I BEG YOUR PARDON. BANDAR DIDN'T PROMISE PUTIN A ROSE GARDEN.

When Bandar bin Sultan met Putin this summer, he didn't promise Putin a rose garden. No. Bandar promised that if Putin didn't dump Assad that he, Bandar, would unleash Islamic terrorists onto the Sochi Winter Olympics, and create hell on earth in Lebanon and Syria.

Since those lovely promises were made:
1. Lebanon has seen an escalation in terrorism, from the attack on the HQ of Hezbollah immediately after Bandar made his promise to Putin, to most recently the assassination of Mohamamd Shatah;
2. Syria saw hell on earth in a false flag attack at Ghouta, when allegedly a thousand civilians died from the use of chemical weapons which was blamed on Assad by NATO media in a vain attempt to trick us into attacking Syria to save Bandar's cutthroats from total annihilation;
3. Southern Russia has also seen a rise in terrorism, such as today in Volgograd where, at the time of writing, the death toll from a female suicide bomber is 16. A few months ago a bus was blown up by another female suicide bomber in Volgograd. Volgograd is the largest main Russian city closest to Sochi, and is also close to the Caucasus where the anti-Russian Islamic terrorists hide out. And last week a car was blown up in Pyatigorsk, which is very close to the Russia-Georgia border and within easy reach of Sochi. In other words, these terrorist attacks in Russia are in the Sochi area (remember that Russia is the largest country in the world by area).

So I repeat my international call; arrest Prince Bandar bin Sultan, before he starts WW3!

MOCKINGBIRD MUGS

At the end of WW2 the Nazi propaganda and intelligence network was not destroyed but was brought to work in NATO and the USA. Part of that network became Operation Mockingbird in which intelligence agents were planted into media organisations to push particular ideas and themes. The original idea was to fight the growth of Communism (which was created and controlled by Wall Street in the first place). But after the fall of Communism that propaganda network survived and continues to push the ideas and themes of the establishment, such as relentless war against everyone for this or that bogus reason.

I recently destroyed the credibility of The Guardian through an analysis of its editorials which were anti-Assad, pro-cutthroat, pro-Israel and pro-R2P war. Not every journalist at The Guardian is part of this network, but some are. As there are at The Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph, The Independent, etc. In other words, our media is infested with intelligence agents pushing propaganda.

US Investigative Journalist Michael Hastings told an incredible story when he returned from his 2010 trip, embedded with US general Stanley McChrystal in Afghanistan. The Pentagon, he revealed in his award winning book 'The Operators', spends $4.7bn of public money annually employing 27,000 psychological operations, marketing and public relations staff around the world. Their daily mission: to push the Pentagon line into the West's national newspapers and broadcast bulletins.

Military staff working on 'Information Operations', Hastings explained in his 2011 Rolling Stone article headlined 'Another Runaway General' , are organized into cells, given specific enemy individual, social media or group targets and precise mission objectives. Hastings documented that ‘Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, and his staff' ordered Lt. Colonel Michael Holmes' I-Ops cell in Kabul not to target the enemy, but visiting US Senators.

Holmes refused to accept that senators could be US psychological warfare targets, so he took Caldwell's written order to two Judge Advocate General's (JAG) lawyers who both agreed he had been given an illegal order. Rather than being vindicated by the command though, Holmes was targeted as a troublemaker by Caldwell. So this where we are: honest, senators and law abiding US army Colonels are now the Pentagon's enemy number one.

When Michael Hastings died in a suspicious fiery Mercedes C250 crash this summer, many believed he was assassinated by a cyber-attack on his car's onboard computer. Whether or not the German car maker can tell if the car was hacked or were even complicit in the killing, Mercedes are not saying.

[source : How economic warfare killed the People's Bank, Tony Gosling, Russia Today, http://rt.com/op-edge/war-terror-economy-bank-873/, 27th December 2013]

THERE IT IS FOR SOMEONE SPECIAL

Not Ferret Ears.

There it is - Shalamar


There it is, there it is
What took us so long to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

That I knew the answer to why people fall in love
But then I found I knew nothing about it
Till I met you, girl, I thought that I had had enough
Now I'm sure I've always been without it

And it feels so good that you and I can go together
Ooh baby, we've both found what we've been looking for
And this time I know we're gonna make it better
Our heart is a key to pump it at the door
Don't have to search no more

There it is, there it is
What took us so long, ooh, to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

In the sea of love we set our sails when waters were up
Two in search of love with no direction
Fish were biting at the time when catching wasn't enough
We couldn't make a sport of our affection

And who could change that we would sail into each other
Ooh girl, I never felt the wave of love so strong
And this love I never felt in any other
I trust it like the lighthouse guides a ship to land
I found it when you touched my hand

Ooh! There it is
What took us so long for a love so strong?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

And it's about time
For love to find its way back home
Girl, you're mine
Now that we've found love we've got to get it on

There it is, there it is
What took us so long to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

There it is, hey, what took us so long
To find the sweet, sweet love?
There it is
This time I'm not wrong
This time I'm not wrong
We got a love that's so strong

COMEDIAN JACK IN A BOX GLENN GREENWALD ATTACKS THE NATO MEDIA THAT HE HAS USED TO ENRICH HIMSELF

You've got to hand it to Glenn Greenwald; he's got balls!

Throughout the summer Ed Snowden via Greenwald revealed to us the not so surprising news that we were being spied upon by our very own government agencies. That such a mass spying program called Echelon had existed for decades, was known about within the alternative media, and previous whistleblowers on this program had been ignored was, for whatever reason, not discussed. Both the NATO and alternative media were outraged. shocked. SHOCKED! All the NATO and the vast majority of the alternative media accused Obama of personally reading all our emails and texts, and listening into all our phone calls.

But look at what is happening now since the 'revelations': nobody is being prosecuted, and the spying is being deemed legal. In other words we have been normalised to this total surveillance.

But I think the most important result of these revelations was that they put so much pressure on Obama, due to the vastly inflated and personal nature of the allegations, that he finally succumbed to the relentless pressure to say that Assad had crossed Obama's 'red line', thus bringing the prospect of war on Syria that bit closer.

For the naïve, here is some background history to the jack-in-a-box Glenn Greenwald.

Obama is not supposed to be in The White House. In 2012 Bilderberg, Wall Street and Israel (same thing really) all backed Mitt Romney and his pro-war, pro-fascism, pro-Israel policies. They gave Romney ten times as much money as they did to Obama. One of their own, DCI David Petraeus, arranged to Carterise Obama at Benghazi. At a time when Obama was made to look weak and incompetent, a powerful Presidential Romney was supposed to rise up and save the nation. But Romney blew it, and Obama won. There was a series of scandals in which Petraeus resigned, but he has since been given a cushy job at KKR, who are ever present at Bilderberg.

Obama was not supposed to win because of his Nobel Peace Prize. Obama may love it, but to the warmongers who planned and executed 9/11 it is bad news. 9/11 was an inside job. Saudi Arabia supplied the patsies, and on the day Zionist agents were in control of the US military, government and media apparatus to make the military go AWOL and the American people go to sleep. Shortly after 9/11 the former head of NATO in Europe General Wesley Clark was told of a plan for war on seven nations in five years. The seven nations named to Clark were Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, and Libya, Sudan and Somalia. The first four were named in a Zionist warmongering document written in 1996 called A Clean Break. Iraq and Iran were also named in Rebuilding America’s Defenses which was written by a Zionist cabal called The Project for a New American Century which interlocked with the authors of A Clean Break. On and after 9/11 members of this cabal were in very, very, very influential positions. Although President Bush was not a member of this cabal, he was surrounded by them and their advice/lies.

We invaded Afghanistan for opium, not for bin Laden, who died around Christmas 2001. He had been suffering from Marfan Syndrome. Our ruling establishment has been running the global drug industries for centuries. The Taliban were destroying the opium crops, but within years of NATO invading Afghanistan the opium harvests were up to record levels.

So after the opium was sorted out the Zionist warmongering plan was implemented. First up was Iraq. They said Iraq was involved in 9/11. They said Iraq had WMDs. It was all lies, lies, lies.

In 2006 Israel engineered a war against Hezbollah, but lost.

So by 2007, just over five years after 9/11, the plan for war on seven nations in five years as revealed to General Wesley Clark was moribund.

To get the plan rolling again a Faustian pact was agreed between the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia that the latter would unleash the nastiest extremist Jihadis onto those nations named to Clark that had not yet been attacked. But so NATO could give these Jihadis some kind of assistance a cover was required. That cover was The Arab Spring, which is not Arab but pure US State Department and CIA.

The first to suffer these Jihadis was Libya. British Special Forces assisted the Jihadis on the ground while NATO bombed a clear and unobstructed path for them all the way into Tripoli, killing tens of thousands of Libyan civilians in the process.

After Libya, next up was Syria. Former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was asked in 2009 by Great Britain to help them smuggle the Jihadis into Syria. The Jihadis have been slaughtering their way through Syria for nearly 3 years, massacring whole villages, cutting the throats of children and blaming it on Assad, the Syrian Arab Army and the Shabiha, using chemical weapons and blaming it on Assad, and a gullible NATO media has been willingly repeating their accusations.

But by late 2012, Assad was still in power, and no overt large scale military campaign, such as against Libya, had occurred. There had been allegations of use of chemical weapons by Assad, and that the Shabiha had slaughtered a whole village at al Houla, but despite massive international pressure Obama, in his wisdom, had refused to take overt action and attack Syria, instead issuing a warning of crossing ‘a red line’. He was supported in this decision by CJCS Dempsey.

So come the US Presidential election in 2012 you can see why the warmongering Bilderberg/Wall Street/Israel crowd wanted Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama out and pro-war pro-Israel Romney in.

Upon Obama returning to The White House, he was immediately embroiled and personally implicated in a series of minor scandals. There were loud calls for his impeachment. At the same time as these scandals there were allegations that Assad had used chemical weapons. And guess who provided the dodgy proof? ISRAEL AND THE UK!

But Obama resisted.

There was some in-your-face diplomacy from leaders such as David Cameron, Recip Erdogan and Benjamin Netanyahu, all trying to persuade Obama to attack Syria.

But still Obama resisted.

And then in June the back of the Syrian rebellion was broken when the important hub of al Qusair was recaptured by the brave and competent Syrian Arab Army.

Within days of this crucial turning point Glenn Greenwald and Ed Snowden, like a jack-in-a-box, appeared on the scene, shouting that Obama was spying on us all, and personally reading all our emails and texts, and personally listening into all our phone calls.

The calls for the impeachment of Obama were raised to a deafening level. The pressure on Obama was too much and he finally relented and decided, months after the event, that Assad had used chemical weapons and had crossed Obama’s ‘red line’, despite the source of the samples and their chain of custody not reaching internationally agreed standards.

But still Obama resisted all out war. Instead Obama announced an increase in supplies of small weapons, which a few weeks later had still not materialised.

So by July the warmongers really were getting desperate. Prince Bandar bin Sultan, suspected handler of the 9/11 patsies, visited Putin in Russia and issued an ultimatum; dump Assad and Saudi Arabia would sign a massive contract to buy Russian weapons and would allow Russia to operate in the Middle East, or he, Bandar, would unleash the Jihadis onto the Sochi Winter Olympics and create hell on earth in Lebanon and Syria. Putin declined.

A few weeks after this meeting the HQ of Hezbollah in Beirut was attacked, because Hezbollah was fighting against Bandar’s Jihadis alongside the Syrian Arab Army.

And then in late August came the horrific allegation that approximately a thousand civilians had been killed by chemical weapons in Ghouta. The NATO media immediately went into overdrive and accused Assad, saying that only Assad had the arsenal large enough for such an attack.

One surprising voice to repeat these allegations was The Guardian, which projects an image of responsibility and professionalism and humanitarianism. I destroyed the credibility of The Guardian a few weeks ago when I provided an analysis of its editorials. It consistently accused Assad of the Ghouta attack, and was pro-war for R2P. It not once addressed the question why Assad would kill a thousand of his own people, or even consider the rebels as suspects despite reports and videos of the rebels possessing and using chemical weapons. It also avoided mentioning disarming Israel of its known chemical, biological and nuclear arsenal. The Guardian had previously pushed green fascism and mass genocide at Copenhagen in 2009, and overtly supported that man so despised by the vast majority of Russia, the jailbird and Rothschild asset Mikhail Khordokovsky.

Yet despite the lies from The Guardian and all the other NATO media, a motion to go to war on Syria was narrowly defeated, thanks to Ed Miliband. This gave Obama the opportunity to duck out of attacking Syria, which Obama wisely took. So the warmongers are pissed off with Obama; no war on Syria, and possible peace with the ultimate target of all their warmongering and lies, Iran.

In response to being denied their wars, the warmongers declared war on Obama by releasing a video attacking Obama as incompetent, citing the possibly sabotaged roll-out of Obamacare and linking that to Obama’s decision not to start war on Syria and Iran. This video was released by The Emergency Committee for Israel, which was founded and run by William Kristol.

Now, which organization did Kristol found that is seriously implicated in all this warmongering? The Project for a New American Century.

The wheels of history go round and round…

But back to Greenwald.

Why did Greenwald go to the obvious NATO media asset, The Guardian?

Have the Greenwald/Snowden/Guardian circus published all the information they have? No. Apparently they have only published 1% of what they have.

Why have they not published everything?

Have they saved ‘the best’? If so, why?

And Greenwald is now teaming up with Jeremy Scahill to form a new media venture funded by the founder of eBay. Scahill has beguiled the alternative media with his film Dirty Wars, yet he launched his own personal but very public dirty war against Mother Agnes Mariam who has provided evidence that what happened at Ghouta was a planned psyop false flag involving children kidnapped from Lattakia a few weeks earlier. Scahill forced Stop The War to dump Mother Agnes Mariam.

I ask : are these the actions of a genuine media and genuine whistleblowers?

I believe not.

So to summarise:
1. before Greenwald and Snowden appeared we had known for years about Echelon, and previous whistleblowers had been ignored.
2. Obama is not supposed to be in The White House. Obama is obstructing the progress of the failing plan for war on seven nations in five years. Massive pressure was put on Obama to attack Syria, but Obama wisely refused. It was only after Greenwald produced Snowden via NATO media asset The Guardian that Obama decided that Assad had crossed Obama’s ‘red line’. But still no war on Syria.
3 Obama’s refusal to attack Syria and Putin’s refusal to dump Assad provoked Prince Bandar bin Sultan to run a false flag at Ghouta in August which nearly provoked WW3. The Guardian played its part in this anti-Assad mad rush to war by immediately blaming Assad, not once considering the rebels as culprits, and dancing with joy at Assad relinquishing his chemical weapons while not addressing Israel’s much larger, more powerful and more horrendous arsenal of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
4. The Guardian is an obvious NATO media asset; it supported green fascism (and still does) at Copenhagen in 2009, and supported the obvious Rothschild asset and jailbird Mikhail Khordokovsky, the man so despised by the vast majority of Russia.

Yet Greenwald ran to The Guardian!!

So when I read this I laughed at the comedian jack-in-a-box Glenn Greenwald.

Journalist Glenn Greenwald condemned the mainstream media during an address at a German computer conference on Friday and accused his colleagues of failing to challenge erroneous remarks routinely made by government officials around the globe.

[source : Greenwald: US, British media are servants of security apparatus, Russia Today, http://rt.com/news/greenwald-snowden-nsa-hackers-conference-889/, 27th December 2013]

As I said; the man’s got balls!

JFK

I still scratch my head, so much that it nearly bleeds, why Justin Raimondo, editor of Antiwar.com and self-proclaimed proud Libertarian and devotee of Murray Rothbard, on the 50th anniversary of JFK's assassination attacked JFK as a warmonger and not once mentioned the assassination, the assassins or the reason for his assassination, when JFK was pulling out of Vietnam but immediately after the assassination LBJ rescinded JFK's orders, wittingly or unwittingly fell for the Gulf of Tonkin lie, and dragged the USA into a very long and unnecessary war that lasted 10 years and killed millions.

Jeff Steinberg on the JFK Assassination


Interview with "Mr.X" Col. Prouty


JFK vs. Empire, Interview with Anton Chaitkin


Kennedy’s “Grand and Global Alliance”

DING DONG MERRILY A SPY

Ding dong merrily a spy
is reading all your emails.
He doesn’t need to tell you why
he needs to know your life’s tales.
Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis!

Everything you do is stored
and data mined later.
And don’t think that your every thought
escapes the freedom hater.
Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis!

The NSA, GCHQ
know what you got for Christmas.
Snowden says it’s up to you:
Cure this spying sickness!
Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis!

CONFUSION REIGNS

The two main parties opposed to the Anglo-American bankers appear to be
1. the Libertarian/Austrian school party
2. Larouche PAC

Regarding 1., I have been reading a few writings of theirs and found some very curious anomalies:
1. Justin Raimondo, editor of Antiwar, on the 50th anniversary of JFKs assassination attacked JFK as a warmonger and not once referred to his assassins. This is curious because it is blatantly obvious that after JFKs assassination the Gulf of Tonkin (non) event occured which was required to drag the USA into a long drawn out war in Vietnam, because before his murder JFK was pulling out of Vietnam.
2. Antiwar proudly state that they are Libertarian and believe in the work of Murray Rothbard of The Ludwig Von Mises Institute. One contributor to the LVMI is Thomas di Lorenzo, who has written books attacking Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln, and has praised another Libertarian writer as having the logic of Ayn Rand. Di Lorenzo has also praised John D Rockefeller in The Truth About the "Robber Barons" on mises.org. It was the Rockefellers who sponsored Hitler and world government. But Hamilton was assassinated by the bona fide traitor Aaron Burr because Hamilton exposed Burr's treason. Burr fled New York to escape prosecution and stayed with hero of the Libertarians Andrew Jackson (who later delivered the USA on a plate to the Rothschilds) to plot yet more treason, but that plot was foiled and Burr eventually escaped to England to stay with Jeremy Bentham.

Regarding 2., one criticism that the Libertarians have is of the Bank of North America and the First and Second Bank of the United States, claiming that all that these banks did was create a British-style banking class but based in the USA. I believe there is possibly something in this. The President of the Bank of North America was the not-so-revolutionary Thomas Willing. Willing was also the first President of the Bank of the United States, who appointed Baring as bankers to the United States, having appointed Baring as his personal bankers just before the revolutionary war broke out. Willing was the son of a Shippen and two of Willing's granddaughters married leading members of the Baring banking family. The LPAC historian Anton Chaitkin in Treason in America attacks both the Shippen family and Barings, yet in A Very American Irony I looked at Willing and the Shippen family and their treason against America, and in other posts throughout last summer I looked at how Baring, which Chaitkin claims was at heart of the British Empire's war against the USA, could have sunk the USA financially several times but each time acted to save the USA, even going so far as to side with and financially assist Lincoln during the British-engineered US Civil War.

So...

CAN YOU FEEL THE FORCE?

With just one week left in 2013, I think we can say that the most memorable and significant political event of 2013 was the humiliating defeat for Der Fuhrer David Cameron in late August after the horrific and highly suspicious events of 21st August in Ghouta, Damascus, Syria.

For the first time in centuries The Marsten House voted against a motion for war.

Can You Feel The Force? - The Real Thing


Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?

There's a mood spreading round the world today
Can you feel the force?
It's with you in your work or at your play
Can you feel the force?
They're cleaning up the streets throughout the world
Can you feel the force?
Ghetto folk have had the final furl
Can you feel the force?

You can feel the pressure lifting off your head
People who make war are making love instead
This could be the dawning of another time
Hatred is a stranger we can see the sign

Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Can you feel the force?
Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Can you feel the force?

All you people with your heads on the ground
Can you feel the force?
I can feel the hope spreading all around
Can you feel the force?
I can feel a new beginning in the air
Can you feel the force?
Peace and love forming everywhere
Can you feel the force?

You can see a change in people's attitudes
Looking to the future in much brighter moods
There's a message clearly written in the sky
Time to change and soon we'll all be flying high

Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Can you feel the force?
Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Can you feel the force?

CONNECTING DOTS

I would strongly recommend watching the four episodes of Connecting The Dots currently available on The People's Voice channel on Youtube.

Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


The latest Episode 4 focuses on the speech given in 1969 by Dr Richard Day, a high ranking employee in the Rockefeller empire, who decided one day to tell a private audience 'the plan'. And oh how prophetic he was!

One aspect of this speech is what Day said about education. According to Day:
1. students would stay in school for longer but not learn much;
2. schools would act as a focus of the community rather than a place of learning;
3. schools would also indoctrinate students in the benefits of world government.

Regarding 1. and 2., the current Secretary for Education Michael Gove recently proposed that schools should be open for longer, both during day time and for more weeks of the year. Standards in English and Mathematics in the UK have fallen significantly as recognised by several recent reports, including the House of Lords STEM Committee last year. Employers grumble that students leaving school have an inadequate education. I heard one employer on a BBC radio phone in say that a student with grade B at GCSE Mathematics couldn't calculate 25% of 50.

But for all you teachers out there, in the USA the Rockefellers financed the General Board of Education and the National Education Association (NEA). But the Rockefellers also sponsored Hitler's eugenics research, and also ignored advice from the US government and gave him technology to increase the capability of the Wehrmacht. The Rockefellers have also sponsored the two attempts at world government; The League of Nations, and The United Nations.

In the editorial of the January 1946 edition of the NEA Journal, editor J. Elmer Morgan wrote,

"In the struggle to establish an adequate world government, the teacher... can do much to prepare the hearts and minds of children.... At the very top of all the agencies which will assure the coming of world government must stand the school, the teacher, and the organized profession."

I have written here that I know of at least one school in which the time dedicated to mathematics was slashed in order to allow study of world and european government as part of a citizenship/life skills program. I have a copy of it, and although the curriculum for this program is supposed to be unbiased, there is a very definite pro-world government bias, and this was clear in the work of students that I looked at.

World war 1 was engineered to establish a world government. But it failed. So a second world war was engineered. That succeeded in that The United Nations has survived and grown in power and influence. As has the European Union. The EU is itself a child of Bilderberg, which was established and run by...the Rockefellers.

There is also a provable link between The Bavarian Illuminati and current education practices through Wilhelm Wundt, whose grandfather was a member of that evil and banned organisation, and who was influenced by other members via Johann Herbart. Wundt's theories were imported to Yale University via members of Skull and Bones which then led to the lovers of the Nazis and world government, the Rockefellers, sponsoring John Dewey at the School of Education at their University of Chicago. Dewey would later state that he wanted a system of mathematics that was useless. He would also become Honorary President of the aforementioned NEA. This is all clearly stated in America's Secret Establishment by Antony C Sutton, and The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America by Charlotte Iserbyt Thompson.

In short, the Rockefellers supported by the Carnegies have been controlling education for decades, financing this organisation and that researcher, all with the aim of finding the perfect system of education for total social control. And if the Rockefellers are involved then it is definitely very, very bad for humanity. This speech by Rockefeller employee Dr Richard Day says it all.

MEET THE GRINCHES WHO HAVE MERRILY SLAUGHTERED CHRISTMAS FOR MILLIONS

This is Bandar bin Sultan.

He is implicated in handling the 9/11 hijackers.

He is also implicated in providing the cutthroat Jihadis who are slaughtering their merry way through Syria.

He has also threatened Putin with unleashing Islamic terrorists onto the Sochi Winter Olympics.

He is also believed to have organised the attacks on the Hezbollah HQ in Beirut and then the horrific events at Ghouta.

There is currently an attempt in The New York Post to expose the role of Bandar bin Sultan and Saudi Arabia in 9/11. Or is it an attempt to deflect blame for 9/11 onto Bandar alone? The Saudis didn't write A Clean Break or Rebuilding America's Defenses.

Whatever. Bandar is no Bandar Claus. He is one of many grinches who have stolen Christmas from millions and replaced it with war, homelessness and cut throats. Other grinches include:
William Jihadi Hague;
David Cameron;
Benjamin Netanyahu;

NIGELLA LAWSON INDICATIVE OF FAKE AND SHALLOW SOCIETY WITH NO SUBSTANCE

She was the beautiful, curvaceous, saucy, wholesome wife who cooked great food and ... (LP scratch).

Hold it!

No she wasn't.

She was, according to her aides who were found not guilty of defrauding her, a fake.

Exactly like the media who used her.

Fake.

Fake.

Fake.

Propagating a myth based on a lie.

WHY IS ED SNOWDEN PREPARED TO GIVE THE CHANNEL 4 CHRISTMAS DAY MESSAGE BUT NOT ANSWER SIBEL EDMONDS QUESTIONS?

Finally, at long last, there was some kind of resistance shown against the Ed Snowden lovefest last week when Sibel Edmonds asked Snowden in an open letter 8 incisive questions:

What was your foremost intention for making the decision to obtain thousands of documents that implicated the United States government?

What was your foremost intention for actually taking the action following your decision, and obtaining those documents?

At the time, when you were obtaining the documents, did you target particular categories of implicating documents, or did you just grab everything you could?

1. If you vetted the documents, or the specific categories of documents, beforehand, and then went about obtaining them, then why would you ask journalists to vet and make personal judgments on which ones to release or which ones to withhold permanently?
2. If you didn’t vet the documents prior to obtaining them, and if you asked particular journalists to vet them and decide what to release and what to withhold, did you make any demands to ensure that you were part of that vetting process and that they had to have your consent?
3. If you didn’t vet the documents prior to obtaining them, and if you asked particular journalists to vet them and decide what to release and what to withhold, did you also asked them to have meetings with U.S. and U.K. government agencies, and have those who were actually implicated in your documents call the shots on what to withhold and what to release?

Did you provide Glenn Greenwald with your explicit consent and authorization to make decisions on what to release and what to withhold? If so, was this in writing? If so, why and how did you make that decision?

1. For example: Mr. Greenwald entered in a contractual agreement with a mainstream corporate publisher to withhold certain documents only to include them exclusively in his coming book in return for millions of dollars. Did you sanction this decision? Do you find this action justified and reasonable?

Did you provide Mr. Greenwald with your explicit consent to strike a business venture with a corporation that is a known cooperative partner of the NSA in a $250 million deal? Did you authorize Mr. Greenwald to withhold 99% of the documents and transfer their ownership to the corporate news entity owned by PayPal’s Pierre Omidyar? If yes, when and how did you provide your consent and approval? What was your reasoning for sanctioning and or authorizing this transfer of document ownership, and to withhold the vast majority of these documents from the public and its right to know?

Do you believe it is reasonable, justified and acceptable that the person you gave the ownership of these documents to is commoditizing and profiting from these documents that are considered classified and stolen by the United States government, yet were considered by you as evidence to which the people have the right to know about?

1. If yes, then, do you believe that it is acceptable and correct for entities who obtain classified and incriminating government documents to market these documents as commodities, and offer them to the highest bidders, whether the bidder is the government, or a corporation, or a book publisher?
2. If your answer to above question (a) is yes, then, do you believe you are also entitled to benefit and profit from the sale and censorship of these documents?

Have you made any venture deals or entered into any contract with Mr. Greenwald where you will receive a cut from the millions of dollars that are being obtained by him in return for publication and withholding certain portions of the NSA documents?

1. If yes, when, where and how?
2. If yes, then, does your flexibility on the sale and commoditization of stolen and classified government documents also extend to foreign government entities?

This appears to be the first case labeled and categorized as a whistleblowing case where a leak is being commoditized at a value of hundreds of millions of dollars by corporations such as PayPal, Book publishers and Hollywood studios. Could you provide us with your general stand, principles and values with regard to leaking and disclosing for political and profit motives?

[source : Mr. Snowden, It’s Time to Come Out and Take a Stand Publicly as to Your Intentions, Boiling Frogs, http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12/15/mr-snowden-its-time-to-come-out-and-take-a-stand-publicly-as-to-your-intentions/, 15th December 2013]

Well, I've just had a good look at Edmonds' website Boiling Frogs, and I assume that Snowden has not answered her questions because there does not yet appear to be a reply to Edmonds' questions on her website.

The reason why I looked at Edmonds' Boiling Frogs website is because Ed Snowden is to give the Channel 4 Christmas Day Message this year.

Edward Snowden, the whistleblower who prompted a worldwide debate when he leaked a cache of top secret documents about US and UK spying, has recorded a Christmas Day television message in which he calls for an end to the mass surveillance revealed by his disclosures.

The short film was recorded for Channel 4, which has 20-year history of providing unusual but relevant figures as an alternative to the Queen's Christmas message shown by other UK broadcasters. It will be Snowden's first television appearance since arriving in Moscow.

[source : Edward Snowden to broadcast Channel 4's alternative Christmas Day message, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/24/edward-snowden-channel-4-christmas-day-message, 24th December 2013]

Readers will know that I was immediately highly sceptical of Ed Snowden. The conduit of his allegations was The Guardian. I demolished the credibility of The Guardian last week with an analysis of its editorials on Syria since the horrific events at Ghouta. The Guardian detests Assad more than it detests Putin. So when The Guardian began publishing the allegations of Snowden shortly after the Syrian rebels lost the strategically important al Qusair I smelled a big fat NATO rat. This scepticism was all but proved when it was casually announced that Glenn Greenwald would be teaming up with Jeremy Scahill, who had just launched his own personal but very public dirty war against arguably the bravest woman on the planet, Mother Agnes Mariam, when he torpedoed her appearance at the Stop The War conference a few weeks ago.

So, why would Snowden appear on Channel 4 TV to give a Christmas Day Message, but not answer in writing the perfectly legitimate and intelligent questions of Sibel Edmonds?

Answers on a postcard please to:
NATO Mass Psyop Department
Brussels
Kiddie Fiddling Belgium
Europe
The World
The Solar System
The Milky Way
The Universe
The Simulation

LORD MILNER'S SECOND WAR

Just been reading a book entitled, "Lord Milner's Second War" by John Cafferky, who does a good job in accusing The Milner Group of starting World War 1, in particular Sir Edward Grey, by either (1) not telling Germany that Great Britain would join in any war, or (2) not telling France that Great Britain would not support them. But one particular chapter completely misses the point, and although Cafferky assumes some kind of British green light to the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand, he also implicates Russia, but only with assumptions. On the other hand there is ample evidence that it was British Freemasonry that engineered the whole bloody saga, from start to finish and The Milner Group was just a cog in their machinery.

5 out of 10 but good effort.

WHERE ARE THE IMAGES OF BARREL BOMBS?

Apparently the Syrian Arab Army has been hovering over Aleppo dropping barrel bombs onto unsuspecting civilians.

And apparently there has been a fierce battle over a hospital being used as a military base.

But apparently the rebels do not appear to have been able to photograph these helicopters or the barrel bombs being pushed out of them. Such photographs would be a dynamite PR victory for the rebels. But for whatever reason the only photographs we get to see in the NATO media is the alleged aftermath of one of these barrel bombs.

Now, if the rebels had any brains (and after nearly 3 years still not realising that they are actually fighting for Israel implies that they don't) you would think that at the first sound of an approaching helicopter they would have their cameras ready to either photograph or even better film barrel bombs being pushed out of helicopters. Alas, no such photographic evidence exists. Instead, all we have are allegations from intellectually challenged and unreliable rebels being passed onto a totally discredited one man band based in Coventry.

On the other hand, as a sick example of just how cutthrroat the rebels are, they posted photographs of their slaughter of civilians at Adra. I do not wish to propagate those images because they are horrific and degrading to humanity. But they are, or were last week, available on the internet.

So that is my point:
1. despite over a week of allegations that the Syrian Arab Army is dropping barrel bombs out of helicopters over Aleppo, we have not been provided with any images of this, despite helicopters announcing their approach quite loudly, thus giving the rebels plenty of time to prepare to film these alleged attacks; and such images would provide a PR victory; but they always seem to have cameras to photograph the aftermath of these attacks;
2. the cutthroats were very eager to display their slaughter of innocent civilians at Adra, with photographs of them holding the decapitated heads of their victims.
3. the rebels and their mouthpieces such as the MI6 SOHR have already been sussed by blaming slaughter of civilians on the Syrian Arab Army at Houla and Khan al Assal, and more importantly at Ghouta.

ON THE NATO MEDIA KHORDOKOVSKY LOVE-IN

Behind every great fortune lies a great crime - Honore de Balzac

Mikhail Khordokovsky has been in prison for 8 years convicted of tax evasion, fraud, embezzlement and money laundering. At the time of his arrest he was one of the richest men in Russia.

But behind every great fortune lies a great crime.

Khordokovsky gained his fortune from Yukos. Under alcoholic Boris Yeltsin, in 1995 Khordokovsky bought Russian state oil company Yukos at a bargain basement price, the previous year having been Deputy Chairman of The Council for Industrial Policy and Privatization. Khordokovsky assisted Yeltsin's campain in 1996 which led to Khordokovsky being given access to the corridors of power and state finance.

Somewhere along the way Khordokovsky became an asset of the Rothschilds. In 2001 Khordokovsky founded The Open Russia Foundation, with Lord Jacob Rothschild and Henry Kissinger on its board of trustees, and its official launch in Somerset House, London, a building owned by the Rothschilds. The aim of the ORF was to open up Russia to bargain basement privatization, much like what happened here with the recent scandal from the cheap sale of Royal Mail. And upon Khordokovsky's arrest in 2003 Khordokovsky tried to give his shares in Yukos to Lord Jacob Rothschild.

The Guardian loves Khordokovsky. It has championed Khordokovsky's case, even going so far as to write an editorial under Khordokovsky's name! A few days ago I provided an analysis of The Guardian's editorials regarding Syria; to put it mildly The Guardian detests Assad, possibly more than it detests Putin.

So to add to that analysis we now have this:
1. nearly everyone in Russia hates Mikhail Khordokovsky because behind his great fortune lies a great crime, or in Khordokovsky's case, crimes, crimes against the Russian people, crimes for which he has been in prison for over 8 years; but The Guardian loves Mikhail Khordokovsky!
2. Khordokovsky appears to be an asset of the Rothschilds, which would explain why the NATO media and its human rights organisations have pushed Khordokovsky's case, and why there is great celebration that such a convicted criminal has been released early.

The world now waits for what surprises Prince Bandar bin Sultan has for Putin at the Sochi Winter Olympics... 

THERE IT IS

There it is - Shalamar


There it is, there it is
What took us so long to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

But I knew the answer to why people fall in love
But then I found I knew nothing about it
Till I met you, girl, I thought that I had had enough
Now I'm sure I've always been without it

And it feels so good that you and I can go together
Ooh baby, we've both found what we've been looking for
And this time I know we're gonna make it better
Our heart is a key to pump it at the door
Don't have to search no more

There it is, there it is
What took us so long, ooh, to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

In the sea of love we set our sails when waters were up
Two in search of love with no direction
Fish were biting at the time when catching wasn't enough
We couldn't make a sport of our affection

And who could change that we would sail into each other
Ooh girl, I never felt the wave of love so strong
And this love I never felt in any other
I trust it like the lighthouse guides a ship to land
I found it when you touched my hand

There it is
What took us so long for a love so strong?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

And it's about time
For love to find its way back home
Girl, you're mine
Now that we've found love we've got to get it on

There it is, baby
There it is, this time I'm not wrong
Got a love that's so strong

Like the lighthouse guides a ship to land
I found it when you touched my hand

There it is, there it is
What took us so long to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

There it is, hey, what took us so long
To find the sweet, sweet love?
There it is
This time I'm not wrong
This time I'm not wrong
We got a love that's so strong

ONCE YOU GET THEM OUT OF THE BOX YOU CAN'T PUT THEM BACK

This is what one source of Seymour Hersh said about the cutthroat Jihadis that have been unleashed onto Syria by Saudi Arabia with the full backing of Israel and the USA.

Nasr went on, “The Saudis have considerable financial means, and have deep relations with the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis”—Sunni extremists who view Shiites as apostates. “The last time Iran was a threat, the Saudis were able to mobilize the worst kinds of Islamic radicals. Once you get them out of the box, you can’t put them back.”

[source : The Redirection, The New Yorker Magazine, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh?currentPage=all, 5th March 2007]

This has now manifested in Syria.

It’s been so long ago, it’s easy to forget that the Syrian Civil War began with peaceful protests. Now those organizers and human rights activists that initially called for the ouster of Assad are finding a rebellion that they recognize less and less, and that has less and less use for them.

Fleeing Assad-held territory, such activists took refuge in the rebel-held north. But as secular rebel fighters lose what little influence they have left, the activists are fleeing Islamist-dominated territory.

Reporters Without Borders and other groups have detailed scores of activists “detained” by al-Qaeda, and at least 150 were reported to have fled the country outright.

[source : Targeted by Islamists, Secular Rebels Flee Syria, Antiwar, http://news.antiwar.com/2013/12/19/targeted-by-islamists-secular-rebels-flee-syria/, 19th December 2013]

But I am not so surprised at Antiwar calling the violence in Syria "the Syrian Civil War" (note the use of capitals to make it sound official). As documented on this blog ad nauseum (which is free of charge and powered by long solitary hours of reading and analysis) there is no civil war in Syria. There is however an invasion of Syria by cutthroat Jihadis who are sponsored by Saudi Arabia. This was agreed with Israel and the USA because the plan for war on seven nations in five years, which was revealed to General Wesley Clark shortly after the inside job 9/11, was moribund.

Why am I not so surprised at Antiwar getting "the Syrian Civil War" wrong? Because on the recent 50th anniversary of JFKs assassination Antiwar had a right go at JFK. Not only that, there is a strong pro-Ron Paul element to their writings. And on Ron Paul, I am again with Webster Tarpley; there is something not right with Paul's link to Bilderberg, which could explain his Austrian economics, or vice versa. Not that I am anti Antiwar. But as with Paul's dodgy finances, we also have to ask who are Antiwar's angels? And what have they asked for in return?

REAL TEARS FROM A GRIEVING MOTHER

At the time of Lee Rigby's murder there was a sick attempt to lead us to believe that his death was a hoax, that somehow the many residents in the area didn't see the lights and cameras and film crews being transported in to film the scenes in which Rigby is attacked with a rubber knife and bleeds ketchup, or the scene in which the murderers charge at the police like in the final scene of Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid starring Robert Redford and Paul Newman.

If Lee Rigby did not die that day in the way we were told then he is playing the cruelest hoax not only on this nation but more importantly on his distraught grieving mother. But the hoaxers will say, "Ah, perhaps his mother is in on it too?"

What a bunch of sickos!

Here is Rigby's mother being interviewed by ITV.
http://www.itv.com/news/2013-12-19/lee-rigbys-mother-justice-will-not-bring-him-back/

Are those real tears from a grieving mother?

OF COURSE THEY ARE!

The unreported facts about this horrific case are that at the time of Rigby's murder:
1. Adebalajo was under surveillance by MI5 suspected of being an Islamic extremist
2. Adebalajo was openly preaching on the streets of Woolwich asking Muslims to go to Syria to join the Jihad against Assad.

You see, in this fucked-up country, it's OK to encourage violence and slaughter of the innocents if it suits British foreign policy. And even better, as in this case, if it suits domestic policy too! For a few months now we have been told that we must cede our privacy and rights because of al Qaeda. And yes, that's the same al Qaeda that we created and was run by Osama bin Laden who had a mansion in Wembley and trained with MI6. We have been warned that British Jihadis who are currently fighting in Syria against the Syrian Arab Army will one day soon return to Great Britain and continue the Jihad on British streets. Hmm. I wonder how many of those Jihadis were inspired by Adebalajo or other extremist preachers on the 'watch' list of MI5, who allowed the preachers to preach Jihad in Syria because the Syrian Arab Army is wiping the floor with those Jihadis there now and more are needed to be the new gimps for Israel?

This really is one fucked-up mugged-off country!


   

THE IMMATURE NATO GUARDIAN MOCKS BELIEVERS IN THE ILLUMINATI

The Guardian has mocked believers in The Bavarian Illuminati.

Why do this now is not clear to me.

The piece mocks those who believe that The Illuminati exists and controls the world. According to The Guardian The Illuminati is,

...a shadowy conspiracy that has existed since the dawn of time, secretly pulling the strings of every major organisation in the world. It manipulates finances and dictates policy so as to usher in a terrifying new world order.

[source : The Illuminati: the secret society pulling the strings of every major organisation in the world, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2013/dec/18/illuminati-secret-society-conspiracy-jay-z, 18th December 2013]

The piece references as evidence for this shadowy conspiracy,

Lindsay Lohan's tattoos. Or Lady Gaga's videos. Or that hand thing that Jay Z does. Or the way Barack Obama shakes hands with the pope...Especially the Guardian. What are all those articles about quinoa for, if not to deliberately make it too expensive for Bolivians and further the rise of McDonald's, which is also part of the Illuminati,

The piece is immature. The Illuminati really did exist. Their documents were full of really evil stuff. They wanted to takeover the world with something similar to Communism. The Bavarian authorities banned them and warned every government in Europe of their activities.

But their leader is alleged to have found sanctuary in the House of Saxe-Gotha. Readers will note that the British Royal Family began to be referred to as Windsor only during WW1. Before this they were Saxe-Gotha-Coburg.

The piece references pop stars such as Jay Z and Lady Gaga. But it does not refer to Rihanna, who is the proclaimed Princess of The Illuminati.

The piece mocks the idea that there is a group who "manipulates finances and dictates policy". But there exists such a group. They created and own The Federal Reserve. Before this they created and owned The Bank of England. Their banks create money out of thin air while we work our arses off just to put crumbs on the table. They run organisations like Bilderberg, The Council on Foreign Relations and The Trilateral Commission to vet politicians and leaders. They attend sick ceremonies at which mock human sacrifices occur in front of a huge stone owl called Moloch, an ancient deity to whom children were sacrificed.

It is these families who created Hitler, financed his eugenics policies, gave Nazi Germany the military technology to build his Wehrmacht and collaborated with him in building Auschwitz. But they also created Soviet Russia. All this is in the excellent books of Professor Antony C Sutton and Webster Tarpley.

But above all they financed the two attempts at world government; first The League of Nations, which failed, and then The United Nations, which has survived and is growing in strength and influence but is not yet a totalitarian world government. But a WW3, one that could occur over Syria and/or Iran, would provoke calls for all national sovereignty to be ceded to the UN.

In short, they can create trillions out of thin air, to buy this corporation or influence that political body. They engineer world wars. They finance world governments.

This is provable fact, and is not to be mocked.

THE GUARDIAN AND ITS ROLE IN ACCUSING ASSAD AND PUSHING FOR WAR ON SYRIA

The Guardian is controlled left. It wholeheartedly supported the push for green genocide at Copenhagen in 2009, publishing little booklets before and during the conference. But it had to. There is only one newspaper that could have possibly supported green genocide that way. Each newspaper has its part to play in projecting an image of the world into our brains, and it is the role of The Guardian to play a caring, humanitarian role. That the leaders of the Africa and Asia rejected the original Copenhagen agreement because they believed it would have led to a drastic decline in living standards and their economies while enriching the west was barely reported.

In the early hours of 21st August 2013 in Syria, it was reported that chemical weapons had been used in a suburb of Damascus called Ghouta. The immediate cry in the NATO media was that Assad did it. Why Assad did it was not addressed, because Assad had no reason to do it. Such an allegation was an insult to logic, because the Syrian Arab Army had turned the war against the invading foreign cutthroats in their favour a few months earlier at al Qusair, resulting in the SAA defeating the cutthroats in battle after battle after battle. The cutthroats were on the run, being chased out of their dens into a cloud of SAA bullets and a shallow grave, or back to where they came from (which is not Syria).

Every single major British newspaper blamed Assad for Ghouta.

Even The Guardian.

There now follows an analysis of the editorials of The Guardian and its sister The Observer.

The Guardian directly accused Assad in its first editorial after the event. They didn't wait for evidence. They know they are one of the most popular news outlets on the internet, and should therefore exercise caution and professionalism and responsibility. But they didn't.

There is next to no doubt that chemical weapons were used in Ghouta in eastern Damascus, and that, unlike previous alleged attacks, they produced mass casualties. Whether the death toll is in the hundreds or over a thousand, as the rebels claim, this is one of the most significant chemical weapons attacks since Saddam Hussein's on the Kurds in Halabja 25 years ago, and an unmistakable challenge to the vow Barack Obama made a year ago that, if proved, the use of chemical or biological weapons would "change my calculus".

Nor is there much doubt about who committed the atrocity. The Syrian government acknowledged it had launched a major offensive in the area and they are the only combatant with the capability to use chemical weapons on this scale.

[source : Syria: chemical weapons with impunity, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/22/syria-chemical-weapons, 22nd August 2013]

A few days later and their accusations (at least in editorials) had calmed down a bit but were still present between the lines. But whereas just after the events in Ghouta The Guardian made accusations but did not call for war, on Sunday 24th August in an editorial in its sister The Observer, war was suggested, the reason was R2P, responsibility to protect. Read this and see what you think:

The stark and compelling evidence of large-scale atrocities, including the strongly suspected use of chemical weapons outside Damascus last week, killing perhaps hundreds of people, comes amid a growing perception that a weak and divided international community is powerless and unwilling to act on crimes against humanity. A sense of impunity feeds boldness and escalation. In Damascus, Cairo and elsewhere, actors today are making dangerous decisions based on the calculation that they will not be called to account.

In these circumstances, it is the easiest thing to say that, in the case of Syria in particular, there are only bad options. That may be true. But increasingly it may be that there is a worse option: doing nothing.

This paper has resisted the calls for military intervention in Syria. It remains the case that such intervention seems a deeply perilous route, with no guarantee of success and pregnant with the risk of triggering a wider regional war. But we do appear to be coming ever closer to a tipping point, with difficult judgments ahead. The recent statements from William Hague and President Obama have raised the temperature and increased the likelihood of some form of action or sanction if it is conclusively proved that the Syrian regime is authoring chemical attacks on its citizens. Hague is right to say that "a chemical attack ... is not something that a humane and civilised world can ignore".

[source : Choosing between bad options in Syria becomes ever more complex, The Observer, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/24/options-syria, 24th August 2013]

There is the strong hint that Assad was to blame for Ghouta, as can be found in, "In Damascus, Cairo and elsewhere, actors today are making dangerous decisions based on the calculation that they will not be called to account."

And then in, "This paper has resisted the calls for military intervention in Syria...But we do appear to be coming ever closer to a tipping point", we see the strong hint that bombing Syria under R2P would be acceptable.

Readers should also note that in not one editorial of The Guardian or The Observer are the cutthroats ever accused or considered as culprits.

Then came the debate in The Marsten House, and to be fair The Guardian appeared to be less antiwar, and did not make any blatant accusations, and appeared pleased at the outcome of that vote.

But it made up for it the following weekend in another Observer editorial.

How many died in the Assad regime's chemical attacks? The UK's mini-dossier put to MPs last Thursday said 330 or so, the fatter US intelligence file cited by Mr Obama said nearly 1,500. One round of claims and responsibilities was described as "highly likely", another as "compelling"

[source : Syria: an air strike will have no practical benefit, The Observer, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/31/observer-editorial-syria-air-strike-no-benefit, 31st August 2013]

You can't get more blatant than that, can you?

The next day the accusations against Assad continued.

The presumed use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime presented the whole international community with a dilemma which has not gone away since. Do nothing effective, and the world would be averting its gaze from a type of warfare which has always triggered a special repugnance from countries which regard themselves as upholding moral standards. Do something forceful, and the human and military impact in Syria and beyond might be hard either to control or to justify.

[source : US and Syria: gambling with engagement, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/01/us-syria-gambling-engagement-obama, 1st September 2013]

In this editorial The Guardian tasks President Obama with "international responsibilities":

Taking the congressional route may be smart domestically.

...It is right that democracies facing wars of choice should vote on whether to go ahead. But democracies have international responsibilities as well as domestic ones. The priorities in Syria are to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict and bring the rule of law to bear. If that happened, Syria's humanitarian crisis could be addressed. Western nervousness is not making any of these things easier to achieve. On the contrary, Russia and Iran are likely to feel emboldened, and Israel more threatened, creating fresh instability. The democracies have rightly opted for a considered approach. But the need for an engaged strategy is as urgent as ever, and is neglected at our collective peril.

What do you think is meant by "engaged strategy"?

The following week Syria agreed to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention. The Guardian was pleased:

But for now, the problem and doubts over enforcement should not be allowed to obscure the ultimate goal – that if Syria signs the CWC, and it said it would, a procedure will be put in place that is more thorough and more targeted at Syria's chemical weapons stock than any military action, barring full scale invasion, could achieve.

If the CWC route takes time, so be it. Renouncing the use of force – that Mr Obama's administration is deeply divided about and struggling to define –may be the price that has to be paid.

[source : Syria: a path worth exploring, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/10/syria-a-path-worth-exploring, 10th September 2013]

And it is in this editorial that we really begin to see The True Guardian.

Can you see why?

Read the editorial again...and again...and again.

Have you read it?

There is not one mention of Israel's chemical weapons or its publicly stated desire to sign the CWC.

Why is The Guardian so pleased at Syria relinquishing its chemical weapons while not mentioning Israel's huge stockpiles of all kinds of nasty stuff, chemical, biological and nuclear?

And in response to the deal reached over Syria's chemical weapons, The Guardian was sceptical:

A bleaker view is to be had on the ground in rebel-held Syria. The rebels see Mr Assad as strengthened by the deal. Giving up weapons which were anyway becoming a liability is a small sacrifice for the implied protection from an air strike which he will secure for at least one year. His chemical weapons stocks were never the crown jewels they were described as being. He has allegedly used them on 14 different occasions before, but always on a small scale – enough to terrify the civilian population, but in small enough quantities to escape verification. It is no exoneration of Mr Assad to say that the most likely explanation for the massacre in Ghouta in Damascus was that it may have been the work of an overzealous local commander. Taking these weapons off the battlefield will be little relief to civilians, who are coming under fire from all manner of conventional high explosive, and no help to the Free Syrian Army.

...Last week Russian diplomacy was at its opportunistic peak. But its arguments that Mr Assad had not used chemical weapons were specious.

[source : Syria: the deal that only goes so far, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/15/syria-deal-only-goes-so-far, 15th September 2013]

But at least in this editorial Israel is mentioned, but its nuclear, biological or chemical weapons stockpiles are not.

And note that nearly a month after Ghouta, the most accurate assessment that The Guardian has as to the culprit is, "It is no exoneration of Mr Assad to say that the most likely explanation for the massacre in Ghouta in Damascus was that it may have been the work of an overzealous local commander." In other words, not Prince Bandar bin Sultan and his merry band of cutthroats.

AND THIS IS THE PAPER SELLING US GLENN GREENWALD AND ED SNOWDEN AFTER ALL THE PREVIOUS NSA WHISTLEBLOWERS WERE IGNORED!? And Greenwald is now cavorting with Jeremy Scahill following Scahill's dirty war against Mother Agnes Mariam.

WHAT A TRANSPARENT SHAM!

So to summarise:
1. The Guardian immediately accused Assad of the horrific events of Ghouta;
2. The Guardian and its sister The Observer pushed R2P as a reason to attack Syria (remember, the loyal readership of The Guardian is generally the antiwar left);
3. The editorials of The Guardian and The Observer continued to accuse Assad of Ghouta after the humiliating defeat for Der Fuhrer in The Marsten House, and not once considered the rebels as the culprits;
4. Following the proposals for Syria to relinquish its stockpile of chemical weapons, The Guardian not once mentioned Israel's stockpiles of WMDs in its editorials.

So from this evidence is The Guardian working for, or at least protecting, somebody?

WASHINGTON POST AGAIN BASHES OBAMA OVER SYRIA

Throughout last summer The Bilderberg Washington Post attacked Obama for not attacking Syria. As explained multiple times on this blog, Syria is just one of seven nations targeted for war shortly after the inside job 9/11, even though no evidence had been provided that those seven nations had anything to do with 9/11. Former Commander of NATO in Europe, General Wesley Clark, was told of this plan shortly after 9/11. The seven nations named to Clark were Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, and Libya, Sudan and Somalia. The first four were named in a Zionist warmongering document called A Clean Break, whose authors interlocked with a powerful network of Zionists in the USA who formed The Project for New American Century. PNAC members were essentially running the US government and military on 9/11. PNAC had also named Iraq and Iran as the biggest threats to the USA. The plan revealed to Clark was for war on these seven nations in five years. But by 2007 only 2 of these nations had been attacked: Iraq was invaded in 2003 and suffered sectarian violence for years resulting in the USA staying in Iraq for longer than planned and the American public becoming war-weary; in 2006 Israel engineered a war on Hezbollah, but somehow managed to lose, killing hundreds of Lebanese children in the process, so Bravo! Israel.

So by 2007 this plan for war on seven nations in five years was moribund.

To inject some life back into this warmongering, the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia reached a Faustian pact that the latter would unleash cutthroat Jihadis onto some of those nations not yet attacked. But some kind of cover was required to mask their cutthroat nature. That cover was The Arab Spring, which is not Arab but CIA and financed by Washington. In Libya in 2011, British Special Forces assisted the Jihadis on the ground while NATO bombed a clear and unobstructed path for them all the way into Tripoli. Former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was asked in 2009 to help the British to get the Jihadis into Syria. Obama was not supposed to win the election last year. Bilderberg and Wall Street picked Romney and his pro-war, pro-Israel, pro-fascism policies. They, through their agent DCI David Petraeus, arranged Benghazi to Carterise Obama, but Romney blew it. Petraeus resigned in a scandal and now has a cushy job with KKR, who are ever-present at Bilderberg.

In other words, to put it bluntly, the plan for war on seven nations in five years has become one big fuck-up, perhaps the biggest fuck-up in the sordid history of fuck-ups. All they have done is expose themselves as heartless, soulless warmongering scum who are prepared to unleash the nastiest medieval cutthroats onto children for slaughter. This scum deserve something much more gruesome than being hung, drawn and quartered.

To pressure Obama into attacking Syria he was personally implicated in a series of scandals, culminating in the 'revelations' from Ed Snowden that Obama was personally reading all our emails and texts. These revelations came just days after the Syrian rebels lost the important hub of al Qusair. There were accusations that Assad had used chemical weapons at Khan al Assal. But Russia was allowed into Syria to collect samples under international regulations and standards and concluded that the rebels had used chemical weapons. Russia passed the evidence to the UN who reached an agreement with Syria to be allowed to enter Khan al Assal to investigate what really happened. Within hours of the news that Syria would allow in the UN the rebels went back into Khan al Assal and slaughtered every living thing, including soldiers from the Syrian Arab Army which proves that Russia was correct in accusing the rebels. This is just one example of the kind of dirty trick played against Syria that is barely reported in the NATO media. The latest and most horrific is that at Ghouta in August which could have led to WW3. In addition, Obama was spoken to personally by Erdogan of Turkey, Der Fuhrer David Cameron, Netanyahu of Israel. But still Obama resisted war.

And so the fury of the warmongers manifested in a video attacking Obama's competence. This video was released by the Emergency Committee for Israel, which was formed by Bill Kristol, who had previously formed...The Project for a New American Century!

Oh, how the wheels of history turn. It is always the same people, the same families, as if it is genetic.

So onto the latest barage against Obama from The Washington Post. The angle of attack from the WP is "we told you so". The WP paints a picture of al Qaeda taking root in the Middle East and causing a huge refugee crisis, a crisis that could have been averted had Obama heeded advice and bombed Syria. But for some strange reason the WP does not mention anything that I state above. Nothing whatsoever. According to their sociopathic minds they are the innocents in all this medieval slaughter of Syrian children, while Obama is the bungling fool who started and propagated all the bloodshed and humanitarian crisis.

Yet there is not one mention of either Saudi Arabia or Israel, not even to praise them. No. According to the WP all the world's problems are due to the bungling Obama who didn't heed the advice of the WP.

It’s impossible to know what U.S. leadership could have achieved, but it’s hard to imagine a more frightful outcome. The one advantage of inaction seems to be the ability to disclaim responsibility: We didn’t break it, so we don’t own it. Even that benefit, however, may prove transient. Already the United States is the largest donor of refugee aid. As misery spreads and anti-American radicals plant roots, the Obama administration, or its successor, may find that the costs of non-involvement far exceed those that would have come with timely and measured intervention.

[source : U.S. inaction in Syria could be far more costly than intervention, Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/us-inaction-in-syria-could-be-far-more-costly-than-intervention/2013/12/17/9417c604-6738-11e3-ae56-22de072140a2_story.html, 18th December 2013]

HERSH LRB SARIN ARTICLE ASKS A VERY GOOD QUESTION BUT ONE THAT WAS ANSWERED BEFORE PUBLICATION

A week ago t'interweb was buzzing with chat about the latest article by Seymour Hersh. The article was concerned with the horrific events in Ghouta on 21st August this year. Hersh tries to piece together a timeline of how The White House prepared its case against Assad, only for Obama to suddenly do 180 and seek peace.

Hersh asks the very pertinent and valid question:

The administration’s distortion of the facts surrounding the sarin attack raises an unavoidable question: do we have the whole story of Obama’s willingness to walk away from his ‘red line’ threat to bomb Syria? He had claimed to have an iron-clad case but suddenly agreed to take the issue to Congress, and later to accept Assad’s offer to relinquish his chemical weapons. It appears possible that at some point he was directly confronted with contradictory information: evidence strong enough to persuade him to cancel his attack plan, and take the criticism sure to come from Republicans.

[source : Whose sarin?, London Review of Books, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin, 19th December 2013]

The way Hersh reports the developments implicates Obama as being one of the instigators in pinning the blame on Assad. Yet, as Hersh states, Obama then did a 180.

Just a few weeks ago The Emergency Committee for Israel issued a declaration of war on Obama. This declaration came in the form of a video attacking Obama for not attacking Syria and seeking peace with Iran. The ECI is a creature of Bill Kristol. It was Kristol who formed The Project for a New American Century. The ECI is run by PNACers. And anyone with any interest in current affairs knows that there was a cabal of Zionists who wrote A Clean Break and/or joined PNAC and guided the response of the USA to the 9/11 attacks. It was they who cherry-picked the intelligence on Iraq. A Clean Break named Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lebanon as targets for Israeli aggression. The first thing that PNAC did was write to then President Bill Clinton demanding war on Iraq. And in their Rebuilding America's Defenses, PNAC named Iraq and Iran as the greatest threats to US national security, with Iran more dangerous than Iraq.

Obama resisted for months the traps and provocations and in-your-face diplomacy designed to drag the USA into a war on Syria. Obama was not supposed to win the election last year. Bilderberg and Wall Street picked Romney and his pro-war, pro-Israel, pro-fascist policies. Prince Bandar bin Sultan organised the horrific tragedy of Ghouta as the hell designed to pressure Putin into dumping Assad and Obama into bombing Syria.

What people must understand is that:
1. 9/11 was an inside job run by Israel and Saudi Arabia with the nod from the DFQ and City of London
2. General Wesley Clark as told that Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, and Libya, Sudan and Somalia would find themselves at war with the USA; these seven nation in five years was the very ambitious plan.
3. but by 2007 only 2 of these nations had experienced war; Iraq and Lebanon.
4. so an agreement was reached between the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia that the latter would unleash cutthroat Jihadis onto some of those 7 nations.
5. first it was Libya.
6. and next it was Syria.

But Syria has not fallen. It is a pile of rubble that with the correct finance and assistance can be rebuilt.

But after over 12 years only 3 of the planned 7 nations have fallen.

And perhaps the ultimate, Iran, still stands, surrounded but unbeaten.

So the plan for war on seven nations in five years is seriously, seriously behind.

In a Monty Python sketch you could say that it is now an ex-plan, it has ceased to be.

9/11 SAUDI DAM ABOUT TO BURST AND FLOOD THE WORLD WITH TRUTH

9/11 was an inside job.

9/11 was an inside job, run by Israeli agents in charge of the US military and government apparatus, and Saudi Arabia supplying the patsies and the finance from the dodgy al Yamamah deal. We see this terrorist alliance today in Syria, in which the cutthroat Jihadis were unleashed onto Syria following an agreement, The Redirection, that was reached in 2007 between the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia. This Faustian deal was made because only 2 of 7 nations named to General Wesley Clark shortly after the inside job 9/11 as targets for war had been attacked. Those 2 nations were Iraq and Lebanon. The other 5 were Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan and Somalia.

The 9/11 Commission was a brilliant whitewash, in the same league as The Warren Commission that covered up the JFK assassination. Members of the 9/11 commission complained of not being given access to records, and those they were allowed access to were completely blacked out.

There is now a growing push to have 28 pages of classified documents implicating Saudi Arabia released. There was recently an article in The New York Post on the Saudi 9/11 cover up, a section of which directly linked Prince Bandar bin Sultan to the 9/11 hijackers.

The Saudis deny any role in 9/11, but the CIA in one memo reportedly found “incontrovertible evidence” that Saudi government officials — not just wealthy Saudi hardliners, but high-level diplomats and intelligence officers employed by the kingdom — helped the hijackers both financially and logistically. The intelligence files cited in the report directly implicate the Saudi embassy in Washington and consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks, making 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war.

...WASHINGTON: Then-Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar and his wife sent checks totaling some $130,000 to Bassnan while he was handling the hijackers. Though the Bandars claim the checks were “welfare” for Bassnan’s supposedly ill wife, the money nonetheless made its way into the hijackers’ hands.

Other al Qaeda funding was traced back to Bandar and his embassy — so much so that by 2004 Riggs Bank of Washington had dropped the Saudis as a client.

The next year, as a number of embassy employees popped up in terror probes, Riyadh recalled Bandar.

“Our investigations contributed to the ambassador’s departure,” an investigator who worked with the Joint Terrorism Task Force in Washington told me, though Bandar says he left for “personal reasons.”

[source : Inside the Saudi 9/11 coverup, New York Post, http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/, 15th December 2013]

It is Prince Bandar bin Sultan who went to Russia during the summer and threatened Putin that he, Bandar, was going to unleash hell in Syria and Lebanon. A few weeks later the HQ of Hezbollah was attacked with a car bomb. And a week or so after that came the horrific tragedy of Ghouta. After Ghouta the Syrian Arab Army raided tunnels to find chemical weapons and gear stamped with "Made in KSA".

2+2=5

"9/11 was an inside job. It kicked off a series of wars planned years ago by the DFQ, USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia.", said I.

"2+2=5", replied William Hague.

"But the former head of NATO in Europe General Wesley Clark was told of the plan."

"Yes, but 2+2=5", said David Cameron.

"Clark said this not only in writing, he is on video, on YouTube, naming names."

"He may well be, but 2+2=5", said John Kerry.

"Clark names Rumsfeld, Cheney and Wolfowitz. He was told that the USA was going to go to war on Iraq, Iran, Lebanon and Syria, even though no evidence had been provided that they were involved in 9/11. Did you know that all four of these nations were named in A Clean Break?"

"Yes, and 2+2=5", replied Nick Clegg.

"And Iraq and Iran were also singled out in PNAC's Rebuilding America's Defenses."

"Of course they were, because 2+2=5", muttered Paddy Ashdown.

"PNAC wrote they needed a new Pearl Harbor to start all these wars, and on 9/11 leading and founding members of PNAC were in charge of the US military when it went mysteriously AWOL."

"2+2=5! 2+2=5!", shouted Hague and Clegg.

"Clark was also told that there would be wars on Libya, Sudan and Somalia. But by 2007 only two of those nations had been attacked; Iraq and Lebanon."

"Yes. We know. But who cares? 2+2=5", sneered Malcolm Rifkind.

"So as reported by Seymour Hersh in 2007 a redirection was agreed between the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia that the latter would unleash the nastiest cutthroat Jihadis onto those nations not yet attacked."

"Hm hm. Yes. 2+2=5", said my MP.

"But these cutthroats needed cover so we organised The Arab Spring."

"OK. But 2+2=5", said a corrupt bunch of Tory MPs.

"So our special forces assisted these Jihadis on the ground while NATO bombed a path for them all the way into Tripoli."

"Yes, because 2+2=5", said Zac Goldsmith MP for Richmond Park and newly married member of THE Rothschild banking family.

"And after Libya these Jihadis were inserted into Syria, the former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was asked by the DFQ to arrange this."

"Yes, we know. Did you you know that 2+2=5?", asked Bilderbergers Nick Boles and George Osborne.

"And in Syria these Jihadis have been cutting the throats of children, slaughtering whole families and blaming it on Assad, trying to provoke a massive bombing campaign like against Libya."

"We do what we want. We say what we want. 2+2=5", replied all the cowardly warmongering corrupt MPs who voted for war on Syria in August, along with all the commentators, bloggers, NATO newspaper editors.

"No. It doesn't. 2+2=4.", said I.

HE'S MAKING A LIST. HE'S CHECKING IT TWICE. HE'S GONNA FIND OUT WHO'S NAUGHTY OR NICE.

So who is Santa not going to bring any presents to this year?

Bandar bin Sultan
William Hague
David Cameron
John Kerry
The cutthroat Jihadis in Syria

I don't think these grinches care anyway.

Santa should definitely, definitely, definitely deliver to the Syrian people and their Syrian Arab Army.

IN CASE YOU ARE WONDERING

The recent disappointment/demoralisation/disillusionment was on a personal level, and not to do with bashing the banks.

There are some who will know what I'm talking about when I say that I was told that someone would be with me soon. As yet, that message doesn't seem to have got through yet.

But in a way I believe that this is a good sign that we are not behind schedule.

Sometimes you get impatient when there is no need.

I'll just have to wait a bit longer...

NATO MEDIA FILTERS OUT CUTTHROAT MASSACRE OF SYRIAN CIVILIANS

There was a massacre of civilians in Adra, Syria recently. At least 80 men, women and children were slaughtered or burned by the Saudi-backed Jihadi cutthroats. But you wouldn't know it from reading the NATO media. Only the BBC covered Adra, and that was a few days ago when the body count was much less. But now that the body count is creeping up to 100, nobody wants to know.

Over 80 civilians in a town northwest of the Syrian capital of Damascus have been executed by Islamist rebels, sources within the Syrian military told RT. Many others were kidnapped to be used as human shields.

Government forces are continuing a large-scale operation against Jabhat al-Nusra and Liwa Al-Islam fighters, who captured the town earlier this week. The area is located some 20 kilometers away from Damascus.

According to SANA news agency, around 1,000 militants were in the town when it was enveloped by the army on Friday.

The military sources said the “armed groups have performed an execution of civilians” in Adra, RT Arabic correspondent Abutaleb Albohaya reported from Syria.

“For now it’s established that over 80 people were killed in the areas now taken over by the army. Often whole families were murdered,” he said.

[source : ‘Whole families murdered’: Syrian rebels execute over 80 civilians outside Damascus, RT, http://rt.com/news/syria-adra-civilian-execution-289/, 16th December 2013]

Instead, the NATO media propagates a mad story from the totally unreliable and discredited one man band The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that the Syrian military dropped barrel bombs out of helicopters hovering above Aleppo. Now why would the Syrian military hover over Aleppo and drop barrel bombs, giving the rebels the perfect opportunity to film this occuring and post the images all over the internet for the whole world to see? As yet, I can find no such film of the Syrian military dropping barrel bombs out of helicopters on the internet or in any NATO media. All we have on this story are the words of a totally discredited news agency, the SOHR, which gets all its information from the rebels. And yes, these are the same rebels who committed the atrocities at al Houla and Khan al Assal and blamed the Syrian military and/or the Shabiha.

There is no civil war in Syria. But there is a proxy war against Syria by Israel and Saudi Arabia who are using cutthroat Jihadis to at least weaken Syria, but ultimately destroy Syria. This decision was taken in 2007 after the plan for war on seven nations in five years, which was revealed to General Wesley Clark shortly after he mother of all inside Ziojobs 9/11, was moribund. That list consisted of: Iraq; Iran; Lebanon; Syria; Libya; Sudan; Somalia. By 2007 only two of the seven nations on that list, Iraq and Lebanon, had been attacked, and Israel somehow managed to lose the war against Hezbollah. The former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was asked by Great Britain to help them insert the cutthroat Jihadis into Syria, the kind of rebels we hear about committing atrocity after atrocity, cutting throat after throat, and eating the hearts of their prisoners.

DRONES FROM MY FATHER

My father dreamed of drones hovering above the unsuspecting people of this world, allegedly protecting them from evil terrorists, when in fact the drones propagate terrorism by killing innocent civilians and act as the greatest recruiting sergeant for the Islamic terrorist cause. And now that I am President I have made my father's dream come true; the skies are full of drones.

[source : extract from a book of fiction, Drones From My Father]

Osama bin Laden used to say, before his death from Marfan Syndrome in late 2001, that Israel was the reason why al Qaeda existed. But now that Saudi Arabia and Israel are forming an alliance against Syria, Iran and Hezbollah, what else can be used to provoke young people to join the Jihad and continue the terrorism?

Drones from my father.

Dronetastic drones, blasting weddings, funerals, men, women and children to smithereens.

Dear Father Christmas

all i want for christmas this year is a drone. all the other children in the village have their own drones but i dont have one. i want my drone to stop the bad men from killing me and my mummy and daddy, even after my mummy said that a drone killed all her friends when they were getting married, and daddy said the government makes the bad men and lets them scare us.

Lots of love

Have a dronetastic christmas and a droneful new year.

I'm droning for a fright christmas
Just like the drones we used to know
Where the hellfire's glisten
And children listen
to hear screams as missiles glow

A DRONETASTIC STATISTIC

The 15 civilians killed by "mistake" in Yemen today is more people than have died in US from terrorism this decade http://t.co/6pIzG0yqhK

— Fire Tom Friedman (@firetomfriedman) December 12, 2013

The War on Terror is an artificial crisis designed to implement a police state and global wars (which at the moment point to Israel as the prime beneficiary though the Saudi Arabia hierarchy are getting ants in their pants about just how moribund the plan for war on seven nations in five years is).

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!

SURPRISE! BILDERBERG FISCHER SET TO BE VICE CHAIR OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE

A few years ago the former governor of the Bank of Israel Stanley Fischer was being promoted by the Bilderberg press (Washington Post and Financial Times) as the next head of the IMF, even though his age officially excluded him.

Earlier this year the same Bilderberg press promoted the sick idea of one of their own, Larry Summers, as next head of the Federal Reserve. Summers withdrew from the race due to his history in causing the recent financial scandal that has lasted for over 5 years and brought misery and austerity to billions.

But what Bilderberg wants Bilderberg gets.

Fischer is now expected to be announced as the Vice Chair of The Federal Reserve.

The White House is considering Stanley Fischer for vice-chair of the US Federal Reserve in a move that would add one of the world’s most respected economists to the central bank under new head Janet Yellen.

Mr Fischer, the former governor of the Bank of Israel, was a dark-horse candidate for Fed chair but he could now get the number two job, according to people familiar with the matter.

[source : White House considers Fischer for number two role at the Fed, FT, 11th December 2013]

The recent financial scandal, caused by Bilderbergers such as Summers and Greenspan and propagated by Bilderbergers Bernanke and Geithner, has benefited Bilderberg Banks the most. Bilderberg banks were given preferential treatment, given huge loans from their inside men at The Federal Reserve to buy up struggling competitors, and slaps on the wrist when found to have defrauded millions to the tune of billions (and not forgetting the drug money laundering too).

And for some strange reason, one that I can't figure out, not only the Bilderberg press but also the whole of the mainstream media omits this HUGE Bilderberg link/scandal.

Whoever said that this system doesn't need changing?

BREAK

I will be taking a break for a while, for the following reasons:
1. slight demoralisation due to a serious disappointment;
2. slight disillusionment due to 1.;
3. other commitments.

HERE IS THE WOMAN WHO HAS STOP THE WAR QUAKING IN THEIR SELL OUT BOOTS

Mother Agnes Mariam was interviewed yesterday by George Galloway on his new show on Rothschild Russia Today.

From his interview I can easily understand why Stop The War allowed Jeremy Scahill to torpedo her appearance at their conference yesterday. My God. She is terrifying, isn't she? I can't understand why the Saudi-backed al Qaeda cutthroats haven't turned around and run for their lives before she eats them all alive for breakfast!

This is the woman who Stop The War is terrified of. They allowed themselves to be bullied into removing her from the conference. But at least all the speakers still have their street cred in tact, slapping each other on the back, while amongst them stands a cognitive infiltrator.

But neither can I understand why Galloway didn't ask her about her investigation into Ghouta, unless the people at Rothschild Russia Today told him not to.

ISRAEL WILL SABOTAGE PEACE DEAL

This relates to the paragraph in Which Path To Persia? in either one of two ways.

Either:
1. Israel is trying to find, or will fabricate, evidence that Iran is violating the peace deal, thus giving the pretext for war on Iran;
2. there is acting no going on, there really is an attempt to find some kind of peace in the Middle East to the fury of Israel, and Israel is trying to sabotage the deal with Iran.

They didn't do 9/11 for nothing. There is no way that both Assad will be left in power, and Iran still have a peaceful civilian nuclear power program. The whole point of 9/11, from Israel's point of view, was to remove Assad and destroy Iran's nuclear power program. I suspect others decided to use it as an opportunity to provoke WW3.

But let's face it. The mother of all inside Ziojobs 9/11 was a grand failure. There was a very ambitious plan behind it; war on seven nations in five years. It took nearly two years before Iraq was taken out. A war on Hezbollah failed. So they unleashed a plague of cutthroat Jihadis onto Libya, and then Syria. So now, 12 years after 9/11, only 2 of the targets have been taken out; Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gaddafi.

Hezbollah is stronger from defeating Israel in 2006.

Despite nearly 3 years of covert invasion by Saudi-backed cutthroat Jihadis, Assad is still in power, and arguably in an even more powerful position with Syrians backing him in his war against al Qaeda in Syria.

Sudan and Somalia have yet to be attacked in a war, though Sudan has been attacked by Israel a few times, and there is a European military force and the occasional US covert ops force operating along the coast of Somalia.

And now there is a deal of some kind with Iran.

Would you call that success?

A list of 7 targets in 5 years, and after 12 years only 2 have been taken out?

9/11 was an inside job too far, rather like Operation Market Garden. The plan was ambitious, but it has failed spectacularly.

ALWAYS THE SAME KIND OF CARS

It's always the same kind of cars.

If there is a queue for a roundabout, with two approaching lanes, the left to turn left or go straight on, and the right to turn right, and there is a biq queue in the left lane, it's always the same kind of car that flies up the right lane and nearly causes a crash as it goes straight on.

Similarly, if there are two lanes at a set of traffic lights, one to turn left or go straight on, and the right to turn right, and there is a long queue in the left hand lane, then it is usually the same kind of car that stops about a half car length in front of you in the right hand lane, with its engine on high revs, that tries to accelerate rapidly to go straight on, again risking a crash.

If there is a long queue at a set of traffic lights and there is an empty bus lane running along side, then it is usually the same kind of car that drives all the way along the bus lane with its indicator signalling left, but it never turns left.

If there is a Pick Up zone at the supermarket, right outside the entrance, it's always the same kind of car that is parked there for ages while its unaccompanied driver does his/her shopping.

If the traffic is busy, and someone wants to turn right, driving across at least one lane of traffic, then it is usually the same kind of car that can't wait for a gap, just pulls out, risking a crash, to stop all traffic so that they can pull out.

If the traffic is congested on the motorway, and you leave a gap between yourself and the car in front, then it is usually the same kind of car that quickly swaps lanes without indicating to fill the gap in front of you, causing you to slam on your brakes.

I'm sure you can think many more similar scenarios.

The kind of cars I am talking about are:
high powered sports cars, like Porsche, Audi, BMW, Mercedes;
boy racers not in BMWs but still high powered versions of, for example, a Honda.