Friday, August 25, 2017

Preston James: The Disturbing Truth about All American Wars in the Mideast since WW2


America had no legal or constitutional right to be involved in any Mideast Wars since WW2.
The USG never had any valid legal right to attack Iraq over its invasion of Kuwait in 1991 under US law, the US Constitution or International Law either.
Why? Because Iraq was very craftily manipulated by the USG and the CIA to invade Kuwait.
Here’s how it happened.
*

April Glaspie
It was a very crafty CIA covert operation that created the Invasion of Kuwait through political manipulation.
The CIA had approached the leaders of Kuwait with a plan to engage in horizontal drilling into Iraq’s main oil field.
Kuwaiti production was waning, and the CIA proprietary drilling company from Sante Fe [sic] assured Kuwaiti officials that the plan was foolproof and would never be discovered by Iraq.
After the horizontal drilling was completed and the oil was being pumped, it is alleged by some well-informed insiders that US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie met with Saddam Hussein.
She informed him that Kuwait was using a new type of drilling (horizontal drilling) and was pumping oil from Iraq’s biggest oil field.
It has been alleged that Saddam Hussein was also provided with satellite photos made with ground penetrating radar that showed the horizontal drilling.
Saddam reacted with anger and asked Ambassador Glaspie what would happen if Iraq invaded Kuwait and took back the land which was rightfully theirs in the first place, taken away by the British earlier. Glaspie supposedly replied, the USG would view that as an “inter-Arab” affair and would consider it none of our concern.
Saddam Hussein took this as a green light from the USG and proceeded to invade Kuwait. Immediately there was an outcry in Congress that something had to be done to stop this Iraqi aggression, which was supposedly threatening the security of the whole Mideast.
Of course the public was never informed that Saddam Hussein had started working for the CIA as a bicycle hit-man at 15 years of age, and worked his way up through the system to become a full-fledged CIA dictator-puppet like Noriega and so many others. Saddam Hussein was willing to attack Iran on Israel’s behalf, in a lengthy war that resulted in millions of dead, with many of these being innocent women and children non-combatants.
Right now Iraq is a destroyed nation. Its major infrastructure has been destroyed by American bombs, and a once modern nation has been reduced to rubble.
Sadly that is what Israel and the Pentagon have long planned for Syria and Iran too.
This is not likely to happen however because the Russian Federation has stepped in and is now defending its Mideast allies, Syria and Iran.
*
Advanced Technology

Electronic warfare device
The Russian Federation’s electronic warfare systems are reputed by deep insiders to be back-engineered alien ET technology, and at present, are far superior to America’s electronic warfare weaponry.
Proof of this is the incident in March of 2014 when two Russian Su-24’s armed with the Khibiny system shut off the USS Donald Cook’s main power bus, temporarily rendering its Aegis missile system and all onboard sonar and radar completely inoperable during that time. 
The USS Donald Cook was dead in the water until the Su-24s left and turned off their Khibiny system.
It is a very good bet that this same advanced electronic warfare technology was used to set up the two recent collisions involving US Navy destroyers, with state of the art radar, sonar and other electronic warfare systems.
Since so many of the CPUs used on these ships were manufactured in China, it is possible that they all have secret backdoors that could be accessed remotely, but my best guess is that the ship’s GPS, radar and sonar were spoofed by someone’s satellite transmission using Quantum transmissions and Dimensional waves (D-waves).

USS Donald Cook
*
There’s a sucker born every minute” – P.T. Barnum
After the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the CIA’s Controlled Major Mass Media (CMMM) began immediately to publish and broadcast USG propaganda, big lies and false narratives.

During Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ’s testimony to the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, she claimed Iraqi troops pulled babies out of incubators and threw them on the hospital floor to die. It was later revealed that she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States and that her testimony was proved false. It was a pretty convincing tale with tears and all, and Amnesty International even backed her story at first but later admitted it could not be verified. We now know for certain it was a fabricated story, a big lie and a clear case of false-atrocity propaganda.
The DC Establishment public relations firm Hill & Knowlton, hired by Kuwait, immediately prepared atrocity propaganda to motivate mainstream America to support a big American war to crush Saddam Hussein and Iraq.
The Kuwaiti Ambassador’s daughter told a very tall tale that was later shown to be a complete fabrication, that the Iraqi soldiers pulled Kuwaiti babies from incubators and threw them on the floor of the hospital to die.
Voice of God Alien ET Technology was deployed in the Gulf War.
Insiders have claimed for years that back-engineered Alien ET electronic warfare technology was deployed against Iraqi soldiers by the American Military.
There have been reliable reports from vetted, respected individuals that the “Voice of God” technology was deployed.
This technology was able to remotely entrain a voice believed by the Iraqi soldiers to be the voice of Allah that they plainly heard coming down from the heavens above.
Reports indicated that this voice of Allah instructed these Iraqi solders to lay down their arms and accept death and receive their immediate rewards from Allah. Thousands of Iraqi troops did so and were bulldozed into the ground to their deaths without any attempt to defend themselves.
Saddam Hussein did not have operable weapons of mass destruction when America attacked Iraq the second time and invaded its capitol city.
The second Mideast War was wrongly fought over false claims by the CIA and the Pentagon that Saddam Hussein and Iraq had operable weapons of mass destruction and was planning to deploy them against America. This claim was later proved to be completely false and was knowingly concocted by the Pentagon and fully supported in the UN by General Colin Powell.
So it is clear beyond any reasonable doubt that both the first Gulf war that stopped short of a complete invasion and set up “no fly zones”, and also the second Iraq war were major international war crimes, crimes against humanity and major acts of aggression against Iraq. The claim that it was the nations of the world that demanded these invasions through the UN was a concoction too, and the coalition forces were economically and financially manipulated into cursory support.
*

Rare Earth Elements found in Afghanistan
Now for the US invasion of Afghanistan.
The DC Establishment had wanted to take over Afghanistan for many years to get the opium and the rare earth minerals like Lithium for batteries. Plus the Pentagon PNACers and top NeoCons in the USG, most of whom were Israeli-American “Israel-first” Dual citizens wanted to protect Saudi Arabia as part of the Petro Dollar agreement set up in 1971 by Henry Kissinger for Richard Nixon.
The Soviets had the same intentions and invaded Afghanistan in late 1979 and finally ended in early 1989 because the CIA had created and built up the Mujahedin army inside Afghanistan and armed them with hundreds of shoulder-fired Stinger missiles. After the Russians withdrew, the Pentagon and the CIA kept the Mujahedin army viable and operative. 
When the Mossad (assisted by the Pentagon, NORTHCOM, the Administration, and the FAA) attacked America on 9-11-01, the USG immediately laid blame on the Terrorists run by Osama bin Laden that were based in Afghanistan.
This fake meme was broadcast and published day and night – 24/7 – by the Controlled Major Mass Media (CMMM), which neglected to inform the American masses of the real truth – that Osama bin Laden was just another CIA man used to run the Mujahedin for the Pentagon. His CIA trade-craft name was “Colonel Tim Osman”, and he was seen numerous times going in and out of the Pentagon long before 9-11-01.

Several Israeli leaders, including Barak and Netanyahu, chortled about how 9-11 helped redeem and justify Israel’s hard-line position against its enemies, hoping that the US would realize what Israel had been dealing with
ISIS is the private mercenary army of the CIA, Israel and Saudi Arabia and has now been defeated.
There is substantial reason to believe that the CIA worked with Israel and Saudi Arabia to create a private mercenary Army called ISIS, ISIL or Daesh et al. This massive, well-supplied and -paid heterogeneous mercenary army was trained, supported and paid by the CIA with help from the Saudis.
This private foreign mercenary army of the CIA, Israel and Saudi Arabia has now been defeated by Syrian forces for Assad, with the help of precision Russian air-power. The Russian Federation is Syria’s legitimate and official ally, and was invited to be in Syria, to help defend Syria. Russia is a strong partner of the Syrians and has invested a lot of money there.
America has never had any business fighting anyone in Syria since it was never an ally and was never invited by Syria, who never wanted America there. Besides, the US Military has been accused by Syria of attacking its Syrian troops, like Israel occasionally did, and of supplying ISIS. It has now been admitted that ISIS’ wounded have been taken to Israel for medical treatment and that is strong evidence that they represent Israel and were created by Israel – the progenitor of Mideast terrorism.
Foreign CIA puppet/Cutout leaders get disposed of when no longer needed.
Like all other CIA foreign puppets, Osama bin Laden (Colonel Osman) was quickly discarded when no longer needed. But this time, he was used as a super devil to motivate the American Masses to attack Afghanistan. He died late in 2001, either from Americans bombs or of Kidney disease (Marfan’s disorder, the same genetic disorder that Abe Lincoln had and would have died of soon after his presidency, had he lived). He was buried in an unmarked grave, according to Mideast newspapers. But the Pentagon propaganda psyops masters decided to keep him officially alive, even though he was dead.

Afghanistan (Fine Art by James Dietz)
So now we know for certain that the USG’s officially stated reasons for America invading Afghanistan, as in both the Gulf War and the Invasion of Iraq, were all based on big government lies, false-narratives, and blatant propaganda.
Since WW2, the USG never had any valid reason to ever go to war in Iraq or Afghanistan or in any other war in the Mideast. These were all wars fought for the International Banksters, run out of the City of London.
But now the USG has recommitted American soldiers to Afghanistan and is sending in at least 6,000 more to fight in this illegal war of aggression for the Banksters, Israel and the Dual Citizens in the Pentagon.
Afghanistan did not attack America on 9-11-01.
Ever since the USG invaded Afghanistan in 2001, after falsely blaming them for the Israeli attack on America on 9-11-01, the US Army has been protecting the poppy production, which has increased many fold and is now the world’s largest.
The USAF flies the opium out of Afghanistan, and it ends up on the streets of America. Now, in America, young deaths from cheap, pure Heroin are the highest ever. And this is all done by the CIA to provide vast sums of drug money for black ops, money that is off the books and unaccountable to the Congress or the American people.
More American troops are now be sent to Afghanistan, because the Pentagon claims it is the root of most terrorism and there are many terrorist groups supported there. This is just another big USG lie. Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UK, and the USA are the world’s biggest terrorist countries. This is a hard, cold fact that needs to be faced.
Is this new American troop deployment to Afghanistan a secret way of trying to build up the Mujahedin into ISIS again?
America had no right under international law, American law or the US Constitution to ever attack Libya and murder Muammar Ghaddafy.
The Pentagon and the US Administration were ordered to do so by the International Banksters based in the City of London, a one square mile private nation inside London proper with its own ambassadors and police. It pays no taxes to the UK, but runs the global fiat interest-bearing, debt-note money systems.
*

(Copyright Gilbert Yu)
Conclusion

General Smedley Butler
Each of these nations – America, Israel, the UK, and Saudi Arabia, which foment terror all around the world through the CIA and NATO – has a war-based economy. This is because they have private Fiat money production that uses pernicious interest-bearing debt notes as mandated tender, which produces continuing inflation.
These terrorist nations must keep engaging in wars of aggression to acquire cheap natural resources and oil for the large International corporations and big profits for defense contractors and the Banksters.
The most decorated US Marine ever, General Smedley Butler, who was twice awarded the Medal of Honor, explained all this in his classic book, War is a Racket.

*

WashingtonsBlog: Are Conspiracy Theorists Nuts?

Conspiracy Theorists USED TO Be Accepted As Normal

Democracy and free market capitalism were founded on conspiracy theories.
The Magna Carta, the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and other  founding Western documents were based on conspiracy theories. Greek democracy and free market capitalism were also based on conspiracy theories.
But those were the bad old days …Things have now changed.


The CIA Coined the Term Conspiracy Theorist In 1967

That all changed in the 1960s.
Specifically, in April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch which coined the term “conspiracy theories” … and recommended methods for discrediting such theories.  The dispatch was marked “psych” –  short for “psychological operations” or disinformation –  and “CS” for the CIA’s “Clandestine Services” unit.
The dispatch was produced in responses to a Freedom of Information Act request by the New York Times in 1976.
The dispatch states:
2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization.
***
The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.
3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the [conspiracy] question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:
a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the [official investigation of the relevant event] made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by …  propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.
***
4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:
a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider.
***
b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent–and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) …
***
c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc.
***
d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other.
***
f. As to charges that the Commission’s report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.
g. Such vague accusations as that “more than ten people have died mysteriously” can always be explained in some natural way ….
5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission’s Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.
Here are screenshots of part of the memo:
CIA conspiracyCIA conspiracy2
Summarizing the tactics which the CIA dispatch recommended:
  • Claim that it would be impossible for so many people would keep quiet about such a big conspiracy
  • Claim that eyewitness testimony is unreliable
  • Claim that this is all old news, as “no significant new evidence has emerged”
  • Ignore conspiracy claims unless discussion about them is already too active
  • Claim that it’s irresponsible to speculate
  • Accuse theorists of being wedded to and infatuated with their theories
  • Accuse theorists of being politically motivated
  • Accuse theorists of having financial interests in promoting conspiracy theories
In other words, the CIA’s clandestine services unit created the arguments for attacking conspiracy theories as unreliable in the 1960s as part of its psychological warfare operations.




But Aren’t Conspiracy Theories – In Fact – Nuts?


Forget Western history and CIA dispatches … aren’t conspiracy theorists nutty?

In fact, conspiracies are so common that judges are trained to look at conspiracy allegations as just another legal claim to be disproven or proven based on the specific evidence:

Federal and all 50 state’s codes include specific statutes addressing conspiracy, and providing the punishment for people who commit conspiracies.
But let’s examine what the people trained to weigh evidence and reach conclusions think about “conspiracies”. Let’s look at what American judges think.
Searching Westlaw, one of the 2 primary legal research networks which attorneys and judges use to research the law, I searched for court decisions including the word “Conspiracy”. This is such a common term in lawsuits that it overwhelmed Westlaw. Specifically, I got the following message:
“Your query has been intercepted because it may retrieve a large number of documents.”
From experience, I know that this means that there were potentially millions or many hundreds of thousands of cases which use the term. There were so many cases, that Westlaw could not even start processing the request.
So I searched again, using the phrase “Guilty of Conspiracy”. I hoped that this would not only narrow my search sufficiently that Westlaw could handle it, but would give me cases where the judge actually found the defendant guilty of a conspiracy. This pulled up exactly 10,000 cases — which is the maximum number of results which Westlaw can give at one time. In other words, there were more than 10,000 cases using the phrase “Guilty of Conspiracy” (maybe there’s a way to change my settings to get more than 10,000 results, but I haven’t found it yet).
Moreover, as any attorney can confirm, usually only appeal court decisions are published in the Westlaw database. In other words, trial court decisions are rarely published; the only decisions normally published are those of the courts which hear appeals of the trial. Because only a very small fraction of the cases which go to trial are appealed, this logically means that the number of guilty verdicts in conspiracy cases at trial must be much, much larger than 10,000.
Moreover, “Guilty of Conspiracy” is only one of many possible search phrases to use to find cases where the defendant was found guilty of a lawsuit for conspiracy. Searching on Google, I got 3,170,000 results (as of yesterday) under the term “Guilty of Conspiracy”, 669,000 results for the search term “Convictions for Conspiracy”, and 743,000 results for “Convicted for Conspiracy”.
Of course, many types of conspiracies are called other things altogether. For example, a long-accepted legal doctrine makes it illegal for two or more companies to conspire to fix prices, which is called “Price Fixing” (1,180,000 results).
Given the above, I would extrapolate that there have been hundreds of thousands of convictions for criminal or civil conspiracy in the United States.
Finally, many crimes go unreported or unsolved, and the perpetrators are never caught. Therefore, the actual number of conspiracies committed in the U.S. must be even higher.
In other words, conspiracies are committed all the time in the U.S., and many of the conspirators are caught and found guilty by American courts. Remember, Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme was a conspiracy theory.
Indeed, conspiracy is a very well-recognized crime in American law, taught to every first-year law school student as part of their basic curriculum. Telling a judge that someone has a “conspiracy theory” would be like telling him that someone is claiming that he trespassed on their property, or committed assault, or stole his car. It is a fundamental legal concept.
Obviously, many conspiracy allegations are false (if you see a judge at a dinner party, ask him to tell you some of the crazy conspiracy allegations which were made in his court). Obviously, people will either win or lose in court depending on whether or not they can prove their claim with the available evidence. But not all allegations of trespass, assault, or theft are true, either.
Proving a claim of conspiracy is no different from proving any other legal claim, and the mere label “conspiracy” is taken no less seriously by judges.

It’s not only Madoff. The heads of Enron were found guilty of conspiracy, as was the head of Adelphia. Numerous lower-level government officials have been found guilty of conspiracy. See thisthisthisthisand this.

Time Magazine’s financial columnist Justin Fox writes:

Some financial market conspiracies are real …
Most good investigative reporters are conspiracy theorists, by the way.

And what about the NSA and the tech companies that have cooperated with them?



 But Our Leaders Wouldn’t Do That


While people might admit that corporate executives and low-level government officials might have engaged in conspiracies – they may be strongly opposed to considering that the wealthiest or most powerful might possibly have done so.
But powerful insiders have long admitted to conspiracies. For example, Obama’s Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein, wrote:
Of course some conspiracy theories, under our definition, have turned out to be true. The Watergate hotel room used by Democratic National Committee was, in fact, bugged by Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House. In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs under Project MKULTRA, in an effort to investigate the possibility of “mind control.” Operation Northwoods, a rumored plan by the Department of Defense to simulate acts of
terrorism and to blame them on Cuba, really was proposed by high-level officials ….

But Someone Would Have Spilled the Beans

A common defense to people trying sidetrack investigations into potential conspiracies is to say that “someone would have spilled the beans” if there were really a conspiracy.
But famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg explains:
It is a commonplace that “you can’t keep secrets in Washington” or “in a democracy, no matter how sensitive the secret, you’re likely to read it the next day in the New York Times.” These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. Of course eventually many secrets do get out that wouldn’t in a fully totalitarian society. But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public. This is true even when the information withheld is well known to an enemy and when it is clearly essential to the functioning of the congressional war power and to any democratic control of foreign policy. The reality unknown to the public and to most members of Congress and the press is that secrets that would be of the greatest import to many of them can be kept from them reliably for decades by the executive branch, even though they are known to thousands of insiders.
History proves Ellsberg right. For example:
  • A BBC documentary shows that:
There was “a planned coup in the USA in 1933 by a group of right-wing American businessmen . . . . The coup was aimed at toppling President Franklin D Roosevelt with the help of half-a-million war veterans. The plotters, who were alleged to involve some of the most famous families in America, (owners of Heinz, Birds Eye, Goodtea, Maxwell Hse & George Bush’s Grandfather, Prescott) believed that their country should adopt the policies of Hitler and Mussolini to beat the great depression”
Moreover, “the tycoons told General Butler the American people would accept the new government because they controlled all the newspapers.” Have you ever heard of this conspiracy before? It was certainly a very large one. And if the conspirators controlled the newspapers then, how much worse is it today with media consolidation?
  • The government’s spying on Americans began before 9/11 (confirmed here and here. And see this.) But the public didn’t learn about it until many years later. Indeed, the the New York Times delayed the story so that it would not affect the outcome of the 2004 presidential election
  • The decision to launch the Iraq war was made before 9/11. Indeed, former CIA director George Tenet said that the White House wanted to invade Iraq long before 9/11, and inserted “crap” in its justifications for invading Iraq. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill – who sat on the National Security Council – also says that Bush planned the Iraq war before 9/11. And top British officials saythat the U.S. discussed Iraq regime change one month after Bush took office. Dick Cheney apparently even made Iraqi’s oil fields a national security priority before 9/11. And it has now been shown that a handful of people were responsible for willfully ignoring the evidence that Iraq lacked weapons of mass destruction. These facts have only been publicly disclosed recently. Indeed, Tom Brokaw said, “All wars are based on propaganda.” A concerted effort to produce propaganda is a conspiracy


Moreover, high-level government officials and insiders have admitted to dramatic conspiracies after the fact, including:
The admissions did not occur until many decades after the events.
These examples show that it is possible to keep conspiracies secret for a long time, without anyone “spilling the beans”.
In addition, to anyone who knows how covert military operations work, it is obvious that segmentation on a “need-to-know basis”, along with deference to command hierarchy, means that a couple of top dogs can call the shots and most people helping won’t even know the big picture at the time they are participating.
Moreover, those who think that co-conspirators will brag about their deeds forget that people in the military or intelligence or who have huge sums of money on the line can be very disciplined. They are not likely to go to the bar and spill the beans like a down-on-their-luck, second-rate alcoholic robber might do.
Finally, people who carry out covert operations may do so for ideological reasons — believing that the “ends justify the means”. Never underestimate the conviction of an ideologue.

Conclusion

The bottom line is that some conspiracy claims are nutty and some are true. Each has to be judged on its own facts.
Humans have a tendency to try to explain random events through seeing patterns … that’s how our brains our wired. Therefore, we have to test our theories of connection and causality against the cold, hard facts.
On the other hand, the old saying by Lord Acton is true:
I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.
Those who operate without checks and balances – and without the disinfectant sunlight of public scrutiny and accountability – tend to act in their own best interests … and the little guy gets hurt.
The early Greeks knew it, as did those who forced the king to sign the Magna Carta, the Founding Fathers and the father of modern economics. We should remember this important tradition of Western civilization.
Postscript: The ridicule of all conspiracy theories is really just an attempt to diffuse criticism of the powerful.
The wealthy are not worse than other people … but they are not necessarily better either. Powerful leaders may not be bad people … or they could be sociopaths.