Category Archives: False flag

CyberBerkut publishes email of Democrat plot to blame Russia for hacking 2016 election

CyberBerkut, founded around 2014, is a Ukrainian nationalist and pro-Russian group of anonymous hacktivists who, as described by Wikipedia, became known for a series of denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks on the pro-West (NATO and the U.S.) Ukrainian government, and on western and Ukrainian corporate websites.

Its name, CyberBerkut or Berkut online, is a reference to Berkut — a special police within Ukraine’s Ministry of Internal Affairs. After the 2014 Ukrainian revolution — in which the Obama State Department was covertly involved — the new pro-West Ukrainian government dissolved Berkut, blaming the special police for most of the nearly 100 civilian deaths. Berkut’s unit in Crimea, which broke away from Ukraine, defected to the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs and kept its old name.

Indeed, CyberBerkut’s emblem is almost identical to that of Berkut:

CyberBerkut’s activities include:

  • Attacks on NATO websites.
  • Attacks on U.S. private military companies.
  • Publication of correspondence with the United States Embassy in Ukraine and United States foundations (e.g., Clinton Foundation).

In response to CyberBerkut’s hacktivism, the group’s Facebook page is repeatedly blocked, and its website repeatedly disrupted. Indeed, when I tried to assess CyberBerkut’s website this morning, I got the message:

“The site is under attack. Service is temporarily unavailable.”

Yesterday, WikiLeaks sent out a tweet informing us that CyberBerkut just published a batch of emails between Ukraine and Hillary Clinton/Clinton Foundation, with a link to the CyberBerkut webpage.

When you go on the CyberBerkut page, the most intriguing thing comes at the end — an email on January 8, 2017, i.e., after Hillary Clinton had lost the presidential election to Donald Trump, showing the Democrats plotting to manufacture the phony story that Russia had hacked the election.

CyberBerkut claims they were given the email by a “whistleblower” and that the names of the email sender and receiver are blacked out to protect the identity of the whistleblower.

Below is the text of the email, followed by a screenshot of the email:

1/8/2017 10:03 PM

From _____
Subject Re. Elections 2016
To _____

Dear ______

We all agree there is a need to provide technical details on Russian hacking.
____ urges you and _____ to bring up again the issue with _____. It’s quite important, especially as we approach the hearings. If there are no technical details we have to find some by all means. I am sure his guys can do it. We are short of time.

Regards,
_______

Sent from my iPhone

CyberBerkut notes that:

“Our whistleblowers gave us information that Russia was going to face great provocation. The Americans intend to manufacture false evidence of the Russian security services’ involvement in cyber attacks during the U.S. presidential elections 2016.

We cover the names of the provocation facilitators in order not to expose our sources. It is worth saying, a famous American politician and major financier took part in the plot.”

Is the “famous American politician” Hillary Clinton, and the “major financier” George Soros?

See also:

~Eowyn

Advertisements

Judge blocks California’s high-capacity magazine ban

second amendment3

Score one for the Second Amendment.

From ABC News: A federal judge on Thursday blocked a California law set to take effect Saturday that would have barred gun owners from possessing high-capacity ammunition magazines.

The judge ruled that the ban approved by the Legislature and voters last year takes away gun owners’ Second Amendment rights and amounts to the government taking people’s private property without compensation.

California law has prohibited buying or selling the magazines since 2000, but until now allowed those who had them to keep them.

“Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of otherwise law-abiding citizens will have an untenable choice: become an outlaw or dispossess one’s self of lawfully acquired property,” San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez wrote. (Judge Benitez was appointed by George W. Bush.)

He issued a preliminary injunction blocking the law from taking effect while he considers the underlying lawsuit filed by the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association.

Meanwhile, a Sacramento-based judge on Thursday rejected a similar challenge by several other gun owners’ rights organizations, creating what Ari Freilich, staff attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, called “dueling opinions” that may be sorted out on appeal. “Unfortunately this law will be delayed but we are confident it will go into effect, and soon,” he said.

He called the San Diego lawsuit and ruling part of an effort by the NRA “to delay and dismantle California’s law brick by brick.”

Had the ban taken effect, owners would have been required to get rid of their magazines by sending them out of state, altering them to hold no more than 10 bullets, destroying them or turning them into law enforcement agencies. Possession could have been punished by $100 fines or up to a year in jail.

Owners can now keep the magazines until a final ruling by Benitez or if an appeals court overturns his injunction, said Chuck Michel, attorney for the NRA and the California Rifle & Pistol Association.

“This court recognized that the Second Amendment is not a second-class right and that law-abiding gun owners have the right to own these magazines to defend themselves and their families,” Michel said.

State lawmakers approved the ban last year as part of a package of bills adding to what already were some of the nation’s strictest gun laws. Voters agreed in November when they approved Proposition 63, a measure that toughened the penalties by allowing violators to be fined or jailed.

Benitez said he was mindful of voters’ approval and government’s legitimate interest in protecting the public but added that the “Constitution is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.”

Gun owner’s constitutional rights “are not eliminated simply because they possess ‘unpopular’ magazines holding more than 10 rounds,” he wrote in a 66-page decision.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra criticized the decision but did not say what he will do next. “Proposition 63 was overwhelmingly approved by voters to increase public safety and enhance security in a sensible and constitutional way,” Becerra said in a statement. “I will defend the will of California voters because we cannot continue to lose innocent lives due to gun violence.”

Supporters say that magazines often holding 30 or 100 bullets are typically used in mass shootings and aren’t needed by hunters or civilian owners. “Clearly it escalates the lethality in any mass shooting when high-capacity magazines are involved,” said Amanda Wilcox, a spokeswoman for the California chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence whose daughter was fatally shot.

Forcing assailants to change magazines more frequently gives victims time to flee or subdue the shooter, Becerra argued in court filings.

He listed as examples the shooting in Orlando, Florida, that killed 49 people and injured 53; the terrorist assault that killed 14 and injured 22 in San Bernardino; the massacre of children and teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut; and the Arizona attack that killed six and wounded 13 including former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

Moreover, the government wouldn’t own the magazines in the way it would property seized for a new highway or public building, he argued, since the magazines would be destroyed by law enforcement agencies.

Becerra said opponents’ Second Amendment challenge has repeatedly been rejected by other courts, allowing at least seven other states and 11 local governments to already restrict the possession or sale of large-capacity ammunition magazines.

DCG

Who’s grieving? This dog or these Sandy Hook parents?

Molika Ashford writes for Live Science, Dec. 28, 2010:

“People often assign feelings to animals […] But scientists haven’t determined whether these human-like expressions really mean anything. […]

Scientists believe that certain brain cells in humans called spindle cells are responsible for human social behavior and the interplay between thoughts and feelings. Studies have revealed that chimpanzee, dolphin and whale brains also possess spindle cells. Although these are all animals that can act people-like, the presence of these cells does not mean that the animals have feelings.

Even animals that don’t have spindle cells, such as dogs, have shown behaviors that can suggest a human-like social sense. In recent experiments, dogs have shown that they know to follow a human’s pointed finger to find a food treat. Scientists report that this shows dogs are sensitive to human social cues and are able to correctly interpret them. Still, this only proves that dogs know how to find food, not that they have feelings.

[…] In a recent study, a Barnard College researcher tested dogs to see if their guilty looks were linked to actual bad behavior. Dogs were tempted with a treat and told by their owners not to eat it.

The dog’s owners weren’t allowed to see whether their pets had eaten the treat or not, but were told either that they did or that they didn’t, and were then instructed to scold the dogs that disobeyed. The experimenters noted that scolded dogs showed a guilty look whether or not they had actually done wrong.

This illustrates the difficulty in accurately interpreting animal behavior as a marker of human-like feelings. A guilty look suggests a feeling of guilt in a human but not necessarily in a dog, according to the Barnard research. Similarly, even apparent mourning or empathy behavior might not actually mean these feelings are present in the brains of animals.

Oh yeah?

Tell me this dog, grieving over the death of a companion, doesn’t have feelings. Note his repeated gasping/choking toward the end of the video, his entire body shaking.

And yet we are to believe Christopher and Lynn McDonnell are grieving parents whose child, Grace, was killed by Adam Lanza in Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14, 2012.

I don’t need “scientists” to tell me the meaning of what I can see with my own eyes, which is that the dog was overcome with feelings of distraught and grief, whereas the smiling and tearless McDonnells were acting.

If the McDonnells were grieving, they sure have a strange way of showing it. I’d sure like to see “scientists” explain their peculiar display of “feelings” over their 7-year-old daughter’s murder.

By the way, Christopher and Lynn McDonnell are among the Sandy Hook residents who purchased their home on December 25, 2009, for $0.

~Eowyn

London Bridge Terror was a hoax: CCTV shows ‘victim’ getting up from ground

At around 9:58 pm on the night of June 3, 2017, just 12 days after the terrorist bombing at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England, Britain experienced a third terrorist attack of the year when three men drove a van into pedestrians on London Bridge. Wielding knives, the men left the van and went to the nearby Borough Market, where they stabbed people in and around restaurants and pubs. Seven people were killed and 48 wounded, including four unarmed police officers who attempted to tackle the assailants.

The three attackers wearing fake explosive vests — Khuram Shazad Butt, Rachid Redouane and Youssef Zaghba — were shot dead by police. ISIS has claimed “responsibility” for the attack. Twelve people were arrested and four properties raided the following day, with more raids on the day after. (Wikipedia)

Or so we are told.

On June 6, I published a post on a curious video taken by a citizen journalist of what appears to be a group of police officers changing their clothes behind a police van during the London Bridge incident. One of the officers pulled on a pair of camouflage pants, which certainly is not standard police uniform. He was later seen, in camouflage pants, lying on the ground as one of the three terrorists shot dead by police at 10:16 pm.

Below is a longer video of the police changing their clothes AFTER the terrorists drove their van into pedestrians on the London Bridge attack, but BEFORE the Borough Market stabbing.

The video shows not only the red-hair officer changing into camouflage pants, but also officers in white tops and black pants, as well as others donning all-black hoodie jumpsuits.

Later in the video, CCTV footage of the Borough Market stabbing shows supposed restaurant “waiters” dressed in white tops and black pants being “stabbed” by “terrorists” wearing all-black hoodie jumpsuits.

Hmm . . . .

There is also a telling and quite funny CCTV footage of a stabbing “victim” (or a “terrorist” whom the police just “shot”) miraculously getting up from the ground to avoid being run over by a runaway police car that the cops had forgotten to brake.

Here’s a screenshot I took, followed by a GIF I had made.

See also “Fake News: CNN Becky Anderson stages fake Muslim ‘peace protest’ in London“.

~Eowyn

57 y.o. mentally-ill woman sentenced to 5 mos. for Sandy Hook death threats & belief in conspiracy theories

James Tracy, a former tenured professor at Florida Atlantic University, received many vicious death threats for simply exercising his First Amendment right of free speech on Sandy Hook. (See “Hate mail, death threats sent to Prof. James Tracy for being a Sandy Hook skeptic“)

Not only was nothing done about the death threats Dr. Tracy received to both himself and his young children, FAU saw fit to fire this tenured professor for a trivial administrative reason — that of not filing a piece of paperwork in a timely manner.

Contrast Tracy to the case of Lucy Richards, a 57-year-old mentally-ill, wheelchair-bound woman. Two days ago in Florida, Richards was sentenced to 5 months in prison for issuing death threats by voice- and e-mail to Lenny Pozner, father of alleged Sandy Hook child victim Noah.

Even more troubling is that in sentencing Lucy Richards, U.S. District Judge James I. Cohn, a George W. Bush nominee, pronounced that “no one should cite a conspiracy theory or belief in a hoax in the deaths of 20 children and six adults that occurred at the school,” thereby implicitly criminalizing belief in conspiracy theories.

As if the U.S. government had not been proven to engage in conspiracies again and again. (See Nixon’s Watergate and the Kennedy Administration’s stunning Operation Northwoods as examples.)

Professor James Fetzer received a phone call that Richards had attempted to commit suicide. See his post “CBS NEWS: Woman who threatened parent of Sandy Hook victim sent to jail“.

See also “Sandy Hook hoax: 6 signs that school was closed before massacre“.

By the way, did you know that it was the CIA who, in 1967, coined the term “conspiracy theories” and recommended its use to the media for the express purpose to discredit speculations about the Kennedy assassination? (ZeroHedge)

Cinderella's Broom

A study in contrasts.

In June 2016, three boys, all Muslim migrants,  rape a developmentally disabled five-year-old girl, Jayla Peterson, in Twin Falls, Idaho. The oldest boy films the entire incident.

Months later, it’s as if an actual rape had never happened. The boys are found guilty not of rape, but of lewd sexual conduct. And the proceedings, which were said to involve five hours of commiserating with the boys’ “post-traumatic stress disorder,” are kept secret.

After the sentencing, also kept secret, the judge forbids the family to talk about why they are grievously unhappy with his decision, threatening to jail them if they do. They are treated as if they are the criminals.

Jayla Peterson’s  emotional turmoil is a footnote; not even that, it is as if she never suffered, never experienced pain, will not be changed forever by the terror and humiliation she was forced to endure by…

View original post 530 more words

London Bridge terrorist attack: video of police changing into camouflage pants

At around 9:58 pm on June 3, 2017, just 12 days after the terrorist bombing at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England, Britain experienced a third terrorist attack in 2017 when three men drove a van into pedestrians on London Bridge. Wielding knives, the men left the van and went to the nearby Borough Market, where they stabbed people in and around restaurants and pubs. The attackers were believed to be Islamist terrorists.

Seven people were killed and 48 wounded, including four unarmed police officers who attempted to tackle the assailants. The three attackers, who were wearing fake explosive vests, were shot dead by police. The Metropolitan Police declared the attack a terrorist incident. Twelve people were arrested and four properties raided the following day, with more raids on the day after. (Wikipedia)

ISIS has claimed “responsibility” for the attack.

That same night, a citizen took a video of what appears to be a group of police officers changing behind a police van.

One of the officers pulled on a pair of camouflage pants. Now why would he do that?

Note that the black t-shirts the police officers wore have a white insignia on the upper left, as shown in this pic:

But wait!

The same officer who put on the camouflage pants appears to be one of the three terrorists shot dead by police at 10:16 pm. According to The Guardian, the man had canisters strapped on his body.

Note the same red hair and beard, camouflage pants, and white insignia on black t-shirt.

The Metropolitan Police identified the terrorists as:

  1. Khuram Shazad Butt (born 20 April 1990), a British citizen born in Pakistan.
  2. Rachid Redouane (born 31 July 1986), who claimed to be either Moroccan or Libyan.
  3. Youssef Zaghba (born 1995 in Fez, Morocco), an Italian national of Moroccan descent.

Does the man with the pale skin, red hair and beard lying on the ground look like Khuram Shazad Butt, Rachid Redouane or Youssel Zaghba to you?

Here’s the video:

See also:

~Eowyn

Fake Hate-Crime: Anti-Trump homosexual, posing as pro-Trump Nazi, vandalized Indiana church

Last November, St. David’s Episcopal Church, a pro-LGBT church in Bean Blossom, Indiana, garnered national headlines when immediately after the 2016 presidential election, it was spray-painted with graffiti — the messages “Heil Trump,” “Fag Church,” and a swastika.

It turns out that, once again, the church vandalism is a fake hate-crime by — surprise! — a liberal.

Michael Gryboski reports for Christian Post that on May 3, 2017, Brown County Prosecutor Ted Adams filed a criminal mischief charge against George Nathaniel “Nathan” Stang — St. David’s Episcopal Church’s organist and an openly homosexual liberal who has admitted to vandalizing the church with fake pro-Trump Nazi graffiti.

In an interview with the IndyStar, the 26-year-old Stang explained that he vandalized the church as a “false flag” operation to rally people following Trump’s electoral victory. He said: “I guess one of the driving factors behind me committing the act was that I wanted other people to be scared with me. I’m very sad to have created more hate in a world that already has too much hate … The congregation doesn’t deserve it, the emotional turmoil I put them through.”

“It was November, shortly after the presidential election. Stang told everyone he discovered the graffiti when he arrived for Sunday morning services,” reported WTHR. “Detectives immediately suspected the crime was committed by someone familiar with the church. They said cell phone records put Stang in the area Saturday night.”

Following the election of Donald Trump last November, many claimed that there was a spike in hate crimes directed toward liberals, Muslims, and racial minorities. The Southern Poverty Law Center claimed in a report last December that over 1,000 hate crimes were committed between Nov. 9 and Dec. 12 of 2016:

“Overall, anti-immigrant incidents (315) remain the most reported, followed by anti-black (221), anti-Muslim (112), and anti-LGBT (109). Anti-Trump incidents numbered 26 (6 of which were also anti-white in nature, with 2 non-Trump related anti-white incidents reported) . . . . [A]round 37 percent of all incidents directly referenced either President-elect Donald Trump, his campaign slogans, or his infamous remarks about sexual assault.”

But Associate Editor of Reason Elizabeth Nolan Brown maintains this wave of alleged hate crimes was mostly comprised of hoaxes and exaggerations rather than actual bigoted violence:

“The bottom line is that when it comes to physical aggression inspired by this election, we are looking at a little more than a dozen incidents reported, over a 10 day period, in a country of roughly 318.9 million people—none of which resulted in serious injuries. Regarding the rash of hateful graffiti and signs popping up this week: while some was certainly meant to offend or inspire terror, other times it has turned out to be the work of anti-Trump forces who intended it as commentary on how they perceive ‘Trump’s America.'”

See also:

~Eowyn