Tag Archives: CIA

Could Iranian general Qassem Soleimani fake his death if someone gave him a hand?

Before discussing Soleimani there are a couple things to keep in mind that are brought up in these 2  clippings from stories that were published in 2008 and 1990.

In March 2008  the following story was published by Fox News.

The Headline was “Severed Fingers of Kidnapped Westerners Sent to U.S. Officials”

“MIAMI – A senior U.S. official confirmed to FOX News that the severed fingers of five Western hostages were delivered to U.S. government officials in Iraq, giving the men’s relatives hope that they are still alive.

The Austrian weekly magazine News first reported the delivery of the five fingers in Wednesday’s edition, citing unidentified authorities working on the case.   

One of the kidnap victims in Iraq was a University of Florida student. The hostages have been missing for more than a year and U.S. authorities in Baghdad recently were sent their severed fingers.

Four of the men had been working as contractors when they were captured in a brazen ambush of their 43-truck supply convoy on Nov. 16, 2006.The men were working for Crescent Security Group, a Kuwait-based private security company.

They were kidnapped by men in Iraqi police uniforms who ambushed the convoy they were escorting near the southern city of Safwan.Patrick Reuben, a Minneapolis police officer whose twin brother, Paul Reuben, is among the missing, said late Wednesday the FBI told his family that “the fingers were confirmed to be those of the hostages.”

DNA samples had been identified 4 of the hostages.  “John Young of Kansas City, who was seized with them.  None of the fingers belonged to him”.

The story also informs us that the Western hostages appeared in two hostage videos released in December 2006 and January 2007 where demands were made for the United States to withdraw troops from Iraq and to free all Iraqi priosners.

In January, 1990 AP  News ran the following story.

Police: Boy Killed for Ransom from Drug-Dealing Brother

“NEW YORK (AP) _ A kidnapped 12-year-old boy whose finger was cut off to persuade his drug- dealing brother to pay ransom was found dead in a pile of plastic bags just days after the brother was killed, police said Monday.”

In this case the family was able to identify the body without the need for DNA testing.

Hostages severed fingers or other body parts delivered with the kidnappers demands is not a new concept.    The problem is that it doesn’t really prove the hostage is the person they say it is. The only way to know for sure it’s the person is through DNA testing.   This is common knowledge.  It’s the same procedure when it comes to identifying remains of mangled bodies in car accidents,  fire victims or a foot found in the woods without a body attached to it.  If the body is missing or destroyed beyond recognition the only way to get a positive identification is with a DNA test.  In some cases the victim may have some form of identification on them but that is not a 100% guarantee.

“Okay, DNA,  two  stories from 1990 and 2008.  What’s the point?”

These two stories are just 2 examples out of thousands of how body parts have been used to identify people.  The severed fingers story is more relevant to what I am discussing today.  There are 2 main points to keep in mind.  DNA testing was required to identify the identity of the fingers owners.  Second point just proof that people in Iraq completely understand how body parts can be used to prove identity when a complete body is not present.  (Shiite Muslim militias alegedly were the kidnappers of the 4 men)

It’s not inconceivable that people in the Middle East  could fake a persons death and leave a body part behind to to identify  the body.  Perhaps a hand with a ring on one it’s fingers.

“People have faked their own deaths”

  • TOM CAREW, author of “Jihad!” Carew was really Philip Sessarego. Served in the regular British army, not the SAS. Sessarego had faked his death in a car bombing in Croatia and reinvented himself as the dashing Carew in 1993.
  • DAVID FRIEDLAND, New Jersey state senator.  Faked his death in a scuba-diving accident in the Bahamas.
  • JOHN STONEHOUSE,  British Labour lawmaker.  Faked his own death by leaving his clothes in a bundle on a Miami beach in 1974. (20 years after his death it was revealed that Stonehouse had been a Czech spy throughout the 1960s)
  • KEN KESEYK, published novel “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”.  Parked on a cliff-side road in California. In his truck was suicide note.   He wrote “Ocean, Ocean, I’ll beat you in the end” . A friend smuggled him into Mexico in the trunk of his car.

These are just a few examples of people that have faked their own deaths.  Three of these examples were facing jail time.  Each felt they had to escape in order to keep their freedom or to stay alive.

In 2011 Igor Vorotinov’s  dead body was found.  He turned up alive a couple of years later.  He used someone elses body to fake his own death.

Could  Iranian general Qassem Soleimani fake his death if someone gave him a hand?

There is no doubt in my mind that the the drone nailed the vehicles that it targeted. In case you missed it,  below is a video of the airstrike and the aftermath.

 

 

 

 

 

As you can see in the video both vehicles are destroyed.  Obviously, everyone in those vehicles were killed.  So the question is “who were in the vehicles?”

There are mixed stories as to how many people were in the vehicles.  My focus is on just one of the people that we are told was riding in one of the vehicles and is now dead.  That would be Qassem Soleimani.

We are told the missle strike killed him.  I found these 2 photos on Twitter along with the following message,

“Bad Death With One Hundred Virtues Do you, your father, be a martyr of anything? This fate awaits the rest of the IRGC commanders and those around them “

 

*second image is a link because the image is pretty gruesome

Second image click here

 

The tweet didn’t say if the body in the second image was Qassem Soleimani.  To the best of my knowledge, the hand with the ring is all that’s left of him.

This is the part that where I see some problems.  Besides being told Soleimani was in one of the cars, all we have is a hand with a Ring. They have confirmed they belonged to Soleimani simply because he wore a ring with a red stone.

For all we know that hand and ring could belong to this guy, He has a hand.  He has a red ring,

random
Just some Random unknown guy.

 

I went ahead and found some images of  Soleimani while he was wearing his rings. I tried to match them with the ring on the severed hand   My results were that none of the images I found matched  the severed hand.  I’ve provided two images of my comparisons.  You will notice the the setting of the severed hand is different the the rest.  I found additional images and had the same results.sol2

Here is a closer view.

sol1

Sorry, but a severed hand with a ring with a red stone is not enough to convince me.  It’s disappointing that so many people do not question this.  DNA?

I’m sure Trump and Pompeo think the evil general is dead.  That was their mission.  The airstrike was a perfect hit.  Looks like a perfect kill.  I would bet there were US assets on the ground to verify the hit.   But there are some questions that should be asked.

  • It’s this not a  perfect time to take advantage of Trump’s huge ego?
  • I Did anyone pay attention to the plane that Soleimani flew in on?
  • Did anyone see who got off the plane when the two cars departed?
  • Did anyone check the passenger log/crew log?
  • Where was the planes next destination and were it’s passengers?
  • Why did Iran respond with such a weak attack?
  • The US killed their most loved general.  Iran responded by killing how many Americans? Zero.   I really find that hard to believe?
  • In a head to head war, the US would crush Iran and bring it to it’s knees in a few days at the most.  Why is Iran being made out as some huge threat to the USA?
  • The U.S. has pursued Soleimani  for decades The State Department revealed last year that his  operations within Iraq since 2003 killed more than 600 American personnel. He has been sneaking around organizing  terrorist groups or years.  As untounhable as Soleimani thinks he is, he’s not stupid.  He has to know he is a target.   So why was his trip to Iraq not kept in secret?
  • We are told Soleimani went  to Iraq to meet with politicians and military allies.  Trump had planned 8 months ago to take out Soleimani. Around June or July of 2019 Iran claimed to have captured 17 CIA agents.  Is it not possible that some of those captured agents talked?
  • Is it possible Soleimani learned about the hit on him and took precautions.  Maybe the two cars were decoys and he stayed on the plane. Did he fool the world?
  • Soleimani has been reported dead on several occasions in the past.  It didn’t get much attention.  Why all the attention now?
  • Where is the DNA proof?

These are all important questions that require answers.

What it gets down to is  either you trust the information presented to you from the MSM, our government, Iran, Iraq or any other government or you don’t trust it.

Will you accept a severed hand wearing a ring with a red stone as unconditional truth?  Keep in mind that no match was found for the ring.

Remember that In April ,1979,  the current regime had taken control of Iran.
In November,  1979,  Iranian students seized US embassy personnel. Fifty-two hostages were held for 444 days until January 1981.  This was done right after they learned that the  Shah of Iran(ex-leader and king of Iran) went to the United States for cancer treatment.  The current regime has no love for the USA.

No matter how you look at it,  this is something that should be discussed and investigated.

Additional General information on Iran.

This does not include any current spy vs spy,  CIA, etc  operations that may or may not exist.  I like to think this is the minimun amount of knowledege a person should before they can make any sort of accurate analysis on Iran.  Some will say more, some will say less.

FACTUAL KEY HISTORICAL INFORMATION ON IRAN 

This is just review of  what I felt were the key events.  Many events were left out.  The data is still accurate. And the end result the same.

The Nazis were in Iran in WWII. Iran didn’t kick them out. During its occupation by the Nazi’s Iran was controlled by monarch Rezā Shāh. At the Tehran Conference of 1943, the Allies(USA, USSR,GB, France,Australia, etc) issued the Tehran Declaration. It gave Iran independence and boundaries when war ended.(USSR didn’t leave until 1946). Mohammad Reza Pahlavas had taken his fathers place as Shah(King of Iran).  In 1949 He was able to get the Senate of Iran formed. In 1951 Reza(the Shah) appointed Mohammad Mosaddegh as Prime Minister(PM) after he was approved by the Parliament.

Mosaddegh took control of the British built/owned oil refineries which caused problems for Iran.   A British boycott of Iran’s oil had been iniated and enforced. . During Mosaddeh  time as PM part of his land reform act was that land owners give 20% of their land to its tenants. During his time as PM Iran he implemented his socialist ideologies and was destroying Iran’s economy.

In 1951, Realizing that the opposition would take the vast majority of the provincial seats, Mosaddegh stopped the voting when it reached 79 deputies. Just enough to form a parliamentary quorum. He suspended the elections using Foreign influence as the reason.

In 1952.  Mosaddeh made some requests to parliament that would have given him more power in the government, while weakening the Shah’s position. After being denied the request, he resigned.

Mosaddegh loyalist, the National Front, Islamist, Tudeh. socialist parties along with various Nationalist started protest and causing problems. They called for the assassinations of the Shah and other royalists. Major strikes broke out in all of Iran’s major towns, with the Bazaar closing in Tehran. Over 250 demonstrators in Tehran, Ramadan, Ahvaz, Isfahan, and Kermanshah were killed or suffered serious injuries. After 5 days the military quit trying to maintain order.

The shah put Mosaddegh back as PM.  Mosaddegh then managed to get full control of the military. He then continued to work against the Shah until he was removed.

As his dictatorial powers grew, his political supporters were turning on him, By 1953 Mosaddeh had lost a lot of support from members of parliment and others throughout the government, including one of his key political allies, House Speaker Ayatollah AbolGhasem Kashani.

Iranians distrust in Mosaddeh grew. Largley because of the failing economy.  Britain had been boycotting Iran after he took control of British refineries so no money had been coming in from oil.
In April, 1953 in America funds were appoved to be used to pay for activities, operations that could assist in the removal of PM Mosaddegh. Britain wanted its refineries back. America was worried about his close ties to communism(so we are told). Mosaddeh had supporters that were socialist and communist supporters. Part of the CIA’s plan was to make it appear like Mosaddegh he was a communist.
In August 1953, the Shah formally dismissed the prime minister in a written decree, an act that had been made part of the constitution during the Constitution Assembly of 1949. Mossadegh escaped and then turned himself in. He ended up getting 3 years solitary confinement in a military prison in December, 1953. He died under house arrest in 1967. They buried him in his living room. He wasn’t allowed to have a funeral.
Martial law ended in 1957. Iran began modernization economic growth at an unprecedented rate. The US paid for a large part of Irans reconstruction.

In early June 1963 several days of massive rioting occurred in support of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini following the cleric’s arrest for a speech attacking the shah.

In the early 70s region’s strongest military power. Iran had problems with leftist guerrilla groups such as Mujaheddin-e-Khalq (MEK)that attacked the regime along with foreign targets. We are told 1978 the first major demonstrations took place of the Islamic Revolution. The movement, itself, had started long before this date.

In January 1979 Mohammad Reza Pahlavi left the country after strikes and demonstrations paralyzed the country.
In February 1979 Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Tehran.
On February 11, 1979  Iran’s military gave up again declared itself “neutral” after guerrillas and rebel troops overwhelmed troops loyal to the Shah in armed street fighting.
In April 1979 officially became an Islamic Republic.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini became Supreme Leader of Iran until his death in 1989.
Talking points

MOHAMMAD MOSADDEGH(PM)

Mohammad Mosaddegh was removed because he abused his power. The Shah could have ruled with an Iron Fist, but he chose the route where his country prospers.  When the Shah had regained control of the country. Iran had did exactly that, prosper. Mosaddegh desire for power held Iran back. He reduced the size of the army, Iran’s army couldn’t even keep control of country.  Two times we witnessed this. Ultimately, this is how the Shah lost control of the country. Too small of an army. ( Exactly what Obama was trying to do with the military in the USA. Reduce our army so it could be overpowered.)
Attempting to overthrow a king of a country is usually a penalty of death. Mosaddegh got very lucky.

MORE OBVIOUS TRUTH THAT GET SKIPPED

People keep referring to Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi as a dictator. That simply isn’t true. From 1501 until 1979 Iran had been a monarchy ruled by an emperor almost without interruption. When Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlav replaced his father initially there were hopes that post-occupation Iran could become a constitutional monarchy.

The Shah willingly gave up some of his power and kept a” hands-off role” in government. allowing parliament to hold a lot of power.

“Some elections were held in the first shaky years, although they remained mired in corruption. “Parliament became chronically unstable, and from the 1947 to 1951 period Iran saw the rise and fall of six different prime ministers. Pahlavi increased his political power by convening the Iran Constituent Assembly, 1949, which finally formed the Senate of Iran, a legislative upper house allowed for in the 1906 constitution.”

“His father, Rezā Shāh was all about moderization. He encouraged women not to wear their hijabs. He wanted his people to wear the same type of clothing the people in the west were wearing. He wanted his people to evolve. His mistake was not kicking out the Germans in WWII. They had him convinced that they were going to win the war.
His son Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlav gave Iranians even more freedom.”

The Shah was the one that was overthrown by a dictator, Say yid Ruhollah Khomeini(9 years as Supreme Leader of Iran).
The Supreme leader is above the president in Iran. The current one is Say yid Ali Djamena. Almost 31 years as Supreme Leader.
The Supreme Leader is elected and overseen by the Assembly of Experts. Candidates for membership at the Assembly of Experts (including the President and the parliament are appointed by the Guardian Council, whose members in turn, are appointed by the Supreme Leader.

All directly-elected members of the Assembly of Experts still require the Supreme Leader’s approval even after the Guardian Council’s vetting process.

The supreme leader is considered always right.

The Supreme leader is never questioned.
The Supreme Leader is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces and the provisional head of the three branches of the state the Judiciary, the Legislature, and the Executive
Elections in are currently for show in Iran.

The Supreme leader is a dictator.

Final thoughts

People should be perfectly clear that from the years 501 to 1979 Iran had been controlled by a king or emperor.  Much like Great Britain with an Islamic twist.  The current form of government  has only existed since 1979.  They like to call it a theocracy and presidential democracy.  The truth is the country is controlled by 1 man, the Ayatollah.  He has final say and controll of  everything.  He  cannot be questioned. How would you define him and his role?

The problem is not Iran in general.  The problem is Islamic agression.  Qassem Soleimani isn’t loved because of the country he is from.  He’s not loved because he defends Iran.  All Iranians don’t love him.  He is only loved by Muslims.  He is a soldier of Islam.  He fights for Islam.  That is why Muslims in other countries love him.

You will not find one christian in the Middle East that loves Soleimani.  Not unless they are from America and are a liberal or democrat.  Christian democrats and Christian  liberals in America seem to love Soleimani.  Actually, I’ll rephrase that.  Satan worshipping democrats and Satan worshipping liberals love Soleimani. Iran’s army isn’t the army of Iran, to protect Iran.  It’s the army of Islam, to protect Muslims.

Islam becomes the religion of peace only when every person on the planet is Muslim.

 

 

Always fact check and do your own research.

Respectfully, Deplorable Patriot

*CIA operation “Ajax” took place during the year of 1953

 

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Ever throw a rock through a paper wasp nest?

That’s what President Trump did when he called the newly elected Ukrainian president to deal with Hunter Biden.

Like a nest of angry wasps, the DNC and the Deep State came out to destroy President Trump with a relentless impeachment show-trial.

WhatfingerNEWS: Pete Santilli, in an article today, detailed out what actually happened in Ukraine.

Article here: https://videos.whatfinger.com/2019/12/23/pete-santilli-ukraine-ground-zero-for-the-cias-coup-upon-america/

I won’t wear you out, repeating the content that is presented more skillfully in this video. But look at the title:
UKRAINE GROUND ZERO FOR THE CIA’s COUP UPON AMERICA

When President Trump called the Ukrainian president to deal with Hunter Biden, he was blowing the lid off the mother-load of CIA False Flags and the Deep State’s active attempt to overthrow the American republic.

That’s why the impeachment madness was completely disproportionate. In Ukraine we find Hillary, Obama, McCain, Biden, Kerry, and their stooges, Brennan and Clapper, together with Soros, running a direct coup against America. Their biggest motivation in the ridiculous and fatally flawed impeachment charade was most likely to change the subject and distract us from the real story.

A coup against America!!!
That’s you and me!

~ TD

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

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Jon Rappoport on Edward Snowden

Unanswered questions for ex-CIA officer Edward Snowden
by Jon Rappoport
March 18, 2015
NoMoreFakeNews.com
Now that the documentary, Citizen Four, has been released, and now that it has won an Oscar, it’s time to revisit unanswered questions, which I raised soon after Snowden’s identity was revealed to the world. (Spygate archive here)
This is not an article about the value of the documents Edward Snowden took from the NSA. I leave those judgments to others.
This article is about Snowden himself and his back-story.
So far, I see no reporter who has directly asked Snowden even faintly challenging questions about his background.
I find that quite odd. And the number of people who don’t find it odd makes the situation even odder.
If a man came to me, stating he was an ex-CIA officer who had taken a huge cache of vital documents from the other major spying agency in the US, the NSA, I would want to know a great deal about him.
I wouldn’t care that he was an engaging young man who appeared to be committing a heroic act on behalf of freedom. I wouldn’t care, because I know that people who work for intelligence agencies are prepared to lie. They are trained to lie. They believe in lying. This is basic knowledge that any reasonable reporter would have.
Yet, in Snowden’s case, an exception has been made. Why?
As soon as you see a photo of Snowden for the first time, you realize he’s the perfect image of the techie’s counter-spy: young, thin, bespectacled, “vulnerable.”
You have to wonder: if he’d been 60, balding, fat, with a constant sheen of nervous perspiration on his chubby cheeks, would he have grabbed so much positive attention from the get-go? Would reporters have refrained from grilling him about his back-story?
Within a day of Snowden’s identity being revealed, details of that story appeared in the press.
Upon reading the story, a number of questions sprang to mind. To my knowledge, none of them have been satisfactorily answered, or even posed by journalists who have had direct access to Snowden.
Why do potential or possible holes in Snowden’s back-story matter? Because holes always matter. They can lead to unexpected discoveries; they can reveal that a person is more than he says he is, different than he says he is.
In 2003, at age 19, without a high school diploma, Snowden enlists in the Army. He begins a training program to join the Special Forces. The sequence here is fuzzy. At what point after enlistment can a new soldier start this training program? Does he need to demonstrate some exceptional ability before Special Forces puts him in that program?
Snowden breaks both legs in a training exercise. He’s discharged from the Army. Is that automatic? How about healing and then resuming Army service?
If Snowden was accepted in the Special Forces training program because he had special computer skills, then why discharge him simply because he broke both legs?
Circa 2003 (?), Snowden gets a job as a security guard for an NSA facility at the University of Maryland. He specifically wanted to work for NSA? It was just a generic job opening he found out about?
Also in 2003 (?), Snowden shifts jobs. He’s now in the CIA, in IT. He has no high school diploma. He’s a young computer genius?
What kind of work does he do for the CIA until, in 2007…
He is sent to Geneva. He’s only 23 years old. The CIA gives him diplomatic cover there. Diplomatic cover is serious status. Snowden is put in charge of maintaining computer-network security. A major job. Obviously, he has access to a wide range of classified documents. Sound a little odd? He’s just a kid. Maybe he has his GED by now. Otherwise, he still doesn’t have a high school diploma.
Snowden reportedly says that during this period, in Geneva, one of the incidents that really sours him on the CIA is the “turning of a Swiss banker.” One night, CIA guys get a banker drunk, encourage him to drive home, the banker gets busted, the CIA guys help him out of that jam, and then with that bond formed, they eventually get the banker to reveal deep banking secrets to the Agency.
Snowden is this naïve? He doesn’t know by now that the CIA does this sort of thing all the time? He’s shocked? He “didn’t sign up for this?”
Furthermore, if this banker story is true, and if Snowden is the source for it, why did he reveal it? All sorts of people should be able to do a little digging and figure out who the Swiss banker is—thus blowing the banker’s cover and exposing him. Was that Snowden’s intention?
In 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA.
It should noted here that Snowden claimed he could do very heavy damage to the entire US intelligence community in 2008, but decided to wait because he thought Obama, just coming into the Presidency, might make good changes.
After two years with the CIA in Geneva, Snowden really had the capability to “take down most of the US intelligence network,” or a major chunk of it? He had that much access to classified data?
Snowden goes on to work for two private defense contractors, Dell and Booze Allen Hamilton. In this latter job, Snowden is assigned to work at the NSA.
He’s an outsider, but he claims to have access to so much sensitive NSA data that he can take down the whole US intelligence network in a single day. Really?
How many people work in highly classified jobs for the NSA? Here is one man, Snowden, who is working for Booz Allen, an outside NSA contractor, and he can get access to, and copy, documents that expose the spying collaboration between NSA and the biggest tech companies in the world—and he can get away with it.
If so, then NSA is a sieve leaking out of all holes. Because that means a whole lot of other, higher-level NSA employees can likewise steal these documents. Many, many other people can copy them and take them. Are we to believe this?
“Let’s see. Who’s coming to work for us here at NSA today? Oh, new whiz kid. Ed Snowden. Outside contractor. Twenty-nine years old. No high school diploma. Has a GED. He worked for the CIA and quit. Hmm. The CIA. They don’t like us and we don’t like them. Why did Snowden quit the CIA? Oh, never mind, who cares? No problem.
“Tell you what. Let’s give this kid access to our most sensitive data. Sure. Why not? Everything. Let Snowden see it all. Sure. What the hell. I’m feeling charitable. He seems like a nice kid.”
Sometimes cognitive dissonance, which used to be called contradiction, rings a gong so loud it knocks you off your chair.
Let’s see. NSA is the most awesome spying agency ever devised in this world. If you cross the street in Podunk, Anywhere, USA, to buy an ice cream soda, on a Tuesday afternoon in July, they can know.
They know if you sit at the counter and drink that soda or take it and move to the only table in the store. They know if you lick the foam from the top of the glass with your tongue or pick the foam with your straw and then lick it.
But this agency, with all its vast power and its dollars…with the brightest, sharpest minds in the business…
Can’t protect its own data from outright theft. Can’t lock up its own store. They overlooked their own security systems. Never set them up right in the first place. Forgot to.
And they can’t track one of their own, a man who came to work every day, a man who made up a story about needing treatment in Hong Kong for epilepsy and then skipped the country.
Just can’t find him.
Can’t find him in Hong Kong, where he does a sit-down video interview with Glenn Greenwald and Poitras and MacAskill. Can’t track the reporters to Snowden’s hotel.
Can’t find that place where Snowden’s staying.
No. Can’t find him or spy on his communications while he’s in Hong Kong. Can’t figure out he’s booked a flight to Russia.
Can’t intercept him at the airport before he leaves for Russia. Too difficult.
And this man, this employee, is walking around with three or four laptops that contain the keys to all the secret spying knowledge in the known cosmos.
Can’t locate those laptops. The most brilliant technical minds of this or any other generation can find a computer in Outer Mongolia in the middle of a blizzard, but these walking-around computers in Hong Kong are somehow beyond reach.
And before this man, Snowden, this employee, skipped Hawaii, he was able to access the layout of entire US intelligence networks. Yes. He was able to use a thumb drive.
He walked into work with a thumb drive, plugged in, and stole…everything. He stole enough to “take down the entire US intelligence network in a single afternoon.”
Not only that, but anyone who worked at this super-agency as a systems-analyst supervisor, or higher, could have done the same thing. Could have stolen the keys to the kingdom.
This is why NSA geniuses with IQs over 180 decided, in the midst of the Snowden affair, that they needed to draft “tighter rules and procedures” for their employees. Right.
A few thousand pieces of internal security they hadn’t realized they needed before would be put in place.
This is, let me remind you again, the most secretive spying agency in the world. The richest spying agency. The smartest spying agency.
But somehow, over the years, they’d overlooked their own security. They’d left lots of doors open.
But now, yes now, having been made aware of this vulnerability, the Agency would make corrections.
Sure.
Should we believe the NSA is this weak and bumbling, when it comes to protecting its data, when it comes to tracking down one of its own who has stolen the farm? Or should we entertain the possibility that Snowden didn’t really steal all that information himself? Did someone at the CIA give it to him? Was this a long-term CIA op?
Yes, strange possibilities. But the world of intelligence is strange. It’s designed that way.
May 20, 2013: Snowden arrives in Hong Kong from Hawaii. He’s just taken medical leave from the NSA. This is not troubling to his employer, despite the fact that, as AFP reports, Snowden worked briefly at the US Embassy in New Delhi (2010) and abruptly left India, citing medical problems on that occasion as well.
Both times, Snowden didn’t seek medical help in the country in which he was employed.
June 1, 2013: Three reporters connected with The Guardian—Glenn Greenwald, Ewen MacAskill, and Laura Poitras—fly from New York to Hong Kong, and begin their week-long interview of Snowden. If this raises red flags, it doesn’t lead to intercepting Snowden.
June 5, 2013: The Guardian publishes its first article containing NSA leaks. The next three days see more NSA revelations, but there is no mention of Snowden.
June 9: The Guardian goes public about Snowden for the first time. According to Reuters, the NSA started an “urgent search” for Snowden several days before June 9—perhaps as early as June 1.
June 10: Snowden checks out of his hotel, but remains in Hong Kong. The US intelligence apparatus still can’t find him.
June 12: The South China Post publishes an interview with Snowden, who says he’ll stay in Hong Kong until he’s told he has to go. The NSA still can’t find him.
June 14: The UK Home Office orders airlines to deny passage to Snowden, if he tries to come to the UK.
June 20, 21: The Guardian publishes more top-secret documents from the Snowden cache.
June 23: Free and unencumbered, Snowden flies to Moscow with Wikileaks’ Sarah Harrison.
During this entire period (May 20-June23), the NSA, and other agencies of the US government, have been unable to locate Snowden?
They’ve been unable to get hold of, or disable, his famous four laptops, which presumably contain all the documents he took from the NSA. Instead, Snowden transfers the documents to Greenwald and Poitras in Hong Kong, hides out successfully, and makes his flight to Moscow.
In past articles, based on all these questions and oddities and paradoxes, I’ve spelled out alternative scenarios about who Snowden might be, and what’s really going on here. For this piece, in the wake of Citizen Four, I just want to refresh the questions, the unanswered questions about Snowden and the NSA.
And point out that no reporters who have had direct access to Snowden have pressed these questions.
He’s been given a free pass.
“Well, why should we wrangle with Snowden? He handed us the documents? Why should we look a gift horse in the mouth?”
Because in the spying game, things are not what they seem. In the spying game, ops are layered. They have multiple purposes. Cover stories. These ops conceal their bottom lines.
Snowden worked for the CIA. He was a spy. And at certain levels, the CIA and the NSA hate each other. They compete for federal money, for status, for prestige.
The NSA doesn’t just spy on private citizens. The NSA spies on politicians and bankers and corporate CEOs, and those people know it and they don’t like it, and they want to relieve themselves of that burden and that threat. They want to curb the power of the NSA as it applies to them.
They would welcome, as perhaps the CIA would, putting a crimp in NSA’s spying capabilities, limiting those capabilities in some way, at least giving NSA pause for thought about risking further exposure beyond Snowden’s disclosures.
For these and other reasons, the back-story of Edward Snowden is more than an academic pursuit, and the unanswered questions are of more than passing interest.
Educated privacy advocates who spend a great of their time commenting on security issues may not want to disturb the image of Snowden; and they certainly don’t want to be called conspiracy nuts re their view of who Snowden might be; but reporters shouldn’t care about that. Reporters should vet their sources as thoroughly as possible.
That’s SOP. Only this time, from all available information, it didn’t happen. It didn’t happen when Greenwald, Poitras, and MacAskill met Snowden. It didn’t happen after Snowden gave them his cache of NSA data. And it isn’t happening now.
Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com orOutsideTheRealityMachine.

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

German officer to serve as U.S. Army Europe's chief of staff

A foreigner is now second in command of US Army Europe

A foreigner is now second in command of US Army Europe


Army Times: A German Army brigadier general who recently served with NATO forces in Afghanistan is assuming duties as the chief of staff of U. S. Army Europe, the first time a non-American officer has held that position.
Brig. Gen. Markus Laubenthal, most recently the commander of Germany’s 12th Panzer Brigade in Amberg, and chief of staff of Regional Command North, International Security Assistance Force Afghanistan, will be stationed at USAREUR headquarters, Wiesbaden, Germany. He could report to duty as early as Monday.
Laubenthal also has served as military assistant to the deputy commander of operations and assistant chief of staff of operations for NATO forces in Kosovo.
As the major staff assistant to USAREUR commander Lt. Gen. Donald Campbell, Laubenthal will synchronize the command’s staff activities much as American predecessors have in the past.
“This is a bold and major step forward in USAREUR’s commitment to operating in a multinational environment with our German allies,” said Campbell.
U. S. and German senior military leaders have been serving together in NATO’s International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan for years. Sustaining the shared capability from this experience will benefit both the U. S. and German armies,” said Campbell who has headed the Army’s largest and oldest overseas command since 2012.
Laubenthal’ s assignment comes at a time of strained relations between the U.S. and Germany as a result of disclosures over the past year that the National Security Agency, and more recently the Central Intelligence Agency, had been conducting information gathering operations against German citizens, to include Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Army sources in Europe said the first-ever assignment of a German general to the USAREUR staff is unrelated to the political furor over the spying revelations, but does reflect the increased importance of multinational operations in NATO.
Officials said the addition of a German general officer to the USAREUR staff has been planned for several months, and is part of an American effort to give a more multi-national flavor to its major overseas commands.
My two cents (with input from my military contact):
This is nothing but sucking up to the Germans and Europe. They say it’s unrelated to the CIA’s actions yet you really believe what this administration tells you? Bet a good US Army officer was passed up for this job, too.
This foreigner is going to encounter restrictions – he won’t be able to view certain US classified documents (NOFORN – Not Releasable to Foreign Nationals/Non-US Citizens), and will not be able to view certain unclassified US documents (i.e., documents containing US soldiers’ social security numbers). But hey, what does that matter? It’s a synchronized multi-national cause! The UN must be thrilled with this.
Update: It was brought to my attention that an Australian is the Deputy Commanding General (Operations) for the U.S. Army, Pacific (USARPAC), who has national command and operational experience. This position works under the Chief of Staff and has the same restrictions (NOFORN).
Still, the appointment of this German to Chief of Staff is the first time a non-American has held this position, which is a level above a deputy for an operating division.
DCG

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

British Intelligence: Obama born in Kenya; CIA’s DNA test shows Dunhams not his grandparents

Michael Shrimpton is a British barrister (attorney), an adviser to British intelligence, and a serious person.

He also is a contributing columnist for the blog, Veterans Today. This is his biographical sketch on Veterans Today:

Michael Shrimpton

Shrimpton has his own blog, The Shrimpton Report. His email address is michael@mshrimpton.co.uk. And Wikipedia used to have an entry on him (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Michael_Shrimpton), but if you go to that URL, you’ll get the messsage: “This page has been deleted”.

After you’ve read this post, you’ll know why Wikipedia scrubbed its page on Michael Shrimpton.

Shrimpton was a speaker at a forum, date unknown, but probably sometime in 2008 (more on this later). Beginning at the 1:42 mark of the video below, Shrimpton dropped a bombshell about Obama.

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lpzHEIgNvA]

Shrimpton made the following startling claims:

  1. Although Barack Hussein Obama (BHO) is said to have been born on August 4, 1961, he actually was born in 1960.
  2. Obama’s alleged mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was not pregnant in July 1961.
  3. Although BHO is said to have been born in Honolulu, Hawaii, he actually was born in Mombasa, Kenya, which was then British territory, which means British intelligence has his records.
  4. The C.I.A. surreptiously took a DNA sample of Obama at a fundraising dinner and ran a test, but could not match Obama’s DNA with his [maternal] grandparents, the Dunhams.
  5. Former New York governor and GOP presidential aspirant Rudy Giuliani told Shrimpton at a recent lunch that he (Giuliani) knows all about this. Giuliani had hoped he would be the GOP presidential candidate and he’d then use the information against the Democrats.
  6. The Clintons (Bill and Hillary) also know about this.

For the rest of the 1½ hour video, Shrimpton talked about British politics and the European Union. However, at the 1:09:30 mark, a man in the audience asked Shrimpton a question about Obama and Kenya. In his response, beginning at about the 1:11:55 mark, Shrimpton alluded to the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign as if it was ongoing as he spoke, which suggests that the forum took place in 2008. Shrimpton also made these additional claims:

  1. He believes, given the above British intelligence on the year (1960, not 1961) and place (Kenya, not USA) of Obama’s birth, Obama would “soon be pressured into withdrawing” from the presidential race. With the benefit of hindsight, we of course know that didn’t happen.
  2. Senator John Edwards also knows because Shrimpton had briefed him.
  3. Former CIA director (under Bill Clinton) also knows. Shrimpton does not name him. Clinton had 3 successive CIA directors: James Woolsey, John Deutsch, and George Tenet.
  4. The Kenyan government, of course, knows.
  5. The UK newspaper Daily Telegraph also knows.
  6. The Honolulu press is aware that Obama’s birth records in Honolulu’s Queens Medical Center are fake. The Honolulu Advertiser knows this.
  7. Sen. John McCain knows.
  8. British Intelligence knows because MI5 got the Nairobi Special Intelligence files when Kenya became independent.
  9. Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations from 1997 to 2006, also knows.
  10. Shrimpton also said something very strange — that Obama’s half-sister is actually his full sister, and that the sister is “missing.” (The only “half sister” of Obama about whom we are told is Maya Soetoro-Ng, the daughter of Stanley Ann Dunham and her Indonesian husband, Lolo Soetoro.)

IN OTHER WORDS, JUST ABOUT EVERY FRIGGING POLITICIAN IN THE UNITED STATES AND THE WORLD KNOWS. AND EVERY FRIGGING ONE OF THEM HAS BEEN LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. EVEN WORSE, THEY MOCK AND DEMONIZE US, CALLING US CRAZY CONSPIRACY “BIRTHERS”.

H/t Gaia Media, via Birther Report.

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Ex-CIA agent says Obama had Andrew Breitbart and Tom Clancy assassinated

The following account is based on Brandon Walker’s post on The Free Patriot blog, Oct. 10, 2013, with additional information I found.

Jim GarrowDr. Jim Garrow (pic from his Facebook page)

Dr. Jim Garrow is the Christian founder and executive director of The Bethune Institute, a charitable organization dedicated to advance education in China via teaching English, giving free books to poor Chinese, and medical scholarships. Through its branch organization, The Pink Pagoda, the institute also rescues baby girls from infanticide  in China, and finds homes for the unwanted girls. Dr. Garrow is credited for saving the lives of over 50,000 Chinese girls for which he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Last Sunday, Oct. 6, 2013, on the Now the End Begins Internet radio program, Dr. Jim Garrow (email: drjgarrow@yahoo.com) made a bombshell of an announcement.

Garrow claims that up to a week ago he was a covert CIA agent, but was fired by none other than Obama himself because Garrow told the world (on Alex Jones’ radio, Glenn Beck, and several conservative internet mediums) that Obama’s U.S. military was purging top brass using a “litmus test” of sorts. High-ranking military officials were being asked “Would you fire on an American citizen?”. Garrow claims that if one answered no, you would be fired.

But that’s not the bombshell.

Garrow says that he knows Obama had ordered the hits that killed Tom Clancy and Andrew Breitbart!

Andrew Breitbart, 1969-2012In the early morning hours of March 1, 2012, conservative media firebrand Andrew Breitbart collapsed on a street near his home in Brentwood, CA. Breitbart was only 43 years old.

On April 21, 2012, the L.A. Coroners Office released its final autopsy report on Breitbart — that he had died from “heart failure.” That same day, a forensics technician or criminalist at the L.A. Coroners Office, Michael Cormier, died suddenly from suspected arsenic poisoning after complaining about pain and vomiting. (To my knowledge, we still have not been told the official cause of Cormier’s death.)

According to Dr. Jim Garrow, Andrew Breitbart did not die from natural causes, but was killed by the Obama Administration.

ClancyBest-selling author of techno-military thrillers Tom Clancy died last week on Oct. 2 at the age of 66.

The New York Times said Clancy died at Johns Hopkins Hospital after a brief illness. But neither Clancy’s lawyer, J.W. Thompson Webb, nor his longtime publisher, Ivan Held, president of G. P. Putnam’s Sons, said they knew the precise cause of death. Under “cause of death” on Clancy’s autopsy is “cause of death unknown.”

When Clancy wrote The Hunt for Red October, he was met at the door by Pentagon officials and FBI agents demanding to know where he got top-secret documents. Dr. Garrow states that after the incident, the CIA “spoon fed” him classified information and scenarios to write his novels in a manner that was entertaining but contained that elements of truth. Garrow says that is why Clancy was killed because he was getting too close to a secret they don’t want the world to know.

Dr. Garrow states Obama had Tom Clancy killed as well, noting that it takes 5 days for plant toxins and most poisons to break down and leave no traces in the human body. Strangely (or not), doctors did not perform an autopsy on Clancy’s body for 5 days.

Garrow ended his radio interview with one last revelation.

He said the Obama administration is made up of Marxist Muslims who all take their orders from Senior Adviser to the President, Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett. Garrow said it is well known to intelligence agencies all over the world that Obama is a foreign plant who was placed on the path to the presidency by ultra-rich Saudi nationals. This is why all of Obama’s education records are permanently sealed.

H/t Clash Daily

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

CIA expands Obama-approved training of Syrian militants

This is sheer insanity.

Obama is increasing training and weapons to so-called “moderate” rebels in the Syrian civil war, although those “moderates” are defecting to al-Qaeda jihadists by droves. Also, never forget that the head of the CIA, John Brennan, is himself a Muslim!

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

General Petraeus To Testify On Benghazi This Week

Yep, I’m going to beat Benghazi Like A Dead Horse.

DeadHorseTheoryamplido
OK,   This article looks like things are going to rock and roll when
General Petraeus Testifies this week. Seems he may have an ax to grind with skippy. I’d like to pull one paragraph out and highlight how Jay Carney answers a reporter’s question. It just amazes me how these people can say so much and not even come close to answering your question..LOL
I’ll run the whole story after the pull out. Am I confusing you? Cause I’m sure as heck confusing myself.   😀         ~ Steve~
OK,  This is reporter’s question.
“Again,” one newly curious reporter asked, “what role did the White House play, not just in making but in directing changes that took place to these?”
And this is Carneys response.
“Well,” the carney said, “thank you for that question. The way to look at this, I think, is to start from that week and understand that in the wake of the attacks in Benghazi, an effort was underway to find out what happened, who was responsible. In response to a request from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to the CIA, the CIA began a process of developing points that could be used in public by members of Congress, by members of that committee. And that process, as is always the case — again, led by the CIA — involved input from a variety of …”
Enough. You get the point: Full Spin Cycle.

 Just what in the hell is he saying? I know he did not answer the question, and seems he threw the C.I.A. under the bus. Now if memory serves who was the director of CIA at time of Benghazi? Hmmmm-

Watch out for Petraeus in Benghazi                    scandal

https://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/joseph-curl/

By their second term “inside the bubble,” presidents have completely lost touch with reality: Aides and confidants conspire to keep the chief executive insulated from the real world — the bad news, the worse press coverage. They think it’s their job, and lounging on the Oval Office couches, they nod along with the president’s every musing.
But this presidency has taken OOCS to new heights. Mr. Obama has only a few trusted aides, and occasional leaks from the West Wing show a paranoid president suspicious of nearly everyone around him. Supremely confident, convinced by the fawning minions at his feet that he is untouchable, the president dismisses all controversy as partisan attacks by an overzealous opposition. A pliant press corps of stenographers follows in lockstep.
Not surprisingly, every president in the past 60 years has had a major scandal in Term 2: Dwight Eisenhower had the U-2 “incident”; Richard Nixon had Watergate; Ronald Reagan had Iran-Contra; Bill Clinton had Monica (literally); George W. Bush had Katrina (and let’s not forget those WMDs that never turned up); and now, this president has Benghazi.
Make no mistake: Benghazi is a major scandal. Benghazi is a scandal before, during and after the terrorist attack that left four Americas dead, including an ambassador.
For months before, there were warnings about weak security at the U.S. Consulate in Libya; no one paid attention. During the attack, when Americans were begging for help, the White House ignored their pleas, sent no help.
And after? That’s when the Obama scandal falls into the predictable second-term pattern his predecessors all learned the very hard way. Faced with a crisis, the Obama White House panicked. “We can’t have a terrorist strike two months before Election Day, so … let’s not have a terrorist strike two months before Election Day.” Cue the Cover-Up.
So little is known about what happened in BenghaziWhere was the commander in chief that night? No pictures from the Situation Room this time. Why didn’t the Pentagon authorize a quick-response team to swoop in? Members of the military say they were ready — burning — to go. The call came in: Stand down. Let them die. There were dozens of witnesses to the attack that night: Where are they? What do they know? What really happened that night?
And who forced the heavy-handed redactions of those infamous “talking points,” the ones that sent Mr. Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations onto the Sunday talk shows to declare that the attack was just the culmination of a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video posted on YouTube?
Carnival barker Jay Carney looked almost ashen Friday as he took the podium to face a suddenly invigorated press corps. Of course, the public briefing came after a private session with “reporters who matter,” a sure sign the White House is in full hunker-down mode — and, more precisely, terrified.
“Again,” one newly curious reporter asked, “what role did the White House play, not just in making but in directing changes that took place to these?”
“Well,” the carney said, “thank you for that question. The way to look at this, I think, is to start from that week and understand that in the wake of the attacks in Benghazi, an effort was underway to find out what happened, who was responsible. In response to a request from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to the CIA, the CIA began a process of developing points that could be used in public by members of Congress, by members of that committee. And that process, as is always the case — again, led by the CIA — involved input from a variety of …”
Enough. You get the point: Full Spin Cycle.
Speaking for the White House, the flack said the CIA was fully to blame for the talking points. Fully. “That is what was generated by the intelligence community, by the CIA,” he said.
“Since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants.” That line was stricken: Everything was fine there — fine fine fine.
And: “We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to Al Qaeda participated in the attack.” That line, too, was deleted by … someone. Instead, this was inserted: “There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”
Despite protestations by the White House, this scandal is just beginning. And the White House has picked a very bad scapegoat: the Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA follows RFK’s edict: “Don’t get mad, get even.” And when the CIA gets even, it isn’t pretty.
With the White House putting all blame on the agency, expect push back this week — nuclear push back. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the former director forced to resign after a sex scandal, is a dangerous man to the Obama administration. Mad and intent on getting even, he’s already talking, telling one reporter the talking points were “useless” and that he preferred not to use them at all. The floodgates will open this week, and by the end of business Friday, the scandal will be full blown.

petraeus_web_20121112_0007_s160x146General (Retired) Petraeus

A warning to those West Wing sycophants suffering from acute OOCS: Don’t walk down any dark alleys.
Read more: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/12/curl-watch-out-petraeus-benghazi-scandal/?page=2#ixzz2TB1BiC00

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Benghazi Report, Talking Points Changed 12 Times. ABC News Reports.

Things on benghazi are really heating up. abc news has done a story showing 12 edits to original talking points memo. You can see edits at this link .                                              https://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57583988/emails-reveal-a-flurry-of-changes-to-benghazi-talking-points/                                     

I googled and just about every OTHER network has now reported on it.  Now this I believe is a good thing. It will not go quietly into the night. 

Now for my 2 cents. they may be reporting on it, but every story, and i mean every all throw State, the Cia,   

And STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESWOMAN VICTORIA NULAND under the bus.

US-JAPAN-DIPLOMACY-KERRY-KISHIDA

State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland 

They may be reporting on it , but still covering the jackass’s butt.

Not one reference anywhere to Skippy or white house at all. 

—————————————————————————————————-

   ABC Is Reporting………   

By Robert Laurie (Bio and Archives)  Friday, May 10, 2013

First, NBC outed Democrat attempts to destroy the Benghazi whistleblowers, now ABC News is shredding the official White House version of events. It’s starting to look like the President’s media lapdogs have finally been shamed into exposing their favorite administration.

n this case, ABC has revealed that they’ve received a whopping 12 different revisions of the Benghazi talking points. Their reporting makes it clear that the White House lied when it said the revisions were enacted predominantly by the intelligence community.
“When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story
ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows on the Sunday after that attack.
BRAZIL-US-PATRIOTA-RICE

Susan Rice

White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.”
They even call Jay Carney out – by name – for telling a bald faced lie back in November.         Hehehehehehhee

Poor wittle Jay, him sad cause he in deep doo doo.

Poor wittle Jay, him sad cause he in deep doo doo.


“Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened,” Carney said at the time. “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word “consulate’ to “diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”
Bear in mind, this isn’t Fox News. This isn’t the National Review, TownHall, or even the crackpots at InfoWars. This is mainstream, Democrat-friendly, ABC News. We can all complain about how long it took the last horse to cross the finish line, but at least it’s managed to do so. Progressives can no longer claim that this “is a non-story” or that “only right wingers care.”
The story is becoming bigger and bigger, and not even the Obama-faithful can ignore it any longer.
We’ll see how long this new found love of reality lasts – and the smart money’s on ‘not long’- but if outlets like NBC and ABC have stopped carrying the President’s water on this matter, the wheels are truly coming off.
Here’s the ABC News piece, and you can read all of their reporting HERE.
CBS has a breakdown of the edits. You can read it   HERE

H/T Canada free press
https://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/55120

~Steve~

 

US-JAPAN-DIPLOMACY-KERRY-KISHIDA

State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland listens to US Secretary of State John Kerry and Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida speak to the press prior to a meeting at the State Department in Washington on February 22, 2013. Credit: AFP/Getty Images 

 

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

13% of Americans believe Obama is the Antichrist

Antichrist2
Matt Berman reports for National Journal, April 2, 2013, that a new poll by Public Policy Polling found that 13% of registered American voters surveyed believe the POS is the Antichrist, while another 13% are not sure.
The poll of 1,247 registered American voters was conducted from March 27-30, 2013, through automated telephone interviews. The margin of error for the overall sample is +/-2.8%.

Some other findings of the poll (here’s the survey in pdf):

  • 4% of respondents believe shape-shifting reptilian people control our world by taking on human form and gaining power.
  • 5% of respondents believe Paul McCartney died and
    was secretly replaced in the Beatles in 1966.
  • 7% of those surveyed do not believe the moon landing was fake and that astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin had ever really landed on the moon.
  • 11% are not sure if Osama bin Laden indeed is dead. (Note from Eowyn: Bin Laden allegedly was killed by Navy SEAL Team 6 on May 2, 2011, although the Pentagon has no records of his death.)
  • 14% of respondents believe the CIA was “instrumental” in dealing crack cocaine into America’s inner cities in the 1980s.
  • 15% of those surveyed think the media or government add “secret mind-controlling technology” to TV broadcasts.
  • Only 25% of those surveyed think Lee Harvey Oswald had acted alone in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. 51% believe there was a larger conspiracy.
  • 28% of respondents think Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11; 51% don’t.
  • 28% of those surveyed believe that a “secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or New World Order.”
  • 37% of respondents said global warming is a hoax; 51% think it is not.
  • 44% of respondents believe the Bush administration intentionally misled the U.S. about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to promote the war; 45% said no.
~Eowyn
Please follow and like us:
error0