[Login / Register]

Menu

Forums

error

This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 1/18/2017 5:11:09 PM
	President Trump vs. The Pathocracy Corey Schink Sott.net Tue, 17 Jan 2017 22:25 UTC © Reuters The war between the Establishment and Donald Trump reveals a level of political struggle Americans haven't witnessed in decades, perhaps centuries. For decades, battles in American politics have played out behind the scenes, sometimes waged through assassinations, bribery, threats, psychological warfare, financial warfare and blackmail. But rarely has the dirty side of politics been aired for the public to see. Trump was elected because he's a straight talker. He wasn't put in there by Russia. He wasn't put in there by white racists (in fact his message resonated more with minorities than whites). Trump was voted into power with a mandate to whip the country back in shape after years of 'spine-bending' corruption. As Randall L. Bytwerk wrote in Bending Spines: The Propagandas of Nazi Germany and the German Democratic Republic, "National Socialism and Marxism-Leninism put enormous effort into bending, and sometimes breaking, spines - a process for which both found propaganda necessary."¹ Neoliberalism has been no less spine-bending. Its pathological, postmodern system of ethics has bent and twisted human minds to accept its pursuit of unlimited tolerance, unaccountable lies, and unanswerable inequality. When necessary it breaks people's spines. Its effects on politics, economics, religion and society have been disastrous. The American people through Trump and the Western people as a whole through the Euroskeptic parties and Brexit, show their desire for the return of rational, human nature to politics. As a brash businessman his pragmatic and brutally honest nature has caused a meltdown in Washington as he attempts topersuade America and NATO to stand up straight. Since higher office and society is filled with spiritual invertebrates, we are witnessing a clash of epic proportions. Trump vs. Snowflakes The media is arguably one of the most powerful weapons the Deep State has. As Malcolm X stated, "The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses." The media has trumpeted the claims that Trump is 'literally racist' and is 'literally going to start WWIII,' with pied pipers like Michael Moore and George Soros providing outlets for people to express their shallow 'rage against the Trump machine'. Those acquainted with Political Ponerology will recognize in the media, Michael Moore and George Soros the 'professors' who 'fish for individuals susceptible to the regime's ideology'. No doubt many actual professors have played a similar role in elevating the image of the 'social justice warrior' to the world's stage. Jordan Peterson has laid bare their bizarre agenda. It's important to point out that the likelihood that the 'Social Justice' will turn into a mass movement is very small, as the 'professors' are always disappointed with the number of people who actually succumb to their pathological indoctrination. As Lobaczewski points out, Analyzing these occurrences now in hindsight, we could say that the "professor" was dangling bait over our heads, based on specific psychological knowledge. He knew in advance that he would fish out amenable individuals, and even how to do it, but the limited numbers disappointed him. The transpersonification process generally took hold only when an individual's instinctive substratum was marked by pallor or certain deficits. To a lesser extent, it also worked among people who manifested other deficiencies in which the state provoked within them was partially impermanent, being largely the result of psychopathological induction.² For the entire election cycle, Hillary Clinton played the role of such a 'professor' - indoctrinating a large number of Americans into a worldview that was simplistic, unrealistic, and downright evil. While she worked to rig the election in her favor, she claimed the Russians were doing it. When her own corruption was revealed in email leak after email leak, she claimed Russia was trying to expose her corruption to benefit Trump. For some bizarre reason, many people believed her, and when she lost, the same people had a mini psychological breakdown - doubtless everyone knows of someone who couldn't get out of bed, who cried for the end of the world, who wanted to move to Canada. 'Normal liberals' became 'crazy libtards' in the blink of an eye (or were they always 'libtards'?) There is no doubt that there are a number of people who, due to character defects, drug use, or upper class status, see Trump as 'literally Hitler' and are therefore ready to go to war to make sure that he doesn't get into office (or doesn't stay there long). This is the point where 'ideology' fails to explain anything in a concrete way. These 'progressive goose-steppers' who go along with the war against the legitimately elected POTUS may as well be chanting 'Hail Satan' in their allegiance to deep state icons who, years earlier, were actively murdering their Progressive leaders around the world. And they do this shamelessly. It's astonishing to see it in action! Are these the spiritual descendants of MLK Jr? No. These are the 'color revolution' progeny in the tradition of the nationalist movements in Ukraine and the Wahabbi jihadis in Syria - transpersonified masses who, if successful, wake up to find their countries in ruin and the vultures feasting on their corpses. They may not be large in number but they exert a disproportionate effect on the body politic because of the support they enjoy from the mainstream media, and their calls for the assassination of Donald Trump do not bode well for our future. So like Trump or not, agree with his politics and his brazen personality or not, there is no evidence he is a 'white supremacist' or that he is 'literally Hitler'. Rather, he is up against something far nastier than anyone, possibly even he, fathoms. And he's going at it with a gusto that is either heroically brilliant or recklessly stupid. Either way, he acts like a man with not a moment to waste, and he's giving it to the establishment with both barrels. Crisis of Western Civilization In Evolution of Civilizations elite historian Carroll Quigley defined civilization as a 'producing society with an instrument of expansion.' He subdivided its culture into 6 aspects - religious, military, intellectual, social, political, and economic functions - each representing a basic human need in an ever-changing world. When people come together, they naturally create instruments that seek to satisfy each of these needs. We need to create things of value, and trade them in order to have an economy. We need certainty and meaning, so we have religion. We need to know what we're doing, so we have schools of thought. We need to defend ourselves in case of attack, so we have a military. We need to make decisions and we need laws, so we have politics. In one of these categories an instrument of expansion arises. Through this instrument we create a surplus and someone reinvests it, thus creating an engine of growth. Sometimes it's political - through power relationships one group imposes upon another the demand to work, create surplus, and then the elite take that surplus, reinvest it, and society expands. Sometimes it's religious - the priesthood demands society create a surplus. In modern Western civilization the instrument is economic - capitalism and the pursuit of profit in a price structure. Either way it has 3 chief features: 1) Society must have an incentive to invent 2) Society must have an accumulation of surplus 3) The surplus must be reinvested in society.³ Quigley further elaborated on any given civilization's evolution, dividing it into 7 stages: 1. Mixture - Peoples of various cultures meet and mix together. 2. Gestation - After time has passed people work together, form a unique culture and an instrument of expansion. 3. Expansion - The civilization uses its surplus to expand beyond its borders. 4. Conflict - Once the instrument of expansion is corrupted expansion begins to slow down. Elites foment class, racial, and ethnic conflicts and create institutions of oppression to keep their hold over massive fortunes they should otherwise reinvest. At this point society can either Reform the system to begin expanding again (as in the appeal for Donald Trump's slogan "Make America Great Again") Create an alternative form of expansion to begin expanding again, or Lose the struggle for creative growth to institutionalized forces, thus paving the way for: 5. Universal Empire - Corrupted and ponerized aspects or regions of the civilization take forcible control over the other parts until, 6. Decay - A period of 'acute economic depression, declining standards of living, civil wars between various vested interests, and growing illiteracy'⁴ arise and ultimately, 7. Invasion - In a state of decay neighboring civilizations move in and easily take over, thus beginning the process again. The West is no exception to this process. In the 18th and 19th centuries the West expanded, bubbles were created, they burst, and the world was plunged into chaos. World Wars I & II saw an explosive 'Age of Conflict' that left much of Europe, Russia, China and Japan reduced to ruins. From that destruction America rose to lead the West into an age of 'Universal Empire' with America on top, and the struggle continued for the US to maintain her control over the Western world throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. The instrument of expansion was reformed through the New Deal, the Marshall Plan, and a new global financial order. The US ascended the throne of 'Universal Empire' and political and financial dynasties used the threat of the Soviet Union to cement a somewhat global power structure. From the time of guerilla armies in Cuba, to Operation Phoenix in Vietnam, to the rise of ISIS in Iraq, vested Western interests have been using mercenary forces to undermine regions whose resources they seek to control. The early 2000s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were just the beginning of a larger, fluid and covert war on the world. At the same time the 'elite' had begun implementing institutions of repression back home that would keep the people from challenging their authority. Predatory institutions like false flag events, terror attacks, austerity programs, refugee crises, and mass surveillance were all used to cement the control of vested interests' - to make sure that the people were never in a position to ask for (or demand) their share of the pie. The 2008 banking crisis led to a massive redistribution of wealth to the richest so that now the top 1% own more than the rest of the world combined. But the plan to divide and control the globe, to institute a semi-permanent and truly global empire where 'swarms' of mercenary armies were at hand to topple whomever was deemed a threat, and to do it all under the banner of 'freedom and democracy', was crushed in Syria. It was truly the Stalingrad moment of what could be called World War III: "The Battle of Stalingrad is not a turning point necessarily in strategic terms, because a lot more has to be done before the Soviets can be certain of defeating Germany," says renowned World War II historian Richard Overy. "The West has still got a lot to do to get its act together properly. But it's the extraordinary symbolic power that Stalingrad has for the Soviet people, and it's the point at which they suddenly begin to believe in themselves, and suddenly historic Russia has been saved. Suddenly the Germans are vulnerable. And this is the message that goes round the world." The era of decay (with corrupt forces cemented into place) and universal empire mixed until the time of 'invasion' had come. But today the 'invasion' seems to have come primarily in the form of the rise of a multi-polar world, thanks to Russia and China. With the massive waves of anti-Trump propaganda, it's clear the established elite wanted Trump to get with their program. The problem for them is, he hasn't. With Russia stopping the 'deep state' in Syria, Trump has now moved in on their home turf and, being a pragmatic businessman, he seems to see which way the wind is blowing. It's a fascinating development. Trump's plan to 'Make America Great Again' is part of Quigley's recipe for breaking out of the 'age of conflict' - to bring jobs back, to once again re-invest in America. But we have already moved well past that and into the age of invasion. Thus the charge that Trump is a 'Russian stooge'. Trump is looking, perhaps instinctively, to break the elite's stranglehold over the West's 'instrument of expansion' and to once again move our civilization back onto the path of expansion - something that could be feasible through an 'invasion' of a multi-polar order with mutually beneficial economic relations. The question is, is it possible? The IMF has forecast improved growth for the US economy, citing Trump's impact. But such massive changes are inevitably preceded by chaos, because the parasite will not allow its host to regain its health without a fight. But a fight is exactly what Trump is giving these parasitic 'deep state' actors. Trump vs. Deep State © Reuters A not-so-happy John Brennan After goons like McCain and Sen. Harry Reid fished for and found idiots to publish the 'Trump Dossier', the lies were finally published by BuzzFeed. All the gory details can be read in Joe Quinn's report A Tale of Two Dodgy Dossiers: Putin, Trump MI6 and the CIA. Director of Intelligence Clapper immediately went to visit Trump to discuss the fall-out, to express his 'dismay,' though it's equally plausible he was there for a 'follow-up' to see if the incoming President 'got the message'. Clearly he didn't. After taking aim at the 'Trump Dossier' on Twitter, Trump took the 'Fake News' label peddled by so many MSM pundits and turned it against both them and the intelligence community, with vigor. For a man who can send pharmaceutical stocks plummeting in a press conference, when he denounced CNN as being 'Fake News' and denied their reporters' questions he sent shock waves through the system. The various media outlets were visibly scrambling over themselves to blame one another. He has since floated the idea of bloggers and radio pundits attending his press briefings. *Imagine - the alternative media on the same stage as CNN and the New York Times* - what an entirely justified slap in their face that would be. CIA Director John Brennan responded by not-so-subtly warning Trump to stop 'talking and tweeting' because it's bad for 'national security,' adding later that Trump 'doesn't understand' the reality of the Russian threat. Instead of 'not talking and tweeting' Trump held an interview with Bild and The London Times in which he slammed TTIP, the War on Terror, Russian sanctions, Merkel's migrant policies, and NATO. "I said a long time ago that NATO had problems. Number one it was obsolete, because it was designed many, many years ago. Number two the countries aren't paying what they're supposed to pay. I took such heat, when I said NATO was obsolete. It's obsolete because it wasn't taking care of terror." "With that being said, NATO is very important to me. There's five countries that are paying what they're supposed to. Five. It's not much."** This sent European politics into an uproar, with Merkel, Hollande, and numerous others in disbelief at Trump openly calling them on their numerous failures. To top it off Trump took to Twitter to let Brennan know exactly what he thought of him: Slam! In two Tweets Trump reminds Brennan of all the CIA's major 'mistakes' (read war crimes) in recent years and then called him a 'leaker' - something that's as funny as it is threatening for a CIA official. It looks like we have a real American Duterte on our hands. The establishment, which has been entrenching itself as a global network of organized crime for decades, knows this. Dislodging it will be tricky and, ominously, the Mossad and US Intel haverecently met to discuss their next steps. If the people of the West really wanted to 'shake things up' by voting in Trump and similar-minded individuals, hopefully they understand what they are in for. Because Trump's on-going behavior is perhaps best summed up in the Latin: Fiat justitia ruat caelum. ... "Let justice be done, though the heavens fall". So hold on. This has already been one heck of a ride, and the man isn't even in office yet. References 1. Randall L. Bytwerk's Bending Spines: The Propagandas of Nazi Germany and the German Democratic Republic p.1 2. Andrew M. Lobaczewski'sPolitical Ponerology (A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes) p. 36 3. Carroll Quigley's The Evolution of Civilizations p. 132 4. Carroll Quigley's The Evolution of Civilizations p. 159 Corey Schink Corey has been a co-host for SOTT Radio Network's Truth Perspective. A social worker by training, his interests include research and crisis management. (sott.net)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 1/18/2017 5:22:57 PM
	U.S. intelligence, military and diplomatic veterans demand Obama release proof of Russian 'hacking' - or admit there is none Consortium News Tue, 17 Jan 2017 00:00 UTC More than 20 U.S. intelligence, military and diplomatic veterans are calling on President Obama to release the evidence backing up allegations that Russia aided the Trump campaign - or admit that the proof is lacking. MEMORANDUM FOR: President Barack Obama FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) SUBJECT: A Key Issue That Still Needs to be Resolved As President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take the oath of office Friday, a pall hangs over his upcoming presidency amid an unprecedentedly concerted campaign to delegitimize it. Unconfirmed accusations continue to swirl alleging that Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized "Russian hacking" that helped put Mr. Trump in the White House. As President for a few more days, you have the power to demand concrete evidence of a link between the Russians and WikiLeaks, which published the bulk of the information in question. Lacking that evidence, the American people should be told that there is no fire under the smoke and mirrors of recent weeks. We urge you to authorize public release of any tangible evidence that takes us beyond the unsubstantiated, "we-assess" judgments by the intelligence agencies. Otherwise, we - as well as other skeptical Americans - will be left with the corrosive suspicion that the intense campaign of accusations is part of a wider attempt to discredit the Russians and those - like Mr. Trump - who wish to deal constructively with them. Remember the Maine? Alleged Russian interference has been labeled "an act of war" and Mr. Trump a "traitor." But the "intelligence" served up to support those charges does not pass the smell test. Your press conference on Wednesday will give you a chance to respond more persuasively to NBC's Peter Alexander's challenge at the last one (on Dec. 16) "to show the proof [and], as they say, put your money where your mouth is and declassify some of the intelligence. ..." You told Alexander you were reluctant to "compromise sources and methods." We can understand that concern better than most Americans. We would remind you, though, that at critical junctures in the past, your predecessors made judicious decisions to give higher priority to buttressing the credibility of U.S. intelligence-based policy than to protecting sources and methods. With the Kremlin widely accused by politicians and pundits of "an act of war," this is the kind of textbook case in which you might seriously consider taking special pains to substantiate serious allegations with hard intelligence - if there is any. During the Cuban missile crisis, for instance, President Kennedy ordered us to show highly classified photos of Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba and on ships en route, even though this blew sensitive detail regarding the imagery intelligence capabilities of the cameras on our U-2 aircraft. President Ronald Reagan's reaction to the Libyan terrorist bombing of La Belle Disco in Berlin on April 5, 1986, that killed two and injured 79 other U.S. servicemen is another case in point. We had intercepted a Libyan message that morning: "At 1:30 in the morning one of the acts was carried out with success, without leaving a trace behind." (We should add here that NSA's dragnet SIGINT capability 30 years later renders it virtually impossible to avoid "leaving a trace behind" once a message is put on the network.) President Reagan ordered the U.S. Air Force to bomb Col. Muammar Qaddafi's palace compound to smithereens, killing several civilians. Amid widespread international consternation and demands for proof that Libya was responsible for the Berlin attack, President Reagan ordered us to make public the encrypted Libyan message, thereby sacrificing a collection/decryption capability unknown to the Libyans - until then. As senior CIA veteran Milton Bearden has put it, there are occasions when more damage is done by "protecting" sources and methods than by revealing them. Where's the Beef? We find the New York Times- and Washington Post-led media Blitz against Trump and Putin truly extraordinary, despite our long experience with intelligence/media related issues. On Jan. 6, the day after your top intelligence officials published what we found to be an embarrassingly shoddy report purporting to prove Russian hacking in support of Trump's candidacy, the Times banner headline across all six columns on page 1 read: "PUTIN LED SCHEME TO AID TRUMP, REPORT SAYS." The lead article began: "President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia directed a vast cyberattack aimed at denying Hillary Clinton the presidency and installing Donald J. Trump in the Oval Office, the nation's top intelligence agencies said in an extraordinary report they delivered on Friday to Mr. Trump." Eschewing all subtlety, the Times added that the revelations in "this damning report ... undermined the legitimacy" of the President-elect, and "made the case that Mr. Trump was the favored candidate of Mr. Putin." On page A10, however, Times investigative reporter Scott Shane pointed out: "What is missing from the 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. That is a significant omission." Shane continued, "Instead, the message from the agencies essentially amounts to 'trust us.' There is no discussion of the forensics used to recognize the handiwork of known hacking groups, no mention of intercepted communications between the Kremlin and the hackers, no hint of spies reporting from inside Moscow's propaganda machinery." Shane added that the intelligence report "offers an obvious reason for leaving out the details, declaring that including 'the precise bases for its assessments' would 'reveal sensitive sources and methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future.'" Shane added a quote from former National Security Agency lawyer Susan Hennessey: "The unclassified report is underwhelming at best. There is essentially no new information for those who have been paying attention." Ms. Hennessey served as an attorney in NSA's Office of General Counsel and is now a Brookings Fellow in National Security Law. Everyone Hacks There is a lot of ambiguity - whether calculated or not - about "Russian hacking." "Everyone knows that everyone hacks," says everyone: Russia hacks; China hacks; every nation that can hacks. So do individuals of various nationalities. This is not the question. You said at your press conference on Dec. 16 "the intelligence that I have seen gives me great confidence in their [U.S. intelligence agencies'] assessment that the Russians carried out this hack." "Which hack?" you were asked. "The hack of the DNC and the hack of John Podesta," you answered. Earlier during the press conference you alluded to the fact that "the information was in the hands of WikiLeaks." The key question is how the material from "Russian hacking" got to WikiLeaks, because it was WikiLeaks that published the DNC and Podesta emails. Our VIPS colleague William Binney, who was Technical Director of NSA and created many of the collection systems still in use, assures us that NSA's "cast-iron" coverage - particularly surrounding Julian Assange and other people associated with WikiLeaks - would almost certainly have yielded a record of any electronic transfer from Russia to WikiLeaks. Binney has used some of the highly classified slides released by Edward Snowden to demonstrate precisely how NSA accomplishes this using trace mechanisms embedded throughout the network. [See: "U.S. Intel Vets Dispute Russia Hacking Claims," Dec. 12, 2016.] NSA Must Come Clean We strongly suggest that you ask NSA for any evidence it may have indicating that the results of Russian hacking were given to WikiLeaks. If NSA can produce such evidence, you may wish to order whatever declassification may be needed and then release the evidence. This would go a long way toward allaying suspicions that no evidence exists. If NSA cannot give you that information - and quickly - this would probably mean it does not have any. In all candor, the checkered record of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper for trustworthiness makes us much less confident that anyone should take it on faith that he is more "trustworthy than the Russians," as you suggested on Dec. 16. You will probably recall that Clapper lied under oath to the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 12, 2013, about NSA dragnet activities; later apologizing for testimony he admitted had been "clearly erroneous." In our Memorandum for you on Dec. 11, 2013, we cited chapter and verse as to why Clapper should have been fired for saying things he knew to be "clearly erroneous." In that Memorandum, we endorsed the demand by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner that Clapper be removed. "Lying to Congress is a federal offense, and Clapper ought to be fired and prosecuted for it," said Sensenbrenner in an interview with The Hill. "The only way laws are effective is if they're enforced." Actually, we have had trouble understanding why, almost four years after he deliberately misled the Senate, Clapper remains Director of National Intelligence - overseeing the entire intelligence community. Hacks or Leaks? Not mentioned until now is our conclusion that leaks are the source of the WikiLeaks disclosures in question - not hacking. Leaks normally leave no electronic trace. William Binney has been emphasizing this for several months and suggesting strongly that the disclosures were from a leaker with physical access to the information - not a hacker with only remote access. This, of course, makes it even harder to pin the blame on President Putin, or anyone else. And we suspect that this explains why NSA demurred when asked to join the CIA and FBI in expressing "high confidence" in this key judgment of the report put out under Clapper's auspices on Jan. 6, yielding this curious formulation: "We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump's election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence." (Emphasis, and lack of emphasis, in original) In addition, former U.K. Ambassador Craig Murray has said publicly he has first-hand information on the provenance of the leaks, and has expressed surprise that no one from the New York Times or the Washington Post has tried to get in touch with him. We would be interested in knowing whether anyone from your administration, including the intelligence community, has made any effort to contact Ambassador Murray. What to Do President-elect Trump said a few days ago that his team will have a "full report on hacking within 90 days." Whatever the findings of the Trump team turn out to be, they will no doubt be greeted with due skepticism, since Mr. Trump is in no way a disinterested party. You, on the other hand, enjoy far more credibility - AND power - for the next few days. And we assume you would not wish to hobble your successor with charges that cannot withstand close scrutiny. We suggest you order the chiefs of the NSA, FBI and CIA to the White House and ask them to lay all their cards on the table. They need to show you why you should continue to place credence in what, a month ago, you described as "uniform intelligence assessments" about Russian hacking. At that point, if the intelligence heads have credible evidence, you have the option of ordering it released - even at the risk of damage to sources and methods. For what it may be worth, we will not be shocked if it turns out that they can do no better than the evidence-deprived assessments they have served up in recent weeks. In that case, we would urge you, in all fairness, to let the American people in on the dearth of convincing evidence before you leave office. As you will have gathered by now, we strongly suspect that the evidence your intelligence chiefs have of a joint Russian-hacking-WikiLeaks-publishing operation is no better than the "intelligence" evidence in 2002-2003 - expressed then with comparable flat-fact "certitude" - of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Obama's Legacy Mr. President, there is much talk in your final days in office about your legacy. Will part of that legacy be that you stood by while flames of illegitimacy rose willy-nilly around your successor? Or will you use your power to reveal the information - or the fact that there are merely unsupported allegations - that would enable us to deal with them responsibly? In the immediate wake of the holiday on which we mark the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., it seems appropriate to make reference to his legacy, calling to mind the graphic words in his "Letter From the Birmingham City Jail," with which he reminds us of our common duty to expose lies and injustice: "Like a boil that can never be cured as long as it is covered up, but must be opened with all its pus-flowing ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must likewise be exposed, with all of the tension its exposing creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured." For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.) Marshall Carter-Tripp, Foreign Service Officer (ret) and former Office Director in the State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research Thomas Drake, former Senior Executive, NSA Bogdan Dzakovic, Former Team Leader of Federal Air Marshals and Red Team, FAA Security, (ret.) (associate VIPS) Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.) Mike Gravel, former Adjutant, top secret control officer, Communications Intelligence Service; special agent of the Counter Intelligence Corps and former United States Senator Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS) Larry Johnson, former CIA Intelligence Officer & former State Department Counter-Terrorism Official, ret. Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF (Ret.); ex-Master SERE Instructor for Strategic Reconnaissance Operations (NSA/DIA) and Special Mission Units (JSOC) Brady Kiesling, former U.S. Foreign Service Officer, ret. (Associate VIPS), John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003 Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.) David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.) Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.) Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.) Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA (ret.) Scott Ritter, former MAJ., USMC, former UN Weapon Inspector, Iraq Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.) Peter Van Buren, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS) Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA (ret.) Robert Wing, former Foreign Service Officer (associate VIPS) Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat (sott.net)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 1/19/2017 9:42:18 AM
	President Trump – The Trap Is Set JANUARY 17, 2017 By SCG The Trump years are going to be crazier than you think. Almost by design. Visit StormCloudsGathering.com Source and transcript (activistpost.com)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 1/19/2017 10:25:43 AM
	US Troops Land in Norway for First Time Since WWII As Tensions Grow With Russia Wed, 01/18/2017 - 08:20 by Darius Shahtahmasebi, The Anti-Media Shortly after the Obama administration began deploying American troops across Russia’s border in a number of countries, including Lithuania, some 300 U.S. Marines landed in Norwayfor a six-month deployment. Their Monday deployment marks the first time since World War IIthat foreign troops have been allowed to station in Norway. The Marines will spend a year in total in Norwegian territory, and the current deployment will be replaced after their six-month service is completed. Unsurprisingly, it’s doubtful Russia will view this move favorably. When questioned about the proposal to station U.S. troops in Norway in October last year, Russia questioned the motives behind such a move. As the Russian embassy in Oslo told Reuters: “Taking into account multiple statements of Norwegian officials about the absence of threat from Russia to Norway we would like to understand for what purposes is Norway so … willing to increase its military potential, in particular through stationing of American forces in Vaernes?” A spokeswoman for the Norwegian Ministry of Defense said the arrival of U.S. troops had nothing to do with concerns about Russia. Clearly, that is not the case. In 2014, Norwegian Defense Minister Ine Eriksen Soereide toldReuters that Russia’s actions in Ukraine raised questions about NATO’s collective defense, stating, “[W]e are in a completely new security situation where Russia shows both the ability and the will to use military means to achieve political goals.” Norway is Europe’s number two gas exporter after Russia and is a founding member of NATO. Despite this, relations between Norway and Russia have historically been good. In fact, the two countries were on track at the end of last year to strengthen ties even further after Norway and Finland revived economic and trade contacts with Russian ministers for the first time since the annexation of Crimea. It is not in Washington’s interest to have a Europe that cooperates with Russia. Following the mainstream media’s dishonest hysteria over Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential elections, a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll showed more Americans now view Russia as a threat. This fear-based mentality is exactly what the U.S. establishment wants as it allows the U.S. to encircle Russia with troops, tanks, and missiles while it keeps the military-industrial complex rolling. Why would this be? In a few days, Donald J. Trump will take the top seat at the White House. His unpredictability and admiration and respect for Russian President Vladimir Putin, coupled with his intentions to normalize relations with Russia, might mean the United States will lose a valuable scapegoat and enemy in global affairs. It could also mean the U.S. will have to accept defeat in Syria. By deploying troops to Russia’s borders, including to countries Russia is set to renew relations with, the Obama administration is locking the incoming Trump administration into an anti-Russia policy he may not be able to back out of without perceivably abandoning America’s NATO allies in the region. This article (US Troops Land in Norway for First Time Since WWII As Tensions Grow With Russia) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Darius Shahtahmasebi and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to edits@theantimedia.org. http://theantimedia.org/us-marines-norway-world-war-ii/ Category: World News & Politics
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 1/19/2017 10:59:42 AM
	Chelsea Manning to Be Released Early as Obama Commutes Sentence By CHARLIE SAVAGE JAN. 17, 2017 Chelsea Manning’s 35-year sentence was by far the longest punishment ever imposed in the United States for a leak conviction. CreditUnited States Army This is a very important movement, in my view. And it’s about time, as he/she was an important whistleblower at the time she blew his/her whistle. It also brings to the forefront that many are born in one type of body and decide that they are better suited to another. To me, this has always been no big deal. However, it is amazing to see people like John McCain condemning this as “espionage”, when he and many other politicians have helped create and support ISIS, supported who knows how many color revolutions, and the killing of hundreds of thousands in the name of “protecting THE USA CORP from “terrorism”. “President Obama on Tuesday commuted all but four months of the remaining prison sentence of Chelsea Manning, the Army intelligence analyst convicted of a 2010 leak that revealed American military and diplomatic activities across the world, disrupted Mr. Obama’s administration and brought global prominence to WikiLeaks, the recipient of those disclosures. “The decision by Mr. Obama rescued Ms. Manning, who twice tried to kill herself last year, from an uncertain future as a transgender woman incarcerated at the men’s military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. She has been jailed for nearly seven years, and her 35-year sentence was by far the longest punishment ever imposed in the United States for a leak conviction. “Under the terms of the commutation announced by the White House on Tuesday, Ms. Manning is set to be freed on May 17 of this year rather than in 2045. A senior administration official said the 120-day delay was part of a standard transition period for commutations to time served… “…the move was sharply criticized by several prominent Republicans, including the chairmen of the House and Senate armed services committees, Representative Mac Thornberry of Texas and Senator John McCain of Arizona, who called her leaks “espionage” and said they had put American troops and the country at risk. “In addition, Mr. Obama on Tuesday commuted the sentence of Oscar Lopez Rivera, who was part of a Puerto Rican nationalist group that carried out a string of bombings in the late 1970s and early 1980s; the other members of that group had long since been freed. Mr. Obama also granted 63 other pardons and 207 other commutations, mostly for drug offenders.” ——————————————————– Chelsea Manning to Be Released Early as Obama Commutes Sentence WASHINGTON — President Obama on Tuesday commuted all but four months of the remaining prison sentence of Chelsea Manning, the Army intelligence analyst convicted of a 2010 leak that revealed American military and diplomatic activities across the world, disrupted Mr. Obama’s administration and brought global prominence to WikiLeaks, the recipient of those disclosures. The decision by Mr. Obama rescued Ms. Manning, who twice tried to kill herself last year, from an uncertain future as a transgender woman incarcerated at the men’s military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. She has been jailed for nearly seven years, and her 35-year sentence was by far the longest punishment ever imposed in the United States for a leak conviction. At the same time that Mr. Obama commuted the sentence of Ms. Manning, a low-ranking enlisted soldier at the time of her leaks, he also pardoned Gen. James E. Cartwright, the former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who pleaded guilty to lying about his conversations with reporters to F.B.I. agents investigating a leak of classified information about cyberattacks on Iran’s nuclear program. The two acts of clemency were a remarkable final step for a president whose administration carried out an unprecedented criminal crackdown on leaks of government secrets. Depending on how they are counted, the Obama administration has prosecuted either nine or 10 such cases, more than were charged under all previous presidencies combined. In addition, Mr. Obama on Tuesday commuted the sentence of Oscar Lopez Rivera, who was part of a Puerto Rican nationalist group that carried out a string of bombings in the late 1970s and early 1980s; the other members of that group had long since been freed. Mr. Obama also granted 63 other pardons and 207 other commutations, mostly for drug offenders. Under the terms of the commutation announced by the White House on Tuesday, Ms. Manning is set to be freed on May 17 of this year rather than in 2045. A senior administration official said the 120-day delay was part of a standard transition period for commutations to time served, and was designed to allow for such steps as finding a place for Ms. Manning to live after her release. The commutation also relieved the Defense Department of the difficult responsibility of Ms. Manning’s incarceration as she pushes for treatment for her gender dysphoria, including sex reassignment surgery, that the military has no experience providing. But the move was sharply criticized by several prominent Republicans, including the chairmen of the House and Senate armed services committees, Representative Mac Thornberry of Texas and Senator John McCain of Arizona, who called her leaks “espionage” and said they had put American troops and the country at risk. Speaker Paul D. Ryan called it “outrageous.” “President Obama now leaves in place a dangerous precedent that those who compromise our national security won’t be held accountable for their crimes,” he said in a statement. But in a joint statement, Nancy Hollander and Vince Ward — two lawyers who have been representing Ms. Manning in appealing her conviction and sentence, and who filed the commutation application — praised the decision. “Ms. Manning is the longest serving whistleblower in the history of the United States,” they said. “Her 35-year sentence for disclosing information that served the public interest and never caused harm to the United States was always excessive, and we’re delighted that justice is being served in the form of this commutation.” In recent days, the White House had signaled that Mr. Obama was seriously considering granting Ms. Manning’s commutation application, in contrast to a pardon application submitted on behalf of the other large-scale leaker of the era, Edward J. Snowden, the former intelligence contractor who disclosed archives of top-secret surveillance files and is living as a fugitive in Russia. Asked about the two clemency applications on Friday, the White House spokesman, Josh Earnest, discussed the “pretty stark difference” between Ms. Manning’s case for mercy and Mr. Snowden’s. While their offenses were similar, he said, there were “some important differences.” “Chelsea Manning is somebody who went through the military criminal justice process, was exposed to due process, was found guilty, was sentenced for her crimes, and she acknowledged wrongdoing,” he said. “Mr. Snowden fled into the arms of an adversary and has sought refuge in a country that most recently made a concerted effort to undermine confidence in our democracy.” Mr. Earnest also noted that while the documents Ms. Manning provided to WikiLeaks were “damaging to national security,” the ones Mr. Snowden disclosed were “far more serious and far more dangerous.” (None of the documents Ms. Manning disclosed were classified above the merely “secret” level.) Ms. Manning was still known as Bradley Manning when she deployed with her unit to Iraq in late 2009. There, she worked as a low-level intelligence analyst helping her unit assess insurgent activity in the area it was patrolling, a role that gave her access to a classified computer network. She copied hundreds of thousands of military incident logs from the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, which, among other things, exposed abuses of detainees by Iraqi military officersworking with American forces and showed that civilian deaths in the Iraq war were probably much higher than official estimates. The files she copied also included about 250,000 diplomatic cables from American embassies around the world showing sensitive deals and conversations, dossiers detailing intelligence assessments of Guantánamo detainees held without trial, and a video of an American helicopter attack in Baghdad in which two Reuters journalists were killed, among others. She decided to make all these files public, as she wrote at the time, in the hope that they would incite “worldwide discussion, debates and reforms.” WikiLeaks disclosed them — working with traditional news organizations including The New York Times — bringing notoriety to the group and its founder, Julian Assange. The disclosures set off a frantic scramble as Obama administration officials sought to minimize any potential harm, including getting to safety some foreigners in dangerous countries who were identified as having helped American troops or diplomats. Prosecutors, however, presented no evidence that anyone had been killed because of the leaks. At her court-martial, Ms. Manning confessed in detail to her actions and apologized, saying she had not intended to put anyone at risk and noting that she had been “dealing with a lot of issues” at the time she made her decision. Testimony at the trial showed that she had been in a mental and emotional crisis as she came to grips, amid the stress of a war zone, with the fact that she was not merely gay but had gender dysphoria. She had been behaving erratically, including angry outbursts and lapsing into catatonia midsentence. At one point, she had emailed a photograph of herself in a woman’s wig to her supervisor. Prosecutors said that because the secret material was made available for publication on the internet, anyone, including Al Qaeda, could read it. And they accused Ms. Manning of treason, charging her with multiple counts under the Espionage Act, as well as with “aiding the enemy,” a potential capital offense, although they said they would not seek her execution. Ms. Manning confessed and pleaded guilty to a lesser version of those charges without any deal to cap her sentence. But prosecutors pressed forward with a trial and won convictions on the more serious versions of those charges; a military judge acquitted her of “aiding the enemy.” In her commutation application, Ms. Manning said she had not imagined that she would be sentenced to the “extreme” term of 35 years, a term for which there was “no historical precedent.” (There have been only a handful of leak cases, and most sentence are one to three years.) After her sentencing, Ms. Manning announced that she was transgender and changed her name to Chelsea. The military, under pressure from a lawsuit filed on her behalf by Chase Strangio of the American Civil Liberties Union, has permitted her to partly transition to life as a woman, including giving her cross-sex hormones and letting her wear women’s undergarments and light cosmetics. But it has not let her grow her hair longer than male military standards, citing security risks, and Ms. Manning said she had yet to be permitted to see a surgeon about the possibility of sex reassignment surgery. Until recently, the military discharged transgender soldiers. In June, Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter changed that policy and said the military would instead provide treatment for them, eventually including such surgery if doctors said it was necessary. But President-elect Donald J. Trump mocked that change as excessively “politically correct,” raising the possibility that he will rescind it. Even if he does, Ms. Manning will soon no longer be subject to the military’s control. (The New York Times)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Like us on Facebook!