B. Fulford, 2017-12-11 – Civil war in Western Deep State intensifies with mass arrests in Washington DC, firefights in California

“The November 18th Marine raid on CIA headquarters has also clearly put an end to Operation Mockingbird, as corporate media outlets like The Washington Post, The New York Times, Bloomberg, ABC, CNN, and others have been forced to issue corrections and apologies, usually for anti-Trump stories. They are also now being forced to report the truth about such things as the selling of baby flesh by Planned Parenthood.

By the way, to clarify about the Marine raid on the CIA, what we are now hearing is that the Marines were deployed in a show of force at two airbases “about 180 miles away” from the CIA’s Langley headquarters. This was enough to convince the CIA to let Marine Intelligence enter the compound and seize computers, the sources say. As a result, a purge of the Justice Department, the courts, and the FBI has now begun, the Pentagon sources say…”

All of these moves seem to fly in the face of Trump’s recognition last week of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. This has led many people around the world to think Trump was a Zionist agent after all. However, Pentagon sources say it was “a calculated move to incite global hatred for Israel in order to take down the Khazarian cabal.” The sources point out that the U.S. still refuses to recognize the city of Jerusalem on passports, maps, and official documents.

“The moving of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem is NOT going to happen. The actual implementation of Trump’s order does not take effect for six months. A lot will happen between now and May 2018,” according to a CIA source. This CIA source, who is Jewish, notes that “the Vatican owns Jerusalem to this day.”

Hallo, hallooooooo, guten Morgen, wach auf!

The power struggle and undeclared civil war at the top of the Western secret government intensified radically during the past week, with mass arrests of Khazarian gangsters around the United States and elsewhere, multiple sources concur.  There was also a declaration by U.S. President Donald Trump recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel in a move that is not what it seems.  We will discuss this further below.

First, though, we need to look at the extremely unusual events taking place in California.  These days, the citizens of that state must be feeling like the Solomon Islanders did during World War 2 when the Japanese and Americans fought on their land.  There is now very strong evidence that energy weapons like lasers are being used by opposing factions in California, agree Pentagon and NSA sources.

“The heat is on, as the Bel Air fire in Los Angeles targets the Getty…

View original post 1,745 more words



…. the decentralization of intelligence


Afghan poppy farmers extract raw opium from poppy heads in fields in Zhera disrict west of Kandahar

Commander In Chief Donald Trump is bombing the heck out of the CIA’S Opium Labs – thwarting all the cartel dollars and taking over the corrupt C.I.A.  For those of you out there who had been saying things like “Psyop – If that Marine Troops were at CIA in Langley why didn’t we know about it?  Where are the pictures?”  Good grief!  President Trump said many times on the campaign trail and in televised debates (several of them) that when he is President he will take care of the problems and, “You won’t know what I’m going to do.  That’s stupid to tell the enemy on this day at this time…we are going to fly over and bomb you.”  He said when he was president he would take care of the problems and you will hear about it after it happens.  I will protect America.


Today, the chief prosecutor of…

View original post 1,220 more words

?Marines storm #CIA HQ

merahza (51) in marines

There are reports now circulating that a special forces group of 2200 marines have landed and invaded the CIA Headquarters.

Marines Landed at CIA Headquarters?

Conservative radio hosts Hal Turner and April Lajune are reporting that a Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) landed at Langley on Saturday. (1)

Said Turner:

“According to persons who reside near Langley, a large contingent of Marines arrived at CIA Headquarters in tilt-rotor aircraft and when the Marines deplaned, they were armed and moved quickly into CIA Headquarters!

“Those witnesses also say that a significant number of tilt-rotor aircraft can be clearly seen on the grounds of CIA Headquarters, parked on the grass around the building.

The truth of these stories about troops landing at the CIA has not been confirmed, and of course the Mainstream Media would be the last to report even if this’ true.

The back story is that there is a plan by the leftist to oust trump with a coup d’état.

Russia-China Plan For Incoming Nuke Strikes Over “Credible Evidence” Coup D’etat Will Topple Trump

A gravely worded Ministry of Defense (MoD) report circulating in the Kremlin today states that President Putin has ordered Russian military forces to immediately join with China’s Ministry of National Defense (MNoD) in preparing for “accidental and/or provocative nuclear ballistic missile strikes” after the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) presented “credible evidence” to the Security Council (SC) showing that President Donald Trump may soon be toppled from power by an internal coup d’etat.

Here is Benjamin Fulford’s this week’s report:

The purge of the Satanic Khazarian cabal that turned the West evil is accelerating at an undeniable pace. Most importantly, Pentagon sources confirm multiple Internet reports that Marines stormed the CIA headquarters this past weekend. One of the aims was to shut down Operation Mockingbird, the CIA group that turned the mass media, as well as Google, Facebook, etc. into mass mind-control propaganda, say NSA sources.

So far its still… all quiet on the western (MSM/WH) front.

Originally posted @ Steemit


Gang stalking: victimization through directed energy weapon mind control technology


Not satisfied with controlling the masses through guns, taxes, mass media brainwashing and by dumbing down… the government is using its agencies such as the CIA or DARPA as cover sources for secret energy weapon mind control technology.

Those likely to be victimized by the technology have a number of traits. Are you?

*Someone having high integrity, acting with conscience..?

*Having alternative views..?

*An awakened activist, seeing right through and exposing governmental corruption..?

*Seeing things from a higher perspective..?

-Having these qualities, you could be perceived by your government as a threat to the advancement of their New World Order agenda. Consequently, you could be victimized through becoming one of the government’s targeted individuals for mind control. Without giving your consent or even knowing that you’re being targeted and manipulated, energy weapon mind control technology could be used to taint, discredit, impoverish, silence, subjugate or even kill you.

The way it works

Aka gang stalking essentially, the technology, the victimization, involves directing RF (radio frequency) or microwave electromagnetic waves on to areas of a targeted individual’s brain. By directing these invisible energy waves, specific areas of the brain are electrically stimulated to produce a whole plethora of assimilated events, such as those related to the effects of stimulating the auditory and visual senses. In other words, a targeted individual believing these induced hallucinatory experiences to be real will have no idea of their outside influences.

-It works on the principle that all things are energy: A specific conscious experience can be energetically isolated, mapped and then reproduced for directing at targeted individuals’ brains to induce the desired hallucinatory experience for mind control.

The directing and targeting involves the mind blowing use of advanced artificial intelligence guidance systems which can be used in conjunction with microwave cell phone towers, satellite technology, HARP-like installations, drones and implants… Microchipping is not necessary.  Targeted individuals can be stationery or moving, in enclosed areas or out in the open, either way, the targeting is extremely precise. –Nick Begich has documented this making reference to new DARPA warfare technology.

The effects

Besides auditory and visual hallucinations, other artificially induced experiences include states of euphoria, lovingness, the mystical, the telepathic, dream scenarios, mood changes, panic attacks or anxieties. Pains and brought on illnesses such as those related to heart problems… could be induced.

As mentioned earlier, besides being perceived as a threat to the advancement of the new world order agenda for having certain qualities or alternative views, getting labeled as a ‘heretic..,’ there are other reasons for targeting. This includes, being chosen as an experimental R & D subject, or for social engineering purposes, or to stop you manifesting a particular outcome from, for example, something you’re specialized in which T.H.E.Y (The Hierarchy Enslaving You) don’t want others to know about, or for eugenics purposes (are T.H.E.Y trying to get rid of good humanitarian people?)…

The effects may be used for psyops. For instance, a targeted individual may be made to hear ‘Allah’s voice in his head,’ telling him to go on a shooting rampage… Then there’s the mind control technology’s potential for inducing racial hatred or for the use of sexual exploitation… -As you can imagine the list of the technology’s manipulative capabilities is long.

The technology can also be used for surveillance, as it is able to detect what’s going on with the 5-senses. It can also read thoughts using the remote neural monitoring processes… -All of which can be stored and referenced as a unique behavioral brainwave database belonging to a targeted individual.

As part of the affects, third party mind control involvement may be used. For example, stalkers may not know that they’re also being mind controlled to do the stalking on a targeted individual.

What needs to be done

It is not the intention of the author to scare anyone. The purpose of this is to help targeted individuals understand and come to terms with what’s happening. Not be fooled by the electronic trickery.

Of course, something needs to be done about this illegal, immoral governmental electronic terrorism. However, seeing the bigger picture, it may be difficult to incriminate the culprits: As mentioned by former CIA engineer and whistleblower Dr Robert Duncan it would be difficult to take the victimization cases to court, as the gang stalking involves a number of people in very high places who could control the law process… Having said that, there are ways and governments are getting pressurized to do something about it: Not just America, gang stalking is happening all over the world.

Targeted individuals describing their nightmare experiences have shown us that they don’t necessarily have to be major threats to the new world order agenda to be targeted, just people known for having the already mentioned traits and qualities.

Further, don’t underestimate the capabilities of gang stalking. None of this is exaggerated. Don’t forget, whistleblowers have revealed to us that the military industrial complex and intelligence agencies have secret technology that is way more advanced than what we know.

(More like dumb agencies than intelligence agencies. Remember, when lying and inflicting harm on someone; ‘what goes round comes round.’ But since when have psychopaths ever understood this old adage?!)

On the bright side, gang stalking for a number of victims has served as a fast-track to their awakening process. Some have gone on to become effective campaigners and crime fighters. They have made the public more aware of the victimization, exposing the related crimes against humanity, knowing what needs to be done: Gang stalking is a subject that has not been given enough attention. There are more people targeted than realized.

By Paul A. Philips

Over the years I have come to the firm conclusion that just about every subject under the sun needs redefining using more truthful, honest and integral approaches in theory and practice, hence the name ‘New Paradigm’

-From these new approaches a ‘new era’ in humanity can result.

What could you bring into existence, into being and share with the world that could contribute to transforming humanity in the above way? For example, maybe there’s an area of knowledge with practical applications you could share? So this website invites you to join me in becoming one of a team of co creators by getting involved in some way.

Using me as an example, my subject for some years has been health. I graduated at the School of ‘Biological Sciences’, which included biochemistry, physiology and nutrition… I later worked in a range of related research & development labs…

After watching some close friends and relatives’ die of various illnesses, I learnt that the way in which the medical / pharmaceutical establishment treated diseases was not the only approach. I then got round to writing what I considered to be the truth in health matters: That unknown to many people, there are cheap, natural and non-toxic ways of treating illness. This includes nutrition, exercise, focussing on one’s outlook on life (attitude, thoughts, feelings, emotions, healing intention…) and avoiding environmental toxins. These related powerful approaches can be far, far more successful and, unlike the medical/pharmaceutical model, are capable of curing…

In my rally for the truth, it has been my intent to have people profoundly realise that through my work (and others) and applying the alternative approaches, your health can be totally in your hands!

Whether it’s for health or any other subject with alternative approaches, in the name of freedom I strongly suggest you to get active in making the truth known to others. I consider that we owe it to our friends and relatives (and anybody else for that matter) to also get them educated to make informed choices, don’t you?

(Source: newparadigm.ws; April 20, 2017; http://tinyurl.com/kzqcabu)


Trump is challenging the whole CIA-media nexus

Or to put it another way, every president since Kennedy SHOULD have gone to war with the CIA, but no president did.

Jon Rappoport's Blog

Trump is challenging the whole CIA-media nexus

Nothing like it since JFK

by Jon Rappoport

March 18, 2017

Trump’s attack on the CIA came into focus after the CIA claimed Putin subverted the election on behalf of Trump.

The Trump team retorted: Ridiculous; reminds us of the CIA’s phony assessment of Saddam’s WMDs that led to the disastrous war against Iraq.

Then the CIA’s gloves came off.

But there is more to it than that.

All along, Trump has been hammering the mainstream press, calling them biased, idiots, fake, etc. Certainly through his advisor, Steve Bannon, and quite probably through other sources, Trump knows about the CIA-major media connection. This connection, of course, goes way back to the Mockingbird CIA operation of the early 1950s. Major news outlets have been infested with CIA operatives since that time.

When Trump goes after mainstream news, he’s also going after its shadow brother…

View original post 790 more words

Social Networks Show They Work for Government, not Private Sector



Free Speech Isn’t Facebook’s Job  … My instinct as a First Amendment teacher is to be outraged at Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Microsoft for knuckling under to European Commission pressure to ban hate speech on their platforms. But after sleeping on it, I think it’s fine.    Here’s why: These social media giants are private actors, not the state. –Bloomberg

We disagree with Bloomberg. Facebook is not a private sector actor. If it were up to us, Facebook would be shut down.

It was funded by the CIA which has surely participated in its success around the world.

It’s not really a company. It’s a facility of American  imperialism.

By carefully tracking who knows whom, Facebook can generate groups of related individuals. These groups can be useful to the FBI, CIA and other intelligence outfits.

And Facebook does plenty of other kinds of spying. That’s the reason it’s always getting caught collecting customer data.

That’s the reason it encourages liberal – statist – reporting on its sites.

It’s primarily a vast spying operation.

That’s not how this Bloomberg editorial sees it. The Bloomberg editorial takes these big companies at face value. But these companies would not exist without state power and authoritarian judicial decisions.

They are puffed up by “corporation personhood,” intellectual property rights and monopoly fiat money.

Without these three “legs of the stool” there would be no multinationals. The problems of corporate bigness would not exist.

Marry the CIA and its vast panoply of violent influence peddling to state judicial power and here is the unholy spawn: social networks.

How can anyone maintain they are in any way products of the “marketplace.”


[Social media giants]  can’t be trusted to protect free speech, nor is it their obligation, whether in Europe or the U.S. Those of us who care about preserving free speech need to keep that in mind, while maintaining other venues for free speech that aren’t controlled by private companies.

The editorial goes on to mention “The Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online,” recently posted by the European Commission.

It is a voluntary code but one that the article explains has placed pressure on big Internet vendors like Facebook and Google.

In fact, this entire hate-speech campaign in Europe is reminiscent of George Orwell’s 1984. Juveniles convicted of committing “hate speech crimes” will undergo a rehabilitation program that supposedly will make them more tolerant.

It’s a horrible evolution of censorship in every sense of the word. And the code has received a lot of attention because the big Internet vendors will have to use their own judgment about what constitutes “hate speech.”

The editorial tells us that “independent nongovernmental organizations” shall partner with the big firms to figure out what to remove.

But the companies themselves will have the final say.

The editorial doesn’t find this objectionable because private companies manage customer activities all the time.

The editorial also tells us that big companies have presented themselves as “neutral platforms,” responsible to shareholders not customers.

The editorial’s “upshot” is that “we need to keep an eye on free speech by assuring that there are vehicles for self-expression that aren’t completely controlled by private actors.”

But a company like Facebook is not responsible to its shareholders. If CEO Mark Zuckerberg were to stop collecting information for the CIA, he would be shoved rudely out the door or worse.

When it comes to US security interests, Facebook, Google and all the rest are primarily civilian arms of US intelligence agencies. Their “shareholders” take a back seat.

These companies will NOT exercise their own judgment when it comes to determining what is and is not hate speech.

The European Union will explain that in detail through third parties. And the EU’s concerns will be negotiated with American intel agencies and supervising London bankers.

The same hate speech censorship occurring in Europe is coming to America as well.

To point fingers at Facebook, Google, etc. is to misapprehend the powerful influences that run the West and the world.

Conclusion: If you want to make a difference when it comes to “freedom of speech” you are better off investigating and confronting the City of London than Google. The City, of course, is far more powerful. Much easier to pretend that large social networks are of real importance and part of the “private sector.” They are not.


Lawyer at the European Court Say Facebook & NSA Work Together


BBC US Editor Parrots CIA, Republican Talking Points on Senate Torture Report


by Rupert Stone

bbc lies

The BBC is supposed to be an “impartial”, “honest” and “independent” news outlet, but today its US Editor, Jon Sopel, showed very clearly whose side he is on. In a short post, “A whiff of hypocrisy about CIA report?”, he regurgitates some staple Republican talking-points and makes arguments eerily similar to those presented by former CIA and Bush officials in their various self-exculpatory media appearances this past week.

His piece bears the revealingly Cheney-esque tagline: “America has not come under serious attack since 9/11 on its home soil – so you would think that would be a source of celebration.” Then, just like CIA Director Brennan at his press conference last Thursday, Sopel kicks off with the September 11 attacks. He speculates that there might eventually be two versions of 9/11, one in which “a war on terror was declared, and those responsible were hunted down and detained, and there were no further attacks on US soil”, another in which “the torture tactics used to hunt down and detain those responsible brought condemnation and America lost its moral authority in the world”.

Both of these versions are inaccurate. His assumption is that the CIA’s interrogation and rendition program was the only factor involved in capturing terrorists. Of course there were other departments of the US government at work – most importantly the FBI (which did not use torture). And there were other methods, besides human intelligence, which yielded information (for example, signals intelligence was crucial to the hunt for Bin Laden).

Sopel also implies that every single person captured and detained was involved in 9/11, despite the fact Abu Zubaydah (once heralded as the “number 3 in Al Qaeda”, and whose torture is recorded in gruesome detail in the Senate’s summary) is now recognized by the US government to have played no role in 9/11 and to have never even been a member of Al Qaeda. Moreover, the Senate’s report documents 26 cases of prisoners who were held mistakenly by CIA (note that the report excludes victims of extraordinary rendition to 3rd countries for torture and all those held by the US military). Interestingly, he seems to assume that the torture worked (note that, in his second version of 9/11, he writes that the torture brought “condemnation”, not false intelligence). But the Senate’s report has produced page after page of detail refuting that assumption, and there is plenty of other evidence to support its thesis. To take one example among many, Col. Morris Davis – the former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo, who was familiar with the intelligence gained from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other high-value detainees – told CNN last week that he was not aware of a “single plot” stopped by the torture program.

Sopel then claims that most Democrats “think that there are NO circumstances EVER when coercive interrogation techniques can be condoned”. Note the use of capitals to underscore the absolute nature of their position, as if they’re extremists – but this view simply reflects the law, as embodied in the UN Convention Against Torture, which insists that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever” can be used to justify torture. Anyway, it is presumptuous to say that “most Democrats” are absolutely opposed to torture. Obama’s own CIA Directors Panetta and Petraeus have both testified to Congress that extreme techniques might be considered in ticking-bomb scenarios if conventional methods failed. That being so, he is possibly right in the next paragraph when he implies that a Democrat administration would have responded in similar fashion after 9/11, and that their indignation at the report is somewhat hypocritical. But so what? This report does not need to be read and assessed through a party-political prism. If the Democrats are being hypocritical, that does not alter the evidentiary record of gross torture and war crimes assembled in the summary. As law professor Stephen Vladeck said on C-Span’s Washington Journal last weekend: “The facts in the report speak for themselves. What we did was illegal.”

Sopel then advances a tired jingoistic argument made by Dick Cheney, George W Bush and Barack Obama himself. “Weren’t the overwhelming majority of CIA operatives at that time just driven by one thing – a patriotic duty to keep America safe, by whatever means?” He seems to be suggesting that most CIA operatives involved in the torture program should be excused because they were patriots: not an apology he would likely make for Syrian or North Korean torturers. Besides, the Senate’s summary contains page after page of meticulously-assembled evidence documenting unprecedented criminal brutality, and there is no exception in the applicable laws for patriots trying to “keep America safe”. In fact it seems that many CIA officials objected to the savagery they were being asked to participate in – a point omitted by Sopel, who associates patriotism with protecting America by “whatever means”  (hat-tip to Dick Cheney) – while of course true patriotism entails obeying, not breaking, long-standing legal prohibitions against cruelty and barbarism. As Jane Mayer writes in a recent piece at the New Yorker, “There have been a number of true “torture patriots,” many of them at the C.I.A….They are the officers who blew the whistle on the program internally and externally, some of whom have paid a very high price for their actions.”

Sopel’s next paragraph is, quite simply, risible, and deserves to be cited in full:

“Of course I can sit here at my keyboard and pronounce that torture can never be justified. It is an absolute. I do totally believe that. But what if a child of mine had been kidnapped, and the police arrest the kidnapper, but say to me, “Well we’ve got the guy who took your kid, but despite us asking him really politely where he’s being kept, he’s not telling us… However there are these things called enhanced interrogation techniques – we could give them a go.” Would I say no? I’m really not sure.”

So, he’s absolutely against torture, but might support it: a glaring paradox. Sopel’s trying to oppose torture categorically, like any good BBC journalist, while making excuses for the torturers. Respect for civilized values and the rule of law must always be balanced with obedient deference to state power, even when the state in question has ridden roughshod over those very values and laws. Is that what the BBC means by impartiality and independence? Or are war crimes just fine provided they come wrapped in the stars and stripes?

As a brave member of the fourth estate, forever holding the government to account for its abuses, Sopel is “uncomfortable” that CIA should be held “publicly accountable for their actions”. As Brennan snapped at the Wall Street Journal’s Siobhan Gorman on Thursday, there’s been enough “transparency” with the release of this report. Sopel scoffs, a la Cheney: “This is not the highways department where the road maintenance programme is under debate. This is national security.” But transparency is not the same thing as accountability: the former involves disclosure of information, the latter involves punishment for wrongdoing. This is a crucial distinction. If there were to be serious legal accountability, members of the CIA and Bush administration could find themselves in very hot water, indeed, given the abundant evidence of criminality detailed in the report.

And this is the most revealing aspect of Sopel’s piece. Nowhere does he acknowledge that the CIA broke the law, even though Ben Emmerson, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counterterrorism, last week described the CIA program as a “vast criminal enterprise” and a “criminal conspiracy” at the highest levels of government, emphasizing that, under international law, the ban on torture is absolute and admits of no extenuating circumstances whatsoever (a view echoed by numerous rights groups, along with Morris Davis, who in the interview cited above described the CIA’s actions as “war crimes” and advised the culprits to “vacation domestically”). That “enhanced interrogation techniques” constitute torture was obvious to any rational person even before the release of this report, and is now entirely indisputable (the European Court of Human Rights had already ruled earlier this year, before the Senate’s summary was disclosed, that the CIA had tortured prisoners on Polish soil). In his earlier reporting on the summary, Sopel again echoed Brennan when referring to the CIA’s “mistakes”. But these were no “mistakes”: they were cruel, calculated crimes devised at the highest-levels of government.

Sopel ends with yet another Republican talking-point. “I just wonder whether in 10 years’ time, when my successor is sitting at this desk, whether he or she will be writing a blog on the just-released Republican-led intelligence committee report laying into the drone programme from when President Barack Obama was in the White House.” There is no reason to believe the Republicans would produce such a report, given they’ve supported drone strikes throughout Obama’s presidency. Even if they did, the (hypothetical) report should be judged on its own terms: you cannot just dismiss a report because it was produced by this or that party. That the summary is a partisan effort by Democrats, is yet another argument advanced by former CIA and Bush officials to discredit the Senate’s conclusions. And it’s a poor argument: the report is based on millions and millions of CIA records, its findings corroborated by numerous other reports, sources and news stories. And it is not entirely partisan: after all, the Obama administration held up the summary for months arguing over redactions, and tried to stall it at the last-minute when John Kerry called Diane Feinstein to warn her, with standard CIA scare tactics, that the disclosure might provoke violence abroad (it hasn’t). Fox News has made much of Obama’s hypocrisy, using drone strikes which kill people and opposing torture which doesn’t, and that point is reflected here, like so many other utterly partisan and vacuous Republican, CIA arguments.

Why can’t Sopel condemn, in clear terms, a spy agency that has so clearly violated the law? The CIA did not act alone: Britain, along with many other foreign countries, was involved in the rendition program, permitting flights to pass through its airports and possibly allowing a black site to operate on Diego Garcia. The Senate’s report could provide damning new evidence of UK complicity, and some MPs have already called for a judge-led inquiry into British participation. But, as Sopel writes, there’s been enough transparency. I’m sure Tony Blair, Jack Straw, David Miliband and others would agree.