Skip to content

Does the Quran Teach Hatred Against Christians and Jews? – Rockefeller Foundation Document Envisions Pandemic Police State – Steve Quayle: Ebola Bioweapon – CDC: Ebola Can Float Through the Air – Bengazi Whistleblower Tosh Plumlee

October 27, 2014

 Top Official Contradicts Obama; You Can Catch Ebola From Bus Sweat

“They Just Want The Money!” The IRS Can Now Seize Accounts On Suspicion Alone

Why Should the Law-abiding Care About Electronic Surveillance?

Florida Joins NJ and NY with Required Ebola Quarantines

Voting Machine Changes Votes in Cook County Election

CDC Finally Admits that Ebola Can Float through the Air … 3 Feet

Nelson Bunker Hunt, R.I.P.: The Myth of the Hunt Brothers’ “Scheme to Corner the Silver Market”

Doctor: Feds “Disappearing” Suspected Ebola Patients Across U.S.

Chechen President Says IS Boss Works for CIA

New U.S. operation flies thousands of American soldiers and civilians to Liberia to ‘fight Ebola outbreak’






2010 Rockefeller Foundation Document Envisions Pandemic Police State Scenario

  • Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

“Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified”

Mikael Thalen
October 27, 2014

A May 2010 scenario planning report produced by The Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Business Network envisions the likely creation of a technological police state in response to a deadly worldwide pandemic.

2010 Rockefeller Foundation Document Envisions Pandemic Police State Scenario lockstep

The document, entitled Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development, attempts to wargame different government responses to several potential disasters, while painting the solution as global governance. Page 18 of the document breaks down a fabricated scenario in which the United States refuses to protect its borders and restrict air travel following the outbreak of a new deadly virus.

“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain—originating from wild geese—was extremely virulent and deadly,” the scenario states. “Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults.”

Drawing eerily similar circumstances with the current Ebola outbreak, the scenario goes on to detail a botched response by the United States government as large populations throughout Africa are decimated.

“The pandemic blanketed the planet—though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge,” the document reads. “The United States’s initial policy of ‘strongly discouraging’ citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders.”

Interestingly, the scenario’s author uses the Chinese Communist government as the entity which exhibits the best response, specifically mentioning mandatory quarantines and border protection.

However, a few countries did fare better—China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post- pandemic recovery.

China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.

Necessary and questionable tactics used to stem the tide of the virus remain long after the pandemic, allowing governments to impose “authoritarian” controls under the guise of protecting the public.

“Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”

“At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty—and their privacy—to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit.”

The pandemic was also used to implement long-sought technologies, most notably biometric IDs for citizens.

In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth.

Across the developing world, however, the story was different—and much more variable. Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens’ overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed high- emitting vehicles.

While fictional, the attempt to predict and plan for major disasters by think tanks and governments alike could very well provide insight into decisions being made currently. Although certain medical protocols are needed, the likelihood for subtle power grabs are dangerous and present.

In regards to the current Ebola crisis, an executive order update by President Obama has caused concern among civil liberties advocates, especially given the President’s otherwise lackluster response.

The executive order, known as the Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases, allows President Obama to apprehend and detain any American who simply shows signs of any “respiratory illness.”

The dictate becomes even more troublesome in light of the recent admission by Missouri doctor James Lawrenzi, who exclusively told the Alex Jones Show last week that potential-Ebola patients are being “disappeared” from hospitals without notice.

“These patients are disappearing, they’re doing something with the patients and God knows where they’re going,” said the doctor.

Whether the Obama administration’s dismal response is pure ignorance or an attempt to get the public to demand authoritarian control remains to be seen.

Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development (Rockefeller Foundation and Global Business Network


Call the Suicide Prevention Hotline — Get Killed by a SWAT Team

  • Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

William Norman Grigg
Lew Rockwell Blog
October 23, 2014

They kill not because they want to, but because they think it’s right to in some cases;
Have mercy on them and someday they may Have mercy on you — the Mercy Killers…

— Theme to the imaginary TV show “The Mercy Killers,” as presented in a 1978 Saturday Night Live sketch.

A still-unidentified 35-year-old man from Roy, Utah called a suicide prevention hotline at 4:00 a.m. Tuesday morning (October 21). A SWAT team showed up and, according to Roy PD spokesman Matt Gwynn, “negotiated” with the “subject” for more than six hours.

“At some point those negotiations failed and unfortunately the SWAT team was involved in a shooting, and the subject is now deceased,” Gwynn told a reporter for the Ogden Standard-Examiner, taking refuge in the familiar, officially-prescribed impersonal language used to describe police shootings.

Eyewitness Ron Smith told the Standard-Examiner that he heard “one shot, and then a pause, and then four or five shots after that, that were very rapid.”

Although he provided no further details from the incident — not even the name of the victim — Gwynn quickly asserted the reasonableness of the lethal actions by his fellow officers.

“officers are authorized to stop a threat whenever their life is threatened, or the life of another is threatened,” recited Gwynn. “And at that point if the officer feels he is justified, he may act to stop that threat.” Note, once again, how Gwynn scrupulously avoids the use of descriptive language acknowledging that one of his comrades just killed another human being.

Police are trained and encouraged to perceive the public at large to be a “threat” to “officer safety”; one illustration of this is the fact that as Gwynn spoke to the reporter in an otherwise placid neighborhood he was wearing body armor beneath his polo shirt. In a situation involving a potentially suicidal person, the formula regurgitated by Detective Gwynn would justify pre-emptive execution of the “subject,” who is, after all, threatening to kill someone.

“We encourage those having suicidal thoughts or tendencies to contact a physician or expert that can talk them through it,” advised Gwynn. “In this particular case he attempted to do that — it’s unfortunate and sad that it failed.”

Gwynn appeared utterly insensible of how his advice would appear to anybody paying attention: Suicidally depressed people who call for help will invariably attract the attention of state functionaries endowed with the power of discretionary killing.


Ebola: Obama CDC SWAT Teams – Obama Could Reaffirm Bush Era Acceptance of Torture – Dr. Stanley Monteith: The Fluoride Deception – WMD in Iraq Were Linked to the West – Bloody History of Communism – Cat Puts on a Hat

October 20, 2014

Obama Could Reaffirm a Bush-Era Reading of a Treaty on Torture

Obama announces CDC SWAT teams to round up infected people

Is the oil price fall more than just a coincidence?

Ebola: Liberia deaths ‘far higher than reported’ as officials downplay epidemic

Top Scientist: This Version Of Ebola Looks Like ‘A Very Different Bug’

DVD Review: “Blue” Blows the Horn on Environmental Movement

Texas lawmakers to introduce Ebola travel ban legislation

Matt Drudge Tweets Dire Warning: “Self-Quarantine”

Nurses Union: Duncan Not Put In Isolation, Waste Piled Nearly Up to Ceiling


Comment: Many voices are crying out for federal action to stop all flights from Ebola struck nations and more centralized efforts by Washington to stop Ebola’s spread here in the states. We should use caution, because greater centralized power is exactly what the socialists and globalists want us to accept, thus breaking down further the balance of power established by federalism.  Our government is one of shared powers and the states and the people  actually have greater powers than Washington DC.  The Constitution enumerates certain delegated powers to the united states, and these powers are limited and defined.  As the 10th Amendment clearly states, all other powers are left for the states and the people.  It is up to the states to work together to implement a cohesive plan to stop the outbreak, instead of depending on an inefficient, overreaching federal government.  We should not be quick to give in to fear, allowing another power-grab by insiders bent on enslaving humanity.   John K Rooney






Chemical Weapons Found in Iraq Were Not Those Used to Justify Invasion

Written by 

 Chemical Weapons Found in Iraq Were Not Those Used to Justify Invasion

U.S. troops and U.S.-trained Iraqi forces uncovered about 5,000 chemical weapons in Iraq between 2004 and 2011 and soldiers were injured by these weapons in six instances. However, the weapons had not been manufactured during an active, ongoing chemical weapons program, which the Bush administration cited as justification for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Details of the discovery of these weapons were published by the New York Times on October 14, in a lengthy, 9,000-word report written by former Marine Corps officer and veteran journalist C.J. Chivers.

Despite injuries to our troops, the U.S. government withheld information about the discovery of the weapons even from troops it sent into harm’s way and from military doctors.

“‘Nothing of significance’ is what I was ordered to say,” retired Army Major Jarrod Lampier told the Times. Lampier was on site when the largest chemical weapons dump, containing 2,400 warheads, was found.

The Times report offered reasons why the news of the discovery of the weapons and the injuries they inflicted on our soldiers was withheld from the public:

Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used chemical rounds,” Lampier said. “And all of this was from the pre-1991 era.”

Others pointed to another embarrassment. In five of six incidents in which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western companies.

All the weapons found in Iraq were produced during a crash program started in the 1980s for use against Iran during the Iran-Iraq War from September 1980 to August 1988. Since the overthrow of the Shah in the 1979 Iranian revolution, and the subsequent hostage crisis that began with the occupation of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by Iranian revolutionaries on November 4, 1979 — after which 52 American diplomats and citizens were held hostage for 444 days — the United States and the revolutionary Iranian government had regarded each other as fierce adversaries.

With this history, the United States covertly aided Saddam Hussein in his war against Iran. A report in the New York Times on August 18, 2002 referenced then-current statements made by President George W. Bush and his national security advisor, Condoleezza Rice, that Iraqi use of chemical weapons against Iran was justification for “regime change” in Iraq. The article, headlined “Officers Say U.S. Aided Iraq in War Despite Use of Gas,” pointed to the blatant hypocrisy of the Bush administration’s position, given U.S. complicity in Iraq’s earlier chemical weapons program.

When the Times contacted Frank Carlucci, the Reagan administration defense secretary from 1987-89, he stated: “I did agree that Iraq should not lose the war, but I certainly had no foreknowledge of their use of chemical weapons.”

Col. Walter Lang, retired, the senior defense intelligence officer at the time of the Iraq-Iran War, told the Times he would not discuss classified information, but added that both DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) and CIA officials “were desperate to make sure that Iraq did not lose” to Iran.

“The use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern,” Land said. He added that Reagan’s aides were more concerned that Iran not break through to the Fao Peninsula and spread the Islamic revolution to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Colonel Lang said that the DIA “would have never accepted the use of chemical weapons against civilians, but the use against military objectives was seen as inevitable in the Iraqi struggle for survival.”

The chemical weapons discovered during the post-Saddam U.S. occupation of Iraq, according to what was revealed in this latest exposé, were basically surplus war materiel left over from Iraq’s war with Iran. The Times report noted:

All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.

Despite the fact there is no evidence that Saddam’s government manufactured chemical weapons after 1991, President Bush, on September 12, 2002, while attempting to build a case for the 2003 Iraq invasion, said: “Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.” (Unlike the chemical weapons found by U.S. troops, no biological weapons at all were found.)

Bush continued, “The regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons.”

Had the discovery of the chemical weapons been useful to the Bush administration when they were first uncovered, there is little doubt that their discovery would have been widely publicized by the White House to justify the 2003 invasion. Instead, their discovery was kept a secret, even when hiding their existence posed a serious threat to our troops in Iraq.  Far from justifying the invasion of Iraq, the age and obsolescence of the weapons only confirmed that the invasion had been launched under false pretenses.

In our July 6, 2008 article, “Did We Get Lied Into War?” we described the findings of a 170-page report compiled by the Senate Intelligence Committee, concluding five years of investigations. The committee focused especially on five key speeches made by administration officials concerning “the threats posed by Iraq, Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Iraqi ties to terrorist groups, and possible consequences of a US invasion of Iraq.” It selected statements from those five speeches pertaining to eight categories: nuclear weapons, biological weapons, chemical weapons, weapons of mass destruction, methods of delivery, links to terrorism, regime intent, and assessments about the postwar situation in Iraq.

We will look at what the Senate report said about chemical weapons. It first cited an excerpt from a Bush speech delivered on September 12, 2002:

United Nations’ inspections also revealed that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons.

The Senate report offered this reaction to the Bush assertion:

The committee’s conclusions initially related that statements by the administration “regarding Iraq’s possession of chemical weapons were substantiated by intelligence information.” But then it added: “Statements … regarding Iraq’s chemical weapons production capability and activities  did not reflect the intelligence community’s uncertainties  as to whether such production was ongoing.”[Italics in original.]

The committee’s “postwar findings” once more contradict prewar administration allegations, finding: “The Iraq Survey Group conducted its review of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs and found that there ‘were no caches of CW munitions.’”

But Saddam’s antique store of chemical weapons, some of which were developed with the help of Western governments to use against Iran, have not outlived their usefulness. The Times report notes:

Many chemical weapons incidents clustered around the ruins of the Muthanna State Establishment, the center of Iraqi chemical agent production in the 1980s.

Since June, the compound has been held by the Islamic State [ISIS], the world’s most radical and violent jihadist group.

It would not be surprising if our government soon announced that we must send troops to Iraq to prevent ISIS from accumulating some of those same second-hand chemical weapons that were used to justify the removal of Saddam Hussein.

Photo: AP Images 


Whistleblower: German Journalist Fed Up with CIA Control of News – Ebola Spreading in the US – Windsurfing in 62 MPH Wind – Antarctic Sea Ice at Record High – DUI Checkpoint Refusal

October 13, 2014

Good War and Bad Peace: Perpetual War and the Erosion of Liberty

FBI Chief: Citizens Should Be ‘Deeply Skeptical’ of Government

Second US Ebola victim infected despite protective suit

Hong Kong: Congressional Leaders Urge Obama to Support Freedom

‘Core secrets’ exposed: NSA used undercover agents in foreign companies

Antarctic Sea Ice at Record High, but Global-warming Doomsayers Unimpressed

Officials say ISIS, Ebola are coming across southern border

Asset seizures fuel police spending






The Pillars of American Thinking – The “Father of the Constitution” and the “Father of Free Market Capitalism” – Both Warned Against Warmongers … 200 Hundred Years Ago

Warmongers Are Anti-American

Adam Smith – the father of free market capitalism – wrote a scathing critique on warmongers in the Wealth of Nations 235 years ago:

In great empires the people who live in the capital, and in the provinces remote from the scene of action, feel, many of them, scarce any inconveniency from the war; but enjoy, at their ease, the amusement of reading in the newspapers the exploits of their own fleets and armies. To them this amusement compensates the small difference between the taxes which they pay on account of the war, and those which they had been accustomed to pay in time of peace. They are commonly dissatisfied with the return of peace, which puts an end to their amusement, and to a thousand visionary hopes of conquest and national glory from a longer continuance of the war.

Numerous economists have documented that war is horrible for the economy.

The Father of the Constitution – James Madison – wrote:

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

Many other Founding Fathers warned against warmongering, as well:

Thomas Paine is generally credited with instilling the first non-interventionist ideas into the American body politic; his work Common Sense contains many arguments in favor of avoiding alliances. These ideas introduced by Paine took such a firm foothold that the Second Continental Congress struggled against forming an alliance with France and only agreed to do so when it was apparent that the American Revolutionary War could be won in no other manner.

George Washington’s farewell address is often cited as laying the foundation for a tradition of American non-interventionism:

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

John Adams followed George Washington’s ideas about non-interventionism by avoiding a very realistic possibility of war with France.


President Thomas Jefferson extended Washington’s ideas in his March 4, 1801 inaugural address: “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” …

In 1823, President James Monroe articulated what would come to be known as the Monroe Doctrine, which some have interpreted as non-interventionist in intent: “In the wars of the European powers, in matters relating to themselves, we have never taken part, nor does it comport with our policy, so to do. It is only when our rights are invaded, or seriously menaced that we resent injuries, or make preparations for our defense.”

Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson also said that – if we do need to fight a war for defensive purposes – it should be paid for now, and not placed on the shoulders of future generations.

Postscript: While many civilians believe the myth that conservatives are pro-war, the truth is that many of the most highly-decorated military men in history – including conservatives – became opposed to war after seeing what really goes on. See this, this and this.

Indeed, I have spoken with some very high-level former military and intelligence officers. They are true patriots, who dedicated their life to protecting our country. They are also very passionate about not starting unnecessary wars, because they reduce America’s national security and cause many more problems than they could possibly solve.

Those who call themselves “conservative” – but advocate military adventurism – are not really conservative at all.


Ebola Updates – US Medical System Unprepared for Ebola – North Korea: Something Big May be Happening – Is ISIS Good for the Jews? – Kenneth Hagin Sr: How to be Led by the Spirit 3 – US Borrows $8 Trillion a Year

October 5, 2014

Former U.S. Ebola patient back in hospital; Dallas patient critical

North Korea Shock. Something Big is Happening

Russia is this close to banning Bitcoin

Army chiefs tell Government: stop Gulf states funding terrorism

Epidemiologist: “President Obola” Allowing Spread of “Killer Illness”

Stepdaughter Who Had Direct Contact with Ebola Patient: ‘No One Told Me Nothing’

The U.S. Government Is Borrowing About 8 Trillion Dollars A Year

Report: Liberians Flood Airport Attempting to Flee Ebola-Struck Country

During An Ebola Pandemic All Of Your Rights Would Essentially Be Meaningless

California Governor Signs New Gun Restraining Order Law


View image on Twitter

An image shot by a WFAA News chopper shows unprotected workers cleaning up the sidewalk outside an apartment block in Dallas where Ebola victim Thomas Eric Duncan vomited before he was bundled into an ambulance.





The Shocking Truth: The U.S. Medical System Is Woefully Unprepared for Ebola

We Need to Stop Pretending We’re Prepared … and Actually Get Prepared

Government spokesmen and mainstream talking heads keep saying that Ebola is no threat to the U.S., because our medical system is thoroughly prepared.

However, Reuters notes that American nurses say they are not prepared for Ebola:

Nurses, the frontline care providers in U.S. hospitals, say they are untrained and unprepared to handle patients arriving in their hospital emergency departments infected with Ebola.


A survey by National Nurses United of some 400 nurses in more than 200 hospitals in 25 states found that more than half (60 percent) said their hospital is not prepared to handle patients with Ebola, and more than 80 percent said their hospital has not communicated to them any policy regarding potential admission of patients infected by Ebola.

Another 30 percent said their hospital has insufficient supplies of eye protection and fluid-resistant gowns.

CBS News reports:

U.S. hospitals and health care workers …  say the staff at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas were unprepared to handle the patient — and that this is likely the case at hospitals throughout the country.

Bonnie Castillo, director of the Registered Nurses Response Network, part of the nurses union National Nurses United, said a majority of union members surveyed say their employers haven’t offered appropriate training to deal with an Ebola outbreak.


85 percent said they were not provided any type of formal education to prepare for Ebola patients.

Betsy McCaughey, Ph.D. – former Lt. Governor of New York – writes at Fox News:

Most hospitals in the U.S. lack the rigor and discipline to control Ebola. That’s why common infectious diseases such as MRSA and C. diff are racing through these hospitals, killing an estimated 75,000 patients every year. Ebola is even deadlier. Yet the CDC has done little to equip hospitals, other than send around memos.


  • As Dr. Sanjay Gupta notes, there have been severe lapses in safety at the Centers for Disease Control and U.S. hospitals in treating infectious diseases

“CDC continues to work with reduced financial resources, which similarly affects state, local, and insular public health departments. … These losses make it difficult for state and local health departments to continue to expand their preparedness capabilities, instead forcing them to focus on maintaining their current capabilities.”

  • The CDC report also notes that state and local public health departments on the front lines of any health emergency have shed 45,700 jobs since the 2008 financial crisis (at the same time, hospital staffs are being reduced nationwide.)
  • In 2010, the Obama administration scrapped CDC’s quarantine regulations aimed at Ebola
  • The Department of Homeland Security inspector general issued a scathing report in September warning the department was woefully unprepared for a pandemic

In addition:

  • Two national experts on the spread of infectious disease say that Ebola can spread through aerosols – so healthcare workers should wear protective respirators – but government officials refuse to even consider the possibility.  In any event, the virus is mutating (and see this), so an overly cavalier attitude is not productive

It’s time to stop pretending we’re prepared. It’s long past time we actually became prepared.



School Security Expert Halbig: Sandy Hook Was a Hoax – FBI: No One Killed at Sandy Hook – US Air Strike in Syria Kills Civilians Including 6 Children – CIA Admits to Destroying Gary Webb’s Career – Crimes of Eric Holder

September 29, 2014

U.S. Considering No-fly, Buffer Zones for Syria

‘I’m Going to Shoot Him in the Penis,’ Says Cop Before Executing Camper

Sandy Hook Investigator: Connecticut PD Had FBI Falsify Crime Statistics

Presence of Armed Citizen Prevented More Death Says Oklahoma County Sheriff

New Evidence of How Unemployment Wrecks Families

The Number One Thing That Women Are Looking For In A Husband

James A. Traficant Jr., colorful Ohio congressman expelled by House, dies at 73




(Funny video – language – caption warning)



The Crimes of Eric Holder

  • Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Holder resigns after years of lawlessness

Mikael Thalen
September 25, 2014

The announcement of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s resignation today has fueled speculation as to why the controversial figure has chosen to step down.

Holder, who was recently found to be the least popular politician in the United States according to a Hart Research poll, is arguably the most criminal government official within the Obama Administration. Among his many crimes, a select few have remained at center stage.

Fast and Furious

Between 2006 and 2011, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), under the direct command of the Justice Department, secretly pushed southern gun dealers to sell weapons to suspected drug cartel traffickers in order to allegedly track the weapons into Mexico.

Despite the administration’s attempt to paint the countless deaths associated as unintended consequences after the program went public, documents obtained by CBS News revealed that the ATF had planned to use the deaths to push a gun control agenda.

Eric Holder, who has publicly stated his desire to “brainwash” children to think negatively about gun ownership, has actively worked to keep Fast and Furious documents from becoming public. Unfortunately for Holder, a judge has denied his request to delay the release of a list of Operation Fast and Furious documents currently being protected under the President’s assertion of executive privilege.

Too Big to Jail Banks

After British-based bank HSBC was found to be laundering hundreds of millions of dollars for Mexico’s Sinaloa drug cartel and groups linked to Al Qaeda, Eric Holder refused to prosecute the bank’s executives.

“They violated every g*ddamn law in the book,” said attorney and former Senate investigator Jack Blum at the time. “They took every imaginable form of illegal and illicit business.”

Despite the bank’s involvement in the largest terrorism and drug money laundering case in US history, Holder refused to prosecute any HSBC Executive. According to Holder, the economy would have suffered if any of the bank’s leaders faced punishment. Similarly, Holder outright refused to prosecute any Wall Street CEOs for their role in the country’s financial crisis.

Financial whistleblower Everett Stern spoke with Infowars reporter David Knight last year to discuss how the bank has continued to launder money for nefarious organizations due to Holder’s refusal.

Attack on Whistleblowers & the Press

The Obama administration has charged more journalists and legitimate government whistleblowers with espionage than all other presidents combined since the passage of the 1917 Espionage Act.

Whether it be targeting CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou for exposing the agency’s torture program, seizing Associated Press phone records, prosecuting Chelsea Manning or going after journalists James Risen and James Rosen, Holder has undoubtedly overseen the largest attack on the First Amendment in modern history.

“The Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news,” the New York Times noted.

Amazingly, Holder has attempted to deflect criticism by claiming that he has been the victim of “unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly and divisive adversity,” due to his skin color and not his outrageously illegal tenure.

“Forget about me [specifically]. Look at the way the attorney general of the United States was treated yesterday by a House committee,” Holder said during a recent speech to the National Action Network. “What attorney general has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment? What president has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?”

Ironically, Holder’s career will undoubtedly be remembered for being the most unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly and divisive.

inistration has charged more journalists and legitimate government whistleblowers with espionage than all other presidents combined since the passage of the 1917 Espionage Act.

Whether it be targeting CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou for exposing the agency’s torture program, seizing Associated Press phone records, prosecuting Chelsea Manning or going after journalists James Risen and James Rosen, Holder has undoubtedly overseen the largest attack on the First Amendment in modern history.

“The Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news,” the New York Times noted.


Fight to Declassify 28 Pages of the 9-11 Commission Report – Obama’s “Moderate Rebels” Sign Deal with ISIS – Kenneth Hagin Sr: How to be Led by the Spirit – Eye-Popping Cost of Federal Regulations

September 22, 2014

Mysterious Georgia Guidestones Get Strange ’2014′ Update

Suspicions Run Deep in Iraq That C.I.A. and the Islamic State Are United

Obama’s “Moderate Rebels” Sign Deal With ISIS, Report Says

‘Yes’ Supporters Claim Videos Show Scottish Referendum Was Rigged

Obama administration ‘blocking’ information from the press – AP

Senate Votes to Arm Syrian Rebels; Paul Rips War Enablers

Quarantine and Martial Law Operational Details: “Those Afflicted… Will Be Incarcerated AndIsolated Against Their Will”

Homeschoolers Outnumber Private-school Students in North Carolina

Exponential: Ebola Cases Now Double Every 3 Weeks; CDC Warns As Many As Half A Million May Be Infected Soon






#Declassify: Fight to Reveal the 28 Censored Pages of the 9/11 Commission Report

  • Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Censored information implicates Saudi Arabia in 9/11 attacks

Paul Joseph Watson
September 18, 2014

#Declassify: Fight to Reveal the 28 Censored Pages of the 9/11 Commission Report 180914sept11

Even as Americans marked the 13th anniversary of 9/11 last week, the vast majority remain completely oblivious to the fact that the full story behind the attacks has not been told, with 28 pages of the 9/11 Commission report still remaining classified.

In an effort to lift the lid on the information contained in the censored pages, which almost certainly implicates Saudi Arabia in the September 11 attacks, Congressman Ron Paul has called on Americans to get behind a campaign to draw attention to U.S. Rep. Walter Jones’ House Resolution 428, which demands that the President order the 28 pages declassified in full.

Paul is urging supporters to upload videos to YouTube explaining why the 28 pages should be declassified, in addition to launching the campaign on Twitter under the hashtag #Declassify. Infowars is also throwing its support behind this cause under the hashtag #releasethe28pages.

In an interview with Ron Paul, Congressman Jones gave an insight into the kind of secrecy that surrounds the 28 pages and the security precautions that are taken when lawmakers, who are required to swear on oath not to release details, request to see the information.

“You have to go down into a room that is guarded by uniformed officers, and then also you have an FBI person to sit there in the room,” said Jones. “You can’t make any notes. The Bush people do not want it released. It’s not a national security issue. But it would be embarrassing to the previous administration if this information is opened for the public…. There will be no hope for America’s future if the American people don’t know the truth about a tragedy such as 9/11.”

Representative Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), who is supporting Jones’ resolution, underscored the sensitivity of the information contained in the 28 pages when he stated, “These pages contain information that is vital to a full understanding of the events and circumstances surrounding this tragedy. The families of the victims and the American people deserve better; they deserve answers, they deserve a full accounting, and that has not happened yet.”

Congressman Massie of Kentucky went further, describing the 28 pages as “disturbing,” while noting how he “had to stop every two or three pages and rearrange my perception of history” while reading the documents.

Former Senator and Chairman of the Senate intelligence Committee Bob Graham (D-Fla.) indicated that the pages suggest Saudi Arabia was complicit in the 9/11 attacks when he told the Huffington Post, “There are thousands of Americans who are victims of 9/11 who have been trying to secure justice through our federal court system and who have been largely blocked by our federal government through denying them access to information that would be necessary to successfully pursue their litigation and raising sovereign immunity on behalf of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.”

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden may have also referred to the 28 pages during an interview with NBC News back in May when he spoke about information which confirms the CIA knew about the 9/11 plot beforehand but failed to take action.

“You know this is a key question that the 9/11 commission considered, and what they found in the postmortem when they looked at all the classified intelligence from all the different intelligence agencies, they found that we had all of the information we needed as an intelligence community, as a classified sector, as the national defense of the United States, to detect this plot,” Snowden said.

“We actually had records of the phone calls from the United States and out. The CIA knew who these guys were. The problem was not that we weren’t collecting information, it wasn’t that we didn’t have enough dots, it wasn’t that we didn’t have a haystack, it was that we did not understand the haystack that we had.”

During a recent appearance on the Alex Jones Show, Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer, who is working with Reps. Jones and Lynch to release the censored pages, confirmed that the classification of the documents is being maintained by the Obama White House because the information is damaging to previous administrations.

“It has to do with information which is not convenient to the White House, the Clinton White House or the Bush White House, and it has to do with an ally which essentially looked the other way and allowed a lot of support for the terrorists who conducted the attack,” said Shaffer, confirming that Saudi Arabia is the country implicated in the documents.

Congressman Jones’ resolution is currently being studied by the House Committee on Intelligence. Jones and his co-sponsors have called on the Senate to introduce a similar resolution.

Please support the effort to get justice for the victims of 9/11 and uncover the truth about the 28 pages and Saudi Arabia’s complicity in the 9/11 attacks by tweeting this article out under the hashtags #Declassify and #releasethe28pages.

Facebook @
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @


Follow the Money: War Hawks and the Military Industrial Complex – Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed Bill Returns to Congress – Snorkeling with Whales – Geoengineering: Aircraft Spraying – Ed Griffin: New World Order Conspiracy

September 15, 2014

House Liberty Caucus Republicans Stand Strong Against Third Iraq War

Extent of Antarctic sea ice reaches record levels, scientists say

Senators: Curbing NSA could help ISIS

Man Arrested For Filming Militarized Police Raid

‘The White House is the headquarters of ISIL’: Iran Commander

Ron Paul’s ‘Audit the Fed’ bill returns to Congress

ISIS May Not be as Powerful as Feared, Says Canadian Journalist

1.8 Million Protest in Spain Demanding Separation Like Scotland

Navy Illegally Hacking ‘All Civilian Computers’ in Several States





Follow the Money: War Hawks and the Military Industrial Complex

Written by 

“Follow the money.” This was the advice given by an informant on how to discover who was behind the Watergate break-in, as portrayed in the 1976 movie All the President’s Men.

The suggestion is still sound, and following the financial connection between pro-war pundits and defense contractors reveals relationships between the two that have borne deadly offspring.

From President Obama’s promise to “degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL,” to the ubiquitous appearance of former generals on cable news shows, all calling for a U.S. military response to the alleged threat, the war drums are constantly sounding in the ears of Americans.

One example of the promotion from former brass to send in the armed forces to combat ISIL came from retired Marine General Anthony Zinni, who reportedly recommended putting “as many as 100,000 boots on the ground in Iraq” and using “special operations forces or CIA operatives on the ground there to get detailed intelligence.”

A similar suggestion, highlighted by an article in The Nation, is made by retired General Jack Keane who reportedly recommends “‘offensive’ air strikes and the deployment of more military advisers to the region.”

Generals put out to pasture longing for the glory days of battle is not newsworthy, though. What is worth noting, however, is the ties these hawks have to the manufacturers of military materiel.

Consider as evidence of this unholy alliance the case of Jack Keane. The Nation, in an article posted September 12 entitled “Who’s Paying the Pro-War Pundits” by Lee Fang, provides the following synopsis of his practically unreported alliance between war promoter and war goods producer:

Keane has appeared on Fox News at least nine times over the last two months to promote the idea that the best way to stop ISIS is through military action — in particular, through air strikes deep into ISIS-held territory. In one of the only congressional hearings about ISIS over the summer, Keane was there to testify and call for more American military engagement. On Wednesday evening, Keane declared President Obama’s speech on defeating ISIS insufficient, arguing that a bolder strategy is necessary. “I truly believe we need to put special operation forces in there,” he told host Megyn Kelly.

Left unsaid during his media appearances (and left unmentioned on his congressional witness disclosure form) are Keane’s other gigs: as special adviser to Academi, the contractor formerly known as Blackwater; as a board member to tank and aircraft manufacturer General Dynamics; a “venture partner” to SCP Partners, an investment firm that partners with defense contractors, including XVionics, an “operations management decision support system” company used in Air Force drone training; and as president of his own consulting firm, GSI LLC.

To portray Keane as simply a think tank leader and a former military official, as the media have done, obscures a fairly lucrative career in the contracting world. For the General Dynamics role alone, Keane has been paid a six-figure salary in cash and stock options since he joined the firm in 2004; last year, General Dynamics paid him $258,006.

With this in mind, it would appear that expansion of the “War on Terror” is  less a foreign policy trajectory and more of a marketing tactic of the immense (and every expanding) military-industrial-intelligence complex and the corps of congressmen that act as salesman staking out new territories for the deadly inventory manufactured by the defense contractors. This expansion of the market makes money, much of which finds its way into the campaign coffers of dozens of influential lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

In fairness to Keane, he’s not the only war-promoting pundit to be lining his pockets with Pentagon contractor cash. The aforementioned Anthony Zinni is in on the deal, as well. Again, as reported by The Nation:

Retired General Anthony Zinni, perhaps the loudest advocate of a large deployment of American soliders into the region to fight ISIS, is a board member to BAE Systems’ US subsidiary, and also works for several military-focused private equity firms.

There are other examples, but the question that is relevant given the bloody result of the recommendations made by these retired generals (thousands of dead American military men and women have been offered on the altar of Pax Americana) is whether the media should feel compelled to disclose the corporate connection between those chosen by producers to opine on the need for combat action against ISIL or any other supposed threat.

Remarkably, one of the country’s most prominent news outlets, the New York Times, relies on information provided by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), an organization with a familiar name as chairman of the Board: Jack Keane.

Consider The Nation’s concerns with this incestuous incitement to send American servicemen to die in another unconstitutional, undeclared, unnecessary Middle Eastern morass:

The Times has not mentioned Keane’s potential conflict of interest or that ISW may have a vested stake in its policy positions. The Public Accountability Initiative notes that ISW’s corporate sponsors represent “a who’s who of the defense industry and includes Raytheon, SAIC, Palantir, General Dynamics, CACI, Northrop Grumman, DynCorp, and L-3 Communication.” As the business network CNBC reported this week, Raytheon in particular has much to gain from escalation in Iraq, as the company produces many of the missiles and radar equipment used in airstrikes.

In addition to providing reports and quotes for the media, ISW leaders have demanded a greater reaction to ISIS from the Obama administration. In The Weekly Standard this week, ISW president Kim Kagan wrote that President Obama’s call for a limited engagement against ISIS “has no chance of success.”

If we are to retain the freedoms that remain, Americans must read and heed the words of our first president and “father of his country,” George Washington, himself a retired general at the time this statement was made.

First, to avoid the plague of perpetual war, Washington warned against “foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues.”

Next, Washington declared that a lasting peace comes only from avoiding meddling in foreign armed conflicts and from promoting virtue in the citizenry. A peaceful country, he said, can be maintained only by peaceful people. Washington explained:

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it — It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

Finally, Washington recommends that we avoid at all costs becoming the victim of “tools and dupes” who would destroy liberty:

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it.

Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.


Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American. Follow him on Twitter @TNAJoeWolverton.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 28 other followers