MOSCOW – The German Foreign Ministry’s statements that Berlin is sharing information with Moscow on the Nord Stream terrorist attacks are a lie, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Wednesday.
Oleg Tyapkin, the director of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Third European Department, said in an interview with Sputnik that Russia had officially filed a claim against Germany regarding the investigation into the Nord Stream bombing and is seeking to hold talks on Germany fulfilling its international obligations in the fight against terrorism. On Monday, German Foreign Ministry spokesperson Sebastian Fischer said that Berlin is exchanging data with Russia on the Nord Stream bombings, but is not providing information on the interim results of the investigation.
“They [the German authorities] do not provide the facts they have on this investigation to the Russian side, although they are obliged to do so. Russia insists on holding official bilateral consultations in accordance with the current regulations. They, by the way, are prescribed in the UN anti-terrorist conventions,” Zakharova told a briefing, adding that these statement on the exchange of information “are a lie.”
Germany responds to all Russia’s inquiries regarding the Nord Stream attacks with empty formal replies, the diplomat said, adding that not a single such document contains factual information.
August 21, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Deception, False Flag Terrorism | Germany, Russia |
Leave a comment
Just a few days ago, a former German spy chief stated that the sabotage of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline was planned and ordered by Ukrainian satrap Zelensky and Polish President Andrzej Duda.
Now that the elaborate US narrative on the war in the Ukraine is beginning to come apart at the seams, now that the ultimate defeat of the Ukraine puppet government is becoming ever more apparent, the hour is approaching to throw Zelensky, that talented little piano player in his green T-shirt, under the bus.
With some two thousand Ukrainian soldiers being sacrificed on a daily basis on the altar of the Wall Street Money Gods, the Ukraine will soon have to perish. Now that the Kursk operation, planned on the Potomac and carried out by Western mercenaries, has failed, now that the inferiority of Western arms can no longer be hidden from the public, something was needed to divert attention.
This was done by dusting off an older issue: Nord Stream 2. Joe Biden once threatened to blow it up. However, when it was actually blown up, all of Washington’s lackeys in Europe pointed their little fingers at Russia. It was Putin who did it! Although the German economy was hit the hardest when competitively priced Russian natural gas, vital for its industry and keeping warm in winter, stopped flowing, the German government seemed at a loss. What would their masters in Washington allow them to say and do?
The Scholz government also began to divert the public’s attention, relying chiefly on two apparently mentally retarded, but nonetheless vocal cabinet members. One is Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, a bimbo of unparalleled imbecility, who tours the world making utterly dumb statements. The other is Robert Habeck, the Minister of Economics, who at least seems to have one brain cell more.
After US media suggested it was the Ukrainians who destroyed the pipeline, the former German spy chief joined the chorus, adding that Zelensky did it together with Duda.
Since his reelection in 2020, Duda initially seemed quite OK on account of his unflinching support for the Ukraine, especially after the start of the Russian Special Military Operation in February 2022. With much of the Ukraine historically having been part of Poland at different moments in history, Polish support for a Ukrainian government is always just a bit suspicious. Especially since many Polish nationalists have a very strong historical awareness and continue to regard the Ukraine as part of Poland.
There is, however, another side to Duda: he is a devout Roman Catholic and as such not to be regarded as a complacent and cooperative adherent of gender lunacy. Since this gender lunacy, represented by the LGB-whatever rainbow flag flown at US embassies, is a cornerstone of US foreign policy, the leader of a US satrapy cannot be allowed to ignore this issue or to oppose it! God of Money forbid!
Yet this is precisely what Duda has done. Correctly branding gender lunacy a “foreign ideology,” he was set on changing the Polish Constitution in order to prohibit lesbian and gay couples from adopting children.
Another stain on Duda’s reputation is his failed attempt to make it illegal to blame the Polish nation for anything unpleasant that happened on Polish territory to Jews during the years 1939-1945.
The fact Duda has been indicated as an accomplice in the Nord Stream 2 sabotage provides a nice insight into the way the Empire works. When there is a problem somewhere out there in the imperial boondocks, the local underlings are instructed to take care of the issue, and that way the imperial leadership does not need to soil its own hands.
When the bus arrives, it will crush Zelensky, but quite likely the Polish President as well. Two birds with one stone.
One has to admit, that took some shrewd and refined planning!
August 19, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Economics, False Flag Terrorism | Germany, Poland, Ukraine, United States |
Leave a comment
Germany must stop concealing facts about the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines and must provide full transparency over its investigation into the incident, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has insisted. Moscow has already filed an official complaint against Berlin’s probe into the bombings.
The Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, which were used to transport Russian natural gas to Germany and other parts of Western Europe, were sabotaged in September 2022 in a series of explosions under the Baltic Sea near the Danish island of Bornholm. The perpetrators have yet to be officially identified.
Moscow has accused Washington of orchestrating the attack, while Kiev has maintained that Russia blew up its own infrastructure. Sections of the Western media, meanwhile, have claimed that the sabotage was carried out by a “pro-Ukrainian group.”
In an interview with Izvestia published on Monday, Lavrov stressed that Germany, which has been investigating the incident, must “stop categorically refusing to present the facts that it couldn’t have failed to discover.”
He also suggested that when information formally requested by Russia is not presented officially, but instead appears in news articles, it raises “suspicions that all of this is staged” and that “the entire operation is designed to somehow divert public opinion” from the “true perpetrators, culprits, and clients [of the attack].”
Moscow will formally insist on a transparent international investigation into the bombings, Lavrov noted, claiming that it was “shameful” for Germany to “silently accept” that it had been deprived of a long-term energy supply crucial for its development as a country.
“Germany has swallowed it silently, without any comment,” Lavrov said.
Russian Foreign Ministry official Oleg Tyapkin told RIA Novosti that Moscow has officially filed a complaint with Berlin over its investigation into the Nord Stream bombings, and has “raised the issue of Germany and other affected countries fulfilling their obligation stemming from UN anti-terrorist conventions.”
He noted that the German authorities have issued a warrant for just one suspect in the attack, a Ukrainian citizen who is allegedly part of a group from the same country. Meanwhile, according to Tyapkin, German media have continued to suggest that the suspects may not even be connected to any particular country.
It appears likely that the German investigation “will be closed without identifying the true culprits behind the Nord Stream bombings,” Tyapkin stated, stressing that Russia would not accept this outcome.
August 19, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Deception, False Flag Terrorism | Germany |
Leave a comment
Former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul once asserted, “There’s no history to show that Iranians are aggressive people. When is the last time they invaded a country? Over 200 years ago!”
As with many other important matters, Congressman Paul was absolutely correct; Iran has never been a warmongering state, unlike adversarial belligerents Israel and the USA.
Despite deep state meddling in the Persian nation’s affairs (e.g., the 1953 coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and the 2020 murder of Major General Qasem Soleimani), Iran has never posed the slightest threat to America. Why, then, are we being maneuvered into war when there is absolutely no national interest at stake?
It’s somewhat of a rhetorical question, I admit, since by now most people who aren’t cognitively impaired understand that Israel is trying like hell to steer America’s military into the Middle East to shed more blood on its behalf. The recent provocations towards Iran are but the latest installments in an ongoing saga we’ve witnessed play out repeatedly since 2001.
Americans should know by now what to expect. After having been led by the nose into 20 years of costly wars primarily for the enrichment and comfort of Jewish intruders squatting in the Holy Land, you’d think we might have learned a thing or two about international Zionist statecraft. It’s not as if their methods of fomenting a climate of war have changed. It’s not as if we weren’t told what to expect.
In fact we were told, by none other than former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, General Wesley Clark.
During a 2007 interview on Amy Goodman’s political talk show Democracy Now, General Clark spoke about a detailed war agenda that was revealed to him by members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when he visited the Pentagon just ten days after 9/11:
“One of the generals called me in. He said, ‘Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second… We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.’ This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, ‘We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?’ He said, ‘I don’t know…I guess they don’t know what else to do.’ So I said, ‘Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?’ He said, ‘No, no…there’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq…I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.’ And he said, ‘I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”
A few weeks later, Clark returned to the Pentagon and met with the same man, recalling:
“I said, ‘Are we still going to war with Iraq?’ And he said, ‘Oh, it’s worse than that.’ He reached over his desk. He picked up a piece of paper and he said, ‘I just got this down from upstairs’ — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — ‘today.’ And he said, ‘This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.’ I said, ‘Is it classified?’ He said, ‘Yes sir.’ I said, ‘Well don’t show it to me.’ And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, ‘You remember that?’ He said, ‘Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you.’”
General Clark was having these conversations at a time when the Pentagon was entirely under the thumb of Zionist Jews who had been plotting and preparing for a global war on terror for many years prior to 2001. The battle plan disclosed to Clark is not of American provenance; it is an Israeli war stratagem smuggled into our foreign policy by duplicitous foreign agents. You’ll notice that almost every country named by the general has been ‘dealt with’ militarily in one form or another in the years following 9/11, Iran being the lone exception. That status is likely to change real soon as Israel continues to escalate tensions in the region. AIPAC control over U.S. politicians ensures there won’t be so much as a whimper of protest from the ‘American Colossus’ in response to Zionist saber-rattling and increased provocations. And, rest assured, America will defend Israel to the death when the situation in the Middle East reaches critical mass. American citizens, and especially ‘conservatives,’ need to understand how they’re being emotionally manipulated into supporting yet another war that is entirely at variance with our interests and could only spell doom for our already beleaguered nation.
Netanyahu’s War on Terror
On July 24th, Benjamin ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu swaggered into the U.S. Capitol to address a joint session of Congress and to cultivate material and emotional support for his upcoming war with Iran. During the course of his nagging hour-long harangue, the Israeli prime minister received 58 standing ovations from submissive stooges on both sides of the aisle, proving once more that Pat Buchanan’s description of Capitol Hill as “Israeli-occupied territory” is as true today as it was 30 years ago.
The AIPAC-funded adulation shown this Hebrew war criminal was a sickening sight to behold. Former US Marine and United Nations weapons inspector Scott Ritter summed it up nicely:
“Israel has bragged about buying the US Congress. And this is the result, where a war criminal—a man who has been accused of genocide, who has arrest warrants being prepared for him by the International Court of Justice, a man who heads a State that has been defined legally as an “apartheid state,” carrying out an illegal and unjust occupation and, again, genocide of the Palestinian people—has demanded an audience to the Congress that he has bought and paid for. That’s what’s happening here. We must see it in that perspective. This isn’t an honor being given to Netanyahu by the US Congress. This is the US Congress obeying the commands of the man who leads the nation that owns the US Congress.”
In one of his most memorable lines of the day, Netanyahu affirmed with a straight face, “there is no place for political violence in democracies!” (He made the comment while referring to the recent shooting at a Trump rally in Pennsylvania.) Within one week, however, Israel had assassinated Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran; Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut; and Al Jazeera journalist Ismail al-Ghoul in Gaza. The recent killing spree occurred only three months after IDF jets bombed the Iranian embassy in Syria killing 16 people, including seven diplomats. “There is no place for political violence in democracies!” quoth the mass-murdering psychopathic Jew, who once attended a two-day anniversary celebration commemorating the Irgun’s 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel.
Bibi the Butcher, that distinguished darling of America’s political class, has spent his entire adult life promoting Israel’s War on Terror.
In 1979, he and his father Benzion partnered with Irgun terrorist-turned-prime minister Menachem Begin to organize the Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism, a three-day event intended to “launch an international propaganda offensive to promote and exploit the issue of international terrorism,” as Philip Paull explains in his 1982 book, International Terrorism: The Propaganda War. The event was held at the Yonatan Institute, named after Netanyahu’s deceased older brother, and its purpose was to bring Western political leaders together to discuss international terrorism and the possibility of manipulating America’s military into the Middle East to wage a war on terror. The elder Netanyahu (born Mileikowsky) said in his opening address, “This conference was called to serve as a beginning of a new process — the purpose of rallying democracies of the world to a struggle against terrorism and the dangers it represents.” (George H.W. Bush spoke on the last day of the event.)
From that point on, the Western media dutifully disseminated the propaganda of the Jerusalem Conference and Benjamin Netanyahu would produce a number of books, articles and speeches throughout the 1980s and 90s promoting the doctrine of a global War on Terror. As Philip Paull wrote in 1982, “This ‘anti-terrorist’ propaganda campaign was and is being conducted in a style reminiscent of war-time ‘psychological warfare’ by journalists serving as conduits and spreaders of misinformation originating in Jerusalem.”<
Forecasting War
Netanyahu’s plan to haul America’s military into the Middle East to wage war on Israel’s enemies became a reality after September 11, 2001, a day he claimed was “very good” for Israel. (Source: New York Times, Sept. 12, 2001)
Many Americans still believe the War on Terror was launched in response to the 9/11 attacks. The fact is, however, the War on Terror was conceived many years before 2001, and the atrocities perpetrated in New York City and Washington D.C. were merely the excuse to make the war agenda operational.
In February 1982, the World Zionist Organization published ‘The Yinon Plan: A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties.’ The document was published in Hebrew but was later translated into English by the eminent professor Israel Shahak of Hebrew University. It was written by military strategist Oded Yinon and detailed a plan to break up large Arab nations like Iraq and Syria and transform them into tiny ethnic statelets that would be incapable of defending themselves against Israel’s superior military might. Yinon wrote:
“The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas… is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target.”
Yinon’s vision for Iraq came to fruition following the illegal American invasion, launched on the Jewish revenge holiday Purim, in 2003. Almost immediately, America’s conquering forces disbanded Iraq’s military and the entire country soon descended into civil war between competing factions of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. Prior to the invasion, Iraq had been a significant impediment to Israeli domination of the Middle East, which is why the Jews in control of America’s foreign policy selected it for annihilation. And, as an added bonus, there were the financial spoils of war to acquire as well. Oded Yinon: “Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand…is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria.”
What Yinon described in 1982 is the Eretz Yisrael (Greater Israel) project that Americans have been fighting and dying for since 2001. America’s military is not fighting terrorism; it is reorganizing the Middle East to conform with Israel’s whims and Iran is the crown jewel. This war agenda has already bankrupted America morally and financially and has destroyed the erstwhile superpower’s standing on the world stage. As noted Middle East expert Linda S. Heard wrote in an article for Counterpunch (April 25, 2006), “Oded Yinon’s 1982 ‘Zionist Plan for the Middle East’ is in large part taking shape. Is this pure coincidence? Was Yinon a gifted psychic? Perhaps! Alternately, we in the West are victims of a long-held agenda not of our making and without doubt not in our interest.”
A Clean Break and PNAC
An updated version of The Yinon Plan was drafted for Netanyahu in 1996 during his first year as Israel’s prime minister. Titled ‘A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,’ the document was assembled for Netanyahu by neocon hawks Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser. It specifically called for the removal from power of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Bashar al-Assad in Syria and recommended military confrontations with both countries as well as with Lebanon and Iran. One year later, Perle, Feith and Wurmser would all join the newly-founded Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and continue their strategizing for Netanyahu’s War on Terror.
PNAC was an elite neoconservative think-tank founded in 1997 by influential Zionists William Kristol and Robert Kagan. The majority of the group’s membership was comprised of fanatical Jews with deep ties to the state of Israel, many of whom came to power just prior to 9/11 within the administration of George W. Bush. These include: Dov Zakheim, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Elliot Abrams, Richard Perle, David Frum, Robert Zoellick, David Wurmser, and the convicted felon Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby.
The overarching philosophy of PNAC was based on the ideology of Jewish intellectual Leo Strauss. Like many of today’s neoconservatives, Strauss was an ex-Trotskyite who promoted Machiavellian tactics and the use of lies as necessary political tools while a professor of political science at the University of Chicago. Significantly, he was also a dedicated Zionist and a follower of the terrorist Ze’ev Jabotinsky. On the surface these ideological alignments appear to be contradictory, unless some understanding of the overwhelming Jewish role in both Zionism and Communism can be apprehended. Both were pioneered by the same man, Moses Hess, and both are Jewish revolutionary movements whose sole aim is to do whatever is best for Jewish interests even if it means employing seemingly opposing methods. Far-right Zionism (Jewish nationalism) and far-left Communism (Jewish internationalism) are two sides of the same shekel working in tandem as a lethal pincer for global hegemony. Attempting to explain these amorphous tendencies, Jewish historian and political theorist Murray Rothbard once noted that neoconservatives “moved from cafeteria Trotskyites to apologists for the US warfare state without missing a beat.”
In September 2000, PNAC published a 90-page document titled ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century.’ The document, co-authored by Rabbi Dov Zakheim, called for America to initiate a series of regime change wars in the Middle East and North Africa with an emphasis on Iraq, Syria, Libya, Lebanon and Iran. The authors of the report emphasized the importance for America to “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars” but acknowledged that “the process of change is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor.” One year to the month of the document’s publication America got what George W. Bush referred to at the time as ‘our Pearl Harbor.’
Conclusion
And so America teeters once again on the brink of war due to our fatal attraction to the Zionist state. The man who claims “there is no place for political violence in democracies” presides over a country that has made political assassinations its stock-and-trade and is undoubtedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks which activated its long-held War on Terror scheme. Speaking to an audience at Bar Ilan University in 2008, the war criminal recipient of 58 standing ovations from the US Congress reiterated his belief that the 9/11 attacks were in fact good for Israel: “We are benefitting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.” (Source: Ha’aretz, April 16, 2008)
*Nota bene: Netanyahu listed three things, not one, but to the mind of an architect of the War on Terror, all three blend seamlessly together.*
The Israeli prime minister and his minions have nothing but contempt for America. That won’t change regardless of how many standing ovations he receives from a goyische congress or how many US dollars flow into his over-stuffed war chest. In 2001, he was filmed having a conversation with Israeli settlers about ways in which he intended to undermine the US-led Oslo Peace Accords that had been signed in 1993 and 1995. During one such conversation, he crowed: “I know what America is… America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won’t get in the way.” He goes on to boast about his ability to manipulate the US in the ongoing Israeli/Palestinian peace process, saying, according to the Washington Post (July 16, 2010), “They asked me before the election if I’d honor [the Oslo Accords]… I said I would, but … I’m going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the ’67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I’m concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue.”
Benjamin Netanyahu ladies and gentleman. A man whose military has killed upwards of over 186,000 Palestinians this year alone and has bombed hospitals, schools, churches, aid convoys and refugee camps; a man who sanctions the anal rape of prisoners; a man American politicians hail as a conquering hero; a man millions of evangelical ‘Christians’ believe we should sacrifice more of our children’s blood for.
August 15, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | Israel, Middle East, Palestine, United States, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Media outlets such as the WSJ recently started to peddle a narrative that the Nord Stream pipeline destruction in 2022 was allegedly orchestrated by a group of high-ranking Ukrainian officers led by Gen. Valery Zaluzhny.
Despite Western media efforts to implicate Ukraine, the United States still looks like the “main beneficiary and customer of the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline,” says German political analyst and independent journalist Dr. Gregor Spitzen.
“This has been clear from the very beginning, both in terms of the basic Roman law principle of ‘Cui bono?’ [who benefits?] and the statements by President Joe Biden and Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland that the US would not allow the pipeline to go into operation,” he tells Sputnik.
Efforts by German politicians and media to draw the attention away from the US by “throwing new and implausible versions into the information field,” while understandable – “if the US is found guilty of an act of state terrorism on the object of German property, the whole architecture of European security will collapse” – are still no less outrageous, Dr. Spitzen remarks.
“Germany’s attempts to pin the blame on Ukrainian saboteurs who acted without a clear mandate from their government, while at the same time taking President Zelensky out of harm’s way, looks legally flawless, but completely implausible,” Dr. Spitzen elaborates. “It can be predicted that the specific Ukrainians accused of sabotage will never be found. Either they will be found to have died of natural causes under suspicious circumstances, or they will have committed suicide.”
“This would be the best solution to the Nord Stream sabotage case. The pipeline is destroyed, US guilt is not proven, German politicians’ reputations are saved, Ukrainian political leaders are exonerated, and the specific perpetrators, who acted on their own initiative, are dead or missing,” he adds.
Former CIA operations officer Philip Giraldi also branded media efforts to pin the blame on Ukraine as a “cover story,” arguing that Kiev simply lacked the resources to carry out the Nord Stream bombing.
“The US did and had even stated its intention in advance to destroy the pipeline if Russia were to invade Ukraine. And there is also the involvement of Norway which is not plausible if it were a Ukrainian operation,” he said.
Both Spitzen and Giraldi suggested that the fact that the story about Ukraine’s alleged role in the Nord Stream bombing surfaced simultaneously in the US and German media hints at the likelihood of a coordinated effort to craft “an acceptable narrative regarding what took place,” as Giraldi put it.
“It suggests to me that they are coordinating some new approach in dealing with Ukraine and Zelensky though I am not sure what that might be,” Giraldi added.
August 15, 2024
Posted by aletho |
False Flag Terrorism | Germany, Ukraine, United States |
Leave a comment
Kiev had nothing to do with the explosions on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, Mikhail Podoliak, a top adviser to Ukrainian leader, Vladimir Zelensky, has said.
Podoliak made the statement to Reuters on Thursday in response to a report by the Wall Street Journal, claiming that Zelensky authorized the September 2022 attack which ruptured the key energy infrastructure built to deliver Russian gas to Germany and the rest of Europe.
According to the US outlet’s sources, which included officers allegedly involved in the operation, Zelensky initially approved the attack on Nord Stream. He later tried to call it off under pressure from the CIA, but then Ukrainian commander-in-chief Valery Zaluzhny told him it could not be done as the sabotage group had already been dispatched and there was no way to contact it.
“Such an act can only be carried out with extensive technical and financial resources… and who possessed all this at the time of the bombing? Only Russia,” Podoliak told the agency.
Russia has ridiculed claims that it would destroy its own pipelines, which provided it with steady revenue. Top officials in Moscow, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, have previously pointed the finger at Washington, arguing that it stood to gain the most from the disruption of Russian gas supplies to the EU.
“Ukraine has nothing to do with the Nord Stream explosions,” Podolyak insisted, adding that Kiev did not gain any strategic or tactical advantage from the sabotage.
The report by the WSJ claimed that “a handful of senior Ukrainian military officers and businessmen” came up with the idea of blowing up the pipelines during a drinking party in May 2022, a few months after the outbreak of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. The plotters believed that it would reduce Russia’s energy profits and make the EU less dependent on Moscow, it said.
Zaluzhny, who is now Ukraine’s ambassador to the United Kingdom, told the outlet that claims of his – or Kiev’s – involvement in the destruction of Nord Stream were a “mere provocation.” A senior official in the Security Service of Ukraine, the SBU, also denied the report, insisting that Zelensky in particular “did not approve the implementation of any such actions on the territory of third countries and did not issue relevant orders.”
The WSJ said its reporting is partially corroborated by the findings of the German police investigation into the Nord Stream explosions. The German Federal Public Prosecutor issued a first arrest warrant in connection with the sabotage this week, according to local reports. The suspect is believed to be a Ukrainian citizen identified as ‘Vladimir Z’.
The newspaper suggested that the police investigation could “upend” relations between Kiev and Berlin, which has been Ukraine’s biggest backer in the EU amid the conflict with Russia.
August 15, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Deception, False Flag Terrorism | European Union, Germany, Ukraine, United States |
Leave a comment
In the months following the attacks of 9/11, the government laid the blame for orchestrating them on Osama bin Ladin. Then, after it murdered bin Ladin, the government decided that the true mastermind was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
By the time of bin Ladin’s death, Mohammed had already been tortured by CIA agents for three years at various black sites and charged with conspiracy to commit mass murder, to be tried before an American military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Mohammed and four other alleged conspirators have been awaiting trial since their arrivals at Gitmo in 2006. Since then, numerous government military and civilian prosecutors, as well as numerous military judges, have rotated into and out of the case. Two weeks ago, the government and the defendants agreed to a guilty plea in return for life in prison at Gitmo. Then, last week, the Department of Defense abruptly changed its mind and rescinded its approval of the guilty pleas.
Here is the backstory.
The concept of military tribunals for the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks was born in the administration of President George W. Bush, who argued that the attacks, though conducted by civilians on civilians, were of military magnitude and thus warranted a military response. Throughout the entire 22-year existence of the U.S. military prison at Gitmo, no one has been tried for causing or carrying out the crimes of 9/11. The government tried only one person for crimes related to 9/11. That was Zacarias Moussaoui, who pleaded guilty in federal court in Virginia to conspiracy for being the 20th hijacker and then was tried in a penalty phase trial where the jury chose life in prison.
Bush’s rationale not only brought us the fruitless and destructive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; it also brought a host of legal problems unforeseen by Bush and his revenge-over-justice colleagues. The first legal issue was conspiracy. Since Mohammed did not carry out the attacks, he could only be charged with planning them. But conspiracy is not a war crime, and thus no military tribunal could hear the case. So Congress came up with a historic first — a military tribunal that would try civilian crimes.
The next issue was where to try Mohammed and his colleagues. President Barack Obama wanted to close Gitmo, which costs $540 million annually, and try Mohammed and the others in federal courts. This would have been consistent with federal law and the U.S. Constitution. But Republicans in Congress viewed Mohammed as too dangerous to bring onto U.S. soil, and so Congress enacted legislation that prohibits the removal of Mohammed and the others to the U.S. for any purpose.
The prohibition on removal means that any life terms would need to be spent at Gitmo. It also means that there would be a legal obstacle to the execution of a death sentence, as Gitmo is not equipped to execute anyone.
Most troubling, however, is the government’s problem of how to address the issue of torture. Bush believed that military men on military juries would neither cringe at torture nor hesitate to impose a death sentence. Yet, when defendants at Gitmo, in non-9/11-related cases, described the torture that CIA agents and military officials had inflicted upon them, military jurors were repulsed at what they heard and recommended clemency even for those who caused deaths.
These events — filing legally baseless charges, prohibiting the removal of civilian defendants to civilian courts, and fear of the likely reaction of military jurors to testimony about torture — caused the prosecution team to rethink the entire idea of putting Mohammed on trial, and thus in March 2022, the government initiated secret plea-bargaining negotiations with defense counsel.
In large measure, government prosecutors — now the fourth team since 2006 — recognized that Bush’s torturers had so brutalized the defendants that their so-called voluntary confessions would likely be tossed by the trial judge or rejected by a jury. Moreover, there are serious ethical issues when lawyers defend torture — so serious that it could jeopardize their careers.
Why would the government agree to such a plea bargain for the persons it claims are the monsters who murdered 3,000 Americans on 9/11 and triggered all the horrors that followed those murders? What does the government fear?
What does it always fear? THE TRUTH.
Since the trial judge — the fourth judge on the case — had already accepted the guilty pleas before the DoD changed its mind, it is unclear if he will enforce them.
If he does not, one day there will be a trial. At trial, the defendants will be permitted to bring the government’s imperialistic wars, its tortures and its foreknowledge of 9/11 into the courtroom. The government knows that much of its behavior — from the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of a popularly elected prime minister of Iran in the early 1950s to the untruthful excuses for toppling Saddam Hussein — will show American foreign policy at its imperialistic and violent worst.
And the hours and weeks and months and years of repeated torture — all of it criminal — will undermine the case against Mohammed and the others.
This is what happens when the fabric of our legal system is interfered with for authoritarian reasons. The tragedy of 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch. What did the CIA know before 9/11? Bush compounded his ignorance and failures with boasts of bravado and torture — all of which have come back to haunt his current successor in the White House.
Defense and Justice Department lawyers have recognized that they cannot try this case without material damage to the scheme of American empire, built on death, lies and torture, without revealing the names and methods of the folks who did these horrible deeds and the lies of the presidents who authorized them — and without the truth coming out at last.
What good has come from Bush’s torturers? None.
To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit https://JudgeNap.com.
COPYRIGHT 2024 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM
August 8, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | 9/11, CIA, Middle East, United States, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Given that we have all been born and raised under a national-security state form of governmental structure, no one in the mainstream press is batting an eyelash over Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s role in a plea bargain into which military prosecutors had entered with three men who are accused of participating in the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, and Mustafa al-Hawsawix. Austin scotched the plea bargain because it eliminated the possibility of a death sentence for the three men.
To be sure, there are some mainstream pundits who have expressed disagreement with Austin’s decision to cancel the plea bargain. But none of them question the very notion that a retired military general is making a major decision in a case involving criminal justice. That’s because the mainstream press, along with many Americans, has come to accept the normality and permanence of the judicial system that the Pentagon established in Cuba after the 9/11 attacks.
But the fact is that Austin’s role in a criminal prosecution is weird — extremely weird. A retired military general serving as U.S. Secretary of Defense has no more legitimate role in America’s criminal-justice system than he does in America’s public-school system.
The U.S. Constitution established one judicial system. It consists of U.S. District Courts, federal courts of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. It encompasses both civil and criminal jurisdiction. Under the Constitution, when the U.S. government targets someone with criminal prosecution, it must do so within the rules and constraints of the federal-court system.
In other words, the Constitution did not set up two dual, competing criminal-justice systems — one run by civilians and one run by the military. It set up only one criminal-justice system. And that one judicial system is subject to the constraints of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, specifically the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments.
Contrary to popular opinion, terrorism is not an act of war. It is a criminal offense under the U.S. Code. When someone is charged with the crime of terrorism, the Constitution requires that he be treated like any other defendant in the federal-court system.
What happened after the 9/11 attacks, however, was that the military-intelligence establishment seized on the crisis, panic-filled environment to establish a brand new dual, competing judicial system at its imperial outpost in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Mind you, there was no constitutional authority for such a judicial system but given the climate of “emergency” and the dominant role that the national-security establishment had already come to play in America’s federal governmental system, the Pentagon knew that no one would interfere with its new judicial system.
Thus, under America’s dual, competing judicial systems, the military now decides how an accused terrorist is going to be handled. If the military decides that an accused terrorist, whether foreigner or American, should go into the constitutional system, that’s where he will go. In fact, there have been a number of criminal prosecutions for terrorism in America’s federal-court system, both before and after the 9/11 attacks.
However, if the military decides that an accused terrorist, including an American citizen, will instead be placed in the military’s judicial system at Gitmo, that’s where he will end up. That’s why the plea bargain into which the accused 9/11 planners entered was done with military prosecutors rather than with U.S. Attorneys and assistant U.S. Attorneys.
The difference between these two judicial systems is like day and night. In the constitutional system, the accused has the right to a speedy trial, the right to trial by jury, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishments, and other procedural protections.
None of those protections exists for people who are shunted into the military’s judicial system at Gitmo. That’s why criminal defendants have been held there for some 20 years without a trial — there is no right to a speedy trial at Gitmo. The accused can also be convicted on hearsay evidence, which means that he has no right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. He can be tortured into confessing to his crimes. He has no right to trial by jury. Instead his guilt or innocence is determined by a military commission whose kangaroo-court-like verdict will inevitably turn on pleasing superior officers.
This entire dual, competing judicial system is about as weird as weird can get, including the fact that a retired military general now wields the authority to involve himself in plea bargains in criminal prosecutions. The fact that this weird judicial system has become a normal and permanent part of American life just goes to show how the national-security establishment controls, manages, and directs the federal government, with the other three branches simply playing a supportive role. See National Security and Double Government by Michael J. Glennon.
August 6, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, False Flag Terrorism | 9/11, Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
On Saturday, an explosive fell onto a sports field in Majdal Shams in Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, killing 12 children. Israel blamed the Lebanese Shia movement Hezbollah. The group has denied the accusation.
Veteran war correspondent Elijah Magnier told Sputnik on Monday that what little information is available on the Golan Heights explosion that killed 12 Arab Druze Muslim children contradicts the official story offered by the Israeli government.
“First, [Israel has] refused any Western investigation by Israeli allies. So they don’t want anyone to investigate the type of rockets and/or the debris,” Magnier explained. “And the technical details of the explosions are very telling. The Falaq rocket that Hezbollah fires is a 50 kilogram explosive. Now, a warhead with such a quantity of explosive doesn’t leave the damage that was left by the explosion that happened in Golan Heights, [it would be] much bigger.”
Magnier, who has over 35 years of experience covering conflicts in Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, says that the evidence the Israelis have provided has been unconvincing.
“We have not seen any picture… of the guidance system, or any component that [we] need to understand what kind of rocket [or missile] that exploded in this place,” Magnier began. “They showed us two pieces with serial numbers that match the Falaq, but not on the same scene of the explosion. They’re completely different on a white plank. So, we don’t know where these pieces were taken from.”
“Normally, when the forensic team is on the scene, [they] take hundreds of photographs with every single piece before they touch anything. We haven’t seen all that, but we’ve seen a rush of accusing Hezbollah,” Magnier added.
“The diameter of the crater [from a Hezbollah Falaq rocket] can [be] between four to six meters and the depth can be… between 1.5 to 3 meters, which is not the case at all of the explosion we’ve seen,” Magnier described. “We’ve seen in this explosion only a small part of the fence [was] damaged and the other part of the fence is still intact. So, even the fragment of the explosion is different. The shrapnel is different.”
On Sunday, Israel bombed 12 settlements in Lebanon after saying that Hezbollah had crossed a “red line” in the attack. Hezbollah has vehemently denied it was involved. Magnier pointed out that they do not have a reason to attack Druze Muslims in Golan Heights, which is illegally occupied by Israel but still contains a large Muslim population.
“Hezbollah has thousands of civilian objectives [it could hit] that are close to the borders of Lebanon, and it can really destroy any village or any Israeli occupied city without the need to go to another village that is occupied by Druze Muslims who have [influence] in Syria and Lebanon and want to declare their support to the Palestinians,” argued Magnier, who added that Hezbollah has not been hitting civilian targets since it started shelling Israel in solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza.
Magnier argued that a faulty Israeli air defense missile was a more likely culprit in the Golan Heights explosion.
“I can say that there are malfunctioning missiles and there are malfunctioning rockets that can fall anywhere and these incidents are very frequent, in particular with the Israeli interception missiles, where they say that only 60 to 65% reach their target and the others miss,” he said. “A strong possibility… an Israeli interception missile of the type Tamir… they carry around 10 to 15 kilograms of explosive and they have a very similar impact to what we’ve seen in the pictures provided on the ground by the people of Majdal Shams in the Golan Heights.”
Magnier noted that the size of the crater matched what the Tamir could create and that there was still grass from the field around the crater, which would not happen with a larger Falaq rocket.
“Everything there indicates that we’re talking about a small-sized missile [and] not a big sized rocket of 50 kilograms.”
On Monday, US and Israeli media reported that an Israeli official said its response was still coming and that it would be “limited but significant” in order to avoid an all-out war.
“So, we understand that Netanyahu is really trying to avoid being involved in a war that he doesn’t know what the consequences would be. He can start, but he can’t end it,” concluded Magnier. “What is the ultimate objective [in attacking Hezbollah]? Destroy Lebanon? Destroy the airport? He will have his airport destroyed. Attack the Capital? He will have Tel Aviv destroyed. So this is where we see that things are not as smooth as the Israelis are trying to show.”
July 29, 2024
Posted by aletho |
False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Hezbollah, Israel, Syria, Zionism |
Leave a comment
The Majdal Shams strike resulted in the tragic loss of 12 lives, all natives of the occupied Golan. What insights can we recover from the evidence gathered following yesterday’s incident?
Israeli regime authorities claimed on Saturday afternoon that Hezbollah launched a rocket at the occupied town of Majdal Shams, killing twelve civilians, including 10 children, in the process.
The Israeli military command even specified the type of rocket artillery shell used in the alleged attack, which it claimed was the Falaq-1 rocket.
On the other hand, the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon – Hezbollah fully denied any involvement and responsibility for a deadly strike on the village in the Israeli-occupied Syrian Golan.
So where does the truth lie?
A brief analysis of the impact site and the video capturing the moment of the strike dismantles the Israeli narrative, bolstering Hezbollah’s account.
A few points must be made clear before analyzing the moment of the strike on Majdal Shams and the aftermath caused by the explosion.
First, Israeli officials said the Israeli occupation forces were able to identify the shell used in the attack as the Falaq-1 rocket, reportedly confirming their suspicions.
The Falaq-1 rocket is a rocket artillery shell with the following specifications:
- 240 mm caliber
- 1320 mm length
- Estimated 10 km range
- Maximum flight ceiling of 3.5 km
- 50 kg high explosive warhead
- Solid-propellant rocket
Second, high-explosive warheads usually contain a mixture of explosives alongside components that would act as shrapnel propelled by the pressure caused by the aforementioned explosives. Following the moment of impact with the surface, a crater should be formed.
The size of this crater varies according to several factors, which include the mass of the explosives, the pressure generated by the warhead into the ground, and the surface’s composition, among other elements.
Third, the Falaq rocket exhausts the solid propellant less than two seconds after being fired.
Israeli Iron Dome interceptors record multiple failures since October
Another important nuance that would aid Hezbollah’s denial of involvement is the failure of Iron Dome interceptors, Tamir surface-to-air missiles, on several occasions in the past months.
This includes a crash of an Iron Dome interceptor in Tel Aviv in early December 2023 and a fire caused by an Israeli interceptor in occupied al-Jalil following a failed interception of a Hezbollah drone on July 25, 2024.
There are many such incidents, with some being captured live on camera, including an event in which an Israeli Tamir missile struck a hospital in Tel Aviv on November 6, 2023.
Several technical issues related to an Iron Dome battery could result in a catastrophic interception failure. These issues include a malfunctioning engagement radar, a faulty radar seeker, a defective self-detonation sensor, and a compromised motor, among other potential problems. The most dangerous of these are faults in self-detonating sensors, which leave operators unable to destroy rogue surface-to-air missiles.
Did an Israeli Tamir missile impact Majdal Shams?
It is highly probable that faults in a surface-to-air missile fired from an Iron Dome launcher just behind Majdal Shams caused the grave massacre.
Majdal Shams, which is among the towns and cities occupied by “Israel” in 1967, hosts a vast majority of Arab Syrian Druze and a minority of Israeli settlers. The town and other similar demographics, where natives are significantly represented, have not come under the direct fire of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon since October 8, 2023.
Although the Resistance has launched highly precise weapons such as an anti-tank guided missile and drones at Israeli military positions in towns such as Arab al-Aramshe, it never fired unguided rocket artillery weapons at these towns.
Specifically, Majdal Shams has never come under an attack by Hezbollah, throughout the nearly 300 days of intense confrontations near the Lebanese-Palestinian border.
The Resistance has also not been shy of taking responsibility for mishaps in the past, such as an incident in the 2006 war on Lebanon when a rocket launched by Hezbollah fighters impacted a home in occupied al-Nasirah.
The attack took place on July 19, 2006, and the Secretary-General of Hezbollah Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah took the nearest opportunity amid the ongoing war to apologize to the family.
“To the family that was hit in al-Nasirah — on my behalf and my brothers’, I apologize to this family,” he said.
“Some events like that happen. In any event, those who were killed in al-Nasirah, we consider them martyrs for Palestine and martyrs for the nation. I pay my condolences to them.”
A corresponding crater
As for evidence collected from the impact site, the crater formed by the projectile is around 2 meters wide and a few centimeters deep. This indicates that the warhead that detonated in the area is far less than 50 kg and closer to the 10 kg range.
In comparison, a crater formed by a Falaq-1 rocket in Kiryat Shmona ripped through cement and caused extensive damage to nearby infrastructure as seen in this video.
The Falaq-1 rocket is among Hezbollah’s heaviest rocket artillery shells that can be fired from multiple rocket launchers and which can cause extensive damage to targets.
On the other hand, the crater seen in Majdal Shams could be more closely attributed to a Tamir missile.
The possibility that Hezbollah used a smaller caliber munition to conduct the attack is improbable, as it was Israeli authorities who claimed that the munition used in the attack was a Falaq-1 rocket.
Large flames produced by liquid propellant
Another aspect to examine is the relatively large amount of combustion that occurred as a result of the impact on the football field.
High-explosive warheads generally do not produce large fireballs upon detonation. Instead, they create a powerful blast wave and intense fragmentation. The explosion of an HE warhead primarily generates heat, shock waves, and shrapnel rather than a visible fireball. A large-sized and visible fireball is typically associated with the combustion of fuel, such as that found in rocket engines or fuel tanks.
As seen in this footage, the projectile produced a large fireball.
A Tamir missile launched from a nearby position is likely to contain a substantial amount of fuel, as the air defense rocket was designed to fly for around 70 km. This means that the majority of the fuel meant for the missile’s flight after take-off detonated and produced the fireball seen in the video.
Despite Israeli assertions of a Hezbollah attack using a Falaq-1 rocket, substantial analysis points towards a malfunctioning Israeli Tamir interceptor missile as the more plausible cause of the explosion. The discrepancies in crater size, the nature of the explosion, and Hezbollah’s historical targeting patterns all support this alternative explanation. The true story behind the Majdal Shams explosion remains shrouded, but the evidence presented here offers a compelling case for reconsidering the initial narrative.
July 29, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Deception, False Flag Terrorism | Hezbollah, Israel |
Leave a comment
By Uriel Araujo | July 19, 2024
Contradictions on Trump’s attempted assassination pile up, with serious security breaches and officials claiming an investigation is needed to determine whether it was a matter of incompetence or malice.
To begin with, according to the ABC News, “law enforcement officials investigating the assassination attempt on Donald Trump told lawmakers Wednesday that 20 minutes passed between the time U.S. Secret Service snipers first spotted the gunman on a rooftop and the time shots were fired at the former president.” How can one explain that?
Moreover, it is a well-established fact now that onlookers alerted the authorities about the presence of an armed man on a nearby roof. One witness reported that to the BBC shortly after the incident.
In addition, local officials in Pennsylvania are complaining that the Secret Service, in an attempt to deflect blame, is throwing them “under the bus”. According to one local police officer: “The Secret Service came out here more than a month ahead of time and met with all the local agencies. They tell us exactly what to do, exactly what they want and exactly how they want it. It’s all on them.”
More intriguingly, several witnesses describe a second shooter, and there seems to be plenty of cell phone footage indicating that – while the Secret Service insist there was only one. According to a Times of India story, “an audio forensic analysis conducted by experts from the National Center for Media Forensics at the University of Colorado in Denver suggests the possibility of a second shooter in the incident”. A CNN story in turn reports that “forensic analysis suggests that as many as three weapons were fired at the Trump rally.”
Stephen Bryen, security expert, takes the second shooter allegation seriously, and, in his Substack newsletter, he is calling for a “solid FBI investigation with Congressional oversight” on the matter. He adds that “there is a general consensus that security at the Trump Rally was poor”, and adds: “if the Secret Service actually approved all the security measures … we wonder, like millions of others no doubt, how could they overlook the rooftops.” Bryen is no fringe figure – he is a former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, who writes for Newsweek, the Jewish Policy Center, and others.
Cory Mills, a member of the United States House of Representatives, takes the matter a bit further, saying an investigation on the Secret Service is needed to determine whether this was merely incompetence or rather malice, with an intent to neutralize Trump.
Cory Mills is a former military, and was a member of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) 20 in Iraq. He is also a defense contractor, who has earned a Master of Arts in international relations and conflict resolution from American Military University. Again, this is also no fringe figure, and his allegations raise eyebrows.
Given all the above, it is no wonder suspicions abound – the fact that Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle is very close to the Biden couple certainly doesn’t help. According to the New York Post, she “landed her role thanks largely to a close relationship with first lady Jill Biden.” In any other country, by the way, after such a scandal, the Secret Service director would have been fired already or would have resigned. One thing that hampers further scrutiny, however, is an American cultural trait, namely the distaste for “conspiracy theories” (which is rather ironic in a country where conspiracies abound). Here, some context is needed.
Most scholars concede that sometimes conspiracy theories (CT) are proven to be at least partly correct. A “true” or ideal CT is supposed to always be false – meaning that its narrative does not describe reality. However, what happens when new data changes the “official” story? For instance, nowadays it is known that in 1962 the US Department of Defense proposed a false flag operation (the Operation Northwoods), calling for CIA operatives to actually commit terrorist attacks against American civilians and military targets in American cities (with bombings and hijackings) and then using those to justify a Cuban invasion. Then President John F. Kennedy rejected the plan, but the proposal existed, and no one denies it.
It is thus not clear at all how a “correct” conspiracy theory (one which later happens to be proven true) differs from a false one. Was it a CT when critics argued that the US government had lied about the real motivations which led it to invade Iraq? Other authors define “conspiracy theories” in a more neutral manner as any hypotheses that try to explain an event by invoking a “conspiracy” – namely, a secret plan carried out by a group of people.
One should also be cautious as to avoid equating a mere CT (about anything) and a conspiratorial way of understanding society and history in general. The latter (conspiracism), implicitly holds that nothing ever happens by chance but rather everything (especially tragedies) happens by design. Conspiracies do exist but not everything is a conspiracy. On the other hand, in the face of a major politically charged event, when various contradictions pile up, it would be naïve to readily dismiss everything as a “coincidence” (I would describe it as a “coincidence theory”).
With Biden’s undeniable senility getting worse, it is becoming increasingly clear he is not fit to run for the presidency again – he can barely participate in a debate or give interviews. Given this, the question then, as I wrote, is how can he govern, or rather how come has he been governing thus? In other words, who has been doing all the governing? Some talk about a “ triumvirate”, referring to Biden’s close advisers Bruce Reed, Mike Donilon, and Steve Ricchetti – the matter is far from being clear, though. One can only imagine the amount of palace intrigue going on amid this “emperor clothes” scenario.
With the ongoing political crisis, any investigation on the Secret Service will be either weaponized by Republicans against Democrats or covered up by the latter, amid a major narrative war and claims about “conspiracy theories”. The crisis is thus also an epistemic one, so to speak.
This state of affairs can only further undermine the legitimacy of American institutions, with serious consequences for the country’s stability. With a suspicious murder attempt on a presidential candidate and an embarrassingly senile incumbent president, the rest of the world holds their breath while the politics within the Atlantic superpower has just gone mad.
July 19, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Deception, False Flag Terrorism | United States |
Leave a comment
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
or DOWNLOAD THE MP4
Aletho News 