conspiracy

The Scandal Reaches Barack Obama

We now finally have evidence linking Obama to the Spygate scandal:

Screen Shot 2020-06-24 at 7.22.24 PM.png

“Shocking”? I don’t know, Senator. I’ve been expecting this for years.

Anyone who has been following this thing closely since the beginning has known that Obama knew the whole time what was going on. But now we have some proof, in the form of Peter Strzok’s hand-written memos about the Flynn ambush.

Not only that, but we have Biden being involved, too. Add another scandal to the list along with Ukraine.

Here is a photo of the hand-written Strzok note. It’s kind of tough to make out:

Screen Shot 2020-06-25 at 12.15.00 AM

The third line down says “VP: ‘Logan Act'” as in it was Biden who suggested using the Logan Act as a pretense to go after Flynn.

“P” has got to mean President, as in President Obama.

“D” means FBI Director James Comey. According to Strzok’s notes, Comey said “Flynn –> Kislyak [Russian Ambassador] calls but appear legit.”

I wish I could transcribe more of it but his handwriting is hard to read.

Obama is also quoted as saying, “Make sure you look at things + have the right people on it.” With, of course, “it” meaning the Flynn “investigation.”

Is this the bombshell we’ve been waiting for? No, I don’t think so. There’s still more that should and hopefully will come out.

I want ’em all in cuffs. Obama, Biden, Hillary, Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Rice, Strzok, Samantha Power, Sally Yates. All of ’em.

Why I’m Inherently Skeptical of 5G

Lately there’s a lot of talk about 5G.

Does it cause coronavirus? I don’t know.

Is it bad for you in general? I don’t know.

There’s a lot I don’t know about 5G. I’m not an expert in this field so I’m not going to pretend to be one.

But I’m inherently skeptical of 5G for one simple reason: because there is no obvious need for it.

4G LTE works perfectly fine for me. It’s plenty fast. I’ve never once thought “Damnit, LTE sucks! I wish we had something faster!”

There is nothing wrong with 4G. I can watch YouTube videos perfectly fine with no buffering 99% of the time. Netflix, Hulu, Disney+ and HBO Go work perfectly over LTE.

Yet 5G is sold to us as being super fast:

“Remember in “The Amazing Spider-Man” when Peter Parker runs a Bing search (we know, Bing?) on Dr. Kurt Connors and instantly gets results? Your Web pages never load that fast. “That’s Darth Vader’s computer there,” Ericsson Chief Technology Officer Ulf Ewaldsson quipped. Pages usually take a second or two to load, even on a fast connection. With 5G, those results will come immediately.

Or if you wanted to kick back and download the movie “The Guardians of the Galaxy,” it would zip to your device in 15 seconds instead of the 6 minutes it takes via 4G.”

Yes, how did we ever live with one second loading times for search engine results and six-minute movie download times?

We don’t need 5G. LTE is fast enough.

Yet they’re selling 5G to us based on how much faster it will be.

I’m not buying it. There’s got to be some other reason for 5G.

And as if there weren’t enough reasons to be wary of 5G, the New York Times has already played the “RUSSIA!!!” card:

external-content.duckduckgo.png

Putin wants you to be afraid of 5G! If you are skeptical of 5G, you are a Russian Agent!

You wouldn’t want to be a traitor now, would you? Good. Then shut your damn mouth while the 5G antenna is installed on the streetlight in front of your house.

Scientific American published an op-ed in October 2019 entitled, “We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe.”

“The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced through a press release that the commission will soon reaffirm the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that the FCC adopted in the late 1990s. These limits are based upon a behavioral change in rats exposed to microwave radiation and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure.  

Yet, since the FCC adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating.”

In other words, the FCC’s radio frequency radiation exposure limits are out of date.

“Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

“Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”

So all these bad things can happen to us (and animals and plants) even at radio frequency radiation exposure levels that the FCC has deemed “safe.”

Here’s where 5G comes in, and why it’s unique compared to previous generations of wireless technology (4G, 3G, etc.):

“The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.”

So what are the effects of millimeter waves on humans? I’m sure you’ll be shocked to learn that they’re not good:

“Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).”

Virtually every part of the elite’s overall agenda has depopulation in mind: abortion, LGBT rights, female empowerment, male disempowerment, vaccines, etc. It can’t be a coincidence that 5G can cause sterility.

The government doesn’t seem to care what health risks 5G–or any wireless technology at all, for that matter–cause:

“Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G. Little is known the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology, because governments have been remiss in funding this research. Meanwhile, we are seeing increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which may be at least partially attributable to the proliferation of cell phone radiation. These increases are consistent with results from case-control studies of tumor risk in heavy cell phone users.

5G will not replace 4G; it will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term. If there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR, our overall risk of harm from RFR may increase substantially. Cancer is not the only risk as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress.”

Neurological disorders? That’s some scary shit.

“As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S. close to where we live, work and play?

Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety.”

I don’t trust 5G.

If you do trust it, that means you’re simply accepting the word of telecom industry “experts” and leaving your fate in their hands. What, exactly, have the elites done to earn your trust?

There is no obvious, pressing need for 5G, yet they’re rolling it out anyway. This, to me, has always struck me as suspicious. “5G is faster,” they tell us. But LTE is fast enough.

There’s something else they’re not telling us.

I’d advise getting out of cities as soon as possible.

***

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on 5G:

Screen Shot 2020-04-07 at 2.05.57 PM.png

 

 

Is the Coronavirus a Bioweapon?

Let’s see:

  • It kneecapped China’s economy (America’s primary rival).
  • Virus hit just before Lunar New Year in China, the country’s biggest travel holiday, for maximum impact.
  • Also spread in Iran, another of America’s chief geopolitical rivals. In particular, several Iranian politicians have contracted the disease. A prominent adviser to Ayatollah Khomeini died from the virus.
  • An Israeli company’s suspicious comments about producing a vaccine. It claimed it had already been developing a Coronavirus cure before the outbreak of the virus, and had decided to begin developing a Coronavirus vaccine out of “pure luck.”

There are claims that the virus actually originated in the US, rather than China. At least one Chinese official is publicly claiming that the US military brought the virus to China in Ocotber 2019 under the guise of the Wuhan Military Games, which took place that month.

Of course, while the disease initially hit China the worst and then Iran, it is now spreading rapidly in a lot of countries considered to be America’s allies. South Korea, Italy, France, Spain and Germany are all getting hit badly.

In fact the virus has largely plateaued in China, and Europe has become the epicenter, according to the World Health Organization. Based on the official reports from China, the worst is over for them:

It has plateaued in South Korea and it seems they largely have it under control there, but it is not under control in Europe.

So if this virus was an American bioweapon, there has been an awful lot of collateral damage. But this is all under the assumption that only cases and deaths matter. What if infecting a lot of people wasn’t the ultimate goal for whomever released the virus?

To the extent that people discuss conspiracy theories about the Coronavirus, they think along the lines of it being a weapon intended to kill lots of people.

But I don’t think that’s accurate. If the Coronavirus was indeed a bioweapon, and whomever unleashed it intended it to kill lots of people, by any objective measure, they have failed spectacularly at that. It’s tough to say with certainty just how many people have been infected by this virus given that we’re taking the official numbers at face value and assuming they haven’t been underreported by any country. But even if we triple the official numbers, that’s still not a lot of people in the grand scheme of things.

No, I think if this was a bioweapon, the real goal was something else. To figure out what that something else is, let’s look at what the virus has succeeded in doing:

  • Fear
  • Economic disruption

It has succeeded in spreading fear and disrupting the economy. If those outcomes were the actual goal of the coronavirus, then they didn’t even need an actual disease. They only needed a media fear campaign.

In fact, it seems that every year since Y2K there has been some media fear campaign over something or other:

ESI-cFEU4AE4hcs.jpg

And don’t forget Global Warming™, which has been an unrelenting fear campaign for the past 15 years.

Why would they want us to be afraid? A scared populace is a controlled populace. And it makes us more likely to give up our freedoms in exchange for perceived safety.

But there is one highly compelling reason that suggests the Coronavirus isn’t a bioweapon orchestrated by the elite, or the Pentagon going rogue, or what have you: it has exposed the structural deficiencies of the globalist world order. Open borders and free trade turn epidemics into global pandemics. Globalization means a virus in one country can spread to countless other countries and even bring down the whole global economy.

Pat Buchanan recently argued quite convincingly that the Coronavirus could end up delivering a knockout blow to the globalist ideology.

“In retrospect, was it wise to have relied on China to produce essential parts for the supply chains of goods vital to our national security? Does it appear wise to have moved the production of pharmaceuticals and lifesaving drugs for heart disease, strokes and diabetes to China? Does it appear wise to have allowed China to develop a virtual monopoly on rare earth minerals crucial to the development of weapons for our defense?

As for the “open borders” crowd, do Democrats still believe that breaking into our country should no longer be a crime, and immigrants arriving illegally should be given free health care, a proposition to which all the Democratic debaters raised their hands?

In this coronavirus pandemic, people now seem to be looking for authoritative leaders and nations seem to be looking out for their own peoples first. Would Merkel, today, invite a million Syrian refugees into Germany no matter the conditions under which they were living in Syria and Turkey?

Is not the case now conclusive that we made a historic mistake when we outsourced our economic independence to rely for vital necessities upon nations that have never had America’s best interests at heart?

Which rings truer today? We are all part of mankind, all citizens of the world. Or that it’s time to put America and Americans first!”

It’s probable that once the dust settles and this thing has run its course, the coronavirus will have done irrevocable damage to the credibility of the ruling globalist elite. Nationalist ideologies have already been growing in popularity since at least 2015, and the rapid global spread of this virus will only boost their appeal.

How many normal people have been red-pilled against globalism due to the coronavirus? More and more people are going to start rejecting open borders and free trade after seeing how a virus can spread around the world. The idea that China’s (or any other country) problems shouldn’t be our problems resonates with people on a very fundamental level.

Now, just because this virus destroys the credibility of the globalist elites does not mean it wasn’t orchestrated. It’s possible the military went rogue and did this on its own, believing it to be in its interests rather than those of the civilian elite.

Or maybe the globalist elite was on-board with the military’s plan and it was simply botched. Never discount the possibility that the elite can be incompetent sometimes. They may be powerful but they’re not all-powerful. They make mistakes sometimes. After all, they failed to foresee that 9-11 and their power grab after it (Patriot Act/mass surveillance, world policing, endless foreign wars, massive ramp-up in military spending, etc.) would backfire into a lot of the driving force behind the resurgence of nationalism and isolationism.

So what’s the verdict? I don’t know. I reflexively distrust the mainstream media/government narrative on just about everything, and the coronavirus is no different. But it’s tough to see how this benefits anyone. The economic impact in America (and everywhere else) is likely to be severe, and if anything, this only further damages the public’s faith in the ruling elite and its official ideology of liberal globalism.

But we haven’t yet seen the endgame. Maybe they’re planning on rolling out some sort of vaccine in the darkest hour that people will desperately accept. Or maybe they’ll use the virus to roll out sweeping policy changes regarding quarantines, lockdowns and other authoritarian measures, similar to the Patriot Act following 9-11.

It’s tough to say because we’re still in the middle of it. We’ll have to wait and see what changes the elite seeks to implement with the virus as justification.

 

LBJ Killed JFK: The 56th Anniversary of the Coup of ’63

56 years ago today, also on a Friday, at around 12:30pm CST, President John F. Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas, Texas. While most Americans consider the Kennedy Assassination a tragic day in American history, that would only be true if the Official Narrative™ of the “lone nut” assassin were true.

But the reality is it’s more than a tragedy: given that Kennedy was assassinated not by a “lone nut” but by a criminal conspiracy orchestrated by the most powerful men in the country, November 22, 1963 was the day The Deep State took power and the American Republic ended in all but name.

Most Americans reject the Official Narrative™ regarding the Kennedy Assassination, which states that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by a lone nut named Lee Harvey Oswald. The Official Narrative™ claims that Americans don’t want to believe the beloved 35th President was killed for no reason at all, and so they cling to wild “conspiracy theories”–such as the “grassy knoll,” the mob, the Cubans, or the Soviets–in a vain effort to bestow some form of meaning on Kennedy’s untimely death.

But while most Americans reject the idea that Oswald was a lone nut who acted alone and that Kennedy’s death was not part of any grand conspiracy, most Americans are also quite cloudy on the truth behind what happened on Friday November 22, 1963 in Dallas. In other words, while Americans know Oswald didn’t act alone, they are not certain who was really behind Kennedy’s assassination. Americans’ feelings toward the Kennedy assassination can be best characterized as a vague distrust of the Official Story.

I’ve spent the past few weeks doing some research on the matter and I believe I now have a general understanding of what really happened: the main culprit behind the Kennedy assassination was then-Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson, as well as other high-ranking government officials who wanted JFK gone.

I am certainly not claiming to be the first person to advance this theory, especially given that I have come to believe it through the work of others who have looked into the matter. But my aim here is to provide some clarity on the Kennedy Assassination for those who only know that they reject the Official Narrative™ but don’t have a coherent alternative explanation, as well as to place the JFK assassination into proper context in American history.

Obviously, Johnson stood to gain the most from the assassination: the moment Kennedy was pronounced dead, LBJ was sworn in as the 36th U.S. President. Johnson’s motive was as clear as day, and it’s a wonder more people don’t view him as the prime suspect.

In any murder mystery, the best strategy is to look for the person with the strongest motive to carry out the murder, and LBJ undoubtedly had the strongest motive to get Kennedy out of the way. Not only did he personally dislike the Kennedys, he had everything to gain from getting them out of the way.

Because JFK was his superior, LBJ largely tolerated President Kennedy, and vice versa. Kennedy didn’t much care for Johnson, either.

But LBJ didn’t hold anything back when it came to the President’s younger brother Bobby, also the U.S. Attorney General.

LBJ biographer Robert Caro characterized Johnson’s feelings towards Bobby Kennedy as “hatred,”:

“You don’t want to use words like this as a historian, but hatred is the right word to describe Robert Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson,” Caro said. “They hated each other from the first time they met. Someone said the first time they met, it was like two strange dogs walking into a room and there was a low growl and the hair rises on their neck. It never stops. … (Robert Kennedy) can humiliate Johnson and he humiliates him at every opportunity and then with the crack of a gunshot, the world is reversed and Johnson has the power over Bobby Kennedy.”

Awfully convenient for Lyndon Johnson, no? It really is interesting just how well things worked out for LBJ following JFK’s assassination.

In 2011, the Daily Mail reported that in the wake of her husband’s murder, Jackie Kennedy privately expressed her belief that LBJ was behind the assassination:

“Jackie Onassis believed that Lyndon B Johnson and a cabal of Texas tycoons were involved in the assassination of her husband John F Kennedy, ‘explosive’ recordings are set to reveal.

The secret tapes will show that the former first lady felt that her husband’s successor was at the heart of the plot to murder him.

She became convinced that the then vice president, along with businessmen in the South, had orchestrated the Dallas shooting, with gunman Lee Harvey Oswald – long claimed to have been a lone assassin – merely part of a much larger conspiracy.”

After all, the assassination did take place in Johnson’s home state of Texas. If ever there were a place where LBJ could execute a cover-up from the ground-up, where he had the most pull and clout and connections, it was in Texas. It just makes sense.

In 2007, Rolling Stone ran a lengthy piece in which it was claimed that the late notorious former CIA operative E. Howard Hunt–a man who was part of both the JFK assassination and the Watergate burglary–admitted on his deathbed to his son that LBJ was the mastermind of the JFK assassination:

“[I]n Miami, with [E. Howard Hunt’s son] Saint by his bed, and disease eating away at him, and him thinking he’s six months away from death, E. Howard finally put pen to paper and started writing. Saint had been working toward this moment for a long while, and now it was going to happen. He got his father an A&W diet root beer, then sat down in the old man’s wheelchair and waited.

E. Howard scribbled the initials “LBJ,” standing for Kennedy’s ambitious vice president, Lyndon Johnson. Under “LBJ,” connected by a line, he wrote the name Cord Meyer. Meyer was a CIA agent whose wife had an affair with JFK; later she was murdered, a case that’s never been solved. Next his father connected to Meyer’s name the name Bill Harvey, another CIA agent; also connected to Meyer’s name was the name David Morales, yet another CIA man and a well-known, particularly vicious black-op specialist. And then his father connected to Morales’ name, with a line, the framed words “French Gunman Grassy Knoll.”

So there it was, according to E. Howard Hunt. LBJ had Kennedy killed. It had long been speculated upon. But now E. Howard was saying that’s the way it was. And that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t the only shooter in Dallas. There was also, on the grassy knoll, a French gunman, presumably the Corsican Mafia assassin Lucien Sarti, who has figured prominently in other assassination theories.

“By the time he handed me the paper, I was in a state of shock,” Saint says. “His whole life, to me and everybody else, he’d always professed to not know anything about any of it. But I knew this had to be the truth. If my dad was going to make anything up, he would have made something up about the Mafia, or Castro, or Khrushchev. He didn’t like Johnson. But you don’t falsely implicate your own country, for Christ’s sake. My father is old-school, a dyed-in-the-wool patriot, and that’s the last thing he would do.”

Then there’s also the story about what LBJ allegedly said to his mistress, Madelein Duncan Brown, the night before the assassination took place. Watch from the 2:36 mark:

She claims Johnson, in a rage, said to her, on the night of November 21, “After tomorrow, those sons of bitches will never embarrass me again!”

Given that Johnson was the obvious and immediate beneficiary of Kennedy’s death, and that the assassination took place in Johnson’s home state of Texas, it appears to me likely that Johnson was behind it.

LBJ had the motive, but he needed to have backing. There’s no way coup could’ve been pulled off if only LBJ wanted to get rid of Kennedy. There had to be others with the same motive. And there were.

Certainly J. Edgar Hoover, the notorious head of the FBI and arguably the most powerful man in America for nearly four decades prior, was a part of the conspiracy. Bolstering the case that Hoover was part of the plot is this:

“In 1964, just days before Hoover testified in the earliest stages of the Warren Commission hearings, President Lyndon B. Johnson waived the then-mandatory U.S. Government Service Retirement Age of 70, allowing Hoover to remain the FBI Director “for an indefinite period of time.”

In 2017, the Trump Administration authorized the release of previously classified documents pertaining to the Kennedy Assassination. One of those documents was this  particular memo from J. Edgar Hoover:

“Referring to Nicholas Katzenbach, the deputy attorney general at the time, Hoover dictated: “The thing I am concerned about, and so is Mr. Katzenbach, is having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin.”

It’s not clear from the memo whether Hoover thought there might have been a conspiracy but didn’t want it to be known or whether he sincerely believed Oswald acted alone and hoped to head off public fear and confusion.”

If Oswald truly was the “lone assassin,” then why would Hoover be so concerned with convincing the public he was?

As far as a motive for Hoover, it is said that Hoover and the Kennedys never liked each other. In 1987, there was even a TV miniseries called “Hoover vs. the Kennedys,” which detailed the deep rift between the two sides. Apparently Hoover had tried to blackmail Kennedy over his affairs and feared Kennedy would fire him.

But the primary agency behind the assassination was undoubtedly the CIA. Notorious for orchestrating foreign coups and assassinations, the Kennedy assassination was the CIA’s first ever domestic coup and assassination. What, you think the CIA wouldn’t do that here if it felt its institutional interests were threatened by the President?

The thing to know about government agencies is that they inevitably become more and more self-interested over time. The “national interests” take a back-seat to the interests of the agency, and by the 1960s, the CIA, which was founded in the late 1940s as a re-organization and rebranding of the WWII intelligence agency the OSS, had become very powerful and unaccountable. The CIA had come to believe it, rather than the democratically-elected President and Congress, knew best how to manage America’s foreign affairs.

When Eisenhower, in his farewell address in January 1961, warned of the growing power of the “Military industrial complex,” that included the CIA. The Military Industrial Complex wanted to ramp-up the war in Vietnam, but in October, 1963–a month before he was assassinated–JFK signed National Security Action Memorandum 263, which authorized the withdrawal of 1,000 of the 16,000 total U.S.military personnel in Vietnam by the end of December, and said that the goals of our Vietnam military operation would be achieved by 1965.

Upon taking power, LBJ pretended to agree with the assessment of NSAM 263, but by August of 1964, the entirely fabricated Gulf of Tonkin Incident would provide Johnson an excuse to massively escalate the Vietnam War–just as the Military Industrial Complex wanted all along. The CIA, of course–the beating heart of the Military Industrial Complex–was heavily involved in American operations in Vietnam dating all the way back to 1955.

In the 1950s under Allen Dulles (the longest-serving CIA Director in U.S. history), the CIA overthrew Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossaddegh, deposed democratically-elected Guatemalan Prime Minister Jacobo Arbenz, carried out the MKUltra mind control project (which the media would have you believe was both a failure and a conspiracy theory), and in 1961 bungled its attempt to assassinate Fidel Castro (Bay of Pigs).

President Kennedy was so furious over the Bay of Pigs debacle that he was reported by the New York Times to have said he wanted to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds.” Instead he fired Allen Dulles, but left the CIA itself largely intact. This was likely the move that turned the CIA–and of course the hugely powerful Dulles–against him and ultimately sealed his fate. One week after Kennedy was assassinated, newly sworn-in President LBJ appointed Allen Dulles as one of the seven commissioners on the Warren Commission to investigate Kennedy’s death–or, more likely, cover it up.

There were undoubtedly more people than just LBJ, Hoover and Dulles involved in the conspiracy to kill JFK. But they were the biggest names behind the coup.

What about the alleged shooter himself, Lee Harvey Oswald? He never confessed to the shooting, and on the night of the assassination, he declared his innocence and said “I’m just a patsy!

It’s one thing for Oswald to claim he’s innocent and that they’ve got the wrong guy, but it’s another entirely thing for him to say “I’m just a patsy!”

That would indicate he knew more about conspiracy to the kill the President, and was more than just a guy in the wrong place at the wrong time. Oswald proclaiming to be a patsy is a tacit admission that there was a wider conspiracy behind the killing. He knew he was set up to be the fall guy.

Oswald was correct that he was “just a patsy.” He knew there was a larger network that had set him up to take the fall. And that’s precisely why he was shot and killed by Jack Ruby not even 48 hours after Kennedy was pronounced dead. A loose-end tied-up.

Somehow Jack Ruby (real name Jacob Rubenstein) was able to kill Oswald while Oswald was in police custody. Ruby was able to make it into the basement of the police station where Oswald was in the process of being transferred to an armored car, get in with a group of reporters, and then get a clean shot at Oswald at point-blank range.

According to Ruby’s Wikipedia page (meaning information about him that the Uniparty is okay with the public knowing), Ruby was a career criminal and lowlife:

“There was evidence indicating Jack Ruby had been involved in the underworld activities of illegal gambling, narcotics, and prostitution.

A 1956 FBI report stated that their informant, Eileen Curry, reported that in January of that year, she moved to Dallas with her boyfriend, James Breen, after jumping bond on narcotics charges. Breen told her that he had made connections with a large narcotics setup operating between Texas, Mexico, and the East, and that “in some fashion, James got the okay to operate through Jack Ruby of Dallas.”

Former Dallas County Sheriff Steve Guthrie told the FBI that he believed Ruby “operated some prostitution activities and other vices in his club” since living in Dallas.

Dallas disc jockey Kenneth Dowe testified that Ruby was known around the station for “procuring women for different people who came to town.”

Is it a stretch to say that some law enforcement agency like J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI made Ruby kill Oswald? They certainly had a lot on Ruby and probably threatened to put him away for a long time if he didn’t comply with them.

Ruby was then sentenced to death by a jury in Dallas, but the decision was appealed and Ruby was granted a new trial. Before this trial could be completed, however, Ruby died of a pulmonary embolism in 1967.

Let’s get back to Oswald. As for the actual shooting itself, here are the details:

  • JFK’s limo was traveling at about 11mph.
  • Oswald was allegedly situated in the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and was 81 meters (265ft) away from Kennedy when he fired the killing shot.
  • Oswald allegedly fired the three shots from a bolt-action rifle in a span of six seconds, maintaining his aim on a moving target while using the bolt-action rifle.
  • Of the three shots Oswald allegedly fired, the first was said to have missed, the second hit Kennedy in the upper back, and the final shot hit the President in the side of the head.

Seems like an awfully tough shot. And it’s odd that the first shot was said to have missed given that you’d expect the first shot to be the most accurate, not the least. Think about it.

Former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura tried to replicate the shot with the same rifle at the same distance and was unable to get three shots off in less than about nine seconds. And his target was stationary, unlike Oswald’s:

Now it’s certainly possible that Oswald was a phenomenal shot and pulled off the assassination himself. But an investigation by the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded in 1979 that there was “a high probability that at least two gunmen fired at the President” and that the fourth shot came from a second assassin located on the grassy knoll, but missed.” That’s the official conclusion of a U.S. Congressional Committee.

The Committee claims the fourth shot missed, but if you watch the Zapruder film of the assassination, the killing headshot appears to have hit Kennedy from the front given the way his head snaps back and left:

This is why the “grassy knoll” theory is so popular.

However, even if the fourth shot missed, as the Committee claimed, the fact that a U.S. Congressional Committee went on-record and claimed there were two shooters decimates the credibility of the Official Story™. For goodness sake it is all based on the claim that Oswald was a “lone nut” who acted alone.

The purpose of this post is to get into the conspiracy to kill JFK rather than debate how the assassination truly unfolded on that fateful Friday, so I won’t spend much more time discussing the shooting itself, but if you’re interested in this subject I’d recommend checking out this video of Joe Rogan debating the “Single bullet theory”:

The thing is, it doesn’t ultimately matter whether Oswald was the lone shooter or whether there were other shooters. The heart of the matter here is whether or not Oswald was part of a larger conspiracy. Oswald may well have fired the killing shot all by himself, but the real question is whether or not you believe he acted entirely alone and was simply a lone nut.

For most Americans, the answer to that question is no. It does not seem plausible that a President could be killed for no reason at all. But that’s what Official Washington and its television propaganda department would have you believe.

Trust your instincts. Do not allow “experts” and “authority figures” to overrule your common sense and gut instincts. Do not be distracted or confused by their long and complex explanations. They try to muddy the waters by using big words and using terminology you don’t understand, but don’t lose sight of the only things that matter here: the who, how and why.

Who killed JFK? How did they pull it off? Why did they do it?

It doesn’t take an 880-page Warren Report to answer these simple questions, but they would have you believe it does.

The gatekeepers go into lengthy and absurd explanations on how a single bullet ricocheted all throughout JFK’s body and then managed to hit Texas Governor John Connally, where it also ricocheted around and then exited, whereas common sense would tell you simply: there were multiple gunmen.

This country would be so much better off if people simply trusted their common sense and didn’t listen to the spin doctors and lying “authorities.”

Most crimes are rather simple, but the gatekeepers’ job is to complicate simple matters in order to obfuscate the truth. If a President is murdered and a number of powerful people had good reasons to try to get rid of him, it’s a good bet that they were behind the murder. That’s it.

To understand why something happened, it’s important to look at the aftermath: who got what they wanted because of the event? For example, gun controllers get what they want after mass shootings: gun control. The government got what it wanted after 9/11: endless wars in the Middle East and vastly expanded surveillance powers.

It’s easy to understand these major events when you look at them this way.

It is glaringly obvious that LBJ was behind the Kennedy Assassination given that it took place in his home state and he was the single greatest beneficiary from it. Yet the Deep State and its minions in the media did an excellent job muddying the waters, casting doubt into Americans’ minds and causing us to override our common sense and instincts.

***

So how should we view the Kennedy Assassination in the context of American history? Well, if you believe that LBJ was behind it, then it cannot be viewed as anything other than a full-scale coup d’etat, which is why Mark Gorton refers to it as the “Coup of ’63“. I recommend reading Gorton’s essay, because it does a good job putting it all into context.

But again: the takeaway is that the JFK assassination should not be viewed as merely a tragedy but also a full-scale coup.

Though killed for different reasons, JFK was killed in essentially the same manner as was Julius Caesar: betrayed in a plot by other high-ranking government officials. At least the Roman Senate had the decency to own the fact that they collectively murdered the Caesar. The Cabal behind the JFK plot blamed it all on a patsy and their propagandists in the media still maintain that “lone gunman” Official Narrative™️ 56 years later.

So what is the relevance of the Coup of ’63 to today’s America?

It’s no secret that the Deep State is currently in the middle of yet another attempt to oust President Donald Trump, but so far they’ve kept their attempts to remove him strictly in impeachment, rather than assassination, territory.

(Although a story the other day suggests that someone may have tried to poison Trump.)

So this can mean a few things:

  1. Either Trump has not yet posed a serious threat to them to make them desperate enough to try to kill him.
  2. Our Deep State in 2019 has gone soft compared to the outright animals who were running the show in the 1960s.
  3. They feel like killing Trump would make him a martyr and make his political movement more powerful than ever, whereas they feel impeachment is a far better way to discredit him.

Remember, the same people that pulled off the JFK assassination also pulled off the Watergate Coup in ’74, so they’ve got experience with both ways to carry out a coup. Given the way Americans view Kennedy today (near-universal admiration and reverence) vs. the way people view Nixon today (widespread disapproval, consensus that he’s the most corrupt and nefarious President in history), it should be obvious that the impeachment route is the better way for the Deep State to carry out a coup d’etat.

(And yes, I am aware that Nixon wasn’t impeached. But he only resigned because his impeachment and conviction were inevitable and he knew it.)

So I don’t expect the Deep State to try to assassinate Trump. At least not yet–they’re not desperate enough for this yet.

But understanding the Coup of ’63 makes it much easier to understand what’s going on today with Trump. There exists a shadow government in Washington that calls the shots, and when the President is not under their control, they will go to extraordinary lengths to get rid of him.

Whatever you want to call them: the Cabal, the Deep State, the Uniparty, the oligarchs, the men behind the curtain, the puppeteers–they all refer to the same people.

November 22, 1963 was the day they officially seized power, and they still have it today.

Of course, the original conspirators are long dead, but they passed the baton on to succeeding generations of the Deep State.

New York Times: Yes, the Deep State is “Alive and Well” and is Trying to “Bring Down Trump”

From outlandish rightwing conspiracy theory to confirmed by the New York Times:

But they obviously try to put a spin on it by saying it’s just Honest Public SERVANTS who are trying to save us from Trump.

They’re doing this for your own good, you ungrateful peasants! (Even though the header picture they chose for the article clearly has a dark and shadowy vibe to it.)

The most annoying part of this–besides them attempting to gang-rape 250 years of American democracy–is them trying to act like they’re the Good Guys the whole time.

I’m sorry but you cannot have it both ways. You can’t be executing an obvious anti-democratic coup to destroy a duly-elected President while also being the good guys.

Just own it, you slimy bastards. Own the fact that you are the bad guy, the tyrants, the sinister cabal.

Now, people might nitpick here and say that this is the opinion section of the New York Times, but come on: we all know the opinion section is just where they put the material they can’t publish in the “news” section because it’s too obviously partisan.

The Opinion section has the blessing of the Editors one way or another. We all know how this works.

The New York Times has confirmed the existence of the Deep State as well as the fact that it is actively trying to undo the result of the 2016 election–and, presumably, rig the result of the 2020 election.

Jeffrey Epstein’s “Suicide” Was So Obviously a Murder that Even WaPo Reports His Injuries “More Commonly Found in Homicidal Strangulation”

It’s the conspiracy theory that everyone believes in, even an Establishment propaganda organ like the Bezos Post:

Jeffrey Epstein was murdered so he couldn’t rat out his powerful friends.

They were so desperate to ensure he couldn’t rat them out that they carried out one of the most obvious and blatant cover-up murders ever.

While Notre Dame Cathedral Was Still Burning, “French Authorities” Had Already Ruled Out Terrorism/Arson as a Cause

Because the most important thing here is that nobody even asks if the burning of the Notre Dame Cathedral had anything to do with the mass Islamic immigration France has undergone over the past several decades:

That was sent at 5pm US Eastern Time, meaning about midnight Paris time.

What a speedy investigation.

But we all just know it couldn’t have been Islamic terrorism, even though Muslims were photographed at the scene with huge smiles on their faces as the ancient cathedral was engulfed in flames in the background:

https://twitter.com/RittmeisterJa11/status/1117889667637153795

Yes, it is utterly outrageous for anyone to ask whether or not this was arson.

Thousands of Muslims were reacting with smiley faces on a Facebook stream of the fire:

Even if Muslims didn’t do it, many are reacting as if they did, or at the very least as if this is a victory for them.

But still, it’s a “Conspiracy Theory” to wonder if terrorists were behind this.

fgdgdsfgdsf.PNG

IT WAS AN ACCIDENT, OKAY?

Last year, 875 churches were vandalized in France:

And in 2016, a 22 year old Muslim woman was caught trying to blow up the Notre Dame Cathedral with a car full of gas canisters. She was sentenced to prison three days ago:

And just last month, a famous French church, St. Sulpice, was set on fire:

https://twitter.com/PardesSeleh/status/1117851308457725952

Police said the Saint Sulpice fire was “not an accident.” The Notre Dame burning is simply the latest in a string of attacks on Christian sites in France:

“While Notre Dame is undoubtedly the most well-known landmark to be affected, Paris’ second largest church, Saint-Sulpice, briefly burst into flames on March 17, the fire damaging doors and stained glass windows on the building’s exterior. Police later reported that the incident had not been an accident.

“The images of flames in Saint Sulpice church this weekend are one more example of the violence committed against Catholics,” said Philippe Gosselin and Annie Genevard of France’s National Assembly, tying the incident into a wider trend of attacks on Catholic places of worship.

February saw a series of such attacks across France. In one incident, a cross of human excrement was smeared on the wall of the Notre Dame des Enfants in Nimes, the vandals also looting the church and spreading consecrated wafers in the garbage.

The same month, the altar at Saint-Alain Cathedral in Lavaur was set on fire, while statues and crosses were smashed throughout the premises. Two teenagers were later arrested in relation to the incident.”

But yes, the mere suggestion that the burning of Notre Dame was not an accident is so far-fetched, so inappropriate, and so dangerous that Fox New’s Shep Smith lectured a French politician for even entertaining the possibility:

What a complete jackass Shep Smith is.

IT WAS AN ACCIDENT! 

For what it’s worth, that French politician, Phillippe Karsenty said this before Shep Smith erupted on him: “Of course you will hear the story of the politically correct which will tell you it is probably an accident.”

Many in France are not buying the “official” story.

Whether it was terrorism or simply negligence, the Burning of the Notre Dame Cathedral is unavoidably a sign of the decay of Western Civilization.

Choose one: Either Christendom has been overrun by Islam, or Christendom has lost the will to preserve its most sacred sites.

Whether it was terrorism or neglect, this is a terrible day for all of us. The sorry state of Western Civilization was on full display as that 850 year old Cathedral burned.

As for me, my two cents is that when one of the important sites in Christianity, one of the most recognizable and iconic cathedrals on the planet, goes up in flames during the holiest week of the Christian calendar, I’m sorry, but I just refuse to believe that’s a. a coincidence and b. an accident.