He said today: “In its efforts to expand NATO into Ukraine, the Biden administration is recklessly inflaming the international crisis, endangering global security. It is often forgotten that in 1990, the U.S. promised that NATO would not expand into the former communist states of Eastern Europe; ‘not one inch Eastward,’ Soviet leaders were assured by the U.S. Secretary of State at the time. Despite this promise, NATO soon expanded into Eastern Europe, eventually placing the alliance up against Russia’s borders. To resolve the current crisis, the Biden administration should offer a written guarantee that Ukraine will not be allowed to join NATO. To do this would satisfy the key Russian demand, consistent with the 1990 U.S. commitment.”
MASSIVLY UPDATED POST NOW THAT WAS NOT WORDED OR ORGANIZED AS COHERENTLY AS I WOULD HAVE LIKED IN MY TIRED STATE LAST EVENING, BUT WAS EVEN THEM STILL BETTER BY FAR THAN THE PIECE THAT PROMPTED MY LATE NIGHT.
The following plymouthherald.co.uk piece of scat masquerading as a purveyor of facts is literally the worst duh-bunk-turd attempt at debunking the 9/11 truth movement EVER and we have taken on quite a few around these parts over the years...
The official explanation is that puffs of smoke from the towers was air pressure caused by collapsing floors, the Daily Star reports.
But John-Michael Talboo, from Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, said of videos of the attacks: “There is no reason, on the ‘dust puff’ theory, for such blasts to be as isolated as they were."
The day following the attack, US President Donald Trump gave a TV interview which appeared to suggest the World Trade Center buildings collapsed because of bombs.
He said: “It wasn’t architectural defect. How could a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been; how could it possibly go through that steel?
“I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs – bombs that exploded simultaneously.
“Because I can’t imagine anything being able to go through that wall.”
Experts have cast doubt on whether the seeming explosions were caused by bombs, however.
Structural engineers who worked on the FEMA investigation believe that the puffs of smoke were caused by a process known as 'pancaking'.
This is what happens when floors collapse downward in a chain reaction, rather than a bomb being detonated.
Dear Lord, what sleuths these ones are. FFS Where to start... Well, first, thanks for the compliment that kicks of your headline! #ProudConspiracyTheorist
Posting below the video, Mike Wayne wrote: "This really s***s on the "dust puffs and air pressure" claim of the official lie."
So, to reiterate the significance from my original article that these Stevie Wonder blunder heads apparently couldn't see even in their own hit piece...
As to these ejections appearing only after the collapse initiation, it should be noted that the North Tower's antenna dropped before any other building movement is seen, which is evidence that demolition devices were working on the core before any squibs were seen emerging out of the perimeter walls. There is also video showing that some of these ejections occurred even before the collapses began. See Visible Explosion at World Trade Center and WTC 1 collapse initiation — visible signs.
For those dear readers who have eyes to see, it should be apparent that the pancaking floors "puffs of dust" explanation is directly contradicted by the video they focused on, as well as the other material I mentioned. Which by the way, was kept from the public's prying eyes by the official investigator's at NIST, even after a FOIA request was filed seeking the material. It took an eventual lawsuit to finally obtain the materials, very much akin to the firefighter oral histories, which like the stonewalled videos, are strongly suggestive of explosive demolition being employed on 9/11. In the case of the videos, we would likely not even be discussing them if not for the efforts of the 9/11 truther organization that fought for them and filed suit...
The International Center for 9/11 Studies is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the scientific study of the attacks in New York and Washington DC on September 11, 2001. The Center engages in scientific research and educational activities that are international in scope and multidisciplinary in nature, and is committed to promoting and engaging in data-driven empirical research performed to the highest academic standards. Through a network of former and current University professors, as well as professionals in a multitude of science and engineering professions, the Center encourages collaboration, information sharing, dialogue and debate across geographical and disciplinary boundaries. Scientific Papers The Center's Director has authored or co-authored several peer reviewed papers regarding the collapses of the Twin Towers. Government Accountability The Center led an effort by a team of experts to submit public comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology pointing out serious errors and omissions in the NIST report on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. https://ic911studies.org/
On August 12, 2005, the New York Times announced the release of more than 12,000 pages of oral histories in the form of transcripts of interviews with 503 firefighters and emergency medical responders. The interviews were conducted between October of 2001 and January of 2002 under the order of New York City's fire commissioner at the time of the attack, Thomas Von Essen, who wanted to preserve first-hand accounts of the attack. 1
The New York Times published the oral histories, and provides an index of PDFs of the interviews here. 2 The Times converted a subset of the interviews into text files. 3 The following pages excerpt passages from the accounts pertaining to the observation of aspects of the destruction of the Twin Towers.*
Pretty lame brained schooling of us conspiracy theorists so far from this purported journalistic mainstream source of (dis?) information. Trump's allegations of fake news from the legacy "mainstream" news just essentially got proved in one fowl and foul swoop via the outrageous wool this so-called paper tried to pull over the eyes of it's readers like you that it obviously takes to be just unsuspecting fools. And quoting me was a mistake also too, because I'm not a UK aristocrat, it's true, but I'm far from a rube. Trump is likely spot on about the explosions on 9/11 as well and those plane impacts also! He's a building construction expert too, but they must have also became absent minded about this, or assume you forgot as they are apparently prone to do and they aren't going to remind you. Only their experts that they fall back on after quoting Trump, they must expect of you, are the only ones worthy of you to look to. Because gain, if you discover that they exist, it will be despite their hard hitting news that fails to mention much of anything regarding the expertise of many of the conspiracy theorizing community that they aim to poo-pooh with the poo they spew.
Frank DiMartini (WTC Construction Manager): The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. The building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jet liners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door. The jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. https://www.quotes.net/mquote/1078345
The plymouthherald.co.uk crew could have perhaps better informed the US nation than us here at the tinfoil hat plantation, but that train has left the station. Yes, it's gets worse...
After failing somehow to see the inherent flaw in the pancake theory that they still managed to expose without disclosing for whatever reason, they then immediately pivot to that very same damn THEORY to debunk the info that debunks it, stating...
Powered by Structural engineers who worked on the FEMA investigation believe that the puffs of smoke were caused by a process known as 'pancaking'. This is what happens when floors collapse downward in a chain reaction, rather than a bomb being detonated.
My God, there's a lot of bunk to unpack for such a small statement as that! First off, FEMA was only an initial limited investigation and was preceded by the much larger in volume follow up "official story" final word by NIST in two massive and yet massively lacking in substance reports, but the article authors mustn't have got the word AGAIN. Much like the Government reports, that didn't even model the collapse of the Towers beyond the initiation, because it's just so purportedly painfully obvious that they fell naturally after that, both these similarly feathered birds are patently absurd! NIST did, however, after pestering from truther experts, quit with the weasel words, and said the same thing again, but with the spin undone and reversed regarding their lack of due diligence that left a huge, massive skyscraper sized, stone unturned...
In August of 2005, 9-11 Research published Building a Better Mirage: NIST's 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up of the Crime of the Century, Version 0.98, by Jim Hoffman. The essay critiqued the Draft of NIST's Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Towers, which actually only treats the Twin Towers, not WTC 7, the third WTC tower to totally collapse. (The Report's detailed title, Final Report of the National Construction Safety Team on the Collapses of the World Trade Center Towers (Draft), is similarly misleading.) Hoffman's essay noted that NIST went to great lengths to model aspects of the attack that are well understood -- such as the impacts of the jetliners -- while quietly sidestepping the core question of how the Twin Towers totally collapsed. By truncating the timelines of its models before the collapses even began, NIST not only evaded its stated objective of explaining the collapses, it avoided disclosing the many features of controlled demolition exhibited by the collapses. https://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/official/nist/index.html
But let's get back to the start, with FEMA, in regards to WTC 7... The FEMA experts wrote in their 2003 report that the best scenario they could devise for Building 7’s collapse had only a “low probability” of occurrence. In 2005, Sunder told reporters that the agency’s “working hypothesis” was that Building 7 fell because of fuel fires coupled with structural weakening caused by falling debris from a main tower. NIST retracted that idea in its final draft of the Building 7 report, concluded in August.
The NIST WTC 7 report also included a key correction, once again only brought to light by the diligent efforts of another expert truther, this time a physics instructor...
The Facts: A study out of the university of Alaska at Fairbanks concluded that World Trade Center 7 definitively could not have fallen from fire. NIST's official explanation that 'thermal expansion' caused the building to fall was proven to be impossible.
The new film Seven, directed by Dylan Avery, examines the story of the scientific study of World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7) recently published by the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The study was led by structural engineering professor J. Leroy Hulsey and took nearly five years to complete. It evaluated the possibilities for destruction of WTC 7 using two versions of high-tech computer software that simulated the structural components of the building and the forces that acted upon it on September 11th. After inputting worst case conditions, and painstakingly eliminating what didn’t happen, Hulsey and his team of engineers came to the following conclusions. “The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” https://davidicke.com/2020/12/31/ae911truths-new-documentary-about-dr-leroy-hulseys-groundbreaking-new-study-on-wtc7/
Damn those non-Government investigators! Media solution... ignore them! You should, but the former not the latter. ;)
Back on over to FEMA, who along with blatant distortions of fact such as the literally physical reality of core building columns existing, also found evidence consistent with demolition and recommended further study of the puzzling "mystery" evidence, after which NIST did nothing to resolve their concerns and also admitted to not forensically testing for explosives because they know that they weren't used, so why test for what's not there.
Appendix C of the initial Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) study of the collapses in which three Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) professors called the “severe corrosion and subsequent erosion” of the debris a “very unusual event.” They said of the residue on the steel that “no clear explanation of the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
Investigation History In the wake of the attack a group of engineers from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) volunteered to investigate the structural responses of the WTC buildings to the September 11 attack. Eventually FEMA took over the investigation of the ASCE volunteers, dubbing them the Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT).
The BPAT lacked subpoena power, hence was unable to obtain access to important documents such as engineering drawings of the buildings. 2
...
The Report is illustrated with many colorful cartoon-like drawings, such as one explaining FEMA's postulated floor collapse mechanism. It seems crafted to mislead the casual reader into thinking that the Towers had no core structures.
Metallurgical Examination of WTC Steel Suggests Explosives
The results of the examination are striking. They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese." The New York Times described this as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." 2
A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.
Two other official investigations also found evidence consistent with a controlled demo job and independent follow up expert analysis only furthered this case...
It would take a scientist working without the benefit of a government stipend to provide a plausible hypothesis answering questions about the dust and corroded steel: Steven E. Jones.
This is, however, only one of a myriad of possible demolition scenarios/options that have been proposed as the culprit or some combination thereof, but all stand in a united front against the official story and none are refuted via the non-forensic official approach, that has been articulately argued as more than approaching scientific fraud. https://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/theories/index.html
Note that some researchers put much more credence into other demo theories than the above linked source...
They produce a case based on speculation while ignoring the physical evidence.
So because they are the government institution charged with the investigation they only "have to explain why they don't think there were explosives"... they do that because they have the power.
What grade do you think an applied physics students gets on their exam when they only explain why they think there is no need to a physical test... F is the answer.
The fact you are still refusing to admit NIST was in error here does not do you reputation any good... a real debunker calls every and all bunk including NIST's.
In fact, in its numerous public pronouncements between 2004 and 2008, NIST cites no forensic evidence gathered by criminal investigators, even though Congress had granted the agency subpoena power. For example, the final report on the collapse of the 47-story Building 7 includes the New York City fire and police departments among “cooperating organizations” that assisted its inquiry but says nothing of the FBI or other federal investigative agency.
A computer search of FBI and Justice Department documents and press releases failed to turn up any record of the FBI’s findings concerning tests for explosives at Ground Zero. The FBI and another Justice Department unit, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, routinely do forensic testing of crime scenes where explosives or incendiaries are a possibility.
As pointed out by the group FireFightersFor911Truth, "The National Fire Protection Association very clearly states melted steel or concrete is a sign of exotic accelerants. (both have been documented in the WTC debris) Therefore, the debris should have been thoroughly analyzed for exotic accelerants, specifically Thermite.”
And in NIST's 2006 Q&A paper they stated that they didn't test for any type of explosives, conventional or otherwise.
Q: Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues?
A: NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
NIST's final installment was its December 2008 Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation. In it, NIST repeated the same sophism that it had used in its FAQ on its Twin Tower report: implying that thermite/thermate would have been unsuitable as a demolition tool because it acts too slowly, would have been too hard keep pressed against the steelwork, and would have required too much preparation and material quantities to go undetected. NIST goes on to repeat its earlier assertion that testing for evidence of explosives "would not necessarily have been conclusive".
Nonsensical decisions backed by circular logic are just as dumb when experts do it as when any other commoner or village idiot engages in such a logically fallacious manner of operating. Can't find what's not there. Uh-huh, genius level expert, let me do a conspiracy query because I'm feeling weary... Can you also not find what you don't look for?! Experts abound, but they're out to lunch for sure, it's as palpable as wind from a slumbering bear's snore than their brains are asleep even more!
Let's reexamine the main article I'm addressing by repeating one of the author's statements. This short bit of text is the epitome of a skill I didn't know existed, that of being epically wrong, but not taking too long...
Powered by Structural engineers who worked on the FEMA investigation believe that the puffs of smoke were caused by a process known as 'pancaking'. This is what happens when floors collapse downward in a chain reaction, rather than a bomb being detonated.
Please do check it out, but here also is a hip-hop laced presentation with some video aides that also extinguishes the "puffs of smoke" joke, but a different approach for different folks and easier to copy and/or share in totality. But best of all it covers something that I didn't, which the plymouthherald.co.uk inexplicably rested their hats on despite the fact that the other major point they focused on demolished the hat rack... The pancaking floors! That said, I will add some more debunker poison to the pancake mix after the video quits just to ensure, as best as I can kids, that their bullshit quits.
How can pancaked floors cause the squibs if the idea was abandoned by NIST?!?!
NIST's findings do not support the "pancake theory" of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel "trusses" integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon. https://www.nist.gov/world-trade-center-investigation/study-faqs/wtc-towers-investigation
Quoting FEMA instead of NIST seems a bit sus and smells like fish, just like all the other seemingly dumb stuff they did that smells like Grade A Government seal of approval stamped bullshit, that these propagandists tried with us true skeptics willing to question the credibility of more than just anything that goes against the status quo narrative pretending to be the norm and thus worthy of, establishment defending driven pseudo-skeptical scorn. The devoted "skeptic" movement types, I must warn, are skeptical at a level much lower than luke war, in regards to anything that the power structure has sworn is beyond the pale, one can't help but to wonder if some or many are just hired gun mouthpieces for sale to tyrants avoiding jail.
Of course, not being visually impaired we truthers could always see that the floors didn't pancake, because there was no such stack of floors left on the ground as one would expect from such an event...
Here is a small structure with pancaked floors from an earthquake...
Instead, at Ground Zero, with massive structures we saw images like this...
Ultimately, official story defenders with just say that whatever theory is the current accepted one caused the squibs. They have to unless they want to be decried and treated like little kids.
They so fake woke, used to slavery and scared of bravery and that a much scarier world might exist, that they might just get, a karmic gift, of some pants filled with piss, once they see the light, join the fight and resist. But I digress... The failure of the pancake theory to explain the squibs circles us back to the surrounding supporting evidence, that to put it concisely, is that the Twin Towers quite obviously and inexplicably explosively blew the F up, with no prior or subsequent adequate precedent except controlled demolition, which actually isn't nearly as an explosive of an event with traditional acknowledged demos (7 was a classic demo). Peace out.
North Tower Exploding by David Chandler
Collapse Features
Characteristics of the Twin Towers' Destruction and What They Show
The total destructions of the two towers were almost identical. The most apparent difference is that the top of the South Tower tipped for a few seconds before falling, whereas the top of the North Tower telescoped straight down from the start. Here are some of the principal characteristics of the destructions, based on study of the surviving evidence.
The cores were obliterated. There is no gravity collapse scenario that can account for the complete leveling of the massive columns of the towers' cores.
The perimeter walls were shredded. No gravity collapse scenario can account for the ripping apart of the three-column by three-floor prefabricated column and spandrel plate units along their welds.
Nearly all the concrete was pulverized in the air, so finely that it blanketed parts of Lower Manhattan with inches of dust. In a gravity collapse, there would not have been enough energy to pulverize the concrete until it hit the ground, if then.
The towers exploded into immense clouds of dust, which were several times the original volumes of the buildings by the time their disintegration reached the ground.
Parts of the towers were thrown 500 feet laterally. The downward forces of a gravity collapse cannot account for the energetic lateral ejection of pieces.
Explosive events were visible before many floors had collapsed. Since overpressures are the only possible explanations for the explosive dust plumes emerging from the buildings, the top would have to be falling to produce them in a gravity collapse. But in the South Tower collapse, energetic dust ejections are first seen while the top is only slightly tipping, not falling.
The towers' tops mushroomed into thick dust clouds much larger than the original volumes of the buildings. Without the addition of large sources of pressure beyond the collapse itself, the falling building and its debris should have occupied about the same volume as the intact building.
Explosive ejections of dust, known as squibs, occurred well below the mushrooming region in both of the tower collapses. A gravitational collapse explanation would account for these as dust from floors pancaking well down into the tower's intact region. But if the floors -- the only major non-steel building component -- were falling well below the mushrooming cloud above, what was the source of the dense powder in the cloud?
The halting of rotation of the South Tower's top as it began its fall can only be explained by its breakup.
The curves of the perimeter wall edges of the South Tower about 2 seconds into its "collapse" show that many stories above the crash zone have been shattered.
The tops fell at near the rate of free fall. The rates of fall indicate that nearly all resistance to the downward acceleration of the tops had been eliminated ahead of them. The forms of resistance, had the collapses been gravity-driven, would include: the destruction of the structural integrity of each story; the pulverization of the concrete in the floor slabs of each story, and other non-metallic objects; and the acceleration of the remains of each story encountered either outward or downward. There would have to be enough energy to overcome all of these forms of resistance and do it rapidly enough to keep up with the near free-fall acceleration of the top.
Pundits on the Television are sometimes worse "conspiracy theorists" than those on the internet and elsewhere. At least those who get the label the most are usually those trying to make an actual difference in the world for the betterment of the people. As opposed to Pundits on the Television. They are true enemies of the people. I have no problem saying that some of them belong in The Hague alongside many in D.C. and elsewhere.
In honor of Rachel Maddow, the quote of the day is "...thanks to Democracy." Throw in a little "freedom" in there too. Imagine if the United States took part in "supporting extremists, and racists and separatists and otherwise destabilizing movements."
Well, if so, or if only an oversimplified imaginary "conspiracy nut" strawman, the joke was on them!
"There are people, like myself, who are called 'health nuts'. A 'health nut' is a person who advocates natural health things. So that's... The 'nut' is a term of endearment now. They were called 'health nuts' by the establishment, in a derogatory way, for many, many years. But now, a lot of us are proud to take the term 'health nuts'.
Well there are also 'conspiracy nuts'. And they're identical to 'health nuts': they have been put down with that term for a long time. They're a person who has keen insights to the ongoing problems of the world; and to the news of the world, he 'reads between the lines' and he sees that there are people out there with an agenda, powerful people with an agenda. And he begins to believe it and study it, and he gets to be called, by the establishment (which is part of the agenda problem) a 'conspiracy nut'.
South Park Episode Hits Mark For Toilet Humor, But Misses On 9/11 Skepticism
It took longer than expected, but Trey Parker and company have joined with the growing ranks of the opportunists who distort 9/11 skepticism for fun and profit (unlike the screeds by Alexander Cockburn , Matthew Rothschild and Matt Taibbi , at least the South Park episode had its humorous moments).
They included the obligatory “the Jews did it” canard, and the focus taken was shallow and purposely exploitative. The underlying idea was: “the conspiracy theorists are retarded, because they believe the government was competent enough to pull off 9/11.”
The psychological principle that unifies the distortions of Cockburn, Rothschild, Taibbi and the creators of South Park is avoidance. 9/11 skepticism is an easy target for ridicule, because it includes ridiculous theories (911truth.org is well aware of them , and has cautioned readers to be careful with them). But a commentator can take any attitude he wishes toward these theories. Our attitude has been to largely ignore them, and instead focus on the most striking and disturbing evidence of official complicity in the attacks.
The distortionists make sure to lump together the speculative with the completely ridiculous, and to avoid altogether the ‘elephant in the living room’ of complicity with our with our “enemies”.
The undeniable, indisputable and ugly political reality of our times is that the US intelligence apparatus simply cannot be completely separated from the networks of its supposed enemies. That is the story, and by itself it is cause for impeachment and treason trials for our top officials. But although this is “known”, and has been known for decades, this potentially explosive information has been managed and de-emphasized by the information brokers in society to the point it’s become “old news”. Its treasonous particulars have never become common knowledge among mainstream folks. This dark truth of complicity is buried in the collective unconscious of the society, just like the repressed material individuals bury because it is too painful to confront.
When questions about the 9/11 attacks get raised, the repressed material returns in the form of pointed questions by certain members of society. And while there can be reasonable disagreement about the extent of complicity, there will always be those who will not be able to even face the possibility (or figure it makes more sense to simply ridicule it for fun and profit).
South Park’s conclusion that “a bunch of pissed-off Muslims” did 9/11 ultimately says very little. The key word is “did”: if Al-Qaeda was responsible, does that mean the US could not also be? Of course not, yet nowhere is this possibility seriously considered by them or by recent critics of 9/11 skepticism.
The creators of South Park, a show I like, are now two-time offenders, as they copped out in “Team America” as well. There too, the US was depicted as a bumbling, ignorant yet well-intentioned behemoth that was ruining the world through sheer incompetence and stupidity. It was Kim Jong-Il who was truly evil, you see.
There’s no shortcut to understand the deep politics of official treachery that characterizes our times. South Park wants to ridicule the impulse to a deeper examination of this reality by ascribing ridiculously absolutist beliefs to the members of 911truth.org. It’s a cheap trick, and a sure indication they’re running out of ideas.
After all, in this episode, they resorted to channeling Beavis and Butthead by spinning out a whole show which was essentially a 30-minute excuse for asking: “How many different alliterative ways can we say “take a shit”? (Heh, heh, he said “fudge dragon”!)
It’s funny the first couple of times, but it gets tired. Just like the refusal to face aspects of our collective reality gets tiring. Here’s hoping for a fairer portrayal of 9/11 skepticism next time.
You're not supposed to believe in "conspiracy theories," despite the fact that conspiracies and shenanigans by the powerful are all around us, especially now that we are living through a top-down directed global revolution against ordinary people. A revolution designed to strip away our rights -- rights that we must protect.
Ukraine Gives Guns to Citizens ‘To Defend Our Country’
The Ukrainian government will give weapons ” to anyone who wants to defend the country”, it has said, in the aftermath of Russia expanding its war in the country’s eastern territory. Breitbart
RUSSIA INVADES UKRAINE: BIDENS ROLE, WWIII WORRIES, AND MORE - UKRAINE INVASION DAY TWO: BIDEN LOSES ON SWIFT, GHOST OF KYIV, UKRAINE CIVILIAN MILITARIZATION
When conflict erupts, you are going to see a swarm of media stories in western nations trying to outline the complexity of the relationship between Russia and Ukraine since the fall of the Soviet Union, while ignoring certain inconvenient truths. You will see many of these stories construct a narrative which then oversimplifies the situation and paints Russia as the monstrous aggressor. The goal will be to convince the public that our involvement in Ukraine is a moral and geopolitical necessity. There will be attempts to gain American favor and a call for US boots on the ground. Joe Biden will be at the forefront of this push.
The surface trigger for the confrontation is obviously rooted in the 2009 decision by western powers and Ukrainian officials to consider the country for membership in NATO. Most of Russia’s actions when dealing with Ukraine can be owed to NATO involvement in the region, including the Russian invasion of Crimea in 2014. Strategically, it makes sense. Imagine if Mexico suddenly announced it was joining a military alliance with China and that Chinese military assets were going to be transferred near the US southern border? It probably would not end well.
To be sure, Russia has a history of hypocritical behavior when it comes to its involvement in the affairs of its neighbors. For example, only a few months ago Kazakhstan was facing mass protests which the government claimed were caused by “foreign manipulation.” Zero proof was presented to justify this assertion. However, the claim was enough to rationalize the deployment of 2300 Russian troops over the border to shut down the protests...
The diplomatic mess between Ukraine and Russia can be blamed in part on both sides, and it’s this kind of historical ambiguity where globalists tend to thrive. The fog of war helps to obscure establishment activities and often it is hard for people to see who is truly benefiting from the chaos until it’s too late. It is my belief that the Ukraine problem is at least partially engineered and that it is designed as a first domino in a chain of intended crises... https://alt-market.us/order-out-of-chaos-how-the-ukraine-conflict-is-designed-to-benefit-globalists/
Alabama Solar Factory to Close After Joe Biden Guts U.S. Tariffs on China
A Huntsville, Alabama, solar panel factory will close after President Joe Biden exempted foreign-made bifacial solar panels from United States tariffs earlier this month. Breitbart
“Let Freedom Roll” is the slogan of “The People’s Convoy” set to depart Wednesday morning from Adelanto, California, on its way to Washington, DC, to protest federal coronavirus mandates and call for an end to Joe Biden’s emergency declaration. Breitbart
WHO is keeping the public from seeing the evidence? WHAT is their agenda? WHY do they want to keep YOU in the DARK? WHERE does this gatekeeping happen? WHEN did all the suppression and lies begin? HOW did they think they could KEEP LYING and KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT indefinitely? Join us for a clear look at a colossal current conspiracy, and one of the main frauds perpetrating it!
Ron Paul on 9/11: “I Believe That If We Ever Get The Full Truth, We’ll Find Out That Our Government Had It In The Records Exactly What The Plans Were, Or At Least Close To It”
“The American People have the right to know the truth and to know the relationship with the Saudis at the time of the Bush administration,” declared Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) in a Monday discussion with Ron Paul on the Ron Paul Channel. Jones made the comment in support of his US House of Representatives legislation H.Res. 428 that seeks the declassification of 28 pages redacted from a joint House and Senate Intelligence Committees report regarding the attacks on America on September 11, 2001.
Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), who chaired the joint Intelligence Committees investigation that produced the report, explained at a March press conference hosted by Jones and other House supporters of H.Res. 428 that the 28 redacted pages make up an entire chapter that “dealt primarily with who financed 9/11.” Graham further states that thousands of Americans currently litigating against Saudi Arabia and other entities for complicity in the September 11, 2001 attacks have been denied justice in part because of the withholding of information, including the 28 pages, that could sustain the court claims.
Jones asserts in the Ron Paul Channel discussion that the national security justification for classifying these pages of the report is bogus, noting that President Barack Obama appears to be preserving the classification just to protect from embarrassment the George W. Bush administration that originally made the redactions. Jones notes that, despite Obama’s pledge to 9/11 families that Obama would declassify the 28 pages, the president has kept the pages classified.
Jones, an RPI Advisory Board member, places very high importance on the release of these 28 pages, stating “there will be no hope for America’s future if the American people do not know the truth about a tragedy such as 9/11…”
Jones notes that he read the classified pages in a guarded room, as someone from the Federal Bureau of Investigation observed, under conditions including that Jones may neither take notes nor later discuss the pages’ contents. For the American people there is not even this very restricted access to the classified information.
In addition to ten cosponsors of his legislation in the House, Jones notes that Graham supports the declassification and has even attempted federal court action to force the publication of the 28 pages. Jones also discusses how the chairman and vice-chairman of the more well-publicized 9/11 Commission have also called for declassification of the pages redacted from the congressional report.
Jones says he is contacting US Senators to seek a sponsor for the legislation in the Senate as well.
Paul, who is RPI’s chairman and founder, suggests in the Ron Paul Channel discussion that US government commissions on matters ranging from the assassination of President John F. Kennedy to the siege at Ruby Ridge to the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City are “mainly designed for covering up rather than getting to the truth.” Paul further asserts that, when some truth that could threaten the government’s key interests or would embarrass the government may come to light from an investigation, efforts are often undertaken to hide the information. This is occurring, Paul continues, with the US Central Intelligence Agency’s ongoing revising and redacting of the still unreleased Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture.
Watch the complete interview, in which Jones and Paul also discuss the escalation of US military action in Iraq and the movement of people in the military toward supporting non-intervention, here:
DAVID GIBBS, dgibbs@email.
