Anthony Gucciardi — Story Leak.com June 17, 2013

The results are in: virtually no one trusts the scripted mainstream media. We’ve known it for years, but a new Gallup poll shows that a whopping 77% of Americans distrust mainstream media television.

Only a bit more ‘trustworthy’ than Congress, which scored in at a record low of 90% saying they do not trust the government body, the Gallup poll details that only 23% of viewers actually trust the mainstream media television news. A reality that has been clear as day in light of blatant mainstream media blackouts on key events like the outrageous DHS ‘Fourth Amendment free‘ zones that stretch up to 100 miles out from every single border of the US, to the blackout over eyewitness reports at the Boston Marathon.

I recently spoke with the legendary Lew Rockwell on the decline of the mainstream media on his radio show, discussing how the media completely fears the power of the alternative news community:

A NEW ERA OF NEWS HAS ARRIVED

The mainstream media is on its last breath, and they are already scurrying to secure phony ‘alternative news’ websites in a bid to stay afloat, but the new era of news 2.0 is already here. And in this new paradigm of content consumption, reality is king. We’re talking about a model in which one person with a smart phone can generate millions of views on YouTube by filming a protest or civil rights violation. No longer are people required to tune into their nightly news programs to hear the ‘latest’ news.

Today, instant aggregation exists on platforms like Drudge Report, and exclusive news leaks are available here at Storyleak — many of which are exclusives that the mainstream media wishes they could get their hands on. One such example is the Boston Marathon bombing witness I referenced earlier, who happened to call me back over the multitudes of mainstream press agencies that had been desperately trying to get a hold of him. But what happened when I got the exclusive interview and offered them the ability to utilize the video? Well, they declined of course.

The mainstream media is afraid of the new media, they are afraid of you. If one man or woman will a smart phone can change history, that is a scary thought for the political control freaks who seek to censor you at every turn. The new era of news consumption has arrived, and it’s time to kick the mainstream media out for good.

Source

IntelliHub — June 15, 2013

After a long court battle, the Court dismissed the whistle blowers protection for the reporters because the Court stated that there was no law to force that the NEWS must state the truth.

NEWS was/is no different than other TV shows/reality shows.) This is type of deceitful corruption is not just FOX news but includes almost all Main Stream Media. Self researched, alternative news and information (from multiple sources) is one of the best methods to stay well informed. Never trust or follow MSM/mega corporations such as Monsanto. The corrupt FDA has once again turned it’s back on the American public and has actually assisted in suppressing the dangers of this issue.

If you consumed or fed regular milk to your family today, there is more than a 90% chance that it was from a cow injected with BGH. (Bovine somatotropin developed by using recombinant DNA technology). You could be killing or harming your child every time you pour them a glass of milk, the same as pouring them a glass of slow acting poison. Please take action to ensure our children’s safety, for they can not protect themselves. Remember too, that pus (exudate, infection discharge) is almost always present cow’s milk… think about this fact the next time you feed your child this supposedly healthy product.

Source

Vigilant Citizen — June 12, 2013

In this edition of SPOTM: Sharon Needles, Selena Gomez, Rihanna, Tara McDonald and many other examples of how artists must adopt Illuminati symbolism in order to stay in the spotlight.

This Flaunt magazine photoshoot features Sharon Needles – an entertainer who was crowned “America’s Next Drag Superstar” on a reality TV show. The name of the photoshoot? “Hail Satan”. Going with that theme, here’s Sharon sporting devil horns. Click to enlarge

The photoshoot is also about that one-eye thing, proving that this is part of Illuminati Agenda.

The entertainment industry sure loves one-eyed BDSM satanic stuff.

Continues with more pics …

David Mikics — Tablet June 10, 2013

Adolf Hitler loved American movies. Every night at about 9:00, after the Führer had tired out his listeners with his hours-long monologues, he would lead his dinner guests to his private screening room. The lights would go down, and Hitler would fall silent, probably for the first time that day. He laughed heartily at his favorites Laurel and Hardy and Mickey Mouse, and he adored Greta Garbo: Camille brought tears to the Führer’s eyes. Tarzan, on the other hand, he thought was silly.

As it turns out, Hitler’s love for American movies was reciprocated by Hollywood. A forthcoming book by the young historian Ben Urwand, to be published by Harvard University Press in October, presents explosive new evidence about the shocking extent of the partnership between the Nazis and major Hollywood producers. Urwand, a former indie rock musician and currently a member of Harvard’s prestigious Society of Fellows, takes the subject personally: His parents were Jewish refugees from Egypt and Hungary. Digging through archives in Berlin and Washington, D.C., he has unearthed proof that Hollywood worked together with the Nazis much more closely than we ever imagined.

Urwand has titled his riveting book The Collaboration: Hollywood’s Pact With Hitler, and as you turn its pages you realize with dismay that collaboration is the only fitting word for the relationship between Hitler and Hollywood in the 1930s. Using new archival discoveries, Urwand alleges that some of the Hollywood studio heads, nearly all of whom were Jewish, cast their lot with Hitler almost from the moment he took power, and that they did so eagerly—not reluctantly. What they wanted was access to German audiences. What Hitler wanted was the ability to shape the content of Hollywood movies—and he got it. During the ’30s, Georg Gyssling, Hitler’s consul in Los Angeles, was invited to preview films before they were released. If Gyssling objected to any part of a movie—and he frequently did—the offending scenes were cut. As a result, the Nazis had total veto power over the content of Hollywood movies.

What is shocking and new about Urwand’s account is its blow-by-blow description of Hollywood executives tailoring their product to meet the demands of the Nazi regime. While Hollywood’s relations with the Nazis is not a new subject, the inclination of previous historians like Thomas Doherty, author of Hollywood and Hitler, 1933-1939, who did not have access to the documents that Urwand has uncovered, has been to let the studio executives off the hook. Like most historians before Urwand, Doherty seconds Jack Warner’s self-portrait as an ardent foe of the Nazis, who stopped doing business in Germany because he was appalled by the Nazis’ treatment of Jews. But as Urwand alleges here, it wasn’t Warner who rejected the Nazis; they rejected him: Hitler dumped Warner Bros. because the studio failed to make the substantial cuts demanded by his consul Gyssling to a movie called Captured!, set in a German-run camp for foreign POWs during World War I. By July 1934, Warner Bros. had been kicked out of Berlin, and the rest of the studios were running scared. Urwand details Hollywood distribution companies faced with having to fire half of their Jewish staff members in Germany and negotiating with the Nazis so that they could hang on to other half. In 1936, all Jews associated with the American film industry in Germany were forced to leave the country. Yet even after this, the studios eagerly kept up their profitable dealings with Hitler’s regime.

Many dozens of Hollywood movies were imported into Nazi Germany each year, and they often did stunningly well at the box office. The American movies that the Nazis loved best were those that proclaimed the need for a strong leader. Nazi newspapers were ecstatic to see the “leader principle” illustrated in films like The Lives of a Bengal Lancer, Mutiny on the Bounty, Our Daily Bread, and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. They found in these blockbuster entertainments sound fascist political lessons leavened by humor—a light American touch that, Nazi reviewers lamented, German movies could never approach. (In 1939 10 Nazi newspaper editors—including the editor of the Völkischer Beobachter, the official Nazi party newspaper—were treated to a “good will tour” of the MGM studio.) No one was more wholesomely American than the warm-hearted, stammering Jimmy Stewart; but movies like Mr. Smith were welcomed in Germany because they showed that the democratic form of government was inefficient and corrupt.

A film that showed the advantages of democracy over fascism could never be made in Hollywood in the 1930s because of political pressure stemming from Hitler’s Germany, whose market was simply too lucrative for the studios to ignore. In 1936 MGM planned to adapt for the screen Sinclair Lewis’ novel about a fascist takeover of America, It Can’t Happen Here. When Louis B. Mayer called off the project shortly after it started production, the Nazis announced their pleasure with Mayer’s decision. Mayer was first tipped off to the danger of making It Can’t Happen Here by Will Hays. The Hays Office, Hollywood’s censorship bureau, enforced its Movie Production Code “to the end that vulgarity and suggestiveness may be eliminated and that good taste may be emphasized” (as the code put it). Hays admitted that It Can’t Happen Here didn’t offend according any standards of decency, but he warned that certain foreign governments—i.e., Germany—would be upset by the film.

Even before the Nazis took power, Hollywood was buckling under to German demands. In 1932 a new German regulation, inspired in part by Nazi agitation, appeared: Film producers could have their permits to show their films in Germany revoked if they screened, anywhere in the world, movies whose effect was damaging to Germany’s prestige. The intent was to curtail a flourishing genre: movies about World War I that portrayed German officers as scoundrels or sadists (and that often starred Erich von Stroheim, the Silesian Jewish genius who supplied his villainous acting roles with Teutonic growls, barks, and carpet-chewing mannerisms). When Hitler came to power a year later, he used the new law as a way to censor Hollywood movies: to control how they could depict Germans and Jews not only within Germany, but around the world.

Ironically, the man who set the pattern for German interference in American movie making was Carl Laemmle Sr., head of Universal, who later heroically aided Jewish refugees from his native Germany (see Allison Hoffman’s recent Tablet Magazine story). In 1930, Nazis had disrupted the German premiere of Universal’s antiwar film All Quiet on the Western Front: Led by Goebbels, they set off stink bombs and let white mice loose in the theaters. After the Nazi riots, Laemmle, a Jew, put an ad in the German newspapers: “I yield to no one in my love for the Fatherland. The fact that I came to America as a boy and built my future in America has never for a moment caused any cessation of my love for the land of my birth.” Laemmle agreed to make major cuts to All Quiet on the Western Front, not only for screenings in Germany, but worldwide. The picture was gutted—its savage attack on German militarism wound up on the cutting room floor. The same thing would happen later in the decade to MGM’s Three Comrades, again in response to German demands. Other studio heads were less sympathetic than Laemmle to the plight of their fellow Jews, but they shared his wish to keep the German market safe for American movies. Laemmle’s personal efforts to save Jews from the Nazis later on may well have been motivated by his guilt at doing the German government’s bidding as the head of a major Hollywood studio.

Hollywood’s policy of collaboration with the Nazis took more active forms as well. As Jews were systemically excluded from German life and barred from schools and professions, 20th Century Fox released The House of Rothschild (1934), starring George Arliss, the British actor who had earlier played Disraeli. The movie showed how a single Jewish family, headed by its greedy, mean-spirited patriarch Mayer Rothschild, managed to gain control over the finances of Europe and was even able to influence the decisions of governments about war and peace. It was a film that the Nazis might have commissioned themselves.

In fact, the Nazis liked The House of Rothschild so well that a scene from the movie was actually incorporated into the most notorious Nazi anti-Semitic film, Der Ewige Jude. The ADL was so disturbed by the film that it convinced the studios to avoid all mention of Jews in their future productions. And so Jewish characters, who had been featured in hundreds of movies in the 1920s, all but disappeared from the American screen after Hitler’s rise to power. Hitler’s government couldn’t have been happier: There would be no reference to the ever-more desperate plight of the Jews under the Nazi rule in any Hollywood film of the ’30s.

Incredibly, the creative collaboration between the Nazis and Hollywood only deepened throughout the 1930s as exclusionary violence against Jews increased and Hitler tightened his grip on power. In the late 1930s, Urwand claims, Paramount and 20th Century Fox produced newsreels in Germany depicting major Nazi events. Most shocking of all, Urwand maintains, in 1938 MGM invested in factories making German weapons in Austria and the Sudetenland. As Urwand put it in a recent YouTube interview, “The biggest movie studio in America was actually financing the production of German armaments immediately before World War II.” After Germany invaded Poland, MGM further consolidated its alliance with the Nazis by donating eleven of its most popular movies to the cause of German war relief.

***

In 1937, Urwand discovers, Jack Warner seems to have agreed to Gyssling’s demand that the word “Jew” not be spoken in The Life of Emile Zola, which depicted the Dreyfus case; Warner Bros. reassured the German consul that Dreyfus was not a major figure in the movie. The studios even sometimes signed their communiqués to Berlin “Heil Hitler!”: They were loyal to the Führer, even when he didn’t want their movies and in fact wanted to see them dead. Eventually, in 1939, Warner Brothers produced a B movie titled Confessions of a Nazi Spy—the first and only Hollywood criticism of Hitler Germany to be released in the six years since the Nazis took power. But the damage had already been done; the cravenness of the American film industry had made them de facto allies of the Nazis.

Hollywood’s repression of the facts about Jewish persecution continued even during the war years, after all the studios had finally been driven from Germany (MGM and Paramount remained there well into 1940) and America was at war with the Nazis. Despite the courageous efforts of screenwriter Ben Hecht to raise public awareness of the Holocaust while it was happening, there was only one reference to what was being done to the Jews in any Hollywood movie made during the war: a 5-minute sequence of a minor courtroom drama called None Shall Escape (1944), in which Nazis shoot a group of Jewish prisoners who fight back while they are being loaded onto a train. Five minutes was all the studio heads could give to the mass murder of their people, which by then had become common knowledge—in part as a result of Hecht’s full-page newspaper ads and his 1943 Madison Square Garden pageant, We Will Never Die.

Hitler saw himself as a cinematic hero, a matinee idol who overwhelmed the adoring crowds awestruck by his power. He stepped in on occasion and edited the Nazi newsreels himself; he realized that film swayed the masses. Hitler knew he had to feed people fantasy in order to get them to follow his evil vision, and he knew that the movies had taught him how to exploit fantasy’s power: how to seduce on the grandest possible scale. The movies he found most inspiring, most magical in the spell they cast on an audience, were made in America. As Neal Gabler argued in An Empire of Their Own, the Hollywood Jews invented the America of our dreams, a place of high excitement, courage, laughs, compassion, family feeling, and true love. Hitler’s dream was different, and it found a terrible fulfillment in mass murder and war. Hollywood could have helped awaken the world to the looming danger of Nazism, but instead the Jewish dream-makers cast their lot with the world’s—and the Jews’—greatest enemy.

David Mikics is the editor of The Annotated Emerson, and author of Who Was Jacques Derrida? and other books. He lives in Brooklyn and Houston, where he is John and Rebecca Moores Professor of English at the University of Houston.

Source

Kevin Boyle — No One To Vote For June 9, 2013

A wretched mornings viewing this Sunday on BBC1.

On ‘The Daily Politics’ there was, for the first time, an item on the Bilderberger Conference, held this year at ‘The Grove’ in Watford, UK. There were large crowds of protesters outside, if somewhat distant from, the hotel itself. BBC coverage managed to make it look like a handful of fruitcakes carrying ventriloquist’s dummies, wearing clown suits and carrying  deranged-looking ( to the disinterested observer) placards about paedophilia and the like. Cut to the studio where Andrew Neil interviewed David Aaronovitch and (Blimey What’s This!) Alex Jones about the Bilderbergers. Look at the clip below (to the very end please) and judge for yourselves but for once, and it is once, I have to almost agree with David Aarovitch when he said, re global criminal conspirators manipulating world events, to Jones:

“The fact you are here indicates that either that one, they don’t exist or two, you are part of the conspiracy. I say the first.”

Anyone who watches the entire sorry performance below will surely go with number two.

Could Jones possibly have used this precious time more wastefully. Could he possibly have given a more discreditable performance. God help us!. He was embarrassing to watch and said nothing, in my view, that would tempt the casual government-trusting observer to change their views. Andrew Neil’s gesture at the end was surely, to the average viewer, quite fitting.

Jones is the very worst kind of spokesman for those of us who try to educate people about deep manipulation of political processes, the hegemony of finance, and the breathtaking and murderous lies of all our leaders.

I admit to having learnt quite a bit from Jones myself but this ‘limited hangout’ artist acts like a fool, looks like a fool and, what’s worse, brings down ridicule on the heads of the rest of us.

Most of us quickly grow out of admiring this Zion-funded egomaniac.

What was it Lenin said?

The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.

Looks like Alex, smells like Alex.

Must be Alex.

For more BBC1 manipulation watch ‘The Big Questions’ on BBC iPlayer (series 6, episode 20), aired this morning also, but not yet online.

The debate about Syria was so skewed it was sickening to watch. There were two opponents of ‘our’ intervention in Syria, the main guy being a decent enough military fellow but a bit dim. He pointed out the obvious dangers based on the experience of Iraq and Afghanistan but failed to also make the point out that it was US/UK/EU politicians (with the support of Qataris and Saudis) that kicked off the’Syrian Rebellion’ that these same politicians now find so ‘heartbreaking’. He also did not challenge the picture of a satanic government at war with its own people when NATO’s own research shows that 70% of the Syrian public support Assad, 20% are neutral and only 10% support the rebels. This is a level of support that David Cameron and Barack Obama can only dream about.

The (don’t laugh) ‘democrats’ pushing for war far outnumbered these two and were allowed to bang on about our ‘humanitarian duty’ ad nauseam. One also notes that whenever issues of war are debated on the BBC, the Jewish representative from the ‘Henry Jackson Society’ always seems to make an appearance, loathsome dissembling git that he is.

Yup, the BBC know how to create the impression they desire. Gotta be the world’s most skilled and practiced liars. Increasing numbers, encouragingly, are seeing through the system. Even Tory MP’s are up in arms about the prospect of our arming ‘the rebels’ (as their party leaders recommend) so these people are getting educated somewhere even if it is not by the BBC.

P.S. Here is a powerful report about and appeal for Syria written by Nobel Laureate, Mairead Maguire.

It’s conclusion (below) contains the kind of truth you will never read in the western mainstream media,

http://www.sibialiria.org/wordpress/?p=1517%2024%20maggio%202013

AN OVERVIEW:

Following many authorized reports in the mainstream Medias and our own evidences I can stress that the Syrian State and its population are under a proxy war led by foreign countries and directly financed and backed mainly by Qatar who has imposed its views on the Arab League. Turkey, a part of the Lebanese opposition and some of the Jordan authorities offer a safe haven to a diversity of jihadist groups, each with its own agenda, recruited from many countries. Bands of jihadists armed and financed from foreign countries invade Syria through Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon porous frontiers in an effort to destabilize Syria. There are an estimated 50,000 foreign jihadist fighters terrorizing Syria.Those death squads are destroying systematically the Syrian State infrastructures (Electricity, Oil, Gas and water plants, High Tension Pylons, hospitals, schools, public buildings, cultural heritage sites and even religious sanctuaries).  Moreover the country is submerged by snipers, bombers, agitators, bandits.  They use aggression and Sharia rules and hijack the freedom and dignity of the Syrian population.  They torture and kill those who refuse to join them. They have strange religious beliefs which make them feel comfortable even perpetrating the cruelest acts like killing and torture of their opponents. It is well documented that  many of those terrorists are permanently under stimulant like Captagon. The general lack of security unlashes the terrible phenomenon of abduction for ransoms or for political pressure.  Thousands of innocents are missing, among them the two Bishops, Youhanna Ibrahim and Paul Yazigi, many priests and Imams.

Source

James Hurley — Telegraph.co.uk June 9, 2013

The inventor of the World Wide Web said the internet is facing a “major” threat from “people who want to control it on the sly” through “worrying laws” such as SOPA, the US anti-piracy act, and through the actions of internet giants.

“If you can control [the internet], if you can start tweaking what people say, or intercepting communications, it’s very, very powerful…it’s the sort of power that if you give it to a corrupt government, you give them the ability to stay in power forever.”

Sir Tim was speaking as it emerged that the US government has been collecting huge amounts of personal information from Google, Facebook, Apple and other internet companies.

There have also been reports that British spies have been gathering intelligence from the internet giants “through a covertly run operation set up by America’s top spy agency”

“Unwarranted government surveillance is an intrusion on basic human rights that threatens the very foundations of a democratic society,” Sir Tim said. “I call on all web users to demand better legal protection and due process safeguards for the privacy of their online communications, including their right to be informed when someone requests or stores their data.

“Over the last two decades, the web has become an integral part of our lives. A trace of our use of it can reveal very intimate personal things. A store of this information about each person is a huge liability: Whom would you trust to decide when to access it, or even to keep it secure?”

Sir Tim added that a “wake up call” had been delivered when former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak cut off communications services during the uprising that ousted him.

“A lot of people thought the internet was like the air, it just flows. [After this] people asked, ‘who could turn off my internet’?”

Sir Tim said “companies and governments in different places all over the world trying to take control of the internet in different ways” is a much bigger threat to its development than fears over any one company having an online monopoly.

“If you remember [web browser] Netscape, people thought, oh the web is great but here’s a completely controlling web company, what are we going to do? Then one morning they weren’t worried about Netscape any more, it was Microsoft. Then suddenly, wait a moment the browser wasn’t the issue, it was the search engine. Then, it’s wait a moment, it’s the social network.

“If you look at it broadly, yes a monopoly slows innovation, reduces competition. That’s why it’s important this is an open platform. But monopolies come and go all the time.”

Sir Tim called for governments to protect the neutrality and independence of the web and compared its democratic importance to the freedom of the press.

He said “organisations that keep the internet running” should be “connected to government but at arms length. That’s really important and as years have gone by that’s got more and more important. Once you have an open internet, with an open world wide web on top of it, I’m very optimistic”.

Sir Tim was speaking in Monte Carlo at the Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur of the Year competition. He likened the determination he needed when developing the web to the single mindedness exhibited by successful entrepreneurs.

“With the web, it was a paradigm shift. It’s a well used phrased but it means that afterwards the world is so different, there weren’t the words in the old word to describe the new world. People didn’t understand clicks and links and web pages – we didn’t have words.

“You just need to stick with it and work with a few people with in a twinkle in their eye because they get it. Some people will respond with excitement – not everybody, maybe three in three hundred will get it. The web took off because a few people around the world had the twinkle in their eye and said they could understand what it would be like if all the information in the world was [online].”

He added that while about “25pc of the world” now uses the web, “a massive gap” remains. “There are number of languages where there isn’t a lot of stuff on the web, and a lot of culture that isn’t represented. A lot of countries haven’t got the backbone for a good internet-based democracy.

“The change for the world will be massive when we go from only 20pc of the world having it to 80pc of the world. It is going to be a wonderful explosion in culture and participation and I hope that people of different cultures use it to understand each other as a result.”

Source

Gilad Atzmon — gilad.co. June 7, 2013

In the last week we have been following British and French’s desperate attempts to push for a military intervention in Syria. It is far from being a secret that both British and French government are dominated by the Jewish Lobby. In Britain it is the ultra Zionist CFI (Conservative Friends of Israel) – apparently 80% of  Britain’s conservative MPs are members of the pro Israeli Lobby. In France the situation is even more devastating, the entire political system is hijacked by the forceful CRIF.

But in case anyone fails to grasp why the Jewish Lobby is pushing for an immediate intervention, Debka, an Israeli news outlet provides the answer. Seemingly, the Syrian army is winning on all fronts. Israel’s military and geo-political calculations are proved to be wrong.

According to Debka, “the battle for Damascus is over”. The Syrian army had virtually “regained control of the city in an epic victory”.  The rebels, largely mercenaries,  have lost the battle they “can’t do much more than fire sporadically. They can no longer launch raids, or pose threats to the city centre, the airport or the big Syrian air base nearby. The Russian and Iranian transports constantly bringing replenishments for keeping the Syrian army fighting can again land at Damascus airport after months of rebel siege.”

But it isn’t just the capital. Debka reports that “Hezbollah and Syrian units have tightened their siege on the rebels holding out in the northern sector of al Qusayr; other (Syrian army) units have completed their takeover of the countryside around the town of Hama; and a third combined Syrian-Hizballah force has taken up positions around Aleppo.”

Debka maintains that senior IDF officers criticized the Israeli defense minister (Moshe Ya’alon) who “mislead” the Knesset a few days ago estimating that “Bashar Assad controlled only 40% of Syrian territory.”  Debka suggests that Israeli defense Minister drawn on a “flawed intelligence assessment and were concerned that the armed forces were acting on the basis of inaccurate intelligence.” Debka stresses, “erroneous assessments… must lead to faulty decision-making.”

Debka is clearly brave enough to admit that Israeli military miscalculations may have lead to disastrous consequences. It reports, “the massive Israeli bombardment of Iranian weapons stored near Damascus for Hezbollah, turned out a month later to have done more harm than good. It gave Bashar Assad a boost instead of weakening his resolve.”

Debka is obviously correct. It doesn’t take a genius to predict that an Israeli attack on an Arab land cannot be accepted by the Arab masses, not even by Assad’s bitterest Arab opponents.

Debka maintains that the “intelligence focus on military movements in Syria especially around Damascus to ascertain that advanced missiles and chemical weapons don’t reach Hezbollah laid to a failure of in detecting major movement by Hezbollah militia units towards the Syrian-Israeli border.”

Israel is now facing a new reality.  It is facing Hezbollah reinforcements  streaming in from Lebanon towards the Golan heights and its border with Syria.

Israel, Debka concludes,  will soon find itself  “face to face for the first time with Hezbollah units equipped with heavy arms and missiles on the move along the Syrian-Israeli border and manning positions opposite Israel’s Golan outposts and villages.”

Debka is correct to suggest that instead of “growing weaker, Iran’s Lebanese proxy is poised to open another warfront and force the IDF to adapt to a new military challenge from the Syrian Golan.”

Rather than The Gurdian or the Le Monde, it is actually the  Israeli Debka that helps us to grasp why Britain and France are so  desperate to intervene. Once again, it is a Zionist war which they are so eager to fight.

Sadly enough, it isn’t The Guardian or The New York Times that is there to reveal the latest development in Syria and expose Israeli lethal miscalculations. It is actually a ‘Zionist’ Israeli patriotic outlet that is providing the good. I actually believe that this form of harsh self-criticism that is embedded in Israeli culture, is the means that sustains Israeli regional hegemony, at least monetarily. This ability to critically examine and disapprove your own leadership is something I fail to encounter in Western media. Seemingly,  the  media in Israel is far more tolerant toward criticism  than the Zionist dominated  Media in the West.

Source

Introduction — June 7, 2013

After more than half-a-century studiously ignoring it the mainstream media is finally giving some coverage to the annual Bilderberg meeting. Even the BBC is  is reporting on the event, even if it has taken them nearly sixty years to get round to doing so.

However, the attention suddenly accorded the annual meeting of the rich and powerful doesn’t represent some new dawn for the mainstream media. Far from it.

For the media giants could do little else after coverage in the independent Internet news media forced the conference organisers to issue a press release listing the 61st annual meeting’s talking points and attendees.

This only came after the hitherto secret annual meeting had been publicised on the Internet and protesters began to congregate at the meetings venues. This in turn forced the intellectual whores in the corporate media to give the Bilderberg some coverage. If they hadn’t it would have been all too obvious who they really served.

Had it not been for the independent internet media we’ve no doubt that nothing would have changed and outlets like the BBC and the Independent would have continued to studiously ignore the event.

David Cameron to attend Bilderberg meeting

Nigel Morris — The Independent June 7, 2013

David Cameron will tonight attend a meeting of the secretive Bilderberg Group, which comprises senior politicians, business leaders and academics from around the globe, Downing Street has announced.

His decision to join the gathering at a country house hotel near Watford will provoke controversy as the Prime Minister once pledged to lead the world’s most open and transparent government.

About 140 leaders from banking, finance and politics, as well as some members of royalty and aristocracy, will be present at the conference, which is taking place in Britain for the first time for 15 years.

The Chancellor George Osborne and Kenneth Clarke, the minister without portfolio and former Chancellor, are also on the guest-list, along with the shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls.

The Bilderberg Group has always attracted conspiracy theories as its meetings always take place in strict secrecy and no records are released of its deliberations.

Downing Street said Mr Cameron had been invited to the session as he was head of government in the conference’s host country.

It said he would not be delivering a speech, but taking part in a discussion “around domestic and global issues”.

Source

Steve Anderson — The Independent June 7, 2013

Featuring helicopters and scores of armed police, the dramatic, night-time raid on the remote luxury mansion of a larger-than-life comic book villain in January last year had all the trappings of a Hollywood blockbuster.

This, however, was real-life. Kim Dotcom, the internet entrepreneur and founder of the now-defunct file-sharing website Megaupload was arrested at his home in New Zealand on 20 January 2012, and is fighting extradition to the US, where he – along with six others – is wanted for allegedly making more than $175m (£110m) in illegal profits from online piracy. Indicted for copyright infringement, racketeering and money-laundering, he faces up to 50 years in jail if convicted.

Now holed up in his rented $24m pad in New Zealand after being released on bail, the 39 year-old (born Kim Schmitz in Germany) retains the air of silver-screen bad guy.

But members of his legal team claim the story behind his arrest, and the attempts to extradite him, have a far closer connection with Tinseltown.

Lawyers for the entrepreneur say the charges against him form part of a “political prosecution” waged by the Obama administration in exchange for campaign contributions and political support from film industry lobbyists.

One of Dotcom’s lawyers, Robert Amsterdam, told The Independent that the criminal case against his client, which alleges that Dotcom used Megaupload as a front for a criminal enterprise that willingly shared and profited from millions of dollars’ worth of copyrighted material, is based on erroneous use of civil law and is rooted in the relationship between the upper reaches of the Democratic party and the film-making industry.

In particular, Amsterdam cites the friendship between Vice President Joe Biden and Chris Dodd, CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and a former Senator.

According to Amsterdam and his co-counsel, the US Department of Justice is going to great lengths to prosecute, and thus appease the Hollywood lobby, using racketeering laws to bolster a weak case built on non-existent civil theories of ‘secondary copyright infringement’.

“Here you have, if you excuse me, computer geeks, and they’re being treated as if they’re the heads of the Gambino crime family,” he says.

Expanding on a white paper recently released via Dotcom’s website, Amsterdam points out that the raid on Dotcom’s mansion came on the same day as the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), a bill designed to tackle online piracy, was shelved in US Congress after outcry from online giants such as Google and Facebook, which claimed it would curb online freedoms.

The day before, Dodd made comments implying that the MPAA would stop supporting President Obama if something was not done to tackle copyright infringement.

Dodd, a man Biden has described as one of his best friends, had told FOX News: “Those who count on quote ‘Hollywood’ for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who’s going to stand up for them when their job is at stake. Don’t ask me to write a cheque for you when you think your job is at risk, and then don’t pay any attention to me when my job is at stake.”

For Hollywood, a considerable amount of money is certainly at stake. The MPAA estimates that online piracy costs the US film industry around $20.5bn per year. Though critics say the true figure is in the hundreds of millions, it is still a significant loss for an industry that is already facing other funding pressures after the 2008 financial crisis.

Amsterdam argues that shutting down Megaupload, and the raid on Dotcom, was a “Plan B” to pushing through SOPA.

“I think, when the President of the Motion Picture Association, on 19 January says that if people basically don’t help him out, he’s not writing any cheques, and then on the 20 January [authorities] attack my client… and throw him in jail, there’s at least an inference there that at least requires an explanation.”

Amsterdam also points to White House logs, which show President Obama hosted Chris Dodd for a two-and-a-half hour private lunch meeting in the Oval Office on 9 December 2011, six weeks before the raid.

Though some would call this conspiratorial, and skeptics will point to the many other issues a former Senator and Hollywood bigwig would discuss at the White House, Amsterdam argues that Megaupload and its founder are likely to have cropped up.

“Starting off from all of the legal grounds that exist and moving to the political nature of the attack [we must ask] ‘was this discussed in the White House?’ and ‘who said what to whom?’,” he says.

Hollywood’s long-standing financial support for the Democrats is no secret. Amsterdam describes the relationship thus: “The MPAA is to the Democrats what the NRA is to the Republicans.”

One glitzy, celebrity-packed dinner organised by George Clooney raised $15m for Obama’s re-election campaign last year.

Dotcom maintains that Megaupload was used by millions of people legitimately, and should be protected under US safe-harbour laws that say internet service providers are not responsible for copyright infringement by their users. His argument is that you can’t sue a corporation for what someone does once they’ve appropriated that corporation’s product or service, and started using it.

“The prosecution seeks to hold Megaupload and its executives criminally responsible for alleged infringement by the company’s third-party cloud-storage users. The problem with the theory, however, is that secondary copyright infringement is not – nor has it ever been – a crime in the United States,” says the white paper, authored partly by Amsterdam.

However, in court filings lodged in Virginia, prosecutors allege that the defendants themselves used the Megaupload website and its subsidiaries to directly infringe copyright and knowingly encourage others to do the same. They also accuse Dotcom’s defense team of using civil concepts to “exaggerate the complexity of the criminal charges”.

The lead prosecutor, Neil MacBride, formerly served as a legal advisor to Joe Biden and was an anti-piracy chief at the Business Software Alliance – the software equivalent of the MPAA. Amsterdam says he has been “hand-picked” and the appointment further backs up his claims of a political prosecution.

The Department of Justice has declined to comment on Macbride’s selection, but Biden has denied claims that he was at all involved in the Megaupload arrests. The Independent’s request for comment from the White House went unanswered.

Amsterdam and his co-counsel Ira P Rothken, just two of Dotcom’s 29-strong legal team, say that if the extradition bid is successful it has massive implications in terms of US overreach and internet freedom across the world.

“You have the United States dealing with a man who has never set foot in the country, dealing with a company where over 90 per cent of the customers involved are non-Americans, and freezing all the information, freezing all this man’s assets,” Amsterdam says. “I just find this so beyond the pale.”

Source

Vigilant Citizen — Vigilant citizen.com June 4, 2013

In the second part of this two part series, we’ll look at the end of Marilyn Monroe’s career and the circumstances around her death – all of which were typical for a victim of mind control. We will also examine her legacy in the shady MK Ultra underworld and how she became a symbol for Monarch Programming in Hollywood.

Note: It is recommended that you read the first part of the series first.

The first part of this series of articles described the hidden side of Marilyn Monroe’s childhood and her beginnings in the entertainment industry. While Monroe projected the image of a glamorous sex symbol, the reality of her day-to-day life was pretty much the opposite: She was controlled, abused, exploited and even traumatized by various handlers while living in prison-like conditions. Her difficult situation slowly lead to a total mental breakdown and, when she apparently lost her usefulness to those controlling her, she lost her life in very strange circumstances.

Monroe’s legacy lives on, however, and in some ways she is more relevant today than ever in the entertainment industry … but for the wrong reasons. There are now a great number of mind control slaves in Hollywood and those behind the scenes have made Marilyn Monroe the ultimate symbol of Beta Programming. There are several Marilyn Monroes in Hollywood, these days, all projecting a sex-pot image while being subjected to the same control and hardship as Monroe was. And all of them get associated with Monroe at one time or another in their career. Is it a coincidence? If you read my series of articles Symbolic Pics of the Month, you probably know that the use of Monroe’s image is often repeated on a specific type of celebrity … too often to be simply a coincidence.

Let’s look at the end of Monroe’s career, the circumstances of her death and how her image is exploited by today’s Illuminati industry.

Presidential Model

At the height of her career, Marilyn got involved with the highest power figure in the world: The President of the United States, John F. Kennedy. While some historians classify their relationship as an “affair”, researchers in Monarch mind control claim that she was actually a presidential model – the highest “level” of Beta Programming slaves who are used to “service” Presidents.

If true, the existence of presidential models is quite a troubling concept, one that proves the power and the importance of Monarch Mind Control in elite circles.

“Presidential models” were/are allegedly used by big time entertainers and politicians as sexual playthings; mind controlled puppets programmed to perform assorted perverse acts at the bidding of their manipulative “handlers”. Supposedly Marilyn Monroe was the first Monarch sex slave who achieved “celebrity” status. For those unfamiliar with the term “Presidential model”, I’ll refer them to The Control of Candy Jones by Donald Bain and Long John Nebel. As the story goes, Long John Nebel–a New York radio personality in the 50′s-70′s–discovered via hypnosis that his wife, Candy Jones, was a victim of just this sort of mind control project, one of the many MK-ULTRA mind slaves, programmed by CIA “spychiatrists” and used by high mucky muck dignitaries to perform their perverse sexual whims, among other assorted duties such as being used as drug mules and message couriers for this vast network of morally deficient power brokers. More has come to light in this regard in recent years by way of similar allegations disbursed widely across the Internet, as well as such highly controversial books as Trance Formation In America by Mark Phillips and Kathy O’Brien, wherein Ms. O’Brien relates her own troubling tales of MK-ULTRA and Monarch abuse. ”

- Adam Gorightly, “An Interpretation of Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut”

According to mind-control researchers, Marilyn was the first “high profile” presidential model, a situation that required her handlers to exercise extreme control on what she said and did in public.

“They stripped Marilyn of any contact with the outside world to insure that their mind control would work. They were afraid that something might go wrong with the first Presidential slave that was allowed to be highly visible to the public”

- Fritz Springmeier, The Illuminati Formula to Create a Mind Control Slave

Marilyn singing “Happy Birthday Mr. President” to JFK on May 19th 1962. In this iconic moment of U.S. History, Monroe sings to the President in a sultry voice while wearing a skin-tight dress with nothing under it. When one knows the “hidden side of history” this event was actually about a Beta Programming slave singing to the President she is servicing - for the whole world to see.

“High level” Monarch slaves are often identified with gems and stones to identify their status. Presidential models are reportedly identified with diamonds.

“For bona-fides & recognition signals, the Monarch slaves wear diamonds to signify they are presidential models. (…)

Emeralds mean drugs, rubies mean prostitution, diamonds (rhinestones) Presidential Model work.”

- Ibid.

In the movie “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes”, Monroe famously performs the song “Diamonds are a Girl’s Best Friend”. Was there a double meaning to that song?

Relevant fact: The dress worn by Monroe while singing “Happy Birthday Mr. President” contained more than 2500 rhinestones. Was it a way to identify her as a Presidential Model? One thing is for sure, behind the smiles and the diamonds, things were extremely sour for Marilyn during that time period. In fact, that Presidential performance was actually one of her last public appearances, as she was found dead less than three months later.

Slowly Breaking Down

The last months of Marilyn’s life were characterized with erratic behavior, strange anecdotes and several “intimate” relationships with high-powered individuals. As she was increasingly showing signs of serious mental distress, she also had affairs with several men (JFK, his brother Bobby Kennedy, Marlon Brando, etc.) and according to a biography Marilyn Monroe: My Little Secret by Tony Jerris, with some women as well.

As a Beta Slave, she was also used sexually by industry people. In June DiMaggio’s book Marilyn, Joe and Me the author describes how she was forced to service old men and that she had to completely dissociate from reality (an important aspect of MK programming) to be able to go through the disgusting acts.

“Marilyn couldn’t afford emotions when she had to sleep with wrinkled old men to survive in the business. She had to protect herself by virtually turning them (emotions) off during those times – as if she were playing a part in order to remove herself from the horror of the situation. When these highly placed, high-priced moguls owned her body and soul, she couldn’t afford a life of her own. There were times, she told me, when she came home exhausted from a day’s shoot and some powerful old geezer would telephone her and her skin would crawl. After some of the horrors of her studio sex she would come over and stay in our shower for an hour or more. She wanted to wash away the terrible experience she’d had to endure”.

- June DiMaggio, Marilyn, Joe and Me

In the last months of her life, Marilyn was reportedly very difficult to work with and her behavior caused observers to worry about her situation. During the shooting of her last completed movie, The Misfits, Monroe had a “serious illness” that was never disclosed but was reportedly treated by a … psychiatrist. In other words, mind control.

“Monroe was frequently ill and unable to perform, and away from the influence of Dr. Greenson, she had resumed her consumption of sleeping pills and alcohol. A visitor to the set, Susan Strasberg, later described Monroe as “mortally injured in some way,”and in August, Monroe was rushed to Los Angeles where she was hospitalized for ten days. Newspapers reported that she had been near death, although the nature of her illness was not disclosed. Louella Parsons wrote in her newspaper column that Monroe was “a very sick girl, much sicker than at first believed”, and disclosed that she was being treated by a psychiatrist.”

- Wikipedia, “Marilyn Monroe”

In 1962, Marilyn began filming Something’s Got to Give, but she was so ill and unreliable that she ultimately got fired and sued by the studio 20th Century Fox for half a million dollars. The movie’s producer Henry Weinstein stated that Marilyn’s behavior during the filming was horrifying:

“Very few people experience terror. We all experience anxiety, unhappiness, heartbreaks, but that was sheer primal terror.”

- Anthony Summers, “Goddess”

Weinstein observed that Marilyn’s was not having regular “bad days” or mood swings. She was feeling “sheer primal terror” – something that products of trauma-based Mind Control often end up experiencing.

The Last Sitting

In late June 1962, Marilyn modeled for a photoshoot with photographer Bert Stern for Vogue magazine. Six weeks later, she was found dead. There is something troubling about those images as they show a sensual yet aging Monroe, drunk and with a eyes that somewhat lost of their spark. Whether it was intentional or not, this photoshoot is symbolic for several reasons.

In Stern’s book The Last Sitting, the photographer chose to include pictures that were crossed out by Marilyn because they were deemed unsatisfactory. Now knowing that she would be “crossed out” a few weeks later, probably because she was deemed unsatisfactory by her handlers, there is something prophetic about these images.

Knowing what would happen to her a few weeks after this shoot, this red veil on her face and these closed eyes can symbolically portray Marilyn’s sacrifice by the industry.

The photoshoot took place at the Bel Air Hotel and, reportedly, there was a lot of alcohol in the air. It is also rumored Marilyn and the photographer became “intimate” during the session.

This photoshoot, taken at the most difficult time of her life – after a “miscarriage”, a divorce, a forced trip to a psychiatric ward, and all kinds of abuse, will also be remembered as her most revealing and intimate one. As Marilyn’s life got more difficult, she also became increasingly sexual – which is what Beta Programming slaves are programmed to do. However, like other MK slaves, she did not live past the age of 40.

Her Death

Marilyn Monroe was found dead by her psychiatrist Ralph Greenson in her bedroom on August 5, 1962. While her death was classified as a “probable suicide” due to “acute barbiturate poisoning”, it is still one of the most debated conspiracy theories of all time. There are indeed a great number of facts pointing toward murder, yet the truth about her death has never been official acknowledged. Since Marilyn’s demise, a great number of other celebrities have lost their lives in similar circumstances. To those who are aware of the dark side of the entertainment industry, the modus operandi of the occult elite has become quite clear.

In Marilyn’s case, the evidence is quite startling. In fact, so much evidence has been destroyed that it is difficult not to believe in a cover-up. Jack Clemmons, the first LAPD officer who investigated the death scene, has gone on record to state that he believes that she was murdered. Many other detectives have said the same, but no murder charges were ever filed.

Three people were present in Marilyn’s house at the time of her death: Her housekeeper Eunice Murray, her psychiatrist Dr. Ralph Greenson, and her internist Dr. Hyman Engelberg. The investigation around Marilyn’s death revealed that Dr. Greenson called the police over an hour after Dr. Engelberg pronounced her dead. The behavior of the three present at the scene was described as “erratic”. Here are parts of the official timeline of events of that fateful night.

· 7–7:15 p.m.: Joe DiMaggio Jr., son of baseball player Joe DiMaggio (and thus Monroe’s former stepson) phones her about his broken engagement to a girl in San Diego. DiMaggio Jr. said when interviewed that Monroe sounded cheerful and upbeat. On duty with the Marines in California, DiMaggio was able to place the time of the call because he was watching the seventh inning of a Baltimore Orioles-Los Angeles Angels game being played in Baltimore. According to the game’s records the seventh inning took place between 10 and 10:15 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time; thus, Monroe received the call around 7 p.m. California time.

· 7:30–7:45 p.m.: Peter Lawford (President Kennedy’s brother-in-law) telephones Monroe to invite her to dinner at his house, an invitation she had declined earlier that day. According to Lawford, Monroe’s speech was slurred and was becoming increasingly indecipherable. After telling him goodbye the conversation abruptly ends. Lawford tries to call her back again, but receives a busy signal. Telephone records show that this is the last phone call Monroe’s main line received that night.

· 8 p.m.: Lawford telephones Eunice Murray, who is spending the night in Monroe’s guest house, on a different line asking if the maid would check in on her. After a few seconds, Murray returns to the phone telling Lawford that she is fine. Unconvinced, Lawford will try all night long to get in touch with Monroe. Lawford telephones his friend and lawyer Milton A. “Mickey” Rudin, but is advised to keep away from Monroe’s house to avoid any public embarrassment that could result from Monroe possibly being under the influence.

· 10 p.m.: Housekeeper Eunice Murray walks past Monroe’s bedroom door and later testifies that she saw a light on under the door, but decided not to disturb Monroe.

· 3:00 a.m.: Eunice Murray calls Marilyn’s personal psychiatrist, Dr. Greenson, on the second telephone line, she cannot wake Monroe. She is sure something is very wrong after peeking into her barred bedroom window.

· 3:40 a.m.: Dr. Greenson arrives and tries to break open the door but fails. He looks through the French windows outside and sees Monroe lying on the bed holding the telephone and apparently dead. He breaks the glass to open the locked door and checks her. He calls Dr. Hyman Engelberg. There is some speculation that an ambulance might have been summoned to Monroe’s house at this point and was later dismissed

· 4:30 a.m.: Police are called and arrive shortly after. The two doctors and Murray are questioned and indicate a time of death of around 12:30 a.m. Police note the room is extremely tidy and the bed appears to have fresh linen on it. They claim Murray was washing sheets when they arrived. Police note that the bedside table has several pill bottles, but the room contains no means to wash pills down as there is no glass and the water is turned off. Monroe was known to gag on pills even when drinking to wash them down. Later a glass is found lying on the floor by the bed, but police claim it was not there when the room was searched.

· 5:40 a.m.: Undertaker Guy Hockett arrives and notes that the state of rigor mortis indicates a time of death between 9:30 and 11:30 p.m. The time is later altered to match the witness statements.

· 6 a.m.: Murray changes her story and now says she went back to bed at midnight and only called Dr. Greenson when she awoke at 3 a.m. and noticed the light still on. Both doctors also change their stories and now claim Monroe died around 3:50 a.m. Police note Murray appears quite evasive and extremely vague and she would eventually change her story several times. Despite being a key witness, Murray travels to Europe and is not questioned again.

- Wikipedia, “Death of Marilyn Monroe”

To sum up some strange events that happened that night: The police were called more than an hour after Monroe was found dead; the room was cleaned up by the maid and linen were changed AFTER she was found dead; there were multiple pill bottles in her room, but no water; a glass was later found on the floor, but was not there when the room was first searched; the time of death given by the witnesses changed several times. Finally, prime witness (and a possible suspect), Eunice Murray leaves the country and is never questioned again.

Monroe7 cap: Pill bottles found next to Monroe’s body.

Circumstances surrounding Monroe’s autopsy are also extremely suspicious, as the conclusion of the most important reports clearly show that swallowing pills was not the cause of her death. Furthermore, there appears to be a clear effort to suppress all evidence that might lead to the true cause of Monroe’s death.

“The pathologist, Dr. Thomas Noguchi, could find no trace of capsules, powder or the typical discoloration caused by Nembutal in Monroe’s stomach or intestines, indicating that the drugs that killed her had not been swallowed. If Monroe had taken them over a period of time (which might account for the lack of residue), she would have died before ingesting the amount found in her bloodstream. Monroe was found lying face down. There was also evidence of cyanosis, an indication that death had been very quick. Noguchi asked the toxicologist for examinations of the blood, liver, kidneys, stomach, urine and intestines, which would have revealed exactly how the drugs got into Monroe’s system. However, the toxicologist, after examining the blood, did not believe he needed to check other organs, so many of the organs were destroyed without being examined. Noguchi later asked for the samples, but the medical photographs, the slides of those organs that were examined and the examination form showing bruises on the body had disappeared, making it impossible to investigate the cause of death.

The toxicology report shows high levels of Nembutal (38–66 capsules) and chloral hydrate (14–23 tablets) in Monroe’s blood. The level found was enough to kill more than 10 people. An examination of the body ruled out intravenous injection as the source of the drugs. Coroner Dr. Theodore Curphey oversaw the full autopsy. Apart from the cause of death as listed on the death certificate, the results were never made public and no record of the findings was kept.”

- Ibid.

In 1985, British journalist Anthony Summers investigated the circumstances surrounding Monroe’s death. He managed to obtain an interview with the maid Eunice Murray for a BBC report. She inadvertently admitted some damning facts.

“For the BBC program Eunice Murray initially repeated the same story she had told Robert Slatzer in 1973 and the police in 1962. She apparently noticed the camera crew starting to pack up and then said, “Why, at my age, do I still have to cover this thing?” Unknown to her, the microphone was still on. Murray went on to admit that Monroe had known the Kennedys. She volunteered that on the night of the actress’ death, “When the doctor arrived, she was not dead.” Murray died in 1994 without revealing further details.”

- Ibid.

Despite all of these facts, the truth about Marilyn’s death is still not out in the open. As is the case for many other celebrity deaths, there is an aura of mystery surrounding it and a whole lot of answered questions. In other words, it fits the profile of a typical occult elite assassination that has the power to keep law enforcement from revealing the truth.

Some researchers have attempted to pin-point who instigated the murder. Some cite the Kennedys, the CIA, her psychologists or other individuals. It is perhaps wiser to take a step back and to look at the wider picture: Most of the people around Monroe were part of the same system. It was not a single person who decided to kill her, she was a MK slave who was “thrown off the freedom train”. Like many others after her, she was a celebrity who was exploited when she was useful and eliminated when her programming started to break down.

“The deeper meaning here is that all Monarch slaves are expendable if they cross the line, and many of these victims reportedly have been “discarded” in just such a manner after they become a certain age and are no longer desirable as prostitute/slaves, or if they in someway break free of their programming and are considered a “risk”.”

-  Op. Cit. Gorightly.

Symbol of Beta Programming in Today’s Entertainment Industry

While Marilyn Monroe quickly became a larger-than-life icon representing all that is hot and glamorous in Hollywood, she also became, in the shady world of MK-Ultra, a symbol of Beta Programming in Hollywood. Today, more than ever, many young starlets raised in the entertainment industry follow in Marilyn’s footsteps – as if it was all planned out for them. Manipulated by handlers, they are lead to fame and fortune, but also go through trauma-based mind control, abuse, exploitation, break downs and, sometimes, early death. In all cases, these celebrities are made to embody Marilyn Monroe at one stage of their career, as if it was a sick requirement by the MK puppeteers, who make it a point to identify their slaves to the clueless masses. How many videos or photoshoots featuring major stars are said to “channel” Marilyn Monroe? Too many to be a coincidence. In some cases, the resemblance is not only aesthetic. Here are some examples.

Britney Spears

One of the most obvious cases of mind control in today’s entertainment industry is Britney Spears. From her childhood as a Mouseketeer to her adulthood living under the conservatorship of her father and fiancée (aka her handlers), Britney has always been closely monitored by powerful figures. Like so many other slaves, she has gone through breakdowns, substance abuse, and is often described as a “drugged zombie” by those closest to her.

Britney “channels” Marilyn Monroe, complete with a platinum blonde look. Her hands are bound which can represent her state in the entertainment industry.

In this stage performance, Britney recreates the iconic flowing dress Monroe moment.

Britney is reportedly “obsessed” with Monroe. According to Wonderwall, Britney demands that a collection of Marilyn Monroe DVDs be on-hand in all her hotel rooms. She also visits Marilyn’s grave regularly and wants to be buried in the same cemetery. Are Beta slaves programmed to adulate Marilyn?

Anna-Nicole Smith

Anna-Nicole Smith’s life was very similar to Monroe’s, right down to the tragic end. Famous for her curves and her “dumb blonde” persona popularized by Monroe, her life in the spotlight was typical of a Beta slave. In the final years of her life, she was in a relationship with her attorney Howard K. Stern – who acted more as a MK handler than a husband. In this video (that I originally posted in the article When Insiders Expose the Ugly Side of the Entertainment Industry), we see Anna-Nicole demonstrating odd behavior … quite possible a programmed alter-personality switched on. The sad scene is filmed by Stern who appears to have triggered the episode.

Anna-Nicole also had to live through some incredibly traumatic events. For instance, her 20 year-old son, Daniel Wayne Smith, died in her hospital room right after giving birth to her daughter. The cause of his death was never clear but, as usual, the reason given by mass media is “drugs”. Was this a sacrifice by the occult elite to traumatize Anna-Nicole Smith the Beta slave? One thing is for sure, the event completely changed for the rest of her life. (Note that Monroe lost two unborn babies and claims they were “taken from her” by unidentified people).

Less than three weeks after the death of her son, Anna-Nicole “committed” to handler Howard. K. Stern in an unofficial ceremony. Five months later, Smith was found dead in a hotel room in Florida. She lost her life at age 39 due to a “combination of drugs”. In short, Smith’s resemblance to Monroe was not only physical, she was programmed to relive Monroe’s life.

Anna-Nicole Smith in a recreation of Monroe’s movie “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes”.

One of the numerous occasions Smith was made to look exactly like Monroe.

Other Beta Programming Celebrities as Monroe

Here are other personalities with Beta personas that are associated with Marilyn Monroe:

Lindsay Lohan recreated The Last Sitting photoshoot with the same photographer, Bert Stern.

Like Monroe, Lohan is a sex symbol whose frequent trips to rehabilitation centers (a.k.a. reprogramming centers) and erratic behavior are reminiscent of Monroe’s breakdown.

Megan Fox poses with a book on Marilyn Monroe while showing off her Monroe tattoo.

Since then Fox has however removed that tattoo. She stated in an interview: “I’m removing it. It is a negative character, as she suffered from personality disorders and was bipolar. I do not want to attract this kind of negative energy in my life.” Did she learn the truth about Monroe and what she represents in the MK Ultra entertainment industry?

Katy Perry is definitely used to push the Illuminati Agenda – including Beta Programming symbolism. Here she is posing as Monroe with a Masonic checkerboard pattern in the background.

As stated in previous articles, Courtney Stodden has all of the bearings of a Beta slave. She married her handler when she was 16 and he was 51. Her online videos are all about being a Beta Kitten and displaying multiple personalities.

In her video “National Anthem”, Lana del Rey recreated the Monroe’s “Happy Birthday Mr. President”. The imagery in many of her videos allude to Beta Programming.

While it is normal for celebrities to be inspired by an iconic star such as Marilyn Monroe, her image is systematically used on stars pushing the Illuminati Agenda. Like other symbols described on this site, the symbol of Monroe is used to represent the presence of Beta programming in popular culture.

In Conclusion

In this two-part series of articles, we looked at Marilyn Monroe’s youth, career, death and legacy. In all of these stages, Monroe’s life was imprinted with trauma, abuse and mind control. As a victim of Beta Programming, when she was not working on a project, she was literally passed around for her ” intimate services”. Towards the end of her life, Marilyn was JFK’s Presidential Model, a situation that could have been explosive if revealed to the public. Both of them would die shortly afterwards in circumstances that remain extremely shady and suspicious.

Even after Monroe’s death, her image continues to be used ad-nauseam to identify those who are following in her footsteps by the same system that controlled her entire life. Why do the most iconic figures in our pop culture often end up living tragic lives? Is it because there is something terribly wrong in the entertainment industry? I’ll let Marilyn Monroe sum up the situation.

“Hollywood is a place where they pay you 50,000 dollars for a kiss and 50 cents for your soul”

- Marilyn Monroe

Source

by James Perloff — (henrymakow.com) June 3, 2013

Hollywood is no place to find political truth. Although it has produced–with increasing rarity–some uplifting films, and even anti-Communist ones during the Cold War, movies exposing the Illuminati and how they operate are almost nonexistent.

However, an occasional film has slipped through — or was permitted to. (I don’t refer to Illuminati films with sly Illuminati references, but movies genuinely opposing them.)

One was 1970′s made-for-TV The Brotherhood of the Bell, reviewed by Dr. Makow and viewable on YouTube.

2) “MURDER BY DECREE“

Also on this site, John Hamer unveiled the truth about the Jack the Ripper slayings.  The victims were a group of prostitutes who attempted to blackmail the royal family.  Prince Albert Victor had impregnated and secretly married one of their number.  The royal family entrusted the girls’ elimination to high-ranking Masons, who slew them in Masonic ritual style.  The last girl’s death reveals why the murders suddenly halted, as did police investigation.  The compromise of Charles Warren, metropolitan police commissioner — and 33rd degree mason — largely explains why the crimes went “unsolved.”

Many of Hamer’s revelations were dramatized in the 1979 film Murder by Decree.  Although the plot set fictitious Sherlock Holmes (Christopher Plummer, with James Mason as Dr. Watson) after the Ripper, it captured much of the reality.  In a memorable scene, Holmes throws Charles Warren off guard by greeting him with an upper-level Masonic handshake. See this very anti-Masonic scene here.

3) ‘The Wild Geese’

Continues …

Paul Vale — Huffington Post May 31, 2013

Jewish groups have spoken out against a cartoon published in a Norwegian newspaper that portrays circumcision as an act of barbarism. The European Jewish Congress (EJC) called the depiction a “hate crime” and is considering legal action, while the Anti Deformation League (ADL) called the cartoon “sickening” and “deeply offensive”.

The cartoon, which was published in Norway’s Dagbladet newspaper on Tuesday, shows a Rabbi with a devil’s pitchfork stabbing a baby in the head. A woman is cutting off the child’s toe, while blood spurts over a religious book. In the caption the woman tells a policeman: “Mistreating? No, this is tradition, an important part of our belief!” The officer retorts: “Belief? Oh yes, then it is all right.”

In response, Dr Moshe Kantor, the President of the EJC, said: “This cartoon has crossed all lines of decency and is dripping with hate and anti-Semitism. We are now studying the possibility that this legally constitutes incitement to hatred and even a hate crime and will require legal action if this proves to be the case.”

He added: “This is a violent cartoon which is meant to inspire hate and contempt against one particular people. This type of hate, reminiscent of Nazi propaganda, cannot be left unanswered, and it is exactly this type of incitement which is contributing to a very troubling period for minorities in Europe at this time, especially with the rise of the far right.”

Abraham Foxman, the ADL National Director, was equally scathing. “This grotesque cartoon of a bloodied, mutilated baby, suffering at the hands of adults is a deeply offensive and appalling distortion of a core Jewish ritual,” he said. “The image harkens back to the centuries of anti-Semitic illustrations depicting Jews engaged in ritual ceremonies involving gratuitous and fabricated bloodletting.”

“In no way can this sickening cartoon be justified as an acceptable graphic representation in support for the campaign to legislatively restrict ritual circumcision, which unfortunately has gained some traction in Europe.”

Source

News Brief — May 28, 2013

European Union foreign ministers have agreed to lift an arms embargo on ‘Syrian rebels’ opening the way for an escalation of the conflict that could lead to further outside intervention.

The move ups the ante following Russia’s announcement that it would begin supplying the “game-changing” S-300 air-defence system to Syria.

Although Britain’s Foreign Secretary William Hague said Britain had no immediate plans to do so, Britain and its Western allies have long been pushing to arm groups opposed to President Assad.

The fact that many in the ‘opposition groups’ are not even Syrian but a rag-tag army of outside extremists, some of whom have even been linked to al-Qaeda, obviously hasn’t deterred Hague.

The Foreign Secretary told the BBC that the UK will only supply arms “in carefully controlled circumstances, in company with other countries and with accordance with international law”.

Fine sounding words but simply a grandiose way of saying that Britain will arm extremists who have a record of committing atrocities against civilians.

For its part and almost on cue, the BBC followed up with reports of what it claimed was a “massacre” carried out by Syrian government forces in al-Bayda, in the west of the country in early May.

Although no independent corroboration was provided, the BBC quoted “eyewitnesses” who claimed hundreds of civilians died at the hands President Assad’s forces. It was, said a BBC news reader on the 6 pm news broadcast, possibly one of the “worst massacres” yet seen in the conflict.

If the timing of the report seemed a little suspicious, coming just as moves maybe underway to arm the Syrian opposition groups and when a reluctant British public needs to be assured of the necessity of doing so, then a look at the BBC’s record in reporting events in Syria confirms it. The Corporation has served as no more than a propaganda mouthpiece in a campaign to oust Syrian President Assad.

As far back as June 2012, BBC world news editor Jon Williams admitted that the coverage of the previous month’s Houla massacre in Syria by the world’s media and the BBC was a compendium of lies.

However, that didn’t stop the BBC using photos from the conflict in Iraq to illustrate stories about the alleged massacre.

Nor did it stop BBC correspondent Ian Pannell reporting on this latest alleged “massacre” in al-Bayda. In fact he’s an old hand at this sort of thing. For this is the very same Ian Pannell who rode in with Libyan fighters when the al-Qaeda linked militants first seized the Syrian city of Aleppo in July 2012.

Thereafter, Pannell portrayed the seizing of Aleppo as a “liberation”, carefully glossing over the atrocities that followed.

Of course the BBC has not been alone in providing this sort of skewed coverage. Virtually the entire Western news media has been doing the same. As former CNN correspondent Amber Lyon told Syria’s SANA news agency: “there is constant demonization of Syria, Iran and other countries on the US mainstream media.”

Nonetheless, the lifting of the arms embargo on Syria and new reports of an alleged massacre in Syria, coupled with Russia’s decision to supply Assad with the S-300 air defence system signals a potential escalation of the Syrian crisis. An escalation that could ultimately lead the West into direct confrontation with Assad’s two key supporters: Russia and Iran.

Introduction — May 26, 2013

Is this yet more disinformation? We ask because the following article recounts how the authorities are “now bombarding extremist websites to create a “counter-narrative”. This, the Independent informs us is because “the Government, police and other agencies are involved in a propaganda war to counter extremism.”

On the surface that seems fairly straightforward.

However, a couple of days prior to the Woolwich outrage and since then this website has been bombarded with messages. Most have been completely meaningless: ranging from offers of “same day loans” to utterly vacuous comments about nothing in particular.

Is this part of the authorities “propaganda war against extremism”? Is this website being targeted?

If that is the case — and it does seem more than a little coincidental that we’ve been inundated with messages just as the authorities announce they’ve launched a campaign to “bombard extremist websites” with messages — then we have to ask: does this website appear to be “extremist”? Does the Truth Seeker appear to support terrorism in any shape or form?

Is this website one of the “estimated 8,000 websites “serving terrorists and their supporters”.

Of course it isn’t.

The Truth Seeker is simply trying to expose the real forces hidden behind recent terror outrages. So why is this website suddenly being inundated with emails and messages? Are we getting too close to the truth?

Certainly evidence is emerging that is at odds with the official account of recent “terror attacks” and the “War on Terror”.

From the Boston Marathon bombing — where photographic evidence emerged that was at odds with the official version of events but was completely ignored by the corporate media — to glaring incongruities in the Woolwich beheading, there is every reason to question what really happened.

This web site is simply trying to bring this to the attention of a wider public. Is that a crime? Or do some in authority want those questions silenced? Do they want the public kept in ignorance?

In many cases those behind terror attacks are not what the authorities or the corporate media claim them to be. Indeed, there is good reason to suspect that elements in authority have been in collusion with those behind recent terror attacks.

Is that why we’ve been inundated with meaningless messages over the past few days?

The Independent, from which the following article is taken doesn’t question the official line one bit. It doesn’t stray from it one iota. Instead it plays along with the official narrative, an account of events which is highly questionable.

In effect, making the journalists responsible for it are no more than mouthpieces for the authorities.

Journalists have been described as “intellectual whores” and what follows is an example of intellectual prostitution in its lowest form. The two journalists responsible for it are not trying to expose the truth, they are actively working to conceal it.

Terror in Woolwich: Internet is the vital frontline in war against extremism

Paul Cahalan & Jonathan Owen — The Independent May 26, 2013

The major battle in the war against extremism is being fought over the internet by elite teams stationed behind keyboards and engaged in winning the hearts and minds of would-be terrorists.

It is a sign of the increasing understanding that small-scale, unsophisticated attacks such as the one in Woolwich are a growing threat: the Government, police and other agencies are involved in a propaganda war to counter extremism.

An Independent on Sunday investigation has revealed that more than 2,000 websites promoting terrorism have been taken offline since 2010 by the Metropolitan Police’s counter-terrorism internet referral unit. Experts are now bombarding extremist websites to create “counter-narrative” messages from survivors of terrorism. Former radicals also infiltrate forums to spread doubt and challenge the extremist rhetoric.

Last night, Rob Wainwright, director of Europol, Europe’s crime intelligence agency, described the threat as a “rising concern”, with an estimated 8,000 websites “serving terrorists and their supporters”.

The Home Office, which has a unit that specialises in detecting patterns among social media, is focusing on countering extremist rhetoric online before any would-be attacker is radicalised.

Experts say a group of jihadist internet forums is at the heart of a virtual army of extremists. An estimated 25,000 people from more than 100 countries belong to web forums, research has shown. “Jihadist cyberspace has become a breeding ground for new individual jihadists and jihadist networks,” said a 2012 report by the Dutch security service AIVD.

Increased internet use in countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen has resulted in an influx of extremists keen to spread their ideology, it says. A number of plots against Western targets have had a “prominent virtual component” and online propaganda is inspiring a growing number of people to take violent action, warns Dutch intelligence.

There are “rising concerns” about the way terrorists are using the internet, warned Rob Wainwright, director of Europol.

“What we have noticed in the last few years is more and more activists in Europe using the internet,” he said. “We are pretty convinced that this form of incitement and radicalisation online is a major element in contributing to terrorist planning and activity.”

Jeff Bardin, chief intelligence officer for the security consultancy Treadstone 71, said jihadist websites use the internet to recruit, indoctrinate and contribute to radicalisation, with an explosion of sites on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Pastebin. Internet relay chat is popular for immediate communication of messages.

The internet is “the perfect communications platform for the enemies of Western societies”, he says. “The number of sites has grown to tens of thousands with new sites, pages, accounts and personae popping up hourly.”

Those responsible for extremist websites are increasingly aware that they are being monitored by security services and are turning to social media, says Robin Simcox, an analyst on terrorism at the think-tank the Henry Jackson Society. The changing climate would make crude attacks akin to the one in Woolwich likely to increase as organisations become more desperate.

“I think these attacks take place out of necessity rather than choice. It is a sign of weakness rather than strength, because it is now all they can do,” he says. “A huge attack by an underground cell across many countries is almost impossible. They are telling people: ‘Use what you can’. It is their last option.”

The effect of smaller attacks could still be massive. “Woolwich has had a crippling effect on politicians and its impact isn’t so different to 7/7 in the way it has shaken our thinking,” he adds.

A second group fighting to combat extremist propaganda, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, implants messages of peace when people try to access radical websites. Ross Frenett, programme manager for the Against Violent Extremism (AVE) network, says the hope is to make potential extremists refrain from meeting radicalising influences in the real world. “We use survivors of terrorism and formers [those formerly radicalised]. People who have been personally touched by the violence are very difficult to dismiss: those who have lost a loved one or a limb. And someone who has been on the inside and come out the other side is very credible,” he said.

AVE is privately funded, with Google paying for about 50 per cent, but the group is talking to the EU and other foundations about funding, Mr Frenett says. It uses algorithms and search engine optimisation to ensure that when certain terms are searched for, counter-narrative messages appear in the search and adverts.

“Formers” will openly go on forums to challenge opinions directly, while others will be more subtle, creating a profile and posting suggestive remarks that, it is hoped, will raise questions and sow seeds of doubt.

Mr Frenett also says he and other groups are looking at ways of hacking a site with positive messages, though the viability legally and technically is an issue being debated.

Met keeps watch on social media

Continues …

Arthur Martin — Daily Mail May 24, 2013

Internet giants were last night slammed for refusing to remove extremist websites.

Search engines such as Google and Yahoo must do more to shut down hate-filled sites in the wake of the Woolwich attack, MPs said.

Thousands of videos which help to radicalise impressionable young men are easily available on YouTube.

And within hours of the execution of Drummer Lee Rigby, 25, vile messages praising the attack and encouraging further outrages appeared on Twitter.

Police have seized computers since Wednesday’s atrocity and are still investigating if the two fanatics who beheaded the soldier were indoctrinated by online terror videos. Michael Adebolajo, 28, was radicalised by a banned extremist group whose members use the internet to recruit impressionable young men.

Search engines and social media websites say they rely on members of the public to ‘flag up’ incendiary material. But critics last night called for more investment to be used to stop the spread of radical videos.

Continues …

Meanwhile Aangifan website reports:

In Woolwich:

“I asked the on-site police officer in our school:

“I bet your briefing this morning at the station was an intense one.

“Officer: I was expecting exactly that, but it was just too odd. I asked why there’s no briefing, believing we’d be told which streets to be in and what to look out for, but no. Nothing. It was as if it hadn’t happened.

“‘In fact, the skipper said ‘it didn’t happen.’

“He told me he didn’t recognise any of the officers on his own patch at the scene either nor any of the members of the public, despite always seeing the same people.”

Source

News Commentary — May 23, 2013

Rather than blame Britain’s Foreign policies, or the huge influx of immigrants into the country in recent years or even just the “War on Terror”, a new culprit is being cited for Tuesday’s horrific events in Woolwich.

Various “experts” have already been quoted claiming the Internet was involved.

According to Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens for the Study of Radicalisation at King’s College London, the two killers were probably acting alone:

“I think it’s most likely they became radicalised through the Internet…”

She was echoed by Margaret Gilmore of the United Services Institute:

“I think it has been easier for our intelligence services to track people who have been radicalised through known terror groups or followed certain paths,” Gilmore said.

“But it’s rather more difficult when you get people who have become radicalised through the Internet”. From what I know I would not be surprised if these people had not crossed the radar of the security services”.

However, the security services did indeed already know of the main culprit involved in the Woolwich attack, as they have in so many recent terror outrages. Although it appears that neither he nor his accomplice was considered an immediate threat.

The two British men of Nigerian descent who carried out the attack are thought to have done so in revenge for wars in Muslim countries.

After first running down the victim in a motor vehicle, the two then launched into a frenzied attack on the fallen man.

One man, filmed calmly justifying the killing as he stood by the body holding a knife and meat cleaver in bloodied hands, was named by acquaintances as 28-year-old Londoner Michael Adebolajo — a British-born convert to radical Islam.

DAYLIGHT ATTACK

The dramatic clip filmed by an onlooker showed Michael Adebolajo justifying the attack on religious grounds:

“We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reason we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day,” he said. “This British soldier is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”

The attack has revived speculation in the corporate media about “lone wolves”. Individual Muslim militants who may have had no direct ties with recognised terror groups but are inspired by radical preachers and by militant Islamic websites.

Whatever ultimately transpires, in the wake of Tuesday’s attack we can expect more calls for a clampdown on the Internet.

Vigilant Citizen — Vigilant Citizen.com May 21, 2013

Marilyn Monroe is possibly the most iconic figure in American culture and the most recognizable sex symbol of all times. However, behind Monroe’s photogenic smile was a fragile individual who was exploited and subjected to mind control by powerful handlers. The first part of this two-part series will look at the hidden life of Marilyn, a Hollywood Monarch slave.

Marilyn Monroe is the ultimate sex symbol, embodying everything that Hollywood represents: glamor, glitz and sex-appeal.  Her iconic sensual blonde persona forever revolutionized the movie industry and, to this day, is greatly influential in popular culture. While Marilyn represents everything that is glamorous about Hollywood, the disturbing story of her private life equally represents everything that is dark in Hollywood. Marilyn was indeed manipulated by high level “mind doctors” who controlled every aspect of her life and caused her to basically lose her mind. Her death, at the young age of 36 is one of the first “mysterious celebrity deaths” in popular culture. While many facts point to a murder, it is still classified as a “probable suicide”.

While many biographers explain away Marilyn’s hardships with “psychological issues”, piecing together facts about her life combined with knowledge of the dark side of Hollywood reveals something a lot darker: Marilyn Monroe was one of the first celebrities subjected to Monarch mind control, a branch of the CIA’s MK Ultra program (for more information on the subject, read my article entitled Origins and Techniques of Monarch Mind Control). Through trauma and psychological programming, Monroe a became high level puppet of the shadow elite, even became JFK’s Presidential Model.

When Monroe’s programming lost its effect and she started to break down, some argue that she was “thrown off the freedom train”, an MK ULTRA term for designating slaves that are killed when they are not useful (and potentially dangerous) to their handlers.

The first part of this series of articles will look at the real life and career of Monroe, an isolated girl whose great beauty became a true curse.

Her Early Years

Norma Jeane Mortenson had a difficult and unstable youth. She never knew her father and her mother was mentally unstable and incapable of taking care of her. In My Story, Monroe wrote that she recalled seeing her mother “screaming and laughing” as she was forcibly taken to a State Hospital.

At age 11, Norma Jeane was declared a ward of the state. She lived in a total of 11 foster homes throughout her youth; when there was no foster home available, she sometimes ended up at the Hollygrove Orphanage in Los Angeles. As if moving from one foster home to another wasn’t difficult enough, Norma Jeane recalled being treated harshly in several of them. Even worse, she was abused in at least three of them.

For instance, at age 11, Norma Jeane was adopted by her mother’s best friend Grace McKee and her new husband, Ervin Silliman “Doc” Goddard. There, “Doc” repeatedly sexually assaulted her, which forced Norma Jeane to move out. In another case, when she was in middle-school, Norma Jean was sent to her great-aunt’s house in Compton, California. There, one of her great-aunt’s sons abused her, forcing her, again, to move out. Here is another account of abuse:

“She told of being whipped by one foster mother for having touched ‘the bad part’ of her body. Another more serious incident occurred when she was eight. One evening a lodger she called Mr. Kimmel (Marilyn said later that this was not his real name) asked her to come into his room and locked the door behind her. He put his arms around her. She kicked and struggled. He did what he wanted, telling her to be a good girl. (In a later interview Marilyn stated that the abuse involved fondling).

When he let her out, he handed her a coin and told her to buy herself an ice cream. She threw the coin in his face and ran to tell her foster mother what happened, but the woman wouldn’t listen.

‘Shame on you,’ her foster mother said. ‘Mr. Kimmel’s my star boarder.’

Norma Jean went to her room and cried all night.

Marilyn said she felt dirty and took baths days after it happened to feel clean. Such repeated attempts to feel clean through showers or baths are typical behavior for victims of assault.

Marilyn said she began to stutter after the incident and reverted to it at times of stress. When she told one interviewer about the abuse, she began stuttering.

The evidence points to the fact that she was an abused child whose early sexualization led to her inappropriate behavior as an adult.

- Daily Mail, “The magic red sweater that turned ‘Norma Jeane, string bean’ into Marilyn Monroe”

Norma Jeane’s unstable and sometimes traumatic youth made her a perfect candidate for Monarch mind control. Being a ward of the state, she had no stable family.

“Some children live in foster homes, or with adopted parents, or in orphanages, or with caretakers and guardians. Because these children are at the mercy of the non-related adults, these types of children frequently are sold to become mind-controlled slaves of the intelligence agencies.”

- Fritz Springmeier, The Illuminati Formula to Create a Mind Control Slave

Norma Jeane’s background made her a prime target for Beta Programming (also known as Kitten programming). Being an attractive and charismatic woman looking to be part of show business, she also had the perfect profile for it.

“Beta is the second Greek letter, and it represents the sexual models and alters that the Programmers are creating. The primitive part of the brain is involved in this type of programming. An early abuse event will be used to anchor this programming.”

- Ibid.

Contact with Occult Hollywood

Before becoming famous, Norma Jeane went by the name of Mona and worked as a stripper at a Burlesque house in Los Angeles. There, she came in contact with Anton LaVey, the man who would later found the highly influential Church of Satan. According to Springmeier, LaVey was an MK handler and Monroe became one of his “Kitten” slaves.

“Marilyn Monroe was an orphan, and during her infancy the Illuminati/CIA programmed her to be a Monarch slave. Before becoming an actress, while she was still a stripper, she spent time with the founder of the Church of Satan Anton LaVey. Victims of LaVey have pointed him out as a mind-control programmer.”

- Ibid.

LaVey’s biography also mentions an “affair” with Monroe, which was probably more than that.

“When the carnival season ended, LaVey would earn money by playing organ in Los Angeles area burlesque houses, and he relates that it was during this time period that he had a brief affair with a then-unknown Marilyn Monroe.”

-  Magus Peter H. Gilmore, Anton Szandor LaVey: A Biographical Sketch

Anton Lavey visiting Monroes grave in 1967

Around the same time period, LaVey was involved with another actress, one that was known for being the “working man’s Marilyn Monroe”: Jayne Mansfield. The relationship between the two was also described as an “affair”, but the reality was a lot darker.

“Anton LaVey has been the mind-control handler/programmer of a number of Hollywood actors & actresses, including Jayne Mansfield and Marilyn Monroe, who both serviced him as sexual slaves”.

- Anton Szandor LaVey, Whale.to

Marilyn Monroe and Jayne Mansfield had a lot in common. Both were “blond bombshells” (neither were natural blondes) and are credited for “sexualizing” Hollywood. Both were Playboy playmates, both had an “affair” with Anton LaVey and both had an “affair” with Robert F. Kennedy and John F. Kennedy (the “affair” was actually them being Presidential Models). Finally, both died in their 30s.

A Star Living Like an Inmate

Another common point between Monroe and Mansfield is that they were both part of the Blue Book Model Agency.  It is there that Norma Jean metamorphosed into the iconic Marilyn Monroe.

When Norma Jeane was recruited as a model, she had curly red hair. This “girl next door” will soon get a Hollywood makeover and embody a new persona named Marilyn Monroe. Click to enlarge

Industry insiders convinced Norma Jeane to undergo aesthetic surgery, to change her name to Marilyn Monroe and to change her hair color to platinum blonde. Monroe’s sensual, “dumb blond” persona allowed her to land roles in several movies which began a clear culture shift in Hollywood.

In the movie “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes”, Marilyn adorns her trademark platinum blonde “Hollywood” hairdo. In this movie, she plays the role of a sensual yet materialistic woman that is not afraid of using her charm to obtain what she wants. This type of character will be repeated time and time again in popular culture.

Norma Jeane used Marilyn Monroe as a stage name for several years, but in 1956, she accomplished a strange but symbolic move: She legally changed her name to Marilyn Monroe. The change reflected many sad truths about her personal life: In mind-control terms, the changing of her name to Marilyn Monroe represents the suppression of her “core persona” in order to only allow her programmed alter persona to exist. Marilyn was only what “they” wanted her to be.

As several biographies have revealed, Marilyn had little to no personal freedom. She had no contact with her family, and her handlers isolated her in order to further control her and to avoid “real” people from helping her to realize that she was being manipulated. The only people that she was in contact with were her “psychologists” and her handlers.

“Marilyn’s existence was not of a rich person, but more like of an inmate. Marilyn was allowed to have no personal life, outside of the dictates of the programmers and her masters. The programmers and users bore down so hard on controlling Marilyn that they repeatedly came close to driving her insane.”

- Springmeier, Op. Cit.

Marilyn was also constantly under high surveillance. Years after her death, an incredible amount of surveillance equipment was found in one of her homes.

“In 1972, actress Veronica Hamel and her husband became the new owners of Marilyn’s Brentwood home. They hired a contractor to replace the roof and remodel the house, and the contractor discovered a sophisticated eavesdropping and telephone tapping system that covered every room in the house. The components were not commercially available in 1962, but were in the words of a retired Justice Department official, “standard FBI issue.” This discovery lent further support to claims of conspiracy theorists that Marilyn had been under surveillance by the Kennedys and the Mafia. The new owners spent $100,000 to remove the bugging devices from the house.”

- Source: IMDB

Under the Spell of Mind Doctors

In 1956, Marilyn converted to Judaism and married her third husband, screenwriter Arthur Miller. At this point, the only people in Monroe’s life were her husband and her acting teacher Lee Strasberg and her psychiatrists Margaret Hohenberg, Marianne Kris and Ralph Greenson.

“Marilyn’s life was incredibly monotonous for her. Her doctor’s appointments (I later learned these were appointments with psychiatrists) and her acting lessons were virtually all she had to to look forward to.”

- Lena Pepitone, Marilyn Monroe Confidential: An Intimate Account”

Lee Strasberg, Monroe’s acting coach. According to Elia Kazan: “He carried with him the aura of a prophet, a magician, a witch doctor, a psychoanalyst and a feared father of a Jewish home.”

The ultimate proof that these individuals were the ONLY people in Marilyn’s life is that they inherited most of her fortune. Lee Strasberg alone inherited 75% of her estate while Dr. Kris obtained 25%.

“Marilyn began associating with Lee and his wife Paula Strasberg from around 1955, very quickly they became a colossal influence in Marilyn’s life, taking over almost every aspect of her very being.

Many of Marilyn’s friends and colleagues watched this happen and felt very uncomfortable about it but were powerless to do anything about it. Whilst she was married to Arthur Miller, Miller had begun to voice these concerns to Marilyn.

During the final year of her life there were signs that her faith in the Strasbergs’ was weakening and that she no longer wanted them to have the control. It has been said that she was in the process of dispensing with their services – this was seen as another indicator that Marilyn was intending to change her Will.”

- Loving Marilyn, Who Owns Marilyn’s Things?

After her death, Marilyn’s Will was contested due to her being under “undue influence” of her handlers.

“On 25^th October 1962, the Los Angeles Times reported that Marilyn Monroe’s Will was being contested by her long time business manager Inez Melson. Miss Melson, who was not a beneficiary of the Will claimed that Marilyn was under undue influence of either Lee Strasberg or Dr Marianne Kris at the time the Will was made.”

- Ibid.

Another proof of the excessive control of “mind doctors” on Marilyn’s life is the fact that her psychiatrist Ralph Greenson was the one who found Monroe dead. Why was he at her house late at night? As we’ll see in the next part of this series of articles, the circumstances of her death are incredibly suspicious.

In short, as it is the case for most Monarch slaves, Marylin’s handlers were in charge of every aspect of her life. Contact with family members was totally forbidden.

“Although Marilyn Monroe had family, her doctors, psychologists, and acting coaches isolated her from them. (…) Members of the Hogan family, who lived in the Los Angeles area, had attempted to make contact with Marilyn Monroe after she was famous, and their efforts to connect with her were blocked.”

- Jennifer Jean Miller, “Was Phenergan Marilyn Monroe’s Silent Killer, and Was She a Victim of Psychological Abuse, Medical Malpractice and Wrongful Death?”

Disconnected from her family and with virtually no friends, Monroe was visiting therapists almost daily. Were these visits actually programming sessions? One thing is for sure, as the visits augmented in frequency, Monroe became worse. One particularly hunting account is the “Surgeon Story”, a text written by Monroe herself.

The Surgeon Story

The Surgeon Story is a text written in poem form by Monroe where she describes being cut open by Lee Strasberg and her psychiatrist Margaret Hohenberg. While some describe this story as Marilyn’s recollection of a nightmare, other researchers claim that it is actually a description of a mind control session.

Best finest surgeon—Strasberg
to cut me open which I don’t mind since Dr. H
has prepared me—given me anaesthetic
and has also diagnosed the case and
agrees with what has to be done—
an operation—to bring myself back to
life and to cure me of this terrible dis-ease
whatever the hell it is—(…)

Strasberg cuts me open after Dr. H gives me
anesthesia and tries in a medical way to comfort me  –
everything in the room is WHITE in fact I can’t even see anyone just white objects -​

they cut me open – Strasberg with Hohenberg’s ass.
and there is absolutely nothing there—
Strasberg is
deeply disappointed but more even—
academically amazed
that he had made such a mistake. He
thought there was going
to be so much—more than he had ever
dreamed possible …
instead there was absolutely nothing—
devoid of
every human living feeling thing—
the only thing
that came out was so finely cut sawdust—like out of a raggedy ann doll—and the sawdust
spills
all over the floor & table and Dr. H is
puzzled
because suddenly she realizes that this is a
new type case. The patient … existing
of complete emptiness
Strasberg’s dreams & hopes for theater
are fallen.
Dr. H’s dreams and hopes for a permanent
psychiatric cure
is given up—Arthur is disappointed—
let down.

In this odd and disturbing story, Monroe describes being drugged and cut open by her psychiatrists. She writes that she “didn’t mind the operation” because she was “prepared”. Was she dissociating? There is also mention of her seeing “only white” which might refer to sensory deprivation – a method used in MK Ultra programming.

Once cut open, the doctors only found “finely cut sawdust” inside of her “like out of a raggedy ann doll”. These are the typical words of an MK slave who have completely lost touch with their true core personality. Marilyn perceives herself as an “empty” doll.

According to Jason Kennedy, a member of Marilyn’s family, the Surgeon’s Story describes Mind Control techniques such as sensory deprivation and the administration of dissociative anesthetic drugs.

“Online publications have referred to the “Surgeon Story” as a dream or nightmare. Even a musician, Annie Clark, was inspired to write a song with the lyrics, “Best, finest surgeon/Come cut me open”, because she believed Marilyn wrote the words due to her reverence of Lee Strasberg during her studies with him.

Jason, on the other hand, likened it to a very real time in the life of Marilyn Monroe, and her narrative of the experience, after being subject to mind-control techniques and drugs at the hands of Lee Strasberg and Dr. Margaret Hohenberg, when she underwent private sessions with the duo in 1955 to help release blocks in her acting techniques.

Their methodology consisted of having Marilyn Monroe delve into painful childhood memories, they told her, to make her into a great actress.

According to Jason’s research, the pair convinced Marilyn this was all a part of “helping” her. He said she was confused from the start as she documented the “Surgeon Story” details, correcting her own details of the story from “pupil” or “student”, to coining herself the “patient”.

“It was a mental operation,” Jason said. “She wasn’t physically cut, but mentally cut open.”

He said it was used to break her down and change her behavior.

“This had nothing to do with acting,” Jason continued. “It was pure and simple extortion using mind control techniques. Also, ‘mind-control drugs’ were only one aspect of the process of mind-control. Sensory deprivation, dissociative anesthetic drugs, and psychic driving are part of an overall process of mind-control.”

Lee Strasberg often referred to himself as doctor, including in his 1965 book, “Strasberg At The Actor’s Studio: Tape Recorded Sessions”.

- Ibid.

Whether or not this story actually happened, it nevertheless conveys the inner-thoughts of a mind control slave who is powerless against her handlers and their clinical attempts to program and modify her. Sadly, other traumatic events caused by her handlers were all too real.

Traumatized by Her Handlers

In 1961, Dr. Kris convinced Marilyn to check in at Payne Withney psychiatric ward. The events that ensued are shocking considering the fact that Marilyn was a world-renowned movie star – but not surprising considering the fact that she was a mind control slave. Here’s what happened at the psychiatric ward:

“Kris had driven Marilyn to the sprawling, white-brick New York Hospital—Weill Cornell Medical Center, overlooking the East River at 68th Street. Swathed in a fur coat and using the name Faye Miller, she signed the papers to admit herself, but she quickly found she was being escorted not to a place where she could rest but to a padded room in a locked psychiatric ward. The more she sobbed and begged to be let out, banging on the steel doors, the more the psychiatric staff believed she was indeed psychotic. She was threatened with a straitjacket, and her clothes and purse were taken from her. She was given a forced bath and put into a hospital gown.

On March 1 and 2, 1961, Marilyn wrote an extraordinary, six-page letter to Dr. Greenson vividly describing her ordeal: “There was no empathy at Payne-Whitney—it had a very bad effect—they asked me after putting me in a ‘cell’ (I mean cement blocks and all) for very disturbed depressed patients (except I felt I was in some kind of prison for a crime I hadn’t committed. The inhumanity there I found archaic … everything was under lock and key … the doors have windows so patients can be visible all the time, also, the violence and markings still remain on the walls from former patients.)”

(…)

A psychiatrist came in and gave her a physical exam, “including examining the breast for lumps.” She objected, telling him that she’d had a complete physical less than a month before, but that didn’t deter him.

When she refused to cooperate with the staff, “two hefty men and two hefty women” picked her up by all fours and carried her in the elevator to the seventh floor of the hospital. (“I must say that at least they had the decency to carry me face down.… I just wept quietly all the way there,” she wrote.)

She was ordered to take another bath—her second since arriving—and then the head administrator came in to question her. “He told me I was a very, very sick girl and had been a very, very sick girl for many years.”

Dr. Kris, who had promised to see her the day after her confinement, failed to show up, and neither Lee Strasberg nor his wife, Paula, to whom she finally managed to write, could get her released, as they were not family.”

- Marilyn and Her Monsters, Vanity Fair

Another less publicized aspect of Monroe’s life is her two failed pregnancies. While most biographies state that she suffered miscarriages, some accounts hint that, in reality, the miscarriages were provoked. Provoking miscarriages is a common practice in MK Ultra and, reading Marilyn’s own words, it appears that her baby was taken away by her handlers. In Pepitone’s book, Marilyn reportedly said about her pregnancy:

“Don’t take my baby. So they took my baby from me… and I never saw it again.”

- Pepitone, Op. Cit.

The book basically states that Marilyn did not suffer a miscarriage. “They” took her baby away.

“After Marilyn had a healthy baby it was taken away from her and she was never allowed to see it. It was very likely sacrificed. Marilyn was too afraid to ask what they were going to do with it.”

- Springmeier, Op. Cit.

According to her biographies, Marilyn lost both her babies at Polyclinic Hospital, the place where, according to Springmeier, she was being programmed.

“The operation took place at Polyclinic Hospital where Marilyn had lost her baby the year before…Marilyn said: “Going back to that hospital’s a nightmare… Pain? What ‘pain?”. For her, the only pain was in not having her own child”

- Pepitone, Op. Cit.

“Notice she always goes back to the Polyclinic Hospital. Monarch victims have had to endure vast amounts of horrible torture. They learn to survive by disassociation. When Marilyn says “What is pain?” she is being accurate in reflecting her response to pain. She could not have pain–because she would disassociate it. Certain alters are created to take the pain, and the other alters don’t have to experience it.”

- Springmeier, Op. Cit.

In Conclusion

In the first part of this series of articles, we looked at the hidden life of Marilyn Monroe – one that reveals the dark side of Hollywood. Marilyn was not only thoroughly manipulated by her handlers, but actually mistreated and traumatized in order to “keep her down” and reinforce programming. The chilling facts mentioned above originate from different sources but, when they are put together, they paint a sad, yet crystal clear picture of the life of a Hollywood MK slave. Trauma, abuse, isolation, mind control and constant surveillance were part of Monroe’s daily life.

This kind of abuse however takes a severe toll on the victims and, after a while, a total breakdown almost inevitably ensues. At that point, MK slaves are usually “thrown off the freedom train”. Was this Marilyn’s ultimate fate?

This concludes the first part of the two-part series on Marilyn Monroe. Stay tuned for the second part which will describe her life as JFK’s Presidential Model and the strange circumstances of her death. We will also examine how she has become the symbol of Beta Programming in today’s entertainment industry and how her story is being repeated again and again.

Source

Ali Abunimah — Electronic Intifada May 19, 2013

In an unprecedented act of political censorship Al Jazeera English has deleted an article by noted Columbia University Professor Joseph Massad after coming under intense criticism from Zionists in recent days.

Massad told The Electronic Intifada that he had “received confirmation” from his editor at Al Jazeera English that “management pulled the article.” The Electronic Intifada was able to independently confirm that the article was pulled.

The piece, “The Last of the Semites,” published on 14 May, was taken down from the main Al Jazeera English site Sunday morning – the link now redirects to Al Jazeera’s main page. It has also disappeared from Massad’s personal page on the Al Jazeera website.

The article had been one of the most viewed and emailed articles on the site and had been tweeted hundreds of times.

Al Jazeera has yet to offer any public explanation for its action.

Intense criticism

Since its publication, the article generated intense criticism from Zionist extremists, including a columnist in the virulently anti-Palestinian Jerusalem Post, and condemnation on Twitter from President Barack Obama’s favorite Israel lobby gatekeeper and former Israeli prison guard Jeffrey Goldberg:

Jeffrey Goldberg ✔ @JeffreyGoldberg

Congratulations, al Jazeera: You’ve just posted one of the most anti-Jewish screeds in recent memory: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/05/201351275829430527.html …

John Podhoretz, editor of the neoconservative anti-Palestinian Zionist magazine Commentary, tweeted about Massad: “Congratulations, donors to Columbia University, for paying this monstrous fuckhead’s salary!”

The backlash has been so intense precisely because Massad goes to the core of Israel’s claim to represent Jews and to cast its critics as anti-Semites by showing that indeed it is Israel and Zionism that partake of the same anti-Semitism that targeted European Jews.

In doing so, Massad pulls the rug from under Zionists and Israel lobbyists by demonstrating that they are the anti-Semites and taking away the most formidable weapon they wield against critics of Israel: the accusation that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.

By neutralizing this ideological weapon that Israel has used so effectively in the Western media to cover up its colonization of Palestine, Massad’s pro-Jewish position and strenuous attack on Zionist anti-Semitism is clearly understood by Israel lobby figures such as Goldberg as a complete obliteration of their ideological arsenal.

Zionism and anti-Semitism: two sides of the same coin

Goldberg’s claim that Massad’s article is an “anti-Jewish screed” could not be further from the truth.

Massad has long argued – convincingly – that Zionism and anti-Semitism are two sides of the same coin. It is a theme he develops with great erudition in his 2006 book The Persistence of the Palestinian Question, and one to which he returns in his latest article, “The Last of the Semites,” published on Al Jazeera on 14 May, which opens thus:

Jewish opponents of Zionism understood the movement since its early age as one that shared the precepts of anti-Semitism in its diagnosis of what gentile Europeans called the “Jewish Question.” What galled anti-Zionist Jews the most, however, was that Zionism also shared the “solution” to the Jewish Question that anti-Semites had always advocated, namely the expulsion of Jews from Europe.

Last December, in another piece for Al Jazeera, Massad explained how “Zionist leaders consciously recognized that state anti-Semitism was essential to their colonial project” in Palestine, a recognition epitomized by the notorious Transfer Agreement Zionist leaders signed with the Nazi government of Germany in 1933.

A theme that Massad develops in his latest piece is that European, and especially Germany’s, support for Israel after 1948, is no break with the anti-Semitic past:

West Germany’s alliance with Zionism and Israel after WWII, of supplying Israel with huge economic aid in the 1950s and of economic and military aid since the early 1960s, including tanks, which it used to kill Palestinians and other Arabs, is a continuation of the alliance that the Nazi government concluded with the Zionists in the 1930s.

The “The Last of the Semites” was based on a lecture Massad gave at a conference in Stuttgart (PDF), Germany, to a largely German audience, just last week:

Censorship

Although Qatar-based Al Jazeera receives much criticism, and often deserved, for reflecting Qatar’s foreign policy, the censorship of Massad’s article for political reasons is unprecedented because the English-language website had, until now, enjoyed complete editorial independence.

It is well understood that Al Jazeera’s red lines have always been criticism of Qatar or its Emir, and yet, Massad has even published several articles on Al Jazeera English that harshly criticized both Qatari foreign policy (See here, here and here) and the Emir himself without ever being censored.

And Massad has written plenty of articles that have enraged Zionists.

This indicates, without doubt, that the decision to remove Massad’s article today was taken at the highest level.

But why would this happen now?

One reasonable interpretation would be that the removal of Massad’s article reflects a tightening of the editorial line as the network launches its new channel, Al Jazeera America, which will rely – for access to cable systems, and “mainstream” credibility – on forging good relations with US elites.

An illustration of what this process might look like was on display when Ehab Al Shihabi, executive director of Al Jazeera’s international operations and the official responsible for setting up Al Jazeera America, recently visited Chicago – which will be home to a major Al Jazeera bureau.

While in the city, Al Shihabi struck up a cozy relationship with Mayor Rahm Emanuel, President Barack Obama’s former chief of staff.

Emanuel, a major powerbroker in America’s ruling Democratic Party, is, of course, also notorious for his hardline pro-Israel positions.

It is unknown if Al Shihabi had anything directly to do with the removal of Massad’s article – that decision would almost certainly have been taken at an even higher level in Doha – but his dalliance with Emanuel is a good indicator of who Al Jazeera is out to impress.

Until late Sunday, Massad’s piece could still be read in full on Al Jazeera’s mobile site, but by late evening, that too had disappeared.

Here is a PDF image of the censored article.

The Last of the Semites – Joseph Massad – Al Jazeera Engli

Source

Courtesy Shamireaders

News Commentary — May 20, 2013

Snow covered fields in County Durham, December 16, 2011

So this is what the BBC’s audience gets in return for the corporation’s extortionate and mandatory licence fees. After nearly 15 years, a belated admission that global warming isn’t quite the looming threat that they had warned about.

Although, of course, the BBC isn’t quite so open in acknowledging its error. If indeed it was an error and not deliberate disinformation.

Instead, the BBC claims that “Since 1998, there has been an unexplained ‘standstill’ in the heating of the Earth’s atmosphere.”

In other words there has been no significant global warming. Despite relentless BBC attempts to persuade us otherwise and its quibbling admission that “there has been an unexplained ‘standstill’” in the process.

All of which is a disingenuous way of saying that “global warming” maybe something of a non-event. Like Saddam’s Weapons of Mass Destruction, another impending threat that the BBC had relentlessly reported on and which ultimately turned out to be entirely non-existent.

This is hardly news though. Only the fact that the Corporations has acknowledged an “unexplained standstill” is noteworthy. After all, recent winters have been some of the harshest in decades so this “standstill” in global warming has been self-evident.

Or at least it should be to anyone who don’t accept all they’re told by the corporate media without question.

Climate slowdown means extreme rates of warming ‘not as likely’

Matt McGrath — BBC Online May 19, 2013

The impacts of rising temperatures are being felt particularly in the polar regions, says the BBC caption.

Scientists say the recent downturn in the rate of global warming will lead to lower temperature rises in the short-term.

Since 1998, there has been an unexplained “standstill” in the heating of the Earth’s atmosphere.

Writing in Nature Geoscience, the researchers say this will reduce predicted warming in the coming decades.

But long-term, the expected temperature rises will not alter significantly.

The slowdown in the expected rate of global warming has been studied for several years now. Earlier this year, the UK Met Office lowered their five-year temperature forecast.

But this new paper gives the clearest picture yet of how any slowdown is likely to affect temperatures in both the short-term and long-term.

An international team of researchers looked at how the last decade would impact long-term, equilibrium climate sensitivity and the shorter term climate response.

Transient nature

Continues …

Michael Collins Piper — The Ugly Truth May 20, 2013

Jumping for joy, some patriots are now convinced that those who control the big media have “gone conservative.”

The patriots point out that the traditionally “liberal” media is dumping on the Obama administration and expressing disgust that the IRS was targeting tea party and conservative groups.

This indeed may be the first time in history the media has been so concerned about the mistreatment of such groups that have always been subject to special IRS scrutiny.

And then there’s the scandal enveloping Attorney General Eric Holder over the Justice Department’s seizure of journalists’ phone records.

“Things are so bad,” patriots say, “even the media has come around and realizes how rotten Obama and Holder and the IRS are.”

Well, it’s not quite that simple.

If nine months ago you were carefully reading the Aug. 13, 2012 issue of American Free Press, you wouldn’t be surprised at the media’s disdain for the president, his attorney general and the IRS.

Here’s what AFP reported, foreshadowing the scandals that some say could lead to the impeachment of the president:

Both supporters and opponents of President Obama are concerned about negative political repercussions likely to arise from an ongoing high-level criminal investigation.

It is not widely known that the Obama administration’s attorney general, Eric Holder, has upset some powerful people by launching a federal grand jury inquiry into wealthy Americans who have, according to a June 19 report from CNBC, “hidden money in Israel, many for generations” in violation of U.S. tax laws.

Two of Israel’s biggest banks—Bank Leumi and Bank Hapoalim—are reportedly central to the inquiry and note that in 2008 the Israeli government’s controlling interest in Leumi was purchased by Cerberus, the Wall Street syndicate run by Stephen Feinberg, described by Israel’s Ha’aretz as “a New York Jew with a golden touch.”

Since AFP first focused on that little-noticed grand jury—predicting trouble for Obama and Holder as a consequence of this inquiry— the IRS-Justice Department investigation actually escalated.

On Sept. 19, 2012 the internet-based Tax Times reported another Israeli bank, Mizrahi-Tefahot, was now on the list of financial institutions under scrutiny by Holder and the IRS.

Earlier, on June 20, Forbes.com assessed the situation, pointing out that “U.S. citizens with accounts in Israel may feel a little less secure,” since, Forbes noted, “the Justice Department and IRS announced the indictment of three Israeli-American tax preparers charged with helping Americans hide money in Israeli banks.” Charged were a father and son who had dual citizenship in Israel and the United States, along with an Israeli citizen living in the U.S.

In fact, according to prominent New York tax attorney Asher Rubinstein: “Many American Jews maintain bank accounts in Israel for various reasons.” But while such accounts are legal, problems arise if those accounts are used to avoid U.S. taxes.

On April 12, the Justice Department announced a Jewish woman in California, Guity Kashfi, had pleaded guilty on criminal charges in relation to her Israeli accounts, this on the heels of another Justice prosecution of a Jewish man in California, Zvi Sperling, for maintaining a secret Israeli account.

On May 19, The Jerusalem Post reported “a Tel Aviv-based banker with United Mizrahi Bank pleaded guilty to setting up secret bank accounts in Israel that, prosecutors say, helped charitable contributors to an orthodox Jewish group evade US taxes.” A Jewish rabbi in New York, Moshe E. Zigeman, also plead guilty to his part in the scheme which the Justice Department claimed defrauded the U.S. government out of millions in taxes.

In the wake of all of this, a vocal congressional voice for Israel, Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich), issued a sharply-worded letter to the IRS demanding to know if pro-Israel groups had been targeted by the IRS along with the tea party. In fact, according the May 19 issue of the influential Jewish newspaper The Jewish Press: “Pro-Israel groups were targeted.”

All of this—at a time when the president seems disinclined to attack Iran or invade Syria (projects of special concern to Israel)—might explain why the big media (largely controlled by families and financial groups that are firm supporters of Israel) has begun savaging the president, his attorney general and the IRS.

Source