3632-ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? | View Thread

The West blames Russia for the bloody mess in Syria, but U.S. Special Forces saw close up how the chaotic U.S. policy of aiding Syrian jihadists enabled Al Qaeda and ISIS to rip Syria apart, explains ex-British diplomat Alastair Crooke.

"No one on the ground believes in this mission or this effort", a former Green Beret writes of America's covert and clandestine programs to train and arm Syrian insurgents, "they know we are just training the next generation of jihadis, so they are sabotaging it by saying, '**** it, who cares?'". "I don't want to be responsible for Nusra guys saying they were trained by Americans," the Green Beret added.

In a detailed report, US Special Forces Sabotage White House Policy gone Disastrously Wrong with Covert Ops in Syria, Jack Murphy, himself a former Green Beret (U.S. Special Forces), recounts a former CIA officer having told him how the "the Syria covert action program is [CIA Director John] Brennan's baby ...Brennan was the one who breathed life into the Syrian Task Force ... John Brennan loved that regime-change bull****."

In gist, Murphy tells the story of U.S. Special Forces under one Presidential authority, arming Syrian anti-ISIS forces, whilst the CIA, obsessed with overthrowing President Bashar al-Assad, and operating under a separate Presidential authority, conducts a separate and parallel program to arm anti-Assad insurgents.

Murphy's report makes clear the CIA disdain for combatting ISIS (though this altered somewhat with the beheading of American journalist James Foley in August 2014): "With the CIA wanting little to do with anti-ISIS operations as they are focused on bringing down the Assad regime, the agency kicked the can over to 5th Special Forces Group. Basing themselves out of Jordan and Turkey" — operating under "military activities" authority, rather than under the CIA's coveted Title 50 covert action authority.

The "untold story," Murphy writes, is one of abuse, as well as bureaucratic infighting, which has only contributed to perpetuating the Syrian conflict.

But it is not the "turf wars," nor the "abuse and waste," which occupies the central part of Murphy's long report, that truly matters; nor even the contradictory and self-defeating nature of U.S. objectives pursued. Rather, the report tells us quite plainly why the attempted ceasefires have failed (although this is not explicitly treated in the analysis), and it helps explain why parts of the U.S. Administration (Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and CIA Director Brenner) have declined to comply with President Obama's will - as expressed in the diplomatic accord (the recent ceasefire) reached with the Russian Federation.

The story is much worse than that hinted in Murphy's title: it underlies the present mess which constitutes relations between the U.S. and Russia, and the collapse of the ceasefire.

"The FSA [the alleged "moderates" of the Free Syria Army] made for a viable partner force for the CIA on the surface, as they were anti-regime, ostensibly having the same goal as the seventh floor at Langley" [the floor of the CIA headquarters occupied by the Director and his staff] - i.e. the ousting of President Assad.

But in practice, as Murphy states bluntly: "distinguishing between the FSA and al-Nusra is impossible, because they are virtually the same organization. As early as 2013, FSA commanders were defecting with their entire units to join al-Nusra. There, they still retain the FSA monicker, but it is merely for show, to give the appearance of secularism so they can maintain access to weaponry provided by the CIA and Saudi intelligence services. The reality is that the FSA is little more than a cover for the al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra. ...

"The fact that the FSA simply passed American-made weaponry off to al-Nusra is also unsurprising considering that the CIA's vetting process of militias in Syria is lacklustre, consisting of little more than running traces in old databases. These traces rely on knowing the individuals' real names in the first place, and assume that they were even fighting-age males when the data was collected by CTC [Counterterrorism Centre] years prior."

Sympathy for Al Qaeda

Nor, confirms Murphy, was vetting any better with the 5th Special Forces operating out of Turkey: "[It consisted of] a database check and an interview. The rebels know how to sell themselves to the Americans during such interviews, but they still let things slip occasionally. 'I don't understand why people don't like al-Nusra,' one rebel told the American soldiers. Many had sympathies with the terrorist groups such as Nusra and ISIS."

Others simply were not fit to be soldiers. "They don't want to be warriors. They are all cowards. That is the moderate rebel," a Green Beret told Murphy, who adds:

"Pallets of weapons and rows of trucks delivered to Turkey for American-sponsored rebel groups simply sit and collect dust because of disputes over title authorities [i.e. Presidential authorities] and funding sources, while authorization to conduct training for the militias is turned on and off at a whim. One day they will be told to train, the next day not to, and the day after only to train senior leaders. Some Green Berets believe that this hesitation comes from the White House getting wind that most of the militia members are affiliated with Nusra and other extremist groups."

Murphy writes: "While the games continue on, morale sinks for the Special Forces men in Turkey. Often disguised in Turkish military uniform, one of the Green Berets described his job as, 'Sitting in the back room, drinking chai while watching the Turks train future terrorists' ...

"Among the rebels that U.S. Special Forces and Turkish Special Forces were training, 'A good 95 percent of them were either working in terrorist organizations or were sympathetic to them,' a Green Beret associated with the program said, adding, 'A good majority of them admitted that they had no issues with ISIS and that their issue was with the Kurds and the Syrian regime.'"

Buried in the text is this stunning one-line conclusion: "after ISIS is defeated, the real war begins. CIA-backed FSA elements will openly become al-Nusra; while Special Forces-backed FSA elements like the New Syrian Army will fight alongside the Assad regime. Then the CIA's militia and the Special Forces' militia will kill each other."

Comment: In other words, a multi-staged plan for more chaos, carnage and destruction. It's a mind-boggling plan in one sense, but completely in keeping with what the psychopathic CIA is all about.

Well, that says it all: the U.S. has created a 'monster' which it cannot control if it wanted to (and Ashton Carter and John Brennan have no interest to "control it" — they still seek to use it).

U.S. Objectives in Syria

Professor Michael Brenner, having attended a high-level combined U.S. security and intelligence conference in Texas last week, summed up their apparent objectives in Syria, inter alia, as:

- Thwarting Russia in Syria.

- Ousting Assad.

- Marginalizing and weakening Iran by breaking the Shi'ite Crescent.

- Facilitating some kind of Sunni entity in Anbar and eastern Syria. How can we prevent it falling under the sway of al-Qaeda? Answer: Hope that the Turks can "domesticate" al-Nusra.

- Wear down and slowly fragment ISIS. Success on this score can cover failure on all others in domestic opinion.

Jack Murphy explains succinctly why this "monster" cannot be controlled: "In December of 2014, al-Nusra used the American-made TOW missiles to rout another anti-regime CIA proxy force called the Syrian Revolutionary Front from several bases in Idlib province.The province is now the de facto caliphate of al-Nusra.

That Nusra captured TOW missiles from the now-defunct Syrian Revolutionary Front is unsurprising, but that the same anti-tank weapons supplied to the FSA ended up in Nusra hands is even less surprising when one understands the internal dynamics of the Syrian conflict, i.e. the factional warfare between the disparate American forces, with the result that "Many [U.S. military trainers] are actively sabotaging the programs by stalling and doing nothing, knowing that the supposedly secular rebels they are expected to train are actually al-Nusra terrorists."

How then could there ever be the separation of "moderates" from Al-Nusra - as required by the two cessations of hostilities accords (February and September 2016)? The entire Murphy narrative shows that the "moderates" and al-Nusra cannot meaningfully be distinguished from each other, let alone separated from each other, because "they are virtually the same organization."

The Russians are right: the CIA and the Defense Department never had the intention to comply with the accord - because they could not. The Russians are also right that the U.S. has had no intention to defeat al-Nusra - as required by U.N. Security Council Resolution 2268 (2016).

So how did the U.S. get into this "Left Hand/Right Hand" mess - with the U.S. President authorizing an accord with the Russian Federation, while in parallel, his Defense Secretary was refusing to comply with it? Well, one interesting snippet in Murphy's piece refers to "hesitations" in the militia training program thought to stem from the White House getting wind that most of the militia members were "affiliated with Nusra and other extremist groups."

Obama's Inklings

It sounds from this as if the White House somehow only had "inklings" of "the jihadi monster" emerging in Syria - despite that understanding being common knowledge to most on-the-ground trainers in Syria. Was this so? Did Obama truly believe that there were "moderates" who could be separated? Or, was he persuaded by someone to go along with it, in order to give a "time out" in order for the CIA to re-supply its insurgent forces (the CIA inserted 3,000 tons of weapons and munitions to the insurgents during the February 2016 ceasefire, according to IHS Janes').

Support for the hypothesis that Obama may not have been fully aware of this reality comes from Yochi Dreazen and Séan Naylor (Foreign Policy's senior staff writer on counter-terrorism and intelligence), who noted (in May 2015) that Obama himself seemed to take a shot at the CIA and other intelligence agencies in an interview in late 2014, when he said the community had collectively "underestimated" how much Syria's chaos would spur the emergence of the Islamic State.

In the same article, Naylor charts the power of the CIA as rooted in its East Coast Ivy League power network, its primacy within the intelligence machinery, its direct access to the Oval Office and its nearly unqualified support in Congress. Naylor illustrates the CIA's privileged position within the Establishment by quoting Hank Crumpton, who had a long CIA career before becoming the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism.

Crumpton told Foreign Policy that when "then-Director Tenet, declared 'war' on Al-Qaeda as far back as 1998, "you didn't have the Secretary of Defense [declaring war]; you didn't have the FBI director or anyone else in the intelligence community taking that kind of leadership role."

Perhaps it is simply - in Obama's prescient words - the case that "the CIA usually gets what it wants."

Perhaps it did: Putin demonized, (and Trump tarred by association); the Sunni Al Qaeda "monster" - now too powerful to be easily defeated, but too weak to completely succeed - intended as the "albatross" hung around Russia and Iran's neck, and damn the Europeans whose back will be broken by waves of ensuing refugees. Pity Syria.

Alastair Crooke is a former British diplomat who was a senior figure in British intelligence and in European Union diplomacy. He is the founder and director of the Conflicts Forum, which advocates for engagement between political Islam and the West.

For those who have been paying attention to things on the mandatory vaccinations front, to say things are heating up would be an understatement. In just the last month, the Powers That Be have been making moves to continually erode health freedoms in favour of a 'total vaccine state', certainly in the US. These moves include:

Mandatory vaccinations for school children
Persecution of non-compliant doctors
The erosion of the last bastion of vaccine avoidance: medical exemptions
Attacks on freedom of speech, including the silencing of a documentary that exposes the Center for Disease Control (CDC) for the cesspool of corruption that it is

Oddly, much of this is centered around the state of California.

The stereotype of 'the golden state', where New Age hippy yoga gurus meet plastic-surgery-obsessed, too-fast-for-life Hollywood types, surfers, bikers and every other 'born-free', 'take-life-as-it-comers'. Not exactly a place you'd expect to be ground zero for the encroaching medical fascist state.

Anyway, this is what we're starting to see: things kicked off at the start of the year when:

"The California law requiring 100% compliance with the government vaccine schedule (including what, when, and how the child receives the vaccine) in order to be allowed to enroll your child in public or private school, and even daycare (depending on the child's age when enrolling) became effective on January 1, 2016. When passed, the law abolished any philosophical or religious exemption."

The law referred to is California's infamous Senate Bill 277 (SB277).

From the link in the above quoted paragraph, to the Contra Costa County government Health Services website:

"Until January 1, 2016, parents may exempt their children from one or more of the doctor-recommended, school-required immunizations, if vaccination is contrary to their personal beliefs, by submitting a completed form prior to admission into child care, kindergarten, 7th grade, or when transferring to a California school from out of state. To complete the form, parents are required to discuss the risks and benefits of immunizations and the diseases they prevent with a healthcare practitioner.

Personal belief exemptions will no longer be permitted beginning January 1, 2016. Personal belief exemptions submitted before January 1, 2016 are valid until the child enters kindergarten (including transitional kindergarten) or 7th grade. Valid medical exemptions from a licensed physician are not affected and will continue to be accepted. More information about the changes in school immunization law."

So that's that. Where there used to be leeway for parents to discuss their personal beliefs with a healthcare practitioner, now there is no discussion. The freedom to choose the medical treatment for one's children according to one's beliefs, religious or otherwise, has been abolished. If you want your child enrolled in school in the state of California, that child needs to be vaccinated according to the untested CDC schedule.

In the above-linked Alliance For Natural Health article, we learn that "the sponsor of the bill, state senator Richard Pan (D-Sacramento), promised that the only remaining out - the medical exemption - would not be tampered with. Apparently Sen. Pan was lying." While medical exemptions have not been officially removed, what else can we conclude but that the California Medical Board is seeking to forcibly stop medical exemptions through persecution of individual physicians who grant them?

Capistrano Beach pediatrician Dr. Bob Sears has come under attack from the California Medical Board for doing just that - granting a medical exemption to a child who had previously had a negative reaction to a vaccine. This doctor is being charged with "gross negligence".

As the Orange County Register reports:

"[Dr. Sears] medical record notes that his mother said after his 2-month shots his bowels and bladder "shut down" for 24 hours. After the baby's 3-month shots, she said, he was limp for a day and didn't act like himself for a week."

Dr. Bob Sears

It rather sounds like Dr. Sears actually applied a healthy dose of common sense in providing a medical exemption to this child. Anyone with two neurons firing should be able to deduce that if someone has an adverse reaction to a medical procedure, the last thing any doctor of good conscience would do would be to expose them to that medical procedure again. The fact that it is considered "gross negligence" to have avoided what could have easily been a medical catastrophe is simply jaw-dropping.

From the Alliance for Natural Health article:

"The board's documents say Sears failed to obtain a detailed medical history documenting the boy's prior vaccines and reactions. What is concerning about these accusations is that again, the public is witnessing a medical body/agency attack and attempt to set the precedent to dismantle and erode the sacrosanct doctor-patient relationship. Once SB277 was set in motion, there has been a chain of events pointing directly to a concerted effort to destroy the doctor-patient relationship and replace it with bureaucrat-run healthcare. Continually taking a backseat in the eyes of politicians and governing bodies since SB277's activation have been doctor's discretion and parental choice."

Maybe we shouldn't be surprised that this is being 'pioneered' in California. After all, anti-smoking fascism began in earnest there. Author John Rappoport, in 'California: In the land of biomed, mandatory vaccinations are par for the course,' where he, in his words, 'plunged into California culture', found that the state is overflowing with biotech companies. From his article:

[T]he number of these companies is staggering. They form a background context in which a mandatory vaccination law is easy to understand—just as a farm bill would be easy to understand in Iowa, or a bill about ranching would be easy to understand in various western states.

Looking into a site covering San Diego and Southern California, Rappoport discovered 660 different biotech companies. He continues, "Along with war-making defense dollars, agriculture dollars, Silicon Valley and Hollywood dollars, California floats on biotech biomed money. And in that context, a mandatory vaccine law is simply par for the course."

With this much money flowing in from the biotech industry, "turning back, rejecting, stepping on the mandatory vaccination bill [SB277] would have sent the wrong signal to biomed businessmen. It was never going to happen."

Also in California, a new bill, Assembly Bill 1671 (AB 1671), currently up before the California legislature, seeks to make it illegal to make, or even report on, undercover recordings of healthcare providers. As usual, the language of the bill is problematic in that it could be interpreted in a number of ways. "Healthcare provider" could be stretched to cover pharmaceutical reps, CDC employees, chemotherapy manufacturers and more.

Nick Cahill, of the Courthouse News Service, says:

"The bill would criminalize publishing undercover video footage of 'health care providers' and subject third parties, including journalists, to penalties for reporting and distributing the illegally recorded footage"

That sounds like blatant suppression of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, not to mention outright censorship.

Cahill continues:

Under AB 1671, a journalist receiving and posting footage from an anonymous source could be punished by the state as well as be opened up to potential civil lawsuits. Whistleblowers would not be exempt from the proposal either, regardless of how they obtained the illegal footage.

As Rappoport points out, if the bill passes, it could make screening of the documentary film Vaxxed, or indeed, even reporting on it, illegal. The documentary exposes undercover conversations with CDC employee William Thompson, who confesses that he and his colleagues buried data in a key study on the MMR vaccine; data that showed the vaccine did, in fact, increase the risk of autism in children. The film has been the target of wild censorship attempts since its release. Rappoport again:

"Furthermore, AB 1671 specifically seeks to protect "healthcare providers" from "exposure" via "undercover recordings" documenting their crimes. Certainly, by stretching the definitions a bit, the CDC, for whom Thompson works, and Thompson himself, could be considered such healthcare providers. Lawyers could argue that position until the cows come home and hang up a case in various courts for years—while an injunction prohibiting the screening of Vaxxed remains in force."

As Rappoport says, "criminal penalties could be applied to anyone who posts the videos and comments on them, online. Not just reporters. And surely, audio recordings, as well as videos, would be banned." While the bill doesn't mention Vaxxedspecifically, its timing is telling. It seems there's little the CDC wouldn't do to keep the public ignorant of their corruption, including making it illegal to publish undercover video of those confessing their crimes.

Vaxxed is making waves around the planet right now. The film's very well-argued premise is that the CDC has lied for well over a decade after setting out, back in 2000, to definitively determine whether the MMR vaccine is correlated with autism. It's a shocking look at the levels of corruption in the CDC, a body that is supposed to have the public interest at its core.

Right from the get-go, the mainstream have been trying to keep Vaxxedquiet, bungling the job all the way. First, the film was pulled from the Tribeca Film Festival amid speculation that pressure was coming from on-high.

Next, a Houston Film festival was threatened by unnamed Houston city officials to remove the film from its roster, with accusations of "criminal conduct and extortion," and aggressive threats made to the film festival organizer.

This new attack is much more subtle, attempting to pass laws that will criminalize any dissent against 'the gospel according Big Pharma' and their friends in government. So the question of whether or not bill #1671 will in fact be used against the film is looming, but what is clear is that the pharmaceutical mafia do NOT like Vaxxed, and are making every effort to make sure you don't see it.

Interestingly, we have this from Gary Null:

"During the past eight years, we have directed and produced three award winning documentaries about vaccine injury, autism, and the serious flaws and failures in CDC-approved vaccine science. These films, however, have focused more upon the medical science that challenge vaccine safety and efficacy rather than the rampant corruption in our federal health agencies in Washington.There was no outcry over these films being screened at film festivals across the nation, although considerable venom came forth from the pharmaceutical paid trolls in the blogosphere and the Sci-copaths in the cult of evidence based medicine. While our films are explicitly anti-vaccination, Vaxxed isn't. So what might account for this massive media outrage?"

Good question. Could it be because the film, instead of focusing hard on the science, instead shows how corrupt 'the man behind the curtain' actually is? Again, from Gary Null:

"Vaxxed is not anti-science. Nor is it anti-vaccine. Instead it presents unquestionable evidence of corruption and fraud that is anti-CDC. The film endangers the professional credibility and integrity of the nation's most powerful federal health agency as well as the private vaccine industry's profits that the CDC protects. If it were simply a visual screed of voices opposing mandatory vaccinations, the documentary would have its burst of limited popularity and quickly be forgotten as so many anti-vaccine films are. Vaxxed, on the other hand, incriminates federal officials and scientists at the highest levels, including former CDC Director Julie Gerberding, with the intentional coverup and manipulation of the agency's own research data to continue its public relations charade that vaccines under no circumstances are associated with the US's increasing autism crisis in our midst."

In my last article, I covered the latest CDC push to stamp out every last smidgen of medical freedom for American citizens. In it, I discussed the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the August 15, 2016 edition of the Federal Register to amend federal public health law. The tricky language of the document, along with the fact that it's coming from the CDC, which, as I said in my last piece, has "a proven track record of hyping up non-issue diseases, hiding uncomfortable facts that will make their vaccines look bad, and widespread corruption," make this a dangerous move. But the document itself further hints at forcible detainment, quarantines and forced medical procedures, including vaccinations.

Quoted from my last piece:

In a populace so tied to believing the word of their leaders (with the help of the mainstream media) the public will, apparently, completely buy into any perceived threat, no matter how inane. A little research goes a long way toward tearing down the official narrative, but the number of people willing to take this step remains shockingly small. As a result we have a population so steeped in lies they are willing to submit to whatever steps their leaders deem appropriate "for their own safety", despite the fact that the actual threat is quite minuscule.

Given that all the moves the government-pharmaceutical nexus is making depend upon a populace that is brainwashed into thinking anything that forces people to get vaccinated is for the greater good, anything that might threaten that perception will be intolerable. How anxious are people going to be about getting detained, based on nothing more than suspicion of a non-medically trained, trumped-up security guard, by an institution that they know has been lying to them for over twenty years?

Anyone even remotely suggesting that "vaccines cause or contribute to autism", can be painted as 'nutjobs' by the media. It won't matter that they're taking a nuanced view and not flatly rejecting vaccines: no one will pay attention to what they're actually saying. But by sidestepping that typical discourse and highlighting the corruption, Vaxxed shines a light at the heart of the issue. Rock-solid evidence of corruption can't be dismissed as "anti-vaxxer propaganda" quite so easily. And if there's damning evidence of tampering, the big question on everyone's mind has to be why?

Also in vaccine news, we've got this piece highlighting what may actually be behind your doctor's motivation to make sure you and your family get the jab. Wellness and Equality received a "Physician Incentive Program" document from a reader that shows health insurer "Blue Cross Blue Shield pays pediatricians $400 per fully vaccinated child. If your pediatrician has just 100 fully-vaccinated patients turning 2 this year, that's $40,000."

The article continues:

"But here's the catch: Under Blue Cross Blue Shield's rules, pediatricians lose the whole bonus unless at least 63% of patients are fully vaccinated, and that includes the flu vaccine. So it's not just $400 on your child's head - it could be the whole bonus. To your doctor, your decision to vaccinate your child might be worth $40,000, or much more, depending on the size of his or her practice."

Combine this with the fact that the American Academy of Pediatrics has just told doctors that it's OK to drop families from their practice who refuse to vaccinate and you've got a clear picture of what the future of healthcare looks like in the US. Get the jabs, all of them, or go without medical coverage, because your doctor isn't interested in wasting his or her time with patients who aren't bringing in the bonuses.

All of this paints a pretty bleak picture. Indeed, it reads like a dystopian science fiction story. The moves being made, both behind the scenes and on the main stage, are a blatant attack on Americans' freedom of choice in regards to their own medical decisions and those of their families. This makes a mockery of the supposed 'Land of the Free' the US imagines itself to be. Forced medical procedures, persecution of those following their conscience, censorship, suppression of free speech, corruption and coercion of patients by their doctors - none of this describes "freedom", by any possible stretch of the imagination.

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 10/4/2016 1:13:42 PM
	U.S. Special Forces officer: How the CIA armed and trained jihadists for war in Syria Alastair Crooke Consortium News Thu, 29 Sep 2016 00:00 UTC The West blames Russia for the bloody mess in Syria, but U.S. Special Forces saw close up how the chaotic U.S. policy of aiding Syrian jihadists enabled Al Qaeda and ISIS to rip Syria apart, explains ex-British diplomat Alastair Crooke. "No one on the ground believes in this mission or this effort", a former Green Beret writes of America's covert and clandestine programs to train and arm Syrian insurgents, "they know we are just training the next generation of jihadis, so they are sabotaging it by saying, '**** it, who cares?'". "I don't want to be responsible for Nusra guys saying they were trained by Americans," the Green Beret added. In a detailed report, US Special Forces Sabotage White House Policy gone Disastrously Wrong with Covert Ops in Syria, Jack Murphy, himself a former Green Beret (U.S. Special Forces), recounts a former CIA officer having told him how the "the Syria covert action program is [CIA Director John] Brennan's baby ...Brennan was the one who breathed life into the Syrian Task Force ... John Brennan loved that regime-change bull**." In gist, Murphy tells the story of U.S. Special Forces under one Presidential authority, arming Syrian anti-ISIS forces, whilst the CIA, obsessed with overthrowing President Bashar al-Assad, and operating under a separate Presidential authority, conducts a separate and parallel program to arm anti-Assad insurgents. Murphy's report makes clear the CIA disdain for combatting ISIS (though this altered somewhat with the beheading of American journalist James Foley in August 2014): "With the CIA wanting little to do with anti-ISIS operations as they are focused on bringing down the Assad regime, the agency kicked the can over to 5th Special Forces Group. Basing themselves out of Jordan and Turkey" — operating under "military activities" authority, rather than under the CIA's coveted Title 50 covert action authority. The "untold story," Murphy writes, is one of abuse, as well as bureaucratic infighting, which has only contributed to perpetuating the Syrian conflict. But it is not the "turf wars," nor the "abuse and waste," which occupies the central part of Murphy's long report, that truly matters; nor even the contradictory and self-defeating nature of U.S. objectives pursued. Rather, the report tells us quite plainly why the attempted ceasefires have failed (although this is not explicitly treated in the analysis), and it helps explain why parts of the U.S. Administration (Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and CIA Director Brenner) have declined to comply with President Obama's will - as expressed in the diplomatic accord (the recent ceasefire) reached with the Russian Federation. The story is much worse than that hinted in Murphy's title: it underlies the present mess which constitutes relations between the U.S. and Russia, and the collapse of the ceasefire. "The FSA [the alleged "moderates" of the Free Syria Army] made for a viable partner force for the CIA on the surface, as they were anti-regime, ostensibly having the same goal as the seventh floor at Langley" [the floor of the CIA headquarters occupied by the Director and his staff] - i.e. the ousting of President Assad. But in practice, as Murphy states bluntly: "distinguishing between the FSA and al-Nusra is impossible, because they are virtually the same organization. As early as 2013, FSA commanders were defecting with their entire units to join al-Nusra. There, they still retain the FSA monicker, but it is merely for show, to give the appearance of secularism so they can maintain access to weaponry provided by the CIA and Saudi intelligence services. The reality is that the FSA is little more than a cover for the al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra. ... "The fact that the FSA simply passed American-made weaponry off to al-Nusra is also unsurprising considering that the CIA's vetting process of militias in Syria is lacklustre, consisting of little more than running traces in old databases. These traces rely on knowing the individuals' real names in the first place, and assume that they were even fighting-age males when the data was collected by CTC [Counterterrorism Centre] years prior." Sympathy for Al Qaeda Nor, confirms Murphy, was vetting any better with the 5th Special Forces operating out of Turkey: "[It consisted of] a database check and an interview. The rebels know how to sell themselves to the Americans during such interviews, but they still let things slip occasionally. 'I don't understand why people don't like al-Nusra,' one rebel told the American soldiers. Many had sympathies with the terrorist groups such as Nusra and ISIS." Others simply were not fit to be soldiers. "They don't want to be warriors. They are all cowards. That is the moderate rebel," a Green Beret told Murphy, who adds: "Pallets of weapons and rows of trucks delivered to Turkey for American-sponsored rebel groups simply sit and collect dust because of disputes over title authorities [i.e. Presidential authorities] and funding sources, while authorization to conduct training for the militias is turned on and off at a whim. One day they will be told to train, the next day not to, and the day after only to train senior leaders. Some Green Berets believe that this hesitation comes from the White House getting wind that most of the militia members are affiliated with Nusra and other extremist groups." Murphy writes: "While the games continue on, morale sinks for the Special Forces men in Turkey. Often disguised in Turkish military uniform, one of the Green Berets described his job as, 'Sitting in the back room, drinking chai while watching the Turks train future terrorists' ... "Among the rebels that U.S. Special Forces and Turkish Special Forces were training, 'A good 95 percent of them were either working in terrorist organizations or were sympathetic to them,' a Green Beret associated with the program said, adding, 'A good majority of them admitted that they had no issues with ISIS and that their issue was with the Kurds and the Syrian regime.'" Buried in the text is this stunning one-line conclusion: "after ISIS is defeated, the real war begins. CIA-backed FSA elements will openly become al-Nusra; while Special Forces-backed FSA elements like the New Syrian Army will fight alongside the Assad regime. Then the CIA's militia and the Special Forces' militia will kill each other." Comment: In other words, a multi-staged plan for more chaos, carnage and destruction. It's a mind-boggling plan in one sense, but completely in keeping with what the psychopathic CIA is all about. Well, that says it all: the U.S. has created a 'monster' which it cannot control if it wanted to (and Ashton Carter and John Brennan have no interest to "control it" — they still seek to use it). U.S. Objectives in Syria Professor Michael Brenner, having attended a high-level combined U.S. security and intelligence conference in Texas** last week, summed up their apparent objectives in Syria, inter alia, as: - Thwarting Russia in Syria. - Ousting Assad. - Marginalizing and weakening Iran by breaking the Shi'ite Crescent. - Facilitating some kind of Sunni entity in Anbar and eastern Syria. How can we prevent it falling under the sway of al-Qaeda? Answer: Hope that the Turks can "domesticate" al-Nusra. - Wear down and slowly fragment ISIS. Success on this score can cover failure on all others in domestic opinion. Jack Murphy explains succinctly why this "monster" cannot be controlled: "In December of 2014, al-Nusra used the American-made TOW missiles to rout another anti-regime CIA proxy force called the Syrian Revolutionary Front from several bases in Idlib province.The province is now the de facto caliphate of al-Nusra. That Nusra captured TOW missiles from the now-defunct Syrian Revolutionary Front is unsurprising, but that the same anti-tank weapons supplied to the FSA ended up in Nusra hands is even less surprising when one understands the internal dynamics of the Syrian conflict, i.e. the factional warfare between the disparate American forces, with the result that "Many [U.S. military trainers] are actively sabotaging the programs by stalling and doing nothing, knowing that the supposedly secular rebels they are expected to train are actually al-Nusra terrorists." How then could there ever be the separation of "moderates" from Al-Nusra - as required by the two cessations of hostilities accords (February and September 2016)? The entire Murphy narrative shows that the "moderates" and al-Nusra cannot meaningfully be distinguished from each other, let alone separated from each other, because "they are virtually the same organization." The Russians are right: the CIA and the Defense Department never had the intention to comply with the accord - because they could not. The Russians are also right that the U.S. has had no intention to defeat al-Nusra - as required by U.N. Security Council Resolution 2268 (2016). So how did the U.S. get into this "Left Hand/Right Hand" mess - with the U.S. President authorizing an accord with the Russian Federation, while in parallel, his Defense Secretary was refusing to comply with it? Well, one interesting snippet in Murphy's piece refers to "hesitations" in the militia training program thought to stem from the White House getting wind that most of the militia members were "affiliated with Nusra and other extremist groups." Obama's Inklings It sounds from this as if the White House somehow only had "inklings" of "the jihadi monster" emerging in Syria - despite that understanding being common knowledge to most on-the-ground trainers in Syria. Was this so? Did Obama truly believe that there were "moderates" who could be separated? Or, was he persuaded by someone to go along with it, in order to give a "time out" in order for the CIA to re-supply its insurgent forces (the CIA inserted 3,000 tons of weapons and munitions to the insurgents during the February 2016 ceasefire, according to IHS Janes'). Support for the hypothesis that Obama may not have been fully aware of this reality comes from Yochi Dreazen and Séan Naylor (Foreign Policy's senior staff writer on counter-terrorism and intelligence), who noted (in May 2015) that Obama himself seemed to take a shot at the CIA and other intelligence agencies in an interview in late 2014, when he said the community had collectively "underestimated" how much Syria's chaos would spur the emergence of the Islamic State. In the same article, Naylor charts the power of the CIA as rooted in its East Coast Ivy League power network, its primacy within the intelligence machinery, its direct access to the Oval Office and its nearly unqualified support in Congress. Naylor illustrates the CIA's privileged position within the Establishment by quoting Hank Crumpton, who had a long CIA career before becoming the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism. Crumpton told Foreign Policy that when "then-Director Tenet, declared 'war' on Al-Qaeda as far back as 1998, "you didn't have the Secretary of Defense [declaring war]; you didn't have the FBI director or anyone else in the intelligence community taking that kind of leadership role." Perhaps it is simply - in Obama's prescient words - the case that "the CIA usually gets what it wants." Perhaps it did: Putin demonized, (and Trump tarred by association); the Sunni Al Qaeda "monster" - now too powerful to be easily defeated, but too weak to completely succeed - intended as the "albatross" hung around Russia and Iran's neck, and damn the Europeans whose back will be broken by waves of ensuing refugees. Pity Syria. Alastair Crooke is a former British diplomat who was a senior figure in British intelligence and in European Union diplomacy. He is the founder and director of the Conflicts Forum, which advocates for engagement between political Islam and the West. Comment: Yes, pity Syria - that has, however indirectly, and for the last how many years, bravely fought a life or death struggleagainst one of the most maniacal, covert and pathological forces ever to walk Earth - the CIA. And if that isn't bad enough, it has one of the most maniacal, covert and pathological forces on Earth spreading lies about the whole tragedy - the Western media. (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? 10/4/2016 11:12:40 PM
	Vaccine State USA: Mandatory vaccinations are here - California law requires total compliance Doug DiPasquale Sott.net Mon, 03 Oct 2016 20:50 UTC © vaccineresistancemovement.org For those who have been paying attention to things on the mandatory vaccinations front, to say things are heating up would be an understatement. In just the last month, the Powers That Be have been making moves to continually erode health freedoms in favour of a 'total vaccine state', certainly in the US. These moves include: Mandatory vaccinations for school children Persecution of non-compliant doctors The erosion of the last bastion of vaccine avoidance: medical exemptions Attacks on freedom of speech, including the silencing of a documentary that exposes the Center for Disease Control (CDC) for the cesspool of corruption that it is Oddly, much of this is centered around the state of California. The stereotype of 'the golden state', where New Age hippy yoga gurus meet plastic-surgery-obsessed, too-fast-for-life Hollywood types, surfers, bikers and every other 'born-free', 'take-life-as-it-comers'. Not exactly a place you'd expect to be ground zero for the encroaching medical fascist state. Anyway, this is what we're starting to see: things kicked off at the start of the year when: "The California law requiring 100% compliance with the government vaccine schedule (including what, when, and how the child receives the vaccine) in order to be allowed to enroll your child in public or private school, and even daycare (depending on the child's age when enrolling) became effective on January 1, 2016. When passed, the law abolished any philosophical or religious exemption." The law referred to is California's infamous Senate Bill 277 (SB277). From the link in the above quoted paragraph, to the Contra Costa County government Health Services website: "Until January 1, 2016, parents may exempt their children from one or more of the doctor-recommended, school-required immunizations, if vaccination is contrary to their personal beliefs, by submitting a completed form prior to admission into child care, kindergarten, 7th grade, or when transferring to a California school from out of state. To complete the form, parents are required to discuss the risks and benefits of immunizations and the diseases they prevent with a healthcare practitioner. Personal belief exemptions will no longer be permitted beginning January 1, 2016. Personal belief exemptions submitted before January 1, 2016 are valid until the child enters kindergarten (including transitional kindergarten) or 7th grade. Valid medical exemptions from a licensed physician are not affected and will continue to be accepted. More information about the changes in school immunization law." So that's that. Where there used to be leeway for parents to discuss their personal beliefs with a healthcare practitioner, now there is no discussion. The freedom to choose the medical treatment for one's children according to one's beliefs, religious or otherwise, has been abolished. If you want your child enrolled in school in the state of California, that child needs to be vaccinated according to the untested CDC schedule. In the above-linked Alliance For Natural Health article, we learn that "the sponsor of the bill, state senator Richard Pan (D-Sacramento), promised that the only remaining out - the medical exemption - would not be tampered with. Apparently Sen. Pan was lying." While medical exemptions have not been officially removed, what else can we conclude but that the California Medical Board is seeking to forcibly stop medical exemptions through persecution of individual physicians who grant them? Capistrano Beach pediatrician Dr. Bob Sears has come under attack from the California Medical Board for doing just that - granting a medical exemption to a child who had previously had a negative reaction to a vaccine. This doctor is being charged with "gross negligence". As the Orange County Register reports: "[Dr. Sears] medical record notes that his mother said after his 2-month shots his bowels and bladder "shut down" for 24 hours. After the baby's 3-month shots, she said, he was limp for a day and didn't act like himself for a week." Dr. Bob Sears It rather sounds like Dr. Sears actually applied a healthy dose of common sense in providing a medical exemption to this child. Anyone with two neurons firing should be able to deduce that if someone has an adverse reaction to a medical procedure, the last thing any doctor of good conscience would do would be to expose them to that medical procedure again. The fact that it is considered "gross negligence" to have avoided what could have easily been a medical catastrophe is simply jaw-dropping. From the Alliance for Natural Health article: "The board's documents say Sears failed to obtain a detailed medical history documenting the boy's prior vaccines and reactions. What is concerning about these accusations is that again, the public is witnessing a medical body/agency attack and attempt to set the precedent to dismantle and erode the sacrosanct doctor-patient relationship. Once SB277 was set in motion, there has been a chain of events pointing directly to a concerted effort to destroy the doctor-patient relationship and replace it with bureaucrat-run healthcare. Continually taking a backseat in the eyes of politicians and governing bodies since SB277's activation have been doctor's discretion and parental choice." Maybe we shouldn't be surprised that this is being 'pioneered' in California. After all, anti-smoking fascism began in earnest there. Author John Rappoport, in 'California: In the land of biomed, mandatory vaccinations are par for the course,' where he, in his words, 'plunged into California culture', found that the state is overflowing with biotech companies. From his article: [T]he number of these companies is staggering. They form a background context in which a mandatory vaccination law is easy to understand—just as a farm bill would be easy to understand in Iowa, or a bill about ranching would be easy to understand in various western states. Looking into a site covering San Diego and Southern California, Rappoport discovered 660 different biotech companies. He continues, "Along with war-making defense dollars, agriculture dollars, Silicon Valley and Hollywood dollars, California floats on biotech biomed money. And in that context, a mandatory vaccine law is simply par for the course." With this much money flowing in from the biotech industry, "turning back, rejecting, stepping on the mandatory vaccination bill [SB277] would have sent the wrong signal to biomed businessmen. It was never going to happen." © firebrandrecording.com Also in California, a new bill, Assembly Bill 1671 (AB 1671), currently up before the California legislature, seeks to make it illegal to make, or even report on, undercover recordings of healthcare providers. As usual, the language of the bill is problematic in that it could be interpreted in a number of ways. "Healthcare provider" could be stretched to cover pharmaceutical reps, CDC employees, chemotherapy manufacturers and more. Nick Cahill, of the Courthouse News Service, says: "The bill would criminalize publishing undercover video footage of 'health care providers' and subject third parties, including journalists, to penalties for reporting and distributing the illegally recorded footage" That sounds like blatant suppression of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, not to mention outright censorship. Cahill continues: Under AB 1671, a journalist receiving and posting footage from an anonymous source could be punished by the state as well as be opened up to potential civil lawsuits. Whistleblowers would not be exempt from the proposal either, regardless of how they obtained the illegal footage. As Rappoport points out, if the bill passes, it could make screening of the documentary film Vaxxed, or indeed, even reporting on it, illegal. The documentary exposes undercover conversations with CDC employee William Thompson, who confesses that he and his colleagues buried data in a key study on the MMR vaccine; data that showed the vaccine did, in fact, increase the risk of autism in children. The film has been the target of wild censorship attempts since its release. Rappoport again: "Furthermore, AB 1671 specifically seeks to protect "healthcare providers" from "exposure" via "undercover recordings" documenting their crimes. Certainly, by stretching the definitions a bit, the CDC, for whom Thompson works, and Thompson himself, could be considered such healthcare providers. Lawyers could argue that position until the cows come home and hang up a case in various courts for years—while an injunction prohibiting the screening of Vaxxed remains in force." As Rappoport says, "criminal penalties could be applied to anyone who posts the videos and comments on them, online. Not just reporters. And surely, audio recordings, as well as videos, would be banned." While the bill doesn't mention Vaxxedspecifically, its timing is telling. It seems there's little the CDC wouldn't do to keep the public ignorant of their corruption, including making it illegal to publish undercover video of those confessing their crimes. Vaxxed is making waves around the planet right now. The film's very well-argued premise is that the CDC has lied for well over a decade after setting out, back in 2000, to definitively determine whether the MMR vaccine is correlated with autism. It's a shocking look at the levels of corruption in the CDC, a body that is supposed to have the public interest at its core. Right from the get-go, the mainstream have been trying to keep Vaxxedquiet, bungling the job all the way. First, the film was pulled from the Tribeca Film Festival amid speculation that pressure was coming from on-high. Next, a Houston Film festival was threatened by unnamed Houston city officials to remove the film from its roster, with accusations of "criminal conduct and extortion," and aggressive threats made to the film festival organizer. This new attack is much more subtle, attempting to pass laws that will criminalize any dissent against 'the gospel according Big Pharma' and their friends in government. So the question of whether or not bill #1671 will in fact be used against the film is looming, but what is clear is that the pharmaceutical mafia do NOT like Vaxxed, and are making every effort to make sure you don't see it. Interestingly, we have this from Gary Null: "During the past eight years, we have directed and produced three award winning documentaries about vaccine injury, autism, and the serious flaws and failures in CDC-approved vaccine science. These films, however, have focused more upon the medical science that challenge vaccine safety and efficacy rather than the rampant corruption in our federal health agencies in Washington.There was no outcry over these films being screened at film festivals across the nation, although considerable venom came forth from the pharmaceutical paid trolls in the blogosphere and the Sci-copaths in the cult of evidence based medicine. While our films are explicitly anti-vaccination, Vaxxed isn't. So what might account for this massive media outrage?" Good question. Could it be because the film, instead of focusing hard on the science, instead shows how corrupt 'the man behind the curtain' actually is? Again, from Gary Null: "Vaxxed is not anti-science. Nor is it anti-vaccine. Instead it presents unquestionable evidence of corruption and fraud that is anti-CDC. The film endangers the professional credibility and integrity of the nation's most powerful federal health agency as well as the private vaccine industry's profits that the CDC protects. If it were simply a visual screed of voices opposing mandatory vaccinations, the documentary would have its burst of limited popularity and quickly be forgotten as so many anti-vaccine films are. Vaxxed, on the other hand, incriminates federal officials and scientists at the highest levels, including former CDC Director Julie Gerberding, with the intentional coverup and manipulation of the agency's own research data to continue its public relations charade that vaccines under no circumstances are associated with the US's increasing autism crisis in our midst." In my last article, I covered the latest CDC push to stamp out every last smidgen of medical freedom for American citizens. In it, I discussed the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the August 15, 2016 edition of the Federal Register to amend federal public health law. The tricky language of the document, along with the fact that it's coming from the CDC, which, as I said in my last piece, has "a proven track record of hyping up non-issue diseases, hiding uncomfortable facts that will make their vaccines look bad, and widespread corruption," make this a dangerous move. But the document itself further hints at forcible detainment, quarantines and forced medical procedures, including vaccinations. Quoted from my last piece: In a populace so tied to believing the word of their leaders (with the help of the mainstream media) the public will, apparently, completely buy into any perceived threat, no matter how inane. A little research goes a long way toward tearing down the official narrative, but the number of people willing to take this step remains shockingly small. As a result we have a population so steeped in lies they are willing to submit to whatever steps their leaders deem appropriate "for their own safety", despite the fact that the actual threat is quite minuscule. Given that all the moves the government-pharmaceutical nexus is making depend upon a populace that is brainwashed into thinking anything that forces people to get vaccinated is for the greater good, anything that might threaten that perception will be intolerable. How anxious are people going to be about getting detained, based on nothing more than suspicion of a non-medically trained, trumped-up security guard, by an institution that they know has been lying to them for over twenty years? Anyone even remotely suggesting that "vaccines cause or contribute to autism", can be painted as 'nutjobs' by the media. It won't matter that they're taking a nuanced view and not flatly rejecting vaccines: no one will pay attention to what they're actually saying. But by sidestepping that typical discourse and highlighting the corruption, Vaxxed shines a light at the heart of the issue. Rock-solid evidence of corruption can't be dismissed as "anti-vaxxer propaganda" quite so easily. And if there's damning evidence of tampering, the big question on everyone's mind has to be why? Also in vaccine news, we've got this piece highlighting what may actually be behind your doctor's motivation to make sure you and your family get the jab. Wellness and Equality received a "Physician Incentive Program" document from a reader that shows health insurer "Blue Cross Blue Shield pays pediatricians $400 per fully vaccinated child. If your pediatrician has just 100 fully-vaccinated patients turning 2 this year, that's $40,000." The article continues: "But here's the catch: Under Blue Cross Blue Shield's rules, pediatricians lose the whole bonus unless at least 63% of patients are fully vaccinated, and that includes the flu vaccine. So it's not just $400 on your child's head - it could be the whole bonus. To your doctor, your decision to vaccinate your child might be worth $40,000, or much more, depending on the size of his or her practice." Combine this with the fact that the American Academy of Pediatrics has just told doctors that it's OK to drop families from their practice who refuse to vaccinate and you've got a clear picture of what the future of healthcare looks like in the US. Get the jabs, all of them, or go without medical coverage, because your doctor isn't interested in wasting his or her time with patients who aren't bringing in the bonuses. All of this paints a pretty bleak picture. Indeed, it reads like a dystopian science fiction story. The moves being made, both behind the scenes and on the main stage, are a blatant attack on Americans' freedom of choice in regards to their own medical decisions and those of their families. This makes a mockery of the supposed 'Land of the Free' the US imagines itself to be. Forced medical procedures, persecution of those following their conscience, censorship, suppression of free speech, corruption and coercion of patients by their doctors - none of this describes "freedom", by any possible stretch of the imagination. Doug DiPasquale Doug DiPasquale is a Holistic Nutritionist, Paleo enthusiast and health journalist living in Toronto, Canada. He's a regular contributor for SOTT.net, Dot Connector Magazine, the Huffington Post Canada, The Food Network Canada and has contributed to many other blogs and online publications. He's passionate about the food we eat, exposing the lies and faulty thinking of the "food police" and informing the public about how to eat real food, ie. replacing that wheatgrass shot with bacon. (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? 10/4/2016 11:33:57 PM
	MAINSTREAM MEDIA: The True Enemy Of The People Posted on October 3, 2016 by State of the Nation MSM Guilty of Multiple Ongoing Cover-ups of Major Government and Corporate Crimes 9/11 VERDICT: Mainstream Media Guilty Of The Biggest Coverup In U.S. History (VIDEO) State of the Nation “Every major organ of the Mainstream Media has quite willingly participated in the ongoing cover-up of the Crime of the Millennium—the 9/11 false flag terror attacks in New York City and Washington.”[1] — Veteran 9/11 Investigator To many it is now quite obvious that the mainstream media (MSM) is the real enemy of We the People. Stated more accurately it is the owners of the MSM who are the real enemies of the American Republic. Actually, it is those clandestine powers who control the MSM owners, via multiple control mechanisms, who are the true enemies of the American people … as well as the world community of nations. Indisputable Fact: Until this harsh reality is dealt with decisively and firmly, there can be no real change throughout the planetary civilization. Very few are aware, but whoever controls the mainstream mediaeffectively controls the world. That’s because whoever controls the flow of information, controls the minds of the global population. Whoever Controls The Media Controls The World The next logical step in this critical research project is to ask: Who REALLY Controls The Mainstream Media? Why is the 9/11 cover-up so important? The highly coordinated cover-up of the U.S. government-directed terror attacks on 9/11 is quite representative of all the major cover-ups throughout modern American history. The true perpetrators utilized the same MO as they did to cover-up the assassination of John of Kennedy … the Oklahoma City Bombing … the Sandy Hook School ‘massacre’, etc. Hence, when one understands how they can successfully cover-up such a massive crime as 9/11, it is then easier to see why they routinely employ the same basic game plan whenever they so choose. 9/11 TRUTH GOES NUCLEAR: Massive Download In Progress For anyone who has conducted even a modicum of research into the 9/11 black operation, it quickly becomes clear that not only did the U.S. Federal Government coordinate the biggest cover-up in American history, they could only have done so with the full knowledge and support of every major news platform within the MSM.[2] 9/11 Commission Report: The Most Ridiculous Conspiracy Theory Of All Time Point of Fact: Without the intimate involvement of the MSM, the 9/11 cover-up could not have succeeded. TREASON & TRAITORS In light of the [ONGOING] 9/11 cover-up, it can be stated with absolute certainty that the MSM is guilty of the cover-up of state-sponsored terrorism (by the US government), various crimes against humanity, the countless war crimes of the post 9/11 wars, and high treason of the highest order. 9/11 FACT: The Pentagon Was Hit By A Cruise Missile From The US Military Arsenal Where it concerns the 9/11 false flag operation, the degree of treachery demonstrated by the MSM against the American people is unprecedented in its depth and breadth. Their profound betrayal of the U.S. citizenry through the implementation of the MSM cover-up is both shocking for its sheer audacity as it is stunning for its naked malevolence. What is crucial to understand here is that where the original crime was carried out over 15 years ago, the enormous cover-up continues up to this very day. Therefore, the duration and severity and number of the myriad MSM cover-up crimes grows by the day. As matter of fact, the unprovoked wars of aggression prosecuted by the Obama Administration in the Mideast and elsewhere have only occurred only because of the success of the MSM 9/11 cover-up. War on Terror Justified With 9/11 False Flag Terror Attacks In view of this irrefutable state of affairs, it can be asserted that those who populate the highest echelons of the entire corporate media are traitors and turncoats. Who they really serve can only be surmised, but their loyalties do not lie with the American Republic. Because the continuing 9/11 cover-up requires so much day-to-day dissemination of known falsehoods and fabricated lies, those who staff the major organs of the MSM at even the lower levels are likewise guilty of treason. There is only one realistic solution to this ever-worsening predicament. The mainstream media in its current form must be shut down and removed from American civil society. Or, it must be completely taken over by a newly constituted U.S. Federal Government that truly serves the interests of the American people, as well as the world-at-large. Any endeavor that is undertaken that does not include one of these two execution plans is essentially worthless. That’s because there can be no meaningful dissemination of the truth, or reconciliation throughout the nation, until the power of the press is fully restored to the people themselves. Absent this successful initiative, there can be no justice, nor will there be any peace, at home or abroad. The influence of the American MSM is far too great worldwide and therefore needs to be radically transformed into a force for good. Exactly how the new media platforms are constructed remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the country has seen everything about how NOT to run a media operation, so building a new enterprise based on truth, and run with integrity, ought to be fairly straightforward. It’s simply called: “Tell the Truth—Always!” Conclusion The current corporate MSM must be shut down and taken over. The sooner the better, as no meaningful change can take place as long as it continues to operate against the interests of the American people. Those individuals who own and operate, direct and oversee, the major corporate media companies need to be arrested post haste for treason and other serious crimes. They should be imprisoned without bail until their trials by jury can be conducted by a special9/11 Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Within this legal framework and judicial format, they ought to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Many media analysts and political commentators in the alternative media have suggested that those who are found guilty — of both the 9/11 crimes and cover-up — must be given the harshest punishments possible to serve as a powerful deterrent to all future traitors to the American Republic. The Neocon Zionists Must Be Arrested And Put On Trial For False Flag 9/11 Terrorism Let’s get busy! State of the Nation October 3, 2016 Source [1] 9/11 VERDICT: Mainstream Media Guilty Of The Biggest Coverup In US History [2] 9/11: The Ultimate Inside Job And False Flag Operation References ‘Official’ NIST Report Shattered by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth 9/11: Russia Presents Evidence Against US, UK And Israel Co-Conspirators Recommended Reading *NEOCON* CABAL: A Stone-Cold Terrorist Cell Occupies The U.S. Federal Government (stateofthenation2012.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? 10/5/2016 10:48:13 AM
	‘Brutal’ video shows white officer violently arresting black man sitting on his mother’s porch By Kristine Guerra October 4 at 6:00 AM Police bodycam footage shows a North Carolina officer violently arresting Dejuan Yourse as he sits on his own porch. (City of Greensboro via 88.5 WFDD) Dejuan Yourse was outside his mother’s house, sitting on the front porch in Greensboro, N.C., when two police officers arrived. They’d received a report about a possible burglary and a man with a shovel trying to open a house’s garage. When they saw Yourse on the porch, they asked what he was doing and why he was there. Yourse explained that he didn’t have a key to his mother’s house and he was waiting for her to get home. When one of them seemed suspicious, Yourse tried to get the officer on the phone with his mother, but the call rolled to voicemail. He also told him to talk to neighbors to verify his identity. The confrontation between Yourse, who is black, and the white officer, Travis Cole — captured in body cameras — started out as a cordial conversation, but it escalated after only a few minutes. The June incident resulted in an internal affairs investigation by the Greensboro Police Department, which found that Cole used excessive force on Yourse and violated other agency rules when he punched and violently arrested the 36-year-old man, who had not committed a crime. Last August, two months after the incident, Cole resigned. The other officer involved in the incident, Officer C.N. Jackson, left her post last week, according to media reports. The body-camera footage, which has since been made public, showed Cole asking Yourse questions about where he lives, why he was sitting outside, whether he has any warrants against him and why he has prison tattoos. Yourse, who started to become agitated, admitted that he’d been in prison before. As the two talked, Jackson went to her patrol car to verify Yourse’s identity. [‘We run the streets’: Video shows angry mob attacking CHP patrol car with officer still inside] At one point, Cole took Yourse’s phone from his hand as he was talking to someone. Moments later, Cole punched Yourse in the face. “You can’t do that! What are you doing?!” Yourse said “You didn’t have to punch me in my eye!” “Yes I did!” Cole responded. Cole then forced Yourse to the ground, as the latter kept screaming: “I’m not resisting! I’m not resisting! I am not resisting!” “You are resisting the whole time!” Cole said. At that point, Yourse appeared to be either sitting down or on his knees as Cole held his arms behind his back. “Why are you doing this to me? I’m trying to cooperate, man! You can’t do that when I’m not resisting you!” Yourse said, as he sat on the ground. [Police say black teen shot by LAPD was armed with a handgun when he was killed] Minutes later, Yourse was on his stomach on his mother’s front lawn, handcuffed. Cole placed his right knee on Yourse’s shoulder. “Do not f—- move. Don’t say another damn word,” Cole told Yourse, who had been yelling and cursing. “This is ridiculous, man,” Yourse said. “Damn right it is,” Cole responded. During a special meeting by the Greensboro City Council on Sept. 26, Mayor Nancy Vaughn called Cole’s actions “ugly,” “brutal” and “completely unnecessary.” Yourse was charged with resisting arrest and assault on a government official, according to media reports. Charges were later dropped. During the City Council meeting, Greensboro Police Chief Wayne Scott said the charges were questionable. An internal affairs investigation, which was completed on Aug. 30, found that Cole violated the Greensboro Police Department’s rules on use of force, courtesy toward the public, arrest, search and seizure, and compliance with laws and regulations. Cole resigned from his position while the investigation was pending, Scott said during the City Council meeting. The Washington Post called a cell number registered under Cole but did not receive a call back. A relative of Yourse’s reached by The Post said he does not want to talk. The police department also began a criminal investigation on Cole, but the Guilford County district attorney’s office declined to file charges. Chief Assistant District Attorney Howard Neumann did not return a call from The Post on Monday, but he told the Greensboro News & Record last week that Cole did not commit a crime. Law enforcement officers are entitled to use whatever amount of force they deemed necessary to arrest someone they believed committed a crime, Neumann told the paper. “To charge him would be a violation of my role as a prosecutor,” Neumann said. [‘I’m going to hit him’: Dash-cam video shows officers tried to run over man before shooting him 14 times] The Greensboro City Council adopted a resolution last week stating that the police department will ask the district attorney’s office to review the incident again. City officials also recommended to a state commission to revoke Cole’s law enforcement certification indefinitely. If that happens, he will no longer be able to be a law enforcement officer. According to the News & Record, Cole, along with 15 other officers, had been approved for a promotion before his encounter with Yourse. The promotion took effect on Aug. 1, the paper reported. Last week, City Manager Jim Westmoreland placed a 30-day hold on the promotions of any officers involved in the incidents surrounding Cole. It’s unclear how many officers were affected by the hold. Carla Banks, a city spokeswoman, said the promotion was a non-competitive process and was based on the number of years of service. Greensboro, where Yourse lives, is about 90 miles northeast of Charlotte, where the shooting death of a black man at the hands of a police officer last month prompted nights of riots and ignited an already tense relationship between law enforcement and the African American community. According to The Washington Post’s database, police have fatally shot 719 people this year. In 2015, 991 people were shot by police. [Fatal force: The Washington Post’s police shooting database] A combination of footage from Cole’s and Jackson’s body cameras was shown to the public for the first time during the Sept. 26 City Council meeting. After the video was played, the mayor, council members and the police chief publicly apologized to Yourse, who was in attendance. “It’s hard to watch a video like that and not feel moved to do something and try to make it right to a degree,” City Council member Justin Outling said. Scott said the incident “is not indicative of what we as a police department want our citizens to experience.” “I’m sorry,” he said, “and it was wrong.” (The Washington Post)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Menu

Forums

U.S. Special Forces officer: How the CIA armed and trained jihadists for war in Syria

Vaccine State USA: Mandatory vaccinations are here - California law requires total compliance

MAINSTREAM MEDIA: The True Enemy Of The People

MSM Guilty of Multiple Ongoing Cover-ups of Major Government and Corporate Crimes

9/11 VERDICT: Mainstream Media Guilty Of The Biggest Coverup In U.S. History (VIDEO)

Why is the 9/11 cover-up so important?

TREASON & TRAITORS

There is only one realistic solution to this ever-worsening predicament.

Conclusion

Like us on Facebook!