Friday, September 9, 2016

The Tide is Turning: The Official Story Is Now The Conspiracy Theory

The Tide is Turning: The Official Story Is Now The Conspiracy Theory
EDITOR'S CHOICE | 09.09.2016

Paul Craig Roberts
In a few days it will be the 15th anniversary of 9/11, and this November 22 will be the 53rd anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas. These two state crimes against democracy destroyed American democracy, accountable government, and the Constitution’s protections of civil liberty.
Years after the damage done by these events the American people no longer believe the official stories. Neither does the government, but the government will never validate the distrust that Americans now share of the oligarchs’ government by acknowledging the truth.
The official explanation of the assassination of President Kennedy never made any sense. Videos of the assassination contradicted the official story, as did witnesses, and many credible people challenged the government’s story. The CIA was faced with the official explanation becoming unglued and launched its media program stigmatizing doubters as “conspiracy theorists.” (See)
The CIA’s psych warfare against the public succeeded at the time and for a number of years during which witnesses had mysterious deaths and the trail grew cold. But by the late 1970s there was so much public skepticism of the official story that the US Congress took the risk of being labeled “conspiracy kooks.” The House Select Committee on Assassinations reopened the inquiry into JFK’s murder. The House Committee concluded that the Warren Commission’s investigation was seriously flawed, that there was more than one person firing at President Kennedy and that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK.
The corrupt US Department of Justice (sic) contradicted the House Select Committee’s report. However, the American people believed the Select Committee and not the corrupt Justice (sic) Department, which never tells the truth about anything.
By 2013 polls showed that most Americans are “conspiracy kooks” who do not believe the official government line on JFK’s assassination. So with regard to JFK’s assassination, the “conspiracy theorists” are in the majority. The minority are the Americans who cannot escape their brainwashing.
In a few days it will be the 15th anniversary of the alleged al Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, and we are witnessing the fading protection that the charge of “conspiracy theorist” provides for the officlal government story. Indeed, the official 9/11 story is collapsing before our eyes.
Europhysics, the respected publicaton of the European physics community has pubished an article by scientists who conclude that “the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three [World Trade Center] buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.” Few American scientists can admit this, because their careers depend on US government and military/security complex research contracts. Independent scientists in the US are a vanishing breed, an endangered species.
The scientists say that in view of their findings, “it is morally imperative” that 9/11 “be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities.”
So now we are faced with a peculiar situation. The scientifically ignorant two-bit punk American presstitutes claim to know more than the editors of the journal of the European physics community and the scientists who did the investigation. Don’t you think it farfetched that ignorant, corrupt, and cowardly American journalists who lie for money know more than physicists, chemists, 2,700 high-rise architects and structural engineers who have called on the US Congress to launch a real investigation of 9/11, firefighters and first responders who were on the WTC scene, military and civilian pilots and former high government officials, all of whom are on record challenging the unbelievable and physically impossible official story of 9/11? What kind of a dumbshit moron does a person have to be to believe that the United States government and its media whores know better than the laws of physics?
The ability of the presstitutes to influence Americans seems to be on the decline. The media ganged up on Donald Trump during the Republican primaries, intending to deny Trump the nomination. But the voters ignored the presstitutes. In the current presidential campaign, Hillary is not the run-away winner that the presstitutes are trying to make her. And despite the propaganda ministry, the legs under the official 9/11 story are wobbly, to say the least.
Indeed, the official 9/11 story already has lost credibility with the American public. Last April a Rasmussen Poll found that “Americans doubt they’ve been told all the facts about the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States and strongly believe the government should come clean.”
A YouGov poll in 2013 found that 50 percent of Americans “have doubts about the government’s account of 9/11,” which shows that the public is far more intelligent and less corrupt than the presstitutes who are paid to lie to the public. This poll also found that as a consequence of the cover-up job performed by the American presstitutes, 46 percent of Americans were not even aware that a third WTC building, Building 7, collapsed on September 11. After viewing films of WTC 7’s collapse, 46 percent saw it as a controlled demolition. By a margin of two to one, poll respondants support a new investigation of Building 7’s collapse.
So, in America today “conspiracy kooks” outnumber those who believe the official lies. As the official lies are themselves conspiracy theories, Americans who disbelieve the official conspiracy theories outnumber Americans who believe official conspiracy theories. The question is: who are the real conspiracy kooks, the majority who disbelieve the official lies or the minority who believe the official lies?
It is curious that the CIA’s psych-op mind-controll has broken down in the cases of the JFK assassination and 9/11, but is still effective in more recently orchestrated events, such as San Bernardino, Orlando, Paris, and Nice. Perhaps this is because not enough time has passed for the public to pay attention to the vast difference between the stories and the evidence.
The Internet offers many refutations of the official accounts. With regard to Nice, France, the Nice police officials themselves are having problems with the official story. The French Anti-Terrorist Sub-Directorate in Paris has ordered the public authorities in Nice to delete the video recordings from security cameras of the “Nice Terror Truck Attack.” The Nice authorities refused on the grounds that this would be destruction of criminal evidence. This story has disappeared from the news. I have asked friends in France how this conflict was resolved and have not heard anything. The French like to live life well and faced with the refugees from Washington’s wars, they seem to be focused on living life well while it can be done. If I hear anything, I will pass it on.
Apparently, the order to delete the video evidence of the “attack” was not sufficient for the French Ministry of the Interior. According to a senior Nice police officer, Sandra Bertin, the Interior Ministry pressured her to falsify her police report on the Nice “truck massacre.” Officer Bertin told the Journal du Dimanche that “he ordered me to put in [the report] the specific positions of the national police which I had not seen on the screen.” 
The Interior Minister, Bernard Cazeneuve is suing the Nice police official for “defamation,” as if it is possible to defame any politician anywhere in the corrupt West. Moreover, why would a senior Nice official make up a story about being ordered to change a report? It doesn’t make any sense, does it? Clearly, the central government is trying to hide the evidence against the official story.
It seems that the French media is disposing of the Nice police official by branding her a rightwing racist opposed to the current government.
Watch this video and ignore the narrator’s four-letter vocabulary. What you will learn is that all those people you saw running in the presstitute TV reports had no idea why they were running. The presstitutes created the impression that they were running away from the truck. However, as the interviews show, they were running because other people were running, because the police told them “terrorists, run,” and because they heard shots (apparently police firing blanks). Those interviewed reported, “You run with them even though you have no idea what you are running from. You can’t help it, you run with them.” None of those running away ever saw a truck.
According to the foul-mouthed narrator, the film of the people running away was taken prior to the time the truck allegedly mowed down 185 people, killing 85 of them. The narrator appears to be correct if the time stamps on videos are correct. The narrator says the streets needed to be cleared for the crisis actors to put on their show that is used to control our minds about what happened.
I have pointed out that a truck that hit 185 people, killing 85 of them would be covered in blood and that bodies would be splattered all over the street with blood everywhere. Yet, the photos and videos that we are shown show no such evidence. The stopped truck on which police are directing gunfire is as white as snow.
Independently of the vast analysis online of the video evidence of the alleged “Nice attack,” I suspect the Nice “terror attack” for the same reason that the Pentagon attack is suspect. Despite all the contrary evidence against the official stories, the authorities refuse to release the video evidence that, if it shows what the authorities claim, would shut up the skeptics and prove the official story.
When a government claims it has video evidence that proves its official story but refuses to release it, indeed, demands the destruction of the video evidence, we know for an absolute fact that the video evidence totally contradicts the official story. That is the only possible conclusion.
My readers will write to me asking how the government expects to get away with its faked, and in the case of 9/11 false flag, terror orchestrations? The answer, perhaps, is that just as it took a long time for the JFK assassination and 9/11 lies to catch up with the government, the recent orchestrations will also take some time for a slowly awakening public to catch on. In the meantime the orchestrated events will serve the agendas that they are intended to serve, and by the time that the public sees through the orchestrations, a new situation will be in place with new orchestrations.
Keep in mind that the public thinks it is shown evidence. Newspapers need photos to give a visual dimension to their coverage, and TV needs videos of the events. News organizations are under a time pressure, and they have to use what they are handed or what is at hand. There is no time to scrutinize the visual material or to raise questions about it. Most of the public thinks that the photos and videos shown to them are evidence or would not be shown and accepts the visual evidence without question. In an earlier column I linked to the vast array of Nice photos provided in the UK Daily Mail. The photos show a calm situation. There are a few people lying in the street without any sign of bodily damage or blood and there are covered objects that the public assumes are dead people. But the streets are devoid of the splattered blood and mangled bodies that would be the consequence of a truck hitting 185 people. Similarly, we have been shown very few videos and their origin is unknown except for the one attributed to Richard Gutjahr who was apparently pre-positioned to film inconclusively both the Nice and German “terror attacks.” Online analysis of the videos shows that the videos are not evidence for the storyline. The real question is why the French Interior Minister has prevented the release and demanded destruction of the security camera videos that filmed the entire event, an order that brought the central government in Paris in conflict with the public authorities in Nice. There has been no US media interest whatsoever in this very strange event. It is not a “conspiracy theory” to ask why the public cannot see the video evidence that shows what actually happened.
What agenda is served by the Paris and Nice attacks? This is the question everyone should be asking and the media, if we had one, should be investigating. With the information currently available to me, my answer is this. Of all the peoples of Western Europe, the French are the most independently minded. French independence has taken a number of recent hits from Washington:
The largest French bank was forced to hand over $9 billion to Washington for doing business with a country on Washington’s disapproval list.
Washington forced France to cancel a lucrative ship-building program for Russia, to the detriment of French companies and shipyard workers.
Washington has forced France into a diplomatic conflict with Russia that the French do not want and into a looming military conflict which the French want even less, as the conflict would mean the vaporization of France. As one Russian SS-18 can wipe out three-fourths of the state of New York, how many do you think it would take to wipe France off of the face of the Earth? Not even a handful.
Keep in mind that in 1966 President Charles de Gaulle pulled France out of NATO on the grounds that it was necessary to preserve French independence in world affairs. France did not again submit to Washington’s control until 2009 when Washington-owned Nicolas Sarkozy, put into the French presidency by Washington’s money, followed his orders and rejoined NATO.
The Paris and Nice orchestrated events serve to scare France back into Washington’s arms. Dreams of independence become nightmares when independence leaves the French people at the mercy of both terrorists and Russians. Washington, who owns Sarkozy, who is once again Washington’s candidate for president of France, intends to keep France in NATO.
The article in Europhysics pointing out the impossibility of the official 9/11 story could possibly lead to a rebirth of skepticism among Europeans. Only a skeptical media willing to investigate government storylines can bring a halt to the staged terror events that serve secret agendas.
Keep in mind that the US government has plentiful video evidence of the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon but refuses to release the evidence that it says support its story. Similarly, the French federal government has prohibited Nice authorities from releasing the security camera videos of the Nice truck attack and has ordered the video evidence destroyed. How can we believe governments that refuse to show us the hard evidence?

Published time: 9 Sep, 2016 08:47

Donald Trump is one of the most unorthodox presidential nominees in American electoral history. He is unpolished and very brash. But some of his foreign policy ideas are intriguing, even common sense. This terrifies and enrages the establishment.
CrossTalking with Nomi Prins, Stephen Yates and Alex Newman.

G20 Hangzhou Summit: Analysis of Global Trends

G20 Hangzhou Summit: Analysis of Bilateral Meetings Reflects Global Trends
ANDREI AKULOV | 09.09.2016 | WORLD

 Analysis of Bilateral Meetings Reflects Global Trends

The official agendas of G20 summits are normally more or less standard. Since the financial crisis of 2008, the meetings have been dominated by coordinating the measures to support global growth and stabilize financial markets. A G20 top level meeting is always an opportunity for world leaders to meet each other. The bilateral meetings dominated this summit to reflect global trends and illustrate how much political clout each participant has in the contemporary world.
During the summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin met half of all participants after eight bilateral talks and the sideline 5-party BRICS meeting. Thus, the Russian president met 11 out of 19 leaders of state and government of the G20 members and the president of Egypt – one of 8 invited guests. Mr. Putin had also had talks with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Park Geun-hye, the President of South Korea, at the Eastern Economic Forum held in the Russian city of Vladivostok on September 2-3 on the eve the Hangzhou event (September 4-5).
He did not have an official meeting with only six G20 members (excluding eye-to-eye backstage meetings), including the leaders of Australia, Italy, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico and the EU. But Jean Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, and Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi met the Russian president at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum that took place in June.
Mr. Putin met Indonesian President Joko Widodo in May at the Association of South-East Nations summit held in the Russian Black Sea resort of Sochi. It leaves out only three leaders. The prime ministers of Canada and Australia seem to be the only ones to remember about the idea of «Russia’s isolation» which became a thing of the past a long time ago. The recent G20 summit provided ample evidence to the fact.
Instead of Russian leader’s isolation, it was the US president who was haunted by problems began as soon as he landed in China with no stairs waiting for him to emerge from his usual door at the front of Air Force One and the following flare-ups and simmering tensions throughout the visit. President Obama had nothing to do but play down the «snub» which reflects how frayed and fraught with frustration the US-Chinese relationship has become.
The US leader will be remembered for making foreign policy blunders. Actually, the «snub» was expected after he told CNN just before the G20 summit that Beijing had to recognize that «with increasing power comes increasing responsibilities.» «If you sign a treaty that calls for international arbitration around maritime issues, the fact that you're bigger than the Philippines or Vietnam or other countries ... is not a reason for you to go around and flex your muscles», Obama said in a clear warning to China.
«You've got to abide by international law», he said evidently to soften the message, but the remark was perceived as a threat.
Chinese President Xi Jinping told his South Korean counterpart that China opposes the US deployment of the THAAD anti-missile system in South Korea.
China and Russia should firmly support each other's efforts to safeguard sovereignty, security and development interests, President Xi Jinping told Russian President Vladimir Putin at the summit. He evidently meant the United States.
China, a signatory to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, recently lost an arbitration dispute over the South China Sea. A court in The Hague found China had no historic title over the waters of the South China Sea and had infringed on the rights of the Philippines. Beijing has rejected the ruling. Russia doesn't necessarily backs Chinese claims, but supports China’s stance on the South China Sea court dispute and opposes any third-party interference.
According to the Russian president, China has a right not to recognize the court’s ruling. «Any arbitration proceedings should be initiated by parties to a dispute while a court of arbitration should hear the arguments and positions of the parties to the dispute. As is known, China did not go to the Hague Court of Arbitration and no one there listened to its position. So, how can these rulings possibly be deemed fair? We support China’s position on the issue», Mr. Putin explained.
He also noted that «The intervention of third-party non-regional powers, in my opinion, is harmful and counterproductive».
Moscow and Beijing don’t recognize the right of Washington to meddle into their relationships with neighbors and the disputes the US has no relation to. The situation in Ukraine and the South China Sea territorial dispute have a lot in common. The US sticks to the policy of containment towards Russia and China. The goal is to prevent these countries from restoring their clout in the areas of vital interests - Russia in the post-Soviet space and China in South East Asia. In Europe, the US uses the EU as an instrument to exert pressure against Russia. In Asia, Washington tries to take advantage of the contradictions between China and its neighbors.
The words of the Chinese president about the need to firmly support each other's efforts to safeguard sovereignty, security and development interests signal closer coordination of Russian and Chinese efforts to counter the American pressure. It takes place against the background of Russia-China joint naval exercises to take place in the South China Sea.
The Russia’s Pacific Fleet will dispatch a number of surface warships to the South China Sea to participate in the annual Sino-Russian naval exercise, dubbed Joint Sea 2016, held from September 11 to 19.
China and Russia have held six joint naval drills since 2005, with Beijing first assuming the role of host for the Joint Sea exercise in 2012. In 2015, both countries held naval and amphibious assault exercises in the Sea of Japan, a smaller naval drill in the Mediterranean, among a number of other bilateral military exchanges. Both countries have also participated in trilateral and multilateral exercises, for example, under the umbrella of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
The Russia-China rapprochement is a real nightmare for Washington. America was sure the relationship will not last long, but it miscalculated. The Obama administration has refocused from the Middle East to the Asia Pacific region only to be countered by the two leading nations united by the desire to protect their sovereignty and resist outside pressure.
Moscow is back in the Middle East. Its clout in the region is growing as many regional powers get frustrated with the US policy. The United States has to coordinate its activities in the region with Russia after the plans to «punish» Moscow in Europe have been stymied and the US clout in Europe started to wane too.
In the Pacific the US does take advantage of the China-Japan contradictions and the fear that some China’s neighbors may feel as the Chinese economic and military might is growing. But it does not make all Pacific states US allies.
Russia has reinvigorated a dialogue with Japan and South Korea. Sooner or later, it will make them less dependent of the United States.
This G20 event was the last big summit for the US president before he leaves in January. Before his tenure is over, Mr. Obama is scheduled to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meetings in Lima, Peru, slated for November 19–20, 2016. This year the event will boast a high level representation to include half of the G20 member states. The Pacific summit will have symbolic significance for the US president – the author of «Asia pivot» concept aimed at boosting the American power in the region and containing China. As the second term nears the end, it becomes clear the plans have been hopelessly stymied.
It’s an open secret that as a lame duck the US president will hardly be in the focus of the upcoming Lima event. He will not be in the position to lead the decision making process. A new US president will be elected ten days before the Lima summit kicks off.
The G20 meeting was the last forum where he could achieve a foreign policy success, for instance an agreement with Russia on Syria. It would have been very important for him, but Mr. Obama failed. The US Syria policy in tatters is the legacy a new US president will inherit. No hopes are pinned on President Obama anymore.
Being a Nobel Peace Prize winner, Mr. Obama has failed to turn the tide and make the US as strong as it once was. Will a new US president be able to turn the 21st century into a truly «American» century in the same way the 20th century was? Given the way things have played out over the last several years, it’s hard to bet on it. To put it mildly, such a prediction looks to be on shaky ground, especially after the Hangzhou event.