Comey has an insurrection on his hands beyond the ability of anyone to control. These mutinous senior FBI agents have enough dirt to toss Obama, Comey, Hillary and others in jail. They also loathe the idea of being subjected to Clinton in the future as they know they will be forced to perpetrate more cover-ups and stain the bureau even more. They presented Comey and Obama with a choice… “give us Hillary’s head on a platter and we will be silent on Obama’s complicity in federal crimes [effectively a Nixon type pardon by omission of pursuit] and we will allow Comey to quietly be succeeded by a person of our choosing on an incoming Trump Administration.” OR ELSE THEY WILL GO PUBLIC. Comey could have been silent until after the election no matter what they found on Weiner’s laptop because they already have seen ALL the emails including the deleted ones. The fact that Comey is taking this action indicates that his hand is being forced and that he [and Obama] have accepted the terms offered by the insurrectionists in exchange for the face saving terms offered. This also dovetails with Assange saying his next batch [the FBI knows the contents of ALL of Podesta’s emails] will result in the arrest of Hillary. The FBI cannot weather another PR storm revealing them complicit in a cover-up. They also must be proactive and use Hillary’s arrest/indictment/forced withdrawal from the race as a lightning rod to quell a furious public by granting them their ‘pound of flesh’. No one likes Hillary, and don’t think that the Pentagon is going to silently sit still as one of their 4-Star generals get ramrodded for MUCH less than Hillary did. They are aligned with the insurrectionists at the FBI. Comey and Obama’s hand is being forced. Hillary is toast and going to jail. You will know this is true within a few days because the sheriff is about to slap the cuffs on Hillary. Weiner’s laptop is just a cover story.
Archive for October, 2016
Human beings are natural community builders; we are constantly seeking out others of like-mind and like-purpose because we understand subconsciously that groups of individuals working together can (often but not always) accomplish more. That said, human beings also have a natural tendency to value individual freedom and the right to voluntary association. We do not like to be forced to associate with people or groups that do not hold similar values.
Cultures erect borders because, frankly, people have the right to vet those who wish to join and participate in their endeavors. People also have a right to discriminate against anyone who does not share their core values; or, in other words, we have the right to refuse association with other groups and ideologies that are destructive to our own.
Interestingly, globalists and their mouthpieces will argue that by refusing to associate with those who might undermine our values, it is WE who are violating THEIR rights. See how that works?
Globalists exploit the word “isolationism” to shame sovereignty champions in the eyes of the public, but there is no shame in isolation when such principles as freedom of speech and expression or the right to self defense are on the line. There is also nothing wrong with isolating a prosperous economic model from unsuccessful economic models. Forcing a decentralized free market economy to adopt feudal administration through central banking and government will eventually destroy that model. Forcing a free market economy into fiscal interdependencey with socialist economies will also most likely undermine that culture. Just as importing millions of people with differing values to feed on a nation after it has had socialism thrust upon it is a recipe for collapse.
The point is, some values and social structures are mutually exclusive; no matter how hard you try, certain cultures can never be homogenized with other cultures. You can only eliminate one culture to make room for the other in a border-less world. This is what globalists seek to achieve. It is the greater purpose behind open border policies and globalization – to annihilate ideological competition so that humanity thinks it has no other option but the elitist religion. The ultimate end game of globalists is not to control governments (governments are nothing more than a tool). Rather, their end game is to obtain total psychological influence and eventually consent from the masses.
Variety and choice have to be removed from our environment in order for globalism to work, which is a nice way to say that many people will have to die and many principles will have to be erased from the public consciousness. The elites assert that their concept of a single world culture is the pinnacle principle of mankind, and that there is no longer any need for borders because no other principle is superior to theirs. As long as borders as a concept continue to exist there is always the chance of separate and different ideals rising to compete with the globalist philosophy. This is unacceptable to the elites.
This has led not so subtle propaganda meme that cultures that value sovereignty over globalism are somehow seething cauldrons of potential evil. Today, with the rising tide of anti-globalist movements, the argument in the mainstream is that “populists” (conservatives) are of a lower and uneducated class and are a dangerous element set to topple the “peace and prosperity” afforded by globalist hands. In other words, we are treated like children scrawling with our finger paints across a finely crafted Mona Lisa.
There is no modicum of evidence to support the notion that globalization, interdependencey and centralization actually work. One need only examine the economic and immigration nightmare present in the EU to understand this. So, the globalists will now argue that the world is actually not centralized ENOUGH. That’s right; they will claim we need more globalization, not less, to solve the world’s ailments.
The reality of free energy cannot be denied, the controversy that comes into question is whether we can tap into it, and generate enough of it so that it can be useful. A lot of evidence points to the fact that we can, and already have.
“These concepts have been proven in hundreds of laboratories throughout the world and yet they have not really seen the light of day. If these technologies were to be set free worldwide, the change would be profound, it would be applicable everywhere. These technologies are absolutely the most important thing that have happened in the history of the world.” – Brian O’leary, Former Nasa Astronaut and Princeton Physics Professor
The background and nature of the “First E.T. Contact”:
“In 1953, astronomers discovered large objects in space which were moving toward the Earth. It was first believed that they were asteroids. Later evidence proved that the objects could only be spaceships. When the objects reached the Earth, they took up a very high orbit around the Equator. There were several huge ships, and their actual intent was unknown.”
Operatives of Project Sigma, which worked to intercept radio signals, and a new project, Plato, tasked with establishing diplomatic relations with this race of space aliens, worked together to transmit radio communications to the ships using the binary computer language. The U.S. was thus able to arrange a landing that resulted in face-to-face contact with alien beings from another planet. In the meantime, a race of human-looking aliens also contacted the U.S. government.
“This alien group warned us against the aliens that were orbiting the Equator and offered to help us with our spiritual development. They demanded that we dismantle our nuclear weapons as the major condition. They refused to exchange technology citing that we were spiritually unable to handle the technology which we then possessed. They believed that we would use any new technology to destroy each other.”
This race stated that:
*** We were on a path of self-destruction and we must stop killing each other.
*** We must stop polluting the Earth.
*** We must stop raping the Earth’s natural resources.
*** We must learn to live in harmony.
Cooper writes that these terms were met with extreme suspicion, especially the major condition of nuclear disarmament. It was believed that meeting that condition would leave us helpless in the face of an obvious alien threat. We also had no precedent in history to help in making the decision. In any case, it was decided that nuclear disarmament was not in the best interest of the United States. The aliens’ overtures were rejected.
“The significant point about Cooper’s version,” Salla writes, “is that the humanoid extraterrestrial race was not willing to enter into technology exchanges that might help weapons development and was instead focused on spiritual development. Significantly, the overtures of these extraterrestrials were turned down.”
In retrospect, it seems we said “no” to the good guys, doesn’t it?
In any case, Eisenhower’s February 1954 meeting was not successful. After the failure of that first meeting, the president subsequently met later that year with a race of large-nosed gray aliens who had been orbiting the Earth before landing at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico.
Eisenhower and/or members of his administration reached a basic agreement with this second alien race. The ETs identified themselves as originating from a planet in orbit around a red star in the Constellation of Orion that we call Betelgeuse. They stated that their planet was dying and that at some unknown future time they would no longer be able to survive there.
The treaty reached with this gray race stated that the aliens would not interfere in our affairs and we would not interfere in theirs. We would keep their presence on Earth a secret. They would furnish us with advanced technology and would help us in our technological development.
They would not make a treaty with any other Earth nation.
They could abduct humans on a limited and periodic basis for the purposes of medical examination and the monitoring of our development, with the stipulation that the humans would not be harmed, would be returned to their point of abduction, and would have no memory of the event. The alien nation agreed to furnish a list of all human contacts and abductees on a regularly scheduled basis.
Further testimony comes from yet another whistleblower, Phil Schneider, a former geological engineer who was employed by corporations contracted to build underground bases. Schneider worked extensively on black projects involving extraterrestrials. He summarized what he knew about the earthling/alien compact:
“Back in 1954, under the Eisenhower administration, the federal government decided to circumvent the Constitution of the United States and form a treaty with alien entities. It was called the 1954 Greada Treaty, which basically made the agreement that the aliens involved could take a few cows and test their implanting techniques on a few human beings but that they had to give details about the people involved.”
“By 1955,” Cooper writes, “it became obvious that the aliens had deceived Eisenhower and had broken the treaty. It was suspected that the aliens were not submitting a complete list of human contacts and abductees and it was further suspected that not all abductees had been returned.”
Lear says similarly, “We got something less than the technology we bargained for and found the abductions exceeded by a million-fold what we had naively agreed to.”
In October 1955, General Douglas MacArthur delivered a famous warning that suggested some extraterrestrial presence existed that threatened human sovereignty.
“You now face a new world,” MacArthur said, “a world of change. We speak in strange terms, of harnessing the cosmic energy, of ultimate conflict between a united human race and the sinister forces of some other planetary galaxy. The nations of the world will have to unite, for the next war will be an interplanetary war. The nations of the Earth must someday make a common front against attack by people from other planets.”
Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford has had to issue a reminder/warning to the troops to stay committed to their oaths, as well as the chain of command in the coming weeks. In light of everything I’ve been warning people of, this recent report is most troubling…
The Daily Caller Reports:
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford wrote a Medium blog post Monday to remain committed to its military oath amid the 2016 election.
“What we must collectively guard against is allowing our institution to become politicized, or even perceived as being politicized, by how we conduct ourselves during engagements with the media, the public, or in open or social forums,” Dunford reminded troops.
Dunford further urged service members that the military must remain committed to the chain of command structure until the next administration comes in, and that the military should not undermine its credibility in the interim with the next president. “I have a duty to protect the integrity and political neutrality of our military profession,” he continued.
Dunford’s comments also come amid increased concern that the U.S. military is becoming too politicized. He is reportedly furious with Retired Marine Gen. John Allen and Retired Army Gen. Michael Flynn for actively campaigning on behalf of the Democratic and Republican presidential nominees.