Trump Is Back

Trump is back

Trump is back on track

With new campaign manager Stephen Bannon, Trump is back, as this new campaign speech (starting at 42:00 below) clearly illustrates. If he keeps it up with speeches like this, Hillary doesn’t stand a chance.

Ted Cruz Religion — Probably More than You Bargained for.

Ted Cruz religion: Ted Cruz’s father preaching that Ted Cruz was anointed to take dominion over God’s Creation and transfer the spoils of war, the wealth of the wicked, to transfer it to the righteous.

Ted Cruz religion: Ted Cruz has been called and anointed to be the next president of the United States: the laying on of hands and talking in tongues. This is what awaits you if Ted Cruz becomes president.

9-11 Conspiracy: Who Were the Five Dancing Israelis and What the Hell Was Mossad Up To?

9-11 conspiracy

9-11 conspiracy — Who were the dancing Israelis? Image Credits: By Michael Foran, Wikimedia Commons

9-11 Conspiracy: Anyone who has even the most basic understanding of physics and mechanics understands that it’s impossible for a building to collapse and freefall straight into its own footprint, or foundation, without being rigged with explosives for demolition.

The reason for this is simple: all of the vertical supports — for instance, all of the vertical 2x4s in all of the walls of your house — have to be removed simultaneously; otherwise the building will collapse off to the side.

It would be as if removing three legs from a table and expecting it to fall straight to the ground. No, that wouldn’t happen: it would fall in the direction of the missing legs with one corner being held up by the leg that hadn’t been removed.

On 9-11 three buildings, not just one, freefell into their own foundations, something that has never happened before in the history of the world because it is impossible. One of them, Building Seven, hadn’t been hit by a plane but had only small scattered fires burning throughout the building, something that would never cause a modern steel and concrete office building to collapse, let alone freefall into its own footprint.

Do you remember five men being arrested by NYPD on 9-11 for filming and celebrating the attacks?

From Zero Hedge by hedgeless_horseman

disbelief – noun – dis·be·lief
: a feeling that you do not or cannot believe or accept that something is true or real.

I cringe every time I see a, “9-11 Never Forget,” bumper sticker, t-shirt, or beer coozie. I sigh and say to myself, “How can you never forget what you never knew?”

There are many conspiracy theories surrounding 9-11, but this article focuses on just one conspiracy fact. The FBI released the, “Five Dancing Israelis,” that were arrested by the NYPD on 9-11 for filming and celebrating the attacks on the WTC and driving around in a van that tested positive for explosives.  These were admitted Mossad agents working undercover in the USA.

Here is an interesting exercise that I invite all zerohedge readers to try.  The next several times that you engage someone in a conversation, preferably a politician running for office, ask the following questions.

Do you remember anything about five Middle Eastern men being arrested by the NYPD on 9-11 for filming and celebrating the attacks on the WTC and driving around Manhattan in a van that tested positive for explosives…these were admitted foreign intelligence agents working undercover in the USA?

In asking this question dozens of times, most recently in a conversation with two rabbis at one of the five Holocaust Museums in Texas, I have personally never, not once, had a person answer yes.

However, if they do answer yes to you, then ask if they recall what nation the men were from.  I would be shocked to hear any American say, “Israel.”

If they answer no, tell them they were Israeli Mossad agents, and ask if that helps them to remember.

Again, I have never had anyone say that they knew anything about what I was talking about.  Not once, not in any city, nor in any state of the USA.  If the conversation does continue, what I do hear, almost exclusively, is utter disbelief that what I am saying is true.

But it is true.

Now, consider that since 9-11, the USA has invaded and occupied what was once the sovereign nation of Afghanistan for almost 15 years and counting, allegedly due to the role it played in 9-11.  We have spent billions upon billions of dollars and killed tens of thousands of people, if not hundreds of thousands, in this war effort. . . . (more)

9/11 Revisited: Declassified FBI Files Reveal New Details About ‘The Five Israelis’

From 21st Century Wire by Greg Fernandez

Editor’s Note: The story of the Dancing Israelis remains one of the most controversial and explosive untold stories of Sept. 11, 2001. Previous efforts to analyze this aspect of 9/11 have been mostly emotive OpEds and conspiratorial rants – until now. Writer Greg Fernandez presents some new declassified FBI material as part of a newly compiled and highly detailed account of this chilling chapter in the 21st century’s most iconic event.

It only took only a few hours for the Twin Towers to fall to the ground on September 11th, 2001. Later that same day, World Trade Center Building 7 became the third tallest building in the world to implode into its own footprint, allegedly from ‘fire.’ Additionally, to date there is still no evidence that commercial airline Flight 77 struck the Pentagon, even though authorities insist that they have the attack captured on film (but for some reason, they cannot show it to us).

Added to the long list of strange events that happened on September 11th is the infamous story of the five Israeli nationals who were arrested by New Jersey police officers in connection with the WTC attacks on the day. The five suspects were held in detention for three months while the FBI investigated their “jovial” behavior after the North Tower was struck by an aircraft. As the North Tower burned, witnesses saw three young men “high-fiving” each other and appearing to be celebrating the worst attack in American history. One eyewitness wrote down the license plate of the men’s vehicle and called police. It didn’t take long for New Jersey’s finest to locate the van and find traces of explosive materials inside.

The Five Israelis

“On May 29th, 2015, John Massaria filed a FOIA request in attempt to retrieve the data stored on the 16 computers seized by the FBI from the ‘Urban Moving Systems’ warehouse in New Jersey.”¹

John Massaria asked for the data on the hardrives but instead, was given the following FBI Report –doc-1 (141 pages), Police Report (4 pages), and FOIA-2 – FOIA-6. Special thanks to Ken Doc for making me aware of these files. Within three days of filing the FOIA request for the data on the Urban Moving Systems’ hardrives, John Massaria was given the declassified files.

Leaving Brooklyn

On September 10th, 2001, one of the five Israeli nationals was seen in the Doric Towers apartment complex exiting the 9th floor. The Israeli claimed to be a “construction worker” who would be working in the complex until 7 p.m. that night. Several residents of Doric Towers also believed they may have seen one or more of the five Israelis on September 10th, 2001 inside the apartment complex.

FBI files also revealed that all five Israeli nationals were together on September 10th, 2001 at an apartment in Brooklyn on Lawrence Street. At least one of the five men went from this Brooklyn residence to the “J&S Gulf” gas station, before heading to the Urban Moving Systems warehouse in New Jersey. I believe four of the five men were living at the Brooklyn apartment on September 11th. How many of the five men were in the van when the vehicle left Brooklyn?

Also living in the apartment was an unnamed woman. The woman worked in New Jersey and used “mass transit to get to work” because she “doesn’t own a car.” She “takes a train from Brooklyn to the World Trade Center where she takes a Path train to Journal Square. From Journal Square [ – ] takes a cab to work.” It’s not clear if this woman works for Urban Moving Systems, or is the woman who later tells FBI agents that Urban Moving Systems only has one white van; which is a lie.

An Urban Moving Systems white Chevrolet 2000 van was used by the Israeli nationals to travel from their residence in Brooklyn, New York to the Urban Moving Systems location in Weehawken, New Jersey. The EZ-Pass found by authorities revealed that the van “passed through the Brooklyn, New York entrance to the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel at 7:48 a.m.”

A gas station attendant at J&S Gulf, located at 1324 Willow Avenue, Hoboken, New Jersey, told FBI agents that a white Urban Moving Systems van came to get gas prior to the attacks on the World Trade Center. “The driver had short, dark hair” but the gas station attendant did “not know if any other people were in the van with the driver.” Though the gas station attendant was certain the white van arrived before the attacks on the Twin Towers, FBI agents “determined that the Israelis purchased gasoline [“from the Gulf service station”] at approximately 2:14 p.m., which was subsequently corroborated by reviewing the photographs taken by the Israelis that day.” Did the Israelis make two stops to the same gas station on September 11th? . . . (more)

Obama Attacks Libya — Again

Obama attacks Libya

Nothing breed success like success. Obama attacks Libya again.

Obama attacks Libya one more time. Our Nobel Peace Prize winning, pacifist president will bring more war to Libya, in the name of human rights, no doubt; bringing love, peace and stability to the world, American style.

US Military Action in Libya Worked So Well the First Time, They’re Doing it Again

Op-Ed by Claire Bernish
February 1, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United States — At this point, it is fair to say no one would be surprised by further military engagement initiated by the government of the United States anywhere on the planet — so it won’t come as a shock that the U.S. is preparing for war in Libya. Again. And no, legal justification didn’t miraculously manifest itself this time, either.

“President Obama today convened his National Security Council to discuss the intensification of our campaign to degrade and destroy ISIL,” said the White House in a press release Thursday [all emphasis has been added]. “The President emphasized that the United States will continue to counter ISIL terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary. Noting that ISIL affiliates and other violent extremists attempt to find safe haven in areas with limited or poor governance, the President directed his national security team to continue efforts to strengthen governance and support ongoing counterterrorism efforts in Libya and other countries where ISIL has sought to establish a presence.”

Of course, Libya, as a whole, certainly qualifies as such an area of both limited and poor governance after the U.S.’ first military action to depose Muammar Qaddafi left the country in utter turmoil.

Obama attacks Libya

Love is always better the second time around Obama attacks Libya again

“We came, we saw, he died,” Hillary Clinton “sociopathically boasted about the mob rape and murder of Qaddafi while guffawing on 60 Minutes” — as Glenn Greenwald in The Intercept so aptly characterized that alarming 2011 interview. Clinton’s sociopathy appears truly maniacal when considering the original U.S. and allied motivation for ousting Qaddafi included his government’s plans to abandon the petrodollar in favor of the gold dinar — a theory critics long suspected, now proven true in a batch of Clinton’s notorious emails released on New Year’s Eve.

Now President Obama seeks to extend military action in Libya under the guise of fighting ISIL, which — though likely superficially true — would be a hard sell for a public now keen to the disarray left in the wake of the U.S.’ true, yet covert, original motives. But the administration and presidential hopefuls are nonetheless actively propagandizing armed engagement with ISIL in Libya, even with such absurdly contradictory statements as what Clinton crafted during the CNN Democratic Forum last week:

“Every situation is different. So I want to make sure I stay as close as possible to the non-intervention,” she said, though it remained entirely unclear whether she was reminding herself or attempting to convince the audience.“That’s why I say no American ground troops in Syria or Iraq. Special Forces, trainers, yes. Planes to bomb, yes. No ground forces.”

That “non-intervention” already intervened in November, when the U.S. employed one of its F-15 fighters to kill alleged Islamic State leader Abu Nabil in an airstrike — in Libya. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Joseph Dunford, also greased the gears for war last week when he asserted ISIL’s expansion must be thwarted and the U.S. “need[s] to do more.” This includes the urgency to identify the appropriate fighters on the ground to support.

In December, Obama’s own hypocritical double-speak also bolstered the narrative of an inevitable, approaching military engagement, when he said:

“You know, when I said no boots on the ground, I think the American people understood generally that we’re not going to an Iraq-style invasion of Iraq or Syria with battalions that are moving across the desert.”

His emphatic insistence of “no boots on the ground” — an assertion he’d made 16 times previously — amounted to little more than an obligatory farce intended to somehow pacify an ‘American’ public already weary of perpetual warfare and its literal and figurative costs. In fact, no boots should touch the ground — nor bombs drop, drones strike, nor any military presence be excused — until the military authorization, required under the law and by the Constitution, is approved by Congress. Despite the ongoing U.S. military campaign against ISIL — which began in earnest in August 2014 — that approval has yet to occur. As The Guardian pointed out, Obama unintentionally — or perhaps lackadaisically — attempted to maneuver past that pertinent illegality in an address in early December:

“[I]f Congress believes, as I do, that we are at war with ISIL, it should go ahead and vote to authorize the continued use of military force against these terrorists.

“For over a year, I have ordered our military to take thousands of airstrikes against ISIL targets. I think it’s time for Congress to vote to demonstrate that the American people are united and committed to this fight.”

Though it may, indeed, be ‘time’ for Congressional approval, as The Sunday Times reported yesterday, Obama isn’t planning to wait for it. A “secret reconnaissance mission” to plot airstrikes against ISIL in Libya was undertaken last week by a team from the West, which included British military and intelligence officials. According to the Times, “Six RAF officers flew to an airbase in Libya, controlled by pro-western militia forces, along with a group of MI6 operatives, diplomats from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and U.S. and French military personnel.”

Full military engagement in Libya is evidently a foregone conclusion; and no matter our objections or concerns, we are left to witness the government’s propaganda circus spin yet more war into something ostensibly palatable — even if we’re forced to swallow it with our hands tied behind our backs.

This article (US Military Action in Libya Worked So Well the First Time, They’re Doing it Again) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email

Video Games Government Regulation? Is There Anything Big Brother Can’t Keep Its Hands Off Of?

Video games government regulation — the government wants to control everything, even how games are played

Video games government regulation — the government wants to control everything, even how games are played.

Video games government regulation; is there no pie they won’t stick their fat fingers in?

They already control practically every facet of the real world and now they want to control the virtual. Giuliano Millan from Mises Daily explains . . .

Do Video-Game Worlds Need Government Regulation?

From Mises Daily by Giuliano Millan

… Recently, massively multiplayer online games or MMOs have seen increased popularity. In many of these MMOs, players are allowed to define their own goals and play in any way they desire. In addition, games such as EVE Online allow players to produce goods which can then be traded in the game world for the game world’s currency and goods. This means that the game takes place in and around a real and functioning virtual economy.

With the increasing popularity of virtual economies, however, scholars and academics have argued that the economies of virtual worlds are not as separate from the real world as they may appear at first glance. The argument goes that virtual currencies can be seen as just a continuation of money in the real world. This interpretation of virtual currencies can be seen when real world currencies are exchanged for virtual world currencies through sites such as Ebay. Increasingly, there has been a call for governments to regulate and implement policies into these virtual economies.

* * *

The argument used for implementing regulatory measures states that if virtual world currencies are a continuation of real world currencies, they must be subjected to real world laws and regulations. It has been stated by the same scholars who call for government regulation that the way in which regulation should be imposed is unclear; however, the notion that government oversight should be implemented in some way should be questioned before it becomes more widely accepted as the norm. Proponents of implementing real world regulations will point to scandals and crises in the virtual world to justify the need for regulation in virtual worlds, but this ignores some basic arguments against regulating.

* * *

Choice in a virtual world presents some very interesting opportunities. Because developers create their own governments and regulations, analysis of which virtual governments’ people choose to live under would be an interesting venture. They can also be used to demonstrate economic laws. For example, the game Diablo 3 can help us understand the causes of hyperinflation. Unfortunately, many of these possibilities for analyzing human action may be limited or eliminated depending on how and whether government regulation is implemented. . . . (more)

Is Windows 10 Malware?

Is Windows 10 Malware? Image Credits: By wwward0.Jangelo9397, Wikimedia Commons.

Is Windows 10 Malware? I’ve been having a lot of troubles with my PC lately; not just with Microsoft Internet Explorer but also with Firefox, and Google Chrome — computer lock ups, recover webpage popups, stop script popups, with open tabs reloading, causing me to lose stuff whenever I opened a new window; and, also, IE has stoped working dialog boxes, IE has stopped working and was forced to shut down and reopen this tab dialog boxes, and so on. So, I ran a full scan, got rid of all my cookies and temporary files, then did disk optimization — a number of times. Then, when I got my latest Window updates, the problem even got worse.

I’m running Windows 8.1, not that I wanted it, but because it just decided to download itself onto my computer and replace my Windows 8. And it did it right in the middle of when I was working on something on Adobe Illustrator — thank God I had just clicked save half a minute before it took over my computer and I didn’t lose much, but . . .

But back to my troubles. My problems were intermittent: sometimes everything would work fine; I could keep a dozen or so windows open, going back and forth with no problems at all, and other days were a nightmare. So, I thought maybe I should get Windows 10 with its new Edge Browser: Microsoft popups kept making their appearance, saying I could get it for free, and not a trial, but yours to keep for ever and ever. Then I read up on it and decided maybe not.

So what’s going on? Was Windows 8.1 and IE under some sort of hacking attack? Then I read the Following. Maybe some lawyer should bring a class action suit.

Windows 10 Is Malware; Deletes Users’ Programs

From New American by :

Windows 10 seems to be Microsoft’s deliberate attempt at creating the most intrusive operating system ever. If that is the goal, the software giant from Redmond, Washington, is succeeding. It seems that every new update brings the newest iteration of Windows increasingly closer to giving Microsoft total control over the way users can operate their own computers. The most recent update makes that abundantly clear.

Malware is defined by The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edition as:

Malicious computer software that interferes with normal computer functions or sends personal data about the user to unauthorized parties over the Internet.

While computer users typically think of that definition applying to viruses, it unfortunately fits Windows 10 — and increasingly Windows 7, 8, and 8.1 — very well. What else do you call an operating system that reports back to its developers supplying them with personally identifiable information about you including your name, e-mail address, postal address, phone number, passwords, password hints, age, and gender, as well as your browsing history, address book, calendar, the contents of your e-mails, and access to all your files including pictures, videos, documents, and anything else stored on your hard drive? What about an operating system that while doing all that hides updates from you, will not provide you information about them, and installs them even when you have told it not to? What about that same operating system being designed in such a way that you cannot even turn off these settings?

If none of that rises to the level of defining Windows 10 (and, because of updates, Windows 7, 8, and 8.1) as malware, the most recent news certainly does. The New American has previously reported on the outrageous Microsoft Services Agreement and accompanying documents that must be agreed to before any Microsoft product or service can be used. We explained:

Few will ever read the terms of these documents since they span some 40,000 words and would run 110 pages if printed. As is to be expected, most of the terms are written in legalese and are not overly easy to understand. There are some parts of the terms that users need to be aware of, though, because agreeing to them grants Microsoft the right to read, save, and share anything stored on or accessed using any computer running Microsoft Windows as well as any computer using Microsoft products or services.

The Microsoft Services Agreement also gives the software empire permission to not only install whatever software it chooses on your computer, but also to delete whatever software it chooses from your computer. Microsoft announced its Windows 10 November update with great fanfare. What the company did not tell users was that the update would give Microsoft the ability to reach into their computers and remove software that the company deemed either unstable (based on its own criteria) or pirated (based on its own assumptions). Just whose computer is it, anyway? . . .

Read the whole article — you should.

When It Comes to Self Defense Do Old Guys Have to Play Fair?

Self Defense do old guys have to play fair?

Put up your dukes, you’ll not have your way with me. Self Defense do old guys have to play fair?

Self Defense do old guys have to play fair? What’s a fair fight? What are the limits of self defense? If an old white guy is attacked by some young punk, does he have to fight it out mano e mano till he drops dead from a heart attack, or can he pull out a gun, shrug his shoulders and shoot the guy dead. The Chuck Norris Rule demands that force can only be met with equal force. The Chicago Way, on the other hand, from the movie The Untouchables demands that: If he sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue! In two recent cases, much to the chagrin of the anti-gun crowd, it was the latter that prevailed.

From Taki’s Magazine by David Cole:

Old White Guys and the Chuck Norris Rule

In two separate but similar criminal cases that were resolved this year, a precedent was established that will possibly, hopefully, influence prosecutors in the years to come: Elderly white guys are not legally mandated to play by the “Chuck Norris rule” if they believe their lives are at risk.

What’s the Chuck Norris rule? As anyone who’s ever seen his family-friendly brand of martial-arts ass-kicking knows, the Chuck Norris rule is simple: Force can only be met with equal but not greater force. An evil ninja comes at you with fists, you use fists to defeat him. Kicks can be met with kicks. Weapons like a staff or a sword are only allowable when the bad guys use them first. And a gun? That’s only a permissible line of defense when the villain is firing directly at you with intent to kill.

In the Chuck Norris universe, this type of proportional response to villainy is mandated. It’s why, for eight seasons, CBS was able to promote Walker, Texas Ranger as family-friendly entertainment.

* * *
Like all elderly people, aging whites will become increasingly susceptible to crime, and matters relating to self-defense will become more and more important. Which is why I consider it a small victory that this year, two separate attempts to penalize old white men for not abiding by the Chuck Norris rule failed miserably.

* * *
In July 2014, 80-year-old Long Beach resident Tom Greer had the utter gall to think he could just waltz into his own house after spending an evening out. Unfortunately, his act of aggression—coming home—surprised two local thugs (both with a history of crimes against the elderly) who were in the process of ransacking Greer’s house when the old man returned. The criminals—a 26-year-old man and a 28-year-old woman—began mercilessly beating Greer, breaking his collarbone and knocking him to the floor. As the male robber tried to force open Greer’s safe, the female continued the attack, stomping on the helpless octogenarian. Finally, she left to help her boyfriend with the safe, giving Greer time to crawl toward where he kept his .22 Smith & Wesson. . . . “Greer should have called police and waited for them to arrive,” said Navarrette, a vocal gun-control advocate.

* * *
And in another case: 74-year-old Wayne Burgarello, a retired schoolteacher. Burgarello had the nerve to own a rental unit, a duplex, that he wasn’t using (greedy white man! So many people can’t afford one home, and he dares to have two?). A heroic junkie decided to break into the duplex and use it as her own personal medicinal meth clinic. Burgarello had been becoming more and more agitated about break-ins and thefts at the duplex, so one evening he decided to drop by, foolishly thinking he had the right to visit his property anytime he wanted. After calling out a warning demanding that any trespassers leave, Burgarello entered. . . .

Read the whole article.

The Clint Eastwood Rule, the antithesis of the Chuck Norris Rule: Counter your adversaries with overwhelming force

The Adventures of Ford Fairlane Rule, as seen at the end of the movie: Challenge the other guy’s masculinity by daring him to go mano e mano, and when he puts down his gun shoot him with yours. A version of this can be seen in this Star Trek clip:

Brits Drop Trial of Man Accused of Arming Terrorists to Avoid Exposing British Intelligence for Doing Same Thing

Brits drop trial of man accused of arming terrorists

All the world’s a stage, And all the men and women merely players. Manipulated like pawns on a chess board, Kipling’s “great game” continues.

Brits drop trial of man accused of arming terrorists

A New World Order — Order out of chaos in the name of the King

Brits drop trial of man accused of arming terrorists — A good lawyer is worth his weight in gold.

From The Guardian, by Seumas Milne:

Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq