Category: Deep State

About Deep State

Subscribe Feeds

De VS oorlog tegen ‘landelijk terrorisme’ is een definitieve stap naar een volledige politiestaat…….

Posted on by Telmo Claro

De enorme hysterie in de VS na de bestorming van Capitol Hill en het Capitol, gevoed met angst door vooral de reguliere media, is het laatste instrument voor Joe Biden en z’n psychopathische administratie om maatregelen door te voeren die een eind zullen maken aan burgerrechten als:

  • vrijheid van meningsuiting

  • het recht om te demonstreren

  • het recht om fout overheidsbeleid te weerleggen

  • het recht om jezelf te verdedigen (een omkering van bewijslast, je bent zonder meer schuldig en probeer maar te bewijzen dat dit niet zo is, althans als je die kans al krijgt…..)

  • het recht op verantwoording en transparantie van de overheid

  • het recht op privacy (al is daar al praktisch niets van over)

  • het recht op een onafhankelijke pers (die is al lang ter grave gedragen en de reguliere [afhankelijke] media roepen zelfs om censuur op de sociale media en de rest van het net, censuur die zelfs al wordt toegepast, óók in ons land…..)

  • het recht op vereniging (wat hier zwaar geweld wordt aangedaan met de Coronamaatregelen…)

  • het recht op lichamelijke integriteit

  • het recht op een representatieve volksvertegenwoordiging

Al deze zaken hadden in de VS al ‘aan glans verloren’ door het aannemen van de Patriot Act na de aanslagen van 11 september 2001 (9/11), een wet die al in 1995 werd opgesteld door de huidige president Joe Biden, onder de naam: ‘Omnibus Counterterrorism Act…..’ ‘Patriot Act II’ ofwel de: Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act (DTPA), die de Biden administratie voorbereidt, is de definitieve oorlogsverklaring, niet aan landelijke terreur, maar aan iedere VS burger en aan het laatste restje democratie in dat middels een genocide gestolen land).

Het is duidelijk dat deze nieuwe ‘War on Terror’ niet alleen een oorlog is die iedere VS burger kan treffen, maar die zoals gezegd definitief een eind zal maken aan de al meer dan waardeloze democratie is zoals de VS die nu nog kent…..

Volgens Michael McGarrity, opperhoofdsmeerpijp van de FBI afdeling van contraterrorisme, ziet de FBI ‘huiselijk terrorisme’ in de volgende 4 zaken:

  • raciaal gemotiveerd gewelddadig extremisme

  • anti regerings/autoriteit extremisme

  • dierenrechten en milieu extremisme

  • abortus extremisme

Ofwel als je gezichtspunten onderschrijft die tegengesteld zijn aan wat de regering of andere autoriteiten (als de FBI, NSA of andere geheime diensten >> de VS heeft er meer dan 25) voorstaan, kan je worden aangemerkt als een ‘binnenlandse terrorist’ en als zodanig worden behandeld (dat geldt dan bijvoorbeeld voor Black Lives Matter [BLM] activisten….)….. Moet je nagaan: dan is de VS de eerste die altijd met een beschuldigende (vieze hypocriete) vinger wijst naar landen waar men hetzelfde omgaat met deze zaken…..

De VS heeft al organisaties opgetuigd die ‘misdaden’ (‘misdaden’ als dierenactivisme) moeten voorkomen, dit gebeurt middels 78 fusion centra, die zaken verbinden op federaal niveau (FBI, justitie), regionaal en lokaal gebied, maar ook middels centra die data verzamelen, met hulp van: -gedragswetenschappers, -bedrijven, -de sociale media (Facebook, Twitter enz.) en -‘gemeenschapsorganisatoren’, dit alles ondersteund met de nieuwste technieken, uiteraard ook op het gebied van kunstmatige intelligentie, gezichtsherkenning, biometrie (identificatiemethoden op basis van unieke lichaamskenmerken) en gedragsepigenetica (met wie men kan zien welke ervaringen tijdens het leven het genetische beeld verouderen)……. Met name die nieuwe technieken vromen een groot gevaar voor alle burgerrechten, daar controle van de massa’s tegenwoordig steeds makkelijker wordt, neem alle camera’s in steden en dorpen, het ‘live scannen’ van internetverkeer en ga nog maar een half uur door…….

De Coronacrisis is als olie op het vuur van antidemocratische maatregelen en ook de rest van het westen moet oppassen niet als makke schapen achter de VS aan te lopen en maatregelen van de VS over te nemen, maatregelen die ook hier de democratie volkomen zullen uithollen (immers vergeet niet dat de andere westerse landen maar wat graag antidemocratische maatregelen uit de VS overnemen, niet in de laatste plaats daar deze het regeren [per decreet] vergemakkelijken en totale controle van het volk mogelijk maken, waarbij de reguliere media grote propagandisten zijn van dergelijke maatregelen, zoals ze ook voor censuur zijn op de sociale media en zelfs op het hele internet……

Lees het volgende uitstekende artikel van John en Nisha Whitehead, met bijdragen van o.a. Glenn Greenwald, een artikel dat ik overnam van Information Clearing House (ICH):

The Government’s War on Domestic Terrorism Is a Trap

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead

“This is an issue that all Democrats, Republicans, independents, Libertarians should be extremely concerned about, especially because we don’t have to guess about where this goes or how this ends. What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody who is pro-life? [The proposed legislation could create] a very dangerous undermining of our civil liberties, our freedoms in our Constitution, and a targeting of almost half of the country.”—Tulsi Gabbard, former Congresswoman

January 31, 2021 “Information Clearing House” – This is how it begins.

We are moving fast down that slippery slope to an authoritarian society in which the only opinions, ideas and speech expressed are the ones permitted by the government and its corporate cohorts.

In the wake of the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol, “domestic terrorism” has become the new poster child for expanding the government’s powers at the expense of civil liberties.

Of course, “domestic terrorist” is just the latest bull’s eye phrase, to be used interchangeably with “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist,” to describe anyone who might fall somewhere on a very broad spectrum of viewpoints that could be considered “dangerous.”

Watch and see: we are all about to become enemies of the state.

In a déjà vu mirroring of the legislative fall-out from 9/11, and the ensuing build-up of the security state, there is a growing demand in certain sectors for the government to be given expanded powers to root out “domestic” terrorism, the Constitution be damned.

If this is a test of Joe Biden’s worthiness to head up the American police state, he seems ready.

As part of his inaugural address, President Biden pledged to confront and defeat “a rise of political extremism, white supremacy, domestic terrorism.” Biden has also asked the Director of National Intelligence to work with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in carrying out a “comprehensive threat assessment” of domestic terrorism. And then to keep the parallels going, there is the proposed Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021, introduced after the Jan. 6 riots, which aims to equip the government with “the tools to identify, monitor and thwart” those who could become radicalized to violence.

Don’t blink or you’ll miss the sleight of hand.

This is the tricky part of the Deep State’s con game that keeps you focused on the shell game in front of you while your wallet is being picked clean by ruffians in your midst.

It follows the same pattern as every other convenient “crisis” used by the government as an excuse to expand its powers at the citizenry’s expense and at the expense of our freedoms.

As investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald warns:

“The last two weeks have ushered in a wave of new domestic police powers and rhetoric in the name of fighting ‘terrorism’ that are carbon copies of many of the worst excesses of the first War on Terror that began nearly twenty years ago. This New War on Terror—one that is domestic in name from the start and carries the explicit purpose of fighting ‘extremists’ and ‘domestic terrorists’ among American citizens on U.S. soil—presents the whole slew of historically familiar dangers when governments, exploiting media-generated fear and dangers, arm themselves with the power to control information, debate, opinion, activism and protests.”

Greenwald is referring to the USA Patriot Act, passed almost 20 years ago, which paved the way for the eradication of every vital safeguard against government overreach, corruption and abuse.

Free speech, the right to protest, the right to challenge government wrongdoing, due process, a presumption of innocence, the right to self-defense, accountability and transparency in government, privacy, press, sovereignty, assembly, bodily integrity, representative government: all of these and more have become casualties in the government’s war on the American people, a war that has grown more pronounced since Sept. 11, 2001.

Some members of Congress get it.

In a letter opposing expansion of national security powers, a handful congressional representatives urged their colleagues not to repeat the mistakes of the past:

“While many may find comfort in increased national security powers in the wake of this attack, we must emphasize that we have been here before and we have seen where that road leads. Our history is littered with examples of initiatives sold as being necessary to fight extremism that quickly devolve into tools used for the mass violation of the human and civil rights of the American people… To expand the government’s national security powers once again at the expense of the human and civil rights of the American people would only serve to further undermine our democracy, not protect it.”

Cue the Emergency State, the government’s Machiavellian version of crisis management that justifies all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security.

This is the power grab hiding in plain sight, obscured by the political machinations of the self-righteous elite. This is how the government continues to exploit crises and use them as opportunities for power grabs under the guise of national security. Indeed, this is exactly how the government added red flag gun laws, precrime surveillance, fusion centers, threat assessments, mental health assessments, involuntary confinement to its arsenal of weaponized powers.

The objective is not to make America safe again. That has never been the government’s aim.

Greenwald explains:

“Why would such new terrorism laws be needed in a country that already imprisons more of its citizens than any other country in the world as the result of a very aggressive set of criminal laws? What acts should be criminalized by new ‘domestic terrorism’ laws that are not already deemed criminal? They never say, almost certainly because—just as was true of the first set of new War on Terror laws—their real aim is to criminalize that which should not be criminalized: speech, association, protests, opposition to the new ruling coalition.”

So you see, the issue is not whether Donald Trump or Roger Stone or MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell deserve to be banned from Twitter, even if they’re believed to be spouting misinformation, hateful ideas, or fomenting discontent.

Rather, we should be asking whether any corporation or government agency or entity representing a fusion of the two should have the power to muzzle, silence, censor, regulate, control and altogether eradicate so-called “dangerous” or “extremist” ideas.

This unilateral power to muzzle free speech represents a far greater danger than any so-called right- or left-wing extremist might pose.

The ramifications are so far-reaching as to render almost every American an extremist in word, deed, thought or by association.

Yet where many go wrong is in assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or challenging the government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character, labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.

Eventually, all you will really need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, question government authority, or generally live in the United States.

The groundwork has already been laid.

The trap is set.

All that is needed is the right bait.

With the help of automated eyes and ears, a growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social media and behavior sensing software, government agents have been busily spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies of the state.

It’s the American police state’s take on the dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Phillip K. Dick all rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.

What’s more, the technocrats who run the surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you support, and with whom you communicate. Computers by way of AI (artificial intelligence) now do the tedious work of trolling social media, the internet, text messages and phone calls for potentially anti-government remarks, all of which is carefully recorded, documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of the government’s choosing.

For instance, police in major American cities have been using predictive policing technology that allows them to identify individuals—or groups of individuals—most likely to commit a crime in a given community. Those individuals are then put on notice that their movements and activities will be closely monitored and any criminal activity (by them or their associates) will result in harsh penalties.

In other words, the burden of proof is reversed: you are guilty before you are given any chance to prove you are innocent.

Dig beneath the surface of this kind of surveillance/police state, however, and you will find that the real purpose of pre-crime is not safety but control.

Red flag gun laws merely push us that much closer towards a suspect society where everyone is potentially guilty of some crime or another and must be preemptively rendered harmless.

This is the same government that has a growing list—shared with fusion centers and law enforcement agencies—of ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that could flag someone as suspicious and result in their being labeled potential enemies of the state.

For instance, if you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you could be at the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.

Moreover, as a New York Times editorial warns, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the police if you are afraid that the government is plotting to confiscate your firearms, if you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government will soon declare martial law, or if you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car.

According to one FBI latest report, you might also be classified as a domestic terrorism threat if you espouse conspiracy theories, especially if you “attempt to explain events or circumstances as the result of a group of actors working in secret to benefit themselves at the expense of others” and are “usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.”

Additionally, according to Michael C. McGarrity, the FBI’s assistant director of the counterterrorism division, the bureau now “classifies domestic terrorism threats into four main categories: racially motivated violent extremism, anti-government/anti-authority extremism, animal rights/environmental extremism, and abortion extremism.”

In other words, if you dare to subscribe to any views that are contrary to the government’s, you may well be suspected of being a domestic terrorist and treated accordingly.

Again, where many Americans go wrong is in naively assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or harmful in order to be flagged and targeted for some form of intervention or detention.

In fact, U.S. police agencies have been working to identify and manage potential extremist “threats,” violent or otherwise, before they can become actual threats for some time now.

In much the same way that the USA Patriot Act was used as a front to advance the surveillance state, allowing the government to establish a far-reaching domestic spying program that turned every American citizen into a criminal suspect, the government’s anti-extremism program renders otherwise lawful, nonviolent activities as potentially extremist.

In fact, all you need to do these days to end up on a government watch list or be subjected to heightened scrutiny is use certain trigger words (like cloud, pork and pirates), surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, limp or stutter, drive a car, stay at a hotel, attend a political rally, express yourself on social media, appear mentally ill, serve in the military, disagree with a law enforcement official, call in sick to work, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, appear confused or nervous, fidget or whistle or smell bad, be seen in public waving a toy gun or anything remotely resembling a gun (such as a water nozzle or a remote control or a walking cane), stare at a police officer, question government authority, or appear to be pro-gun or pro-freedom.

Be warned: once you get on such a government watch list—whether it’s a terrorist watch list, a mental health watch list, a dissident watch list, or a red flag gun watch list—there’s no clear-cut way to get off, whether or not you should actually be on there.

You will be tracked wherever you go.

You will be flagged as a potential threat and dealt with accordingly.

This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it’s been a long time coming.

The government has been building its pre-crime, surveillance network in concert with fusion centers (of which there are 78 nationwide, with partners in the corporate sector and globally), data collection agencies, behavioral scientists, corporations, social media, and community organizers and by relying on cutting-edge technology for surveillance, facial recognition, predictive policing, biometrics, and behavioral epigenetics (in which life experiences alter one’s genetic makeup).

If you’re not scared yet, you should be.

Connect the dots.

Start with the powers amassed by the government under the USA Patriot Act, note the government’s ever-broadening definition of what it considers to be an “extremist,” then add in the government’s detention powers under NDAA*, the National Security Agency’s far-reaching surveillance networks, and fusion centers that collect and share surveillance data between local, state and federal police agencies.

To that, add tens of thousands of armed, surveillance drones and balloons that are beginning to blanket American skies, facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go and whatever you do. And then to complete the picture, toss in the real-time crime centers being deployed in cities across the country, which will be attempting to “predict” crimes and identify so-called criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance, complex mathematical algorithms and prognostication programs.

Hopefully you’re starting to understand how easy we’ve made it for the government to identify, label, target, defuse and detain anyone it views as a potential threat for a variety of reasons that run the gamut from mental illness to having a military background to challenging its authority to just being on the government’s list of persona non grata.

There’s always a price to pay for standing up to the powers-that-be.

Yet as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, you don’t even have to be a dissident to get flagged by the government for surveillance, censorship and detention.

All you really need to be is a citizen of the American police state.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People is available at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

==========================================

* NDAA: National Defense Authorization Act.

Zie ook: ‘De laatste beslissing van Trump t.a.v. Jemen gaat wat betreft schunnig handelen mijlen verder dan de Capitol Hill rel en zal niet worden teruggedraaid door Biden‘

‘A Domestic Terrorism Law? War on Dissent Will Proceed Full Speed Ahead‘ (een ICH artikel geschreven door Philip Giraldi)

‘Trumpisme en fascisme eindig je niet met censuur en andere autoritaire maatregelen, maar door de condities te veranderen die e.e.a. mogelijk hebben gemaakt‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht)

‘Joe Biden belazert het volk en de rel op Capitol Hill leidt tot Patriot Act II: totale controle op het volk, ofwel de vorming van een totale politiestaat‘

‘De roep om censuur na de stormloop op het Capitol zal ook links keihard treffen‘

‘Rellen op Capitol Hill: burgeroorlog in VS dichterbij dan de laatste 155 jaar en de roep om censuur klinkt harder dan ooit‘

‘Edward Snowden over Silicon Valley censuur en andere zaken die de persvrijheid en de vrijheid in het algemeen in gevaar brengen‘

‘Om ons thuis, de planeet, te redden moeten we de westerse oorlogsmachine stilleggen‘

En terzijde: ‘American Psychosis‘ (een kort artikel en korte video op ICH met Chris Hedges)

9/11: de teller voor het aantal door VS/NAVO gedode mensen staat intussen op meer dan 2,5 miljoen

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Vandaag is het 18 jaar geleden dat o.a. de Twin Towers het doel zouden zijn geweest van een terreuraanval, waarbij volgens de autoriteiten 3.000 mensen om het leven kwamen……

Sinds die aanvallen, die in de VS vooral de politiek, het militair-industrieel complex, de geheime diensten en de politie (ofwel deep state) erg goed uitkwamen, is het aantal door de VS met haar oorlogshond de NAVO vermoorde mensen in het Midden-Oosten (inclusief Afghanistan en Libië) de 2,5 miljoen fiks overstegen…… Het voorgaande in illegale oorlogen, standrechtelijke executies (een misdaad tegen de menselijkheid, waarbij meer dan 90% van de slachtoffers niet eens werd verdacht…) en geheime militaire acties onder regie van de CIA, ofwel VS terreur op enorme schaal…….

Door deze VS/NAVO terreur zijn hele stromen vluchtelingen op gang gekomen en hebben we te maken met (door het westen gekweekte) terreur op de straten van Europa…….

Terwijl van het recht op privacy vrijwel niets meer over is en onze vrijheid is verworden tot een farce, precies wat de door de VS terreur gecreëerde islamitische terreurgroepen voor elkaar wilden krijgen…… Waar een aantal terreurgroepen zelfs door de VS werden (en worden) gesteund met wapens, munitie, rollend oorlogstuig en militaire training, groepen als IS en Al Qaida…….

Ondertussen heeft de VS onder toezicht en zelfs met eigen handelen gevangenen gemarteld, ontvoerd en gegijzeld……. In Guantanamo Bay zitten nog steeds velen gevangen die nooit een proces hebben gehad, mensen die op grond van vreselijke martelingen al een enorm aantal jaren vastzitten……

‘Lang leve 9/11…….’

Zie ook:
‘9/11 voorkennis verzwegen in officiële rapporten‘

‘9/11 en de voorkennis van de aanslagen in de VS‘

‘9/11: New Yorkse brandweercommandanten vragen een nieuw onderzoek naar de aanslagen op het het WTC in 2001‘

‘SPECIAL REPORT – More Censored 9/11 History‘

‘First The Explosion And Then The “Planes”‘

‘9/11 “The Palestinians cheered” hoax‘

‘9/11 Wiring The Buildings‘

En zie verder:
‘Misvormde kinderen in Irak door gebruik van verarmd uranium in VS munitie‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht over de illegale oorlog van de VS en andere NAVO-lidstaten tegen Irak)

Voor meer berichten over 9/11 klik op het label 911, direct onder dit bericht.

Russiagate, ‘couppoging tegen Trump’ en kindermisbruik netwerk Epstein zijn gekoppeld

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Er is al veel gezegd over het schandaal dat een aantal bekende figuren nog net konden ontlopen met de zogenaamde suïcide van (lees: moord op) Jeffrey Epstein. ´Nog net ontlopen´, maar nog steeds hebben figuren als Clinton, Blair en prins Andrew de kans te worden vervolgd voor meervoudig kindermisbruik……. Al zal het me niet verbazen als alle bewijzen (video’s e.d.) zijn vernietigd…..

Greg Hunter schreef een artikel op USA Watchdog dat ik overnam van Information Clearing House. In dat artikel vertelt Hunter over een interview dat hij afnam met Kevin Shipp, een voormalige CIA beambte en klokkenluider, die een verband ziet tussen de leugen die Russiagate bleek te zijn (die hij ziet als een couppoging tegen Trump) en de moord op Epstein. In dit geval noemt Shipp ook de Clinton Foundation, dat van fraude aan elkaar hangt (veelal niet of slecht over bericht in de reguliere westerse massamedia). De hoofdfiguren uit deze twee zaken zijn verbonden door dezelfde Deep State figuren…..
Bill Clinton wordt genoemd als degene die het meest gebruik heeft gemaakt van ‘de diensten’ die Epstein hem bood……. Intussen zou de FBI zaken moeten weten over veel bekende figuren, daar deze dienst ook de verblijven van Epstein op diens eiland is binnengevallen. Echter het is nog maar de vraag of de FBI alle zaken zal vrijgeven, immers ook de FBI maakt deel uit van Deep State……. Uiteraard zal de FBI haar kennis over bekende figuren met Epstein banden, zolang deze niet op straat ligt, voor eigen voordeel misbruiken……..
Ondanks zijn ontkenning van iets te weten wordt ook Trump genoemd in het zwarte boekje van Epstein en gezien de relatie van Trump met de FBI zou er toch nog wel een berg ellende op straat kunnen komen te liggen, die Trump in grote problemen kan brengen…… (hoewel? De schoft komt werkelijk overal mee weg…)
Je zou hopen dat alle al genoemde figuren in deze zaak ten val komen dat zou tevens een mooie opruiming zijn van een aantal schoftenpolitici in de VS en wellicht ook in GB en Frankrijk…….
Lees het artikel van Hunter, zie de video waarin hij Shipp interviewt en zie ook de links onder dat artikel over de zaak Epstein:
Russia Hoax Coup and Epstein Interlocked – Kevin Shipp
By Greg Hunter

August 19, 2019 “Information Clearing House” – Former CIA Officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp says the Russian hoax and attempted coup of President Trump and the sex trafficking case against Jeffrey Epstein are linked together by the same Deep State players. Shipp explains, “The FBI has completely raided his vault, and they have some pretty damning material. I don’t know why it took so long, but they have raided Epstein’s island . . . So, there is a lot of damning information the FBI has now on certain people. At the top of the list, and the one who flew the most, was Bill Clinton. Then he lied about it. They are intertwined in that regard and with the Clinton Foundation that we know is a fraud. It is known around the world, and you’ve got these two intersections with Bill and Hillary Clinton. Of course, Hillary Clinton is tied to the dossier in an attempt to get rid of Donald Trump. So, these webs interlocked with each other, and these people interlock with each other. Welcome to the global elite. Welcome to human trafficking. These things are connected, and with Epstein dead, there are a lot of prominent people breathing a sigh of relief—for now. Is Barr aggressive enough? He says he is going to pursue this case anyway. Is he going to call in the people seen on the CD’s, videos and photographs? That remains to be seen.”

On Epstein’s officially ruled suicide while in prison, Shipp says, “Epstein tries to commit ‘suicide,’ and his cellmate, a four-time convicted murderer, said he didn’t see (or hear) it because he had his headphones on. Attorney General William Barr was in charge of the safety of Jeffery Epstein. There should have been an entire contingent of U.S. Marshals to protect this huge witness, but there were none. Why is that? . . . . It is just unbelievable how they left this huge witness to die in prison. The prison guards were off, as we know. The cameras were not functioning. He was taken off of suicide watch and on and on we go. There are so many things that add up to this not being a suicide that it is remarkable. . . . We are all still hoping that Attorney General Barr will do his job and people are charged, but this is starting to bother me a little bit. A major witness that was connected to high level people in government and finance was left alone to die in prison, and I think he was murdered. This was all left to happen by William Barr. The pieces to this just don’t add up. . . .We’ve got so many strange things going on here that do not add up, and Attorney General Barr is ultimately responsible for this happening.”

Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with former CIA Officer and author of the top selling book about the Deep State called “From the Company of Shadows.” (This is Part #1 of a two part interview. Click here for Part #2)

This article was originally published by “USA Watchdog” – –
======================
Zie ook:
‘Epsteins pedoseksuele netwerk was al lang bekend, onder andere ABC hield de berichtgeving tegen‘

‘Epstein was een agent van de Mossad en werd gebruikt om politici te chanteren‘

 ‘Jeffrey Epstein: bewakers die fraudeerden weigerden een ‘plea deal’‘

 ‘Prince Andrew: het voorbeeld dat koningshuizen eindelijk moeten worden opgedoekt‘

 ‘Epstein vermoord volgens patholoog-anatoom‘

 ‘Jeffrey Epstein en Ghislaine Maxwell werkten mede voor de militaire geheime dienst van Israël‘

 ‘Kindermisbruikers beschermd door overheden‘

 ‘Donald Trump – Jeffey Epstein: you’ve got to grab them by the pussy‘

‘WHAT THE EPSTEIN CASE REVEALS, “PEOPLE ARE OVERLOOKING THE CHILDREN…” (video van Brasscheck TV)

 ‘Prince Andrew ontkent kennis kindermisbruiknetwerk Epstein, maar……..‘

 ‘Jeffrey Epstein waarschijnlijk op ‘loonlijst’ Mossad, de Israëlische geheime dienst‘

‘Jeffrey Epstein (exploitant kindermisbruik netwerk) ‘overleden aan suïcide’‘

 ‘Jeffrey Epstein, beheerder van een kindermisbruiknetwerk ‘is gesuïcideerd’ ofwel vermoord‘

 ‘Jeffrey Epstein: seksueel wangedrag van welgestelden veelal onder de pet gehouden‘

 ‘Jeffrey Epsteins kleine zwarte pedo-boek met namen als Bill Clinton, David Koch, Courtney Love, prins Andrew en Tony Blair‘

Intel investeert miljarden in een fascistische apartheidsstaat

Posted on by Telmo Claro
DeBeurs.nl maakte afgelopen dinsdag bekend dat het VS bedrijf Intel miljarden dollars meer gaat investeren in Israël…..
Alsof Israël geen fascistische staat is na het aannemen van de natiestaat wet….. Alsof Israël niet een overduidelijk apartheidsbeleid voert…… Alsof Israël sinds vorig jaar maart niet meer dan 150 ongewapende Palestijnse demonstranten heeft vermoordt (waaronder kinderen, invaliden, medisch personeel en journalisten..)… Alsof Israël niet de ene massamoord na de andere op de Palestijnen begaat….. Alsof Israël geen terreur uitoefent in Syrië en daar diverse terreurgroepen heeft gesteund…….. (zelfs IS = ISIS!)
Bedrijven als Intel zijn zo machtig dat ze volkomen schijt kunnen hebben aan de verontwaardiging onder haar klanten over zaken zoals hierboven beschreven, daar de meeste consumenten geen gelegenheid hebben om een computer zonder Intel-chip te kopen…. Ofwel dit soort bedrijven maken misbruik van hun machtspositie op de wereldmarkt, waar ze regeringen in hun zak hebben zoals in dit geval de Trump administratie, (al zit die administratie bomvol met lobbyisten voor Israël, het militair-industrieel complex, de oliemaffia, de bankensector en andere grote bedrijven als Intel…..)
Intel steunt met haar investeringen de onderdrukking van het Palestijnse volk, zoals de vele massamoorden die Israël begaat op die Palestijnen….. Ach ja, grote bedrijven hebben nooit moeite gehad met het steunen van fascistische en/of apartheidsregimes >> ‘leve het ijskoude en inhumane neoliberalisme……’
Hier het bericht van de Beurs.nl:

Intel steekt miljarden in Israël

Gepubliceerd op 29 jan 2019 om 08:47 | Reacties: 1 | Onderwerpen: Israël
JERUZALEM (AFN) – Intel investeert omgerekend bijna 11 miljard dollar in Israël. De Amerikaanse chipgigant maakte al eerder bekend zijn productiefaciliteiten in onder meer dat land uit te willen breiden. De omvang van de investering, die duizenden banen moet opleveren, is nu door de overheid bekendgemaakt.

Volgens een Israëlische krant verwacht Intel een bijdrage van 10 procent van de overheid voor zijn investering. Intel wil onder meer zijn fabriek in Kiryat Gat uitbreiden. Er wordt nu gewerkt aan een plan voor continue investeringen in die productielocatie.

Wie het nieuws controleert, controleert de wereld……

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Ben het niet geheel eens met de kop van dit bericht, echter het hieronder opgenomen Engelse artikel met de kop die zo ongeveer dezelfde strekking heeft, is een uitstekend artikel waarin de macht van de media aan de kaak wordt gesteld.


Het artikel van Caitlin Johnstone begint met de rel die in de VS ontstond rond de presentator van MSNBC Joy (-Ann) Reid. Deze presentator fantaseert er af en toe graag op los en heeft in het verleden al heel wat zeer foute uitspraken gedaan. Johnstone is daar verder niet zo in geïnteresseerd, maar wel in het feit dat de top van MSNBC deze presentator keer op keer de handen boven het hoofd houdt…………

Het is niet moeilijk teksten op te lezen voor tv, wel is het moeilijk om dag in dag de boel te belazeren en te manipuleren ten gunste van een kleine groep geprivilegieerden, aldus verwoordt Johnstone ‘het werk’ van Reid……. (al moet ik zeggen dat het niet zo moeilijk is om te liegen en bedriegen, zeker als je ziet hoeveel reguliere mediaorganen zich hier schuldig aan maken…) Dezelfde Reid maakt iedereen af in de media die ter linkerzijde van Hillary Clinton staat en noemt zichzelf desondanks ‘links…’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! (Reid zou zo bij de PvdA aan kunnen sluiten!)

Voorts stelt Reid dat niemand heeft geprofiteerd van Wikileaks, behalve Rusland dan….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Ja ik lach wel, maar dergelijke onzinverhalen vindt je overal in de reguliere westerse (massa-) media, ook in ons land. De grootste kul wordt met een serieus gezicht keer op keer opgelepeld en lullig genoeg heeft dit een grote invloed op de westerse bevolkingen dat hoor je pas goed als je de reacties onder krantenberichten leest of inbellers op een actualiteitenprogramma hoort praten. Negen van de tien redeneren vanuit de valse informatie die hen dag in dag uit wordt voorgeschoteld (op een manier die vergeleken kan worden met hersenspoelen)…….

 Bovendien is het wel erg wrang om te stellen dat Rusland baat heeft bij Wikileaks, als je ziet hoe Rusland wordt gedemoniseerd vanwege vermeende manipulaties van o.a. de presidentsverkiezingen in de VS, waar Rusland zelfs werd beschuldigd van het lekken van VS overheidsdocumenten naar Wikileaks……. Wat een idioot moet je zijn om te denken dat Rusland profiteert van de hysterische anti-Russische propaganda in het westen, neem alleen al de sancties die op valse gronden zijn genomen tegen dit land……

 In feite zou een groot deel van de wereld moeten profiteren van Wikileaks, immers in de documenten van Wikileaks valt te lezen hoe smerig de spelletjes van de VS op het wereldtoneel zijn. Jammer genoeg doet bijna niemand iets met deze documenten en blijft men de meer dan valse, fascistische en uiterst gewelddadige VS buitenlandpolitiek door dik en dun steunen……

 Terug naar de claim dat wie het nieuws controleert, de wereld controleert: echter voor het controleren van de wereld is ‘iets’ meer nodig dan de reguliere (massa-) media, zoals het militair-industrieel complex, de geheime diensten (aan wie de hiervoor aangehaalde media lippendiensten bewijzen) en de financiële wereld (beter gezegd: financiële maffia), ofwel deep state…..

En dan durft men in die reguliere media, bijna zonder uitzondering in handen van miljonairs/multimiljonairs en investeringsgroepen, te spreken over fake news (nepnieuws) en manipulatie door sociale media…….

Dezelfde media die een enorm aantal fake news berichten de wereld in hebben gestuurd en sturen, neem alleen al de berichtgeving van die media in aanloop van en tijdens de illegale oorlogen die de VS deze eeuw is begonnen……..

Lees het verhelderende artikel van Caitlin Johnstone (en vertelt het ajb verder, het is de hoogste tijd dat de macht van de reguliere media voorgoed wordt gebroken en het volk de waarheid wordt verteld!):

Whoever Controls the Narrative, Controls the World



 June 4, 2018 at 7:55 pm
Written by Caitlin Johnstone

(CJ Opinion) — MSNBC host Joy Reid still has a job. Despite blatantly lying about time-traveling hackers bearing responsibility for bigoted posts a decade ago in her then-barely-known blog, despite her reportedly sparking an FBI investigation on false pretenses, despite her colleagues at MSNBC being completely fed up with how the network is handling the controversy surrounding her, her career just keeps trundling forward like a bullet-riddled zombie.

To be clear, I do not particularly care that Joy Reid has done any of these things. I write about war, nuclear escalations and the sociopathy of US government agencies which kill millions of people; I don’t care that Joy Reid is or was a homophobe, and I don’t care that she lied to cover it up. The war agendas that MSNBC itself promotes on a daily basis are infinitely worse than either of these things, and if that isn’t obvious to you it’s because military propaganda has caused you to compartmentalize yourself out of an intellectually honest understanding of what war is.

What is interesting to me, however, is the fact that Reid’s bosses are protecting her career so adamantly. Both by refusing to fire her, and by steering the conversation into being about her controversial blog posts rather than the fact that she told a spectacular lie in an attempt to cover them up, Reid is being propped up despite this story constantly re-emerging and making new headlines with new embarrassing details, and despite her lack of any discernible talent or redeeming personal characteristics. This tells us something important about what is going on in the world.


Variety
✔@Variety

Joy Reid is dealing with a new controversy. MSNBC is backing her again. https://bit.ly/2LdeaK5
12:01 AM – Jun 3, 2018

It is not difficult to find someone to read from a teleprompter for large amounts of money.
What absolutely is difficult is finding someone who is willing to deceive and manipulate to advance the agendas of the privileged few day after day. Who else would be willing to spend all day on Twitter smearing everyone to the left of Hillary Clinton while still claiming to stand on the political left? Who else would advance the point-blank lie about “17 intelligence agencies” having declared Russia guilty in US election meddling months after that claim had been famously and virally debunked? Who else would publicly claim that Edward Snowden’s NSA leaks did not benefit anyone besides Russia? Who else could oligarchs like Comcast CEO Brian L Roberts, whose company controls MSNBC, count on to consistently advance his agendas?

While it’s easy to find someone you can count on to advance one particular lie at one particular time, it is difficult to find someone you can be absolutely certain will lie for you day after day, year after year, through election cycles and administration changes and new war agendas and changing political climates. A lot of the people who used to advance perspectives which ran against the grain of the political orthodoxy at MSNBC like Phil Donahue, Ed Schultz and Dylan Ratigan have vanished from the airwaves never to return, while reporters who consistently keep their heads down and toe the line for the Democratic establishment like Chris Hayes, Rachel Maddow and Joy Reid are richly rewarded and encouraged to remain.

The disempowered want change; those in power want predictability and consistency. The more you can guarantee predictability and consistency to those in power, the more those in power will reward you.

Those who report the news and shape public narratives are of particular interest to US oligarchs, who bought up the old media long ago and are doing everything in their power to secure influence over the new media as well. Pundits like Joy Reid are some of their most valuable assets, and they protect those assets accordingly. Because whoever controls the narrative controls the world.

(hier de link naar het origineel waar je deze afbeelding kan vergroten)

The Council on Foreign Relations is a massively influential think tank with members in the leadership of pretty much every significant media outlet in America. In late April it held a conference titled Political Disruptions: Combating Disinformation and Fake News in which a man named Richard Stengel told the audience that it is necessary for the US government to propagandize its citizens. Stengel is the former managing editor of Time Magazine, a position he vacated to go and work for the US State Department. Yes, really.

“Basically, every country creates their own narrative story and, you know, my old job at the State Department was what people used to joke as the ‘chief propagandist’ job,” Stengel told the CFR audience. “We haven’t talked about propaganda… I’m not against propaganda. Every country does it, and they have to do it to their own population, and I don’t necessarily think it’s that awful.”

You can cringe all you like, but he’s right. Not about propaganda being a legitimate weapon for an ostensibly free democracy to inflict upon its citizens of course; manipulating the way your citizenry thinks is manipulating the way they vote and organize and what they consent to, and is plainly sociopathic. But he is right that all the shrieking the US does about Russian propaganda applies fully to its own behavior.

As we’ve discussed previously, the only real power in this world is the power to control the public narrative about what is going on. The only reason governments operate the way they operate, the only reason money works the way it works, the only reason power exists where it exists, is that we’ve all agreed to play along with some made-up mental stories about those things and pretend that they are true and real. The only thing stopping the populace from collectively deciding to change the way money works, from deciding that the assholes on Capitol Hill aren’t in charge anymore, or from deciding that every billionaire in America should be butchered like a hog and turned into Slim Jims is the fact that those ideas have not become the dominant narrative. If you can control the stories that the masses tell themselves about what is in their best interests, you control everything.


#FreeAssange! (tweets by campaign)⌛@JulianAssange

This is quite good: How To Fight The Establishment Propaganda Machine And Win https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/how-to-fight-the-establishment-propaganda-machine-and-win-449f94e1d40b …
3:58 PM – Jul 9, 2017

How To Fight The Establishment Propaganda Machine And Win

I am going to keep hammering and hammering on this point until I see that it has taken root in American consciousness: the single best way…

medium.com

(klik op de bovenstaande tekst voor het volledige twitterbericht)

This is why the alliance between Silicon Valley and US intelligence agencies is becoming more and more brazen. This is why Facebook and the NATO propaganda firm Atlantic Council announced that they’ve formed a partnership weeks after the Atlantic Council published an article explaining why westerners need to be propagandized for their own good. This is why social media corporations are being instructed on the Senate floor that they need to take action to silence sources of rebellion. This is why Julian Assange is being aggressively silenced by the western empire. And it is why Joy Reid still has a job.

The good news about all this is that we know exactly where our shackles are. Our shackles are made of narrative, and the oligarchs’ ability to control it. A populist movement to disrupt establishment narratives and wake people up to what’s going on is all it will take to break our rulers’ ability to control the way the citizens of the world think and vote. From there we can make our own narratives and create a world which benefits us all and not just a few ruling elites. Right now there is a mad rush by those same elites to scale back our ability to network and share information via new media, so one of the most revolutionary things we can do at this time is prevent them from doing so and outpace them in that race.

 It isn’t the west versus Russia. It isn’t left versus right. At this time the real conflict in our society is a few ruling elites and their cronies versus humanity’s natural impulse to act in a way that is beneficial to humanity. All we need to do is help that impulse flourish, get out of our oligarchy-imposed brain boxes, and build a new world.

Support Caitlin’s work on Patreon or Paypal.

Opinion by Caitlin Johnstone / Republished with permission / Steemit / Report a typo

==============================
Zie ook:
‘Robert Epstein: Google en Facebook corrumperen de politiek en manipuleren de presidentsverkiezingen‘

‘Facebook staat valse informatie toe tijdens de (voor-) verkiezingen van het presidentschap in de VS‘

‘Twitter weert waarheid: Paul Craig Roberts in de ban, Roberts >> de grote criticus van de illegale oorlogen die de VS voert‘

 ‘Facebooks zuivering van de alternatieve (nieuws) media staat nog in de kinderschoenen‘

 ‘Facebook censureert de waarheid over Columbus en de verovering van de Amerika’s…….‘

 ‘Facebook censuur gestuurd door het westers militair-industrieel complex en de NAVO in het bijzonder……….‘

 ‘Facebook en Twitter verwijderen nu volledige accounts………‘


‘Aanval op alternatieve media ‘succesvol’ meer en meer sites worden van het net geweerd……..‘

 ‘Media Too Busy Defending John McCain to Report the News That Actually Affects You‘ Onder andere aandacht voor PRISM.

 ‘Censuur op het internet met vliegende start in de VS, ‘het land van het vrije woord….’‘
‘Facebook stelt perstituee van New York Times aan als censuur-agent…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

 ‘AVG: Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (geleid door Aleid Wolfsen PvdA) niet berekend op EU wetgeving…….‘

 ‘Facebook e.a. hebben lak aan AVG (GDPR), misbruik persoonsgegevens gaat gewoon door…….‘

 ‘Het echte Facebook schandaal: manipulatie van de gebruikers en gratis diensten voor eertijds presidentskandidaat Obama…….‘

 ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

 ‘Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook doneerde aan de politici die hem in de VS aan de tand voelden >> in het EU parlement maakte hij gebruik van megalomane EU politici…..‘

 ‘Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

 ‘Westerse massa misleiding in aanloop naar WOIII……‘

 ‘VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’‘

 ‘Facebook verlaat ‘tranding news’ voor ‘brekend nieuws’ van 80 reguliere mediaorganen, ofwel nog meer ‘fake news…..’‘

 ‘Facebook komt met nieuwsshows van betrouwbare media als CNN en Fox News…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

Deep State stuurt VS presidenten bij >> uitleg van Edward Snowden

Posted on by Telmo Claro

In het volgende artikel uitleg van Edward Snowden over hoe de deep state werkt (in de VS). Zoals je wellicht al bekend was, het gaat bepaald niet alleen om de geheime diensten, maar bijvoorbeeld ook om de ambtenaren op sleutelposities, die na een wisseling van presidenten niet hoeven te vertrekken. Jammer dat Snowden niet de grote bedrijven en banken noemt, daar deze wel degelijk deel uitmaken van deep state……

Gezien dat laatste, hebben ook de miljardairs veel invloed, immers zij bezitten bedrijven of hebben de meerderheid van aandelen van bedrijven in handen, zoals die van de grote dagbladen >> niet voor niets dat de ‘journalistiek’ in die bladen allesbehalve onafhankelijk is….
Snowden legt uit hoe presidenten worden ingepakt door deep state, alle hervormingen die zij willen doorvoeren, zoals hervorming, dan wel opheffen van geheime diensten, stranden en zullen blijven stranden…… (althans zoals het er nu uitziet en er moet wel een enorme catastrofe passeren wil daar verandering in komen……)

Snowden Explains How the Deep State Influences Presidents

March 24, 2018 at 11:36 am
Written by Truth In Media
(TIM) — Famed whistleblower Edward Snowden was recently interviewed by Italian publication La Repubblic. The publication noted the 5-year mark of Snowden’s historic act of blowing the whistle on the NSA’s expansive surveillance programs and that “many thought he would end up very badly, but when he connects via videolink for this interview with la Repubblica, he seems to be doing very well: the frank smile and peaceful face of someone who is easy in his mind.”


In an excerpt from the exclusive interview, Snowden explained how the presidencies of both Obama and Trump are shaped by the Deep State following an illuminating question by journalist Stefania Maurizi.


Stefania Maurizi: We saw that President Obama, who was an outsider to the US military-intelligence complex, initially wanted to reign in the abuses of agencies like the CIA and the NSA, but in the end he did very little. Now we see a confrontation between president Trump and so-called Deep State, which includes the CIA and the NSA. Can a US president govern in opposition to such powerful entities?


Edward Snowden: Obama is certainly an instructive case. This is a president who campaigned on a platform of ending warrantless wiretapping in the United States, he said “that’s not who we are, that’s not what we do,” and once he became the president, he expanded the program. He said he was going to close Guantanamo but he kept it open, he said he was going to limit extrajudicial killings and drone strikes that has been so routine in the Bush years. But Obama went on to authorize vastly more drone strikes than Bush. It became an industry.


As for this idea that there is a Deep State, now the Deep State is not just the intelligence agencies, it is really a way of referring to the career bureaucracy of government. These are officials who sit in powerful positions, who don’t leave when presidents do, who watch presidents come and go, they influence policy, they influence presidents and say: this is what we have always done, this is what we must do, and if you don’t do this, people will die.


It is very easy to persuade a new president who comes in, who has never had these powers, but has always wanted this job and wants very, very badly to do that job well. A bureaucrat sitting there for the last twenty years says: I understand what you said, I respect your principles, but if you do what you promised, people will die. It is very easy for a president to go: well, for now, I am going to set this controversy to the side, I’m going to take your advice, let you guys decide how these things should be done, and then I will revisit it, when I have a little more experience, maybe in a few months, maybe in a few years, but then they never do.


This is what we saw quite clearly happen in the case of Barack Obama: when this story [of Snowden exposing the NSA’s mass surveillance] came forward in 2013, when Obama had been president for five years, one of the defences for this from his aides and political allies was: oh, Obama was just about to fix this problem! And sure enough, he eventually was forced from the wave of criticism to make some limited reforms, but he did not go far enough to end all of the programs that were in violation of the law or the constitution of the United States. That too was an intentional choice: he could have certainly used the scandal to advocate for all of the changes that he had campaigned on, to deliver on all of his promises, but in those five years he had become president, he discovered something else, which is that there are benefits from having very powerful intelligence agencies, there are benefits from having these career bureaucrats on your side, using their spider web over government for your benefit.


Imagine you are Barack Obama, and you realise – yes, when you were campaigning you were saying: spying on people without a warrant is a problem, but then you realise: you can read Angela Merkel’s text messages. Why bother calling her and asking her opinion, when you can just read her mind by breaking the law? It sounds like a joke, but it is a very seductive thing. Secrecy is perhaps the most corrupting of all government powers, because it takes public officials and divorces them from accountability to the public.


When we look at the case of Trump, who is perhaps the worst of politicians, we see the same dynamic occurring. This is a president who said the CIA is the enemy, it’s like Nazi Germany, they’re listening to his phone calls, and all of these other things, some claims which are true, some claims which are absolutely not. A few months later, he is authorizing major powers for these same agencies that he has called his enemies.


And this gets to the central crux of your question, which is: can any president oppose this? The answer is certainly. The president has to have some familiarity going in with the fact that this pitch is going to be made, that they are going to try to scare him or her into compliance. The president has to be willing to stand strongly on line and say: ‘I was elected to represent the interests of the American people, and if you’re not willing to respect the constitution and our rights, I will disband your agency, and create a new one’. I think they can definitely be forced into compliance, because these officials fear prison, just like every one of us.

EXCLUSIVE: tells how the shapes presidents,whether
he wants to see all his files published,how he looks at and at the increasingly close relationships ,, and the intel (English)

Edward Snowden: “Poisoning people who are long out of their service is contemptible”

In an exclusive interview, Edward Snowden tells La Repubblica what has changed in the five years since he blew the whistle on the NSA, how presidents Obama and

repubblica.it


 By Jay Syrmopoulos / Republished with permission / TruthInMedia.com / Report a typo

Mijn excuus voor de weergave van het Twitterbericht, krijg het niet op orde >> voor het origineel, klik op deze link.

Sleepwet: vrijgegeven documenten bewijzen dat de VS gewone burgers bespioneert >> zie ons voorland…….

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Onlangs vrijgegeven documenten, gepubliceerd door ‘The Electronic Border Foundation’ (EFF) en verkregen van de in opspraak geraakte Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), bewiijzen dat de VS wel degelijk gewone burgers bespioneert, mensen die niets onwettigs hebben gedaan…..

Vooral de NSA en FBI maken zich schuldig aan het afluisteren van gesprekken tussen mensen die op geen manier een bedreiging vormen…… Ook aan het publiek in de VS is meermaals voorgehouden dat met metadata verzameling hun privacy niet geschonden zou worden, wel dus…….
Overigens bleek eerder al, dat de geheime diensten in de VS (waartoe ik in deze ook de FBI reken) foto’s en filmpjes uit internet bestanden van mensen plukken en bekijken……..

‘Onafhankelijke’ rechters besluiten achter gesloten deuren wat wel of niet is toegestaan en daarover is geen enkele openheid…… In Nederland wil de regering met de Sleepwet die stap zelfs achterwege laten bij het verzamelen van data en reken maar dat men wel degelijk telefoongesprekken zal beluisteren, ook al is daar geen enkele reden toe…… De toestemming mag met de Sleepwet in werking, ook achteraf worden gevraagd en gegeven >> de dood in de pot voor ons recht op privacy, onze privacy waar al niet teveel meer van over is……..

Zie in de VS waar wij naar toe gaan met de nieuwe Sleepwet, die Rutte 3 van plan is erdoor te drukken…… Geloof maar niet dat het referendum, zelfs als de grote meerderheid tegen de Sleepwet stemt, daar enige verandering in zal brengen……. We hebben immers niet voor niets een ‘constitutionele democratie’, met een volksvertegenwoordiging, uh ik bedoel een bedrijven- en welgesteldenvertegenwoordiging…….

Newly Released Documents Prove the US Gov’t Is Spying on Innocent Americans

February 26, 2018 at 7:39 am
Written by Derrick Broze
(AP) — The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has acquired formerly classified court orders from the controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) which detail how the court violates the privacy of innocent Americans caught in the crossfire of federal surveillance. The documents are the result of Freedom of Information Act requests filed by the EFF as part of an effort to shine light on the inner workings of the secret court.
The EFF writes:

These documents raise larger questions about whether the government can meaningfully protect people’s privacy and free expression rights under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which permits officials to engage in warrantless mass surveillance with far less court oversight than is required under the “traditional” FISA warrant process.[…]

Although many of the 13 opinions are heavily redacted — and the government withheld another 26 in full — the readable portions show several instances of the court blocking government efforts to expand its surveillance or ordering the destruction of information obtained improperly as a result of its spying.

The documents provided to the EFF detail several cases where conversations of people not targeted by federal authorities were swept up in the course of surveillance investigations. Specifically, the documents show the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) spying on innocent people and attempting to conceal the practice. A 40-page court opinion from 2004 or 2005 details how FISC Judge Harold Baker declined a proposal from FBI to save these conversations, often known as incidental collection. “The opinion demonstrates both the risks of over-collection as part of targeted surveillance as well as the benefits of engaged, detailed court oversight,” The EFF notes.
Under the standards set by section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the FISC approves digital surveillance for federal agencies who are supposed to follow certain procedures to prevent the accidental interception of innocent people’s communications. The new documents highlight how the FBI used incidental collection to capture the communications of a number of innocent people.
The FBI attempted to argue to Judge Baker that the practice has “minimal, if any” impact on the Fourth Amendment protections against invasions of privacy. The FISC apparently actually did their job by attempting to prevent this practice from continuing and becoming normalized. The surveillance court appeared to admonish the FBI for expanding the use of incidental communications, rather than deleting the communications of individuals unrelated to ongoing investigations.
The EFF notes that the court “faulted the FBI for failing to account ‘the possibility that overzealous or ill-intentioned personnel might be inclined to misuse information, if given the opportunity.’ As the court put it, ‘the advantage of minimization at the acquisition stage is clear. Information that is never acquired in the first place cannot be misused.’”
The surveillance court was originally created under the the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) in response to reports produced by the 1975 Church Committee. The Senate panel was tasked with investigating the foreign and domestic surveillance operations by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), NSA, and FBI during the 1970s. The Church Committee also released detailed reports on the governments Counter Intelligence Programs (COINTELPRO) that were used against activists and influential voices of opposition during the 1950s and ’60s.
These newly released documents offer the latest example of how the secret surveillance court is ripe for abuse. Although this example shows one judge working to maintain some level of accountability, the vast majority of the documents were redacted so there is no way to see if this case is the exception or the norm. Further, this court order is thirteen to fourteen years old. Take a moment to consider the massive growth of the U.S. surveillance state and the FISC specifically. There is simply no way to trust that this single judges effort to hold the federal government accountable represent the status quo.
Much of the issues surrounding the secret surveillance court related to Section 702 of the FISA bill. According the EFF, Section 702 “allows the NSA to collect emails, browser history and chat logs of Americans. Section 702 also allows other agencies, like the FBI, to search through that data without a warrant. Those searches are called ‘backdoor searches.’” As revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013, Section 702 also authorizes two Internet surveillance programs known as PRISM and Upstream.
PRISM gathers messaging data sent via Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, and other tech companies, while Upstream taps into the so-called backbone of the Internet to gather data on targets. The NSA began collecting Americans’ international phone calls and emails without a warrant immediately after the 9/11 attacks as part of the Stellar Wind program. Once the public became aware of the program in 2008, Congress codified the program into law by passing section 702 of FISA.
The FISA Court is a glaring example of The Deep State. A secret court run by secret judges who interpret the law behind closed doors and who refuse to publicly release their findings or their interpretation.
By Derrick Broze / Republished with permission / Activist Post / Report a typo

================================

Zie ook: ‘Volkskrant en Nieuwsuur Fake News over ‘Russische hacks…..’‘

Via Artwave Art de volgende link: ‘Hoe zit het precies met die ‘sleepwet’? In deze vier podcasts leggen we het uit’ (door de Volkskrant, dus let op en geloof vooral niet alles wat je verteld wordt, zo zouden wij ook voordelen hebben van de sleepwet….. ha! ha! ha! ha! Alsof ze je had eraf hakken en dan stellen dat je nu veel beter gebruik van je andere hand zal gaan maken….)

FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web……..

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Er is al veel geschreven (althans in de alternatieve media) over de ware schuldigen achter Russiagate, met bewijzen werd en wordt aangetoond dat de geheime diensten FBI, CIA en NSA de ware schuldigen zijn achter Russiagate, waar overigens het campagneteam van hare kwaadaardigheid Clinton, aanstichter en mededader is…….

Gisteren op het blog van Stan van Houcke een artikel geschreven door Ray McGovern (ex-CIA) en gepubliceerd op de site van schrijver/journalist Paul Craig Roberts, die het overnam van Consortium News (kan je het nog volgen?). McGovern legt op een gedegen manier uit dat de FBI de ware grote dader is achter Russiagate.

Niet voor niets zegt nu zelfs de Wall Street Journal dat er een punt moet worden gezegd achter het Russiagate verhaal……. ha! Ha! Ha! Eerst liepen de persen van de Wall Street Journal zo hard op deze leugen dat ze bij wijze van spreken bijna vastliepen…….. Waar nu blijkt dat het Clinton campagneteam en de geheime diensten samen hebben gewerkt om te voorkomen dat Trump in het Witte Huis zou komen, wil deze bijna grootste krant van de VS dus een punt achter het enorme leugenverhaal dat Russiagate is………*

Nogmaals toont een massamediaorgaan aan ‘fake news’ (of: nepnieuws) te hebben gebracht en daar het volk maandenlang over te hebben voorgelogen……

Lezen mensen, een geweldig stuk over dombo’s Strzak en Page, die dachten in het geheim te kunnen communiceren, maar van wie onlangs een eerste deel van hun lange correspondentie werd vrijgegeven en waardoor ten overvloede de FBI nog eens kan worden aangewezen als spin in het Russiagate web…….

The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate

By Ray McGovern
January 15, 2018 Paul Craig Roberts.

As I have reported from the beginning, Russiagate is an orchestrated hoax by the security agencies for the purpose of preventing Trump from normalizing relations with Russia and, if necessary, for removing him from office. Russiagate is an act of treason by the security agencies. Those responsible must be arrested, prosecuted, and convicted. — PCR

“After months of breathless searching for ‘evidence’ of Russian-Trump collusion designed to put Trump in the White House, what now exists is actual evidence that senior officials of the Obama administration colluded to keep Trump out of the White House.” — Ray McGovern

Special Report: In the Watergate era, liberals warned about U.S. intelligence agencies manipulating U.S. politics, but now Trump-hatred has blinded many of them to this danger becoming real, as ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern notes. January 12, 2017, Information Clearing House
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48572.htm

The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate
By Ray McGovern

Russia-gate is becoming FBI-gate, thanks to the official release of unguarded text messages between loose-lipped FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok and his garrulous girlfriend, FBI lawyer Lisa Page. (Ten illustrative texts from their exchange appear at the end of this article.)

Despite his former job as chief of the FBI’s counterintelligence section, Strzok had the naive notion that texting on FBI phones could not be traced. Strzok must have slept through “Security 101.” Or perhaps he was busy texting during that class. Girlfriend Page cannot be happy at being misled by his assurance that using office phones would be a secure way to conduct their affair(s).

It would have been unfortunate enough for Strzok and Page to have their adolescent-sounding texts merely exposed, revealing the reckless abandon of star-crossed lovers hiding (they thought) secrets from cuckolded spouses, office colleagues, and the rest of us. However, for the never-Trump plotters in the FBI, the official release of just a fraction (375) of almost 10,000 messages does incalculably more damage than that.

We suddenly have documentary proof that key elements of the U.S. intelligence community were trying to short-circuit the U.S. democratic process. And that puts in a new and dark context the year-long promotion of Russia-gate. It now appears that it was not the Russians trying to rig the outcome of the U.S. election, but leading officials of the U.S. intelligence community, shadowy characters sometimes called the Deep State.

More of the Strzok-Page texting dialogue is expected to be released. And the Department of Justice Inspector General reportedly has additional damaging texts from others on the team that Special Counsel Robert Mueller selected to help him investigate Russia-gate.

Besides forcing the removal of Strzok and Page, the text exposures also sounded the death knell for the career of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, in whose office some of the plotting took place and who has already announced his plans to retire soon.

But the main casualty is the FBI’s 18-month campaign to sabotage candidate-and-now-President Donald Trump by using the Obama administration’s Russia-gate intelligence “assessment,” electronic surveillance of dubious legality, and a salacious dossier that could never pass the smell test, while at the same time using equally dubious techniques to immunize Hillary Clinton and her closest advisers from crimes that include lying to the FBI and endangering secrets.

Ironically, the Strzok-Page texts provide something that the Russia-gate investigation has been sorely lacking: first-hand evidence of both corrupt intent and action. After months of breathless searching for “evidence” of Russian-Trump collusion designed to put Trump in the White House, what now exists is actual evidence that senior officials of the Obama administration colluded to keep Trump out of the White House – proof of what old-time gumshoes used to call “means, motive and opportunity.”

Even more unfortunately for Russia-gate enthusiasts, the FBI lovers’ correspondence provides factual evidence exposing much of the made-up “Resistance” narrative – the contrived storyline that The New York Times and much of the rest of the U.S. mainstream media deemed fit to print with little skepticism and few if any caveats, a scenario about brilliantly devious Russians that not only lacks actual evidence – relying on unverified hearsay and rumor – but doesn’t make sense on its face.

The Russia-gate narrative always hinged on the preposterous notion that Russian President Vladimir
Putin foresaw years ago what no American political analyst considered even possible, the political ascendancy of Donald Trump. According to the narrative, the fortune-telling Putin then risked creating even worse tensions with a nuclear-armed America that would – by all odds – have been led by a vengeful President Hillary Clinton.

Besides this wildly improbable storyline, there were flat denials from WikiLeaks, which distributed the supposedly “hacked” Democratic emails, that the information came from Russia – and there was the curious inability of the National Security Agency to use its immense powers to supply any technical evidence to support the Russia-hack scenario.
The Trump Shock

But the shock of Trump’s election and the decision of many never-Trumpers to cast their lot with the Resistance led to a situation in which any prudent skepticism or demand for evidence was swept aside.
So, on Jan. 6, 2017, President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper released an evidence-free report that he said was compiled by “hand-picked” analysts from the CIA, FBI and NSA, offering an “assessment” that Russia and President Putin were behind the release of the Democratic emails in a plot to help Trump win the presidency.

Despite the extraordinary gravity of the charge, even New York Times correspondent Scott Shane noted that proof was lacking. He wrote at the time: “What is missing from the [the Jan. 6] public report is what many Americans most eagerly anticipated: hard evidence to back up the agencies’ claims that the Russian government engineered the election attack. … Instead, the message from the agencies essentially amounts to ‘trust us.’”

But the “assessment” served a useful purpose for the never-Trumpers: it applied an official imprimatur on the case for delegitimizing Trump’s election and even raised the long-shot hope that the Electoral College might reverse the outcome and possibly install a compromise candidate, such as former Secretary of State Colin Powell, in the White House. Though the Powell ploy fizzled, the hope of somehow removing Trump from office continued to bubble, fueled by the growing hysteria around Russia-gate.

Virtually all skepticism about the evidence-free “assessment” was banned. For months, the Times and other newspapers of record repeated the lie that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies had concurred in the conclusion about the Russian “hack.” Even when that falsehood was belatedly acknowledged, the major news outlets just shifted the phrasing slightly to say that U.S. intelligence agencies had reached the Russian “hack” conclusion. Shane’s blunt initial recognition about the lack of proof disappeared from the mainstream media’s approved narrative of Russia-gate.

Doubts about the Russian “hack” or dissident suggestions that what we were witnessing was a “soft coup” were scoffed at by leading media commentators. Other warnings from veteran U.S. intelligence professionals about the weaknesses of the Russia-gate narrative and the danger of letting politicized intelligence overturn a constitutional election were also brushed aside in pursuit of the goal of removing Trump from the White House.

It didn’t even seem to matter when new Russia-gate disclosures conflicted with the original narrative that Putin had somehow set Trump up as a Manchurian candidate. All normal journalistic skepticism was jettisoned. It was as if the Russia-gate advocates started with the conclusion that Trump must go and then made the facts fit into that mold, but anyone who noted the violations of normal investigative procedures was dismissed as a “Trump enabler” or a “Moscow stooge.”

The Text Evidence

But then came the FBI text messages, providing documentary evivdence that key FBI officials involved in the Russia-gate investigation were indeed deeply biased and out to get Trump, adding hard proof to Trump’s longstanding lament that he was the subject of a “witch hunt.”

Justified or not, Trump’s feeling of vindication could hardly be more dangerous — particularly at a time when the most urgent need is to drain some testosterone from the self-styled Stable-Genius-in-Chief and his martinet generals.

On the home front, Trump, his wealthy friends, and like-thinkers in Congress may now feel they have an even wider carte blanche to visit untold misery on the poor, the widow, the stranger and other vulnerable humans. That was always an underlying danger of the Resistance’s strategy to seize on whatever weapons were available – no matter how reckless or unfair – to “get Trump.”

Beyond that, Russia-gate has become so central to the Washington establishment’s storyline that there appears to be no room for second-thoughts or turning back. The momentum is such that some Democrats and the media never-Trumpers can’t stop stoking the smoke of Russia-gate and holding out hope against hope that it will somehow justify Trump’s impeachment.

Yet, the sordid process of using legal/investigative means to settle political scores further compromises the principle of the “rule of law” and integrity of journalism in the eyes of many Americans. After a year of Russia-gate, the “rule of law” and “pursuit of truth” appear to have been reduced to high-falutin’ phrases for political score-setttling, a process besmirched by Republicans in earlier pursuits of Democrats and now appearing to be a bipartisan method for punishing political rivals regardless of the lack of evidence.

 Strzok and Page

Peter Strzok (pronounced “struck”) has an interesting pedigree with multiple tasks regarding both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump. As the FBI’s chief of counterespionage during the investigation into then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a personal email server for classified information, Strzok reportedly changed the words “grossly negligent” (which could have triggered legal prosecution) to the far less serious “extremely careless” in FBI Director James Comey’s depiction of Clinton’s actions. This semantic shift cleared the way for Comey to conclude just 20 days before the Democratic National Convention began in July 2016, that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring charges against Mrs. Clinton.

Then, as Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division, Strzok led the FBI’s investigation into alleged Russian interference in the U.S. election of 2016. It is a safe bet that he took a strong hand in hand-picking the FBI contingent of analysts that joined “hand-picked” counterparts from CIA and NSA in preparing the evidence-free, Jan. 6, 2017 assessment accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of interfering in the election of 2016. (Although accepted in Establishment groupthink as revealed truth, that poor excuse for analysis reflected the apogee of intelligence politicization — rivaled only by the fraudulent intelligence on “weapons of mass destruction“ in Iraq 15 years ago.)

In June and July 2017 Strzok was the top FBI official working on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into possible links between the Trump campaign and Russia, but was taken off that job when the Justice Department IG learned of the Strzok-Page text-message exchange and told Mueller.

There is no little irony in the fact that what did in the FBI sweathearts was their visceral disdain for Mr. Trump, their cheerleading-cum-kid-gloves treatment of Mrs. Clinton and her associates, their 1950-ish, James Clapperesque attitude toward Russians as “almost genetically driven” to evil, and their (Strzok/Page) elitist conviction that they know far better what is good for the country than regular American citizens, including those “deplorables” whom Clinton said made up half of Trump’s supporters.

But Strzok/Page had no idea that their hubris, elitism and scheming would be revealed in so tangible a way. Worst of all for them, the very thing that Strzok, in particular, worked so hard to achieve — the sabotaging of Trump and immunization of Mrs. Clinton and her closest advisers is now coming apart at the seams.

Congress: Oversee? or Overlook?

At this point, the $64 question is whether the various congressional oversight committees will remain ensconced in their customarily cozy role as “overlook” committees, or whether they will have the courage to attempt to carry out their Constitutional duty. The latter course would mean confronting a powerful Deep State and its large toolbox of well-practiced retaliatory techniques, including J. Edgar Hoover-style blackmail on steroids, enabled by electronic surveillance of just about everything and everyone. Yes, today’s technology permits blanket collection, and “Collect Everything” has become the motto.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, with almost four decades of membership in the House and Senate, openly warned incoming President Trump in January 2017 against criticizing the U.S. intelligence community because U.S. intelligence officials have “six ways from Sunday to get back at you” if you are “dumb” enough to take them on.

Thanks to the almost 10,000 text messages between Strzok and Page, only a small fraction of which were given to Congress four weeks ago, there is now real evidentiary meat on the bones of the suspicions that there indeed was a “deep-state coup” to “correct” the outcome of the 2016 election. We now know that the supposedly apolitical FBI officials had huge political axes to grind. The Strzok-Page exchanges drip with disdain for Trump and those deemed his smelly deplorable supporters. In one text message, Strzok expressed visceral contempt for those working-class Trump voters, writing on Aug. 26, 2016, “Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support. … it’s scary real down here.”

The texts even show Strzok warning of the need for an “insurance policy” to thwart Trump on the off-chance that his poll numbers closed in on those of Mrs. Clinton.

An Aug. 6, 2016 text message, for example, shows Page giving her knight in shining armor strong affirmation: “Maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace [Trump].” That text to Strzok includes a link to a David Brooks column in The New York Times, in which Brooks concludes with the clarion call: “There comes a time when neutrality and laying low become dishonorable. If you’re not in revolt, you’re in cahoots. When this period and your name are mentioned, decades hence, your grandkids will look away in shame.”

Another text message shows that other senior government officials – alarmed at the possibility of a Trump presidency – joined the discussion. In an apparent reference to an August 2016 meeting with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Strzok wrote to Page on Aug. 15, 2016, “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he [Trump] gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.” Strzok added, “It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event that you die before you’re 40.”

Insurance Policy?

Senate Judiciary Committee chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, says he will ask Strzok to explain the “insurance policy” when he calls him to testify. What seems already clear is that the celebrated “Steele Dossier” was part of the “insurance,” as was the evidence-less legend that Russia hacked the DNC’s and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails and gave them to WikiLeaks.

If congressional investigators have been paying attention, they already know what former weapons inspector Scott Ritter shared with Veteran intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) colleagues this week; namely, that Fusion GPS’s Glenn Simpson, who commissioned the Russia dossier using Democratic Party money, said he reached out to Steele after June 17, just three days before Steele’s first report was published, drawing on seven sources.

“There is a snowball’s chance in hell that this is raw intelligence gathered by Steele; rather he seems to have drawn on a single ‘trusted intermediary’ to gather unsubstantiated rumor already in existence.”

Another VIPS colleague, Phil Giraldi, writing out of his own experience in private sector consulting, added: “The fact that you do not control your sources frequently means that they will feed you what they think you want to hear. Since they are only doing it for money, the more lurid the details the better, as it increases the apparent value of the information. The private security firm in turn, which is also doing it for the money, will pass on the stories and even embroider them to keep the client happy and to encourage him to come back for more. When I read the Steele dossier it looked awfully familiar to me, like the scores of similar reports I had seen which combined bullshit with enough credible information to make the whole product look respectable.”

It is now widely known that the Democrats ponied up the “insurance premiums,” so to speak, for former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele’s “dossier” of lurid — but largely unproven — “intelligence” on Trump and the Russians. If, as many have concluded, the dossier was used to help justify a FISA warrant to snoop on the Trump campaign, those involved will be in deep kimchi, if congressional overseers do their job.

How, you might ask, could Strzok and associates undertake these extra-legal steps with such blithe disregard for the possible consequences should they be caught? The answer is easy; Mrs. Clinton was a shoo-in, remember? This was just extra insurance with no expectation of any “death benefit” ever coming into play — save for Trump’s electoral demise in November 2016. The attitude seemed to be that, if abuse of the FISA law should eventually be discovered — there would be little interest in a serious investigation by the editors of The New York Times and other anti-Trump publications and whatever troubles remained could be handled by President Hillary Clinton.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, who chairs the Judiciary Subcommittee of Judiciary on Crime and Terrorism, joined Sen. Grassley in signing the letter referring Christopher Steele to the Justice Department to investigate what appear to be false statements about the dossier. In signing, Graham noted the “many stop signs the Department of Justice ignored in its use of the dossier.” The signature of committee ranking member Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, however, was missing — an early sign that a highly partisan battle royale is in the offing. On Tuesday, Feinstein unilaterally released a voluminous transcript of Glenn Simpson’s earlier testimony and, as though on cue, Establishment pundits portrayed Steele as a good source and Fusion GPS’s Glenn Simpson as a victim.
The Donnybrook is now underway; the outcome uncertain.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army and CIA intelligence analyst for 30 years; prepared and briefed the President’s Daily Brief for Nixon, Ford, and Reagan; and is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).
+++++++++++++

Sample text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, released to Congress and the media on December 13, 2016
++++++++++++++
03/04/2016
Strzok – God Hillary should win. 100,000,000-0.
Page – I know
++++++++++++
04/02/2016
Page – So look, you say we text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can’t be traced, you were just venting, bc you feel bad that you’re gone so much but that can’t be helped right now.
++++++++++
07/08/2016
Strzok – And meanwhile, we have Black Lives Matter protestors, right now, chanting “no justice no peace” around DoJ and the White House…
Page – That’s awful.
+++++++++
07/14/2016
Page – Have you read this? It’s really frightening. For Whites Sensing Decline, Donald Trump Unleashes Words of Resistance http://NYTI/ms/29WCu5!
Strzok – I have not. But I think it’s clear he’s capturing all the white, poor voters who the mainstream republicans abandoned in all but name in the quest for the almighty $$$
Page – Yeah, it’s not good.
Strzok – Poll Finds Emails Weighing on Hillary Clinton, Now Tied With Donald Trump http://nyti.ms/29RV5gf
Page – It is
+++++++++++++
07/26/2016
Strzok – And hey. Congrats on a woman nominated for President in a major party! About damn time! Many many more returns of the day!!
Page – That’s cute. Thanks
++++++++++
08/06/2016
Page – Jesus. You should read this. And Trump should go f himself. Moment in Convention Glare Shakes Up Khans American Life http://nyti.ms/2aHulE0
Strzok – God that’s a great article. Thanks for sharing. And F TRUMP.
++++++++
08/06/2016
Page – And maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace. To that end comma, read this:
Page – Trump Enablers Will Finally Have to Take A Stand http://nyti.ms/2aFakry
Strzok – Thanks. It’s absolutely true that we’re both very fortunate. And of course I’ll try and approach it that way. I just know it will be tough at times. I can protect our country at many levels, not sure if that helps
++++++++++++
08/09/2016
Page – He’s not ever going to become president, right? Right?!
Strzok – OMG did you hear what Trump just said?
+++++++++++
08/26/2016
Strzok – Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support…
Page – Yep. Out to lunch with (redacted) We both hate everyone and everything.
Page – Just riffing on the hot mess that is our country.
Strzok – Yeah…it’s scary real down here
+++++++++
10/20/2016
Strzok: I am riled up. Trump is a f***ing idiot, is unable to provide a coherent answer.
Strzok – I CAN’T PULL AWAY, WHAT THE F**K HAPPENED TO OUR COUNTRY (redacted)??!?!
Page– I don’t know. But we’ll get it back. We’re America. We rock.
Strzok– Donald just said “bad hombres”
Strzok– Trump just said what the FBI did is disgraceful.
This article was originally published by Consortium News –

====

Was the DNC/Clinton campaign-funded dossier used to obtain warrants on Trump team from the secret court?
=============================
* Zie: ‘Wall Street Journal wil punt achter Russiagate‘

Zie ook: ‘WikiLeaks belooft The Guardian 1 miljoen dollar als het haar leugens i.z. Assange en Russiagate kan bewijzen…….‘

en: ‘Russiagate? Britaingate zal je bedoelen!‘

en: ‘Facebook gebruikte ‘fake news’ beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden‘

en ‘Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax‘

en: ‘New York Times ‘bewijzen’ voor Russiagate vallen door de mand……‘

en: ‘Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen‘

en: ‘Google, de volgende ‘die advertentieruimte verkocht aan Putin zelf……’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..‘

en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election‘

en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘‘Russiagate’ een verhaal van a t/m z westers ‘fake news…..’‘

en: ‘Rusland zou onafhankelijkheid Californië willen uitlokken met reclame voor borsjt…….‘

en: ‘Clinton te kakken gezet: Donna Brazile (Democratische Partij VS) draagt haar boek op aan Seth Rich, het vermoorde lid van DNC die belastende documenten lekte‘

en: ‘CIA deed zich voor als het Russische Kaspersky Lab, aldus Wikileaks Vault 8…..‘ (zie ook de andere links onder dat bericht)

en: ‘Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Ollongren gesteund door Thomas Boesgaard (AD), ‘Rusland verpakt het nepnieuws gekoppeld aan echt nieuws…..’ Oei!!‘ (ja ook deze D66 plork gaat plat op de bek!)

en: ‘RT America één van de eerste slachtoffers in een heksenjacht op westerse alternatieve media en nadenkend links……‘

en: ‘Rusland heeft niets van doen met manipulaties van de VS presidentsverkiezingen via Facebook, wel maakt Facebook meer kapot dan je lief is…….‘

en: ‘‘False flag terror’ bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken……….‘

en: ‘CIA 70 jaar: 70 jaar moorden, martelen, coups plegen, nazi’s beschermen, media manipulatie enz. enz………‘

en: ‘CIA en 70 jaar desinformatie in Europese opiniebladen…………‘

en: ‘Pompeo (CIA opperhoofd met koperen fluit): heeft alle aanwijzingen dat Rusland de midterm verkiezingen zal manipuleren……‘

 en: ‘‘Russiagate’ een complot van CIA, FBI, Hillary Clinton en het DNC………..‘

 en: ‘De Russiagate samenzweringstheorie dient de machthebbers………‘

 en: ‘‘Fake News’ hysterie willens en wetens gelanceerd om sociale media tot zwijgen te brengen, Rusland te demoniseren en daarmee de waarheid te verbergen……..‘

Georganiseerde misdaad en overheid, wat is het verschil tussen die twee? Een uiterst hilarische lezing van Michael Parenti over de moord op JFK!

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Brasscheck TV kwam afgelopen zaterdag met een lezing van Michael Parenti, waarin de vraag wordt beantwoord of er een verschil bestaat tussen georganiseerde misdaad en de politiek in de meeste landen.

Het zal je waarschijnlijk niet verbazen dat er amper of geen verschil is.

 De staat is er vooral om de belangen van de welgestelden te beschermen en verdeeldheid te zaaien als minderheden of groepen die zich verzetten tegen onrecht of afbraak van het milieu, zich organiseren….. (verdeel en heers…) Waarnaast de gekleurde bevolking van de VS vanaf eind 60er jaren willens en wetens door de overheid werd volgepropt met drugs, dezelfde overheid die sinds begin 70er jaren zogenaamd een oorlog tegen drugs voert…………….

 Dezelfde VS die er niet mee zit vooraanstaande leiders van minderheden te vermoorden, of zelfs een president te vermoorden, waar Parenti vooral spreekt over de moord op J.F. Kennedy. Parenti noemde de film JFK van Oliver Stone, de enige film die 6 maanden voordat deze werd uitgebracht al kritiek kreeg, o.a. van de reguliere (massa-) media in de VS, die de staat steunt waar het maar kan…… Diezelfde staat was van meet af bang aan voor deze film (gezien de kritiek die Stone keer op keer gaf op het ‘land’ dat zich de United States of America durft te noemen…….

Of neem de houding van die massamedia (overigens ook in de rest van wat men het westen noemt), voorafgaand en tijdens de illegale oorlogen tegen Afghanistan, Irak, Libië en Syrië (wat betreft de laatste: de reden voor de VS een opstand te organiseren in Syrië en het land vol te proppen met terroristen en wapens, was Assad, die moest hoe dan ook weg…… De VS was al in 2006 bezig met de voorbereidingen daartoe……. Deze zaken moesten tijdens de lezing van Parenti nog plaatsvinden, de lezing dateert uit 1993.

 Voorts gaat Parenti nog in op het begrip ‘Deep State’.

Beluister deze geweldige en uiterst hilarische lezing waar Perenti, die zoals gezegd, vooral spreekt over de moord op J.F. Kennedy en de grote en belachelijke leugens die daar over werden verteld. Luister en oordeel zelf, althans als je nog niet overtuigd was van het feit dat de overheid achter de moord op JFK zat. Dit keer geen video, maar audio van Brasscheck:

The Gangster Nature of the State

MICHAEL PARENTI (1993)

Can someone tell me the difference between organized crime and most States including our own?
One analyst Michael Parenti examined the question and could not find any real difference.
One of the best talks on this subject you’ll ever hear.

“TOUGH, HILARIOUS, RIGHT-ON MIX OF SCHOLAR AND STREET”

Can someone tell me the difference between organized crime and most States including our own?
One analyst Michael Parenti examined the question and could not find any real difference.
“This tough, hilarious, right-on mix of scholar and street.” – KPFA-Pacifica, 1994
Michael Parenti was born and raised in an Italian-American working class family in New York City. After high school he worked for a number of years then returned to school, eventually earning a B.A. from City College of New York, an M.A. from Brown University, and a Ph.D. in political science from Yale University. His many books include The Face of Imperialism (2011); God and His Demons (2010); The Assassination of Julius Caesar (2003); and Democracy for the Few, 9th edition (2010). He recently published a warmly received “ethnic memoir” entitled Waiting for Yesterday: Pages from a Street Kid’s Life.
Portions of his writings have been translated into some twenty languages. Books and articles of his have been used extensively in college courses and also by lay readers. Over 550 articles of his have appeared in scholarly journals, political periodicals, various magazines, newspapers, books of collected readings, and online publications.
More about Parenti here: http://www.michaelparenti.org

================================

Zie ook: ‘Martin Luther King jr. vermoord door de overheid, aldus rechter……..‘

en: ‘JFK de moord: de macht van de geheime diensten gecombineerd met die van het militair-industrieel complex‘

en: ‘J.F. Kennedy vermoord door Lyndon Johnson en z’n maten in misdaad, geheime diensten en politiek…..‘

en: ‘Kabinet ‘wil kunnen hacken’, zonder daar melding van te maken………. Hoe bedoelt u, ‘politiestaat??’‘

PS: het begrip ‘conspiracy Theory’ (samenzweringstheorie) is door de CIA geïntroduceerd na de moord op JFK, om zo het volk juist weg te houden van de smerige, stinkende waarheid…..

JFK de moord: de macht van de geheime diensten gecombineerd met die van het militair-industrieel complex

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Het volgende artikel geschreven door Ray McGovern was nog niet gepubliceerd of Trump beloofde ook de rest van de JFK documenten vrij te geven, terwijl hij eerder onder druk van de CIA en NSA 300 pagina’s achterhield.

Daarmee was de kop van het McGovern artikel achterhaald, al moeten we eerst nog zien, of Trump kan leveren, immers de geheime diensten hebben hem bijna volledig in hun macht gekregen met de Russia-gate leugens*.

Verder een artikel met alweer toch een aantal nieuwe feiten, waaruit de conclusie bijna niet is te vermijden dat de CIA heeft meegewerkt aan de moord op J.F. Kennedy, uiteraard in opdracht en samenwerking met het militair-industrieel complex. Kennedy was van plan de aanwezige troepen uit Zuid-Vietnam terug te trekken, dat zou deze industrie een paar miljard dollar aan winst kosten…… Uiteraard was de mislukte invasie op Cuba een stevige plank aan de doodskist van Kennedy, men heeft hem nooit vergeven dat hij geen troepen stuurde naar Cuba om de gevangen genomen militairen te bevrijden, sterker nog: Kennedy ontsloeg de verantwoordelijken voor het Bay of Pigs incident…..

Truman, de ex-president plaatste een maand na de moord op Kennedy een artikel in de Washington Post, waarin hij pleitte de macht van de CIA aan banden te leggen, dit werd niet herhaald in de late editie van deze krant en werd gemeden door de rest van de reguliere media in de VS, terwijl Truman NB de CIA had opgezet in 1947……….

Lees het volgende (verder) prima artikel:

The Deep State’s JFK Triumph Over Trump

October 30, 2017 at 9:27 am
Written by Ray McGovern

 Fifty-four years after President Kennedy’s assassination, the CIA and FBI demanded more time to decide what secrets to keep hiding – and a chastened President Trump bowed to their power, observes ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.
(CN) — It was summer 1963 when a senior official of CIA’s operations directorate treated our Junior Officer Trainee (JOT) class to an unbridled rant against President John F. Kennedy. He accused JFK, among other things, of rank cowardice in refusing to send U.S. armed forces to bail out Cuban rebels pinned down during the CIA-launched invasion at the Bay of Pigs, blowing the chance to drive Cuba’s Communist leader Fidel Castro from power.
It seemed beyond odd that a CIA official would voice such scathing criticism of a sitting President at a training course for those selected to be CIA’s future leaders. I remember thinking to myself, “This guy is unhinged; he would kill Kennedy, given the chance.”
Our special guest lecturer looked a lot like E. Howard Hunt, but more than a half-century later, I cannot be sure it was he. Our notes from such training/indoctrination were classified and kept under lock and key.
At the end of our JOT orientation, we budding Agency leaders had to make a basic choice between joining the directorate for substantive analysis or the operations directorate where case officers run spies and organize regime changes (in those days, we just called the process overthrowing governments).
I chose the analysis directorate and, once ensconced in the brand new headquarters building in Langley, Virginia, I found it strange that subway-style turnstiles prevented analysts from going to the “operations side of the house,” and vice versa. Truth be told, we were never one happy family.
I cannot speak for my fellow analysts in the early 1960s, but it never entered my mind that operatives on the other side of the turnstiles might be capable of assassinating a President – the very President whose challenge to do something for our country had brought many of us to Washington in the first place. But, barring the emergence of a courageous whistleblower-patriot like Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden, I do not expect to live long enough to learn precisely who orchestrated and carried out the assassination of JFK.
And yet, in a sense, those particulars seem less important than two main lessons learned: (1) If a President can face down intense domestic pressure from the power elite and turn toward peace with perceived foreign enemies, then anything is possible. The darkness of Kennedy’s murder should not obscure the light of that basic truth; and (2) There is ample evidence pointing to a state execution of a President willing to take huge risks for peace. While no post-Kennedy president can ignore that harsh reality, it remains possible that a future President with the vision and courage of JFK might beat the odds – particularly as the American Empire disintegrates and domestic discontent grows.
I do hope to be around next April after the 180-day extension for release of the remaining JFK documents. But – absent a gutsy whistleblower – I wouldn’t be surprised to see in April, a Washington Post banner headline much like the one that appeared Saturday: “JFK files: The promise of revelations derailed by CIA, FBI.”
The New Delay Is the Story
You might have thought that almost 54 years after Kennedy was murdered in the streets of Dallas – and after knowing for a quarter century the supposedly final deadline for releasing the JFK files – the CIA and FBI would not have needed a six-month extension to decide what secrets that they still must hide.
Journalist Caitlin Johnstone hits the nail on the head in pointing out that the biggest revelation from last week’s limited release of the JFK files is “the fact that the FBI and CIA still desperately need to keep secrets about something that happened 54 years ago.”
What was released on Oct. 26, was a tiny fraction of what had remained undisclosed in the National Archives. To find out why, one needs to have some appreciation of a 70-year-old American political tradition that might be called “fear of the spooks.”
That the CIA and FBI are still choosing what we should be allowed to see concerning who murdered John Kennedy may seem unusual, but there is hoary precedent for it. After JFK’s assassination on Nov. 22, 1963, the well-connected Allen Dulles, whom Kennedy had fired as CIA director after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, got himself appointed to the Warren Commission and took the lead in shaping the investigation of JFK’s murder.
By becoming de facto head of the Commission, Dulles was perfectly placed to protect himself and his associates, if any commissioners or investigators were tempted to question whether Dulles and the CIA played any role in killing Kennedy. When a few independent-minded journalists did succumb to that temptation, they were immediately branded – you guessed it – “conspiracy theorists.”
And so, the big question remains: Did Allen Dulles and other “cloak-and-dagger” CIA operatives have a hand in John Kennedy’s assassination and subsequent cover-up? In my view and the view of many more knowledgeable investigators, the best dissection of the evidence on the murder appears in James Douglass’s 2008 book, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.
After updating and arraying the abundant evidence, and conducting still more interviews, Douglass concludes that the answer to the big question is Yes. Reading Douglass’s book today may help explain why so many records are still withheld from release, even in redacted form, and why, indeed, we may never see them in their entirety.
Truman: CIA a Frankenstein?
When Kennedy was assassinated, it must have occurred to former President Harry Truman, as it did to many others, that the disgraced Allen Dulles and his associates might have conspired to get rid of a President they felt was soft on Communism – and dismissive of the Deep State of that time. Not to mention their vengeful desire to retaliate for Kennedy’s response to the Bay of Pigs fiasco. (Firing Allen Dulles and other CIA paragons of the Deep State for that fiasco simply was not done.)
Exactly one month after John Kennedy was killed, the Washington Post published an op-ed by Harry Truman titled “Limit CIA Role to Intelligence.” The first sentence read, “I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency.”
Strangely, the op-ed appeared only in the Post’s early edition on Dec. 22, 1963. It was excised from that day’s later editions and, despite being authored by the President who was responsible for setting up the CIA in 1947, the all-too-relevant op-ed was ignored in all other major media.
Truman clearly believed that the spy agency had lurched off in what Truman thought were troubling directions. He began his op-ed by underscoring “the original reason why I thought it necessary to organize this Agency … and what I expected it to do.” It would be “charged with the collection of all intelligence reports from every available source, and to have those reports reach me as President without Department ‘treatment’ or interpretations.”
Truman then moved quickly to one of the main things clearly bothering him. He wrote “the most important thing was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisions.”
It was not difficult to see this as a reference to how one of the agency’s early directors, Allen Dulles, tried to trick President Kennedy into sending U.S. forces to rescue the group of invaders who had landed on the beach at the Bay of Pigs in April 1961 with no chance of success, absent the speedy commitment of U.S. air and ground support. The planned mouse-trapping of the then-novice President Kennedy had been underpinned by a rosy “analysis” showing how this pin-prick on the beach would lead to a popular uprising against Fidel Castro.
Wallowing in the Bay of Pigs
Arch-Establishment figure Allen Dulles was offended when young President Kennedy, on entering office, had the temerity to question the CIA’s Bay of Pigs plans, which had been set in motion under President Dwight Eisenhower. When Kennedy made it clear he would not approve the use of U.S. combat forces, Dulles set out, with supreme confidence, to give the President no choice except to send U.S. troops to the rescue.
Coffee-stained notes handwritten by Allen Dulles were discovered after his death and reported by historian Lucien S. Vandenbroucke. In his notes, Dulles explained that, “when the chips were down,” Kennedy would be forced by “the realities of the situation” to give whatever military support was necessary “rather than permit the enterprise to fail.”
The “enterprise” which Dulles said could not fail was, of course, the overthrow of Fidel Castro. After mounting several failed operations to assassinate Castro, this time Dulles meant to get his man, with little or no attention to how Castro’s patrons in Moscow might react eventually. (The next year, the Soviets agreed to install nuclear missiles in Cuba as a deterrent to future U.S. aggression, leading to the Cuban Missile Crisis).
In 1961, the reckless Joint Chiefs of Staff, whom then-Deputy Secretary of State George Ball later described as a “sewer of deceit,” relished any chance to confront the Soviet Union and give it, at least, a black eye. (One can still smell the odor from that sewer in many of the documents released last week.)
But Kennedy stuck to his guns, so to speak. A few months after the abortive invasion of Cuba — and his refusal to send the U.S. military to the rescue — Kennedy fired Dulles and his co-conspirators and told a friend that he wanted to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds.” Clearly, the outrage was mutual.
When JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters came out, the mainstream media had an allergic reaction and gave it almost no reviews. It is a safe bet, though, that Barack Obama was given a copy and that this might account in some degree for his continual deference – timorousness even – toward the CIA.
Could fear of the Deep State be largely why President Obama felt he had to leave the Cheney/Bush-anointed CIA torturers, kidnappers and black-prison wardens in place, instructing his first CIA chief, Leon Panetta, to become, in effect, the agency’s lawyer rather than take charge? Is this why Obama felt he could not fire his clumsily devious Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who had to apologize to Congress for giving “clearly erroneous” testimony under oath in March 2013? Does Obama’s fear account for his allowing then-National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander and counterparts in the FBI to continue to mislead the American people, even though the documents released by Edward Snowden showed them – as well as Clapper – to be lying about the government’s surveillance activities?
Is this why Obama fought tooth and nail to protect CIA Director John Brennan by trying to thwart publication of the comprehensive Senate Intelligence Committee investigation of CIA torture, which was
based on original Agency cables, emails, and headquarters memos? [See here and here.]
The Deep State Today
Many Americans cling to a comforting conviction that the Deep State is a fiction, at least in a “democracy” like the United States. References to the enduring powers of the security agencies and other key bureaucracies have been essentially banned by the mainstream media, which many other suspicious Americans have come to see as just one more appendage of the Deep State.
But occasionally the reality of how power works pokes through in some unguarded remark by a Washington insider, someone like Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, the Senate Minority Leader with 36 years of experience in Congress. As Senate Minority Leader, he also is an ex officio member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is supposed to oversee the intelligence agencies.
During a Jan. 3, 2017 interview with MSNBC’S Rachel Maddow, Schumer told Maddow nonchalantly about the dangers awaiting President-elect Donald Trump if he kept on “taking on the intelligence community.” She and Schumer were discussing Trump’s sharp tweeting regarding U.S. intelligence and evidence of “Russian hacking” (which both Schumer and Maddow treat as flat fact).
Schumer said: “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you. So even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s being really dumb to do this.”
Three days after that interview, President Obama’s intelligence chiefs released a nearly evidence-free “assessment” claiming that the Kremlin engaged in a covert operation to put Trump into office, fueling a “scandal” that has hobbled Trump’s presidency. On Monday, Russia-gate special prosecutor Robert Mueller indicted Trump’s one-time campaign manager Paul Manafort on unrelated money laundering, tax and foreign lobbying charges, apparently in the hope that Manafort will provide incriminating evidence against Trump.
So, President Trump has been in office long enough to have learned how the game is played and the “six ways from Sunday” that the intelligence community has for “getting back at you.” He appears to be as intimidated as was President Obama.
Trump’s awkward acquiescence in the Deep State’s last-minute foot-dragging regarding release of the JFK files is simply the most recent sign that he, too, is under the thumb of what the Soviets used to call “the organs of state security.”
Ray McGovern works with the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. During his 27-year career at CIA, he prepared the President’s Daily Brief for Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, and conducted the one-on-one morning briefings from 1981 to 1985. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

By Ray McGovern / Republished with permission / Consortium News / Report a typo

===============================================

* Zie o.a.: ‘Walls Closing in on Russiagate Conspiracy Theorists: Evidence Mounts That DNC Emails Provided to WikiLeaks By Inside Source‘ en: ‘WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Drops Russiagate Shell!!!‘ (video).

Zie ook: ‘Martin Luther King jr. vermoord door de overheid, aldus rechter……..‘

en: ‘J.F. Kennedy vermoord door Lyndon Johnson en z’n maten in misdaad, geheime diensten en politiek…..‘

en: ‘Georganiseerde misdaad en overheid, wat is het verschil tussen die twee? Een uiterst hilarische lezing van Michael Parenti over de moord op JFK!‘

en: ‘Newsweek erkent ‘false flag’ operatie van de VS tegen de Sovjet Unie……‘

en: ‘Kabinet ‘wil kunnen hacken’, zonder daar melding van te maken………. Hoe bedoelt u, ‘politiestaat??’‘

Zie ook de volgende links, die weliswaar niets met Kennedy te maken hebben maar die wel aangeven hoe groot de macht de reguliere VS media en vooral de geheime diensten hebben, iets dat weer eens goed duidelijk werd door de leugens over ‘Russiagate’ (alleen dat woord is al een leugen op zich en werd voor het eerst gebruikt voor de Russische oligarchen die eind 90er jaren hun geld witwasten in het westen):
‘Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..‘ (een vervolg op het bovenstaande bericht)

en: ‘Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election‘

en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information‘

en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election‘

en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media‘

en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence‘

en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..‘

en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump‘

en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media‘

en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence‘

en: ‘‘Russiagate’ een verhaal van a t/m z westers ‘fake news…..’‘

en: ‘New York Times met schaamteloze anti-Russische propaganda en ‘fake news….’‘

en: ‘BBC World Service: Rusland heeft VS verkiezingen gemanipuleerd……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Hoe Clinton en haar team de wereld op scherp hebben gezet >> Did Hillary Scapegoat Russia to Save Her Campaign?‘

en: ‘Brekend nieuws: door Rusland betaalde reclames van Shell, Calvé pindakaas, AH boerenkool en Hema worst >> doel Rutte 3 ten val te brengen!!!‘

PS: Kennedy en dan met name zijn broer Robert gingen ook behoorlijk tekeer tegen de maffia en volgens een aantal deskundigen zou de maffia hebben samengewerkt met de geheime dienst. Lee Harvey Oswald, die Kennedy als zou hebben vermoord, werd door Jack Ruby doodgeschoten, deze zou lid van de maffia zijn geweest of daar hechte banden mee hebben gehad………