1

6 Bizarre Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True

By Alexa Erickson | Collective Evolution

Mainstream media has done their due diligence to slap a label on any news story that doesn’t fit their agenda, which we’ve come to discover is dictated by the world’s elite. Many stories are derided as mere conspiracy theories, ensuring they don’t receive serious consideration and are instead viewed as some sort of backward joke.

Conspiracy theories are stigmatized because people don’t want false news filling up their heads, and how can anyone blame them? Yet, because mainstream media has garnered the reputation of being the go-to for factual information, they have the ability to take possible truths and immediately have them ridiculed and dismissed.

But alternative outlets and powerful people such as WikiLeaks, Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, and many unbiased journalists are paving the path to break such stigmas. They are opening people up to the notion that they should decide for themselves whether many of the “conspiracy theories” the mainstream so readily trashes are worth further consideration; to the notion that, in fact, the mainstream may be actively suppressing the truth rather than promoting it.

Here are five examples of conspiracy theories that proved to be true:

1. U.S. Military Fired 300 Shells at North Vietnamese Torpedo Boats That Weren’t Even There

Sometimes called the USS Maddox Incident, the Gulf of Tonkin incident surrounded U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War when the destroyer USS Maddox apparently fired at North Vietnamese Navy torpedo boats as part of an intelligence patrol. Almost 300 shells were shot off. President Lyndon B. Johnson quickly drafted the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution as a tool for providing legal justification for U.S. military intrusion in Vietnam. But that isn’t what actually happened.

In 2005, a declassified internal National Security Agency study exposed the reality that no North Vietnamese naval vessels were even present during the incident. In 1965, President Johnson commented: “For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there.”

Navy pilot James Stockdale disputed the event, as did others present, saying, “I had the best seat in the house to watch that event, and our destroyers were just shooting at phantom targets — there were no PT boats there … There was nothing there but black water and American fire power.”

2. The FBI Harassed Political Groups to Discredit and Smear Them

A secret program called COINTELPRO (counter-intelligence program) involved FBI agents illegally taking on projects to infiltrate domestic political organizations in order to disgrace them. The act incorporated psychological warfare, slander by way of forged documents and false reports in the media, harassment, wrongful imprisonment, and allegedly intimidation, violence, and assassination. Affected people included critics of the Vietnam War, civil rights leaders such as Dr. Martin Luther King, and many activists and journalists.

The book The United States of Paranoia by Jesse Walker states:

Under COINTELPRO, FBI agents infiltrated political groups and spread rumors that loyal members were the real infiltrators. They tried to get targets fired from their jobs, and they tried to break up the targets’ marriages. They published deliberately inflammatory literature in the names of the organizations they wanted to discredit, and they drove wedges between groups that might otherwise be allied. In Baltimore, the FBI’s operatives in the Black Panther Party were instructed to denounce Students for a Democratic Society as “a cowardly, honky group” who wanted to exploit the Panthers by giving them all the violent, dangerous “dirty work.” The operation was apparently successful: In August 1969, just five months after the initial instructions went out, the Baltimore FBI reported that the local Panther branch had ordered its members not to associate with SDS members or attend any SDS events.

As for  Dr. Martin Luther King, agents tried to instill paranoia by way of following him, bugging his hotel rooms, attempting to break up his marriage, and even sending him an anonymous letter in hopes of getting him to commit suicide.

The truth behind the conspiracy theory came to light when a group of eight anti-war activists broke into an FBI field office in 1971 and discovered documents that exposed the program.

3. U.S. Military Leaders Devise Plan to Kill Innocent People and Put the Blame on Cuba

The Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. military created and approved a plan called Operation Northwoods that would allow for acts of terrorism on U.S. soil in order to brainwash Americans into supporting a war against Cuba. With the documents out there to prove the immoral and disgusting plan, it’s impossible to label it a conspiracy theory.

President Kennedy ultimately rejected the plan that involved the killing of innocent Americans by shooting them on the streets, sinking boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba, violent terrorism to be executed in Washington, D.C., Miami, and more, framing people for bombings they did not commit, and planes being hijacked.

The documents noted:

We could develop a Communist Cuba terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington . . .  We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida (real or simulated) . . . Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government.

[Read more here]

 




The CIA & The Media: 50 Facts The World Should Know

By Arjun Walia | Collective Evolution

Credit – the New Observer

James F. Tracy is a PhD from the University of Iowa. A former professor of communications at Boca Raton, Florida Atlantic University. He is one of many critical thinkers within the world of academia, and as result of presenting the following information that might spark some cognitive dissonance, he has been singled out due to his activism efforts.
For example, he was fired from his tenured professorship at Florida Atlantic University for questioning official narratives of terror events. Now, his Blog has been taken down by WordPress with no clear explanation.

You can listen to what he has to say on the matter here.

You can support the James Tracy Legal Defense Fund, and find out about what is going on with him at the moment HERE. He made national headlines, as many academics who are not afraid to stand up for truth do, in an attempt to ridicule them. 

He is well researched, and now reports on several different matters of escalating importance. Below is an article he wrote in August of 2015, and is relevant today given all of the “fake news” campaigns that have been directed against alternative media.

Since the end of World War Two the Central Intelligence Agency has been a major force in US and foreign news media, exerting considerable influence over what the public sees, hears and reads on a regular basis. CIA publicists and journalists alike will assert they have few, if any, relationships, yet the seldom acknowledged history of their intimate collaboration indicates a far different story–indeed, one that media historians are reluctant to examine.

When seriously practiced, the journalistic profession involves gathering information concerning individuals, locales, events, and issues. In theory such information informs people about their world, thereby strengthening “democracy.” This is exactly the reason why news organizations and individual journalists are tapped as assets by intelligence agencies and, as the experiences of German journalist Udo Ulfkotte (entry 47 below) suggest, this practice is at least as widespread today as it was at the height of the Cold War.

Consider the coverups of election fraud in 2000 and 2004, the events of September 11, 2001, the invasions Afghanistan and Iraq, the destabilization of Syria, and the creation of “ISIS.” These are among the most significant events in recent world history, and yet they are also those much of the American public is wholly ignorant of. In an era where information and communication technologies are ubiquitous, prompting many to harbor the illusion of being well-informed, one must ask why this condition persists.

Further, why do prominent US journalists routinely fail to question other deep events that shape America’s tragic history over the past half century, such as the political assassinations of the 1960s, or the central role played by the CIA major role in international drug trafficking?

Popular and academic commentators have suggested various reasons for the almost universal failure of mainstream journalism in these areas, including newsroom sociology, advertising pressure, monopoly ownership, news organizations’ heavy reliance on “official” sources, and journalists’ simple quest for career advancement. There is also, no doubt, the influence of professional public relations maneuvers. Yet such a broad conspiracy of silence suggests another province of deception examined far too infrequently—specifically the CIA and similar intelligence agencies’ continued involvement in the news media to mold thought and opinion in ways scarcely imagined by the lay public.

The following historical and contemporary facts–by no means exhaustive–provides a glimpse of how the power such entities possess to influence if not determine popular memory and what respectable institutions deem to be the historical record.

1. The CIA’s Operation MOCKINGBIRD is a long-recognised keystone among researchers pointing to the Agency’s clear interest in and relationship to major US news media. MOCKINGBIRD grew out of the CIA’s forerunner, the Office for Strategic Services (OSS, 1942-47), which during World War Two had established a network of journalists and psychological warfare experts operating primarily in the European theatre.

2. Many of the relationships forged under OSS auspices were carried over into the postwar era through a State Department-run organization called the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) overseen by OSS staffer Frank Wisner.

3. The OPC “became the fastest-growing unit within the nascent CIA,” historian Lisa Pease observes, “rising in personnel from 302 in 1949 to 2,812 in 1952, along with 3,142 overseas contract personnel. In the same period, the budget rose from $4.7 million to $82 million.” Lisa Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” in James DiEugenio and Lisa Pease, The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X, Port Townsend, WA, 2003, 300.

4. Like many career CIA officers, eventual CIA Director/Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Richard Helms was recruited out of the press corps by his own supervisor at the United Press International’s Berlin Bureau to join in the OSS’s fledgling “black propaganda” program. “‘[Y]ou’re a natural,” Helms’ boss remarked. Richard Helms, A Look Over My Shoulder: A Life in the Central Intelligence Agency, New York: Random House, 2003, 30-31.

5. Wisner tapped Marshall Plan funds to pay for his division’s early exploits, money his branch referred to as “candy.” “We couldn’t spend it all,” CIA agent Gilbert Greenway recalls. “I remember once meeting with Wisner and the comptroller. My God, I said, how can we spend that? There were no limits, and nobody had to account for it. It was amazing.” Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, New York: The New Press, 2000, 105.

6. When the OPC was merged with the Office of Special Operations in 1948 to create the CIA, OPC’s media assets were likewise absorbed.

7. Wisner maintained the top secret “Propaganda Assets Inventory,” better known as “Wisner’s Wurlitzer”—a virtual rolodex of over 800 news and information entities prepared to play whatever tune Wisner chose. “The network included journalists, columnists, book publishers, editors, entire organizations such as Radio Free Europe, and stringers across multiple news organizations.” Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 300.

8. A few years after Wisner’s operation was up-and-running he “’owned’ respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS, and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all, according to a CIA analyst. Each one was a separate ‘operation,’” investigative journalist Deborah Davis notes, “requiring a code name, a field supervisor, and a field office, at an annual cost of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars—there has never been an accurate accounting.” Deborah Davis, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post, Second Edition, Bethesda MD: National Press Inc, 1987, 139.

9. Psychological operations in the form of journalism were perceived as necessary to influence and direct mass opinion, as well as elite perspectives. “[T]he President of the United States, the Secretary of State, Congressmen and even the Director of the CIA himself will read, believe, and be impressed by a report from Cy Sulzberger, Arnaud de Borchgrave, or Stewart Alsop when they don’t even bother to read a CIA report on the same subject,” noted CIA agent Miles Copeland. Cited in Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 301.

10. By the mid-to-late 1950s, Darrell Garwood points out, the Agency sought to limit criticism directed against covert activity and bypass congressional oversight or potential judicial interference by “infiltrat[ing] the groves of academia, the missionary corps, the editorial boards of influential journal and book publishers, and any other quarters where public attitudes could be effectively influenced.” Darrell Garwood, Under Cover: Thirty-Five Years of CIA Deception, New York: Grove Press, 1985, 250.

11. The CIA frequently intercedes in editorial decision-making. For example, when the Agency proceeded to wage an overthrow of the Arbenz regime in Guatemala in 1954, Allen and John Foster Dulles, President Eisenhower’s Secretary of State and CIA Director respectively, called upon New York Times publisher Arthur Hays Sulzberger to reassign reporter Sydney Gruson from Guatemala to Mexico City. Sulzberger thus placed Gruson in Mexico City with the rationale that some repercussions from the revolution might be felt in Mexico. Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 302.

[Read more here]




This is a Coup: the Homeland Security Takeover of US Elections

By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News

On a scale of importance from 1 to 10, with 10 being the most important, this breaking development is a 500.

On Friday, the traditional day of the week for quietly releasing big news that will hopefully be ignored by the public—and also obscured by the Fort Lauderdale Airport shooting—the chief of Homeland Security announced that his office will be taking over US elections.

If you can’t see the coup in progress, you need to keep looking until the message comes through.

Read carefully—ABC News reports. My comments are in brackets:

“Citing increasingly sophisticated cyber bad actors and an election infrastructure that’s ‘vital to our national interests’, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced Friday that he’s designating U.S. election systems critical infrastructure…”

[Also known as: “we’re taking over.”]

“’Given the vital role elections play in this country, it is clear that certain systems and assets of election infrastructure meet the definition of critical infrastructure, in fact and in law’,” Johnson said in a statement. He added: ‘Particularly in these times, this designation is simply the right and obvious thing to do’.”

[Also known as: “we’re taking over.”]

“The determination came after months of review and despite opposition from many states worried that the designation would lead to increased federal regulation or oversight on the many decentralized and locally run voting systems across the country. It was announced on the same day a declassified U.S. intelligence report said Russian President Vladimir Putin ‘ordered’ an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election.”

[Also known as: “we needed an excuse, a fake cover story for our takeover, and Russia is it.”]

“Such a change [in who controls the US election process] does not require presidential action [or Congressional approval], and only requires the secretary [of DHS] to first consult with the assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism.”

[Also known as: “this is a coup by the White House.”]

“Johnson said election infrastructure included storage facilities, polling places and vote tabulation locations, plus technology involved in the process, including voter registration databases, voting machines and other systems used to manage the election process and report and display results.”

[Also known as: “We’re taking over every significant aspect of the national election process.”]

“The designation [of US elections as critical infrastructure] allows for information to be withheld from the public when state, local and private partners meet to discuss election infrastructure security — potentially injecting secrecy into an election process that’s traditionally and expressly a transparent process. U.S. officials say such closed door conversations allow for frank discussion that would prevent bad actors from learning about vulnerabilities. DHS would also be able to grant security clearances when appropriate and provide more detailed threat information to states.”

[Also known as: “we can intercede in the election process and determine its outcome without any need to pretend we’re being transparent; only people we approve will know the details of how we run elections; secrecy works.”]

“The Obama administration has proposed international cyber rules for peacetime that would expressly note that countries shouldn’t conduct online activity targeting critical [US] infrastructure, which will now also include election systems.”

[Also known as: “in case there is any doubt, elections systems in America will be property of the federal Executive Branch.”]

This is a coup.

This is equivalent to declaring a national state of emergency, including martial law: the DHS, if it deemed it necessary, could utilize armed agents to enforce the new directive and take over states’ offices that resist.

Election-processes belong to the states. But not anymore.

And of course, with this awesome new power, the DHS could intercede, behind the scenes, in the voting process and rig elections.

There is an additional aligned factor at work in this op: the proposed elimination of the Electoral College—yet another measure designed to “federalize” the election process.

Most people are entirely ignorant of the fact that the Constitution was a pact among states. With reluctance, the independent states agreed to relinquish certain specified powers to the newly created central government, while retaining all other powers.

The Electoral College was, therefore, a natural invention, because the states would maintain crucial influence in determining the outcome of presidential elections. State Electors would cast their presidential votes based on which candidate won in their state.

Eliminating the Electoral College now would add one more layer of federal control over the whole country, and take control from the states. More centralization.

Imagine it. Only the popular vote counts. The states are dumped. And on top of it all, the Dept. of Homeland Security has the power to run the election process as a piece of “critical infrastructure.”

Rigging the vote in New York and California, plus a few other populous states, would decide the election. And in time, no one would think about “New York” or “California” as separate entities—because they wouldn’t be. They would just be “more land and people” that are part of “wholly unified” America.

[Read more here]




Another look at Supreme Court Justice Scalia’s death

By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News

I’m taking another look because I have a new statement about a related case: Melaney Parker, a woman found dead on the railroad tracks in Marfa, Texas, in 2013, after a train hit her.

The same judge who inexplicably decided Scalia needed no autopsy, after he died in Texas, in 2016, came to the same conclusion in the Melaney Parker case.

That Texas judge is Cinderela Guevara.

Heavy.com (Feb 2016) summarizes the questions surrounding the 2013 death of Melaney Parker and Guevara’s role:

“Liz Parker, Melaney’s mom, questioned how Guevara handled the investigation of her daughter’s death, The Daily Kos reported. Melaney was hit by a Union Pacific Railroad train and, Liz wrote, a Union Pacific representative told her that it appeared that her body had been placed on the tracks while she was unconscious. Liz asked the Justice of the Peace and the Sheriff to open the case as a homicide investigation, but they would not. Guevara, who was a Justice of the Peace at the time, did not order a rape kit or an autopsy, Liz wrote, because a doctor at the scene said the cause of death was obvious.”

“Liz later wrote a letter to the editor, published in Big Bend Now, in which she said that Guevara had asked for God to give her an answer [!] about whether Melaney’s death was suicide. Liz wrote that Guevara told her: ‘Yes, this was a tragedy, but the true tragedy was that she died without accepting Jesus Christ as her savior’.” [!!]

“Big Bend Now also published a story about the controversial investigation. Melaney’s cousin, Aspen Parker, wrote a letter to Fox News in 2013 saying that Guevara’s cause of death ruling mentioned that Melaney had submitted a letter of resignation to her employers before her death. Aspen wrote that he called Melaney’s employers and they said that wasn’t true.”

The death of Melaney Parker sounds like a case begging to be reopened. I now have a new statement on it.

According to someone with knowledge of the investigation (or non-investigation), the crime scene was a mess. The day after the police initially visited it, Melaney Parker’s eyeglasses were still there. They hadn’t been picked up as evidence.

Pieces of Parker’s flesh were there as well. The engineer of the train that hit Parker said Parker had been positioned with one arm above her head, which suggested she might have been killed somewhere else and then dragged to the railroad tracks.

After toxicology tests were completed, Parker’s remains were cremated without her family’s permission.

If all this is true, Judge Guevara’s decision to skip an autopsy and accept the ruling of suicide is even more suspect.

And then three years later, when Justice Scalia dies, Guevara issues the same long-distance ruling, on the phone. No autopsy necessary.


Here is what I originally wrote about Scalia’s death. It’s extensive. Six articles. Some of the information overlaps:

ONE: “’Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was the senior member of the U. S. Supreme Court and one of the 10 most important public servants in the country. For better or worse over the course of his 29 years on the Court, he was arguably the most influential person in America’.” Eric Mink, Huffington Post, 2/17.

We start here—from the NY Post:

“Lethal poisoning could have left Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s body in virtually the same condition in which it was found, a top forensic pathologist told The Post on Wednesday.

“’It would look like he’s asleep. It [poisoning] doesn’t show anything on the body,’ said Dr. Michael Baden, who spent 25 years in the city’s chief Medical Examiner’s Office.

“Still, Baden stressed that natural causes was a plausible explanation.”

However, the official pronouncement of natural causes carries a burden with it. The burden of some semblance of proof. In this case, there was none.

And if you think “none” should be SOP in the case of a US Supreme Court Justice, you need to think again.

Judge Cinderela Guevara, miles away from Scalia’s body, sitting on the phone, rendered the judgment of natural causes after talking with marshals, none of whom had forensic training; and after talking with Scalia’s doctor, who was a few thousand miles from the Texas ranch where Scalia died.

Apparently, Scalia’s doctor told Judge Guevara that Scalia had a heart condition. Yes? And? This is proof a US Supreme Court Justice died of a heart attack?

Guevara, like a true bumbling amateur (or was something more ominous going on here?), decided no autopsy of the body was necessary. She decided she was too busy (doing what?) to climb in her car and drive to the ranch, to oversee the situation and talk to people at the scene.

So she said, on the phone, “Natural causes. No autopsy.”

In the case of a US Supreme Court Justice. In the biggest moment of Judge Guevara’s professional life.

And the Department of Justice, the FBI, the President, and all the members of US Congress immediately bought it.

No objections. No questions. No outrage.

[Read more here]




Standing Rock Represents a Shift in American Consciousness

Marie Oliver | Natural News

Water is sacred. Water is life. Water is freedom. Water heals.

What the world has witnessed at Standing Rock is an unprecedented coming together of Tribal peoples and representatives of indigenous cultures from around the world who understand the urgency of protecting the sacredness of the water and the land.

Standing Rock marked a turning point in our nation’s history as American Veterans came to stand between international corporate mercenaries and the First Americans. Veterans came to stand with their Tribal brothers and sisters in defense of the land, the water and constitutionally guaranteed rights. As they acknowledged the atrocities that separated these great peoples, they also sought forgiveness for the horrors of the past. Standing together to protect that which is sacred, a great healing began. This represents a monumental shift in the consciousness of the people of the United States.

The Spirit of God is in the water, the land, the trees and all of nature. All of nature is sacred and so are we. We are not mere stewards of this planet. We are her children. We are sovereign. The onslaught of violence against our Mother Earth has also been an onslaught against us as her children and against our sovereignty.

False Paradigm

The control or confiscation of land and water, the assault on the health and well-being of life, all for the sake of controlling the resources of this planet is the centuries old model for the false paradigm. The Agenda 21 and 2030 models of environmentalism that separates us from our mother and supplants our relationship with layers of bureaucratic jurisdiction is just as false as the model of corporate confiscation that is exemplified by the Black Snake of the DAPL. Both remove the people from the land and give all authority to a few controlling globalists. Both serve to violate the sacred relationship between the Mother and Child. The symbolism in this violence is not lost on us.

The Long Nights Moon of December holds vigil over Standing Rock. The December moon brings a time of introspection and self-examination. Symbolically, it is a time of death and rebirth. It’s a time for casting off that which has proven untrue or deceitful; a time for reshaping the direction of our path. So too is it a time for our country to cast aside the false paradigm of dependence, lack, confiscation and control. We must restore our relationship with the sacred.

The coming together of Water Protectors and the Veterans represents a cognitive shift in perspective. Our ancestral participation in the Manifest Destiny was but a prelude to WWI and WWII, Korea, and the Middle East. The prospect of war with Russia so zealously propagandized by candidate Clinton is still spuriously promoted by President Obama. American troops are being positioned to again serve the will of a false paradigm.

Global corporatists and social technocrats are aligned in their rush to control the resources of the entire planet. Technocracy has no need of the sacred or sovereign. Instead, that which is devoid of life would supplant the sacredness of all life and consciousness with the sacrilege of an artificially intelligent post human technocracy.

Reclaim the Sacred

As the long nights of introspection give way to the re-birthing of life, we must find both the will and the wisdom to reclaim the sacred in ourselves, in our land, in the water, and in our future.

[Read more here]

 

 

 




ET Disclosure – The Truth is in Our Hands!

Author of the new book We Are the Disclosure, Miguel Mendonca weighs in on the consequences in looking for the “Official” announcement of ET disclosure.

“Only a fool looks to a liar for truth.”

This sentiment was brought up in my recent talk with author and ET/UFO researcher Miguel Mendonca during an impassioned discourse about what he believes to be a system that has absolutely no interest in revealing anything that would surely be in the public’s best interest, not the least of which is an eventual admitting that there is indeed an ET presence here on earth and that “they” have been aware of such a reality for many years.

This is called “Disclosure.” An event that many feel should and will happen in the not-so-distant future.

Among those who are pushing for disclosure is ET lobbyist and executive director of the Paradigm Research Group Stephen Bassett. In 2011 Bassett initiated a petition campaign for the White House to “Immediately disclose the government’s knowledge of and communications with extraterrestrial beings.”

Their response was as follows:

“The U.S. government has no evidence that any life exists outside our planet, or that an extraterrestrial presence has contacted or engaged any member of the human race. In addition, there is no credible information to suggest that any evidence is being hidden from the public’s eye.”

ET DisclosureThis Miguel feels, is the sort of blatant denial that plagues many subjects that deserve important attention, and this is why he wrote the book (in two parts), We Are the Disclosure – 700 Years of Research on ET-Human Interaction.

Mendonca contends that it us up to us as the public (as individuals and as a collective) to take the “disclosure” issue into our own hands. And based on the cornucopia of research, including personal anecdotes by so-called experiencers of the ET phenomenon, we have more than enough tried and true evidence – not to mention our own personal experiences, that this is a real phenomenon and not just the fanciful imagination of perhaps millions, worldwide.

We are the Disclosure features interviews from some of the leading researchers in the field of UFOlogy. Among those who were interviewed: Jim Marrs, Alfred Lambremont Webre, Stanton Friedman, Barbara Lamb, and Mary Rodwell.

I was also honored to be included in this book. Speaking from the perspective of a researcher and interviewer of those much closer to the phenomenon than I, my sense is that as I stated in part one of the book, “The biggest discovery here is that it is self-discovery. On every level, we are the disclosure.”

I encourage you to listen in full to this very passionate dialogue, then weigh the “evidence” for yourself. But most importantly, if you’ve been waiting patiently for some official admission of the ET reality, consider tossing that as the only viable truth to this phenomenon, and begin to take disclosure as a matter that is, and always has been completely in our own hands.

Visit the website We Are the Disclosure to learn more.

Miguel Mendonca is also the co-author of Meet the Hybrids with Barbara Lamb. You can check out my interview with him based on this book HERE.

Visit the website of Higher Journeys for a closer look at We Are the Disclosure HERE.

 

iTunes3

If you haven’t already, be sure to subscribe to our show on iTunes!

About the Author:

alexisheadshotv2Alexis Brooks is the #1 best-selling author of Conscious Musings, writer/editor for CLN and host of Higher Journeys Radio. Alexis brings over 30 years of broadcast media experience to CLN. For over half of that time, Alexis has dedicated her work to the medium of alternative journalism, having researched and reported on the many aspects and angles of metaphysics, spirituality and new thought concepts.

This article and its accompanying media was originally created and produced by Higher Journeys in association Conscious Life News and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alexis Brooks, HigherJourneys.com and ConsciousLifeNews.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this Copyright/Creative Commons statement.

 

 




Bernard Kerik: What’s More Dangerous — DNC Hack or Criminality It Exposed?

By Bernard Kerik | Newsmax

Editor’s Note: Every parent knows how a effective a tool redirection can be with a child. When a child is going toward danger, throwing a tantrum, or in a real funk, etc., it can be critical to maintain a child in a state of safety and equilibrium. In politics, redirection is often used to treat adult citizens like children to deflect their attention away from a politician’s bad conduct. In the 2016 Election Season debates, it seemed quite evident that James Comey and Russia became the bogeymen with which Hillary Clinton redirected everyone away from an unprecedented exposure of deep corruption in the Democratic Party. This article asks a great question – should we allow ourselves to obsess over who made the leak or should we be put that same time into bringing those engaged in criminal conduct to justice, even if that means potentially further tearing down the reputation of, for some, a much-loved icon – Hillary Clinton?

First, it was the FBI and Director James Comey that were responsible for Hillary Clinton’s failed presidential campaign.

Then, there was Green Party candidate Jill Stein claiming voter fraud and voter hacking, which turned out to be a farce.

Now, according to a few members of Congress, the CIA has assessed through “circumstantial evidence” that Russia was responsible for hacking into the Democratic National Committee’s emails and providing those emails to WikiLeaks, which released them to the public.

The claim is that Russia did so in an attempt to influence the election. After 24 hours of this latest rambling, we’re now learning that the FBI doesn’t necessarily agree with the CIA, and worse, that the top overseers of the U.S. intelligence community have not embraced a CIA assessment.

 The first question that comes to mind is exactly what circumstantial evidence is there that led the CIA to believe not only that Russia hacked into the DNC email system, but that it did so with the clear intent to influence the election? That would mean they would have had some idea as to what would be in those emails.

Did Russia know the emails would expose clear-cut criminality by Secretary Clinton and her family, and her former staff as it relates to using her office to solicit tens of millions of dollars from foreign heads of state, for her family’s foundation?

There was also clear evidence, that Clinton’s campaign staff colluded with CNN journalists prior to her debate with Donald Trump in order to assist her in the debate and the election.

Lastly, did they also know that Clinton’s campaign staff and the DNC colluded to undermine and destroy the presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders?

Clinton’s staff and members of the DNC were well aware of the fact that Sanders was soliciting millions of dollars for his presidential campaign, knowing that while doing so, they were all covertly conspiring to do everything in their power to undermine his campaign and guarantee his failure.

In the federal legal circles, I’m pretty sure that’s called honest services fraud, but I haven’t heard anyone mention that.

So someone, perhaps the Russians, Chinese, or some moron sitting in a Starbucks, allegedly hacked into the DNC’s emails, which exposed all of this criminal conduct that our illustrious members of Congress just ignored and made believe never happened, but they’re all about figuring out the identity of the mysterious hacker.

 Who were the senators in the intelligence committee that were briefed and then publicly spewed the contents of that briefing to the general public? What exactly was their purpose — political perhaps?

To interfere with this election, I’m sure, especially given that Nancy Pelosi’s daughter has called for a full intelligence briefing prior to the Dec. 19 Electoral College vote.

Interesting.

As it stands right now, no one knows for sure who hacked into the DNC, or who gave those emails to WikiLeaks. No one knows for sure if it was Russia, or what its true intent was if Russia was the culprit.

However, if during this next briefing, the FBI, CIA, or any other three-letter federal agency authenticates and validates the emails that were leaked by WikiLeaks that exposed all of this criminal conduct, I’m curious if these same members of Congress will do their job and refer the matter to the FBI for criminal investigation.

[Read more here]

 




Ron Paul: The War on ‘Fake News’ is a War on Free Speech

Video Source: minnesotachris

(RPIA major threat to liberty is the assault on the right to discuss political issues, seek out alternative information sources, and promote dissenting ideas and causes such as non-interventionism in foreign and domestic affairs. If this ongoing assault on free speech succeeds, then all of our liberties are endangered.

One of the most common assaults on the First Amendment is the attempt to force public policy organizations to disclose their donors. Regardless of the intent of these laws, the effect is to subject supporters of controversial causes to harassment, or worse. This harassment makes other potential donors afraid to support organizations opposing a popular war or defending the rights of an unpopular group.

Many free speech opponents support laws and regulations forbidding activist or educational organizations from distributing factual information regarding a candidate’s positions for several months before an election. The ban would apply to communications that do not endorse or oppose any candidate. These laws would result in the only sources of information on the candidate’s views being the campaigns and the media.

Recently the Federal Election Commission (FEC) rejected a proposal to add language exempting books, movies, and streaming videos from its regulations. The majority of FEC commissioners apparently believe they should have the power, for example, to ban Oliver Stone’s biography of Edward Snowden, since it was released two months before the election and features clips of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump discussing Snowden.

The latest, and potentially most dangerous, threat to the First Amendment is the war on “fake news.” Those leading the war are using a few “viral” Internet hoaxes to justify increased government regulation — and even outright censorship — of Internet news sites. Some popular websites, such as Facebook, are not waiting for the government to force them to crack down on fake news.

Those calling for bans on “fake news” are not just trying to censor easily-disproved Internet hoaxes. They are working to create a government-sanctioned “gatekeeper” (to use Hillary Clinton’s infamous phrase) with the power to censor any news or opinion displeasing to the political establishment. None of those wringing their hands over fake news have expressed any concern over the fake news stories that helped lead to the Iraq War. Those fake news stories led to the destabilizing of the Middle East, the rise of ISIS, and the deaths of millions.

The war on “fake news” has taken a chilling turn with efforts to label news and opinion sites of alternative news sources as peddlers of Russian propaganda. The main targets are critics of US interventionist foreign policy, proponents of a gold standard, critics of the US government’s skyrocketing debt, and even those working to end police militarization. All have been smeared as anti-American agents of Russia.

Just last week, Congress passed legislation creating a special committee, composed of key federal agencies, to counter foreign interference in US elections. There have also been calls for congressional investigations into Russian influence on the elections. Can anyone doubt that the goal of this is to discredit and silence those who question the mainstream media’s pro-welfare/warfare state propaganda?

The attempts to ban “fake news;” smear antiwar, anti-Federal Reserve, and other pro-liberty movements as Russian agents; and stop independent organizations from discussing a politician’s record before an election are all parts of an ongoing war on the First Amendment. All Americans, no matter their political persuasion, have a stake in defeating these efforts to limit free speech.

This article (Ron Paul: The War on ‘Fake News’ is a War on Free Speech) by Ron Paul originally appeared on RonPaulInstitute.org and was used with permission




Over 2,000 U.S. Veterans To Form Human Shield At Dakota Pipeline Site

By Alexa Erickson | Collective Evolution

military-veteran-compressed

According to demonstration organizers, more than 2,000 U.S. military veterans plan to form a human shield to protect protesters against the North Dakota Access Pipeline, in response to a federal deadline that pressures peaceful activists to evacuate the camp they have been occupying.

Growing exhausted of the protests, North Dakota law enforcement has sought desperate measures to put the event to an end, while those occupying the site are determined to make change no matter how long or hard they have to fight. Law enforcement had previously tried to cut off supplies to the camp, but failed to follow through due to public outcry and a growing awareness of their unethical treatment of the protestors.

Protestors have been rallying for months to stop the $3.8 billion Dakota Access Pipeline from moving forward, as it would disrupt the lake near the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, harming water resources and sacred Native American sites.

Now, former U.S. Marine Michael A. Wood Jr. and  Wesley Clark Jr., a writer whose father is retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark, have formed Veterans Stand for Standing Rock. They plan to round up thousands of demonstrators at camps located on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers land as a means for protecting organizers.

U.S. Representative Tulsi Gabbard, a Democrat from Hawaii and a Major in the Hawaii Army National Guard, said on Twitter that she, too, will join the protectors who plan to build the human shield this Sunday.

Morton County Sheriff’s Office spokesman Rob Keller responded to the news, saying his agency was aware of the veterans’ plans, though he did not explain how law enforcement officials planned to handle the ordeal.

[Read more here]




Breaking: North Dakota Police Terrorize Standing Rock Sioux as Millions Watch

By Rajie Kabli | *Collective Evolution

militarized-police-standing-rock-compressed

A situation is unfolding as you read this. A live feed with currently 60k people watching, 56k comments and 80k shares (and growing) is being shown on Facebook. Kevin Gilbert seems to be the only LIVE feed coming from Standing Rock at a police blockade on a bridge on HWY 1806. They are using extreme force on unarmed, peaceful water protectors. It is sub-zero temperatures right now at Standing Rock and police are using water cannons to spray the protectors. Tear-gas is also being used. In the LIVE feed, Kevin interviews a friend who was on the front lines providing blankets to people when she was heavily tear gassed and as a result, she vomited and peed herself.

According to UnicornRiot, this all started when protectors attempted to remove the blockade on the bridge to open up the HWY. There were also mentions of Dakota Access bringing in drills under the cover of night.

These are people that just want to protect the land and the water they drink. It could be your friend, brother, sister, mom, dad, uncle, aunt, niece… out there on the front lines. Thousands of people watching LIVE are referring to this as torture. Honestly, I’m having a hard time understanding how this could be considered anything but torture.

Where is senior leadership and mainstream media in all of this? These are the most common questions asked by people in the comments. Myself and a couple other CE journalists just returned from Standing Rock and believe me when I tell you, what is happening at Standing Rock goes beyond simple morals or “right versus wrong.” There is a serious injustice taking place and it affects every single person living on this planet, not just the Indigenous people living at Standing Rock. When will we stand up to corporations that run around doing whatever they want, whenever they want? Now is the time.

The authorities are siding with and protecting Energy Transfer Partners, the parent company of Dakota Access, while the people are left to defend themselves, demanding to be heard.

The cell service is not great there. There are reports of police jamming signals as well, so the LIVE is choppy. Watch here. And for new live feeds just go straight to his Facebook page.

[Read more here]

Originally entitled: “BREAKING: MILLIONS WATCH AS WATER CANNONS, RUBBER BULLETS, TEAR GAS, CONCUSSION GRENADES BEING USED ON PEACEFUL PROTECTORS”




Millions Around the World Are Watching the Standing Rock Sioux’s Fight for Human Rights

By Rajie Kabli |* Collective Evolution

standing-rock-north-dakota-compressedThe North Dakota Access Pipeline protests rage on. The latest comes today when a Dakota Access company resumed construction of its pipeline that is said to run under the Missouri River after requests from Army Corps were ignored to wait as they assess re-route options.

 

The protesters call themselves water protectors. The Missouri is their main source of water and they are protecting the land, water, and air of ancient native burial grounds. Camps formed back in April and protests began in August. Members of the Sioux Indigenous tribe of Standing Rock are going up against Energy Transfer Partners, the oil company looking to finally complete the last 2000km of a pipeline running through 4 different states (Illinois, Idaho, South Dakota, North Dakota). This whole project has $3.8B invested in it from 17 national banks and a host of other investors.

But, there seems to be a bigger issue at stake here, one we’ve seen many times in the past but never confronted head on. That is, corporate interests and profits taking precedence over the health and well-being of the people and the land.

When will we realize that we cannot eat money?” I saw on someone’s status today. It alludes to the fact that the people at Standing Rock are fighting (quite literally) for basic human rights, but because that interferes with Energy Transfer Partners plans, all those rights go out the window. The police are outfitted in a lot of heavy gear. Morton county has has a HUGE boost in equipment with new militarized cars, LRAD (sound technology), mace, rubber bullets, batons, and a host of other ‘toys’ they definitely did not have before. I’m pretty sure they didn’t rent this stuff from somewhere. In the next few weeks we will be submitting a public records request to follow the money and determine who exactly was providing the police with all this highly sophisticated technology they are using on peaceful protesters.

The people are fighting to be heard. To be recognized as having legitimate concerns. The bulldozing of the land is a metaphor for the bulldozing of the hearts of the people there. This is everyone’s fight. No longer can we allow the corporations to run rampant and do whatever they want, when they want, and who they want to. There must be more attention placed on this issue. More pressure applied to those we must hold accountable for the harm they are doing  and will do to the people and the land.

[Read more here]

*Originally entitled: “MILLIONS AROUND THE WORLD ARE WATCHING”




No Matter Who Wins: the Case Against Hillary Clinton is Alive

By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News

hillary-comey-compressed

 

Follow the bouncing ball.

It turns out that several money bundlers for Hillary Clinton—Fredrick D. Schaufeld, Karen Schaufeld, Sonjia Smith, Michael Bills—donated significant sums to Jill McCabe, who was running for the state senate in Virginia, in 2015.

Well, Jill McCabe’s husband is an assistant FBI director, Andrew McCabe, who was involved in the Hillary email scandal investigation. You know, the investigation that falsely exonerated Hillary.

The hits keep coming. With the Clintons, there is no end of them.

President, no-President, Hillary is not off the hook.

For the moment, forget about FBI Director Comey’s latest flip-flop on the 650,000 Weiner emails. “Yes the Hillary case is reopened, no it’s closed.” Forget that.

Go back to July, when Comey recommended against prosecuting Hillary. He presented enough evidence to send her to prison, but stated that because there was no hostile intent on her part, a case couldn’t be made.

In July, Comey asserted there were at least four lies Hillary told at some point in the FBI investigation. Taken together, as anyone can see, they constitute a prosecutable crime:

* When Hillary said she didn’t use her unprotected personal server to send or receive emails marked “classified,” she lied.

* When Hillary said she didn’t send classified material, she lied.

* When Hillary said she used only one device that was connected to her personal server, she lied. She used four.

* When Hillary said she returned all work-related emails from her personal storage to the State Department, she lied. She didn’t return thousands of emails.

This all adds up to gross negligence in the handling of classified materials. It’s a felony. “Hostile intent” is not the issue. The FBI went after a former CIA Director, General Petraeus, who leaked classified information with no discernible hostile intent, and he was prosecuted. The law is clear.

The law states that gross negligence in handling and transmitting classified materials is enough to warrant prosecution for a crime, and it can carry up to ten years in prison. (Federal Penal Code, Title 18, section 793[f].) The quality of the intent behind the negligence has nothing to do with the law. Good intent, bad intent, neutral intent. All irrelevant. Comey knows that.

“Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.” (Title 18, section 793[f], Federal Penal Code)

So, in essence, Hillary Clinton should have been prosecuted back in July. Comey rigged her exoneration. (In other hands, the case could still be reopened.)

[Read more here]

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)




Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s Response to Treatment of Protesters

By Standing Rock Sioux Tribe | Indian Country Today Median Network

waterrights-680x380

Since Saturday October 22, [2016] 127 water protectors have been arrested. There have been multiple reports that peaceful protestors were met with violence. The statement below is from the Chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Dave Archambault II.

The militarization of local law enforcement and enlistment of multiple law enforcements agencies from neighboring states is needlessly escalating violence and unlawful arrests against peaceful protestors at Standing Rock. We do not condone reports of illegal actions, but believe the majority of peaceful protestors are reacting to strong-arm tactics and abuses by law enforcement.

Thousands of water protectors have joined the Tribe in solidarity against DAPL, without incident or serious injury. Yet, North Dakota law enforcement have proceeded with a disproportionate response to their nonviolent exercise of their First Amendment rights, even going as far as labeling them rioters and calling their every action illegal.

We are disappointed to see that our state and congressional delegations and Gov. Jack Dalrymple have failed to ensure the safety and rights of the citizens engaged in peaceful protests who were arrested on Saturday. Their lack of leadership and commitment to creating a dialogue towards a peaceful solution reflects not only the unjust historical narrative against Native Americans, but a dangerous trend in law enforcement tactics across America.

[Read more here]

Robert O'Leary 150x150Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding int alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield (MA), New England & “virtually” the world, with his website. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.com.

 



RT’s Bank Accounts Frozen, Assange’s Internet Cut In Apparent Move to Silence West’s Critics

wikileaks-rt-bank

By Claire Bernish | Activist Post

In a major development being described as a brutal blow to free speech, RT — the Russian outlet formerly known as Russia Today — has now found its bank accounts allegedly blocked by the U.K.

“Our accounts in Britain have been blocked,” tweeted RT’s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan Monday morning. “All of them. ‘Decision not to be discussed’. Hail to freedom of speech!”

According to RT, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said London abandoned any obligations to free speech when it moved to exit the European Union, as clearly evidenced in the inexplicable move by The National Westminster Bank.

In a statement from its press office on Twitter, RT announced:

RT has received a letter from Natwest, part of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group, which has a significant shareholding by the UK government, informing it that its UK banking facilities with the bank will be withdrawn without explanation or redress.

The decision is incomprehensible, and without warning. It is however, not at odds with the countless measures that have been undertaken in the UK and Europe over the last few years to ostracize, shout down, or downright impede the work of RT.

RT UK will continue its operations uninterrupted.

In the letter announcing its decision after reviewing the media outlet’s “banking arrangements,” NatWest indeed provides no explanation for the cancellation of its client relationship with RT, except to say:

We assure you that we have only reached this decision after careful consideration, however our decision is final and we are not prepared to enter into any discussion in relation to it.

Given the secretive nature of the sudden termination, speculation naturally must include RT’s function as a state-run media agency — and the worsening situations between the West and Russia in Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere — particularly, as RT notes, the U.K.’s ‘significant shareholding in NatWest.

Perhaps the baffling move would not be as suspect were it not for another apparent act of extreme censorship which began to unfold yesterday evening.

On Sunday night, WikiLeaks announced via Twitter that Julian Assange’s Internet connection had been purposely cut in his sanctuary-turned-prison home inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London:

Julian Assange’s internet link has been intentionally severed by a state party. We have activated the appropriate contingency plans.

Prior to this accusation, WikiLeaks had tweeted a string of three tweets appearing to reference its ongoing October Surprise document leaks — including cryptic codes naming U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, Ecuador, and the U.K.’s Foreign & Commonwealth Office — in turn setting off alarm bells by those concerned the tweets indicated Assange’s ‘dead man’s switch’ had been triggered.

Although neither the cutting of Assange’s Internet access nor that a state agent was responsible have been proven, if factual, speaks to the power wielded in the government transparency WikiLeaks continues to provide when, for instance, President Obama’s administration has failed.

WikiLeaks assumedly already has possession of whatever documents Assange might have obtained and plans to release in the future, but the attempt to silence the controversial and vociferously debated public figure are at least concerning — and at worst disturbingly indicative of the trouble an unknown will go to silence free speech and press.

Related Article: Wikileaks Founder Reveals More Reasons Why the TPP Should Never Become Law

Attempting to gag RT — no matter its Russian state association — also presents a troubling aspect about increasingly limited and denigrated press freedom.

“We have no idea why it happened,” RT’s Simonyan told RBT, “because neither yesterday nor the day before yesterday, nor a month ago, nothing special happened to us, nobody threatened us in any way. Hypothetically, this may have something to do with new British and American sanctions against Russia, which may be announced soon. It may not. Our legal department is dealing with the issue now.”

Publisher Marcus Papadopoulos echoed that surprise, as well as concern for what amounts to abrupt censure.

“I sincerely hope that there’s no political motive for this, because we know that the British government isn’t happy with RT in Britain,” Papadopoulos asserted to RT.

RT has a lot of viewers in Britain. Many British people now tune in to RT to receive information on major topics around the world, including in Britain. And many British people believe that the alternative accounts that RT puts forward and covers are more truthful than what they’re hearing from, for example, Sky News.

If no bank in Britain would allow RT to be a customer, then that could spell the end of RT broadcasting in Britain, which would be a catastrophic event for freedom of speech in Britain.

Russia, currently home to asylum-seeker and controversial whistleblower Edward Snowden, might indeed face additional sanctions by the United States and U.K. if American politicians infuriated over a false narrative of Russian aggression in Syria and elsewhere have their way.

U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May responded to outrage over the sudden proxy censure of RT, stating, “It’s a matter for the bank and it’s for them to decide who they offer services to based on their own risk appetite.”

However, as Zero Hedge pointed out, with both RBS and thus NatWest essentially acting as ‘wards of the state,’ such a politically-significant mover surely had prior clearance from the government.

As the already-chilled diplomacy between the West and Russia continues to deteriorate, an announcement from White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Obama is considering a response proportional to alleged Russian state hacking into the Democratic National Committee servers — despite the lack of unassailable evidence backing that claim.

Related Article: Fakery: Major Media Preparing to Steal Election-night Outcome?

On Friday, unnamed and unverified CIA officials told NBC News the “Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election.”

Whether or not any state agent — of the U.S., the U.K., or Russia — is responsible for any of these events might never be known. But the circumstances and timing are worthy of consideration.

Claire Bernish writes for TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared.

Read more great articles at Activist Post.




Fakery: Major Media Preparing to Steal Election-night Outcome?

By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News

Mainstream media

Note: this article is about the early projections media outlets make on election night—when they call the winner.

Here it is in a nutshell: major media consider the election a media event.

Therefore, they control it.

Therefore, when they project the election-outcome the night of the vote, even though that call is unofficial, they want compliance from the candidates. THEY WANT A FAST CONCESSION SPEECH from the loser. Well, a concession from Trump, because the networks and their allies in print newspapers are already painting a picture of a Hillary victory (for example, see this WaPo article). The picture is: Trump’s campaign is falling apart, Hillary is leading in battleground states, and she may even expand her reach into states Trump was previously thought to have wrapped up.

On Meet the Press Sunday, Mike Pence was asked point blank: if you lose on election night, will you and Donald concede? And Pence said yes.

The media-concocted story line: if Trump loses and he refuses to concede, because he believes the count was rigged, he’ll be inciting violence and endangering the country.

Of course, the networks calling the election victory is unofficial. It’s all happening in a bubble.

The networks are terrified that Trump will refuse to concede if they say he lost. Instead, he will say: “My team and I have definite knowledge of widespread vote fraud in many states. As I speak, we are filing suits. We not only want an accurate recount, we want criminal charges brought against the vote riggers. We know who they are. Some of the culprits are media networks. You can say I’m a sore loser but I’m not. I’m for fairness, and we don’t have that. We’re going all the way with our accusations and our facts. All along I’ve been saying the system is corrupt. Now we’re going to prove that…”

The media could then be accused of direct complicity in stealing the election.

So…how do the networks decide who wins an election? Buckle up. Here is a concise description from Wikipedia. Notice that the media are basically getting their vote-info from…themselves:

“The National Election Pool (NEP) is a consortium of American news organizations formed in 2003 to provide ‘information on Election Night about the vote count, election analysis and election projections.’ Member companies consist of ABC News, the Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News. The organization relies on the Associated Press to perform vote tabulations and contracted with Edison Research and Mitofsky International to ‘make projections and provide exit poll analysis.’ Edison Research has provided this data since 2004.

“The precursor was Voter News Service, which was disbanded in 2003, after controversies over the 2000 and 2002 election results. The NEP plan is largely the suggestion of CNN, which used Edison/Mitofsky as consultants in the past. Mitofsky headed the original pool that preceded VNS.

“The organizers of the pool insist that the purpose of their quick collection of exit poll data is not to determine if an election is flawed, but rather to project winners of races. Despite past problems, they note that none of their members has incorrectly called a winner since the current system was put in place. However, to avoid the premature leaking of data, collection is now done in a ‘Quarantine Room’ at an undisclosed location in New York. All participants are stripped of outside communications devices until it is time for information to be released officially.”

Doesn’t that warm the cockles of your heart and give you great confidence?

Back in 2012, I wrote this about Edison Research and Mitofsky:

“Both Edison Research and Mitofsky were involved in the 2004 election scandal (Kerry-Bush), in which their exit polls confounded network news anchors, because the poll results were so far off from the incoming vote-counts.

“Edison and Mitofsky issued a later report explaining how the disparity could have occurred; they tried to validate their own exit-poll data and the vote-count, which was like explaining a sudden shift in ocean tides by saying clouds covered the moon. It made no sense.”

But wait. Even though media giants are getting their election-night info from themselves, they must be basing that info on actual vote counts in the 50 states, as reported by the secretaries of states. Right? Read the last two paragraphs again. The exit polls differed greatly from the vote counts.

And remember, if widespread electronic vote fraud occurs on election night (read my previous piece on the crooked GEMS vote-tabulating system used across the US in 25% of the vote), the early media projections of a Presidential winner will serve to cut off any doubt about, or investigation into, the veracity of the GEMS system.

[Read more here]

(To read about Jon Rappoport’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Robert O'Leary 150x150Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield (MA), New England & “virtually” the world, with his website. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.com.