The totalitarian state

[Firestarter]

This makes me really sad.
Just last February 11, I made some less than flattering remarks about Andrew Puzder.
According to the “independent” Wikipedia these reasons are precisely what made Puzder withdraw his nomination as Secretary of Labor on February 15:

Puzder had "come under intense fire from Democrats and liberal groups who accused him of mistreating his workers, opposing the minimum wage and supporting automation in the workplace" as well as conservatives who criticized Puzder's "employment of an undocumented immigrant as a housekeeper and his failure to pay taxes for her services."[39] On February 15, 2017, the eve of his scheduled confirmation hearing, Puzder withdrew his nomination, after "it became clear to Republican Senate leaders that they did not have the votes to confirm him" in the Senate confirmation.[40][41] Puzder acknowledged that the allegations of spousal abuse, which he denied and his ex-wife recanted in 1990 as part of a custody agreement, contributed to his withdrawal.

What makes me almost break down and cry is that Puzder wasn’t the only great patriot on the Trump team that is looking for a new job.
On February 13, national security adviser Michael Flynn was forced to resign after his cosy relation with Putin’s Russia couldn’t be denied anymore.
I’m just happy that I wasn’t going crazy like the “fake news media … with their conspiracy theories and blind hatred”.
Even now I won’t imply that Donald Trump is even more involved with Russia’s regime than the Obama administration. I just hope nobody finds out that Donald Trump is a Goldman Sachs puppet.

If I understand correctly Flynn had to step down because he discussed sensitive national-security information with Russia’s ambassador… According to the media this all the more damaging, because he did this before becoming national security adviser?!?
Flynn called Russian ambassador to the US, Sergey Kislyak, the day Obama imposed new penalties and gave him "the impression that the sanctions would be revisited at a later time".
On December 25, 2016 Flynn sent a friendly text to Kislyak “Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year”. Kislyak immediately replied with similar good wishes.

When this news broke, suddenly Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence claimed that Flynn had not been totally open about his warm relation with the Kremlin. They also claimed that Flynn had done nothing illegal. Maybe Donald Trump’s rant on Twitter makes this less convincing:

From intelligence, papers are being leaked, things are being leaked. It’s criminal action, criminal act, and it’s been going on for a long time, before me, but now it’s really going on, and people are trying to cover up for a terrible loss that the Democrats had under Hillary Clinton (…)
The real scandal here is that classified information is illegally given out by “intelligence” like candy. Very un-American! (…)
I think it’s very, very unfair what’s happened to General Flynn, the way he was treated, and the documents and papers that were illegally, I stress that, illegally leaked. Very, very unfair”

I have to agree with Donald: it’s really American to cover up all kinds of corruption and criminal activity by the US government: http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/lea ... 9204d2c6c4

Here we can see Michael Flynn and Vladimir Putin shaking hands in Russia in 2015.


I just hope nobody finds out that Flynn is already the third man in Trump’s team that resigned because of ties to Putin’s Russia. Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager, and Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser, had to step down from the Trump campaign over their dealings with Russia.
Manafort "managed" communication between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, and received "kickback payments" from deposed Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych throughout 2016. Yanukovych was ousted in 2014 and has lived in Russia since: http://www.businessinsider.com/michael- ... &r=US&IR=T

Maybe the saddest thing is that Donald Trump doesn’t look as confident as he did before. He couldn’t possibly have doubts about his (lacking) skills, could he?

[editor]

Since you seem all-in on the "let's slam Trump for being friendly with Russia" bandwagon, may I presume you're in favor of the U.S. going to war with Russia?

I think that's what McCain and Schumer want, so you'll be in very distinguished company.

Did you see Trump's latest press conference? I loved the part where he told CNN's Acosta how everything he does gets portrayed negatively, while Obama and Hillary Clinton got a free pass.

You say this "Russia Connection" isn't fake news? Until and unless we see the actual transcripts from Flynn's call, that's exactly what it is, fake news.

On the other hand, did you know that in 2008, before the election, Obama sent former American ambassador to the Ukraine William G. Miller on a secret mission to Iran? He went to deliver Obama's message that Obama was friendly to Iran, and sympathetic to their position; that the relationship between the two countries would change when Obama won the election.

This is the exact equivalent of what the news is trying to pin on Trump. Where is the outrage? Where is CNN? Where is Firestarter?

Trump went on in his press conference to ask why Hillary didn't come forward and announce that CNN had given her the debate questions prior to the debate? She could have come forward, denounced CNN, and demanded that a different, neutral network handle the debate (and ask different questions). She didn't. Where is the outrage?

Here's another one for you:

U.S. State Department Confirms Iran NEVER Signed Treaty, Obama’s Nuclear Deal Fully Illegal
Posted by Martin Walsh | Dec 21, 2016 | Breaking News
(Original source: https://conservativedailypost.com/u-s-s ... y-illegal/)

In a breaking news story, we have received evidence that Obama and John Kerry did not require Irans leaders to sign the nuclear deal that his team negotiated with the regime, and the deal is not “legally binding,” his administration acknowledged.

Obama and Iran agreed that a legally binding deal would be strongly discouraged and disapproved of in the United States, so they wanted to skip the “legally binding” part and just give Iran everything they asked for if Iran promised not to use the nuclear weapons on countries.

In a non legally binding agreement, Iran was given:

• A lift on $100 billion in sanctions.
• They were paid more than $36 billion for “long overdue actions.”
• Unlimited access to trade with Europe again.
• A lift on the arms embargo. They can buy and sell weapons from anyone, anywhere, anytime they want to.
• They are allowed to run “safety tests” on themselves.
• They report “illegal actions” themselves to the U.N. Meaning, Iran will tell Obama and the U.N. if they are acting criminally or inappropriately.

What the United States got:

• Anti-American propaganda videos where American sailors were captured and humiliated.
• Iran has test-fired an illegal long-range missile on several occasions.
• Iran detained dozens of Americans and held them until Obama paid them a ransom.

That is it. We got absolutely nothing. We armed a jihadi maniac with nuclear weapons and gave them everything they asked for.

There is a silver lining: The deal was never signed, so two things can occur.

First, Trump can rip the deal up on day one and we can place all of the restrictions and bans right back on Iran while forcing them to destroy their nuclear systems.

Second, this was a clear act of treason by Obama and Kerry, and they should be charged once Trump is in office. The United States labels Iran as the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, so that means the United States is working with terrorists.

Under the “Stop Funding Terrorists Bill,” which is going to House floor next week, if Republicans vote to pass this, Obama and any other government agency or official that supplies terrorists can be charged with treason.

Would you support Donald Trump charging Obama and Kerry with treason for this horrendous deal that placed the entire world at risk?

Where is the outrage? Where is CNN? Where is Firestarter?

I've said this before, I don't mind reports of dirt on Trump if it's real dirt. But I'm completely tired of the daily Trump bashing fake news bullshit. With all due respect Firestarter, find something more productive to bitch about.

[Firestarter]

You say this "Russia Connection" isn't fake news? Until and unless we see the actual transcripts from Flynn's call, that's exactly what it is, fake news.

I have never claimed that Donald Trump is worse than the democrooks, but on the contrary. There is more about the crimes of the Clinton crime syndicate than about Donald Trump in this thread.

Even now I won’t imply that Donald Trump is even more involved with Russia’s regime than the Obama administration. I just hope nobody finds out that Donald Trump is a Goldman Sachs puppet.

Maybe you don't want to know that in the last week 2 of Trump's crooks had to step down?

Here's another one for you:

U.S. State Department Confirms Iran NEVER Signed Treaty, Obama’s Nuclear Deal Fully Illegal
Posted by Martin Walsh | Dec 21, 2016 | Breaking News
(Original source: https://conservativedailypost.com/u-s-s ... y-illegal/)

Here's one for you: the whole atomic energy/bombs nonsense is nothing but a scam.
E = mc2 has never been experimentally proven (Einstein must have thought this was really funny).
There has never been any nuclear bomb that has actually blown up anything. Atomic bombs, the only weapon of mass destruction that has never been used on a massive scale, supposedly because it's too destructive...
No energy is generated in nuclear power plants.
While radioactive material cannot be used to generate energy it is a very effective toxic to reduce the population.

If you want to know who the greatest inventor of the 20th century was, look no further than H.G. Wells, not only did he invent the "First men in the moon", but also the atomic bomb. Here you can read Wells' The world set free: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1059/1059-h/1059-h.htm

I've said this before, I don't mind reports of dirt on Trump if it's real dirt. But I'm completely tired of the daily Trump bashing fake news bullshit. With all due respect Firestarter, find something more productive to bitch about.

Yeah sure, you really don't get upset when I criticise the Republicans that are possibly even worse than the Democrats. Oh sorry: they're not 2 parties, but the one party Democrat-Republicans of the Totalitarian state.

[editor]

I didn't mean to go off on you Firestarter. I don't care for either Party. However, the sheer amount of anti-Trump nonsense coming from all the media tips the scales for me. Anyone hated this much by the media can't be all bad. And what's the alternative? An out-of-control intelligence community with the power to do anything it likes?

The Gaslighting Of The American Public Continues...
Feb 17, 2017 1:49 PM
by Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com

The gaslighting of the American public continues, with Gaslighter-in-Chief, The New York Times, whipping up a frenzy of Russia paranoia.*

It reminds me of an old gambit in fly fishing called the “artificial hatch.” Trout like to gorge on mayfly nymphs as they rise out of a stream and shuck their nymphal shells to fly away as winged adults. The bugs do this in bunches, at a particular time of day, according to sub-species. This “hatch” drives the trout into a feeding frenzy.

A lot of the time, of course, there’s no action on the stream, so the bored fly fisherman whips his line here and there around a particular pool, trying to create the simulation of a mayfly hatch so the trout will wake the fuck up. It is, to be frank a crude dodge, really an act of desperation. But at least it gives the fisherman something to do for a while besides worry about missing another mortgage payment.

The Russia paranoia frenzy is serious business because it indicates that a state-of-war exists between the permanent bureaucracy of government (a.k.a. the Deep State) and the new Trump administration. There are features of the struggle that ought to be much more disturbing than the dubious alleged monkey business about Russia hacking the election and the hoo-hah around a single intercepted phone call between Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador, made to open a line-of-communication between high-ranking officials, strictly routine business in any other administration.

Most disturbing are signs that the so-called intelligence community (IC) has gone rogue in collusion with forces aligned around Democratic Party functionaries up to and including former president Obama and Hillary Clinton, along with CNN, The Times, The Wash-Po, NBC News and a few other mouthpieces of the defeated establishment. Obama and Hillary remain conspicuously sequestered from this maelstrom, but they must be working their phones like nobody’s business. (Is the IC monitoring them, too, one wonders?)

Until his Queeg-on-steroids news conference late yesterday, Trump laid pretty low after General Flynn was thrown under the bus, but he must be plotting counter-moves, with Bannon and Steven Miller straining at their leashes, slavering for blood. Will some employees over at the CIA and the — what? — sixteen other IC outposts that stud the government like shipworms in a rotting hulk — be called on the carpet of the oval office, and possibly handed pink slips? How do you drain that swamp in Langley, VA? Perhaps with subpoenas? Surely Jeff Sessions over at the Department of Justice has got to be weighing action against the IC leakers. That shit is against the law.

The next disturbing element of the situation is all the war-drum beating by the same cast of characters: the IC, the Democratic Party, and major media. Why in hell are we antagonizing Russia? In the last month of Obama’s term — and for the first time in many years — NATO moved a bunch of tanks close to Russia’s border with the Baltic states. Do you really think Russia wants to reoccupy these countries for the pleasure of subsidizing them and draining the Russian treasury? In those twilight days of Obama, government officials made wild and unspecific charges about “Russian aggression,” and vague assertions about Russian plans to dominate the global scene. Major what-the-fuck there. There’s the ugly situation in Ukraine, of course, but that was engineered by Obama’s state department. Do you know why Russia annexed Crimea after that? It couldn’t have been for more transparently rational reasons. And what exactly is our beef with Russia in Syria? That they’re trying to prop up the Assad government because the last thing the Middle East needs is another failed state with no government whatsoever? What’s our plan for Syria, anyway? Same as Somalia, Iraq, and Libya? These stories about Russia’s intentions seem insane on their face. It’s amazing that readers of The New York Times swallow them whole. It must say something about the deterioration of the coastal gene pool. The story-mongers have a purpose though: to promote a state of permanent hostility, neo-cold-war style, to justify the grotesquely overgrown operations of the IC.

Note, too, that the new cold war benefits the thousands of ex-CIA personnel and retired US military officers who have signed on to work as Deep State IC private contractors in recent years. A new cold war is their gravy train. How about a congressional inquiry into the number of private security contractors selling their services to the Deep State, and exactly who they employ? Now that might be a scandal greater than Watergate, but not the Mike Flynn affair.

Have you asked yourself: what would war with Russia look like if the wishes of ninnies like Senator McCain and Lindsey Graham come true? Where’s the battlefield? Do we dispatch a few divisions over to invade Russia proper? Napoleon and Hitler already tried that… didn’t work out so well. And what’s the strategic objective? To occupy Russia and school them in democracy? That’s rich. Or do we go back to fighting proxy wars with Russia in various Third World backwaters as we did so earnestly in the 1960s. Another Vietnam would be grand, right? Just what we need. Or maybe a fifty-year-war like the one in the Congo. Or should we put aside all that penny-ante nonsense and just Drop the Big One, no a thousand Big Ones! Oh, wait a minute… they’ve got plenty of their own Big Ones.

Now, it may be the case that President Donald Trump is batshit crazy, but cooking up fake hostilities with the world’s second-leading nuclear super-power is a strange way to run a coup d’état against the White House. I mean, if it’s that bad, the generals and the senior spooks ought to just step up to the plate without further pretense and remove the fucker — as I’ve been predicting they would inside of sixty days from the inauguration. But then even if Trump is crazy and incompetent, what’s so great about a Deep State security matrix that refuses to be subordinate to anybody, that can do whatever it wants to whomever it wants? This thing is turning into a regular shoot-out at the OK Corral. If you know your history, you’ll recall that Wyatt Earp was hardly the eagle scout he’s depicted as on the boob tube. He was something of a thug, with a mad streak. Maybe that’s what it takes to stand up to the Deep State.

* Gaslighting — a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or members of a group, hoping to make targets question their own memory, perception, and sanity.

[Firestarter]

I didn't mean to go off on you Firestarter. I don't care for either Party. However, the sheer amount of anti-Trump nonsense coming from all the media tips the scales for me. Anyone hated this much by the media can't be all bad. And what's the alternative? An out-of-control intelligence community with the power to do anything it likes?

I try to present the information as good as I can. I'm afraid that Donald Trump will in fact help the out-of-control intelligence community.
The only positive things I can say about Donald Trump, is that he's not Clinton, Obama or Bush...
The alternative? It would be nice if anybody could have some magical trick to make this world a better place. Jesus Christ tried. Maybe Che Guevara really did try, but his support of Communism makes this doubtful.

Some Dutch law students tried to explain to me the legal merits of the travel ban.
This is (only) a presidential executive order (and no Act of Congress) that’s been blocked. The Congress can only by a 2/3 majority overrule an executive order (which doesn’t make this practical), but the Congress can practically block executive orders, by simply denying funding.


The Justice Department has appealed Judge Robart’s order of blocking the Muslim ban. The appeals court in San Francisco rejected this.
Donald Trump has quietly admitted that he won’t challenge the appeal in the Supreme Court: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 74541.html


Judge Robart is a District Judge, which is a Federal Judge.
In accordance with Marbury vs. Madison (1803) the US court has the authority to review if a law is constitutional: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison


Immigration policy can only be decided for the whole USA (so not just for one state); see pages 68-69 (IX) of Texas vs. United States (2015):

But the Constitution requires “an uniform Rule of Naturalization”;206 Congress has instructed that “the immigration laws of the United States should be enforced vigorously and uniformly”;207 and the Supreme Court has described immigration policy as “a comprehensive and unified system.”208
(…)
Furthermore, the Constitution vests the District Court with “the judicial Power of the United States.”210 That power is not limited to the district wherein the court sits but extends across the country. It is not beyond the power of a court, in appropriate circumstances, to issue a nationwideinjunction.211

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pu ... 38-CV0.pdf

Donald Trump has said about the blocking of his Muslim ban by Judge Robart: “Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!”.
Does this sound like a false flag attack in the making?

Some Muslims believe that not all Americans are as bad as Donald Trump and still want to come to the USA. The State Department has reinstated at least 60,000 visas (possibly up to 100,000) that had been cancelled under the temporary ban: https://web.archive.org/web/20170207204 ... an-battle/


I’ve seen lots of photos of protests against the Muslim ban, mostly Arabs are pictured. The following shows a protest (also of some proponents of the ban) at LAX airport. It looks like a huge crowd of people, maybe Sean Spicer or Donald Duck can estimate how large.

[editor]

I agree the courts knocking down the immigration ban creates a ripe opportunity for a false flag.

It's also a ridiculous action by the courts, considering the action Trump took was legal, and within the purvue of his job description.

Any Christian nation that fails to deal with the Muslim migrant issue, does so at its own peril.

http://vidmax.com/video/151794-Video-Sh ... ant-Crisis

http://vidmax.com/video/151794-Video-Sh ... ant-Crisis

[Firestarter]

Post on drugs by the intelligence agencies removed to “new” thread: https://www.lawfulpath.com/forum/viewto ... f=7&t=1366

Keywords: “War drugs, Peter Dale Scott, United States Afghanistan, Columbia, Indochina, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Robert White, Civil Air Transport Air America, Kuomintang (KMT), DynCorp, Paul Helliwell, Meyer Lansky’s bank Miami, Castle Bank of the Bahamas, World Finance Corporation, Nugan Hand Bank (Australia), and Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), Olmsted’s Financial General Bank, CIA Directors George H.W. Bush William Casey, Golden Crescent, Pakistan, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Bin Laden, mujahedin, Jimmy Chagra, Danny Ray Lasater, Bill Clinton, Kentucky Governor John Y. Brown, Jr., Carlos Castaiio, General Barry McCaffrey, FARC”

[Firestarter]

In a world where the media print only lies, it shouldn’t be surprising that the main objective of Google and Yahoo is to hide the truth.
If you’re surprised about removed videos from YouTube - YouTube is part of Google Inc.

The chairman of Google Inc Eric Schmidt is both a member of Bilderberg and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Schmidt is also CEO of Alphabet Inc. (previously known as Google Ideas).
Jared Cohen is another member of the CFR. Cohen is founder and president of Jigsaw, part of Alphabet Inc. Cohen is also advisor to Eric Schmidt. From 2006 to 2010 Cohen served as a member of the secretary of state's Policy Planning Staff and was a close advisor to Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton.
Ruth Porat is on the board of directors of the CFR and Chief Financial Officer of both Alphabet Inc. and Google Inc.
Eric Schmidt attended several meetings of the Bilderberg Group. In 2015 also Regina Dugan and Demis Hassabis of Google joined the Bilderberg meeting.

In December 2015 Eric Schmidt explained that Google must censor hate speech, by using spelling checkers (to combat “terrorism”).
Eris Schmidt wrote in an opinion piece for the New York Times
“It's our responsibility to demonstrate that stability and free expression go hand in hand
(...)
Without this type of leadership from government, from citizens, from tech companies, the Internet could become a vehicle for further disaggregation of poorly built societies, and the empowerment of the wrong people, and the wrong voices”.
In other words speech is only “free” if it doesn’t wake up the sheeple. And we wouldn’t want the have-nots empowered by using technology, would we?
Barack Obama added:
“as the internet erases the distance between countries, we see growing efforts by terrorists to poison the minds of people”.
According to Hillary Clinton tech companies need to “deny online space” to terror groups, that
“are using websites, social media, chat rooms and other platforms to celebrate beheadings, recruit future terrorists and call for attacks. We should work with host companies to shut them down”.
Not only Google, but also Facebook and Twitter remove contents: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... hmidt.html
Maybe I should ask Google and the government which speech is allowed. But I already know: telling the truth is a capital crime.
I have to admit that I think that censorship protects the terrorists in charge.

What kind of strategies does Google use to hide the truth?
In 2012 Google acknowledged that each day it adds about 9500 new websites to its quarantine list (that won’t show in the search results, removed from the index). Google blocks at the very least millions of websites.
Certain (fake) news sources get blacklisted for promoting a political, religious or moral agenda that the Google censors disapprove of.
The autocomplete blacklist can be used to not complete key words that the censors don’t want us to find.
Google lets the government flag “inappropriate” videos at YouTube, so Google can remove them.
Google can stop providing services (for example Gmail) without explanation: https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles ... -regulated

[Firestarter]

Bizarrely (almost) the complete David Icke forum (where I have posted information) has been removed from the internet today – only viewable now after logging in (Private): https://forum.davidicke.com/

[editor]

If you can still view it after logging in, then it hasn't been removed from the Internet.

Lawfulpath.com's forum has a private side which can only be seen if you've been given special permissions. It's not all that unusual. The private side helps support this website and forum, since everything else is free. We don't even run any outside ads, in spite of the many offers we get on a regular basis.

What an authentication wall does do though, is remove the articles from all public search engines. So I would say it's unusual to put a forum behind a wall which has been public in the past.

Still, you've got to realize forums such as Icke's, and this one too, are private property. Owners of private forums can do as they please. Take stuff down, put other things up; make up rules with which we may or may not want to agree, and ban users for completely arbitrary reasons or no reason at all. If I ever decide to stop paying the bills for lawfulpath.com, it will be gone overnight.

Services provided by companies such as Google or Facebook are in a bit of a gray area, since they are basically extensions of the American intelligence agencies, founded and maintained by public funds. Even with these you'll have a tough row to hoe if you go against their terms of service, which they can change at any time.