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.
Encrypted text messages between an Army colonel and a former Special Forces soldier working on a private effort to extricate stranded Americans from Afghanistan reveal that the US evacuation was anything but the ‘extraordinary success’ President Biden declared on Tuesday.
“We are f#cking abandoning American citizens,” said an Army colonel assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division in an encrypted Sunday text message to Michael Yon, who revealed the message to Just the News.
Yon told Just the News that a group of Americans were abandoned at the Kabul airport, pleading for help as military officials told them they were finished with evacuations.
“We had them out there waving their passport screaming, ‘I’m American,’” Yon said Tuesday while appearing on the John Solomon Reports podcast. – Just The News
“People were turned away from the gate by our own Army,” said Yon, the former Special Forces soldier and war correspondent.
Yon’s account, which he shared with JTN’s John Solomon, is backed by three dozen text and email exchanges with frontline Army officials in Afghanistan.
The stranded Americans eventually scattered to safe houses to avoid capture by the Taliban, after which Yon wrote a ‘stinging email’ to an Army major whose team abandoned the rescue effort.
“You guys left American citizens at the gate of the Kabul airport,” wrote Yon on Tuesday. “Three empty jets paid for by volunteers were waiting for them. You and I talked on the phone. I told you where they were. Gave you their passport images. And my email and phone number. And you left them behind.”
“Great job saving yourselves. Probably get a lot of medals,” he added.
While the helper group worked frantically to get the Americans through the gate, members texted one another to say they had seen National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on CNN saying that neither he nor U.S. Central Command chief Gen. Kenneth McKenzie were told that Americans were abandoned.
“Hey did they end up just taking off?” one correspondent texted the helper group. “Because the National Security Advisor just told Tapper that neither he nor McKenzie had heard anything about Americans being left at the gates.”
The correspondent noted that the private group heard differently from a lieutenant colonel (O-5): “Given we had comms with an O-5 on the ground, that means CENTCOM C3 is s–t, or someone is lying.”
According to the private rescue effort, the US Army was told by the State Department not to rescue the Americans.
“We get them to the gate, and the U.S. Army completely fails this saying, ‘Oh, we can’t do it, because the Department of the State tells us we can’t do it,” Yon told Just the News.
Remember all those articles warning about about FEMA Camps, and how everyone said that you were a conspiracy nut job for believing that?
Well, surprise, surprise, turns out you may have been right on the money all along, why do I say that?
Because right now the New York State Assembly is proposing Bill A416 that would remand people deemed to be “disease carriers”, and put them away in a facility chosen by the Democrat leadership of New York.
People like Governor Andrew Cuomo who’s executive order killed over 11,000 elderly at the start of the COVID crisis.
The Gateway Pundit reports “Bill A416 relates to “the removal of cases, contacts and carriers of communicable diseases that are potentially dangerous to the public health.”
This is not an over-estimation of just how scary and just how dangerous this situation is.
Is COVID-19 being used to create an American gulag in the name of fighting a pandemic? It sure look like it.
Remember all those people in Berlin in 1933, all those Jews who watched what was coming and decided to ‘ride it out’? Think you will fare any better than they did?
When we talk about NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo, you will remember that he is the same person who cheered and cried for joy when New York passed their new abortion bill in 2019 that allows abortions at any stage of the third trimester, and prevents protections for babies surviving the abortion procedure.
Cuomo is the same person who in 2020 issued an executive order sending COVID-19 patients into nursing homes where they infected and killed over 11,000 elderly.
[These people need to be tried for crimes against humanity and even genocide!]
Now they want to pass Bill A416 that authorizes the arrest and detention of people with ‘communicable diseases’ and send them to a ‘designated facility’ until the state decides they can go?
Let me say this as strongly as I can, if YOU live in New York….RUN!!….GET OUT NOW!!
Here below is the entire contents of New York State Assembly Bill A416, read it for yourself and decide if what we are telling you is true or not.
But read the parts I have bolded and underlined, read how it takes a court order to have you released after you have been ‘detained at a facility’ of their choosing.
Read how it says you will be kept against your will until they have decided it is ‘safe’ to release you. READ IT!
AN ACT to amend the public health law, in relation to the removal of cases, contacts and carriers of communicable diseases who are poten- tially dangerous to the public health
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The public health law is amended by adding a new section 2120-a to read as follows: § 2120-A. REMOVAL AND DETENTION OF CASES, CONTACTS AND CARRIERS WHO ARE OR MAY BE A DANGER TO PUBLIC HEALTH; OTHER ORDERS. 1. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE UTILIZED IN THE EVENT THAT THE GOVERNOR DECLARES A STATE OF HEALTH EMERGENCY DUE TO AN EPIDEMIC OF ANY COMMUNI- CABLE DISEASE. 2. UPON DETERMINING BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT THE HEALTH OF OTHERS IS OR MAY BE ENDANGERED BY A CASE, CONTACT OR CARRIER, OR SUSPECTED CASE, CONTACT OR CARRIER OF A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE THAT, IN THE OPINION OF THE GOVERNOR, AFTER CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMISSIONER, MAY POSE AN IMMINENT AND SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH RESULTING IN SEVERE MORBIDITY OR HIGH MORTALITY, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELE- GEE, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE COMMISSIONER OR THE HEADS OF LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS, MAY ORDER THE REMOVAL AND/OR DETENTION OF SUCH A PERSON OR OF A GROUP OF SUCH PERSONS BY ISSUING A SINGLE ORDER, IDEN- TIFYING SUCH PERSONS EITHER BY NAME OR BY A REASONABLY SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE INDIVIDUALS OR GROUP BEING DETAINED.SUCH PERSON OR GROUP OF PERSONS SHALL BE DETAINED IN A MEDICAL FACILITY OR OTHER APPRO- PRIATE FACILITY OR PREMISES DESIGNATED BY THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE AND COMPLYING WITH SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION. 3. A PERSON OR GROUP REMOVED OR DETAINED BY ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE
EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted. LBD04443-01-1
A. 416 2
DETAINED FOR SUCH PERIOD AND IN SUCH MANNER AS THE DEPARTMENT MAY DIRECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION. 4. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY INCONSISTENT PROVISION OF THIS SECTION: (A) A CONFIRMED CASE OR A CARRIER WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVI- SION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT CONTINUE TO BE DETAINED AFTER THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES THAT SUCH PERSON IS NO LONGER CONTAGIOUS. (B) A SUSPECTED CASE OR SUSPECTED CARRIER WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT CONTINUE TO BE DETAINED AFTER THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES, WITH THE EXERCISE OF DUE DILIGENCE, THAT SUCH PERSON IS NOT INFECTED WITH OR HAS NOT BEEN EXPOSED TO SUCH A DISEASE, OR IF INFECTED WITH OR EXPOSED TO SUCH A DISEASE, NO LONGER IS OR WILL BECOME CONTAGIOUS. (C) A PERSON WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION AS A CONTACT OF A CONFIRMED CASE OR A CARRIER SHALL NOT CONTINUE TO BE DETAINED AFTER THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES THAT THE PERSON IS NOT INFECTED WITH THE DISEASE OR THAT SUCH CONTACT NO LONGER PRESENTS A POTENTIAL DANGER TO THE HEALTH OF OTHERS. (D) A PERSON WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION AS A CONTACT OF A SUSPECTED CASE SHALL NOT CONTINUE TO BE DETAINED: (I) AFTER THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES, WITH THE EXERCISE OF DUE DILI- GENCE, THAT THE SUSPECTED CASE WAS NOT INFECTED WITH SUCH A DISEASE, OR WAS NOT CONTAGIOUS AT THE TIME THE CONTACT WAS EXPOSED TO SUCH INDIVID- UAL; OR (II) AFTER THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES THAT THE CONTACT NO LONGER PRESENTS A POTENTIAL DANGER TO THE HEALTH OF OTHERS. 5. A PERSON WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL, AS IS APPROPRIATE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES: (A) HAVE HIS OR HER MEDICAL CONDITION AND NEEDS ASSESSED AND ADDRESSED ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND (B) BE DETAINED IN A MANNER THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH RECOGNIZED ISOLATION AND INFECTION CONTROL PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE LIKELIHOOD OF TRANSMISSION OF INFECTION TO SUCH PERSON AND TO OTHERS. 6. WHEN A PERSON OR GROUP IS ORDERED TO BE DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDI- VISION TWO OF THIS SECTION FOR A PERIOD NOT EXCEEDING THREE BUSINESS DAYS, SUCH PERSON OR MEMBER OF SUCH GROUP SHALL, UPON REQUEST, BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. IF A PERSON OR GROUP DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION NEEDS TO BE DETAINED BEYOND THREE BUSINESS DAYS, THEY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH AN ADDITIONAL COMMIS- SIONER'S ORDER PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS TWO AND EIGHT OF THIS SECTION. 7. WHEN A PERSON OR GROUP IS ORDERED TO BE DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDI- VISION TWO OF THIS SECTION FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING THREE BUSINESS DAYS, AND SUCH PERSON OR MEMBER OF SUCH GROUP REQUESTS RELEASE, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE SHALL MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR A COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING SUCH DETENTION WITHIN THREE BUSINESS DAYS AFTER SUCH REQUEST BY THE END OF THE FIRST BUSINESS DAY FOLLOWING SUCH SATURDAY, SUNDAY, OR LEGAL HOLIDAY, WHICH APPLICATION SHALL INCLUDE A REQUEST FOR AN EXPE- DITED HEARING. AFTER ANY SUCH REQUEST FOR RELEASE, DETENTION SHALL NOT CONTINUE FOR MORE THAN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS IN THE ABSENCE OF A COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING DETENTION. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING PROVISIONS, IN NO EVENT SHALL ANY PERSON BE DETAINED FOR MORE THAN SIXTY DAYS WITH- OUT A COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING SUCH DETENTION. THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE SHALL SEEK FURTHER COURT REVIEW OF SUCH DETENTION WITHIN NINETY DAYS FOLLOWING THE INITIAL COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING DETENTION AND THERE- AFTER WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF EACH SUBSEQUENT COURT REVIEW. IN ANY COURT PROCEEDING TO ENFORCE AN ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE FOR
A. 416 3
THE REMOVAL OR DETENTION OF A PERSON OR GROUP ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS SUBDIVISION OR FOR REVIEW OF THE CONTINUED DETENTION OF A PERSON OR GROUP, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE SHALL PROVE THE PARTICULARIZED CIRCUMSTANCES CONSTITUTING THE NECESSITY FOR SUCH DETENTION BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE. 8. (A) A COPY OF ANY DETENTION ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE GIVEN TO EACH DETAINED INDIVIDUAL; HOWEVER, IF THE ORDER APPLIES TO A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS AND IT IS IMPRACTICAL TO PROVIDE INDIVIDUAL COPIES, IT MAY BE POSTED IN A CONSPICUOUS PLACE IN THE DETENTION PREMISES. ANY DETENTION ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL SET FORTH: (I) THE PURPOSE OF THE DETENTION AND THE LEGAL AUTHORITY UNDER WHICH THE ORDER IS ISSUED, INCLUDING THE PARTICULAR SECTIONS OF THIS ARTICLE OR OTHER LAW OR REGULATION; (II) A DESCRIPTION OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND/OR BEHAVIOR OF THE DETAINED PERSON OR GROUP CONSTITUTING THE BASIS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE ORDER; (III) THE LESS RESTRICTIVE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE ATTEMPTED AND WERE UNSUCCESSFUL AND/OR THE LESS RESTRICTIVE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE CONSID- ERED AND REJECTED, AND THE REASONS SUCH ALTERNATIVES WERE REJECTED; (IV) A NOTICE ADVISING THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO REQUEST RELEASE FROM DETENTION, AND INCLUDING INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW SUCH REQUEST SHALL BE MADE; (V) A NOTICE ADVISING THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED BY LEGAL COUNSEL AND THAT UPON REQUEST OF SUCH PERSON OR GROUP ACCESS TO COUNSEL WILL BE FACILITATED TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES; AND (VI) A NOTICE ADVISING THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THEY MAY SUPPLY THE ADDRESSES AND/OR TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF FRIENDS AND/OR RELATIVES TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF THE PERSON'S DETENTION, AND THAT THE DEPARTMENT SHALL, AT THE DETAINED PERSON'S REQUEST AND TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE, PROVIDE NOTICE TO A REASONABLE NUMBER OF SUCH PEOPLE THAT THE PERSON IS BEING DETAINED. (B) IN ADDITION, AN ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS TWO AND SEVEN OF THIS SECTION, REQUIRING THE DETENTION OF A PERSON OR GROUP FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING THREE BUSINESS DAYS, SHALL: (I) ADVISE THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THE DETENTION SHALL NOT CONTINUE FOR MORE THAN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS AFTER A REQUEST FOR RELEASE HAS BEEN MADE IN THE ABSENCE OF A COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING SUCH DETENTION; (II) ADVISE THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT, WHETHER OR NOT THEY REQUEST RELEASE FROM DETENTION, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE MUST OBTAIN A COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING DETENTION WITHIN SIXTY DAYS FOLLOWING THE COMMENCEMENT OF DETENTION AND THEREAFTER MUST FURTHER SEEK COURT REVIEW OF THE DETENTION WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF SUCH COURT ORDER AND WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF EACH SUBSEQUENT COURT REVIEW; AND (III) ADVISE THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REQUEST THAT LEGAL COUNSEL BE PROVIDED, THAT UPON SUCH REQUEST COUNSEL SHALL BE PROVIDED IF AND TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND THAT IF COUNSEL IS SO PROVIDED, THAT SUCH COUNSEL WILL BE NOTIFIED THAT THE PERSON OR GROUP HAS REQUESTED LEGAL REPRESEN- TATION. 9. A PERSON WHO IS DETAINED IN A MEDICAL FACILITY, OR OTHER APPROPRI- ATE FACILITY OR PREMISES, SHALL NOT CONDUCT HIMSELF OR HERSELF IN A
A. 416 4
DISORDERLY MANNER, AND SHALL NOT LEAVE OR ATTEMPT TO LEAVE SUCH FACILITY OR PREMISES UNTIL HE OR SHE IS DISCHARGED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION. 10. WHERE NECESSARY AND FEASIBLE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND PERSONS SKILLED IN COMMUNICATING WITH VISION AND HEAR- ING IMPAIRED INDIVIDUALS SHALL BE PROVIDED. 11. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE ISSUANCE OF ORDERS PURSUANT TO § 11.21 OF THE NEW YORK CITY HEALTH CODE. 12. IN ADDITION TO THE REMOVAL OR DETENTION ORDERS REFERRED TO IN SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION, AND WITHOUT AFFECTING OR LIMITING ANY OTHER AUTHORITY THAT THE COMMISSIONER MAY OTHERWISE HAVE, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE MAY, IN HIS OR HER DISCRETION, ISSUE AND SEEK ENFORCEMENT OF ANY OTHER ORDERS THAT HE OR SHE DETERMINES ARE NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO PREVENT DISSEMINATION OR TRANSMISSION OF CONTAGIOUS DISEASES OR OTHER ILLNESSES THAT MAY POSE A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ORDERS REQUIRING ANY PERSON OR PERSONS WHO ARE NOT IN THE CUSTODY OF THE DEPARTMENT TO BE EXCLUDED; TO REMAIN ISOLATED OR QUARANTINED AT HOME OR AT A PREMISES OF SUCH PERSON'S CHOICE THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT AND UNDER SUCH CONDITIONS AND FOR SUCH PERIOD AS WILL PREVENT TRANSMISSION OF THE CONTAGIOUS DISEASE OR OTHER ILLNESS; TO REQUIRE THE TESTING OR MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PERSONS WHO MAY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO OR INFECTED BY A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE OR WHO MAY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO OR CONTAMINATED WITH DANGEROUS AMOUNTS OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS OR TOXIC CHEMICALS; TO REQUIRE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO OR INFECTED BY A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE TO COMPLETE AN APPROPRIATE, PRESCRIBED COURSE OF TREATMENT, PREVENTIVE MEDICATION OR VACCINATION, INCLUDING DIRECTLY OBSERVED THERAPY TO TREAT THE DISEASE AND FOLLOW INFECTION CONTROL PROVISIONS FOR THE DISEASE; OR TO REQUIRE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN CONTAMINATED WITH DANGEROUS AMOUNTS OF RADIO- ACTIVE MATERIALS OR TOXIC CHEMICALS SUCH THAT SAID INDIVIDUAL MAY PRES- ENT A DANGER TO OTHERS, TO UNDERGO DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE DEPARTMENT. SUCH PERSON OR PERSONS SHALL, UPON REQUEST, BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD, BUT THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISIONS TWO THROUGH ELEVEN OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT OTHERWISE APPLY. 13. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO PERMIT OR REQUIRE THE FORCIBLE ADMINISTRATION OF ANY MEDICATION WITHOUT A PRIOR COURT ORDER. § 2. This act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall have become a law. Effective immediately the addition, amendment and/or repeal of any rule or regulation necessary for the implementation of this act on its effective date are authorized to be made and completed on or before such date. READ THIS ON NY SENATE.GOV
New York Senate Bill 416 authorizes quarantine of individuals or groups who “potentially pose a threat to public health,” including forced testing and vaccinations. This must stop now!
Congratulations, Americans! The media that declares the winners of your (s)elections have reported that the voting machines that decide the winner of your (s)elections have (s)elected Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. to become the 46th President of the good ol’ US of A in January!
And in a longstanding tradition befitting of the nation that stands as the Beacon of Democracy and Leader of the Free World™, we know that the loyal slaves subjects citizens of the United States will dust themselves off, shake hands, compliment each other on a good contest and go back to business as usual, right?
No, of course not. Things are not going back to business as usual. They aren’t meant to. That’s the point.
No, today’s pronouncement (which, lest we forget, will be challenged) is not the end of anything. It’s just the beginning.
And it does not present a path out of chaos. On the contrary. This path leads straight into the heart of chaos.
None of this is surprising. In fact, things are going exactly according to plan.
Confused? Don’t be. I have a data dump of info for you.
Let’s start with Rosa Brooks and Nils Gilman.
Brooks is a Georgetown law professor who has publicly advocated a military coup as one method of “getting rid of” Trump and Gilman is an historian at the globalist Berggruen Institute who once called for the execution of a lecturer and research fellow at Hillsdale College.
Back in 2019, these completely neutral political observers took it upon themselves to organize something called the Transition Integrity Project (TIP), bringing together a “bipartisan” group of politicos to simulate four different scenarios “aimed at identifying potential risks to the integrity of the 2020 election and transition process.”
And who, exactly, did Brooks and Gilman bring on board for this totally bipartisan endeavour?
Oh, just concerned and distinterested political observers like John “Pizzagate” Podesta, Donna “DNC Rigger” Brazile, William “Neocon” Kristol and David “Axis of Evil” Frum.
See? It was a totally bipartisan effort involving deep state operatives from both sides of the phoney left/right political spectrum!
The four scenarios that the group simulated were as follows:
Scenario A: Democratic party candidate Joe Biden wins both the popular vote and the Electoral College by a healthy margin;
Scenario B: Biden wins both the popular vote and the Electoral College by a narrow margin;
Scenario C: President Trump wins the Electoral College vote by a narrow margin, but loses the popular vote by a healthy margin;
Scenario D: The winner of the election was not known as of the morning after the election and the outcome of the race was too close to predict with certainty.
The report that they produced this past August (and which the controlled corporate media dutifully fawned all over) lays out in black and white the exact (organized) chaos that we have seen play out over the last few days, noting that:
The concept of “election night,” is no longer accurate and indeed is dangerous.
A determined campaign has opportunity to contest the election into January 2021.
The administrative transition process itself may be highly disrupted.
The first part of their prediction has already started to unfold: “We anticipate lawsuits, divergent media narratives, attempts to stop the counting of ballots, and protests drawing people from both sides.
President Trump, the incumbent, will very likely use the executive branch to aid his campaign strategy, including through the Department of Justice.”
The rest of their prediction seems equally plausible given how things stand at the moment:
“We assess that there is a chance the president will attempt to convince legislatures and/or governors to take actions – including illegal actions – to defy the popular vote.
“Federal laws provide little guidance for how Congress should resolve irregularities when they convene in a Joint Session on January 6, 2021. Of particular concern is how the military would respond in the context of uncertain election results.”
Oh, and the whole report ends by suggesting:
that there needs to be a “truth and reconciliation commission” set up to deal with ex-Trump collaborationists;
and that there needs to be a campaign to root out the “white supremacist and extremist networks that enabled Trump’s rise to power.”
Of course, this TIP report isn’t an amazingly accurate “prediction.”
It is a predictive program, a cover for the exact operation that we see playing out right now.
In their “scenario” the TIP LARPers “imagined” the following:
The Trump Campaign engaged in a large and coordinated disinformation campaign primarily focused on the legitimacy of the mail-in ballots.
This campaign used the media to amplify “stolen election” and “voter fraud” narratives, and launched [a] noisy DoJ investigation into voter fraud.
Keep in mind that this report was released three months ago, before this very “stolen election” scenario became the news headlines that we are reading in today’s paper.
Now, if one were a conspiracy theorist, one might posit that a criminal group who was going to use forged mail-in ballots and voting machine software “glitches” to steal an election would want to seed the idea ahead of time that any talk of election stealing is a transparent lie.
That way, when they commit their crime, the victim would either have to accept the stolen election or play into their narrative by doing exactly what they predicted he would do.
But if there is one moment when the TIP coup planners reveal their hand, it is where they suggest that rather than “healing the pain” and bringing together a divided nation, the Democrats should instead double down and make sure that they utterly crush any Republican opposition to their coming rule.
According to the report, “GOP activists (possibly encouraged by Trump himself and by far-right media) may seek to create ongoing street-level chaos and conflict,” which, according to these “experts” should be countered by the Democrats escalating the tension by “publicly supporting the peaceful protest movement that has emerged since late May, rather than continuing to seek conciliation and compromise with the GOP.”
You see, the plan was never to cool things off or calm people down after this scripted (s)election drama plays out. Not even close. In reality, the chaos is the plan.
This is only confusing if you think that the deep state consists only of establishment Democrats who care about the continued functioning of the status quo functioning of USA Inc.
But we conspiracy realists know that is not the case.
The real deep staters — the ones with Rs after their name and the ones with Ds after their name and the ones who aren’t even American and the ones who participated in the assassination of JFK and the ones who coordinated the 9/11 plot and the ones who have worked to erect the biosecurity state that is locking the world down even as we speak — are not interested in the long-term survival of Pax Americana.
In fact, it’s the exact opposite. The plan has always been for a Great Reset to bring about a New World Order of a one-world financial system and an international governing body to implement the perfect technocratic state.
And, as I have stressed time and time again, that cannot happen until the current paradigm — the Pax Americana built on the petrodollar and enforced by NATO — is destroyed.
As I wrote during the last chaotic change of puppets in Washington:
Of course, we have to understand that we have been brought to this point for a reason. In order to get their new order, the powers-that-shouldn’t-be had to generate this current chaos.
The unprecedented levels of social, political and economic tension we are experiencing right now are part of a game plan. To reset the chess pieces, the board has to be knocked over first.
These words are even more apt today than they were on the day that I first wrote them.
And it is important for the Americans in the crowd to know that the lockdowns and pandemic hysteria that have engulfed the entire world in this year of chaos was not all about the American political (s)election.
The Trump/Biden circus is just one chapter in the Book of 2020 that is being written by the Gateses and the Schwabs and the technocrats who are seeking to force through fundamental changes in the governing order of the world.
If you want a sense of where the Great Resetters are planning to take America and the globe, just turn to their handy-dandy Great Reset bible where they discuss these issues at great length:
On an individual basis, for many, life as they’ve always known it is unravelling at alarming speed. But deep, existential crises also favour introspection and can harbour the potential for transformation.
The fault lines of the world – most notably social divides, lack of fairness, absence of cooperation, failure of global governance and leadership – now lie exposed as never before, and people feel the time for reinvention has come. A new world will emerge, the contours of which are for us to both imagine and to draw.
And, just in case you didn’t get the point:
Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal. The short response is: never.
Nothing will ever return to the “broken” sense of normalcy that prevailed prior to the crisis because the coronavirus pandemic marks a fundamental inflection point in our global trajectory.
Some analysts call it a major bifurcation, others refer to a deep crisis of “biblical” proportions, but the essence remains the same: the world as we knew it in the early months of 2020 is no more, dissolved in the context of the pandemic. Radical changes of such consequence are coming that some pundits have referred to a “before coronavirus” (BC) and “after coronavirus” (AC) era.
By 2025, people seemed to be growing weary of so much top-down control and letting leaders and authorities make choices for them. Wherever national interests clashed with individual interests, there was conflict.
Sporadic pushback became increasingly organized and coordinated, as disaffected youth and people who had seen their status and opportunities slip away — largely in developing countries — incited civil unrest.
In 2026, protestors in Nigeria brought down the government, fed up with the entrenched cronyism and corruption.
Even those who liked the greater stability and predictability of this world began to grow uncomfortable and constrained by so many tight rules and by the strictness of national boundaries.
The feeling lingered that sooner or later, something would inevitably upset the neat order that the world’s governments had worked so hard to establish.
No, this is not about a US presidential (s)election.
This is about the Titanic forces that are leading us through a dialectical process of conflict and unrest into a world of top-down control the likes of which has never been seen before in human history. And we are only at the beginning of this change.
In short, prepare for more chaos, not less, as the deep state cheerleaders pop the corks on their champagne bottles and prematurely rejoice a return to “normality.” I think we’re all about to find out we’re not in Kansas anymore.
High School history fables taught us that the Spanish-American War of 1898 was a meaningless war instigated by the Yellow Journalist William Randolph Hearst. Here’s a typical history-book sample of the retarded drivel that is still being spoon-fed to captive audiences of dumbed-down students who are even awake to hear it:
“It is arguable that the Spanish-American War was perhaps the most pointless war in the history of the United States. Although it was not known at the time, the war was not truly fought for territory, for markets, for principle, or even for honor. Rather, it began because William Randolph Hearst, editor of the popular New York Journal sought sensational material to print.”
Certainly, Hearst and his rival at the New York World, Joseph Pulitzer, helped to poison the public mind towards Spain. But this idiotic and incomplete analysis ignores the “big picture” of the Globalist hand which moves the chess pieces. The Spanish-American War was neither “pointless”, nor insignificant. To the contrary, without the precedent-setting features, tactical acquisitions, and adverse side-effects of this unjust war, and the prolonged US-Philippines War which grew out of it, World War I, the Bolshevik Revolution, World War II and all the other horror stories of the past 100 + years would not have been possible.
Intrigued? Keep reading.
1- As outrageous and essential as their propaganda was, the belief that a newspaper circulation rivalry between Hearst and Pulitzer caused the war, as the first cartoon above suggests, is just as moronic. // 2- The shocking claim of Spaniards strip-searching American women was false.
As the turn of the century approached, America was strong, independent, and what the Globalists would call “isolationist” – a stupid propaganda term used to mock the desire to maintain peaceful commerce and neutral relations with foreign countries. The very thought of picking a fight overseas was as foreign to the American psyche as homosexual “marriage” or government housing.
The Globo-Zionist crime gang was not nearly as entrenched among the American elite as it is today, but the pernicious influence of the Globalists was indeed growing fast. Money Masters such as Jacob Schiff, John D Rockefeller, Rothschild front-man JP Morgan and others were already on board with the Globalist movement; as were media moguls like Adolph Ochs(NY Times), and the aforementioned Hearst and Pulitzer. America’s potential as a global ‘hit-man’ for the N.W.O. was not lost upon these One Worlders, particularly in regard to establishing a menacing naval presence from which the emerging U.S. bully could influence the affairs of Asia. Thus was born the idea for the first “Asian pivot” – the theft of the Spanish colonies of Guam and the Philippines.
The “problem” of overcoming American “isolationism” posed a challenge for the Globalists. Americans wanted as much to do with the affairs of the Asia Pacific as they did those of Mars or Venus. Besides, Spain wasn’t about to give away territories which it had benevolently ruled for more than three centuries. Concurrent with the desire to take Guam and the Philippines was a movement to annex Hawaii and make it an American territory. But in 1897, the annexation movement stalled due to the strong opposition of native Hawaiians and the inability of supporters to win a 2/3 majority in the U.S. Senate. What’s a Globalist to do?
1- Location. Location. Location. The stepping-stones of Hawaii, Spanish Guam & Spanish Philippines would enable the U.S. to project a presence in Japan’s backyard, with proximity to China and far eastern Tsarist Russia as well. // 2- Rothschild, Rockefeller and Jacob Schiff (above) had long range plans to control Asia.
It just so happened that the Spanish colony of Cuba was located only 90 miles off the coast of Florida. What if, using the pretext of “Spanish tyranny” over Cuba, the U.S. could pick a fight with “evil” Spain in America’s own backyard? The public might not get too excited about “oppressed” Spanish subjects 5,000 miles away, but certainly, the good and decent American people would never allow the poor freedom-seekers of nearby Cuba to be so oppressed by a European monarchy and get a nice treasure out of it as well, “Puerto Rico”.
And what if, using the cover of this oh-so-noble war for “Cuban liberation,” the U.S. could then chase the Spaniards out of the Asian Pacific and establish its own bases? Can you see the scam now? Toward these ends, a baseless propaganda campaign was suddenly unleashed against Spain, with Hearst and Pulitzer taking the lead in the press while certain U.S. Senators and Congressmen worked from inside DC.
Although the intensive propaganda campaign of 1897 and early 1898 had succeeded in poisoning the public perception of Spain, the reluctance to go to war of many in Congress, as well as that of the conservative President, William McKinley, still had to be overcome. Can you smell the false-flag event coming?
President McKinley was not impressed by the anti-Spanish propaganda. Some further “persuading” had to be done.
In 1897, The Globalist “Powers That Be” had arranged for the ambitious control-freak, New York City Police Commissioner Theodore Roosevelt, to be appointed as Assistant Secretary of the Navy. In February of 1898, TR, on his own initiative, ordered the USS Maine to provocatively sail into Cuba’s Havana Harbor (controlled by Spain). In a remarkable “coincidence”, the Maine “spontaneously” and oh-so-conveniently blew up, killing 251 American sailors. TR and the Yellow Press wasted no time in blaming Spain for the “mine attack.”
Assistant Naval Secretary Roosevelt murdered 251 sailors and then blamed Spain for it.
Spain strongly denied the false charges and invited an investigation into the matter. President McKinley continued to resist the demands and threats of the Congressional warmongers and the Yellow Press. But by April, the pressure for war was just too much for McKinley to resist. On April 25, 1898, America declared war upon Spain — a war whose rallying cry was: “Remember the Maine and to hell with Spain.”
Neither the Pope, nor the innocent Spaniards, nor the U.S. President were able to beat back the insane war mania and press propaganda which followed the destruction in the Maine.
Immediately after the war declaration, “Assistant” Secretary Roosevelt again took matters into his own hands by issuing an order for America’s Asiatic Squadron – stationed in British Hong Kong in order to “protect commerce” – to destroy the Spanish fleet based in the Philippines. Try not to laugh, dear reader; but Americans on the west coast were told that this outrageous act of aggression was a necessary defensive strike aimed at preventing a Spanish attack on California! The Battle of Manila Bay took place on May 1. It was a rout. Commodore Dewey not only destroyed the Spanish fleet, but also captured the harbor of Manila – effectively a U.S. body of water ever since.
On June 20, a U.S. fleet commanded by Captain Henry Glass, captured the island of Guam – a U.S. territory ever since. And finally, in July, the House and Senate worked their way around the 2/3 Senate requirement for annexing Hawaii by voting on a joint resolution instead. The “emergency” of the war is what finally enabled the establishment of a huge base in Hawaii (Pearl Harbor).
Philippines, Guam, Hawaii; yes, the war with Spain turned out to be very good for the future conquerors of Asia. Hey Teddy! Wasn’t this holy war supposed to be about “liberating” Cuba?
The war for “Cuba’s freedom” was really all about controlling Asia.
The totally lopsided war ended in August, after just 3 and 1/2 months. But not before the war’s most important instigator, Teddy Roosevelt, stepped down from his position and volunteered to “fight.” The grand-standing clown served just long enough to build his resume as a “war hero.” His mythical achievements as the fearless, horse-mounted leader of the “The Rough Riders” and “hero of San Juan Hill” would be hyped by the very same Yellow Press which propagandized for the phony war in the first place. In reality, the Battle of San Juan Hill was only a minor skirmish, fought on foot, in which Americans outnumbered Spaniards 15-1!
Just three months after the war had ended, Roosevelt was elected Governor of New York State. He had campaigned vigorously on his puffed-up war record, winning the election by just 1%. Then, as now, dumb Americans loved their “war heroes.”
The following year, 1899, McKinley’s Vice President, the equally conservative and pro-“hard money” Garret Hobart, conveniently died of a “heart ailment” (or poison?) at age 55. The same warmonger / “progressive” faction that had imposed the Spanish-American War upon McKinley, would now impose Roosevelt upon the reluctant President McKinley. In 1900, after an astonishingly rapid climb up the political ladder, the fiendishly ambitious TR was just “a heartbeat away” from the Presidency.
1- Idiotic false propaganda turned TR into an instant “war hero” // 2- Vice President Garret Hobart (r) died suddenly. Was he poisoned to make way for TR? // 3- With TR just “a heart beat away” from power, the Globalists need only to kill the conservative McKinley.
In September of 1901, President McKinley was assassinated by Leon Czolgosz, a Red terrorist-anarchist and devotee of the New York Anarchist-Communist Jew, Emma Goldman. How convenient! Pinko-Progressive Teddy Roosevelt became President and immediately began accelerating the process of converting America towards socialism at home and imperialism (New World Order) abroad.
TR waged a brutal war against the ex-Spanish colony of the Philippines. During TR’s war of aggression, 5,000 Americans and 20,000 Filipinos were killed, with as many as 100,000 more natives dying of disease. This was the Philippine independence movement’s reward for rising up against Spain, based on America’s empty promises. The formerly Spanish-speaking natives were then converted to the English language, which they speak to this day.
1- A Red’s bullet put a “Progressive” into the White House. // 2- Under TR’s reign of terror, Philippine rebels were tortured. // 3- Cartoon mocks TR and the Banksters as being fans of Karl Marx.
In 1903, irritated by Colombia’s request for better terms for what was to become the Panama Canal, TR ordered a fake revolution in Colombia. The result was the newly formed puppet state of Panama. Colombia got screwed out of lease payments!
In 1905, TR, with Asian-Pacific naval bases now in hand, brokered a peace deal between Russia and Japan. Jacob Schiff’s money and TR’s anti-Russian peace deal helped to weaken the Tsar, who would be overthrown by murderous Reds in the decade to come. For this contribution towards anti-Russian Globalism, war-loving TR was awarded the phony Nobel Peace Prize!
In 1907, the megalomaniac TR sent “The Great White Fleet” to sail around the world as a show of intimidation.
In 1908, one year after the Bankster-engineered Panic of 1907, TR established the “National Monetary Commission” to study the crash and make suggestions. Nelson Aldrich, an in-law of the Rockefellers, was named Chairman. The NMC suggested the establishment of a Central Bank for America – which will eventually come into being in 1913 as “The Federal Reserve.”
This is how Bankster puppet TR rolled. Both personally and politically, he was a classic bully and a fake “man of the people” who set the precedents which many other Presidents would follow for the next 100 years. Great American author and essayist Mark Twain described TR as follows:
“Mr. Roosevelt is the Tom Sawyer of the political world of the twentieth century; always showing off; always hunting for a chance to show off; in his frenzied imagination the Great Republic is a vast Barnum circus with him for a clown and the whole world for audience; he would go to Halifax for half a chance to show off and he would go to hell for a whole one.”
Yes, indeed, TR did quite a bit of damage to America and, by extension, the world; and none of it would have been possible were it not for the Spanish-American War which created him, after he had created it.
1- Psycho TR’s ‘Great White Fleet’ – USA! USA! USA! // 2- Nelson Aldrich, David Rockefeller’s maternal grandfather, will help Schiff, Warburg, Rockefeller and Morgan to set up the criminal Federal Reserve scam. // 3- Mark Twain despised Roosevelt.
After a 10 year run of killing U.S. sailors and Philippine natives, ex-President Roosevelt took to killing elephants, rhinos, leopards and lions as a hobby.
In closing, let us review the adverse consequences and historical mutations which grew out of what one of TR’s backers described as “a splendid little war”:
The successful selling of the sinking of The Maine to the gullible public set the original precedent and template for all future false-flags and/or provocations (Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Tonkin Gulf, USS Liberty, 9-11, the Sandy Hook non-shootings etc)
The legal, historic and psychological precedents for America going overseas to fight wars and impose puppet regimes was also established. Without which, US entry in World War I (just 19 years later) would not have been possible.
An imperialistic American/NWO naval foothold was established in the Pacific (Philippines, Guam, Hawaii). Without which, the 1905 undermining of Tsarist Russia, the 1930’s U.S. influence over China, and the associated harassment and provocation of Japan (World War II) would not have been possible.
Phony “war hero” TR, an unelectable “progressive”, was skyrocketed to the Governorship of New York, then to the Vice Presidency, and finally to the Presidency. Without TR, the establishment of the currency-debasing perpetual debt machine known as ‘The Fed’, and the 1912 election of Woodrow Wilson (yikes!) would not have been possible. (TR ran 3rd Party in 1912 solely for the purpose of splitting the Republican vote and unseating the conservative, William H. Taft.)
Those four monstrous ‘mutations’ alone spawned every other disaster of the past 118 years, making the “pointless” Spanish-American War, in many ways, one of the most important watershed events in American and world history. Indeed, the Spanish-American War was the ‘Typhoid Mary” of the world disasters which followed, and continue to unfold today.
Pearl Harbor and the destructive effects of perpetual war — It all traces back to 1898!
The assassination of General Soleimani a few days ago with the excuse that this guy was responsible for killing US Soldiers in Iraq (about 600) during the Iraqi war and an American Citizen (Mercenary) a few weeks back, its a complete lie. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m pretty sure this charming fellow is no angel (just look at his face).
But lets dissect thisand go back in time to see where all this propaganda campain comes from…
One of the many myths that have been used to justify the push for war with Iran led by National Security Adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is that Tehran is responsible for the killing of more than 600 U.S. troops during the Iraq War.
Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook, whose job is to round up international support for the Trump administration’s campaign of “maximum pressure” on Iran, presented the charge at a State Department press briefing on April 2. “I can announce today, based on declassified U.S. military reports,” Hook said, “that Iran is responsible for the deaths of 608 American service members. This accounts for 17 percent of all deaths of U.S. personnel in Iraq from 2003 to 2011.”
Navy Commander Sean Robertson followed up with an email to media outlets pushing that same line. When this writer asked Robertson for further clarification of the origins of that figure, however, he acknowledged that the Pentagon doesn’t have any study, documentation, or data to provide journalists that would support such a figure.
In fact, the myth that Tehran is responsible for killing over 600 U.S. troops in the Iraq War is merely a new variant of a propaganda line that former Vice President Dick Cheney used to attempt to justify a war against Iran more than a decade ago. Reviewing the history of that earlier effort is necessary to understand why the new myth is a palpable lie.
Myths About Iran Providing Shiite Militias With Bombs
The history of the myth begins with Vice President Dick Cheney’s determination to attack Iran sometime before the end of the George W. Bush administration. Cheney had contemplated a campaign of U.S. airstrikes on Iran, to be justified by charging that Iran was trying to produce a nuclear weapon. But that rationale for a U.S. military strike on Iran was unanimously rejected by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in a December 13, 2006, meeting with Cheney and President George W. Bush, according to a report by political columnist Joe Klein in TIME magazine.
After that rebuff, Cheney began to focus on another rationale for war on Iran: the alleged Iranian role in killing U.S. troops in Iraq. On January 10, 2007, President George W. Bush gave a speech that included language accusing Iran of “providing material support for attacks on American troops.” Although Bush did not threaten in that speech to retaliate against Iran, his words established a legal and political basis for a possible future attack, according to Hillary Mann Leverett, former National Security Council staff director for the Persian Gulf, in an interview with me in 2008.
But the evidence proved otherwise. Hezbollah — not Iran — had been well known as the world’s most knowledgeable designer and user of EFPs. Michael Knights, who had been following the role of EFPs in Iraq for nearly three years for a private security company in London, told me in an exclusive interview in January 2007 that it was Hezbollah that had transferred EFPs and components for manufacture to Palestinian militants after the second intifada began in 2000. He also observed in a detailed account in Jane’s Intelligence Review in 2006 that the first EFPs to appear in Iraq in 2004 were believed to have come from Hezbollah.
When officials of the Trump administration claim that Iran is responsible for U.S. deaths in Iraq, they are following Dick Cheney’s playbook.
Newsday had reported on August 12, 2005, moreover, that Shiite militiamen had begun copying Hezbollah techniques for building as well as using EFPs, based on Lebanese and Iraqi official sources.
The U.S. military intelligence chief in Iraq had claimed in September 2006 that the C-4 explosive used in EFPs in Iraq bore the same batch number as the C-4 found on a Hezbollah ship said by Israeli officials to be bound for Palestinian fighters in 2003. But Knights observed this statement showed that Iran wasn’t shipping the materials for EFPs to Shiites in Iraq. If Iran had been shipping the C-4 to Iraq the previous year, he pointed out, the batch number would have been different from the one given to Hezbollah at least four years earlier.
The command’s effort to push its line about Iran and EFPs encountered one embarrassing revelation after another. In February 2007 a U.S. command briefing asserted that the EFPs had “characteristics unique to being manufactured in Iran.” However, after NBC correspondent Jane Arraf confronted the deputy commander of coalition troops, Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, with the fact that a senior military official had acknowledged to her that U.S. troops had been discovering many sites manufacturing EFPs in Iraq, Odierno was forced to admit that it was true.
Then in late February 2007, U.S. troops found another cache of parts and explosives for EFPs near Baghdad, which included shipments of PVC tubes for the canisters that contradicted its claims. They had come not from factories in Iran, but from factories in the UAE and other Arab countries, including Iraq itself. That evidence clearly suggested that the Shiites were procuring EFP parts on the commercial market rather than getting them from Iran.
Although the military briefing by the command in February 2007 pointed to cross-border weapons smuggling, it actually confirmed in one of its slides that it was being handled by “Iraqi extremist group members” rather than by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). And as Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, the U.S. commander for southern Iraq, admitted in a July 6 press briefing, his troops had not “captured anybody that we can directly tie back to Iran.”
Blaming Iran for Casualties From U.S. Attacks
The centerpiece of the Petraeus campaign was an effort to argue that Iran was responsible for U.S. casualties, primarily in Baghdad, because of its sponsorship of Shiite militias. In August 2007, Lt. Gen. Odierno asserted that 73 percent of all attacks that had killed or wounded U.S. forces in Baghdad during July were by Shiite militias linked to Iran. That charge generated the New York Times headline, “U.S. Says Iran-Supplied Bomb Kills More Troops.”
In fact, however, the increase in U.S. deaths was the direct result of Petraeus’s decision to target Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army in the hope of weakening it. Beginning in late April 2007, the U.S. launched dozens of military operations aimed solely at capturing or killing Mahdi Army officers, and the Mahdi Army was strongly resisting those raids and imposing more casualties on U.S. troops.
In his September 2007 congressional testimony, Petraeus introduced a new propaganda line that Iran had turned Sadr’s militia into a “Hezbollah-like force” in order to “fight a proxy war against the Iraqi state and coalition forces in Iraq.” But there was no evidence that those Shiite forces resisting the U.S. military’s offensive had broken away from Sadr and were now responsive to Iran.
The Iraqi Shiite figure said to have been the leader of supposed Iranian-backed breakaway “Special Groups,” Qais al-Khazali, was interrogated by the U.S. military for weeks after his arrest in March 2007. Reports of dozens of those interrogations have recently been declassified, and a review of the reports reveals that Khazali portrayed the “Special Groups” as an integral part of the Sadrist movement. He recalled that a large meeting of the “Sadrist Trend” — the political and military forces aligned with Sadr — made the decision to organize “Special Groups” as early as 2004. And he pointed out that Iranian financial support did not go directly to those groups, but went through the same Sadr channel that supported the rest of the Mahdi Army.
The bitter irony of the Petraeus propaganda campaign against the Mahdi Army is that Muqtada al-Sadr had stubbornly maintained his Iraqi nationalist stance completely independent from Iranian policy in Iraq since 2003. Meanwhile, rival Iraqi Shiite organizations, the Badr Organization and the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), having fled to Iran years earlier, had followed strict orders from their Iranian patrons to collaborate closely with the U.S. military and civilian authorities to establish and consolidate a Shiite-dominated regime in Iraq. The Shiite groups loyal to Iran and Sadr’s armed followers were always in bitter conflict, and in 2008 they fought in the streets of Basra and Baghdad.
Propaganda Supporting Cheney’s Strike Plan
In a July 2, 2007, press briefing Petraeus’s spokesman, Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner implied that Iran’s Qods Force had helped a Shiite militia carry out a January 2007 attack in Karbala, Iraq, that killed five Americans. Bergner offered no evidence of any such Iranian role in the attack, however, only the suggestion that the Qods Force leadership was informed about the planning of the operation by a Hezbollah official in Iraq.
Around the time Lieberman was introducing that resolution (in partnership with four Republican senators), Cheney proposed in a meeting with other senior officials if the United States obtained hard evidence of Iranian support for Shiite militias killing U.S. forces in Iraq, such as fighters or weapons crossing into Iraq from an IRGC base in Iran linked to that assistance, it should carry out a retaliatory attack on an IRGC base in Iran.
Defense Department officials quashed the proposal, however, by demanding that Cheney’s staff explain how this military escalation would unfold, and how it would end, according to J. Scott Carpenter former deputy assistant secretary of state, in a 2008 interview with this writer. Cheney’s staff couldn’t provide satisfactory answers.
When officials of the Trump administration claim that Iran is responsible for U.S. deaths in Iraq, they are following Dick Cheney’s playbook. As the Bolton-Pompeo team tries to steer the U.S. toward attacking Iran, it is important to draw that parallel to Cheney’s strategy, and understand the history behind this push for war.
By the way,
are we going to believe people like Mike Pompeo Ex CIA Director and currently The Secretary of State when he says statements like this?