Government and Media Misinformation

 VIDEO: "They Weren't Expecting This"
Paul Joseph Watson (11 min.)

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks" is a famous line from Macbeth and commonly used to suggest that someone who denies something very strongly must be hiding the truth. It is apparently a formal policy of the UK government and news media, with the added threat from the government that if you question their "truth" you will face criminal charges.

One recent example where the truth has finally come out has to do with a little girl who was forced to display a knife and hatchet in order to protect her sister from a couple immigrants who propositioned the two girls and, subsequently, attacked them. Hot Air reports on the latest developments:

    In August of last year, Lola and Ruby Moire were walking home in a suburb of Dundee, Scotland, and being harassed by the ubiquitous 'migrants' who form so integral a part of these United Kingdom stories anymore. The abuse from their pursuers was so intense that one of the girls can be heard warning them off, shouting, 'Don’t f**king touch her, she’s f**king 12!' 

    Weapons the youngster had in her waistband came out, and she brandished them bravely as their tormentors taunted the little girls.

    Tormented, recorded, and then reported them to the police, who arrested the 12-year-old sister for 'brandishing a bladed weapon.'

    Several of the Xweets condemning both the arrest and the Labour government's two-tier indulgence of crimes against native British by its foreign imports, over those same citizens defending themselves from becoming victims or, even worse, criticizing the sorry state of things, have vaporised into the ether. No doubt after a campaign against 'misinformation' or maybe even a visit to the front door from Starmtrooping social media enforcement officers.

    As the world rallied around the young girl forced to swing a hatchet in self-defence, Keir Starmer's propaganda machine was already swinging the heavy battle axe of government propaganda against her. There are plenty of those Xweet and articles left from the rush to crush the nascent symbol of everything wrong with the Starmer regime.

    To turn the story back on the little psychopath and away from the innocently threatened immigrants.

    The BBC and the Dundee police were nearly beside themselves exonerating the completely innocent 'strolling Bulgarian couple' who'd been terrorized by the rampaging, blade-wielding pre-teen, and Scotland Yard was warning the public NOT TO SPREAD MISINFORMATION about the violent little urchin. She was no one's heroine.

Other British elites in government and media piled on, condemning the working class girls, defending the perverts that had accosted the girls, and warning against spreading "disinformation" about the incident.

    But even as the police were urging everyone to ignore the filthy little lying girls, they actually knew that the girl was completely justified in hauling out her arsenal. The Bulgarian couple were charged and the trial recently wrapped up and turns out that everything the girls had said was true as even the BBC reluctantly has reported:

    A man has been found guilty of making sexual remarks to a group of girls aged between 12 and 14 in Dundee before grabbing and pushing one of them to the ground.

    Ilia Belov, 22, claimed he confronted the girls after receiving abusive remarks and said he saw one of the girls with a knife in her waistband before the assault. [The article later indicates that the evidence showed he didn't see the knife until after he had pushed her to the ground].

    His sister Nadjedzha Belova, 20, previously admitted assaulting a 13-year-old girl by seizing and pulling her hair, dragging her to the ground, and striking her on the head to her injury during the incident.

    The pair will be sentenced at Dundee Sheriff Court on 5 August.

    The court heard that Belov had said "hello sexy, I'll show you a good time" to the girls while walking past them in the Lochee area of the city.

    After one of the girls called him a creep, he had returned to confront the group and called his sister, who arrived shortly afterwards and assaulted one of the girls. 

 The confrontation, or parts of it, were apparently caught on surveillance cameras. 

    Paul Joseph Watson has some more thoughts about this incident, particularly emphasizing that the police had evidence supporting the girls' account, yet nevertheless lied about the incident taking the side of the Bulgarian couple.

    Of course this is neither the first or last time. For instance, turning to classic propaganda in the U.S., the Emmett Till story has been carefully edited to make Till seem completely innocent in order to maximize white guilt. Matt Walsh has a video about that cover up:

 VIDEO: "The Emmett Till Story You've Heard Your Whole Life Is A Lie."
Matt Walsh (19 min.)

Is This The Reason The Media Attacked Hegseth For The Steak And Lobster?

Alladin on X relates:

I did a little digging. It seems the two vendors who had a monopoly on DOD food supply lost their contracts: VAL-PRO, INC. (located in California) and CHICO PRODUCE, INC. (also based in California). The new vendor setup is now open to multiple vendors (see the last picture).    

VAL-PRO had been awarded a nearly $1 billion 5-year contract in 2024 to provided food for then DoD and USDA schools and reservations. 

"Ammunition Feeders"--Are They Like Bird Feeders?

The New York Post reports that a "Long Island man arrested after 22 guns found behind ‘false wall’ in basement closet." The man arrested was on parole so possessing the firearms was a big "no-no". But what caught my eye was this sentence (emphasis added): "The cache included 14 handguns and eight assault rifles, along with ammunition feeders, ABC 7 reported." I went to the ABC 7 story, and it reported (bold added): "Officers found eight assault rifles, 10 semi-automatic handguns and four revolvers. They also discovered ammunition feeding devices." Is this to feed the baby .22LR ammo so it can grow into larger calibers like .50 BMG?

This Is A Good Example Of Why NPR Lost Its Funding

NPR reports that the Pentagon will be conducting a review of using women in ground combat positions. The article begins: "The Pentagon is mounting a six-month review of women in ground combat jobs, to ensure what it calls the military 'effectiveness' of having several thousand female soldiers and Marines in infantry, armor and artillery, according to a memo obtained by NPR." Note the scare quotes around "effectiveness". The bulk of the article makes it seem that Secretary of War Hegseth just has it in for women, noting the number of women serving in ground combat roles and including the following from "experts":

    Ellen Haring, a senior research fellow at Women in International Security, is a West Point graduate and retired Army colonel with 30 years in uniform, dismissed the Pentagon review as a way to exclude women from ground combat.

    "It's exactly what [Hegseth] said all along," she said. "He's against women in combat and he's going to get them out. It's going to be an effort to prove women don't belong."

    Meanwhile, Khris Fuhr, also a West Point graduate who worked on gender integration for the Army Forces Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, said an Army study between 2018 to 2023 found that women performed well in ground combat units, and in some cases had higher scores than male soldiers. She called the upcoming Pentagon study, "a solution for a problem that doesn't exist."   

Only at the second to last paragraph does the article reveal:

Marines privately bristled at the announcement [in 2015 requiring them to incorporate women into combat units]. They conducted a training exercise in the Mojave desert in 2015 that found gender-integrated units were slower, less lethal and more prone to injury than all-male units. Marine officers also said accepting women would lead to greater risk, meaning more Marine combat casualties. ...

And then even the final paragraph tries to backpedal and downplay that finding. In short, the article tries to paint Hegseth as an unreasonable sexist pig and it is only well past the point that most readers would have stopped reading does the article reveal objective evidence to support why Hegseth would order a review. 

    The real lede to this article should have been, however, that the Pentagon sees the possibility of war in the future and no longer has the luxury of coddling feminists.  

Related:

•  "IDF: Women can't serve in combat units due to physiological differences"--Jerusalem Post (April 17, 2023). An excerpt:

    The IDF has conducted several pilot programs for the integration of women in combat positions, upon which it said the military often bases its decisions. From 2020-2021, it conducted an analysis of combat positions for women, a follow-up to a previous study that determined there was a low probability for women being able to fulfill the physical requirements of certain units, such as armored and heavy infantry. The IDF is conducting further analysis and review of the issue.

    The ability to carry heavy weight, in particular being repeatedly burdened with heavy backpacks for long distances, subjected women to a significantly greater risk of injury than men, the IDF said.   

• "Israel Stops Training Women Combat Soldiers Over 'Health Risks'"--NDTV (May 30, 2025). 

    The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has ended a pilot programme under which female soldiers due to health and fitness concerns. The trained women were to serve in "combat mobility units" that deliver equipment and supplies to infantry forces in enemy territory and recover wounded soldiers, but IDF Chief of Staff Lt-Gen Eyal Zamir decided to pull the plug on Thursday (May 29), according to a report in the Jerusalem Post.

    As per IDF, though the professional performance of females undergoing the combat course was strong and equal to their male counterparts, their "physical and combat fitness levels fell short of the standards required for the role". 

Reuters Report Underscores How Dems Not Enforcing Gun Laws

Reuters is whining "How immigration swallowed up federal gun crime efforts." The article relates:

    Detectives in Baltimore watched on security video last summer as an argument inside a convenience store spilled into the parking lot and gunshots erupted at a sedan speeding away. They quickly recognized one of the shooters: He had been shot himself two days earlier.

    Officers soon found a handgun under his bed, one of them wrote in a court filing. Because the man was a felon, merely having the weapon could be a serious federal crime – precisely the sort of case federal authorities long made a staple in their efforts to combat violent crime in one of the United States’ most dangerous cities. 

    But federal authorities did not charge him. The U.S. Attorney's Office in Baltimore declined to comment on the case.

The article goes on to insinuate that the reason for a lack of a federal prosecution is that federal prosecutors are turning their attention to immigrant related crime. But so what? The federal government was never intended to exercise general police powers or handle local criminal matters. Besides, as the article points out in its last couple of paragraphs, Baltimore Police have significantly increased the number of arrests they have been making for felony possession of firearms. Perhaps the dimwits at Reuters should instead ask why the Maryland courts are letting violent criminals back onto the streets so quickly. 

    Also, a hint for the Reuters' dimwits: a drop of 10% in federal prosecutions of gun crimes is not "everything being swallowed up by immigration enforcement." Learn some basic arithmetic and be less credulous of Democrat hacks.

NBC Apologizes For Telling Truth

 "Woke NBC issues apology for misgendering Minneapolis child killer"--Daily Mail. 

Question Everything But...

In early July, Stonetoss published this political cartoon:

Source: "Book Squirm" by Stonetoss.

I don't know what prompted the cartoon, but it seemed rather prescient. On September 2, Tucker Carlson released a video of an interview he conducted of Darryl Cooper, an amateur historian and podcaster of no particular note as far as I can tell. Or he would have been of little note but for the Streisand Effect. For there was an immediate flood of opinion pieces from both the Left and the Right criticizing Carlson and/or Cooper, with little of it actually addressing Cooper's ideas, but rather going straight into ad hominem attacks on Carlson and his audience. I was particularly perturbed because of the number of criticisms posted at or linked through Instapundit. It seemed curious to me that a website and its pundits that normally pride themselves on defending freedom of speech were suddenly and viciously attacking Carlson for interviewing someone with a different take on certain aspects of World War II.

    I have only watched a short (probably 5 minute) segment of the 2 hour interview, but from what I saw and read in the tsunami of articles that followed, the critic's objections revolved around two of Cooper's assertions:

1. That Germany was logistically (food and otherwise) unprepared for the number of prisoners they took in the first several months of their invasion of the Soviet Union; and, faced with the prospect of millions of these prisoners starving or freezing to death during the winter, took the pragmatic step of executing them rather than letting them suffer (much as you might put down a dog). I don't know if Cooper actually described this as an "accident" but it has been transformed by those hating on Carlson and Cooper as Cooper explaining away the Holocaust as an accident.
   
2. That Winston Churchill was the real villain of World War II because, Cooper argues, he pushed the UK into the war and then, later, rejected peace overtures from Hitler, thereby unnecessarily extending the war and causing additional millions of deaths. 
   

There are valid arguments to be made against Cooper's arguments--Ron Unz provides a detailed rebuttal (as well as addressing failures of some of Cooper's critics)--but for the most part, the critics didn't do that. Rather, as alluded to earlier, many of them--including so-called conservatives who normally defend free speech--simply resorted to calling Carlson and his viewers stupid and/or made arguments that boiled down to "how dare he question the established narrative!"

     Although I found the sudden love for censorship from conservative pundits very curious, I ultimately decided not to write about it. That is, until I saw this article in the New York Post: "Hitler’s AI translated speeches go viral on TikTok – with one video topping 1M views – in troubling trend: report."  The problem, as the article indicates, is that "Misguided TikTokers are using AI to translate Adolf Hitler’s speeches into English – and racking up millions of clicks on the under-fire platform, according to a watchdog media report." This, apparently, violates a TikTok prohibition on “promoting (including any praise, celebration, or sharing of manifesto) or providing material support to … individuals who cause serial or mass violence, or promote hateful ideologies.”

    Obviously, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy involved here as no doubt you could probably find countless videos promoting Marxism (the bloodiest ideology ever seen), pushing racial hate (in the guise of DEI and CRT), supporting the abuse of children (i.e., transgenderism), and so on. And although they were together responsible for 100,000,000 deaths, I doubt that speeches from Lenin, Stalin, or Mao would be banned.

    But the removal of the Hitler speeches is rooted in the same condescending attitude that accompanied the attacks on Tucker Carlson and Darryl Cooper: the attitude that the rubes are too stupid to be permitted to listen to certain ideas.

    This is how you get to a world where 15% of internet traffic is cat videos and memes. 

VIDEO: Rasmussan Warns That MSM Polls Are Gaslighting Voters

In the video below, Mark Mitchell, the head pollster for Rasmussan, goes over the polling data his firm has collected on Trump v. Harris and discusses competing polls. The basic takeaway, though, is that the polls saying that Harris has a sizable (3 or 4%) lead over Trump are misinformation. Rather, Trump is not only ahead overall, but there are systemic changes in Trump's popularity with certain demographics which suggest that he will remain ahead of Harris going into the election. I was impressed not only by that fact that Mitchell thought the other polls were so bad that he felt compelled to create this video, but they were so bad that he actually used the term "gaslighting" to describe them.

VIDEO: "Kamala Harris is NOT WINNING! Latest 2024 Trump v. Harris Numbers"
Rasmussen Reports (18 min.)

Hot Air: "Why You’re Not Hearing More About That Mass Shooting In Fresno"

Article here. The basic takeaway is because the shooting, in which 4 were killed and another 6 injured, did not fit the narrative. The victims (and probable shooters) were Hmong and the shooting might have been gang related. Also, the shooters used handguns rather than "assault rifles." So, nothing here, move along folks. The author of the article compared the media reaction to that of the Bunny Friend Park shooting in 2015 that left 17 people injured but was largely ignored because it was blacks shooting blacks.

Three Teens Take the Room Temperature Challenge

Three teenagers of the usual background decided that it would be fun to commit armed robbery at 4 a.m. in the Atlanta, Georgia, area. Unfortunately for them, one of the victims took a dim view of the events ... and happened to be armed. Apparently with some sort of "assault" rifle according to a neighbor.

      Local news reports:

       Three masked teenagers were killed in a shootout with a homeowner outside an Atlanta-area home early Monday.

      According to the Rockdale County Sheriff’s Office, the incident happened just after 4 a.m. in Conyers as three teens were apparently attempting to rob three people in a front yard.

      The sheriff’s office said the teens, two 16-year-old boys and a 15-year-old, were killed during an exchange of gunfire.

      Family members identified two of the teens as brothers Isaiah Reid, 16, and Jaime Hernandez, 15.

 * * *

      Rockdale County deputies were able to later determine that one of the attempted robbery suspects brandished a gun and fired shots at the residents, but one of the intended victims returned fire.

     One of the teens was dead at the scene, while two were transported to a hospital where they later died.

Police are saying that this is a "stand your ground" case and no charges have been filed against the homeowner who apparently shot the youths.

      The weapon used by the homeowner has not been identified, but "[e]yewitness Carlos Watson said: 'It was five shots and then it sounded like a handgun. Then I heard somebody have an assault rifle. And it was a slew of shots that came out'," and "WSB-TV in Atlanta confirmed it to be a long-barrel semi-automatic."

      Of course, the youths were upstanding citizens that showed a lot of promise. "'They was loving, they was brothers,' said LaShawn Thornton, their aunt, Monday evening, speaking of how close they were to each other." So loving that, armed with a Glock, they tried robbing people at 4 a.m. Good thing they weren't hateful.

      Normally a story like this would have generated a huge backlash and call for repealing stand your ground laws. We would have seen photographs of the slain teens all over the news for days or weeks at a time. Instead of angry protests, there was a peaceful vigil where "[n]o one ... said the teenagers were in the right" and "[n]o one really talked about what happened." So why the difference? In this case, the homeowner who shot the youths was also black.

Is Rod Rosenstein's Departure A National Emergency?

        David Frum seems to think so. In a piece entitled "Rosenstein’s Departure Is a National Emergency," Frum goes on a stream of consciousness tirade that Rosenstein's departure will somehow upend the rule of law. And, perhaps more worryingly to Frum, "[i]f the president can browbeat Rosenstein into resigning—or even plausibly misrepresent the firing as a resignation—Trump gains the power to bypass the Senate confirmation process under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. He can replace Rosenstein with any serving official previously confirmed by the Senate to any other job." The horror, the horror!

       I don't think that it is lost on Frum that senior government officials work at the pleasure of the Chief Executive, the President--he just doesn't want his readers to realize it. Trump would be within his rights--and in accord with the law--to terminate Rosenstein for any reason or no reason at all. Rosenstein works at the sufferance of the President, not the Senate, the federal bureaucracy, or newspaper and magazine columnists.

       What we see here is Frum defending the deep state (deep statists?): the unelected bureaucrats that have immunized themselves from the will of the people or their elected representatives, pressing forward with their pet policies and to hell with the citizenry.

       Pearl Harbor was a national emergency, the 9/11 attacks were a national emergency. Some statist flunky losing his job is not.

The Major Solar Storm That Wasn't

Earlier this week, major media outlets were loudly proclaiming that Earth would be struck by a strong solar storm that would disrupt communications and electronics. Except there was no such storm. I commented at the time, based on those same articles, that the warnings were an example of the Chicken Little cries of "the sky is falling" because even the articles, when you dug into them, only admitted to an insignificant coronal mass ejection. But even that was incorrect: there simply was no storm. I won't attempt to explain why the media was so spooked over nothing (or, perhaps more correctly, wanted the public spooked over nothing), but I would direct you to these two videos showing how calm our star was at the time:

"NO SOLAR STORM COMING | Nonsense News March.14.2018"--Suspicious Observers (1 min.)

"Solar Impact Report, Snow, Magnetic Bubble | S0 News Mar.15.2018"--Suspicious Observers (3 min.)

How Media Bias Threatens Freedom

"THE TRUTH vs CNN"--Bill Whittle Channel (5 min.)

Whittle discusses the danger of a biased press. In particular, he notes that Evan Thomas, from Newsweek, said in 2004 that press bias was worth about 15 points at the polls. He then shows that if this bias were removed, Republicans would have handedly won the elections of 2008 and 2012, and that Trump would have done even better, carrying every state but Hawaii (and D.C., although it isn't a state).

Child Victims and the Media's Double Standard (Warning: disturbing images)

"I WAS RIGHT ABOUT SWEDEN"--Paul Joseph Watson (5 min.)

       In the video above, Watson relates that the recent terrorist attack on Sweden was inevitable, given their policies and laws regarding refugees and immigrants. It will be the first of many such attacks.

       However, he also raises a important point: that the media will freely show photographs of dead children when it advances the left's narrative, but not when it runs counter to the narrative.

       I think that we are all familiar with the double standards of the media when it comes to child victims of whatever disaster is in the headlines. For instance, when the media wanted the Western public to feel ashamed of keeping Syrian refugees out of Europe, we were flooded with images of child refugees, with the pièce de résistance being the photograph of Alan Kurdi, a young Syrian boy, lying lifeless on a beach, after the boat capsized in which he was a passenger.  (The media largely ignored the inconsistencies and other questions raised by the incident).

(The rest of the story is below the fold)

The Rabbit Hole Goes Deeper Than We Thought

     Breitbart interviewed Erik Prince (of Blackwater fame), who claims to have information from insiders at the New York Police Department (NYPD) concerning note only the type of information found on Anthony Weiner's computer, but that the only reason that FBI director Comey restarted his investigation into the Clinton emails is that the NYPD threatened to go public if the FBI did not do something. According to Prince:

“They found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times,” he said. 

“The amount of garbage that they found in these emails, of criminal activity by Hillary, by her immediate circle, and even by other Democratic members of Congress was so disgusting they gave it to the FBI, and they said, ‘We’re going to go public with this if you don’t reopen the investigation and you don’t do the right thing with timely indictments,’” Prince explained. 

“I believe – I know, and this is from a very well-placed source of mine at 1PP, One Police Plaza in New York – the NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants and the additional arrests they were making in this investigation, and they’ve gotten huge pushback, to the point of coercion, from the Justice Department, with the Justice Department threatening to charge someone that had been unrelated in the accidental heart attack death of Eric Garner almost two years ago. That’s the level of pushback the Obama Justice Department is doing against actually seeking justice in the email and other related criminal matters,” Prince said. 

“There’s five different parts of the FBI conducting investigations into these things, with constant downdrafts from the Obama Justice Department. So in the, I hope, unlikely and very unfortunate event that Hillary Clinton is elected president, we will have a constitutional crisis that we have not seen since, I believe, 1860,” Prince declared.

The NYPD operates the largest intelligence agency in the United States outside of the Federal Government, so hopefully it will have the means to protect itself from the U.S. Justice Department.

     It may seem far fetched to some, but there is historical precedent. For instance, the New American notes the following about a British cover-up of a high level pedophilia ring, which resulted in a newspaper being raided to seize documents exposing the ring:

The volcanic politician demanding the papers was Liberal Party MP Cyril Smith. Known as “Big Cyril,” he stood over six feet tall and, tipping the scales at more than 400 pounds, is said to have been the heaviest British parliamentarian in history. And he certainly carried weight. Despite allegedly being a predatory child molester with approximately 140 complaints filed against him, he eluded justice and, in 2010, died a free man of natural causes at age 82. 

The same could be said of Smith’s pal Jimmy Savile. After the flamboyant and eccentric BBC television host passed away in 2011 at age 84, it emerged that he was not only a prolific pedophile, he sexually abused older people as well — including the elderly — and even descended into necrophilia. 

Then there was Leon Brittan — head of the Home Office, the U.K. department responsible for immigration, security, and law and order — who oversaw the pedophilia investigation in what could have been a prime example of the fox guarding the henhouse. It was revealed early last year that he himself was accused of raping a woman and sexually abusing boys. And, you might have guessed it, he also died early last year a free man, at the age of 75. As is so often the case, justice is not a thing of this world.

The Telegraph also reported on the subject in 2014:

The country was still reeling from the horrors of the Jimmy Savile child abuse scandal that saw the BBC accused of cover up and culture of secrecy to protect itself. 

But the expose opened the door on a potentially even more explosive scandal – the claims of a VIP Westminster paedophile ring operating from the heart of the British Establishment from the 1960s onwards. 

It has led to allegations of a massive cover up across Whitehall spanning decades, pressure on the police and prosecutors not to pursue cases and the apparent disappearance of key dossiers and files detailing claims of child abuse and alleged attackers. 

More than 10 current and former politicians are said to be on a list of alleged child abusers now being investigated by police and the pressure is growing for a public inquiry. 

But the belated investigations only serve to highlight decades of apparent inaction in the corridors of power to get to the truth despite relentless campaigning by a number of MPs.

* * *

Lord Brittan, who was Home Secretary under Margaret Thatcher from 1983 to 1985, is now facing questions over his handling of the document and inconsistencies in his account of what he did with it. 

He told journalists last year he had no recollection of it but last week said instead that he had been handed a “substantial bundle of papers” by Mr Dickens in November 1983 and had passed them to officials for further investigation but had no further dealings with it. 

Just hours later he amended his position again when proof emerged that he had written to Mr Dickens in March 1984 to say the dossier had been assessed by prosecutors and handed to the police. 

Over the weekend, Mark Sedwill, the Home Office permanent secretary, confirmed that a review had not found “a single dossier from Mr Dickens”. 

However, officials did uncover “several sets of correspondence over a number of years” from the MP, who died in 1995, to several Home Secretaries containing allegations of sexual offences. 

Mr Sedwill also revealed that 114 official files relating to historic allegations of organised child abuse have also gone missing. 

The documents, which related to a 20-year period between 1979 and 1999, were "presumed destroyed, missing or not found", he said. 

There are also questions over what happened to evidence surrounding a senior Tory MP who was said to have been found with child pornography videos by a customs officer in the 1980s. 

The politician, a former MP, is believed to be another name in the Dickens’ dossier and was stopped in Dover after acting suspiciously. 

The videos, which allegedly involved children under 12 taking part in sex acts, were passed to the officer’s superiors but the MP was never arrested or charged. The tapes and paperwork have also since gone missing.

     But does the rabbit-hole go even deeper? Wikileak has released emails suggesting that John Podesta, one of Hillary's top confidants, has been involved with Satanic occult rituals--spirit cooking. The term refers to “an occult performance [by artist Marina Abramovic] during which menstrual blood, breast milk, urine, and sperm are used to create a ‘painting’.” The mainstream media has attempted to debunk the story, suggesting that the "spirit cooking dinner" referred to the emails did not involve spirit cooking, per se, but was a dinner to thank those that had help fund Abramovic's so-called "art." But even if so, it is clear that that these people fetishize blood and cannibalism.

Video: "Spirit Cooking With The Clintons"--Black Pigeon Speaks.

    Not so many years past, I would have automatically discounted such stories as pure "conspiracy theory" or "paranoia." But, unfortunately, we seem to be fated to live in an era where conspiracy theories are being proven true. Something most graphically illustrated by the domestic intelligence surveillance revealed by Snow. A television program, Person of Interest, went from being pure science fiction to something that is plausible at some level, even if there is not yet an AI reviewing the data. And it continues as more and more revelations come out, and more corruption exposed.

    The extent and nature of these revelations have even Roger L. Simon, who until recently was adamantly opposed to a Trump presidency, now wondering if the United States faces a civil war no matter the outcome of the election. He writes:

The bad news is this:  As miserable as this endless election season has been, the aftermath is likely to be far worse.  You don't have to be Nostradamus to see that putting the American Humpty Dumpty together again is going to be a herculean task. Our country could be permanently fractured in ways few of us would have anticipated even a year ago.  Anything is possible now. 

If Hillary Clinton is elected, the very next day millions of Americans will be watching to see what will happen with the FBI and the Justice Department.  Since we can now assume this will be a close election, that would be nearly half the voters in this country, sixty to seventy million people, almost all of whom believe Clinton, the woman a few weeks from inauguration as president, should have been charged with serious crimes and belonged behind bars, not in the White House. 

Moreover, many have seen the WikiLeaks that reek of collusion between the Clintonistas and officials at the FBI and Justice, not to mention with virtually all the mainstream media outlets that were distrusted to begin with and are now reviled. 

If that's not an explosive situation, what is?  And we don't know what Assange et al have in store for us after the election.  Just now we learned that the Clinton Foundation accepted—while Her Ladyship was secretary of State and in honor of Bill's birthday—an unreported one million dollar donation from that paragon of women's and gay rights, Qatar. This is chump change in the grand Clinton scheme of things, but another reminder of their unending greed and corruption. More importantly, as Tyler Durden points out, this time there should be legal consequences for the foundation—or would be normally in a country governed by the rule of law. 

Only we're not anymore. 

This and a thousand other things put Obama, quite possibly liable himself from the email disclosures, and his attorney general Lynch behind a treacherous eight ball going forward, because they are not dealing with a few thousand disgruntled people, but those many millions.  If they were to go ahead with Jarrett's suggestion, take Comey's head (i. e. fire him) and replace him with a yet more complaisant successor, who knows what would happen? 

But if they don't, and even if they do, the investigation may reveal things so shocking the nation will never be the same. Rumors have been flying that are so extreme that even a ten percent accuracy rate could ignite a firestorm. 

The problem for all of us is that there is literally nothing Clinton can do to get out of this box, even if, as many predict, Obama pardons her.  The corruption is so pervasive there is no way short of an actual military putsch to stop the continuing revelations. And such an action would itself unleash ... well, you know the title of this article.

Univision's Reporting on Fast and Furious

Ignored by the U.S. mainline media, "Fast and Furious" is finally getting the coverage it deserves through Univision. Bob Owens at PJ Media writes:

On Sunday night, Spanish-language station Univision— one of the only networks to provide critical coverage of President Obama’s failures in office instead of cream-puff interviews — broke open the Fast and Furious investigation, revealing new evidence of weapons smuggling and displaying shocking new images of the bloody aftermath of the government-supported gun-smuggling program.

The Univision report undermines the integrity of the recently released DOJ inspector general report on Operation Fast and Furious, already heavily criticized as an attempt to whitewash criminal activity within the Obama administration.

The hour-long Univision report revealed the existence of another 57 guns recovered by Mexican authorities, including some of those used in the mass-murder at a party just one year after Obama’s inauguration . . . .
These 57 recovered weapons discovered are in addition to the 122 weapons referenced in a congressional report. . . .  It is even more disturbing to know that American Department of Justice officials knew that most of the weapons walked over the border would only be discarded by the police and recovered by Mexican authorities after they were used in a crime, and that they were indifferent to the body count being racked up, callously noting that to make an omelet, eggs had to be broken.

Univision pulled no punches in describing the horrors of the Villas de Salvarcar massacre, even showing a graphic pool of blood reminiscent of the iconic Normandy D-Day invasion scene in the classic World War II film The Big Red One.

The report also shed more light on a fact that many in the media have attempted to ignore — namely, that Operation Fast and Furious was not the only federal gun-walking operation providing weapons to criminals at this time.

Operation Castaway, run with the same bloody-minded approach as Operation Fast and Furious, provided more than 1,000 guns to cartels via the Tampa ATF. Those guns leaked out across Honduras, Colombia, and Venezuela, according to the U.S. veteran who smuggled some of the weapons, Hugh Crumpler:

“When the ATF stopped me, they told me the guns were going to cartels,” Hugh Crumpler, a Vietnam veteran turned arms trafficker, told Univision News. “The ATF knew before I knew and had been following me for a considerable length of time. They could not have followed me for two months like they said they did, and not know the guns were going somewhere, and not want for that to be happening.”

Univision also uncovered evidence of weapons being smuggled from Texas: two gun-smuggling programs similar to Fast and Furious are rumored to have put thousands of additional weapons in the cartels’ hands in operations larger than Fast and Furious. ... The Department of Justice has denied the existence of such programs, despite the physical evidence of guns recovered suggesting otherwise. While the Univision report focused on guns the DOJ ran to Mexican cartels, there is enough evidence to suggest other Obama administration-sanctioned gun-walking plots arming domestic criminal gangs, such as the so-called Gangwalker plot in Indiana, which supplied Chicago street gangs, and similar rumored operations in California, North Carolina, northern Florida, and elsewhere, which provided weapons to gangs in U.S. cities. Nor has the Univision report focused on weapons that have found their way to cartels via the State Department or the Department of Defense.

Ever since Mike Vanderboegh and David Codrea broke the story of Obama administration gun-walking, critics have been noting that this is the biggest, bloodiest scandal in U.S. presidential history.

Despite a concerted effort by the mainstream media to ignore the story and the Obama administration’s attempt to stonewall investigators, this story seems to be catching fire.

More on Univisions reporting here.

I have two observations. (1) It appears that Univision waited for the Congressional report to come out before releasing this story. The "white wash" in the Congressional report is even more damning because of the timing. (2) Because this reporting is coming through a Spanish language news service, it will have a much greater impact on Hispanic voters than if it had come through the regular media.

The Meaning of the Black Muslim Flag

I was reading a story on Fox News today about Egyptian President Morsi and read something disturbing in its ignorance or its intent to deceive readers. The story, which is from the Associated Press, states:

In the interview, Morsi dismissed criticism that he responded too slowly when protesters managed to scale the walls of the heavily fortified U.S. Embassy in Cairo on Sept. 11. The demonstrators replaced the American flag with a banner carrying the Islamic declaration of faith.  

CBS reported at the time the following:

Dozens of protesters scaled the embassy walls, went into the courtyard and took down the flag from a pole. They brought it back to the crowd outside, which tried to burn it, but failing that, tore it apart. The protesters on the wall then raised on the flagpole a black flag with the Muslim declaration of faith on it, "There is no god but God [sic] and Muhammad is his prophet."

Here's a photo:

The black flag has special significance in Islam. As Joel Richardson explains in his book, Antichrist: Islam's Awaited Messiah:

In Islam there are two flags. One is white and one is black. Written across both flags in Arabic are the words, "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger." The white flag is called Al-Liwaa and serves as the sign for the leader of the Muslim army and is the flag of the Islamic State. The black flag is called Ar-Raya and is used by the Muslim army. It is also called the flag of jihad, and is carried into battle. One flag is governmental and the other is a military flag. 

 * * * 

Islamic tradition pictures the Mahdi [the Islamic messiah] as joining with teh army of Muslim warriors carrying black flags. The Madhi will then lead this army to Israel and re-conquer it for Islam. The Jews will be slaughtered until very few remain and Jerusalem will become the location of the Mahdi's rule over the Earth.

(pp. 45-46).

Delusions About Survivalists and Preppers

There are some seriously sick people out there who think that the only reason that survivalists and preppers are into preparing is because of paranoid delusions. I think that they are instead projecting their own bias, beliefs, and mental issues onto a benign group of people--the preppers. From the Edmonton Sun:

Motivations for survivalists are as varied as the causes they get behind.

Stephen Kent is a University of Alberta professor specializing in sociology and religion.

"A lot of people can conflate reality with fantasy, with fear and what comes out is a dire picture about the future and the frightened image in what their place in it is," Kent said.

There are subcultures within the subculture of survivalism.

Lack of education, receiving news from only one source, and apocalyptic entertainment all play into fears, added Kent.

"These survivalists run the gamut from sincere but deluded people with personality disorders to people whose childhood experiences have been violent, religiously violent, in terms of God's love," Kent said.

* * *

Predictions about electronic failures in 2000 and the Church of the Triumphant's predictions on soviet missile launches in the 1960s may have fallen flat, but Kent said there are legitimate concerns people should be prepared for.

As dams broke in the Northwest United States in the 1980s flooding the towns settled beneath, communities with higher percentages of Mormons bounced back quicker.

"Good Mormons stock about a year's worth of food," Kent said. "It doesn't pay off often, but it has paid off sometimes."

He said there have been examples where even in a highly-developed society with a well-intentioned government things can go wrong, pointing to the ice storms in Quebec in 1998 that left people without power for weeks. Having food and water in case of disaster is prudent.

"The reality is, all of us are going to experience some personal apocalypticisms at some point," Kent said. "The survivalists just have a very dire fantasies about what theirs is going to be like and hold the belief they can do something about it. A lot of people are much more avoidant or fatalistic about their own demises."

So, on one hand, Kent thinks that it is prudent to have some food and water on hand, but on the other hand, it is delusional and paranoid to have some food and water on hand. C'mon Kent. Make up your mind.

To see who is the crazier, I just went to Google News to see if there are any articles just in the top news stories (not further searching for specific terms or going into sub-catagories) that would support a survivalists/preppers world view. There were a few:

1.  There were several stories concerning the civil war in Syria, including this one from the Associate Press on rebel attacks on Asad strongholds.

2. Evacuations ordered as Colorado fire reaches 8000 acres in size.

3.  Spain requesting 100 billion Euro bailout for its banks.

4.  Thousands fleeing violence after attacks in the Ivory Coast.

5.  "Heavy rain Saturday in southern Escambia County left an unknown number of people homeless, forced over 100 people into shelters, and caused untold millions of dollars in damages." (Full story here).

That was just off the front page of Google News at the time I drafted this post. How many other disasters, big and small, would I find. How about the personal disasters that underlie the unemployment statistics? Or house-fires? Or the death or lengthy illness of a family's breadwinner?

Like anything segment of the population, there are going to be the kooks and crackpots--the outlying extreme on the bell curve. But to take the abnormal as an example of the the "norm" is the basest form of logical error, and intellectual dishonesty.

For more on this topic, here is an article from MyNorthwest.com about a prepper speaking out against the stigma attached to make disaster preparations.

Mortar Attack on Columbian Police Station

From the Telegraph:

Assailants in pickup trucks fired homemade mortars at a Colombian police station on Thursday, killing at least six people and wounding more than 20.

* * *

The dead in Thursday's attack included the Villa Rica police post's commander and five civilians. Also killed dead were 3-year-old girl and a 19-year-old woman.

The part that really struck me was this comment from the unnamed "reporter":

The peasant-based FARC, which has been fighting a succession of governments since 1964 demanding a more equitable distribution of wealth, is seeking to open a peace dialogue with the government.

What an idiot. FARC is no more a "peasant-based" movement "demanding a more equitable distribution of wealth" than Wall Street is a small group of colonial merchants trading stock under a tree. Maybe once, in the beginning, but not for a long time. Here's a hint for the brain-dead, PC zombie that wrote the story--FARC is a group of murderers.