Category Archives: Deep State

#DeepStateUnmasked: IRS officials, “You should give increased scrutiny to conservatives”

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

DemoRAT Hypocrite Kristen Gillibrand: “A country that values women wouldn’t allow this”

Gillibrand and Harvey Weinstein

Gillibrand and Slick Willie

By now you’ve heard about the latest Alinsky tactics to derail Brett Kavanaugh.

DemoRATs are working very, very hard at this smear campaign. It’s coming fast and furious thanks to many, many demoRAT operatives. See here and the many posts on Twitchy.

And the RINOs are, of course, succumbing. Arrrrgggggghhhhh!

Another demoRAT working hard at this effort is Senator Kristen Gillibrand. You should see her Twitter timeline – full of sympathy, empathy and disdain for women who are victims of sexual assault and are not being heard because of the evil republican men.

Some examples of her tweets:

  • “We can’t change our country’s culture of sexual harassment and assault if we don’t change our treatment of survivors. A country that values women wouldn’t allow this.
  • By refusing to treat her allegations properly and by playing games to protect Kavanaugh’s nomination, they’re telling women across the country that they’re not to be believed. That they are worth less than a man’s promotion.”
  • “This isn’t just about one incident. It’s about whether we’ll send women who have experienced sexual trauma back into the shadows.
  • “Why don’t they want the facts?”
  • “We’re all better off when women’s voices are heard.”
  • To every survivor out there: I see you. You deserved better, and we will keep fighting for justice.”

You want to know Kristen about women who were sent back into the shadows because of sexual trauma? Listen to what these women have to say:

HYPOCRITE.

All you demoRATs pushing these unverified and libelous stories about Brett Kavanaugh without acknowledging the voiced experiences of Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey prove just one thing:

You don’t care about women who are victims of sexual assault ONE BIT. All you care about is POWER.

All you demoRATs involved in this smear against Brett Kavanaugh are HYPOCRITES.

I wonder what Mary Jo Kopechne would have to say…had she been a survivor.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Google Employees Discussed Manipulation of Search Results After Trump Travel Ban

Shocker, not.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

 

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Operation Northwoods: A true U.S. government conspiracy for those who mock conspiracy theories

Sat, 29 Aug 2015 11:30:48 +0000   eowyn2

The next time someone heaps scorn on you, making fun of your suspicions about the federal government by calling you a “conspiracy theorist,” show this post to your mocker.

The term “false flag” has its origins in naval warfare where a flag other than the belligerent’s true battle flag is used as a ruse de guerre or pretext for war. As the term is used in contemporary America, a “false flag” incident is some traumatic event that is contrived and manipulated by the authorities to achieve some covert agenda. The public is given an untruthful version of the event by government and/or the media. The intended result is a “rallying around the flag” effect, wherein an inflamed and duped populace rally in support of the government’s secret agenda.

Admittedly, it is difficult for the ordinary American to think the U.S. government can stoop so low as to instigate false flags, for that would mean our government is in the hands of people so diabolical, calling them psychopaths does not begin to describe what they are. That is a frightening thought.

But it is a thought not entirely alien to our Founding Fathers who instituted a new polity based on a view of human nature as inherently self-interested instead of benevolent, and of government as a necessary evil that must be constrained and delimited. To quote James Madison in The Federalist Papers:

“What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external or internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”

For his part, Thomas Jefferson, in his 1787 letter to Edward Carrington, vividly described what government would be if unchecked and unsupervised. He warned that “if once” the people “become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall all become wolves.

The plain fact of the matter is that there are governments and political leaders who are evil psychopaths. Just ask the millions of innocent men, women, and children whom the Nazis had slaughtered, or the hundreds of millions of innocent men, women, and children whom the Communists had killed in the former Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China and Kampuchea. Why would Americans, who partake of the same non-angelic human nature, be uniquely virtuous? It is for that reason that the Founders established a polity with mechanisms of checks and balances to limit government.

Even with checks and balances in place, the history of the United States is riddled with actual and planned false flags and conspiracies. As an example, the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which the U.S.S. Maine and U.S.S. Turner Joy reportedly were fired on without provocation by the North Vietnamese, was a false flag of the Lyndon Johnson Administration. Congress took the bait and passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that, by pre-approving the president’s military actions, gave Johnson a free ticket to wage war in Vietnam. It turned out no Vietnamese boats were even in the gulf at the time of the alleged attack.

Then there was Operation Northwoods, a false flag of such scope and devious audacity, it takes your breath away.

As reported by David Ruppe for ABC News, May 1, 2001:

In the early 1960s, America’s top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba’s then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America’s top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: “We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba,” and, “casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.” […]

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy’s defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

Operation Northwoods was proposed in March 1962 at the beginning of John F. Kennedy’s presidency by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff and approved by the head of every branch of the U.S. armed forces. Only a year before, in his farewell speech to the American people on January 17, 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower had warned that “we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex.”

The Operation Northwoods proposals called for the CIA or other government operatives to undertake acts of terrorism against U.S. military and civilian targets in Guantanamo Bay, Miami, other Florida cities, and even in Washington, D.C. Proposed acts included sinking U.S. ships, having fake Cuban MIGs attack a United States Air Force aircraft, hijacking and shooting down a chartered civil airliner, and gunning down civilians in the streets. The attacks would be blamed on the Fidel Castro government, which would be used as pretexts for a “military intervention” against Cuba.

Thankfully, President Kennedy rejected the proposals. A year and 8 months later, on November 22, 1963, he was assassinated.

The public learned about Operation Northwoods only 35 years later on November 18, 1997. That day, the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board declassified Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba, a top secret collection of draft memoranda outlining the false flag proposals, written by the Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Below are screenshots I took from the Appendix of a memo to the Joint Chiefs of Staff from the Department of Defense, dated March 9, 1962, in Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba. The Appendix contains the nauseating details of the proposed false flag.

Operation Northwoods memo1Operation Northwoods memo2Operation Northwoods memo3Operation Northwoods memo4Operation Northwoods memo5Operation Northwoods memo6Operation Northwoods memo7Operation Northwoods memo8Operation Northwoods memo9Operation Northwoods memo10

Please ask yourself whether anything has really changed for us to be assured that our government has not and will not undertake false flags like Operation Northwoods or worse. On the contrary, with the establishment media acting more as a Ministry of Truth than the feisty check on political power intended by the Founding Fathers, I fully expect our government to be even more devious and skillful. (See “CIA spreads disinformation to news agencies“)

If Sandy Hook was a false flag, it is small potatoes compared to Operation Northwoods.

See also:

~Éowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Fellowship of the Minds is back!

Good morning, patriots!

Last Wednesday, August 15, 2018, like a thief in the night, in the darkness of the early morning hours between 1 AM and 3 AM, WordPress (WP) arbitrarily and without warning took down Fellowship of the Minds (FOTM) — a blog that was nearly 9 years old, with 38½ million views, and tens of thousands of published posts.

The reason given was an unspecified “violation” of WP’s Terms of Service (TOS).

I immediately asked WP exactly which TOS we had “violated”.

It wasn’t until five days later that WP deigned to answer my question with a vague and all-purpose non-explanation:

“Upon review of your WP site, we no longer feel that your account aligns with our TOS and User Guidelines. As such you will no longer be permitted to use WordPress.com.”

Note their use of the word “feel”. One can dispute a fact — whether FOTM in fact had violated a particular term of service. But how can a “feeling” be disputed? You feel happy, which is something I can neither agree nor disagree nor dispute about. It’s an emotion, a feeling.

The domain transfer to our new server is completed, and we are back up and running at https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/.

We are in the process of retrieving and restoring posts from the old FOTM  —  a curse on WordPress for what they did to us — the digital equivalent of burning down not one book, but an entire library. Until we’ve completed the painstaking process, we won’t know just how much of the old FOTM can be restored, and how many posts are lost forever, unless we can find them in the Internet archives on the Wayback Machine.

In the coming days, weeks, and months, we will re-publish one-by-one whatever posts we are able to salvage, with the original publishing dates.

Thank you for your patience and loyalty. You were our buoy as we struggled to revive FOTM in the eight long days after WordPress burned our library down.

Please come and visit our new site. Exercise your First Amendment Constitutional right to freedom of speech and of opinion that our Founding Fathers so wisely and presciently created 242 years ago. We will not be silenced!!!

WWG1WGA = Where We Go One, We Go All

God bless you all, God bless Fellowship of the Minds, and God bless America,

See also:

Dr. Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Fusion GPS rats out John McCain on Trump 'Russian dossier'

Fri, 05 Jan 2018 20:05:09 +0000

eowyn2

Fusion GPS is the opposition research firm that, in 2016, was first hired by unnamed Republican(s) during the GOP primaries to dig up dirt on Donald Trump. After Trump won the GOP primaries to become the Republican presidential nominee, the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign hired Fusion GPS to do the same.

Note: According to Fusion GPS (see below), the conservative news website Washington Free Beacon were the Republicans who hired the firm.

See “Fusion GPS, hired by Hillary for dirt on Trump, also paid 3 journalists

Fusion GPS then hired a former MI6 spook named Christopher Steele, who proceeded to concoct what became known as the “Russian dossier” on Trump, which included the fictitious “golden shower” account of Trump hiring Russian prostitutes to urinate on a Moscow hotel bed.

See “Trump ‘fake news’ dossier’s creator, British spook Chris Steele, fears for his life

Someone, long rumored to be Sen. “snake tongue” “wandering boot” John McCain — whose foundation (McCain Institute) is funded by George Soros, the Rothschilds and the Saudis — then gave the Russian dossier to the website Buzzfeed, which published it in January 2017.

Carl Bernstein in January 2017 first identified John McCain as having been given the Russian dossier by Chris Steele. According to Bernstein, McCain then handed it to the FBI. (New York Post)

Now we have confirmation of the McCain rumor, from none other than Fusion GPS.

john-mccain-lord-of-the-tarp1

Cover photo of The Atlantic, October 2008.

On January 2, 2018, in a New York Times op/ed, Fusion GPS’ founders and former journalists Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch identified The Washington Free Beacon and Hillary’s campaign as, respectively, the Republican and Democratic funders of its Trump research who “separately came to hire us [Fusion GPS] in the first place.”

This is what Simpson and Fritsch wrote about John McCain:

After the election, Mr. Steele decided to share his intelligence with Senator John McCain via an emissary. We helped him do that. The goal was to alert the United States national security community to an attack on our country by a hostile foreign power. We did not, however, share the dossier with BuzzFeed, which to our dismay published it last January.

What is ironic is that it’s John McCain who, in 2008, had illegally solicited campaign contribution from Russia.

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

NSA tweet: Pizzagate is real

Wed, 13 Dec 2017 13:33:21 +0000

eowyn2

A year ago, on December 4, 2016, some “white hat” at the National Security Agency (NSA) tweeted that Pizzagate is real. Below is the tweet, which was retweeted the next day by @axslinger99 (h/t Voat):

I can confirm the following:

Certainly, if anyone knows about Pizzagate, it would be the NSA — the federal government agency that spies on every phonecall, email, bank transfer, travel record of every American. See:

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Former public defender on FBI not prosecuting Hillary Clinton; 54% of Americans disagree

Thu, 07 Jul 2016 13:08:04 +0000

eowyn2

Jay B. Gaskill is an attorney; former Public Defender of Alameda County, CA (1989-1999); former Democrat and now a political Independent. He is also my friend and one of the smartest and fairest-minded men I know.

In the following essay, Gaskill employs his legal knowledge and experience to analyze FBI Director James Comey’s decision not to seek a criminal indictment against Hillary Clinton, notwithstanding the FBI’s findings that she is at fault by using a private, unsecured email server when she was secretary of state. (My comments are in italics, colored teal.)

hillary-innoculatedWHY DID THE FBI DIRECTOR CUT HILLARY A BREAK?

Analysis by Jay B Gaskill

Hillary Clinton has dodged a legal bullet. FBI Director James B. Comey is recommending “no prosecution” following Secretary Clinton’s email scandal investigation. By all accounts, Director Comey is a straight shooter. Yet for many, Tuesday’s no-prosecution announcement was a disappointment.

After a detailed recitation of the evidence of the Top Secret and other highly sensitive resident on Secretary Clinton’s private, unsecured email servers and devices, Comey’s “no-go” decision was a puzzle. In my opinion, the evidence that Director Comey summarized is probable cause that Secretary Clinton crossed the line into a criminal security breach. Yet not every probable cause case is charged. Reasonable prosecutors can and do differ on such charging decisions.

Why did Comey cut Hillary Clinton a break?

There were a large number of secret and top secret documents kept in hackable, non-secure private servers under her control. And, yes, Clinton and her staff were “extremely careless” in doing this – these are Director Comey’s words.

Comey revealed that “52 e-mail chains have been determined … to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information.”

And it was Director Comey’s judgement that “any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position … should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”

He put it bluntly: “None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system,

… these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”

Was Secretary Clinton’s unsecured email system hacked?

Director Comey pointed out that “…we would be unlikely to see … direct evidence” of that. Then he added that “Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was … readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries.”

My translation: She visited more than 60 countries including Korea, China, Egypt, Iraq, Russia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, among other sensitive spots, all while using unsecured email to and from her wide-open private server.   Of course her emails were hacked. But the United States’ security community has obviously decided not to confirm that Hillary’s server was hacked, or even to publically talk about the issue. I can’t blame them. And I suspect that Director Comey was not read in on the full scope of the damage that Clinton’s security breaches may have caused.

Director Comey bluntly reminded everyone that “it is a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way.”

So… Hillary was spared because of the difference between “extremely careless” and “grossly negligent?”

…A fine line indeed. That difference is in the eyes of the beholder. It might appear differently to a Grand Jury member, than to a trial juror.

Why did Director Comey gave Hillary Clinton a pass? Let me count the reasons:

A political trial of this magnitude would be messy and divisive. As a practical matter, it could not take place before the presidential inauguration in 2017. Remember O J Simpson? The word “circus” comes to mind. How difficult would it be to find twelve impartial jurors for Hillary’s case? Note that “grossly negligent” is essentially a subjective test, the application of which allows jurors very wide discretion.

Moreover, the prosecution would be complicated because of the shifting roles and responsibilities of Clinton’s staff. I can readily imagine the defense using the computer-challenged grandmother defense. …And I can readily imagine one more loyal staff members falling on their swords for Hillary.

In other words, Comey’s reasons were political/practical, instead of legal or in the interest of justice. -Dr. Eowyn

The bottom line: Secretary Clinton was not exonerated. Her security breach investigation was an authentic, full-on professional FBI investigation, not a political stunt. Had any lesser employee done the same thing, that employee would have lost his or her security clearance and would have been terminated.

The bottom line as I see it: Clinton was not punished, whereas “any lesser employee” who did what she did “would have been terminated” and prosecuted.

For that matter, less than a year ago, the FBI did exactly that to Bryan H. Nishimura, a Naval reservist deployed as a military engineer in Afghanistan (2007-2008). Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. But he downloaded and stored the classified materials on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. Nishimura pleaded guilty to precisely what the FBI concluded Hillary had done — “unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials” without malicious intent — and was sentenced to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine, the surrendering of any currently held security clearance and to never again seek such a clearance. -Dr. Eowyn

This is the moment where I and millions of other patriotic Americans devoutly wish that we had better choices this November. I think of Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan, among others. Neither party’s presumptive candidate is in the same league with American history’s solid, admirable presidents.

The settle-for election continues…

JBG

Hillary for Prison 2016

Meanwhile, most U.S. voters disagree with Comey not prosecuting Hillary.

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey conducted on the evening of July 5, 2016, found that:

  • A majority of “likely U.S. voters” — 54% — disagree with the FBI, and believe instead that Hillary should have been indicted.
  • Only 37% agree with the FBI’s decision not to indict; 10% are undecided.
  • Opinions on this are clearly partisan:
    • Among Democrats, 64% agree with the FBI decision; only 25% disagree.
    • In contrast, 79% of Republicans and 63% of Independents disagree.
  • 33% of all voters say if Hillary were indicted, a fair trial would not have been possible. 46% think it would have been possible for her to get a fair trial; 21% are not sure.

FBI Director James Comey has been summoned to Capitol Hill to explain why his agency is not recommending charges be filed against Hillary Clinton in the email scandal. Expect fireworks, but I predict that in the end, Congress will do nothing.

H/t FOTM‘s Ken Russell

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0