June-July 2018
Deep State Armageddon
"Russia's Errors" vs Russia : 2
THE EDITOR
Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams said publicly, "a Shadow Government in the United States" exists; a Government Within a Government, comprising some thirty to forty thousand people that the American government turns to when it wishes certain illegal covert operations to be extant pursuant to a political objective. |
- Al Martin (The Conspirators, 2001) |
Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — New World Order — can emerge... and today that New World is struggling to be born. |
- George H.W. Bush (Jan. 1991, eve of the First Iraq War) |
[George W. Bush] said [to me] the best way to revitalise the economy is war. And that the United States has grown stronger with war. |
- Nestor Kirchner (President of Argentina, 2010) |
I said, how is it, that we always get foreign countries to do what we want? He said, "Money." I said, "Oh, you mean foreign aid." "No, we give the leaders bagfuls of money. We own them...." ... And then I remembered, Tony Blair left office, one year later he's worth fifty million pounds. ... [It] explains why no foreign leader represents the interests of their country over the interests of Washington. It is why all of them have enabled Washington's wars. |
- Paul Craig Roberts (April 2018) |
As our introductory quotes indicate, Deep State cause-and-effect mirrors the age old modus operandi and motivations of organised crime: corruption and conflict — money and control. What is new and scary is its heightened scale due to the global reach and resources at Deep State disposal, and its nexus with criminality of every stripe (drug cartels, terrorists, Wall Street banksters, et. al.). As a consequence, the corruption, conflict, money and control are all magnified infinitely, and effected or pursued with impunity.
This impacts lives worldwide to one unjust degree or another. Whether sorely abused taxpayers whose hard-earned underwrites epic waste and fraud; abused and trafficked children used to service and/or blackmail perverted elites; ancient Christian communities destroyed by contrived and lucrative wars; innocent civilians and entire wedding parties droned to death; legal citizens abandoned to open border chaos even as their civil liberties including privacy are shredded; Western peoples brainwashed by corporate media monopolies; or a sitting American president relentlessly obstructed and attacked by his enemies as cover for their heinous crimes ("Congratulations America," Donald Trump tweeted on 17 May, "we are now into the second year of the greatest Witch Hunt in American History" — an ongoing unbloody coup, in fact).
Truly, the list of victims on the receiving end of Deep State-Big Brother collusion are endless.
The cover for all this criminality, blood, repression, and destabilisation is the perennial push for a New World Order. Frequently and fervently advocated by George H. W. Bush, it is promoted by all those with an eye to the main chance. Tony Blair, Washington's favourite poodle and Britain's endless shame, personifies the type. Quite simply, Blair embraced the NWO mantra-cum-agenda peddled by his Deep State patrons with a view to the jet-setting luxury lifestyle he now enjoys. His Chancellor, Gordon Brown, less venal but just as dysfunctional, egotistical and messianic, did likewise. As if aping our post-conciliar pontiffs, Brown called for a new world order based on the "deep moral sense" shared by all faiths. During one oration delivered to 2,000 souls at St Paul’s cathedral, he used the word "global" no less than 29 times, urging people to unite to forge a new "global society."
Presented as humanity's last best hope for peace and unity, the NWO project is not really a project inspired by high-minded humanism. When all is said and done, it is simply a primeval pretext for power, control, piles of filthy lucre and untrammelled sexual gratification. In other words, a mere euphemism for Deep State ends justifying any and all means.
The Church as NWO handmaiden
At the same time, it is also the Fatima prophecy writ large. For what else is the NWO if not a product of Soviet metastasis: the materialistic "errors" of Russia deceptively diffused throughout a "new" socialistic Western body stripped of its primary defence: the Ten Commandments of Almighty God. As understood and explicated by His Holy Church, these divine mandates kept atheistic carcinogens at bay, Western bodies and souls happy, healthy and harmonious, while fostering faith, hope and charity at the service of truth, justice and the common good.
This sublime agenda is the antithesis of oligarchic aims. As Jean Vanier, Catholic founder of the L’Arche communities for the intellectually disabled, put it: "The wise and powerful lead us to ideologies, whereas the weak are not seeking power; they are seeking friendship." That these two worlds and worldviews are incompatible is confirmed each time Bush/Blair/Brown-like calls for a "new world" utopia ignore the only spiritual force capable of knitting it together into an orderly whole: viz., the Catholic religion; a faith at once global and true. Quite apart from prejudice and ignorance, this studious omission stems from the pragmatic fact that only a syncretic world of global disorder facilitates the central stratagem of the power elites — divide and rule.
Whether implemented through identity politics, coups, pre-emptive and unwinnable wars, or via the uncontrolled immigration so dear to the heart of Deep State sugar daddy George Soros, this chaotic NWO agenda is threatened by the unifying force of a universal religion that speaks with divine authority and proclaims doctrinal and moral absolutes. This is why early NWO protagonists pushing a League of Nations rejected papal appeals and offers of mediation during post-WWI negotiations and settlements (with disastrous results). It is why, stealthily and over time, Jesus has come to be portrayed as one self-declared prophet among many; His Teachings leeched of their salvific meaning; His Divine Authority and Social Kingship eviscerated.
In myriad ways fully documented in these pages, Francis has now added pontifical weight to this secularisation by which atheistic Russian "errors" have largely deconstructed the Christian West. Papal appeals to 'humility', 'poverty' and 'reform' sound decidedly disingenuous when affluent/effeminate FrancisChurch is converging at speed with an equally degenerate NWO.(1)
Now an ex-civilisation — defined by the cultural Marxism that Lenin simultaneously unleashed to augment militant Marxism — the West has been refashioned in Russia's socialist image by political correctness: a soft-totalitarianism hardening by the year. And yet, even as the legal persecution of Catholic conscientious objection is ramping up, far from galvanising her troops to confront this globalisation of paganism, Our Lord's Mystical Bride, the Holy Catholic Church, has been reduced to one more protestantised handmaiden at the service of oligarchs and their political puppets (— the latter personified by criminally-enriched Deep State dynasties like the Clintons and Bushes, and the likes of former Rothschild banker Emmanuel Macron, described emphatically by his predecessor François Hollande as "the president of the very rich" - Channel TMC, 25/4/18).
Already enfeebled under Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, the learned and refreshingly blunt Monsignor Antonio Livi rightly insists herein that Pope Francis now intends to set this heretical Church Convergent — the humanistic ape of the Church Militant — in concrete; thereby realising St. Pio's foreknowledge of total post-conciliar collapse.
As recently related by the apostolate of Our Lady of Good Success, Father Gabriele Amorth, the late renowned exorcist, who knew Padre Pio for 26 years, revealed during a 2011 interview with José María Zavala, that around 1960 he had a conversation with Padre Pio during which the great Capuchin stigmatist sorrowfully remarked:
"You know, Gabriele? It is Satan who has been introduced into the bosom of the Church and within a very short time will come to rule a false Church."
Asked if Padre Pio was concerned with chastisements that may befall the world because of sin, Fr. Amorth replied:
"Nothing of the sort mattered to him, however terrifying they proved to be, except for the great apostasy within the Church. This was the issue that really tormented him and for which he prayed and offered a great part of his suffering, crucified out of love."
Fr. Amorth then added that this was the Third Secret of Fatima — the Great Apostasy.
Quite apart from the demands of faith and fidelity, this is why we are all preoccupied with our terrifying ecclesiastical predicament. As Christ underlined via Our Lady of Fatima and St. Pio, whatever calamities we may bring upon our sinful selves, the orthodoxy of His Holy Church is all that really matters because its health is central to the flourishing of every good and virtuous thing. Its chronic ill-health, on the other hand, is always a boon to apocalyptic currents: such as the present morphing of "Russia's errors" into myriad Western monsters like the legalistic persecution of Christians. Without the Catholic bulwark of old to obstruct them — by sheer weight of its countervailing reach, prestige, and authority — the Deep State architects and instruments of this hellish juggernaut are now free agents.
Certainly, their onward march may be slowed by providential, energising band-aids: like Donald Trump, Brexit, and the patriotic resistance of over a dozen EU nations uniting to block the Franco-Germanic control exercised by Brussels. As flagged by President Trump's capitulation to the Middle Eastern designs of Deep State Zionists, however, even the most welcome band-aids have their flip side: not least the ever present danger of righteous reconstructive movements being co-opted/infiltrated and turned into destructive ones.
Ultimately, without the essential ingredients of Catholic truth and authority to knit disparate gains into a coherent, principled and sustainable Christian whole — that is, until we establish the Social Reign of Christ the King (the "King of kings, and Lord of lords" - Rev. 19:16) — we are merely holding on; treading water in a rising tide.
Beginning of the end: the 9/11-Iraq nexus
All that necessarily said, just as the "wars and persecutions against the Church" foretold by Our Lady were integral to totalitarian Soviet expansion, the New World Order continues to expand in direct proportion to its enrichment of the rapacious, warmongering Deep State elites — the masters of "creative destruction," as Zionist Michael Ledeen boastfully described his neo-conservative brethren and their scorched-earth agenda (see Buchanan herein; also CO, June/July 2010, pp. 43-46). Like Judas — "the son of destruction" (Jn 17:12) — and the other faithless Jews, Our Lord identified and denounced the lineage of such prideful destroyers and liars:
You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof. [John 8:44]
True sons of satan, the Deep State-destroyers currently have their sights set on Syria, caricaturing Bashar al-Assad as a "monster"; an "animal" who must be taken out however many innocent lives must be snuffed out to that end. Yet who is the real "monster"? President Assad, who insists that "Christians are not guests or migrating birds. They are from the origins of the nation and without them, there is no Syria" [17/9/17]? Or the Neocons, who deem the destruction of ancient Christian communities, considered vital to the peace and development of the Middle East, a "creative" project?
Long before Bashar al-Assad, however, at the outset of their march towards Syria and Iran, they had misrepresented Saddam Hussein and his regime in the same mendacious manner.
At its core, the deceit entailed the usual caricature of a brutal dictator; one who, like Assad, maintained a delicately balanced social, political and religious order in the face of equally brutal enemies. Never a hard sell, the crazed persona presented to the public was made even easier by the violent escapades of his psychotic sons. Yet if Saddam was hardly a sympathetic figure, he was a sane and co-operative one. Far from antagonising America, hiding his weapons and threatening world peace as the press had us all believe, he begged Washington not to invade his country, complying with every reasonable request made of him to avoid that dire outcome.
As with today's anti-Assad/anti-Russian/anti-Trump narratives, the false impression gained by the public was conveyed by the Deep Staters occupying key positions in Washington, via controlled media organs worldwide. For self-serving reasons far removed from America's national interests, they wanted rid of Saddam at any price. A peaceful resolution was never an option.
Indeed, "regime change" in Iraq had obsessed several presidential administrations spanning Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II, stemming from arch-Neocons like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and other Zionist ideologues. To that fateful end, a standard CIA psychological operation prepped the public for the inevitable invasion. Mockingbird media headlines denouncing Saddam-the-irrational-monster trumpeted deceitful reports that laid the ground for the later Big Lies about 9/11 and WMDs (both euphemistically labelled "intelligence failures"). The following example typifies the jaw-dropping mendacity employed in this vengeful psy-op.
Prior to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, readers will recall lurid headlines about defenceless Kuwaiti children being removed from incubators by Iraqi soldiers and left to die. A heart-rending media narrative which ran and ran, it placed Saddam, his troops and his country far beyond the civilised pale. How could we not act against such "animals"? The story was accepted at face value because no person of goodwill could conceive that such an utterly shocking charge, by an eyewitness testifying before Congressmen no less, would be reported by the media if it were not true. And yet, it was not true. It was "fake news."
Questioned about the conspiracy during a lengthy interview carried in Neo-CONNED!: Just War Principles: A Condemnation of War in Iraq [IHS Press, 2005], the late Jude Wanniski replied:
That "atrocity" was proven to be false years ago, but let's briefly run over it. In the fall of 1990, members of Congress and the American public were swayed towards war with Iraq by the tearful testimony of a 15-year old girl known only as Nayirah. In the girl's testimony before a Congressional caucus — which is well documented in McCarthur's book, Second Front — she described how, as a volunteer in a Kuwaiti maternity ward, she had seen Iraqi troops storm the hospital, steal the incubators and leave 312 babies "on the cold floor to die."
During the debate [over whether to attack Iraq] no less than seven Senators referred to this story, a debate which resulted in war by a mere five votes. In the weeks after Nayirah spoke, President Bush, Sr., invoked the incident five times, saying that such "ghastly atrocities" were like "Hitler revisited."
But just weeks before the bombing campaign began in January 1991, questions began to be raised about the veracity of the incubator tale. It was later learned that Nayirah had no connection with the hospital that she referred to, but was, in fact, the daughter of the Kuwait Ambassador to America! She had been coached — along with a handful of others who would "corroborate" the story — by senior executives of Hill & Knowlton, the largest PR firm in the world at that time, and who had a contract worth more than $10 million with the Kuwaitis "to make the case for war."
Several years later, in an interview with the Guardian, Bush Sr.'s National Security Adviser claimed (risibly) that "we didn't know [Nayirah's story] wasn't true at the time," but added (shamelessly) that "it was useful in mobilising public opinion." So useful, in fact, that G.H.W. Bush continued to reference the lie as gospel truth long after it was exposed.
Despite the hatchet job, and regardless of any genuine charges raised against him, Saddam was nonetheless perfectly rational in his dealings with the U.S. and the U.N., and in his relations with his neighbours. Which is to say that he was not a madman. Not even a loose cannon. Far from it. Moreover, if for no other reason than self-preservation, he was totally opposed to jihadis. According to former CIA insider Susan Landauer,
Saddam had been one of our best sources on terrorism throughout the 1990s. [He] hated terrorism. He hated Islamic jihadis. He did. Whether you like Saddam or not. Whether you hate Saddam or not, he hated Islamic conservatives. He was convinced that they would take advantage of the crumbling of authority in Baghdad under the sanctions. That they would try to overturn his government, and the poverty of the people from the sanctions would fuel this problem; would help overturn his government. So he wanted to help us at every turn. To keep these people from becoming too powerful. So we knew this.
As a measure of his desire to avoid a conflict he had, for instance, not only destroyed his WMDs, as requested, many years before the 2003 invasion (now admitted by the CIA itself), he guaranteed U.S. corporations huge Iraqi contracts, and even offered to purchase a million American cars annually for a decade — an incredible offer. But Deep State gets what Deep State wants. And they didn't want jobs for Americans, they wanted Saddam gone.
Peace in the making
A CIA asset in the Middle East, Susan Landauer was also "the chief asset" in direct contact with the Iraqis and Libyans. During a talk delivered in August 2011(2), she recounted the reality denied us by the media, which at best offered occasional factual fragments easily washed away by the relentless flow of the overriding false narrative. The following lengthy extracts from her talk provide a truthful antidote to the toxic deceits poisoning the West:
It's very important for you to know that as the ten year anniversary of 9/11 comes up, no offence, but you guys have no idea what actually happened. The lies are so much bigger than what you know. And it's so much deeper and so much more tragic, once you have the truth. ...
I'm going to take you back to November 2000. They had not yet declared that George Bush had won the election. I was having meetings with the full knowledge and permission of the CIA, with Iraq's ambassador to the United Nations [in New York], on resuming the weapons' inspections. It is very important for you to understand [that] 9/11 also ties in deeply with what happened with Iraq. And contrary to everything you were told, the Iraqis were not resistant to weapons' inspections. The CIA had a comprehensive agenda for resolving the entire conflict without war — at all. And it involved weapons' inspections, co-operation with anti-terrorism, and major financial contracts for U.S. corporations. And oil.
This would be developed over a period of time. But we already had, by November 2000, we already had an agreement with the Iraqi government. We had a framework agreement. At that point... not so well defined. We had to make it defined. But, they had already consented to all of these things. They wanted peace with us.
So, by February of 2001, the Iraqis had agreed to invite the FBI to send a taskforce into Baghdad, with authorisation to conduct terrorism investigations, and to make arrests of terror suspects. ... This is like the background you have to know [to understand 9/11]. In April of 2001 this is already happening, the comprehensive peace framework discussions are already underway. And I am at this point the chief asset covering the Iraqi embassy, and the Libya house — both of them, I do both of them, and Yemen, and Syria and Egypt and Malaysia. But Iraq and Libya are my primary countries. So I'm a back-channel, which means that the U.S. government gives me messages to give the Iraqis, and then the Iraqis give me messages to give to Washington. So I know everything. Every single conversation is going through me.
Peace derailed: the "catalyzing" event
Landauer states that these successful peace negotiations proceeded even as a looming attack on the Twin Towers attack became widely known within the intelligence agencies:
In June and July [2001], virtually every single week, my CIA handler Dr. Richard Fuisz and I talked about [what became] 9/11. And it was very clear the intelligence community was being prepped for two things. One, to expect airplane hijackings. They prepped us to expect the airplane hijackings. They told us about it. My CIA handler demanded that Iraq had to give us [any information they had on the plot]. They insisted if it [an attack] happened there would be dire consequences.
There was something else going on that summer that was really beautiful. This peace framework that we had been working on was magnificent, it was turning out just glorious — for a peace dividend. The Iraqis were now offering the weapons’ inspections — the United States had very rigorous standards for the weapons’ inspections. Iraq was offering co-operation with anti-terrorism, to allow the FBI to go in. And Iraq started to offer a lot more. A lot more came on the table. By June and July of 2001, Iraq was offering the United States preferential contracts — think about the economy today — preferential contracts on telecommunications, healthcare, hospital equipment, pharmaceuticals, transportation.... Iraq offered to buy one million American-manufactured automobiles, every year, for ten years. Think of what that would’ve done for the economy.
... I was doing this [negotiating] because I hated the sanctions [placed on Iraq]. I was doing it because they [the sanctions] had destroyed [Iraqi] education, they wiped out literacy in a single generation, they destroyed the hospitals and the healthcare system. ... Eleven thousand people died every month. ...
So that’s my motivation. But the CIA did not have my motivation. They were out to make sure that the United States was not going to be punished for what they had done. And believe me, by this point we just wanted to get rid of the sanctions. The Iraqis were like, 'If that’ll get rid of the sanctions, you bet, we’ll give them anything they want.'
So before 9/11 you could have had every single thing you possibly could dream of.
Everything, that is, except the "single thing" that occupied Neocon dreams: "regime change." And so, for reasons which had nothing to do with American national interests but everything to do with corporate/Israeli/Wall St. self-interest, they realised their wicked dream by staging a real-life nightmare: Pearl Harbor Mk II.
As noted last month and as Pat Buchanan records again herein, a Neocon paper published in September 2000 freely acknowledged that only a "catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor" could guarantee the sort of U.S. military presence in the Middle East required to accelerate the "process of transformation" (read: wholesale "regime change" throughout the region).
And whaddaya know, just twelve months later — kaboom!
Cue NWO-acceleration on steroids.
What an amazing coincidence! Not.
In fact, as with Pearl Harbor — when those in the know about the Japanese plans, like Admiral Lyons, Commander of the Pacific Fleet, tried unsuccessfully to alert President Roosevelt and his administration (CO, May 2018, p. 57)(3) — those within the intelligence community seeking to prevent the 9/11 attacks were thwarted by opposing forces. Susan Landauer and her CIA handler were among the former. She says:
Above all, to understand why 9/11 was an 'inside job,' it's critical to understand that its completion resulted from opposing forces colliding against each other — one side working aggressively to stop the attack, and the other undercutting every pro-active move.
Collusion on high
For exposing this internal tug-of-war between 'black hats' and 'white hats', and especially for revealing the common knowledge within the senior Bush administration that plans were being made to fly jets into the World Trade Center as early as April 2001, Landauer met the usual fate of whistleblowers: vile attempts to ruin her reputation and her life. But this only serves to enhance her credibility: as a primary source whose truth-telling they rightly fear. Which is why her explanation of events unfolding behind the scenes over the summer of 2001 needs a full recounting (italicised emphases hers; bracketed elaborations mine):
So, you had peace, which is breaking out in the Middle East. You had the 9/11 warnings. And then in August of 2001 we went into high mode — high activity mode.
I can tell you the exact day. On August 2nd was the Senate nomination hearings for Robert Mueller, to head the FBI. He was going to be the FBI Director. And I was on the phone with my CIA handler, Richard Fuisz, and I said there’s not one single terrorism investigation that this man hasn’t thrown [i.e., to protect Deep State interests]. He threw the Oklahoma City bombing investigation. He threw Lockerbie. And I said this man should not be the FBI Director when this next attack occurs.
And Richard Fuisz said to me, ‘My God, what if there is no FBI Director when this happens.’
I said, ‘Do you think it’s that soon? Do you think the attack is imminent?’
He said, ‘Oh yeah. It’s absolutely just in the next couple of weeks.’
I said, ‘Richard, I’ll go back to New York right now, and I’ll pump the Iraqis and see if they’ve got anything from Baghdad. See if they have any news for us [about the plot].’
And he said, ‘Susan, do not go back to New York City, it’s too dangerous. We’re expecting the use of a miniature thermo-nuclear device.’ And they were not afraid that I was going to be hurt by, like, falling debris in the World Trade Center. I wasn’t going to be in the World Trade Center. They were afraid of radiation contamination. Like the winds blowing the radioactive stuff. He was like, ‘Don’t go up there, we’re expecting mass casualties.' I can tell you the exact date, it was a Thursday, and I said ‘I will go up to New York on Saturday and I’ll report to you on Monday. And we’ll just find out if the Iraqis have anything to give us.’
I went up to New York. The Iraqis said, ‘We ain’t got nothin. We don’t know. We don’t know anything about this. You keep telling us about this. The only way we know about it is cause you’re talking about it. We don’t have any information to give you. And if we did we understand the consequences. We know if we don’t help you, you’re going to go to war with us, if you think we did [have information], and if there’s anything we could give you we would do it.’
So, I go back and I report that on August 6th. On August 6th, there is a memo to the president, telling him that this is a high security threat, that it is an emergency level, that it’s imminent.
At my meeting with Richard Fuisz, [he] does something very important. He tells me that because of my direct contacts with Iraq and Libya, I should be the one — I am perfectly positioned, because everyone likes to think that Iraq and Libya are involved in terrorism to begin with — I should be the one to contact US Attorney General John Ashcroft’s office. And I should tell them that we’re looking for what’s called an "emergency broadcast alert", across all agencies, seeking any fragment of intelligence, involving airplane hijackings and a strike on the World Trade Center, identified specifically.
And I make that phone call. My conversation with Richard Fuisz is August 6th — probably August 7th/August 8th I call them. I have the phone number inside the Attorney General’s office. I’m not calling his switchboard, I’m calling his private staff. Okay. ... I call his private internal office — there’s about 20 members of his private staff: his legislative director is there, his government relations person is there, but I call inside that office. And they give me the phone number for the office of counter-terrorism, they say ‘repeat exactly what you just told us, and tell them.’
I am told that John Ashcroft said, ‘Oh, those CIA people keep talking about terrorism, and they keep talking about this darn airplane hijacking, and they’re so paranoid, why do they keep bugging us about it.’ That’s what I’m told he said. But I did what I did. And when I did that I, apparently, tripped some wires. Because it denied the White House, it denied the Justice Department and it denied the Attorney General’s office of deniability — plausible deniability. And that’s very important. And that is why they came after me so hard, and tried to destroy me utterly. Because they could not admit to you that we had absolutely anticipated this thing. We knew it was going to happen. Exactly as it did go down. With one exception.
Planes and controlled demolition?
Landauer goes on to explain this "one exception" to what she herself knew and experienced, that she subsequently learned. Although endlessly controvertible, given her bona fides, and the weight of supportive expert testimony and other eye witness accounts of a similar nature, what she now relates is surely closer to a plausible explanation of what went down on 9/11 than a tin foil-hat conspiracy theory derided by government colluders. Moreover, it speaks to the same psychotic ends justifies means-mentality behind the failed Operation Northwoods, and so many other 'successful' shadow-government operations down the decades, in which human life counted for nothing:
Now, all things I’ve told you are things I did directly. So I’m not relating what somebody else did, or a conversation that somebody else had, that has been reported to me. This is direct, primary knowledge, from my own experience. But what I’m going to tell you now, is from somebody else. Okay? So I distinguish these two things.
I have been told, by somebody who saw the videos, that at the World Trade Center, from approximately August 23rd — and it could’ve been August 22nd, it could’ve been August 24th — okay, approximately August 23rd, until approximately September 3rd — again, it could be September 2nd. The spooks can be weird about this stuff. Okay, they could say well it wasn’t September 4th! So, no. It could’ve been September 3rd. Okay? It could’ve been September 2nd. Right? It was [within] a couple days of this. My friend says, at approximately 3 o’clock in the morning, strange vans, and there were maybe three of them he said, but not just a couple. The way he put it was “a couple” of vans. So we’re thinking three. Possible four. But most likely three. A couple of vans arrived at 3 o’clock in the morning, after the janitorial trucks had left the building. It’s very important because they were able to identify the vans, according to make, model, colour, and there were no markings on the vans. But the janitorial vans did have markings. And so they were able to distinguish that these were not the same vans.
And they know how the janitorial vans left the building, and they actually tracked the path the janitorial vans took to drive home. The janitorial workers were driving down certain roads, to get over to their houses, and the CIA, the FBI, the NSA folks, tracked those people home. And he was quite convinced that these were not the same trucks. And between the hours of 3 o’clock and 5 o’clock, these trucks had never been in this building before. It was an anomaly, definitely. It wasn’t like it was going on for months and months and it just continued. They showed up, for 10 days — ten or eleven days approximately — then they were never seen again. And that’s when they believe they wired the building.
And my friend told me absolutely it was a thermite bomb. It was a thermite bomb, with potential sulphour in it. The important thing about a thermite bomb is it is an extraordinary heat-reducing bomb. It takes steel and it creates molten steel. So it takes beams of steel and it turns it into molten steel. And everything underneath just sinks into the ground. Like what you saw [in the controlled demolition-like collapse of World Trade Center 7 on TV]. And it is a special US military-grade weapon. Okay? It is a military-grade weapon. It’s not something you can make, ever, in your kitchen or your garage, or your living room. It is impossible for you to do this. This is a US military weapon.
The hijackers were assets!
Landauer believes this is what happened and that it helps to explain "some of the missing pieces." To further place those pieces in context, she now returns to her own first-hand experience of managing CIA "assets":
They had known about the terrorist attack for months. There is a long term advance knowledge. Assets are being watched. The so-called “terrorist” — whether they’re real ["terrorists" or not]— Mohammed Atta was an asset, trained by the United States government, supervised by the United States government.
And I can assure you that assets, and I’m speaking directly from my own personal experience — assets are heavily controlled individuals. I was never dealing with Iraq and Libya without someone paying extremely close attention to me. At every stage. And my phones were tapped. I mean at some point they had wired my house. When they had the handover of the two Libyan men [an operation she had mentioned], I went down to my basement, the same day they handed over the men, and the ceiling of my basement had been torn out, and there were cables and wires dangling from the ceiling. About a dozen cable wires. And I had a contractor come over to my house and he said, ‘Wow. That’s amazing. You have these wires going to every single room of your house – even in your bathroom.’ I’m like, yuk. He said it’s everywhere. He said, ‘You must have a stereo system that, like, rocks, in this house.’
The point is that there’s no way these assets could have functioned without everyone knowing every single detail of what they were doing. There’s no way they could’ve hidden. They could not have disguised their actions, from their handlers. Even if they tried to disguise them it wouldn’t work. Believe me, it wouldn’t work. No, it’s impossible. Impossible!
So it’s more likely they were using Mohammed Atta to guide the conspiracy. To track the conspiracy. And then they discovered that they were bozo pilots. They were clowns. They weren’t any good at this flying stuff. And now they had an agenda. And the agenda was, that when this attack happened, they were going to go to war with Iraq. But oh gosh, we’ve got a problem now. Because the problem is they’re not going to be able to do the job. Uh-oh. What a bummer.
Motive, opportunity, and maximum impact
She concludes her take by explaining the overriding importance of the scale of the tragedy to the Deep State conspirators:
So here’s the thing, and I’m speaking again from experience: The 1993 World Trade Center attack [in New York] killed five people. But the bombing of the USS Cole [in Aden harbour, Yemen, in 2000] killed twelve people. And once the smoke clears, and the catastrophe, the chaos is over, and the noise is done, there’s not a lot of damage, certainly not enough that would allow a government, a pro-war cabal, to throw itself into a new war with Iraq. Which they wanted to do. They’d already decided to do it. And so, that is the motivation. The thing is, any police officer will tell you, there is no crime without a motive and opportunity. And we had both.
So it’s not like they just spontaneously wired the World Trade Center. They knew it was coming. They wanted to make sure they had maximum damage when it hit. They knew they were gonna use the airplanes as the cover to demolish the buildings. ... Both things happened. They knew the airplanes were going to be hijacked, so they used it as a cover to guarantee maximum destruction. Because they already knew the consequence of war.
They also knew that the series of Middle Eastern wars they had long advocated would see untold numbers of young men and women fight and die in hell holes like Afghanistan and Iraq. So, sacrificing a 'mere' several thousand more innocent Americans in their "catastrophic and catalyzing event" to trigger those wars, was hardly a major issue (— just as the 2,403 Americans killed at Pearl Harbor were deemed a price worth paying by the Washington mob who buried advance intelligence in 1941). And they could always rely on a maximised strike causing maximum disorientation of the masses, especially in combination with relentless media spin and distraction — which official narrative, of course, never referenced the truth about Pearl Harbor, or the multiple murderous plots like Northwoods and Gladio which never baulked at civilian "collateral damage" on a grand scale.
Certainly, even in the face of damning historical realities and first-hand accounts which shred the formal narrative, such malevolence at the highest levels is hard to conceive. But we need to grow up and set aside a passive Cold War mentality; one which reflexively accepts official explanations forever projecting heinous Deep State sins and atrocities onto Vladimir Putin and any convenient dictator.
Rather, we must ever recall the truth pointed out by Kevin Shipp herein: that the face of evil is often benign; that the most evil intentions and actions have been harboured and perpetrated against the innocent by Western nations and their seemingly respectable elites and institutions. (Even Hitler himself could credibly point to American eugenic laws as evil grist to his mill.(4)])
The Gunderson Files
To further underline this banality of evil and its Deep State apotheosis, let us now also consider the experience and findings of the late Ted Gunderson (1928-2011); a man whose vast knowledge of the shocking truth tallied with the likes of fellow insiders Landauer and Shipp.
A Special Agent In Charge and something of an FBI superstar, Gunderson was chief of the Dallas, Memphis and Los Angeles FBI Offices. Credited with bringing down the Black Panthers, he was also a candidate for FBI Director in 1979. Worried that "Americans, for the most part, are oblivious to what’s really going on behind the scenes" and feeling "compelled to do everything I can to educate as many fellow Americans as I can," he spent his retirement (and most of his retirement money) selflessly and courageously exposing the profound corruption within the American intelligence community, and its collusion with the political and corporate establishment.(5) Exposing, in other words, the Deep State nexus that has latterly exploded into public view with the election of outsider Donald Trump.
World Trade Center - 2001
Gunderson's documented investigations confirmed Landauer's experience of 'black hat'-intelligence involvement in 9/11. As a former heavyweight of the criminal justice system, his information and warnings in this regard, about Deep State actors who control heinous 'events', are particularly worthy of a detailed transcription. The lengthy extract which follows is from a talk he gave in 2005(6), during which he summarised a number of his investigations. As regards 9/11, he provides the important testimony of a friend, Michael Riconosciuto.
Gunderson first met Riconsciuto in 1982: "He was a CIA agent, operative for some two decades. He was also an FBI informant at one time." In the late 1980s, Riconosciuto was called to give testimony to Congress about a "trap door" he had implanted in CIA mass intelligence-gathering software, which allowed the CIA to steal information from its allies (France, Britain, Canada, Israel et. al.) to whom they sold computers containing the software.
After that Congressional summons, said Gunderson, "Michael received a threatening phone call two weeks before he was to testify, he claimed from a fellow named Peter [surname inaudible], [from the] US Department of Justice: 'If you testify you’ll be sorry.' Michael testified anyway. A few weeks later was arrested for drugs. [He] is now serving a 30-year prison sentence — because he dared to expose these nefarious activities by this rogue criminal enterprise operating in the confines of the US government."
After more astonishing background on Michael Riconosciuto — provided to the audience in order to establish that "He's not some guy walking down the street... He has credibility" — Gunderson goes on:
That brings us up to 9/11. As I said, Michael’s in prison. I’m his, quote, "investigator of record." Which means I’m like an attorney. I should have access to him on a regular basis. I represent this man. For a year prior to 9/11, actually a year and-a-half, I tried to get in and see Michael. He was in prison in northern Pennsylvania. I was in the Philadelphia area. The Bureau of Prisons would not allow me to see him. I finally was able to talk to Michael, in January 2003. I flew to the east coast, spent three days with him.
Michael told me that he had developed information from among his contacts, in advance of 9/11, that they were going to be involved in using missiles, airplane missiles, and they were going to be involved in sky-jackings. They were training Arab terrorists, and also, he knew the identity of the person in the United States, an Arab, who lived in Patterson, New Jersey, who was the leader, of terrorist activity by the Arabs, in this country.
Now, Michael had this information because … you’re saying ‘how can Michael develop this information being in prison?’... because I met with Osama Bin Laden, along with Michael, and along with the State Department representative, in the Spring of 1986. At that time, I was contacted by a former top Reagan, Ronny Reagan official, who said can we help the Afghan rebels. They were friends then. And I called Michael and I said, ‘What do you think?’ And he said, ‘Let’s meet’.
So, there was a fourth fellow there, we didn’t know who he was at the time [because] Osama Bin Laden actually used the name Tim Osman, travelling under a Turkish passport. But because of Michael, I passed the ball to him, I just arranged the meeting and went on. But Michael travelled all over the world putting this package together. [He] furnished the Afghan rebels with surface to air missiles. That defeated the Soviets, really, shot down their helicopters.
As a result of this, Michael developed sources inside the Arab world. And that’s how Michael knew, in advance, about 9/11. Michael told the FBI on March the 20th, 2001, about this plan, to use sky-jacked airplanes and use them as missiles. He also furnished to the FBI, one of his sources — one of his confidential sources, inside the Arab group. The FBI interviewed him [the confidential source], threatened him with prosecution, and deported him. That man along with his family have disappeared. We think that they’re dead. The FBI refuse, absolutely refuse, to look into this situation.
More shocking, is that Michael had the names of the people who were obtaining — [i.e., he had] the false names of the people, the Arabs, who were obtaining false passports. Had their names. He had the source who could furnish him that information. He told FBI agent Keith 'Cootrie' [?], March 20th, 2001, ... ‘I’ll give you these names, the name of this person, who’s co-ordinating the whole project, for the Arabs, providing I be given immunity, and he be given immunity.'
Mr 'Cootrie', in spite of the fact he was armed with this information six months prior to 9/11, came back two days after 9/11, on the thirteenth, and saw Michael in prison again, accused Michael of being anti-government, anti-FBI, a publicity seeker, and so forth. Being disloyal.
And so Michael, of course, didn’t have much to say after that. Michael’s still in prison, as I said. But we had this information, FBI had this information. Did nothing with it. 'Cootrie' admitted on September the 13th, that the FBI did nothing with it.
So after I visited Michael, 2003, I felt it was important that I confirm the FBI did meet with him.
The Bureau of Prisons would not furnish Michael with the visitor’s list, to confirm it. So I started writing letters to the FBI through Senator George Allan, to confirm that he did meet with them, I wanted it documented. I also asked for the identity of the other agent who was with agent 'Cootrie'. And I had a terrible time. Took me a year-and-a-half, writing letters to the FBI, to get them to admit that they’d interviewed Michael on March the 20th, 2001. I finally did have that information. That information is available again, in one of my reports. My terrorist report.
World Trade Center - 1993
Let us consider, too, what Gunderson discovered about the first bombing at the World Trade Center, eight years earlier:
And then we have, in 1993, continuing with the Great Conspiracy — I call this the Great Conspiracy, and that’s what it is — a car bombing of the World Trade Centre.
I have a copy, of the New York Times, October 28th, 1993, and in [this] article — reporting from the trial that took place — an FBI informant named Salem was in among the terrorists, [and he] testified, that he was commissioned by the terrorists to put the bomb together, the car bomb together, to bomb the World Trade Centre in February 1993. And, fortunately for him, when he met with the terrorists he wore a body mike, so he could record every word that was said. Unknown to the FBI, when he met with the FBI he also wore a body mike, [and] that was probably what kept him from being set up and framed and sent to prison. This is actually in this newspaper article. He went to his FBI superiors and said, ‘I’ve been commissioned to put the bomb together, we’re going to use a [phoney] bomb aren’t we?’ And he was told by his FBI superiors, ‘No, we’re going to use a real bomb.’
Now, I don’t understand, why Congress and Senate investigators, and our leaders in Washington D.C., are not jumping up and down over that situation. The FBI not only knew in advance, about the car bombing, they furnished the ingredients for the bomb. Why doesn’t somebody take some action in that area? Why doesn’t somebody investigate this international kidnapping ring being operated by the CIA? [see footnote 5, p. 20 - Ed.] Why are these Congressmen voting on bills like the Patriot Act, which takes away many of our Constitutional rights and civil liberties, in the best interests of, quote, “protection for our country and protection from the terrorists"?
Let me tell you something, ladies and gentlemen, there are people in our government, a rogue outfit, whatever, I’m not sure, who are actually behind these terrorist acts. And the reason they’re behind the terrorist acts is, so they can pass bills like the Patriot Act. And the reason the Congressmen and Senators vote for these stupid bills, stupid by our terms and our definition, is because many of them have been set up and framed, through sex and drugs.
After the fashion of Landauer, Shipp and other truth-tellers, it goes without saying that despite his vast experience, thoroughly documented investigations and impeccable FBI record, the usual suspects smeared and dismissed the heroic Gunderson as a 'conspiracy nut'. Fortunately, despite their best efforts to ruin and 'neutralize' him, they failed, and he continued to provide invaluable information to those who encountered his findings in their own search for the truth.(7)"We need to wake up an apathetic, sleeping society, that is active in America today," he insisted.
Elite pyschopathy
Occasionally, though, the malevolence of those orchestrating events is so obvious that we awake without insider assistance. For, every now and then, when their mask slips and high-level Deep State functionaries reveal their true selves, the chilling NWO psychopathy and its terrible potential for the fate of mankind roars into public view, and smacks us in the face.
For instance, when asked during a nationally televised interview whether America's Middle Eastern machinations were worth the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi infants, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, a grandmotherly figure, paused and reflected momentarily before calming stating: "Yes, we think they were."
Her considered response tallies with so many other similar indicators which flag the inhumanity of these creatures (not least the attitude of those who administer population control programmes on their behalf(8)). For them, life is a mere commodity expendable en masse to achieve their goals. In fact, the human cost of the U.S. sanctions on Iraq was even greater than Albright conceded, as she well knew. Susan Landauer explains that
By the end of 1996, 500,000 children had died [from] sanctions, and they only counted 5-year-olds and younger. They didn’t even count the 6-year-olds, because the United Nations was holding back the numbers. And after that report in December of ’96, they stopped counting. The United Nations never published another report on the deaths. So, frequently what you will hear is that only 500,000 children died, but in fact they continued to die, and approximately one million children died. They were babies. They weren’t even alive when the First Gulf War happened. This is an offence against… you know, this is genocide. This is a mass genocide.
"It shows how hard the [neo-conservative] ideology is," commented Paul Craig Roberts, referencing Albright's notorious comment during a recent series of interviews with Scandinavian Herland Report TV [HTV]. "It's merciless. It's a merciless ideology. That nothing counts but Washington's hegemony. It's really not even American hegemony. It's Washington's hegemony." He went on:
[Paul] Wolfowitz, a high Pentagon official, in the early 1990s, set it out. He wrote that the principle goal of American foreign policy is to prevent the rise of any other power, especially Russia, that could serve as a restraint on American unilateralism. You can find this online. A Pentagon document that he wrote.
Now, others in the government thought this was a little bit too obvious, and they toned it down a little bit. But they didn't change the meaning. So this is what I meant when I said that the worst thing that happened was the collapse of the Soviet Union. Because it removed the [geo-political] constraint, it let the neo-conservatives make [and enforce] these kinds of claims... .
True enough, although we still maintain that the Soviet monstrosity did not so much "collapse" militarily as "morph" culturally — and strategically— into us!
Anyway, at this point, the female interviewer recalled how "General Wesley Clarke talked openly post-9/11 about his shock at discovering pre-9/11 plans in the Pentagon for destroying nation after nation" (—"Seven countries in five years," interjects Roberts—). As a result of which, she continued, "Maybe America today is one of the most hated countries in the world. I live in the Middle East and people wonder why hundreds of thousands have to die. They ask, 'Is democracy something to be bombed on us?'"
War racketeers
Of course, 'democracy' (aka "nation building") is just a coverall for every dark neo-conservative deed. The bombings also have more to do with the family pedigree of a president whose administration was stacked to the rafters with Neocons; a man whose signal lack of talent and accomplishments was no obstacle to his growing rich and privileged on dirty deeds, and wars — after the precise fashion of his warmongering CIA father, and his Nazi-collaborating grandfather Prescott Bush, who was charged by the federal government in October 1942 for running Nazi front groups in the U.S. (from which he made a fortune).
Therefore, since the apple never falls far from the tree, it was no surprise to learn what actually motivated the 43rd president of the U.S.A. And it had nothing to do with 'democracy' or ideology as such. In Oliver Stone's 2010 documentary South of the Border, former Argentine president Nestor Kirchner recalled his discussion of global economic problems with George W. Bush:
I said that a solution for the problems right now, I told Bush, is a Marshall Plan. And he got very angry. He said the Marshall Plan is a crazy idea of the Democrats. He said the best way to revitalise the economy is war. And that the United States has grown stronger with war.
To be more precise: the Bushes and their elitist ilk have grown stronger and richer with wars of every kind and magnitude. Not so the hoi polloi they use as cannon fodder. As American war hero General Smedley Butler (1881-1940) tirelessly proclaimed in the aftermath of his long and highly decorated military career:
War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
Including those who ingratiate themselves with "the very few," like one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, who was gifted a "huge fortune" by the global banking cartel — the almighty financier/facilitator of all wars — as a Faustian reward for selling out his country to Washington. Indeed, Paul Craig Roberts ruminated on this very fact just a few months ago, during his aforementioned interviews with HTV.
A former editor of the Wall St Journal and Reagan economic adviser who knows a thing or two about the Deep State and high finance, Dr. Roberts recalled a telling high-level conversation from his youth, firstly relating the context in which it occurred:
Many years ago, when I was a young man, I had recently gotten my PhD , and my dissertation chairman found himself the Assistant Secretary of Defence for International Security Affairs, which at the time was the most powerful position in the Pentagon. And he sent for me.
One of his jobs was to wind down the Vietnam war. This was during the Nixon administration. And I came to his office, which was about the size of a football field — it was massive. And he wanted me to go to Vietnam, to take over the aid programmes, or to run the aid programmes.
Well, by then I knew that Vietnam was finished, as the Congress had withdrawn support, and I knew that the aid programmes would be one of the main sources for money, and either I had to steal it, and get rich, and divide it up with whoever was there [in Vietnam], for protection. Or they would kill me and take it. And so I told him I didn't think that was a job that could any longer be done, in the way that he wanted it done, and refused.
But I used the opportunity to ask him something that puzzled me. I said, how is it, that we always get foreign countries to do what we want?
He said, "Money."
I said, "Oh, you mean foreign aid."
"No, we give the leaders bagfuls of money. We own them. They report to us."
He didn't approve of it. But what he was telling me was: there were no independent governments anywhere in Europe. Or anywhere. That we owned them.
I've never forgotten this. And some years ago, long after he had died... I wrote [about] this, in the newspapers. And I got two letters, from two of his assistants, who said, ''That's absolutely right. That's exactly right'. They said, 'You're gonna catch hell for this! [chuckles] But that's absolutely right.'
And then I remembered, Tony Blair left office, one year later he's worth fifty million pounds. Where did that come from? How does the Prime Minister of England accumulate £50 million?
And it explains why no foreign leader represents the interests of their country over the interests of Washington. It's why all of them have enabled Washington's wars. They're all complicit in the refugees that are overrunning Europe. It's the fault of Merkel and the French president. And the Spanish and the Italian and all the rest, for enabling those wars. They provided the cover. Otherwise it was American aggression. Instead, it's a 'coalition of the willing'. It's some kind of democracy-bringing enterprise. Blah blah blah.
Yes indeed, war has been very good for "The Bliar." Now a paid-up war racketeer — one of "the very few" enriched "at the expense of the very many" — he travels in private jets, enjoys luxury accommodation, and rubs shoulders with the super-rich who continue to hand him "bagfuls of money" (under the laughable guise of 'consultancy' services for the likes of JP Morgan).
As for his friend G.W. Bush who facilitated this quid pro quo — war for wealth — how appropriate that the most rampant racket of them all — "permanent war" predicated on an indefinable "war on terror" set in train by a "catastrophic and catalyzing" conspiracy — happened on the presidential watch of a treacherous and criminal dynasty that embodies the secretive machinations of the self-serving "very few" General Butler decries. A family whose aged patriarch once presented such epic criminality as a 'grand vision' to be embraced. Before the January, 17, 1991 Desert Storm salvo, George H. W. Bush challenged a joint session of Congress regarding this overriding international objective:
A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — New World Order — can emerge... and today that New World is struggling to be born.
This is the grandiose NWO altar upon which Iraqi children were worthily sacrificed, according to Madeleine Albright. Like Bush Snr., her repellent Deep State elitism was perfectly captured in the response of Nazi officials when faced with obstruction to their grand vision: ethnic cleansing. In early 1943, after strong opposition from the Bulgarian Orthodox Church and Bulgarian society saw the cancellation of Nazi plans to deport 48,000 Jews to the death camps, Obergruppenführer Adolf Beckerle argued that "the Bulgarian people… lack the ideological enlightenment that we [in Germany] have."
The Zionist imperative
Beckerle's doctrinaire socialist disdain for the benighted masses could not be more contemporary. Or, given his specific brand of National Socialism, more ironic. For as Zionist Michael Ledeen boasted, the neo-conservative ideology(9)wrecking and 'cleansing' the Middle East via U.S. blood and treasure is a messianic construct: developed by Zionists (Deep State Neocons), for Zionists, enforced by the Jewish lobby, and imbued with the age-old Jewish revolutionary spirit. Paul Craig Roberts explains:
The Neoconservatives are very closely allied with Israel. In fact, most of them are Zionists. Some of them are dual [American/Israeli] citizens. And in my opinion, this is why American unilateralism began in the Middle East. Because it's been directed at the countries that supply Hezbollah, the militia in Lebanon that twice defeated the Israeli army from occupying southern Lebanon. Israel wants the water resources of southern Lebanon. Twice [Israel] sent in the army, and twice Hezbollah drove it out. Well who supplied Hezbollah? Iraq, Syria, Iran.
This is why we have so much pressure in the United States from Israel to continue the war on Assad, and to start the war on Iran. Because if Iran and Assad are not supplying
Hezbollah, then there's nothing to stop Israel expanding into southern Lebanon.
It's obvious if you just look at the media. So much of the attack on Iran is Israeli inspired. And it's the Israelis who want to use the American forces to put Iran in the same chaos that Iraq is in. And which they hoped Syria would be in. And would've been, had it not been for the Russian intervention.
Dr. Roberts notes how this ruling foreign policy ideology marries with the "creative destruction" of domestic identity politics:
So this is another aspect. Because it shows an alliance between... two ideologies: the Neoconservative one of American hegemony, and the identity politics ideology. Both of these are destructive in their own ways. When you get a dose of both of them, you're really in trouble.
That is a situation which is difficult for a president. Because the Israel lobby is very powerful. Numerous books [have been] written about it. There have been numerous Senators and Congressmen who have said, we lost [our re-elections] because we opposed something Israel wanted. In fact, if Israel wants something it usually gets voted unanimously. It's very, very seldom that even two members of the entire Congress will vote against something in Israel's behalf.
So they are a powerful entity. The Wall St crowd, the big banks, are a powerful entity. The military-security complex probably the most powerful, because it has intelligence agencies who can control explanations, who can fabricate cases, who can fabricate events, who can claim things happened that didn't, because under the guise of "national security" they don't ever have to tell you. They just say it. 'Oh, we can't show you the evidence because it might compromise national security.' See, they can get away with this.
So when you have a country like that [America], and then it doesn't have a media, the question is: who's in control? Well, whoever controls the explanations. And they're easy to control because... the media is organised in six [corporate] hands. And they're not run by journalists.
FOOTNOTES:
(1) This profane convergence was showcased by the Vatican's recent collaboration with the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art's exposition: "Heavenly Bodies: Fashion and the Catholic Imagination." Several dozen sacred items from the Sistine Chapel sacristy were loaned for the exhibit, along with other priceless objects like the papal tiara given to Pius IX by Queen Isabella II of Spain. Unsurprisingly, these ended up alongside blasphemous outfits for female cardinals, bishops and priests; all intended as a "provocation" according to the museum's curator Andrew Bolton, who orchestrated the event with Vatican co-operation. The scandal was aggravated by the widely publicised 'Catholic-themed' fashion gala that preceded the exhibit. This self-aggrandising flesh-fest attended by New York's filthy rich, famous and godless included "a leather bondage mask draped in rosary beads, a jewelled bustier with its gems strategically placed and a fuschia gown inspired by cardinals’ robes." One pop-star paraded half-naked in a micro-mini skirt, with chasuble-style cloak and matching mock mitre. Other celebrities in various stages of undress wore crucifixes, rosaries, and tight strapless dresses adorned with images of Our Lady. That Cardinal Ravasi, President of the Pontifical Council for Culture, would even consider making common cause with the degenerate fashion world of our times (especially an event funded by Versace whose founder is a sodomitic icon), and then defend the inevitably blasphemous outcome, speaks volumes. But as Maike Hickson writes, we should not be surprised because "In 2013, Ravasi – who has been an advocate for Vatican dialogue with Freemasonry – caused a stir when he tweeted a quote from musician, Lou Reed, who had been known for his bisexuality. He also publicly praised another LGBT icon, David Bowie." For his part, the unspeakable Cardinal Dolan of New York attended the Gala, laughing off the sacrilegious 'fashions' in his usual boorish way, while lauding the exhibit as a testament to "the Church and the Catholic imagination" which, like the expo itself, he said, is all about "truth, goodness and beauty." Judas himself could not have inverted the reality with more devilish aplomb.
(2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnn-jn_cvLo [link address at time of writing]
(3) Many others have confirmed the truth of this epochal conspiracy. For example, Ted Gunderson, a former senior FBI agent and dogged investigator, stated during a 2005 lecture: "I interviewed the Naval Intelligence Officer who, on December 4th, 1941, received information that the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor. We had broken the secret code of the Japanese. He told me personally, that on December the 4th he gave it to his superiors. They passed it up the line. After Pearl Harbor, he was subpoenaed to testify before Congress. His boss called him in and said ‘Don’t worry about it. Don’t respond to this subpoena. Someday you’ll know why.’ He never did testify before Congress. And he recently passed on."
(4) "There is today, one state in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception of immigration are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States. [...] I have studied with great interest the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock." - Mein Kampf.
(5) Among much else, his thorough investigations documented FBI, CIA and Justice Department collusion in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and the 2011 Twin Towers attacks. He also confirmed and furthered the findings of other brave investigators concerning FBI, CIA, DOJ and Secret Service protection of a national paedophile network that kidnaps, enslaves and trafficks children to the highest levels of corporate and political life, stretching at one point into the Oval Office itself.
(6) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57GVIbVkHQY [link address at time of writing]
(7) Gunderson said: "The FBI not only tried to set me up on a drug deal, I’ve also been the victim of four separate investigations. They tried to set me up on a fraud case in Dallas. And most recently, very frankly, I’ve been under surveillance, heavy surveillance. There’s been illegal entries into my car, and my apartment. There’s been attempts to gas me, within the last month. And I was able to anticipate it, and avoid it. But they don’t want people like me, out telling the truth. And that’s what I’m doing. And I will not stop. And I will continue to do so in the future."
(8) A recent report by Dr. Luis Garcia (Fertility Awareness in the Developing World - 22/5/18) reveals the gross inhumanity of the "contraceptive imperialists" at work in Ecuador, for example. He describes poor women pleading to have their Norplant devices removed from their bodies to allow them to have more children, only to be told it would cost them a prohibitive price. The response to one woman, Carmen, revealed the satanic motivation of the NWO elite and their lackeys: "I went to the clinic where they put it in and asked if I could get it taken out," she related. "They said no." When Dr. Garcia asked Carmen why, she hesitated, before saying: "They told me, "We don’t want more people like you'."
(9) "The neo-conservative ideology is that America is the indispensable country. It is the exceptional country. Now what does it mean when you say that? If the United States is indispensable, it means everyone else is dispensable. If the United States is exceptional, it means everyone else is unexceptional. It's a claim to hegemony, over mankind. It's like: We, are God's chosen people. We Americans." - Paul Craig Roberts (Herland Report TV interview, posted 2/4/18).