods-style false flag attack involving aircraft could be employed to provide Wall Street and London with the support it needs to accelerate its long-stalled agenda of regime change and reordering in both Syria and across the Iranian arc of influence. Readers may recall Operation Northwoods, reported on in an ABC News article titled, “U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba
,” which bluntly stated:
In the early 1960s, America’s top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
In addition to Operation Northwoods, the public must also consider NATO’s Operation Gladio, and its larger “stay behind” networks established after World War II across Europe and at the center of multiple grisly assassinations, mass shootings, and terrorist bombings designed to demonize the Soviet Union as well as criminalize and crush support for left-leaning political parties growing in popularity in Western Europe. It would be determined that NATO’s own covert militant groups were killing innocent Western Europeans in order to effect a “strategy of tension” used to instill fear, obedience, and control over Western populations.
That the FBI and Australian authorities had coordinated staged security operations in tandem on opposite ends of the globe to terrify their respective populations into line behind an impending war with Syria, and now two highly suspicious attacks have been carried out using the very script Western security agencies were using to lead suspects through “sting operations,” suggests a new “Operation Northwoods” or “Operation Gladio” of sorts is already being executed.
Staged executions on cue by ISIS in the Middle East of US and British citizens at perfectly timed junctures of the West’s attempt to sell intervention both at home and abroad, and now live shootings just in time to heighten a new “strategy of tension” reek of staged mayhem for the sole purpose of provoking war. Could grander and ultimately more tragic mayhem be in store?
As ABC News’ article on Operation Northwoods and the Military Channel’s documentary on Operation Gladio
suggest, there is no line Western special interests will hesitate to cross.
With the West attempting to claim ISIS now has a “global” reach, the US and its partners’ attempts to obfuscate the very obvious state-sponsorship it is receiving will become exponentially more difficult. That the FBI is admittedly stringing along easily manipulated, malevolent patsies who at any time could be handed real weapons and sent on shooting sprees and/or bombings – and now apparently have been – Americans, Canadians, Europeans, and Australians would be foolish to conclude that their real enemy resides somewhere in Syria and not right beside them at home, upon the very seats of Western power.
Proving what we have been saying ALL ALONG… That “Ebola” is largely made up. (Just like the Bird Flu and Pig Flu scares) – This is why the (real) media is not allowed in “Hot Zones”. With poverty in Africa the highest in the world, it doesn’t take much to convince the citizenry to pitch in for a few bucks)
WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT EVERYTHING IS A “HOAX” – The Ebola Head fake just makes sense.
No audio because this was recorded at a Starbucks. Of particular interest is the scam nature of this video, which is most clearly shown at the end where a kid, supposedly dying of “Ebola” obviously falls down in the most incredibly fake acting job ever. Though there is no audio, the scam nature of this video
WHAT IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE TO HAVE “EBOLA”
Video for “Green Shirt” from the “Armed Forces”
WHY? (Money and Power)
DEEP POCKETS OF WORLD “HEALTH” AND RESOURCE CABALS … WHY NOT TRY TO GET MORE MONEY?
Liberia health workers to go on strike over Ebola danger pay
Sales of gas masks, bio-hazard suits and foil blankets soar as ‘survivalists’ prepare for Ebola epidemic – and warn others to store water
“People are all too willing to relinquish their civil rights and personal freedoms in the wake of such engineered frights.”
Details of How Mandatory Ebola “Vaccines” Will Soon Be a Reality
What might it be that the PTB doesn’t want us to see?
Monrovia (AFP) – Liberia said on Friday it was banning journalists from Ebola clinics, defying media rights campaigners who have warned panicked African governments against “muzzling” reporters.
“Journalists are no longer allowed to enter ETUs. These journalists enter the ETUs and cross red lines,” Jackson, the deputy information minister, told listeners to commercial station Sky FM.
“They violate people’s privacy, take pictures that they will sell to international institutions. We are putting an end to that.”
Journalists had earlier been denied access to the Island Clinic in Monrovia to cover a nationwide “go slow” day of action by healthcare workers demanding risk bonuses for treating Ebola.
The minister told the Monrovia-based station he would insist that journalists report his statements from now on rather than what they saw for themselves.
Sources from global aid agency Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF, Doctors Without Borders), which runs a unit of around 250 beds in Monrovia, said it would be writing to the government to ask to be excluded from the ban.
Liberia is ranked 89th out of 180 countries in the 2014 press freedom index produced by Reporters Without Borders. Ebola-hit Sierra Leone is 72nd while Guinea is ranked 102nd.
– ‘Quarantining journalists’ –
The media rights campaign group warned that panicked governments fighting the epidemic were “quarantining” reporters to prevent them covering the crisis.
“Combatting the epidemic needs good media reporting but panicked governments are muzzling journalists,” the organisation, known by its French initials RSF, said in a statement.
Liberia’s announcement came after soldiers prevented the media in Guinea from investigating the murders in September of eight people, including three journalists, during an Ebola education visit.
An AFP correspondent was among a group of journalists who were initially permitted to look around the southern town of Womey on Saturday, accompanied by troops, before suddenly being ordered to leave and having memory cards confiscated.
In Liberia, medics have been banned from communicating directly with the media, RSF said, while Sierra Leone has threatened to adopt draconian measures against journalists criticising its Ebola response.
“We urge these governments not to yield to a panic that could induce them to reverse democratic advances that have taken years to achieve,” said Clea Kahn-Sriber, the head of the group’s Africa desk.
The Island Clinic, Liberia’s largest government Ebola treatment centre, is run by the World Health Organization (WHO) and opened in September.
Like all units run by NGOs, it is under-resourced and overrun by demand, forced to fill in for a public health infrastructure that has been decimated by 14 years of civil war and grinding poverty.
Although a “go slow” campaign was officially due to start on Friday, the clinic has been crippled by staff protests all week.
– ‘We’re risking our lives’ –
“Most of the workers are no longer coming to work. The few ones who come don’t work. We don’t have the manpower needed to do the work here at the centre,” director Atai Omoruto told reporters before the government clampdown.
Omoruto said the centre had been designed for a maximum capacity of 150 beds but had been forced to take in 300 patients.
“But now, we cannot take any new patient because there is no one to take care of them,” he said.
Alphonso Wesseh, representing the clinic’s healthcare workers, told AFP the government had refused to pay benefits for dealing with Ebola and salaries were as low as $250 a month.
“We cannot work under these conditions. We are risking our lives every day and the government remains insensitive to our plight. This is not human.”
Ebola, which spreads through contact with bodily fluids, has infected around 8,000 people and killed almost half of them.
Liberia, the country hit hardest by the outbreak, has seen more than 2,000 deaths — including 94 healthcare workers — from the haemorrhagic fever which the virus causes.
President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and her counterparts in Sierra Leone and Guinea pressed the heads of the International Monetary Fund, United Nations and World Bank on Thursday for a more rapid rollout of support to fight the epidemic.
“This will also require support for compensation to healthcare workers who, for fear of the risk involved, have refused or are reluctant to return to work,” she told the Washington conference via video link.
October 3, 2014
I have presented this information, in depth, in other recent articles. Here I present the bare bones.
Q: What is the major psychological factor at work here?
A: Above all else, it is people making an automatic connection between their own frightening image of Ebola and the statement, “So-and-so is sick.”
Q: “Sick” doesn’t automatically=Ebola?
A: That’s right, even when an authority says some person is sick and in the hospital and has Ebola.
Q: Is the Ebola epidemic a fraud, in the same way that Swine Flu was a fraud?
A: In the summer of 2009, the CDC stopped counting cases of Swine Flu in the US.
A: Because lab tests on samples taken from likely and diagnosed Swine Flu cases showed no presence of the Swine Flu virus or any other kind of flu virus.
Q: So the CDC was caught with its pants down.
A: Around its ankles. It was claiming tens of thousands of Americans had Swine Flu, when that wasn’t the case at all. So why should we believe them now, when they say, “The patient was tested and he has Ebola.” The CDC is Fraud Central.
Q: Where is the fraud now, when it comes to counting Ebola cases and labeling people with the Ebola diagnosis?
A: The diagnostic tests being run on patients—the antibody and PCR tests are most frequently used—are utterly unreliable and useless.
Q: Therefore, many, many people could be labeled “Ebola,” when that is not the case at all?
Q: But people are sick and dying.
A: People are always sick and dying. You can find them anywhere you look. That doesn’t mean they’re Ebola cases.
Q: In other words, medical authorities can place a kind of theoretical grid over sick and dying people and reinterpret them as “Ebola.”
A: Exactly. The map can be drawn in any number of ways.
Q: Could an “Ebola patient” have other viruses in his body?
A: Of course. Many other viruses. The mere presence of a virus does not mean a person is sick or is going to get sick.
Q: What test needs to be run, in order to say, “This person is sick because of Ebola.”
A: First of all, the Ebola virus would need to be isolated from the patient directly. The two tests I mentioned above are indirect. Then, if Ebola is isolated from the patient directly, a test needs to show that the patient is harboring millions of active Ebola virus—that’s called a test for titer.
Q: Are these procedures being done as a matter of course on people suspected of having Ebola?
Q: We’re told that the Dallas Ebola patient was vomiting profusely outside his apartment, before he was sent to the hospital. Isn’t this a symptom of Ebola?
A: It could be a symptom of many things. Some news reports state that the patient had already been to the hospital, where he was given antibiotics and sent home. All classes of antibiotics list nausea and vomiting as adverse effects.
Q: So the symptoms of Ebola, like cough, fever, fatigue, diarrhea—these can be attributed to many causes?
A: Absolutely. The flu, for example.
Q: Now we’re seeing a search operation for contacts of several Ebola patients.
A: This will whip up hysteria to new heights. But where is the proof that the original patients have Ebola?
Q: Again, the original patients are sick.
A: “Sick” does not automatically equal “Ebola.”
Q: What’s killing all those people in West Africa?
A: With the tests being run on them—and many are simply eyeballed and called “Ebola”—there is no proof that any of these people have Ebola.
Q: There are other long-term reasons for death and dying in West Africa?
A: Protein-calorie malnutrition, hunger, starvation, extreme poverty, contaminated water supplies, overall lack of basic sanitation, a decade of horrific war, toxic medical drugs, prior toxic vaccine campaigns, etc.
Q: And the combined effect of these conditions?
A: Destruction of immune systems. Then, any germ that sweeps through the population, a germ that would ordinarily be defeated, instead kills many people. Why? Because the immune system is too weak to respond. With healthy and strong immune systems, the germs would have no significant effect.
Q: What about the health workers in West Africa who have died?
A: Since unreliable diagnostic tests would have been run on them, we don’t have any idea why they died. But at least some of them were suffering greatly from working inside hazmat suits, sealed off from the outside. In a one-hour shift, in boiling heat, they were losing five quarts of body fluid, then coming out, rehydrating, disinfecting with toxic chemicals, putting their suits on again, going back to patients for the next shift, losing extraordinary amounts of body fluid again, and so forth and so on. That would cause anyone to collapse.
Q: But this has to be an Ebola epidemic, with all the press coverage, with statements from the CDC, with announcements from experts.
A: That’s what they said about Swine Flu, which was a dud. This doesn’t have to be Ebola just because official sources say it is.
Q: Let’s get back to the psychological factors involved here.
A: A person has heard all about how dangerous Ebola is. He has a fear of some unknown invisible tiny killer, a virus. He has heard about “bad diseases” coming from Africa. Now, someone from the CDC stands up and talks about the threat of Ebola and says a patient with Ebola is in a Dallas hospital, and is sick. What’s the effect? Utter acceptance of the idea that the hospital patient has Ebola. “It’s Ebola. It couldn’t be anything else.”
Q: But it could be something else?
A: Of course.
Q: People don’t want to accept that, though. They want to believe in the doctors and the CDC and the tests that are run on people to decide if they have Ebola.
A: That belief isn’t based on anything real.
Q: People believe in the power of what they’re told.
A: Yes. It’s interesting to see people who otherwise call the CDC a fraud suddenly accept the CDC’s edict about Ebola. There is no rational substance to that acceptance.
Q: So to be clear, you’re saying there might not be an Ebola epidemic at all.
A: What do you need to determine whether people have Ebola? Accurate diagnostic tests. Accurate tests aren’t being done. So this is an unproven epidemic. And making the assertion of an epidemic is a hoax.
Q: Like the Swine Flu.
A: Exactly. As I said, in the summer of 2009, the CDC stopped counting cases of Swine Flu and yet maintained there was an epidemic. The samples of blood from patients they sent to labs showed, in the overwhelmingly number of cases, that there was no Swine Flu virus present.
Q: And at that time, how many cases of Swine Flu had the CDC already said were present in the US?
A: Tens of thousands.
Q: And what did the CDC do next?
A: Unbelievably, they doubled down and estimated there were 22 MILLION cases of Swine Flu in the US. That’s the level of lying we’re dealing with here. And now, the CDC says Ebola is loose. The diagnostic tests they’re running and relying on are useless. But everybody and his brother believes the CDC.
Q: Again, people dying doesn’t automatically equal Ebola? You’ll hear, “What else could it be? It must be Ebola.”
A: People have all sorts of preconceptions that lead them to say, “It must be Ebola.” Here is the sequence: We hear nothing about people dying. Then the press reports, “People are dying. It’s an outbreak. It’s Ebola.” And that is automatically accepted. Why? Because populations have been tuned up by decades of propaganda to make those connections.
Q: Believing what you say here—this would imply such an enormous level of fraud—it’s unthinkable.
A: No, it’s not unthinkable. Again, for comparison, I refer you to the Swine Flu hoax. That was absolutely staggering. It was exposed by CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson in October of 2009. She published her work on the CBS website. CBS was about to put the story on the Evening News. Then it was stopped. Attkisson was cut off at the knees. Censored.
A: Because the entire vaccine establishment, including the CDC, which is really a PR agency for pharmaceutical companies, would have been exposed for all to see. By calling Swine Flu an epidemic, millions and millions of Swine Flu shots were given. The CDC, knowing the “epidemic” was a fraud, their own fraud, was pitching the vaccine as if their lives depended on it.
Q: Was the World Health Organization (WHO) involved in the fraud?
A: They started it.
A: As Peter Doshi has written in BMJ Online, in the spring of 2009, with only 20 cases of Swine Flu in the world—20—the WHO declared Swine Flu a “level 6 pandemic,” their highest classification of danger. Not only that, they changed their own definition of “pandemic,” so that it no longer had to mean widespread and severe death and dying. They just changed the meaning of word “pandemic.” Quite Orwellian.
Q: But the US government is buying and distributing hazmat suits. People are being quarantined. There is a hunt for contacts of the Dallas patient. Stories in the press are ramping up fear. All these people couldn’t be wrong.
A: I have condos for sale on the moon. I think you might be an ideal customer.
Q: Speaking of the CDC, a long-term scientist with the agency, William Thompson, recently admitted he committed fraud, when he co-authored a 2004 study that claimed the MMR vaccine had no connection to autism.
A: Thompson had several co-authors from the CDC on that study. They all committed fraud. Consider the conversations that must have taken place at the CDC to arrange that fraud.
Q: Do you think the fraud went all the way to the top of the CDC?
A: In 2004, whistleblower Thompson wrote a letter to Julie Gerberding, the head of the CDC. He warned her he was about to present troubling and sensitive data about the vaccine at an upcoming conference on vaccines and autism. His meaning was clear. He had found a vaccine-autism connection.
Q: What did Gerberding do?
A: She never answered Thompson’s letter, and his presentation at the conference was canceled.
Q: Is Gerberding still the head of the CDC?
A: No. She left the CDC in 2009.
Q: Where is she now?
A: She’s the president of Merck vaccines.
Q: What vaccine do they manufacture?
A: The MMR.
Q: The same vaccine Thompson found had a connection to autism?
Q: And for 10 years, from 2004 to now, Thompson and his co-authors sat on the knowledge that the MMR vaccine has a connection to autism?
Q: And this is the same CDC that now wants us to believe that there is an Ebola epidemic?
A: Yes. As I was saying, I have a lovely condo for you on the dark side of the moon. Swimming pool, outdoor grill, playground for the kiddies, nine-hole golf course. Interested?
Q: No comment. But since we’ve come this far, perhaps you could explain why the tests for diagnosing Ebola are unreliable and useless.
A: Let’s start with the antibody test. Two problems. First, the test is notorious for what’s called “cross-reactions.” That means the test isn’t really registering, in this case, the presence of Ebola. It’s registering one of a whole host of other factors. For example, the patient received a vaccine, and that triggers a falsely positive reading.
Q: What’s the second problem?
A: The antibody test doesn’t say whether a person was sick, is sick, or will get sick. At best, if there are no cross-reactions, it merely says the person had contact with the virus in question. So a positive antibody test for Ebola is far from saying “this person has Ebola.” That’s a lie. In fact, before 1985, the general conclusion from positive antibody tests was: this is a good sign; the patient’s immune system contacted the germ and threw it off, defeated it.
Q: What about the PCR test for Ebola?
A: This test is prone to many mistakes, starting with the tiny, tiny sample of material taken from the patient. Is it really genetic material, and is that material really a piece of a virus, or is it just a piece of general and irrelevant debris? The test itself takes that tiny sample and amplifies it millions of times so it can be observed. Assuming it is actually Ebola virus, or a fragment of Ebola virus, there is no indication there is enough of the virus in the patient’s body to make him sick. There have to be millions upon millions of active virus in the patient’s body to begin to say that virus is causing problems. The PCR test says nothing about that. In fact, why was it necessary to do the PCR test at all? If the patient had enough Ebola virus in his body to cause illness, there was no need to search for a tiny fragment of a hoped-for Ebola virus, to start the PCR test. The virus would have been everywhere.
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com.
Next Page »