By Eric Striker | The Main Street Tribune | November 11, 2022
A bombshell New York Times report has revealed that Greg McWhirter, the Vice President of the Oath Keepers who helped lead the group’s presence on January 6th, is an FBI informant.
Federal officials worked hard to hide McWhirter’s status as a Confidential Human Source (CHS) in the seditious conspiracy trial of Oath Keeper’s leader Stewart Rhodes and his associates, presenting their asset in public filings as a mere “witness” instead.
In a furious November 8th filing, federal prosecutors accused defense attorneys of illegally disclosing confidential discovery about McWhirter to the press. It appears that the actual way McWhirter’s status was leaked was through a clerical error by DC court employees, who accidentally published the sealed document on the docket.
Federal officials have been suppressing information on the role their assets and agents played in inciting violence at the Capitol by having them testify as witnesses in cases related to January 6th.
McWhirter, a black Sheriff’s deputy in Montana, rose through the ranks of the Oath Keepers thanks in part to his existing contacts with law enforcement as well as his race. Rhodes regularly showcased McWhirter’s black heritage as evidence that he is not racist.
The infiltrator has also courted public controversy for other legally dubious stunts over the years. During the 2016 election, he called on members of his militia to patrol voting sites in order to discourage election fraud. In a more recent incident, he aided the FBI in attempting to manufacture an Oath Keeper’s conspiracy to kill members of Antifa in Portland as retaliation for the anarchist murder of Aaron Danielson.
Following the events of January 6th, McWhirter bought a gun shop and immediately began offering steep discounts on ammo and weapons to militia members, with implications that they had to prepare for civil war.
The defense for Rhodes, et al, was planning to call McWhirter as a witness in order to expose his role as an agitator. Yet, as the FBI informant boarded the plane to travel to his scheduled court appearance, he suffered heart trouble and could not testify. He is only 40-years-old.
On social media, many are speculating that federal agents either induced his emergency health issue with drugs or, more plausible, worked with him and his physician to fake the whole thing. In light of this curious coincidence, Rhodes’ defense was forced to rest its case without being able to cross examine the agent provocateur.
This is not the first irregular development in the trial. Witnesses Rhodes’ defense planned to call who were slated to tell the court that the defendants were innocent of plotting violence at the Capitol had FBI agents visit their homes right before they were scheduled to testify. The FBI agents told them that they would legally incriminate themselves and be prosecuted if they spoke in Rhodes’ defense. This intimidation tactic proved effective, leading to witnesses taking the fifth amendment when called, much to the shock and frustration of the defense.
McWhirter was not the only person working for the FBI inside the Oath Keepers. Another black member, Abdullah Rasheed, was also exposed in court for providing information on the group’s inner workings to federal agents in the run up to January 6th.
In addition to this, the FBI appears to be preparing to thwart expected Congressional inquiries into domestic counter-terrorism operations. Journalist Julie Kelly recently reported that Christopher Wray is rushing to replace the head of its Washington Field Office, Steven D’Antuono, who has led agents in using controversial tactics across the country to entrap persons with right-wing political beliefs of all types in fictitious terror plots. D’Antuono suddenly announced his retirement despite his recent lucrative and prestigious promotion, which will make it difficult for Congress to question him on his actions under the color of law in the last three years.
The Oath Keeper’s trial, which to date is the most serious and high profile prosecution of all January 6th cases, will soon be going to jury deliberation.
BY DR DAVID PATON | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | NOVEMBER 8, 2022
A new peer reviewed article in the journal Vaccine has been published comparing surveys data on attitudes to vaccination from before the pandemic with attitudes now.
The authors report that “paradoxically, despite the success of COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, vaccine confidence has significantly declined since the onset of the pandemic”.
I am not quite sure why the authors appear so surprised at their result but a clue can be found in their use of the word “despite”. In many countries the “success” of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign relied in large part in pressuring, bullying and sometimes coercing people to get vaccinated.
Now if governments tell you that getting vaccinated is in your best interests, but that nonetheless those who choose not to get vaccinated will be pilloried in the press and on social media, barred from participating in normal everyday activities and, in some cases, sacked from their employment, perhaps we should not be surprised that people start to doubt whether those governments really do have their best interests at heart.
And those doubts have substance behind them. From a very early stage, it was clear that for many people, the known risks from vaccination probably outweighed any likely benefit. This was most obvious for those who had already had Covid (and for whom the marginal impact of vaccination in preventing a further infection was small), for groups who faced very low risks of serious illness if they contracted Covid and especially for young males for whom vaccination seems to be bring additional risks of heart problems.
But instead of acknowledging that Covid-19 vaccines may make sense for some people and not everyone, too many public health officials, scientists and politicians have systematically downplayed immunity from previous infection, brushed aside concerns over side effects and dismissed concerns that the roll out to the whole population was rushed given uncertainty over long term effects.
The latter was a particularly serious error. Right from the start of the roll out the public was assured that the vaccines had been thoroughly tested. Yet in May 2021, the Government decided to stop providing the AstraZeneca vaccine to under 40s due to the relatively high rate of blood clots. That decision would have been little consolation to the families of the 73 people whose deaths the MHRA report as being linked to that vaccine.
Rather than taking that as a lesson, authorities around the world doubled down and rolled out vaccine mandates, passports and travel restrictions as a way of twisting more arms into receiving the jab. Ironically, these measures were aimed primarily at young people for whom the benefits of vaccination were lowest and (particularly for males) the risks seem highest.
The official rationale for these policies was that vaccination would help protect others from being infected. We now know that there was never any evidence to back this up. And when official data started to suggest that the vaccinated may be getting infected at similar if not greater rates than the unvaccinated, the response of some journalists was not to probe further and investigate but to encourage the authorities to suppress the data. Truly, you could not make it up.
Researchers such as Alex de Figueiredo from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine warned at the time that coercion was likely to lead to a loss of trust in vaccination more generally. With the latest research paper, we have firm evidence that this is indeed the case.
It is not unreasonable to conclude that the most dangerous ‘anti-vaxxers’ over the past two years have not been fringe conspiracy theorists but governments and the public health establishment itself.
It’s a sorry state of affairs, but where do we go from here? Well public health leaders could start by switching tack. Rather than setting out to persuade everyone to get vaccinated, they could concentrate on providing good information about benefits and risks to help people decide whether vaccination is right for them. If, at the same time, they start to engage honestly with those who have suffered side effects and acknowledge the high level of uncertainty that still exists in the evidence, perhaps they can begin to regain some of the trust they have so negligently lost.
David Paton is Professor of Industrial Economics at Nottingham University Business School.
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 10, 2022
Germany’s ruling party the Social Democrats (SPD) has called for more scrutiny of Twitter, following the takeover by tech billionaire Elon Musk.
There have been mixed reactions to the new ownership of Twitter. Some politicians are complaining about a potential rise in “misinformation” and “hate speech,” while some are anticipating the changes he plans to make to make the platform more free-speech-friendly.
Some members of SPD have called on the relevant regulators and Justice Minister Marco Buschmann to put Twitter under tighter scrutiny to make sure it follows EU’s rules on content.
“For me, the fact that Twitter is being taken over by somebody who wants to use the network for political purposes even more strongly is highly problematic,” SPD party chief Lars Klingbeil said, speaking to a local newspaper, Handelsblatt.
“Should the variety of opinion be limited further, authorities will have to take resolute action.”
Jens Zimmermann, the party’s digital policy spokesperson, was also critical of the new ownership of Twitter. He noted that the recent mass layoffs will make it difficult for Twitter to fulfill the EU rules on content moderation and fail to respond to complaints related to harmful content.
He said that the federal justice office should “put Twitter under strict scrutiny.”
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 10, 2022
Former Greek soccer player Vassilis Tsiartas was fined 5,000 euro ($5,008) and given a 10-month suspended prison sentence for criticizing the legalization of gender transition surgery in children.
Tsiartas was taken to court by the Transgender Support Association, which accused him of violating a law against “racism” that contains provisions against inciting violence or hatred based on gender ideology.
In 2017, responding to a law legalizing gender identity, the former soccer player posted on Facebook that he hoped “the first sex changes are carried out on the children of those who ratified this abomination.” He added, “Legitimize pedophiles too, to complete the crimes.”
Tsiartas is the first person to be convicted under the law against incitement to violence or hatred. The Transgender Support Association called the conviction “particularly important for the transgender community.” It added that it will continue fighting “all forms of intolerance, racism, and incitement to discrimination, hatred, and violence.”
The LGBT group also wants to “fully safeguard the human rights and freedoms of LGBTQ+ and especially transgender people in every sector of the public and private sphere.”
Tsiartas plans to appeal the ruling, according to the Greek Reporter.
By Tom Parker | Reclaim The Net | November 9, 2022
The world’s largest social network, Facebook, has announced plans to increase its elevation of “authoritative climate information” and expand its “fact checking” of content that it deems to be climate misinformation.
Facebook will expand its fact-checking tools by increasing the availability of its “Climate Science Center” (a page that contains “factual resources from the world’s leading climate organizations and actionable steps people can take in their everyday lives to combat climate change”) to 165 countries and expanding its “Climate Inform Labels” (labels that are added to Facebook posts and link to posts from the Climate Science Center).
The tech giant has also launched a “Climate Science Literacy Initiative” that will “pre-bunk climate misinformation” by running ads that “feature five of the most common techniques used to misrepresent climate change.”
To boost “authoritative” climate information, Facebook is testing a new “Climate Pledges” feature in Groups and has committed to amplifying the voices of “trusted organizations in the climate space.”
This new Climate Pledges feature was developed with inputs from the United Nations (UN) and contains what it calls “expert-backed climate solutions” that “spark conversation” within Groups and “help people understand the most impactful actions they can take.”
Facebook is also working closely with several climate change groups such as Monash Climate Change Communication Research Hub, Cambridge Social Decision-Making Laboratory, and Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. Facebook will boost these organizations by “providing ad credits, insights and support to help them share reliable information about climate change, and inform users about common techniques used to spread myths about climate science.”
Facebook’s announcement of these changes follows it and other tech giants facing mounting pressure to censor content that challenges the mainstream climate change narrative as climate groups, science groups, and even tech employees demand more censorship.
Not only has there been an increased push for Big Tech platforms to censor climate content that deviates from the mainstream narrative but influential groups, banks, and executives are also pushing for increased tracking and surveillance of individual carbon usage as a proposed strategy for combating climate change.
Samizdat – 10.11.2022
The number of British citizens neither working nor looking for a job has grown dramatically since the beginning of the pandemic. Much of this can be attributed to mental health issues, which could impede the UK’s economic growth, economists warn.
According to research carried out by a UK media outlet, the number of economically inactive people in Britain rose by 537,500 between June 2019 and June 2022. About 450,000 of these cases were connected to mental health issues. The number of economically inactive people in the UK has skyrocketed to almost nine million. Britons are plagued by depression and anxiety disorders, the research shows.
This trend will have a negative impact on the British economy, the analysts warn. For instance, Deloitte’s research unit states that mental disorders of employees affect the productivity and turnover of companies. According to their report, annual costs associated with poor mental health have increased by 25% since the outbreak of COVID-19.
The epidemic of mental disorders will affect the British economy globally, economists claim.
Many experts claim the “rise in economic inactivity will hold UK growth back.” Economically inactive people do not contribute to public finances. Furthermore, the disability benefits bill in the UK has already reached £14.7 billion.
Mental disorders are among a number of conditions that may qualify for disability benefits. Depression and anxiety disorders are on the list, but in general any mental condition qualifies if it prevents a person from gaining or maintaining employment.
By Drago Bosnic | November 9, 2022
The bureaucratic empire in Brussels seems to be pushing all the wrong buttons in regards to Budapest. The European Union’s failed attempts to force it into submission are effectively being laughed off in Hungary. The bloc’s suicidal anti-Russian sanctions and policies are creating numerous points of contention between Brussels and Budapest. Viktor Orban’s Hungary has run out of patience for this, especially as the EU is also threatening the Central European country with internal sanctions and other restrictions under various pretexts. There are very few things Brussels and Budapest agree on and the differences aren’t only limited to domestic EU policies, but foreign relations as well.
While Hungary prefers a realpolitik approach in regards to other countries and global powers, particularly Russia (and to a certain extent China), the EU’s foreign policy framework is ideological. This often results in accusations that Budapest is a “Russian puppet/asset” and that it’s “trying to ease” the bloc’s economic pressure on Moscow. However, the reality is much simpler – Hungary is trying to ease the pressure on its citizens, as the economic fallout of the failed siege of Russia is deeply affecting the regular people. In the meantime, the detached bureaucrats in Brussels are left unscathed and thus unmoved by the struggles of tens of millions of EU countries’ citizens.
Being fully aware of this for years and determined to prevent economic consequences of such policies, Budapest stated that it won’t support the bloc’s latest “aid” package for the Kiev regime. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto openly stated that the country will not change its stance as long as it’s forced to fight for access to EU funds blocked by the “rule-of-law” dispute. Namely, Brussels is still holding up at least €7.5 billion in funds for Hungary under the pretext of “persisting corruption and fraud” in the country. In reality, the reason is Budapest’s refusal to follow anti-Russian sanctions and policies which would effectively destroy its economy.
The Western mainstream propaganda machine often portrays Hungary as a “rogue state” and the main obstacle to the futile attempts of isolating Russia, while its leader Viktor Orban is usually presented as a “dictator”, although his popularity in the country suggests otherwise. Hungary’s persistence in its demands for exemptions from anti-Russian energy sanctions is usually used to accuse it of being pro-Russian. However, the country accomplished retaining lower energy prices in comparison to the rest of the EU, which is going through economic and financial unraveling thanks to Brussels’ suicidal subservience to Washington DC.
As there is growing conviction among many EU member states that anti-Russian policies have not only failed to produce desired results, but have even backfired and are ravaging their economies, Hungary is hardly alone in this regard. In addition, the claim that Budapest is pro-Russian is genuinely laughable, as it has provided ample support for the Kiev regime and will continue to do so, as stated by the country’s foreign minister Szijjarto, who said so on November 7 during a conference in Sofia. However, “Budapest still opposes any arrangement that would see funding [for Kiev] jointly with other EU member states,” he added.
Today, November 9, the EU is set to propose a new €18 billion “aid” package for the Kiev regime, which would provide constant cash flow to the Neo-Nazi junta in 2023. The plan is to use the bloc’s joint budget as a guarantee to secure funding for the Kiev regime. The move also involves changes to the EU’s rules that require a unanimous vote to pass proposals. Hungary objects to this, as it would be a dangerous precedent which would force members who voted against certain policies to still follow them, regardless of the negative consequences for those who objected. What’s more, even if a member state voted for a certain decision, it could still be denied funds if it was under sanctions of the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.
This paradox is precisely what’s happening to Hungary. Namely, the country already supported the EU’s decision to jointly raise debt to finance the bloc’s recovery from the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, but the funds Budapest is set to receive are being blocked until it “ensures the rule of law.” Brussels is planning to discuss the status of those funds on November 22, which is the deadline given to Hungary to meet the bloc’s “rule of law” requirements. EU bureaucrats are currently working on an assessment of Hungary’s compliance regarding 17 pieces of legislation the bloc insists on. Still, Budapest is not hiding its frustration with the way it’s being treated.
“They’re punishing us and openly blackmailing us with EU money,” Viktor Orban said in a statement for the Budapester Zeitung news outlet last month. “But there’s no legal basis for this — it’s blackmail, pure and simple,” he concluded.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | November 8, 2022
Given the mid-term elections, the anti-Russia paranoia of U.S. officials has been at a peak. The feds have been scouring the Internet to determine whether the Russians are improperly influencing American voters into supporting candidates who refuse to adopt the Pentagon’s and the CIA’s extreme anti-Russia animus. The idea is that American voters, given that they are mostly public-school graduates, have extremely pliant minds that are overly susceptible to being molded into being pro-communist or pro-Russia dupes.
For example, last July the Justice Department secured an indictment against a Russian citizen named Aleksandr Viktorovich Ionov who heads up an organization based in Moscow named Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia, which allegedly receives funds from the Russian government.
The charge? Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen declared, “Ionov allegedly orchestrated a brazen influence campaign, turning U.S. political groups and U.S. citizens into instruments of the Russian government.”
See what I mean? The minds of public-school educated Americans are so pliant and susceptible to propaganda that they have to be protected by their federal daddy from those evil Russkies who are trying to turn them to the dark side.
Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite, Jr. of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, reinforced what Olsen stated: “Secret foreign government efforts to influence American elections and political groups threaten our democracy by spreading misinformation and breeding distrust.” U.S. Attorney Roger B. Handberg for the Middle District of Florida weighed in on the matter: “The prosecution of this criminal conduct is essential to protecting the American public when foreign governments seek to inject themselves into the American political process.”
When I read such nonsensical statements from what are supposed to be intelligent people, I can’t help but wonder about two things:
One, how U.S. officials justify their massive interventions into the political processes of other countries. Hey, just for starters, let’s not forget their knowing, intentional, and deliberate destruction of the democratic systems of Iran, Guatemala, and Chile, not to mention their programs of state-sponsored regime-change assassinations, coups, sanctions, and embargoes.
Two, when we are discussing the extreme anti-Russia animus that has long driven the federal government, I can’t help but think about President Kennedy. He was determined to move America in a direction that was opposite to that of the Pentagon and the CIA. He was determined to bring an end to the extreme anti-Russia animus that the Pentagon and the CIA had inculcated in the American people.
I can’t help but wonder what would have happened if Kennedy had survived the assassination attempt in Dallas and had run for reelection in 1964. Would the Pentagon and CIA have been targeting Russian citizens who were supporting Kennedy and opposing his GOP opponent, Barry Goldwater, whose mindset mirrored that of the Pentagon and the CIA?
I don’t think there is any doubt that they would have been doing that. They also would have been accusing Kennedy of having become a Russian dupe who was leading America to disaster. In fact, as I detail in my newest book, An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story, that’s precisely what they were saying about him before they assassinated him. Also, see FFF’s book JFK’s War with the National Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated by Douglas Horne, who served on the Assassination Records Review Board.
The Pentagon’s and the CIA’s extreme anti-Russia animus that has held America in its grip for decades is a grave threat to the liberty and well-being of the American people, in part because it has, once again, brought us to the edge of life-destroying nuclear war. The sooner this paranoid nonsense is brought to an end, the better off the American people will be.
Malcolm Muggeridge, Walter Duranty, and the collision of ideology with evidence
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | November 7, 2022
Blinded by Ideology: Part 4 in a series on Willful Blindness
Malcolm Muggeridge was an exceptionally talented journalist who lived in Moscow in 1933, working for the Manchester Guardian. Though attracted to communism in his youth, the experience of being in Stalin’s Russia and observing what was going on in it caused him to become disillusioned. Especially disturbing was his realization that Stalin’s army and police were—as part of their collectivization program—starving millions of landowning peasants (known as kulaks) in the Ukraine by confiscating their grain. This massive organized crime—known as the Holodomor—resulted in the deaths of millions in the winter of 1933.
Muggeridge was the only western journalist to report what was going on. When his reports were published, many of his fellow writers—including George Bernard Shaw, Aldous Huxley, Jean-Paul Sartre, Upton Sinclair and Theodore Dreiser, and Sidney and Beatrice Webb—refused to believe them and passionately asserted that Muggeridge was spreading falsehoods about Stalin’s regime. Muggeridge was related to the Webbs by marriage, and years later he told a funny story about Beatrice.
I remember Mrs. Webb, who after all was a very cultivated upper-class liberal-minded person, an early member of the Fabian Society and so on, saying to me, ‘Yes, it’s true, people disappear in Russia.’ She said it with such great satisfaction that I couldn’t help thinking that there were a lot of people in England whose disappearance she would have liked to organize.”
For decades, Muggeridge’s accurate reporting of the Holodomor was denied and suppressed. The dominant narrative of Stalin’s Russia in the early thirties was that propagated by the New York Times Moscow bureau chief, Walter Duranty, who vehemently denied the Holodomor. While Muggeridge’s true and courageous reporting was denied, Duranty won a Pulitzer Price for his concealment of one of the greatest crimes of the 20th Century. It’s a testament to the power of Duranty’s mendacious work that most Americans have still never heard of the Holodomor.
Over the last two years I’ve often thought about Muggeridge and Duranty as I have watched courageous scholars like Dr. Peter McCullough persecuted and censored, while COVID-19 vaccine ideologues are rewarded. Most notable is the COVID-19 vaccine propagandist, Dr. Peter Hotez, who was recently nominated for the Nobel Prize.
One of the most bizarre features of our bizarre time is that an experimental, gene transfer technology has become an object of unshakable devotion. Among members of the COVID-19 Vaccine Cult, belief in the substance (about which they know nothing) is an article of faith.
In the 1930s, 40s, and even 50s, many of the most prominent journalists, writers, intellectuals, and artists believed in Stalin’s Cult of Personality. Muggeridge knew (from his own observations) that they weren’t seeing the reality of Stalin’s regime. Because they viewed the world through the highly distorting lens of ideology, they couldn’t see what was right in front of them.
By Ron Paul | November 7, 2022
Tomorrow is election day and polls suggest that Americans are going to overturn Democratic Party control of the House and Senate. Politicians and the media always say that this is the most important election ever, but all too often once the voting is over and the smoke has cleared, not much changes. The Washington uni-party takes over and makes sure the status quo is maintained.
It doesn’t have to be this way. An incoming Republican House and Senate, for example, could take early steps to reassure their supporters that their votes weren’t wasted on Tweedledee vs. Tweedledum in Washington. Here are three suggestions to get things off to a good start.
First, Republican Party Leadership must vow to end the massive money spigot opened by the last Congress for Ukraine. By some estimates some $60 billion dollars have been authorized for Ukraine to fight a proxy war between the US/NATO and Russia.
This would be a move strongly supported by the Republican base. A recent Wall Street Journal poll showed that only 37 percent of Republicans support sending more US aid to Ukraine. Republican firebrand Representative Marjorie Taylor-Greene said recently that under Republicans, not another penny will go to Ukraine. While I am skeptical that her party leadership would support such a move, it’s clear Republican voters would.
Plus, ending this proxy war would carry with it the benefit of reducing the dangerously high possibility of global nuclear war. That’s not a bad trade-off.
Second, Republicans can signal that they will de-fund the Department of Homeland Security. At the time this monstrosity was created, I said this on the House Floor:
“The list of dangerous and unconstitutional powers granted to the new Homeland Security department is lengthy. Warrantless searches, forced vaccinations of whole communities, federal neighborhood snitch programs, federal information databases, and a sinister new ‘Information Awareness Office’ at the Pentagon that uses military intelligence to spy on domestic citizens are just a few of the troubling aspects of the new legislation.”
Unfortunately all of these things came to pass…and more. As we recently learned, the DHS has been colluding with social media companies to try and prevent Americans from being able to say or post opinions the government doesn’t want others to hear.
They promised that a Department of Homeland Security would keep us safer, but there is nothing that makes us less safe than the destruction of our Constitution.
Finally, the third task an incoming Republican House and Senate can take is maybe the easiest one: pass the Audit the Fed bill. Ten years ago the US House voted in a bipartisan manner to pass my Audit the Fed legislation only to see it stall in the Senate. With Republican control of both houses of Congress there is no reason a broadly-supported bill to open the books at the Federal Reserve cannot find its way to President Biden’s desk. We all support transparency, right?
Inflation is out of control and causing real harm to the American middle class. The Biden Administration seems determined to lead us to a potentially life-ending war with Russia. The Department of Homeland Security has turned into a weapon mobilized against the American people and our Constitution.
A Republican-controlled House and Senate can actually do something to fix these problems and thus make us more safe and more free. Will they?
By Rishikesh Kumar – Samizdat – 07.11.2022
Pakistan’s Supreme Court on Monday ordered the police chief of Punjab to lodge a First Information Report (FIR) in the Imran Khan assassination case within 24 hours.
The police said that the provincial government was preventing Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) from registering the case despite several attempts.
Issuing a warning to Punjab police, the court said that suo-motu action will follow in case the complaint is not registered against Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah, and Maj. Gen. Faisal Naseer, all of whom, as Khan believes, were allegedly involved in the attack against him.
Khan’s “Absolute Freedom March” was halted on Thursday following the assassination attempt against Khan, whose convoy reached Wazirabad at that time. Khan openly accused Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and an army official of being behind the attack, in which one person died and at least nine people suffered bullet injuries, including the PTI chief.
“Under the criminal justice system, police can register the FIR itself. It’s been more than 90 hours but the FIR has yet to be registered,” the Supreme Court observed.
Local media also reported that the Punjab government was not in favor of adding Maj. Gen. Naseer, an official of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency, in the complaint, but the request was rejected by the PTI.
Meanwhile, PTI’s Fawad Chaudhry has deemed the order the “first step towards justice.”
Khan, 70, sustained a bullet injury when two gunmen opened fire, shooting several rounds at him and his political aide on a container-mounted truck in the Wazirabad area of Punjab province on November 3.
After being discharged from the hospital, Khan announced he would resume the march to Pakistan’s capital on Tuesday. The Islamabad police warned the PTI of strict action if they carried out protests in the capital without the permission of the administration.
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Involuntary servitude is good for business
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | April 20, 2026
In 2025, Alex Karp, the CEO of government and military tech contractor Palantir, published The New York Times best-seller, The Technological Republic: Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West. The Wall Street Journal praised the book as a cri de coeur, a passionate appeal “that takes aim at the tech industry for abandoning its history of helping America and its allies,” while Wired praised the book as a “readable polemic that skewers Silicon Valley for insufficient patriotism.”
On April 18, 2026, Palantir posted twenty-two points to social media summarizing the book. In addition to taking Silicon Valley to task for insufficient patriotism, advocating a role for AI in forever war, and denouncing the “psychologization of modern politics,” the Palantir post on X declares: “National service should be a universal duty. We should, as a society, seriously consider moving away from an all-volunteer force and only fight the next war if everyone shares in the risk and the cost.”
National conscription, a form of involuntary servitude, and the wars it portends, is good for business, especially for corporations within the orbit of the Pentagon, the CIA, and the national security state. Palantir fits comfortably within this amalgamation. … continue
Aletho News If Americans Knew No Tricks Zone
Aletho News 