Tom Cotton: ‘Susan Rice Is the Typhoid Mary of the Obama Administration’


Tuesday on Hugh Hewitt’s nationally syndicated radio show, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) commented on a report that former National Security Advisor Susan Rice for President Barack Obama was behind the unmasking of the identities of members of Donald Trump’s transition team.

trump fried rice lol

Cotton noted Rice’s involvement in this story and her involvement in what he suggested were other Obama administration foreign policy missteps and likened her to “Typhoid Mary.”

“Susan Rice is the Typhoid Mary of the Obama administration foreign policy,” Cotton said. “Every time something went wrong, she seemed to turn up in the middle of it, whether it was these allegations of improper unmasking, intentional or improper surveillance, whether it’s Benghazi or the other fiascos over the eight years of the Obama administration.”

“If Eli Lake’s reporting is correct, it is hard to square what Susan Rice said in that PBS interview,” he added.

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/04/04/tom-cotton-susan-rice-typhoid-mary-obama-administration/

Advertisements

Globalists Continue To Push The Lie That Treaties Are Binding Upon The United States Citizens: Treaties Can Be Nullified By States Or Statutes & Obama Removed From Office!


Our Senate and President (not to mention that he is a usurper) lack lawful authority to enter into a treaty that conflicts with The Constitution so even signed and ratified it would not be a valid treaty.

Reblogged from Political Vel Craft dated July 2012

The following qualifies as one of the greatest lies the globalists continue to push upon the American people. That lie is: “Treaties supersede the U.S. Constitution“.

The Second follow-up lie is this one: “A treaty, once passed, cannot be set aside”. HERE ARE THE CLEAR IRREFUTABLE FACTS: The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that

1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution. 2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last, 3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you’ve read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone — anyone — claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth. “This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty.” – Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.

This case involved the question: Does the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (treaty) supersede the U.S. Constitution? Keep reading. The Reid Court (U.S. Supreme Court) held in their Opinion that,

“… No agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution. Article VI, the Supremacy clause of the Constitution declares, “This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all the Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land…’

“There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification which even suggest such a result…

“It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights – let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition – to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power UNDER an international agreement, without observing constitutional prohibitions. (See:Elliot’s Debates 1836 ed. – pgs 500-519).

“In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article VI. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined.”

Did you understand what the Supreme Court said here? No Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Executive Agreement, no NAFTA, GATT/WTO agreement/treaty, passed by ANYONE, can supersede the Constitution. FACT. No question! At this point the Court paused to quote from another of their Opinions; Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 at pg. 267 where the Court held at that time that,

“The treaty power as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or a change in the character of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter without its consent.”

Assessing the GATT/WTO parasitic organism in light of this part of the Opinion, we see that it cannot attach itself to its host (our Republic or States) in the fashion the traitors in our government wish, without our acquiescing to it. The Reid Court continues with its Opinion:

“This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which MUST comply with the Constitution, is on full parity with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict, renders the treaty null. It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument.”

The U.S. Supreme court could not have made it more clear : TREATIESDO NOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUTION, AND CANNOT, IN ANY FASHION, AMEND IT !!! CASE CLOSED. Now we must let our elected “representatives” in Washington and the State legislatures know that we no longer believe the BIG LIE… we know that we are not bound by unconstitutional Treaties, Executive Orders, Presidential Directives, and other such treasonous acts.

[Note: the above information was taken from Aid & Abet Police Newsletter, with limited revision. P.O. Box 8712, Phoenix, Arizona. Acknowledgment given to Claire Kelly, for her good assistance and in depth treaty research. The use of this information is not to be construed as endorsement of Aid & Abet Police Newsletter. Claire Kelly is a trusted and knowledgeable friend. – CDR]

__________________________________________

Here’s what Thomas Jefferson said on the right to renounce treaties:

“Compacts then, between a nation and a nation, are obligatory on them as by the same moral law which obliges individuals to observe their compacts. There are circumstances, however, which sometimes excuse the non-performance of contracts between man and man; so are there also between nation and nation. When performance, for instance, becomes impossible, non-performance is not immoral; so if performance becomes self-destructive to the party, the law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others”.

pg 317 – “The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson,” A. Koch & Wm. Peden, Random House 1944, renewed 1972. Jefferson also said in a letter to Wilson C. Nicholas on Sept. 7, 1803, Ibid. pg 573

“Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction [interpretation]. I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of the treaty making power as boundless. If it is, then we have no Constitution.” ______________________________________________________________Further evidence:

Excerpt from a letter from U.S. Senator, Arlen Specter, (R. Penn.) to constituent, November 3, 1994.

“Dear Mr. Neely:”Thank you for contacting my office regarding the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. … I have signed on as a cosponsor of Senator Bradley’s resolution [SR 70, which urges the president to seek the advice and consent of the Senate for ratification] because I believe that the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child is an appropriate step in the direction of promoting the well-being of children throughout the world. [he goes on to mention concerns that the treaty would subjugate familial and parental responsibility to an international entity, which he denies] “… Secondly, the Convention would not override the U.S. Constitution; rather, as in the case of any treaty, any provision that conflicts with our Constitution would be void in our country… “

[CDR Note: It is our belief that Arlen Specter would not have been as truthful regarding Constitutional Supremacy over treaties if he had a clue that this letter to a constituent would have found its way into the hands or eyes of the public.]

_________________________________________________

Logical deduction:      No law or treaty supersedes the Supreme Law of the Land.  ‘Supreme’… meaning ‘highest or greatest’.  What is higher than highest or greater than greatest, other than our Creator?  The Constitution acknowledges our God-given, unalienable rights, and secures those rights in that acknowledgement.         The Constitution gives the US Senate authority to ratify treaties with other nations. Americans have been propagandized into believing that those treaties become the supreme law of the land superseding the Constitution. Let’s examine this deception closely and dispel the myth once and for all. Article VI of the Constitution states:

Clause 2 – “This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution [of any state] or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.”Clause 3 – “The senators and representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executives and judicial officers, both of the United States and the several states, shall be bound by oath of affirmation to support this Constitution .”

Laws made in pursuance of this Constitution are laws which are made within the strict and limited confines of the Constitution itself. No federal, state, or international law, rule or bureaucratic regulation and no state constitution can supersede B or be repugnant to B this Constitution.

Treaties made under the authority of the United States… the United States (federal government) was authorized by and on behalf of the people and in pursuance of this Constitution to enter into certain treaties with other governments. The United States (federal government) obtains its authority solely from the Constitution. It would be ludicrous to think that it has the power to circumvent (via treaties) that which grants it its authority.

In Clause 3, it is made clear that every elected official, both federal and state, is bound by oath to support this Constitution. Who can rightly, and genuinely claim to be given the power to destroy that which they are elected and sworn to uphold?

The powers granted by the Constitution cannot sanely be construed to provide the authority to usurp, pre-empt or eradicate it.       The U.S. Supreme Court as cited above correctly ruled that the supremacy of the Constitution overrides treaties. It should be noted that if any Court, be it a State, Federal or the U.S. Supreme Court, should ever rule otherwise, the decision would be repugnant to the Constitution and the ruling would be null and void.

The answer to this question is self-evident.

The Constitution authorizes the United States to enter into treaties with other nations B the word Anation@ although not explicit, is certainly implied. The United Nations is an Organization – a Global Corporate Bureaucracy.The ‘experts’ in international law, commerce, banking, environment, etc.; and a cadre of alleged conservative / Christian-conservative leaders — lawyer, Dame of Malta, Phyllis Schlafly being a prime example — have been spewing forth propaganda to instill and further the myth of ‘treaty-supremacy’ for decades.

Their ‘expertise’ is an illusion created apparently with hopes to instill a sense of inferiority in the ‘common man’ (their term) so we will all defer to their superior intelligence. Let’s not go there. Here’s a perfect example of ‘expert’ propaganda on the supremacy question: On April 11, 1952, Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles (cfr), speaking before the American Bar Association in Louisville, Kentucky said…

“Treaties make international law and also they make domestic law. Under our Constitution, treaties become the supreme law of the land…. Treaty law can override the Constitution. Treaties, for example, …can cut across the rights given the people by their constitutional Bill of Rights.”

Mr. Dulles is confused about the People’s rights. To repeat an earlier statement of fact: the Constitution doesn’t ‘give’ us rights. The Constitution acknowledges and secures our inherent, Creator-endowed rights. What Creator gives, no man can take away. The Dulles brothers worked (lied) long and hard to firmly establish the treaty-supremacy myth. And they realized it would have to be done by deceit — propaganda. Admittedly by propaganda.

“There is no indication that American public opinion, for example, would approve the establishment of a super state, or permit American membership in it. In other words, time – a long time – will be needed before world government is politically feasible… This time element might seemingly be shortened so far as American opinion is concerned by an active propaganda campaign in this country…”

Allen W. Dulles (cfr) from a UN booklet, Headline Series #59 (New York: The Foreign Policy Association., Sept.-Oct., 1946) pg 46.      The question of “nationhood” in reference to the United Nations seems to have been addressed by the errant Congress.  A quick fix apparently took place in the U.S. Senate on March 19, 1970. According to the Anaheim (Cal) Bulletin, 4-20-1970, the Senate ratified a resolution recognizing the United Nations Organization as a sovereign nation. That would be tantamount to recognizing General Motors as a sovereign nation. Are we beginning to get the picture? Case Closed Sweet Liberty

Second Important Article About The Treaty Myth.

Treaties do not override the Constitution.
By Don Fotheringham In anticipation that our president may sign one or more treaties that conflict with the U.S. Constitution’s limited grant of power, several voices of alarm are contending that a treaty can override, or in effect amend, our Constitution. Although that view has gained some currency, it is a myth that contradicts the intent of those who framed the Constitution. And it violates any reasonable interpretation of that document. Origin of the Myth The frightful idea that U.S. treaties with foreign nations supercede the Constitution has been regularly promoted since the Eisenhower era.
 divider gif
1 It was given a big boost in 1952 when Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, a founding member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), made the following statement:
divider gif
2 … congressional laws are invalid if they do not conform to the Constitution, whereas treaty laws can override the Constitution. Treaties, for example, can take powers away from Congress and give them to the President; they can take powers from the states and give them to the Federal Government, or to some international body and they can cut across the rights given the people by the Constitutional Bill of Rights.
 divider gif
3 It would be hard to find a more preposterous assertion. Sadly, however, many citizens have been led to believe that treaties do override the Constitution. Could anyone really think our founding fathers spent four months in convention, limiting the size, power and scope of government, and then provided for their work to be destroyed by one lousy treaty?
 divider gif
But one might object, what about Article VI? Article VI establishes the supremacy of U.S. laws and treaties made within the bounds of the Constitution. It is called the Supremacy Clause, because it places federal laws and treaties that are made pursuant to the Constitution above state constitutions, laws. and treaties. Some Important History This was needed because, contrary to their agreement under the Articles of Confederation, certain states had violated their trust and entered into treaties with foreign powers.
 divider gif
During the convention,
Madison said: “Experience had evinced a constant tendency in the States to encroach on federal authority; to violate national Treaties, to infringe the rights and interests of each other.”
divider gif
4 State-made pacts often conflicted with peace and trade treaties wanted by the Confederation Congress for the benefit of all thirteen states, making it hard for Congress to consummate better agreements with other nations. This also led to fierce contention between the states in their effort to monopolize the import of goods from Europe and the Indian tribes. But more serious dangers arose in matters of security, for should one state be at war with a foreign power while a sister state honors its peace agreement with the same enemy, the security of the entire Confederation would be threatened.
divider gif
5 In an effort to head off such dangers, the Confederation Congress frequently attempted to nullify
state-made treaties in the state courts (there were no federal courts). But as might be expected, the state judges ruled inevitably in favor of their own states, pursuant to the state laws and constitutions.
divider gif
The 1787 Convention corrected that problem by making certain only federal treaties would be recognized as valid. In this light, it is not hard to understand why paragraph two of Article VI is worded as follows: This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. Upon ratification of the Constitution, the state treaties were nullified.
divider gif
Thereafter, only federal treaties were recognized as supreme, regardless of any remaining state provisions to the contrary. Moreover, under the new Constitution the founders established a Supreme Court, granting it original jurisdiction over treaty controversies, and thereby removing from state judges jurisdiction over treaty cases. In addition to quelling strife among the states, Article VI accomplished a major objective of the Convention, mainly that of placing the United States in a position to speak to the world with one voice.
 divider gif
United States treaties are created when proposed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate. The power of the President and the Senate, in their treaty-making capacity, was never intended to be a power greater than the Constitution. Citizens who met in the state ratifying conventions (1787 to 1790) to examine with great care the provisions of the proposed Constitution had a correct understanding of the Supremacy Clause.
divider gif
During the ratifying debates, James Madison answered questions regarding the new national charter and commented on the extent of the treaty-making power under Article VI: “I do not conceive that power is given to the President and Senate to dismember the empire, or to alienate any great, essential right. I do not think the whole legislative authority have this power. The exercise of the power must be consistent with the object of its delegation.”
 divider gif
6 In the same discussion
Madison said: “Here, the supremacy of a treaty is contrasted with the supremacy of the laws of the states. It cannot be otherwise supreme.” That is, a treaty cannot in any other manner or situation be supreme. Thomas Jefferson: “I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of treaty- making to be boundless. If it is, then we have no Constitution.”
divider gif
But we do have a Constitution. Its life and viability depend entirely on the small number of citizens who 1) understand the document, and 2) who equally understand the forces at work to destroy it. At this point enough time has passed, and enough false teachings have been promulgated, to cause modern Americans to fall for the treaty power ploy. It is not surprising that John Foster Dulles, a ranking member of the CFR, should in 1952 circulate the treaty-power heresy that yet prevails.
divider gif
It is time for serious reflection on the words of Edmond Burke, “The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.” Those who seek to preserve the sovereignty of the United States must work energetically to expose the Dulles delusion — the ridiculous idea that treaties have intrinsic powers greater than the Constitution.
 divider gif
1 In decades immediately prior to the Dulles speech, Supreme Court decisions had already begun to enunciate the idea (see, for example, Missouri v. Holland in 1920 and United States v. Pink in 1942).
 divider gif
2 Dulles actually made this statement during a speech in Louisville on April 2, 1952, shortly before Eisenhower appointed him Secretary of State.
 divider gif
3 Quoted by Frank E. Holman, Story of the Bricker Amendment, (New York Committee for Constitutional Government, Inc., 1954), pp. 14, 15.
divider gif
4 The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, Farrand, Vol. I, p. 164.
 divider gif
5 Benjamin Franklin’s Plan of Union, America, Vol. 3, p. 47.
 divider gif
6 Debates on the Federal Constitution, Jonathan Elliot, ed., second edition, Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Company, 1907, Vol. III, p. 514. Robert Welch University
divider gif
Founding Fathers

divider gif

Related articles:

Facebook Nazis Want Rid Of Me. And Anyone Else Like Me.


Check the private message FB sent me.
Facebook nazis are getting ready to declare me ‘ineligible’ to use facebook because I dont meet community standards???
ScreenHunter_451 Dec. 27 09.34.jpg
Facebook already declared me ineligible August 2014 and then permanently disabled my original profile.
Taking cyberhostage my 5000 fb friends and readers plus hundreds of followers who couldnt be on my friendlist because of stupid fb frind limit.. I was accused of posting sexually explicit photos of children after I sounded the larm for the patriots to come close down Laredo crossing back in June 2014. I tagged Texas Governor Perry with it too just FYI.. along with every other state governor and sheriff and lawdog and peacekeeper amd oathkeeper and hellraiser and militia man and true American Patriot who want to defend our Liberty in America.
Sat 8:21pm December23,2015
look what the facebook nazis just sent me
8:18pm
Fαcebook wιll ιmmediαtely dιsαble your αccount thαt ιs consιdered ιnelιgιble use. If you αre the orιgιnαl owner of thιs αccount.
Please clιck the followιng lιnk to contιnue the recovery process :
If wιthιn 2 hours you do not vιsιt our lιnks, we wιll block your αccount permαnently αs α reαson for not fulfιllιng the terms of use. Thαnk you for helpιng to ιmprove our servιces.
Terms of Use

fb sharia compliant

For lots more info about the fb nazis click here>
Update: Kelli D Gordon vs The Facebook Nazis
Posted on August 20, 2014 by Kelli D Gordon III% TX

https://kellidgordonlibertyblog.wordpress.com/2015/12/16/facebook-nazis-at-it-again/

U.S. Military Pilots Provide Solid Proof That Obama Is Helping ISIS… Here’s What They’re Saying


U.S. Military Pilots Provide Solid Proof That Obama Is Helping ISIS… Here’s What They’re Saying

This news comes after the horrific attacks in Paris by the Muslim terrorist group ISIS. While France and Russia have no problem bombing the hell out of these scumbags, Obama has squashed effective strikes for over 2 years by placing ludicrous policies in place that require special ‘clearance’ before any strikes can be executed.

The Washington Free Beacon reported that strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

 jet pilot obama wont let us shoot isis targets

The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State.

“You went 12 full months while ISIS was on the march without the U.S. using that air power and now as the pilots come back to talk to us they say three-quarters of our ordnance we can’t drop, we can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us,” Royce said.

“I don’t understand this strategy at all because this is what has allowed ISIS the advantage and ability to recruit,” he added.

The Pentagon defended Obama’s policy saying, “The bottom line is that we will not stoop to the level of our enemy and put civilians more in harm’s way than absolutely necessary,” adding that the military often conducts flights “and don’t strike anything.”

“The fact that aircraft go on missions and don’t strike anything.

http://www.jewsnews.co.il/2015/12/19/u-s-military-pilots-provide-solid-proof-that-obama-is-helping-isis-heres-what-theyre-saying-2/

FACEBOOK NAZIS AT IT AGAIN.


FACEBOOK NAZIS AT IT AGAIN.. BLOCKING ME FROM MY OWN PROFILE HOW IN THIS FACEBOOK HELL AM I SUPPOSED TO RECOGNIZE THE PROFILE THAT THESE IMAGES GO TO?

Update: Kelli D Gordon vs The Facebook Nazis


August 21, 2014

fb display of civil disobedience for real


By Kelli D Gordon in McAllen, TX                                                                          August 20 2014

I’m blogging everything from now on first.
FB actually made me mad enough to file a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (Ref. # 55570072 if anyone wants to chime in) or leave me a statement in the comments below) I’m seeing an attorney later this week.

Normally, I avoid the court system like the plague. I am of the opinion that THERE IS NO JUSTICE left to be had in my once great American Nation of God & Liberty. However,  I WILL NOT stand still for ANYMORE of this slander and tyranny! Now I been accused of posting sexually explicite photos of children?? and declared “ineligible” to use facebook!! (This the final insult, after enduring months and months of unconstitutional discrimination and harrassment by fb nazi “security checks” and ridiculous invasions of my privacy.  I hope the attorney takes this case. Im charging FB with slander, discrimination, defamation of character, theft of intellectual property, theft of my treasured collections of archived articles  that i utilized daily in my informative, humorous and thought provoking posts. I kept my collections proudly in 50 publicly visible and well organized “Situation Rooms” I am also furious about these fb nazis holding my 5000 FB friends (and family) and readers cyber hostage. I am suffering from separation anxiety (I miss the interaction and conversations I once enjoyed with my fellow like-minded fb friend). I feel I have been targeted simply for being an outspoken Federal Government Dissident who is resisting a tyrannical situation. Is the federal government afraid of little old me? Is this fear I smell? Fear that my message is being recieved and understood by others who will organize and help me fight this tyranny?

My networking skills obviously scare the hell out of the enemy. I am NOT going to go quietly into the night. I will amp up the volume instead. I am not going to diminish in to the sunset or out of the way. I will make even more noise and bring even more attention to the treachery instead.

My blog numbers dropped from 2600 viewers a day down to just 2 or 3 hundred since I no longer can access my homepage, groups or friends and readers so they succeeded in killing the reach of my messages and posts. And I’m pissed. They had to try to stop me because i was reaching too many people. I have effing had it with these nazi rat bastards and the unconstitutional censorship, discrimination and bias.

Not only have I have been declared “ineligible” to use facebook with no explanation as to why, but three of my favorite American Patriots were also taken down from posting on facebook. Irish Lass of California, John Gaultier of Texas and Michael Louis Toups of Louisiana are no longer among the patriot voices I once enjoyed reading on Facebook. These three individuals are also outspoken, highly intelligent and effective networkers, organizers, activists, writers, thinkers and all around Great Americans!!!

Shame on Zuckerberg and on the facebook anti-American stance.

fb zuckerberg hitler lol

Kelli D Gordon vs Facebook Nazis

For more info click the link. https://kellidgordonlibertyblog.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/face-book-nazis-3/


August 18, 2014

Kelli D Gordon and Kelli DeAnne Gordon both profiles have been taken down by the facebook nazis. Discrimination? What… targeted by a criminal out of control government. This is unacceptable. How many patriot voices will we sacrifice to the enemy of Liberty before we make a stand and fight for our unalienable rights!!!? What about John Gaultier and Michael Louis Toups or Irish Lass? Declared ‘ineligible’? with no explanation from the faceless facebook gestapo. Hmmmm.
https://kellidgordonlibertyblog.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/face-book-nazis-3/ 


 Someone commented that this was a four year old pic anyways, I went to try to verify this and got threatened by the nsa and another group called IWF internet watch foundation??? WTH?? Then was notified that my browser is ‘locked’. Im not even kidding. Along with a pic of flashing lights and handcuffs.. YAH.. Investigate me treat me like a criminal.
BUT DONT GO ANYWHERE NEAR INVESTIGATING A MOSQUE. ALLOW ISLAM IN MY DHS AND ALLOW JIHAD TRAINING CAMPS AND SCHOOLS TO THRIVE… SEEMS LEGIT.

Federal Court Says the Government Can Impersonate You on Social Media — and There’s Not Much You Can Do About It


Twitter sues U.S. government over national security data

By Eric Bradner, CNN
updated 3:19 PM EDT, Tue October 7, 2014

Military Partnered with Facebook to Conduct Massive Psy-Op… And It Was All Done in Secret


Uncle Sams Misguided Children is sharing my fb story!

Patriots under attack

Kelli is emphatic that no one is going to shut her up. She has elicited the services of Attorney James Grissom of McAllen, Texas for her action.

“They take you down and you have to rework everything you’ve done…They play games…They are working with the government against hard-hitting Patriots…They believe we are ‘subversive.’”

Kelli is not alone. Patriots and Conservatives on Facebook live under the ever-present censorship of the social network. Though everyone who “joins” Facebook must sign a user agreement demanding that they comply with Facebook “Community Standards,” those standards are not applied equitably to all groups.  There is a definite liberal/pro-muslim agenda.

 http://misguidedchildren.com/domestic-affairs/2014/10/patriots-under-fire-facebooks-continual-attack-on-freedom-of-speech/31940


 

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/5:2013cv05996/273216


You Won’t believe What Facebook is Doing & You Could Be Their Next Target! Exclusive Victims Report

You Won’t believe What Facebook is Doing & You Could Be Their Next Target! Exclusive Victims Report https://youtu.be/iyyN543EF_E
Published on Dec 12, 2014
Here is the link that goes with the post: http://b4in.info/rjhU

Lyn Leahz Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/user/LynLeahz

If anyone out there misses me, my posts or is angry that facebook falsely and slanderously accused me of posting sexually explicite photos of CHILDREN!!! Then declared me ‘ineligible’ to use facebook and permanently disabled my Kelli D Gordon account, please leave me a comment below so I can show my attorney evidence that we have all been injured and angered. That though we may have never met before we still care for one another and consider ourselves friends.

 
If anyone out there misses me, my posts or is angry that facebook falsely and slanderously accused me of posting sexually explicite photos of CHILDREN!!! Then declared me ‘ineligible’ to use facebook and permanently disabled my Kelli D Gordon account, please leave me a comment below so I can show my attorney evidence that we have all been injured and angered. That though we may have never met before we still care for one another and consider ourselves friends.

Comments collected from my secondary Kelli DeAnne Gordon account on 9/4/2014

Try to remember with farcebook, they can kick you off any time they want. I just got that treatment a few days ago.

 

https://kellidgordonlibertyblog.wordpress.com/2015/12/16/facebook-nazis-at-it-again/

Flynn’s Last Interview: Iconoclast Departs DIA With A Warning


on August 07, 2014 at 12:42 PM

Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn in happier days, taking command of the Defense Intelligence Agency just two years ago.

In this exclusive exit interview with Breaking Defense contributor James Kitfield, the outgoing chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, talks about metastasizing Islamic terrorism, his struggles to reform intelligence-gathering, and the risk of lurching from crisis to crisis in an Internet-accelerated world.  – the editors.

“Disruptive.” That’s how Michael Flynn’s enemies reportedly described him during his time as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, a tenure that ends tomorrow – a year early – when the three-star general retires after 33 years in the US Army. Was Flynn forced out? The Pentagon said his departure had been “planned for some time” when it made the announcement in April. But Flynn had challenged the Obama administration narrative that al-Qaeda’s brand of nihilistic extremism had died with Osama bin Laden in 2011. He had bruised egos at the DIA trying to transform the 17,000-person bureaucracy into a more agile and forward-deployed intel operation, one shaped by the lessons he had learned as intelligence chief for Joint Special Operations Command in Iraq and Afghanistan, working for the ill-fated iconoclast Gen. Stanley McChrystal. As early as 2010, Flynn made waves with a report, Fixing Intel, that said US intelligence could not answer “fundamental questions” in Afghanistan.

James Kitfield: DIA is tracking global crises from Ukraine to the Mideast to North Korea and the Western Pacific. Have you ever seen so many crises occurring simultaneously? 

Flynn: No. I come into this office every morning, and other than a short jog to clear my head, I spend two to three hours reading intelligence reports. I will frankly tell you that what I see each day is the most uncertain, chaotic and confused international environment that I’ve witnessed in my entire career. There were probably more dangerous times such as when the Nazis and [Japanese] Imperialists were trying to dominate the world, but we’re in another very dangerous era. We rightfully talk about the last decade being the longest war in American history, for instance, but when we pull combat troops out of Afghanistan at the end of this year, it’s not going to feel like that war is over. To me, it feels like we’ll be facing a familiar threat and heightened uncertainty for a long time yet.

JK: Why?

Flynn: I think we’re in a period of prolonged societal conflict that is pretty unprecedented. In the Middle East, we’re starting to see issues arise over boundaries that were drawn back in the post-colonial era following World War I. In some regions, we’re seeing the failure of the nation-state, and to some degree the disintegration of the [Westphalian] system of nation-states: Look at Libya, or Mali, or Nigeria. Because of a youth bulge, Nigeria will be the third most populated country on the planet in ten years, and [the Al Qaeda-linked terrorist group] Boko Haram is active in half of that country. Then look at what’s happening in Iraq and Syria.

What I see is a strategic landscape and boundaries on the global map changing right before our eyes. That change is being accelerated by the explosion of social media. And we in the intelligence community are trying to understand it all.

JK: Do you worry that instability will cause crises to escalate dangerously?

Flynn: Yes, because events happen so fast. Just consider the crisis in Ukraine. Information travels so fast now that suddenly everyone is asking policymakers, ‘What are you going to do about it?’ Even the President, I believe, sometimes feels compelled to just do something without first saying ‘Wait! How did this happen? Who made this decision?’ My point is before we wade into the middle of a big crisis, we need to take a deep breath, and figure out whether it was prompted by a decision by [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, or [Chinese President Xi] Jinping? Or is it provoked by some Russian general on the ground ordering his troops into Ukraine to gain a promotion, or some Chinese admiral looking to act tough by sinking a Japanese vessel? Because if a crisis escalates and we go to the gates in preparation for war, we had better do it for the right reasons.

JK: When you were asked recently at the Aspen Security Forum whether the United States is safer from the terrorist threat today than before 9/11, you answered no.

Flynn: I know that’s a scary thought, but in 2004, there were 21 total Islamic terrorist groups spread out in 18 countries. Today, there are 41 Islamic terrorist groups spread out in 24 countries. A lot of these groups have the intention to attack Western interests, to include Western embassies and in some cases Western countries. Some have both the intention and some capability to attack the United States homeland.

For instance, we’re doing all we can to understand the outflow of foreign fighters from Syria and Iraq, many of them with Western passports, because another threat I’ve warned about is Islamic terrorists in Syria acquiring chemical or biological weapons. We know they are trying to get their hands on chemical weapons and use what they already have to create a chemical weapons capability.

Remember anthrax was used in 2001 [killing five people] and pretty much paralyzed Capitol Hill. If that anthrax had been dispersed more efficiently, it could have killed a quarter million people.

JK: You also said recently that terrorist leaders like Osama bin Laden represent the leadership of al-Qaeda, but that “core al-Qaeda” is its ideology of perpetual jihad.

Flynn: Yes, and unfortunately the core ideology and belief system is spreading, not shrinking. Look at the unbelievably violent videos [of beheadings, executions and the destruction of religious places] coming out of Iraq just in recent days. I’ve physically interrogated some of these guys, and I’ve had the opportunity to hear them talking about their organizations and beliefs. These are people who have a very deeply-rooted belief system that is just difficult for Americans to comprehend. Just think about the mindset of a suicide bomber.

JK: When the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria routed the Iraqi Army recently, the terrorists also appeared to have become much better organized, disciplined and led.

Flynn: These various groups have learned from fighting the U.S. military for a decade, and they have created adaptive organizations as a means to survive. They write about and share ‘Lessons Learned’ all the time. That was something Bin Laden taught them before he died. These proliferating Islamic terrorist groups have also for years been developing connective tissue to each other and back to al-Qaeda senior leadership in Pakistan’s tribal regions. Some of those connections are pretty strong. We’re not talking bits and pieces or nascent connections.

JK: After Bin Laden was killed and democratic revolutions swept through the Middle East, there was a belief in the White House and elsewhere that his radical Islamist movement would also die. Why did you push back against that?

Flynn: There’s a political component to that issue, but when Bin Laden was killed there was a general sense that maybe this threat would go away. We all had those hopes, including me. But I also remembered my many years in Afghanistan and Iraq [fighting insurgents].. We kept decapitating the leadership of these groups, and more leaders would just appear from the ranks to take their place. That’s when I realized that decapitation alone was a failed strategy.

JK: Did you ever feel like a lone voice in the administration warning that the terrorist threat was growing, not receding?

Flynn: I think we collectively felt that way. We said many times, “Hey, we need to get this intelligence in front of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, the National Security adviser! The White House needs to see this intelligence picture we have!”

We saw all this connective tissue developing between these [proliferating] terrorist groups.  So when asked if the terrorists were on the run, we couldn’t respond with any answer but ‘no.’ When asked if the terrorists were defeated, we had to say ‘no.’ Anyone who answers ‘yes’ to either of those questions either doesn’t know what they are talking about, they are misinformed, or they are flat out  lying.

JK: What do you see as your legacy as DIA’s leader?

Flynn: We took ten years of ‘Lessons Learned’ from combat about intelligence integration, collaboration and focus on the field, and built five Intelligence Integration Centers to support our combatant commanders and warfighters. Despite all the madness going on in the world that we have discussed, those fusion centers have been stood up and are operating magnificently. I think we have greatly improved the capability of the Defense Clandestine Service, shutting down 20 nonproductive facilities and moving a whole bunch of people out into the field in conflict zones. I’m also proud of the fact that our relationship and partnership with both the CIA and FBI are far stronger today than in the past, which is largely a result of the personal relationships we have established over the past decade of conflict.

JK: What did you make of reports that you are being forced out of your job for being disruptive?

Flynn: If anyone was concerned about my leadership, I would have been out long ago. But to be frank, this is my third assignment at DIA, and I have spent five of the last ten years on combat deployments. If you go back over my career, everyone I’ve worked with during all my assignments will tell you, ‘Oh yeah, Flynn will come in and shake things up.’ That was actually the direct guidance I was given by [former Defense Secretary Leon] Panetta when I was given this job.

So accomplishing the goals I set required shaking things up at DIA. Maybe it did get to the point where I was a little too far out in front of my headlights. I had a meeting with my boss and the message was ‘it’s time for you to go,’ and my reaction was to salute and say, ‘Okay, no problem.’

I was fine with that because at the end of the day I’m a soldier, and I serve at the pleasure of my superiors. But I will also tell you that with all these crises we’ve been discussing the nation is confronting a dangerous era, facing multiple threats and challenges from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Islamic terrorist groups, you name it. If I wasn’t in there shaking things up, I probably wouldn’t have been doing my job.

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/08/flynns-last-interview-intel-iconoclast-departs-dia-with-a-warning/

CIA Admits to Hacking Senate Computers


In a sharp and sudden reversal, the CIA is acknowledging it improperly tapped into the computers of Senate staffers who were reviewing the intelligence agency’s Bush-era torture practices.

 

July 31, 2014 The Central Intelligence Agency improperly and covertly hacked into computers used by Senate staffers to investigate the spy agency’s Bush-era interrogation practices, according to an internal investigation.

CIA Director John Brennan has determined that employees “acted in a manner inconsistent with the common understanding” brokered between the CIA and its Senate overseers, according to agency spokesman Dean Boyd.

Feinstein: ‘CIA’s Search May Well Have Violated’ the Constitution

The Senate Intelligence Committee leader accused the CIA of interfering with its investigation into the agency’s old interrogation programs.

The stunning admission follows a scathing, 40-minute speech by Senate Intelligence Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein on the Senate floor back in March, in which she accused the CIA of secretly accessing her panel’s computers that were used to review documents related to the government’s torture, detention, and rendition policies deployed during George W. Bush’s presidency. The powerful California Democrat lacerated the CIA for attempting to impede her panel’s investigation and charged the agency with possibly violating the Constitution.

At the time, Brennan denied Feinstein’s accusations, telling NBC News reporter Andrea Mitchell, “As far as the allegations of the CIA hacking into Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth.… That’s beyond the scope of reason.”

But after being briefed on the inspector general’s findings, Brennan “apologized” on Tuesday to both Feinstein and the panel’s top Republican, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, for the actions of his officers, spokesman Boyd said.

Brennan has submitted the inspector general’s findings to an accountability board led by retired Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh, according to Boyd. Bayh, an Indiana Democrat, once served on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

In a statement, Feinstein called Brennan’s apology and the accountability board submission “positive first steps.”

 

Spy vs Spy
Spy vs Spy

“The investigation confirmed what I said on the Senate floor in March—CIA personnel inappropriately searched Senate Intelligence Committee computers in violation of an agreement we had reached, and I believe in violation of the constitutional separation of powers,” Feinstein said. “This [inspector general] report corrects the record and it is my understanding that a declassified report will be made available to the public shortly.”

Feinstein’s bombshell allegations, as well as the CIA’s charge that her staff removed classified documents from a CIA facility in Virginia, were both referred to the Justice Department for further investigation. But earlier this month, the department said it did not have enough findings to launch a criminal probe into either matter.

Last week, the chairwoman issued a statement commending the Justice Department for not opening an investigation into her staff, saying it would “allow the committee to focus on the upcoming release of its report on the CIA detention and interrogation programs.”

The Intelligence Committee voted to make a 500-page executive summary of its report public, but that literature is currently undergoing an exhaustive declassification process by the Obama administration.

CIA misinformation

michael hastings as the dos xx guy
Michael Hastings an Excellent Investigative Reporter. Assassinated?

http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/cia-admits-it-improperly-hacking-senate-computers-20140731

We’re Fighting the Feds Over Your Email Governments want the right to see email stored anywhere in the world. Microsoft says not so fast.


Updated July 29, 2014 7:35 p.m. ET

On Thursday Microsoft MSFT -0.76% will oppose the U.S. government at a hearing in federal court in New York, arguing that it can’t force American tech companies to turn over customer emails stored exclusively in company data centers in other countries. This dispute should be important to you if you use email, because it could well turn on who owns your email—you or the company that stores it in the cloud.

NSA IF YOU LIKE YOUR PRIVACY YOU CAN KEEP YOUR PRIVACY

In December the government sent Microsoft a search warrant seeking a consumer’s emails as part of a narcotics investigation. While the company appreciates the vital importance of public safety, it seeks to ensure that governments access customers’ communications only through a valid legal process. In this case, the emails are stored in Dublin, Ireland, where Microsoft maintains a data center to service some of its customers outside the U.S.

Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

Microsoft believes you own emails stored in the cloud, and that they have the same privacy protection as paper letters sent by mail. This means, in our view, that the U.S. government can obtain emails only subject to the full legal protections of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment. It means, in this case, that the U.S. government must have a warrant. But under well-established case law, a search warrant cannot reach beyond U.S. shores.

The government seeks to sidestep these rules, asserting that emails you store in the cloud cease to belong exclusively to you. In court filings, it argues that your emails become the business records of a cloud provider. Because business records have a lower level of legal protection, the government claims that it can use its broader authority to reach emails stored anywhere in the world.

Courts have long recognized the distinction between a company’s business records and an individual’s personal communications. For example, the government can serve a subpoena on UPS to disclose business records that show where a customer shipped packages, but it must establish probable cause and get a warrant from a judge to look at what a customer put inside.

Similarly, the government can use a subpoena to obtain bank records that show when a customer accessed a safe-deposit box, but it needs a warrant to search the private papers kept inside. It may subpoena the business records containing a hotel‘s guest registry, but it cannot take the diary in a guest’s hotel-room drawer except through a legal search and seizure.

Even under current rules for telephone calls, the government can more readily obtain the metadata contained in company records about who called what phone numbers and when than it can listen to an individual’s conversations. For that it needs a court order.

Microsoft believes the higher legal protection for personal conversations should be preserved for new forms of digital communication, such as emails or text and instant messaging.

It’s worth heeding the words of a unanimous Supreme Court last month when it concluded that the police must get a warrant from a court before searching a cellphone. As Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in Riley v. California, an individual’s emails and electronic files contain “[t]he sum of an individual’s private life,” including “a record of all his communications,” “a thousand photographs,” and materials like “a prescription, a bank statement, a video.” The court concluded that an individual’s email account is an electronic “cache of sensitive personal information” that is entitled to the highest level of Constitutional privacy protection.

The company’s case in New York’s federal court involves not only vital constitutional principles, but important practical considerations as well. If the U.S. government prevails in reaching into other countries’ data centers, other governments are sure to follow. One already is. Earlier this month the British government passed a law asserting its right to require tech companies to produce emails stored anywhere in the world. This would include emails stored in the U.S. by Americans who have never been to the U.K.

It’s hard to believe that the American people will blithely accept that foreign governments can obtain their emails stored in U.S. data centers without letting them know or notifying the U.S. government. Yet the U.S. government is taking precisely this position toward emails stored in Microsoft’s data center in Ireland.

Microsoft believes the public gets it. The company recently commissioned a poll by Anzalone Liszt Grove Research that found 83% of American voters believe personal information stored in the cloud deserves the same protections as personal information stored on paper.

This makes the equation clear. Technology should advance. But timeless values should endure, and digital common sense should prevail.

Mr. Smith is the general counsel and executive vice president for legal and corporate affairs at Microsoft.

Correction

Due to an editing error, an earlier version misidentified the court case in which Chief Justice Roberts wrote about electronic files containing the “sum of an individual’s private life.”

Operation PATCON & The Strategy of Tensions (FBI Anti-Patriot False Flag Terrorism) Eric Holder Manipulating The American Mind


waco just doing their jobs

 

==============================================================

PATCON (FBI Anti-Patriot False Flag Terrorism) Research Pack, v1

(Download ZIP package by clicking below.)

https://ia700508.us.archive.org/33/items/PatconfbiAnti-patriotFalseFlagTerrorismResearchPackV1/PatconfbiAnti-patriotFalseFlagTerrorismResearchPackV1.zip

https://ia700508.us.archive.org/33/items/PatconfbiAnti-patriotFalseFlagTerrorismResearchPackV1/PatconfbiAnti-patriotFalseFlagTerrorismResearchPackV1_meta.xml

In order to discredit and implicate “right-wing terror groups”, the FBI evidently instituted a “sting” program to help create such groups, supply them with weapons and explosives, and then move them on to violent acts. The purpose? Ultimately to enact otherwise impossible anti-constitutional legislation, to futher erode protections of privacy, and to further limit the right of US citizens to posess firearms.

A long legacy of violent acts seems thereby to have been artficially created: the Stockton Schoolyard Massacre, the 1993 Twin Towers bombing (proven to be FBI created), and the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing. In 1999, FBI “Project Meggido” officially declared certain conservative Christian groups as ‘terrorists’.

oklahoma_city_bombing

All this appeared to the public to give some credence to Bill Clinton’s strange announcement of a “Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy” – a ‘conspiracy’ he evidently had a hand in creating himself.

bill clinton

PATCON seems to have morphed for some time (ca 2000) to include factes necessary for perpetrating the 9/11 attacks, under the administration of George Bush. This included, for examle, shadowing Mossad agents, who were in turn shadowing the ‘hijackers’ who had CIA-supplied passports, but doing nothing to stop them. You will note in certain of the documents contained in this pack references to “middle-eastern” men etc. … and remembering “Middle East Terrorists” working together with the FBI for the WTC-93 bombing… the framework for 9/11 already being laid.

WTC 1993 trade-center-bombing-explosion

In the same year as the original World Trade Center bombing, the FBI circulated a peculiar memo (in this package) suddenly calling for PATCON to stop – sort of. The memo seems to leave some ambiguity as to whether the program is ending, or if agents were just to stop talking about it. Remember “class-1″ FBI operations involve illegal activities (carried out by FBI agents) to begin with, and the revelations of FBI involvement in that WTC attack might have made things a little too hot to go on without ‘deniability’.

Under the Obama administration, however, PATCON (though “officialy” ended as a class-1 illegal operation in 1993), seems to have been restored to its original purposes, and once more under the watchful eye of Eric Holder (assistant in the original PATCON). This time, it takes the form of engendering bloodshed and violence using the “Fast and Furious” gun-running scheme. This FBI-sponsored gun running to Mexican drug cartels was ment to frame lawful US gun owners and firearms dealers as the cause of the violence. Again, the purpose was to get anti-Constitutional legislation passed.

BRIAN TERRY RIP

 

“Operation Gladio” – The Violent Cold War Black Op Continues Today – 2013

https://archive.org/details/operationGladio-TheViolentColdWarBlackOpContinuesToday-2013

Delve into the forbidden history of once-hidden programs of terror and public manipulation, born after World War 2 and continuing – almost unchanged – to the present day. This affects your life from behind the scenes right now.

The BBC documentary referred to in this video has been recovered, will be linked here soon.

Gladio – Behind False Flag Terrorism

More on how this impacts your life today:

FALSE FLAG

Secret History – Khazarian (Israeli) False-Flag Terrorism – Documentary

The Sandy Hook False-Flag 2012 Murders – The Evidence Mounts

Eric Holder and the FBI’s ‘Patriot Conspiracy’ (PATCON) False-Flag Terror Program – 2011 Interview

The ‘Batman Massacre’ Has Hallmarks of A False Flag – Author Fritz Springmeier

PATCON (FBI Anti-Patriot False Flag Terrorism) Research Pack, v1

Adam Lanza / Sandy Hook Staged Massacre – Mysteries, Fakery, and Similarities to Other False Flag Events

The Sandy Hook Coverup — Full Movie

Terror Storm – Full Movie – Special Edition Re-Mastered with Extra Features – in HD

Sourcery of Sandy Hook

Revealed – An FBI Agent Armed the Black Panthers

The Terror Within – Former DHS Officer Julia Davis Speaks Out – The Real Purpose of ‘War on Terror’ IS Terror

dhs whistleblower julia

http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/9860

The strategy of tension: A tactic to divide, manipulate and control people

 

The strategy of tension (Italian: strategia della tensione) in any language, even as reported by Wikipedia in an article dotted with claims for documentation that appear to be distractions, is a tactic that aims to divide, manipulate, and control public opinion using fear, propaganda, disinformation, psychological warfare, agents provocateur, and false flag terrorist actions. Sound like today’s news? It’s not. But it does have an inglorious tradition that goes back to the CIA-supported, neofascist movement, Operation Gladio, post World War II.

The observation of the strategy of tension began with accusations that the United States government and the Greek military junta of 1967–1974 supported far-right terrorist groups in Italy and Turkey, where communism was growing in popularity, to spread panic among the population who would, in turn, demand stronger and more dictatorial governments.

Is it not like President Obama’s (NDAA) National Defense Appropriation Act, in which he includes the right for the military to indefinitely detain people affiliated with “terrorism,” including American citizens, without proof or legal representation or a trial? It even includes the right to kill any person associated with terrorists. Yes, the strategy of tension is an old terror chestnut brought back to frighten the liberal left citizens challenging right-wing power and actions.

The term “Strategy of tension” recurred during the trials that followed in the 1970s and 1980s Years of Lead ( “anni di piombo”), during which terror attacks and assassinations were committed by apparently neofascist terrorists (with such names as Ordine Nuovo, Avanguardia Nazionale or Fronte Nazionale), reeking with Italian patriotism.

In reality, it was primarily members and international supporters of the Italian Communist Party who invented and popularized the term “strategy of tension”. They meant to draw attention to the crimes of the Italian Right and far-right parties who were allegedly supported by the foreign belligerents. Again, these tragedies are not unlike the invocation of terrorist acts like Sandy Hook, the Boston Marathon and the Aurora bomber—all designed to instill fear and a desire for more protection?

“The strategy of tension” grew out of the post-WW II Operation Gladio, Italy’s branch of the secret pre-positioned NATOstay-behind” armies of Western Europe. These armies were set up to perform resistance, partisan, and guerrilla activities in the event of Soviet invasion; equivalent units were set up by other NATO members in their states. It is claimed that Gladio units were engaged in destabilization at the behest of the United States and other Western governments, intelligence agencies (e.g., the CIA), the P2 Masonic lodge, the Order of the Solar Temple, various church-related organizations, and domestic influences such as organized crime.

This is all verifiable history, like the creation today of a paramilitary controlled surveillance society, which prides itself on more and more protection, even total domination as in martiall law put into effect in Boston when bad things went bad with the Boston Marathon. In fact, there is a likely probability that Craft International, a mercenary company like Xe or Blackwell SF, which the CIA uses with impunity, was largely responsible. It is the premier technique of right-wing false-flag operatives.

Back in post-WWII days, the claims were backed by judicial proof which established that European fascist dictatorships of the time (the Greek junta and the secret services of Francisco Franco) were heavily involved in supporting and arming Italian neo-fascist and neo-nazi groups, such as Ordine Nuovo and Avanguardia Nazionale.

In this case it was assassinations, as Avanguardia Nazionale hitman Pierluigi Concutelli used an Ingram MAC-10 SMG to assassinate magistrate Vittorio Occorsio in the 1970s. It has been proven that Avanguardia Nazionale secured the weapon from the CIA via Francoist Spain. General Gianadelio Maletti, commander of the counter-intelligence section of the Italian military intelligence service from 1971 to 1975, stated that his men in the region of Venice discovered a right-wing terrorist cell that was supplied military explosives from Germany, and he alleged that US intelligence services instigated and abetted right-wing terrorism in Italy during the 1970s.

Carlo Digilio, an Italian neofascist, code named “Uncle Otto,” coordinated CIA activities in the Italian regions of Veneto and Friuli from the 1960s to the 1970s, recruiting former fascists to serve the NATO and U.S. interests in Italy. He himself had been recruited in Verona by U.S. Navy Captain David Carrett.

These groups began to pursue an ostensibly extreme right-wing anti-communist agenda using violent means, including false flag bombings that were then blamed on extra-parliamentary left-wing militant organizations, to discredit the political Left, in general, at a time in Italy when the Italian Communist Party was very close to becoming the majority in the government. Today, we can substitute the word “terrorist” for Communist, yesterday’s boogeyman.

It should be noted that the actions carried out by these extreme groups were meant primarily to agitate and control public opinion, creating fears about the Communist Party. At the time, they created massive public concern and widespread paranoia. According to the “strategia della tensione” theory, this was de rigeur.

Examples of such actions include the 1972 Peteano bombing, long thought to have been carried out by the Red Brigades, but for which the neofascist terrorist Vincenzo Vinciguerra has been imprisoned, the attempted assassination of former Interior Minister Mariano Rumor on 17 May 1973 or the Bologna railway station bombing known as the Bologna massacre of 1980.

Today, we can look back to 9/11/2001 for the starting point of a more contemporary “strategy of tension” that endures until this day, and is used internationally by the US government and its allies for regime change, assassinations, hit lists, drone-bombings and the like.

The Guardian (UK), in an article published on June 24, 2000, reported that the parliamentarians of the Left Democrats, wrote a report to a subcommittee of the Italian Parliament about what they viewed as United States support for ‘anti-left terror in Italy’, and the activities of Gladio.

The report by the Left Democrats claimed that the aim of this alleged support for Gladio was to make the public think that the bombings were committed by a communist [sic terrorist] insurgency, to promote the formation of an authoritarian government, and to prevent the Italian Communist Party (PCI) from joining the ruling Democrazia Cristiana (DC) in a national unity government (the “Historic Compromise” between Aldo Moro (who was subsequently assassinated) and Enrico Berlinguer, respective leaders of the DC and of the PCI).

An astonishing observation of the terrorism in Italy that was blamed on communists is that it coincided with election victories for the communists at the polls. So as the PCI was gaining popular support, the number of civilian-targeted bombings, random knee-cappings, and high-profile kidnappings blamed on communist terrorists increased markedly.

Furthermore, starting with the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing and the 1972 Peteano attack, several bombings carried out by the far-right were at first blamed on anarchists (for the first one) and, for the second one, on the Red Brigades (BR)—although it was later found that neofascists, such as Vincenzo Vinciguerra, had organized them. Piazza Fontana’s bombing, in December 1969, marked the beginning of the “strategia della tensione,” which ended around the time of the Bologna railway station bombing in 1980. Post 9/11, there were train bombings in Madrid in 2004 and on July 7, 2005 in London’s subway bombing, the latter backed by MI6.

The report from the Left Democrats of Italy to a subcommittee of the Italian Parliament apparently concluded that the strategy of tension followed by Gladio had been supported by the United States to “stop the PCI, and, to a certain degree, also the PSI from reaching executive power in the country”.

Members of the Democratic Party of the Left (PDS), part of the Commission on Terrorism headed by Senator Giovanni Pellegrino and created in 1988, also described the Italian peninsula since the end of World War II as a “country with ‘limited sovereignty’” and as an “American colony”

The centrist Italian Republican party described the claims as worthy of a 1970s Maoist group. Aldo Giannuli, a historian who works as a consultant to the parliamentary terrorism commission, sees the release of the Left Democrats’ report as a maneuver dictated primarily by domestic political considerations. “Since they have been in power, the Left Democrats have given us very little help in gaining access to security service archives,” he said. “This is a falsely courageous report.”

The existence of US Army Field Manual 30–31B lends even more credibility to the accusations that the CIA tried to destabilize democratic nations to foster U.S. interests. The United States maintains that such a manual is a forgery and has found Soviet defectors willing to testify that it was put together by the KGB. However Licio Gelli, grand master of the P2 Masonic Lodge involved in all of the murkiest and bloodiest episodes of the “strategy of tension,” repeated openly and bluntly (for example, to BBC journalist Allan Francovich) to have received his copy directly from the hands of CIA men.

Piazza Fontana bombing

In December 1969, four bombs struck Rome’s Monument of Vittorio Emanuele II (Altare della Patria), the Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, Milan’s Banca Commerciale and the Banca Nazionale dell’Agricoltura. The later attack, known as the Piazza Fontana bombing of 12 December 1969, killed 16 and injured 90, marking the beginning of this violent period.

Giuseppe Pinelli, a young anarchist, was interrogated about the crime, and died in police custody. After his suspicious death, which was claimed to be suicide by the authorities, investigator Luigi Calabresi came under violent criticism from the left and many intellectuals, considering him the person responsible for Pinelli’s death; Calabresi would be murdered two and a half years later. Think of ex-FBI terror chief John O’Neil, killed on his first day of work in the WTC, after resigning from the FBI.

Think about the Reichstag bombing. The paradigm for that act, in which several communists were accused, included the main “suspect” who was mentally ill and was sentenced to be decapitated and his several cronies hanged. Yet, it was Goering who orchestrated the fire. Think about the Oklahoma bombings, another false-flag attack blamed on domestic terrorists.

Think of the World Trade Center bombing of Tower 1 in 1993, blamed on the blind Sheik Rahman when it was the FBI who engineered the event. Think about 9/11/2001 and the fact that NORAD, flying exercises on the Northeast seaboard was not available to get a plane in the air to defend New York City. Then NORAD blamed the tragedy on 19 Muslim terrorists. More likely it was the Israeli Mossad, who stood most to gain.

In 1997, the courts condemned Leonardo Marino and Ovidio Bompressi for carrying out Piazza Fontana bombing, and Adriano Sofri and Giorgio Pietrostefani for ordering it. At the time of the murder, all four belonged to the extreme left-wing group Lotta Continua. After Pinelli, the police investigated another anarchist, Pietro Valpreda. He quickly became a hero to the left, who perceived him to be a victim of a plot to attribute a fascist bombing to the left. The leftist environment produced an investigative book, La strage di Stato (“The state massacre”), in which they claimed the state was attacking anarchists because they (by definition) could not have a political party to defend them, as communists would have had.

Neo-fascist terrorist Stefano Delle Chiaie was then arrested in Caracas, Venezuela, in 1989 and rendered to Italy to stand trial for his role. Delle Chiaie was however acquitted by the Assise Court in Catanzaro in 1989, along with fellow accused Massimiliano Fachini.

Think of the true culprits behind the 9/11 attack, NORAD and the Israeli Mossad, who have successfully laid the blame on Muslim terrorists.

In 1998, David Carrett, a U.S. Navy captain, was indicted by a Milanese magistrate, Guido Salvini, on charges of political and military espionage and his participation in the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing, among other events. Judge Guido Salvini also opened a case against Sergio Minetto, an Italian official for the US-NATO intelligence network, and pentito Carlo Digilio. La Repubblica underlined that Carlo Rocchi, the CIA’s man in Milan, was surprised in 1995 searching for information concerning Operation Gladio, thus demonstrating that all was not over.

A June 20, 2001, conviction of Italian Neo-fascists Carlo Maria Maggi, Delfo Zorzi and Giancarlo Rognoni was overturned in March 2004. Carlo Digilio, a suspected CIA informant, received immunity from prosecution by becoming a witness for the state (in agreement with the pentiti laws). All were declared not guilty.

According to extreme right-wing Ordine Nuovo member Vincenzo Vinciguerra, “The December 1969 explosion was supposed to be the detonator which would have convinced the political and military authorities to declare a state of emergency.” Does it sound familiar, followers of Sandy Hook and the Boston Massacre?

The first judicial investigation concerning the 1974 Piazza della Loggia bombing led to the condemnation in 1979 of a member of the Brescian far-right movement. However, this first sentence was canceled in 1983 and the suspect absolved in 1985 by the Court of Cassation. A second investigation led to the accusation of another far-right activist, who was thereafter absolved in 1989 because of insufficient proof.

A third investigation is still in active. On May 19, 2005, the Court of Cassation confirmed the arrest warrant against Delfo Zorzi, a former member of the Ordine Nuovo neo-fascist group, who was also suspected of being the material executor of the 1969 Piazza Fontana bombing. Alongside Delfo Zorzi, his neo-fascist comrades Carlo Maria Maggi and Maurizio Tramonte, all members of the Ordine Nuovo group founded in 1956 by Pino Rauti, are also suspected of having organized the Piazza della Loggia bombing.

Bologna railway bombing, August 2, 1980

The Bologna railway bombing killed 85 persons and injured 200. A long, troubled and controversial court case and political issue ensued. The relatives of the victims formed an association (Association tra i famigliari delle vittime della strage alla stazione di Bologna del 2 agosto 1980) to raise and maintain civil awareness on the Bologna massacre. On 23 November 1995 the Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione) upheld the sentences of the second appeals court:

Role of Italian intelligence services

In 1974, Vito Miceli, P2 member, chief of the SIOS (Servizio Informazioni), Army Intelligence’s Service from 1969 and SID‘s head from 1970 to 1974, was arrested on charges of “conspiracy against the state” concerning investigations about Rosa dei venti, a state-infiltrated group involved in terrorist acts. In 1977, the secret services were reorganized in a democratic attempt. With law #801 of 24/10/1977, SID was divided into SISMI (Servizio per le Informazioni e la Sicurezza Militare), SISDE (Servizio per le Informazioni e la Sicurezza Democratica) and CESIS (Comitato Esecutivo per i Servizi di Informazione e Sicurezza). The CESIS had a coordination role, led by the President of Council.

It was a very simple strategy: Bombs were built by chemistry students, some of them were optimistic and believed that they could bring freedom to their colleagues in Yugoslavia and Romania. Other people were pessimistic and believed that the leadership would be replaced by people more loyal to Moscow, after which would come what Senator Giulio Andreotti has called “the great silence”.

Counter-Guerrilla

Turkey has a history of involvement in similar plots. The Turkish branch of Gladio, known as Counter-Guerrilla, allegedly followed a similar strategy in order to justify the 1980 military coup. Turkish secret police are also believed to have instigated the bombing of the Turkish consulate in Thessaloniki, Greece in 1955, leading to the Istanbul Pogrom against the Greek minority of Istanbul. Today, the Turkish government has exploded in violent response to gatherings of Turkish people in an Istanbul park to protest Prime Minster Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s intended destruction of the park to build a shopping mall. Erdoğan has condemned the protestors as rebels wanting to destroy the country.

On and on it goes, the “strategy of tension” in the U.S. and around the world, using tactics that aim to divide, manipulate, and control public opinion using fear, propaganda, disinformation, psychological warfare, agents provocateurs, and false flag terrorist actions. It also points to a universal conspiracy of the right to run these techniques in any country in the world that has a democratic or left-leaning government. And that definitely is not just yesterday’s news? That is the future unless we change it.

Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer and life-long resident of New York City. An EBook version of his book of poems “State Of Shock,” on 9/11 and its after effects is now available at Amazon.com and Barnesandnoble.com. He has also written hundreds of articles on politics and government as Associate Editor of Intrepid Report (formerly Online Journal). Reach him at gvmaz@verizon.net.

– See more at: http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/9860#sthash.wk6O9z3s.dpuf