Humint Events Online: April 2017

Sunday, April 23, 2017

Quarantine Escape Watch, 33 Watch and Earth Day

Really great bit from Bill Maher on Mars versus Earth:

Maher makes a point I hadn't really thought about or heard much of, but there is a big push by the elites and PTB to colonize and settle Mars.

Particularly disturbing is Trump, who has slashed the EPA budget and is helping accelerate climate change and environmental destruction, has slashed much science funding, signed a NASA funding bill with strong funding, and endorsed the goal of going to Mars by 2033.

It doesn't get much more obvious than that:  
that these fuckers don't care about this planet or the humans on it, and are desperate to escape this planet.

This idea does fit perfectly with what A.P. proposed as the goal of the evil ETs quarantined on earth-- eascaping the earth and the space quarantine.

It's also pretty fucked and disturbing how much Trump talks about nuclear weapons and says the real worry about global warming should be from using nuclear weapons.

So the evil fuckers are still up to their old tricks, which is what I figured would be the case when this monster psychopathic man was "elected".

The fact is-- we need to SAVE THIS PLANET.



"Cause there is no more new frontier, we have got to make it here"
Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Hard Proof of Trump Treason?

From Louise Mensch:
Carter Page Went to Moscow With a Tape of Donald Trump Offering Treason For Hacking
April 16, 2017 ~ patribotics
Sources with links to the intelligence community say it is believed that Carter Page went to Moscow in early July carrying with him a pre-recorded tape of Donald Trump offering to change American policy if he were to be elected, to make it more favorable to Putin. In exchange, Page was authorized directly by Trump to request the help of the Russian government in hacking the election.

All I will say is that it is plausible, even though hard to believe. But multiple people are now saying there is evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia, and it is only a matter of time before it all comes out.  If so, this would be the biggest political scandal in US history, I think.
Bookmark and Share

Alex Jones in Child Custody Battle, Reveals He Is a Performance Artist

uh huh... just like Trump I suppose...
At a recent pretrial hearing, attorney Randall Wilhite told state District Judge Orlinda Naranjo that using his client Alex Jones’ on-air Infowars persona to evaluate Alex Jones as a father would be like judging Jack Nicholson in a custody dispute based on his performance as the Joker in “Batman.”
“He’s playing a character,” Wilhite said of Jones. “He is a performance artist.”
But in emotional testimony at the hearing, Kelly Jones, who is seeking to gain sole or joint custody of her three children with Alex Jones, portrayed the volcanic public figure as the real Alex Jones. “He’s not a stable person,” she said of the man with whom her 14-year-old son and 9- and 12-year-old daughters have lived since her 2015 divorce. “He says he wants to break Alec Baldwin’s neck. He wants J-Lo to get raped. “I’m concerned that he is engaged in felonious behavior, threatening a member of Congress,” she said, referring to his recent comments about California Democrat Adam Schiff.
“He broadcasts from home. The children are there, watching him broadcast.”
Beginning Monday, a jury will be selected at the Travis County Courthouse that in the next two weeks will be asked to sort out whether there is a difference between the public and private Alex Jones, and whether, when it comes to his fitness as a parent, it matters.
For Naranjo, who has been the presiding judge of the 419th District Court since January 2006, it is about keeping her eyes, and the jury’s eyes, on the children. “This case is not about Infowars, and I don’t want it to be about Infowars,” Naranjo told the top-shelf legal talent enlisted in Jones v. Jones at the last pretrial hearing Wednesday. “I am in control of this court, not your clients.”
But for Alex Jones, at the peak of his power and influence, what emerges from the art deco courthouse on Guadalupe Street might shape whether he comes to be seen by his faithful as more prophet or showman.
Bookmark and Share

Monday, April 10, 2017

"Wag The Dog — How Al Qaeda Played Donald Trump And The American Media"

Excellent, long detailed piece by Scott Ritter

It makes a good case that the gas attack at Khan Sheikhoun was probably, in fact crude chlorine gas made by the local jihadi group linked to ISIS, and was hence, a false-flag attack meant to spur US action.

Many of the fighters affiliated with Tahrir al-Sham are veterans of the battle for Aleppo, and as such are intimately familiar with the tools and trade of the extensive propaganda battle that was waged simultaneously with the actual fighting in an effort to sway western public opinion toward adopting a more aggressive stance in opposition to the Syrian government of Assad. These tools were brought to bear in promoting a counter-narrative about the Khan Sheikhoun chemical incident (ironically, many of the activists in question, including the “White Helmets,” were trained and equipped in social media manipulation tactics using money provided by the United States; that these techniques would end up being used to manipulate an American President into carrying out an act of war most likely never factored into the thinking of the State Department personnel who conceived and implemented the program).
Even slick media training, however, cannot gloss over basic factual inconsistencies. Early on, the anti-Assad opposition media outlets were labeling the Khan Sheikhoun incident as a “Sarin nerve agent” attack; one doctor affiliated with Al Qaeda sent out images and commentary via social media that documented symptoms, such as dilated pupils, that he diagnosed as stemming from exposure to Sarin nerve agent. Sarin, however, is an odorless, colorless material, dispersed as either a liquid or vapor; eyewitnesses speak of a “pungent odor” and “blue-yellow” clouds, more indicative of chlorine gas. And while American media outlets, such as CNN, have spoken of munitions “filled to the brim” with Sarin nerve agent being used at Khan Sheikhoun, there is simply no evidence cited by any source that can sustain such an account.
Heartbreaking images of victims being treated by “White Helmet” rescuers have been cited as proof of Sarin-like symptoms, the medical viability of these images is in question; there are no images taken of victims at the scene of the attack. Instead, the video provided by the “White Helmets” is of decontamination and treatment carried out at a “White Helmet” base after the victims, either dead or injured, were transported there. The lack of viable protective clothing worn by the “White Helmet” personnel while handling victims is another indication that the chemical in question was not military grade Sarin; if it were, the rescuers would themselves have become victims (some accounts speak of just this phenomena, but this occurred at the site of the attack, where the rescuers were overcome by a “pungent smelling” chemical – again, Sarin is odorless.)
More than 20 victims of the Khan Sheikhoun incident were transported to Turkish hospitals for care; three subsequently died. According to the Turkish Justice Minister, autopsies conducted on the bodies confirm that the cause of death was exposure to chemical agents. The World Health Organization has indicated that the symptoms of the Khan Sheikhoun victims are consistent with both Sarin and Chlorine exposure. American media outlets have latched onto the Turkish and WHO statements as “proof” of Syrian government involvement; however, any exposure to the chlorine/white phosphorous blend associated with Al Nusra chemical weapons would produce similar symptoms.
Moreover, if Al Nusra was replicating the type of low-grade Sarin it employed at Ghouta in 2013 at Khan Sheikhoun, it is highly likely that some of the victims in question would exhibit Sarin-like symptoms. Blood samples taken from the victims could provide a more precise readout of the specific chemical exposure involved; such samples have allegedly been collected by Al Nusra-affiliated personnel, and turned over to international investigators (the notion that any serious investigatory body would allow Al Nusra to provide forensic evidence in support of an investigation where it is one of only two potential culprits is mindboggling, but that is precisely what has happened). But the Trump administration chose to act before these samples could be processed, perhaps afraid that their results would not sustain the underlying allegation of the employment of Sarin by the Syrian air force.

Looking at it this way, and in a more conspiratorial light:
1) ISIS-linked jihadi groups are linked to the CIA (not a big leap and the White Helmets have US propaganda, i.e. CIA training):
2) the CIA does not want Trump getting too friendly with the Russians
3) this could be a provocation by the US deep state to get Trump to act to go against Assad and hence, Russia.

And as I posted previously, Trump has his own reasons for wanting to carry out the strike-- it's a wonderful diversion from many issues, even though it doesn't solve anything in the long run. So it's not clear how much Trump is giving into "globalists" or "Zionists", although they were a factor no doubt.

The over-arching problem is Trump's lack of any coherent policy and general lack of thought.
The real culprits here are the Trump administration, and President Trump himself. The president’s record of placing more weight on what he sees on television than the intelligence briefings he may or may not be getting, and his lack of intellectual curiosity and unfamiliarity with the nuances and complexities of both foreign and national security policy, created the conditions where the imagery of the Khan Sheikhoun victims that had been disseminated by pro-Al Nusra (i.e., Al Qaeda) outlets could influence critical life-or-death decisions.
That President Trump could be susceptible to such obvious manipulation is not surprising, given his predilection for counter-punching on Twitter for any perceived slight; that his national security team allowed him to be manipulated thus, and did nothing to sway Trump’s opinion or forestall action pending a thorough review of the facts, is scandalous. History will show that Donald Trump, his advisors and the American media were little more than willing dupes for Al Qaeda and its affiliates, whose manipulation of the Syrian narrative resulted in a major policy shift that furthers their objectives.
The other winner in this sorry story is ISIS, which took advantage of the American strike against Al Shayrat to launch a major offensive against Syrian government forces around the city of Palmyra (Al Shayrat had served as the principal air base for operations in the Palmyra region). The breakdown in relations between Russia and the United States means that, for the foreseeable future at least, the kind of coordination that had been taking place in the fight against ISIS is a thing of the past, a fact that can only bode well for the fighters of ISIS.
For a man who placed so much emphasis on defeating ISIS, President Trump’s actions can only be viewed as a self-inflicted wound, a kind of circular firing squad that marks the actions of a Keystone Cop, and not the Commander in Chief of the most powerful nation in the world.
But the person who might get the last laugh is President Assad himself. While the Pentagon has claimed that it significantly degraded the Al Shayrat air base, with 58 of 59 cruise missile hitting their targets, Russia has stated that only 23 cruise missiles impacted the facility, and these did only limited damage. The runway was undamaged; indeed, in the afternoon of April 7, 2017, a Syrian air force fighter-bomber took off from Al Shayrat, flew to Idlib Province, where it attacked Al Nusra positions near Khan Sheikhoun.

Ultimately there is no easy solution to Syria. It's a huge mess, with no good guys. The only way to stop the fighting would be to cut off arms shipments to Saudi Arabia and Turkey and other Sunni Arab states by the US and the EU.

Finally, this podcast is quite worth a listen, Rania Khalek is a great source for truth in Syria and "the War on Terror".
Bookmark and Share

Sunday, April 09, 2017

Trump and the Media Have a Wargasm Over Syria Strike

Trump of course is a very unpopular president, record low approval for this early stage, and there are questions about his competency, mental stability and improper ties to Russia, among other problems this very unqualified president has.

So what better than to start a new war, or take military action, to goose up those approval ratings?  Of course the military LOVES war especially corporate cable TV news (mother fucking blood suckers-- isn't their a law against war profiteering?).

And better yet-- attack Syria, an ally of Russia, which should dispel some worries about Trump's ties to Russia and Putin. Also, attack on "humanitarian grounds", which will win over some squishy liberal pundits, and make Trump seem like he cares (when he obviously doesn't).

It also did something Obama didn't do, bomb Syria after the 2013 attack, despite the fact the GOP then was quite against such military action (as was I).

So some 59 cruise missiles were shot at a military airbase, at a tune of about $90 million bucks (a pittance for the US military of course).

Never mind that the air strip was functional less than 24 hours later and then used to bomb more Syrians. Never mind that to avoid causing a problem with Russia, the Russians were pre-warned and of course, they then warned Syria, so they could evacuate. All in all, the attack seems to be a sham. The evidence that Trump's completely ineffectual military strike on Syria was just an empty political gesture is overwhelming.

But the media goosing was accomplished, and it was a great diversion from other troubles the Trump administration has, especially the Russia ties and campaign collusion (treason) hearings. Also it distracted from the hugely important US-China summit that was going on at the same time as the strike and which was completely over-shadowed by the Syrian strike. For all his tough talk about China during the campaign, Trump basically was a pushover in the meeting with the Chinese, and it seems like not much was changed (even though Trump was furious previously with how the Chinese had "raped us"). Amusingly, the Chinese mocked Trump about the missile strike after they left the US.

Was it actually a ruse by the Russians? It seems plausible:
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell tonight opened his show positing that “if Vladimir Putin masterminded the last week in Syria, he has gotten everything he could have asked for.” He argued that it’s conceivable that Putin could have told Bashar al-Assad to carry out a small chemical attack “just big enough to attract media attention so that my friend in the White House will see it on TV” and then Trump can fire missiles that will “do no real damage” to ensure that the U.S. media will “change the subject from Russian influence” on the White House. O’Donnell said it certainly “changes the conventional wisdom” about the dynamic between Trump and Russia, “as long as you never, never question whether Vladimir Putin wanted all of this to happen this week.”

One thing for sure is that Trump's alt-right, conspiracy fan base is upset about the Syrian strike, saying he gave into the Neocons and he's just another US president controlled by Jews and globalists and the military-industrial complex. To which I say, no shit. It was the stupidest kind of wishful thinking to think Trump would be any sort of "peace" or "truth" president, instead of the clueless arrogant asshole he is, who is easily swayed by whatever he sees on TV and whoever plays to his ego.

And not shockingly either, attacks on ISIS in Syria are now down.

Also, worth mentioning that during the campaign, there were HUGE fears about Hillary starting WWIII by pissing off the Russians by going into Syria. I'd say those fears are quite a bit bigger with respect to the unstable Trump taking military action in Syria.
Bookmark and Share

Bizarre Brazilian Abduction UFO-Related Story

Bruno Borges, 24, reportedly went missing from his family home in Brazil on March 27.
The psychology student’s disappearance has sparked international interest after a bizarre video of his bedroom was leaked online. The seriously freaky footage shows he had transformed his room into a kind of shrine, covering his walls with a coded writing and installing a huge statue of philosopher Giordano Bruno.
Giordano Bruno was one of the first thinkers to predict the existence of extraterrestrial life – and some have suggested the boy was trying to complete his work. Police investigating Bruno’s disappearance say “all possibilities are being considered”.
14 books, each marked with Roman numberals, were left behind by Bruno Borges. “He only told me that he was writing 14 books that would change mankind in a good way” --Mum Denise Borges
Weird signs associated with Satanism and the Illuminati covered the floor. And an eerie self-portrait of the boy with an alien was found on the wall. The creepy coincidences have sent the internet into meltdown – and led some to speculate Bruno has been taken away in a UFO. There is a painting of Bruno Borges with an alien.
Bruno had been working on a secretive project before he vanished. Relatives say he was constantly asking them for funding for the scheme – but refused to give details apart from saying he was writing a series of books that would “change humanity in a good way”.
Bruno Borges appears to have been obsessed with aliens. Fourteen bound manuscripts – each with a Roman numeral on it – were found in the room. They were written in the same code as that on the walls. Police have reportedly confiscated the volumes. But a photograph that allegedly shows one page of one of the books has appeared online and has been “decoded” by a Brazilian computer expert.
One passage supposedly says: “It is easy to accept what you have been taught since childhood and what is wrong. “It is difficult, as an adult, to understand that you were wrongly taught what you suspected was correct since you were a child. “In other words, if you fit into the system, your behaviour will be determined, making you at the mercy of beliefs already provided and well established in dogmas and rituals, with the masses.”
Bookmark and Share

Kubrick and "The Shining"

I watched this classic and odd movie a couple nights ago, and of course couldn't forget the idea that it was largely symbolic of Kubrick's role in creating fake moon landing footage:
The audience watching the film literally sees the launch of Apollo 11, right before their eyes, as Danny rises from the floor. It isn't the real launch of Apollo 11, it is, of course, the symbolic launching of Apollo 11. In other words - it isn't real. What happens next is crucial to understanding everything else that happens in the film. Danny, bewildered, walks down the hallway. He sees that Room 237 - the room that Halorann warned him about - has a key in the lock and the door is wide open.
It is important to note that the room in question was numbered 217 in the Stephen King version of The Shining. For unknown reason's Kubrick changed it to 237. Those unknown reasons are about to be come known. Danny is literally carrying a symbolic Apollo 11, on his body, via the sweater, to the Moon as he walks over to room 237. Why do I think this? Because the average distance from the Earth to the Moon is 237,000 miles.
The real truth is that this movie is really about the deal that Stanley Kubrick made with the Manager of the Overlook Hotel (America). This deal was to get Kubrick to re-create, in other words, to fake, the Apollo 11 Moon landing.
Danny represents the artistic side of Kubrick. Because of the complexity of the artistic realization of the manner in which the lunar landings needed to appear, Kubrick needed to trust his artistic side.
Room 237 represents the fake lunar set that Stanley had to create to make the lunar landings appear factual. But really, on this set, and in this room, nothing is real. As the film will soon reveal, Room 237 has to be lied about. It cannot be understood at all… ever. Nothing real ever happens in room 237. For a moment, in the film, it looks like Danny is actually going to enter Room 237. But we are never sure.
In the next scene Jack has a bad dream while he is working. He tells Wendy that in his dream he has killed Wendy and Danny. Meanwhile Danny enters the scene and it is obvious that some mysterious force has physically hurt Danny. This mysterious force has also torn his Apollo 11 sweater.
 Without knowing this, you would never guess, the symbolism is very subtle. But once you know it, it's hard to deny. There is a lot more to the argument in the essay, there are a lot of images from the movie, and the essay is a great read, but this is the crux.

I also noticed something else not mentioned in the essay-- how Danny rides his big wheel around the hotel in a circuit, almost like an orbit. So his little bike is symbolic of the Apollo craft orbiting the moon.

The author of this essay is Jay Weidner, who subscribes to the secret space program theory, that I do not believe. It seems like disinfo to me and doesn't make a lot of sense. It seems silly to fake the moon landings if we are actually going there anyway.
Bookmark and Share

Why Didn't Obama Prosecute the Bush Administration War Criminals?

I hadn't really heard this argument before, but it does have some merit brought to light by Trump's craziness:
No, what concerns me about this story is whether Trump has really thought this through. One of the few political norms that has endured into the 21st century is that new administrations are reluctant to prosecute high-ranking officials from past administrations for bad behavior. During the 2016 presidential campaign Trump promised to prosecute Hillary Clinton for Benghazi but backed down from that promise during the transition. When Barack Obama replaced George W. Bush, he decided not to prosecute any Bush officials for anything related to the torturing of prisoners in the War on Terror. Writing in Slate in 2014, Eric Posner explained why Obama made that decision:
Obama’s best argument for letting matters rest is the principle against criminalizing politics. This is the idea that you don’t try to gain political advantage by prosecuting political opponents — as governments around the world do when authoritarian leaders seek to subvert democratic institutions. Of course, if a Republican senator takes bribes or murders his valet, the government should prosecute him. But those cases involve criminal activity that is unrelated to the public interest. When the president takes actions that he sincerely believes advance national security, and officials throughout the government participate for the same reason, then an effort to punish the behavior — unavoidably, a massive effort that could result in trials of hundreds of people — poses a real risk to democratic governance.
Obama’s problem is that if he can prosecute Republican officeholders for authorizing torture, then the next Republican president can prosecute Obama and his subordinates for the many questionable legal actions of the Obama administration.
The more that Trump says that members of the Obama administration committed high crimes and misdemeanors, the more he will criminalize politics. That kind of rhetoric will no doubt play well with his base, and stoke the partisan fires for a bit longer. Much like Trump’s proposed EPA cuts, however, the long-term effects will be devastating. The ongoing polarization of American politics suggests that the next Democratic president will need to play to his or her base just as much as Trump is doing right now.
Trump’s provocative rhetoric creates a powerful precedent for the next Democratic president to investigate former Trump officials for crimes as well. And given who the president is and how this administration has been run, it seems like a target-rich environment for any decent prosecutor. I’m sure that Trump thinks that, as president, he is above the law. Eventually, however, he’ll be an ex-president. He should remember that before violating more political norms.
Bookmark and Share

Monday, April 03, 2017

What Is It with Trump and Russia

The Federal Bureau of Investigation cannot tell us what we need to know about Donald Trump’s contacts with Russia. Why? Because doing so would jeopardize a long-running, ultra-sensitive operation targeting mobsters tied to Russian President Vladimir Putin — and to Trump.
But the Feds’ stonewalling risks something far more dangerous: Failing to resolve a crisis of trust in America’s president. WhoWhatWhy provides the details of a two-month investigation in this 6,500-word exposé.
The FBI apparently knew, directly or indirectly, based upon available facts, that prior to Election Day, Trump and his campaign had personal and business dealings with certain individuals and entities linked to criminal elements — including reputed Russian gangsters — connected to Putin.
The same facts suggest that the FBI knew or should have known enough prior to the election to justify informing the public about its ongoing investigation of potentially compromising relationships between Trump, Putin, and Russian mobsters — even if it meant losing or exposing a valued informant.

The Steele dossier got additional confirmation, and this bit is key:
In the report, Steele spoke of an "established operational liaison between the TRUMP team and the Kremlin… an intelligence exchange had been running between them for at least 8 years."
Members of the Obama administration believe, based on analysis they saw from the intelligence community, that the information exchange claimed by Steele continued into the election.
"This is a three-headed operation," said one former official, setting out the case, based on the intelligence: Firstly, hackers steal damaging emails from senior Democrats. Secondly, the stories based on this hacked information appear on Twitter and Facebook, posted by thousands of automated "bots", then on Russia's English-language outlets, RT and Sputnik, then right-wing US "news" sites such as Infowars and Breitbart, then Fox and the mainstream media. Thirdly, Russia downloads the online voter rolls. The voter rolls are said to fit into this because of "microtargeting". Using email, Facebook and Twitter, political advertising can be tailored very precisely: individual messaging for individual voters. "You are stealing the stuff and pushing it back into the US body politic," said the former official, "you know where to target that stuff when you're pushing it back."
This would take co-operation with the Trump campaign, it is claimed. 
"If you need to ensure that white women in Pennsylvania don't vote or independents get pissed in Michigan so they stay home: that's voter suppression. You can figure what your target demographics and locations are from the voter rolls. Then you can use that to target your bot."
This is the "big picture" some accuse the FBI of failing to see. It is, so far, all allegation - and not just the parts concerning Donald Trump and his people. For instance, the US intelligence agencies said last October that the voter rolls had been "scanned and probed" from a server in Russia.
But the Russian government was never shown to have been responsible. There are either a series of coincidences or there is a conspiracy of such reach and sophistication that it may take years to unravel.
"I hear a lot of people comparing this to Watergate," said Congressman Eric Swalwell, a Democrat who sits on the House Intelligence Committee. "Let me just tell you, the complexity of this case is unlike anything we've ever seen. "Watergate doesn't even come close. That was a burglary in the Metro section of the Washington Post. "It doesn't have the international waypoints [of this]. Russia's M.O. is to avoid attribution. This investigation is going to take time."
In his testimony, the FBI director gave away nothing of the details of the inquiry. As I wrote in January, it is being done by a "counter-intelligence taskforce" that includes the CIA, with the FBI leading. I wrote then that the secret US intelligence court had granted an order, a so-called Fisa warrant, to intercept the electronic records of two Russian banks.
The White House cited this report several times as evidence for President Trump's tweets that "Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower… This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!" It isn't. Since Watergate, no president can simply order the CIA or FBI to tap someone's phone.
I wrote that: "Neither Trump nor his associates are named in the Fisa order." If they were, the court would have to see "probable cause" that they were agents of a foreign power. It is possible that the communications of Trump associates were picked up in monitoring of foreign entities, such as the Russian banks, so-called "incidental collection". This is presumably what the White House spokesman, Sean Spicer, is talking about when he asks Congress to investigate an "abuse of power" by the Obama administration.
Comey was careful in his testimony to say the investigation was into "co-ordination" rather than collusion. "Collusion is not a term, a legal term of art," he said, "and it's one I haven't used here today, as we're investigating to see whether there was any co-ordination…"
Comey's testimony confirmed there was an open investigation over the links between the Trump campaign and Russia - but not much more "Explicit or implicit coordination?" a Congressman asked. "Knowing or unknowing," Comey replied. The investigation, then, is into a range of possibilities: at one end, unwitting co-operation with Russia by members of the Trump campaign; at the other conscious "co-ordination".
Hillary Clinton's former campaign manager, Robby Mook, said that if Trump's aides knew of Russia's plans, there should be charges of treason. Trump's enemies ask us to believe that some of his people were either traitors or dupes.
The president himself has another version of events: there was no "co-ordination"; the whole thing is a monstrous lie created by the Obama administration, fed by the intelligence community and amplified by the "dishonest" media, billowing black clouds of smoke but no fire.
When the dossier was released, he tweeted: "Are we living in Nazi Germany?" These two stories cannot be reconciled. With each new drip of information, option three - the chance that this is all a giant mistake, an improbable series of coincidences - seems further out of reach.

I think it's quite striking that Michael Flynn was actually anti-Russia until he joined the Trump campaign.  So, it's not that people brought into the campaign made Trump more pro-Russia, it was the other way around. That fits with the idea that Trump was pro-Russia way back... not just recruited recently.
Bookmark and Share

33 (333) of the Day

For the second consecutive year, Japanese whalers have returned to port after an Antarctic expedition with the carcasses of 333 whales.

2 years in a row with 333? That can't be a coincidence...
Bookmark and Share

When Even Noam Chomsky Warns of a False-Flag...

You gotta go, WTF?
Following the collapse of the president's healthcare law, and with Trump hitting new lows in the latest popularity polls, academic and left-wing intellectual Noam Chomsky is calling for vigilance against possible "false flag" terrorist attacks that he claims would be staged in order to shore up political support for the president, and to strip Americans of their constitutional rights.
According to Chomsky, once voters will see Trump for the "con man" he is, and that his promises were "built on sand," Trump will go to extreme measures to rally support. “I think that we shouldn’t put aside the possibility that there would be some kind of staged or alleged terrorist act, which can change the country instantly,” Chomsky said in an interview with AlterNet's Jan Frel.
In Chomsky's opinion, once things start to go wrong, Trump will have to find other targets to point the finger at, so he will say “‘Well, I’m sorry, I can’t bring your jobs back because these bad people are preventing it.’ And the typical scapegoating goes to vulnerable people: immigrants, terrorists, Muslims and elitists, whoever it may be. And that can turn out to be very ugly.”

Things are definitely weird, when Chomsky becomes a conspiracy theorist...
Bookmark and Share

Powered by Blogger