Who Are The Illuminati?

Who Are The Illuminati?

By Richard Stone 

“A loose affiliation of millionaires and billionaires” (Paul Simon).
“The world is governed by far different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes” (Benjamin Disraeli).
“Give me control over a nation’s currency, and I care not who makes the laws” (Mayer Rothschild).

Conspiracy theory is the theory that most of the world is secretly governed by a small group of men who operate behind the scenes. Conspiracy theory is now an accepted turn of phrase but sometimes one hears the expression, sometimes whispered rather than spoken. “The Illuminati”.

What does this mean? Who are the Illuminati? They are, in essence, a cartel of international bankers and industrialists based in Western Europe and North America. The names of certain families persist over long periods of time. Some of the most important names are Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan, Lazard, Warburg, Schroder and Schiff.

The pivotal family is probably the house of Rothschild, the descendants of Mayer Rothschild (1743 – 1812) of Frankfurt. The male descendants of this family, for at least two generations, generally married first cousins or even nieces. The family established banking institutions in Vienna, London, Naples and Paris as well as Frankfurt. Ever since the middle ages, these families have been building their power by lending money at rates of interest to the monarchies and governments of Europe who were forever in debt, particularly in times of war. Sooner than tax the population to raise funds, always an unpopular measure, they usually preferred to borrow money from the money-lenders. This was the birth of the concept “the national debt.” The countries of the world are forever in debt but where there is a debtor there is a creditor – who is this money owed to? It is owed to this coterie of international bankers.

By the nineteenth century the power of the Rothschild family was immense. They increased their wealth with great cunning and cleverness, while maintaining a low public profile. A notable example of their methods was their exploitation of the battle of Waterloo. The Rothschilds had spies watching the course of the battle and as soon as became evident that Wellington had won, a Rothschild agent traveled at maximum speed to London, arriving hours before Wellington’s own messenger. Rothschild received the messenger and began conspicuously selling his stocks. The whole stock exchange assumed that Wellington had lost and Napoleon had won so everybody started selling, at this point, other Rothschild agents bought up huge stocks at give-away prices. Thus an already massive fortune was massively increased.

The Rockefeller family may be equally important. The pivotal figure in this family was J.D.Rockefeller, who made his fortune out of Standard Oil or Esso in Ohio and Pennsylvania. He also controlled the railroads. When rival road transport systems were established he attempted to block them by parking his trains across the roads at level crossings. His basic business technique was the elimination of competitors at all costs, followed by the establishment of a monopoly, followed by profit taking. He rapidly gained a name for huge wealth, secrecy and hard and dirty business practice. In his later years he had a harsh and gaunt appearance, so to counter his bad “public image” JD more or less invented the PR industry. He had short films of himself made, calculated to charm the public, himself playing golf with a pretty little child for instance. This film was shown on TV recently. It has a rather false and amateurish air but was very effective with the public of the day.

The Rockerfellers currently have controlling interests in Exxon (the world’s biggest company) and the Chase Manhattan Bank, which turns over trillions of dollars a week. With so many billions in their hands already, what does more money mean? Obviously it means more power and more control over other human beings, but to what end and in whose name?

Apparently in the name of Lucifer, the fallen angel also known as the bringer of light, hence the name “Illuminati”, which means “the enlightened ones”. Lucifer is also known for the characteristics of pride, deception and impermanence. The illuminati were apparently founded in Bavaria in 1770 by one Adam Weisshaupt, a student of the Jewish philosopher Mendelsohn, and backed by the Rothschild family. The society has always been based on the lodges of Freemasonry, which was taken over at the highest levels during the course of the eighteenth century by agents of the Illuminati. Freemasonry is a very secretive institution, to the extent that members at one level do not know what members at another level are doing. Hence it is an organisation which is full of bonhomie and good deeds at the lower and middle levels, while its motives and deeds at the highest levels veer towards the dark side.

Both Freemasonry and Judaism have strong roots in the ancient Egyptian systems of religious belief, and it was this very similarity which attracted the illuminati to Freemasonry, for most of them were Jewish. It is a source of controversy today to speculate whether or not they are still predominantly Jewish. No unfair racism intended – they either are or they aren’t. Certainly there is much evidence to suggest that they are not, George Bush for instance, a prominent illuminati figure and obviously not Jewish.

The all seeing eye on the U.S. Dollar Bill

The United States of America is more or less a creation of Freemasonry. The symbol of Freemasonry was placed on the cornerstone of the Whitehouse, while the assembled Freemasons lodges stood and watched the ceremony. The famous all-seeing eye in the pyramid appears on the one dollar bill. It is one of the main symbols of Freemasonry. This bill also bears the inscription, in Latin, “1776, the year of inception of a new world order”. If one joins the dots formed by the stars of the thirteen original states one obtains an exact Star of David.

The goal of the IlIuminati is total control of the world. The only nations, which are holding out against their power, are some Islamic nations and China but this resistance is limited because the Illuminati have crushing economic power.

There are certain methods of subjugation and control which are indispensable to this power. The first is, of course, complete control over all financial systems, all borrowing and lending. All banks, all building societies, all insurance companies have to be under their control. At the lowest level even the smallest bank will be forced to toe the line. At the highest level the World Bank decides the fate of countries. It is an interesting and amazing fact that both the Federal Reserve Bank and the Bank of England are controlled by these Illuminati dynasties, in spite of the names of these banks, which suggest that they are run for public benefit. It is said that both Abraham Lincoln and John Kennedy wanted to change this system.

The second essential component is control of the media. It is controlled through business fashion. If the board meeting, or the management meeting, or the sales meeting, or the training meeting suggests that facts should be presented in a certain way, who is going to present them differently? There is an implied threat to one’s job and one’s career. Few people would gladly face demotion, retrenchment or the dole and most people are so ambitious they will do nearly anything “reasonable” to court favour with their superiors. This is how business is controlled and the media is the most important part of business, for it controls people’s minds. People are very suggestible and often lend more credence to what they see on “the box” than to what happens on their own street. The Illuminati know this and use this suggestibility factor to the full. Lenin’s key move during the Russian revolution was the capture of the radio station.

The third factor in the control system is the universities, and through them the whole education system. Particular effort is put into the schools of sociology, politics, economics and education, hence “liberal” systems of education which are often degenerate and even violent. Their men are inserted into the universities through the power of funding by big business. They then spread their influence downwards through tertiary to secondary and primary education.

The fourth factor is the enormous influence wielded by two similar organisations, The Council of Foreign Relations in the USA and the Royal Institute of International Affairs in England. These institutions are schools for statesmen, Illuminati statesmen. They are the stamping grounds of men such as Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinksi and Lord Carrington. These two “think tanks” have a crucial influence on all US and British governments, no matter which party is “in power”. The statesmen produced by these institutions can and do decide the fate of nations.The tax-exempt foundations are also instruments of Illuminati power. The Ford foundation and the Rockefeller foundation are two prominent examples of this type of “charitable” institution. They were heavily involved in supporting various communist powers when the cold war was at its height. Communism versus capitalism arms race = more money and power for the Illuminati. So these are some of the structures through which the Illuminati work but what methods do they use?

Pitting one side against the other, using a theory devised by Hegel, which is: Thesis versus antitheses – synthesis.

Every force tends to have an opposite counterforce. The conflict between the two results in a new situation, the synthesis. The illuminati make it their business to be the synthesis. Thus no problem situation is ever “nipped in the bud” it is rather fostered and used, just as the Soviet Union was fostered and used.

The insertion of immigrant groups into countries is a variation of this divide and rule process. Each group can be played off against the other.

“Double talk” and “double think”. George Orwell knew instinctively what was going on when he invented these two expressions:
I categorically deny = it will happen a bit later.
Peace = war by another means.

To say one thing and do another is fundamental to Illuminati practice. They believe that the public will accept these lies through laziness and wishful thinking. Unfortunately they are usually correct.

“Keep them busy busy busy, back on the farm with the other animals.” We are kept so busy with business (or busyness) that we do not understand or participate in the decisions and events that will crucially affect our future.

When a real power move is made it is usually done secretly and suddenly often with the pretence that nothing has happened. There is preparation for opposition, but conflict is often not necessary as most people have been trained to be so passive that they will probably not create an effective opposition.

Use of front men in important positions. These front men have the characteristic of “servile obedience”, probably because of a blot or blots on their character which they are anxious to conceal. Most of the Presidents of the USA fall into this category. The current situation springs to mind. Behind the opponent stands the man with real power, who has long been groomed for this position. Men like Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski and George Bush are in this category.

The assassination of opposing leaders as quietly and as secretly as possible, so as to simulate a natural death. If this is not possible due to time constraints or other limited circumstances, surrogates are used and the lines of suspicion are covered by deception, false accusation and if necessary, multiple assassinations. Induced heart attacks, fake motor accidents and apparent suicides are also favoured methods of assassination.

Social engineering. An easily manipulated rabble is what is required. Mixed population groups with weak morals, weak traditions, low educational standards and weak group willpower are the aim. Those with special aptitudes can be taken out and trained to serve the illuminati for technical purposes, security purposes or as part of the propaganda apparatus. The middle class will become surplus to requirements and will be reduced to relative poverty.

Mockery and submission of the manners and morals of societies which show any resistance. Control of the media, the fashion industries and the education systems are essential components in this strategy. “Free love”, the cult of youth, mockery of the Christian and Muslim faiths also fall into this category. “I don’t give a rats ass about Jesus Christ” is one recent masterpiece from one of Hollywood’s biggest starts. He probably didn’t realise what he was saying, which makes him a “useful idiot’. A “useful idiot” is much more effective than a conscious supporter. By these means of subversion societies and nations are conquered from within and open battle is usually not necessary.

The conduct of unrelenting economic warfare. This is the real war and continues even while the bombs are falling and the bullets are flying. The important part is the control of the enemy’s economy after the conflict. The recent economic crash in the far-eastern countries is in reality an assertion of the Illuminati’s economic power, an expression of economic dominance. The Illuminati now control 10-15% of the Japanese economy. This is public knowledge, that is what has been bought at bargain prices. In reality they probably control much more.

Control and exploitation of the standards of public health. The sale of prescription drugs is a huge business generating mega profits. Medical operations and treatments can also be very profitable to big business. These extreme treatments have their place but are over-used for the sake of profit.

In fact big business, particularly the big drug companies, have a vested interest in the ill health of the population. These companies, working through the US Food and Drug Administration, have tried to suppress the health food industry. In this they have largely failed but now the game is to own it and control it so that health foods can only be afforded by the elite.

Argument through defamation of character. The factual debate is ignored while characters are defamed. This is usually a very effective technique as many human beings are very suggestible and seem reluctant to use their reasoning abilities. Thus a “smear campaign” can easily draw attention away from the facts.

To conclude, it is growing increasingly evident that a world government is developing, and many would say that it is probably no bad thing, but few have asked for what purpose this “new world order” is created. Nor have they asked themselves what the consequences will be. These consequences (or some of them) will probably be as follows:

• Increasing profits for big business, increasing poverty for the middle class (who they despise). A rapid decline in moral standards and the promotion of social decay.

• Transience. Jobs that don’t last; neighbourhoods that don’t last.

• Increasing levels of crime and violence.

• Decline and demise of public services; replacement by private enterprise – good service for the few who can afford it.

• Ongoing ill health for the bulk of the population because of stress; poor quality foods; food additives; genetic engineering; pollution and drugs. There may be good health for those who can afford it – only the rich and well informed.

• The gradual phasing out of national governments, which will have powers more like the regional governments of today.

• The formation of several conglomerations like the United States.

In time a world leader will be announced, a real one this time. A pity he will have a cynical contempt for the most of humanity. Do we deserve it?

Pentagon Ignored Evidence of Civilian Casualties in ISIS Strikes, Human Rights Group Says

Ryan Devereaux — The Intercept Oct 26, 2016

Smoke rises in the sky from clashes in Mosul. Click to enlarge

Smoke rises in the sky above Mosul. Click to enlarge

U.S. authorities overseeing the war against the Islamic State in Syria have failed to respond to evidence of hundreds of civilian casualties resulting from coalition airstrikes and potential violations of the laws of war, according to a startling new account from Amnesty International.

In a press release issued Tuesday night, Amnesty said it has presented the Pentagon with evidence that 11 coalition airstrikes in Syria over the past two years appear to have led to the deaths of as many as 300 civilians — and that so far that evidence has been met with silence.

“U.S. authorities have provided no response to a memorandum Amnesty International sent to the Department of Defense on September 28 to raise questions about the conduct of coalition forces in Syria,” the group claimed.

“We fear the U.S.-led coalition is significantly underestimating the harm caused to civilians in its operations in Syria,” Lynn Maalouf, deputy director for research at Amnesty’s Beirut regional office, said in a statement. “Analysis of available evidence suggests that in each of these cases, coalition forces failed to take adequate precautions to minimize harm to civilians and damage to civilian objects.”

Maalouf added that some of the strikes in question “may constitute disproportionate or otherwise indiscriminate attacks.”

U.S. Army Maj. Josh T. Jacques said CENTCOM, the component of the U.S. military running the coalition war against the Islamic State, “is aware of the letter from Amnesty International and is currently evaluating the allegations of civilian casualties it contains.”

“The coalition takes great care — from analysis of available intelligence to selection of the appropriate weapon to meet mission requirements — in order to minimize the risk of harm to non-combatants,” Jacques said in an email to The Intercept. “Civilian casualty allegations come from various sources, including our own internal reviews and unit self-reporting, media reports, non-governmental organizations, or other U.S. government departments.”

While the Syrian military and its Russian allies have been responsible for the vast majority of civilian casualties resulting from airstrikes within Syria’s borders, the 27-page memorandum Amnesty sent to the Pentagon last month painted a detailed picture of nearly a dozen incidents in which coalition operations frequently described by U.S. officials as the most careful and precise in the world appear to have gone deeply awry.

“For several incidents, no military objective could be discerned and reports indicate that the only casualties were civilian,” the memo noted. “The loss of civilian life was so high in a few attacks that it is difficult to see how a significant enough military advantage could have been anticipated that would have outweighed the risk to civilians.”

More than a third of the deaths Amnesty catalogued were the result of bloody operations to liberate areas around and in the Syrian city of Manbij from Islamic State control over the summer. While death counts from airstrikes during that offensive varied, Amnesty claims that attacks launched on one village, al-Tukhar, may have resulted in the greatest loss of civilian life in the history of the coalition’s war on ISIS, with 73 civilians — including 27 children — killed, according to evidence Amnesty compiled.

While the U.S. has confirmed that it launched an investigation into the high-profile incidents in Manbij, its broader efforts at investigating alleged civilian casualty incidents in the war on the Islamic State have been repeatedly called into question.

A Defense Department official said that the Pentagon had not yet incorporated Amnesty’s report, but as of October 13, had received 249 allegations of civilian casualties stemming from coalition operations in Syria and Iraq. Of the complaints received, 62 resulted in closed investigations, with 31 conclusions announced publicly — 13 in Syria and 18 in Iraq. The Pentagon deemed 179 of the allegations not credible. In Syria, five investigations remain open. All told, the Pentagon claims that 55 civilians have been killed and 29 injured over two years and thousands of airstrikes in Syria and Iraq.

The figures pale in comparison to civilian casualty estimates offered up by human rights organizations and other monitoring groups, which claim that anywhere from 600 to more than 1,000 civilians have died in coalition airstrikes. In the case of the 11 strikes Amnesty examined, the human rights group reported that to date CENTCOM has acknowledged only a single civilian casualty resulting from those operations.

“Based on Amnesty International’s research and analysis, some attacks known or suspected to have been carried out by coalition forces may have violated international humanitarian law,” Amnesty’s memorandum to U.S. officials noted.

The reported failure to follow up on alleged civilian casualties, the group argues, appears to fall short of an executive order issued by President Obama in July, which requires U.S. authorities to investigate when civilians are believed to have died in U.S. counterterrorism operations.

“This is totally contrary to the president’s stated commitments to transparency and accountability on this issue,” said Naureen Shah, director of Amnesty’s Security with Human Rights program. “The Defense Department must acknowledge and investigate these civilian deaths immediately.”


Swedes and Germans told to Intergrate into their “New Country”

Jonas Anderson — New American Oct 25, 2016


Screen-grab from tax-funded ad on Swedish TV promoting “the new country”. Click to enlarge

In addition to paying for the importation of well over a million Islamic migrants over the last year, Swedish and German taxpayers are financing advertising campaigns urging them to integrate into the new countries that the mass migration is creating. The changes are irreversible and the old way of life is not coming back, so get used to it and adapt, the natives were told.

In Sweden, a tax-funded TV ad created by a government-backed “charity” called “Individuell Manniskohjalp” (Individual Relief), or IM, informs Swedes that their old country is never coming back. Translated to English, the slogan for the campaign is #TheNewNation. “There is no way back,” the ad begins. “Sweden will never be like it was. Europe is changing and Sweden is needed as a safe space for people who seek refuge. Now we must look forward and find a way to live side by side.”

As African and Middle Eastern faces intermixed with Swedish faces cycle through on the screen, the ad informs viewers that Sweden is in for some dramatic changes. “It’s time to realize the new Swedes will claim their space, and will take up room with cultures, languages and customs,” the narrators say in Swedish, alternating between male and female voices. “It’s time we see this as a positive force. The new country is about shaping a new future.”

The very definition of Swedish is changing, the ad continues, adding that the old Swedes need to adapt to the new country and the customs of the “new Swedes.” “To be Swedish must be more than skin color and place of birth, it must be you, me, and everyone together,” the narrator continues. “It’s not only new Swedes that need to integrate. Everyone needs to integrate, even established Swedes.”

Then viewers get some more information on just what sort of “integration” is being demanded of them. “Integration is about finding mutual understanding,” the ad continues. “Let’s create a future that is based on equal parts reality and belief in the future. Let’s build a country where we put hate and fear aside.”

Needless to say it’s extremely unlikely that many of the Islamic migrants flooding into Sweden, overwhelmingly male, will be finding “mutual understanding” with the old Sweden’s liberal values any time soon. Critics of the ad, speaking out on Twitter and in comment sections, even complained of an alleged “genocide” against native Swedes. After incredible anger, the government-supported charity later said on Twitter that it was not promoting the destruction of Sweden or Swedish culture but “mutual integration,” which “means that the two go together into something bigger.”

The ad also describes #TheNewNation that is emerging, which is really an obliteration of the old nation. “We all have the new country within us, in our worldview, thoughts, and actions,” the narrators say. “The time has come to build a country that is proud, inclusive and sustainable — something new. The New Country — #detnyalandet.” A Somali Muslim with an Islamic head covering is shown as the face of “The New Country.”

It is not the first time Sweden has made global headlines for strange “integration” ideas. Last year Lutheran Bishop of Stockholm Eva Brunne told a church in her diocese that it should remove all crosses from the building so it would be less offensive to newly arrived Muslim migrants. The bishop also said the direction of Mecca should be clearly marked so Muslims would know which way it was.

Many public swimming pools in Sweden now have segregated times so women do not need to worry about being sexually assaulted and groped by Islamic migrants and so Muslims can feel comfortable using the pool.

In 2015 almost 200,000 Islamic migrants from Africa and the Middle East arrived in Sweden, which has 9.8 million people, meaning Sweden accepted the highest number of migrants per capita of any European country. Voters have turned sharply against the government’s policy however, with most voters wanting less immigrants and just 13 percent wanting more. Some 80 percent of police are considering quitting their jobs.

Some high-profile figures in Swedish media have called for using rat poison to exterminate Swedes who disagree with the open borders and mass Islamic immigration, comparing them to rats who need to be destroyed.

In Germany, a highly contentious tax-funded advertisement also financed by a United Nations agency actually encourages German women to cover their heads with an Islamic-style outfit as part of “tolerance.” First the ad shows a woman from the back dancing to Islamic-style music while wearing an Islamic outfit. The words “Turkish women wear the Islamic head scarf” appear on the screen.

Then when the woman turns around, it can becomes clear that it is a blonde German woman. “Me too,” she says about wearing the Islamic head covering. “It’s beautiful.” Then she says, “Enjoy difference, start tolerance.” Then viewers are told that the ad was made in cooperation with UNESCO, the UN agency in charge of education, culture and science.

Some people were offended by the ad. Others said it would still not be enough to placate hard-line Muslims in Germany. “Much of her hair is showing. Some of her bare leg shows also as she struts around. All these elements of the presentation would make it absolutely unacceptable to the Islamic hardliners that she (and the German government, and UNESCO) are demanding that the Germans tolerate,” said Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch. “The tolerance is, as always, one way: no one asks Muslims to enjoy difference, start tolerance. Non-Muslims are told, on pain of charges of racism and hate, that they must tolerate an authoritarian, supremacist ideology whose adherents aim to take power, and once they do, will not accord non-Muslims that same tolerance.”

To be sure, both the Swedish and German governments have “integration” programs to integrate the millions of Muslim migrants into their own decadent “values” systems. A key part of the efforts is a growing censorship campaign to silence dissenters including mass arrests for criticizing Islamic or mass Islamic immigration. Also Muslims and immigrants are being confronted with posters in public places explaining that sexually assaulting women is not allowed.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble urged Muslim migrants to Germany to create what he described as a “German Islam” that follows liberalism and tolerance rather than the violent demands of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. “The origin of the majority of refugees means that we will be increasingly dealing with people from quite different cultural circles than previously,”  Schaeuble said in a strange column published by Welt am Sonntag, highlighting mass sex assaults by migrants and recent Islamic terror attacks in Germany that had Germans on edge about the non-stop immigration flows. “Without a doubt, the growing number of Muslims in our country today is a challenge for the open-mindedness of mainstream society.”

On October 14 the newspaper Tageszeitung published a letter from a German mother who described what she had seen at a government-supported “integration” session for migrants in Munich. “Here I met about 6-8 mothers, some with their children,” wrote “Anna” in the open letter to the mayor. “All of the women wore headscarves and none of them spoke German. The organizers of the event quickly informed me I will probably find it hard to integrate myself here (their exact words!!!). I should note that I am German. I speak fluent German and I do not wear a headscarf. So I smiled a little and said I would try to integrate myself. Unfortunately, I brought a salami and ham sandwich to the breakfast, to which everyone was asked to bring something. So of course I had even less chance of integrating. I was not able to speak German to anyone at this women’s breakfast, which is actually supposed to promote integration, nor was anyone interested in doing so. The organizers did not insist on anyone speaking German, and the women, who appeared to be part of an established Arab-Turkish group, simply wanted to use the room…. So my impression of these events to promote integration is miserable. No interchange takes place at all!!! How can the City of Munich tolerate such a thing? In my view, the entire concept of these events to promote integration must be called into question.” She and her family decided to leave Munich. According to reports Germans are also leaving Germany “in droves.”

Other European leaders such as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban have said the reason globalists are encouraging the mass Islamic immigration is to destroy Western civilization, Christianity and nation-states to promote internationalism.


Editor of Austria’s Largest Paper Charged with ‘Hate Speech’ over Migrant Article

Chris Tomlinson — Briebart.com Oct 25, 2016


An editor of Austria’s largest paper, Kronen Zeitung, is to be tried for hate speech over a commentary he wrote about the migrant crisis last year.

On 25 October 2015, Christoph Biro wrote of the masses of migrants who were travelling through the Styrian countryside and remarked on the assaults and property damage committed by migrants, reports Kurier.

Calling the majority of the migrants “testosterone-driven Syrians”, Mr. Biro recounted the multiple reports of migrants carrying out, in his words, “extremely aggressive sexual assaults”.

He also detailed Afghan men had slashed the seats of the trains that were transporting them to Germany because they refused to sit where Christians had previously sat.

The commentary provoked a negative reaction at the time with 37 complaints lodged against Mr. Biro. He took four weeks off from his position at the time, claiming that he had lost perspective and proportion of the situation.

Many, including the Austrian train company ÖBB, denied that Afghans had destroyed their seats, though cases of sexual assault have been rampant across Austria over the past year.

The prosecutor in the Styrian capital of Graz has confirmed they will be seeking charges against Biro for his comments after the case was brought to them by left-wing SOS Mitmensch. The group released a guide for Austrians earlier this year on how to successfully get people tried for hate speech crimes.

SOS Mitmensch describes itself as a pressure group for human rights and has been a staunch opponent of the anti-mass migration Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ) who have significantly risen in the polls over the course of the migrant crisis. Head of the left-wing group, Alexander Pollak, has claimed that his organisation has been inundated with requests on how to report anti-migrant comments to the police.

While many private individuals in Germany and Austria have been successfully prosecuted for anti-migrant, or even migrant-critical rhetoric, the case against Mr. Biro marks the first time a member of the press has been prosecuted in Austria since the migrant crisis began.

A similar case in neighbouring Germany had been that of comedian Jan Böhmermann, who faced charges for insulting the President of Turkey in a crude poem he recited on his television programme; the charges against him were dropped by prosecutors earlier in October.

Even politicians are not immune from hate speech investigations. A Vienna prosecutor is currently looking into charges against FPÖ leader Heinz-Christian Strache over posts made on his Facebook page by other users that may be deemed inflammatory by Austrian law. The prosecutor is looking into whether Mr. Strache or his staff could be liable for not removing offensive comments fast enough.


PHOTO ESSAY: Trump vs Hillary Crowd Comparison – Pictures Say a Thousand Words!

Jim Hoft — Gateway Pundit Aug 11, 2016


Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is leading Republican Donald Trump in many of the polls weighted heavily with Democratic voters. But thanks to social media there is more and more evidence that the polls are way off.

Clinton has a hard time filling small union halls or high school gymnasiums while Trump continues to fill stadiums with several thousand left standing outside.

Donald Trump is also destroying Clinton on social media.

Here’s a comparison of the two campaigns and the enthusiasm of their supporters.

Wednesday August 10

Hillary can’t fill a high school auditorium in Des Moines –

In Ft Lauderdale, FL Trump has massive crowd!

Also, on the 10th Trump delivers economic speech in Abingdon, Virginia to all-time record crowd with many turned away!

Tuesday August 9

Hillary reports no events scheduled

Trump with massive crowds and long lines at events in Fayetteville and Wilmington, North Carolina.

Monday August 8

Hillary’s response to Trump’s economic speech in St Petersburg, FL was another empty Hillary rally.  She also reported a gathering in Kissimmee, FL.


Continues …

50,000 Soros-linked voting machines being illegally deployed to 16 states

Shepard Ambellas — Intellihub Oct 25, 2016

Smartmatic voting machine. Click to enlarge

Smartmatic voting machine. Click to enlarge

It appears that at least 16 states may be using up to 50,000 George Soros-linked Smartmatic voting machines which have not yet been approved to be used in the U.S. Presidential Election, a National Association of Secretaries of State said.

The shady elite billionaire seeks to compromise what is left of the integrity of America by pushing for a country with no borders, all the while funding the Clinton Campaign and other far left operatives.

Edmund Kozak writing for Lifezette reported:

A 2006 classified U.S. diplomatic cable obtained and released by WikiLeaks reveals the extent to which Smartmatic may have played a hand in rigging the 2004 Venezuelan recall election under a section titled “A Shadow of Fraud.” The memo stated that “Smartmatic Corporation is a riddle both in ownership and operation, complicated by the fact that its machines have overseen several landslide (and contested) victories by President Hugo Chavez and his supporters.”

The Smartmatic machines used in Venezuela are widely suspected of, though never proven conclusively to be, susceptible to fraud,” the memo continued. “The Venezuelan opposition is convinced that the Smartmatic machines robbed them of victory in the August 2004 referendum. Since then, there have been at least eight statistical analyses performed on the referendum results.”

This planned undermining of the American people is unacceptable and must be stopped before the election. Please call your congressmen, senators and local media.



Trump warns of World War III if Clinton is elected

Jeremy Diamond — CNN Oct 25, 2016

Donald Trump. Click to enlarge

Donald Trump. Click to enlarge

Donald Trump warned in an interview Tuesday that Hillary Clinton’s policies as president to address the Syrian conflict would lead to World War III, arguing the Democratic nominee would draw the US into armed confrontation with Russia, Syria and Iran.

“What we should do is focus on ISIS. We should not be focusing on Syria,” Trump told Reuters on Tuesday morning at his resort in Doral, Florida. “You’re going to end up in World War III over Syria if we listen to Hillary Clinton.”

The Republican nominee, who has called for a rapprochement with Russia in order to jointly combat ISIS, argued that his Democratic rival’s calls for taking a more aggressive posture in Syria to bring the conflict there to an end and combat ISIS will only draw the US into a larger war. Trump’s remarks come as he trails Clinton in most national and key battleground state polls just two weeks from Election Day.

“You’re not fighting Syria anymore, you’re fighting Syria, Russia and Iran, all right? Russia is a nuclear country, but a country where the nukes work as opposed to other countries that talk,” he said.

Trump has not laid out a clear strategy for combating ISIS or addressing the globally destabilizing conflict in Syria, which has killed hundreds of thousands and pushed millions more to flee their homes. He has suggested the US should allow ISIS, anti-government rebels and the Syrian government to fight it out and more recently has focused on joining forces with Russia — which has aided the Syrian regime in the bombing of civilians and US-allied rebels — to combat ISIS.

“Assad is secondary, to me, to ISIS,” Trump told Reuters of the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whom US officials have argued must step down.

Clinton has called for establishing a no-fly zone over Syria to help bring the five-year civil war to an end, a proposal top Republicans in Congress have championed, which President Barack Obama and others have opposed due to the risk of entering into conflict with Russia. A US-enforced no-fly zone would mean the US could shoot down a Russian jet should it enter Syrian airspace.

Clinton addressed those concerns in the final presidential debate, arguing that it would “save lives and hasten the end of the conflict,” while cautioning that “this would not be done just on the first day.”

“This would take a lot of negotiation and it would also take making it clear to the Russians and the Syrians that our purpose is to provide safe zones on the ground,” Clinton said during the debate earlier this month. “I think we could strike a deal and make it very clear to the Russians and Syrians that this was something that we believe the best interests of the people on the ground in Syria. It would help us in the fight against ISIS.”

Trump has additionally called for establishing safe zones in Syria to protect civilians — as has Clinton — which could also put the US in conflict with the Syrian government or Russia should they oppose the policy.

While Clinton has accused Trump of being Putin’s “puppet,” Trump knocked Clinton for her criticism of the Russian strongman, asking, “How she is going to go back and negotiate with this man who she has made to be so evil.”

And just two days after he tied the successful enactment of his agenda as president to the election of Republican majorities in Congress, Trump also returned to his more typical complaints of a lack of Republican unity weighing down his candidacy.

“If we had party unity, we couldn’t lose this election to Hillary Clinton,” he told Reuters.

That complaint didn’t put Trump in more of a bipartisan mood, though, as the Republican nominee also told Reuters he would not consider putting any Democrats in his cabinet — a departure from recent presidents, who have sought to post at least one member of their rival party in a top administration post.


PROOF! Here’s the List of Mainstream Reporters Working Directly With the Clinton Campaign

DC Whispers — Oct 24, 2016

These are not journalists.

These are political activists whose sole purpose is to convince you to agree with their agenda.

In 2016, that agenda is the election of Hillary Clinton as the next President of the United States.


The above faces represent a list of no fewer than sixty-five “journalists” who accepted a private, behind closed doors work sessions with top Clinton campaign officials as far back as April. The gist of those meetings was, “…how to sell Hillary Clinton to the public.” (See list below)


And here is just a partial list of those who attended these meetings. Look at these names, and then imagine how many times these journalists were knowingly marketing Hillary Clinton to the public instead of actually reporting the news. 

They’ve been doing it for months, and are very much still doing it now…

liberal-reporters-for-hillary liberal-reporters-for-hillary-2


Brother Nathanael: Trump In The Eye Of The Storm

Brother Nathanael — Oct 25, 2016

9/11 Truth? Was it an “American coup?”

Phillip Giraldi — The Unz Review Oct 25, 2016

wtc7-collapseFor the first time a presidential candidate, admittedly from a fringe party, is calling for a reexamination of 9/11. Jill Stein of the Green Party has recognized that exercises in which the United States government examines its own behavior are certain to come up with a result that basically exonerates the politicians and the federal bureaucracy. This has been the case since the Warren Commission report on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which, inter alia, failed to thoroughly investigate key players like Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby and came up with a single gunman scenario in spite of considerable evidence to the contrary.

When it comes to 9/11, I have been reluctant to enter the fray largely because I do not have the scientific and technical chops to seriously assess how buildings collapse or how a large passenger airliner might be completely consumed by a fire. In my own area, of expertise, which is intelligence, I have repeatedly noted that the Commission investigators failed to look into the potential foreign government involvement in the events that took place that day. Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan just for starters may have been involved in or had knowledge relating to 9/11 but the only investigation that took place, insofar as I can determine, was a perfunctory look at the possible Saudi role, the notorious 28 pages, which have recently been released in a redacted form.

A friend recently recommended that I take a look at a film on 9/11 that was first produced back in 2005. It is called Loose Change 9/11 and is available on Amazon Video or in DVD form as well as elsewhere in a number of updated versions. The first version reportedly provides the most coherent account, though the later updates certainly are worth watching, add significantly to the narrative, and are currently more accessible.

Loose Change is an examination of the inconsistencies in the standard 9/11 narrative, a subject that has been thoroughly poked and prodded in a number of other documentaries and books, but it benefits from the immediacy of the account and the fresh memories of the participants in the events who were interviewed by the documentary’s director Dylan Avery starting in 2004. It also includes a bit of a history lesson for the average viewer, recalling Hitler’s Reichstag fire, Pearl Harbor and the Gulf of Tonkin incident, all of which were essentially fraudulent and led to the assumption of emergency powers by the respective heads of state.

The underlying premise of most 9/11 revisionism is that the United States government, or at least parts of it, is capable of almost anything. Loose Change describes how leading hawkish Republicans were, as early as 2000, pushing to increase U.S. military capabilities so that the country would be able to fight multi-front wars. The signatories of the neocon Project for the New American Century paper observed that was needed was a catalyst to produce a public demand to “do something,” that “something” being an event comparable to Pearl Harbor. Seventeen signatories of the document wound up in senior positions in the Bush Administration.

The new Pearl Harbor turned out to be 9/11. Given developments since 9/11 itself, to include the way the U.S. has persisted in going to war and the constant search for enemies worldwide to justify our own form of Deep State government, I would, to a large extent, have to believe that PNAC was either prescient or perhaps, more diabolically, actively engaged in creating a new reality.

That is not to suggest that either then or now most federal employees in the national security industry were part of some vast conspiracy but rather an indictment of the behavior and values of those at the top of the food chain, people who are characteristically singularly devoid of any ethical compass and base their decisions largely on personal and peer group ambition.

9/11 Truthers are characteristically very passionate about their beliefs, which is part of their problem in relating to a broader public. They frequently demand full adherence to their version of what passes for reality. In my own experience of more than twenty years on the intelligence side of government I have frequently found that truth is in fact elusive, often lying concealed in conflicting narratives. This is, I believe, the strength of Loose Change as it identifies and challenges inconsistencies in the established account without pontificating and, even though it has a definite point of view and draws conclusions, it avoids going over to the dark side and speculating on any number of the wilder “what-if” scenarios.

I recommend that readers watch Loose Change as it runs through discussions of U.S. military exercises and inexplicable stand-downs that occurred on 9/11, together with convincing accounts of engineering and technical issues related to how the World Trade Center and WTC7 collapsed. Particularly intriguing are the initial eyewitness accounts from the site of the alleged downing of UA 93 in Pennsylvania, a hole in the ground that otherwise showed absolutely no evidence of a plane having actually crashed. Nor have I ever seen any traces of a plane in photos taken at the Pentagon point of impact.

The film describes the subsequent investigative failures that took place, perhaps deliberately and arranged from inside the government, and concludes that the event amounts to an “American coup” which changed the United States both in terms of its domestic liberties and its foreign policy. After watching the film, one must accept that there are numerous inconsistencies that emerge from any examination of the standard narrative promoted by the 9/11 Commission and covered up by every White House since 2001. The film calls the existing corpus of government investigations into 9/11 a lie, a conclusion that I would certainly agree with.

The consequences of 9/11 are indeed more important than the event itself. Even those who have come to accept the established narrative would have to concede that “that day of infamy” changed America for the worse, as the film notes. While the United States government had previously engaged in illegal activity directed against for suspected spies, terrorists and a variety of international criminals, wholesale surveillance of what amounts to the entire population of the country was a new development brought in by the Patriot Acts. And, for the first time, secret prisons were set up overseas and citizens were arrested without being charged and held indefinitely. Under the authority of the Military Commissions Act tribunals were established to try those individuals who were suspected of being material supporters of terrorism, “material supporters” being loosely interpreted to make arrest, prosecution and imprisonment easier.

More recently, executive authority based on the anti-terror legislation has been used to execute American citizens overseas and, under the Authorization to Use Military Force, to attack suspects in a number of countries with which the United States is not at war. This all takes place with hardly a squeak from Congress or from the media. And when citizens object to any or all of the above they are blocked from taking action in the courts by the government’s invocation of State Secrets Privilege, claiming that judicial review would reveal national secrets. Many believe that the United States has now become a precursor police state, all as a result of 9/11 and the so-called War on Terror which developed from that event.

So who benefited from 9/11? Clearly the executive branch of the government itself, which has seen an enormous expansion in its power and control over both the economy and people’s lives, but there are also other entities like the military industrial complex, the Pentagon and intelligence agencies, and the financial services sector, all of which have gained considerably from the anti-terror largesse coming from the American taxpayer. Together these entities constitute an American Deep State, which controls both government and much of the private sector without ever being mentioned or seriously contested.

Suggesting government connivance in the events of 9/11 inevitably raises the question of who exactly might have ordered or carried out the attacks if they were in fact not fully and completely the work of a handful of Arab hijackers? The film suggests that one should perhaps consider the possibility of a sophisticated “false flag” operation, by which we mean that the apparent perpetrators of the act were not, in fact, the drivers or originators of what took place. Blowing up huge buildings and causing them to pancake from within, if indeed that is what took place, is the work of governments, not of a handful of terrorists. Only two governments would have had that capability, the United States itself and also Israel, unfortunately mentioned only once in passing in the film, a state player heavily engaged in attempting to bring America into its fight with the Arab world, with Benjamin Netanyahu subsequently saying that “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq swung American public opinion in our favor.”

To be honest I would prefer not to think that 9/11 might have been an inside job, but I am now convinced that a new 9/11 Commission is in order, one that is not run and guided by the government itself. If it can be demonstrated that the attacks carried out on that day were quite possibly set up by major figures both inside and outside the political establishment it might produce such a powerful reaction that the public would demand a reversal of the laws and policies that have so gravely damaged our republic. It is admittedly unlikely that anything like that could ever take place, but it is at least something to hope for.



Battle for Mosul Not What It Seems

Stephen Lendman — StephenLendmanBlog Oct 25, 2016

The battle for Mosul is more about redeploying thousands of US-supported ISIS fighters to Syria, along with perhaps letting Turkish forces move in to control evacuated areas.

Erdogan long coveted Mosul. He may think now’s his chance to seize the city and its lucrative oil reserves, claiming it’s a buffer zone against Kurdish fighters, similar to his northern Syria occupation.

According to Syrian parliamentarian Hohammad Kheir Akam, “(t)he US has opened a southern side of Mosul (corridor) to the terrorists to” let thousands of its fighters enter Syria.

US-led coalition warplanes easily spot their convoys. Yet they’re allowed to move freely – America supporting terrorists it claims to oppose.

Iraqi Ansarullah al-Nujaba Movement spokesman Hashem al-Moussavi said “Washington is still continuing its military support for the terrorists in” his country, airdropping them weapons and other supplies.

“Our forces have filmed US aircraft while dropping military aids for” ISIS terrorist fighters, he said. Iraq’s Hassan Abdel Hadi said government forces are concerned about US aerial attacks, impeding their advance to ISIS-controlled areas.

“Unfortunately, there are still some people in Iraq who have been deceived by the US-led coalition, while Washington supports ISIL and is trying to compensate for the damage done” to their fighters by government forces, he explained.

Last Friday, Russia’s Defense Ministry spokesman General Igor Konashenkov said US-led coalition warplanes struck a funeral procession. “Dozens of Iraqi civilians died, including women and children,” he explained.

“Russian reconnaissance pinpointed two jets conducting airstrikes on Daquq, located 30 kilometers to the south of Kirkuk, where, according to our data, there are no ISIS fighters,” – a willful war crime.

They’re “almost a daily routine for the (US-led) international coalition. Too often weddings, funerals, hospitals, police stations, and humanitarian convoys are being hit by the coalition warplanes.”

Russian General Sergey Rudskoy said “(w)e are closely monitoring the situation around Mosul. So far we see no substantial progress in liberating this city from…ISIS” since operations began on October 16 – because no effort is made to do it.

Last week, a coalition airstrike targeted a mosque south of Kirkuk, killing over a dozen women and children. A southern Mosul girl’s school was struck. US-led coalition warplanes were operating in the area, clearly responsible for what happened.

On October 25, Russia’s Defense Ministry reported over 60 civilians killed, over 200 others injured on airstrikes on residential areas in Mosul – locations where no ISIS fighters were present.

So far, no fighting inside Mosul was reported. By the time, so-called liberating forces enter the city, ISIS fighters will be gone – redeployed to Syria to combat government troops and civilians.

Moscow letting this happen without resistance so far makes the battle to liberate Syria harder. Is an offensive planned to rectify this blunder, compounded by failing to launch airstrikes against al-Nusra terrorists in eastern Aleppo since October 18?

According to General Rudskoy, Russian Aerospace forces are monitoring the situation in the area of the Syrian-Iraqi border day and night with the help of unmanned aerial vehicles and other reconnaissance means.”

“Russian planes are on patrol missions in the airspace and are ready to immediately deliver strikes against terrorists.” Aerial operations “in a 10-km zone around Aleppo” remain suspended. “The moratorium…will be extended.”

The longer Russia delays full-scale aerial operations against US-supported terrorists infesting eastern Aleppo, the harder the struggle ahead to liberate the city and all key parts of Syria.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”


Surviving the New World Odor

henrymakow.com — Oct 25, 2016

surviving-the-nwoI assume I’m not the only one who finds the current US election extremely depressing.
The lack of fair play and honesty on the part of the Zionist Establishment and media presage dark times ahead if Hillary wins.  I am reposting this popular article about coping in bad times.

from 24/12/2010 — by Henry Makow Ph.D.

[Memo to Myself]

This isn’t about storing silver coins or canned food or getting an AK-47.
It’s about saving your soul, not your skin. It’s about the tendency to obsess on the New World Odor, get depressed and become unbearable.
The situation is depressing. A satanic cult controls the credit of the world and rules through myriad proxies. It is determined to destroy civilization and institute an Orwellian police state.
You spend your hours addictively watching for new developments. Your face is pressed up against the shop window of the world.
You are “externalized.” You can’t go into the kitchen without switching on the radio.

Continues …

BDS Changed its Goal Statement Once Again

Gilad Atzmon — gilad.co.uk Oct 25, 2016


A to Zion-The definitive Israeli Lexicon

When the call for Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions of Israeli goods was established in 2005 in Ramallah its first demand was for Israel to:
“End[ing] its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantl[ing] the Wall” (http://www.bdsmovement.net/call)
This call didn’t leave room for interpretation. Back in 2005, the BDS movement disputed the legitimacy of the Jewish State.
But in 2010, its primary goal was changed significantly into:
“Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall.”
This change didn’t leave much room for a doubt. The BDS has become an instrument to legitimise the Jewish State within its pre 1967 borders.
There was no public record of the process that led to this change. And, as if to prove its deceptive nature, the change appeared only in English and has never been integrated into any of the official BDS publications in Arabic. It is likely that most Palestinians were not aware of the change made on their behalf by people who claim to be their ‘grassroots’ representatives. My research suggested that the change in the BDS goal statement that, de facto, legitimised the Jewish State took place at the time the BDS movement became popular amongst Jewish activists and started accepting funds from liberal Zionist George Soros’s Open Society Institute.*
But the BDS campaign has now decided to change its first goal once again. It now reads:
“Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall” (https://bdsmovement.net/what-is-bds)
The 2010 embarrassing reference to the 1967 Israeli occupation is now  removed. However once you read the small letters, you grasp that BDS is more of a JVP (Jewish Voice for Peace) rather than a Palestinian voice.  Though the goal does refer, once again, to Israeli “colonization of all Arab land,” the statement now makes it clear that it limits its demands to territories occupied in 1967:
“International law recognises the West Bank including East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the Syrian Golan Heights as occupied by Israel. As part of its military occupation, Israel steals land and forces Palestinians into ghettos, surrounded by checkpoints, settlements, and watchtowers as supplemental to the illegal apartheid Wall. Israel has imposed a medieval siege on Gaza, turning it into the largest open air prison in the world. Israel also regularly carries out large-scale assaults on Gaza that are widely condemned as constituting war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
Though the first goal may resemble the original 2005 BDS call, in practice it is consistent with the left Zionist mantra – it opposes the occupation.
Disappointing? Not really. Treacherous? It depends on who you ask.
The truth of the matter is that the  BDS is not really a Palestinian grassroots organization as it claims to be. It is an integral  part of the ever growing solidarity industry. Though I don’t have any doubt about the benevolent intentions of many BDS supporters and leaders, the BDS movement has managed to unwittingly serve Israel and its interests. It has managed, for instance, to divert the essential discussion about the legitimacy of the Jewish State and the Right of Return into an endless – and meaningless – discussion about Israeli products. It, de facto, legitimized the existence of the Jewish State over the land of Palestine.
*You can read more about BDS, Soros money promoting BDS campaign here: http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/israelpalestine-and-the-queer-international-a-book-review-by.html


Politics Isn’t Boring

Nick Kollerstrom — Terror on the Tube Oct 25, 2016

Quote from Crooked Hilary –

“If that fucking bastard Trump gets elected we’ll all be hanging from nooses.”

Who said politics is boring?
That was when she came offstage, from an interview, having assumed as usual all the questions would be fixed –  so she would have prepared answers. But instead Lauer the interviewer gave decided to give her an unscripted question!
When she came offstage the screaming started, “she went kind of manic and she didn’t have any kind of control over herself at that point.  You really had to see this to believe it; she came unglued; she is the most foul-mouthed woman I’ve ever heard … and that voice at screech level – awful!”
Lauer was the guy who interviewed here, and put an unscripted question – here’s more of that comment:
“If that fucking bastard Trump wins we’ll all be hanging from nooses! Lauer’s finished .. and if I lose its all on your heads for screwing this up.”
Priceless. That’s her best quote since her  ’I’m-a-robot’ story of how she was assembled in a garage.
Then two rather large aides grabbed her and helped her to walk to her car.
One of her aides described Hilary as ‘an egotistical psychopath.’
A black woman Donna Brazil had been a Hilary Aide for a while – Hilary screamed at her
“I’m so sick of your face. you stare at the wall like a brain-dead buffalo, while letting that f*** Bauer get away with this. What are you good for really?’
Somehow, Donna Brazil managed to stare back and not flinch.  One aide commented, ‘It was the most awful and terrible – and racist display, such a profane display I have never  witnessed from anyone  and I will never forget it.’

Her Wandering Left Eye

You might want to checkout how her left eye seems to wander all over the place while she’s speaking.

She cheated in last Trump Debate

In the 3rd and final debate with Trump, did you notice how she was always assured and crisp, with no pauses at all, and keeping Trump on the defensive? That’s because she was reading her answers – from a hidden teleprompter:
Be angry now
Please, do one thing for me gentle reader.
Post a comment on VeteransToday expressing your feelings about their total, complete support for Hilary Clinton over the last few months.


Vote for Hillary – Saviour of the Nation

Darkmoon — Oct 25, 2016

WARNING! — This website reserves the right to publish silly articles we don’t agree with.

By Sir Christopher Meyer

Sourced from The Mail on Sunday

with pictures, captions and additional material by Lasha Darkmoon

“If America can’t stop hating Hillary,” thunders (((Sir Christopher Meyer))), Britain’s former ambassador to Washington, “we are ALL in peril.”


“Where is the Goddamn f***ing flag! I want the Goddamn f***ing flag up every morning at f***ing sunrise.” — Hillary Clinton to staff at the Arkansas Governor’s mansion on Labor Day 1991, from Inside the White House, by Ronald Kessler, p.244.
“Come on Bill, put your d**k up!  You can’t f**k her here!!” — Hillary Clinton to her sex-crazed hubby Bill as she sees him chatting up an attractive female, Ibid. p. 243

More Hillary Clinton quotes:

“You f***ing idiot!”….  “Where’s the miserable c**ksucker?”…. “F**k off!  It’s enough I have to see you s*it-kickers every day, I’m not going to talk to you too!!  Just do your Goddamn job and keep your mouth shut.”
“This ill-tempered, violent, loud mouth, hateful and abusive woman wants to be your next president and have total control as commander and chief of our military, the very military for which she has shown incredible disdain throughout her public life.  Surely the people of the United States can easily do better than this. — Ed Schriber Col.  USMC (Ret.)
All the above are authentic quotes  sourced from
The Filthy Mouth of Hillary Clinton 


“Hillary Clinton has a pretty distinguished record.
It is hard to understand why she is so disliked.”
— (((Sir Christopher Meyer)))

In just two weeks’ time, to the blessed relief of many, the US presidential election will come to its tawdry climax. Voters will go to the polls on Tuesday, November 8, so bringing down the curtain on one of the dirtiest and meanest contests in the history of Western democratic politics.
“It ain’t over till it’s over,” said the famous quipster and baseball star Yogi Berra. But it very much looks as though Hillary Rodham Clinton will become America’s first woman president, as Donald Trump disappears into the vortex of his grossness, narcissism and dishonesty, all on vivid display in the third and final presidential debate last week.
For all its repugnant features, this has been an election of endless fascination for students of US politics. The inquests have already begun. How could an ignorant political maverick and dodgy businessman like Trump have captured the Republican Party – the ‘Grand Old Party’ and heirs to Abraham Lincoln? How, to this day, despite all the gaffes and sexual scandals, can Trump still retain the loyalty of 40 per cent of likely voters? What is the deep pool of discontent in which he has been fishing, pretty successfully, for votes?
All these questions revolve around the flamboyant, thin-skinned and corpulent figure of Trump. But there is something else. If the polls are to be believed, there have never been two more unpopular candidates in the history of presidential elections.
That is understandable where Trump is concerned, since the politics of division are at the heart of his strategy, such as it is. But Hillary, too, is massively unpopular. For many on this side of the Atlantic it is hard to understand why she is so disliked, and why she made such heavy weather of defeating her rival at the primary stage, an obscure senator called Bernie Sanders, and why she is not 100 per cent certain of beating Trump.
After all, Hillary Clinton has a pretty distinguished record. Aside from eight years as First Lady to President Bill Clinton, she was a senator from New York for eight years and President Obama’s secretary of state for four. Add in her time – nine years – as wife to Bill Clinton when he was governor of Arkansas and she is beyond question one of the most experienced politicians in the United States.
—  §  —
I should declare an interest. My wife and I knew her pretty well when I was ambassador to the US in Bill Clinton’s second term. We found her the opposite of her public image. In private she was amusing and vivacious with a raucous laugh.
We never met Trump. But we had a narrow escape.
We once attended a charity dinner in Florida, where he was one of the sponsors. A number of other ambassadors were also there. At Trump’s invitation, they had hitched a ride from Washington on his private jet. We, thank goodness, were travelling under our own steam.
On the journey back, Trump suddenly changed course and flew to a tiny airport in New Jersey, where the ambassadors were unceremoniously dumped. That tells you a lot about Trump the man and Trump the politician, none of it complimentary.


HILLARY  CLINTON (quoted here) :  Stay the f**k back, stay the f**k back away from me! Don’t come within ten yards of me, or else! Just f**king do as I say, okay!!?
(((SIR CHRISTOPHER MEYER))) : If the polls are to be believed, there have never been two more unpopular candidates in the history of presidential elections. That is understandable where Trump is concerned.”  
The downside of having decades of experience in frontline politics is that you accumulate a lot of mud and a lot of enemies. Trump accuses Clinton of having had ‘bad’ experience. Throughout her career, starting with her Arkansas days, there have been episodes that have emitted the whiff of scandal or impropriety, though nothing has ever been proved.
Opaque land deals, something not quite right with travel expenses in the White House and, more recently, the interminable saga of whether, when she was Secretary of State, she had broken the law by using a private email server for classified government communications. Her response was not a model of transparency, to put it charitably (but the FBI said earlier this year it would not press charges).
So, you would expect Republican voters to mistrust her intensely. But with many, especially Trump supporters, it is a matter of deep, unshakeable hatred, as much emotional as rational. They believe the email scandal sealed Hillary’s reputation as a serial liar. They think Hillary and Bill are deeply corrupt, using the Clinton Foundation to extract millions of dollars from dubious donors around the world.
They see her replacing Bill at the heart of a Washington establishment for which they have profound contempt. ‘Crooked Hillary’, as Trump calls her, represents, to many people, everything they dislike about politicians, above all their hypocrisy.
Recent revelations that she has earned enormous fees for addressing private gatherings of Wall Street institutions such as Goldman Sachs, while preaching against income inequality on the campaign trail, have reinforced the visceral loathing she arouses.
One of the reasons Sanders did so well against her was that a lot of this vituperation bled into her own party, where some of her severest critics are perversely found. Some of this goes back to her husband’s years as President, when his affairs with Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers and others came to light – what Hillary called his ‘bimbo eruptions’. Her determination to stand by her man infuriated the more ardent feminists who would normally be part of her core constituents.
LD: I cannot resist inserting at this point a pertinent comment and compelling cartoon from the site of Noor-al-Haqiqa: Noor observes: “Just when you wondered how much lower things could go in these elections then along comes Slutona Madonna. Is she trying to prove Hillary a hypocrite, or is she just giving the nod from one queen of degeneracy to another?”


SIR CHRISTOPHER (continues breathlessly) :  This is the most important American election in my lifetime.
We live in the Age of Unravelling as our international system, set up after the Second World War, starts to fall apart. Failed states proliferate in the Middle East and Africa. Putin tears up agreements made with the West at the end of the Cold War. Tectonic plates shift beneath the EU. The turmoil is beyond the power of international institutions and agreements to contain.
A new ideological struggle is under way, in which the very survival of Western liberal democracy is at stake.
There has rarely been greater need for firm, wise and calm leadership in the US, still the world’s greatest power. Hillary Clinton can give this leadership. Trump cannot. The future of the world depends on it.
LD : Sir Christopher will be pleased. A new poll shows Hillary leading by 12 points.
Please watch this disturbing 8-minute video just sent in by one of our readers. There’s no doubt in my mind that Hillary Clinton’s total lack of control, as exhibited in this video, means that the world will be in imminent danger of destruction if this mentally deranged woman gets her finger anywhere near the nuclear button.


The Presstitutes Have Set Up The Election To Be Stolen

Paul Craig Roberts — paulcraigroberts Oct 24, 2016

Over the course of its history, the New York Times has reported on many American elections that have been rigged or stolen or are suspected of having been being rigged or stolen. For example, as a supporter of the black civil rights movement, the NY Times has many stories in its archives of elections rigged by disenfranchisement of black voters.

But this was when the NY Times was an independent voice before it became a whore for the Oligarchs who rule America. When the NY Times reported that black Americans could have no confidence in the integrity of American elections, the NY Times did not denounce itself for delegitimizing American democracy.

The NY Times forgot all of this when it published Max Fisher’s article yesterday. Fisher fished up “scholars” among the Hillary advocates, and they obligingly told him that Trump’s questioning of the integrity of American elections were the tactics of a would-be dictator who is at work delegitimizing democracy so that he can take over.

What Fisher and his “scholars” overlook is that the US government is already delegitimized in the eyes of the American population, as well as foreign populations. If the US government was not already delegitimized, Donald Trump would not have been successful in what, despite Trump’s damnation by the presstitutes, was an easy sweep-aside of the Establishment’s candidates for the Republican presidential nomination.

The US government is delegitimized, not only in the eyes of Americans, but also in the eyes of most of the world. Millions of Americans have lost their jobs, their careers, their hopes, because corrupt bought-and-paid-for-Washington enabled Globalism to send the futures of the American people to China and India. Millions of Americans lost their homes, because the corrupt Federal Reserve came down on the side of five “banks too big to fail” at the expense of the American people. Millions of Americans along with much of the world know that the US government has been slaughtering millions of peoples in seven countries based on lies, wasting not only countries and the lives of millions of peoples, but trillions of American dollars that Americans needed for their welfare. Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. Assad did not use chemical weapons. Gaddafi was innocent of all the absurd charges that Washington used to destroy Libya, a country that had the most progressive social system on earth. Russia did not invade Ukraine. The Taliban had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. Yet countries are in ruins because of Washington’s war crimes justified by transparent lies.

If the NY Times does not know this, the organization is too stupid to justify its existence. Of course the Times knows it. But the NY Times is no longer a newspaper. It is a cog in the Ministry of Propaganda that works to create a Matrix in which brainwashed Americans accept the dictates of the Oligarchs.

The purpose of the Times’ article is to discredit in advance criticism of an election that the ruling Oligarchs intend to steal. If the Times believed that Hillary would have a clear election victory, there would be no point to Fisher’s article.

We see voluminous signs of the intended theft of the election. For example, Hillary’s lead in the polls is based on the pollsters skewing the affiliation of those polled to Democrats. The percentage of Democrats in the samples is far higher than their percentage of registered voters. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-23/how-wapos-latest-poll-give-hillary-12-point-advantage-over-trump

It the past it was difficult to steal elections unless they were very close. Exit polls were a check on vote count, and the disenfranchisement of blacks could be risky if it attracted the attention of the US Department of Justice. The new method, which is unfolding before our eyes, steals the election in advance with the Oligarchs’ candidate far ahead in the polls (now by 12 points according to the latest fiction) and by making anyone who questions the faked results into a fascist dictator.

Obviously, if Hillary was really ahead by 12 points — a landslide — there would be no need for Fisher’s article or for the constant drumbeat against Trump. Judging from the hysteria, as reflected in Fisher’s NY Times article, for example, the Oligarchs are aware that objections to their rule has elevated Trump. In order to hold on to power, the American Oligarchs must smash Trump and put their bought-and-paid-for-candidate, Hillary — whom the Oligarchs have provided along with Bill a personal fortune of $120 million and endowed the Clinton Foundation with $1,600 million — into the Oval Office.

Pollsters by nature of their business are unreliable. If truthful results offend the establishment political organizations, the pollsters are out of work. Polls have to serve the Oligarchs or the polling firms go down. Trump is an outsider toward whom the ruling Oligarchy is totally opposed, which is why Americans support him. Therefore, polling firms are adverse to betting their future on poll results favorable to Trump, especially when the whores who constitute the American print and TV media, such as the NY Times, are all out to put Hillary in the White House.

As Hillary’s public statements have made clear, Hillary is antagonistic toward Russia and the Russian government, calling the president of Russia “the new Hitler.” She promises conflict with Russia, which would certainly be nuclear and end life on earth.

Trump says in the face of contrary ruling neoconservative opinion that he sees no point in conflict with Russia and no point in NATO’s continued existence a quarter century after the purpose of NATO collapsed with the Soviet Union. Trump might not be successful in appointing a government that serves his instincts, but at least he gives us hope of avoiding military conflict with Russia and China. With Hillary there is no hope whatsoever. My opinion is that the world would not survive Hillary’s first term. I have known the neoconservatives since the 1970s. They are crazed fanatics, and they hate Russia. Hillary is their agent.

It is unclear that the Russian government understands, or takes seriously, the neoconservative ideology of US world hegemony. Putin’s hesitant, indecisive behavior in Syria has done more to set himself and Russia up for demonization than to defeat ISIS. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/10/24/by-cooperating-with-washington-on-syria-russia-walked-into-a-trap-paul-craig-roberts/

The Western world is corrupt and evil. The list of its victims is almost endless. What disconnect makes some Russians desire association with the Western world?

How the Media and Democrats Rig the Perception of Trump


The Orchestrated Trump-Putin Connection

Leaked emails prove that the Trump-Putin connection was orhestrated as campaign talk to deflect attention from damaging content of Clinton’s released emails.


Integrity Of US Elections Among Lowest Of All Countries

According to Shyla Nelson, the co-founder of Election Justice USA, US elections are manipulated in many ways, including «voter suppression, unauthorized registration purges, district gerrymandering, gross exit poll variances, the privatization of voting machinery, and the lack of transparency in ballot processing – our elections will continue to rank among the lowest in the world in integrity.

US elections are so corrupt that the US has threatened Russian diplomats with arrest if they attempt to monitor the US November presidential election.


Bill Clinton’s Rape Victims (the ones we know about)


But we must not tolerate Trump’s lewd comments.

Bill and Hillary are lawless because they have never been held accountable. As the justice system has given Hillary a pass, will voters hold her accountable in November, or will the American public also give her a pass?

Hillary Has Never Been Held Accountable For Anything

What is worse, Hillary laughing about her success in getting a child rapist off or Trump’s lewd comments about women? Why is it that the TV women can’t come up with the right answer? How can democracy function when a propaganda ministry takes the place of the media?



A Comparison of Trump’s and Hillary’s Crowds

Trump’s crowds are hundreds of times larger than Hillary’s, so how is it that she is in the lead? We are being told lies in order to cover up the coming election theft.


Poll of Likely Voters Finds 53% Want Hillary Indicted

If 53% of voters want Hillary indicted, how can she be leading in the presidential race?

Which of the polls is wrong?


Rigged Elections Are An American Tradition


Stephen Lendman pleads: don’t let them steal the election, reject the presstitutes’ propaganda:

November 8 isn’t election day. It’s orchestrated grand theft theater to anoint Hillary Obama’s successor. Americans are deluded to believe their vote matters.

This year’s outcome was decided well in advance, likely last year before aspirants announced their candidacy for the nation’s highest office.

Power brokers running America bear full responsibility for concocting a sham system, fantasy democracy, not the real thing.

Disgracefully one-sided pro-Hillary media scoundrels and corporate pollsters share blame for creating the impression of her unbeatability.

Press agent journalism proliferates. Biased corporate polls are easily manipulated to show what sponsors want. On Sunday, The New York Times virtually declared Hillary November’s winner and next president, saying she “has a 93% chance to win.”

The dirty game aims to discourage Trump supporters, convince them he has no chance to win, hoping many will stay home, while encouraging rank and file for Hillary to show up en masse.

Any number of dirty tricks can be used to assure she’s anointed president-elect. Stolen elections are a longstanding US tradition from the early days of the republic.

Now it’s done by methods explained above, electronic ease, voter roll stripping and other dirty tricks.

Paul Craig Roberts explains turnout for Trump stump speeches overwhelming exceeds what Hillary attracts.

So how come most polls show her leading, he asks? “We are being told lies in order to cover up the coming election theft,” he justifiably explains.

Want more evidence? Here it is. Citing an October 18 – 19, Rasmussen poll, RT International reported 65% of voters surveyed saying Hillary acted extrajudicially by storing classified State Department emails on her private server.

A 53% majority believe she should be indicted. When asked if Hillary’s email scandal was important in influencing their vote, 70% replied affirmatively – 49% calling it very important.

If Hillary wins as expected, around 70% of Republican voters believe it’s by election-rigging, according to a separate Reuters/Ipsos poll RT cited.

If most voters want her indicted, polls showing her leading Trump lack credibility.

She’s the establishment candidate, Wall Street’s choice, Trump an outlier, relentlessly denigrated, things rigged to assure he loses.

Democracy in America serves its privileged few alone — indifferent to the needs, rights and welfare of most others, especially the nation’s poor and vulnerable.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net


Did Google Kill Julian Assange?

henrymakow.com — Oct 24, 2016

Julian Assange was about to drop the hammer on Google. Did Google get to him first? 
(Disclaimer- The statement by Wikileaks below this article attempts to dispel these worries but thousands of people still are demanding proof Assange is alive. Wikileaks is tweeting a poll asking if they would prefer a picture, video, statement by lawyers or appearance at window. So far, video has a slight lead over window.)


by Buddy Schwartz — (henrymakow.com) 

Rumors abound that Julian Assange, CEO of Wikileaks, is dead.
People familiar with Mr. Assange and his daily habits point to strange anomalies right after the police invasion of the Ecuadorian Embassy October 15, 2016, in the wee hours of the night. Soon after, Julian Assange’s internet access and tweets were shut down.
They point out that:
(1) Wikileaks DNS Server was suddenly pointed elsewhere;
(2) Mr Assange’s subsequent tweets were noticeably more hostile and attacked his most loyal supporters;
(3) Mr Assange’s tweets regularly misspelled the names of some of his closest friends whom he has known for decades (Gavin McFadyen became McFayden for example). McFadyen,76, a mentor of Assange’s, was found dead.
(4) Streams of disinformation were spewed;
(5) Themes supported by Mr Assange for years were now being knocked down/discredited by his subsequent tweets and communications;
(6) “Body double” rumors have been circulated and documented;
(7) New strange hitherto unknown moderators of Wikileaks have suddenly been installed;
(8) and his “deadman switch” has been activated, wherein much of his stored data and secret website PINS were to be released in the event of his untimely death.
So all signs and evidence point to his death.



Continues …

NATO Continues to Prepare for War with Russia

Peter Korzun — Strategic Culture Oct 22, 2016

US troops en route to NATO drills in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. Click to enlarge

US troops en route to NATO drills in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. Click to enlarge

NATO uses any pretext to accuse Russia of harboring aggressive intentions. It has raised ballyhoo over the recent deployment of Iskander short-range surface-to-surface ballistic missiles to the Kaliningrad region.

Time and time again, the alliance reaffirms its bogus Russia narrative. “We see more assertive and stronger Russia that is willing to use force,” concluded NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg speaking at the round table in Passau, Bavaria on October 10.

At the same time, NATO is pushing ahead with its military “Schengen zone” in Europe.

“We are working to ensure that each individual soldier will not require a decision at the political level to cross the border,” said Estonian Defense Minister Hannes Hanso.

The idea is to do away with travel restrictions on the movement of NATO forces troops and equipment across Europe. There will be no need to ask for permissions to move forces across national borders. It will undermine the sovereignty of member states but facilitate the cross-continent operations instead. The Baltic States and Poland are especially active in promoting the plan. The restrictions in place hinder rapid movement of the 5,000 strong “Very High Readiness Joint Task Force”.

Besides being the first response tool, it could be used for preventing Article 4 situations, such as subterfuge, civil unrest or border infractions, from escalating into armed conflict. The troops can move freely in time of war, but introducing a NATO Schengen zone is needed for concentrating forces in forward areas in preparation for an attack across the Russian border. The formation of the much larger 40 thousand strong NATO Response Force (NRF) is on the way.

Meanwhile, the US and Norwegian militaries are discussing the possibility of deploying US troops in Norway – a country which has a 200 km long common border with Russia. The deployment of US servicemen would be part of a rotating arrangement in the country that would fulfil a “long-standing US wish.” Norwegian newspaper Adresseavisen reported on October 10 that 300 combat US Marines could soon be in place at the Værnes military base near Trondheim, about 1,000 kilometres from the Russian-Norwegian frontier.

The air station also serves as part of Marine Corps Prepositioning Program-Norway, a program that allows the Corps to store thousands of vehicles and other major pieces of equipment in temperature-controlled caves ready for combat contingency.

Several defence sources told the newspaper that the plans to put US troops at the military base have been underway for some time. According to Military.com, the information that the plans are underway was also confirmed by American Maj. Gen. Niel E. Nelson, the commander of Marine Corps Forces Europe and Africa.

300 Marines can be easily reinforced. The only purpose for the deployment is preparation for an attack against Russia. After all, the Marines Corps is the first strike force. And it’s not Russian Marines being deployed near US national borders, but US Marines deployed in the proximity of Russian borders. The provocative move is taking place at the time the Russia-NATO relationship is at the lowest ebb.

This 1997 aerial photograph shows the entrance to a cave facility the U.S. military uses in the Trondheim region of central Norway. (Defense Department photo courtesy of the National Archives). Click to enlarge

This 1997 aerial photograph shows the entrance to a cave facility the U.S. military uses in the Trondheim region of central Norway. (Defense Department photo courtesy of the National Archives). Click to enlarge

In February, it was revealed that US Marines were using Cold War era Norwegian caves to store new tanks, artillery and other military equipment to ramp up their presence near the Russia-NATO border.

The military began using the caves to store military equipment in 1981. With the Cold War over, the costs of maintaining the caves were transferred to Norway. The cave complex is back in active use now holding enough equipment to support some 15,000 Marines.

According to Heather Conley, the director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Europe Program, Northern Europe is now being viewed as a “theatre of operations”.

These steps are taken against the background of the already highlighted plans to boost NATO’s presence and intensify its military activities in the proximity of Russia’s borders.

The war preparations are taking place at the time Germany – the European economic giant – has announced it wants a more assertive role in European defense and plans to significantly boost its defense expenditure.

German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen noted that the German Finance Ministry has accepted to increase defense spending by to a total of 10 billion euros by 2020 for the procurement of equipment and personnel. “Germany is ready to engage … to take more responsibility…This is the right path, but it will require an enormous commitment of time and money”, she stressed addressing a biennial gathering of 200 high-ranking military officials in Berlin on October 17.

The alliance is trying to whip up tensions in Europe to reinforce its relevance in the ever changing world. It needs a fictional enemy to keep it together. Without attracting much public attention, NATO is actively involved in military preparations in the proximity of Russia’s borders. Neither the plans for the military “Schengen zone”, nor the deployment of US Marines in Norway, nor Germany beefing up its combat potential have been on the radar screen of Western media.

One provocation follows another against the endless drumbeat of Western media reports about “Russian aggression”. The war preparations greatly reduce European security and the chances for revival of constructive dialogue between Russia and NATO – something Russia has been calling for so many years. Instead, the bloc is doing its best to provoke an arms race with unpredictable results.


Top University Stole Millions From Taxpayers By Faking Global Warming Research

David Rose — Daily Mail Oct 23, 2016

One of the world’s leading institutes for researching the impact of global warming has repeatedly claimed credit for work done by rivals – and used it to win millions from the taxpayer.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday also reveals that when the Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy (CCCEP) made a bid for more Government funds, it claimed it was responsible for work that was published before the organisation even existed. Last night, our evidence was described by one leading professor whose work was misrepresented as ‘a clear case of fraud – using deception for financial gain’. The chairman of the CCCEP since 2008 has been Nick Stern, a renowned global advocate for drastic action to combat climate change.

He is also the president of the British Academy, an invitation-only society reserved for the academic elite. It disburses grants worth millions to researchers – and to Lord Stern’s own organisation.

On Friday, the CCCEP – based jointly at the London School of Economics and the University of Leeds – will host a gala at the Royal Society in London in the peer’s honour. Attended by experts and officials from around the world, it is to mark the tenth anniversary of the blockbuster Stern Review, a 700-page report on the economic impact of climate change. The review was commissioned by Tony Blair’s Government.

The review argued that the world had to take immediate action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or face much higher future costs. It has exerted a powerful influence on successive British governments and international bodies.

Part of the CCCEP’s official mission, which it often boasts about in its public reports, is to lobby for the policies Lord Stern advocates by presenting the case for them with British and foreign governments and at UN climate talks.

Last night, CCCEP spokesman Bob Ward admitted it had ‘made mistakes’, both in claiming credit for studies which it had not funded and for papers published by rival academics. ‘This is regrettable, but mistakes can happen… We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,’ he said.

The Mail on Sunday investigation reveals today that:

  • The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), which has given the CCCEP £9 million from taxpayers since 2008, has never checked the organisation’s supposed publication lists, saying they were ‘taken on trust';
  • Some of the papers the CCCEP listed have nothing to do with climate change – such as the reasons why people buy particular items in supermarkets and why middle class people ‘respond more favourably’ to the scenery of the Peak District than their working class counterparts;
  • Papers submitted in an explicit bid to secure further ESRC funding not only had nothing to do with the CCCEP, they were published before it was founded;
  • The publication dates of some of these papers on the list are incorrect – giving the mistaken impression that they had been completed after the CCCEP came into existence.

Academics whose work was misrepresented reacted with fury. Professor Richard Tol, a climate change economics expert from Sussex University, said: ‘It is serious misconduct to claim credit for a paper you haven’t supported, and it’s fraud to use that in a bid to renew a grant. I’ve never come across anything like it before. It stinks.’

Continues ….

How Different Religions Coexist in Heaven – Swedenborg and Life

Syrian Catholics denounce Western media biased reporting on Aleppo

Off-Guardian.org — Oct 24, 2016

Alexandra Nucci writes for The Catholic World Report:

A nunnery in West Aleppo that has been targeted by militants. Click to enlarge

A nunnery in West Aleppo that has been targeted by militants. Click to enlarge

[…] Earlier this month Carmelite nuns in Aleppo wrote to Catholic charity Aid to the Church in Need to denounce skewed reporting in the international media, citing only the most recent examples of unreported tragedies in the western part of Aleppo that is under fire, not from the Syrian government, but from rebel-held East Aleppo:

“As you already know from the reports that have reached the West, the air strikes on Aleppo are frequent. But the situation in West Aleppo is no better, even though the media won’t report it. This bias in the news is very painful to us, because of the things we witness each and every day, directly or indirectly, through the information we get from priests or from trustworthy people close by, of the plight of many of the neighborhoods in the West of the city, where more and more people are being killed by grenades, by missiles, and by ever-more sophisticated weapons, or are succumbing to the total lack of water and electricity, which have been cut off by the enemy; the West too counts dozens of dead and injured, daily. […]”

Bishop Antoine Audo, SJ, head of Caritas Syria and Chaldean bishop of Aleppo, corroborated the Carmelites’ words in an interview with Vatican Radio: “The testimony of the Carmelite nuns is reliable,” said the bishop. “To us it’s important to let people know that in the Western part of Aleppo, where there are two million inhabitants, many Christians have left because of the bombs that are being dropped everywhere and every day, with no one saying a thing. For example, yesterday morning they bombed a school in the Christian quarter, killing four or five children, and injuring some 50 people. A school!”

“I think,” Bishop Audo added, “that those who control the information in the West have a political agenda. We must, as Christians, as honest people, ask who is behind this manipulation, this exploitation of the media. And I think that if the war goes on like this not only will there will be soon be no one left in Aleppo. Whoever can, leaves. Only those who can’t leave are staying on, which means the poor and the elderly. Little by little it will be the end of this wonderful Christian community of Aleppo. This is our drama and our pain. We try to do everything we can. We say: ‘Peace! Peace! Peace!’ but on the side of the rebels there is no peace but ‘War! War! War!’ which will they continue all the way to destruction.” […]