TwistedTimes

Saturday, September 13, 2014

The Covert Origins of ISIS

Amazing coincidence that the Mossad's official name is ISIS?

#ISIS revealed as ISRAELI SECRET INTELLIGENCE SERVICE: http://t.co/0efDrAuKey via @YouTube
— Debra McKinney (@dmmckinney) September 14, 2014

Friday, September 12, 2014

The Geopolitics of World War III

Biden Delivers Fiery ISIS Remarks: We Will ‘Follow Them to the Gates of Hell!’

Is this the attitude you want from your vice president?

U.S. Vice President says: We Will Follow ISIS ‘To The Gates Of Hell’. ISIS destined for 'gates of hell'. Joe Biden vows: Hell Is Where Islamic State Will Reside!

WASHINGTON (CBSDC/AP) — Vice President Joe Biden says the United States will follow the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria terror group to the “gates of hell.”
Speaking in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Biden minced no words on how the U.S. will respond.
“We will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice because hell is where they will reside,” Biden said.
The vice president added: “If they think the American people will be intimidated, they don’t know us very well.”
During a press conference in Estonia on Wednesday, President Barack Obama said that the United States will not be intimidated by ISIS and that a coalition will be built to “degrade and destroy” the group.
Obama still did not give a timeline for deciding on a strategy to go after the extremist group’s operations in Syria. “It’s going to take time for us to be able to roll them back,” the president said at a news conference during a visit to Europe.
Obama vowed the U.S. would not forget the “terrible crime against these two fine young men.”
“We will not be intimidated. Their horrific acts only unite us as a country and stiffen our resolve to take the fight against these terrorists,” Obama said. “And those who make the mistake of harming Americans will learn that we will not forget, and that our reach is long and that justice will be served.”
Separately, Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement: “Barbarity, sadly, isn’t new to our world. Neither is evil.”
Obama also sought to clean up the damage from his statement last week that “we don’t have a strategy yet” for dealing with the Islamic State group in Syria. Republicans quickly seized on the remark to argue the president lacks a coherent approach to fighting the extremist group.
“It is very important from my perspective that when we send our pilots in to do a job, that we know that this is a mission that’s going to work, that we’re very clear on what our objectives are, what our targets are,” Obamasaid. “We’ve made the case to Congress and we’ve made the case to the American people, and we’ve got allies behind us so that it’s not just a one-off, but it’s something that over time is going to be effective.”
Obama responded that the airstrikes have been effective in blunting the militant threat and he will continue to battle the “barbaric and ultimately empty vision” that the Islamic State represents. He said he will be consulting with NATO allies at a summit in Wales Thursday and Friday on a strategy to combat the Islamic State and other militant networks that arise.

For more on where ISIS really originates and what their purpose really is, watch "The Covert Origins of ISIS"

Netanyahu Bragged He Has America Wrapped Around His Finger

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Dan Rather Predicts Collapse of WTC7 within SECONDS! #Remember9/11

Jesse Ventura on 9/11 and the Islamic State: ‘It’s a war that will go on...

Why won’t the government release the full 9/11 Commission Report?

1/3 of Americans Believe 9/11 Was an Inside Job False Flag Attack, Accor...

Jet Fuel Takes Down 3 Steel Towers; That's a Good One

#ClosetTruthers - Mark Wahlberg Gives 9/11 Truth Message in "Shooter"

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

9/11 Loose Change 2nd Edition Meets Cyberjacking and Drone Theory

This is a fairly recent special report from James Corbett for the Boiling Frogs Post alternative news organization.

This is an older documentary - the second edition - which was one of the theories of the 9/11 truther movement - that drones hit the towers. Follow this video to its source on YouTube and then read the comments. There are several other videos to take you down the rabbit hole.

Distractions, distractions, distractions.

Remember Remember the 11th of September and all the evidence your govt doesnt want you to see http://t.co/9pGGM4z2WC
— #Remember911 (@TwistedPolitix) September 10, 2014

Missing Links (Israeli involvement in 9/11)

BREAKING: Press Conference on the Role of Foreign Governments in 9/11

Yesterday a press conference was held to discuss the declassification of a 28-page finding on foreign government support of the 9/11 hijackers. It was almost COMPLETELY IGNORED in the mainstream media with ONE exception, CNN's Jake Tapper did a 15-minute segment. You can find that video here.

It is absolutely infuriating to anyone with even a modicum of intelligence that in the 21st century United States of America, following the greatest attack on American soil since the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, and we are NOT told that foreign agents and governments were involved in financing, coordinating, executing, and covering up the 9/11 massacre.

To truly understand what is being alluded to in these videos, read the stories linked below for more background.

CNN: 28 Pages of a 9/11 report you can't see

Here is the press release on the conference:

September 10, 2014

Yesterday, Congressmen Walter Jones, Stephen Lynch and Thomas Massie hosted another press conference in their continuing drive to achieve the declassification of a 28-page finding on foreign government support of the 9/11 hijackers. This one, coming two days shy of the 13th anniversary of the September 11 attacks, was marked by emotional appeals from family members of 9/11 victims as well as a survivor at the World Trade Center.

Below, you’ll find the full video of the press conference, including a question-and-answer session that followed prepared remarks. Especially touching are the words of Kaitlyn and Justin Strada, whose father, Tom Strada, was killed at the World Trade Center just four days after Justin was born.

The most sharply-pointed demand for the release of the 28 pages came when Matthew T. Sellitto, whose son Matthew C. Sellitto was killed at the World Trade Center, closed his remarks by saying:

So, if I spoke to (9/11 Commission Chairman) Tom Kean and if I spoke to (9/11 Commission Vice-Chairman) Lee Hamilton, and they told me there’s no security risk, and if the people that gave them the power to run this 9/11 Commission trusted them, and they tell me there’s no security risk, then Mr. President, when you tell me there’s a security risk and that’s the reason you’re not making these public…Mr. President, I call you—a liar. And my son’s dead. And I don’t know all the facts, because Mr. President, you’re lying to me.

28 pages from 9/11 Congressional Joint Inquiry remain classified. What & why is gov't hiding? @jaketapper reports. http://t.co/BEVO04tG8I
— Thomas Drake (@Thomas_Drake1) September 9, 2014

Other Top Stories Related to 9/11:

Instances of the United States overthrowing foreign government

Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)

    China 1949 to early 1960s
    Albania 1949-53
    East Germany 1950s
    Iran 1953 *
    Guatemala 1954 *
    Costa Rica mid-1950s
    Syria 1956-7
    Egypt 1957
    Indonesia 1957-8
    British Guiana 1953-64 *
    Iraq 1963 *
    North Vietnam 1945-73
    Cambodia 1955-70 *
    Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
    Ecuador 1960-63 *
    Congo 1960 *
    France 1965
    Brazil 1962-64 *
    Dominican Republic 1963 *
    Cuba 1959 to present
    Bolivia 1964 *
    Indonesia 1965 *
    Ghana 1966 *
    Chile 1964-73 *
    Greece 1967 *
    Costa Rica 1970-71
    Bolivia 1971 *
    Australia 1973-75 *
    Angola 1975, 1980s
    Zaire 1975
    Portugal 1974-76 *
    Jamaica 1976-80 *
    Seychelles 1979-81
    Chad 1981-82 *
    Grenada 1983 *
    South Yemen 1982-84
    Suriname 1982-84
    Fiji 1987 *
    Libya 1980s
    Nicaragua 1981-90 *
    Panama 1989 *
    Bulgaria 1990 *
    Albania 1991 *
    Iraq 1991
    Afghanistan 1980s *
    Somalia 1993
    Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
    Ecuador 2000 *
    Afghanistan 2001 *
    Venezuela 2002 *
    Iraq 2003 *
    Haiti 2004 *
    Somalia 2007 to present
    Libya 2011*
    Syria 2012

Q: Why will there never be a coup d’état in Washington?

A: Because there’s no American embassy there.

Global Research Editor’s note: To this list published in February 2013, we must add Ukraine, where Viktor Yanukovych was successfully ousted in February 2014.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Top Russia Expert: Ukraine Joining Nato Would Provoke Nuclear War

This is from @democracynow about 4 months ago:

This is from the almighty Zerohedge today:

Stephen Cohen is one of America’s top experts on Russia. Cohen is professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University, and the author of a number of books on Russia and the Soviet Union.

Cohen says that the West is mainly to blame for the crisis in Ukraine:

This is a horrific, tragic, completely unnecessary war in eastern Ukraine. In my own judgment, we have contributed mightily to this tragedy. I would say that historians one day will look back and say that America has blood on its hands. Three thousand people have died, most of them civilians who couldn’t move quickly. That’s women with small children, older women. A million refugees.

Cohen joins other American experts on Russia – such as former U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union, Jack Matlock – in this assessment.

Cohen also says that if Ukraine joins NATO, it will lead to nuclear war:

[Interviewer:] The possibility of Ukraine in NATO and what that means and what—

STEPHEN COHEN: Nuclear war.

[Interviewer:] Explain.

STEPHEN COHEN: Next question. I mean, it’s clear. It’s clear. First of all, by NATO’s own rules, Ukraine cannot join NATO, a country that does not control its own territory. In this case, Kiev controls less and less by the day. It’s lost Crimea. It’s losing the Donbas—I just described why—to the war. A country that does not control its own territory cannot join Ukraine [sic]. Those are the rules.

[Interviewer:] Cannot join—

STEPHEN COHEN: I mean, NATO. Secondly, you have to meet certain economic, political and military criteria to join NATO.

Ukraine meets none of them. Thirdly, and most importantly, Ukraine is linked to Russia not only in terms of being Russia’s essential security zone, but it’s linked conjugally, so to speak, intermarriage. There are millions, if not tens of millions, of Russian and Ukrainians married together. Put it in NATO, and you’re going to put a barricade through millions of families. Russia will react militarily.

In fact, Russia is already reacting militarily, because look what they’re doing in Wales today. They’re going to create a so-called rapid deployment force of 4,000 fighters. What is 4,000 fighters? Fifteen thousand or less rebels in Ukraine are crushing a 50,000-member Ukrainian army. Four thousand against a million-man Russian army, it’s nonsense. The real reason for creating the so-called rapid deployment force is they say it needs infrastructure. And the infrastructure—that is, in plain language is military bases—need to be on Russia’s borders. And they’ve said where they’re going to put them: in the Baltic republic, Poland and Romania.

Now, why is this important? Because NATO has expanded for 20 years, but it’s been primarily a political expansion, bringing these countries of eastern Europe into our sphere of political influence; now it’s becoming a military expansion. So, within a short period of time, we will have a new—well, we have a new Cold War, but here’s the difference. The last Cold War, the military confrontation was in Berlin, far from Russia. Now it will be, if they go ahead with this NATO decision, right plunk on Russia’s borders. Russia will then leave the historic nuclear agreement that Reagan and Gorbachev signed in 1987 to abolish short-range nuclear missiles. It was the first time nuclear—a category of nuclear weapons had ever been abolished. Where are, by the way, the nuclear abolitionists today? Where is the grassroots movement, you know, FREEZE, SANE? Where have these people gone to? Because we’re looking at a new nuclear arms race. Russia moves these intermediate missiles now to protect its own borders, as the West comes toward Russia. And the tripwire for using these weapons is enormous.

One other thing. Russia has about, I think, 10,000 tactical nuclear weapons, sometimes called battlefield nuclear weapons. You use these for short distances. They can be fired; you don’t need an airplane or a missile to fly them. They can be fired from artillery. But they’re nuclear. They’re radioactive. They’ve never been used. Russia has about 10,000. We have about 500. Russia’s military doctrine clearly says that if Russia is threatened by overwhelming conventional forces, we will use tactical nuclear weapons. So when Obama boasts, as he has on two occasions, that our conventional weapons are vastly superior to Russia, he’s feeding into this argument by the Russian hawks that we have to get our tactical nuclear weapons ready.

"We Are Not Beginning a New Cold War, We Are Well Into It": Stephen Cohe...

You live in a country run by idiots if...

Originally posted by Dr. Eowyn at Fellowship of The Minds blog ,

1. If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for being in the country illegally, you live in a country run by idiots.

2. If you have to get your parents’ permission to go on a field trip or take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion, you live in a country run by idiots.

3. If you have to show identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor or check out a library book, but not to vote on who runs the government, you live in a country run by idiots.

4. If the government wants to ban stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines with more than ten rounds, but gives 20 F-16 fighter jets to the crazy leaders in Egypt, you live in a country run by idiots.

5. If, in the largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not a 24-ounce soda because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat, you live in a country run by idiots.

6. If an 80-year-old woman can be stripped searched by the TSA but a woman in a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched, you live in a country run by idiots.

7. If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more, you live in a country run by idiots.

8. If a seven year old boy can be thrown out of grade school for saying his teacher’s “cute,” but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable, you live in a country run by idiots.

9. If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government intrusion, while not working is rewarded with EBT cards, WIC checks, Medicaid, subsidized housing and free cell phones, you live in a country run by idiots.

10. If the government’s plan for getting people back to work is to incentivize NOT working, with 99 weeks of unemployment checks and no requirement to prove they applied but can’t find work, you live in a country run by idiots.

11. If being stripped of the ability to defend yourself makes you more “safe” according to the government, you live in a country run by idiots.

And my own personal contribution:

12. If you live in a country where elected officials permit a foreign entity to take land away from Americans to protect turtles, birds, and mice, , you live in a country run by idiots. #UNAgenda21

13. If you live in a country where you can't afford daycare but your neighbor gets it for free from the government who then taxes you, you live in a country run by idiots.

14. If you live in a country where patriotic citizens are duped into supporting countless wars of aggression to enrich bankers and oilmen, you live in a country run by idiots.

15. If you live in a country where billions of dollars of tax money is diverted into "foreign aid" for foreign elite to buy weapons, so we can later send our soldiers to fight those tyrants, you live in a country run by idiots.

How about your own ideas? Submit them below anonymously.

The Imperial Presidency: Illegal Wars

Submitted by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute,

Forty years ago many Americans celebrated the demise of the imperial presidency with the resignation of Richard Nixon. Today it is clear they celebrated too soon. Nixon’s view of presidential powers, summed up in his infamous statement that, “when the president does it that means it is not illegal,” is embraced by the majority of the political class. In fact, the last two presidents have abused their power in ways that would have made Nixon blush.

For example, Nixon’s abuse of the Internal Revenue Service to persecute his political opponents was the subject of one of the articles of impeachment passed by the US House of Representatives. As bad as Nixon’s abuse of the IRS was, he was hardly the first president to use the IRS this way, and the present administration seems to be continuing this tradition. The targeting of Tea Party groups has received the most attention, but it is not the only instance of the IRS harassing President Barack Obama’s political opponents. For example, the IRS has demanded that one of my organizations, Campaign for Liberty, hand over information regarding its major donors.

Nixon’s abuse of federal power to spy on his “enemies” was abhorrent, but Nixon’s abuses of civil liberties pale in comparison to those of his successors. Today literally anyone in the world can be spied on, indefinitely detained, or placed on a presidential “kill list” based on nothing more than a presidential order. For all his faults, Nixon never tried to claim the power to unilaterally order anyone in the world detained or killed.

Many today act as apologists for the imperial presidency. One reason for this is that many politicians place partisan concerns above loyalty to the Constitution. Thus, they openly defend, and even celebrate, executive branch power grabs when made by a president of their own party.

Another reason is the bipartisan consensus in support of the warfare state. Many politicians and intellectuals in both parties support an imperial presidency because they recognize that the Founders’ vision of a limited executive branch is incompatible with an aggressive foreign policy. When Republicans are in power “neoconservatives” take the lead, while when Democrats are in power “humanitarian interventionists" take the lead. Regardless of party or ideological label, they share the same goal — to protect the executive branch from being constrained by the constitutional requirement that the president seek congressional approval before waging war.

The strength of the bipartisan consensus that the president should have limitless discretion in committing troops to war is illustrated by the failure of an attempt to add an article dealing with Nixon's “secret bombing” of Cambodia to the articles of impeachment. Even at the low point of support for the imperial presidency, Congress still refused to rein in the president’s war-making powers.

The failure to include the Cambodia invasion in the articles of impeachment may well be the main reason Watergate had little to do with reining in the imperial presidency. Because the imperial presidency is rooted in the war power, attempts to rein in the imperial presidency that do not work to restore Congress’ constitutional authority to declare war are doomed to fail.

Repealing Nixon’s legacy requires building a new bipartisan coalition in favor of peace and civil liberties, rejecting what writer Gene Healy calls “the cult of the presidency,” and placing loyalty to the Constitution above partisanship. An important step must be restoring congressional supremacy in matters of war and peace.