Broken-down hacks

"New York Times’ fraudulent “election plot” dossier escalates anti-Russia hysteria" (Van Auken):

"Mazzetti is notorious for his secretly passing to the CIA in 2011—prior to publication—a piece written by Times columnist Maureen Dowd, along with a note reading, “this didn’t come from me… and please delete after you read.”
Shane was the author of a 2012 article titled “The moral case for drones,” that attempted to justify the assassination program being run out of the White House that claimed the lives of thousands in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere.
The authors are, to put it bluntly, a pair of broken-down hacks, embedded with the US military and intelligence apparatus and held in contempt by serious journalists."

Tweet (OffGuardian):

"No names, no second source, no supporting data. Nothing. The 'great work' involved Bellingcat publishing the unsourced rumours, hints and allegations their NATO handlers slipped them. Tragic these guys either don't see why it's junk or have to pretend they don't"

Smell the freedom!:  "VIDEO REPORT: US Diplomats Involved in Trafficking of Human Blood and Pathogens for Secret Military Program" (Gaytandzhieva).

"WATCH: Congressman Pushing for War in Syria Claims Assad is ‘Butcher of Baghdad’—in IRAQ":

"Ironically, Kinzinger should probably have known that Baghdad was not in Syria, given that he served in the US air force in both Iraq and Afghanistan during his military career."

Did Erdoğan promise to block the false-flag chemical attack?: "Russia, USA, Israel, Iran and Syria: a continuous struggle to trigger or avoid war"(Magnier).  The whole tone of this is oddly pro-Israeli (in line with this tendency to promote the line that the Israelis are desperately trying to prevent war, which also sometimes takes the form that the pacifist Israelis are up against the actions of those damn warmongering 'American' neocons!).  It doesn't matter, as the neocons have redefined the future casus belli to include any de-terrorizing operations by Syria and its allies:  "Idlib: Lull before the hurricane – by Peter Ford".

"The only good news in all of this is that US forces were not involved. This still tells me that Trump and Mattis are still in charge of their chain of command and that other forces are conspiring to drag them into a conflict no one in their right minds wants."

"Bill Browder Strikes Back in Europe" (Luongo).

"Alexander Perepilichnyy possible MI6 links to stay secret" (the plan is to leave the idea he was a British intelligence asset investigating Russian organized crime who was therefore assassinated by that rascal Putin, while maintaining some deniability on the issue whether the British government is in bed with Russian gangsters):

"The government can keep secret the details of whether there were any links between British spies and a Russian businessman who died in mysterious circumstances, a coroner has ruled.

An investigation by Surrey Police later found he died of natural causes.

Critics of the police response say a full public inquiry is now needed to establish whether he was poisoned.

The coroner at the inquest into his death, judge Nicholas Hilliard QC, upheld an application by Home Secretary Sajid Javid, who is refusing to publicly release documents from MI5 and MI6 relating to Mr Perepilichnyy for security reasons.

Mr Perepilichnyy, a millionaire businessman, moved to the UK in 2009 and had been helping the Hermitage Capital hedge fund expose an alleged $230m (£176m) money-laundering scheme linked to Russian organised crime.

He spent the night before his death in Paris, where a witness said he fallen ill at a sushi restaurant and was sick several times.

Forensic tests later found no evidence of toxins in his system, although poisoning could not be completely ruled out.

The coroner said he was "mindful" of heightened concern about the case following the attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury.

But he said he agreed with the home secretary that publicly releasing intelligence information would lead to "a real risk of serious harm to national security"."

'Lost':  "Police investigating Russian whistleblower Alexander Perepilichnyy’s death lost vital evidence".

"Treat Russia Like the Terrorist It Is" (Lake).

"Three Point Failure: The Guardian’s racist campaign against “dirty Russian money”" (Kit):

"Why do oligarchs prefer to London to Moscow?

It’s a simple question with a simple answer – Britain is soft on financial corruption. It is one of the money laundering centres of the WORLD. Because we don’t make millionaires pay taxes, we don’t charge people with embezzlement and we don’t ask inconvenient questions. We have a weak, soft economy that NEEDS money brought in from overseas – no matter how it was acquired – in order to limp along in any kind of vaguely functional way.

That’s a British problem, not a Russian problem.

Russian oligarchs are more comfortable in London than Moscow. The video never stops to ask what this means.

Luke Harding – always just a few heartbeats away from a total paranoid breakdown – talks about the oligarchs being “squeezed out or put in jail” by Putin’s government, but never makes the obvious point that maybe THAT is why they all live in London now, and do nothing but talk about how evil Putin is.

Two ex-bankers are interviewed – Roman Borisovich and Vladimir Ashurkov – they are credited as “anti-corruption” campaigners, with no reference to their personal wealth, how they acquired it, or why they left the country.

The oligarchs in London have been kicked out of Russia for corruption, and taken their ill-gotten fortunes with them. Most of them hate Putin, and would do anything to undermine his government. This very simple reality is never addressed in the video."

"Novichok suspects' drug-fuelled night of 'cannabis and prostitutes' at £75-a-night East London hotel just hours before Salisbury attack":  ". . . the respected investigative website Bellingcat . . . "!

Tweets by T. Greer. See the last five in the stream, e.g., "P.S. A thought on framing: I am displeased with reports that describe this all as a reaction to "terrorism" in scare quotes. There should be no scare quotes. Using the same methodology above, it's easy to confirm that the terrorist concern is real."  Besides the Saudis, the Turks are also heavily involved in this massive terrorist attack against China, as the Uyghurs are regarded as 'Turks', and the area thus a irredentist goal of Turkish nationalists.  "No, the UN Did Not Report China Has ‘Massive Internment Camps’ for Uighur Muslims" (Norton/Singh).  More HRW/NED - each led, naturally, by a Khazar - warmongering PR crap.

"Push to Execute Saudi Clerics Rattles Kingdom’s Power Structure" (Said).  Sunnis!  Their crime is "not openly supporting the government’s pressure campaign against Qatar".

"Saudi Arabia Bankrolled Iran’s MEK with Tons of Gold, Rolexes – Report".

"Woodward: No Evidence of Trump-Russia Collusion" (Walsh).  "NYT Admits That Its "Mountain of Evidence" For Russian Collusion Is Smaller Than A Molehill" (Moon).  Watch for Mueller to earn his shekels and use his considerable pressure on Manafort and Cohen to have them produce some 'evidence'.

"Not aliens after all? Mysterious solar observatory closure triggered by FBI child porn probe" (Delimont).  Child porn investigation seems to be the new excuse - see also Paddock's brother - for intelligence shenanigans the details of which they don't want us to see, as who's going to argue against stopping child porn?

"FBI Had "Two Sets Of Records" On Trump Investigation; Comey, McCabe Implicated: Carter" (Durden).  The FBI is basically an organized crime organization keeping two sets of books!

"Palestine: the Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear Up the Rules-based International Order" (Cook).  This sounds big and political, but the 'plan' is simply to get more shekels.

If you ever start to think that Weiss' motives are pure, and his efforts are anything other than a Khazar supremacist trick, just read this!:  "The Holocaust, vengeance and the Palestinians". Note the typical Khazar stunt of establishing a 'shared understanding' which will later come around and bite you, and anybody in the way of Khazar supremacism, in the ass!

"The Great Unz-Cole Holocaust Debate" (Quinn).  You have to wonder if Unz is running a more sophisticated version of the same stunt.  As I've said before, denialism fits right into (((their))) plans.  Engaging in the 'debate' - in this case, literally between two Khazars, one of which is described as 'brave' - means you accept the premise that whatever happened to the Khazars in Europe still has moral relevance to what is being done to the people of, say, Syria or Palestine today, so they win either way, again, in typical fashion (as with Oslo), by quietly laying down the accepted shared premises of any future 'debate'.  I think:

1. really bad things happened to Khazars in Europe, on a mass scale, at least some of which was organized by governments or other political entities, although we have been completely blocked from examining the details;
2. these bad things happened with the connivance of the Khazar leadership (this is the third rail that 'Red Ken' touched), who did so with the intention of concocting a 'refugee crisis' which was a necessary precondition of their plans to find enough Jews to stock their colonial project in the Middle East, while simultaneously cleaning up the Khazar genetics which had been contaminated by centuries of shtetl breeding with gentiles; and
3. denialism is trick which plays right into their hands by implying that it, and the issues in discussion, have moral relevance to what is being done today.

J is for joke

Escobar, on what has to be one of the most stunning reveals in recent history:  "Russia reveals the MH17 ‘smoking gun’".  Needless to say, this won't go anywhere as nobody involved in the 'investigation', including the apparently well-shekeled families of the victims, has even the tiniest interest in actually determining what happened.  We now know it was the Ukrainians, either from the ground or, if from a plane from a Ukrainian plane, but you can't start WWIII with that!  The 'J' in JIT stands for 'joke'.

Actually, paid -off 'victims' and the right-wing culture of worshiping victims of crimes, has consistently been a big problem.  Look at the families saying nothing while comical lawfare is conducted against Iran - or even the Saudis, guilty as they are of so much else - involving 9-11.  Even though this kind of legal travesty obscures what really happened and protects the real perps, the families go along with this crap as (((somebody))) has promised them shekels.

The sheer number of problems with the joke is also stunning:  "The Dutch Investigation into Flight MH17 and Kiev’s Veto" (van der Pijl).  Nobody could possibly be innocently that consistently incompetent!  Where are the families screaming for justice?  Oh yeah, paid off.

MH17, etc.

"The Strange Russian Alibi." and "Lynch Mob Mentality" (Murray).  If they made up their cover stories, they did a remarkably good job of it, even manufacturing parts of the story that nobody would make up due to their implausibility, parts which seem to fit the facts.  Their implausible cover story is thus in line with their implausible lack of tradecraft - Russian government assassins using their own identities with no attempt at disguise on CCTV (and, in a way that is almost a cliché, British CCTV coverage, as with, for example, the 7/7 London terrorist attack, seems to switch on and off for various suspects and victims in mysterious, but convenient, ways)! - and fits tourist much better than Russian agents.

"Petrov, Boshirov and the Burden of Proof" (Slane).

"It Wasn’t Russia (4)" (Shrimpton).  This guy is a bit nuts - he has a laroucheian obsession with German intelligence causing all problems in the world! - but he raises all the good points about how this doesn't fit with an actual Russian intelligence operation.

"UK Wants Skripal Hysteria to Soften Public Before Attacks in Syria – Scholar".  "Freedom of Expression in the UK: Prominent British Scientist and Critic of the Skripal Poisoning Story Arrested" (Nimmo).

"Pravda/Censored/Suppressed: In the situation with the IL-20 there is a French track?"  Makes more sense that the French would do Bibi's dirty work, especially given the convoluted pinball explanation for how the Russian plane was hit, somehow prevented by the Israelis of avoiding what amounted to an implausible friendly fire attack.

"Syrian-Russian Victory Only Way to Avenge Israeli-French Strikes" (Cartalucci).  The argument for cucking is that retaliation is exactly what Bibi wants, and we can't argue with Putin's success rate at being an adult so far.

"Syria - The Rationale Behind The Delay Of Idleb's Liberation - Updated 2x" (Moon).  Or is Erdoğan just buying time for the White Helmets to set up their false flag casus belli, presumably in exchange for American help with his economic problems?

Comment by kinggeor to a VT article:

"Ironically at the same time of this attack US Rep. Amash made the announcement just as Monday’s evening’s massive Israeli strike on Syria was underway, which resulted in a downed Russian surveillance plane carrying 20 Russian airmen amidst the confusion of missiles flying over the Mediterranean.
Congress Members Demand Trump Seek Approval Before Military Action In Syria

While the Pentagon formally denied any US role in the strikes, it was an extremely dangerous situation with yet again the potential for serious escalation between Russia and the US and its allies.
The letter was signed by a handful of Republicans including Thomas Massie, Mark Sanford, and Walter Jones, as well as 42 Democrats. It begins as follows:
We write to strongly urge you to consult with and obtain authorization from Congress before ordering any additional U.S. military action in Syria. We are deeply concerned by recent reports indicating that your administration is preparing again to strike Syria in the event of another chemical weapons attack."

"Israel-Russia Relations and the Downing of Russian Aircraft over Syria" (Korybko).  Off his meds.  Bizarrely paints Israel as the victim of an American conspiracy to come between Israel and Russia!

In the middle of all this nonsense, it seems important to note that the Ukrainians somehow managed, through sheer intelligence incompetence in an ill-advised dump of documents, to implicate themselves - or at the very least, exculpate the Russians - in the downing of  MH17:    "Russian Propaganda’s Rank Fail on MH17" (West).  "Mutual Disbelief" (Robinson).

And Julian swims away.  "Police Stumped In Search For Missing Wikileaks-Linked Cybersecurity Expert" (Durden).  "WikiLeaks Associate Kamphuis’ Belongings Found Floating in Sea, Sparking Homicide Fears" (Webb).

This story has a whiff of old-school conspiracy about it:  "Evacuated Solar Observatory Set To Re-Open; Officials Offer Unbelievable Explanation" (Durden).

Classic lawfare technique is to slip into an agreement some verbiage that seems inconsequential and off topic at the time, but is later abused in the best Le Merchant style:  "Comrade Joseph Massad on Self-determination" (Angry Arab). "A “Gentleman’s Agreement”: How Oslo Worked Out as Planned for Israel" (Cook).  The general understanding laid down by Oslo was that the Palestinians were just squatters on Jewish land, an issue to be dealt with at a later time, which is now.

"NY Town Recognizes That Demography Is Destiny: "Chester Buying Property ‘To Keep The Hasidic Out’"" (Bishop).  The lawfare is going to doom these poor people.

Peak Khazar

There is nothing more dangerous in the world than when the Khazars get full of themselves, as they are now, with all the shekels washing around Washington and all the treason agents, including President Jared, on the American throne.  "Russian military plane with 14 on board disappears during Israeli strikes on Latakia".  "Russian aircraft shot down during Israeli missile attack on main Syrian government port" (Van Auken).  "The Major Attack On Syria Followed Putin-Erdogan Agreement For Demilitarized Zone In Idlib" (Durden).

Putin needs temporarily to stop cucking it up - arguably Erdoğan also got one over on him in the Idlib negotiations - as his adult, diplomatic, turn-the-other-cheek strategies are leading to Israel (and perhaps now France, doing Israel's dirty work thanks to the Rothschild stooge running France) walking all over Russian interests without the slightest fear of reprisal.

"The West should send Israel an ultimatum" (Alexis).  We're clearly reached Peak Khazar, and their never-ending anti-gentilism is either going to kill us, or we're going to put a stop to it.  It is ironic that the Khazar view is that western politics is propelled entirely on the basis of an irrational Jew-hatred, a hatred that basically doesn't exist, except extremely rarely in the face of massive provocation, and the real basis of history in the west at this time is undoubtedly a completely irrational anti-gentilism, all the weirder in that the Khazars are themselves gentiles.

Creeping wokenness

"Syria - The Rationale Behind The Delay Of Idleb's Liberation" (Moon).  Erdoğan is a real nasty piece of shit, authoritarian to the max and personally corrupt, and requires political support from even worse pieces of shit, vicious ultra-conservative Islamists.  Having said that, he's completely rational in every step he takes, works primarily for fairly secular Turkish big-business interests (who want the economic issues to settle down and things to be quiet so they can make money), has his back up against the wall (the Gülen attack from the CIA, the recent economic attack from Trump and the American government), and needs Russian help to get him through the next few years.  He'll talk like he's going for maximalist irredentist land-grabbing positions to appeal to his base (he recently tried to pull this on Iraq, and then reversed), but will eventually fall back to simply ensuring that the Syrian Kurds are under political control, unable to pull the Greater Kurdistan trick, best achieved if the Kurds get some kind of weak autonomy in a federal Syria.

"The Dike Breaks - Netherland Ends Support For "White Helmets" Terrorist Propaganda" (Moon).  This might be an extremely important shift.  The White Helmets are al-Qaeda + British Intelligence + the Khazar western media PR apparatus, so this kind of break by a loyal vassal, as obvious and commonsensical as it may be, may indicate a dangerous and possibly contagious attack of wokenness.

The (((media))), naturally, won't report this properly, or note its real significance, but this Manafort story is on point on a number of issues, and gets to the real issue of foreign meddling in American politics, not to mention the strikingly cynical way the concept of 'anti-Semitism' now manipulated:  "Manafort and Senior Israeli Official Meddled in Ukraine Elections, Obama Foreign Policy" (also):

"A mysterious Israeli connection appeared on Friday within the pages of the plea deal signed between Paul Manafort, U.S. President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager, and the office of special counsel Robert Mueller, who is investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. 

According to the document, in 2012, while Manafort was working as a lobbyist for the pro-Russian government of Ukraine, he received help from a senior Israeli official in an attempt to tarnish the reputation of Ukraine’s then-opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko. Parliamentary elections were held in Ukraine on October 28, 2012. 

Manafort and the senior Israeli official, who is not named in the document, worked to jointly accuse Tymoshenko’s supporters and allies of supporting anti-Semitism. Manafort bragged at the time that “Obama Jews” would put pressure on the American administration to disavow Tymoshenko and her supporters as a result of his ploy.

“Manafort sought to undermine United States support for Tymoshenko,” the document states. “He orchestrated a scheme to have, as he wrote in a contemporaneous communication, ‘Obama Jews’ put pressure on the [Obama] administration to disavow Tymoshenko” and support the Ukrainian government, which was his client.

The document further states that “Manafort coordinated privately with a senior Israeli government official to issue a written statement” that would highlight the alleged anti-Semitism of his client’s political rivals in Ukraine. Then, “with secret knowledge of that Israeli statement,”  Manafort worked to spread the story in the American media.  “I have someone putting it in the New York Post. Bada bing bada boom,” Manafort wrote to one of his associates. He wanted to use the allegations in order to pressure the Obama administration into acting against his clients’ rivals in Ukraine. “The Jewish community will take this out on Obama on Election Day if he does nothing,” Manafort said at the time.  The document doesn’t name the senior Israeli official that Manafort communicated with. However, in October 2012, at the same time that Manafort was working on this issue, Israel’s then-foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, published a statement attacking the political rivals of Manafort’s clients in Ukraine for espousing anti-Semitism. Lieberman’s statement was featured in reports by a number of American news outlets, including The New York Times and Breitbart.  "Israel is concerned by the recently signed agreement between the Batkivshchyna party and the extremist party Svoboda, who’s anti-Semitic outbursts have caused outrage in Ukraine and Israel more than once," the statement read. Batkivshchyna, or Fatherland, is lead by Tymoshenko, while Svoboda, or Freedom, is an ultra-nationalist party. "For example, in the past, the leader of Svoboda has praised 'the fight against the moscali [derogatory term for Russians] and the zhyd [derogatory term for Jews].' The expression of such views brings to mind the dark pages of history of the last century, which have led humanity to the tragedy of World War Two. Israel condemns anti-Semitism in all its forms, and expresses hope that common sense will prevail," the statement concluded. Lieberman, who is currently defense minister, denied on Friday that he had ever met with, spoken to or worked with Manafort." 

Ha!:  "Israel's Defense Chief Calls for Probe Into Identity of Top Official Embroiled in Manafort Case".

"Sam Patten: Spy 4-Hire: Completing the Jigsaw of Double Agents and “Deep State” Actors" (Kamens):

"Patton has no shame. He has worked for both Mikheil Saakashvili and Bidzina Ivanishvili, who replaced Saakashvili, claiming to be his polar opposite, following the 2012 election. Ivanishvili may not be the murderous crook Saakashvili is, but he was also parachuted into his job by the US to clean up the embarrassment Saakashvili had become – and therefore protect US interests, rather than those of Georgia.

Patten is perfectly happy working both sides of the fence, and based on his recent conviction, many sides of many fences. It is this, rather than contrition, which has persuaded him to agree to co-operate with Robert Mueller’s investigation into Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. He is hoping to turn star witness, and “somehow” get more reward from doing that than he is from helping his previous donors. He is still a spy for hire, he has merely changed employer—even now.

But who exactly is that employer? Robert Mueller is making a lot of capital out of allegedly being an impartial Special Prosecutor, whose purpose is to get at the truth. But he is in the same position as healthcare professionals who murder their patients, but get away with it for a long time because everyone HAS to trust a doctor.

We already know much about Robert Mueller, from people with those same Georgian connections, and from the staff of Veterans Today—a US based military/veterans affairs online magazine. He is in thick with the deep state, or whatever you want to call it. As Trump has said, his investigation is not so much about Trump and his dirty deeds, or any alleged connections to Russian or other offshore money (Ukrainian and Georgian, strangely enough) but with maintaining the status quo.

Most of the complaints President Trump has made about Mueller’s “sprawling” investigation have been on target and completely valid. Trump may well be a terrible president, who should be impeached and convicted for war crimes in Yemen and Syria at the very least, but Mueller’s investigation has been an illegitimate “witch hunt” from the get go.

Trump is right: the deep state is trying to trap him, and he has much more important things to think about and work on. He is also right in saying that the top level of the FBI is full of crooks. They include the likes of Bryan Paarmann, the guy sent to – yes- Georgia, to write a report which said that the former Prime Minister had been killed by fumes from a heater rather than by operatives working for Saakashvili, despite his many visible injuries.

Despite Trump’s many crimes, he is being hounded out of office by what he rightly claims is “a sad chapter for law enforcement,” and “a rigged system”. So, has Patten really changed sides by acting as the fall guy, and pleading guilty rather than taking the opportunity to defend himself?

Mueller’s agenda is not to restore justice but to secure the outcome the Deep State wants, before Justice, which would get Trump anyway, can triumph. Then the Deep State can continue to operate above justice, in the same way you wouldn’t dare to give Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein a parking ticket. If Mueller hadn’t been appointed to do this job, Patten would have been one of the best qualified people to do it himself, given his track record and very similar connections.

In Georgia Patten did the same work he has since done for Cambridge Analytica and the CIA. He would write and plant articles in support of one candidate or another, and present these as the opinion of the Georgian people, most of whom couldn’t even read the articles, let alone agree with them.

One of his connections in Georgia was with Robert Mueller himself. Before he became a household name in the Trump investigation, this former FBI director was involved in secret meetings in Georgia dating back to 2008. He was also involved in the cover-up of weapons deals with the Saakashvili regime and John McCain, the illegal re-export of weapons and even drug deals. Most of this was done behind closed doors, albeit known, and has never been covered by the Western Press.

Patten worked for both sides in the Georgian elections, in the hope the US would still be in charge whether the replacement scheme worked or not. On April 30, 2008, US Ambassador Bass met with political consultants Jeremy Rosner and Sam Patten, of Greenberg Associates, the American political consulting company hired by the ruling National Movement party. Rosner said that the UNM has close ties with the Republican Party in the US via Sam Patten. However another of Patten’s cohorts in Georgia was Frank Wisner, who worked for international law firm Patton Boggs. Bidzina Ivanishvili, parachuted in to replace Saakashvili, hired Patton Boggs to lobby for him in the United States.

Patten also spent his time promoting future leaders in waiting in case Ivanishvili messed up in turn. One of these was Temur Yakobishvili. This man can also have his cake and eat it, as he has government experience from the Saakashvili years but is also a Jew, and therefore an outsider – in a country which has historically treated Jews much better than most others have, and would attract great international sympathy by “electing” a Jewish leader.

Sam Patten was responsible for planting an article in a Washington DC based Jewish publication, which happens no longer to be accessible on line, promoting Yakobishvili, a Saakashvili gang member, as a champion of human rights. Here is an excerpt:

“Soon after the funeral, Yakobashvili began to secretly explore his grandfather’s ancient prayer books, leafing through the pages with a curious fascination. “It was the first time I saw the alef bet, and couldn’t understand anything in it,” recalled Yakobashvili, who now speaks fluent Hebrew…..within a short time Yakobashvili had spearheaded the creation of several Jewish campus groups that united activists from across the USSR. It wasn’t long before Yakobashvili was organizing political demonstrations at home and across Europe. Jewish advocacy helped to introduce Yakobashvili and his Jewish compatriots to the global Zionist community.”

It is not hard to see which audience, and whose guilt complexes, this article is courting. If certain feminists can get away with saying “all men are rapists”, it is not hard to make the case that anyone who doesn’t want Yakobishvili back, as the leader of a new, “cleansed” United National Movement, UNM, is a Nazi."

Belling Bellingcat. You have to love how the assumption is that Russian intelligence would send assassins using their real names with no attempt to hide their identities.  Also, see replies to this tweet!

"After Cutting All UNWRA Humanitarian Aid, US to Award Israel with $3.3B/Year in Military Aid" (Webb).

Hello, Newman! news:  "Provoked by BDS campaign, Trump administration says anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism" (Weiss/Johnson).  "Trump administration moves to curb campus criticism of Israel" (Barrows-Friedman) (note the history of the use of lawfare by Marcus, a Khazar identifier at least back to Le Merchant of Venice):

"The announcement was made without public or congressional notification or debate, and reportedly took current and former investigators in the education department “by surprise.”"

"After 9/11: The Staggering Economic and Human Cost of the War on Terror" (Dangl).  Massive understating by at least an order of magnitude of the cost in lives of all the Wars For The Jews, and, I suspect, a similar understating of the economic cost of the anti-gentilism under which we all suffer.  Until we become woke and admit what is really going on, the incomprehensible cost of anti-gentilism, both in lives lost and quality of life for those unlucky enough to survive, is our collective cross to bear.

JYT:  "New York Times goads Trump into major new war in Syria" (Van Auken).

"Is Antisemitism Dead? A Philosophical Consideration" (Lowden) (to be read with "Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israel was brought to you by Jeffrey Goldberg" (Hirsch)):

"The question of antisemitism’s death is necessarily comparative. It implies that aspects of modern antisemitism that were once “alive” are no longer so. These aspects are easily identified. “Political antisemitism,” which probably began in the 1870s, more or less ceased to exist in 1945 in the sense that explicitly anti-Jewish elements vanished from lobby groups, political parties, and public policy throughout the West. Key facets of political antisemitism such as the management and exclusion of Jews in areas of public life (for example, via voting restrictions and educational quotas) are no longer in place in any Western country, and it is currently unthinkable for anyone to even suggest such policies. Another once-lively aspect of modern antisemitism that is now dead is “anti-Semitic discourse.” The historical presence of anti-Jewish thought in Western literature and its broader culture are today distorted and exaggerated by Jewish academics and those eager for grants.
It is undeniable, however, that a mainly negative discourse about Jews was extant in all areas of Western art and culture prior to the 1950s, and this discourse was a powerful force in energizing and disseminating knowledge about Jews. Linked with cultural discourse was popular journalism. Anti-Jewish newspapers, with mainstream or near-mainstream circulation, were once relatively common in the West. Some editors, such as the Frenchman Édouard Drumont, even rose to public (and electoral) prominence. Again, it is quite unthinkable for something of this nature to happen today.
Perhaps more important than the vanishing of any of these aspects, is the relative disappearance of knowledge of Jews among the Western masses. Indeed, there has been the almost total transformation in what the mass of the public “knows” about Jews. The transformation has been a dramatic shift from objective to subjective knowledge. For example, ask a random member of the public today what they know about Jews, and they would very likely respond by regurgitating a series of banal, media-derived tropes: Jews are good actors/directors/comedians; Jews are harmless and very smart/talented; Jews are a historically downtrodden and victimised group. This is essentially “junk” knowledge; entirely subjective, and more or less useless to forming a meaningful opinion on matters involving Jews — or worse, this “knowledge” is actually obstructive to forming a meaningful opinion on matters involving Jews. The contemporary situation contrasts sharply with the knowledge earlier generations possessed about Jews (derived from politics, journalism, and anti-Semitic discourse), and with the knowledge possessed by those today classed as anti-Semites. This knowledge includes objective facts: population statistics of Jews and their relative wealth; the prevalence of actual positions of influence occupied by Jews, particularly in the media and in the political process (e.g., the Israel Lobby, donors to political candidates); the contents of Jewish intellectual efforts (from the Talmud to the Frankfurt School and beyond); the prevalence of Jews in White Collar crime; the reality of the Jewish relationship with moneylending/usury; the extent and nature of Jewish involvement in the pornography industry; and the manner in which Jews view non-Jews.
An intellectual gulf lies between these two forms and levels of knowledge, and the latter is overwhelmingly stifled by the former. Equally important is the fact that, even when the masses are “educated” on ostensibly objective themes, their educators are likely to be Jewish academics, Jewish authors, or Jewish presenters of Jewish-produced television documentaries. Any account or interpretation of the history of Jewish-European interactions rooted in the perspective or interests of their ancestors is almost non-existent. Thus, in the absence of meaningful contemporary knowledge, Jews have an effective monopoly on historical or historiographical perceptions of their group — something unprecedented for any minority group in world history."

It's amazing how deep the anti-gentilism creeps into all the horrible things that are going on:  "‘Deadly Exchange’: Report Details Israel’s Role in Militarizing US Law Enforcement".

"YouTube shuts down pro-Syrian government channels".  From Al Jazeera, no less, not a traditional place to find out about Khazar censorship/deplatforming of the Syrian government! See also:  "Wikileaked: Israeli Government Launches AI Command Center to Monitor and Report Social Media Anti-Semitism" (Castillo).  "Pro-Israel Group Secretly Ran Misleading Facebook Ads To Target Palestinian-American Poet" (Elliott/Nathan-Kazis).  "Censored film reveals The Israel Project’s secret Facebook campaign" (Abunimah/Winstanley).

"Canada betrays its own citizens. Hassan Diab's case is among its most egregious: Neil Macdonald".  Note the Khazar leaders who now pronounce themselves 'duped' by the Canadian government!!!  Macdonald - and I should note that Macdonald is often uniquely brave in discussing matters related to anti-gentilist attacks, without, of course, identifying them as such! - claims that the problem is that the review is being done by a 'prosecutor' - such a review would normally be done by a prosecutor, a retired judge, or a law professor - but can't bring himself to state the woke position that an obvious Khazar anti-gentilist conspiracy is being 'reviewed' by a Khazar.

Related:  "The Racism and Smear Tactics of B’nai B’rith and Israel-first MPs in Defense of Israeli Crimes" (Engler). The 'left' is so Khazared-up - see also, the Labour Party - it can no longer be seen as even remotely progressive.

"Cuba’s ‘Sonic Attacks’ vs Edinburgh University: The 40% Mystery" (Augist).  It turns out that American diplomats are naturally cognitively impaired, just as you would expect!  No, I'm kidding (I think).  What the American 'experts' did was rig the standard neurological tests to find impairment where there wasn't any, for political reasons, first against Cuba, and now, with the political situation changing, against Russia.

"Saudi Arabia Purchased Israel's Iron Dome Defense System: Controversial Report" (Durden).  As it doesn't work, this is great news (a false sense of security for assholes is never a bad thing), with the bonus that it shows the people of Saudi Arabia just what traitors the drinking, thieving and whoring princelings really are.

"German festival boycotts Brian Eno for pro-BDS views".  They'd disinvite Beethoven to a classical music festival as they didn't care for his views on Hegel.  The Germans. despite being the most informed people in the western world, and thus potentially naturally woke, still have this weird Hologuilt which causes them to behave weirdly.

"Book Accusing Israel of Sparing Palestinian Lives ‘In Order To Control Them’ Wins Women’s Studies Award".  The title of this piece is ridiculous as they intentionally mangle the thesis correctly stated in the first line.  The idea, of course, is that disabled people will damage the Palestinians collectively due to the costs of looking after them, but the idea that the Khazars would be such monsters to do this as an intentional program is impossible to conceive unless you are woke and understand the scourge of anti-gentilism and the inherent evils of supremacism and its disdain for anyone outside the supreme group.  See also:

"Critics have accused Puar of anti-Semitism and labeled the book a “blood libel,” referring to the ancient smear that Jews kill Christian babies in order to use their blood for ritual purposes."

"On David Irving, Nazi Germany, and World War II" (Alexis/Clark).  It is ridiculous to call Irving a denialist, but his sin is insisting on the right to engage in his considerable research into things the goyim aren't supposed to know.

Sailer on the 'somebody would have talked' conundrum:  "Conspiracy Theorists vs. an Actual Giant Conspiracy".  It is amazing how many counter-examples there are in real life proving that people don't in fact talk, or, if they do, their talk is easily dismissed due to the fact that nobody else talked.

It's funny that there is a sphere of 'gossip', which is its own world, and a sphere of 'news', and the spheres rarely meet:  "Alex Jones to Marco Rubio: 'Go Back to Your Bathhouse'".

Gas artists

I'm wondering if all the acclaim over the movie making of the White Helmets has turned them into auteurs who can't shoot a scene without 127 takes, thus delaying the finished PR product.

In the world of PR fakery, there is nothing new:  "Military Fraud in the JFK Autopsy" (Hornberger).

"The Bluffer’s Guide to Bombing Syria" (Ford).  Good list, but anything approaching common sense is not relevant as the (((usual suspects))) will ensure it doesn't make it to the (((mainstream media))).  It is useful to envisage Bolton and Haley screaming about Assad while Sheldon throws shekels at their feet and they stumble to pick them up.  It is difficult to imagine that Ford used to be a US ambassador.

It is particularly amazing for the Americans to be whining about faked gas attacks as the ruins of Falluja, Mosul and Raqqa - and remember the destruction of Raqqa, ostensibly fighting 'terrorists', was completely phony, with the terrorists allowed to escape - are still smoldering from vicious American attacks by actual American bombs (not to mention what is going on in Yemen).

I should note that Cole takes the truth of the faked Syrian gas attack at Khan Sheikhoun as a given, exactly the kind of invidious imperial lying that makes a mockery of his pretense at being woke.

"Israeli Right: Oslo Peace Process is Dead, and We Packed down the Earth on the Grave" (Weizman).  "As Trump-Netanyahu Crush Palestinians, was “Oslo Peace Process” always a Scam?" (Tolan).  "The Oslo curse" (Abu Zuhry).  "The Veiled Danger of the ‘Dead’ Oslo Accords" (Baroud) (note that the Pipes solution is basically what Bibi said in his Khazaria-über-alles speech, and also appears in recent statements by American ambassador Friedman):

"In January 2017, Daniel Pipes of the pro-Israel Middle East Forum came up with what seemed like a puerile idea: a ‘way to peace’ between Israel and the Palestinians, based on the simple declaration that Israel has won.

The new strategy requires little by way of negotiations. It merely entails that Israel declares ‘victory’, which Pipes defined as “imposing one’s will on the enemy, compelling him through loss to give up his war ambitions.’

As unconscionable as Pipes’ logic was, a few months later, Congressional Republicans in the US launched the “Israel Victory Caucus.” The co-Chair of the Caucus, Rep. Bill Johnson, ‘predicted’ in April 2017 that Trump would soon be heading to Israel to announce the relocation of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Since then, the US is obviously following a blueprint of a strategy in which the US advances Israel’s ‘victory’, while imposing conditions of surrender on defeated Palestinians. Despite its more diplomatic and legal language, that was also the essence of Oslo.

Trump, to the satisfaction of Israel’s right-wing Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, may think that he has single handedly destroyed the Oslo Accords or whatever remained of it. However, judging by his words and actions, Trump has indicated that the spirit of Oslo remains alive: the bribes, the bullying and the fighting for that coveted and final Israeli ‘victory.’

Oslo is not a specific legal document that can be implemented or rejected. It is a spectrum in which the likes of Beilin, Lieberman and Pipes have more in common than they may think, and in which the fate of the Palestinian people is left to inept leaders, incapable of thinking outside the permissible space allocated to them by the Israelis and the Americans.

Unfortunately, Abbas and his Authority are still reveling at the expense of the empty space that is Oslo, not the ‘accords’ – provisions, stipulations and heaps of paper – but the corrupt culture – money, perks and unmitigated defeat."

I remain fascinated by the obsessive use by the Khazars of complicated legal structures, the implications of which are not fully understood at the time, which are then interpreted in legalistic letter-but-not-spirit-of-the-law ways to get what they want (think Le Merchant Of Venice, a play which - and I'm dating myself here - we were taught in school - I remember having to memorize Portia's famous speech, cue the fainting spells - to indicate just how far things have changed, as I think that play is now proscribed 'hate speech' probably unavailable in any school library), with the courts, of course, well stocked with their members.

"Erekat: Oslo agreement is dead and we will not abide by it".  Great, so stop taking the shekels and stop enforcing Khazar domination over your people!

I think Trump's view is that the world is divided into winners and losers, the losers are hopeless, and the Palestinians are losers.  While the Palestinians individually show tremendous personal courage and determination, he's not wrong.  What kind of people takes money to police their own subservience?

Eaters and vendors

""Panic And Dismay": Leaked Video Reveals Distraught Google Execs Grappling With Hillary Clinton's Loss" (Durden).  "Google Was "Working To Get Hillary Clinton Elected" With "Silent Donation" According To Leaked Internal Email" (Durden).  Lucky for Trump they are incompetent.

It appears that Trump has been ordered to stand down on any idea of regulation of the thought-controlling internet monopolies, no matter how outrageously they behave:  "Why you should care that Facebook is at war with LUV News" (Balkwill).

A noamian analysis of Corbyn's 'gas the kikes' politics:  "Letter from Britain: The Real Reason for the ‘Anti-Semite’ Campaign Against Jeremy Corbyn" (Mercouris). It's not the Khazars, goyim, it's the American British Empire!

"Israel Secretly Armed and Funded 12 Syrian Rebel Groups, Report Says".  "Israel's Military Censor Removed News Report Detailing IDF Support To Anti-Assad Fighters" (Durden).  "Inside Israel’s Secret Program to Back Syrian Rebels" (Tsurkov).

Now that al Qaeda is 'truly our second greatest ally' (after, you know), can we wind up the Global War On Terror which was ostensibly to fight al Qaeda? There is no more need for all the Wars For The Jews, and no more need for the Orwellian security state.  With 'greatest allies' like these - between the human organ eaters and the human organ vendors - who needs enemies?

Tweet (OffGuardian):

"@GeorgeMonbiot celebrating the release of 300 #AlQaeda and #AlNusra terrorists back in 2014. Monbiot will also tell you this same #alQaeda murdered 3,000 US citizens on 9/11. He apparently has no problem with this cognitive dissonance. AQ are our chums now. That's just fine."

"Afghan War Has Grown More Expensive Than The Marshall Plan: Report" (Durden).  Trump would need the help of Pakistan to get out, so he of course wrecked the American relationship with Pakistan.  It would be awful if it was $840 million.  $840 billion here, $840 billion there, it eventually all adds up to serious money.  It is a shame that money couldn't have been spent on American social programs, health care, infrastructure and education, but look at all the progress in the attack on the people of Afghanistan!

"We DIDN'T win the war! Like us all, PETER HITCHENS grew up on stories of Britain’s heroic victory over Hitler... but now, without questioning the bravery of our troops, he’s written a book challenging all we think about WW2".  It is funny how the only people who 'win' any of these wars are the Khazars, yet we never learn from our repeated mistakes.

A psycho bullshit artiste in academia (with the professional 'feminists' acquitting themselves just as badly as you might expect, until they realized they were falling into the abyss and did a 180):  "The Avital Ronell story".  The more you read, the worse it gets, with the #metoo stuff just the tip of the iceberg.

Putin did 9/11 and cubanheadachegate.

Only three?

""We Have Found Them" Putin Says Of Skripal Suspects, "They Are Civilians"" (Durden)!

"Papadopoulos Back on Deep State Bandwagon" (Marshall).  Marshall is being sarcastic, but everything Papadopoulos says fits the facts as we know them and makes perfect sense.  I like to see the 'conspiracy theory' which everybody knows but nobody will admit out loud, taken as a given.  See also:  "Eric Trump Says Woodward Wrote Book To Get 'Three Extra Shekels'" (Langum).

"Guardian Continues Shameless Misinformation Campaign Against Nicaragua" (Mejía).

Optimism:  "The US’s Choice: WWIII or Saving Face in Syria" (Luongo).

There is reason to hope/fear that Trump has done a deal with the machers.  For shekels, of course, and making sure the (((media))) stays transfixed by Russiagate and the usual Trump mayhem, and stays well away from Trump's real corruption problems, Trump will let the Khazars have their way, completely, with the Palestinians, and will put all possible pressure on Iran short of actual war.  They have to accept that he won't give them a War For The Jews or WWIII, but Bolton can say whatever nutty things come into his mind.

"Shocking: Jews Use Historical 1939 Warsaw Phone Book to Create “Restitutions” Database" (Byron).  On the rich Khazars who got out.  A Tor link as The Daily Stormer appears to be under another attack.

"Nixon backpedals on letter saluting ‘courageous’ artists who boycotted ‘clearly illegal’ Israeli settlement" (Weiss).  She's not going to win and she's not going to get the shekels, so why not admit she did the right thing and own it?

"Trump in Space? Did American Astronauts Sabotage Soyuz?" The ultimate locked-room mystery.

Is that a man running with a rifle?

"Is The New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts By Sowing Suspicion?" (Johnstone).  We have to allow for the possibility that Trump planted this story.  There is a strategy of promoting mayhem for marketing purposes:  "Donald Trump bodyslams, beats and shaves Vince McMahon at Wrestlemania XXIII".

"Does Brazil Also Have a 'Lucky Larry,' or Should I say 'Senor Lucky Larry?'" (Bacon).  Like Zim pulling out of the WRC months before 9/11, or all those Jewish businessmen deciding to go into to work late on September 11, 2001, the torah took a fortuitous walk just before the fire, with the timing adjusted by the (((media))) to make it seem less suspicious.

"Canadian politicians lead unprecedented smear campaign against advocate for Palestinian rights" (Engler).  Besides the audacity of denouncing somebody for calling for politicians to stand up against death threats, we see yet another example of the surprising - surprising as the (((media))) simply doesn't cover it - levels of actual violence and threats of violence by the Khazars against gentiles.  Anti-gentilism is real, and extremely violent.

"Trump’s swamp is drowning Washington" (Madsen).  Good details on Lewandowski's lobbying firms.

"Butina prosecutors wrote their own James Bond novel with sex allegations – and the media loved it".  It is funny that Butina is a spy, but Mangiante is just your everyday child abduction lawyer/political advisor to various Eurotrash men/'Italian'/stinktank employee/actress/associate of a man who simply cannot be found/wife of a victim of the IC sting on the Trump campaign.  Nothing abnormal about this at all!

"Gaius Publius: Big Oil Seeks Billions from U.S. Government to Protect It From…Climate Change".  Assholia is a country where people stand up to their necks in water with their hair on fire screaming that climate change isn't real, while the causers of said climate change calmly line up at the trough for government gibs to recompense themselves for the costs of it

"Is A New Crisis Brewing In The Saudi Royal Family?" (Widdershoven).  This appears to be MbS paid PR, damage control for the indications of unrest.

"Target Syria" (Giraldi).  If Trump thinks he can overcome the mid-term enthusiasm gap between Democrats and his base by starting a War For The Jews in October, one based on particularly outrageous lies, he is going to be sadly mistaken, and impeached, and probably in jail, within a year.

"Trump’s Psyche and the Threat of Force" (Goodman).  1973, 2018 - Khazar treason agents working for Israel manoeuvre a President against Russia for the sole benefit of Zionist colonialism.

"Kamikaze from California" (Shamir).  The goyim still don't realize that denialism is exactly what the Khazar supremacists want, as it fits right into their ideology that the main issue in the world is irrational Jew-hatred, proving that the Jews are incapable of doing anything wrong or being criticized by the irrationally-hating goyim.  The truth, that 'white' Khazars (think of people like the Rothschilds, or today, also the Kagans or Kristols) conspired with some German officials, including Eichmann, to stage an attack on the impure -  impure as their Khazar blood had been intermixed with gentile blood over the centuries of intermingling - shtetl dwellers, both to clean up the supremacist race and provide a 'refugee crisis' which could stock the land they intended to steal in the Middle East, is much, much worse for Khazar supremacism than the idea that the Holocaust is fiction.  A few 'white' Khazars died in the confusion, but most hurried to escape (the evidence of which are all the claims now being made for reparations for art sold by rich Jews, supposedly at a big discount, due to the fact they left in such a hurry!).

"American Pravda: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories" (Unz).  "9/11 Was an Israeli Job" (Guyénot) (too much 'truther' crap, the best of which only proves Khazar foreknowledge, an issue which isn't in doubt).  There are two big problems with this, one rhetorical, and one based on the mechanics of any possible conspiracy, based on years of examples of conspiracies that we have all seen.  The rhetorical problem is, again, that this kind of speculation plays right into the hands of the supremacist Khazars, who will say 'see, the goyim keep making up these ridiculous lies against us based solely on their irrational Jew-hatred, meaning that anything else they say about us, including, say, any criticisms of what Israel is doing to the Palestinians, or criticisms of the constant warmongering to trick Americans into fighting Wars For The Jews, is similarly motivated and suspect!'  The conspiracy problem is that there is no evidence that the Jews had sufficient control over the gatekeepers like NORAD, control which would have been required for the whole conspiracy to work.  There is lots of evidence of Jewish/Israeli foreknowledge of 9/11, but 9/11 had to be an inside job of the American government at many levels, which had more to do with deep structural/spiritual problems within Assholia (and failure to admit these problems leads to typical Assholian lack of discipline in analyzing the real problem).  And again, criticizing without hard evidence just plays into their hands and allows them to deflect all criticism of what we all know they are actually doing.  The Unz essay is particularly clumsy (he's promising possibly to rewrite it), where the 'turn' in the argument - where he moves from setting up the conclusion to the conclusion itself - is very weak:

"Cheney and Rumsfeld had both spent decades as stalwarts of the moderate pro-business wing of the Republican Party, each serving in top government positions and also CEOs of major corporations. The notion that they capped their careers by joining a new Republican administration in early 2001 and immediately began organizing a gigantic false-flag terrorist attack upon the proudest towers of our largest city together with our own national military headquarters, hoping to kill many thousands of Americans in the process, is too ridiculous to even be part of a leftist political satire.

Let’s step back a bit. In the entire history of the world, I can think of no documented case in which the top political leadership of a country launched a major false-flag attack upon its own centers of power and finance and tried to kill large numbers of its own people."

What Unz calls "too ridiculous to even be part of a leftist political satire" I consider to be normal operating procedure in the Assholian government, with many, many examples.  Still, Unz at his worst still has his moments (and note that he points out that American authorities could easily arrest the real perps of the anthrax attacks if they wanted to, as identifying them is a no-brainer):

". . . the complete ideological triumph of the Neocons after the 9/11 attacks was all the more shocking given their recent political missteps. During the 2000 presidential campaign, nearly all of the Neocons had aligned themselves with Sen. John McCain, whose battle with Bush for the Republican nomination had eventually turned quite bitter, and as a consequence, they had been almost totally frozen out of high-level appointments. Both Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were then widely regarded as Bush Republicans, lacking any significant Neocon ties, and the same was true for all the other top administration figures such as Colin Powell, Condeleeza Rice, and Paul O’Neil. Indeed, the only Neoconservative figure offered a Cabinet spot was Linda Chavez, and not only was the Labor Department always regarded as something of a boobie prize in a GOP Administration, but she was ultimately forced to withdraw her nomination due to her “nanny problems.” The highest-ranking Neocon serving under Bush was Rumsfeld Deputy Paul Wolfowitz, whose seemingly inconsequential appointment had been almost totally ignored by everyone.

Most of the Neocons themselves certainly seemed to recognize the catastrophic defeat they had suffered in the 2000 election. Back in those days, I was on very friendly terms with Bill Kristol, and when I stopped by his office at the Weekly Standard for a chat in the spring of 2001, he seemed in a remarkably depressed state of mind. I remember that at one point, he took his head in his hands and wondered whether it was time for him to just abandon the political battle, resigning his editorship and taking up a quiet post at a DC thinktank. Yet just eight or ten months later, he and his close allies were on their way to gaining overwhelming influence in our government, an eirie parallel to Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Lenin in Zurich. The totally fortuitous 9/11 attacks and the outbreak of war had suddenly allowed a small but committed ideological faction to seize control of a gigantic country."

and (if you've read this blog, which most of my critics clearly haven't, you will know I've been droning on about as cruise missile fired from Fort Meade or Andrews Air Force Base for years):

"In addition, an old friend of mine with strong connections to elite French circles at some point shared what he regarded as an amusing anecdote. He mentioned that at a private dinner party in Paris attended by influential political and media figures, France’s former Defense Minister had told the other disbelieving guests that the Pentagon had been struck by a missile rather than a civilian jetliner. My friend explained that the minister in question was widely regarded as extremely intelligent and level-headed, thereby proving that even the most highly reputable individuals may sometimes believe in utterly crazy things.

But I interpreted those same facts very differently. France probably possessed one of the four or five best intelligence service in the world, and surely a French Defense Minister would be privy to better information about true events than a typical media pundit. In fact, one of the earliest books sharply questioning the official 9/11 narrative was 9/11: The Big Lie by French journalist Thierry Meyssan, which appeared in 2002 and similarly argued that the Pentagon had been struck by a missile, perhaps suggesting that it may have been partly influenced by leaks coming from French Intelligence."

Now, this is good, really good, the kind of analysis I'd like to see more of, comparing the attacks on American legislatures, and the 'unity' it provokes, to a similar issue in Canada:  "9/11 Truth: War on Terror or “War on Democracy”? The Physical Intimidation of Legislatures" (McQueen) (my emphasis in red):

"And now we arrive at the fourth and last case from the annals of the War on Terror to be reviewed today. This is the invasion of the Centre Block of the Parliament Buildings in Ottawa on October 22, 2014.
Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette has recalled her experience in her Senate office:

At 2:30 p.m., to cries of “Police,” my assistant opens the office’s main door. He comes face to face with soldiers aiming their machine guns at him and ordering him to put his hands in the air. One by one, our doors are opened and the soldiers point their guns at my other assistants who exit their offices, hands in the air, as if they were criminals… The door we go through is destroyed; glass has exploded all over the floor. The door across the hallway has also been knocked in. Glass litters the hallway. There are more than 50 people crammed into four offices, everyone talking to one another…
I sit near the open window. I’m breathing but stunned: parliamentarians are under the command of the military. Parliament is in the hands of the armed forces.

The persons holding the automatic weapons were almost certainly federal police officers, not members of the armed forces, but for our purposes today the distinction may not be important. Men in camouflage clothing with heavy boots, helmets, and automatic weapons would have been hard for most Canadians to identify. Let us simply say that security forces took control of Parliament. The image fits the theme of this talk very well.
But you are thinking: naturally they took control—an armed gunman was running down the hall shooting!
Yes, but let us look a bit more closely at the affair.
I want to begin by saying I do not pretend to have sorted out the facts of this attack. I am not in a position to say with confidence that the RCMP were complicit. But, in a report I have written on this incident, The October 22, 2014, Ottawa Shooting: Why Canadians Need a Public Inquiry, I do claim that (a) there are very serious unanswered questions about this series of incidents (I list 32 questions), (b) the RCMP have given both misleading and false information to the public and (c) in any serious inquiry the possibility of RCMP complicity would have to be considered.
The RCMP are, of course, the ones in charge of the investigation of the October 22, 2014 events. But this simply illustrates the dilemma faced by citizens in North America. The agencies charged with investigating acts of alleged Islamic terrorism have a proven record of incitement, entrapment and framing. They would, for this reason, be treated as suspects within an uncorrupted system of policing and litigation.
When we look for recognition of this obvious truth in mainstream North America media today we will seldom find it. I saw not a single person interviewed on television or radio, or quoted in mainstream newspapers, in Canada in the days after the October 22, 2014 attacks, who was willing to raise this as a serious possibility.
Drawing on the 2013 Canada Day case, we might ask our question this way: Could the 2014 impoverished drug addict from Vancouver (Zehaf-Bibeau) have been assisted by the RCMP the way the 2013 impoverished drug addict from Vancouver (Nuttall) was assisted? Could the two acts of intimidation of the people’s elected representatives have belonged to the same pattern of police behavior?
Before entering into the critical questioning of the mainstream account of October 22, I draw attention to the triad we have seen before: Threat, Unity, Reaction.
Let us begin with threat. After allegedly shooting Corporal Cirillo at the War Memorial the suspect, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, made it to the Centre Block of Parliament. The Conservative caucus, including Mr. Harper, was assembled behind a door on one side of the central Hall of Honour, while the New Democratic Party was assembled behind a door on the other side. To the astonishment and horror of the MPs, a barrage of shooting broke out in the Hall.
Globe and Mail reporter Josh Wingrove caught the gunfire (second volley) on his Blackberry, and the showing of this video footage gave the public a dramatic sense of what MPs, hunkered down behind poorly barricaded doors off the main hall, heard at that time.

Oct. 22, 2014 (from Wingrove video): just before the 2nd volley of shots in Centre Block.

Volley one, which had occurred prior to the volley caught on this video, had roughly the same number of shots as volley two.
So MPs certainly felt threatened. The danger was emphasized by the CBC, which said on October 22 that the perpetrator may have fired 30 shots in the Hall of Honour. John Baird, then the Minister of Foreign Affairs, said on Anderson Cooper’s TV show on October 23 that if Sergeant-at-Arms Kevin Vickers had not killed Zehaf-Bibeau a dozen people might have been killed.
It turned out these statements were based on fantasy. The evidence we now have suggests that the suspect, Zehaf-Bibeau, ran into Centre Block with two bullets in his rifle. His firearm was a lever-action hunting rifle—a model first produced in 1894. Zehaf-Bibeau’s goals at that point are not clear, but he fired his two bullets, hitting no one (security guard Samearn Son appears to have been hit in the leg by a ricochet) and at one point he declined to shoot a security guard he was facing at point blank range. In the space between volleys he seems to have loaded one more bullet in his rifle, which he fired—again hitting no one—just before dying in a hail of bullets less than two minutes after entering the building. He did not, therefore, shoot 30 times; he shot three times. And he was in no position to kill a dozen people. Of the roughly 59 shots heard by MPs, 56 were fired by police with semi-automatic 9mm handguns.
While it is important to sort out these facts, it remains true that the feeling of threat experienced by MPs was intense. They heard a huge barrage of shots, could not see what was going on, and felt at risk.
How about the next member of our triad, unity?
We have a remarkable piece of footage from the next day, October 23, fully as striking as the singing of God Bless America on the steps of the Capitol. Kevin Vickers, apparently one of the two men who killed Zehaf-Bibeau, was Sergeant-at-Arms and regularly carried the mace into Parliament. (The mace represents the authority of the Speaker and the right of the House, transmitted to it by the crown, to pass laws.) When Mr. Vickers entered Parliament with the mace on October 23 he was given a prolonged standing ovation by the House, with members of all political parties enthusiastically participating.
In addition to this particular symbolic statement of unity we saw in Canada the embraces familiar to us from the U.S. incidents of the fall of 2001. The Canadian Prime Minister signaled his trans-party solidarity with Mr. Trudeau of the Liberal Party and Mr. Mulcair of the NDP with hugs.

Post-event hugs, October 2014: Harper and Mulcair, Harper and Trudeau.

So we had threat and we had unity. The third element is reaction, which possesses two components. Internally, citizens and their representatives are all supposed to pull together, sacrificing civil rights or having them sacrificed on their behalf. Externally, they are to fling themselves at the enemy—whoever has been assigned that role.
In Prime Minister Harper’s speech on October 22 he made clear, albeit in genteel and delicate language, that he intended to move ahead on both fronts: to give more power to national security agencies at home while joining with allies in military action abroad.

This week’s events are a grim reminder that Canada is not immune to the types of terrorist attacks we have seen elsewhere around the world…this will lead us to strengthen our resolve and redouble our efforts and those of our national security agencies to take all necessary steps to identify and counter threats and keep Canada safe here at home, just as it will lead us to strengthen our resolve and redouble our efforts to work with our allies around the world and fight against the terrorist organizations who brutalize those in other countries with the hope of bringing their savagery to our shores. They will have no safe haven.

The forms this reaction took are well known. Internally we had the passage of a series of bills, including the famous Bill C-51. Externally, we found the victim of the War Memorial shooting, Corporal Cirillo, quickly exploited in Iraq.
So we have the triad found in the War on Terror in its autumn, 2001 manifestation. The presence of death in the October 22 events has guaranteed that the pattern will be deeply inscribed in people’s consciousness. The absence of killing in the B.C. bombers incident is, I am convinced, one of the reasons the incident has had relatively little impact in Canada. In fact, the lengthy court case associated with this incident—still not resolved as this talk is being given—has embarrassed the RCMP at the same time the lack of casualties has left the Canadian population uninterested. The operation cannot be called a success.
Would it not be tempting for police, after such a failure, to mount an operation in which there are deaths to draw people’s attention and where the perpetrator or patsy is killed in the operation so that there will never be a court case?
I am aware that I have to this point offered no evidence that the October 22, 2014 incident was planned or carried out with police complicity. Let me now, therefore, look at selected aspects of the RCMP’s performance and foreknowledge. In my view these are sufficiently peculiar, even if they were the only anomalies encountered, to justify a public inquiry. For other problematic issues in the case my report may be consulted.
I begin with a question: Where did the most blatant security failure occur, which allowed the suspect to make it into a building of Parliament after shooting Mr. Cirillo at the War Memorial? The answer is that the main security failure occurred between the time he emerged from his car in front of the bollards near East Block until the time he entered the doors of Centre Block. This zone was the responsibility of the RCMP. As he stepped onto Parliament Hill he was no longer the responsibility of the Ottawa police, and as he entered Centre Block he became the responsibility of House of Commons security. In between the RCMP was responsible.
Now, during that brief period when he was the responsibility of the RCMP he ran from the bollards along the grass in front of the East Block, his keffiya over the lower part of his face, his long hair flowing, and his Winchester rifle in his hands. He hijacked a black ministerial car in front of East Block. The driver got out and ran away at top speed. The suspect then got into the black car with his rifle and drove straight to Centre Block. On his way he passed two white RCMP vehicles. Neither moved to intercept him, although either one could have done so. Neither seems to have made a serious effort to catch him or intercept him on the rest of his journey to Centre Block, although they followed him to his destination.

Black hijacked car (circled), heading in direction of top of frame, has just driven past two white RCMP vehicles.

I am not interested in blaming the officers in these two cars. The more important issue is the fact that the RCMP has such a thin and permeable line of security, not to mention a communications system that performed very badly. Two cars between the suspect and Parliament, each with one officer, neither of whom seemed to expect anything and neither of whom appeared to have heard the 911 calls from the War Memorial? Neither of whom appears to have been able to warn the House of Commons security, who were, therefore, caught off guard when Zehaf-Bibeau burst through the door?
We now know, thanks to a CBC access to information request, that the RCMP were short by at least 29 persons in their Parliament Hill security at that time. We also know that the extra patrols in the vicinity that the RCMP had mounted in mid-October due to various incidents had been halted two days before the October 22 incident.
Am I being a Monday morning quarterback? Will you object that it is all very well to bemoan this reduction of security in retrospect but that the RCMP could not possibly have known of the danger at the time? Well, I certainly would have thought that the killing of a soldier at Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu two days earlier by an apparent “terrorist” would have led to some tightening of security. But, beyond that, there were plenty of signs of danger.
We are now touching on one of the most explosive aspects of the October 22, 2014 case, namely advance warnings. If we turn to the RCMP and ask what was the stated and official position we find it set out very clearly. Commissioner Paulson said without hesitation that there had been “no advance warning.” Is this true? Consider the following list:
(1) October 8, 2014
Warning: potential “knife and gun” attacks inside Canada.
Source: NBC News, crediting US intelligence sources, in turn crediting Canadian authorities. The warning was quickly denied by Canadian authorities.
(2) October 17:
Warning: “heightened state of alert”
Source: Integrated Terrorism Assessment Centre (ITAC), which is housed at the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) but has several partner organizations, including the RCMP.
(3) October 17:
Warning: “violent act of terrorism”
Source: Privy Council Office (PCO), which advises the Prime Minister.
(4) October 18:
Warning: ISIS considering attacks on uniformed law enforcement persons in Canada
Source: Criminal Intelligence Integrated Unit of the RCMP
(5) October 21:
Warning: [We do not know what is in this report, which the RCMP has refused to release, but it was apparently based on more than the lethal October 20 event in Quebec.]
Source: National Intelligence Coordination Centre, RCMP
(6) September to October, 2014, beginning about a month before the October 22 events
Warning: There was a war-gaming of “an attack in Quebec followed by an attack in another city” (CBC journalist Adrienne Arsenault called it the “precise scenario” that unfolded in October).
Source: Adrienne Arsenault, speaking on The National, CBC television, October 22, 2014. According to her the participants in the war game included CSIS, the RCMP, and the National Security Task Force.
We find, in short, that there were repeated warnings beginning at least a month before October 22 and growing more intense in the five days prior to the attacks. Such warnings are not at all normal in Canada. ITAC’s last similar warning had been issued about four years previously. As to the precision in timing of the warnings, Craig James, an official at the B.C. legislature, said that his office had been told “there may be a problem this week.” How extraordinary. There was, indeed, a problem “this week:” there was a lethal attack on the Monday (October 20) followed by a lethal attack on the Wednesday (October 22).
But the words of Craig James raise another issue: it is not merely the timing that is peculiar but also the institutions warned. With warnings going out to legislatures in Canada, how could the most important legislature at all have been left with no warning? As journalist Michael Smyth of The Province put it: “our provincial politicians [in B.C.] and legislative security staff were well-briefed by the feds here, but the RCMP in Ottawa got taken by surprise? What is wrong with this picture?”
What is more, consider the peculiarity in the October NBC warning. “Knife and gun” attacks inside Canada? Such attacks are very uncommon. Yet both on October 20 and October 22 large knives were found at the crime scene. Is this a coincidence?
Finally, we have the war-games exercise, which was found to be oddly prophetic when an attack in the province of Quebec (October 20) was followed by an attack in a second city (Ottawa, Ontario). It is true that part of the war-game scenario mentioned by Arsenault (a third incident with returnees from Syria) did not manifest itself, but there were certainly efforts, which involved RCMP lies, to tie both October suspects to Syria.
So, what are we to think of Mr. Paulson’s statement about “no advance warning?” Mr. Paulson was lying. Why? There are two main possibilities.
First, he may have been lying to disguise gross RCMP incompetence. To suggest this is to stay within the bounds of acceptable discourse, although even in this case there should be calls for Mr. Paulson’s resignation.
But how does the incompetence theory fit with the fact that the although the PCO document of October 17 explicitly called for maintaining patrols, the RCMP, after the issuing of the PCO document, actually halted a series of patrols they had been making in the vicinity of Parliament Hill? And why would the RCMP, after receiving a series of clear warnings, allow themselves to remain short-staffed on the scene to the tune of at least 29 officers? Moreover, since the PCO warning explicitly called for maintaining excellent communications, how is it that the RCMP neither received nor passed on, in a timely way, effective warnings that would have prevented the suspect’s assault on Centre Block?
The unspeakable possibility—the possibility that is outside the bounds of respectability and will not be mentioned by mainstream media and political representatives–is that Mr. Paulson denied receiving warnings of the attacks because the RCMP were complicit in the attacks.
It is not wise to pretend we know the truth about an incident when we do not. I do not pretend, in this talk or in my written report, to know with certainty whether the Royal Canadian Mounted Police was complicit in the October 22, 2014 attacks in Ottawa. But I do know that, given its history of complicity in establishing “terrorist” threats, as well as the serious anomalies and unanswered questions that stare us in the face when we investigate the October 22 events, the RCMP must be regarded as suspects.
Conclusions:
Let me end this talk by reiterating five points.

1. There is a pattern, common enough in war and found in the War on Terror: Threat, followed by Unity, followed by Reaction, which has an internal and external dimension.

Whatever the value of this pattern to human survival at various times in our history, it can leave populations open to deception and manipulation.

2. In the War on Terror deception and manipulation are exactly what we find. There is strong evidence that legislatures of the U.S. and Canada have been subjected to physical intimidation that has facilitated both the internal projects (repressive legislation) and the external projects (invasions and occupation) of the leaders of the War on Terror.

3. A strong social taboo has been constructed that has hampered awareness of this deception and manipulation. The taboo extends through the population but is especially strong in legislatures, including the Parliament of Canada.

4. This taboo ensures that our Canadian Parliament, like the U.S. Congress, is unfit to protect citizens from the deceptions and violence of the War on Terror and is even unable to protect itself.

5. Of the four cases dealt with today, I regard complicity in the physical intimidation of legislatures by state agencies as established in three cases. In the fourth case, the events of October 22, 2014 in Canada, state-sponsored intimidation had not been established, but is a possibility that must be explored through investigation and research—formal and public if possible, but otherwise by members of civil society using all their intelligence and determination."

Note the vital importance in conspiracy analysis of considering the odd actions of the gatekeepers/protectors:

1. in the face of specific warnings, the existence of which is now specifically and vehemently denied, the RCMP did nothing to beef up security at the most obvious target in the country;
2. in fact, in a pattern that occurs far too often, the RCMP just happened to be remarkably understaffed, an understaffing that occurred just before that day!;
3. the ubiquitous presence in these cases of 'drills' paralleling the actual attack, prompted no doubt by the denied warnings, from which nothing, it seems, is learned;
4. the gatekeepers whose only job was to prevent this kind of thing from happening, obviously saw the perp, running towards Parliament with a rifle, but pursued him in the most desultory way imaginable, and gave no warning whatsoever to security inside the building

We've actually set up a situation where gross incompetence/malfeasance by the gatekeepers actually benefits them as an institution!