In the World of Truth and Fact, Russiagate is Dead. In the World of the Political Establishment, it is Still the New 42 126


Douglas Adams famously suggested that the answer to life, the universe and everything is 42. In the world of the political elite, the answer is Russiagate. What has caused the electorate to turn on the political elite, to defeat Hillary and to rush to Brexit? Why, the evil Russians, of course, are behind it all.

It was the Russians who hacked the DNC and published Hillary’s emails, thus causing her to lose the election because… the Russians, dammit, who cares what was in the emails? It was the Russians. It is the Russians who are behind Wikileaks, and Julian Assange is a Putin agent (as is that evil Craig Murray). It was the Russians who swayed the 1,300,000,000 dollar Presidential election campaign result with 100,000 dollars worth of Facebook advertising. It was the evil Russians who once did a dodgy trade deal with Aaron Banks then did something improbable with Cambridge Analytica that hypnotised people en masse via Facebook into supporting Brexit.

All of this is known to be true by every Blairite, every Clintonite, by the BBC, by CNN, by the Guardian, the New York Times and the Washington Post. “The Russians did it” is the article of faith for the political elite who cannot understand why the electorate rejected the triangulated “consensus” the elite constructed and sold to us, where the filthy rich get ever richer and the rest of us have falling incomes, low employment rights and scanty welfare benefits. You don’t like that system? You have been hypnotised and misled by evil Russian trolls and hackers.

[Whether Trump and/or Brexit were worthy beneficiaries of the popular desire to express discontent is an entirely different argument and not one I address here].

Except virtually none of this is true. Mueller’s inability to defend in person his deeply flawed report took a certain amount of steam out of the blame Russia campaign. But what should have killed off “Russiagate” forever is the judgement of Judge John G Koeltl of the Federal District Court of New York.

In a lawsuit brought by the Democratic National Committee against Russia and against Wikileaks, and against inter alia Donald Trump Jr, Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort and Julian Assange, for the first time the claims of collusion between Trump and Russia were subjected to actual scrutiny in a court of law. And Judge Koeltl concluded that, quite simply, the claims made as the basis of Russiagate are insufficient to even warrant a hearing.

The judgement is 81 pages long, but if you want to understand the truth about the entire “Russiagate” spin it is well worth reading it in full. Otherwise let me walk you through it.

This is the crucial point about Koeltl’s judgement. In considering dismissing a case at the outset in response to a motion to dismiss from the defence, the judge is obliged to give the plaintiff every benefit and to take the alleged facts described by the DNC as true. The stage of challenging and testing those facts has not been reached. The question Koeltl is answering is this. Accepting for the moment the DNC’s facts as true, on the face of it, even if everything that the Democratic National Committee alleged happened, did indeed happen, is there the basis for a case? And his answer is a comprehensive no. Even the facts alleged to comprise the Russiagate narrative do not mount up to a plausible case.

The consequence of this procedure is of course that in this judgement Koeltl is accepting the DNC’s “facts”. The judgement is therefore written entirely on the assumption that the Russians did hack the DNC computers as alleged by the plaintiff (the Democratic National Committee), and that meetings and correspondence took place as the DNC alleged and their content was also what the DNC alleged. It is vital to understand in reading the document that Koeltl is not stating that he finds these “facts” to be true. Doubtless had the trial proceeded many of them would have been challenged by the defendants and their evidentiary basis tested in court. It is simply at this stage the only question Koeltl is answering is whether, assuming the facts alleged all to be true, there are grounds for trial.

Judge Koeltl’s subsequent dismissal of the Russiagate nonsense is a problem for the mainstream media and their favourite narrative. They have largely chosen to pretend it never happened, but when obliged to mention it have attempted to misrepresent this as the judge confirming that the Russians hacked the DNC. It very definitely and specifically is not that; the judge was obliged to rule on the procedural motion to dismiss on the basis of assuming the allegation to be true. Legal distinctions, even very plain ones like this, are perhaps difficult for the average cut and paste mainstream media stenographer to understand. But the widespread failure to report the meaning of Koeltl’s judgement fairly is inexcusable.

The key finding is this. Even accepting the DNC’s evidence at face value, the judge ruled that it provides no evidence of collusion between Russia, Wikileaks or any of the named parties to hack the DNC’s computers. It is best expressed here in this dismissal of the charge that a property violation was committed, but in fact the same ruling by the judge that no evidence has been presented of any collusion for an illegal purpose, runs through the dismissal of each and every one of the varied charges put forward by the DNC as grounds for their suit.

Judge Koeltl goes further and asserts that Wikileaks, as a news organisation, had every right to obtain and publish the emails in exercise of a fundamental First Amendment right. The judge also specifically notes that no evidence has been put forward by the DNC that shows any relationship between Russia and Wikileaks. Wikileaks, accepting the DNC’s version of events, merely contacted the website that first leaked some of the emails, in order to ask to publish them.

Judge Koeltl also notes firmly that while various contacts are alleged by the DNC between individuals from Trump’s campaign and individuals allegedly linked to the Russian government, no evidence at all has been put forward to show that the content of any of those meetings had anything to do with either Wikileaks or the DNC’s emails.

In short, Koeltl dismissed the case entirely because simply no evidence has been produced of the existence of any collusion between Wikileaks, the Trump campaign and Russia. That does not mean that the evidence has been seen and is judged unconvincing. In a situation where the judge is duty bound to give credence to the plaintiff’s evidence and not judge its probability, there simply was no evidence of collusion to which he could give credence. The entire Russia-Wikileaks-Trump fabrication is a total nonsense. But I don’t suppose that fact will kill it off.

The major implication for the Assange extradition case of the Koeltl judgement is his robust and unequivocal statement of the obvious truth that Wikileaks is a news organisation and its right to publish documents, specifically including stolen documents, is protected by the First Amendment when those documents touch on the public interest.


These arguments are certainly helpful to Assange in the extradition case. But it must be noted that the extradition request has been drafted to try to get round the law by alleging that Wikileaks were complicit in the actual theft of documents by Chelsea Manning. Judge Koeltl does not address this question as he was presented with no evidence that Wikileaks had contact with the “hackers” prior to their obtaining the documents, so the question did not arise before him. In the extradition request, the attempt is to argue that Assange encouraged and abetted Manning in obtaining the material. This is supposed to be a different argument.

In fact this attempt to undermine the First Amendment has no merit. Cultivation of an insider source is a normal part of journalistic activity, and encouraging an official to leak material in the public interest is an everyday occurrence in such cultivation. In the “Watergate” precedent, for example, the “Deep Throat” source, Mark Felt of the FBI, was cultivated and encouraged over a period by Woodward. In addition to which, Manning’s access to the documents could not be characterised as “theft”. Leaking of official secrets by an insider is a very different thing to a hack from outside.

And in conclusion, I should state emphatically that while Judge Koeltl was obliged to accept for the time being the allegation that the Russians had hacked the DNC as alleged, in fact this never happened. The emails came from a leak not a hack. The Mueller Inquiry’s refusal to take evidence from the actual publisher of the leaks, Julian Assange, in itself discredits his report. Mueller should also have taken crucial evidence from Bill Binney, former Technical Director of the NSA, who has explained in detail why an outside hack was technically impossible based on the forensic evidence provided.

The other key point that proves Mueller’s Inquiry was never a serious search for truth is that at no stage was any independent forensic independence taken from the DNC’s servers, instead the word of the DNC’s own security consultants was simply accepted as true. Finally no progress has been made – or is intended to be made – on the question of who killed Seth Rich, while the pretend police investigation has “lost” his laptop.

Though why anybody would believe Robert Mueller about anything is completely beyond me.

So there we have it. Russiagate as a theory is as completely exploded as the appalling Guardian front page lie published by Kath Viner and Luke Harding fabricating the “secret meetings” between Paul Manafort and Julian Assange in the Ecuadorean Embassy. But the political class and the mainstream media, both in the service of billionaires, have moved on to a stage where truth is irrelevant, and I do not doubt that Russiagate stories will thus persist. They are so useful for the finances of the armaments and security industries, and in keeping the population in fear and jingoist politicians in power.

——————————————

Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



 


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments will be closed on August 21, 2019.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

126 thoughts on “In the World of Truth and Fact, Russiagate is Dead. In the World of the Political Establishment, it is Still the New 42

1 2
  • Brian c

    Thank you Craig, this is the first I have heard of Koeltl’s judgement. Very surprisingly it has not been the subject of sensational headlines or breathless commentary by MSM conspiracy theorists.

    But as you say, it will not make the slightest tear in the Putin’s puppet / Manchurian candidate comfort blanket. It has been clear for a long time that this fairytale will remain a bombproof article of faith among the west’s most respected politicians and opinion formers, clung to not just despite a lack of evidence but despite the strongest possible counterevidence.

    By which I mean Donald Trump’s actual real-world policies toward Russia over the past three years. Every confirmed Russiagater and neo-McCarthyite should be asked which of Trump’s ultra antagonistic policies strikes them of quid pro quo appeasement of the Kremlin:

    — the harshest sanctions imposed on Russia by any US administration since the Cold War?
    — a huge increase in military aid to ferociously anti-Russian neo-Nazis in Ukraine?
    — the ramping up of military bases, manoeuvres, and missle installations on Russia’s border?
    — the bombing of Russia’s Syrian ally?
    — the blatant effort to depose Russia’s Venezuelan ally?
    — the unilateral abandonment of the INF nuclear treaty agreed between Reagan and Gorbachev?

    Any who still see evidence of indebtedness to Putin should be asked how they interpret the infinitely more Russophile policies of Trump’s sainted predecessor. An open and shut case of the highest treason, surely? And if not, why not?

    • Node

      It has been clear for a long time that [the Russiagate] fairytale will remain a bombproof article of faith among the west’s most respected politicians and opinion formers, clung to not just despite a lack of evidence but despite the strongest possible counterevidence.

      The rules of the game have changed and many are still unaware. The media no longer consider it necessary to convince the majority to believe their invented narratives. Instead they concentrate their efforts on demonising those who question them. Effectively they are saying “If you are informed enough to know this narrative is bullshit, you are informed enough to know we can and will destroy you if you challenge it. Come and have a go if you think you’re hard enough. We’ll use you as an example to deter others.”

    • Carolyn Zaremba

      Thank you. You are quite right, of course. The American MSM once again attempts to “protect” the citizenry from the truth about the predations of othe United States and points a finger anywhere else but at home for all “evils”. The surest sign of an encroaching authoritarian dictatorship is it’s blaming “outsiders” for its own crimes, for its own social disasters and its own collapse. The U.S. government has been doing this for decades, of course, but the ramping up has accelerated in recent years, especially after 9/11. I think many of the resisters of the truth are embarrassed because they fell for this CIA-DNC nutjob fairy tale so completely. Fortunately, this Judge not only knew the law, he actually respected it.

  • Simon

    Hi Craig,

    Everywhere I go, sophisticated voices on each side argue with “less sophisticated” voices on the other. If you want to have this fight, please have it with Virginia Heffernan of Trumpcast. She’s outraged by the Trump Tower meetings, and it’s difficult to disagree with her. She might say the Trump Tower meetings are outrageous for what they represent more than what they changed – a totally self dealing candidate, surrounded by a self-dealing clique etc.

  • Sharp Ears

    Yet another ‘expert’ from Chatham House/RUSI, writes on Russia to say that it does not have a good side!

    ‘Russia doesn’t have a good side’: More xenophobic bile spewing forth from Western ‘experts’
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/465423-russia-xenophobia-keir-giles/

    I have never heard of him before. He is Keir Giles. I had to copy this from behind a pop up where they are trying to get your details in an ‘audience survey’. His time with the BBC is included in his biog..

    ‘ Keir Giles is a senior consulting fellow of the Russia and Eurasia Programme.
    Keir spent the early 1990s in the former USSR. With the BBC Monitoring Service, he reported on political and economic affairs in the former Soviet Union for UK government customers. He also wrote for several years as a Russia correspondent for UK aviation journals.
    Other professional experience in Russia includes a period with Ernst & Young working on intricate and constantly shifting Russian business law.
    While attached to the UK Defence Academy’s Research and Assessment Branch (R&AB), he wrote and briefed for UK and overseas government and academic customers on Russian military, defence and security issues; Russia’s relations with NATO and with its neighbours in Northern Europe; and human factors affecting decision-making in Russia.
    In addition to Keir’s work with Chatham House, he leads the Conflict Studies Research Centre, a group of subject matter experts in Eurasian security.
    Areas of expertise
    Cyber and information security
    Military transformation in Russia
    Russian foreign and domestic security policy
    Past experience
    2010 – Present
    Director, Conflict Studies Research Centre Ltd
    2005 – 10
    Consultant, Conflict Studies Research Centre, UK Defence Academy (subsequently also Advanced Research Assessment Group and Research and Analysis Branch, UKDA)
    1992 – 2006
    Various positions in BBC Monitoring Service
    1994 – 95
    Ernst & Young, Moscow
    1991 – 93
    Director, Russ-Sky Ltd and A/O Aerokontsept
    https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/keir-giles#

  • mark golding

    Since the ‘red chip’ ruse nearly a decade ago MI5 have colluded with MI6 to realize fourth estate policies thereby subverting the first principle of government to protect the British public from harm especially from foreign agents such as Shin Bet and others.

    Certainly, the mechanics of Russiagate is the perfect example of this collusion. Attempts to conceal the origin of the series of memos that formed the Steele dossier became a bane and Skripalmania a nemesis when the double agent threatened to expose his role in authoring some parts of the dossier to his handler, Miller. The bright idea from the Integrity Initiative was turning sour; Skripal planned to return to Russia after demanded payment for his input, and the plot to silence him evolved. The Russian ‘bagmen’ would, in fact, be ‘left with the bag’ at Salisbury cathedral while the spy Skripal rendered permanently QT.

    British intelligence must sing a different tune and with intention, we can entangle with Craig. That means giving, giving Craig Murray the financial freedom to walk with truth. Please help if you can.

  • DaveX

    I agree the elites in the US & UK cant recognise/admit that they have made the main contribution to state of the world today & therefore need an easy target to blame. One thing i find curious though is that i could understand the promotion of Russia as ‘baddie’ when it was the USSR, as it was seen as a supporter of non-capitalist countries and movements across the globe. The west got what it wanted & now Russia is a capitalist country. So it is now an economic competitor rather than political competitor (similarly China) but perhaps western capitalism feels anger/envy that their new competitors in the free world can ignore such things as democracy, the environment, safety regulations and workers rights (as western capitalism did in its history). The response seems to be to try & reduce these ‘burdens’ in the US & its most fervent allies. Perhaps Trump admires the Russia of Putin & oligarchs and aspires to change the US the emulate it?

    • Goose

      Hard to believe now, but Obama got on relatively well with the Russians during his first term:

      At a nuclear disarmament summit in Seoul in March 2012, President Obama was caught on a hot mic talking to Russian President (at the time) Dimitri Medvedev. “This is my last election,” Obama said. “After my election I have more flexibility.”

      “I understand,” Medvedev is recorded replying. “I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

      It all when to crap after 2013, when first Russia gave Snowden asylum (Snowden arrived in June from Hong Kong). Then after the August 21st -the Ghouta gas attack , Russia disputed the US claims. Then in November 2013 the US backed Ukraine’s protests which led to the coup, Russia annexed Crimea further worsening relations. Hillary wanted a no-fly zone over Syria, opposed by Russia and Assad. 2013 was the year it all went wrong between the two countries.

      Trump getting elected just allowed the Democrats to continue the vendetta started by the party’s leaders.

      • John2o2o

        Goose, aren’t foreign relations simply a matter of policy decisions? Surely no politician worth their salt is going to base their international relations on personality.

        Obama initially “got on well” with the Russians because it was seen as politically expedient to do so.

        I think Trump is an exception though and he is more likely to base his international relations on personality. So he likes Kim Jong-un and probably likes Putin, though the MIC/security establishment in the US seems deeply hostile to the latter. That is not praise for the orange lunatic by the way!

    • John2o2o

      Peter Hitchens has said that the problem was that the military establishment (MIC) in the US relentlessly lobbied the Clinton administration as it feared loss of revenues if NATO was disbanded as it should have been when the Soviet Union broke up and the Warsaw Pact ended.

      IMO the US needs to keep it’s citizens in a state of paranoia in order to justify arms production and military expenditure. It needs to promote war and the idea that countries such as Iran want war in order to justify continued arms production and sales to countries such as Saudi Arabia.

      The US relentlessly pushes the idea that countries such as Russia are actively hostile, when in fact it is they and unfortunately us in the UK that are promoting the hostility and not Russia. Again all in order to justify arms production and military expenditure.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ DaveX August 5, 2019 at 14:43
      ‘…perhaps western capitalism feels anger/envy that their new competitors in the free world can ignore such things as democracy, the environment, safety regulations and workers rights (as western capitalism did in its history)…’
      There is some misunderstandings here, re Russian and Chinese health safety standards. Take EMF Standards:
      Magnetic (mG) Electric (Vm) RF (mWm2)
      Russia 100 500 100
      China 833 3333 400
      ICNIRP 2000 4167 10,000
      IEEE 9040 5000 10,000

      As for workers’ rights, look what Maggots and her war against the Unions did in the UK, and Trump is slashing away in all directions to remove the already pitiful environment regulations.

      And the Soviet Union had banned microwave ovens over safety concerns; this was overturned after ‘Perestoika’ and all it’s Western interference.
      Also, Russia has banned both the cultivation and importation of GMO crops, allowing limited scientific research only.
      So who cares more for their people?
      And Russia has held many hugely expensive, massive civilian Civil Defense drills against the possibility of Nuclear War.
      Western governments and Elite just worry about their own safe shelters, sod Joe Public.

  • M.J.

    If we are compilcit in torture by accepting its dodgy results (which I don’t think we should), than in accepting the results of hacks by Vlad’s agents, wikileaks and the Trump campaign are complicit in such hacking, even in the absence of a definite conspiracy.

  • Jerry Sponger

    Billions in TV advertising are spent during a POTUS campaign whilst Russian actors spent 10k on FB in 2016, but try telling that to the hillybilly/redneck lumberjack seed under relentless daily haranguing by rachelmadcows. As omar pointed out, its some kind of hypnosis. Methinks dem hillybillys have been drinking too much moonshine laced with matzo powder in plentiful supply from the chucktodds of the murdoch media.

    • J

      ‘Billions in TV advertising are spent during a POTUS campaign’ but only stupid poor people are susceptible to their entire social fabric, reward system, punishment system, networks of esteem, networks of peers and the billions of dollars used against them. Idiots.

  • MrK

    “The other key point that proves Mueller’s Inquiry was never a serious search for truth is that at no stage was any independent forensic independence taken from the DNC’s servers, instead the word of the DNC’s own security consultants was simply accepted as true.”

    The FBI allowed the DNC hired Crowstrike to look at the servers. Interesting detail: the President of Crowdstrike, Shawn Henry, was a former high level member of the FBI himself.

    https://www.crowdstrike.com/about-crowdstrike/executive-team/shawn-henry/

    “He joined CrowdStrike in 2012 after retiring from the FBI, where he oversaw half of the FBI’s investigative operations, including all FBI criminal and cyber investigations worldwide, international operations, and the FBI’s critical incident response to major investigations and disasters. He also oversaw computer crime investigations spanning the globe and received the Presidential Rank Award for Meritorious Executive for his leadership in enhancing the FBI’s cyber capabilities.”

    Another interesting detail: the DNC made 5 payments to Crowdstrike in the years 2015 and 2016. One nearly 100k payment was 1 day after the death of Seth Rich. Another just over 100k payment was 1 day after the death of Shawn Lucas.

    More here:

    https://twitter.com/MrK00001/status/1154234248372658176

  • Dave

    There is a saying “Generals fight the last war”! And they do so because of all the economic vested interests in the paraphernalia of the last war, such as horses rather than vehicles, which eventually undermines security when someone comes along with new weapons and tactics that make the old weapons and tactics obsolete.

    These new weapons and tactics emerge due to certain restraints and sanctions imposed on defeated countries, like Germany after WWI and Russia today and German blitzkrieg and Russia’s new super weapons come to mind, which make the US weapons obsolete.

    The added problem for US is because of corrupt procurement their weapons are not only obsolete they don’t even work at twice the price, but in turn this undermines world security, because US is left with the option of do nothing or nuclear Armageddon. Admittedly this option is in the face of powerful opponents as opposed to the neo-con policy of destroying defenceless countries.

  • Mist001

    I long for the day that someone liberates (hacks) the mythical PNC (Police National Computer), if it even exists. Hackers can get into banks, private servers and the likes, but this thing is bullet proof? I don’t buy it.

  • Anon

    Where does Trump stand if Secretary Acosta was given the cabinet post for ‘lolita’ services rendered re epstein? Has he been compromised all along? An Iran war must be on the cards before Nov 2020 then, Trump will have lost his voter base after being constrained by El Paso so his owners cannot take the chance he fails re-election. BTW – Camillas wink may just have saved the Royal Family from the ignominy (a state visit afforded to a world class conman), once the fraudster is uncovered.

    • Dave

      It deliberately deceptive for MSM to refer to an Metropolitan Police investigation as it implies its the police who are investigating and accountable to a democratic police authority. I.e. it sounds normal!

      Except its actually the “counter-terrorism police” who are a law unto themselves and not accountable and not really police, but deep state operatives.

  • Gary

    Thank you for publishing this. I’ve seen NONE of this reported ANYWHERE. Deliberately buried. I really fear that the BBC, for one, are becoming increasingly partisan in all of their reporting. It seems that in every story their is a clear ‘point of view’ they are putting across rather than report factually and let the story tell itself and viewers make their own minds up.

    One small point about Assange though. As far as I’d read before I thought the basis for the case was ‘participation’ rather than ‘encouragement’ They were charging that he gave Manning direct help in hacking by telling him exactly how to carry out, at least part, of the hack. This is as weak a case as I think is possible but I don’t see Assange being given anything resembling a fair trial, not if his current and previous situation is anything to go by…

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Gary August 7, 2019 at 06:59
      My understanding of it is that Manning could get as much info as he wanted, as he was an ‘Insider’ and had the codes.
      He asked if Julian could assist in hacking the servers, simply to cover his trail, so it would not be obvious an’insider’ was responsible.
      My understanding is Julian tried, and failed. So again, no hack, just an insider stealing the info.

  • Peter

    I just posted this on the next (Scots Indy) article then realised that maybe I should have posted it here:

    People may (or may not) be interested in this afternoon’s R4 Media Show which features a programme length (36m), Amol Rajan interview with none other than Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat fame/infamy:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0007bwn

    You may notice the way his voice speeds up when he’s asked questions about eg his funding and relationships with the security services.

    • Andyoldlabour

      Thanks Peter. I was astonished to hear him say – “when the Libya thing started to die down in 2011”, as if the “Libya thing” ever died down. This is the language of a neocon, a New American Century, Atlantic Council person.
      These warmongers make me sick.

  • Trowbridge H Ford

    Keep repeating your claims there were no hacks of the Hillary/DNC emails. just leaks, until your naive posters believe it.

  • Andy

    “at no stage was any independent forensic independence taken from the DNC’s servers” — I’m not saying that this phrase negates your argument in any way, but you should have had a second pair of eyes on this before posting. Always a good thing to do.,

    • michael norton

      James
      that is a very good question.

      The Salisbury poisonings were so obviously made up.

      Russia does seem very good at not making a fuss about things.

      • John2o2o

        Well they were nothing to do with the Russian government, I am sure of that.

        I think I have posted elsewhere that it is my confident belief that Yulia Skripal poisoned her father and then tried to take her own life. I have explained in detail why I believe this to be the case. And not with Novichok.

  • Paul Barbara

    ‘Russiagate’ cannot be allowed to fade, it needs regular increments to keep up the background Demonisation of Russia to prepare the public for the planned war against them. Churchill tried to persuade America to attack Russia at the end of WWII, and there are serious suspicions that Churchill had FDR poisoned as he wouldn’t play ball with Churchill’s ideas of not just the continuation of Empire, but it’s increasing after WWII: ‘WHO KILLED FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT?’ http://www.prouty.org/coment11.html
    The Luciferian ‘Elite’ who ‘rule’ us really are intent on bringing on Armageddon, foolishly believing they will come out on top.
    The absurdity of their position leads most ordinary people to dismiss the idea they have these plans, which plays into their hands.
    Just as scores of ‘novels’ were written of fictitious German invasions of the East Coast pre-WWI, and rumours circulated of tens of thousands of military-age Germans working as waiters and barmen, a 5th Column just waiting to strike at the appointed time, as well as constant MSM lies about German intentions and state of armaments buildup, and continuous Jingoism, the ‘ground’ of public opinion is being desensitised incrementally to subconsciously accept the feasability and continued preparation for nuclear war (like Trident replacement and forward stationing of medium range nukes around Russia’s borders.
    It’s a very big mistake to think that wiser counsel will ultimately prevail, it very rarely has in the past.

  • Steve Hayes

    The FBI are claiming that pushing conspiracy theories is a dangerous form of terrorism that must be stopped. Apparently, by conspiracy theory they mean anyone who challenges official narratives, regardless of the veracity of said narratives.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Steve Hayes August 11, 2019 at 15:31
      They’s be a damn sight more dangerous if there weren’t so many blockheads in the world who don’t believe them when they are presented.
      Talking about the FBI, their J Edgar Hoover was somewhat similar to Epstein, though I’m not aware he set up ‘honey traps’, he did have the sexual dirt on all and sundry, and they knew it. That is why he lasted as head of the FBI so long (JFK was going to ‘retire’ him, as well as do away with the CIA).
      J E Hoover was a rampant gay, who persecuted gays, and a friend of the mob, who at one time insisted there was no ‘organised crime’ problem in America!
      The ‘Justice System’ and the police and Intel agencies in the US have been corrupt for a very long time now – don’t expect them to improve, but to get even worse.

1 2