There's no doubt that there's plenty of "Wars and rumors of Wars" as predicted in Matthew 24:6; however any rational skeptic could easily argue that there have almost always been "wars and rumors of wars" throughout history, and Matthew 24:34 says that "before this generation has passed away, all these things will have taken place." Therefore it would be reasonable to demand extraordinary evidence before making any biblical claims to a connection between current events.
Whether or not that evidence exists there's an enormous amount of insanity going on, and some of it may sound like Biblical Prophecy, and even if it isn't related to this many people think it is, so it is worth considering. But, if we consider this it would be worth looking at history leading up to current events, including enormous volume of evidence to indicate that the mainstream media is routinely misrepresenting or omitting the vast majority of events raising doubts about the United States "defending freedom," as they often claim.
Iran doesn't have a history of invading one country after another, despite all the mainstream media claims about them being a leading supporter of terrorists. It's the United States that's been intervening in far more countries that any one else in the world since World War II. Iran is one of the countries the United States intervened in the most, supporting a coup in 1953, overthrowing a democratically elected government because they wanted a fair deal for their own people, despite an outrageous deal negotiated with foreign oil companies before they were elected, and the CIA helped create SAVAK a few years later which tortured and killed thousands of innocent people to maintain control of the country.the United States also overthrew democratically elected governments in Guatemala, Chile, and many other countries, including Honduras in 2009, and many of these countries also supported death squads oppressing their own people.
That is why we're having so many problem with migrants crossing the borders, they're fleeing tyrants installed, directly or indirectly by actions of our government.
The United States also supported both side of the Iran/Iraq war with weapons prolonging it, and the U.S. Navy warship Vincennes shot down a civilian Iranian airliner killing two hundred and seventy people, including sixty children. Yet after 9/11 Iran condemned the attacks and was still willing to cooperate with the United States by helping detain Al Qaeda members and share intelligence with them.
Then despite their help, George W. Bush declared them to be part of the axis of evil, which was part of a pattern of behavior antagonizing rivals that continues into the Trump administration. It wasn't until after this that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was much more extreme than Mohammad Khatami his predecessor. There's little or no chance that he would have been elected if Bush hadn't been so antagonistic.
Trump also antagonized them for abandoning the nuclear deal that Obama had signed, which is what began this escalation in tensions.
The Iranians are fully aware of this history and much more; however, it's rarely ever mentioned in the US media, while an enormous amount of propaganda claiming they're a leading supporter of terror is repeated over and over again, which is used to drum up support among the complacent people for our foreign policy.
Without going into anything that could be potentially be referred to as a fringe conspiracy theory, there's enough historical evidence to raise major doubts about the media coverage and politicians claims that Iran is the one antagonizing the United States. This evidence also supports claims that wars are routinely based on lies, like weapons of mass destruction, that don't exist, stories about babies being removed from incubators, the Gulf Of Tonkin, and many more lies that led to escalating wars. This is important to keep in mind, if considering evidence of something more far-fetched, which at least to some degree, does exist, and perhaps much more, sicne if more complicated theories fall apart there's still evidence that the military industrial complex is still maintaining pa permanent state of war.
Furthermore, the entire Trump administration has been behaving insanely from the time he began his campaign; and, the only reason he managed to get elected was that the Democrats and mainstream media gave Hillary Clinton an overwhelming advantage, despite their own polls showing that neither Trump of Clinton had high approval ratings during the 2016 election!
Add that to the fact that Iran hasn't been invading other countries, while the United stated surrounded their country with our bases after they overthrew the tyrannical Shah installed against the will of their people, it's no surprise that it's not just the conspiracy theorists that are claiming there's a false flag involved in the Japanese tanker attacks, but our own allies, including Japan, the victim of the attack, Germany, and even some members of the British Parliament are claiming that there's major doubts about the evidence if not calling it an outright lie.
The video of Iranians allegedly removing a second mine from the tanker after the first one exploded makes no sense at all, since it's hard to imaging they would be foolish enough to think they could remove evidence like that without getting caught. Furthermore, if they were making an attack that they didn't want to trace back to them they wouldn't use mines that have evidence of their origins in the first place.
Mike Pompeo's claim that Iran has ties to Al Qaeda is even more unbelievable, at least to those familiar with the Middle East politics, since Al Qaeda has always had much stronger ties to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan than either Iran or Iraq. Iran is dominated by the Shiite and Al Qaeda dominated by the Sunni; If Al Qaeda was inclined to support either Iran or Iraq, while Saddam Hussein was in power, it would have been Iraq; however, they were enemies as well, which is part of the reason why Osama Bin Laden was so outraged that the United States was housing their troops in Saudi Arabia for after the first Iraq War, and part of the motivation allegedly behind the 9/11 attacks!
The entire foreign policy establishment is highly skeptical of this claim, and if Mike Pompeo wanted to know this was inevitable before he made this absurd claim he would have! Why would he make such an absurd claim if he should have known that it would only destroy his own credibility?
Does he even want to have any credibility?
This sounds absurd, but if he did why would he say "We lied, we cheated, we stole. It was like we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment?"
While explaining Seven Reasons To Be Highly Skeptical Of The Gulf Of Oman Incident 06/13/2019 Caitlin Johnstone said "Sometimes the things put out by the US State Department feel like they’re conducting experiments on us, just to test the limits of our stupidity," which of course sounds utterly absurd, however even if she is just throwing this out there as wild speculation, it really is close to the truth. They do study how we respond to their propaganda and have done so for decades; and they've learned that if the get demagogues lining up on the talk show circuit scaring people they can drum up support for war every time from a shocking percentage of the public.
However, they want it to seem credible, which should mean they wouldn't want to go too far destroying their own credibility so bad that even those not paying too much attention stop trusting them. there's a growing percentage of the public becoming skeptical of both the political establishment and the media, yet they DO know how to do a better job coming up with propaganda to deceive the public, and they know that if they push it to bizarre extremes then a growing percentage of the public will stop trusting them, which is happening.
There would have to be something extremely far-fetched to believe that they might not want people to believe them, or at least, those paying the most attention to the history behind perpetual war, and that something just might be happening. And anyone familiar with the history of the CIA would know that they lied, cheated, and stole, long before Pompeo admitted it, including when they fabricated the evidence of weapons of mass destruction and many other times, yet the mainstream media routinely presents politicians with background from the CIA including Valerie Plame, who's now running for Congress, and Abigail Spanberger, as the more credible alternative to the fanatical right wing Republicans. And politicians like Senator Gary Peters who recently said on the talk shows that he would always trust the "intelligence community" and Rep. Adam Schiff who said "There's no question that Iran is behind the attacks. I think the evidence is very strong and compelling," Schiff: Evidence of Iran Being Behind Tanker Attacks Is ‘Very Strong’ 06/17/2019
Why are opposition politicians and so many media pundits lining up to agree with the "intelligence community" even though they routinely get caught lying, and Pompeo finally even admitted that it's routine? Why are there still so many people that trust them? They really can do a better job telling lies, yet they don't!
And these scare tactics that might potentially lead us into war aren't the exception, nor are sudden reversals like pulling back the planned attack at the last minute, supposedly after some planes were already in the air after the strike on an unmanned drone; they did the same thing when trump struck that childish pose crossing his arms saying that North Korea "will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen," after he made threats against the United States, which were of course in response to threats from the United States. this was followed by a ridiculous reconciliation that had little credibility because Kim Jong Un wrote him "beautiful letters and we fell in love." Additional clownish threats and caves included the threats to use military force against Venezuela, impose tariffs on countries all around the world, and round up millions of undocumented immigrants this past weekend, all of which were canceled in a clownish manner.
But the current problems didn't begin with Trump, as the media and Democratic establishment often try to imply, they go back decades with conflicts with many countries and lies leading us into war from both political Parties, one time after another, and there's good reason to believe that either the CIA is incredibly incompetent or they let several countries, including North Korea, Libya, Iran, and Iraq get some nuclear technology. Iran first got some nuclear technology for energy purposes, while it was still run by the Shah. Iraq may have also gotten some technology while it was still an ally of the United States for energy purposes. And Libya, North Korea, and Iran among other countries all got some nuclear technology from A.Q. Khan. According to Mohamed ElBaradei the technology that Libya got from him wasn't nearly as good as the press implied, and they gave it up in a deal with the Bush administration, and most credible reports don't indicate that Iran has nuclear weapons; however, regardless of whether or not it was the technology from Khan that enabled North Korea to develop nuclear weapons they all agree that he has them.
In "The Age Of Deception" 2011 Mohamed ElBaradei claims that A.Q. Khan may have had some support within the Pakistan government, and that even the CIA knew he was developing nuclear weapons and sharing it with other countries. He writes "Ruud Lubbers, the former Dutch prime minister, told me that the Dutch had wanted to arrest Khan as early as the 1970s, only to be told not to by the CIA. This was corroborated by other sources. Seymour Hersh, writing in the New Yorker in March 2004, reported a senior U.S. intelligence officer as saying, 'We had every opportunity to put a stop to the A. Q. Khan network fifteen years ago. Some of those involved today in the smuggling are the children of those we knew about in the eighties. It’s the second generation now.'[11] Robert Einhorn, who held the post of U.S. assistant secretary for nonproliferation from 1991 to 2001, later made a similar statement: 'We could have stopped the Khan network, as we knew it, at any time. The debate was, do you stop it now or do you watch it and understand it better so that you are in a stronger position to pull it up by the roots later? The case for waiting prevailed.' ..... Whatever the circumstances or arguments at the time, in hindsight the decision to watch and wait was a royal blunder."
"Royal blunder" is putting it mildly, part of the reason why North Korea and many other countries now have some nuclear technology appears to be because at best, the CIA allowed them to develop it, or at worst some espionage, which they refer to as "intelligence," agencies that often work with the CIA shared the technology to develop nuclear weapons, which is insane either way.
However, insane as this sounds there's plenty of good research, including declassified documents like "Operation Northwoods" to show that our government has a history planning false flags and routinely passes up opportunities to establish peace, including when bush arbitrarily abandoned the nuclear deal that could have prevented North Korea from developing nuclear technology, and when Trump did the same with Iran, although they haven't developed the technology, it clearly antagonized them and helped lead up to the current situation.
Last year they also reported on an alleged confession of an Iranian official admitting that they were tied to 9/11, which didn't actually get too much attention on cable news but was reported widely on dozens of internet articles; however, according to Saudi-owned Al-Arabiya under fire for claiming Iran 'confessed' to 9/11 06/11/2018 Mohammad-Javad Larijani "was in fact detailing the accusations against Iran presented in the Commission Report - and stressed the commission had concluded the Islamic Republic had no involvement in the attack." This is presumably why they didn't report it widely on Cable news; however they circulated it on the internet much more widely than this rebuttal in an attempt to build up support for a war.
However, this doesn't mean that Iran also contributed to this potential conflict; they shot down a drone either just beyond their airspace, or just within it, which clearly played right into the propaganda efforts for the war mongers in the United States. And some of their past history, including Wikipedia: 2009–11 detention of American hikers by Iran which never made any sense at the time. The explanation for why they went near the Iranian border or crossed it never made any sense since they had to know about the tensions between Iran and the United States; yet, the media never scrutinized this at all throughout the obsession coverage of it.
Iran claimed they were CIA agents and an Iraqi cop also agreed according to, Iraqi cop: U.S. hikers are CIA agents 08/03/2009 and this article, A Sliver of Truth: The Curious Case of Mother Jones’s Shane Bauer 03/11/2019 shows some indirect funding from the CIA for one of the hikers. Shane Bauer also has ties to David Corn, who also allegedly has ties to the CIA involving his propaganda about the Russia conspiracy. This isn't what I would consider conclusive evidence; however, there's always been something about this story that doesn't make sense; so, I wouldn't completely rule out a CIA connection to the hikers. But the motive behind this would have to be huge, what ever it is.
Nevertheless, regardless of why the hikers were in Iran or if they had ties to the CIA, Iran played into their hands handing them propaganda cover to demonize them by holding the hikers for two years and striking down the drone at a time when it looked like the United States was faking the evidence to justify an invasion, which was clearly against Iran's best interests. They could claim they were responding to antagonization from the United States, which may be true; however, they should have known that they were playing into their hands anyway.
To sum it up, regardless of the details both sides are taking advantage of the eternal conflict to control their own people. But I wouldn't completely rule out other motives, perhaps much bigger.
It certainly seems as if "Many false prophets" have arisen; and they are deceiving "many, and with the increase of lawlessness, love in most people will grow cold" Mathew 24:11-2; however, there're still many problems with prophecies that raise major doubts, or completely rule out many of the most common assumptions about most religious beliefs, including the claim that "God," assuming he or some unknown advanced intelligence that religious people have come to know as "God" exists, has a higher moral authority, and can be trusted.
If you accept the Bible as the literal truth, or if "God" gives it tacit approval to guide people, then that should raise major doubts about his alleged moral authority, when there are examples of obvious entrapment, among other things in the Bible including Exodus 14: 4 "I shall then make Pharaoh stubborn and he will set out in pursuit of them; and I shall win glory for myself at the expense of Pharaoh and his whole army, and then the Egyptians will know that I am Yahweh.' And the Israelites did this." According to this narrative "God" could have avoided the atrocities that led to the freeing of the Israeli's if he simply didn't "make Pharaoh stubborn" and advised him to let them go, or even better, to never have enslaved them in the first place; but he chose to do it this way to demonstrate his power and to show that if they didn't obey him he would terrorize them.
This is part of a control process that is repeated over and over again throughout the Bible, and it certainly doesn't demonstrate a higher moral authority.
It even admits it in Deuteronomy 9: 4-6 when it says "Do not think to yourself, once Yahweh your God has driven them before you, 'Yahweh has brought me into possession of this country because I am upright,' when Yahweh is dispossessing these nations for you, because they do wrong. You are not going into their country to take possession because of any right behaviour or uprightness on your part; rather, it is because of their wickedness that Yahweh is dispossessing these nations for you, and also to keep the pact which he swore to your ancestors, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Be clear about this: Yahweh is not giving you possession of this fine country because of any right conduct on your part, for you are an obstinate people."
The alleged "God" of the Bible doesn't appear to be a higher moral authority at all, but a control freak using fear to force his followers to obey him for one reason or another. Why would he make a "pact" or "covenant" with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to give them this land in the first place, if it meant they had to obtain it through conquest where according to other Bible verses it involved genocide of the Canaanites, especially if he was a higher moral authority? Why wouldn't he just maintain an open line of communication and teach them to live together peacefully develop a fair democracy and educate their children without abusing them?
If he was a higher moral authority he would have done that, or something much better, not what was described in the Bible.
This control process is repeated throughout the Bible including Matthew 10: 34-7 "'Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth: it is not peace I have come to bring, but a sword. For I have come to set son against father, daughter against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law; a person's enemies will be the members of his own household. 'No one who prefers father or mother to me is worthy of me. No one who prefers son or daughter to me is worthy of me." this is not the actions of a higher moral authority, it clearly describes the tactics of a brainwashing cult leader, which, if "God" exists is what he would be.
There are also plenty of biblical verses teaching how to use corporal punishment from an early age to tech children to blindly obey orders and believe what they're told to believe including Proverbs 13:24 "Whoever fails to use the stick hates his child; whoever is free with correction loves him." Proverbs 23: 13-4 "Do not be chary of correcting a child, a stroke of the cane is not likely to be fatal. Give him a stroke of the cane, you will save his soul from Sheol." and additional verses about corporal punishment (ESV)
There's plenty of modern research showing this method of child rearing teaches them to respond to their problems with violence, and it ensures that they're always concerned about when their next beating will come making them emotionally unstable, which impairs their ability to develop critical thinking skills. It also makes them much more likely to go along with crowds, even when they're acting irrational or obey orders in wars based on lies. I went into how this is also used as an indoctrination method in Dobson’s Indoctrination Machine. Modern research about the impacts of corporal punishment is in many ways much more advanced than the bible; however, when it comes to effective indoctrination methods, the Bible is far more effective than some people might have expected out of people that didn't have access to modern psychology research.
These indoctrination methods don't require anything supernatural, although if there was an unknown advanced intelligence influencing early civilization, with an undisclosed agenda, then they might have known how to teach the leaders how to control the masses. Either that, or they learned it on their own, but the Bible is a very advanced indoctrination manual that doesn't appear so to those those that don't understand how people are being manipulated.
One of the ways that the Bible describes indoctrination methods is Jesus's use of parables, which he admits is to ensure that only those chosen will allegedly understand his will as described in Matthew 13: 10-3 "Then the disciples went up to him and asked, 'Why do you talk to them in parables?' In answer, he said, 'Because to you is granted to understand the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven, but to them it is not granted. Anyone who has will be given more and will have more than enough; but anyone who has not will be deprived even of what he has. The reason I talk to them in parables is that they look without seeing and listen without hearing or understanding."
Parables or many mythological stories can be interpreted in many different ways, and a charismatic speaker can interpret it one way at one time and another way at another time. This is more effective if there are many followers that are inclined to believe their leaders and help intimidate any cult followers who dare to question their leader, often by thinking rationally. This also means that many of the alleged prophecies throughout history can be interpreted in so many different ways that a cult leader can always find a way to convince people that prophecies are coming true, or if he prefers, he can convince them that they're not interpreting them properly if he doesn't want them to believe.
Therefore from a scientific point of view it would be necessary to confirm prophecies in a more reliable manner, or for that matter that God exists at all. I might think that it's extremely unlikely that early civilizations were able to develop such a sophisticated indoctrination method as they appear to have done so but without something more I would hardly consider it evidence of "God." Why would this "God" teach all these religions to fight against each other, as a close look at the Bible and other religious books seems to indicate is happening? Is there other supernatural activities that could prove he exists?
There are certainly plenty of prophets throughout history that claim to do so and some of them are much more convincing than others, including a few recent ones that can be subjected o closer scrutiny; however, if there is strong evidence that is clear cut the best might be ancient megaliths which may raise major doubts about how our early civilization was developed.
I went into this more in 107 Wonders of the Ancient World which reviews the megaliths that were moved in ancient times and experiments that show that it shouldn't have been possible. In the past two hundred years there have been dozens if not hundreds of efforts to move massive megaliths without using modern technology. The vast majority of them were under ten tons, moved successfully with great difficulty; however most of these experiments involved putting the megalith on a sledge and using massive amounts of coordinated manpower to pull the sledge. The majority of the ones in the twentieth century cheated to get the megaliths on to the sledge, but a few did succeed, and efforts in the nineteenth century didn't even have this option, since they were moving them in the desert of Iraq, Egypt or Cambodia. A handful of experiments tried to move megaliths between ten and forty tons, but they cheated on all of these to get them on the sledge, had an enormous problem with broken ropes, and one experiment with a thirteen ton megalith had the sledge fall apart, and, although the sledges moving twenty five or forty ton megaliths didn't fall apart, they were only able to inch it forward a few inches at a time, at best, moving it no more than ten to twenty feet total before giving up and didn't even try anything bigger than forty tons.
If the vast majority of megaliths weren't much if any bigger than ten tons, or at most forty tons, then these experiments might back up the argument that all they needed was enough men and lots of time. Roger Hopkins, who was one of the organizers of a couple of the biggest experiments trying to prove that it could be done with ancient technology, eventually had to admit that he couldn't figure out how they moved it as I explained in Either Pseudo-skeptics can't handle the truth or they just might be involved in a massive cover-up. This article was one of several that speculate about the possibility that there might have been an unknown advanced intelligence influencing our society since it's beginnings. when discussing the ancient megaliths now the most common explanation, besides traditional scientists, that stick with the claim that they moved it with sledges, even though the research they cite actually refutes this, is the claim from Ancient Aliens theorists on the History Channel.
As I reported in previous articles the History Channel explanation has as many, if not more colossal blunders as the skeptics that are in denial about how the megaliths are moved, but at least they admit that it shouldn't be possible, and even though they don't get many of the details right they offer and explanation that might actually be close, if there's good peer review to correct all the colossal blunders form both sides.
In my past articles on this subject I also cited additional evidence that there might be an unknown advanced intelligence influencing our society, including many mystics that can't be explained easily after taking a close look, although the beliefs of their followers are almost always flawed, crop circles, cattle mutilations, and of course UFOs. However the coverage of these subjects has been seriously flawed, with high profile advocates on both sides of each subject ignoring facts that don't suit their belief, and there's rarely any good peer review, except perhaps on the local level where there are almost certainly rational people reviewing it that can't get any media coverage.
But even if high profile debate is is flawed there's an enormous amount of coordination to present this case to the public; which means that either there's something to it; or there's a massive effort to make it seem like there's something to it, and some of this effort is very sophisticated, including the fact that the mainstream media has been providing coverage for the subject for decades, first with a series of shows including "UFOs Then And Now," "The UFO Files," which may have been the most credible series, "UFO Hunters," and for the past ten years "Ancient Aliens."
If there is something to this, perhaps some of the strongest evidence to motive might be Philip Corso's claim that he shared alien technology with corporations, dating back to the forties and fifties. Like all other reporting on this subject, there are flaws with his claims, and as I've reported previously, there's a strong possibility that intentional disclosure of accurate information mixed in with obvious blunders might be part of the cover-up, since most people won't believe it; and most of the people that do believe it will also accept many of the colossal blunders.
To sum up my past theories on this subject, if there was an advanced intelligence influencing our early society, whether it's aliens or not, they must have an undisclosed motive, which might involve using us for a series of research projects big and small. this could include developing advanced medical research and adding to other advanced technology they already have, perhaps sharing it with the leaders of society when, and only when it suits their purposes. If this is the case it could explain incredibly rapid development of technology over the past seventy years picking up the pace dramatically in the past twenty to thirty years.
This could potentially include massive advances to medical technology including heart transplants that have been successful, bionics, and much more. If this is the case, and if they ever plan to disclose it they might offer this as justification for it agreeing to sharing it. Although they shouldn't be counting on that, since if the "aliens," "God," or what ever this unknown advanced intelligence is exists they've been betraying the human race for thousands of years, so if they do want to use us for additional research they might make promises they never intend to keep which is why those involved in the cover-up should begin disclosure immediately, even without permission from their leaders.
If Climate Change is influenced by man, as most credible researchers agree, then it may mean that research into that could be part of what's going on as well. this would mean that, intentional or not some form of Geoengineering is already going on, and there're growing number of scientific reports suggesting that we do this even if we haven't done it intentionally before or recommending more of it if we have. This might be one of the biggest motives for them.
 |
| Could there be pieces of the truth, or something close, buried in absurd satire? |
This probably sounds insane to most rational people, as it should; however, there's little or no doubt that something insane is going on. With the entire political establishment playing a game of planetary chicken with the environment, while simultaneously developing incredible technology it's clear something strange is going on. If they can develop this amazing technology why can't they prevent this political insanity; or to reverse it with all this political insanity, how can they possibly be developing this technology?
If this theory is close then the political insanity is a massive charade designed to distract the majority of the public from the fact that they're being used for the benefit of the elites.
I first went into the connection to an Apocalypse conspiracy theory in 2016 in Yes Virginia There Is A Trump And Clinton Conspiracy; where I started with a rational theory based on strong evidence showing that the media coverage and elections were being rigged by a small percentage of the public, before going into bigger unsolved mysteries and speculating about an even bigger theory about Hillary Clinton having many of the characteristics of the "Whore of Babylon," and Trump having the characteristics of the "Beast." This theory should have fallen apart; but instead the insanity continued to escalate, if anything making this fringe theory more viable.
However, even if it's not true, then there should be no doubt that we need to stop fighting one war after another based on lies; the research showing this is the case isn't from fringe conspiracy theorists, it's from credible researchers.
Whether this theory is true or not we need to protect the environment in the most effective way possible reversing the enormous amount of damage done by oil companies with renewable energy, and conservation by not buying enormous volumes of wasteful things that we don't need. Mike Hudema is constantly tweeting about new technology that can solve large portions of our problem saying "We have the solutions to the climate and economic crisis. Let's implement them." some of his solutions might not be ready for a mass market, but many of them are, especially the simplest ones. However if the most complicated technology is viable then it could be stronger evidence of advanced technology developed with the help of aliens.
And, whether this theory is right or not there's no doubt that we should control the interview process of candidates at the grassroots level ensuring that we get to hear from all candidates, not just the ones that are supported by the oligarchy, that routinely rigs elections against candidates they don't support by simply refusing to give them any coverage ensuring they never get the name recognition they need to get elected.
There should be no doubt that they're rigging media coverage to give candidates they support an overwhelming advantage however, it's not always easy to tell who they're rigging it for until after it's too late. In 2016 it seemed almost certain that they rigged it for Clinton but they may have actually have faked that and rigged it for Trump. Since this election has begun there have been claims that they're trying o rig it for Biden, Kamala Harris, Beto O'Roarke, Pete Buttigieg, or even Elizabeth Warren with some people claiming that she's trying to take progressive votes from Bernie Sanders so that a centrist can win. I can't rule any of these completely out but there's another possibility, assuming this theory is close, and they do want to implement partial solutions before it's too late.
I'm not completely ruling out the possibility that they're rigging it for Bernie Sanders.
This sounds laughable to most Bernie Sanders supporters since they clearly rigged the primaries in 2016 against him; but he's attracting an enormous following anyway, much stronger than any of the other candidates at the grassroots level, and it might be because of the incredibly incompetent manner they're rigging elections against him, which could conceivably be a bizarre form of reverse psychology. He's also raised doubts about himself when he went along with their requests to preserve the duopoly by agreeing to support the Democratic nominee no matter who it is. He also remained silent about the election rigging.
Bernie Sanders supporters routinely say that he's the only one that can reform the system; and judging by the media coverage they appear to be correct; however, that's only because he's the only one the mainstream media gives coverage to, and in some cases, he's demonstrated that he won't call out their cheating, or call for major media reform enabling much more diverse media, nor is he supporting ranked choice voting or trying to break up the duopoly by joining the green Party. He's also gone along with the propaganda about Russia rigging the elections even though it's mainstream media that rigs them with help of the DNC and RNC; and he also gave lukewarm opposition to attempts to overthrow the Venezuela government.
This doesn't mean I don't support him anyway, but on some issues it's clear that he is the lesser of two evils. But on many other issues he's far better than any of the candidates that the media is willing to cover. We need major reform but there's little or no chance that we'll be able to elect someone like Sanderson Beck who I covered in Censored Candidates For President By Mass Media and he isn't perfect either.
No matter who gets elected the most important reforms have to come from the grassroots, which Bernie Sanders is energizing, and many of them call him out when he does cave to the establishment. This has shown even the best candidate available needs to be held accountable, and this should go even after we get major election and media reform, assuming we do, which we'll have to push even if Bernie Sanders or any other president doesn't help us out.
 |
| Absurd Apocalypse hasn't come to the United States yet, but it has come to many other countries and if we continue with this insanity we could bring it here! |
The following are some of my past articles on this subject followed by additional sources for this article:
Hurricane Apocalypse Coming With or Without Fringe Conspiracy Theory
Why so few arrests for Crop Circles makers? Is there microwave evidence?
UFO Hypothesis Far More Credible Than Catholic Claim of A "Miracle Of The Sun"
Spectacular Heart Transplant for Sophia But at What Cost
Who's Controlling Oligarchies Dividing The Market? Aliens?
Do Aliens own Stock in Monsanto, DuPont, or Microsoft? This includes a list of most of my previous articles on this subject.
The following are additional sources for this article including some Biblical verses and more articles showing that they're lying about the justifications for war:
Matthew 24: 6-13 You will hear of wars and rumours of wars; see that you are not alarmed, for this is something that must happen, but the end will not be yet. For nation will fight against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All this is only the beginning of the birthpangs. 'Then you will be handed over to be tortured and put to death; and you will be hated by all nations on account of my name. And then many will fall away; people will betray one another and hate one another. Many false prophets will arise; they will deceive many, and with the increase of lawlessness, love in most people will grow cold; but anyone who stands firm to the end will be saved.
24: 23-4 'If anyone says to you then, "Look, here is the Christ," or "Over here," do not believe it; for false Christs and false prophets will arise and provide great signs and portents, enough to deceive even the elect, if that were possible.
24: 34 In truth I tell you, before this generation has passed away, all these things will have taken place.
LDS Last Days: Wars and Rumors of Wars
Japan demands more proof from U.S. that Iran attacked tankers 06/16/2019 (This article was expired after no more than eight days, this copy was retrieved from the Way back machine) A source close to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said, "These are not definite proof that it's Iran." "Even if it's the United States that makes the assertion, we cannot simply say we believe it," he said. If having expertise sophisticated enough to conduct the attack could be a reason to conclude that the attacker was Iran, "That would apply to the United States and Israel as well," said a source at the Foreign Ministry.
A US war with Iran looms. Don’t for one second think that it is justified 06/19/2019
How the Trump administration is using 9/11 to build a case for war with Iran 06/14/2019 For months, President Donald Trump and some of his top officials have claimed Iran and al-Qaeda, the terrorist group that launched the 9/11 terror attacks, are closely linked. That’s been a common refrain despite evidence showing their ties aren’t strong at all. In fact, even al-Qaeda’s own documents detail the weak connection between the two.
The Exceptionally American Historical Amnesia Behind Pompeo’s Claim of ‘40 Years of Unprovoked Iranian Aggression’ 06/20/2019
Veteran Navy Officer Exposes Flaws in US Version of Iran Oil Tanker Narrative 06/20/2019
Strait of Hormuz: US confirms drone shot down by Iran 06/20/2019
After Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor Warns of False Flag to Start War with Iran, US Blames Iran for Attacks 06/18/2019
Remember the Vincennes? The US’s Long History of Provoking Iran 06/17/2019
Operation Northwoods
Iran Has Ties to Al Qaeda, Trump Officials Tell Skeptical Congress 06/19/2019
U.S. Intelligence Undercuts Trump’s Case on Iran-al Qaeda Links 06/24/2019
Pompeo brags about the CIA & State Dept’s MO: We lied, we cheated, we stole. April 2019
Japan requests proof of Iran involvement in tanker attack 06/16/2019
Japan Demands More Proof From The U.S. That Iran Attacked Tankers 06/19/2019
Germany joins chorus casting doubt on Trump administration claim that Iran was behind attack on oil tankers 06/14/2019 "Whether it's an attempt to remove Venezuela's democratic government or regime change in Iran, the USA is causing global instability in furtherance of its imperial interests. We must reject the lies being used by the Trump admin to gain public support for their disastrous plans," Chris Williamson, a member of the British parliament with the UK's Labour Party, said in a statement.
Trump says US was 'cocked and loaded' to strike Iran before he pulled back 06/21/2019 "We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights (sic) when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General," Trump tweeted. "10 minutes before the strike I stopped it."
Dan Kovalik’s “The Plot to Attack Iran:” a Tool to Combat Washington’s Middle East Wars 10/03/2018
Iran Gave U.S. Help On Al Qaeda After 9/11 10/07/2008
Wikipedia: Reactions to the September 11 attacks "Iran: Iranian president Mohamed Khatami[52][53][54] and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei condemned and denounced the attacks and the terrorists who carried them out. Iranians who gathered for a soccer match in Tehran two days after the 9/11 attacks observed a moment of silence. There was also a candlelight vigil. Huge crowds attended candlelit vigils in Iran, and 60,000 spectators observed a minute's silence at Tehran's soccer stadium.[55][56] On Tuesday, September 25, in 2001, Iran's fifth president, Mohammad Khatami meeting British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, said: "Iran fully understands the feelings of the Americans about the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington on September 11." He said although the American administrations had been at best indifferent about terrorist operations in Iran (since 1979), the Iranians instead felt differently and had expressed their sympathetic feelings with bereaved Americans in the tragic incidents in the two cities." He also stated that "Nations should not be punished in place of terrorists." [57] According to Radio Farda's website, in 2011, on the anniversary of the attacks, United States Department of State, published a post at its blog, in which the Department thanked Iranian people for their sympathy and stated that they would never forget Iranian people's kindness on those harsh days. This piece of news at Radio Farda's website also states that after the attacks' news was released, some Iranian citizens gathered in front of the Embassy of Switzerland in Tehran, which serves as the protecting power of the United States in Iran, to express their sympathy and some of them lit candles as a symbol of mourning."
Iranian official: We protected al-Qaeda terrorists before 9/11 06/09/2018
Saudi-owned Al-Arabiya under fire for claiming Iran 'confessed' to 9/11 06/11/2018 But in the original 45-minute interview, Larijani begins by stating "in the commission report it says.." before going into detail about the four official US reports on 9/11, two of which mention Iran. Larijani was in fact detailing the accusations against Iran presented in the Commission Report - and stressed the commission had concluded the Islamic Republic had no involvement in the attack.
Wikipedia: 2009–11 detention of American hikers by Iran
Wikipedia: 1953 Iranian coup d'état
64 Years Later, CIA Finally Releases Details of Iranian Coup 06/20/2017
To what extent was the US involved with the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988)? 06/02/2008 U.S. support for Iraq blossomed throughout the war. ..... The United States had sold Iran weapons via Israel, including thousands of sophisticated tube-launched optical-tracking wire-guided (TOW) antitank missiles and Homing-All-The-Way-Killer (HAWK) surface-to-air missiles, in a bid to get Iran to release American hostages held by Iran's Lebanese ally, Hezbollah.
I was right about Vietnam. I was right about Iraq. I will do everything in my power to prevent a war with Iran. I apologize to no one. 05/24/2019
Wikipedia: Iran–Iraq War
Who has invaded the most countries in history? April 2016 Probably Britain, but most of that was before World War II
These are all the countries the USA has invaded, in one map 08/23/2017
These are the only 3 countries America hasn't invaded 08/31/2016
US-funded police linked to illegal executions in El Salvador May 2017
Terrorism with a “Human Face”: The History of America’s Death Squads 07/14/2016
Iran refrained from targeting US plane with 35 on board flying beside downed drone – commander 06/21/2019
The US isn't interested in dialogue with Iran, France says 06/26/2019
NY Times admits it sends stories to US government for approval before publication 06/24/2019
U.S. Escalates Online Attacks on Russia’s Power Grid 06/15/2019
Christian Theologians Prepare for Extraterrestrial Life 06/12/2008
US and Israel fabricating lies to provoke war with Iran: Ex-CIA officer 05/12/2019
