Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
In 1940, while Churchill’s Britain and Germany were at war, the “anti-Semitic,” (here) anti-Churchill, anti-war Ambassador to England, Joseph Kennedy Sr., sent a strange telegram to the US State Department. Original-Source historian David Irving explains:
“When Kennedy decides to go back to Florida for a vacation, he takes the plane down to Lisbon, and he boards the USS Manhattan to sail back across the Atlantic, and in a bit of a panic because he knows who he’s dealing with, he’s dealing with Churchill, he sends a telegram to the State Department saying: Please, will you announce that if the USS Manhattan is torpedoed and sunk that the United States will not declare war (with Germany) over this because I have reason to believe that Churchill is planning to torpedo the Manhattan knowing that I’m on board!” (here)
Papa Joe surely knew that the British were intercepting all such messages — so this was probably his way of protecting himself from “the usual suspects” in advance. We should also note that in private conversations between themselves (and later retold to James Forrestal) Kennedy and the former British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain blamed the Jews for wanting the world war. Kennedy also hated FDR and the “communists and Jews” around him. He was a friend of the “anti-Semitic” ™Father Coughlin and later supported Senator Joe McCarthy.
This historical flashback adds critical context to the sad fate which awaited the Patriarch’s progeny — like Joe Kennedy Jr. in 1944 and Kathleen Kennedy in 1948 — and, most notably, President John F Kennedy in 1963 — among others.
As a refresher course for you veteran “conspiracy theorists,” and as a crash course for younger newbies, let us review the fundamentals of the CONSPIRACY that murdered America’s 35th President and other members of the Kennedy Clan.
1a. US Ambassador to UK Joe Kennedy and 1b. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain (nick-named “the Umbrella Man,”) greeting Hitler. Both Kennedy & Chamberlain wanted peace with Hitler (whom Kennedy admired). // 2. Joe Kennedy Jr. was blown up during the war when his plane mysteriously exploded during a non-combat mission over England in 1944. Papa Joe later referred to FDR as “that crippled son-of-a-bitch who killed my son.” (here) // 3. Young John F Kennedy (who almost lost his own life after a strange incident during the war) wrote in his diary that “Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived. He had within him the stuff of which legends are made.”
The CIA After Allen Dulles‘s CIA deliberately botched the 1961 “Bay of Pigs” invasion to overthrow Communist Cuba, JFK was so upset that he, according to The New York Times, told a high-ranking member of his administration that he wanted to “splinter the C.I.A. in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” (here)
The Pentagon After flatly rejecting the Pentagon’s proposal to stage false-flag attacks in Florida as a pretext for going to war with Cuba (Operation Northwoods, 1962), JFK demoted the Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, Lyman Lemnitzer. (here) JFK was also committed to pulling out the US “advisors” that were already in Vietnam. The Vietnam War would not have happened had JFK lived.
The Communists JFK had big-government leanings, but he hated Communists. Both he and his father, Ambassador to UK Joseph Kennedy, had admired the accomplishments of The Great One(that’s Hitler for you newbies and normies). JFK was also a friend and supporter of the great Joseph McCarthy, and he warned Marxist Loser King, whom he had placed under FBI surveillance, to get rid of his Communist connections.
The Federal Reserve? Jim Marrs, in his book Crossfire, makes a compelling case that Kennedy was trying to rein in the power of the Federal Reserve. He alleges that the issuance of Executive Order 11110 was actually a back-door effort by Kennedy to transfer power from the Federal Reserve to the United States Department of the Treasury by replacing Federal Reserve Notes with interest-free Silver Certificates, backed by silver.
Israeli Hardliners In strongly worded letters to two consecutive Israeli Prime Ministers, JFK demanded access to the the facilities at Dimona and threatened to cutoff Israel’s foreign aid money if continued to pursue atomic weapons technology.
Dallas, Texas: 11-22-1963
The killers of Kennedy (CIA & Mossad) picked the occult-numbered double-digit date of 11-22 to take out the disobedient and popular young President with a team of snipers. Though clearly shot in the face while traveling in a motorcade, the “patsie” Lee Harvey Oswald is soon framed as “the lone gunman” who struck from behind. On 11-24, just one day after declaring, in front of live cameras, “I’m just a patsie,” (here) Oswald himself is killed on live TV, silenced by a low-level Jewish mobster named Jack Ruby (born Jacob Rubenstein). Just 3 years and 1 month later, Ruby dies in prison after claiming that he was being injected with cancer-causing toxins.
Moments before the infamous deed in Dallas — Image 2: A vindictive farewell message at the precise moment of JFK’s murder. The mysterious “Umbrella Man” — who later admitted in Senate testimony that he was just a “protester” and that the umbrella was a symbol to invoke Papa’s Joe’s friend –the umbrella-toting Neville Chamberlain. He is standing just behind another man (whom he later sits down next to) giving what appears to be a “Nazi” salute to JFK as he rides by just seconds before the fatal moment.)
In 1964, Papa Joe’s youngest son, Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), is nearly killed in a small plane crash which killed two of the passengers.
In, 1968, third son and Senator Robert F Kennedy (D-NY) is assassinated on 6-6 after winning the California Democrat Primary. His official time of death was 1:44 AM PST (4:44 EST). Had he lived, RFK would likely have been elected President in 1968 and then gone after his brother’s killers.
In 1969, Senator Edward Kennedy is again nearly killed when his car drives off of a small bridge — drowning the young woman he was with. His cowardly abandonment of Mary Jo Kopechne so damaged his name that the incident at Chappaquiddick cost him a legitimate shot at the presidency, which would elude him in future years.
And finally, 31 years later, in 1999, JFK’s celebrity son, JFK Jr. is killed in a mysterious plane crash. He was about to embark upon an unstoppable political career with a run for a US Senate seat for New York State — a position which Killary Clinton wanted and obtained in 2000.
“Conspiracy theory,” ™ eh? You’re dog-gone right it is!
US-NATO weapons of mass destruction are portrayed as instruments of peace. Mini-nukes are said to be “harmless to the surrounding civilian population”. Since the George W. Bush administration, pre-emptive nuclear war has been portrayed as a “humanitarian undertaking”.
While one can conceptualize the loss of life and destruction resulting from present-day wars including Iraq, Syria and Yemen, it is impossible to fully comprehend the devastation which might result from a Third World War, using “new technologies” and advanced weapons, until it occurs and becomes a reality. The US administration has endorsed nuclear war in the name of world peace. “Making the world safer” is the justification for launching a military operation which could potentially result in a nuclear holocaust.
US nuclear threats directed against Russia predate the Cold War.
They were first formulated at the height of World War II under the Manhattan Project when the US and the Soviet Union were allies.
The secret plan to bomb 66 Soviet cities was released in mid-September 1945, two weeks after the formal surrender of Japan.
Had the US decided NOT to develop nuclear weapons for use against the Soviet Union, the nuclear arms race would not have taken place.
Neither The Soviet Union nor the People’s Republic of China would have developed nuclear capabilities as a means of “Deterrence” against the US, had it not been for the Manhattan Project which was intent to annihilate the Soviet Union.
Flash Forward to 2021:
President Joe Biden does not have the foggiest idea as to the consequences of nuclear war.
Massive amounts of money have been allocated by the Biden Administration to feed the weapons industry including the Pentagons’ 1.3 trillion dollar nuclear weapons program first launched under Obama.
Humanity is at a dangerous crossroads. Nuclear war has become a multi-billion dollar undertaking, which fills the pockets of US defense contractors. What is at stake is the outright “privatization of nuclear war”.
The use of nuclear weapons against Russia is currently on the drawing board of the Pentagon. US-NATO war games are being carried out on Russia’s doorstep. A first strike preemptive nuclear attack on Russia is not excluded.
In the words of Fidel Castro on October 15, 2010
“In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.
Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!” (Fidel Castro Ruz, conversations with the author, October 2010) Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, December 2021
“Wipe the Soviet Union Off the Map”, 204 Atomic Bombs against 66 Major Cities, US Nuclear Attack against USSR Planned During World War II
All major cities of the Soviet Union were included in the list of 66 “strategic” targets. The tables below categorize each city in terms of area in square miles and the corresponding number of atomic bombs required to annihilate and kill the inhabitants of selected urban areas.
Six atomic bombs were to be used to destroy each of the larger cities including Moscow, Leningrad, Tashkent, Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa.
The Pentagon estimated that a total of 204 atomic bombs would be required to “Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map”. The targets for a nuclear attack consisted of sixty-six major cities.
To undertake this operation the “optimum” number of bombs required was of the order of 466 (see document below)
One single atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima resulted in the immediate death of 100,000 people in the first seven seconds. Imagine what would have happened if 204 atomic bombs had been dropped on major cities of the Soviet Union as outlined in a secret U.S. plan formulated during the Second World War.
The document outlining this diabolical military agenda had been released in September 1945, barely one month after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (6 and 9 August, 1945) and two years before the onset of the Cold War (1947).
The secret plan dated September 15, 1945 (two weeks after the surrender of Japan on September 2, 1945 aboard the USS Missouri, see image below) , however, had been formulated at an earlier period, namely at the height of World War II, at a time when America and the Soviet Union were close allies.
It is worth noting that Stalin was first informed through official channels by Harry Truman of the infamous Manhattan Project at the Potsdam Conference on July 24, 1945, barely two weeks before the attack on Hiroshima.
The Manhattan project was launched in 1939, two years prior to America’s entry into World War II in December 1941. The Kremlin was fully aware of the secret Manhattan project as early as 1942.
Were the August 1945 Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks used by the Pentagon to evaluate the viability of a much larger attack on the Soviet Union consisting of more than 204 atomic bombs? The key documents to bomb 66 cities of the Soviet Union (15 September 1945) were finalized 5-6 weeks after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings (6, 9 August 1945):
“On September 15, 1945 — just under two weeks after the formal surrender of Japan and the end of World War II — Norstad sent a copy of the estimate to General Leslie Groves, still the head of the Manhattan Project, and the guy who, for the short term anyway, would be in charge of producing whatever bombs the USAAF might want. As you might guess, the classification on this document was high: “TOP SECRET LIMITED,” which was about as high as it went during World War II. (Alex Wellerstein, The First Atomic Stockpile Requirements (September 1945)
The Kremlin was aware of the 1945 plan to bomb sixty-six Soviet cities.
The documents confirm that the US was involved in the “planning of genocide” against the Soviet Union.
Let’s cut to the chase. How many bombs did the USAAF request of the atomic general, when there were maybe one, maybe two bombs worth of fissile material on hand? At a minimum they wanted 123. Ideally, they’d like 466. This is just a little over a month after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Of course, in true bureaucratic fashion, they provided a handy-dandy chart (Alex Wellerstein, op. cit)
Central to our understanding of the Cold War which started (officially) in 1947, Washington’s September 1945 plan to bomb 66 cities into smithereens played a key role in triggering the nuclear arms race.
The Soviet Union was threatened and developed its own atomic bomb in 1949 in response to 1942 Soviet intelligence reports on the Manhattan Project.
While the Kremlin knew about these plans to “Wipe out” the USSR, the broader public was not informed because the September 1945 documents were of course classified.
Today, neither the September 1945 plan to blow up the Soviet Union nor the underlying cause of the nuclear arms race are acknowledged. The Western media has largely focussed its attention on the Cold War US-USSR confrontation. The plan to annihilate the Soviet Union dating back to World War II and the infamous Manhattan project are not mentioned.
Washington’s Cold War nuclear plans are invariably presented in response to so-called Soviet threats, when in fact it was the U.S. plan released in September 1945 (formulated at an earlier period at the height of World War II) to wipe out the Soviet which motivated Moscow to develop its nuclear weapons capabilities.
The assessment of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists mistakenly blamed and continue to blame the Soviet Union for having launched the nuclear arms race in 1949, four years after the release of the September 1945 US Secret Plan to target 66 major Soviet cities with 204 nuclear bombs:
“1949: The Soviet Union denies it, but in the fall, President Harry Truman tells the American public that the Soviets tested their first nuclear device, officially starting the arms race. “We do not advise Americans that doomsday is near and that they can expect atomic bombs to start falling on their heads a month or year from now,” the Bulletin explains. “But we think they have reason to be deeply alarmed and to be prepared for grave decisions.” (Timeline of the Doomsday Clock, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 2017)
IMPORTANT: Had the US decided NOT to develop nuclear weapons for use against the Soviet Union, the nuclear arms race would not have taken place. Neither The Soviet Union nor the People’s Republic of China would have developed nuclear capabilities as a means of “Deterrence” agains the US which had already formulated plans to annihilate the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union lost 26 million people during World War II. The Cold War List of 1200 Targeted Cities: This initial 1945 list of sixty-six cities was updated in the course of the Cold War (1956) to include some 1200 cities in the USSR and the Soviet block countries of Eastern Europe (see declassified documents below). The bombs slated for use were more powerful in terms of explosive capacity than those dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Source: National Security Archive
“According to the 1956 Plan, H-Bombs were to be Used Against Priority “Air Power” Targets in the Soviet Union, China, and Eastern Europe. Major Cities in the Soviet Bloc, Including East Berlin, Were High Priorities in “Systematic Destruction” for Atomic Bombings. (William Burr, U.S. Cold War Nuclear Attack Target List of 1200 Soviet Bloc Cities “From East Germany to China”, National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 538, December 2015 Source: National Security Archive
Washington, D.C., December 22, 2015 – The SAC [Strategic Air Command] Atomic Weapons Requirements Study for 1959, produced in June 1956 and published today for the first time by the National Security Archive www.nsarchive.org, provides the most comprehensive and detailed list of nuclear targets and target systems that has ever been declassified. As far as can be told, no comparable document has ever been declassified for any period of Cold War history. The SAC study includes chilling details. According to its authors, their target priorities and nuclear bombing tactics would expose nearby civilians and “friendly forces and people” to high levels of deadly radioactive fallout. Moreover, the authors developed a plan for the “systematic destruction” of Soviet bloc urban-industrial targets that specifically and explicitly targeted “population” in all cities, including Beijing, Moscow, Leningrad, East Berlin, and Warsaw. Purposefully targeting civilian populations as such directly conflicted with the international norms of the day, which prohibited attacks on people per se (as opposed to military installations with civilians nearby).National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 538, December 2015 List of Cities
Excerpt of list of 1200 cities targeted for nuclear attack in alphabetical order. National Security Archive, op. cit. From the Cold War to the Present In the post Cold War era, nuclear war directed against Russia, China, North Korea and Iran is “On the Table”.
What distinguishes the October 1962 Missile Crisis to Today’s realities:
1. Today’s president Joe Biden does not have the foggiest idea as to the consequences of nuclear war.
2, Communication today between the White House and the Kremlin is at an all time low. In contrast, in October 1962, the leaders on both sides, namely John F. Kennedy and Nikita S. Khrushchev were accutely aware of the dangers of nuclear annihilation. They collaborated with a view to avoiding the unthinkable.
3. The nuclear doctrine was entirely different during the Cold War. Both Washington and Moscow understood the realities of mutually assured destruction. Today, tactical nuclear weapons with an explosive capacity (yield) of one third to six times a Hiroshima bomb are categorized by the Pentagon as “harmless to civilians because the explosion is underground”.
4. A one trillion ++ nuclear weapons program, first launched under Obama, is ongoing.
5. Today’s thermonuclear bombs are more than 100 times more powerful and destructive than a Hiroshima bomb. Both the US and Russia have several thousand nuclear weapons deployed.
Moreover, an all out war against China is currently on the drawing board of the Pentagon as outlined by a RAND Corporation Report commissioned by the US Army
U.S Foreign Policy Insanity
There is a long history of US political insanity geared towards providing a human face to U.S. crimes against humanity.
On August 9, 1945, on the day the second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, president Truman (image right), in a radio address to the American people, concluded that God is on the side of America with regard to the use of nuclear weapons and that
“He May guide us to use it [atomic bomb] in His ways and His purposes”.
According to Truman: God is with us, he will decide if and when to use the bomb:
[We must] prepare plans for the future control of this bomb. I shall ask the Congress to cooperate to the end that its production and use be controlled, and that its power be made an overwhelming influence towards world peace.
We must constitute ourselves trustees of this new force–to prevent its misuse, and to turn it into the channels of service to mankind.
It is an awful responsibility which has come to us.
We thank God that it [nuclear weapons] has come to us, instead of to our enemies; and we pray that He may guide us to use it [nuclear weapons] in His ways and for His purposes” (emphasis added)
Trump’s post-election purge of the Pentagon and Intelligence now makes more sense.
As regular readers you know that in numerous articles over these past few months, grown bolder and bolder in asserting that prominent celebrities, politicians and journalists have been “disappeared” and replaced with skin-mask-wearing imposters and / or those “Deep Fakes” which Fake News has been “warning” us about for some time now. Furthermore, reports continue to come in about Washington DC being a military occupied ghost town. And we also presented the case for the Kyle Rittenhouse “shooting” event and recent trial as comical crisis actor dramas scripted by the White Hats to their advantage — as was the recent auto-massacre (by an outspoken Trump hater) — also in Wisconsin.
Such sophisticated and sprawling psychological operations could only be orchestrated and concealed by a hidden power on par with or even stronger than the old CIA Deep State (which is slowly being choked to death) which staged crisis actor events like the Sandy Hook & Parkland High shootings. As Q had posted many times, “The only way is the military.” — specifically, Special Operations and Military Intelligence ( by the way, I’m still skeptical about the whole Q thing).
That being understood — and we know that these are very difficult “red pills” for even our fellow “conspiracy theorists” ™ to swallow — we are now re-posting a post-election article from one year ago. The event described was very, very intriguing one year ago. Today — in light of all this weirdness and counter-hoaxery — the motives for Trump’s bizarre post-election military & intelligence purges of 2020 are, in hindsight, starting to make more sense.
Was the Pentagon’s “Continuity of Government” emergency takeover plan actually activated by President Trump? We now suspect that it was.
FLASHBACK TO NOVEMBER 2020 POSTING It all makes sense now.
Trump is ‘Going to the Mattresses’
In the classic film, Godfather I, the acting “Don,” Sonny Corleone, eager to avenge an attempted assassination upon his father, wanted to “go to the mattresses” against a rival Mafia family.
* Tom Hagen (Advisor) : Sonny, We ought to hear what they have to say.
* Sonny Corleone: No, no, no! No more! Not this time, consiglieri. No more meetings, no more discussions, no more Sollozzo tricks. You give ’em one message: I want Sollozzo. If not, it’s all-out war: we go to the mattresses.
“Going to the mattresses” means sending teams of hit-men to some apartment in rival territory, in anticipation of receiving a call to kill other mobsters. Mattresses would then be set up on the floor for the men to sleep. In short, GTTM = war, aka “whacking” your enemies — and GTTM is not something that “The Donald” would start if he was contemplating leaving the White House in just 7 weeks time. And yet, GTTM against the Deep State is exactly what the now fully-liberated “Don Trumpeone” is doing. Let’s have a look at what the panic-filled pinko press has dubbed: “The Purge at the Pentagon.”
The question on everyone’s mind is — WHY?
* SECRETARY OF DEFENSE — MARK ESPER
Swamp creature Esper holds a Master’s Degree in “Public Administration” from Harvard and membership in the Council on Foreign Relations. Just those two bullet-points on his resume make him guilty and guilty of being one of “them.” Esper — a former DC lobbyist and executive at defense giant Raytheon (two more strikes against him) — subtly undermined Trump’s plan to pull out of Afghanistan and openly undermined Trump’s wish to invoke the Insurrection Act against the Red street scum of Portland and Seattle. Just one week after the fraudulent election of 11.3, Esper was “whacked” and replaced by Chris Miller — a lifelong soldier, military scholar, and former Green Beret who is totally loyal to Trump.
* ESPER’S CHIEF OF STAFF — JEN STEWART
After her boss was shit-canned, Stewart was bumped off and replaced with Kash Patel. As a House staff member, Patel played an important role in helping to protect Trump by discrediting the “Russian collusion” investigation. Patel is a solid Trump loyalist.
* UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE — JAMES ANDERSON
Anderson, the Pentagon’s acting policy chief, repeatedly clashed with the White House over the installation of Trump allies in the Defense Department. Anderson’s dismissal cleared the path for retired Brig. Gen. Anthony Tata to take over policy on a temporary basis. Tata has been trashed by Fake News as a “conspiracy theorist.”
* ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR SPECIAL OPERATIONS — JOSEPH KERNAN
Like his boss, Esper, swamp creature Kernan also “resigned.” Kernan held a very high-level intelligence position which has been assumed by Military Intel agent Ezra Cohen-Watnick — a young Mike Flynn protege whose rise was foretold to us by Q Anon in 2018. The mysterious Cohen-Watnick has been protected and promoted by Trump all along. Although we’re not all that crazy about his name (its ethnicity, that is) — ECW appears to be a hard-core anti-Communist Jew in the mold of Joe McCarthy‘s sidekick (and former Trump layer)Roy Cohn. We expect that ECW will be the one ordering and coordinating the expected mass arrests of Deep State scum.
PENTAGON SWAMP CREATURES OUT! —
HARD CORE TRUMP LOYALISTS
That was a substantial post-election decapitation of the civilian leadership of the Offense Department. But the best was yet to come. Quietly and unexpectedly, on the eve of Thanksgiving Day, “Don Trumpeone” again “went to the mattresses” and abruptly “whacked” 11 of the 13 membersof the Pentagon’s high & mighty “bipartisan” ™Defense Policy Board.
“The Trump administration has removed several members of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board in what some are calling its parting shot at some of the top leaders of the nation’s foreign policy establishment.”
A “parting shot,” eh? We shall see about who will be “parting.”
Included in Trump’s pre-Thanksgiving Massacre were the untouchable holy icons of Globalism — Madeleine Albright(cough cough) and — (pinch me, am I dreaming?) — Henry Frickin’ Kissinger (cough cough)! Yes, that’s right — the legendary “German-born” Globalist Secretary of State that President Richard Nixon privately mistrusted but could not touch, was dumped like the sack-of-seditious shit that he is by Donald J. Trump.
Other big names “whacked” from the entrenched Kosher Commie Policy Board were former House Republican leader Eric Cantor(cough cough) and former Demonrat Rep., AIPAC agent, 50% Newsweek mag owner, and multi-millionairess Jane Harman(cough cough). It was like the baptism scene / multiple mob hit from The GodFather — but it’s just firings now, not actual killings. Although, we pray, the killings of Deep Staters will happen later.
* Headline: The Independent (UK) (November 27, 2020): Trump Pushing Through Dozens of Last Minute Policy Changes – Including Use of Firing Squads
Let’s kill em’ all Trump. Let’s kill em’ all. Now, while you got the muscle.
Some of youse younger folk may not quite understand the magnitude of the age-defying Kissinger’s worldwide “rock star” stature as an NWO sub-capo over these past 50 years. Trump’s disrespectful dumping of Harvard Henry the K (and other big names) from the “bipartisan” Defense Policy Board is a HUGE indicator that — as Q so often has said: “the patriots are in control.”
True definition of “Fascism” is: “a populist resistance to Marxism / Globalism centered around a strong and righteous man.”
The AP reported that “the deadline could be pushed up if the vaccine receives final FDA approval or infection rates continue to rise.”
“I will not hesitate to act sooner or recommend a different course to the President if l feel the need to do so. To defend this Nation, we need a healthy and ready force,” the Defense Secretary added.
An Armed Forces member refusing to take the vaccine is subject to punishment under the U.C.M.J., the AP’s report noted. The punishment for refusal to obey an order may escalate up to court martial.
“Some unvaccinated service members have suggested they’d get the shot once it’s required, but others are flatly opposed,” the report said.
Now, some of those ‘flatly opposed’ soldiers are filing a lawsuit in court against the coming military vaccination mandate.
Those listed on the lawsuit as defendants are Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Secretary of Health & Human Services Xavier Becerra, and Janet Woodock, Acting Commissioner of the Food & Drug Administration.
“Plaintiffs Staff Sergeant Daniel Robert, U.S. Army, and Staff Sergeant Holli Mulvihill, USMC, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated active duty, National Guard, and Reserve servicemembers, as documented survivors of COVID-19, file this action against the Department of Defense (“DoD”), seeking a declaratory judgment that the DoD cannot force them to take a COVID-19 vaccination under existing military regulations, federal regulations, federal law, and the U.S. Constitution,” the plaintiffs’ legal complaint states.
“The Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin (the “SECDEF”) has publicly notified Plaintiffs, via Memo, that he will seek authorization from the President of the United States of America (the “President”), to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine on or about September 15, 2021,” the plaintiffs note.
“Upon information and belief, the DoD is already vaccinating military members in flagrant violation of its legal obligations and the rights of servicemembers under federal law and the Constitution.”
“Army Regulation 40-562 provides documented survivors of an infection, a presumptive medical exemption from vaccination because of the natural immunity acquired as a result of having survived the infection,” the legal complaint added.
“General examples of medical exemptions include the following… Evidence of immunity based on serologic tests, documented infection, or similar circumstances,” the lawsuit cites.
“Plaintiffs also seek a declaratory judgment on the separate basis that the Emergency Use Authorization (“EUA”) DoD COVID-19 Vaccine mandate, which they have been notified is imminent, cannot be issued in violation of 10 U.S.C. §1107 [U.S. Code] and its implementing regulations, including DoD Directive 6200.2, the FDA regulation of biologics at 21 C.F.R. § 50 et seq., as well as the law regarding informed consent 50 U.S.C. 1520 (‘The Nuremburg Code’),” the lawsuit added.
Legal analysts cite prior situations that suggest that legal challenges to the COVID vaccine order may fail in court.
“Legally, vaccines under emergency use authorization require service members to grant ‘informed consent’ to receive one, which they are allowed to withhold,” U.S. News reports.
“The law states a president may override that concern in the ‘interests of national security,’ according to an analysis from Duke University’s Lawfire blog in February.”
Robert Sanders, chair of the National Security Department at the University of New Haven, pointed to the case of troop vaccination to protect them from anthrax.
A follow-on case found such orders did not violate troops’ constitutional rights because, “The requirement to place the needs of the nation above a service member’s personal welfare applies in peacetime as well as in war.”
Professor Sanders gave his assessment of legal challenges to the military vaccination order. “I believe such challenges will fail on the merits under the history of the anthrax vaccine’s military litigation,” he said.
The plaintiffs are also submitting in their lawsuit expert testimony from Dr. Peter McCullough, M.D., who is board certified in internal medicine and was the Chief Fellow at William Beaumont Hospital.
In addition to being a cardiologist, he also holds a Master’s Degree in Public Health from the University of Michigan. He is currently a Professor of Medicine at Texas Christian University and the University of North Texas Health Sciences Center School of Medicine.
“To put it concisely and bluntly, people who have naturally created antibodies resulting from contracting and recovering from the Virus should not receive any inoculation against the virus or any family or variant thereof becuase it will do more harm than good,” Dr. McCullough is testifying.
The Pentagon has yet to formally issue the vaccine mandate, but the order is expected to be issued in September.
Facebook’s growing role in the ever-expanding surveillance and “pre-crime” apparatus of the national security state demands new scrutiny of the company’s origins and its products as they relate to a former, controversial DARPA-run surveillance program that was essentially analogous to what is currently the world’s largest social network.
In mid-February, Daniel Baker, a US veteran described by the media as “anti-Trump, anti-government, anti-white supremacists, and anti-police,” was charged by a Florida grand jury with two counts of “transmitting a communication in interstate commerce containing a threat to kidnap or injure.”
The communication in question had been posted by Baker on Facebook, where he had created an event page to organize an armed counter-rally to one planned by Donald Trump supporters at the Florida capital of Tallahassee on January 6. “If you are afraid to die fighting the enemy, then stay in bed and live. Call all of your friends and Rise Up!,” Baker had written on his Facebook event page.
Baker’s case is notable as it is one of the first “precrime” arrests based entirely on social media posts—the logical conclusion of the Trump administration’s, and now Biden administration’s, push to normalize arresting individuals for online posts to prevent violent acts before they can happen. From the increasing sophistication of US intelligence/military contractor Palantir’s predictive policing programs to the formal announcement of the Justice Department’s Disruption and Early Engagement Program in 2019 to Biden’s first budget, which contains $111 million for pursuing and managing “increasing domestic terrorism caseloads,” the steady advance toward a precrime-centered “war on domestic terror” has been notable under every post-9/11 presidential administration.
This new so-called war on domestic terror has actually resulted in many of these types of posts on Facebook. And, while Facebook has long sought to portray itself as a “town square” that allows people from across the world to connect, a deeper look into its apparently military origins and continual military connections reveals that the world’s largest social network was always intended to act as a surveillance tool to identify and target domestic dissent.
Part 1 of this two-part series on Facebook and the US national-security state explores the social media network’s origins and the timing and nature of its rise as it relates to a controversial military program that was shut down the same day that Facebook launched. The program, known as LifeLog, was one of several controversial post-9/11 surveillance programs pursued by the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) that threatened to destroy privacy and civil liberties in the United States while also seeking to harvest data for producing “humanized” artificial intelligence (AI).
As this report will show, Facebook is not the only Silicon Valley giant whose origins coincide closely with this same series of DARPA initiatives and whose current activities are providing both the engine and the fuel for a hi-tech war on domestic dissent.
DARPA’s Data Mining for “National Security” and to “Humanize” AI
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, DARPA, in close collaboration with the US intelligence community (specifically the CIA), began developing a “precrime” approach to combatting terrorism known as Total Information Awareness or TIA. The purpose of TIA was to develop an “all-seeing” military-surveillance apparatus. The official logic behind TIA was that invasive surveillance of the entire US population was necessary to prevent terrorist attacks, bio-terrorism events, and even naturally occurring disease outbreaks.
The architect of TIA, and the man who led it during its relatively brief existence, was John Poindexter, best known for being Ronald Reagan’s National Security Advisor during the Iran-Contra affair and for being convicted of five felonies in relation to that scandal. A less well-known activity of Iran-Contra figures like Poindexter and Oliver North was their development of the Main Core database to be used in “continuity of government” protocols. Main Core was used to compile a list of US dissidents and “potential troublemakers” to be dealt with if the COG protocols were ever invoked. These protocols could be invoked for a variety of reasons, including widespread public opposition to a US military intervention abroad, widespread internal dissent, or a vaguely defined moment of “national crisis” or “time of panic.” Americans were not informed if their name was placed on the list, and a person could be added to the list for merely having attended a protest in the past, for failing to pay taxes, or for other, “often trivial,” behaviors deemed “unfriendly” by its architects in the Reagan administration.
In light of this, it was no exaggeration when New York Times columnist William Safire remarked that, with TIA, “Poindexter is now realizing his twenty-year dream: getting the ‘data-mining’ power to snoop on every public and private act of every American.”
The TIA program met with considerable citizen outrage after it was revealed to the public in early 2003. TIA’s critics included the American Civil Liberties Union, which claimed that the surveillance effort would “kill privacy in America” because “every aspect of our lives would be catalogued,” while several mainstream media outlets warned that TIA was “fighting terror by terrifying US citizens.” As a result of the pressure, DARPA changed the program’s name to Terrorist Information Awareness to make it sound less like a national-security panopticon and more like a program aiming specifically at terrorists in the post-9/11 era.
The TIA projects were not actually closed down, however, with most moved to the classified portfolios of the Pentagon and US intelligence community. Some became intelligence funded and guided private-sector endeavors, such as Peter Thiel’s Palantir, while others resurfaced years later under the guise of combatting the COVID-19 crisis.
Soon after TIA was initiated, a similar DARPA program was taking shape under the direction of a close friend of Poindexter’s, DARPA program manager Douglas Gage. Gage’s project, LifeLog, sought to “build a database tracking a person’s entire existence” that included an individual’s relationships and communications (phone calls, mail, etc.), their media-consumption habits, their purchases, and much more in order to build a digital record of “everything an individual says, sees, or does.” LifeLog would then take this unstructured data and organize it into “discreet episodes” or snapshots while also “mapping out relationships, memories, events and experiences.”
LifeLog, per Gage and supporters of the program, would create a permanent and searchable electronic diary of a person’s entire life, which DARPA argued could be used to create next-generation “digital assistants” and offer users a “near-perfect digital memory.” Gage insisted, even after the program was shut down, that individuals would have had “complete control of their own data-collection efforts” as they could “decide when to turn the sensors on or off and decide who will share the data.” In the years since then, analogous promises of user control have been made by the tech giants of Silicon Valley, only to be broken repeatedly for profit and to feed the government’s domestic-surveillance apparatus.
The information that LifeLog gleaned from an individual’s every interaction with technology would be combined with information obtained from a GPS transmitter that tracked and documented the person’s location, audio-visual sensors that recorded what the person saw and said, as well as biomedical monitors that gauged the person’s health. Like TIA, LifeLog was promoted by DARPA as potentially supporting “medical research and the early detection of an emerging epidemic.”
Critics in mainstream media outlets and elsewhere were quick to point out that the program would inevitably be used to build profiles on dissidents as well as suspected terrorists. Combined with TIA’s surveillance of individuals at multiple levels, LifeLog went farther by “adding physical information (like how we feel) and media data (like what we read) to this transactional data.” One critic, Lee Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, warned at the time that the programs that DARPA was pursuing, including LifeLog, “have obvious, easy paths to Homeland Security deployments.”
At the time, DARPA publicly insisted that LifeLog and TIA were not connected, despite their obvious parallels, and that LifeLog would not be used for “clandestine surveillance.” However, DARPA’s own documentation on LifeLog noted that the project “will be able . . . to infer the user’s routines, habits and relationships with other people, organizations, places and objects, and to exploit these patterns to ease its task,” which acknowledged its potential use as a tool of mass surveillance.
In addition to the ability to profile potential enemies of the state, LifeLog had another goal that was arguably more important to the national-security state and its academic partners—the “humanization” and advancement of artificial intelligence. In late 2002, just months prior to announcing the existence of LifeLog, DARPA released a strategy document detailing development of artificial intelligence by feeding it with massive floods of data from various sources.
The post-9/11 military-surveillance projects—LifeLog and TIA being only two of them—offered quantities of data that had previously been unthinkable to obtain and that could potentially hold the key to achieving the hypothesized “technological singularity.” The 2002 DARPA document even discusses DARPA’s effort to create a brain-machine interface that would feed human thoughts directly into machines to advance AI by keeping it constantly awash in freshly mined data.
One of the projects outlined by DARPA, the Cognitive Computing Initiative, sought to develop sophisticated artificial intelligence through the creation of an “enduring personalized cognitive assistant,” later termed the Perceptive Assistant that Learns, or PAL. PAL, from the very beginning was tied to LifeLog, which was originally intended to result in granting an AI “assistant” human-like decision-making and comprehension abilities by spinning masses of unstructured data into narrative format.
The would-be main researchers for the LifeLog project also reflect the program’s end goal of creating humanized AI. For instance, Howard Shrobe at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and his team at the time were set to be intimately involved in LifeLog. Shrobe had previously worked for DARPA on the “evolutionary design of complex software” before becoming associate director of the AI Lab at MIT and has devoted his lengthy career to building “cognitive-style AI.” In the years after LifeLog was cancelled, he again worked for DARPA as well as on intelligence community–related AI research projects. In addition, the AI Lab at MIT was intimately connected with the 1980s corporation and DARPA contractor called Thinking Machines, which was founded by and/or employed many of the lab’s luminaries—including Danny Hillis, Marvin Minsky, and Eric Lander—and sought to build AI supercomputers capable of human-like thought. All three of these individuals were later revealed to be close associates of and/or sponsored by the intelligence-linked pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who also generously donated to MIT as an institution and was a leading funder of and advocate for transhumanist-related scientific research.
Soon after the LifeLog program was shuttered, critics worried that, like TIA, it would continue under a different name. For example, Lee Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation told VICE at the time of LifeLog’s cancellation, “It would not surprise me to learn that the government continued to fund research that pushed this area forward without calling it LifeLog.”
Along with its critics, one of the would-be researchers working on LifeLog, MIT’s David Karger, was also certain that the DARPA project would continue in a repackaged form. He told Wired that “I am sure such research will continue to be funded under some other title . . . I can’t imagine DARPA ‘dropping out’ of a such a key research area.”
The answer to these speculations appears to lie with the company that launched the exact same day that LifeLog was shuttered by the Pentagon: Facebook.
Thiel Information Awareness
After considerable controversy and criticism, in late 2003, TIA was shut down and defunded by Congress, just months after it was launched. It was only later revealed that that TIA was never actually shut down, with its various programs having been covertly divided up among the web of military and intelligence agencies that make up the US national-security state. Some of it was privatized.
The same month that TIA was pressured to change its name after growing backlash, Peter Thiel incorporated Palantir, which was, incidentally, developing the core panopticon software that TIA had hoped to wield. Soon after Palantir’s incorporation in 2003, Richard Perle, a notorious neoconservative from the Reagan and Bush administrations and an architect of the Iraq War, called TIA’s Poindexter and said he wanted to introduce him to Thiel and his associate Alex Karp, now Palantir’s CEO. According to a report in New York magazine, Poindexter “was precisely the person” whom Thiel and Karp wanted to meet, mainly because “their new company was similar in ambition to what Poindexter had tried to create at the Pentagon,” that is, TIA. During that meeting, Thiel and Karp sought “to pick the brain of the man now widely viewed as the godfather of modern surveillance.”
Soon after Palantir’s incorporation, though the exact timing and details of the investment remain hidden from the public, the CIA’s In-Q-Tel became the company’s first backer, aside from Thiel himself, giving it an estimated $2 million. In-Q-Tel’s stake in Palantir would not be publicly reported until mid-2006.
The money was certainly useful. In addition, Alex Karp told the New York Times in October 2020, “the real value of the In-Q-Tel investment was that it gave Palantir access to the CIA analysts who were its intended clients.” A key figure in the making of In-Q-Tel investments during this period, including the investment in Palantir, was the CIA’s chief information officer, Alan Wade, who had been the intelligence community’s point man for Total Information Awareness. Wade had previously cofounded the post-9/11 Homeland Security software contractor Chiliad alongside Christine Maxwell, sister of Ghislaine Maxwell and daughter of Iran-Contra figure, intelligence operative, and media baron Robert Maxwell.
After the In-Q-Tel investment, the CIA would be Palantir’s only client until 2008. During that period, Palantir’s two top engineers—Aki Jain and Stephen Cohen—traveled to CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia, every two weeks. Jain recalls making at least two hundred trips to CIA headquarters between 2005 and 2009. During those regular visits, CIA analysts “would test [Palantir’s software] out and offer feedback, and then Cohen and Jain would fly back to California to tweak it.” As with In-Q-Tel’s decision to invest in Palantir, the CIA’s chief information officer during this time remained one of TIA’s architects. Alan Wade played a key role in many of these meetings and subsequently in the “tweaking” of Palantir’s products.
Today, Palantir’s products are used for mass surveillance, predictive policing, and other disconcerting policies of the US national-security state. A telling example is Palantir’s sizable involvement in the new Health and Human Services–run wastewater surveillance program that is quietly spreading across the United States. As noted in a previous Unlimited Hangout report, that system is the resurrection of a TIA program called Biosurveillance. It is feeding all its data into the Palantir-managed and secretive HHS Protect data platform. The decision to turn controversial DARPA-led programs into a private ventures, however, was not limited to Thiel’s Palantir.
The Rise of Facebook
The shuttering of TIA at DARPA had an impact on several related programs, which were also dismantled in the wake of public outrage over DARPA’s post-9/11 programs. One of these programs was LifeLog. As news of the program spread through the media, many of the same vocal critics who had attacked TIA went after LifeLog with similar zeal, with Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists telling Wired at the time that “LifeLog has the potential to become something like ‘TIA cubed.’” LifeLog being viewed as something that would prove even worse than the recently cancelled TIA had a clear effect on DARPA, which had just seen both TIA and another related program cancelled after considerable backlash from the public and the press.
The firestorm of criticism of LifeLog took its program manager, Doug Gage, by surprise, and Gage has continued to assert that the program’s critics “completely mischaracterized” the goals and ambitions of the project. Despite Gage’s protests and those of LifeLog’s would-be researchers and other supporters, the project was publicly nixed on February 4, 2004. DARPA never provided an explanation for its quiet move to shutter LifeLog, with a spokesperson stating only that it was related to “a change in priorities” for the agency. On DARPA director Tony Tether’s decision to kill LifeLog, Gage later told VICE, “I think he had been burnt so badly with TIA that he didn’t want to deal with any further controversy with LifeLog. The death of LifeLog was collateral damage tied to the death of TIA.”
Fortuitously for those supporting the goals and ambitions of LifeLog, a company that turned out to be its private-sector analogue was born on the same day that LifeLog’s cancellation was announced. On February 4, 2004, what is now the world’s largest social network, Facebook, launched its website and quickly rose to the top of the social media roost, leaving other social media companies of the era in the dust.
A few months into Facebook’s launch, in June 2004, Facebook cofounders Mark Zuckerberg and Dustin Moskovitz brought Sean Parker onto Facebook’s executive team. Parker, previously known for cofounding Napster, later connected Facebook with its first outside investor, Peter Thiel. As discussed, Thiel, at that time, in coordination with the CIA, was actively trying to resurrect controversial DARPA programs that had been dismantled the previous year. Notably, Sean Parker, who became Facebook’s first president, also had a history with the CIA, which recruited him at the age of sixteen soon after he had been busted by the FBI for hacking corporate and military databases. Thanks to Parker, in September 2004, Thiel formally acquired $500,000 worth of Facebook shares and was added its board. Parker maintained close ties to Facebook as well as to Thiel, with Parker being hired as a managing partner of Thiel’s Founders Fund in 2006.
Thiel and Facebook cofounder Mosokvitz became involved outside of the social network long after Facebook’s rise to prominence, with Thiel’s Founder Fund becoming a significant investor in Moskovitz’s company Asana in 2012. Thiel’s longstanding symbiotic relationship with Facebook cofounders extends to his company Palantir, as the data that Facebook users make public invariably winds up in Palantir’s databases and helps drive the surveillance engine Palantir runs for a handful of US police departments, the military, and the intelligence community. In the case of the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal, Palantir was also involved in utilizing Facebook data to benefit the 2016 Donald Trump presidential campaign.
Today, as recent arrests such as that of Daniel Baker have indicated, Facebook data is slated to help power the coming “war on domestic terror,” given that information shared on the platform is being used in “precrime” capture of US citizens, domestically. In light of this, it is worth dwelling on the point that Thiel’s exertions to resurrect the main aspects of TIA as his own private company coincided with his becoming the first outside investor in what was essentially the analogue of another DARPA program deeply intertwined with TIA.
Facebook, a Front
Because of the coincidence that Facebook launched the same day that LifeLog was shut down, there has been recent speculation that Zuckerberg began and launched the project with Moskovitz, Saverin, and others through some sort of behind-the-scenes coordination with DARPA or another organ of the national-security state. While there is no direct evidence for this precise claim, the early involvement of Parker and Thiel in the project, particularly given the timing of Thiel’s other activities, reveals that the national-security state was involved in Facebook’s rise. It is debatable whether Facebook was intended from its inception to be a LifeLog analogue or if it happened to be the social media project that fit the bill after its launch. The latter seems more likely, especially considering that Thiel also invested in another early social media platform, Friendster.
An important point linking Facebook and LifeLog is the subsequent identification of Facebook with LifeLog by the latter’s DARPA architect himself. In 2015, Gage told VICE that “Facebook is the real face of pseudo-LifeLog at this point.” He tellingly added, “We have ended up providing the same kind of detailed personal information to advertisers and data brokers and without arousing the kind of opposition that LifeLog provoked.”
Users of Facebook and other large social media platforms have so far been content to allow these platforms to sell their private data so long as they publicly operate as private enterprises. Backlash only really emerged when such activities were publicly tied to the US government, and especially the US military, even though Facebook and other tech giants routinely share their users’ data with the national-security state. In practice, there is little difference between the public and private entities.
Edward Snowden, the NSA whistleblower, notably warned in 2019 that Facebook is just as untrustworthy as US intelligence, stating that “Facebook’s internal purpose, whether they state it publicly or not, is to compile perfect records of private lives to the maximum extent of their capability, and then exploit that for their own corporate enrichment. And damn the consequences.”
Snowden also stated in the same interview that “the more Google knows about you, the more Facebook knows about you, the more they are able . . . to create permanent records of private lives, the more influence and power they have over us.” This underscores how both Facebook and intelligence-linked Google have accomplished much of what LifeLog had aimed to do, but on a much larger scale than what DARPA had originally envisioned.
The reality is that most of the large Silicon Valley companies of today have been closely linked to the US national-security state establishment since their inception. Notable examples aside from Facebook and Palantir include Google and Oracle. Today these companies are more openly collaborating with the military-intelligence agencies that guided their development and/or provided early funding, as they are used to provide the data needed to fuel the newly announced war on domestic terror and its accompanying algorithms.
It is hardly a coincidence that someone like Peter Thiel, who built Palantir with the CIA and helped ensure Facebook’s rise, is also heavily involved in Big Data AI-driven “predictive policing” approaches to surveillance and law enforcement, both through Palantir and through his other investments. TIA, LifeLog, and related government and private programs and institutions launched after 9/11, were always intended to be used against the American public in a war against dissent. This was noted by their critics in 2003-4 and by those who have examined the origins of the “homeland security” pivot in the US and its connection to past CIA “counterterror” programs in Vietnam and Latin America.
Ultimately, the illusion of Facebook and related companies as being independent of the US national-security state has prevented a recognition of the reality of social media platforms and their long-intended, yet covert uses, which we are beginning to see move into the open following the events of January 6. Now, with billions of people conditioned to use Facebook and social media as part of their daily lives, the question becomes: If that illusion were to be irrevocably shattered today, would it make a difference to Facebook’s users? Or has the populace become so conditioned to surrendering their private data in exchange for dopamine-fueled social-validation loops that it no longer matters who ends up holding that data?