The Zionists have a much better sense of how to do these things. They know that it is essential to focus on one or two key targets and issues, and pile on those issues from every direction without getting distracted by peripheral matters. To use my hunter analogy above, they are also standing in a circle, but they are facing inward from the high ground and firing rifled slugs downward at a wounded target. And remember as I wrote in the beginning that they are winning, and winning big time – or has no one looked at the change in the remnants of Palestine over the last five years (more settlements, more settlers, miserable Gaza) or the total lack of opposition to Israel now in the US Congress?
We need to adopt their approach to strategy, stop fighting them where they are strongest, and take a more indirect approach – Sun Tzu rather than Clausewitz, if you will. In the US, their strength is at the national level, and in some selected state level offices; their weakness is at most local levels. I doubt if there is a national office of anything, especially if it is based in Washington or New York City, that is not in their pocket, and I include the national offices of veterans organizations as much as the Congress. I would not be at all surprised if the national officers of (e.g.) the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) or the Navy League are regularly visited and entertained by AIPAC, for instance; but I'd bet the bank that the local VFW chapters here have never even heard of AIPAC. And the same with the rest – for instance, politicians who cozy up to AIPAC (or vice versa) in Washington are in their center of comfort and power, but when they come back to their home states and districts, the local media and the local chapters of their parties do not care about Washington, and that is where they can be cornered and hammered. And similarly in other countries.
My take is that we generally spend way too much time looking at Palestine when searching for ways to combat Zionism. The American people would not care greatly about a distant issue like the Palestinians, or an abstraction (however significant) like Zionist domination of the mainstream media, even if they knew the cold, hard facts about those things. They do care about things that hurt them, or make them afraid, or enrage them. Therefore, we in America and elsewhere should hit the Zionists on what they do to us — because if we take them down on that, especially in the US, then Palestine wins by default, BUT the converse does not hold.
The way I see it, the gate to first containing and then rolling back Israel, and thus helping Palestine, is not over there, it is in the US. The lock to that gate is not in Washington, it is in the heartland of America where the Zionists have as of yet remarkably little influence. And the key to that lock is the open wound today which is 9/11 and the wars it spawned. Nail them on 9/11 and the cover-up of it, nail them for the wars they contrived and the wars they want the US to wage on Israel’s behalf, nail them for the lives and treasure America has spent and the lives it has taken waging America’s Jewish Wars, nail them often and hard, and the Zionists may end up wishing Germany had won WWII. How to define 9/11 for the American public and to bring them its message is the subject of the next article: Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
The Chinese Government Is Buying Up Economic Assets And Huge Tracts Of Land All Over The United States
In 2011, America is for sale and the communist Chinese are eager buyers. The Chinese government is using sovereign wealth funds and Chinese state-owned enterprises to buy up economic assets and huge tracts of land all over the United States. Many of our politicians hail all of this "foreign investment" as something that is "good for America", while many others see something much more sinister going on here. In any event, this is a trend that is rapidly accelerating and that is causing great concern among patriotic Americans.
In my recent article entitled "China Wants To Construct A 50 Square Mile Self-Sustaining City South Of Boise, Idaho", I examined a potential deal that Sinomach (a company controlled by the Chinese government) wants to do with the government of Idaho. There will be more on this deal in a minute.
But first it is important to note that this is a phenomenon that is happening all across the United States.
Today, the cost of transportation is rapidly going up. If state-owned Chinese companies can set up shop inside the United States and get massive tax breaks from state and local governments at the same time why wouldn't they want to do it?
In my recent article entitled "China Wants To Construct A 50 Square Mile Self-Sustaining City South Of Boise, Idaho", I examined a potential deal that Sinomach (a company controlled by the Chinese government) wants to do with the government of Idaho. There will be more on this deal in a minute.
But first it is important to note that this is a phenomenon that is happening all across the United States.
Today, the cost of transportation is rapidly going up. If state-owned Chinese companies can set up shop inside the United States and get massive tax breaks from state and local governments at the same time why wouldn't they want to do it?
Monday, June 20, 2011
GLOBALISTS CALL FOR ’BIG WAR’
ST. MORITZ, Switzerland—The secret globalist group “Bilderberg” called for a big war by expanding the turmoil in Libya into a full-scale conflict involving the entire Middle East except for Israel. This is a grim and bloody outlook, because, historically, every time Bilderberg orders war, the guns begin to shoot. In 1991, President George H.W. Bush followed orders and attacked Iraq in Persian Gulf War I. He lost to peace candidate Bill Clinton, who followed orders and invaded Yugoslavia.
The list is endless: Every war dating back to and including World War II has been ordered by Bilderberg. Although they did not start calling themselves Bilderberg until 1954, Rockefeller and Rothschild cronies had the ear of President Franklin Roosevelt when the White House baited the Japanese into conducting a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on Sunday, Dec. 7, 1941.
When Bill Clinton, a Bilderberg attendee, was president, NATO became the UN’s standing army, operating anywhere in the world on the orders of the Security Council. Under the UN, NATO invaded Yugoslavia. Under its charter, NATO is a defensive army only. But the first weapon fired in anger was an offensive war under direction of the UN.
Bilderberg has forgiven Barack Obama for hesitancy about what is now “his war.” They understand the political delicacy in Washington but, as one said, “he’s a good soldier and he’ll follow orders.”
The list is endless: Every war dating back to and including World War II has been ordered by Bilderberg. Although they did not start calling themselves Bilderberg until 1954, Rockefeller and Rothschild cronies had the ear of President Franklin Roosevelt when the White House baited the Japanese into conducting a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on Sunday, Dec. 7, 1941.
When Bill Clinton, a Bilderberg attendee, was president, NATO became the UN’s standing army, operating anywhere in the world on the orders of the Security Council. Under the UN, NATO invaded Yugoslavia. Under its charter, NATO is a defensive army only. But the first weapon fired in anger was an offensive war under direction of the UN.
Bilderberg has forgiven Barack Obama for hesitancy about what is now “his war.” They understand the political delicacy in Washington but, as one said, “he’s a good soldier and he’ll follow orders.”
NATO's Terror Over Tripoli
The NATO excursion into Libya started with disingenuous humanitarian concerns translated into a no-fly zone, which incrementally transitioned into attacks on Qaddafi's ground forces, targeted assassinations against Qaddafi himself, then talk of destroying civilian infrastructure and a full-out ground invasion. NATO declared mid-May that it would be "increasing the range of targets" it could hit, including "government infrastructure." With a residential area hit and NATO playing dumb over its role in murdering the very civilians it is supposedly protecting, it appears they made good on their promise.
The key to Qaddafi's long reign, his survival and resistance in the face of NATO's relentless attacks is the support he garners from his own people. While the mainstream media preys on the ignorance of its audience, those who took the time to examine the demographics of Libya would realize the current fighting is split along traditional tribal lines where animosity has existed, and in fact been funded and fostered by the West for at least three decades. With NATO incapable of handing their inept terrorist stooges on the ground the country with airstrikes alone, it appears they are attempting the same terroristic "shock and awe" tactics used against Iraq to break the will of the population with overwhelming violence.
Reports of civilian casualties owed to NATO strikes have been filtering out for weeks. Commonsense dictates the impossibility of dropping high explosive ordnance in the middle of a densely populated city without incurring considerable "collateral damage." However the corporate-owned media dismissed Libyan accounts of such murder and mayhem with a complete whitewash of NATO's terror over Tripoli. A ridiculous AP story titled, "Libyan regime accused of exaggerating casualties," claims that doctors dropped secret notes for reporters to read claiming many of the deaths the government was reporting were from road accidents rather than NATO's admitted bombardment of the nation's populous capital city.
Just before NATO itself had to admit it did indeed drop ordnance in a residential area, media outlets, who have built the entire case against Libya with unverified reports from less than objective sources (the rebels), attempted to downplay the "alleged" claims of the Libyan government. Slate made sure in a recent article to remind readers that, "the Libyan government’s claims of civilian casualties have been exaggerated in the past." We must assume a doctor dropped Slate a secret note as well, for Slate makes no attempt to verify their assertion.
The key to Qaddafi's long reign, his survival and resistance in the face of NATO's relentless attacks is the support he garners from his own people. While the mainstream media preys on the ignorance of its audience, those who took the time to examine the demographics of Libya would realize the current fighting is split along traditional tribal lines where animosity has existed, and in fact been funded and fostered by the West for at least three decades. With NATO incapable of handing their inept terrorist stooges on the ground the country with airstrikes alone, it appears they are attempting the same terroristic "shock and awe" tactics used against Iraq to break the will of the population with overwhelming violence.
Reports of civilian casualties owed to NATO strikes have been filtering out for weeks. Commonsense dictates the impossibility of dropping high explosive ordnance in the middle of a densely populated city without incurring considerable "collateral damage." However the corporate-owned media dismissed Libyan accounts of such murder and mayhem with a complete whitewash of NATO's terror over Tripoli. A ridiculous AP story titled, "Libyan regime accused of exaggerating casualties," claims that doctors dropped secret notes for reporters to read claiming many of the deaths the government was reporting were from road accidents rather than NATO's admitted bombardment of the nation's populous capital city.
Just before NATO itself had to admit it did indeed drop ordnance in a residential area, media outlets, who have built the entire case against Libya with unverified reports from less than objective sources (the rebels), attempted to downplay the "alleged" claims of the Libyan government. Slate made sure in a recent article to remind readers that, "the Libyan government’s claims of civilian casualties have been exaggerated in the past." We must assume a doctor dropped Slate a secret note as well, for Slate makes no attempt to verify their assertion.
Bilderberg 2011: The tipping point
So they discussed "China". Care to be a bit more specific? No – just "China". I wouldn't exactly describe their agenda as "information rich". They might as well have listed: "important stuff; things; other things; areas of interest; topics and assorted other subjects".
But more importantly, the website is full of inaccuracies, gaps, and outright lies. The delegate list is never complete, it's just a list of people who don't mind admitting they've been. Some prefer to keep their names out of Bilderberg history. (Tony Blair never admitted going, he even lied to parliament about it, although it's well documented that he attended).
Then it claims that: "Participants attend Bilderberg in a private and not an official capacity." Just not true. We know from the Treasury that Osborne has been in St Moritz in his official role as chancellor.
But a few moments digging around documents and history books, and you realise how the Bilderberg conference actually works. The annual conference bit, whilst being hugely important, is only the "public" bit of the organisation. The steering committee (which has on it, amongst others, our lord chancellor, Kenneth Clarke MP) meets throughout the year. It's extremely active, but even more secretive still.
For example, see if you can find this 1958 conference of the 'Extended Steering Group' in the official Bilderberg history …
But more importantly, the website is full of inaccuracies, gaps, and outright lies. The delegate list is never complete, it's just a list of people who don't mind admitting they've been. Some prefer to keep their names out of Bilderberg history. (Tony Blair never admitted going, he even lied to parliament about it, although it's well documented that he attended).
Then it claims that: "Participants attend Bilderberg in a private and not an official capacity." Just not true. We know from the Treasury that Osborne has been in St Moritz in his official role as chancellor.
But a few moments digging around documents and history books, and you realise how the Bilderberg conference actually works. The annual conference bit, whilst being hugely important, is only the "public" bit of the organisation. The steering committee (which has on it, amongst others, our lord chancellor, Kenneth Clarke MP) meets throughout the year. It's extremely active, but even more secretive still.
For example, see if you can find this 1958 conference of the 'Extended Steering Group' in the official Bilderberg history …
Saturday, June 18, 2011
LIBYA BOMBSHELL: Obama Overruled Two Top Lawyers, Who Told Him War Must Be Terminated
This week several members of Congress challenged Obama on the legality of the Libya war, given that actions have exceeded the 90 day period during which The White House doesn't need Congressional authority for military action under the War Powers Act.
The White House response: We don't need Congressional approval because this is not technically a hostile action (because we don't have ground troops in Libya).
Tonight the NYT has a major bombshell: Two top lawyers -- Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel -- told The White House otherwise.
Even Attorney General Eric Holder sided with Krass.
But Rather than heed their advice, he instead went with two lawyers with views more favorable to him: Bob Bauer (who is internal at The White House), and State Department advisor Harold Koh.
No doubt this will only embolden the bi-partisan group of Congressmen who think the war at this point is illegal.
The White House response: We don't need Congressional approval because this is not technically a hostile action (because we don't have ground troops in Libya).
Tonight the NYT has a major bombshell: Two top lawyers -- Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel -- told The White House otherwise.
Even Attorney General Eric Holder sided with Krass.
But Rather than heed their advice, he instead went with two lawyers with views more favorable to him: Bob Bauer (who is internal at The White House), and State Department advisor Harold Koh.
No doubt this will only embolden the bi-partisan group of Congressmen who think the war at this point is illegal.
The Destabilization of Syria and the Broader Middle East War
Dangerous Crossroads: The Broader Middle East War
Israel and NATO signed a far-reaching military cooperation agreement in 2005. Under this agreement, Israel is considered a de facto member of NATO.
If a military operation were to be launched against Syria, Israel would in all likelihood be involved in military undertakings alongside NATO forces (under the NATO-Israel bilateral agreement). Turkey would also play an active military role.
A military intervention in Syria on fake humanitarian grounds would lead to an escalation of the US-NATO led war over a large area extending from North Africa and the Middle East to Central Asia, from the Eastern Mediterranean to China's Western frontier with Afghanistan and Pakistan.
It would also contribute to a process of political destabilization in Lebanon, Jordan and Palestine. It would also set the stage for a conflict with Iran.
Israel and NATO signed a far-reaching military cooperation agreement in 2005. Under this agreement, Israel is considered a de facto member of NATO.
If a military operation were to be launched against Syria, Israel would in all likelihood be involved in military undertakings alongside NATO forces (under the NATO-Israel bilateral agreement). Turkey would also play an active military role.
A military intervention in Syria on fake humanitarian grounds would lead to an escalation of the US-NATO led war over a large area extending from North Africa and the Middle East to Central Asia, from the Eastern Mediterranean to China's Western frontier with Afghanistan and Pakistan.
It would also contribute to a process of political destabilization in Lebanon, Jordan and Palestine. It would also set the stage for a conflict with Iran.
CIA Agent: Bush Admin. Used CIA "To Get" Michigan Professor
Former CIA supervisor Glenn L. Carle has accused senior Bush administration officials of trolling secret CIA files for negative information about one of its public critics, University of Michigan Professor Juan Cole, according to the June 16 New York Times.
The paper reported that David B. Low, the National Intelligence Officer (NIO) for Transnational Threats at the National Intelligence Council, asked Carle in 2005: “What do you think we might know about him, or could find out that could discredit him?” After being rebuffed for making an inappropriate request, Low continued: “But what might we know about him?” Carle said Low asked: “Does he drink? What are his views? Is he married?”
Carle rebuffed the request again, stressing that it was illegal. But the next day, Carle explained that "on his way to a meeting in the C.I.A.’s front office, a secretary asked if he would drop off a folder to be delivered by courier to the White House. Mr. Carle said he opened it and stopped cold. Inside, he recalled, was a memo from Mr. Low about Juan Cole that included a paragraph with 'inappropriate, derogatory remarks' about his lifestyle."
Juan Cole — the target of the CIA's political dirt, called the spying "outrageous." Wired.com's Spencer Ackerman summarized that "[B]ewilderingly, all Cole did was say mean things about the Bush team on the internet. He wasn’t a militant, he wasn’t even an activist. He blogged. To devote precious intelligence resources, especially from counterterrorism officials, to silencing him is laughably solipsistic."
The paper reported that David B. Low, the National Intelligence Officer (NIO) for Transnational Threats at the National Intelligence Council, asked Carle in 2005: “What do you think we might know about him, or could find out that could discredit him?” After being rebuffed for making an inappropriate request, Low continued: “But what might we know about him?” Carle said Low asked: “Does he drink? What are his views? Is he married?”
Carle rebuffed the request again, stressing that it was illegal. But the next day, Carle explained that "on his way to a meeting in the C.I.A.’s front office, a secretary asked if he would drop off a folder to be delivered by courier to the White House. Mr. Carle said he opened it and stopped cold. Inside, he recalled, was a memo from Mr. Low about Juan Cole that included a paragraph with 'inappropriate, derogatory remarks' about his lifestyle."
Juan Cole — the target of the CIA's political dirt, called the spying "outrageous." Wired.com's Spencer Ackerman summarized that "[B]ewilderingly, all Cole did was say mean things about the Bush team on the internet. He wasn’t a militant, he wasn’t even an activist. He blogged. To devote precious intelligence resources, especially from counterterrorism officials, to silencing him is laughably solipsistic."
Friday, June 17, 2011
Living in the Shadows: A World of Black Ops and Cyber Wars
A shadow has descended on freedom worldwide: Congress is in the dark; sovereign foreign nations are in the dark; and the average American can't imagine that a world of espionage, black ops, psy ops, and the apparatus of a surveillance-industrial complex run by globalists has them in the crosshairs.
When exiting CIA director, Leon Panetta, openly admitted that shadow wars and black ops should be a strategy employed through direct military control by the CIA, it marked a new Dark Age.
'(It's) appropriate for the head of such department or agency [read: CIA] to direct the operations of the element providing that military support while working with the Secretary of Defense.' A 'significant advantage of doing so,' he continued, 'is that it permits the robust operational capability of the U.S. Armed Forces to be applied when needed.'
That’s contentious: it would put the military in the territory of performing operations that the government can legally deny all knowledge of ordering... (Source)
A later response by Panetta to a question by Sen. McCain literally empowers Barack Obama to become a dictator, within a military dictatorship framework, as it heralds a philosophy of extralegal measures taken by the president "when needed" by the military.
When exiting CIA director, Leon Panetta, openly admitted that shadow wars and black ops should be a strategy employed through direct military control by the CIA, it marked a new Dark Age.
'(It's) appropriate for the head of such department or agency [read: CIA] to direct the operations of the element providing that military support while working with the Secretary of Defense.' A 'significant advantage of doing so,' he continued, 'is that it permits the robust operational capability of the U.S. Armed Forces to be applied when needed.'
That’s contentious: it would put the military in the territory of performing operations that the government can legally deny all knowledge of ordering... (Source)
A later response by Panetta to a question by Sen. McCain literally empowers Barack Obama to become a dictator, within a military dictatorship framework, as it heralds a philosophy of extralegal measures taken by the president "when needed" by the military.
Kucinich, Colleagues Sue Obama Over Libya War
Give Dennis Kucinich credit for tenacity. Having been thwarted by the House of Representatives’ leadership in his attempt to get the House to pass a resolution demanding an end to President Barack Obama’s unconstitutional war in Libya, the Ohio Democrat, along with nine other Congressmen, is suing Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates in federal court in hopes of putting a stop to the United States’ involvement in the NATO operation.
The other plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Reps. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Howard Coble (R-N.C.), John Duncan (R-Tenn.), Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.), John Conyers (D-Mich.), Ron Paul (R-Texas), Michael Capuano (D-Mass.), Tim Johnson (R-Ill.), and Dan Burton (R-Ind.). They are being represented by George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley.
Their 36-page complaint cogently and thoroughly makes the case that Obama’s military action is indeed a war, that it was undertaken and is being funded in violation of the U.S. Constitution, that the administration has failed to satisfy the requirements of the War Powers Resolution, and that therefore the court should order the President to “suspend military operations in Libya absent a declaration of war from Congress.”
The Congressmen would certainly seem to have an open-and-shut case against the Obama administration — one that would probably prevail easily if it went to trial. Unfortunately, courts have previously ruled that members of Congress do not have standing to sue the executive branch, so the court could dismiss this case on similar grounds.
The other plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Reps. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Howard Coble (R-N.C.), John Duncan (R-Tenn.), Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.), John Conyers (D-Mich.), Ron Paul (R-Texas), Michael Capuano (D-Mass.), Tim Johnson (R-Ill.), and Dan Burton (R-Ind.). They are being represented by George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley.
Their 36-page complaint cogently and thoroughly makes the case that Obama’s military action is indeed a war, that it was undertaken and is being funded in violation of the U.S. Constitution, that the administration has failed to satisfy the requirements of the War Powers Resolution, and that therefore the court should order the President to “suspend military operations in Libya absent a declaration of war from Congress.”
The Congressmen would certainly seem to have an open-and-shut case against the Obama administration — one that would probably prevail easily if it went to trial. Unfortunately, courts have previously ruled that members of Congress do not have standing to sue the executive branch, so the court could dismiss this case on similar grounds.
AIPAC Pushes Hard for War With Iran
Former AIPAC staffer Keith Weissman, indicted in 2005 under the Espionage Act alongside colleague Steven J. Rosen and Defense Department employee Col. Lawrence Franklin, is desperately worried. In a lengthy, rambling monologue delivered to independent reporter Robert Dreyfuss, Weissman breaks a long silence to declare he’s “concerned that if a confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran leads to war, it will be a disaster—one that Weissman fears will be blamed on the American Jews.” It is telling, but unsurprising, that Weissman—through misrepresentations and false dichotomy—exhibits little concern for the broader potential consequence of war. Fortunately, his tired arguments are in a final lap toward oblivion.
AIPAC, in the business of advancing Israeli government policies in the United States ever since its founder left the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1951, has long portrayed itself as the sole distillery of Jewish policy needs to politicians eager to tap the Israel lobby’s seemingly limitless barrels of campaign donations. But AIPAC’s brand has recently sprung a leak as growing numbers of youthful, creative, and noisy organizations challenge its tired claims of representation and even legitimacy. Weissman’s actual concern is that AIPAC and its creaky constellation of affiliates will be blamed if the United States is successfully goaded or tripwired into an unnecessary war with Iran. Accountability has always been anathema for an organization operating more like a foreign intelligence agency than a tax-exempt social-welfare organization.
AIPAC has long brushed its footprints away from trapping pits into which it has successfully lured American taxpayers. The Los Angeles Times has lauded its “donor secrecy,” while Fortune called AIPAC “calculatedly quiet.” One anonymous AIPAC official even confided to The National Journal that “there is no question that we exert a policy impact, but working behind the scenes and taking care not to leave fingerprints, that impact is not always traceable to us.” According to the interview:
The overarching problem is the Israel lobby’s subversion of American governance through election fraud, the evasion of tax regulations and laws regulating foreign lobbies, and the systematized, ongoing infiltration of operatives into key government posts to advance the interests of a foreign state. Unfortunately for AIPAC, the Americans gathering to challenge it cross party lines. Whether they wear American flag pins on their suit lapels or Birkenstocks over wool socks is of ever declining significance. Weissman and his fellow travelers can try to outrun opponents by pulling an old horse’s head from right to left. Weissman clearly wants to tell his side of the story. But Weissman and Rosen will only reemerge as legitimate jockeys astride America’s policy circuits when they again register as AIPAC’s agents of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
AIPAC, in the business of advancing Israeli government policies in the United States ever since its founder left the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1951, has long portrayed itself as the sole distillery of Jewish policy needs to politicians eager to tap the Israel lobby’s seemingly limitless barrels of campaign donations. But AIPAC’s brand has recently sprung a leak as growing numbers of youthful, creative, and noisy organizations challenge its tired claims of representation and even legitimacy. Weissman’s actual concern is that AIPAC and its creaky constellation of affiliates will be blamed if the United States is successfully goaded or tripwired into an unnecessary war with Iran. Accountability has always been anathema for an organization operating more like a foreign intelligence agency than a tax-exempt social-welfare organization.
AIPAC has long brushed its footprints away from trapping pits into which it has successfully lured American taxpayers. The Los Angeles Times has lauded its “donor secrecy,” while Fortune called AIPAC “calculatedly quiet.” One anonymous AIPAC official even confided to The National Journal that “there is no question that we exert a policy impact, but working behind the scenes and taking care not to leave fingerprints, that impact is not always traceable to us.” According to the interview:
The overarching problem is the Israel lobby’s subversion of American governance through election fraud, the evasion of tax regulations and laws regulating foreign lobbies, and the systematized, ongoing infiltration of operatives into key government posts to advance the interests of a foreign state. Unfortunately for AIPAC, the Americans gathering to challenge it cross party lines. Whether they wear American flag pins on their suit lapels or Birkenstocks over wool socks is of ever declining significance. Weissman and his fellow travelers can try to outrun opponents by pulling an old horse’s head from right to left. Weissman clearly wants to tell his side of the story. But Weissman and Rosen will only reemerge as legitimate jockeys astride America’s policy circuits when they again register as AIPAC’s agents of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
BATF sent Guns to Terrorists: Will Obama AG be Held Accountable by Congress?
“House Committee demands documents regarding Operation Fast and Furious.” The buck does not stop with Obama and Holder though. Asked about prior knowledge of Operation Gun Runner / Fast and Furious… They just didn’t know what the hell was going on. Maybe this is true. Maybe they are way out of the loop, and this should concern not only every American, but citizens around the world!
Since Obama is nothing more than a figurehead, and a puppet for Global Intelligence (AKA the NWO)… It is possible that he IS completely out of the loop. This is not the best 2012 campaign slogan however: “Vote for me, uhh, I have no clue what’s being done in my name”.
It makes one wonder what ELSE in the area of False Flag Terror (which this P2OG style “Sting Operation” truly is)
In 1993, the world fell for another Alphabet agency “sting” operation at the World Trade Center. Though it was admittedly all run by the FBI, ask people today who blew up the towers in 93… “Muslim extremists” is sure to be the answer. How do they know? “I saw it on the TeeVee”
- And this is what we call LIES BY OMISSION! Kinda like the way the MSM and the Warren er… Hamilton / Kean commission omitted the collapse of Building 7 on 911 from their report. (which they admitted later was a total farce)
Since Obama is nothing more than a figurehead, and a puppet for Global Intelligence (AKA the NWO)… It is possible that he IS completely out of the loop. This is not the best 2012 campaign slogan however: “Vote for me, uhh, I have no clue what’s being done in my name”.
It makes one wonder what ELSE in the area of False Flag Terror (which this P2OG style “Sting Operation” truly is)
In 1993, the world fell for another Alphabet agency “sting” operation at the World Trade Center. Though it was admittedly all run by the FBI, ask people today who blew up the towers in 93… “Muslim extremists” is sure to be the answer. How do they know? “I saw it on the TeeVee”
- And this is what we call LIES BY OMISSION! Kinda like the way the MSM and the Warren er… Hamilton / Kean commission omitted the collapse of Building 7 on 911 from their report. (which they admitted later was a total farce)
Spiritual War: Where Are The Christians?
Where are our own Christians?
The only Christian I know who has spoken of the Pharasaical spiritual occupation of our societies, Bishop Williamson of the Catholic order SSPX, has been ordered to silence by the leader of his own order and by the Pope himself.
The Bishop believes that the endless repetition through the media of the 'Holocaust gas chambers' story has mesmerised and intimidated the entire Christian community into a kind of witless helplessness to the point where we have, effectively, abandoned something at the very core of Christ's message. (Williamson also believes, not without evidence, that the vision of horror that is the industrialised extermination of a people by 'gas chambers' is a lie.)
The mission of Christ, the Jew, was to save the Jews from the satanic wickedness of those who had taken over leadership of His people. His mission was to fulfil the true law of Moses and the prophets, to bring Jews and, through them, the whole world, into right relationship with the ecstacy that is the pure love of God.
The Pharisees wanted to invert this message, which they did. Their drive was to, amazingly, bring the Jewish people to absolute power and ownership over the entire world and its peoples. 'Monstrous'? 'grandiose'? Is there a word out there to adequately describe such an ambition.
The only Christian I know who has spoken of the Pharasaical spiritual occupation of our societies, Bishop Williamson of the Catholic order SSPX, has been ordered to silence by the leader of his own order and by the Pope himself.
The Bishop believes that the endless repetition through the media of the 'Holocaust gas chambers' story has mesmerised and intimidated the entire Christian community into a kind of witless helplessness to the point where we have, effectively, abandoned something at the very core of Christ's message. (Williamson also believes, not without evidence, that the vision of horror that is the industrialised extermination of a people by 'gas chambers' is a lie.)
The mission of Christ, the Jew, was to save the Jews from the satanic wickedness of those who had taken over leadership of His people. His mission was to fulfil the true law of Moses and the prophets, to bring Jews and, through them, the whole world, into right relationship with the ecstacy that is the pure love of God.
The Pharisees wanted to invert this message, which they did. Their drive was to, amazingly, bring the Jewish people to absolute power and ownership over the entire world and its peoples. 'Monstrous'? 'grandiose'? Is there a word out there to adequately describe such an ambition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)