The ‘August coup’ hoax that legitimized the fake collapse of communism

Moscow. The 19th of August 1991. Boris Yeltsin addresses people from the top of a tank. Photo TASS / Valentin Kuzmin; Alexander Chumichev (Photo by TASS via Getty Images)

By Anatoliy Golitsyn
June 22, 2019 Anno Domini
Excerpt: The Perestroika Deception, pgs. 137-144 (1998)

THE FAKE ‘AUGUST COUP’ AND ITS CALCULATED FAILURE

A deliberately engineered ‘Break with the Past’

Who called the shots in the USSR before the ‘coup’ and who introduced the ‘reforms’? Gorbachev and his ‘liberals’? NO, the Party and its strategists.

Who is calling the shots now and who proposed the coup to replace Gorbachev? The ‘hardliners’, the Minister of Defence and the Chief of the KGB? NO, the Party and its strategists.

The ‘coup’ was proposed in accordance with the requirements of the Soviet strategy of convergence leading to eventual World Government. This strategy and its moves, like the present Soviet ‘coup’, can only be understood in the light of the theories of one of the principal Soviet agents of influence, namely Sakharov, and his timetable for convergence. According to Sakharov, during the first phase the Leninist realists (i.e. Gorbachev and other ‘liberals’) will expand and strengthen ‘democracy’ and economic reform in the USSR and other socialist countries.

As we know, this has already happened.

According to Sakharov, in the second phase the pressure exerted by the Soviet example and by the internal progressive forces would lead to the victory of the Leftist Reformist Wing (the Soviet term for American liberals) which would begin to implement a programme of collaboration and convergence with the USSR on a worldwide scale, entailing changes in the structure of ownership. According to Sakharov, this phase would include an expanded role for the intelligentsia and an attack on the forces of racism and militarism.

We had reached this phase before the war with Iraq. In the assessment of the Soviet strategists, the US victory over Iraq adversely affected the political balance in the United States. In their view, the victory weakened and demoralised the liberals (or Leftist Reformists) and strengthened the centrist and conservative forces and the US military. This disturbed Soviet plans to carry out their strategy of convergence.

They saw that their main political allies in achieving convergence with the United States had been weakened. Accordingly they engineered this strategic ‘coup’ to reverse and improve the political fortunes of their American allies. Seen in strategic terms, the main purpose of Gorbachev’s ‘dismissal’ is further to confuse American opinion and to alter the political landscape in the United States so as to accelerate the progress of the Soviet strategy and to put it back on the rails.

This strategy is a deliberate and coordinated walk towards ultimate victory by advancing first the left leg of action by ‘liberals’, then the right leg of action by ‘hardliners’ and then once more the left leg of action by ‘liberals’. The ‘dismissal’ of Gorbachev is temporary. In earlier Memoranda I predicted a calculated ‘resignation’ by Gorbachev and his eventual return to power.

The ‘coup’ confirms this prediction. According to my analysis, the ‘coup’ is aimed at intensifying American anxieties over the fate of Gorbachev and the other ‘liberals’ and ‘reformists’ in the USSR like Shevardnadze. When these concerns reach their peak, the Soviet strategists’ next move can be expected. They will return Gor- bachev and other ‘liberals’ to power through a campaign of strikes and demonstra- tions organised by the Party.

As the Soviet strategists see it, Gorbachev’s return and the strengthening of the ‘reformists’ in the USSR will also strengthen the American liberals, revive their fortunes and help them win future elections – leading eventually to the convergence of the United States and the USSR. In short, Gorbachev’s return will be a repetition of the device of the suppression of Solidarity in Poland, followed by its victory.

The main purpose of the ‘coup’ is to reverse an unfavourable situation for potential Soviet allies in the United States and to create favourable conditions for the implementation of the convergence strategy. The second objective is to secure the non-violent creation of the new Soviet Federation of Republics. The third objective is to provide any potential adventurers there may be in the Soviet military with a lesson and thereby to eliminate any possibility of a genuine coup in the future.

Moscow, August 20, 1991. Russian President Boris Yeltsin makes communist first salute and speaks at a rally held in support of “democracy”. (Photo by: Sovfoto/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

A FURTHER ANALYSIS OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SOVIET ‘COUP’

The point has already been made that Gorbachev will be returned to power at the moment when it best serves the Soviet strategy of convergence. Depending on the circumstances prevailing at the appropriate time, he could be returned to power through an election, after a period of other activities .

His alleged removal from power and house arrest are deliberate devices to build up his popularity before such an election. Meanwhile one can expect that the Soviet strategists intend to replace him or to add to his team another ace card, the ‘anti-Communist’ (but, like Gorbachev, protege of Andropov) Boris Yeltsin, leader of the Russian Republic. As the Soviet strategists see it, Gorbachev has exhausted the influence he exerted on their behalf in the West. He was unable to extract more econ- omic aid at the London Summit Meeting and his advice concerning a diplomatic solution to the conflict with Iraq was ignored by President Bush. It is the strategists’ belief that Boris Yeltsin will give greater credibility in the West to Soviet economic and political ‘reform’. He will be in a better position to exploit his influence to extract additional economic aid from the West and, in particular, to obtain from the West a commitment to a new Marshall Plan for Russia.

A Marshall Plan for Russia is one of the primary interim objectives of the Soviet strategists and one that Gorbachev failed to achieve. The strategists expect that Yeltsin will be able to exert greater influence in diplomatic, economic and political relationships and will receive more cooperation in the international arena particularly in the Middle East and at the United Nations. One can expect that the Soviet strategists will come forward with fresh initiatives combined with deliberate provo- cations and crises in order to enhance the role of the United Nations.

They will do this because they regard the United Nations as a stepping stone to a future World Government The Soviet political game and the Soviets’ trickery in ‘manipulating’ politicians like Gorbachev and Y eltsin for W estern public consumption demand more imagination and a better grasp of these machinations from the Bush Administration. For example, to proceed with the appointment of Mr Robert Strauss as the new Ambassador in Moscow is a great mistake because the appointment is being made at a time when the Soviet strategists are deliberately undermining the credit and prestige President Bush gained from his dealings with Gorbachev. They are undercutting the President in favour of their political allies – namely, the American liberals. Nowadays the situation is more serious than it was after the Second World War. President Truman woke up to the nature of Stalin’s mentality, his deeds and his intentions. The Bush Administration, by contrast, has no understanding of Soviet strategy and its ultimate, aggressive, strategic designs against the United States.

Given this situation and the Soviet ‘game plan’, the President, instead of appointing a politician/businessman like Robert Strauss as American Ambassador in Moscow, should consider appointing someone like Richard Helms or General Vernon Walters – that is to say, a professional man and an intelligence expert who might see through the Soviet game plan and help the Administration as General Bedell Smith helped President Truman in 1947.

THE AUTHOR’S ANALYSIS OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE CALCULATED SOVIET ‘COUP’ AND OF ITS CALCULATED ‘FAILURE’

According to my assessment, the Soviet ‘coup’ and its ‘failure’ constituted a grandiose display of deception – a provocation. The ‘ineptitude’ of the participants in the ‘coup’ and the ‘failure’ of it were skilfully planned and executed. The main argument in support of this assessment is that the Soviet military, the KGB, the Party and leading media figures apparently had neither the skill to launch a successful coup nor the guts to crush resistance to it. This is news indeed!

Oleg Kalugin, former KGB general, giving a speech after the Russian government forces suppressed the fake August Coup – an attempt by supposed hard-line members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) to take control of the country. Moscow, Russia, on August 20, 1991. (Photo by Wojtek Laski/Getty Images)

Facing a real crisis in Hungary in 1956, the same forces displayed exceptional skill, knowhow and determination in crushing a genuine revolt. Knowledge of the Soviet mentality and of Moscow’s record of ruthless action has convinced this analyst that the Soviet military, the Party and the leaders of the media all have the skill, the will and the courage to crush genuine resistance and opposition. They did not display them on this occasion because the abortive ‘coup’ was carried out in accor- dance with Party instructions; and it was the Party and the Komsomol themselves which organised the alleged resistance to it.

The real participants both in the ‘coup’ and in the ‘failure’ were some 20,000 or more chosen Komsomol and Party members in Moscow with two or three tank divisions guided by their political commissars and a handful of dedicated Party offi- cials and generals who sacrificed their prestige in the interests of the Party’s strategy and under the guidance of its strategists. The calculated nature of the ‘coup’ and its timing show that it was staged by the Russian, President Yeltsin, to save the essence of the Union at the time of transition to a new form of federation.

The abortive ‘coup’ and the ‘resistance’ to it were carefully calculated displays intended primarily for the West. This explains why Western media contacts with Moscow were not curtailed. On the contrary, the big guns of the Soviet media like Vitaliy Korotich and representatives of the Arbatov Institute were on hand both in Moscow and in the United States to ‘help’ the Western media with their interpretation of developments in the USSR. The episode shows how well Soviet strategists like Arbatov and his experts on the American media have mastered the art of projecting such displays for consumption by the American media, and throughout the West.

The Soviet strategists sought to underline for the West the dramatic ineptitude of the ‘coup’ and the spectacular courage and resistance displayed by the new ‘Russian democrats’ and their leader Yeltsin in ‘defending’ the Soviet Parliament – their symbolic equivalent of ‘The White House’. The main external objective of the display was to demonstrate to the West that Soviet democratisation is genuine, that it has the support of the people and that it is working. They want to convince the West that Western investment in the USSR will pay dividends.

They expect that the West will now respond with a new Marshall Plan which will bring Western technology flooding in to the Soviet Union, promoting joint ven- tures and stimulating a restructuring of the Soviet economy along the lines of the revival of the German and Japanese economies after the Second World War.

Internally, one objective is to influence the Soviet population towards acceptance of the new Party-controlled ‘democracy’ as a real power and to develop the strength and maturity of the new ‘democratic’ structure and the popularity of its leaders, especially Yeltsin. Another objective is to exploit this staged ‘coup’ in order to reorganise and ‘reform’ the Soviet bureaucracy, the military, the intelligence and counter-intelligence organisations and the diplomatic service, and to give them a new ‘democratic’ image.

The Soviet strategists realise that only with such a new image, implying a ‘Break with the Past’ and severance from Communism, can these organisations be converted into effective weapons for convergence with their counterparts in the United States. A further internal objective is to emphasise the change in the system by means of the spectacular, televised but calculated removal of old Communist symbols like the monuments to Lenin and Dzerzhinskiy, and the red banners.

These changes do not represent a genuine and sincere repudiation of Soviet design and intentions to secure an eventual world victory. Although very spectacular, the changes are cosmetic. They demonstrate only that Arbatov and others know how to manipulate the American and other Western media through the use of powerful symbols such as the dismantling of the Berlin Wall, the toppling of Lenin and Dzerzhinskiy statues and Yeltsin’s staged ‘defence’ of the Soviet ‘White House’.

If the Soviets were truly moving towards genuine democracy, and were intent on a true ‘Break with the Past’, these symbolic changes would be accompanied by the introduction and implementation of a de-communisation programme, the irrevocable (not cosmetic) prohibition of the Communist Party and Komsomol organisations at all levels throughout the USSR, and the removal of ‘former’ Party and Komsomol members from all the main seats of power including the KGB, the Soviet army and its political commissar administration, the Ministries, especially those for the Interior and Foreign Affairs, and the trade unions.

Yeltsin has allegedly banned the Communist Party in Russia. But the question should be asked: ‘Why did he forget to ban the Komsomol youth organisation?’ [Note: According to ‘The New York Times’ of 29 September 1991, the Komsomol voted to dissolve itself; its regulations were changed ‘to allow subordinate youth leagues in the Soviet Republics to succeed it’ – Author’s emphasis].

To carry conviction, the necessary purge of former Communists would have to be carried out at all levels, as was the intention with the de-nazification programme in Germany after the war. Without any such programme, present changes, however impressive, will remain cosmetic.

There are at present no means of distinguishing reliably between a genuine democrat and a former Communist in Russia. However one important criterion for judging the sincerity of the abrupt and virtually simultaneous conversion of former Communist leaders into true democrats would be a frank official statement from them that the Soviet Party and Government adopted a long-range strategy in the years 1958 to 1960, that ‘perestroika’ is the advanced phase of this strategy, and that it is to be abandoned forthwith in favour of normal, open, civilised relations. There has been no sign whatsoever of any such admission.

Further criteria for judging the sincerity of the abrupt conversion of ‘former’ Communist leaders into believers in true democracy would need to include:

  • An official admission that the ‘dissident movement’ and its leader, Sakharov, were serving the interests of that strategy under KGB control;
  • Public exposure of the main KGB agents among Soviet scientists, priests, writers and theatre and movie personalities who have been playing an active role in the KGB-controlled political ‘opposition’ – especially those like the ‘conservative’ Kochetov and the ‘liberal’ Tvardovskiy who in the 1960s engaged in a Party- and KGB-controlled debate intended to convey the false impression that Soviet society was evolving towards democracy;
  • And finally: a categorical repudiation of any strategic intention on the part of the Soviets of working towards ‘convergence’ with the United States.

The self-evident absence of any of these criteria indicates that the symbolic changes mean no more than that the strategists had reached the conclusion that the old symbols had outlived their usefulness – at least, in the Soviet Union and East- em Europe – and had to be replaced by new, more attractive, popular symbols.

Moreover these cosmetic changes are logical and were predicted earlier by this ana- lyst. The Soviets realised that convergence with the United States cannot be achieved under the old compromised symbols like Lenin, Dzerzhinskiy and others associated in the Western mind with terror, repression, exile and bloodshed. Convergence requires the introduction of new, attractive, national and ‘democratic’ symbols conveying the impression that Soviet ‘democracy’ is approaching the Western model.

No doubt these cosmetic changes, the reorganisation of the Soviet bureau- cracy and the new, more enigmatic status of its leaders like Yeltsin will be seen by the West as a deepening of the process of Soviet’ reform’, offering new opportunities for Western policy. But the West’s main weakness remains unchanged: it cannot grasp the fact that it is facing an acceleration in the unfolding of Soviet convergence strategy which is intended to procure the subservience of the West to Moscow under an ultimate Communist World Government.

The Machiavellian boldness and imagination displayed by the Soviet strategists through their staged ‘coup’ and its preordained defeat are alarming. No doubt these manoeuvres will be followed not only by faked suicides, but also by staged trials of the alleged leaders of the ‘coup’. These leaders may well be sentenced to apparent prison terms. But in fact they will live in comfortable retirement in resort areas like the Crimea and the Caucasus. Russia is a big country and places can be found for them to hide.

The ‘coup’ and its ‘defeat’ show that the Soviets will go to any lengths in pur- suit of their convergence strategy. This reminds me of remarks by Vladimir Zhenikhov, the former KGB Rezident in Finland, and Aleksey Novikov, another KGB officer, at the time the strategy was adopted in 1961.

Both of them had recently returned from home leave in Moscow. When I asked for the latest news from headquarters, both replied using different words but to the same effect: ‘This time the KGB are going to finish with capitalist America once and for all’. I believed them then, and I believe that what is happening now is a bad omen for Western democracy.

The other alarming aspect of the situation is Western euphoria and the uncritical acceptance of present Soviet developments at their face value. This shows how easily the West can be taken in by staged Soviet spectacles, and how justified the strategists are in believing that their ‘era of provocations’ will produce the intended results. Furthermore, Western euphoria and naivete serve only to encourage the Soviet strategists to stage new spectacles more convinced than ever that their strategic designs are realistic.

‘Pizzagate’ debunked point by point

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
June 2, 2019 Anno Domini

Dislcaimer: The following is a graphical illustration debunking several of the main claims of the Pizzagate conspiracy theory. The purpose in debunking this theory is not to exhonerate any of the accused (they could be guilty of crimes; I don’t know) but to shed light on the many inconsistencies and outright lies in the narrative and to point out the entire inogranic way the theory suddenly appeared and evolved, which is characteristic of a psyop—in this case, it seems, a KGB active measure operation, which tends to take bits of truth and turn them into seemingly plausible narratives for the purpose of anti-Western psyops. Of course, we now know about all the KGB-Chabad-Mossad manoeuvrings to help Trump win the election, so it’s not far fetched to consider that some of the October Surprises and dirty tricks used during the runup to the previous U.S. federal election were KGB ops. The pizzagate psyop not only helped Trump defeat Hillary but it has also diverted the energy and attention of those interested in conspiracies and populists in general. Instead of investigating the Soviet conspiracy against the West to install one of their puppets, everyone is focused on this psyop and other paralell psyops like Flat Earth, Jade Helm, and others. This expose is not meant to be exhaustive, as the psyop runs deep, so I will just deal with the most important inconsistencies that prop up the entire narrative. For example, without the supposed pedophile code, that alone  demolishes the entire narrative.

I will add more graphics as I make them.

 

 

 

 

 

Pat Buchanan and Right either misled on Russia or controlled opposition

Pat Buchanan

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
Dec. 5, 2018 Anno Domini

As a second response to Father Michael Ruskin’s comments regarding my open letter The Russia Deception of Western Nationalists and the Church, let me start off by saying that Pat Buchanan is no competent analyst of geo-political affairs. 

He has demonstrated this repeatedly, whether it’s ignoring the International Jewish elephant in the room or falling for long-range Soviet deceptions like Perestroika and Glasnost. His is nothing more than kosher konservatism in the spirit of Lenin’s Soviet Trust “monarchist” leagues honeypots. 

Father Ruskin quotes Buchanan, “…Russia’s regime is no longer Communist. The ideology that drove its imperialism is dead.”

OK, Pat, I’ll agree with your first statement, partially. Sure, Russia is no longer “Communist”. It’s actually far worse than 1940s communist USSR, because now it uses far more sophisticated psychological propaganda (like hypernormalization) and has the technology to enforce it in a beyond-Orwellian fashion. Therefore, it’s a hybridized communism that appears democratic, as Golitsyn repeatedly warned us (Has Buchanan ever even read Golitsyn’s work?) As for his second statement, where does he conjure up that the ideology behind its imperialism is dead? Clearly, Buchanan, like most of the Western world, has fallen for the Perestroika Deception. Pat must have a miniature replica of the broken Berlin Wall on his mantlepiece. News for you, Pat. That was a staged incident designed to legitimize one of the greatest deceptions of our time.

“‘Perestroika’ is a great trap of the dark powers. They are preparing something new and more terrible. Russia is standing on the threshold of the Antichrist.” —Hieroconfessor Archimandrite Nektary (Chernobyl)

Someone please tell Buchanan that his failed 1980s analytical template is long due for an overhaul. Or perhaps he has no template but is just taking orders from the Soviet-infested establishment Right. Is he not also a diehard supporter of Jewish-Russian-controlled Trump, the biggest fake conservative  on the planet?

As for God’s work in Russia, we know that it’s taking place regardless of the Soviet-led Moscow Patriarchate and fake Christian Putin. That is what St. Tikhon’s Catacomb Church system was all about—keeping the true faith alive amongst the state-sanctioned presence of the anti-Christ Moscow Patriarchate. This is another area where it appears Buchanan, a so called Catholic, has no clue. If you want to understand the Eastern geo-political situation, you have to know about the complex Church history there, which includes the Catacomb Church or the Russian Church Abroad (colloquially known as ROCOR).

St. Philaret of New York addressed the situation thus:

“And here is something to which I would like to draw your attention to – something about which very many do not think about. Father Archimandrite Constantine, whom probably many of you know, the reposed editor of the journal “Orthodox Rus’”, a profound Christian mind, considered that the most terrible among all the achievements of the communists was that the communists created their own false-church, a soviet church which they shoved onto the unfortunate people in place of the genuine Church which went underground into the catacombs. Do not think that I am exaggerating or that Father Constantine was exaggerating!”

Regarding Father Ruskin’s acceptance of Putin’s mere words, Putin can trash talk communism all he wants. Talk is cheap. It means nothing to those who can see what is really taking place. Putin talks out both sides of his mouth, like all politicians do. They are all liars and deceivers.

“Russia is allowing for Christianity to affect the nation’s conscience,” Ruskin said.

The Kremlin is allowing a bastardized form of Orthodox Christianity to affect the nation’s cohesion…for the sake of geo-political strategy…and demoralization. This is also why homosexuality and feminism are restricted in Russia—not because they are immoral but because they have a detrimental effect on national unity and military camaraderie. In short, the crypto-Communists in Russia are using the vestiges of church and morality as a means to an end (Golitsyn also predicted this)—to foment their national Bolshevik aspirations, which will then be used to lead a Eurasianist world empire.

Heretics embrace: “Pope” Francis and Moscow Patriarch Kirill.

Ruskin goes on to question how I can condemn Russia while the West legislates overtly anti-God laws. Further to what I stated in the previous paragraph, it turns out that Russia actually has validated its first gay marriage. As far as the Vatican II conciliar Church and the Anglican Church are concerned, who do you think it is that is “dialoguing” with said homosexualized churches? None other than Tobacco Metropolitan Kirill and his Soviet Moscow Patriarchate.

“What does the claim Russia is deceiving Christians in the West actually mean? It’s a nothing-burger,” Ruskin writes.

How is it a nothing burger when it appears that most Western conservatives and Christians are so deceived about Putinist Russia that they would seemingly support a full-scale Russian invasion of America and the “evil” West? These sheep are now flocking to Russia in hopes of finding a white, Christian paradise. Good luck in multi-cultural Sharia Russia. They will be disappointed. Hopefully, those expats already living there have realized that Russia is not the land of milk and honey they thought it would be. 

There is no reason to believe that either Kirill or Putin have repented of communism. For every seemingly anti-communist rhetorical statement from either of the two, I could find ten pro-communist statements and pro-communist manoeuvres. Don’t let confirmation bias convince you otherwise.

As for Soviet-infiltrated NATO, former Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen recently began working for a Russia-affiliated bank. Why, the current NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, has a KGB past! It’s pretty obvious now that NATO is completely useless in terms of its original purpose. Why would NATO need to overthrow Ukraine’s so called president when NATO and the globalists are pursuing the same goals? It’s all theatre now, to make is think we have a choice and stand on one side. Pretty much every world power is in cahoots with all the others. That’s how the game works now. Nation states are long over. Now it is merely the world state, with the odd scuffle over who gets to lead it. Seeing as Russia was the pioneer of communism, it feels that it has the right to lead the world communist government that is forming before our eyes. 

Tell me, how do you know Poroshenko is a CIA asset? The only source I have seen for this claim is Russian mainstream media, which has a long history of blaming their crimes on the West and its intelligence establishment. I am not saying he isn’t an asset, but we shouldn’t assume that the Russian mainstream media is telling us the truth. And the alternative media is no better, as it is generally pro-Russia and infiltrated by Russian trolls.

Ruskin said, “Putin merely helped the people of Crimea defend themselves against that overthrow.”

How do you know this? Again, it appears this is just regurgitated rhetoric from Kremlin state-controlled mainstream media. The same people are telling us that the Holodomor never happened and that Stalin was much nicer to prisoners than we are led to believe.

“Finally, you posted a picture of a Communist, perhaps from the 1930’s, secreted in a church and snaring a Russian civilian who was outside. The unfair implication is that this is happening now. Would it be any more truthful if you had shown another picture of a paedophile priest inside a Roman Catholic church, busily snaring a child who was in the vicinity? I think not.”

First of all, I am not Catholic. If you read under that picture, I wrote a description of that Soviet propaganda art suggesting it has dual meaning. On the one hand, the Soviets are saying that Christianity is a snare for the gullible. On the other hand, they could be admitting, cryptically, that their Soviet-controlled Moscow Patriarchate is really the snare. Remember, Satanists have a history of bragging about their crimes in plain sight (it’s called “revelation of the method”). This macabre twist serves to demoralize the victim and empower the Satanists.

It’s important to realize that part of the Leninist strategy is to gain the trust and participation of nationalists and Western conservatives. To achieve this, the communists have to pretend to be nationalists and conservatives. That’s where we are today and one of the reasons Trump was selected by the establishment as president. He is a Judas Goat type rounding up all resisters to the NWO world takeover and there to discredit the last shred of credibility the Right had. What’s more, he was sent in to divide the populist. Divide and conquer.

JFK’s 3D chess, CIA anti-communism

Joseph Kennedy and son U.S. President John F. Kennedy.

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
Dec. 4, 2018 Anno Domini

Unlike Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, pretend players at the table of three-dimensional chess, Joseph P. Kennedy and his son John were truly playing the game.

A good example of this is in the brilliantly crafted public relations campaign that Papa Joseph came up with in order to trick the Jews into supporting his son as president: “Kikes for Kennedy, Nazis for Nixon”—even though Joseph and Jack had a plan to undermine Jewish power in the world. The gambit paid off, as Jack would go on to win the U.S. Presidential election in 1960, with a great deal of support from the Jewish community and the masonic establishment. Granted, the power structure was probably still nervous about what Jack would actually do.

It also seems that the civil rights movement that JFK championed was another attempt at 3D-chess; however, in retrospect, this went too far, as it contributed to the Soviet plan of demoralizing the United States—to the point that it has spawned the Cultural Marxist thought-police state we are in today. While it may have worked in the short-term for JFK, it was a huge mistake for the West in general. It also didn’t help JFK’s image to the intelligence community when he attempted to thwart anti-communist war efforts (Vietnam, Cuba, etc.). I have a difficult time seeing a tangible 3-D chess strategy in such manoeuvres and can certainly sympathize with the Western intelligence community’s perception of JFK as a communist saboteur of sorts.

While I don’t believe JFK was a secret communist trying to sabotage Western war efforts, I struggle to find clarity in much of his foreign policy. Perhaps JFK and his father saw the wars as serving as an overall drain on resources and attention—which could otherwise be diverted back to undermining Jewish power and the Rothschild war dialectic. If this could confuse an analyst in 2018, how much more could it do the same to the intelligence and military analysts of the 1960s? JFK should have committed to Vietnam and definitely a Cuba intervention (Cuba went on to serve as a major Soviet narcotics trafficking point and revolutionary bully in South America as a result of a failed Western intervention during the Bay of Pigs and Cuban missile crisis. The failure also contributed to the mess in Nicaragua, Panama, and Mexico. Vietnam is also a key player in the Soviet narcotics network.). On the other hand, perhaps America really never stood a chance in Southeast Asia and Kennedy saw this. The Rothschild war machine wanted the dialectic to continue while Kennedy wanted to end the waste of resources and lives.

Israel orchestrated the assassination of John F. Kennedy, as the late Michael Collins Piper and others have hypothesized, with the participation of Soviet-compromised Western intelligence, specifically the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military intelligence, and, of course, other players. If anything, Israel (and probably the USSR) did a good job of leading Western intelligence into believing that their participation in the murder of Kennedy would further the anti-communist cause (keep in mind that Western intelligence had already been heavily infiltrated by the communists by this time). Kennedy was in a no-win situation. Apparently, his 3-D chess had backfired and provoked his backers to turn on him, with Russia and World Jewry the sole beneficiaries of the fallout. The assassination of Kennedy did not stop the communist subversion of the West but, instead, furthered it, primarily by dividing the West and guaranteeing Israel and Russia complete dominance in the Middle East (Kennedy apparently worked to protect the Arab countries from Judeo-Marxist subversion). After JFK’s departure from this planet, the Arab world would undergo a radical Marxist transformation that has served Israel’s interest of divide-and-conquer as well as World Jewry’s Kalergi plan of flooding the West with subsequently displaced Muslims.

The Putinists cry about how NATO supposedly has guns pointing at Russia from all sides; meanwhile, the crypto Soviet Union has satellites surrounding all of the Western powers, especially the United States. And with Great Britain now exiting the European Union, Russia now has their satellite Germany—the largest economy in Europe—as the sole inheritor of Eurasian directorship. JFK’s death allowed all of this to happen.

Makow’s Russian source seems credible

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
Nov. 16, 2018 Anno Domini

It’s important when vetting Russian defectors to approach them systematically rather than emotionally. Finding corroborating evidence from multiple sources is key.

The reason for this is not only because Soviet defectors can be wrong but because the Kremlin has a history of carrying out counter-intelligence using fake defectors, as a means of discrediting legitimate defectors and misleading the Kremlin’s enemies.

In the case of Henry Makow’s alleged Russian source (posted to his website Nov. 13, 2018), this defector, or insider, seems credible. There is little doubt that the Kremlin’s manipulation of Trump involves “kompromat”, specifically sexual compromise, as I have thoroughly documented in my series Trump Controlled By Mossad. (At the time I wrote that series, except for perhaps parts IV and V, I wasn’t aware that the Kremlin and Israel are joined at the hip. I am open minded. So, when I came across information contradicting the standard so called patriot/conservative narrative of geo-politics, I gave it an honest hearing and quickly adopted a revised position.) Where I might disagree with Makow’s source is in his verbage. Trump is a Kremlin asset, for sure. His personal and financial instability makes him all the more easy to blackmail and control.

Makow prefaced this article with “They regard him (Trump) as unstable and unreliable. But it does describe a kind of collusion. So what? Why shouldn’t Russia support a pro-peace candidate?” Trump does what he is told. If he appears to be pro-peace, it’s only because his masters have not mandated war. I also disagree with Makow calling disinformation the defector saying “Putin attributes anti-Russian agitation in the US to “right-wing groups”. Since the source doesn’t specify which right-wing groups, we can only assume that he means the truly awakened patriots who know that the Kremlin is pursuing a world communistic agenda—in which case, the source, again, is correct. Makow appears mistakenly to believe that the Left’s cheap and shallow so called anti-Russianism is to what the defector was referring. Evidently, the defector knows that the Left’s perceived anti-Russianism is phoney and empty. The American Left’s superficial opposition to Russia is based mainly on a caricature of Putin alone. They perceive him as a fascist, not as the crypto-communist that he is. As for George Soros, the billionaire is a Soviet agent. All this talk of Nazi-collaborating and the American Left is a distraction.

The defector’s second contention is that Wikileaks is controlled by Russia’s SVR. Again, this is a more-than-plausible argument. For a while, I and several others have been warning people that Wikileaks is an Israeli psyop. Wikileaks is either soft on or completely ignores issues related to both Israel and Russia, especially neo-Russian communism. However, after having learned that Soviet Jewry and Israeli Jewry—which control both Israel and Russia—are one and the same entity, it makes more sense that Wikileaks is a joint Russian-Israeli operation, with Russian institutions being the actual base of operations due to Russia’s well documented massive Internet psych warfare agenda. Unfortunately, the defector doesn’t go beyond Wikileaks in exposing Russian psych warfare operations. It’s clear that there are many more, including Guccifer 2.0, Qanon, and, probably, Edward Snowden.

The defector seems to say that the CIA was trying to thwart Putin’s support of Trump by arranging for the assassination of one of Putin’s drivers, which was a warning to Putin to abandon his pursuit of Trump. It’s possible. If true, it’s unclear what the CIA’s motives would have been. Were they sincerely concerned about having a Kremlin puppet as U.S. president or were they acting on behalf of the Democrats? Perhaps there were other reasons. We will probably never know.

What’s also credible and extremely important is the defector’s allegation that Trump is indebted to Russian and European banks. It’s well know that Trump is not a self-made man and was heavily bankrupt. This makes him even more vulnerable to kompromat, as if the sexual stuff weren’t enough.

The defector’s last allegation, that Melania wants a divorce but can’t because of how it would affect Trump’s presidency, is very probable. Trump is a pig. What decent woman would want to remain married to him?

As this evil system continues to squeeze the populace, you can bet that there will be many more defectors rising up and declaring the truth. But we must be on guard, as there will be fake ones, too.

9/11 Missing Links

By John Alan Martinson and Mike Delaney

Examining the Israeli orchestration of the Sept. 11 terror attacks in NYC.

Final cut (After clicking play, it takes about 20 seconds to get going for some reason; alternatively, you can watch it here)

Fox TV’s The Americans demoralizes and perpetuates old Soviet tricks

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
Sept. 20, 2018 Anno Domini

Sex, violence, and familial dysfunction make up the bulk of Fox television’s drama series The Americans, but Hollywood has given us the added bonus of KGB propaganda.

When your writing sucks and you need to keep the audience hooked before you unleash your indoctrination on them, how do you accomplish this? With sex and violence, of course. This is how Hollywood has done it since the Production Code was abolished. 

Thus, Keri Russell, who plays the mother Elizabeth Jennings, and Matthew Rhys, who plays the father Philip Jennings, when they aren’t having sex with each other as crypto-communist all-American parents, are out banging targets on their assassination-and-blackmail list, be they gay, straight, white, or black. They are super KGB agents, after all, and sex and espionage go hand in hand. They even get their teenaged daughter, Paige (Holly Taylor), in on the action late in the series. And even though Paige and her mother are petite females, the unrealistic script has them kicking the snot out of any would-be enemies, no matter how big.

Jewish CIA agent-turned TV writer Joseph Weisberg’s insidious TV show is about the lives of KGB assassin parents living in 1980s Washington DC, loosely based on the illegals program of that era. Give Fox FX credit, though. They managed to drag out this tired, poorly written story for six seasons despite extremely low ratings and just about zero audience satisfaction (the bad guys always win). It portrays the villains as ideological heroes—something that is almost never the case with KGB agents (defectors have reported that at least 90 percent of agents are so due to blackmail, not ideology) and the good guys as bumbling fools, like FBI counterintelligence agent Stan Beeman (Noah Emmerich), who can’t even discern his across-the-street neighbours, the Jennings, as two of the primary assassins responsible for most of the murder and mayhem going on around him.

The acting is decent, but the speech patterns are atrocious. I guess the directors weren’t sharp enough to realize that East Coasters didn’t uptalk during the 1980s (few people did anywhere in the world). Or perhaps they did know but chose to perpetuate the ongoing degradation of English speech—to which Hollywood has largely contributed.

Now lets get to the point—the culmination of six brutal seasons. The bumbling good guys don’t get to figure out the true identity of the Jennings until the last couple of episodes. But by that time, it’s too late and the villains pretty much escape unharmed—the Jennings parents back to Russia, the kids to elsewhere in the United States. Beneath all this, the plot is building up the case that Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev is a reformer who is attempting to democratize Russia (so called Perestroika and Glasnost) and that pretty soon, the Jennings won’t have to go on murdering for the KGB and they can, instead, lead a somewhat normal life. The way the writers transition the Jennings from seemingly enjoying all the killing to then becoming disillusioned is poorly established. The Perestroika deception is then furthered when the Jennings begin to rebel against their KGB handlers, who they learn are about to stage a coup against Gorbachev (something that the real-life mainstream media portrayed as authentic without a shred of skepticism) in order to keep the Soviet empire intact. The easily-turned Jennings attempt to sabotage events that presumably lead up to the coup, but the show ends before the “August Coup” gets to happen.

Nearly two decades after the real-life staged and fake “August Coup”, communist saboteurs in America, like the writers of The Americans, are still hocking the Perestroika deception. With all that we have learned from countless defectors about how the Soviet leadership remained intact after the so called collapse of communism and the name change, how the country was looted by mainly Jewish-Russian oligarchs, and how the KGB continued to rule and reign through an organized crime-run government, the writers chose to stick with the old lies.

In addition to deceiving the American people about the true fate of the communist world power, The Americans achieves another objective: what KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov called the demoralization phase of a multi-pronged long-term Soviet strategy. The gratuitous sex and violence alone is enough to demoralize the audience. Throw in with that the glorification of Marxist values and the demonization of Western values, and you have completely poisoned the average weak-minded TV watcher. And perhaps the demoralizing nature of the show had a direct effect on the cast themselves, as Keri Russell divorced her real-life husband Shane Deary as she allegedly pursued one with her on-screen husband Matthew Rhys. This shows us that even the propagandists themselves cannot escape the consequences of their own crafting.

Ultimately, this show requires a huge investment of time with pretty much zero cathartic value and mediocre entertainment at best—Soviet propaganda aside.

Alex Jones may have been a Soviet asset all along

A capture of Jones’ Russian visa from earlier this year. What was Jones doing in Russia? We can only guess. Perhaps being debriefed by the POLITBURO. Fellow fake conservative and disinfo artist Jack Posobiec tweeted that the visa is a three-year, multi-entry business visa.

Timothy Fitzpatrick
September 8, 2018 Anno Domini

What if this entire time, self-proclaimed American patriot radio host Alex Jones had been working for the Soviet power bloc in Russia and the East?

Would it be so difficult to believe? Could Russia have used him all this time to divide, distract, and radicalize the American populace as a means of weakening it for a final Marxist takeover?

Everything that has been levelled against Jones by his staunchest critics, myself included, namely that he is a Likudnik Zionist in the employ of Benjamin Netanyahu and the gangster-run Israeli government and that he is a counter-intelligence operative, could easily fit into an all-encompassing Soviets-dunnit narrative. He could very well be all a: Zionist, intelligence asset, freemason, neocon, and Soviet agent. In fact, these nefarious groups have all worked together for decades for mutual goals. Most of the time, it’s difficult to tell one from the other. Let the reader realize that the Soviet Union is run mostly by high-level freemasons and communist Jews who are loyal to the Marxist state of Israel. I use the present tense because the Soviet Union still secretly exists. It merely changed its flag and name for public consumption. The world communist conspiracy persists.

When looking back at all the questionable things Jones has done over the years in determining his loyalty to the West, I think back to the infamous Y2K (year 2000) scare in which Jones, then fairly new to the patriot movement, actively participated. Late conspiracy researcher William Cooper documented and analyzed this event with astounding prescience. He rightfully called Jones a fear mongering “bullshit artist”. He may have been the first to sound the alarm over Jones’ sincerity. During that night, Dec. 31, 1999, a point in time when all kinds of doom had been predicted and many people were on edge, Jones basically attempted to deceive his listeners into believing that the Russians were invading or carrying out some kind of major aggression against the United States. It wasn’t true. So, why did Jones lie about it? Was it merely another of his many scare tactics to whip up his listeners or was there something more?

Soviet human butcher Josef Stalin apparently was fascinated by the fake news of his day—something that fit naturally for a lying Soviet such as himself. Orson Welles’ fake news broadcast of a UFO invasion of America from H.G. Well’s The War of the Worlds especially interested Stalin. Stalin saw the obvious uses for fake news of this kind in manipulating the American populace and the West. If average Americans could be coaxed into brandishing firearms and firing them at imaginary space aliens in the sky, what else could they be tricked into doing? Author Annie Jacobsen writes that Wells’ fiction inspired Stalin and the Soviets to orchestrate the alleged UFO crash in Roswell, New Mexico—an event that would go on to shape UFO folklore and even, to some degree, the conspiracy movement. Since that time, the Soviets have perfected their fake-news psychological operations. Who knows how many of these kinds of operations have been foisted on unsuspecting Western populations. Countless, no doubt. As it turns out, Wells met with Stalin in 1934. Does that mean Wells was a Soviet asset, too? Perhaps, as Wells himself claimed to be further Left than Stalin. He was a staunch Leftist involved in such things as the formation of the globalist/communist League of Nations. For all we know, The War of the Worlds broadcast over CBS radio that caused a public panic in the United States on Halloween in 1938 could have been a Soviet orchestration. Perhaps as Soviet mockery as to the source of this apparent psyop, the opening theme to the CBS broadcast was Tchaikovsky’s piano concerto No. 1.

Back to Jones, his fake news regarding the Soviet invasion during his Y2K broadcast may have been yet another of the POLITBURO’s psych warfare campaigns to test out the gullibility of their enemies. Many people believe that Jones began his career as a legitimate truther patriot and then later became compromised, but the continuity between now and the Y2K incident is apparent. Divide, distract, and radicalize. After writing dozens of articles critiquing Jones and his position as an anti-truther controlled-opposition agent and studying him for years, this seems to be the best conclusion to which I can come for his purpose in the patriot/truther movement—he is an agent provocateur, a stochastic terrorist. And it aligns perfectly with Vladimir Lenin’s prescriptions of establishing divisive agents of influence in the West as part of a long-range strategy of demoralizing and destabilizing it.

Jones’ neoconish style seems largely derived from the Jewish-controlled John Birch Society—a movement set up to roundup and neuter legitimate conservatives and nationalists. As with other Jewish-controlled anti-Communist movements, like the Trotskyite American Jewish League Against Communism,the Birch Society unsurprisingly has been completely ineffective at stopping the global communist threat and has delivered rather shallow blows against it. For instance, where was the Birch Society when the Soviets staged the fake “August Coup” against Gorbachev and the collapse of the USSR? If anyone should have exposed this colossal hoax, it should have been JBS. By leading their own opposition through fake movements, Judeo-Bolsheviks are able to control their opposition. Alex Jones appears to be one such controlled-opposition agent, luring unknowing nationalists down an alley that leads nowhere. The Soviet Trust is another good example of the depths the Soviets have gone to control their opposition. American Thinker writer Ricardo Galván Estrada seems to believe Jones is part of a crypto-communist campaign against the West and compares his rhetoric to that of Russian Foreign Intelligence Services operative Vicky Pelaez.

The original RT (Russia Today). Nothing but a communist rag.

It’s no coincidence that today, the two major powers (really they are one and the same power) Jones refuses to criticize is Soviet power in Russia, which he doesn’t even admit exists, and Jewish power, which Jones protégé Paul Joseph Watson says he doesn’t really see “big Jewish influence…Jewish people aren’t really that present…you don’t really notice them anywhere”. The COMINTERN appears comfortable in allowing assets like Jones to blame the Chinese Communists, but that’s as far as they will let him and others go. And that’s all that is really needed in legitimizing Jones’ fake anti-Communism to his unsuspecting audience—the Chinese Communism angle serving as a limited hangout. Blaming China is a “nothing burger”, as Neocons like Jones like to say. For China is openly Communist. Russia, as the crypto-Communist power, is the one to finger, yet Jones goes along with the establishment narrative that Russia is now a fascist, thus conservative, nation, which has long since abandoned communism. Forget about Jones lying about Soviet manipulation of U.S. elections, which they have been doing since long before Trump came along, he won’t even expose Russian false-flag terrorism—something that used to be the bread and butter of his credibility. It’s no wonder Soviet-controlled Russia Today has featured Alex Jones on its broadcast hundreds of times. Jones defends Russia just about as much as he defends Israel when it comes to geopolitical conflicts, poisonings, false flags, espionage, obvious corruption,or otherwise.

During an Infowars interview with a Russia Today host, Zionist-denier Max Keiser told Jones “Vladimir Putin says to say hello, by the way.” Jones replied that he was “told by the head of RT America, before they even launched it, like eight, nine years ago, Putin’s a big listener.” Incidentally, on February 1 of this year, Alex Jones bragged on Twitter about his ties with Russia by posting a photo of a Russian visa granted to Jones by Russia (at top of this article) with the statement: “Looking forward to Putin giving me the new hashtags to use against Hillary and the dems…”. That same day, Infowars lackey Jack Posobiec tweeted that it was a three-year, multi-entry business visa.

The United States Office of the Director of National Intelligence correctly stated that Russia Today and other Soviet media outlets have been campaigning to “undermine faith in the US Government and fuel political protest.” Nobody in the American media has done this more than Jones, whether it’s fuelling racial tensions or getting Americans to distrust their government. And he has been doing this for years, not just in the run-up to the last U.S. federal election. Jones and his comrades have perhaps been Russia’s best troll farm. It has not gone unnoticed by the Soviets, as Putin is purported to have praised Jones and Putin’s prophet Alexander Dugin has publicly done as much.

For an exhaustive examination of Alex Jones, see this dossier.

Mossad’s manipulation of the world

Excerpts from Israeli Mossad defector Victor Ostrovsky’s second book in his whistleblower series.

(Disclaimer: Ostrovsky may be a false opposition defector who leaks some truths as part of a Limited Hangout campaign to muddy the water overall. For example, he doesn’t explain what really happened when Israel helped the Soviets stage a fake coup against Gorbachev {see below}, but I tend to think Ostrovsky simply didn’t realize what was actually going on. Regardless, I think there is enough truth in his books to help us understand the bigger picture. —Timothy Fitzpatrick)

The Other Side of Deception (1994)
By Victor Ostrovsky

Jewish Banksters Finance Mossad

“Had this been a normal Mossad operation, he could have gotten as much money as he wanted from a bank sayan-a Jewish banker who is regarded as trustworthy and will open the bank for you at any time and provide as much money as needed”
—pg. 150

Mossad Feeds U.S. Intelligence Disinformation

“Operation Trojan was one of the Mossad’s greatest successes. It brought about the air strike of Libya that President Reagan had promised-a strike that had three important consequences. First, it derailed a deal for the release of the American hostages in Lebanon, thus preserving the Hizballah (party of God) as the number one enemy in the eyes of the West. Second, it sent a message to the entire Arab world, telling them exactly where the United States stood regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict. Third, it boosted the Mossad’s image of itself, since it was they who, by ingenious sleight of hand, had prodded the United States to do what was right.”
—pg. 116

“By the end of March, the Americans were already intercepting messages broadcast by the Trojan, which was only activated during heavy communication traffic hours. Using the Trojan, the Mossad tried to make it appear that a long series of terrorist orders were being transmitted to various Libyan embassies around the world (or, as they were called by the Libyans, Peoples’ Bureaus). As the Mossad had hoped, the transmissions were deciphered by the Americans and construed as ample proof that the Libyans were active sponsors of terrorism. What’s more, the Americans pointed out, Mossad reports confirmed it.”
—pg. 115

Mossad Creates and Controls Islamic Extremist Groups and Uses Them As Patsies

“Supporting the radical elements of Muslim fundamentalism sat well with the Mossad’s general plan for the region. An Arab world run by fundamentalists would not be a party to any negotiations with the West, thus leaving Israel again as the only democratic, rational country in the region. And if the Mossad could arrange for the Hamas (Palestinian fundamentalists) to take over the Palestinian streets from the PLO, then the picture would be complete.”
—pg. 197

Mossad Tests Chemical Weapons on Civilians

“It was Uri who enlightened me regarding the Nes Ziyyona facility. It was, he said, an ABC warfare laboratory-ABC standing for atomic, bacteriological, and chemical. It was where our top epidemiological scientists were developing various doomsday machines. Because we were so vulnerable and would not have a second chance should there be an all-out war in which this type of weapon would be needed [Sampson Option], there was no room for error. The Palestinian infiltrators came in handy in this regard. As human guinea pigs, they could make sure the weapons the scientists were developing worked properly and could verify how fast they worked and make them even more efficient.”
—pg. 188

Mossad Frames People as Nazis to Discredit Them

“Ran had realized at some point in mid-1987 that trouble was on the horizon. There was growing dissatisfaction in the Mossad and in the right-wing elements of the Israeli government regarding the behaviour of Chancellor Helmut Kohl, who was defying direct Israeli warnings regarding his relationship with the Austrian leader Kurt Waldheim, who’d been branded a Nazi. (The branding was done by a field unity of Al that entered a UN building on Park Avenue South in New York and placed several incriminating documents that had been removed from other files into Waldheim’s file and the files of a few other individuals-for future use. The falsified documents were then discovered by Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Benjamin Netanyhu, as part of a smear campaign against Waldheim, who was critical of Israeli activities in southern Lebanon.) [Uwe Barschel was assassinated later by Mossad]
—pgs. 228-229

Mossad Control International Media

“He then wanted to hear as much as I could tell him about Robert Maxwell, the British newspaper magnate. His reason was that they were aware of the constant Mossad interest in purchasing media so that it could both influence public opinion and use journalism as a cover for inserting agents into countries.

“He identified Maxwell as a Mossad agent and also reminded me of other occasions on which the Mossad had been behind the purchase of newspapers in England. As an example, he gave the Eastern African, which was bought with Mossad money by an Israeli businessman. The purchase was made, he said, to assist the South African propaganda machine in making apartheid more palatable in the West….Maxwell was a sayan on a grand scale.”
—pg. 203

“I explained to my host, as I had to the British, that in the beginning the Mossad would help Maxwell purchase the newspapers by lending him money and causing labour disputes and other problems, making the target purchases more vulnerable. Later, the tactics changed; they would target in advance a paper that he was to purchase and start it on a collision course with bankruptcy using all available strategies, starting with workforce agitation and ending with pullback of funds from the paper through bankers and advertisers sympathetic to the Mossad. Then, once the target was softened, they’d send Maxwell in for the kill.”
—Pg. 204

Mossad Made Saddam Hussein into a Villian Despite the Fact that Israel Considered Him a Moderate

Ephraim had spelled it out for me and confirmed some of the information I’d already known. He then went on. “After the bombing of Libya, our friend Qadhafi is sure to stay out of the picture for some time. Iraq and Saddam Hussein are the next target. We are starting now to build him up as the big villain. It will take some time, but in the end, there’s no doubt it’ll work.” (spoken before the Gulf War)
—pg. 117

“The Mossad had all but saturated the intelligence field with information regarding the evil intentions of Saddam the Terrible, banking on the fact that before long, he’d have enough rope to hang himself.”

It was clear what the Mossad’s overall goal was. It wanted the West to do its bidding, just as the Americans had in Libya with the bombing of Qadhafi. After all, Israel didn’t possess carriers and ample air power, and although it was capable of bombing a refugee camp in Tunis, that was not the same. The Mossad leaders knew that if they could make Saddam appear bad enough and a threat to the Gulf oil supply, of which he’d been the protector up to that point, then the United States and its allies would not let him get away with anything, but would take measures that would all but eliminate his army and his weapons potential, especially if they were led to believe that this might just be their last chance before he went nuclear.”
—pg. 254

Mossad Destabilizes Countries Through Various Means Including Civil Anarchy, Arming Religious Fanatics, and Assassinations

“As long as it was political, it was fine, but now the Mossad is plunging headlong into this shit. They’ve decided that it’s time to destabilize Jordan to the point of civil anarchy.”

“Destabilize? How?”

“A high influx of counterfeit currency, causing distrust in the market; arming religious fundamentalist elements similar to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood; and assassinating leading figures who are symbols of stability, causing riots in the universities and forcing government to respond with harsh measures and lose popularity.

“Wasn’t the Mossad running weapons to the Egyptian fundamentalists through Afghanistan or something?”

“That’s right.”
—pg. 143

Mossad Behind Privatization Schemes

“The French wanted me to see what information I could gather on some people who, they were worried, were out to destabilize their South Pacific colonies. The plan of these supposed “destabilizers” was to privatize a small country as a model for the world (in other words, create a small political system in which there is no government ownership and see if that model can be extrapolated to a wider setting). A subsidiary goal was to make money in various ways.”

“The first name on the list I was handed was Robert Pool, Jr. A prominent American, Pool was the leading advocate of privatization of the American aviation industry. He was the president of the Reason Foundation, located in Santa Monica, California.”

“Then there was a man called Harry Donald Schultz. He was living in the United States and, from time to time, in Monaco. Schultz’s partner was named Riner Dienharts. The Frenchman said that all these names tied in somehow with a Canadian foundation in Vancouver, British Columbia, called the Phoenix Foundation.”

“Pool was a member, if not a leader, of the Libertarian party.”
—pgs. 243-244

Mossad Conducts Sophisticated Pyschological Warfare Against All Nations, Especially the United States

“Operation Brush-Fire. This was an all-out LAP (LoAhma Psicologit – Israeli psychological warfare) attack aimed at getting the United States involved militarily in the Middle East in general and the Gulf area in particular.”

“The Iran-Iraq war was over. It seemed that the Iranians had had enough and were happy to agree to end the war as the Iraqis wanted. The Mossad, for their part, pretended to the Americans that they wanted to topple Saddam Hussein, while at the same time passing on information to his Muchabarat from the Israeli embassy in Washington, warning him about various attempts on his life an don his regime. The Mossad regarded Saddam Hussein as their biggest asset in the area, since he was totally irrational as far as international politics was concerned, and was therefore all the more likely to make a stupid move that the Mossad could take advantage of.”

“Mossad manipulated it so that Iraq looked as if it were the only country unwilling to talk, thereby convincing the Americans that Iraq had a different agenda.”

“By January 1989, the Mossad LAP machine was busy portraying Saddam as a tyrant and a danger to the world. The Mossad activated every asset it had, in every place possible, from volunteer agents in Amnesty International to fully bought members of the U.S. Congress.”
—pgs. 246-247

Mossad Armed and Supported the Kurds Against Iraq and Saddam

“Saddam had been killing his own people, the cry went; what could his enemies expect? The gruesome photos of dead Kurdish mothers clutching their dead babies after a gas attack by Saddam’s army were real, and the acts were horrendous. But the Kurds were entangled in an all-out guerrilla war with the regime in Baghdad and had been supported for years by the Mossad, who sent arms and advisers to the mountain camps of the Barazany family; this attack by the Iraqis could hardly be called and attack on their own people.”
—pg. 247

Sayan (Secret Civilian Jewish Helpers) Break the Law to Help Mossad Carry Out Assassinations and Operations

“They left the cars in an underground parking lot to be picked up the next day by a car sayan who’d rented the cars to them (Mossad assassins) without registering the rental.”

Canadian Judge Bars Discussion of Ostrovsky’s First Book After Pressure From Israeli Government

“The Canadian judge had barred all discussions of the book for a period of ten days. I knew that this was the interval of time that the Mossad had to try to stop me.
—pg. 264

Zionist Larry King and Guests Call Ostrovsky a Liar – Jonathan Pollard Affair, The Lavon Affair

“Then there was the Larry King Show, by which time the gag order was lifted, where I received somewhat rougher treatment. To build some contentiousness into the hour, the show’s producers had invited Amos Perelmuter, a professor from the American University in Washington, D.C. to join King and me. From the start, it was clear that Perelmuter was an enthusiastic supporter of the state of Israel, and that what he’d heard about my book-he admitted he hadn’t read it-he didn’t like it.

There was never enough time on such shows to put Perelmuter and other “designated champions of Israel” on the spot. How did they know that everything I was saying was lies? I was the one who’d served in the Mossad, not they. Why was it that these loyal Americans were willing to accept any mud thrown at the CIA without even giving it a second though but insisted on defending to the hilt an intelligence agency of a foreign country that had been known to spy on the United States (as in the Pollard case) and hadn’t refrained from attacking American interests (as in the case of the Lavon affair in Egypt, among others)
—pg. 265

Ostrovsky Says Zionism and the State of Israel are a Racist, Prejudiced, and Oppressive Nightmare

“I had already realized for some time that I no longer shared that ideology that for me the state of Israel was no longer the fulfillment of an ancient dream. For me, it was more a nightmare of prejudice, wallowing in racism and waving the white and blue flag as a banner of oppression. I wanted no part of it. What I was doing now was showing the carriers of that banner their vulnerability, so that they would stop and reappraise their own purpose. Maybe then they could join the family of nations on an equal footing.”
—pg. 273

Mossad Planned a False-Flag Assassination of George Bush Using Palestinian Patsies at the Madrid Peace Conference

“There was no doubt that Bush would be out of his element on October 30 when he arrived in Madrid to open the peace talks.”

It was clear from the start that the assassination would be blamed on the Palestinians-perhaps ending once and for all their irritating resistance and making them the people most hated by all Americans.

Three Palestinian extremists were taken by a Kidon unit from their hiding place in Beirut and relocated incommunicado in a special detention location in the Negev desert. The three were Beijdun Salameh, Mohammed Hussein, and Hussein Shahin.

At the same time, various threats, some real and some not, were made against the president. The Mossad clique added its share, in order to more precisely define the threat as if it were coming from a group affiliated with a certain guarantee of getting attention and keeping it. So if something were to happen, the media would be quick to react and say, “We knew about it, and don’t forget where you saw it first.”
—pg. 278-279

Mossad Make Themselves Appear as the Heroes Even When They Are the Villains (Bush Assassination Plot)

“Several days before the event, it was leaked to the Spanish police that the three terrorists were on their way to Madrid and that they were probably planning some extravagant action. Since the Mossad had all the security arrangements in hand, it would not be a problem for this particular clique to bring the “killers” as close as they might want to the president and then stage a killing. In the ensuing confusion, the Mossad people would kill the “perpetrators”, scoring yet another victory for the Mossad. They’d be very sorry that they hadn’t been able to save the president, but protecting him was not their job to begin with. With all the security forces involved and the assassins dead, it would be very difficult to discover where the security breach had been, except that several of the countries in involved in the conference, such as Syria, were regarded as countries that assisted terrorists. With that in mind, it would be a foregone conclusion where the breach was. As far as the Mossad clique was concerned, it was a win-win situation.”
—pg. 279-280

Mossad Used Their Media Control to Discredit Israeli Nuclear Whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu

“But the Mossad had used its ace in the hole one time too many. Asking Maxwell to get involved in a matter of secondary importance (namely, the Vanunu affair) had been a big mistake, for which the media mogul would be made to pay the price.

That involvement caused suspicion in the British Parliament that there was no smoke without fire, particularly after the publication of a book by an American reporter claiming Maxwell was a Mossad agent.”
—pg. 284

Mossad helped stage phoney August Coup against Gorbachev in order to legitimize the so called democratization of the Soviet Union

“It was Maxwell who’d helped created the ties with the now-defunct KGB. The right-wingers realized it would be a devastating blow to Israel’s standing in the West of the world were to learn that the Mossad had participated in an way, as minute as that participation might be, in the attempted coup to stop the democratization of the Soviet Union. It would be perceived as treason against the West.”

A small meeting of right-wingers at Mossad headquarters resulted in a consensus to terminate Maxwell.”

Fox News edits Trump rally protestor holding up giant photo of Trump with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein

Portrait of American financier Jeffrey Epstein (left) and real estate developer Donald Trump as they pose together at the Mar-a-Lago estate, Palm Beach, Florida, 1997.
Davidoff Studios Photography/GettyImages

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
June 20, 2018 Anno Domini

Fox News edited out an embarrassing incident at a Trump rally in Minnesota today where a protestor interrupted the President and held up a giant photo of Trump with his arm around convicted pedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein.

“Who is Jeffrey Epstein?” a caption on the photo asked.

Some alert viewers posted the unedited footage of the incident to Youtube, trumping Fox, which later edited out the incident and showed only a shot of Trump’s face as the protestor was escorted out by security from the Amsoil Arena in Duluth. The rally was in support of the GOP in anticipation of the 2018 Midterm elections.

Trump promptly responded by demanding security remove the man followed by Trump belittling and ridiculing the protestor with statements like, “Go home to your Mom, darling” and “was that a man or a woman, because he needs a haircut more than I do?”

Here is the footage from the live feed before the Fox News edit (the second clip, although captured from a TV, shows the photo more clearly; the third video shows an on-the-ground point of view of the protestor):

And now here is Fox’s sanitized version:

For more on the relationship between Trump and Epstein, please read the following series:

Trump controlled by MossadPart I | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V