Pokemon Go(v) … Another Conspiracy Confirmed!
Corbett | December 18, 2024
Remember Pokémon Go? You know, that cute game where you And! Battle . . . Pokeballs? . . . to capture . . . .monsters in a gym? . . . or something like that. Anyway, the point is, people went bananas over this augmented reality nonsense eight years ago and of course those crazy conspiracy kooks at places like The Corbett Report had to rain on everyone’s parade by warning them about the app’s shady, intel-connected origins. Well . . . guess who just got proven correct again. (SPOILER: it’s the crazy conspiracy kooks who were just proven correct again.)
WATCH ON: 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
or DOWNLOAD THE MP4
SHOW NOTES:
POKÉMON GO – What You Need to Know
Everyone is going crazy over Pokémon Go
Pokémon Go is a viral phenomenon
Pokémon Go – Vaporeon stampede Central Park, NYC
Pokémon Go Came Out In the US, Let’s Catch ‘Em All
The CIA’s ‘Pokémon Go’ App is Doing What the Patriot Act Can’t
The CIA helped sell a mapping startup to Google. Now they won’t tell us why
Pokémon Go to The Military Industrial Complex
Building a Large Geospatial Model to Achieve Spatial Intelligence
‘Pokémon Go’ Players Are Training AI Models To See The World
The Drone Wars: You Are Not Prepared
BELLINGFEST DAY 1 (Niantic exec questioned on potential military use)
Niantic Exec Comments On Governments Buying Pokémon GO Data
Episode 145 – You Are Being Gamed
Most Disturbing Presentation Ever: Our Tech Nightmare (“Skinner Box”) DICE 2010
Why Did Trump Buckle with CIA Appointment?
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | December 19, 2024
Before he even takes office, President-elect Trump has buckled to the CIA and its supporters in the U.S. Senate. Trump intended to appoint Amaryllis Fox Kennedy, who is married to the son of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., as deputy director of the CIA. Given opposition among CIA supporters in the U.S. Senate, however, Trump has buckled and is withdrawing Fox Kennedy’s name from consideration.
But wait a minute! The office of deputy director of the CIA doesn’t require Senate confirmation. Trump has the authority to follow through with his plan and appoint Fox Kennedy to the post regardless of what any member of the U.S. Senate — or, for that matter, any member of the CIA — says.
Of course, it’s not surprising that the CIA or its supporters in Congress would fiercely oppose the appointment of any close relative of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., as the CIA’s deputy director. What if one day Fox Kennedy, for example, were to send out an order stating the following: “I want to see the CIA’s files relating to George Joannides” (or any other files or records relating to the JFK assassination). What then? CIA personnel would then be forced into a position of refusing to obey an order of the agency’s deputy director to produce such records for her review.
During the 1970s, the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations had reopened the investigation in the JFK assassination, with a major focus on the CIA. The CIA appointed Joannides to serve as a liaison to the House Select Committee, with the ostensible aim of assisting investigators to secure whatever CIA records they needed. As it turned out many years later, it was a standard CIA lie. In actuality, Joannides was appointed to serve as an obstacle, with the aim of preventing the House investigators from accessing CIA records relating to the assassination.
It gets worse. As former Washington Post investigative reporter Jefferson Morley discovered after the Assassination Records Review Board had gone out of existence in the late 1990s, Joannides had played a critically important role in matters relating to the assassination back in 1963. He had served as the CIA liaison to a group of Cuban exiles in New Orleans called the DRE, which the CIA was funding generously and supervising — secretly, of course.
Immediately after the assassination, the DRE sent out a press release detailing the communist bona fides of Lee Harvey Oswald, thereby quickly establishing the image that the president had been killed by a “communist.”
When former head of the ARRB, federal judge John Tunheim learned about Joannides’s secret role with the DRE, he stated that CIA has misled the ARRB and that had the ARRB known the truth about Joannides, he would have been called as a witness.
Morley fought an 11-year court battle to secure the CIA’s records on Joanndes. Why 11 years? Because the CIA fought fiercely to protect the secrecy of its Joannides records. Not surprisingly, the federal judiciary ended up ruling in favor of the CIA. To this day, the CIA fiercely protects the secrecy of its Joannides files.
Can you imagine the internal CIA uproar if Fox Kennedy issued an order to place the Joannides files on her desk? They wouldn’t have any excuse to say no, like they did with Morley. That’s because Fox Kennedy worked as a CIA official for some ten years and, thus, surely would have all the required security clearances to review the files. The CIA obviously could not let a Kennedy family member see those files.
Needless to say, it is extremely disappointing to see Trump buckle on any matter relating to the CIA before even he takes office. It would have been nice to see him stand up to the CIA and its supporters in Congress and stick with his initial plans to appoint Fox Kennedy as deputy director.
But of course this is not the first time that Trump has buckled when it comes to the CIA. The last time he was president he announced that he was going to order the release of the long-secret CIA records stretching back to the ARRB’s term in the 1990s. In the week before the scheduled release, however, Trump received a visit by the CIA director. After that visit, Trump announced that he was no longer going to release the records.
Moreover, I am confident that it will not be the last time that Trump buckles with respect to the CIA. Before his election, Trump told podcaster Joe Rogan that if he were to be reelected, this time around he would order the release of those long-secret records. My prediction? The CIA will visit Trump again and oppose the release of its long secret records, at which point I predict that Trump will buckle again, release a few records to make it look good, but keep the vast majority of them secret. Assuming that Trump doesn’t indefinitely delay making a decision, we will soon find out if I am right.
Blinded to Syria
By Patrick Lawrence | Consortium News | December 15, 2024
Decades after deploying mass violence and rendering citizens grotesquely ignorant of the world, U.S.-led powers appear willing to risk world war, while reinventing a terrorist to lead what was a secular nation until last week.
I do not know anyone who was not shocked by the lightning speed with which Damascus fell to expensively armed jihadist militias last weekend.
I know very few people who do not understand that another domino has just fallen in the “seven-front war” Benjamin Netanyahu has boasted this year of waging across West Asia. I know very few people who do not recognize that terrorist Israel is well on the way to establishing itself as a dictatorial hegemon across the region.
I know very few people who do not understand that the longstanding project of the Zionist neoconservatives, who have more or less controlled U.S. foreign policy for decades, i.e., “remaking the Middle East,” is the design behind all that has occurred since the Israelis launched their attack on Gaza on Oct. 7, 2023.
I do not know anyone who has achieved the age of reason who does not recognize the U.S. hand in the stunning sweep through Syria of Hay`at Tahrir al–Sham, long-recognized as a terrorist organization. All one needs to grasp this is a little history.
But I know of no corporate or state-funded medium on either side of the Atlantic — the major dailies, the broadcast networks, NPR, PBS, the BBC — where you can read or hear about any of this.
Blinding Us
Mainstream media are doing exactly what they did as the U.S.–led “regime change” operation in Syria began in early 2012 at the latest and probably in the final months of 2011: They are making sure the events now unfolding in Syria are not quite illegible but nearly.
It is again a question of knowing the history. In the case of Hay`at Tahrir al–Sham and the other jihadists who knocked over the Assad regime as if it were made of Lego blocks, it is another exercise in dressing up a monster in a suit and tie.
The corporate press and broadcasters are now resolutely recasting the murderous fanatics who have seized control of Syria as legitimate “rebels.” Rebels, rebels, rebels: This is the approved terminology.
I see they have left off describing these Sunni zealots as the “moderate rebels” of yesteryear, that phrase having been hopelessly discredited last time around, but the drift is the same: These are civilized people out there trying to do the right thing.
My favorite in this line appeared in The Daily Telegraph several days before the Assad government collapsed: “How Syria’s ‘diversity-friendly’ jihadists plan on building a state.” I had to read this one twice, too.
Nowhere but nowhere in the West’s mass media can you find even a mention of the U.S.–Turkish-and-probably–Israeli support that made possible the swift sweep of Hay`at Tahrir al–Sham and its ever-bickering allies from its seat in the Idlib governorate through Hama and other cities to the center of Damascus.
This is, like the earlier years of the Western-backed terrorist attacks on the Assad regime, and like the proxy war in Ukraine, and like the Saudis’ U.S.–supported war against Yemen, and like the Israeli genocide against the Palestinians of Gaza, and like the Israelis’ attacks in Lebanon, sponsored military aggression we are not permitted to see without considerable effort to transcend official representations of reality.
Understanding Who the Americans Are
What happened, what is happening, what will happen: I do not know anyone who is not asking these questions, too.
We must go back and back and back further to understand what has just occurred in Syria and to understand why, and finally to understand who Americans are and who they have been for all the decades since the 1945 victories.
It is logical to begin this pencil-sketch of the past with the famous coups of the 1950s. These occurred in Iran, where the C.I.A., working with MI6, deposed Mohammed Mossadegh as Iran’s prime minister in August 1953, and in Guatemala, where an agency operation forced Jacobo Árbenz from the presidency a year later.
It is striking today to consider a few of the features of these operations. Stimulating various social and economic antagonisms to foment public unrest and an appearance of political disorder was key in both cases. Both coups removed popularly elected leaders and installed repressive puppets.
There was violence in both cases, but by later standards these operations were something close to surgical. Mossadegh withdrew to his farm in the Iranian countryside; Árbenz, a Swiss pharmacist by background, spent his last years wandering dejectedly through Europe.
An appearance of propriety was important back then. Most Americans were unaware that the C.I.A. had engineered the events in Tehran and Guatemala City. And in the Iranian case, something to note: Removing Iran’s first elected prime minister set in motion a wave of blowback that continues to break over U.S.–Iranian relations; in Guatemala it led to a civil war that endured for 36 years.
The C.I.A. considered the coup in Iran a useful model – Guatemala its next application. But in 1965 the agency began to do things very differently when it organized the coup that brought down Sukarno, independent Indonesia’s charismatic founding father and its first president.
The Jakarta Model
Vincent Blevins, a seasoned foreign correspondent, got this down better than anyone in The Jakarta Method: Washington’s Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World (Public Affairs, 2020). With the Cold War approaching its worst years, the Indonesian coup was the first, as Blevins’s subtitle indicates, to submerge an entire nation in prolonged violence.
There are various figures for the number of deaths that resulted as the agency installed the dictatorial, bottomlessly corrupt Suharto in the presidential palace in 1967. Blevins puts it at a million or more. Along with the deaths, the nation’s previously lively political culture was extinguished until Suharto fell 32 years later.
The Jakarta Method was subsequently applied in various other circumstances, notably but not only in the 1973 coup that deposed Salvador Allende in Chile and installed Augusto Pinochet, a vicious dictator in the Suharto mold. Nine years later Zbigniew Brzezinski put a modified version to use in Afghanistan.
Blind to US Support for Jihadism
As Jimmy Carter’s relentlessly anti–Soviet national security adviser, Brzezinski persuaded Carter to back the mujahideen then fighting the Moscow-backed regime in Kabul. The result was the well-armed, well-financed force named al–Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden.
And so we come, via the campaigns of mass violence in Iraq and Libya and the proxy war in Ukraine, to the Syrian operation. People who rely on mainstream media still have a hard time accepting that the U.S. and its trans–Atlantic allies backed al–Qaeda’s Syrian forces, the Islamic State, and their heinous offshoots in their war against the Assad regime.
There are no grounds whatsoever for this disbelief. The U.S. operation in Syria is a straight readout of Brzezinski’s Afghanistan strategy. Sharmine Narwani, the tenacious Beirut-based correspondent and the founding editor of The Cradle, reported the American op first-hand as it unfolded. She recounted what she saw in an impressively detailed interview I published in 2019. It is here and here in two parts.
It Wasn’t Over
By 2018–19, it was obvious that the C.I.A.’s Syrian operation, in my judgment its largest since the Cold War’s end, had failed after several years of Russia’s bombing campaign against the Islamic State. Everyone making this judgment, myself included, forgot to add four essential words: It had failed for the time being.
Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham was founded at the start of the covert U.S. intervention, in 2011–12. Its name translates as Organization for the Liberation of the Levant.
Liberating the Levant is a very good idea, but HTS does not mean this the way anyone opposed to the Western powers’ long and violent domination of West Asia would mean it. HTS shared with the Islamic State an ambition to establish a caliphate ruled by radical interpretations of Islamic law.
In May 2018 the State Department added HTS to its list of foreign terrorist organizations, FTOs in the parlance of the apparatchiks. It is a direct descendent of Jabhat al–Nusra, which was the worst of the worst among al–Qaeda’s shape-shifting affiliates operating in Syria.
By the time HTS made the list, Jabhat al–Nusra was already on it. They both remain on it as we speak.
HTS was founded by Abu Mohammad al–Jolani, a nom de guerre now all over the news: He has long led HTS and appears now to have plans to make himself Syria’s next president. When he spoke at a celebrated mosque in Damascus last week, he shed the public alias in favor of his real name, Ahmed al–Shara.
Jolani’s background is not to be missed. He was once an Islamic State commander who went on to found Jabhat al–Nusra and, after a violent split, HTS.
As the HTS leader, he was implicated in numerous cases of torture, violence, sexual abuse, arbitrary arrests, disappearances, and so on. Reflecting his singular malignity, the State Department had declared Jolani a “specially designated global terrorist” as far back as 2013.
That designation still stood in 2021. Then something odd, and in hindsight very revealing, occurred.
Rehabilitating Jolani
In April of that year PBS broadcast the first interview with Jolani ever to appear in any Western medium. It was conducted by Martin Smith, a longtime broadcast correspondent with a good reputation.
And there on camera was the specially designated terrorist in a blue blazer and a buttoned-down shirt, telling Smith he planned to build a “salvation government” in Syria.
Smith was not shy, to his credit, in his review of Jolani’s horrific record. But he gave his interview subject ample airtime to make his that-was-then-this-is-now argument.
There was no talk of a caliphate, despite how HTS still named itself. It was about sound local governance. Yes, this would be according to Sharia law, but it would be a kind-and-gentle Sharia law.
The Martin Smith interview, it is now evident, was highly significant for its timing and its implications for U.S. policy. It is almost certain that it signaled an already-in-train revival of the Syrian operation; certainly it marked the start of the preposterous reinvention of Jolani that is now ubiquitous in Western media.
It is a long way from those first postwar coups — large in ambition and implications but small in scale as they look to us now. Since the Jakarta Method was devised in the mid–1960s, mass murder programs have shaped our world just as Vincent Blevins insightfully put it.
Committed to Mass Violence
The questions noted at the start of this commentary remain those we must ask: What happened, what is happening, what will happen. Clarity on these matters arrives by degrees — not by way of official accounts or the corporate press, but in independent media. For now, two conclusions.
One, the U.S. and its trans–Atlantic allies are now thoroughly committed to mass violence. This means it is difficult to avoid concluding that the Western powers and Israel will turn to Iran once Syria as a functioning polity has been thoroughly disabled.
What has prompted the U.S. and Israel to exercise caution to date has been the risk of what would without doubt be a cataclysmic conflict that could tip into another world war.
With a six-decade history of mass violence behind them, these powers now appear willing to take this risk. There is little ground left to continue questioning this.
Two, we now witness the reinvention of a viciously intolerant terrorist given to waging holy wars as an acceptable presence at the head of what was a secular nation until earlier this month.
We must read this as the outcome — the successful outcome — of an eight-decade campaign to render the citizens of the Western powers grotesquely ignorant of the world in which they live.
The New York Times and other major dailies continue to lie by omission about U.S. support for Jolani and the organization he leads, even as both are officially designated terrorists. But something worth considering here: These media ran interesting photographs with their initial stories on the militias’ sudden offensive, showing rocket launchers and armored personnel carriers of obvious Western manufacture. Here is one such picture and here is another.
I see these pictures and the accompanying stories as mirrors. They show us exactly who we are, what we have become — and also the extent to which we are encouraged not to see either.
There are no true surprises in what we witness now in Syria. It is an old story. We have been blinded to it, along with many other things to which we have been blinded. Most fundamentally we have been rendered blind to ourselves.
Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a columnist, essayist, lecturer and author, most recently of Journalists and Their Shadows.
How the US and Israel Destroyed Syria and Called it Peace
By Jeffrey D. Sachs | Common Dreams | December 12, 2024
In the famous lines of Tacitus, Roman historian, “To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace.”
In our age, it is Israel and the U.S. that make a desert and call it peace.
The story is simple. In stark violation of international law, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers claim the right to rule over seven million Palestinian Arabs. When Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands leads to militant resistance, Israel labels the resistance “terrorism” and calls on the U.S. to overthrow the Middle East governments that back the “terrorists.” The U.S., under the sway of the Israel Lobby, goes to war on Israel’s behalf.
The fall of Syria this week is the culmination of the Israel-U.S. campaign against Syria that goes back to 1996 with Netanyahu’s arrival to office as Prime Minister. The Israel-U.S. war on Syria escalated in 2011 and 2012, when Barack Obama covertly tasked the CIA with the overthrow of the Syrian Government in Operation Timber Sycamore. That effort finally came to “fruition” this week, after more than 300,000 deaths in the Syrian war since 2011.
Syria’s fall came swiftly because of more than a decade of crushing economic sanctions, the burdens of war, the U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil, Russia’s priorities regarding the conflict in Ukraine, and most immediately, Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah, which was the key military backstop to the Syrian Government. No doubt Assad often misplayed his own hand and faced severe internal discontent, but his regime was targeted for collapse for decades by the U.S. and Israel.
Before the U.S.-Israel campaign to overthrow Assad began in earnest in 2011, Syria was a functioning, growing middle-income country. In January 2009, the IMF Executive Board had this to say:
Executive Directors welcomed Syria’s strong macroeconomic performance in recent years, as manifested in the rapid non-oil GDP growth, comfortable level of foreign reserves, and low and declining government debt. This performance reflected both robust regional demand and the authorities’ reform efforts to shift toward a more market- based economy.
Since 2011, the Israel-U.S. perpetual war on Syria, including bombing, jihadists, economic sanctions, U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil fields, and more, has sunk the Syrian people into misery.
In the immediate two days following the collapse of the government, Israel conducted about 480 strikes across Syria, and completely destroyed the Syrian fleet in Latakia. Pursuing his expansionist agenda, Prime Minister Netanyahu illegally claimed control over the demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights and declared that the Golan Heights will be a part of the State of Israel “for eternity.”
Netanyahu’s ambition to transform the region through war, which dates back almost three decades, is playing out in front of our eyes. In a press conference on December 9th, the Israeli prime minister boasted of an “absolute victory,” justifying the on-going genocide in Gaza and escalating violence throughout the region:
I ask you, just think, if we had acceded to those who told us time and again: “The war must be stopped”– we would not have entered Rafah, we would not have seized the Philadelphia Corridor, we would not have eliminated Sinwar, we would not have surprised our enemies in Lebanon and the entire world in a daring operation-stratagem, we would not have eliminated Nasrallah, we would not have destroyed Hezbollah’s underground network, and we would not have exposed Iran’s weakness. The operations that we have carried out since the beginning of the war are dismantling the axis brick by brick.
The long history of Israel’s campaign to overthrow the Syrian Government is not widely understood, yet the documentary record is clear. Israel’s war on Syria began with U.S. and Israeli neoconservatives in 1996, who fashioned a “Clean Break” strategy for the Middle East for Netanyahu as he came to office. The core of the “clean break” strategy called for Israel (and the US) to reject “land for peace,” the idea that Israel would withdraw from the occupied Palestinian lands in return for peace. Instead, Israel would retain the occupied Palestinian lands, rule over the Palestinian people in an Apartheid state, step-by-step ethnically cleanse the state, and enforce so-called “peace for peace” by overthrowing neighboring governments that resisted Israel’s land claims.
The Clean Break strategy asserts, “Our claim to the land—to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years—is legitimate and noble,” and goes on to state, “Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon…”
In his 1996 book Fighting Terrorism, Netanyahu set out the new strategy. Israel would not fight the terrorists; it would fight the states that support the terrorists. More accurately, it would get the US to do Israel’s fighting for it. As he elaborated in 2001:
The first and most crucial thing to understand is this: There is no international terrorism without the support of sovereign states… Take away all this state support, and the entire scaffolding of international terrorism will collapse into dust.
Netanyahu’s strategy was integrated into U.S. foreign policy. Taking out Syria was always a key part of the plan. This was confirmed to General Wesley Clark after 9/11. He was told, during a visit at the Pentagon, that “we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” Iraq would be first, then Syria, and the rest. (Netanyahu’s campaign for the Iraq War is spelled out in detail in Dennis Fritz’s new book, Deadly Betrayal. The role of the Israel Lobby is spelled out in Ilan Pappé’s new book, Lobbying for Zionism on Both Sides of the Atlantic). The insurgency that hit U.S. troops in Iraq set back the five-year timeline, but did not change the basic strategy.
The U.S. has by now led or sponsored wars against Iraq (invasion in 2003), Lebanon (U.S. funding and arming Israel), Libya (NATO bombing in 2011), Syria (CIA operation during 2010’s), Sudan (supporting rebels to break Sudan apart in 2011), and Somalia (backing Ethiopia’s invasion in 2006). A prospective U.S. war with Iran, ardently sought by Israel, is still pending.
Strange as it might seem, the CIA has repeatedly backed Islamist Jihadists to fight these wars, and jihadists have just toppled the Syrian regime. The CIA, after all, helped to create al-Qaeda in the first place by training, arming, and financing the Mujahideen in Afghanistan from the late 1970s onward. Yes, Osama bin Laden later turned on the U.S., but his movement was a U.S. creation all the same. Ironically, as Seymour Hersh confirms, it was Assad’s intelligence that “tipped off the U.S. to an impending Al Qaeda bombing attack on the headquarters of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet.”
Operation Timber Sycamore was a billion-dollar CIA covert program launched by Obama to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. The CIA funded, trained, and provided intelligence to radical and extreme Islamist groups. The CIA effort also involved a “rat line” to run weapons from Libya (attacked by NATO in 2011) to the jihadists in Syria. In 2014, Seymour Hersh described the operation in his piece “The Red Line and the Rat Line”:
“A highly classified annex to the report, not made public, described a secret agreement reached in early 2012 between the Obama and Erdoğan administrations. It pertained to the rat line. By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria.”
Soon after the launch of Timber Sycamore, in March 2013, at a joint conference by President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House, Obama said: “With respect to Syria, the United States continues to work with allies and friends and the Syrian opposition to hasten the end of Assad’s rule.”
To the U.S.-Israeli Zionist mentality, a call for negotiation by an adversary is taken as a sign of weakness of the adversary. Those who call for negotiations on the other side typically end up dead—murdered by Israel or U.S. assets. We’ve seen this play out recently in Lebanon. The Lebanese Foreign Minister confirmed that Hassan Nasrallah, Former Secretary-General of Hezbollah had agreed to a ceasefire with Israel days before his assassination. Hezbollah’s willingness to accept a peace agreement according to the Arab-Islamic world’s wishes of a two-state solution is long-standing. Similarly, instead of negotiating to end the war in Gaza, Israel assassinated Hamas’ political chief, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran.
Similarly in Syria, instead of allowing for a political solution to emerge, the U.S. opposed the peace process multiple times. In 2012, the UN had negotiated a peace agreement in Syria that was blocked by the Americans, who demanded that Assad must go on the first day of the peace agreement. The U.S. wanted regime change, not peace. In September 2024, Netanyahu addressed the General Assembly with a map of the Middle East divided between “Blessing” and “Curse,” with Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran as part of Netanyahu’s curse. The real curse is Israel’s path of mayhem and war, which has now engulfed Lebanon and Syria, with Netayahu’s fervent hope to draw the U.S. into war with Iran as well.
The U.S. and Israel are high-fiving that they have successfully wrecked yet another adversary of Israel and defender of the Palestinian cause, with Netanyahu claiming “credit for starting the historic process.” Most likely Syria will now succumb to continued war among the many armed protagonists, as has happened in the previous U.S.-Israeli regime-change operations.
In short, American interference, at the behest of Netanyahu’s Israel, has left the Middle East in ruins, with over a million dead and open wars raging in Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, and with Iran on the brink of a nuclear arsenal, being pushed against its own inclinations to this eventuality.
All this is in the service of a profoundly unjust cause: to deny Palestinians their political rights in the service of Zionist extremism based on the 7th century BCE Book of Joshua. Remarkably, according to that text—one relied on by Israel’s own religious zealots—the Israelites were not even the original inhabitants of the land. Rather, according the text, God instructs Joshua and his warriors to commit multiple genocides to conquer the land.
Against this backdrop, the Arab-Islamic nations and indeed almost all of the world have repeatedly united in the call for a two-state solution and peace between Israel and Palestine.
Instead of the two-state solution, Israel and the U.S. have made a desert and called it peace.
Exposing CIA/MI6 ‘Justice’ Operations in Syria
By Kit Klarenberg | Global Delinquents | December 12, 2024
In the immediate wake of the Syrian government’s abrupt collapse, much remains uncertain about the country’s future. While longtime leader Bashar Assad has sought refuge in Moscow, most of his government and its military, security, and intelligence apparatus remains in Damascus. Calls for reconciliation between officials and the predominantly foreign “opposition” abound, but the prospect of show trials for state apparatchiks is high. After all, elements of Anglo-American intelligence have been planning for such an eventuality since before the Syrian civil war even started.
In May 2011, the Commission for International Justice and Accountability (CIJA) was birthed by shadowy NATO state contractors, ARK and Tsamota. Its first act was to train handpicked Syrian “investigators, lawyers, and activists in basic international criminal and humanitarian law… enabling [them] to link state and non-state actors to underlying criminal acts.” Dedicated “teams of investigators according to their regions” – including Aleppo, Hama, Homs, and Idlib – were created, “and equipped with field investigative kits.”
Their objective was to gather evidence of war crimes committed by Syrian government forces, in support of a “domestic justice process in a future transitional Syria.” We must ask ourselves how such a project came to be before the Syrian army was formally deployed by Damascus, in response to the foreign-fomented crisis that commenced in mid-March that year. Particularly given bringing officials to trial in a “future transitional Syria” was wholly contingent on all-out regime change.
The timing of CIJA’s launch is a palpable indication foreign actors were laying foundations for that eventuality from the very first days of Syria’s “peaceful revolution”, before full-blown civil war had erupted. Given the affiliations of ARK and Tsamota, the pair were well-placed to know in advance of plans by Western governments to topple the Assad government via brute force. Now that has come to pass, it may be time for their long-standing plan to at last be put into action.
‘Regime Change’
Founded by MI6 journeyman Alistair Harris, ARK was one of a constellation of contractors, staffed by military and intelligence veterans, employed by British intelligence at a cost of many millions to conduct covert psychological warfare campaigns in Syria, from the initial days of the crisis. The aim was to destabilise Assad’s government, convince the domestic population, international bodies and Western citizens that genocidal CIA and MI6-backed militant groups pillaging the country were a “moderate” alternative, and deluge media the world over with pro-opposition propaganda.
Under this operation’s auspices, ARK founded and ran numerous ostensibly independent opposition media outlets targeting Syrians of all ages, while tutoring and equipping countless local “citizen journalists”, teaching them “camera handling, lighting, sound, interviewing, filming a story… video and sound editing… voice-over, scriptwriting,” and “graphics and 2D and 3D animation design.” The firm’s students were also instructed in practical propaganda theory, such as “target audience identification, media narrative analysis and monitoring, behavioral identification/understanding, campaign planning, behavioral change, and how communications can influence it.”
Such was ARK’s intimate proximity with anti-Assad elements, it boasted in leaked submissions to the Foreign Office of being entrusted by Western governments to develop a dedicated Office for Syrian Opposition Support. This entity identified the most promising groups for the proxy war’s sponsors to finance, in turn “[helping] present them to international donors, and provide access to networks that could deliver assistance.” These efforts intensified “as the conflict deepened and it became apparent that regime change would not occur in the short term.”
Tsamota’s primitive official website describes the company as “a security and justice sector consultancy which provides rule of law, forensics and natural resources advisory services,” working in “in politically, legally, socially and logistically challenging environments” for Western governments. The firm is not a compelling candidate for holding government officials anywhere accountable for war crimes. Tsamota has since inception offered guidance to major corporations on how to maximise profits in the Global South, while limiting their local and international legal liabilities.
In 2013, Tsamota director William Wiley gave a scandalous presentation to Canadian consortium MineAfrica Inc. In it, he set out a series of hypothetical scenarios in which mining companies operating in countries such as the Congo and Mali employed private security firms to crack down on striking workers, or deal with “local militias” interfering with their operations. Wiley outlined a number of means by which companies could be insulated from repercussions of heavy-handed responses to such incidents, up to and including murder.
That presentation described Tsamota as composed of “experts” drawn from “national police, military and intelligence forces.” Wiley is no exception, having served in the Canadian military for almost two decades. Subsequently, he turned to international law, among other things overseeing the trial of Saddam Hussein October 2005 – December 2006, for crimes against humanity. Mainstream accounts acknowledge Wiley was imposed on the former Iraqi leader’s defence team without consent – a major breach of basic legal norms – by the US embassy in Baghdad’s Regime Crimes Liaison Office.
After capture, Hussein was initially interrogated by the CIA. Contemporary media reports note there was significant concern within the Agency that “their questioning could become public during his eventual trial,” raising issues around “how to conduct the questioning and record the conversations.” The reasons why were unstated, although a likely explanation was Washington wished to avoid awkward disclosures in court about Hussein’s long-running relationship with the CIA, and active US complicity in many of the most heinous crimes of which he was accused.
To say the least, this was a sensitive role indeed. Even prominent Iraqi supporters of US invasion and occupation charged Baghdad’s “interim” puppet government was seeking “show trials followed by speedy executions” of Hussein et al to boost its credibility. That Wiley was entrusted with this mission speaks volumes about his reliability from the US government’s perspective. It also raises obvious questions about the nature of his relationship with the CIA, and whether that bond influenced CIJA’s creation half a decade later.
‘Moving Documents’
A series of leaked ARK files on CIJA’s activities authored in the years immediately following its creation make grand claims about its achievements. One declares the Commission “innovated in the field of transitional justice… aiding the collection of evidence to document war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other violations of International Humanitarian Law” in Syria. Another states its work represented “a landmark development in international justice: the contemporaneous gathering of evidence of violations of international humanitarian law conducted by regime forces”:
“[CIJA], through expert training, effective equipment provision and a commitment to the truth were able to ensure that when the conflict ends, the raw material of a post-conflict war crimes process is ready for trial, in turn providing a key contribution to truth telling, reconciliation and the future of Syria.”
Elsewhere, ARK boasted how CIJA had seized thousands of kilograms of “contemporaneous documentation”, hundreds of thousands of pages of “evidential material” and thousands of videos from Syria, “all of which had to be hand carried” out of the country. Cut to February 2021, and Commission chair Stephen Rapp, a US diplomatic warhorse, bragged to CBS about the sheer volume of evidence CIJA collected. He claimed the papertrail exposed a systematic strategy of Assad government-directed executions of opposition activists, along with ensuing coverups:
“Now we have 800,000 pages of original documents, signed and sealed with original signatures going all the way up to Assad that document this whole strategy…We see reports back about ‘well, we’ve got a real problem here, there are too many corpses stacking up, somebody’s gonna have to help us with that’… Everything is handled in this sort of totalitarian system where they frankly think they can get away with things… they were almost stupid… they created evidence.”
If such damning, incontrovertible proof was bagged at any stage by CIJA, it has never emerged publicly. Still, throughout the Syrian dirty war, the Commission enjoyed glowing profiles in Western media, while providing journalists and rights groups with multiple scoops supposedly exposing Syrian government atrocities. At no point did any mainstream reporter or NGO question, let alone raise concerns about, the manner in which the Commission garnered the material upon which its cases against government officials in Damascus was “hand carried” out of the country.
CIJA chief Wiley acknowledged in 2014 that his organisation smuggled evidence from Syria by working with every opposition group “up to but excluding Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State.” However, a 2019 investigation by The Grayzone amply indicates that CIJA was frequently in extremely close quarters with both groups. Moreover, they were paid handsomely for their assistance in securing documentation. This included material seized in Raqqa after its January 2014 capture by ISIS, right when the ultra-extremist group was massacring Alawites and Christians.
In a 2016 New Yorker profile of CIJA, Wiley detailed the practical hassles and financial drain inherent in “moving documents [over] international borders” and opposition-controlled “checkpoints”, while relying on “rebel groups and couriers for logistical support.” He described how bundles of government files “typically” arrived at the Commission’s offices “in a dizzying array of crappy suitcases.” Wiley lamented, “we burn enormous sums of money moving this stuff.”
Accordingly, CIJA received tens of millions of dollars for its efforts from a variety of Western governments, including those at the forefront of the Syrian dirty war. Despite the vast windfall, the Commission’s work produced zero prosecutions for many years. This changed in late 2019, when Anwar Raslan and Eyad Gharib, two former members of Damascus’ General Intelligence Directorate, were indicted in Germany for crimes against humanity.
‘Many Contradictions’
Raslan headed the Directorate’s domestic security unit, while Gharib was one of his departmental subordinates. The pair defected to the opposition in December 2012. Raslan and his family fled to Jordan, where he played “an active and visible role in the Syrian opposition.” He was part of the anti-Assad delegation at the Geneva II conference on Syria in January 2014, and in July that year, was granted asylum in Germany.
After his escape from Syria, Raslan told numerous lurid tales of abuse and atrocities perpetrated by his unit, and the Assad government more widely, during his 20 years of state service. He claimed his defection was spurred after learning an apparent opposition attack in Damascus that he was charged with investigating was, in fact, staged by security forces. Significant doubts about his accounts, and whether his defection was principled or just cynical opportunism, have been raised in many quarters.
Artist’s rendition of Raslan’s trial
In a perverse irony, Raslan’s loudmouth propensity was his undoing. His assorted claims post-defection provided grounds for arrest by German authorities, and were used against him and Gharib in their prosecutions. These legal actions heavily relied on documents seized by CIJA, including Central Crisis Management Cell records. This unit was created in March 2011 by Damascus, to manage responses to mass rioting that erupted this month. These documents have been widely described as the “linchpin” of the Commission’s case against “the Syrian regime.”
Yet, as this journalist has previously exposed, the Central Crisis Management Cell files in fact show the Assad government explicitly and repeatedly instructed security forces to protect protesters, prevent violence, and keep the situation under control. The documents also detail how from inception, many “peaceful” demonstrators were extremely violent, while opposition fighters systematically murdered security service operatives, pro-government figures, and demonstrators to foment catastrophe, in a manner eerily similar to many CIA/MI6 regime change operations old and new.
In February 2021, Gharib was found guilty of aiding and abetting crimes against humanity. He received four-and-a-half years in prison. A year later, Raslan was given life for crimes including mass torture, rape, and murder. The pair were not convicted for personally perpetrating these horrors, but serving in the General Intelligence Directorate at the time they were allegedly committed. “Expert” witness evidence provided at their trials left much to be desired.
For example, judges and prosecutors alike expressed disquiet at “many contradictions” in the testimony of “P3”, a Syrian government operative who purportedly worked in a security service “mail department”, and was central to Gharib’s conviction. P3 professed to seeing sensitive documents “related to the transfer of corpses” of opposition activists “to burial sites.” They “provided contradictory information” in statements to German police and the court, and were “visibly nervous” while testifying. Throughout, their seemingly aghast attorney sat nearby “putting his hands behind his head.”
Meanwhile, during Raslan’s prosecution, “P4” – a nameless individual who claimed to have been detained in a Syrian prison, and bribed his way out – testified he saw 500,000 corpses buried via a “bulldozer and a truck” next to his house, in an area which was previously “a desert”. Reports of the trial indicate there “was a feeling” among those present in court, including “the public”, that these numbers were greatly “exaggerated.”
The sense that Gharib and Raslan were prosecuted because they were within easy reach, and CIJA needed something to show for all its well-remunerated efforts, is ineluctable. The Commission had strong grounds to be anxious about failing to fulfill its founding objective. In March 2020, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) formally accused the organization of “submission of false documents, irregular invoicing, and profiteering” relating to an EU “Rule of Law” project it ran in Syria.
Fast forward to today, and The Guardian reports that “the abrupt implosion of the infrastructure of state terror” in Syria “has made available a huge volume of evidence.” The outlet quoted CIJA chief William Wiley at some length. He compared Assad’s fall to “a situation much like Germany in 1945 or Iraq in 2003,” with “a sudden availability of all state records” making prosecution of state officials a fait accompli:
“It’s a very unusual situation, and its suddenness creates challenges and opportunities in simply dealing with the material… If there’s any security intelligence guy that rocks up in Europe, there’s typically going to be enough material already to hand.”
Syrian Women Exploited in MI6 Propaganda Ops
By Kit Klarenberg | Global Delinquents | December 5, 2024
The propaganda value of women in conflicts has long-been cynically exploited by Western intelligence services. A leaked CIA memorandum from March 2010 on covert means of increasing flagging support for NATO’s Afghanistan mission noted women “could serve as ideal messengers” in “humanizing” the military occupation. This was due to their “ability to speak personally and credibly about their experiences under the Taliban, their aspirations for the future, and their fears of a Taliban victory”:
“Outreach initiatives that create media opportunities for Afghan women to share their stories… could help to overcome pervasive skepticism among women in Western Europe toward the mission. Media events that feature testimonials by Afghan women would probably be most effective if broadcast on programs that have large and disproportionately female audiences.”
Throughout the US occupation of course, Afghanistan remained one of the worst countries in the world to be a woman, by some margin. Roughly a year after that CIA memo was authored, Gay Girl in Damascus, a blog purportedly written by Syrian-American lesbian Amina Arraf, garnered significant mainstream attention. Widely hailed for her “fearless” and “inspiring” eyewitness reporting, she was lauded as a symbol of the “progressive” revolution erupting in the country.
In June 2011, Amina’s cousin announced on the blog Amina had been kidnapped by three armed men in the Syrian capital. In response, numerous Facebook pages were set up calling for Amina’s release and ‘liked’ by tens of thousands, #FreeAmina trended widely on Twitter, journalists and rights groups begged Western governments to demand her release, and the US State Department announced it was investigating Amina’s disappearance.
Six days later, it was revealed ‘Amina’ was in fact Tom MacMaster, a middle-aged American man living in Scotland, who had penned extensive lesbian literotica fantasies under that alter ego. While corporate news outlets quickly forgot all about the hoax they’d so comprehensively fallen for, their appetite for dubious human interest stories emanating from the crisis wasn’t diminished.
‘Huge Global Coverage’
In July 2019, an image of two young Syrian girls trapped in rubble in opposition-occupied Idlib attempting to haul their sister to safety as she dangled off the precipice of a dilapidated building, their father looking on in horror above, spread far and wide on social media.
The photo, snapped by a photographer for Syrian news service SY24, went viral the world over. Unbeknownst to viewers though, SY24 was created and funded by Global Strategy Network, a prominent British intelligence cutout founded by Richard Barrett, former MI6 counter-terrorism director. In leaked submissions to the British Foreign Office, Global Strategy boasted of how its propaganda “campaigns” broadcast via SY24 generated “huge global coverage,” having been seen by “many hundreds of millions of people,” and “attracting comment as far as the UN Security Council.”
SY24 content was produced by a network of ‘stringers’ in Syria that Global Strategy trained and provided with equipment, including “cameras and video editing software.” The firm drew particular attention to a team of female journalists it had tutored, “who provide about 40 percent of all SY content,” and were part of “a broad ‘network of networks’” enabling the company “to drive stories into the mainstream.”
Global Strategy also established a dedicated centre for training female journalists to produce content for SY24 in Idlib, “accessing stories that male journalists cannot,” which were then shared on social media. It boasted that almost half of SY24’s followers were women, “a remarkably high ratio for Syria-focused platforms.”
Carefully cultivating an entirely misleading image of an inclusive, credible ‘moderate’ Syrian opposition was of paramount importance to British inelligence. It helped whitewash the barbarous nature of the various ‘rebel’ factions London was backing in the region, while simultaneously engendering support among Western citizens for regime change.
In order to engage the “international community” to this end, Global Strategy, in conjunction with ARK – a shadowy “conflict transformation and stabilization consultancy” headed by veteran MI6 officer Alistair Harris – planned “communication surges” around “key dates” such as International Women’s Day.
In a particularly elaborate example of such a “surge”, the pair collaborated on “Back to School”, a campaign in which young Syrians returned to education. Idlib City Council, opposition commanders, and other elements on the ground concurrently engaged in a “unified” communications blitz, using “shared slogans, hashtags and branding.” Rebel fighters were sent to “clear roads” and “enable children and teachers to get to schools,” all the while filmed by the pair’s voluminous local journalist network, footage of which was then “disseminated online and on broadcast channels.”
Ensuring “female teachers” received sizeable coverage in the Western media was a key objective of the campaign. Furthermore, in many leaked files, ARK boasted of the huge network of journalists it had trained and funded in Syria, who would cover such PR stunts, secretly orchestrated by the organisation. Their reports in turn fed to the firm’s “well-established contacts” at major news outlets including Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, The Guardian, New York Times, and Reuters, “further amplifying their effect.”
‘Thrust by Tragedy’
Other documents make clear ARK well-understood the immense difficulties of promoting the role of women internally and externally during the crisis. One file on “[incorporating] the role of women in the moderate opposition” notes Syrian women in rebel-occupied areas faced “an almost overwhelming variety of problems,” and “the space for women to participate in public life has contracted significantly as the conflict has progressed.”
As a result, ARK was “extremely aware of the risks of promoting women’s participation beyond currently accepted social norms… given the potential to hinder message resonance or result in a backlash against female participation.” It therefore proposed to “subtly reframe the narrative of women… increasing the amount of coverage of their initiatives and opinions as the context allows.”
One means of “subtle reframing” was Moubader (which translates to “person who takes initiative”), a media asset created by ARK in 2015, comprising a “high-quality hard copy monthly magazine with widespread distribution across opposition-held areas of Syria,” with a website and Facebook page boasting almost 200,000 likes. Moubader was established by ARK to achieve “behavioural change” in readers. “Given the importance of broadcast television as a trusted source” in Syria, ARK also sought British intelligence funding to develop a Moubader TV programme, to “leverage stories and values to maximum effect and reach an even wider audience.”
Documents submitted to the Foreign Office by another intelligence cutout, Albany, similarly noted women’s access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunity had “been debilitated” during the crisis, which issues such as early marriage, child military recruitment, and “transactional sex” exacerbated. The UN defines the latter as “non-commercial sexual relationships motivated by an implicit assumption that sex will be exchanged for material support or other benefits.”
Still, Albany considered so many Syrian women having been “thrust by tragedy into head of household and breadwinner positions” over the course of the crisis as a golden opportunity to propagandize them and, in turn, their families, while promoting the ‘inclusive’ nature of the opposition, by creating and partnering with female civil society organizations and journalists.
ARK likewise believed women to be a “critical audience”, given the number of Syrian households with female heads –“up to 70 percent”. So, the organisation sought to ensure they were well-represented in all its domestic and international “broadcast products”, as well as on social media.
‘Female Participation’
Unsurprisingly, the files do not acknowledge the increasingly hostile environment for women in Syria directly resulted from foreign efforts to destabilise and depose its government. ISIS and al-Nusra were and remain rightly notorious for their monstrous treatment of women in the areas they occupied, which included widespread rape, sexual violence and abduction.
However, many armed opposition groups backed by Britain and other foreign powers imposed stringent restrictions on women in the areas they occupied, requiring them to wear hijabs and abayas, doling out extreme punishments for failing to comply, imposing discriminatory measures prohibiting them from moving freely, working, attending school, and more.
There are indications British intelligence was in close quarters with such activities. For instance, in December 2017 BBC documentary Jihadis You Pay For alleged Foreign Office cash distributed on its behalf via contrator Adam Smith International in Syria ended up in the pockets of Free Syrian Police (FSP) officers who not only stood by while women were stoned to death, but closed surrounding roads to facilitate their murder.
The ‘Free Syria Police’ at work
FSP, an unarmed shadow civilian police force operating in opposition-controlled areas, was created, funded and trained under the auspices of the British intelligence-funded Access to Justice and Community Security (AJACS) program. In a perverse irony, leaked Adam Smith International files relating to the project indicate it too sought to exploit women for propaganda purposes, applying a gender policy “to encourage female participation in justice and policing.” The company boasted of how, of the 1,868 police officers it trained under the scheme, six – 0.32 percent – were female.
Quite some “revolution”. As Human Rights Watch noted in 2014, prior to the outbreak of civil war, women and girls across Syria were “largely able to participate in public life, including work and school, and exercise freedom of movement, religion, and conscience.” While the country’s penal code and laws governing issues such as marriage, divorce, and inheritance contained some discriminatory provisions, the country’s constitution guaranteed gender equality.
Biden’s Parting Shot at America
By Ron Paul | December 2, 2024
The interim between a US presidential election and the swearing in of a new Administration has for most of our history been a non-eventful period where the outgoing Administration winds down operations and the incoming Administration ramps up new personnel before the inauguration.
The 20th Amendment to our Constitution was enacted in 1933 to reduce the “lame duck” period between election and inauguration to January 20th instead of March 4th. Increasing ease in travel and communications made such a long interim unnecessary. However long the transition period, it has been understood that with the new election came a new mandate from the American people and the “lame duck” outgoing administration was meant to quietly quack out its last few days in office without incident.
Then came Biden. In the period since the American people rejected Biden’s neocon interventionists in favor of Donald Trump’s promises to end the wars, the “lame duck” has run roughshod over the will of the American people. Whoever is running Biden – and the answer is unclear – has decided to “Trump proof” foreign policy to bring us to the literal brink of WWIII with Russia. And to top it off, Biden’s people this past week have again unleashed al-Qaeda linked rebels to wreak havoc in Syria!
After solidly opposing the neocon demand that Ukraine be given permission to fire US weapons deep into Russia, President Biden in the waning days of his presidency suddenly reversed course and granted permission. From back in 2022, when Russia first went into Ukraine, Biden had argued against sending offensive weaponry and US troops to fight on Ukraine’s behalf. “Make no mistake,” he said in March of that year, “that’s called World War III.”
Something about losing the popular and electoral vote has led Biden’s people to disregard the threat of WWIII and give the green light for attacks with US missiles deep into Russian territory. Why is this so different than providing tanks or bullets? These missile systems are highly complex and classified and can only be operated by US or NATO personnel. That means that American military officers are shooting American missiles into Russia – something unimaginable even in the depths of the Cold War!
Then, just days ago, we saw the sudden re-emergence of the US former proxies in Syria – extremists whose ties go back to al-Qaeda – sweep halfway through the country in what appears to be a return of Obama’s disastrous “Assad must go” policy. For five years the conflict in Syria had been more or less “frozen,” but Biden’s people have turned it up to a boil.
Why has the Biden Administration suddenly given a green light to these terrorists and how deeply is the CIA involved in stirring up new trouble in Syria? Make no mistake: these US-backed “rebels” would never have made their move without the approval of the Biden Administration.
The American people did not vote for an expansion of war, either in eastern Europe or the Middle East. A recent CBE News/YouGov poll has shown that a majority of Americans favor an end to all US military aid to Ukraine.
Upending the card table just because you lose the game not only shows blatant disregard for the “democracy” his party constantly preached on the campaign trail, but by pouring gasoline on these two very dangerous conflicts as he heads for the door President Biden puts each and every one of us in grave danger.
Obama and Russiagate: The Untold Story
Part 2 of our series on how Barack Obama undermined U.S. democracy
By Jeff Carlson & Hans Mahncke | TRUTH OVER NEWS | November 15, 2024
One of the least known aspects of the Russiagate affair is the central role that Barack Obama played in it. For years, the focus has been on individuals such as James Comey, Peter Strzok, the infamous dossier author Christopher Steele, and, of course, Hillary Clinton. And those names are indeed central to the plot, with Clinton being the one who devised the nefarious scheme to portray her opponent as a Russian agent. However, there was someone in the background, pulling many strings, who was even more crucial to the entire scheme: the then-sitting president, Barack Obama.
In this installment of our series on how Obama undermined U.S. democracy, we take a closer look at his role in both promoting and weaponizing the Russiagate hoax, which fraudulently linked Trump to Russia.
July 28 disclosure
We know from emails released by WikiLeaks that early discussions regarding the Clinton campaign’s dirty trick to associate Trump with Russia—what Clinton called the Swiftboat plan—were in full swing by February 2016. Over the following months, various components of this nefarious project came together. These included the hiring of campaign operatives Fusion GPS, commissioning the dirty dossier from Christopher Steele, and enlisting a group of IT specialists tasked with creating a false data trail linking Putin and Trump. We do not know whether Obama was privy to these early efforts. The earliest documented date we have for Obama’s involvement in the scheme is July 28, 2016. On this day, Obama’s CIA Director, John Brennan, came to the Oval Office and briefed Obama on Clinton’s Swiftboat project. Thus, we can say with certainty that, at the very latest, it was on this day that Obama became aware that the allegations of Russian collusion were nothing more than a fraudulent scheme concocted by Hillary Clinton.
As president, voters had entrusted Obama with the solemn responsibility of keeping the United States safe and secure. For this reason, Obama had a critical duty on July 28, 2016, to promptly put an end to the fraudulent allegations of collusion with Russia. The nominee of a major political party for president being falsely portrayed as a Russian agent posed numerous national security concerns. The fact that the entire scheme had been orchestrated by his opponent, arguably constituted an even more significant national security threat. In simple terms, of the two individuals who could become president, one was falsely accused of being a Russian agent while the other was the one who had cooked up the scam.
However, consistent with the theme throughout our series on Obama, he opted for treachery instead of truth. He wanted the country to tear itself apart, which is why, instead of telling Clinton to put an end to her devious scheme or, better yet, asking his Justice Department officials to investigate her campaign for creating a national security nightmare, Obama went full steam ahead in helping to perpetuate the hoax. Within 72 hours of the Oval Office meeting, the FBI launched its fraudulent Crossfire Hurricane investigation into Trump.
No peaceful transfer of power
It was a terrible betrayal of the American public who voted Obama into office, and the situation would only worsen. Over the coming months, the fraudulent Russia collusion investigation intensified. Numerous members of Trump’s campaign team were surveilled and monitored by the FBI. When an FBI analyst raised alarm bells about the fabricated Alfa Bank story—a tale concocted by Clinton’s IT operatives to link Putin to Trump—the analyst was promptly sidelined, and the matter was handed over to more pliant agents. However, it was all to no avail. Clinton lost, and Trump was suddenly the president-elect. At this point, it was once again Obama who intervened to undermine Trump and, consequently, American democracy.
The media incessantly discusses the so-called peaceful transfer of power, lamenting that Trump refused to hand over the reins in January 2021. Leaving aside that this assertion is demonstrably false—he did transfer power and retreated to his Mar-a-Lago estate—it is often overlooked in the debate about the peaceful handover of power that it was Obama who did not peacefully hand over power in 2017. Instead, he weaponized the Russia collusion hoax to undermine the incoming Trump administration. He did so fully aware that it would jeopardize Trump’s presidency, and in many ways, it indeed did. It is remarkable how much Trump accomplished despite the persistent cloud of Russia collusion allegations that loomed over him daily.
The specifics of Obama’s actions are relatively straightforward, yet they are seldom discussed. Immediately after Trump won the election, Obama, in collaboration with the intelligence community, initiated an effort to publish an official report, the Intelligence Community Assessment, that would claim that Trump had only won because of Putin’s help. This strategy served two purposes. First, it absolved Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party of accountability for a humiliating defeat. Second, and far more significantly, it created a huge roadblock for the incoming Trump administration. In addition to the persistent inquiries regarding Trump’s alleged connections to Putin, which hindered the administration’s ability to focus on other matters, Obama understood that his plan would effectively criminalize diplomatic relations with Russia. It was sabotage.
Trump’s hands were tied. He could not engage with Russia without provoking an immediate and loud outcry from Democrats, the intelligence community, and the media. Even something as mundane as meeting the Russian ambassador—an event that would ordinarily never make the news—was immediately portrayed as an act of treason. When Trump met Putin in person, the media had a massive meltdown, even accusing Putin of secretly bugging a soccer ball that had been gifted to Trump’s son, Barron. The hysteria knew no bounds, and this was catastrophic, especially given that all of this was occurring against the backdrop of escalating hostilities in Ukraine and the warming of relations between Russia and China—something that the United States should have done everything possible to prevent.
Secret meeting with journalists
And if all of that wasn’t enough, on January 17, 2017, Obama invited a group of journalists to a secret White House meeting. A 21-page transcript, which was only recently released, reveals that Obama used this meeting to carefully plant the fraudulent Russia collusion narrative in the minds of the attending journalists. He did this despite knowing that the entire situation was a hoax. But Obama ensured that the media perceived things otherwise, providing not only the presidential seal of approval to the Russia collusion hoax but also the impression of confirmation from someone with access to all the relevant secret intelligence. In other words, Obama abused the presidency to ensure that his successor would be burdened with the incessant Russia collusion narrative.
Obama’s central role in promoting the Russia collusion hoax was partially revealed by former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, who in 2020 disclosed details of the July 2016 meeting between Obama and Brennan. Other intelligence officials within the Trump administration, including his first Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats, had access to the same information as Ratcliffe. However, instead of speaking out, they actively sought to undermine the president they were supposed to serve. Ratcliffe’s recent nomination as CIA Director represents not only a significant step toward reforming the intelligence community but also suggests that accountability for Obama may finally be on the horizon.
CIA Democrats and Other Party Hawks Win Races in 2024 Election
By Jeremy Kuzmarov | Covert Action Magazine | November 17, 2024
In March 2018, Patrick Martin of the World Socialist Web Site published a political pamphlet entitled “The CIA Democrats.”
In it, he wrote that “an extraordinary number of former intelligence and military operatives from the CIA, Pentagon, National Security Council and State Department” were “seeking nomination as Democratic candidates for Congress in the 2018 midterm elections.”
This is a departure from the 1960s and 1970s when Democrats like George McGovern, Leo Ryan and Frank Church were against wars like Vietnam and sought to reign in the CIA.
Some of the Class of 2018 CIA Democrats, like Elissa Slotkin, a former CIA operative with three tours in Iraq, were recruited as part of a “red-to-blue” program targeting vulnerable Republican-held seats.
In the 2018 race, there were far more former spies and soldiers seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party than for the Republicans. Martin wrote that there were so many “spooks” that with a “nod to Mad Magazine,” one might call the primaries “spy vs. spy.”
CovertAction Magazine has kept tabs on the “spook-soldiers” who were elected as part of the Class of 2018 and followed their careers in Congress. (According to Martin, 30 spook-soldiers won primaries and 11 were elected to Congress.)
Below is a summary of how some of them fared in the 2024 election:
1. Elissa Slotkin:
Slotkin narrowly defeated Republican challenger Mike Rogers in Michigan on November 5 for a seat in the U.S. Senate.
Slotkin is the one-time assistant to Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. Prior to her election to Congress, Slotkin put her stamp on the U.S.’s disastrous Ukraine policy as Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense following the U.S.-backed Maidan coup in 2014.
Over the past six years as a Member of Congress, Slotkin has continued to fervently support the Ukraine war, telling an NPR reporter: “I think we’ve got to give them [Ukraine] what they need….This is a black and white issue. Our weapons have made a huge difference.”
In reality, the only difference those weapons made is in killing more people while prolonging Ukraine’s inevitable defeat.
Described as a “moderate” or “conservative” Democrat of the kind the CIA and the plutocratic elite that it serves like, Slotkin is one of only five Democratic House members who voted against an amendment to prohibit support to and participation in the Saudi-led coalition’s military operations against the Houthis in Yemen—a genocidal operation.
Endorsed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) because of her strong pro-Israel stance, Slotkin further voted against H.Con.Res. 21, which directed President Joe Biden to remove U.S. troops from Syria within 180 days.[1]
When asked by a reporter about her favorite CIA movie, Slotkin tellingly named Zero Dark Thirty, which glorified the use of torture in the hunt for Osama bin Laden.
In the same interview, Slotkin praised the CIA’s Hollywood liaison office, which she said helps Hollywood to “really understand what is going on”—comments that are in line with the CIA’s official cover story for their PR operations in Hollywood, and make it seem like the Agency is merely concerned with greater accuracy, not covering up its crimes or trying to rehabilitate its public image.
2. Andy Kim:
The seat of disgraced New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) has now been filled by Class of 2018 CIA Democrat Andy Kim (D-NJ), an adviser to former CIA Director David Petraeus who served as director for Iraq on Barack Obama’s National Security Council (NSC).
A graduate with degrees in political science from the University of Chicago and Oxford University who was a member of the progressive congressional caucus, Kim has been a staunch supporter of massive U.S. weapons supplies to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.
The first person of South Korean descent elected to the U.S. Senate, Kim voted for a congressional bill declaring that the slogan “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is anti-Semitic, and referred to the death of Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny as a “murder”—absent any proof that this was the case.
Predictably, Kim adopts alarmist rhetoric regarding North Korea that could lead directly into a war. He claimed that “there’s a madman with his finger on the button that can send nuclear weapons to annihilate my family.” However, it is the U.S. that precipitated the development of North Korea’s nuclear program as a security blanket after it bombed North Korea nearly back to the Stone Age during the Korean War and has tried for decades to overthrow its government.
3. Jared Golden:
Class of 2018 CIA Democrat Jared Golden narrowly defeated Republican Austin Theriault to retain his seat in Maine’s 2nd congressional district on November 5.
Golden is a tattooed Iraq and Afghan war veteran who served as a policy adviser on the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
A conservative Blue Dog Democrat who was named Vice Chairman of the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee, Golden has urged President Biden to give F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, and bragged about voting for more than $78 billion in border security funding during his time in Congress.[2]
Additionally, he has championed record military budgets that provided funding for the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, and for developing new naval destroyers and F-35 jets and CH-53K helicopters, which will benefit Pratt & Whitney’s factory in North Berwick, Maine, and the Hunting Dearborn factory in Fryeburg, Maine.
According to Opensecrets.com, Golden took in $375,091 from AIPAC in 2023-2024 and more than $439,999 in total from pro-Israel lobby groups in the same period.[3] Not surprisingly given these totals, Golden has supported every U.S. military aid package to Israel while opposing calls for a cease-fire.
Golden showed himself to be totally deluded from reality when he claimed that Israel was not committing war crimes in Gaza, when they have been widely documented on the pages of mainstream newspapers.
4. Jason Crow
Jason Crow, a former Army Ranger who served in Afghanistan, handily defeated John Fabbricatore on November 5 to win a fourth term in Congress.
Holding a childish view of world affairs out of the 1950s McCarthy era, Crow promotes on his website his role in securing provisions within the National Defense Authorization Agreement (NDAA) to help finance Buckley Space Force base in Colorado as part of his goal of making Colorado a global aerospace leader.
Buckley Space Force Base is headquarters of the U.S. Space Command, which follows a Nazi blueprint of trying to dominate the world by militarizing and controlling outer space.[4]
Space expert Bruce Gagnon has warned that exhaust from escalating numbers of rocket launches by the U.S. Space Force is diminishing the ozone layer, and the growing space debris could even cause the Earth to go dark as collisions become more likely.
Since Ukraine has been a key theater for testing new space-based weapons, it is no surprise that Jason Crow is a staunch supporter of that war and has established close friendships with Ukrainian military and political leaders who have turned their country into a neo-colonial vassal.
Crow claims that “Taiwan will eventually fall if we’re not able to help Ukraine win.”
To avert this outcome, he has called for increased military training to Ukraine and sending more long-range weapons and missiles to hit inside Russia, which he wants to sanction even more than it already is.[5]
A hawk on Israel, Crow supported legislation with Mike Walz (R-Fl), Trump’s new National Security adviser, to strengthen U.S.-Israeli intelligence sharing in the Gaza war, stating that his years fighting terrorism taught him that “intelligence is the key to effective counter-terrorism.”
One of Crow’s biggest donors is Palantir Technologies, a data-analytics company founded with CIA seed money, which signed a major cooperative agreement with the Israeli Defense Ministry while providing artificial intelligence (AI) software used by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) for bomb-targeting and for accumulating data on Palestinians in the occupied territory.
Palantir has also played a key role in the Ukraine War by tracking Russian military movements and helping Ukraine to coordinate battlefield maneuvers along with bomb-targeting and there is concern that the company’s AI software platform also is being weaponized against ordinary Americans.
5. Mikie Sherrill:
Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ), a U.S. Navy helicopter pilot with an intelligence background and Class of 2018 CIA Democrat, defeated Republican Joe Belnome on November 5 to win a fourth term in the 11th congressional district of New Jersey.
The New Jersey Globe reported that Sherrill might not serve out her full term if her gubernatorial campaign takes off.
Sherrill has served on the House Armed Services Committee and Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party, a relic of the Cold War which promotes Sinophobia and confrontation with China.
On her website, Sherrill states that, serving on the House Armed Services Committee, she has been able to “significantly increase funding for Picatinny Arsenal—a major military research and manufacturing institute in her district—which remains the Army’s leading research institution for armaments and ammunition.”
Sherrill continues: “Beyond supporting the critical research and development programs at Picatinny, I am also proud to support the many defense technology companies that call NJ-11 home and are on the cutting edge of modernizing our Armed Forces. Many of my provisions in the FY23 National Defense Authorization Act support funding for our local defense industrial base and businesses.”
Sherrill is an anti-Russia and anti-China national security hawk. On her website, she writes:
“Both Russia and China have continued to build their military might and promote their influence across the globe. Neither country shares our values and often they are undermining our interests across the world. We must ensure we modernize our military to meet this threat and provide critical funding for cybersecurity and election protection.
“Putin instigated an unprovoked attack against Ukraine—a sovereign, democratic nation. He has attempted to rewrite history and has unleashed propaganda and disinformation in pursuit of his clear desire to rebuild the Soviet Union’s so-called sphere of influence. [In 2022], I traveled twice to Ukraine, once in January before Putin’s invasion and again in July. I met with President Zelensky and other top Ukrainian officials about the support they need from us and imparted to them the fierce support in New Jersey—home to one of the largest Ukrainian American communities in the country—for their independence and democracy.
“We secured emergency funding through a bipartisan package to support the Ukrainian people in their fight for freedom. American weapons support has made a tangible difference in the Ukrainians’ ability to hold off Russian aggression, including the M-777 Howitzer, developed here at Picatinny Arsenal.”
The M-777 howitzer, it should be noted, has been used to strike at and kill civilian targets in the Donbass, though has not reversed the failings of Ukraine’s summer 2023 counteroffensive.
Sherrill favors continued military support to Israel and a growing police state at home. She boasts on her website about supporting the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022, which she claims would “better equip our law enforcement with information related to possible attacks and their relationship with hate crimes.”
In May 2022, Sherrill and then-Representative Mike Gallagher (R-WI), Chairman of the Select Committee on Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party, participated in a strategic-operational war game, “Dangerous Straits: Battle for Taiwan 2027,” with the Center for a New American Security and NBC’s Meet the Press.
The war game provided important insight into how a potential war with China over Taiwan could develop, and how the U.S. and its allies and partners could defeat an attack on Taiwan by China.
A Party That Years Ago Crossed Over to the Dark Side
The Class of 2018 CIA Democrats are emblematic of the Democratic Party’s support for the warfare and surveillance states, which have made it hated among broad sectors of the population.
Kamala Harris is estimated to have gotten around 9 million fewer votes than Joe Biden did in 2020 in good part because of her embrace of war-mongering policies.
A key turning point in the history of the Democratic Party was the 1980 election, where many of the progressives of the 1970s were defeated by a big-money offensive and CIA campaign to destroy its congressional enemies.
Bill Clinton (and possibly Hillary too) had a background as a CIA “asset,” as did Barack Obama, who worked for a CIA-linked company that produced economic intelligence reports following his graduation from Columbia University.[6]
During their presidencies, Clinton and Obama helped re-empower the CIA while working to rehabilitate its reputation.
The Class of 2018 CIA Democrats did not come out of nowhere. They fit a historical trajectory by which the Democratic Party has completely crossed over to the dark side.
- Slotkin additionally voted to spy on U.S. citizens without warrant, for unconstitutional vaccine mandates and favored deployment of yet more draconian military surveillance technologies at the U.S.-Mexican border. ↑
- Opposing policing reform, Golden voted against Medicare for all. He got his start in politics working for Republican Senator Susan Collins. ↑
- According to Maine Wire, Golden has also received thousands of dollars in campaign funding from George Soros. Golden disputed the figures presented in Open Secrets. ↑
- See Annie Jacobson, Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America (Boston: Little & Brown, 2014). ↑
- Crow developed a four-step plan for victory in Ukraine, which is delusional, as Ukraine has lost control over much of eastern Ukraine and has zero chance of victory. ↑
- See Jeremy Kuzmarov, Obama’s Unending Wars: Fronting the Foreign Policy of the Permanent Warfare State (Atlanta: Clarity Press, 2019); Jeremy Kuzmarov, Warmonger: How Clinton’s Malign Foreign Policy Set the Groundwork for Bush II to Biden (Atlanta: Clarity Press, 2024). Obama’s grandfather and mother also appear to have worked for the CIA, with his mother and stepfather supporting the CIA-backed Suharto dictatorship in Indonesia that massacred more than a million suspected communists. ↑
The CIA/MI6 Skripal Conspiracy Exposed
By Kit Klarenberg | Global Delinquents | November 17, 2024
On October 14th, a much-delayed inquiry into the mysterious death of Dawn Sturgess, a British citizen who died in July 2018 after reputedly coming into contact with Novichok nerve agent left in England by a pair of Russian assassins, finally commenced. Already, the public show trial has unearthed tantalising evidence gravely undermining the official narrative of the poisoning of GRU defector Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury, in March that year.
These revelations emerged despite the British state’s best efforts to sabotage the inquiry, and curtail its ability to ascertain the truth. For one, the Skripals have been prevented from testifying, despite formally requesting to do so. Such is the apparent risk of Russian intelligence attempting to target the pair anew, not even their video-recorded police interviews from the time can be entered into evidence. Meanwhile, the urgent question of what British intelligence and security services knew, and when they knew it, will not be explored.
Yet, primary source evidence British spies and their American counterparts were well-aware the two Russians accused of attempting to murder the Skripals were visiting Britain in advance of their arrival has lain in plain sight for years. Whether such foreknowledge implies the CIA and MI6 were in reality behind the abortive hit remains a matter of interpretation – but that the CIA and MI6 sought to exploit the Russian presence in Salisbury for their own malign purposes is beyond doubt.
In January 2021, US watchdog group American Oversight released hundreds of pages of emails sent to and from the personal address of Mike Pompeo, CIA director January 2017 – April 2018. In many cases, the emails were official Agency communications discussing matters of extreme sensitivity, conducted off-books. The records – heavily redacted under the US National Security Act – show that on March 1st 2018, Pompeo was approached by two high-ranking CIA operatives, who asked for a meeting on a “very urgent matter”. They added:
“A very positive opportunity is within reach but requires your engagement because of the urgency…I am convinced that this is a very promising opportunity.”
Pompeo responded in the affirmative, and the meeting went ahead early the next morning. Underlining their covert summit’s importance, the emails indicate CIA staffers were preparing to pitch the “positive opportunity” to the Agency’s chief from the early hours of March 2nd. Eerily, the email requesting Pompeo’s signoff on the proposal was sent less than half an hour after Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov, Skripal’s alleged assassins, purchased plane tickets from Moscow to London Gatwick for their Salisbury visit.
‘Strong Option’
Who emailed Pompeo is redacted, although then-CIA deputy director Gina Haspel is an obvious candidate. A longstanding Russia hawk, who cut her Agency teeth recruiting spies in the Soviet Union in the years before its collapse, she twice served as the CIA’s London station chief twice – from 2008 – 2011, and 2014 – 2017. Sergei Skripal arrived in Britain in July 2010 via a grand spy swap during her first tenure, which was negotiated by Haspel’s longtime collaborator Daniel Hoffman, then-CIA Moscow station chief. He was among the very first sources to publicly blame Russia for the Salisbury incident.
During Haspel’s “unusual” second spell in London, Skripal’s enduring connection to his homeland, and yearning to return, would’ve been well-known to British intelligence. Serendipitously, BBC veteran Mark Urban serendipitously interviewed the GRU defector in the year prior to his poisoning. He recorded that Skripal was “an unashamed Russian nationalist, enthusiastically adopting the Kremlin line in many matters, even while sitting in his MI6-purchased house.” Coincidentally, Urban once served in the same tank regiment as Pablo Miller, Skripal’s MI6 recruiter/handler, and Salisbury neighbour.
Moreover, former Kremlin official Valery Morozov, an associate of the GRU defector likewise exiled to Britain, claimed days after the poisoning that Skripal remained in “regular” contact with Moscow’s embassy in London, and met with Russian military intelligence officers there “every month”. He also flatly repudiated any suggestion the purported nerve agent attack on Sergei and Yulia was the work of Russian spies:
“Putin can’t be behind this. I know how the Kremlin works, I worked there. Who is Skripal? He is nothing for Putin. Putin doesn’t think about him. There is nobody in Kremlin talking about former intelligence officer [sic] who is nobody. There is no reason for this. It is more dangerous for them for such things to happen.”
That this information was not shared with Haspel stretches credulity. The Washington Post has reported how her time in Britain made her the personal “linchpin” of the CIA’s relationship with MI6, the Agency’s “most important foreign partner.” Her British colleagues gushed to the outlet, “she knows them so well… they call her the ‘honorary UK desk officer’.” Haspel regularly drew on this experience to “stabilize the transatlantic alliance” between London and Washington, which was frequently strained while she was CIA director May 2018 – January 2021.
This friction resulted in no small part from Trump legitimately accusing British chaos agents of “conspiring with American intelligence to spy on his presidential campaign,” charges that “rattled the British government at the highest levels.” Strikingly, a cited example of Haspel stabilising CIA relations with MI6 provided by WaPo was convincing a highly reluctant President to back the Western-wide expulsion of Russian diplomats, encouraged by London in the Salisbury incident’s wake.
How Haspel pressed Trump over Salisbury was revealed in April 2019. The New York Times reported that the President at first downplayed Skripal’s alleged poisoning and refused to respond, believing the apparent attack to be “legitimate spy games, distasteful but within the bounds of espionage.” However, Haspel successfully lobbied Trump to take the “strong option” of expelling Russian embassy staff in the US, by providing him with British-sourced “emotional images”:
“Haspel showed pictures the British government had supplied her of young children hospitalized after being sickened by the Novichok nerve agent that poisoned the Skripals. She then showed a photograph of ducks British officials said were inadvertently killed by the sloppy work of the Russian operatives… Trump fixated on the pictures of the sickened children and the dead ducks. At the end of the briefing, he embraced the strong option.”
‘Operation Foot’
The New York Times exposé caused a stir upon release, not least because the “emotional images” described had never hitherto been published or referred to in the mainstream media. While the Skripals giving bread to three local boys to feed ducks in Salisbury’s Avon Playground on March 4th 2018 was initially widely reported, no media outlet, government minister, spokesperson, health professional or law enforcement official had ever previously claimed children and/or waterfowl were “sickened” after coming into contact with Novichok. The reverse, in fact.
On March 26th that year, the Daily Mail recorded that the boys given bread by the Skripals – one of whom apparently ate some – were “rushed to hospital for blood tests amid fears they’d been poisoned,” but promptly discharged after being given “the all-clear.” Moreover, two days after the New York Times article was published, British health officials issued a statement not only refuting the report entirely, but denying any children were admitted to hospital in Salisbury as a result of Novichok exposure at all.
Subsequently, the New York Times radically amended its piece, removing any suggestion Haspel showed Trump photos of Novichok victims provided by the British. In fact, the newspaper reverse-ferreted, she had “displayed pictures illustrating the consequences of nerve agent attacks, not images specific to the chemical attack in Britain.” The question of whether the aforementioned images did exist, and were forged by British intelligence for the explicit purpose of bouncing Trump into a hostile anti-Russia stance, remains thoroughly open five-and-a-half years later.
After all, British spies had been planning and hoping for a mass defenestration of Russian diplomats globally, as a prelude to all-out war with Moscow, for years by that point. In January 2015, MI6/NATO front the Institute for Statecraft (IFS) a document setting out “potential levers” for achieving “regime change” in Russia, spanning “diplomacy”, “finance”, “security”, “technology”, “industry”, “military”, and even “culture”. One “lever”, which IFS listed thrice, stated:
“Simultaneously expel every [Russian] intelligence officer and air/defence/naval attaché from as many countries as possible (global ‘Operation Foot’).”
Operation Foot saw 105 Soviet officials deported from Britain in September 1971. Several mainstream media outlets referenced this incident when reporting on London successfully corralling 26 countries – including, of course, the US – into expelling over 150 Russian diplomatic staff in response to the Salisbury incident in March 2018. As a result, IFS got one step closer to its longstanding objective of “armed conflict of the old-fashioned sort” with Russia, which “Britain and the West could win.”
Fast forward to today, and Britain and the West are on the verge of losing that conflict once and for all. Meanwhile, the Salisbury incident’s ever-fluctuating official narrative continues to shift radically, in ways large and small. Contrary to all prior media reports on the matter, the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry has now been told one boy given bread by the Skripals to feed ducks actually “got sick” as a result, and he and his friends “were unwell for a day or two afterwards.”
This fresh rewriting neatly ties in with the highly controversial claim, unflinchingly clung to by British authorities, that the Skripals were poisoned with Novichok smeared on the doorknob of Sergei’s home on the morning of March 4th 2018, before heading into Salisbury. As subsequent investigations will show, available evidence – including Yulia Skripal’s own hospital bed testimony – points unmistakably to the pair being attacked elsewhere, at another time and by another means entirely, with British and American intelligence square in the frame.
Tulsi Gabbard Right Pick to Shake-Up US Spy Agiencies – Philip Giraldi
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 15.11.2024
President-elect Donald Trump nominated the former Democratic congresswoman and a 21-year army reserve veteran to oversee the bewildering array of 18 US spy agencies in his incoming administration.
“A foreign policy and national security appointment that has created considerable dissent is that of Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence [DNI],” Philip Giraldi, a former CIA operations officer with experience in Europe and the Middle East, told Sputnik.
The CIA veteran said much of the dissent comes from inside the ‘intelligence community’, including active officers and former staff of organizations like the CIA and NSA.
Objections to Gabbard’s nomination have focused on her lack of intelligence experience, claiming she will “be unable to perceive problems among an unruly 18-member intelligence community,” the pundit said.
But Giraldi countered that she was “smart, experienced and capable enough to gather her own staff around her that will guide her way through the shoals of Washington DC.”
“To my mind, she is an excellent choice, coming from outside of the intelligence community ‘club,’ and could be an effective and ethical DNI,” he added.
The former CIA officer noted that Gabbard is viewed as a “peace candidate” for her opposition to endless overseas wars, the US military occupation of parts of Syria and the demonization of China. But she is also known for her support for Israel, currently waging a war against the Palestinian territory of Gaza.
“It is likely that Trump appointed her to shake up the intel community, which is regarded by many as the black heart of the deep state,” Giraldi said. “She will, of course, be both helped and handicapped by being provided with plenty of ‘direction’ by a president who is fundamentally ignorant of foreign policy and national security issues.”
Featured Video
Rewriting the risk? Inside the government’s vaccine safety messaging
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
“Davos Can Really Replace the UN”
Inside the book that maps the architecture behind global governance — from the Epstein files to the Pact for the Future
Lies are Unbekoming | April 1, 2026
On June 13, 2019, the United Nations and the World Economic Forum signed a partnership deal to “accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” That same evening, WEF president Börge Brende — Norway’s former Foreign Minister — had dinner with Jeffrey Epstein at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse. The Epstein files, released January 2026, contain an exchange between the two from the previous year. Epstein to Brende: “Davos can really replace the UN. C21, cyber, crypto . genetics… intl coordination.” Brende back to Epstein: “Exactly — we need a new global architecture. World Economic Forum (Davos) is uniquely positioned — public private.”
The next day, the UN General Assembly adopted the framework for restructuring global governance.
That sequence — the partnership signing, the Epstein dinner, the candid admission about replacing the UN with a public-private architecture, and then the formal adoption — opens Jacob Nordangård’s The Digital World Brain. Pages two and three. Footnoted to the UN resolution number, the Epstein files, and the General Assembly record.
I keep coming back to it because it captures what this book does that almost nothing else in the independent research space manages. I’ve followed Jacob’s work for years now and interviewed him about his research. Each book peels back another layer of the same institutional architecture, and each time I think he’s reached the limit of what can be documented, the next one goes further. Nordangård doesn’t speculate. He doesn’t editorialize much. He lays institutional actions next to each other in chronological order and lets the pattern announce itself. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- How I fell foul of the BBC thought police
- The End of NATO
- 37 days of war on Iran cost US staggering $42bln, tracker shows
- Baghdad tells Asian refiners, traders to begin loading Iraqi crude amid Iranian exemption
- Under fire, Moscow and Tehran close ranks
- Iran, US receive Pakistan-mediated plan for ceasefire then final deal
- Iran submits demands for end to war as mediators scramble ahead of Trump deadline
- Iran Threatens Retaliatory Strike on Stargate AI Project in UAE
- US sent ‘a lot’ of arms to Iranian protesters – Trump
- Barak Ravid Launders Deception To Allow Trump To Back Off Of His Power Plant Threat – Again
- If Americans Knew
- The Big Lie of Weeks/Months to an Iranian Nuke
- Autistic children in Gaza face massive regression as Israel’s genocide destroys therapy, care and stability
- Trump poised to “blow everything up” (ie. commit war crimes) in Iran – Daily Update
- In Iran, Israel-US take aim at “reason, research, and freedom of thought” – Daily Update
- US loses planes over Iran, Israel downgrades Lebanon war goals – Daily Update
- Israel Is Blocking Palestinians from Easter at Church Where Jesus Resurrected
- Plot to assassinate Palestinian activist follows harassment campaign promoted by Zionist groups and elected officials
- Prominent New York synagogue hosts presentation on why U.S. Jews should support the ethnic cleansing of Gaza
- Tapper vs. Piker: Is the CNN Anchor Auditioning for David Ellison?
- Shouldn’t Democrats Be Able to Condemn Genocide?
- No Tricks Zone
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
Aletho News 