Douglas Horne, who is renowned for his JFK research, and whose involvement with the ARRB could result in a dramatic screenplay, has had other interests in his life, and one of them is World War II. He has just completed what is being called the definitive work on US entrance into WW2, the events that led up to it. It's called: 

The McCollum Memorandum: A Story of Washington, D.C. in 1940-41: Franklin D. Roosevelt's Journey from Deterrence to Provocation on the Road to Pearl Harbor

https://www.amazon.com/McCollum-Memorandum-Washington-Roosevelts-Provocation/dp/B09BCGMBR7/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=The+McCollum+Memorandum+by+Douglas+Horne&qid=1627577175&sr=8-3

I have ordered Doug's book because World War 2 has become a focused interest of mine, and my realizations about it have rattled me deeply.  And when I finish reading Doug's book, I am going to write an in-depth review of it here. 

Two things are crystal-clear and undeniable now: that the Allies provoked WW2, both in Europe and in the Pacific, and the crimes of the Allies in targeting civilians in Germany and Japan, the abominable treatment of German POWs after the war, and the mass rape of German women, particularly by the Soviets, are on par with the atrocities for which the Germans are accused, and it makes me wonder because the best way to cover up your own atrocities is to accuse your defeated enemy of worse ones. 

Regardless of what you believe about the Holocaust, it should be apparent that all pretenses of WW2 being a "good war" have been blown asunder. That idea, that World War II, unlike Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc., was a "good war," one that was thrust upon us and had to be fought, in which we were the unequivocal, undisputed good guys, is the single biggest, ugliest, and most grotesque lie that has ever been told in human history. World War II was not only not a good war, it was the most evil war ever waged, and I mean by the Allies. And that means that there have been no good wars because Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. certainly weren't good. It means that the entire moral posturing of U.S. militarism as being righteous and decent and good is a complete lie.  

And since the lies about World War 1 are just as egregious as those about World War 2, and since the Allies were just as villainous; just as responsible for starting that war, as laid out by Docherty and MacGregor in Hidden History:

https://www.amazon.com/Hidden-History-Secret-Origins-First/dp/1780576307/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=Hidden+History&qid=1627748145&sr=8-3

... it means that the official history of the 20th century is one big lie, and the whole claim about the Western democracies being the saviors of the world in the 20th century is one big lie. Of course, one of those saviors was the evil Soviet Union, and be aware that, to this day, Russia joins with the West in lying about World War 2.     

I wrote the following piece about WW2 because the shattering of my illusions and delusions about WW2 actually affected me more emotionally than the shattering of my illusions and delusions about JFK and 9/11. 

https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2020/11/the-biggest-most-wretched-lie-ever-told.html

This song is almost 100 years old. But, it still sounds fresh, and it affects people because of its sweet, tender sentimentality. And it goes to show that when a song is good, it endures. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8CoVcXX6Z4

Paul Popa is back, and we have done that swinging song from 1946, Route 66. It was written by singer/songwriter/actor Bobby Troup while he was driving cross country with his wife Cynthia on Route 66. In the litany of towns that the song goes through, they are all in order except that Winona, Arizona actually comes before Flagstaff, although it follows Flagstaff in the song. To give you an idea how popular this song was, it was covered by Nat King Cole, Chuck Berry, the Rolling Stones, and many more, and I know why: because it's fun to do. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohZRCg4rHLU 

 

Sam Haschets

complete disregard for the historical context of 9/11 -- it was a different era -- however, flight 93 did fight back

Ralph Cinque: WHAT? Are you serious? You are actually going to claim that 2001 was a "different era"? That today, people fight back, but not then because it was a different era? And Flight 93 did NOT fight back. There is no reason to BELIEVE that. I know that it's claimed, with the "Let's roll" and all, but I've got news for you: If they were going to "roll" they would have "rolled" immediately, as soon as the hijackers started waving box-cutters around. They (including the pilots) would not have let the hijackers take over the plane, actually giving them the controls, and then decided later, "You know, maybe we should stand up to these guys." The whole thing was just a story concocted to account for why the plane crashed in Pennsylvania. And I know how that goes, being a screenwriter. a contrivance here, a contrivance there. But, the whole story is preposterous since THERE WAS NO PLANE AT THE CRASH SITE IN PA. Supposedly, it sunk into a hole and got swallowed by the Earth. But again: that's bad screenwriting; very bad. Now, I have a question for you: What are you doing here? This is a group intended for people who believe that 9/11 was an inside job. That means that you shouldn't be here, and you shouldn't be allowed to be here. Oh, by the way, I'm making you famous. It's what I do.

After the official Twitter account of the Olympics tweeted praise for an Iranian marksman who won the gold medal in the air pistol men’s final, they were blasted by various Iranians who claimed that the marksman, Javad Foroughi, is a member of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which has been designated by the United States as a terrorist organization.

RC: You dumb plucks. Just because the U.S. government says the Iran Revolutionary Guard is a terrorist organization, you believe them? I've got news for you: the U.S. government is a terrorist organization. After 9/11, the U.S. government went out and killed over 3 million people in illegal wars, and that death toll is according to Brown University in Rhode Island. The wars on Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Syria- they were all war crimes by the U.S. regime; crimes against humanity. 

This is amazing. Some guy goes on a shooting rampage at a party in Texas, and even though he was still armed and shooting when he left, some of the party-goers chased after him to throw landscape bricks at him, and they succeeded at killing him, even though some of them did get shot, and one of them died.  

FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — A man who opened fire at a backyard party in Fort Worth early Monday, killing one and injuring three, died after being chased by fellow party-goers who threw landscaping bricks at him, Texas authorities said.

Fort Worth police said the shooter, who was struck multiple times with at least one brick, was pronounced dead at the scene. Police said the medical examiner will determine the cause of death.

Police said the shooter had been attending the small backyard gathering at a home but became upset and left. He then returned and began arguing with other party-goers before shooting and injuring one person, whose injuries weren't life-threatening. As party-goers gave chase, the shooter turned and fired at them.

The party-goers started throwing bricks at the shooter, police said. Police said at some point the shooter either fell or was taken down to the ground but continued to fire.

Three people were shot during the chase. One person was killed and two others were injured and are expected to survive, police said.

Police said they are continuing to investigate, and that the handgun believed to have been used by the shooter was recovered.

Folks, everyone has got to stop believing the 9/11 story, that when a few guys started waving box-cutters around on 4 airplanes, that everyone aboard cowered, including the pilots, and just submitted to them. Those passengers were Americans. They could have been the people at the party in Ft. Worth. Americans don't take that shit from anybody. And the pilots were mostly ex-military, and they would have fought like commandos. And Americans can do arithmetic. Knowing that they had the hijackers vastly outnumbered, box-cutters or no box-cutters, they would have taken it to them- just like the people at the party. Don't you get it? It's all bull shit. The whole 9/11 story is bull shit.

There is nothing speculative or farfetched about the claim that JFK was shot with the "heart attack gun" containing shellfish toxin because we have a picture of the gun, and we have the words of then CIA Director William Colby saying that it worked, that it was developed to kill people, and that it was accurate from a great distance. This is it. Either this very gun, or one just like it, is the gun that was used to shoot Kennedy in the back high on the hill. And the manifestations that we see on Kennedy in the Zapruder film, his uncontrollable muscle spasms and his mental vacancy, were due to the effects of the drug.  

The year was 1975, which was the same year the Zapruder film first aired on television.  So, at the same time the public saw this unique assassination gun developed by the CIA, they saw JFK looking and acting intoxicated in the Zapruder film- an effect that cannot be accounted for by any physical trauma he had received to that point.  

So, the simple question is: WHY DOES JFK ACT SO WEIRD AND INCAPACITATED IN THE ZAPRUDER FILM? And since physical trauma doesn't account for it, what else can account for it? The answer is: a toxin. And the truth is: there is no other answer that works.  

It would be grossly unfair to Kennedy to suggest that he just lost it mentally because of the horror and terror of the situation. He had been in combat, where he acted decisively, heroically, and bravely. And in this case, his own wife, the mother of his children, was in the car with him. and surely, he would have been cognizant of the danger that she was in and sought to protect her. But, it's obvious in the Zapruder film that JFK was not cognizant of anything. He was completely out of it mentally. It's one of the most telling things about the Zapruder film. So how could he get that way so fast? How could he reach that condition in a matter of seconds? 

And you mustn't accept the timing of the Zapruder film. They cut out a huge swath of it, the part where JFK rode down the hill having been shot in the back, and I can prove it mathematically. You know that they cut out the part when the limo made the horseshow turn from Houston to Elm. So the first we see of the limo is at Z-133. The limo passes behind the  Stemmons freeway sign at about Z-197. That's 64 frames. At 18 frames per second, that comes out to 3.55 seconds. So, that's 3 and 1/2 seconds to get from the top of Elm Street to the Stemmons freeway sign.  But, you realize that the limo was going extremely slowly. It couldn't have reached the freeway sign that fast even if it was traveling at normal speed. But, it was not traveling at normal speed; it was crawling. Even Jackie complained about how slow it was going. 

The fact that JFK's limo reaches the freeway sign in less than 4 seconds in the Zapruder film tells you that they cut out most of his descent on the hill. And the stretch I am talking about has the greatest slope in Dealey Plaza. That's the part they cut out to hide the fact that JFK was already shot in the back high on the hill.  

Again, this is not in doubt, and it can't be disputed, because that 3 and 1/2 second timeline in the Zapruder film is impossible. There was more distance to cover. You couldn't get to the freeway sign that fast, even if you were going, say, 45 mph. And it wasn't even going a third of that speed.  

So, why did they wait until 1975 to release the Zapruder film, to let the public see it? Time/Life had been in possession of it for 12 years, and they sold it back to the Zapruder family for $1, and the Zapruders instantly turned it into a cottage industry, renting it out for outrageous fees, like $40,000 for a one-time viewing.  And remember, that was in 1970s money. And they didn't even have to do the legwork; the National Archives did all the work for them- for free. 

But, the explanation for all this is simple: it was time. It was time to show the world the Zapruder film. They had finally gotten it altered satisfactorily to where they were content that its story was consistent with the official story, that JFK rode down the hill smiling and waving, until he reached the Stemmons freeway sign, where everything happened to him all at once behind that sign, save for the fatal head shot.

That is NOT what happened. He was shot in the back high on the hill, and he rode down the hill that way. Then he was struck again in the throat behind the freeway sign. And then, he was struck a third time with the fatal head shot seconds later.  

Don't assume that the alterations to the Zapruder film were done in days or weeks or even months. Try years. No doubt it was the most extensive and daring film altering that had ever been. It was Frankenstinian, the magnitude of the altering that they did. The fact that anyone continues to deny that the Zapruder film was altered is laughable. 

And it was all predicated by the fact that JFK was shot in the back very early and high on the hill. It was a preparatory shot. It wasn't meant to kill him. It was meant to butter him up, so that when he entered the Kill Zone, he wouldn't be a problem, that he would be a sitting duck.

It wasn't a bullet. Why would anyone want to shoot him with a bullet that stopped short in his back? Some have tried to rationalize it by saying that they were just trying to get one of "Oswald's" bullets into him. That is ridiculous! There was no bullet! 

I'm telling you: it was an ice flechette that delivered a drug. That is now certain. And anyone who fights it is either very stupid OR they are a Kennedy-killer: a modern, 21st century accomplice to the men who killed Kennedy.  

   

 I thank Kevin Barrett for inviting me on his program this evening, Truth Jihad, to discuss my new film The Pro Bono Watchman. 

Realizing the nature of his program and his audience, I want to reveal that that there is a clandestine association between the film and the JFK assassination. That is, there is an element from the JFK assassination that is an element in the story. And that is that a character gets attacked by being shot with an ice flechette, which is a tiny spicule of ice that is very sharp and able to pierce the skin. And it contains a drug, in the case of the film, a heart attack drug. In the case of JFK, it was a nerve agent, most likely shell fish toxin. But, the same gun could deliver either poison. 

So said CIA Chief  William Colby to the Church Committee in 1974, and it was called "the heart attack gun." I maintain that JFK was shot with it on November 22, 1963. It was the first shot that hit him; the shot to his back, which struck him a little to the right of the spine at the level of T3. 

If you bend you head down and put your hand at the junction of the neck and back, the big bump at the top of your back is T1. So, two segments below that is T3. That's where he was hit, a little to the right of his spine. 

It was a preparatory shot to soften him up for the Kill Zone that struck him high on the hill. So, JFK rode down the hill having been shot in the back, and then when he entered the Kill Zone which was much lower on the hill, he was shot in the throat and then in the head. 

Of course, the Official Story has it that he wasn't shot until he got low on the hill, and then a single shot hit him in the back and went through his body, coming out at the bottom of his throat, and then it traversed Connally's body, twice, and then entered it a third time, where it settled. Of course, it is preposterous, and they could have easily tested it by lining up animal tissues equal in density to all the tissues of Kennedy and Connally that it supposedly went through.  And you wouldn't have to kill animals to do it because we kill about a million animals a day in this country for meat. 

But, they never did that, and they never will, and for the same reason they will never count the gold in Ft. Knox. Some things, they just don't want to know. 

A hunter went bore hunting with a Carcano rifle like Oswald's. and he shot a bore with it, from a closer distance, and the bullet did not even traverse the animal's head.  

The Single Bullet Theory is absolutely preposterous. 

But, that brings us to the Zapruder film, which does not show the shot to the back. It shows Kennedy riding down the hill, smiling and waving. Then, he disappears behind the sign. And then he re-emerges reacting to having been shot in the throat. 

So, if what I'm saying is true, how come we don't see Kennedy reacting to being shot in the back earlier in the film? We don't see it because they cut it out. They cut out a huge swath of the Zapruder film- from before he was shot in the back to when he reached the Kill Zone. Do you see that big red rectangle? 

 That entire piece of the film was cut out. So, all the time in which JFK's limo rode very slowly down the hill there in that stretch was cut out. And the reason they cut it out was because during it, JFK was reacting to having been shot in the back. He stopped smiling. He stopped waving. And he was not himself. Jackie even told us that when she first looked at him, he had "quizzical" look on his face. 

The shot itself he barely felt. It felt like no more than a mosquito bite. How do I know? Because Colby said so. But then, the effect of the drug, the nerve agent, started seeping in. And the car was travelling very slowly to give it time. How slowly? Well, just think: Jean Hill was able to speak to JFK. She said to him: "Look this way, Mr. President. We want to take your picture." Imagine saying all that to someone who is passing you in a car. Even if they were passing you at 10 or 15 miles per hour, you wouldn't have time to say it. The limo must have been nearly stopped. Maybe it was going 5 miles per hour, but that's about it. 

So, by the time JFK reached the Kill Zone, he was drugged and incapacitated. The drug had two main effects: one was to immobilize his muscles, and the second was to numb his mind, to turn him into a helpless zombie. The evidence for that is the Zapruder film. This frame shows the complete loss of control of his muscles. You could call it a spasmodic paralysis. 

That is dyskinesia, which is defined as abnormal, uncontrollable, bodily movements. He has no reason to be sticking his elbows out like that, but he can't put his arms down. They don't work right. Jackie is trying to coax him to put his arm down, but to no avail. 

And from there, he just continued seizing up. Here he is right before the fatal head shot.

Oh My God, he is just completely seized up there. Now understand: physical trauma can't explain this. He did not suffer any physical trauma that could have done this. It was a chemical effect, from the drug they put in that icicle.  

Now, what about his mind? It's obvious in the Zapruder film that JFK was completely incapacitated mentally. There is a horrible, terrible rumor that has circulated that JFK yelled out, "I'm hit!" He NEVER did any such thing. That is a lie! He said nothing! And anyone who says that he did is a Kennedy-killer.  People need to stop repeating that ugly false rumor. He was incapable of saying anything. He was completely deranged. He was completely unaware of what was happening to him, the peril that he was in, that he was under attack. He took no action to protect himself or others. He took no evasive action of any kind. He just sat there in a dysfunctional and inebriated state. He was on a drug trip. He was tripping out. I'm telling you that his passivity and helplessness, which is plainly seen in the Zapruder film, is evidence that his mind was gone. Yet, he suffered no brain damage to that point. His derangement was not due to physical trauma. It was due to a chemical effect. He was poisoned. 

This is true beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt. He was not hit in the back with a regular bullet. He was not hit in the back with a sabotted bullet. No bullet of any kind could have hit him in the back and stopped so instantly. The laws of physics say that it is impossible. A bullet reaching him at flight speed could not have stopped that fast. We are talking about a a bullet going from a velocity of 1800 feet per second when it hit him to being stopped over a distance of one inch. If you know anything about physics, if you know anything about Newton's laws of motion, you know that it is impossible. 

And no, the bullet didn't fall out. It wasn't found on the floor of the limo or trapped in his clothes. THERE WAS NO BULLET! It was just a spicule of ice that pricked his skin and then burst and melted. It was just gone!

You understand that ice is a crystalline structure. It's like a gem. As water cools, it gets more dense, as all liquids do. But then, at 4 degrees C, a strange thing happens. Water starts expanding. The hydrogen and oxygen separate. It becomes hexagonal, and there are spaces, big spaces, empty space, between the atoms. 

The empty spaces make ice very fragile. And if it's contaminated with minerals, they make the bonds unstable, where it takes just a little bit of pressure to cause it to burst. 

Haven't you had the experience of digging an ice cube out of a tray when it suddenly explodes? It's due to minerals in the water. If you made ice out of distilled water, that contains nothing but H2O, it wouldn't burst. The more mineralized the water, the more fragile and subject to bursting is the ice from that water.  

So, that ice missile that they used on Kennedy was designed to pierce him, get into him for an inch or so, and then quickly disintegrate, come apart, and melt.  And that is what happened. 

So, when Dr. Humes, who was JFK's autopsist, probed the back wound and found no bullet, the reason he found no bullet was because there was no bullet; the ice had melted. 

This is all I am going to say right now, but I will tell you that my certainty about it is 100%.  There is NO CHANCE that JFK was hit in the back with a regular bullet or any kind of bullet except an ice bullet. That really did happen to him, and it is the best kept secret of the JFK assassination, that and the fact that Jack Ruby was innocent of shooting Oswald: completely, totally innocent. The Garage Shooter whom we see in the films was FBI Agent James Bookhout. 

   

 

An Alabama physician glumly says she is making "a lot of progress" in encouraging people to vaccinate – as she struggles to keep them alive.

Dr. Brytney Cobia, a hospitalist at Grandview Medical Center in Birmingham, wrote in a recent Facebook post that she is treating a lot of young, otherwise healthy people for serious coronavirus infections.

Dr. Cinque: We know that the majority of people who get Covid, get it with mild or no symptoms. So, what determines who succumbs seriously and who doesn't? It's not a matter of luck or chance. Obviously, your health has a lot to do with it. So, I don't accept the statement that "otherwise healthy people are getting serious Corona virus infections" and neither should you.   

"One of the last things they do before they're intubated is beg me for the vaccine," she wrote. "I hold their hand and tell them that I'm sorry, but it's too late." 

Dr. Cinque: Why are they intubating people who have the ability to beg? If you're begging, you're breathing. Imagine a person saying, "Please, would you give me the vaccine? I really want it now. I know I did a dumb thing. But please, let me have it." Anyone who can say all that is getting air. Why would you intubate such a person when you could just give them an oxygen cannula?  Why intubate when you know that 93% of people who get intubated die? And if the person was in a bad way with their breathing, they'd be pleading to you about that, not a vaccine. They'd be saying, "Please help me, I can't breathe!" Their mind would be on that, not vaccines. 

In her post, Cobia wrote that when a patient dies, she hugs their family members and urges them to get vaccinated. She said they cry and tell her they thought the pandemic was a "hoax," or "political," or targeting some other age group or skin color.

Dr. Cinque: Oh my God, this is so stupid. Can you imagine a doctor saying: "I'm so sorry your child died. Now, go get vaccinated." And what is she hugging them for when they aren't vaccinated? What about social distancing? And even if she, the doctor, is vaccinated, she knows that the vaccinated can still get infected and spread the infection. So, why is she hugging them?  

"They wish they could go back. But they can't," Cobia wrote. "So they thank me and they go get the vaccine. 

Dr. Cinque: "How am I going to live without him? (Crying) Where did you say the vaccine station is?" Yeah, right. 

And I go back to my office, write their death note, and say a small prayer that this loss will save more lives."

Dr. Cinque: So, she just saw them and hugged them; then the next thing she does is go write them a note? Are you buying that? Then, she prays to God, "Please, God; let this senseless death lead to more people getting vaccinated, so that others may live." Seriously, she says that? Out loud or to herself?  

Cobia was pregnant when she battled COVID-19 last summer, and she had a low-grade fever, sore throat, fatigue, congestion and sneezing. She spent a weekend with other family members – and eight of them ultimately tested positive for the virus, including her husband. Most suffered more severe symptoms than she did, she said.

"The fear that I feel for myself and my unborn baby is bad enough, but the guilt that I feel for exposing people that trusted me is what I want to focus on," she wrote in a Facebook post. "Don't be me. Don't wear a mask everywhere else in the world EXCEPT around your core."

Dr. Cinque: What is she saying there? That we should mask not only in public but also at home with our loved ones? Do she and her husband wear masks now during sexual intercourse?  I bet you that not even Dr. Fauci does that. I hope you realize that this whole thing is just a propaganda piece to get people to submit to vaccination. And as you can imagine, it is not working on Dr. Cinque.  And what about that picture? Can't you see it's staged? Why would she stop and sit down on the floor to commiserate? Who actually does that? And it's the Covid ward of a busy hospital, so how could she be alone there? This is bad scriptwriting and bad directing. It was written by the stupid for the stupid. 

I hope you realize that my track record on Afghanistan is spot-on perfect. For years, I said that the Taliban would never tolerate the keeping of any foreign forces in Afghanistan. It took Trump and his people about two years to realize that they really meant it, that they weren't going to bend on that. But hey, better late than never. 

Now, the Taliban's military momentum is like a tsunami. They are gaining more territory every day. And, the most significant thing about it is that it is often happening without violence. The other side is just giving up. They don't want to fight, and who can blame them? They are switching sides, and they are being welcomed and accepted by the Taliban. 

The Taliban is also saying that, despite their military dominance, they remain committed to "dialogue and understanding." And I know exactly what they mean because it isn't just government soldiers who are joining them. Other kinds of government workers are also doing it- going over to their side- and they too are being welcomed with open arms. 

The bottom line is that the Taliban knows that the successor government is going to need all kinds of personnel to run the country, and they're all for keeping the ones who have been doing it- so long as they pledge allegiance to the Taliban. So, in that respect, there will be a  merger of the Taliban with the Afghan government. 

But, the clincher is that the top leadership will have to leave. Ghani, Abdullah, and anyone they consider a quisling will have to go.  They won't kill them, but they will make them go. 

So, Afghanistan is going the way of Vietnam, and the plain, unvarnished truth is that we lost both wars. 

The big question that remains is: how long will it take for Kabul to fall? I will simply say: less than a year. So, it will fall faster than Saigon did.  

Clarification regarding recent enemy fabrications and propaganda

After the stooge enemy was exposed and suffered humiliating defeats across the country where thousands of soldiers defected and embraced the open arms of the Islamic Emirate, and nearly two hundred districts were cleansed from their malicious presence, the enemy has now reached for propaganda, fabrications and other futile tactics regarding which we clarify the following:

– Fake statements, documents, threats and other letters are recently being circulated on social media and even physically airdropped into some areas that impose restrictions on locals, threatens them, specifies gender laws, regulates lives, beards, movements and even contains baseless claims about marriage of daughters and other such issues.

– Similarly fake videos and footage of multi-year-old video scenes showing activities of Daesh militias are also passed off as recent actions committed by the Mujahideen of Islamic Emirate.

– Moreover, spurious claims and propaganda is being conjured and handed over to media by the enemy about horrendous dealings by the Mujahideen of Islamic Emirate with locals in the recently liberated districts.

– Unfounded reports about inflicting hundreds of casualties on the Mujahideen of Islamic Emirate or retaking recently liberated districts are also being published by the enemy.

The Islamic Emirate rejects all above material and does not allow anyone to transgress against people anywhere, or to impose laws and regulations by themselves, or to circumscribe lives, and neither has there been any ill-treatment of women and men, nor is anyone allowed to do so.

All this propaganda by the enemy is aimed at controlling their fear and anxiety, to distract common thinking and to cover up their compounding failures.

We want all media outlets, activists and the general public to not fall victim to such propaganda and to rest assured about their Mujahideen brothers. All our publications will be distributed through our official and other channels through which we have communicated with outlets over the past twenty years. Any material published by any additional and novel channels should be ignored.

 

 Today, a fight broke out on a Frontier Airlines flight. 

Two days ago, a fight broke out on an American Airlines flight.

So, why do people believe that when some swarthy guys, some of whom were quite little, started waving boxcutters around on a flight, that everyone just did what they said, even the crew, even the pilots, who turned the plane over to them? And that happened 4x on 1 day? 

People believe it because people are stupid. Some pundit should make a joke about it on television, saying, "Why couldn't these guys have been flying on 9/11 when we needed them?" 

Please read this. The significant point is that Lebanon has no extradition treaty with Japan. So, what did Japan do? Did they attack Lebanon? No. But that's what the U.S. did in 2001. We attacked Afghanistan over Osama bin laden even though we had no extradition treaty with them. 

So, that invasion was illegal. And it's not like the Taliban government was being cocky and defiant. It's not like they said, "Go to Hell. We're not giving him to you." Rather, they asked us to show them the evidence of his guilt. And when we refused to do that (there not being any; we concocted that later with Fatty bin laden) they offered to turn him over to a third country for prosecution. But, that wasn't good enough either. We had to have a war. And everything that happened in that war- every life lost and every life ruined, both Afghan and American- is on us. 

American father, son get Japan prison terms for Ghosn escape

YURI KAGEYAMA

Mon, July 19, 2021, 12:05 AM

TOKYO (AP) — A Tokyo court handed down prison terms for the American father and son accused of helping Nissan’s former chairman, Carlos Ghosn, escape to Lebanon while awaiting trial in Japan.

Michael Taylor was sentenced Monday to two years in prison, while his son Peter was sentenced to one year and eight months. 

They were charged with helping a criminal in the December 2019 escape of Ghosn, who hid in a big box that was flown on a private jet via Turkey to Lebanon. Lebanon has no extradition treaty with Japan. 

In handing down the sentencing, Chief Judge Hideo Nirei said they had committed a serious violation of the law, as now there is next to no chance of putting Ghosn on trial. 

"This case enabled Ghosn, a defendant of a serious crime, to escape overseas,” he said. 

I got a new piano, the Yamaha CLP-745, and it is magnificent. It really sounds like a grand piano. To break it in, I recorded a great song by Cole Porter, one of the best love songs ever written: 

In The Still Of The Night. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAVZrObIBVM

The folks at the Bright International Film Festival in England, who awarded us Best Drama for The Pro Bono Watchman, asked me to take a picture of myself holding the certificate they sent me, and here it is.

Robert Jordan found this first image of the Sniper's Nest, with the boxes snug with the left side of the window. Then there's one with the boxes pretty centered. Then, there's one with the boxes over on the right side. Which one was the real deal? None of them. None of the known shots were taken from the 6th floor. It's all a prop, and apparently, they couldn't decide how they wanted to stage it.

I have exposed phony atrocity footage from the News before, such as the one purportedly showing children who were victims of Assad's chemical weapons in Syria, which was circulated widely though obviously fake.

Now there is a fresh one purportedly showing Taliban fighters executing surrendering Afghan commandos. You can skip the first minute of this video because it's about something else. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g46R7peYX9g

Before I even watched it, I knew it had to be fake. The Taliban aren't stupid. They know very well how this would be perceived. They wouldn't do it just for PR reasons. They've been on a campaign trying to show the world, including leaders in Iran, Russia, and elsewhere, that they're civilized. So, they wouldn't do this. They've been accepting Afghan Army surrenders by the droves. So, why would they start with summary executions now. They wouldn't. They couldn't. They didn't. And even on the video, CNN admits that the Taliban denies that they did it. 

And if you go to the Taliban website, as I did, this is what it says:

Similarly fake videos and footage of multi-year-old video scenes showing activities of Daesh militias are also passed off as recent actions committed by the Mujahideen of Islamic Emirate.

So, what tells us that the footage is fake? First, notice that they say that the massacre occurred a month again. Well, if it occurred a month ago, why are they just reporting it now? Why didn't they report it a month ago? It's because it takes time to fabricate these phony stories and videos. Second, watch it again. You see the commandos being held at gunpoint, but as soon as the firing starts, it's all just a flurry, with the phone pointed at the ground, where you are not really seeing anything. It reminds me of the flurry we saw in the basement of the Dallas PD during the commotion that followed "Ruby" shooting Oswald. 

We never got to see Oswald being carried out of the basement. We never got to see "Ruby" being dragged through the corner door. It was just pandemonium without showing anything at all except commotion, and it's the same way with the other. Finally, at the end of it, it goes to showing you the outcome, the dead bodies, but only vaguely. Look how blurred it is.

This is complete horse shit. The Taliban wouldn't do that. They have no need to. It isn't remotely in their interest to do it. This is pure propaganda from CNN. And I have to wonder: what is their purpose? Are they trying to pressure Biden to reverse course? The worrisome thing is that it just might happen because, as of now, Biden plans to leave about 1000 American troops in Afghanistan "protecting the embassy and guarding the airport." And if he does that, it's certain that the Taliban will eventually attack them.  They have said for years that all U.S. and foreign forces have to get out. They might tolerate a few guards at the Embassy, if we're still going to have one there, but they are certainly not going to tolerate a thousand troops. Leaving a thousand troops there is a recipe for war.  Then, when war comes to the thousand troops, it could become Biden's "Tonkin Gulf" incident, where he claims it was an unprovoked attack on our peaceful forces, and now we have to go back in and destroy the Taliban, once and for all. Yes, it could come to that, and CNN is already stoking it. It's bad enough to lie with words, but when you start lying with phony footages, that is vile. It is a vicious crime against their own viewers. 

 

On the left is Jack Ruby's hat as per the Library of Congress; on the right is his hat as per the Jackson photo. Which do you believe? On the Library of Congress hat, the centerstrip of the ribbon is grey, whereas in the Jackson photo, it's black. It's a small difference, but don't tell me it's unimportant. Don't do it, because if you do, I'll you that you are a Kennedy-killer.  

This isn't the first time the Library of Congress and the National Archives over clothing from the JFK assassination. Over the years, the National Archives has paraded around various different shirts that they said was Oswald's.. In reality, none of them were. They have never shown us Oswald's real shirt. It wasn't an American shirt. It wasn't made in America, and it wasn't made for the American market. It was undoubtedly a shirt he obtained in the Soviet Union when he was there. 

But, as for Ruby's hat, I have no way of knowing if either one of those was his. I know that the man on the right, with the long, rug-like hair that looks like a bad toupee, wasn't Jack Ruby. That was James Bookhout. But, was he wearing Ruby's hat? I don't know. Maybe he was, and maybe he wasn't. And look how short and burly his neck was. Ruby's neck wasn't like that. His was longer and thinner. And his ear wasn't like that either. 

They deliberately staged the Jackson photo so that you couldn't see Bookhout's face, but nevertheless, there are distinct elements that establish that that was him and not Jack Ruby. 

 

 

This man was the longest running top general in Afghanistan, but he took command in August 2018. So, that's a little less than 3 years in a 20 year war. So, what was the average length of command? I don't know, but if it was 2 years, then that means they rifled through 10 top commanders, and that is pretty darn outlandish when you think about it. If it was a corporation that changed its CEO that often, you would have serious doubts about the state of the company. 

But, the Afghanistan War has been waged and reported in sea of delusion. First, there wasn't a speck of evidence that the Taliban was involved in 9/11 or that they were knowingly allowing terrorists to operate from Afghanistan to attack other countries. And not only is there no evidence that they were aware that Osama bin laden was doing that, there is no evidence that he was doing it. The only evidence ever put forward is the ridiculous Fatty bin laden video, which is so obviously not him.  

And it's plain as day that we are well aware that the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11. Because: if we thought they did, we never would have started negotiating with them to return them to power on any basis. 

And consider the total illegality of our invasion of Afghanistan. It was justified by their refusal to extradite bin laden, but we did not have an extradition treaty with them. So far, the UK government, with whom we do have an extradition treaty, has refused to extradite Julian Assange. And don't take that as an endorsement of the UK because they've been monsters too. But, the point is that international law does not allow one country to attack another over extradition, and especially not if no extradition treaty exists. Plus, the Taliban offered to extradite bin laden to a 3rd neutral country to whom we could have presented our evidence. What would have been so terrible about that? Wouldn't it have been better than having a war? How many men, women, and children did we kill waging the war? And none of them, not even any of the men, had anything to do with 9/11.  

We lost the war in Afghanistan, just as we lost the war in Vietnam, although few pundits are admitting it. But, the fact is, that not only did we lose the war, but we started the war, and we are responsible for all the death and destruction of that war. From the outset, it was a war of choice for us. We had to cross an ocean and two seas to launch it. The whole idea that a war was necessary to keep Americans safe is preposterous. It is insane. Yet, no one from government and media is admitting it. Instead, they are spinning it, claiming that we accomplished our mission.  The only thing we accomplished was the deaths and maimings of tens of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Afghans. And anyone who claims otherwise is completely out of touch with reality. 

There is a barrage of very explicit war crimes committed by the United States in Afghanistan, such as bombing 9 wedding parties, but the undeniable truth is that the entire war was a crime- from the very first bomb that was dropped. 

The disgrace of losing the war is nothing compared to the disgrace of having started it. 

 

2 Comment

All Comments



• Susie Chastain Ray

  They wouldn't have known about those pictures of Oswald outside of the School Book Despotary until much later. However, that picture is obviously altered.

  • Like
  •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 
    Share
  •  · 3h
  • Active

    Ralph Cinque

    Admin

    Susie, the FBI was reacting to and talking about the Altgens Photo that weekend. This is an FBI internal memo. Note the addendum was dated 11/25, which means the body of it was written before that. And J. Edgar Hoover had his people implanted at the newspapers. It was a network of control that was like something out of The Godfather.
  • 
    
    
    
    
  •