Jun 212017
 

Hillary Clinton requested that FBI Dir. Mueller deliver highly enriched uranium to the Russians in 2009 in secret ‘plane-side tarmac meeting’

Hillary Clinton Requested FBI Director Mueller Deliver Highly Enriched Uranium To Russians In 2009

New Clinton-Mueller Russian uranium ties surface in a new Wikileaks release. Past dealings with the Russians were also mentioned in the cable.

As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated the transfer a highly enriched uranium (HEU) previously confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices,” a newly leaked classified cable shows.

So-called “background” information was provided in the cable which gave vague details on a 2006 nuclear smuggling sting operation in which the U.S. government took possession of some HEU previously owned by the Russians.

The secret “action request,” dated Aug. 17, 2009, was sent out by Secretary of State Clinton and was addressed to the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilisi, the Russian Embassy, and Ambassador John Beyrle. It proposed that FBI Director Robert Mueller be the one that personally conduct the transfer a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in the early fall of 2009.

The FBI Director was originally scheduled to ‘return’ a sample from the DOE stockpile to the Russians in April but the trip was postponed until September 21.

Paragraph number 6 of the leaked cable confirms Dir. Mueller’s Sept. 21 flight to Moscow.

FBI Director Mueller Deliver Highly Enriched Uranium To Russians

“(S/Rel Russia) Action request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives to Moscow on September 21. Post is requested to convey information in paragraph 5 with regard to chain of custody, and to request details on Russian Federation’s plan for picking up the material. Embassy is also requested to reconfirm the April 16 understanding from the FSB verbally that we will have no problem with the Russian Ministry of Aviation concerning Mueller’s September 21 flight clearance.”

But possible even more shocking is the fact that the State Department wanted the transfer of the HEU to take place on an “airport tarmac” which is rather reminisce of the infamous Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton meeting which occurred on a Phoenix, Arizona, tarmac back in June of 2016.

Past dealings with the Russians were also mentioned in the cable, signifying that previous deals have taken place.

 
 
via

Jun 172017
 

Huge new development: Lawyers in lawsuit against DNC file for protection and cite the death of Seth Rich, Shawn Lucas, and Federal Prosecutor Beranton Whisenant as the reason!

Lawyers In Lawsuit Against DNC File For Protection

This is no longer a conspiracy theory. These are serious lawyers that are fearful of their lives. The DNC is not going to get away with murdering people any more.

Documents on the DNC Class Action Lawsuit from the JamPAC website:

Previously:
3 Dead Attorneys In 2 Weeks In Debbie Wasserman Shultz’s Florida District

 
 

Jun 132017
 
3 Dead Attorneys In 2 Weeks In Debbie Wasserman Shultz's Florida District

How is this woman still holding public offices? Or giving speeches? Or going on TV? She was literally caught red handed rigging a primary for her preferred candidate. Wouldn’t a normal person be hiding in shame?

At around 4:00 he talks about the 3rd dead lawyer, which is the federal prosecutor who was working on the DNC fraud case. He also said that prosecutor was working on passports and “all kinds of weird things like that..that seem semi-linked to the DNC fraud”. I wonder if the “weird things” could be “green cards” (as in ‘look at the cards’) and could tie in with this?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/11/us/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-clinton-foundation-gilbert-chagoury.html

Interesting tidbit from this article about another Clinton contact:

“A cache of emails that the State Department released to the activist group Citizens United, for example, showed an invitation to Mr. Clinton to speak at a United States-China energy summit meeting in 2012 organized by Luca International Group, which was later fined $68 million by the Securities and Exchange Commission for defrauding investors.”

So who runs Luca International Group? Ms. Bing Qing Yang

“Ms. Yang is an entrepreneur with tremendous experience in the oil and gas exploration and production industry in USA. In 2005, Ms Yang founded Luca International Group LLC, focus on the oil and gas development in the Gulf Mexico Region. Ms. Yang is specializing project management, property acquisitions, and strategic planning in the upstream of oil industry. In addition, she has successfully started an EB5 regional center with the potential of families allowing them to acquire their green cards.” ( could this be the “card” connection?)

What charges are against her?

“As alleged in our complaint, Yang falsely claimed that Luca International was a profitable oil and gas drilling operation when it was really a Ponzi-like scheme preying on Chinese-Americans and EB-5 investors who lost millions of dollars while Yang lined her pockets,” said Jina L. Choi, Director of the SEC’s San Francisco Regional Office. https://www.sec.gov/news/pressrelease/2015-141.html

What are EB 5 investors?

The Immigrant Investor Program, also known as “EB-5,” was created by Congress in 1990 to stimulate the U.S. economy through job creation and capital investment by immigrant investors by creating a new commercial enterprise or investing in a troubled business. There are 10,000 EB-5 immigrant visas available annually.

https://www.uscis.gov/archive/blog/2010/11/what-is-eb-5-program_30

 
 

Jun 082017
 

Fired FBI Director James Comey testifies Thursday in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

James Comey Testifies About Fake Russian Interference

These are the questions he should be asked:

Where are James Comey’s notes/tapes on the Hillary Clinton interview? Why did he give her FREE PASS? Why did Loretta Lynch meet Bill Clinton on tarmac? Why was Hillary Clinton’s staff given immunity? Why was data destroyed AFTER ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA – by Bleach bit AND hammers? What crimes were committed via Wieners laptop?

His testimony is scheduled for 10 AM Eastern Time and will be carried via Live Stream below
.

 
 

A Look At The Clinton Body Count

 Infographics, Political  Comments Off on A Look At The Clinton Body Count
May 172017
 

In light of the Seth Rich “Coincidence”, Here is an info-graphic and PDF to refresh people’s memories.

A Look At The Clinton Body Count

Click to enlarge

THE CLINTON BODY COUNT

 

Hillary Clinton Gave The Russians 20 Percent Of The U.S.’ Uranium Supply

 Political  Comments Off on Hillary Clinton Gave The Russians 20 Percent Of The U.S.’ Uranium Supply
May 162017
 

Hillary Clinton approved the transfer of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Russia and nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary Clinton Gave The Russians 20 Percent Of The U.S.’ Uranium Supply

While Hillary Clinton’s State Department was one of eight agencies to review and sign off on the transfer of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Russia — then-Secretary of State Clinton herself was the only agency head whose family foundation received $145 million in donations from multiple people connected to the uranium deal, as reported by the New York Times.

The reason that the Mainstream Media and the Washington Elite continue the false narrative of Trump colluding with the Russians is to distract from the Clinton’s dealings with the Russians, Bill’s speaking fees and Hillary’s uranium deal. That is the real Russian scandal and has been from the beginning.

Donations to the Clinton Foundation, and a Russian Uranium Takeover

Uranium investors’ efforts to buy mining assets in Kazakhstan and the United States led to a takeover bid by a Russian state-owned energy company. The investors gave millions to the Clinton Foundation over the same period, while Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s office was involved with approving the Russian bid.

Uranium

investors

September 2005

Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining financier, wins a major uranium deal in Kazakhstan for his company, UrAsia, days after visiting the country with former President Bill Clinton.

2006

Uranium

One

Mr. Giustra donates $31.3 million to the Clinton Foundation.

FebRuary 2007

UrAsia merges with a South African mining company and assumes the name Uranium One. In the next two months, the company expands into the United States.

June 2008

Negotations begin for an investment in Uranium One by the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom.

Rosatom

2008-2010

Uranium One and former UrAsia investors make $8.65 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One investors stand to profit on a Rosatom deal.

June 2009

Rosatom subsidiary ARMZ takes a 17 percent ownership stake in Uranium One.

17%

Stake

2010-2011

Investors give millions more in donations to the Clinton Foundation.

June 2010

Rosatom seeks majority ownership of Uranium One, pending approval by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, of which the State Department is a member.

 

Rosatom says it does not plan to increase its stake in Uranium One or to take the company private.

June 29, 2010

Bill Clinton is paid $500,000 for a speech in Moscow by a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that assigned a buy rating to Uranium One stock.

October 2010

Rosatom’s majority ownership approved by Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.

51%

Stake

January 2013

Rosatom takes full control of Uranium One and takes it private.

100%

Stake

Rosatom

Real News as reported by the New York Times
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal:
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal - The New York Times

 
 

Bangladesh Prime Minister Says Hillary Clinton Pressured Her To Help Clinton Foundation Donor

 Political  Comments Off on Bangladesh Prime Minister Says Hillary Clinton Pressured Her To Help Clinton Foundation Donor
May 142017
 

Another Clinton Foundation pay-to-play scheme has been revealed by a foreign government.

Bangladesh Prime Minister Says Hillary Clinton Pressured Her To Help Clinton Foundation Donor

While secretary of state, Hillary Clinton made a personal call to pressure Bangladesh’s prime minister to aid a donor to her husband’s charitable foundation despite federal ethics laws that require government officials to recuse themselves from matters that could impact their spouse’s business.

The Office of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina confirmed to Circa that Mrs. Clinton called her office in March 2011 to demand that Dr. Muhammed Yunus, a 2006 Nobel Peace prize winner, be restored to his role as chairman of the country’s most famous microcredit bank, Grameen Bank. The bank’s nonprofit Grameen America, which Yunus chairs, has given between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Global Initiative. Grameen Research, which is chaired by Yunus, has donated between $25,000 and $50,000, according to the Clinton Foundation website.

“Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telephoned Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in March 2011 insisting her not to remove Dr. Muhammad Yunus from the post of Managing Director of Grameen Bank,” Deputy Press Secretary Md Nazrul Islam told Circa in an email.

Islam said the prime minister informed Mrs. Clinton that according to Grameen Bank rules and regulations, nobody can hold the position of the Managing Director of Grameen Bank after the age of 60. He was 70 at the time of his removal and had wrangled for months to no avail with the prime minister over his removal.

According to the Bangladesh government, Grameen Bank is part of a statutory body of the government and therefore is subject to the banking laws, saying they told Clinton “Dr. Yunus drew salaries and allowances illegally for 10 years.”

A commission set up by the Bangladesh government also began investigating Grameen Bank in 2012 for financial mismanagement.

Yunus did not return calls seeking comment. But he has long denied any wrongdoing and suggested his ouster was the result of internal politics — he considered creating a rival political party in 2007 but ended up not doing so.

In a 2013 interview, Yunus said he feared his ouster would put the bank he founded to help millions of impoverished people with microcredit — small loans that are often unsecured by assets but have higher interest rates — under too much government control and alter its mission.

“It will be a disaster,” he said at the time. “Everybody in Bangladesh knows that if any business is controlled by the government, it goes down. Now why do they want to do that for the bank?

“Attack me as a person if you don’t like me, but what wrong has the bank done? The bank is owned by the poor women, it is financed with their deposits,” he added. “The bank should be under the control of those women. That’s the way I had always wanted to keep it.”

Mrs. Clinton’s newly disclosed call to reinstate Dr. Yunus marks one of the most direct involvements in an official government matter that impacted one of her husband’s donors. It may trigger new calls for a criminal investigation into the foundation’s activities but “it’s not likely that anything would come of it,” said Richard Painter, former Chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush.

“People in public life shouldn’t be raising money from anybody, anywhere, or for anything,” Painter said. “But until we fix the campaign finance system this is the way it’s going to be.”

Painter, who supported Clinton during her campaign for president, said that there is little if any evidence that she crossed any legal lines regarding the Clinton Foundation. He said favoritism to somebody giving money to campaign is often and frequent in Washington D.C. politics and “if that were the case we’d be investigating the entire U.S. Congress.”

“This shows the Clinton’s insensitivity to the public’s anger and lack of judgement when they expanded the fundraising beyond politics,” said Painter, who said people in public office should not be raising money.

But opponents of Mrs. Clinton, including President Trump before the election, have made calls for a criminal investigation into the foundation and whether there was a pay-for-play, in which they donors allegedly received favors from the State Department during her tenure from 2009-2013.

The Associated Press reported in August, that at least 85 of 154 “people from private interests who met or had phone conversations with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity” or pledged to donate to one of her international programs.

While Mrs. Clinton was at the State Department she also voted to approve 20 percent sale of U.S. uranium production capacity to the Russian Atomic Energy Agency. The company donated $2.5 million to the Clinton Foundation while the deal was ongoing and before the deal was finalized President Bill Clinton was invited to Moscow and given $500,000 for a speech.

And when it came to Yunus, declassified cables show that Mr. Yunus sought to use Mrs. Clinton’s power as secretary of state to pressure the Bangladesh government.

In 2009, Dr. Yunus sent a personal email to then Secretary of State Clinton’s office asking for intervention into the Bangladesh bank and stated his concerns, according to a declassified WikiLeaks cable.

Those declassified cables show the U.S. ambassador also raised the issue with government officials prior to Mrs. Clinton’s call and that Mrs. Clinton asked State officials to alert her husband to the problems Yunus was having with Bangladesh.

“Please see if the issues of Grameen Bank can be raised in a friendly way,” the email from Yunus to then Clinton advisor Melanne Verveer stated. “I sought an appointment with the Prime Minister to brief her on our problems, at the advice of the U.S. Ambassador in Dhaka.”

Yunus received the Medal of Freedom in 2009, from President Obama, for his work in aiding the 150 million poor families receive financing and business loans through his microfinance program at the bank.

“Almost every important person in Bangladesh congratulated me for receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom,” he states in the cable. “But the Prime Minister and her party said not a word about it, so you can see the depth of the problem,“ Yunus wrote in the cable to Verveer, who now is the executive director of the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security at Georgetown University. “I thought I should keep you briefed and let you figure out what to be done. Thanks for your help,” Yunus wrote to Verveer in 2009. Verveer could not be reached for comment.

Sajeeb Wazed, the son of Prime Minister Hasina, and a permanent U.S. resident, says that between 2010 and 2012, he was repeatedly pressured to ask his mother to end the investigation into Mr. Yunus, and threatened with an audit or other action if he did not comply.

WATCH | In an interview with Circa News, Wazed claims that Clinton State Department employees pressured him to talk with his mother, the prime minister, and get her to end the investigation into Yunus. He has no documentation to back up this claim.

“At two instances during those conversations they brought up the fact that, ‘look, there could be many actions taken against your country, your mother, your family, who knows, you could get audited by the IRS, since you live in the U.S.,” said Wazed, who has been making the allegations for over five years.

 
 
via

Potential Conflicts In Top FBI Official’s Role In Russia Collusion Probe

 Political  Comments Off on Potential Conflicts In Top FBI Official’s Role In Russia Collusion Probe
May 132017
 

Is this why James Comey was really fired?

Potential Conflicts In Top FBI Official’s Role In Russia Collusion Probe

This PDF from Senator Grassley’s website is a must read but the last 4 pages are GOLD. If anyone questions you on the timing of Comey’s firing send them this.

McCabe is NEXT!

An additional bombshell here – as of Match 28 2017 the Clinton Foundation is still under investigation!

A snippet:

Mr. McCabe is already under investigation by the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General for failing to recuse himself from the Clinton investigation due to his meeting with McAuliffe. After that meeting, McAuliffe-aligned political groups donated about $700,000 to Mr. McCabe’s wife, Dr. McCabe, for her campaign to become a Democrat state Senator in Virginia.

This is alarming. McCabe gets away with this without any questions from the media regarding ethics.

You won’t find anything that is informative in the Mainstream Media. That’s a given at this point. If it’s being trumpeted in the Mainstream Media, you can automatically assume one of two things.

  1. It’s a bold faced lie for some agenda
  2. Whatever is being touted has been cherry picked from a barrel of other related facts and spun to benefit the elite somehow.

If the Mainstream Media is not talking about any given subject, and you see a lot of rumblings about it online, you can almost guarantee it’s probably true and/or important… It’s a sad state of affairs, not that this should be a shock to anyone in the know.

Archived link.
2017-05-02 CEG to DOJ (McCabe Continuing Conflicts)

 
 
h/t reddit

China Colluded With The Clintons To Interfere In The 1996 Election

 Political  Comments Off on China Colluded With The Clintons To Interfere In The 1996 Election
May 122017
 

No one cared when China colluded with the Clintons to interfere in the ’96 Election; “Back in 1996, China helped then-President Bill Clinton get re-elected by funneling money to the Clinton campaign”

China Colluded With The Clintons To Interfere In The 1996 Election

The Mainstream Media has devoted exhaustive coverage over the allegation that Russia may have interfered with the 2016 election, as most recently seen in their massive reporting of the James Comey hearings. But there was a time when they didn’t care when a foreign country tried to buy a U.S. election (Hint: It helped a Democrat).

Back in 1996, China helped then-President Bill Clinton get re-elected by funneling money to the Clinton campaign. During Clinton’s re-election campaign against Republican Bob Dole, the Chinese Red Army (via fundraiser Johnny Chung) donated $300,000 to the Clinton campaign. After Clinton won, his administration quietly approved the export of key technology that aided China’s ballistic missile program.

Despite scoops by the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, Washington Post, The Washington Times that detailed connections between Chinese contributions and espionage efforts, as well as exhaustive Congressional hearings the Big Three networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) all but buried the Clinton-Chinese fundraising scandal.  

And even when they did cover the scandal, anchors and reporters were dismissive. The late ABC World News Tonight anchor Peter Jennings, on his April 10, 1997 show, thought the investigation into the scandal wasn’t worth the effort: “When we come back, two investigations of fundraising abuse, two of them on Capitol Hill. Is it a waste of time and money?”

When the late-Senator Fred Thompson’s Governmental Affairs Committee took up the matter in the summer of 1997, ABC correspondent Linda Douglass was quick to claim there was nothing to the investigation: “Senator [Fred] Thompson is clearly tired of taking a beating from the Democrats, who every single day point out the fact that he’s failed to prove there is any Chinese plot in connection with the Democratic presidential campaign.”

On June 17, 1997 then Today co-anchor Katie Couric absurdly asked The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward “Are members of the media, do you think, Bob, too scandal-obsessed, looking for something at every corner?”

And while today the liberal media is playing up the sinister KGB past of Vladimir Putin, back then they were offended by any labeling of China as communist or “red.” On the April 4, 1997 CBS Evening News, reporter Phil Jones huffed: “Republicans call this money ‘a direct slap at those brave young Americans who spilled their blood defending freedom.’ China is referred to as ‘Red China.’ Why not just call it ‘China’? Why ‘Red China’?”

The following are some of the major discoveries from that era and how they were or were not covered: 

China’s Army Funds the Democrats.

On April 4, 1999 the Asian fundraising scandal culminated in a Los Angeles Times report: Johnny Chung told Justice Dept. investigators that the chief of Chinese military intelligence gave him $300,000 to donate to the Clinton campaign. None of the broadcast networks touched this bombshell until Chung appeared before Congress on May 11, but even then the ABC and NBC morning shows and the CBS Evening News ignored him.

China Acquires U.S. Missile Technology.

Beginning in April 1998, The New York Times reported the Chinese government had been given technological expertise that “significantly advanced Beijing’s ballistic missile program,” and the head of one of the offending defense contractors was the largest individual contributor to Democrats in 1996. The number of evening news reports on this story since April 1998? ABC: 7. CBS: 3. NBC: 2. ABC outnumbered these 12 pieces in a 24-hour period highlighting their Monica Lewinsky interview.

China Acquires U.S. Warhead Technology.

One year after that discovery, The New York Times found that the Chinese government had stolen technology from U.S. nuclear labs that would help them miniaturize their nuclear warheads. In the first ten days the Big Three aired only 11 evening stories and six morning stories, then dropped the issue. The networks have since ignored several significant revelations and conducted only one morning show interview.

Clinton’s Denials Exposed.

When pressed by print reports about whether he knew Chinese espionage was occurring on his watch, President Clinton claimed in two press conferences that he was told nothing about espionage occurring during his term. When new print reports revealed him to be lying, the networks again refused to give viewers the evidence. 

 
 
via

May 102017
 

In 1993, Bill Clinton ousted William Sessions as FBI director a day before Vince Foster was found dead

Bill Clinton Fired An FBI Director The Day Before Vince Foster Was Found Dead

The FBI opened the investigation into the Travel Office firings in May 1993.

Bill Clinton fired the FBI director on July, 19th 1993.

Vince Foster was found dead on July 20th 1993.

The FBI was called in to assist with the investigation.

To be fair, the Clintons tend to kill people so often that the firing of an FBI director at the same time is probably a coincidence.

DEFIANT F.B.I

 
 

25 Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation

 Political  Comments Off on 25 Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation
Apr 262017
 

These 25 ways are everywhere in media, from political debates, to television shows, to comments on social media.

25 Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation

Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even “good guys” can be suspect in many cases.

A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluation… to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not… or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.

It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid an a new one must be found… but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion in general.

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
  1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
  2. Become incredulous and indignant
  3. Create rumor mongers
  4. Use a straw man
  5. Sidetrack opponents w name calling, ridicule
  6. Hit and Run
  7. Question motives
  8. Invoke authority
  9. Play Dumb
  10. Associate opponent charges with old news
  11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
  12. Enigmas have no solution
  13. Alice in Wonderland Logic
  14. Demand complete solutions
  15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions
  16. Vanish evidence and witnesses
  17. Change the subject
  18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad
  19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs
  20. False evidence
  21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor
  22. Manufacture a new truth
  23. Create bigger distractions
  24. Silence critics
  25. Vanish
Eight Traits of The Disinformationalist
  1. Avoidance
  2. Selectivity
  3. Coincidental
  4. Teamwork
  5. Anti-conspiratorial
  6. Artificial Emotions
  7. Inconsistent
  8. Newly Discovered: Time Constant

It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process. However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

This why concepts from the film, Wag-The-Dog, actually work. If you saw that movie, know that there is at least one real-world counterpart to Al Pacino’s character. For CIA, it is Mark Richards, who was called in to orchestrate the media response to Waco on behalf of Janet Reno. Mark Richards is the acknowledged High Priest of Disinformation. His appointment was extremely appropriate, since the CIA was VERY present at Waco from the very beginning of the cult to the very end of their days — just as it was at the People’s Temple in Jonestown. Richards purpose in life is damage control.

For such disinformationalists, the overall aim is to avoid discussing links in the chain of evidence which cannot be broken by truth, but at all times, to use clever deceptions or lies to make select links seem weaker than they are, create the illusion of a break, or better still, cause any who are considering the chain to be distracted in any number of ways, including the method of questioning the credentials of the presenter. Please understand that fact is fact, regardless of the source. Likewise, truth is truth, regardless of the source. This is why criminals are allowed to testify against other criminals. Where a motive to lie may truly exist, only actual evidence that the testimony itself IS a lie renders it completely invalid. Were a known ‘liar’s’ testimony to stand on its own without supporting fact, it might certainly be of questionable value, but if the testimony (argument) is based on verifiable or otherwise demonstrable facts, it matters not who does the presenting or what their motives are, or if they have lied in the past or even if motivated to lie in this instance — the facts or links would and should stand or fall on their own merit and their part in the matter will merely be supportive.

Moreover, particularly with respects to public forums such as newspaper letters to the editor, and Internet chat and news groups, the disinfo type has a very important role. In these forums, the principle topics of discussion are generally attempts by individuals to cause other persons to become interested in their own particular position, idea, or solution — very much in development at the time. People often use such mediums as a sounding board and in hopes of pollination to better form their ideas. Where such ideas are critical of government or powerful, vested groups (especially if their criminality is the topic), the disinfo artist has yet another role — the role of nipping it in the bud. They also seek to stage the concept, the presenter, and any supporters as less than credible should any possible future confrontation in more public forums result due to their early successes. You can often spot the disinfo types at work here by the unique application of “higher standards” of discussion than necessarily warranted. They will demand that those presenting arguments or concepts back everything up with the same level of expertise as a professor, researcher, or investigative writer. Anything less renders any discussion meaningless and unworthy in their opinion, and anyone who disagrees is obviously stupid — and they generally put it in exactly those terms.

So, as you read any such discussions, particularly so in Internet news groups (NG), decide for yourself when a rational argument is being applied and when disinformation, psyops (psychological warfare operations) or trickery is the tool. Accuse those guilty of the later freely. They (both those deliberately seeking to lead you astray, and those who are simply foolish or misguided thinkers) generally run for cover when thus illuminated, or — put in other terms, they put up or shut up (a perfectly acceptable outcome either way, since truth is the goal.) Here are the twenty-five methods and seven traits, some of which don’t apply directly to NG application. Each contains a simple example in the form of actual (some paraphrased for simplicity) from NG comments on commonly known historical events, and a proper response. Accusations should not be overused — reserve for repeat offenders and those who use multiple tactics. Responses should avoid falling into emotional traps or informational sidetracks, unless it is feared that some observers will be easily dissuaded by the trickery. Consider quoting the complete rule rather than simply citing it, as others will not have reference. Offer to provide a complete copy of the rule set upon request (see permissions statement at end):

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

(1) Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil

Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

Example: Media was present in the courtroom (Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby) when CIA agent Marita Lorenz ‘confession’ testimony regarding CIA direct participation in the planning and assassination of John Kennedy was revealed. All media reported was that E. Howard Hunt lost his libel case against Liberty Lobby (Liberty Lobby’s newspaper, The Spotlight, had reported Hunt was in Dallas that day and were sued for the story). See Mark Lane’s remarkable book, Plausible Denial, for the full confessional transcript.

Proper response: There is no possible response unless you are aware of the material and can make it public yourself.. In any such attempt, be certain to target any known silent party as likely complicit in a cover up. In this case, it would be the entire Time-Warner Media Group, among others. This author is relatively certain that reporters were hand-picked to cover this case from among those having intelligence community ties.

(2) Become Incredulous and Indignant

Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit.

Example: ‘How dare you suggest that the Branch Davidians were murdered! the FBI and BATF are made up of America’s finest and best trained law enforcement, operate under the strictest of legal requirements, and are under the finest leadership the President could want to appoint.’

Proper response: You are avoiding the Waco issue with disinformation tactics. Your high opinion of FBI is not founded in fact. All you need do is examine Ruby Ridge and any number of other examples, and you will see a pattern of abuse of power that demands attention to charges against FBI/BATF at Waco. Why do you refuse to address the issues with disinformation tactics (rule 2 – become incredulous and indignant)?

(3) Create Rumor Mongers

Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.

‘You can’t prove his material was legitimately from French Intelligence. Pierre Salinger had a chance to show his ‘proof’ that flight 800 was brought down by friendly fire, and he didn’t. All he really had was the same old baseless rumor that’s been floating around the Internet for months.’

Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. The Internet charge reported widely is based on a single FBI interview statement to media and a similar statement by a Congressman, neither of which had actually seen Pierre’s document. As the FBI is being accused in participating in a cover up of this matter and Pierre claims his material is not Internet sourced, it is natural that FBI would have reason to paint his material in a negative light. For you to assume the FBI to have no bias in the face of Salinger’s credentials and unchanged stance suggests you are biased. At the best you can say the matter is in question. Further, to imply that material found on Internet is worthless is not founded. At best you may say it must be considered carefully before accepting it, which will require addressing the actual issues. Why do you refuse to address these issues with disinformation tactics (rule 3 – create rumor mongers)?

(4) Use a Straw Man

Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

Example: When trying to defeat reports by the Times of London that spy-sat images reveal an object racing towards and striking flight 800, a straw man is used. The disinformationalist, later identified as having worked for Naval Intelligence, simply stated: ‘If these images exist, the public has not seen them. Why? They don’t exist, and never did. You have no evidence and thus, your entire case falls flat.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You imply deceit and deliberately establish an impossible and unwarranted test. It is perfectly natural that the public has not seen them, nor will they for some considerable time, if ever. To produce them would violate national security with respect to intelligence gathering capabilities and limitations, and you should know this. Why do you refuse to address the issues with such disinformation tactics (rule 4 – use a straw man)?’

(5) Sidetrack Opponents with Name-Calling and Ridicule

This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’ ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

Example: ‘You believe what you read in the Spotlight? The Publisher, Willis DeCarto, is a well-known right-wing racist. I guess we know your politics — does your Bible have a swastika on it? That certainly explains why you support this wild-eyed, right-wing conspiracy theory.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply guilt by association and attack truth on the basis of the messenger. The Spotlight is well known Populist media source responsible for releasing facts and stories well before mainstream media will discuss the issues through their veil of silence. Willis DeCarto has successfully handled lawsuits regarding slanderous statements such as yours. Your undemonstrated charges against the messenger have nothing to do with the facts or the issues, and fly in the face of reason. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 5 – sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule)?’

(6) Hit and Run

In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.

Example: ”This stuff is garbage. Where do you conspiracy lunatics come up with this crap? I hope you all get run over by black helicopters.’ Notice it even has a farewell sound to it, so it won’t seem curious if the author is never heard from again.

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your comments or opinions fail to offer any meaningful dialog or information, and are worthless except to pander to emotionalism, and in fact, reveal you to be emotionally insecure with these matters. If you do not like reading ‘this crap’, why do you frequent this NG which is clearly for the purpose of such discussion? Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 6 – hit and run)?’

(7) Question Motives

Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

Example: ‘With the talk-show circuit and the book deal, it looks like you can make a pretty good living spreading lies.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply guilt as a means of attacking the messenger or his credentials, but cowardly fail to offer any concrete evidence that this is so. If you think what has been presented are ‘lies’, why not simply so illustrate? Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 6 – question motives)?’

(8) Invoke Authority

Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

‘You obviously know nothing about either the politics or strategic considerations, much less the technicals of the SR-71. Incidentally, for those who might care, that sleek plane is started with a pair of souped up big-block V-8’s (originally, Buick 454 C.I.D. with dual 450 CFM Holly Carbs and a full-race Isky cams — for 850 combined BHP @ 6,500 RPM) using a dragster-style clutch with direct-drive shaft. Anyway, I can tell you with confidence that no Blackbird has ever been flown by Korean nationals nor have they ever been trained to fly it, and have certainly never overflown the Republic of China in a SR or even launched a drone from it that flew over China. I’m not authorized to discuss if there have been overflights by American pilots.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply your own authority and expertise but fail to provide credentials, and you also fail to address issues and cite sources. You simply cite ‘Jane’s-like’ information to make us think you know what you are talking about. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 8 – invoke authority)?’

(9) Play Dumb

No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

Example: ‘Nothing you say makes any sense. Your logic is idiotic. Your facts nonexistent. Better go back to the drawing board and try again.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You evade the issues with your own form of nonsense while others, perhaps more intelligent than you pretend to be, have no trouble with the material. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (Rule 9 – play dumb)?’

(10) Associate Opponent Charges with Old News

A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

Example: ‘Flight 553’s crash was pilot error, according to the NTSB findings. Digging up new witnesses who say the CIA brought it down at a selected spot and were waiting for it with 50 agents won’t revive that old dead horse buried by NTSB more than twenty years ago.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your ignore the issues and imply they are old charges as if new information is irrelevant to truth. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 10 – associate charges with old news)?’

(11) Establish and Rely Upon Fall-Back Positions

Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just isn’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

Example: ‘Reno admitted in hindsight she should have taken more time to question the data provided by subordinates on the deadliness of CS-4 and the likely Davidian response to its use, but she was so concerned about the children that she elected, in what she now believes was a sad and terrible mistake, to order the tear gas be used.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your evade the true issue by focusing on a side issue in an attempt to evoke sympathy. Perhaps you did not know that CIA Public Relations expert Mark Richards was called in to help Janet Reno with the Waco aftermath response? How warm and fuzzy it makes us feel, so much so that we are to ignore more important matters being discussed. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 11 – establish and rely upon fall-back positions)?’

(12) Enigmas Have No Solution

Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

Example: ‘I don’t see how you can claim Vince Foster was murdered since you can’t prove a motive. Before you could do that, you would have to completely solve the whole controversy over everything that went on in the White House and in Arkansas, and even then, you would have to know a heck of a lot more about what went on within the NSA, the Travel Office, and the secret Grand Jury, and on, and on, and on. It’s hopeless. Give it up.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your completely evade issues and attempt others from daring to attempt it by making it a much bigger mountain than necessary. You eat an elephant one bite at a time. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 12 – enigmas have no solution)?’

(13) Alice in Wonderland Logic 

Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

Example: ‘The news media operates in a fiercely competitive market where stories are gold. This means they dig, dig, dig for the story — often doing a better job than law enforcement. If there was any evidence that BATF had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing, they would surely have uncovered it and reported it. They haven’t reported it, so there can’t have been any prior knowledge. Put up or shut up.’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your backwards logic does not work here. Has media reported CIA killed Kennedy when they knew it? No, despite their presence at a courtroom testimony ‘confession’ by CIA operative Marita Lornez in a liable trial between E. Howard Hunt and Liberty Lobby, they only told us the trial verdict. THAT, would have been the biggest story of the Century, but they didn’t print it, did they? Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 13 – Alice in Wonderland logic)?’

(14) Demand Complete Solutions 

Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

Example: ‘Since you know so much, if James Earl Ray is as innocent as you claim, who really killed Martin Luther King, how was it planned and executed, how did they frame Ray and fool the FBI, and why?’

Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. It is not necessary to completely resolve any full matter in order to examine any relative attached issue. Discussion of any evidence of Ray’s innocence can stand alone to serve truth, and any alternative solution to the crime, while it may bolster that truth, can also stand alone. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 14 – demand complete solutions)?

(15) Fit the Facts to Alternate Conclusions

This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

Example: ‘The cargo door failed on Flight 800 and caused a catastrophic breakup which ruptured the fuel tank and caused it to explode.’

Proper response: The best definitive example of avoiding issues by this technique is, perhaps, Arlan Specter’s Magic Bullet from the Warren Report. This was eloquently defeated in court but media blindly accepted it without challenge. Thus rewarded, disinformationalists do not shrink from its application, even though today, thanks in part to the movie, JFK, most Americans do now understand it was fabricated nonsense. Thus the defense which works best may actually be to cite the Magic Bullet. ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imaginative twisting of facts rivals that of Arlan Specter’s Magic Bullet in the Warren Report. We all know why the impossible magic bullet was invented. You invent a cargo door problem when there has been not one shred of evidence from the crash investigation to support it, and in fact, actual photos of the cargo door hinges and locks disprove you. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 15 – fit facts to an alternate conclusion)?’

(16) Vanish Evidence and Witnesses

If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.

Example: ‘You can’t say Paisley is still alive… that his death was faked and the list of CIA agents found on his boat deliberately placed there to support a purge at CIA. You have no proof. Why can’t you accept the Police reports?’ This is a good ploy, since the dental records and autopsy report showing his body was two inches too long and the teeth weren’t his were lost right after his wife demanded inquiry, and since his body was cremated before she could view it — all that remains are the Police Reports. Handy.

Proper response: There is no suitable response to actual vanished materials or persons, unless you can shed light on the matter, particularly if you can tie the event to a cover up other criminality. However, with respect to dialog where it is used against the discussion, you can respond… ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. The best you can say is that the matter is in contention ONLY because of highly suspicious matters such as the simultaneous and mysterious vanishing of three sets of evidence. The suspicious nature itself tends to support the primary allegation. Why do you refuse to address the remaining issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 16 – vanish evidence and witnesses)?’

(17) Change the Subject

Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

Example: ‘There were no CIA drugs and was no drug money laundering through Mena, Arkansas, and certainly, there was no Bill Clinton knowledge of it because it simply didn’t happen. This is merely an attempt by his opponents to put Clinton off balance and at a disadvantage in the election: Dole is such a weak candidate with nothing to offer that they are desperate to come up with something to swing the polls. Dole simply has no real platform.’ Assistant’s response. ‘You idiot! Dole has the clearest vision of what’s wrong with Government since McGovern. Clinton is only interested in raping the economy, the environment, and every woman he can get his hands on…’ One naturally feels compelled, regardless of party of choice, to jump in defensively on that one…

Proper response: ‘You are both avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your evade discussion of the issues by attempting to sidetrack us with an emotional response to a new topic — a trap which we will not fall into willingly. If you truly believe such political rhetoric, please drop out of this discussion, as it is not germane, and take it to one of the more appropriate politics NGs. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 17- change the subject)?’

(18) Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents

If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’

Example: ‘You are such an idiot to think that possible — or are you such a paranoid conspiracy buff that you think the ‘gubment’ is cooking your pea-brained skull with microwaves, which is the only justification you might have for dreaming up this drivel.’ After a drawing an emotional response: ‘Ohhh… I do seem to have touched a sensitive nerve. Tsk, tsk. What’s the matter? The truth too hot for you to handle? Perhaps you should stop relying on the Psychic Friends Network and see a psychiatrist for some real professional help…’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You attempt to draw me into emotional response without discussion of the issues. If you have something useful to contribute which defeats my argument, let’s here it — preferably without snide and unwarranted personal attacks, if you can manage to avoid sinking so low. Your useless rhetoric serves no purpose here if that is all you can manage. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 18 – emotionalize, antagonize, and goad opponents)?’

(19) Ignore Proof Presented, Demand Impossible Proofs

This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

Example: ‘All he’s done is to quote the liberal media and a bunch of witnesses who aren’t qualified. Where’s his proof? Show me wreckage from flight 800 that shows a missile hit it!’

Proper response: ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You presume for us not to accept Don Phillips, reporter for the Washington Post, Al Baker, Craig Gordon or Liam Pleven, reporters for Newsday, Matthew Purdy or Matthew L. Wald, Don Van Natta Jr., reporters for the New York Times, or Pat Milton, wire reporter for the Associated Press — as being able to tell us anything useful about the facts in this matter. Neither would you allow us to accept Robert E. Francis, Vice Chairman of the NTSB, Joseph Cantamessa Jr., Special Agent In Charge of the New York Office of the F.B.I., Dr. Charles Wetli, Suffolk County Medical Examiner, the Pathologist examining the bodies, nor unnamed Navy divers, crash investigators, or other cited officials, including Boeing Aircraft representatives a part of the crash investigative team — as a qualified party in this matter, and thus, dismisses this material out of hand. Good logic, — about as good as saying 150 eye witnesses aren’t qualified. Then you demand us to produce evidence which you know is not accessible to us, evidence held by FBI, whom we accuse of cover up. Thus, only YOU are qualified to tell us what to believe? Witnesses be damned? Radar tracks be damned? Satellite tracks be damned? Reporters be damned? Photographs be damned? Government statements be damned? Is there a pattern here?. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 19 – ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs)?’

(20) False Evidence

Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

Example: Jack Ruby warned the Warren Commission that the white Russian separatists, the Solidarists, were involved in the assassination. This was a handy ‘confession’, since Jack and Earl were both on the same team in terms of the cover up, and since it is now known that Jack worked directly with CIA in the assassination (see below.)

Proper response: This one can be difficult to respond to unless you see it clearly, such as in the following example, where more is known today than earlier in time… ‘You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your information is known to have been designed to side track this issue. As revealed by CIA operative Marita Lorenz under oath offered in court in E. Howard Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby, CIA operatives E. Howard Hunt, James McCord, and others, met with Jack Ruby in Dallas the night before the assassination of JFK to distribute guns and money. Clearly, Ruby was a coconspirator whose ‘Solidarist confession’ was meant to sidetrack any serious investigation of the murder AWAY from CIA. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 20 – false evidence)?’

(21) Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or Other Empowered Investigative Body

Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.

Example: According to one OK bombing Federal Grand Juror who violated the law to speak the truth, jurors were, contrary to law, denied the power of subpoena of witness of their choosing, denied the power of asking witnesses questions of their choosing, and relegated to hearing only evidence prosecution wished them to hear, evidence which clearly seemed fraudulent and intended to paint conclusions other than facts actually suggested.

Proper response: There is usually no adequate response to this tactic except to complain loudly at any sign of its application, particularly with respect to any possible cover up. This happened locally in Oklahoma, and as a result, a new Grand Jury has been called to rehear evidence that government officials knew in advance that the bombing was going to take place, and a number of new facts which indicate it was impossible for Timothy McVeigh to have done the deed without access to extremely advanced explosive devices such as available ONLY to the military or intelligence community, such as CIA’s METC technology. Media has refused to cover the new Oklahoma Grand Jury process, by they way.

(22) Manufacture a New Truth

Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

Example: The False Memory Syndrome Foundation and American Family Foundation and American and Canadian Psychiatric Associations fall into this category, as their founding members and/or leadership include key persons associated with CIA Mind Control research. Read The Professional Paranoid or Phsychic Dictatorship in the U.S.A. by Alex Constantine for more information. Not so curious, then, that (in a perhaps oversimplified explanation here) these organizations focus on, by means of their own “research findings”, that there is no such thing as Mind Control.

Proper response: Unless you are in a position to be well versed in the topic and know of the background and relationships involved in the opponent organization, you are not well equipped to fight this tactic.

(23) Create Bigger Distractions

If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

Example: To distract the public over the progress of a WTC bombing trial that seems to be uncovering nasty ties to the intelligence community, have an endless discussion of skaters whacking other skaters on the knee. To distract the public over the progress of the Waco trials that have the potential to reveal government sponsored murder, have an O.J. summer. To distract the public over an ever disintegrating McVeigh trial situation and the danger of exposing government involvements, come up with something else (Flight 800?) to talk about — or, keeping in the sports theme, how about sports fans shooting referees and players during a game and the focusing on the whole gun control thing?

Proper response: The best you can do is attempt to keep public debate and interest in the true issues alive and point out that the ‘news flap’ or other evasive tactic serves the interests of your opponents.

(24) Silence Critics

If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.

Example: As experienced by certain proponents of friendly fire theories with respect to flight 800 — send in FBI agents to intimidate and threaten that if they persisted further they would be subject to charges of aiding and abetting Iranian terrorists, of failing to register as a foreign agents, or any other trumped up charges. If this doesn’t work, you can always plant drugs and bust them.

Proper response: You have three defensive alternatives if you think yourself potential victim of this ploy. One is to stand and fight regardless. Another is to create for yourself an insurance policy which will point to your opponents in the event of any unpleasantness, a matter which requires superior intelligence information on your opponents and great care in execution to avoid dangerous pitfalls (see The Professional Paranoid by this author for suggestions on how this might be done). The last alternative is to cave in or run (same thing.)

(25) Vanish

If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

Example: Do a Robert Vesco and retire to the Caribbean. If you don’t, somebody in your organization may choose to vanish you the way of Vince Foster or Ron Brown.

Proper response: You will likely not have a means to attack this method, except to focus on the vanishing in hopes of uncovering it was by foul play or deceit as part of a deliberate cover up.

 

 
via

Bill (According to Dr. Seuss)

 Funny, Political  Comments Off on Bill (According to Dr. Seuss)
Apr 182017
 
President Clinton’s Deposition

by Dr. Seuss
I’m here to ask,
As you’ll soon see…
Did you grope
Miss Lewinsky?
Did you grope her
In your house?
Did you grope
Beneath her blouse?
I did not do that
Here or there…
I did not do that
Anywhere!
I did not do that
Near or far…
I did not do that
Starr-you-are!

Did you smile?
Did you flirt?
Did you peek
Beneath her skirt?
And did you tell
The girl to lie
When called upon
To testify?

I do not like you
Starr-you-are…
I think that you
Have gone too far!
I will not answer
Any more…
Perhaps I will go
Start a war!
The public’s easy
To distract
When bombs are
Falling on Iraq!

Bill (According to Dr. Seuss)
 

The Order Of Skull And Bones

 Political  Comments Off on The Order Of Skull And Bones
Apr 122017
 

Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About The Order Of Skull And Bones, But Were Afraid to Ask

The Order Of Skull And Bones

The story begins at Yale, where three threads of American social history — espionage, drug smuggling and secret societies — intertwine into one. ParaScope is pleased to present this treatise on the Order of Skull and Bones, whose initiates fill the ranks of the global elite. Is Skull and Bones the American branch of the Illuminati? Are national and global events manipulated as part of a grand Hegellian equation, thesis and anti-thesis yielding a New World Order synthesis? The evidence and events surrounding the Order of Skull and Bones will shock you. Read on.

1. The Secret Origins of Skull & Bones

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesThe story begins at Yale, where three threads of American social history — espionage, drug smuggling and secret societies — intertwine into one.

Elihu Yale was born near Boston, educated in London, and served with the British East India Company, eventually becoming governor of Fort Saint George, Madras, in 1687. He amassed a great fortune from trade and returned to England in 1699. Yale became known as quite a philanthropist; upon receiving a request from the Collegiate School in Connecticut, he sent a donation and a gift of books. After subsequent bequests, Cotton Mather suggested the school be named Yale College, in 1718.

A statue of Nathan Hale stands on Old Campus at Yale University. There is a copy of that statue in front of the CIA’s headquarters in Langley, Virginia. Yet another stands in front of Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts (where George H.W. Bush (’48) went to prep school and joined a secret society at age twelve).

Nathan Hale, along with three other Yale graduates, was a member of the “Culper Ring,” one of America’s first intelligence operations. Established by George Washington, it was successful throughout the Revolutionary War. Nathan was the only operative to be ferreted out by the British, and after speaking his famous regrets, he was hanged in 1776. Ever since the founding of the Republic, the relationship between Yale and the “Intelligence Community” has been unique.

In 1823, Samuel Russell established Russell and Company for the purpose of acquiring opium in Turkey and smuggling it to China. Russell and Company merged with the Perkins (Boston) syndicate in 1830 and became the primary American opium smuggler. Many of the great American and European fortunes were built on the “China”(opium) trade.

One of Russell and Company’s Chief of Operations in Canton was Warren Delano, Jr., grandfather of Franklin Roosevelt. Other Russell partners included John Cleve Green (who financed Princeton), Abiel Low (who financed construction of Columbia), Joseph Coolidge and the Perkins, Sturgis and Forbes families. (Coolidge’s son organized the United Fruit company, and his grandson, Archibald C. Coolidge, was a co-founder of the Council on Foreign Relations.)

William Huntington Russell (’33), Samuel’s cousin, studied in Germany from 1831-32. Germany was a hotbed of new ideas. The “scientific method” was being applied to all forms of human endeavor. Prussia, which blamed the defeat of its forces by Napoleon in 1806 on soldiers only thinking about themselves in the stress of battle, took the principles set forth by John Locke and Jean Rosseau and created a new educational system. Johan Fitche, in his “Address to the German People,” declared that the children would be taken over by the State and told what to think and how to think it.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel took over Fitche’s chair at the University Of Berlin in 1817, and was a professor there until his death in 1831. Hegel was the culmination of the German idealistic philosophy school of Immanuel Kant.

To Hegel, our world is a world of reason. The state is Absolute Reason and the citizen can only become free by worship and obedience to the state. Hegel called the state the “march of God in the world” and the “final end”. This final end, Hegel said, “has supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the state.” Both fascism and communism have their philosophical roots in Hegellianism. Hegellian philosophy was very much in vogue during William Russell’s time in Germany.

When Russell returned to Yale in 1832, he formed a senior society with Alphonso Taft (’33). According to information acquired from a break-in to the “tomb” (the Skull and Bones meeting hall) in 1876, “Bones is a chapter of a corps in a German University…. General Russell, its founder, was in Germany before his Senior Year and formed a warm friendship with a leading member of a German society. He brought back with him to college, authority to found a chapter here.” So class valedictorian William H. Russell, along with fourteen others, became the founding members of “The Order of Scull and Bones,” later changed to “The Order of Skull and Bones”.

The secretive Order of Skull and Bones exists only at Yale. Fifteen juniors are “tapped” each year by the seniors to be initiated into next year’s group. Some say each initiate is given $15,000 and a grandfather clock. Far from being a campus fun-house, the group is geared more toward the success of its members in the post-collegiate world.

The family names on the Skull and Bones roster roll off the tongue like an elite party list — Lord, Whitney, Taft, Jay, Bundy, Harriman, Weyerhaeuser, Pinchot, Rockefeller, Goodyear, Sloane, Stimson, Phelps, Perkins, Pillsbury, Kellogg, Vanderbilt, Bush, Lovett and so on.

William Russell went on to become a general and a state legislator in Connecticut. Alphonso Taft was appointed U.S. Attorney General, Secretary of War (a post many “Bonesmen” have held), Ambassador to Austria, and Ambassador to Russia (another post held by many “Bonesmen”). His son, William Howard Taft (’87), is the only man to be both President of the United States and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

2. Secrets of the “Tomb”

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesThe Order flourished from the very beginning in spite of occasional squalls of controversy. There was dissension from some professors, who didn’t like its secrecy and exclusiveness. And there was backlash from students, showing concern about the influence “Bones” was having over Yale finances and the favoritism shown to “Bonesmen.”

In October of 1873, Volume 1, Number 1, of The Iconoclast was published in New Haven. It was only published once and was one of very few openly published articles on the Order of Skull and Bones.

From The Iconoclast:

“We speak through a new publication. because the college press is closed to those who dare to openly mention ‘Bones’….

“Out of every class Skull and Bones takes its men. They have gone out into the world and have become, in many instances, leaders in society. They have obtained control of Yale. Its business is performed by them. Money paid to the college must pass into their hands, and be subject to their will. No doubt they are worthy men in themselves, but the many, whom they looked down upon while in college, cannot so far forget as to give money freely into their hands. Men in Wall Street complain that the college comes straight to them for help, instead of asking each graduate for his share. The reason is found in a remark made by one of Yale’s and America’s first men: ‘Few will give but Bones men and they care far more for their society than they do for the college….’

“Year by year the deadly evil is growing. The society was never as obnoxious to the college as it is today, and it is just this ill-feeling that shuts the pockets of non-members. Never before has it shown such arrogance and self-fancied superiority. It grasps the College Press and endeavors to rule it all. It does not deign to show its credentials, but clutches at power with the silence of conscious guilt.

“To tell the good which Yale College has done would be well nigh impossible. To tell the good she might do would be yet more difficult. The question, then, is reduced to this — on the one hand lies a source of incalculable good — on the other a society guilty of serious and far-reaching crimes. It is Yale College against Skull and Bones!! We ask all men, as a question of right, which should be allowed to live?”

At first, the society held its meetings in hired halls. Then in 1856, the “tomb”, a vine-covered, windowless, brown-stone hall was constructed, where to this day the “Bonesmen” hold their “strange, occultish” initiation rites and meet each Thursday and Sunday.

On September 29, 1876, a group calling itself “The Order of File and Claw” broke into the Skull and Bones’ holy of holies. In the “tomb” they found lodge-room 324 “fitted up in black velvet, even the walls being covered with the material.” Upstairs was lodge-room 322, “the ‘sanctum sanctorium’ of the temple… furnished in red velvet” with a pentagram on the wall. In the hall are “pictures of the founders of Bones at Yale, and of members of the Society in Germany, when the chapter was established here in 1832.” The raiding party found another interesting scene in the parlor next to room 322.

From “The Fall Of Skull And Bones”:

“On the west wall, hung among other pictures, an old engraving representing an open burial vault, in which, on a stone slab, rest four human skulls, grouped about a fools cap and bells, an open book, several mathematical instruments, a beggar’s scrip, and a royal crown. On the arched wall above the vault are the explanatory words, in Roman letters, ‘We War Der Thor, Wer Weiser, Wer Bettler Oder, Kaiser?’ and below the vault is engraved, in German characters, the sentence; ‘Ob Arm, Ob Beich, im Tode gleich.’

The picture is accompanied by a card on which is written, ‘From the German Chapter. Presented by D. C. Gilman of D. 50’.”

Daniel Coit Gilman (’52), along with two other “Bonesmen,” formed a troika which still influences American life today. Soon after their initiation in Skull and Bones, Daniel Gilman, Timothy Dwight (’49) and Andrew Dickinson White (’53) went to study philosophy in Europe at the University of Berlin. Gilman returned from Europe and incorporated Skull and Bones as Russell Trust, in 1856, with himself as Treasurer and William H. Russell as President. He spent the next fourteen years in New Haven consolidating the order’s power.

Gilman was appointed Librarian at Yale in 1858. Through shrewd political maneuvering, he acquired funding for Yale’s science departments (Sheffield Scientific School) and was able to get the Morrill Land Bill introduced in Congress, passed and finally signed by President Lincoln, after being vetoed by President Buchanan.

This bill, “donating public-lands for State College for agriculture and sciences”, is now known as the Land Grant College Act. Yale was the first school in America to get the federal land scrip and quickly grabbed all of Connecticut’s share at the time. Pleased by the acquisitions, Yale made Gilman a Professor of Physical Geography.

Daniel was the first President of the University of California. He also helped found, and was the first president of, John Hopkins.

Gilman was first president of the Carnegie Institution and involved in the founding of the Peabody, Slater and Russell Sage Foundations.

His buddy, Andrew D. White, was the first president of Cornell University (which received all of New York’s share of the Land Grant College Act), U.S. Minister to Russia, U.S. Ambassador to Berlin and first president of the American Historical Association. White was also Chairman of the American delegation to the first Hague Conference in 1899, which established an international judiciary.

Timothy Dwight, a professor at Yale Divinity School, was installed as president of Yale in 1886. All presidents since, have been either “Bonesmen” or directly tied to the Order and its interests.

The Daniel/Gilman/White trio was also responsible for the founding of the American Economic Association, the American Chemical Society and the American Psychological Association. Through their influences on John Dewey and Horace Mann, this trio continues to have an enormous impact on education today.

3. Networks of Power

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesIn his book “America’s Secret Establishment,” Antony Sutton outlined the Order of Skull and Bones’ ability to establish vertical and horizontal “chains of influence” that ensured the continuity of their conspiratorial schemes.

The Whitney-Stimson-Bundy links represent the “vertical chain”.

W. C. Whitney (’63), who married Flora Payne (of the Standard Oil Payne dynasty), was Secretary of the Navy. His attorney was a man named Elihu Root. Root hired Henry Stimson (’88), out of law school. Stimson took over from Root as Secretary of War in 1911, appointed by fellow Bonesman William Howard Taft. Stimson later became Coolidge’s Governor-General of the Philippine Islands, Hoover’s Secretary of State, and Secretary of War during the Roosevelt and Truman administrations.

Hollister Bundy (’09) was Stimson’s special assistant and point man in the Pentagon for the Manhattan Project. His two sons, also members of Skull and Bones, were William Bundy (’39) and McGeorge Bundy (’40) — both very active in governmental and foundation affairs.

The two brothers, from their positions in the CIA, the Department of Defense and the State Department, and as Special Assistants to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, exercised significant impact on the flow of information and intelligence during the Vietnam “War.”

William Bundy went on to be editor of Foreign Affairs, the influential quarterly of the Council on Foreign Affairs (CFR). McGeorge became president of the Ford Foundation.

Another interesting group of “Bonesmen” is the Harriman/Bush crowd. Averil Harriman (’13), “Elder Statesman” of the Democratic Party, and his brother Roland Harriman (’17) were very active members. In fact, four of Roland’s fellow “Bonesmen” from the class of 1917 were directors of Brown Brothers, Harriman, including Prescott Bush (’17), George Bush’s dad.

Since the turn of the century, two investment bank firms — Guaranty Trust and Brown Brothers, Harriman — were both dominated by members of Skull and Bones. These two firms were heavily involved in the financing of Communism and Hitler’s regime.

Bonesman share an affinity for the Hegellian ideas of the historical dialectic, which dictates the use of controlled conflict — thesis versus anti-thesis — to create a pre-determined synthesis. A synthesis of their making and design, where the state is absolute and individuals are granted their freedoms based on their obedience to the state — a New World Order.

Funding and political maneuvering on the part of “Bonesmen” and their allies helped the Bolsheviks prevail in Russia. In defiance of federal laws, the cabal financed industries, established banks and developed oil and mineral deposits in the fledgling U.S.S.R.

Later, Averil Harriman, as minister to Great Britain in charge of Lend-Lease for Britain and Russia, was responsible for shipping entire factories into Russia. According to some researchers, Harriman also oversaw the transfer of nuclear secrets, plutonium and U. S. dollar printing plates to the U.S.S.R.

In 1932, the Union Banking Corporation of New York City had enlisted four directors from the (’17) cell and two Nazi bankers associated with Fritz Thyssen, who had been financing Hitler since 1924.

From “George Bush; The Unauthorized Biography”:

“President Franklin Roosevelt’s Alien Property Custodian, Leo T. Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 [11/17/42] seizing the property of Prescott Bush under the Trading with Enemy Act. The order, published in obscure government record books and kept out of the news, Note #4 explained nothing about the Nazis involved; only that the Union Banking Corporation was run for the ‘Thyssen family’ of ‘Germany and/or Hungary’ — ‘nationals … of a designated enemy country.’

“By deciding that Prescott Bush and the other directors of the Union Banking Corporation were legally ‘front men for the Nazis’, the government avoided the more important historical issue: In what way ‘were Hitler’s Nazis themselves hired, armed, and instructed by’ the New York and London clique of which Prescott Bush was an executive manager? …

“4. New York Times, December 16, 1944, ran a five-paragraph page 25 article on actions of the New York State Banking Department. Only the last sentence refers to the Nazi bank, as follows: ‘The Union Banking Corporation, 39 Broadway, New York, has received authority to change its principal place of business to 120 Broadway.’

“The Times omitted the fact that the Union Banking Corporation had been seized by the government for trading with the enemy, and the fact that 120 Broadway was the address of the government’s Alien Property Custodian.”

After the war, Prescott went on to become a U. S. Senator from Connecticut and favorite golfing partner of President Eisenhower. Prescott claims responsibility for getting Nixon into politics and takes personal credit for bringing Dick on board as Ike’s running mate in 1952.

4. Name Roster of the Secret Establishment

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesThere were so many “Yalies” in the OSS that Yale’s drinking tune, the “Whiffenpoof Song”, became an “unofficial” song of the OSS. Many in the OSS were “Bonesmen” or belonged to the other Yale senior societies.

Robert Lovett (’18), Harriman’s childhood friend, had been tapped into Skull & Bones by Prescott Bush’s cell of ’17 and was a director at Brown Brothers, Harriman.

Again, from “George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography”:

“On October 22, 1945, Secretary of War Robert Patterson created the Lovett Committee, chaired by Robert A. Lovett, to advise the government on the post-World War II organization of U.S. intelligence activities…. The new agency would ‘consult’ with the armed forces, but it must be the sole collecting agency in the field of foreign espionage and counterespionage. The new agency should have an independent budget, and its appropriations should be granted by Congress without public hearings. Lovett appeared before the Secretaries of State, War, and Navy on November 14, 1945…. Lovett pressed for a virtual resumption of the wartime Office of Strategic Services (OSS)…. The CIA was established in 1947 according to the prescription of Robert Lovett, of Jupiter Island.”

Gaddis Smith, a history professor at Yale, said, “Yale has influenced the Central Intelligence Agency more than any other university, giving the CIA the atmosphere of a class reunion.” And “Bonesman” have been foremost among the “spooks” building the CIA’s “haunted house.”

F. Trubee Davison (’18) was Director of Personnel at the CIA in the early years. Some of the other “Bonesmen” connected with the intelligence community are:

  • Sloane Coffin, Jr. (’49)
  • V. Van Dine (’49)
  • James Buckley (’44)
  • Bill Buckley (’50)
  • Hugh Cunnigham (’34)
  • Hugh Wilson (’09)
  • Reuben Holden (’40)
  • Charles R. Walker (’16)
  • Yale’s ‘unofficial’ Secretary of War, Robert D. French (’10)
  • Archibald MacLiesh (’15)
  • Dino Pionzio (’50), CIA Deputy Chief of Station during Allende overthrow
  • William and McGeorge Bundy
  • Richard A. Moore (‘3?)
  • Senator David Boren (’63)
  • Senator John Kerry (’66)

…and, of course, George Herbert Walker Bush. Bush tapped Coffin, who tapped Buckley.

Some other prominent Bonesmen include:

  • Henry Luce (’20), Time-Life
  • John Thomas Daniels (’14), founder Archer Daniels Midland
  • Gifford Pinchot (’89), President Theodore Roosevelt’s chief forester
  • Frederick E. Weyerhaeuser (’96)
  • Harold Stanley (’08), founder of Morgan Stanley, investment banker
  • Alfred Cowles (’13), Cowles Communication
  • Henry P. Davison (’20), senior partner Morgan Guaranty Trust
  • Thomas Cochran (’04) Morgan partner
  • Senator John Heinz (’31)
  • Pierre Jay (’92), first chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York
  • George Herbert Walker, Jr. (’27), financier and co-founder of the NY Mets
  • Artemus Gates (’18), President of New York Trust Company, Union Pacific, TIME, Boeing Company
  • William Draper III (50), the Defense Department, UN and Import-Export Bank
  • Dean Witter, Jr.(’44), investment banker
  • Senator Jonathan Bingham (’36)
  • Potter Stewart (’36), Supreme Court Justice
  • Senator John Chaffe (’47)
  • Harry Payne Whitney (’94), husband of Gertrude Vanderbilt, investment banker
  • Russell W. Davenport (’23), editor Fortune Magazine, created Fortune 500 list
  • Evan G. Galbraith (’50), Ambassador to France and Managing Director of Morgan Stanley
  • Richard Gow (’55), president Zapata Oil
  • Amory Howe Bradford (’34), husband of Carol Warburg Rothschild and general manager for the New York Times
  • C. E. Lord (’49), Comptroller of the Currency
  • Winston Lord (’59), Chairman of CFR, Ambassador to China and assistant Secretary of State in the Clinton administration

Ever since Nixon re-established America’s political relationship with China, many of our ambassadors to that country have been Bonesmen, including George Bush, the first Chief U. S. Liaison Officer to the Peoples Republic of China.

5. China and the Opium Wars

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesWhy all this interest in China? Well, China, among other things, is one of the largest producers and users of opiates in the world.

For a while, in the 1800s, the Yankee Clippers in Connecticut and Massachusetts were the fastest ships on the ocean. Speed was crucial to the opium trade; whoever made the trip from Turkey/India to Macao/Hong Kong/Shanghai first got the most for their goods.

During the Opium Wars, the U.S. chose to stand on the sidelines and cheer for the English and French, knowing that treaty obligations would bring the U.S. a share in the spoils. Russell and Company was at times the only trading house operating in Canton and used the opportunity to developed strong commercial ties and handsome profits.

Powerful national interests were behind the drug trade, because American traders were badly in need of some article the Chinese would buy, since by this time the seal breeding grounds had been nearly wiped out. If the Chinese had not bought opium from Americans, then United States imports of silk, porcelain and tea would have to paid in precious coin, which was in short supply. In 1843, when the Port of Shanghai was opened, Russell and Co. was one of its earliest traders.

In 1903, Yale Divinity School set up a program of schools and hospitals in China. Mao Zedong was among the staff. During the intrigues of China in the 1930s and ’40s, American intelligence called upon the resources of “Yale in China”, and George Bush’s cousin and fellow “Bonesman” Reuben Holden.

After stints as UN Ambassador and Chairman of the Republican National Committee for the beleaguered Richard Nixon, George Bush was sent to look after the “China trade”. The Bush family is still very much involved in the economic activities of “Red” China.

Many researchers contend that George Bush has been with CIA since the early 1950s, and that one of his jobs was to consolidate and co-ordinate the worldwide narcotics industry, the largest industry on Earth. Some say that one of the reasons behind the Vietnam “Police Action” was a cover for the consolidation of the “Golden Triangle”.

6. The War on Drugs: An “Intellectual Fraud”

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesBefore the Vietnam “War”, the Golden Triangle was run by French Intelligence and Corsican mobsters. After the French bailed out and America moved in, the triangle was run by U.S. intelligence, with aid from Sicilian mobsters. This narcotics network is well documented in “The Politics of Heroin in S. E. Asia” by Alfred McCoy, “The Great Heroin Coup” by Henrik Kruger and “Double-Cross” by Sam and Chuck Giancana.

Vice-President George Bush, as Chairman of President Reagan’s cabinet-level working group and as Director of the National Narcotics Interdiction System, was the highest U. S. governmental official involved in the “war on drugs”.

Frances Mullen, Jr., former head of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), called Bush’s efforts “an intellectual fraud” and “a liability rather than an asset”. Soon after these statements, Mullen resigned and the resultant General Accounting Office (GAO) report was buried.

In July, 1985, the suppressed GAO paper reported that there were “no benefits from the National Narcotics Border Interdiction System, directed by George Bush. In fact, the overall effect was to encourage supply….”

Monika Jensen-Stevenson, a “60 Minutes” producer, quit her job after the CBS news program refused to air the story she had uncovered relating to the covert drug trade. Her book, “Kiss The Boys Goodbye”, details how our intelligence community used the apparatus of the POW/MIA governmental agencies as a cover for the trafficking of opiates from the “Golden Triangle”.

President Reagan appointed Reform Party founder and Texas billionaire Ross Perot to the President’s Advisory Council on Foreign Intelligence. Reagan made Perot a special presidential investigator, looking into America’s POW and MIAs from the Vietnam “War”.

Ross took the job to heart and spent considerable time and money in pursuit of the quest. He was given special clearance and access. He asked questions and interviewed everyone he could find.

From “Kiss The Boys Goodbye”:

“Relations between Bush and Perot had gone downhill ever since the Vice-President had asked Ross Perot how his POW/MIA investigations were going.

‘Well, George, I go in looking for prisoners,’ said Perot, ‘but I spend all my time discovering the government has been moving drugs around the world and is involved in illegal arms deals…. I can’t get at the prisoners because of the corruption among our own people.’

“This ended Perot’s official access to the highly classified files as a one-man presidential investigator. ‘I have been instructed to cease and desist,’ he had informed the families of missing men early in 1987.”

The wholesale importation of cocaine into the U.S. during “Iran/Contra” is also well documented. George Bush, is known “to be in the loop” with many of the players keeping in contact directly with his office.

Also, there has been much speculation as to the use of the off-shore rigs, pipelines and other assets of Zapata Offshore being used for narcotic trans-shipments.

Narcotics such as cocaine and heroin cannot be manufactured without the precursor chemicals. One of the largest makers of these precursor chemicals is the Eli Lilly Company of Indianapolis, Indiana. The Quayle family is a large stockholder, and George Bush has been on the Board of Directors. Eli Lilly is also the company that first synthesized LSD for the CIA.

7. George Bush, Skull & Bones and the JFK Assassination

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesRodney Stich’s book “Defrauding America” tells of a “deep-cover CIA officer” assigned to a counter-intelligence unit, code-named Pegasus. This unit “had tape-recordings of plans to assassinate Kennedy” from a tap on the phone of J. Edgar Hoover. The people on the tapes were “[Nelson] Rockefeller, Allen Dulles, [Lyndon] Johnson of Texas, George Bush and J. Edgar Hoover.”

Could George Bush be involved in the JFK assassination?

In 1963, Bush was living in Houston, busily carrying out his duties as president of the Zapata Offshore oil company. He denied the existence of a note sent by the FBI’s J. Edgar Hoover to “Mr. George Bush of the CIA.” When news of the note surfaced, the CIA first said they never commented on employment questions, but later relented said yes, a “George Bush” was mentioned in the note, but that it was “another” George Bush, not the man who took office in the White House in 1988.

Some intrepid reporters tracked down the “other” George Bush and discovered that he was just a lowly clerk who had shuffled papers for the CIA for about six months. He never received any interagency messages from anybody at the FBI, let alone the Queen Mary.

It is also worth noting that a CIA code word for Bay of Pigs was Operation Zapata, and that two of the support vessels were named Barbara and Houston.

Many say that George Bush was high up on the CIA ladder at the time, running proprietorial vehicles and placed in a position of command, responsible for many of the Cubans recruited into “service” at the time. All through the Iran-Contra affair, Felix Rodriguez, the man who captured and had Che Guevara killed for the CIA, always seemed to call Bush’s office first.

From The Realist (Summer, 1991):

“Bush was working with the now-famous CIA agent, Felix Rodriguez, recruiting right-wing Cuban exiles for the invasion of Cuba. It was Bush’s CIA job to organize the Cuban community in Miami for the invasion…. A newly discovered FBI document reveals that George Bush was directly involved in the 1963 murder of President John Kennedy. The document places marksmen by the CIA. Bush at that time lived in Texas. Hopping from Houston to Miami weekly, Bush spent 1960 and ’61 recruiting Cubans in Miami for the invasion….

“George Bush claims he never worked for the CIA until he was appointed Director by former Warren Commission director and then president Jerry Ford in 1976. Logic suggests that is highly unlikely. Of course, Bush has a company duty to deny being in the CIA. The CIA is a secret organization. No one ever admits to being a member. The truth is that Bush has been a top CIA official since before the 1961 invasion of Cuba, working with Felix Rodriguez. Bush may deny his actual role in the CIA in 1959, but there are records in the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba that expose Bush’s role…”

On the Watergate tapes, June 23, 1972, referred to in the media as the ‘smoking gun’ conversation, Nixon and his Chief of Staff, H.R. Haldeman, were discussing how to stop the FBI investigation into the CIA Watergate burglary. They were worried that the investigation would expose their connection to ‘the Bay of Pigs thing.’ Haldeman, in his book “The Ends of Power”, reveals that Nixon always used code words when talking about the 1963 murder of JFK. Haldeman said Nixon would always refer to the assassination as ‘the Bay of Pigs’.

On that transcript we find Nixon discussing the role of George Bush’s partner, Robert Mosbacher, as one of the Texas fundraisers for Nixon. On the tapes Nixon keeps referring to the ‘Cubans’ and the ‘Texans.’ The ‘Texans’ were Bush, Mosbacher and Baker. This is another direct link between Bush and evidence linking Nixon and Bush to the Kennedy assassination.”

8. Motives for the Conspiracy

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesSo, why would an intelligence agency/secret society want to smuggle drugs and assassinate JFK?

Well, they make a lot of money, and they garner intelligence assets through their participation. There’s also the rationale that the world is a seamy and unseemly place, and if you’re going to be the ‘big boy’ on the block, you better know what’s going on. And what better way of knowing than by running it yourself? There are also some who theorize that the covert drug trade fits with plans to destabilize American families and society. Through demoralizing and fracturing the body politic, they can impose their will using psychological warfare and the political alchemy of the Hegellian dialectic.

James Shelby Downard’s article, “Sorcery, Sex, Assassination and the Science of Symbolism ,” an underground classic, links American historical events with a wild, numerological, grand occult plan “to turn us into cybernetic mystery zombies”. The assassination of JFK, this article contends, was the performance of a public occult ritual called The Killing of the King, designed as a mass-trauma, mind-control assault against our U.S. national body-politic.

During Operation Sunrise, Operation Blowback, Operation Paperclip and others, thousands of Nazi scientists, researchers and administrators were brought to the United States after World War II. Many were “smuggled” into the country against direct, written, orders from President Harry S. Truman.

Project Monarch was the resumption of a mind-control project called Marionette Programming, which started in Nazi Germany. The basic component of the Monarch Program is the sophisticated manipulation of the mind, using extreme trauma to induce Multiple Personality Disorder.

Mr. Downward feels that the perpetrators purposefully murdered JFK in such a way as to affect our National identity and cohesiveness — to fracture America’s soul. Even the blatancy of their conspiracy was designed to show “their superiority” and “our futility”.

There have been studies that show a correlation between the JFK assassination and the rise in violence in society, distrust of government and other extensions of social ills.

9. The Illuminati: Subverting the Body Politic

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesWhy this attack against our body politic?

In 1785, a bolt of lightning struck a courier en route to Paris from Frankfort-on-the-Main. A tract written by Adam Weishaupt, founder of the Illuminati, “Original Shift in Days of Illuminations,” was recovered from the dead messenger, containing the secret society’s long-range plan for “The New World Order through world revolution”.

The Bavarian Government outlawed the society and in 1787 published the details of The Illuminati conspiracy in “The Original Writings of the Order and Sect of the Illuminati.”

In Adam Weishaupt’s own words:

“By this plan, we shall direct all mankind in this manner. And, by the simplest means, we shall set all in motion and in flames. The occupations must be so allotted and contrived that we may, in secret, influence all political transactions.”

There is disagreement among scholars as to whether or not the Illuminati survived its banishment. Nevertheless, the group had been quite successful in attracting members and had allied itself with the extensive Masonic networks.

The Illuminati was publicly founded May 1, 1776 at the University of Ingolstadt by Weishaupt, Professor of Canon Law. It was a very “learned” society; Weishaupt drew the earliest members of his new order from among his students.

On December 5, 1776, students at William and Mary College founded a secret society, Phi Beta Kappa. A second chapter was formed, at Yale, in 1780. The anti-Masonic movement in the United States during the 1820s held groups such as Phi Beta Kappa in a bad light. Because of pressure, the society went public. This is noted by some researchers as the direct cause of the appearance of Yale’s Order of Skull and Bones.

In “The Cyclopedia Of Fraternities”, a genealogical chart of general Greek-Letter college fraternities in the United States, shows Phi Beta Kappa as “the parent of all the fraternal systems in [American] higher education.” There is only one “side” lineal descendant: the Yale chapter of 1780. The line then continues to Skull and Bones in 1832, and on through the other “only at Yale” senior societies, Scroll & Key and Wolf’s Head.

Phi Beta Kappa is the “first three Greek letters, for ‘Philosophia Biou Kubernetes’ or ‘Love of wisdom, the helmsman of life’.” A skull homophone is scull, a quick, gliding boat and part of Skull & Bones first nomenclature.

John Robison, a professor of natural philosophy at Edinburgh University in Scotland and a member of a Freemason Lodge, said that he was asked to join the Illuminati. After study, he concluded the purposes of the Illuminati were not for him.

In 1798, he published a book called “Proofs Of A Conspiracy”:

“An association has been formed for the express purpose of rooting out all the religious establishments and overturning all the existing governments…. the leaders would rule the World with uncontrollable power, while all the rest would be employed as tools of the ambition of their unknown superiors.”

“Proofs of A Conspiracy” was sent to George Washington. Responding to the sender of the book with a letter, the president said he was aware the Illuminati were in America. He felt that the Illuminati had “diabolical tenets” and that their object was “a separation of the People from their government.”

In “Proofs Of A Conspiracy”, Robison printed the ceremony of initiation of the “Regent degree” in Illuminism. In it “a skeleton is pointed out to him [the initiate], at the feet of which are laid a crown and a sword. He is asked ‘whether that is the skeleton of a king, nobleman or a beggar.’ As he cannot decide, the president of the meeting says to him, ‘The character of being a man is the only one that is importance'”.

This is, essentially, the same as the writing in the Skull & Bones “tomb”:

“Wer war der Thor, wer Weiser, Bettler oder Kaiser? Ob Arm, ob Reich, im Tode gleich.”

Which reads:

“Who was the fool, who the wise man, beggar or king? Whether poor or rich, all’s the same in death.”

10. Skull & Bones = Illuminati?

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesIs the Order of the Skull & Bones part of the Illuminati?

When a person is initiated into Skull & Bones, they are given a new name, similar to the practice of the Illuminati. And many recorded Illuminati members can be shown to have contact and/or strong influences with many of the professors that taught “Bonesmen” in Berlin.

When a secret society conspires against the sovereignty of a king, they need to organize, raise funds, make their plans operational, and hopefully bring them to fruition.

Could we have in the United States a secret society that has used the “National Security State” as a cover for their nefarious plans?

From “George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography”:

“That September [1951], Robert Lovett replaced Marshall as secretary of defense. Meanwhile, Harriman was named director of the Mutual Security Agency, making him the U.S. chief of the Anglo-American military alliance. By now, Brown Brothers, Harriman was everything but commander-in-chief.

“A central focus of the Harriman security regime in Washington (1950-53) was the organization of covert operations and ‘psychological warfare.’ Harriman, together with his lawyers and business partners, Allen and John Foster Dulles, wanted the government’s secret services to conduct extensive propaganda campaigns and mass-psychology experiments within the U.S.A., and paramilitary campaigns abroad….

“The Harriman security regime created the Psychological Strategy Board (PSB) in 1951. The man appointed director of the PSB [was] Gordon Gray…. Gordon’s brother, R.J. Reynolds chairman Bowman Gray Jr., was also a naval intelligence officer, known around Washington as the ‘founder of operational intelligence.’ Gordon Gray became a close friend and political ally of Prescott Bush; and Gray’s son became for Prescott’s son, George, his lawyer and the shield of his covert policy.”

So you have the Whitney/Stimson/Bundy clan and the Harriman/Bush boys wielding a tremendous amount of influence on the political, economic and social affairs of America and the world. Then you have Prescott Bush’s buddy Richard Nixon as an activist vice-president. Then, a nation-chilling assassination, some time under LBJ with the Bundy boys keeping things in line, then Nixon as President with “Bonesmen” aides Ray Price (’51) and Richard A. Moore. Some time out for a Trilateralist-Democrat-patsy president, followed by Prescott’s son as an activist vice-president under Reagan. Next, we get a Skull and Bones president who declares a “New World Order” while beating up on his business partner, Saddam Hussein.

After twelve years of Republican administrations, Bush passes the reins to his drug smuggling buddy from Arkansas, Bill Clinton, who studied at Yale Law School. According to some researchers, Clinton was recruited as a CIA operative while a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford. Could this be the “old Hegallian historical dialectic process”?

11. World History: Plan or Accident?

 
The Secret Origins of Skull & BonesWill we get another failed Democratic administration? A scandal as disgraceful as Nixon’s fall? When Robert P. Johnson (William Barr) told Clinton in a bunker in Arkansas that “you are our fair-haired boy, but you do have competition for the job you seek. We would never put all our eggs in one basket. You and your state have been our greatest asset…. Mr. Casey wanted me to pass on to you, that unless you fuck up and do something stupid, you are number one on our short list for shot at the job you always wanted.”

So, you have William Casey — CIA Director, George Bush’s campaign manager and Sovereign Knight of Malta — speaking through the proxy of George Bush’s last Attorney General to George’s rival in the 1992 federal elections. Is it all just a show and sham for U.S. hoi polloi?

Perhaps so, if there exists the type of control over the electoral process as told by Mae Brussell and the suppressed book “VoteScam,” written by Jim and Ken Collier:

“…Your vote and mine may now be a meaningless bit of energy directed by preprogrammed computers-which can be fixed to select certain pre-ordained candidates and leave no footprints or paper trail.

“In short, computers are covertly stealing your vote.

“–For almost three decades the American vote has been subject to government-sponsored electronic theft.

“–The vote has been stolen from you by a cartel of federal “national security” bureaucrats, who include higher-ups in the Central Intelligence Agency, political party leaders, Congressmen, co-opted journalists — and the owners and managers — of the major Establishment news media, who have decided in concert that how America’s votes are counted, by whom they are counted and how the results are verified and delivered to the public is, as one of them put it, ‘Not a proper area of inquiry.’

“–By means of an unofficial private corporation named News Election Service (NES), the Establishment press has actual physical control of the counting and dissemination of the vote, and it refuses to let the public know how it is done.”

Is the American electorate subjected to cyclic propaganda, pre-selected candidates and winners, and psychological warfare to alienate Americans from the institutions established to serve them by the Constitution? Are the Democratic and Republican National Parties used for a Hegellian experiment in controlled conflict?

Pamela Churchill Harriman, Averil’s wife, is one of the Democratic Party’s biggest fund-raisers. She once gave Bill a job as director of her “PAM PAC” when he was defeated for governor in 1980. Bill paid her back by appointing her as Ambassador to France.

Another Harriman/Bush friend, Eugene Stetson (’34), was an assistant manager for Prescott Bush at Brown Brothers, Harriman’s New York office. He organized the H. Smith Richardson Foundation. The foundation, in the late 1950s, participated in the MKULTRA, the CIA’s domestic covert psychological warfare operation. The Richardson Foundation helped to finance the testing of psychotropic drugs, including LSD, at Bridgewater Hospital in Massachusetts, the center of some of the most brutal MK-ULTRA experiments.

During the Iran-Contra operations, the H. Smith Richardson Foundation was a “private donors steering committee,” working with the National Security Council to co-ordinate the Office of Public Diplomacy. This was an effort to propagandize in favor of and run cover for the Iran-Contra operations, and to coordinate published attacks on opponents of the program.

The H. Smith Richardson Foundation also runs the Center for Creative Leadership at Langley to “train leaders of the CIA,” as well as another center near Greensboro, North Carolina, that trains CIA and Secret Service Agents. Almost everyone who achieves the military rank of general also gets this training.

This is just the tip of an iceberg. You also have eugenics and population control, suppressed history and technology, yearly retreats, profitable partnerships with brutal dictators, deals with “terrorists”, the involvement of the Knights of Malta, war-mongering and profiteering, mind-control, secret societies for teens, ritual magic and more — all spinning the dark threads in the web of conspiracy that our spinning blue ball has gotten caught in.

We’ve got a whole new crop of “Bonesmen” coming up, including George H.W. Bush’s son George W. Bush (’68), Governor of Texas.

When Don Schollander (’68), the Olympic gold-medalist and only known Skull and Bones member living in Portland, was contacted by Willamette Week reporter John Schrang regarding his involvement in the Order, he said, “It’s really something I can’t talk about.”

Not wouldn’t, but “couldn’t”.

In wake of Antony Sutton’s first ground-breaking exposes of the Order, the Sterling Library at Yale has refused to allow any other researchers access to the Russell Trust papers.

Daniel Gilman, like most Bonesmen, makes no mention of Skull & Bones or the Russell Trust in his memoirs or biographies.

So, are we all just ‘fodder” for a secret society with satanic overtones that is attempting to form a one world government with themselves at the helm? Or is the Order of Skull and Bones just a bunch of frat boys from Yale? Wanna bet your future on it?

The Order Of Skull And Bones

 
via