The Case for No Planes is very compelling

Today is the 16th anniversary of 9/11

What! You still believe the official 9/11 story! Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Really? Even though there is so much evidence that it is utterly false.

You took the blue pill? Ok that explains it.

Here's a red pill. Use your brain.

Swallow it down now. There's a good sheeple.

What is shown in this gif violates Newton’s Third Law of motion. Therefore, it cannot have happened. It is fakery. The brain has to rule, the eyes have to take a back seat. It can be no other way.

Thanks Mark Tokarski, blog owner at:

https://pieceofmindful.com/

"Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion

"The direct evidence that the 9/11 planes were computer images can be summarized as follows: many instances of provably manipulated audio and video footage, a total absence of plane deceleration and normal crash physics in video footage of alleged plane impacts, the lack of wake vortices at any of the crash sites, the several indications of evidence-planting of plane parts around the towers, the preponderance of filmmakers and CGI specialists among ‘amateur’ camcorder videographers, the non-listing and apparent non-existence of the WTC flights in flight record databases, and, perhaps above all, the simple, abstractly verifiable impossibility that a 2mm thick aluminum fuselage shell could slice through a much stronger outer and inner steel columns that were respectively 19x and 60x thicker than it. After a discussion of the physical evidence, large amounts of circumstantial evidence (the, e.g. the motivations for or ‘the why’ of plane fakery) will be gone over in later sections. Also addressed will be ‘the why’ of faking the planes, as well as common questions around the thesis, such as ‘what happened to the flights?’ While it is not essential to answer these questions in order to conclude there were no hijackers or Boeing 767 jetliners involved, doing so may increase one’s comfort with that position."

and

"Much of what follows is written for relatively ‘advanced’ researchers who are already 100% certain the event was a conspiracy not carried out by Muslim terrorists, but have not been able to fully come to terms with the fact that no passenger planes were used. The goal here with respect to the uninitiated reader is to normalize the idea that the media-intelligence complex that runs this country did work together to fake the planes and hijackers, and is not above wholly faking other things (events of all kinds, identities and their deaths, etc.) that are presented to us as real. For a ‘crash course’ on this subject that requires less time and attention than the information here, I recommend starting out with the tightly censored film 911 Taboo, and continuing on with this post as time allows."

and

"Before going into the evidence, the most important thing is to lay out what this post does and does not claim to prove. So much of 9/11 research has been about asking questions, or pointing to hundreds of coincidences around the event that, while overwhelmingly indicative of a conspiracy, to the point of incalculably high, million- or billions-to-one odds, do not technically prove one, and are unwieldy for the layman (i.e., someone who cannot or doesn’t wish to spend a lot of time studying 9/11) to examine and ‘process’ all at once. This post, on the other hand, presents scientific evidence and audio and visual comparisons that by themselves make certain things about 9/11 clear beyond any reasonable doubt, to take the reader from A to B, instead of just undermining A.

We can firmly conclude the following from the evidence that will be presented:

1) The Twin Towers and WTC 7 were destroyed on 9/11 and many first responders and building occupants did die in the event. There was an explosion in part of the Pentagon and some of its employees probably died. A small pit with tiny pieces of metal debris in it was found in Shanksville PA farm field after nearby reports of strange noises and a small, low-flying aircraft.

2) No passenger jetliners hit the Twin Towers or the Pentagon in the manner depicted, likely not at all, therefore no passengers or hijackers died there in the way that was alleged. Further, the passengers and hijackers who we were told were on Flight 93 did not die either in the manner alleged, if at all, and the ‘Let’s Roll’ storyline was a fiction.

3) It was known before 9/11 that some of the supposed passenger victims of Flight 93 would be said to have died in the attacks. Further, some of the supposed passengers from all four planes made phone calls that were impossible to make from cruise altitude, and lied to family members that they were being hijacked in the air. A large majority of the alleged victims do not appear in public records or the Social Security Death Index. Therefore, some of the passenger deaths were faked, at least in the manner represented, i.e. if they did die, it was not at the hands of hijackers. If some of the passenger identities and deaths were fake, it is thus likely that all of them were fake.

4) Many of the plane impact videos we were shown on and after 9/11, including the most widely circulated news footage and amateur videos, are fake, meaning they were altered and a CGI plane was inserted into the footage, therefore all videos of plane impact are probably fake, even when doctoring cannot be proven in a specific piece of footage (e.g. due to the area of impact not being viewable).

5) People who had access to many miniature nuclear weapons or other unknown weaponry destroyed the towers, and people with close ties to the media deceived the public, both facts of which eliminate ragtag Muslim terrorists from consideration. Narrowing the pool of suspects down further requires examining available evidence and applying the principles of means, motive, and opportunity. Based on this criteria the Israeli intelligence agents who were arrested in New York are worthy of the most attention as suspects in both the destruction of the towers and recording of footage of the event that was used to create the fake, anonymous video that were aired later.

6) At least a few dozen people inside the Associated Press and all the major news networks, probably including some or all of their leadership, knew that a deception was being carried out and variously either allowed it to happen or actively perpetrated it themselves.

7) Some extremely high-level members of the federal government knew what was happening and helped prevent the true perpetrators from being investigated and the truth from coming out."

and

"The evidence does not explain:

1) What, if anything, hit the towers and Pentagon and exactly what methods of deception were used on the ground to fool bystanders into thinking they saw something they didn’t, such as planting agents on the ground to spread rumors of a passenger plane and falsely testify as to having seen one, or make phone calls into news networks to say they had seen a plane.

2) While it is not in the scope of this article, what exactly destroyed the towers, whether mini-nukes or a more advanced method like a directed energy weapon, or both, as well as a third failsafe, conventional explosives combined with nanothermite; an event that was planned at least 25 years in advance would surely have at least one backup method of destruction in case of a failure, and it’s my belief that all three were used. No single demolition cause thesis can explain all of the phenomena observed and incontrovertible evidence exists for three distinct methods of demolition being used.

3) Which and how many people were involved in the destruction of the buildings and faking of the videos, though ample probable cause exists to investigate certain suspects.

4) What happened to the ‘hijackers,’ meaning the handful of Saudis who are known to have gone to flight school and lived in Florida briefly, as well as the others, if they exist.

5) What happened to the planes, pilots, and passengers of flights 11, 175, 77, and 93 (i.e. those that we know did exist, e.g. David Angell, as opposed to the majority whose identities were fabricated altogether)

6) Whether the supposed plane in Shanksville did not exist at all, was a drone or missile, was a different, unhijacked plane that was shot down, or was real and disposed of in some other way, with a small number of real passengers on the severely underbooked flight having died and alleged passengers such as Daniel Lewin created so that the flight could play the needed part in the operation’s narrative, with the evidence strongly pointing towards a drone or missile being fired into the ground."

Hopefully you are starting to get the picture now.

You thought that you saw a plane.

But that was only an image on a tv screen.

It was not real because nothing on a tv screen ever is real.

A plane could not have done what you saw; it is physically impossible.

The full case is detailed here:

http://www.pats-blog.com/the-case-for-no-planes/

Is that red pill working yet?


Here is another analysis which draws different conclusions but which also makes a strong case for no real planes:

http://www.richplanet.net/starship_main.php?ref=244&part=1

Finally think about this:

If they could fake 9/11 then, what else could they fake?

Answer:

Anything they like.

And they do fake stuff all the time.

Zappa knew in 1973:

https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/frankzappa/imtheslime.html

Comrade Fidel WAS a fraud

He was a CIA agent

I blogged about Comrade Fidel in December 2016 and asked the question:

Was Comrade Fidel a fraud? The Cuba story makes no sense:
https://petefairhurst.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/was-comrade-fidel-fraud.html

I based that blog on my trip to Cuba in 2011, plus some less well known facts about Fidel and some very well known facts about the capability of the US military and spooks.

I now know the answer to my earlier question:

Yes he was a fraud. He worked for the CIA. He was their agent.

How do I know this?

Well, I have just been reading a very informative book by Servando Gonzalez a Cuban historian:

Psychological Warfare and the New World Order
The Secret War Against the American People
Published in 2010

Gonzalez's book is a fascinating and very detailed 319 pages of small typeface with a further 55 pages of small type reference notes at the end.

The book is very wide ranging in scope. It gives extensive and detailed info about Fidel Castro. It reveals Castro as a lifetime psyop agent for the CIA. Castro's ruthless duplicity is a central feature of the book.

Servando Gonzalez is a Cuban and he knows his subject very, very well.


Here is my summary of the key sections of the book that are about:

Fidel the Fraud

Chapter 7 on page 150 - "The Cold War Psyop"

Gonzalez demonstrates that Castro had a central role in creating the Cold War for the US military industrial complex. This chapter provides lots of info about Comrade Fidel's early CIA career, before his Cuban "revolution":

Page 151 - How Castro was instrumental in the CIA's very first [the first of many] foreign coup in 1948, the Colombian Bogotazo riots that followed the assassination of Jorge Gaitan a Columbian politician. Castro was at the scene off the assassination and he was also an agent provocateur for the vicious riots that followed and which overthrew the Colombian government. The violence in Columbia that resulted lasted for decades

Page 152 - How the CIA recruited Fidel because he had an "...impressive record as a gangster, assassin and psychopath totally lacking in moral principles".  How a 1995 book confirmed the authors longstanding suspicions that Castro was a US/CIA agent with direct testimony. The Bogotazo riots were Castro's first CIA job it seems. The CIA was founded in 1947 and Colombia was their first engineered coup

Pages 155 to 170 - Extensive detail about Castro's role in the Bogatazo false flag, with his accomplice, and fellow CIA agent, Rafael del Pino. The whole false flag operation is analysed in detail. Unidentified snipers were used on civilians. It was a template that was used frequently in subsequent decades. The same methods are still being used by them today in fact, see the 21stC coups in Egypt and Ukraine


Chapter 8 on page 180 - "The CFR mole infiltrates the Soviets"

The first few pages of the chapter demonstrate how the Soviet Union was a creation of the international capitalists, the globalists, who were based in the US and UK. They funded and facilitated the revolution in 1917 that helped the Bolsheviks seize power.

[This same group of fascists also created the CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations, in the US and the RIIA, the Royal Institute for International Affairs, in the UK, in the early 1920's]

[The US/UK power elite facilitation of the Soviet Union has been extensively documented in several books by Antony Sutton, and others. They managed to keep the soviet economy afloat for several decades using primarily western technology and western money. You can read Sutton's books online if you want the chapter and verse. Look at the footnotes on his Wiki page for links to his books. They are very detailed with numerous source documents cited. The reasons why they destroyed Imperial Russia and enslaved Russians for 70 years are far too complex to explain in detail here. Suffice to say that one important reason was that total corporate global control has always been a key objective of the group. And that they knew that corporations controlled by communist/socialist State bureaucrats, a la soviets, could never pose a serious threat to their corporations. Their corporations certainly control the commercial and financial world now, so they have been incredibly successful with this objective. Maybe another blog on another day]

Pages 185 & 186 - Castro's early life. His acting in Hollywood in 1940's. His marriage to Mirtha in 1948 with his US honeymoon which was partially funded by President Batista who he later "overthrew" in his "revolution"; Batista was a friend of Castro's father! How Castro lived in the US for 3 periods of up to 18 months each in the 1940's. How his time there is not accounted for. It is not known exactly when, or where, he as recruited by the CIA, or it's predecessor the OSS. Those long unaccounted for periods in the US are the obvious best guess

Pages 187 & 188 - How Castro's Dad's Army "revolution" was in fact supported by the CFR controlled US state department and how Batista was eased out by them by withdrawing their support for him. The US even recognised Castro's new government before he arrived in Havana! Unprecedented haste for them; they usually waited until several other countries recognised a new government, particularly in Latin America where the US was always being accused of Imperialism.

Page 190 - How the US sent a senior diplomat, in mid December 1958, to tell Batista the facts of life, ie. that he must leave Cuba. He was instructed to leave by the end of 1958 and he duly left on New Years eve. [See the film "The Godfather"]. How Castro received lots of positive media coverage during his first trip to the US as Cuban leader in April 1959. Such coverage barely mentioned that he made an important speech at the CFR in Pratt House. He also secretly visited the Rockefeller mansion as an honoured guest on this trip. Where he met David Rockefeller, one of the main CFR conspirators, and a "select group of globalist cronies and members of the mainstream media that they control". How Castro was charged with implementing a carefully designed 2 prong plan:
1. Destabilise Latin America
2. Penetrate the Soviet leadership and push them into unnecessary military adventures

[Big success on both fronts - well done comrade Fidel!]

Page 191 - How, in order to survive, the military-industrial-academic complex needed non-winnable wars and revolutions. Castro was their man

Page 193 - How the Soviets were deeply suspicious of Castro at first, with good reason he was never a communist in his early career. Gonzalez demonstrates this with a lot of detail. He in fact declared his communism a few months after the infamous "Bay of Pigs" US invasion which "failed". He gave a long televised speech that declared to his amazed audience that he was a Marxist-Leninist. His previous non-communist affiliation was "so widely taken for granted internationally....that his speech caused a commotion". It was a major change of tack and was viewed with suspicion at the time. The Soviets had long suspected that he was CIA and so were very sceptical. But then came the Bay of Pigs, followed by Castro's speech, and everything changed.

Pages 195 to 200 - Lots of detail about how the Bay of Pigs operation was designed to fail. How it was a successful psyop on the Soviets. And how it gave Castro the credibility that he previously lacked with them.

[Or did some of the Soviet leadership know this from the get go? A distinct possibility to my mind given that there were CFR men in the Soviet power elite too. Follow the muneeeee, it always reveals deeper motives and players. The Soviets never actually rid themselves of Rothschild bankers. Russia still hasn't today, as far as I am aware. Yet another indication that the East/West dialectic is false. That it is a psyop on ordinary people, and not real at the elite level]


Chapter 9 on page 201 - "Agent Castro warms up the Cold War"

Pages 201 to 210 - Kennedy, Krushchev, Castro and the Cuban Missile crisis which is a familiar tale. It was also a fraud. The missiles did not contain any nuclear warheads. They were dummies and the US knew this. As evidenced by the fact that the US did not insist on checking the missiles for themselves when the Soviet ships left Cuba with them. They took the Soviets on trust - simply ridiculous! In fact he Soviets never sent nukes abroad at that time as a matter of policy. They always kept them at home and closely guarded by special forces. The whole "Cuban missile crisis" story is a rabbit warren of motives, psyops and false stories on all sides. Bluff, double bluff and triple bluffs.

[Simple logic shows that no great world power is going to give nukes to any allied country that just asks for them. And certainly not to such an unreliable, vicious, hot-headed character as Fidel Castro. The soviets were not stupid]

"The USSR installed missiles where it wanted them and nowhere else".

Page 210 - Krushchev is deposed as a result of the missile crisis fiasco. "A year after his faux pas he received an important visitor: David Rockefeller. A few days after David's kiss of death, CFR moles in the Kremlin deposed Premier Krushchev".

Page 211 to 215 - A long list of Castro's subversive international terrorist activities. He was an earlier, and longer lasting, version of Bin Laden. Just like Bin Lid then Fidel the Fraud was promoted as a [State] terrorist in their media but was actually working under their control to justify all their wars and "policing" invasions. North Korea anyone???? ISIS anyone????

["Responsibility to protect" they now call it. Protect them by bombing the shit out of them, eg. Libya]

[The terror angle needed a State to be credible in those days. People were too savvy to accept that a war could be against something as vague as terror. A State was required and Casto's Cuba was perfect. It was only after their 9/11 psyop that the dumbed-down sheeple accepted the "War on Terror" as credible. Even though it is logically impossible to fight a war against a noun that means "extreme fear". They still needed a threat to justify their multi-trillion $ defence and intelligence budgets. So they chose Islamic terror to replace the USSR. Just like Albert Pike said they would in the 19thC. Albert Pike was a major US Freemason]

[The US army cannot account for $6.5 trillion!!!!! Direct from Rothschild Central:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-audit-army-idUSKCN10U1IG
That's right folks - keep paying your taxes. You gotta keep the military goons in clover]

Page 217 to 220 - Detail about the Castro-Chavez psyop. Chavez was a sub-agent. The CIA helped him gain power in 1992.

[Fidel had a very long, and a very effective, CIA career. He was a "lifetime actor"]


Conclusion:

I have read the book very carefully paying particular attention to his source notes in respect to his statements about Fidel. The detail in this book is extensive and, in the main, it is fully sourced. Servando is not a "Conspiracy Theorist" that's for sure.

So there is now no doubt in my mind that Comrade Fidel was an exceptionally successful agent for the Imperialists that he claimed to oppose. I suspected as much when I wrote my earlier piece in 2016. The official story makes no sense whatsoever. Particularly when you see Cuba "in the flesh" like I did in 2011.


It also makes no sense when you think about just how Castro was promoted by their mainstream media over 50+ years. Initially they kept selling us this tale about the communist bogeyman who sent his troops to ferment communist revolutions etc, in Latin America and Africa. Over and over and over we got the same old tale of his dirty deeds backing the commies and cocking a snook at the Yankees. The Yankees who simply couldn't do anything to stop him.

[Despite the fact that Castro was based on an island that has minimal resources, is entirely undefended, had a massive US military and black ops base on it, Guantanamo, and is only 90 miles from mainland USA]

But somehow, towards the end of his life, he changed from being an evil commie into a saintly left-leaning progressive. And he was feted by them when he eventually died.

The mainstream media always lies doesn't it? It's their default mode.

And they lied  ad infinitum about Comrade Fidel the "communist" CIA agent, ie.

Comrade Fidel the Fraud

Servando's book rings even more true when you realise this.


Addendum:

There is a lot more important information in the book, including the following:

* That there is an invisible, secret, executive government in the USA which totally dominates the official executive government and the President

[Who would have guessed it? ;-))]

* That the official democratic government headed by the "elected" President is in practice subservient to the Council on Foreign Relations

[The CFR's British sister organisation is called the Royal Institute for International Affairs, whose public brand is Chatham House. Both the RIIA and CFR were set up by globalists in the 1920's ahead of their World War 2 which they conceived, funded and managed to their advantage. They made an absolute packet and they steered the world in their required direction as a result of their 3 World Wars in the 20thC: WW1, WW2 and the Cold War]

 * That the CFR is the centerpiece of the US invisible, or secret, or shadow, government. The CFR is based in Pratt House in New York, very handy for Wall Street. It is the real center of US executive power. All important policy and strategy is devised behind the closed doors of Pratt House often via the multi-various US & UK think tanks and other non-democratic, usually very secretive, organisations. But the CFR is key. Policy and strategy is then revealed to us plebs, at the right time, by their puppet politicians

* That the CFR is controlled by the USAngloZionist power elite. In other words UK and Israel are integral to the structure. UK has RIIA [Chatham House]. Israel is "Rothschild Central", lock, stock and barrel

[Of course when I say US, UK and Israel then I mean the power elites of those places, the globalists, NOT the ordinary people, well not most of them. In fact rather than use the description "UK" then it would be far more accurate to say "City of London" which, early readers of this blog will already know, is NOT actually part of the UK at all]

*That Presidents are usually "selected", rather than "elected". Potentially suitable individuals are groomed from a very early age. Which is why they often suddenly appear from out of the blue, out of nowhere, and then are given the full media treatment when "voting" is required. Think Carter, Clinton, dumb ass Bush, Obama. All were virtual unknowns until they got the full media spotlight. The globalist elites media of course. The media that they own and fully control and have done since the early part of the 20thC


Addendum 17th February 2018

From the rabbit hole maestro, Miles Mathis:

http://mileswmathis.com/castro.pdf

"In conclusion, we have found another ludicrous story passed off as history. Castro's bio is another patchwork of inconsistencies and impossibilities, one that is almost as risible as the bio of Jack London. It is just more indication they think we are all idiots. We don't even merit a well crafted tale, one where the plot holds together. Do you think “real” historians can't see what I see? Do you think thousands of college-educated wonks, as detail-oriented as any scholars, don't know what I have just told you? Of course they know. Anyone who has bothered to read these bios and histories closely must know they are total disinfo. I put it that way because it means that all the historians are in on the con. They aren't dupes, either. They are all hired to shovel this gruel down your throat, to the last man and woman. Why else would you have to hear it from me?

No historians ever tell you these stories are faked. No lawyers ever tell you the court cases are faked. No artists ever tell you the art market is a big con. No scientists ever tell you science is a hoax. So what does that tell you about the world? It tells me current “culture” is a total fucking write-off. Modern society is little more than a long running conjob, a smokescreen, a fairy tale written by twisted trolls.

It is time to hand it back to the creators with a big NO THANKS! Tell them you have no use for their fake world, and then start making your own real one. It can be done. I am doing it. Why don't you join me? It is a far better place."

The whole piece is well worth reading. It knocks my efforts into a cocked hat! If you were not convinced by Servando then, you surely will be when you read Miles.

Korean War Part II: Why It's Probably Going To Happen

China is the key - it is controlled by the globalists

The globalists may use a nuke in the near future. If they do then don't be fooled into believing that it is from a "rogue" state like North Korea. There are no "rogue" states. Nothing ever happens on the geopolitical stage by accident. Nothing. Ever.

Another thoughtful analysis from Brandon which I am posting here in full:

"Though a lot of people in my line of work (alternative economic and geopolitical analysis) tend to be accused of "doom mongering," I have to say personally I am not a big believer in "doom." At least, not in the way that the accusation insinuates. I don't believe in apocalypse, Armageddon or the end of the world, nor do I even believe, according to the evidence, that a global nuclear conflict is upon us. In fact, it annoys me that so many people seem desperate to imagine those conclusions whenever a crisis event takes shape.

I think the concept of "apocalypse" is rather lazy — unless we are talking about a fantastical movie scenario, like a meteor the size of Kentucky or Michelle Obama's Adam's apple hurtling towards the Earth. Human civilization is more likely to change in the face of crisis rather than end completely.

I do believe in massive sea changes in societies and political dynamics. I believe in the fall of nations and empires. I believe in this because I have seen it perpetually through history. What I see constant evidence of is that many of these sea changes are engineered by establishment elitists in government and finance. What I see is evidence of organized psychopathy and an agenda for total centralization of power. When I stumble upon the potential for economic disaster or war, I always ask myself "what is the narrative being sold to the public, what truth is it distracting us from and who REALLY benefits from the calamity."

The saying "all wars are banker wars" is not an unfair generalization — it is a safe bet.

First, let's clear up some misconceptions about public attitudes towards the North Korean situation. According to "polls" (I'll remind readers my ample distrust of polls), a majority of Americans now actually support U.S. troop deployment to North Korea, but only on the condition that North Korea attacks first.

I want you to remember that exception — North Korea must attack first. It will be important for later in this analysis.

Despite a wide assumption that the mainstream media is beating the war drums on this issue, I find it is in most cases doing the opposite. The mainstream media has instead been going out of its way to downplay any chance that the current inflamed rhetoric on both sides of the Pacific is anything other than bluster that will end with a whimper rather than bomb blasts. This is one of the reasons why I think war is imminent; the media is a notorious contrarian indicator. Whatever they predict is usually the opposite of what comes true (just look at Brexit and the election of Donald Trump, for starters).  Another generalization that is a sure bet is that the mainstream media usually lies, or at the very least, they are mostly wrong.

That said, if we are to believe the latest polls, unfortunately, one thing is clear: The American people, on both sides of the political spectrum, are becoming more galvanized around supporting a potential conflict with North Korea. For the establishment, war is a winning sell, at least for now.

Of course, I am aware that we have heard all this before. Back in 2013 tensions were relatively high with North Korea just like they are today. North Korea threatened a preemptive nuclear strike on the U.S. back then, too, and in the end it was all hot air. However, besides wider public support than ever before in terms of troop deployment to North Korea, something else is very different from 2013. Primarily, China's stance on the issue of regime change.

In the past, China has been consistent in supporting UN sanctions against North Korea's nuclear program while remaining immovable on war and regime change in the region. In 2013, it was clear that China was hostile to the notion of a U.S. invasion.

In 2017, though, something has changed. China's deep ties to the global banking establishment, their open statements on their affection for the IMF, and their recent induction as the flagship nation for the IMF's Special Drawing Rights system make it clear that they are working for the globalist agenda, not against it. This is not necessarily a new thing behind the curtain; China has done the bidding of globalist institutions for decades. Today though, the relationship is displayed far more publicly.

In 2015, it was China, not the U.S., that sounded the alarm over North Korea's nuclear program, indicating that Pyongyang might have technology well beyond American estimates. It was this warning that triggered the slow buildup to today's fear over a fully capable intercontinental ballistic missile package in the hands of North Korea. It seems obvious to me that China plays the role of North Korea's friend as long as it serves the interests of the globalist agenda, and then China turns on North Korea when the narrative calls for a shift in the script. It is China that opens and closes the door to war with North Korea; a China that is very cooperative with the IMF and the push towards total globalization.

In 2013, China presented the narrative of stalwart opposition to U.S. invasion. In 2017, China has left the door wide open.

Both alternative and mainstream media outlets latched onto recent statements made by Beijing proclaiming that China "would not allow regime change in North Korea." What many of them forgot to mention or buried in their own articles, though, was that this was NOT China's entire statement. China also asserted that they would REMAIN NEUTRAL if North Korea attacked first. I cannot find any previous instance in the past when China has made such a statement; a statement that amounts to a note of permission.

Both the American public and the Chinese government have given support for regime change in North Korea given the stipulation that there is an attack on the U.S. or U.S. interests and allies. So, I ask you, what is most likely to happen here?

Much of the world and most importantly the U.S. is on the verge of a new phase of severe economic decline according to all fundamental data trends. The U.S. is set to enter into yet another debate on the debt ceiling issue with many on the conservative side demanding that Trump and Republicans not roll over this time. And, as I discussed in my article 'Geopolitical Tensions Are Designed To Distract The Public From Economic Decline', a North Korean conflict stands as the best possible distraction.

How does the establishment rationalize a contested debt ceiling increase while also diverting blame away from themselves on the continued decline in U.S. and global fiscal data? War! Not necessarily a "world war" as so many are quick to imagine, but a regional war; a quagmire war that will put the final nail in the U.S. debt coffin and act as the perfect scapegoat for the inevitable implosion of the current stock market bubble. The international banks have much to gain and little to lose in a war scenario with North Korea.

I predict that there will be an attack blamed on North Korea. Either North Korea will be prodded into a violent reaction, or, a false flag event will be engineered and tied to Pyongyang. Remember, for the first time ever, China has essentially backed off of its opposition to invasion of North Korea as long as North Korea "attacks preemptively." Why? Why didn't they make this exception back in 2013? Because now the international banks want a distraction and China is giving them the opening they require.

Will this war culminate in global nuclear conflagration? No. The establishment has spent decades and untold trillions building it's biometric control grids and staging the new global monetary framework under the SDR system. They are not going to vaporize all of this in an instant through a nuclear exchange. What they will do, though, is launch regional wars and also economic wars. Those people expecting apocalypse in the Hollywood sense are going to find something different, but in my opinion much worse — a steady but slower decline into economic ruin and global centralization.

Eventually, China and the U.S. will enter hostilities, but these hostilities will lean more towards the financial than the kinetic. The establishment cabal works in stages, not in absolute events. Another Korean war would be a disaster for America, just not in the way many people think.

Will there be a nuclear event? Yes. If war takes place in North Korea then it is likely they will use a nuclear device somewhere in retaliation. We may even see a nuclear event as a false flag catalyst for starting the war in the first place. This will not be a global threat, but a mushroom cloud over any American city or outpost is enough to scare the hell out of most people. It is all that will be needed.

Does this mean "doom" for the American people? It depends on how we react. Will we continue to hold the banking establishment responsible for all of their sabotage previous to a high profile war in the pacific? Or, will we get caught up in the tides of war fever? Will we question the source of future attacks on the U.S., or will we immediately point fingers at whoever the media or government tells us is the enemy? Our response really is the greatest determining factor in whether or not the American ideal of liberty stands or falls. This time, I do not see bluster, but a dark fog very common in the moments preceding conflict. This time, I believe we are indeed facing war, but war is always a means to an end. War is an establishment tool for social engineering on a massive scale."

Source:
http://alt-market.com/articles/3254-korean-war-part-ii-why-its-probably-going-to-happen

The collapse has already happened

But most people are too distracted to notice

My emphasis in italics:

"Tracking geopolitical and fiscal developments over the past several years is a bit like watching a slow motion train wreck; you know exactly what the consequences of the events will be, you try to warn people as much as possible, but, ultimately, you cannot reverse the disaster. The disaster has for all intents and purposes already happened. What we are witnessing is the aftermath as a forgone conclusion.

This is why whenever someone asks me as an economic and political analyst "when the collapse is going to happen," I have to shake my head in bewilderment. The "collapse" is here now. It is done. It is a historical fact. It's just that not many people have the eyes to see it yet, primarily because they are hyper-focused on all the wrong things."

and

"For many centuries now, elitists in power have understood the value of geopolitical distraction as a tool for controlling the masses. If you examine the underlying motivations behind the majority of wars between nations regardless of the era, you will in most cases discover that the power brokers on both sides tend to be rather friendly with each other. In fact, monarchies and oligarchies are historically notorious for fabricating diplomatic tensions and conflicts in order to force populations back under their control.  That is to say, wars and other man-made conflicts give the citizenry something to react to, instead of hunting down the establishment cabal like they should.

One of the greatest illusions of human progress is the notion that most conflicts happen at random; that there are two sides and that those sides are fighting over ideological differences. In truth, most conflicts have nothing to do with ideological differences between governments and financial oligarchs. The REAL target of these conflicts is the people — or, to be more precise, the psychology of the people. Conflicts are often engineered in order to affect a particular change within the minds of the masses or to distract them from other dangers or solutions"

and

"First, let's be clear, the ongoing destabilization of our economy should be the primary concern of every person on the planet, most particularly those in the West. We are living within the husk of a dead fiscal system, reanimated with the voodoo of central bank stimulus, but only for a limited time. Economic decline is the greatest threat to cultural longevity as well as to human freedom. Even nuclear war could not hold a candle to the terror of financial disaster, because at least in a nuclear war the slate is wiped clean for establishment elites as well as the normal population. At least, in the event of nuclear war, the elites face anarchy just like we do.

In an economic crisis, the establishment maintains a certain level of control and thus its arsenal of toys - Including biometric surveillance grids, standing military support in the form of martial law, as well as the delusion among the populace that things "might go back to the way they were before" given enough time and patience."

and

"I could go on and on — it is simply undeniable that nearly every sector of the U.S. economy is in steady decline compared to pre-2008 levels. This instability in the fundamentals will eventually weigh down and crash stock markets, bond markets, currency markets, etc. Such markets are the last vestige of the U.S. economy still giving the appearance of health.

So, there will come a time, probably sooner rather than later, when the piper will have to be paid and someone will have to take the blame for our fiscal non-recovery. The international banks and central banks are certainly not going to volunteer for this even though they are the real perpetrators behind our incessant financial rot. But how do they avoid accepting responsibility?"

and

"My readers know well that according to the evidence I view the East/West conflict to be farcical and theatrical, but this does not mean there will not be real-world consequences to the "little people" caught in the engineered crossfire. I believe this will culminate not in a shooting war, but in an economic war. While the international financiers constructed our bubble economy and will benefit from its failure, it will be eastern nations (and Trump) that receive much of the blame for the destruction of these bubbles."

Source of the above quotations:

http://alt-market.com/articles/3243-geopolitical-tensions-are-designed-to-distract-the-public-from-economic-decline

Is he correct? Let's hope not hey. But I suspect that he probably is and that it is only a matter of time now. The system is broken and it cannot be fixed by any normal means.

Whichever way it goes then, this is a "must read" piece. Brandon is a thoughtful analyst who realised a long time ago that the old right/left political paradigm is a false dialectic. That left/right politics is a distraction and will never address our fundamental, systemic, problems.

In the US then Republican v Democrat is a manufactured and controlled psyop that diverts the peoples energy away from addressing the real problems. Here in the UK we have another very similar false political dialectic, Conservative v Labour. Slightly more sophisticated than the US version but equally distracting and diverting.

The key is not to focus on the differences between the 2 sides but to focus on what they agree on. They never discuss that of course and for very good reasons. Because what they agree upon lies at the heart of humanity's current problems.

Here are 2 key examples, there are plenty of others:

1. The banksters.

All of them but particularly the "Central Banks" like the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank etc. And even more particularly the central banksters central banks. Like the Bank for International Settlements [BIS] and the International Monetary Fund [IMF] and the World Bank.

Russia and China both support the BIS, the IMF and the World Bank. And their own versions too.

The elites on both sides of the false East/West dialectic are globalists.

They control all the banksters and all the political puppets that you read about in their media, which they also control.

None of the elites are on the ordinary peoples side. None of them. They are mainly friends who pretend to be enemies to fuck with your head.

2. The lawyers

All of them but particularly the main nest in the City of London. They set up, and they still run, the worlds legal systems. Don't believe anyone who tells you different. They created some of the most destructive legal concepts in history, including:

* The person legal fiction. ie. your slave status

* The corporate person legal fiction. Which assigns the same "person" status to corporations, and national states, as to you as an individual. A patently ridiculous and unfair notion if you really think about it.

This corporate "person" legalism is at the root of the current corporate domination of the world.

Government by corporations is fascism. By Mussolini's definition. And he surely knew!

If you research the legal meaning of "person" then you will understand this better.

A "person" is NOT a human being.

A "person" is a legal fiction, a strawman.

Read this for starters. It is not for the faint hearted, or those with a short attention span, but it is very, very, revealing:

https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2013/05/13/the-human-rights-act-deception/

Earthling may not have the politics, or the attitude, that turns you on. But no matter, put aside your petty sensitivities and think about the info that he reveals. Take your time. Think deeply. And do more research for yourself. His info is absolutely devastating.

The Emperor has no clothes! Who would have guessed........

This is something that you will never be told at school. Many lawyers don't even understand the point. It is some of the most important info that you will ever receive. When you understand it then you will understand the breadth and the depth of the con.

If you want to know even more then read this much longer piece of his:

https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2014/04/03/columbia-law-review-supports-earthling-re-human-rights-and-persons/

If you can refute any of the concepts that Earthling discusses in either of these 2 links, or in any of his many other blogs on the same subject then, please alert me in the comments. Facts only please, not opinions. But I doubt that you can.

Source of the quotations at the start:

http://alt-market.com/articles/3243-geopolitical-tensions-are-designed-to-distract-the-public-from-economic-decline

Bracing for cyber 9/11

Just like 9/11 it will be a false flag

I'm posting this piece from James Corbett in it's entirety because it is important.

The internet clampdown is coming. Its only a matter of time.

As James says at the end:

" The only people who have any chance of figuring out what actually happened during a cyberattack are the ones with direct access to the server logs, and even those logs can be corrupted, faked or manipulated in various ways. In the end, it amounts to: “Trust the intelligence agencies! Have they ever lied to you?”

If I really have to answer that question for you, you’re probably not a true Corbett Reporteer. If you do know that the intelligence agencies have lied to you, that they have created and spread cyberweapons in the past, that false flag attacks are used to blame political enemies, and that Russia is being set up to take the fall for the upcoming “Cyber 9/11,” then you’ll know what to think when you see the big New Pearl Harbor 2.0 unfolding before you.

But your friends and neighbors probably won’t. Perhaps you can share some of this information with them before events unfold, so they’ll be forewarned about what’s coming."

https://steemit.com/news/@corbettreport/bracing-for-cyber-9-11

As Al-CIA-da become the “good guys” (again), and I-CIA-SIS starts to crumble, and the latest boogeymen fail to strike a chord of panic in a boogeyman-weary public (remember the fearsome Khorasan Group, anyone?), it is safe to say that the old Global War on Terror (GWoT) paradigm is falling by the wayside. Lucky for the multi-trillion-dollar global terror-industrial complex, then, that the spiffy new cyberterror paradigm is waiting in the wings to take its place!

But just as the fading GWoT paradigm requires a steady stream of (perceived) threats in order to justify the bloated budgets of the US intelligence and security apparatus, so, too, does this new cyberterror paradigm require a constant flow of (perceived) online threats to justify the bloated budgets of the US cybersecurity forces. And just as in the GWoT, every “failure” of cyber-intelligence and every “inadvertent” proliferation of cyber-weaponry gives the newly-created US Cyber Command an excuse to expand its role and take even bolder action in its quest to “fight the net.”

The GWoT and all of its attendant ills have been built on the back of that “catalyzing event”— our “new Pearl Harbor,” 9/11. So, naturally, the new cybersecurity establishment is waiting breathlessly for the “cyber 9/11” that will justify the complete crackdown and government takeover of the internet.

Unsurprisingly, the “cyber 9/11” meme stretches back almost to 9/11 itself. Back in 2003, even as the Pentagon was feverishly drafting its plans to “fight the net” as if it were “an enemy weapons system,” Mike McConnell, the ex-director of the National Security Agency (NSA), was fearmongering over the possibility of a cyber attack “equivalent to the attack on the World Trade Center” if a new institution were not created to oversee cybersecurity. Since then, report after report has continued to use the horror of 9/11 as a way of fueling public hysteria over cyberterrorism.

Of course, many of you reading this editorial will already know the reason for the cyberterror frenzy: There is a pre-planned solution waiting in the wings to be revealed to the public after they have been prompted to respond to the next (virtual) false flag provocation. We don’t have to speculate on this point. In 2008, Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig told a technology conference that a cyber equivalent of the Constitution-destroying Patriot Act is on the shelf, ready to be rubber stamped into law. All it requires is a “cyber 9/11” to make such legislation politically viable.

In effect, the advisors, agents and experts in the cybersecurity industry are waiting for a spectacular cyberterror attack to justify a crackdown on the internet. Their plans include “identity management” schemes like fingerprinting for internet access, which would put an end to the free internet.

So if we know the psychopaths in power need a cyber 9/11 to spring their iPatriot Act on the internet, the obvious questions are: Would the US and its cronies really do something like this? And who would be blamed?

The first question is easy enough to answer: Yes. Yes, they would do this. Case in point: Stuxnet.

Stuxnet was a computer worm that the US and Israel jointly created to target Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities at Natanz. And as we have since learned, Stuxnet was only one part of a much larger cyberattack against Iran, jointly launched by the US and Israel and dubbed “NITRO ZEUS.” Although Stuxnet was intended to be the cyber equivalent of a precision-guided bomb, only capable of damaging the specific computer systems it was intended to target, it quickly escaped the computer systems at Natanz and spread across the internet. Oops. Hope that kind of cyberweaponry doesn’t end up in the hands of one of our “enemies.” That might lead to a cyber 9/11!

And wouldn’t you know it? Other attempts to contain the tools in the Pentagon’s cyber-armory have been similarly unsuccessful.

In 2016 it was revealed that the NSA had not only found security vulnerabilities in numerous software and hardware products but, in direct contradiction to its earlier assurances, had failed to inform the vendors of these problems so they could properly secure their product. Instead, the NSA has been hoarding those exploits so it can gain backdoor access to the computer systems of targeted governments and individuals. As cybersecurity researchers warned at the time, this practice ultimately increases the likelihood that these vulnerabilities will be discovered by criminals, hackers and terrorists somewhere down the line. With the spread of the WannaCry ransomware of 2017, itself made possible by an exploit stolen from the NSA, these fears were realized.

Boy, sure hope this technology doesn’t end up in the hands of the enemies! They might use it to inflict a Cyber Pearl Harbor attack on us!

And who are the enemies, exactly?

Why, the Russians, of course! It’s the Russians! It’s always the Russians! Did you stub your toe on a chair this morning? The Russians rearranged your furniture while you were sleeping! Only mismatched socks left in your sock drawer? That’s because the Russians were rummaging through there last night! And if you get hacked? Well you better believe that’s the Russians!

In fact, even if you don’t get hacked, you can just say it was Russian hackers, and millions will believe you unquestioningly. Just ask Hillary and the DNC.

As we’ve already seen, the “intelligence reports” that have been released so far detailing Russian “election hacking” have been completely evidence-free exercises in political mendacity (but I repeat myself). In fact, we’re not even taking the intelligence agencies’ word for it, because they are taking the DNC’s word for it. Never forget: The DNC refused to hand over its servers to the FBI for examination.

Now, to be fair, it is possible to imagine a universe without contradiction in which the Russians hacked into the DNC to expose their emails to the world. I mean, there’s no evidence whatsoever that that’s what happened, but it’s not impossible to imagine it happening. However, as the meme-sphere has rightly pointed out, even if that did happen, it only means that the Russians rigged the election by exposing how the DNC rigged the election. Hmmm…seems the “I’m Still With Her” crowd haven’t quite thought this one through.

Of course, this isn’t about only the DNC hack or the Podesta spearphishing. Rather, this is a now-familiar cycle in which the #fakenews MSM identifies a hack, worm or cyberattack, immediately blames the Russians in ALL CAPS headlines on the front page, and buries the inevitable retraction in small print at the bottom of page B27 (or the internet equivalent thereof). If you think I’m joking, read MoonOfAlabama’s excellent summary of how this has happened over and over and over and over and over again in the past year.

But as ludicrous as the neo-McCarthyite hysteria has become in recent months, perhaps it reached peak pitch last month in the Qatar crisis. Readers of my column about that crisis will remember how this latest spat in the Gulf (ostensibly) started: The Qatari Emir threw shade at the UAE, Bahrain, Egypt and the Saudis, accusing them of smearing the Qataris and their Muslim Brotherhood/Iranian/Hamas/Hezbollah allies and friends. Or at least that’s what was reported in a curious little piece on the Qatari News Agency website—a piece that was yanked down within half an hour.

The Qataris’ immediate explanation for this swiftly-retracted report? Hackers had broken in and planted the story on their site. Things being what they are, the FBI immediately turned around and blamed those dastardly Russian hackers, and the government’s lapdog MSM dutifully regurgitated this unproven assertion without challenge.

The Russians? The Russians planted a fake news story on the QNA website in order to get the Saudis mad at the Qataris? Really?

No, not really. I know you’re not going to believe this, but the self-same FBI that so confidently pointed the finger at Russia now believes with absolute confidence that it was in fact the UAE that hacked the QNA site. I mean, let’s be clear: The feds are probably wrong about this assertion, too, but it just goes to show how seriously we should take their finger-pointing.

All this flipflopping raises the question of how the FBI—or the CIA, for that matter—determines culpability for a cyber attack in the first place. There are a number of methods for doing this, of course, from the ridiculously circular (“We attributed this type of attack to Group X in the past, so it must be Group X this time!”) to the just plain ridiculous (“Look! Russian language and references to old KGB chiefs! Clearly those sneaky Russkies forgetting to hide their tracks!”). But then the CIA’s secret tool for disguising their own hacks to look like it came from another country’s government gets exposed, and we’re back to credulously taking the word of the spooks as gospel when they say they never have and never would use such a deceptive tactic (pinky swear!).

In part, the unreliable intel points to the fundamental problem of attribution in the age of cyberterror. It’s one thing to attribute a physical attack to an enemy. In the wake of a bombing or hijacking or other physical attack, there is at least some forensic evidence left behind, some money trail for investigators to follow. I mean, those records can be faked, too, of course, but at least there’s something for outside investigators to scrutinize. But in the cyber sphere, there’s nothing at all for anyone to examine. The only people who have any chance of figuring out what actually happened during a cyberattack are the ones with direct access to the server logs, and even those logs can be corrupted, faked or manipulated in various ways. In the end, it amounts to: “Trust the intelligence agencies! Have they ever lied to you?”

If I really have to answer that question for you, you’re probably not a true Corbett Reporteer. If you do know that the intelligence agencies have lied to you, that they have created and spread cyberweapons in the past, that false flag attacks are used to blame political enemies, and that Russia is being set up to take the fall for the upcoming “Cyber 9/11,” then you’ll know what to think when you see the big New Pearl Harbor 2.0 unfolding before you.

But your friends and neighbors probably won’t. Perhaps you can share some of this information with them before events unfold, so they’ll be forewarned about what’s coming.

https://steemit.com/news/@corbettreport/bracing-for-cyber-9-11