Watch the former author of Florida school security speak out on Parkland


Ken O'Keefe Exposes US Wars of Aggression.

The death of the mediawhores



Sooner or later they eat their own. As the leftists move against every single institution that defines our nation, they have now set their sights on Starbucks. Most have heard about employees at a Starbucks asking 2 men to leave if they weren't going to make a purchase. Apparently they were there for hours and even used the restroom while they sat in the coffee shop. When they were asked to leave, they refused. An employee then called police who also asked that the men leave. They still refused. Then they were arrested for loitering. Of course, they then claimed they were asked to leave because they were black.

Now the mediawhores have all chimed in and all agree Starbucks is racist. Over 8000 Starbucks will be closed for a day and employees will have to undergo sensitivity training. As an aftereffect, there are now examples of black people coming into Starbucks and demanding free coffee because Starbucks is racist.

Back in 1969, I participated in a civil rights demonstration in Milwaukee. There were police sharpshooters on the roof of an adjacent building at the ready. Fortunately, no one was injured. Racism was defined then as a lack of job opportunities, housing and educational opportunities. It was real and it was wrong. What is was not, was an opportunity to loiter in a business or be deprived of free coffee. The whole reason the latter has become an issue is, for the most part, the real problems of racism are gone, thanks to the dedication and courage of those who came before. These issues are an embarrassment and have no place in real civil rights problems.

Back to Starbucks ----- suppose there weren't 2 black men in the Starbucks. Suppose there were 50. Suppose they took up all of the seating and purchased nothing. Is it still racist to ask them to make a purchase or leave? Let me tell you what's going to happen. One by one, Starbucks, in predominately black areas, are going to move or close altogether. It's still business and it's tough enough to make a profit without all of this added crap.

Bruce                          New World Order News

A new video shows a black man walking into Starbucks, dropping the word “racist” and immediately being given a free coffee.
The stunt was in response to news that Starbucks is set to close 8,000 stores for an afternoon for race-bias training.
Bryan Sharpe, who goes by “Hotep Jesus” on Twitter, recorded himself walking into a Starbucks and telling a barista, “I heard ya’ll was racist, so I came to get my free coffee.”
Hotep Jesus® @VibeHi
Starbucks is racist

“I heard ya’ll don’t like black people, so I came to get my Starbucks reparations voucher,” adds Sharpe and the girl, who is white, immediately complies.
“Is that a real thing?” she says. “I mean, I’ll give it to you, I saw that on my Twitter last night and I was like, what the f**k!”

Sharpe gets his free coffee and leaves the store.
“Black privilege gets me free coffee. I love racism. Only in America,” he subsequently tweeted.

Starbucks is racist …
Hotep Jesus  [🧠] @VibeHi
Black privilege gets me free coffee.

I love racism.

Only in America. [🇺🇸]

Other users dubbed the video the #StarbucksChallenge, suggesting that more people may try to copy Sharpe’s stunt in the coming days.
Starbucks will close 8,000 stores on May 29 so 175,000 employees can undergo “racial tolerance training”.

The decision was made in response to an incident in Philadelphia when two black men entered a Starbucks and asked to use a bathroom. When an employee told them it was only for paying customers, the men sat in the store without ordering. The manager then called the police and the men were arrested.

Back in 2015, Starbucks announced it was launch a nationwide program where baristas would write the words “race together” on Starbucks cups to “start a conversation about race”.
The initiative was a complete failure and became the laughing stock of the Internet.


YouTube bans 28 countries from watching a video exposing Israel’s violence against protesters

There is one thing Youtube has in common with the government of Israel and that is neither one likes freedom of speech very much. Kevin Alfred Strom wrote “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” So here we have the government of Israel and Youtube engaging in massive censorship on anything that paints Israel in an unflattering light. This time Abbey Martin has exposed the most recent example of Israeli military brutality against unarmed Palestinian demonstrators, but there is so much more.

When is the last time you have heard anything from the mediawhores on: The attack on the USS Liberty in 1967. The theft of hydrogen bomb technology by Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard. The declaration by former PM Ariel Sharon that Israel dictates policy to the U.S. The failure of Israel to sign the Nuclear non proliferation Treaty. The failure of the Israeli government to officially draw their borders. The policy of the Israeli government to take land from others resulting in more than a doubling of the territory authorized in 1947 by the U.N.?

A couple of days ago I posted an article written by former Deputy of the Treasury, Paul Craig Roberts, drawing the conclusion that we live in a police state. I would add that, as part of the American empire, we can include those nations we control.

Bruce                 New World Order News

YouTube has blocked 28 countries from watching a video of two journalists exposing the Israeli occupation. Presenter of Empire Files Abby Martin interviewed author Max Blumenthal, who also criticised violence from Israel’s military against Palestinian protestors. The programme was broadcast on Latin American network teleSUR English.

YouTube, owned by Google, says that the internet platform banned the video in 28 countries because it violates “local laws”. Most of the countries YouTube has blocked from seeing the video are European. Elsewhere, YouTube has added a warning to the video and blocked all interactive features:
In response to user reports, we have disabled some features, such as comments, sharing, and suggested videos, because this video contains content that may be inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.

“Nothing was even remotely illegal”
But Blumenthal, author of The 51 Day War: Ruin and Resistance in Gaza, said:
YouTube has claimed that it removed my interview on Israel-Palestine with Abby Martin to comply with laws in 28 countries. However, nothing I did or said in the discussion was even remotely illegal, even in countries with the strictest hate crime laws. My comments were based entirely on my extensive journalistic experience in the region and my analysis was clinical in nature. At no point did I denigrate anyone based on their faith or ethnicity.
The journalist said his motivations were a “strong opposition to Israel’s systemic discrimination against Palestinians” and “dedication to equal rights for all”.

Shining a light on recent acts by Israel’s military
The Empire Files video, uploaded in November 2015, draws attention to Israel’s policies on Palestinian demonstrations.
On 30 March 2018, Israel’s armed forces shot at protesting Palestinians in Gaza. At least 17 died and hundreds more were injured.
In the banned video, Blumenthal speaks to host Abby Martin about an alleged ‘shoot to cripple’ policy:
Soldiers were cracking down on demonstrations with live fire to the legs.

It appears Israel is continuing such behaviour in 2018. After the 30 March shootings, Israel’s military tweeted:
everything was accurate and measured, and we know where every bullet landed
The tweet has since disappeared.

James Wright@wrightismight
Israel said that killing and crippling Palestinian protestors on 31st March was "accurate and measured, we know where every bullet landed". Now YouTube has banned an @EmpireFiles video that spotlights Israel's alleged 'shoot to cripple' policy against Palestinian demonstators:

In the video, Blumenthal also says Israel has used:
‘dum dum bullets’, which are expanding rounds. So, they’ll bounce around inside your limbs and expand, and really cripple you for life.
When challenged by Vice in 2013, a spokesperson for Israel’s military did not deny using such bullets, which are illegal under the Hague Declaration.

‘Political decision’
Now, YouTube has censored the video. Blumenthal branded YouTube’s decision a “political one” and “likely made under pressure from powerful pro-Israel interests”. Since last year, the pro-Israel Anti-Defamation League has been a select contributing member of YouTube’s Trusted Flagger program. The Anti-Defamation League conflates opposition to Israeli violence with ‘opposition to Israel’s right to exist’. Blumenthal believesthat the Anti-Defamation League is likely the root of the censorship of his interview with Martin.

He continued:
The trend of censoring material that presents Israel in a less than favorable light has only intensified as establishment attacks on critical voices expands. This latest episode confirms my view that the pro-Israel lobby and its willing accomplices in Silicon Valley present one of the greatest threats to free speech in the West

As well as YouTube, Facebook has blocked many accounts of Palestinian activists. Israeli officials have lauded how willing Facebook is when Israel demands censorship, saying Facebook granted 95% of requests in four months.


Bombshell IG report. Guess what? They say we are ruled by crooks.

The subject article covers an Inspector General report revealing what we already know. The FBI is riddled with corruption and criminal behavior. There has been no legitimate investigation of Hillary Clinton and any attempts to do so has met with enormous resistance from those in charge of such investigations. The article names individuals committing crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice.

So where is this going? Give up? It's going nowhere. It never goes anywhere. Our government is hopelessly infected with criminal behavior and their main purpose is self preservation. As has been the case in the past, in order to distract people from their behavior, they start wars and demand that we pay for them. Don't look for anything positive coming out of these non-stop investigations. The only solution for us is, they have to go – all of them.

Bruce                               New World Order News

The Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Dept. of Justice, has released a stunning new report that exposes the criminality and corruption of the FBI. Read the full report at this link.

The investigative report concludes that Andrew McCabe — who spearheaded the “deep state” operation to cover up the crimes of Hillary Clinton while falsely accusing President Trump of colluding with “the Russians” — lied under oath and violated FBI Offense Codes 2.5 and 2.6. Labeled “misconduct” in the report, McCabe’s behavior may subject him to criminal indictment.
Here are the most significant findings of the report, as detailed by The Gateway Pundit, which has conducted a detailed analysis (see below). To follow continuing coverage of the crimes of James Comey, Hillary Clinton and the FBI, read, and

Via The Gateway Pundit:
1. In the second paragraph of the introduction of the IG’s report, now infamous cheater and Peter Strzok mistress, and McCabe’s former Special Counsel, Lisa Page, is implicated as being involved in McCabe’s crimes. (p.1)

2. Clinton Foundation was under investigation in 2016 but the FBI decided not to release this information to the public. This information was finally leaked just before the election to the Wall Street Journal and confirmed in a second leak instigated by McCabe. (p. 1)

3. In McCabe’s leak to the WSJ, he refutes that he was being impartial to Clinton due to his connections from his wife’s State Senate run. He then leaked that the Justice Department tried to shut down Clinton Foundation investigation but by doing this confirmed to the public in his leak that the investigation was in place. (p. 1)

4. The FBI hid the Clinton Foundation investigation from the public and it was not confirmed until the McCabe leak on October 30th, 2016.  The FBI decided that it was in the public interest not to share this information with Americans before the 2016 election.  The reasonableness of the decision to not report to the public the Clinton Foundation investigation is not addressed by the IG. (p. 3)

5. McCabe told Comey he didn’t know who leaked and therefore Comey claims he didn’t know about McCabe’s leak. (p. 2)

6. McCabe lied numerous times to either investigators or inspectors and said he didn’t know why Lisa Page leaked information to the Wall Street Journal. He even lied and said that he was outside of Washington D.C when the leak occurred which was not true. (p. 2)

7. When confronted with lying to investigators, McCabe lied and denied previously lying to investigators. (p. 2)

8. IG Report redacts an individual’s name who discussed the Clinton Foundation investigation with James Comey, McCabe and the Special Counsel (presumably Lisa Page). (p. 7)

9. McCabe states that leaking to the WSJ was the only time in his career “where he had authorized the disclosure to the media of a one-on-one discussion that he had with a member of the Department’s leadership.” (p. 9) [Note this leaves open the possibility of other leaks.]

10. FBI Deputy Assistant Director (Peter Strzok) texted Page about a WSJ article and they noted that they were not upset about McCabe throwing Justice Department official under the bus. That day the DOJ was noted in an article in the WSJ as criticizing Comey for informing Congress of the Clinton Foundation investigation. (p. 10) [Note how the FBI and DOJ only communicate through leaks…]

11. A meeting was held on October 31st, 2016 where Comey reportedly stated “Need to figure out how to get our folks to understand why leaks hurt our organization”. (p. 11)

12. McCabe stated that he and Comey discussed on October 31st, 2016, the October 30th WSJ leak and says that he told Comey he authorized it. Comey states that he does not recall McCabe telling him that McCabe had authorized the call.

13. McCabe stated that many FBI officials knew he had authorized the October 30th leak to the WSJ.  “However, none of the potential witnesses identified by McCabe (FBI-GC, Comey’s Chief of Staff, The Counterintelligence Assistant Director (“AD-CI”), and McCabe’s then-Chief of Staff ) corroborated this or recalled knowing at the time, or even now, that McCabe had authorized the disclosure.” (pp. 13-14)

14. McCabe refused to sign an inspector’s notes about his statements to the inspector, specifically noting that he [McCabe] did not know who leaked the information in the WSJ October 30th, 2016, report.

15. McCabe stated to an IG employee under oath that he did not know who authorized October 30th WSJ leak and then a couple days later called them back to correct what he said. (pp. 19 and 20)

1. The tone of the memo chastises McCabe for leaking that the Clinton Foundation investigation was open, not to challenge the rationale for not sharing this investigation with the public, but rather criticizes McCabe for outing the Justice Department official trying to shut down the investigation. Although perhaps it may not be customary to challenge the Departments’ decisions, due to subject in the investigation [the Clinton Foundation], by not releasing the information about the investigation the FBI and DOJ prevented pertinent information from being reported to the American public significant to the election. This information was not released until October 30th in a leak to the WSJ.

2. Many of the FBI and DOJ characters in the report appear corrupt, coordinated and conspiring to assist with the cover up of the Clinton Foundation investigation and in leaking information to the press.

3. The report includes little mention of Anthony Weiner’s laptop emails other than to mention that a meeting was scheduled to get a search warrant to request the emails on October 27th, 2016.  The emails were the suspected cause for Comey’s email to Congress on October 28th, 2016, announcing that the Hillary email scandal was being reopened.  However, per text messages between Strzok and Page, the FBI knew about the emails in September 2016 and had sent a team to New York to review the emails at that time.  [The Weiner emails may be what the Democrats are most fearful of being released to the public.]

4. McCabe [and others] clearly broke laws and FBI policies but no trial date is set as of today. However, the IG is drafting a letter to the FBI recommending actions to be taken.
There are numerous contradictions between FBI employees and each other and with DOJ employees. The FISA Court report on FISA abuses stated that James Clapper’s NSA had an institutional “lack of candor”. It is clear from this report that the FBI and DOJ have the same lack of candor.



When Jesus was brought before Pontius Pilate, Pilate rhetorically asked “What is Truth?”. In his case he was trying to blur the line between a lie and the truth. In reality there is only one truth. It is not a matter of opinion, no matter how much a leader or a government attempts to change a lie into their version of “truth”.

In 2018 America, we are continually and constantly bombarded with government “truth”. Then, when this is broadcast to the population, the mediawhores chime in with their “truth”. It has our heads spinning. Trying to separate their “truth” from reality is an exhausting process. Let me make this suggestion. Anything coming from our government masters or the mediawhores is probably a lie. Think of it this way. If you know someone who constantly lies, you have a tendency to dismiss anything they might say. The same principle applies to government.

The subject article authored by former under Secretary of the Treasury, Paul Craig Roberts, laments the lack of truth in our society today. Even though there may be many who choose to believe anything coming from our government masters, reality will come crashing through sooner or later. Then what?

Bruce               New World Order News

I wonder how many people, not just Americans but those in other countries, have come to the conclusion that the United States today is a less free and less aware society than the societies in the dystopian novels of the 20th century or in movies such as The Matrix and V for Vendetta. Just as people in the dystopian novels had no idea of their real situation, few Americans do either.

What are we to make of the extraordinary war crimes committed by the United States in the 21st century that have destroyed in whole or part seven countries, resulting in millions of dead, maimed, orphaned, and displaced peoples? Consider, for example, the latest Washington war crime, the illegal attack on Syria. Instead of protesting this illegality, the American media egged it on, cheering impending death and destruction.

During the entirety of the 21st century, Israel, Washington’s only ally—as contrasted with the European, Canadian, Australian, and Japanese vassal states of Washington’s empire—has continued with Washington’s support, protection, and encouragement the genocide of the Palestinian people. Essentially, all that is left of Palestine is a getto concentration camp known as Gaza which is routinely bombed by Israel using weapons and money supplied by Washington. When a bombing of Gaza is announced, God’s Chosen People take their lawn chairs and picnics up on a hill overlooking Gaza and applaud as the Israeli military murders women and children. This is America’s only ally.

The crimes committed by the US and Israel are horrific, but meet with little opposition. In contrast, an alleged attack in which 70 Syrians are alleged to have died sets in motion the wheels of war. It makes no sense whatsoever. Israel routinely bombs Syrian targets, killing Syrians, and the US arms and supports the “rebels” that the Obama regime sent to overthrow Assad, resulting in large numbers of dead Syrians. Why all of a sudden do 70 Syrians matter to Washington?

According to the Washington authorities, or to the presstitutes’ reports of their statements, two or three alleged Syrian chemical weapons facilities were destroyed by Washington’s missile attack. Think about this for a minute. If Washington bombed or sent missiles into chemical weapons facilities, a vast cloud of lethal gas would have been released. The civilian casualties would be many times higher than the claimed 70 victims of Assad’s alleged and unsubstantiated chemical attack used as the pretext for the Trump regime’s war crime against Syria. There is no evidence whatsoever of these casualties.
Had there been casualties, Washington’s attack would obviously be a far greater crime than the chemical attack that Washington used as cover for its own crime. Yet the American presstitutes are crowing over the lesson that America has taught Syria and Russia. Apparently, the American media consists of such immoral or moronic hirelings that the presstitutes are unable to comprehend that an attack by Washington on Syrian chemical weapons plants, if such actually existed, is the equivalent of an attack on Syria with chemical weapons.

As I wrote yesterday, when I was a Wall Street Journal editor, if Washington had just announced that it had bombed the chemical weapons facilities of another country in punishment for that country’s alleged use of a chemical weapon, the Journal’s reporters were sufficiently intelligent to ask where are the victims of Washington’s chemical attack on that country? Are there thousands of dead people from the chemical gas released by Washington’s attack? Are the hospitals of the country over-filed with the injured and dying?

If a reporter had brought to us a story that was nothing but a Washington press release claiming obviously impossible happenings, we would have told him to go look again and ask the obvious questions. Today the NY Times and Washington Post put the unsubstantiated report on the front page.

Today reporters no longer have to check sources, because there is no longer journalism in America. When the Clinton regime in compliance with the Deep State that made the Clintons super-rich permitted 90% of the independent and diverse US media to be concentrated in the hands of six political companies, that was the end of journalism in America. All we have now is a propaganda ministry that lies for a living. Anyone in American journalism who tells the truth is either immediately fired or in the case of Tucker Carlson at Fox News is set upon by outside presstitutes in an effort to force Fox to replace him. I wonder how long before some woman pops up and claims Tucker Carlson sexually harrassed her.

As far as I can tell, the United States is now a police state in which all information is controlled and the population is trained to believe the propagana or be accused of lack of patriotism and consorting with terrorists and Russians.



Having no authorization from Congress, the UN or NATO and no evidence of any gas attack, President Trump joined an ever increasing list of warmongers that have held the highest office in our land. We, the people, on the other hand, have absolutely no say in the march towards Armageddon. We've been here before. No matter who is in charge, we are peppered with a non-stop barrage of lies leading to killing innocent people in nations that have done nothing to us.

Remember the Gulf of Tonkin incident? You remember. That is when Lyndon Johnson told a bald faced lie in order to get us into Vietnam leading to the death of over 56,000 U.S. military personnel and 2 million civilians. The there was the invasion of Panama, the invasion of Grenada, the bombing of Serbia into the stone age, the non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the total destruction of Libya and the repeated attacks on Syria based on absolutely nothing. Thanks to U.S. leaders who more appropriately belong in straight jackets rather than in leadership, we are moving closer and closer to the war to end all wars.

So now Russia has promised “consequences”. The Russian leadership has traditionally practiced “Chess” rather than the “Checkers” philosophy practiced by our leaders. So when the insaniacs finally get the war they so desperately desire, who will help us? Maybe nobody. Our leaders have spent the last 50 year alienating scores of nations and peoples around the world. Our missile and bombing diplomacy have exposed us as an international bully. So the world waits. Sadly, here in the U.S., more people are following the NBA playoffs, than the march towards war. I can assure you that this is not the case in Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and maybe, many others. I'm not sure if we can win this next war, but I am sure everyone on earth will lose.

Bruce                         New World Order News




It appears that President Trump has had 2nd thoughts about starting World War 3, but tomorrow is another day. So, no reason to think peace is at hand. The problem is him and the problem is them. Our government masters have shown they have a bloodlust for war. Of course, they will require you to pay for it and send your children and loved ones to die for it. Whether it's Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Serbia, Yemen, Sudan, North Korea or Syria, they love war and they really don't care where they have you fight it. So how do we stop the madness?

You may not like the answer. They have to go ---- all of them. We have tried elections. They lie and they also cheat in the elections. We have tried petitions. They ignore them. We have tried calling. They don't talk to us and they ignore us. We have tried town hall meetings. They control the agenda and they ignore us. We have tried emails. They give us programmed responses and they ignore us.

We only have to look at the fall of the Soviet Union. When the Soviet people had enough of the lies, the wars, the poverty and the broken promises, they took to the streets --- by the millions. Yeltsin stood on a tank and told those in control that they all had to go with those millions backing him up. After a number of days and a failed attempt to kidnap Gorbachev, they left--- all of them. New elections were called and the Communists were forbidden to participate. Short of violence, this is our only answer. If we continue to do nothing (as I fear we will) sooner or later they will get their war and millions, possibly billions, will die.

Bruce                                        New World Order News


President Trump paused on a Syrian airstrike today saying he never promised an attack in the first place.
President Trump tweeted this out Thursday morning.

POTUS TRUMP: Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all! In any event, the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS. Where is our “Thank you America?”
Donald J. Trump

Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all! In any event, the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS. Where is our “Thank you America?”
6:15 AM - Apr 12, 2018


The world has grown tired of the nonstop devastation caused by Western Imperialism in the Middle East. US citizens, citizens of other NATO countries, China, Russia, Iran and especially the countries in the Middle East that have been invaded are tired of the Military Industrial Complex’s warmongering. Many people have pointed out the fact that another Middle Eastern war provoked by the US could spark World War Three. I believe it could spark other significant events as well, including a 2nd American Revolution.

Despite the mainstream media’s attempts to drum up support for any and all new wars, the anti-war movement is becoming more united and stronger than ever before.

There have been anti-war movements throughout the entirety of American history. However, we saw a monumental uprising against war during the 60’s and 70’s when the Vietnam war was taking place. This movement was unique for the US because of its sheer size and scope. It set the stage for the anti-authoritarian/anti-war movements that would come in response to the United States’ involvement in the Middle East.
The anti-war movement in response to the invasion of Iraq after 9/11 might be one of the most significant rebukes of imperial power that we have ever seen. To explain why, here is Noam Chomsky in an interview from 2003:

“The [peace] demonstrations were another indication of a quite remarkable phenomenon. There is around the world and in the United States opposition to the coming war that is at a level that is completely unprecedented in US or European history both in scope and the parts of the population it draws on. There’s never been a time that I can think of when there’s been such massive opposition to a war before it was even started.”

I encourage to read the entire transcript because it is quite fascinating. Chomsky’s statements indicate that the masses are finally starting to catch on to the schemes of the war profiteers. Although these schemes have been known by a few for a very long time, – including the ex-Marine and author of “War is a Racket”, Smedley Butler – the masses have usually fallen into the traps of war propaganda.

The tide is beginning to turn. For millennia, the average citizen was tricked into fighting wars that would only benefit the rich and powerful. However, the internet has now decentralized the flow of information, and people are being exposed to the truth like never before. No matter what you think of their political ideology, people like Ron Paul, Sargon of Akkad, Michael Krieger, Jimmy Dore, Caitlin Johnstone, Kyle Kulinski and many others are now telling the truth about these unjust wars.

CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, New York Times, the Washington Post and all the other lying mainstream outlets are still trying to sell the elite’s wars. But even the mainstream media is beginning to crack. Look at this phenomenal piece that Tucker Carlson did in response to the establishment’s calls for war in Syria:

People from all over the political spectrum are waking up and they are furious. They’re furious that banks, oil companies, weapons manufacturers and many other powerful special interest groups are held above the average citizen. They’re furious that the rent-seeking elites are destroying the middle class. I have a strong feeling that another war in the Middle East would trigger an outrage directed toward the ruling class like we have not seen in this country since the American Revolution.

If the elites ignore the masses and go to war anyway, expect major backlash. Expect a massive number of anti-establishment candidates to run for office at the very least. Expect extremely large demonstrations that voice the displeasure with the current system. If things deteriorate enough, expect these citizens to forcefully overthrow the establishment. Expect this movement not to get nearly the media attention that the establishment-backed anti-gun movement got. As Gil Scott-Heron said, the revolution will not be televised.

We are approaching a critical juncture in human history. The internet has empowered the individual like never before. Governments must be aware of this fact and not attempt to do anything that will spark too much outrage (e.g. another Middle East war). Anything is possible in these highly unpredictable times, but I believe the probability of an American Revolution is at its highest point since the mid 1700’s.



I have posted 2 articles warning about potential Chinese participation in the possible upcoming war in Syria. The facts are rather sketchy and may not be entirely true, however it may be impossible to put “the genie” back in the bottle once an attack takes place.

Look at it from the view of potential enemies. Over the past 30 years, the U.S. has launched a number of wars in the middle east and Africa. The U.S. still has military forces in over 100 nations with no sign this will end. Then there is the Project for A New American Century, where several neo-cons bragged, in writing about their desire to start wars with several nations and take them over. This view was actually the genesis of “American Exceptionalism”. So what if you were China? What if you were Russia? What if you were Iran or many other nations? You might feel that if one of these nations were attacked, you may just want to join in to stop the “American Exceptionalism” before it comes to your doorstep.

Bruce                              New World Order News

Chinese military ships in the Mediterranean Sea are ordered to join the Russian Navy in the case of a massive attack on Syria, sources say.
Rseau International portal, citing French sources has said that Chinese warships in the Mediterranean have been ordered to join the Russian Navy in the case of “massive bombardment” of Syria.

All Chinese warships that are located in the Mediterranean sea at the moment would move towards Syrian Tartus port. Thus, China will take part in repelling the coalition’s aggression.

Experts also say that the allies of Syria took seriously the possible strike of the United States. Now all forces are mobilized. So, Iran brought its forces to full combat readiness. Earlier, Russia’s General Staff also said that the US strike would be repelled in the event of a threat.

Chairman of the CCRF Commission on Harmonization of Interethnic and Interreligious Relations Iosif Diskin has said that the fact that China decided to send it’s ships to Tartus shows the desire of the international community for guarantees of security, in the world where US behaves more unpredictable every day

n 2012, media outlets in the Middle East reported the possibility of a war game involving Iran, Russia, China and Syria in the Mediterranean. It would be one of the largest war games ever planned, involving 90,000 troops, 400 aircraft, 1,000 tanks and hundreds of rockets.
While the war game did not materialize at that time, it was a signal to the US and other Western nations that the four Eurasian powers were drawing a line in the sand – and that line seemed to be Syria.
The dailyReport
Washington politicians tend to project their own fears, desires, and lack of understanding on to others, assuming they will react according to the assumptions held in the Beltway. However, the inability for self-reflection and to stand in others’ shoes so as to understand their perspectives is dangerous – and risks misperception, miscalculation, and escalation of limited military conflict into a larger war.

What leaders in Washington don’t realize is that the United States is not the only country with red lines. By disregarding and violating other states’ legitimate security interests, be it Russia or China, President Donald Trump risks opening the Pandora’s box of drawing in additional great powers to defend the Syrian government from terrorists and regime change.

China has key interests in Syria
So what’s at stake for China in Syria?
As widely reported, Chinese troops are already on the ground in Syria to fight thousands of Uyghur militants, whether in ISIS or the Chinese al-Qaeda. Jihadists launched an attack on the Chinese Embassy in Kyrgyzstan in 2016, and Beijing fears that they plan on further attacking China’s territory and its citizens and assets abroad.

If the Syrian government is toppled by US military strikes and the armed opposition consisting of various jihadist groups, including Uyghurs, are allowed a permanent safe haven in Syria, they will continue to be trained and equipped as a more professional fighting force to attack China and partition Xinjiang, similar to the current partitioning of Syria.

It is well known that China’s core interests are sovereignty, territorial integrity, continued economic development and the survival of the Communist Party of China (CPC). The US providing a safe haven in Syria for a Chinese al-Qaeda to attack China, similar to Afghanistan providing a safe haven for al-Qaeda to attack the US on September 11, 2001, may provoke the Chinese dragon to bring its full military force to bear against this threat.

In addition to protecting its territory from attacks, China also needs energy resources from the Middle East and market access. This sustains the continued rising living standards that undergird the CPC’s legitimacy and survival. As such, when the US military consistently threatens to arm Uyghur militants to destabilize Xinjiang and muses about mining waters around China’s ports to cut off its trade and energy supply, it fuels the CPC’s distrust of Washington’s intentions for regime change.

For example, in a February 2014 article in the US Naval Institute’s Proceedings magazine titled “Deterring the Dragon,” a retired naval commander proposed laying offensive underwater mines along China’s coast to close main ports and destroying its maritime lines of communication. He also recommended sending special operations forces to arm China’s restive minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet.

In a 2015 War on the Rocks article titled “The economics of war with China: This will hurt you more than it hurts me,” a US Army colonel also recommended an offensive mining campaign to bring China’s economy to a halt. He argued that as seven of the top 10 container ports in the world were Chinese, the country was highly vulnerable to energy and trade blockades.

With the Pentagon’s new National Defense Strategy actively planning for war with China and Russia and a barrage of military writings on how to cut off China’s energy supply, one wonders how Chinese defense planners are perceiving US intentions. Most important, how will China respond?
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

The Chinese and Russian militaries seem to be signaling to the US that neither country would stand alone in the event of an attack – whether in East Asia or the Mediterranean. Over the past years, both have conducted joint military exercises in the Mediterranean, Baltic and South China seas.

In 2001 they also signed a “friendship pact” on mutual assistance, which is not a mutual defense treaty although some have surmised that Article 9 could be interpreted as such. However, with the US naming China, Russia, Iran and North Korea as the new axis of evil in its latest National Security Strategy,  inflicting sanctions on Russia and threatening a trade war on China, this could push Beijing and Moscow toward a closer alignment.

As discussed in The National Interest by US Naval War College professor Lyle Goldstein, there exists a plausible scenario of a Sino-Russian alliance and simultaneous armed conflict against the US. He noted that while at present Beijing strategists assess that “US strategic squeezing and containment has not yet reached a level that it is imperative for the two countries to react by forming an alliance,” the statement implies that if Washington were to ramp up the pressure, this scenario would materialize.

Given that Moscow and Beijing signed a defense pact in 1950, the establishment of a new version is plausible. Moreover, if China does not assist Russia when it is attacked in the Mediterranean, it may not be able to count on Russia’s help in East Asia.

Nonetheless, Washington will likely discount this scenario and envisage a quick “shock and awe” victory against the Syrian government, in what The Diplomat’s Franz-Stefan Gady coins as a “war gap” pathology – the failure to understand the true nature of military conflict.

Gady noted a unique American war experience that differs from those of Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa, where despite the US government waging continuous war since 2001, no American civilian and military infrastructure on US territory has been attacked in almost two decades of warfare. As such, Americans have a more sanitary understanding of war, which denotes conflict in a faraway country where only American troops and foreign combatants and civilians are killed.

Moreover, high-tech weaponry and “smart” bombs have dehumanized war and turned it into a video-game-like experience, “in which terms such a ‘surgical strikes’ or ‘collateral damage’ camouflage the actual brutality and consequences of aerial attacks.” War thus becomes a more manageable solution than other non-military options for US leaders, as they are geographically far removed, lack understanding of the complexity and horrors of war when it’s in one’s territory, and turn war into a more scientific, clean, and enlightened endeavor.

However, this experience is not shared by others with recent memories of mass-scale war horrors and conflict in their own territories, and they may react to military threats in a powerful way.

As security analyst Nafeez Ahmed predicted in October 2014, Russia would enter the Syrian war if Western powers shifted the mission from countering ISIS to regime change, and replacing President Bashar al-Assad with an Islamist regime to export more terror and radicalize Muslims in Chechnya.
It is to be hoped that Ahmed’s assessment is wrong in 2018, but before Trump and his advisers order an attack on Syria, they need to consider the wild card – that behind the Lion of Damascus may stand not only the Russian bear, but perhaps a hidden Chinese dragon – and that they risk escalating their “surgical strikes” into a full-scale great-powers war in the Mediterranean


I have posted some more of the headlines that should have the highest priority with the mediawhores ---- not to be. After all there's baseball and the NBA playoffs coming up and Stormy Daniels. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Bruce                            New World Order News




I have posted the headlines of 4 articles from today showing how the insaniacs are planning our destruction. The sickest thing about this is the reason is based on lies. Back in 1964, we didn't know the reason for the escalation of the Vietnam war was based on a lie (The Gulf of Tonkin incident). Back in 2003, we weren't exactly sure if Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. On 2 separate occasions we were sure that Assad didn't gas his own people and now most of the world is well aware that this latest false flag with Assad gassing his own people is total B.S.

No matter! Without a declaration of war and without U.N. approval and without a vote in Congress, a few people who are clearly off their rockers, are putting the survival of the human species at stake. Meanwhile the mediawhores are distracting the people with sports and meaningless , gossipy nonsense. The subject headlines and articles show a much different story in the real world.

So now we pray that once again, the world will reel back from the precipice. It happened during the Cuban missile crisis. There were other close calls over the years, but cooler heads always prevailed. Hopefully, this will be like that, but we can't keep doing this. One of these times it will happen for real. We have got to hold our leaders to a higher standard or better yet, demand they go ---- all of them. We don't need their help in destroying us.

Bruce                  New World Order News




It's getting impossible to get through a week without our government masters feeding us a line of crap in order to gin up a war with Russia and others. Yesterday, in line with all the other lies we have been told, they said that Assad has gassed his own people and we need to attack Syria militarily.

Even though it's really not necessary, others have gone ahead and checked on this story. To no one's surprise, it has turned out to be a total fabrication. The Red Crescent and the Red Cross have reported from the area of the alleged attack that there is no evidence of any attack. The White Helmets reported that those victims of the alleged attack were taken to area hospitals. A check with all of those hospitals reported that there were no victims of any gas attack.

Never mind that! Our military needs to attack Syria and kill a whole bunch of people. Maybe, as a bonus, we can get into a war with Russia and maybe, if we're really lucky, China will join in with Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, North Korea and other privileged nations. Yes, they are insane.

We, the normal people of the United States are running out of options. Our government masters continually lie to us, steal our money and refuse to honor their promises. The last 3 Presidents all promised to wind down our military commitments and all 3 of them lied to us. Now, we are on the brink of a war that could destroy all life on this planet. Yes, we can call and email our representatives, but they don't care what we think. At the very least, we can let them know that we, our children, our husbands, wives and those close to us have no intention of fighting in this or any other war they start. If they are so gung-ho to fight a war, I suggest they fight it themselves. As for us, we prefer peace and will be sitting this one out.

Bruce                                    New World Order News

While Russia puts armed forces on heightened state of alert
Paul Joseph Watson | - APRIL 9, 2018
[Report: US & UK Readying Attack Ships & Fighter Jets Off the Coast of Syria]
Infowars understands that the United States and the UK are readying for potential military action against Bashar Al-Assad by maneuvering attack ships and fighter jets into position off the coast of Syria.
Following the alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma on Saturday, the USS Donald Cook, a guided missile destroyer is in position for any military action within Syria, while the USS Laboon, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer which was previously deployed to Libya after the Benghazi attack, is also in close proximity as is the USS Georgia submarine.
Meanwhile, an RAF operated KC2 tanker, which is used to refuel fighter jets, is also lurking off the coast of Lebanon.
View image on Twitter
[View image on Twitter]

The Intel Crab@IntelCrab
RRR2321, an RAF operated KC2 tanker, caught lurking off the coast of #Lebanon this mornig.
9:49 AM - Apr 9, 2018
In a related story, Russia has reportedly put its armed forces on a heightened state of alert in response to increasing tensions over Syria and the ongoing fallout over the Skripal poisoning case.

“Starting to hear isolated reports from within #Russia that the nation has put her armed forces on a heightened stage of alert,” tweeted the Intel Crab account, which is an aggregator for Strategic Sentinel, a national security analysis group.
The Intel Crab@IntelCrab
Starting to hear isolated reports from within #Russia that the nation has put her armed forces on a heightened stage of alert.
7:15 AM - Apr 9, 2018
“Command and control systems have been deployed to major military installations,” a source told Infowars, adding that the Russian Air Force is closely monitoring the presence of U.S. warships and submarines from the Russian naval facility in Tartus, Syria.

Meanwhile, Russia has launched massive combat drills across the country.
“Russia’s Defense Ministry said in an online statement Monday that it had launched drills stretching from Siberia to the Urals and the Volga region, as well as in Russian military bases in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan,” reports the Moscow Times.
According to the report, Russian soldiers will put their combat skills they learned in Syria to the test during the nationwide exercises.
President Trump commented on the tensions today when he told the press, “We are studying that situation extremely closely. We are meeting with our military and everyone else that will be making some major decisions over the next 24 to 48 hours.”


Update (4:15 pm ET): US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley said during an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on Monday that the US would retaliate against the attack in Syria regardless of what the UN Security Council decides.
"History will record this as the moment when the Security Council either discharged its duty or demonstrated its utter and complete failure to protect the people of Syria. Either way, the United States will respond."

She described the victims in graphic terms.
"I could hold up pictures of babies lying dead next to their mothers, in their diapers, all lying together, dead, ashen blue, open eyed and lifeless, white foam bubbling from their mouths and noses."
Haley added that "the world must see justice done" in Syria.
* * *
Before heading into his Monday afternoon cabinet meeting, President Donald Trump condemned a chemical weapons attack in Ghouta, Syria during an impromptu press conference. The president said "even with the world as bad as it is, you just don't see things like that" before saying he'd decide on a response "probably by the end of today."

And while the US was "having trouble getting people in" to the town, Trump added that he would definitively determine which states were involved in the attack - be it Syria, Iran, Russia (or presumably all three).

With Trump and his most trusted advisors still debating the proper response, several anonymous Pentagon officials have told the Washington Examiner that the US is considering several options including a missile barrage similar to the strike carried out on a Syrian air base last year.

The Israeli F-15s launched a lethal strike on a Syrian airbase early Monday, killing 14 people with the US's tacit approval.
The options being considered now are similar to the options that were provided to the president before last year's strike. The US has several ships armed with tomahawk cruise missiles stationed in the region - including the USS Donald Cook, a guided-missile destroyer that just completed a port call in
Cyprus and got underway in the eastern Mediterranean. The ship is within range of Syria and could presumably strike at any target the president orders. 
Last year, the US destroyed more than a dozen aircraft, as well as oil storage facilities and other structures, and killed at least seven people when it fired 59 missiles at Syria's Shayrat Airbase following a chemical weapons attack that the US also pinned on the Syrian government.

But according to one official who spoke with the Examiner, Trump could be considering a "more robust" strike this time around, considering that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad didn't quite get the message last time.

Both the UK and France have suggested they're considering military action in Syria. UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said he and his French and US allies agree there should be "no impunity for those that use such barbaric weapons."

However, Johnson added that Monday's emergency meeting of the UN Security Council would be "an important next step in determining the international response" and that "a full range of options should be on the table."




A couple of days ago I posted 3 different headlines relating to the contradictory positions held by President Trump on U.S. troops in Syria. Today's subject article may give an answer to this bizarre behavior. Apparently, in a phone call between Trump and Netanyahu, Trump was taken to the woodshed over his promise to remove troops from Syria. After the call, Trump waffled on his promise.

One has to wonder as to who, exactly, is in charge of U.S. foreign policy? Along with absolutely no rational reason for our presence in Syria, our government masters are also carrying out policies that only benefit Israel. We are moving the embassy to Jerusalem. We are about to cancel the P5 + 1 agreement with Iran. We are sending billions of taxpayer dollars to Israel. We are cutting aid to Palestine. We are bombing Yemen. We are still in Iraq. We are still in Afghanistan. We have refused to criticize the Israeli killing of innocent Palestinian demonstrators. Niki Haley, the ambassador to the U.N., ALWAYS, reflects the Israeli position in votes and speeches at the U.N. Several members of our Congress and Senate are citizens of Israel.


Here's another thing that our government masters will never change.

Bruce                               New World Order News

A Wednesday phone call between President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quite tense, according to US officials familiar with the situation. Netanyahu had loudly objected to Trump’s talk of withdrawing US troops from Syria.

Netanyahu has opposed the US troops leaving Syria, arguing that it would leave the nation to Iran. The US military operation in Syria, however, is not aimed at fighting Iran in the first place, and rather is meant to fight ISIS.

Officials indicated that Trump’s plan was to have all US forces out of Syria within six months, a detail officials previously had not provided. The White House has since indicated the pullout is not happening, and Netanyahu has praised Trump for his “commitment to Israel’s security.”

In addition to his own administration resisting his impulse to withdraw from Syria, Trump appears to have faced opposition from foreign allies. In addition to Netanyahu, the Saudi Crown Prince also expressed opposition to the ending of the war.




If the leftists have their way, this will be America's future. This particular case took place in England. After years of gun control, unlimited immigration and PC crap, it has come to this. The subject story covers 2 men breaking into a house with the resident defending himself with a knife. Fortunately, the resident was able to stab one of the intruders in self defense. Later, the intruder died.

Guess what happened next? The homeowner has been arrested and charged with murder. Yes, the leftist paradise of gun control, Russiaphobia, limits on free speech, unlimited immigration without vetting and a murder rate higher than New York, throws law abiding heroes into jail.

Don't laugh. This is exactly the kind of society our leftist screwballs want here. Fortunately for us, we have the example of the ruin of England to guide us.

Bruce                  New World Order News

London: elderly man charged on suspicion of murder for defending home against thieves
By Jon Rappoport

In the midst of London’s rising crime wave, a 78-year-old man, Richard Osborn-Brooks, has been arrested on suspicion of murder, after defending his home against two thieves.

The Daily Mail offers this statement from Scotland Yard: “At 00:45hrs on Wednesday, 4 April, police were called by a homeowner to reports of a burglary in progress at an address in South Park Crescent, Hither Green SE6, and a man injured.”

“The 78-year-old resident found two males inside the address. A struggle ensued between one of the males and the homeowner. The man, aged 38, sustained a stab wound to the upper body.”

“London Ambulance Service took the injured male, who was found collapsed in Further Green Road, SE8, to a central London hospital. He was pronounced dead at 03:37hrs.”

The Telegraph states: “Police arrested him [the homeowner, Osborn-Brooks] on suspicion of grievous bodily harm before then arresting him on suspicion of murder.”

Arresting Osborn-Brooks on what grounds? Defending his home? Defending his life? Defending his wife, who was sleeping upstairs?
Since when is it murder, when a person fights off a thief? Was Osborn-Brooks supposed to sit quietly in a chair, tell the thieves (one of whom ran away) to take everything they wanted, and ask them not to harm him or his wife? Is that proper behavior? Is that what the government demands of its citizens?
If the facts of the story are what Scotland Yard reports to the press, for what possible reason is Osborn-Brooks sitting in a jail cell?
Why aren’t the police thanking him for defending his home and family?

The Daily Mail: “British law allows homeowners to use ‘reasonable force’ against intruders to protect themselves or others in their home.”
“Guidelines introduced in 2005 allow people to protect themselves ‘in the heat of the moment’ – including using an object as a weapon. They can also stop an intruder running off, for example by tackling them to the ground.”

“There is no specific definition of ‘reasonable force’ and it is said to depend on the circumstances.”
So a person is permitted to defend his home with force “in the heat of the moment.” But not if he uses force in a calm, cool, and rational state of mind?
The government presumption is biased against a citizen’s right to self-defense. Thieves’ motives are clear and easily understood, but targets of thieves have ambiguous motives that must be sorted out before a decision is made about whether to prosecute them or release them. In the meantime, lock them up.

This is backwards.
But many people would call it “progressive.”
You see, the thief is really the victim, and the victim is the perpetrator. Once you digest that formula, you’re ready to enter the New Society.
Any person who owns property is automatically suspected of having committed a crime. Property IS theft. A thief would never steal unless he had been “oppressed.”

Got that?
Congratulations. You’re now a card-carrying liberal.
A word of caution: when you see some of your liberal LEADERS moving about with armed security teams, don’t fret or ask questions. They have special rights. Because they’re in the vanguard, flying the banner of new revolutionary values. They need whatever they say they need. It’s all in The Memo.
Which you didn’t receive.

Because you’re an unknowing dupe. The rich and privileged people you think you’re fighting against are the rich and privileged people who are leading you.




A few days ago I posted an article quoting Donald Trump promising to remove U.S. troops from Syria “very soon”. I also expressed skepticism. Today, we have wildly contradictory statements attributed to Trump on this subject.

“President Donald Trump reluctantly agreed in a meeting with his national security team on Tuesday to keep U.S. troops in Syria for an undetermined period of time with the goal of defeating ISIS, a senior administration official said Wednesday”.

A convoy of US military vehicles carrying combat personnel entered the oil-rich province of al-Hasakah in northeastern Syria this afternoon, after withdrawing from their positions in Raqqa province, according to Al Masdar News, citing reports from local activists.

US President Donald Trump has said that Saudi Arabia might have to pay if it wants continuing US presence in Syria.

Wow! I can't imagine anyone in a position of power expressing this kind of schizophrenic dialogue without those under him questioning his sanity. Sadly, this is what we get from leadership in our failing nation. We are rapidly approaching a comparison with other collapsing empires. The imbecile kings of England, the psychotic emperors of Rome and the megalomaniac Pharaohs of Egypt give a view towards our future by looking at their past.

I guess it's too much to ask as to why we are in Syria and exactly on what authority do we justify invading and occupying a nation which isn't ours?

Bruce                            New World Order News



Why is anyone surprised? Over the past few weeks, the mediawhores and government masters have been hysterical over the alleged Russian poisoning in England. Right from the beginning, Russia and many others have asked for proof. No proof has been supplied. Then the British government thought they had an ally from the Porton Down bio-weapons lab. Surely they would supply the so-called “proof”. Today Porton Down said they could not supply any proof of Russian involvement.

So now what? Can we expect any apologies? Can we expect the real culprits will be identified? Will all the nations that expelled Russian diplomats on the basis of these ridiculous claims allow the diplomats to return? Well, we can't be sure, but I'm going out on to a limb in saying, no, no and no. You see the British and their allies knew right from the beginning there was no truth to their allegations. That was never the point. The point is to prop up the failing British government and to continue to fuel the blood-lust for war. Stay tuned. I'm sure there will be more.

Bruce                                            New World Order News

UK scientists have been unable to prove Russia made the nerve agent A-234 (also known as "Novichok") which was used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury.

Scientists at the top secret army base Porton Down are unable to link the samples to Russia, after weeks of Moscow insisting it had nothing to do with the attack. Theresa May’s Government has repeatedly blamed the Kremlin and imposed sanctions on Russia, including the expulsion of 23 diplomats.

#Salisbury attack: Scientists have not been able to prove that Russia made the nerve agent used in the spy poisoning. Porton Down lab's chief exec reveals the details in this interview

Gary Aitkenhead, chief executive of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down, told Sky News: "We were able to identify it as novichok, to identify that it was military-grade nerve agent.

"We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to government who have then used a number of other sources to piece together the conclusions you have come to."

The Skripals, ex-double agent Sergei and his 33-year-old daughter were found slumped on a park bench in Wiltshire on March 4.
Downing Street immediately pointed the finger at Russia and listed a raft of heavy sanctions, the toughest in three decades. European nations were persuaded by Britain to expel diplomats and were asked by allies in the UK to back them against Moscow.

Now, scientists say they are unsure of the links.  Aitkenhead added: "It is our job to provide the scientific evidence of what this particular nerve agent is, we identified that it is from this particular family [Novichok] and that it is a military grade, but it is not our job to say where it was manufactured."
Aitkenhead said there is no known antidote to Novichok, and that none was administered to either of the Skripals. He suggested the substance required "extremely sophisticated methods to create, something only in the capabilities of a state actor".

The OPCW (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) said its executive council would meet in the morning in The Hague, on Russia's request.

Russia's Ambassador in London, Alexander Yakovenko has repeatedly stated Russia has been kept out of the loop.
Russia has asked for samples so it can do tests and has insisted it be allowed to investigate, after being blamed. However, the embassy is left to get information through the press in the UK, according to Yakovenko.



There was an article about this in the New York Times. Guess what? They lied about the facts. Unarmed Palestinians were demonstrating about the betrayal of Israel to fulfill the original agreement with the UN allowing Palestinians to either return to the land from which they were removed or be compensated for the loss. Israel has not done neither.

So, every year they demonstrate. This year, the government of Israel decided they would kill a few of them to teach them a lesson. In the movie, Doctor Zhivago, there was a recreation of an attack on unarmed men, women and children by Czarist troops resulting in the death and injury of dozens. This was the catalyst that led to the Russian revolution, but this is no movie.

In 1948, led by Britain and the United States, Jews from around the world were allowed to migrate to Palestine and take over land belonging to others. Western nations spend billions every year to prop up their economy and provide the government with the latest space age weapons. They are a nuclear power and have threatened to use them if they see themselves threatened. The most ridiculous part of this is those that occupy Israel have no connection to the Jews of ancient Israel. They are Ashkenazi Jews, descended from 8th century Kasars in what is now known as Turkey.
Never mind that. If you don't support everything the Israeli government does, you are an anti-semite.

Bruce                                                         New World Order News

Gaza hospitals, running low on blood and overstretched by the huge number of wounded, were reeling after one of the enclave’s bloodiest days outside of open war, in which Israeli soldiers shot 773 people with live ammunition, according to the ministry of health.
Fifteen of the wounded died, said the ministry spokesperson Dr Ashraf al-Qidra. “Most of the dead were aged between 17 and 35 years old,” he said. “The injuries were on the upper part of the body.” He added that the remainder of the wounded, some of whom were in a critical condition, had been “shot with live ammunition”.

The violence erupted on Friday after mass demonstrations took place demanding the right of return for Palestinian refugees and their descendants to land in Israel.

Tens of thousands of people, including women and children, had planned to camp several hundred metres from the Israeli frontier, which surrounds the 140-square-mile Gaza strip on two sides, on the first day of a peaceful, six-week protest.
But from the main camps, groups of mostly young men approached the border at several locations and started throwing stones and burning tyres. Soldiers responded by opening fire throughout the day.

More than 1,400 people were wounded, mostly by bullets but also rubber-coated rounds and tear-gas inhalation, the health ministry said. The Guardian was unable to independently verify the ministry’s figures.

On Friday, in less than 30 minutes, reporters saw 10 people with bullet wounds carried away on stretchers at one of the demonstrations.
The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, declared Saturday a national day of mourning. More demonstrations are planned.
Israel said it has positioned snipers and responded to “rioting” Palestinians with “dispersal means” and “firing towards main instigators”. It said the movement was a Hamas-orchestrated ploy and it was identifying “terror attacks under the camouflage of riots”.

The military pointed to what it said was an “attempted shooting attack by a terror cell” in the northern part of the Gaza strip on Friday. It added that it had responded with gunfire and by targeting three nearby Hamas sites with tanks and fighter jets. The military sent a video to journalists showing men appearing to tamper with the separation fence and said that Hamas had earlier sent a seven-year-old girl across the border, whom Israeli soldiers returned to her parents.

The Israeli ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, said: “The international community must not be deceived” by what he called “a well-organised and violent terror gathering”.

Hamas, which backed the protest, has fought three wars with Israel since 2008. In the past few weeks, Israeli forces say they have caught people attempting to cut through the frontier to launch attacks.

The UN security council held emergency talks to discuss the risks of further escalation but failed to agree on a statement. “There is fear that the situation might deteriorate in the coming days,” said the assistant UN secretary general for political affairs, Tayé-Brook Zerihoun.
The UN secretary general, António Guterres, has called for an independent and transparent investigation into the violence, according to his spokesman Farhan Haq.

The Palestinian ambassador to the UN, Riyad Mansour, said what happened in Gaza was a “heinous massacre”. He said Palestinians “expect the security council to shoulder its responsibility” and “defuse this volatile situation, which clearly constitutes a threat to international peace and security”.
Friday’s death toll stood at 16 and included a farmer killed by an Israeli tank shell before dawn as he picked parsley near the border, according to the health ministry. An Israeli army spokesman said the man was operating suspiciously.
Al-Qidra said hospitals were running low on several blood types.



I report on this from time to time, but I always try to report on the latest information confirming the devastating side effects of the mandatory vaccine programs. Today's subject article covers the admission of the FDA, that vaccines could cause Autism. Many of us have been saying that for years. We were ridiculed and, in many cases, censored by our government masters and the mediawhores and, no, you aren't going to hear a peep from the mediawhores on this story.

By the way, if autism isn't enough, they also admit to the possibility of vaccine caused anaphylactic shock, crib death and Guillain-Berre'. In the 1960 movie, “The Time Machine” a futuristic society was comprised of the Eloi and the Morlocks. The Morlocks were subhuman, subterranean beast-like creatures which ruled the Eloi. When the sirens sounded the Eloi would go into a trance and walk to the caves where they would be killed and eaten.

Sadly, Americans have fulfilled this prophecy from 70 years ago. When our government masters sound the alarm, our nation's adults and their children go into a zombie-like trance and obediently march to their healthcare provider for their dangerous and ineffective vaccines. No amount of warnings, no amount of disabilities and no amount of needless deaths will stop them.

Bruce                               New World Order News
According to the FDA’s online Biologics Blood Vaccines document, a vaccine manufacturer admits on its package insert that their vaccination can cause autism as one of many adverse reactions.

These adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting. Because these events are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequencies or to establish a causal relationship to components of Tripedia vaccine.
The FDA’s online Biologics Blood Vaccines document admits on its package insert that their vaccination can cause autism as one of many adverse reactions.

In this sense, it should be noted that:
Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Concentrates (For Further Manufacturing Use) are produced by The Research Foundation for Microbial Diseases of Osaka University (BIKEN), Osaka, Japan, under United States (US) license, and are combined with diphtheria and tetanus toxoids manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur Inc. Tripedia vaccine is filled, labeled, packaged, and released by Sanofi Pasteur Inc.

What’s in Tripedia that probably can interfere with brain chemistry and neurology?
According to the Tripedia’s package insert, some ingredients include: Bovine extract, formaldehyde used to inactivate microorganisms a couple of times, ammonium sulfate, aluminum potassium sulfate and two growth mediums: modified Mueller and Miller is one; the other is Stainer-Scholte medium.
What is the content of these two growth mediums?
Mueller and Miller medium, contains:
Tripedia’s ingredients include: Bovine extract, formaldehyde, ammonium sulfate, aluminum potassium sulfate, modified Mueller and Miller and Stainer-Scholte medium.

Glucose, sodium chloride, sodium phosphate dibasic, monopotassium, phosphate, magnesium sulfate hydrate, ferrous sulfate heptahydrate, cysteine hydrochloride, tyrosine hydrochloride, uracil hydrochloride, Ca-pantothenate in ethanol, thiamine in ethanol, pyridoxine-hydrochloride in ethanol, riboflavin in ethanol, biotin in ethanol, sodium hydroxide, beef heart infusion (de- fatted beef heart and distilled water), casein [milk protein] solution. Basically a mixture of sugar, salt, amino acids, vitamins, and minerals.

While Stainer-Scholte medium has the following ingredients:
Tris hydrochloride, tris base, glutamate (monosodium salt) [MSG], proline, salt, monopotassium phosphate, potassium chloride, magnesium chloride, calcium chloride, ferrous sulfate, ascorbic acid, niacin, glutathione.

The vaccine is formulated without preservatives, but contains a trace amount of thimerosal [(mercury derivative), (≤0.3 μg mercury/dose)] from the manufacturing process. Each 0.5 mL dose also contains, by assay, not more than 0.170 mg of aluminum and not more than 100 μg(0.02%) of residual formaldehyde. The vaccine contains gelatin and polysorbate 80 (Tween-80), which are used in the production of the pertussis concentrate.
“Probable cause” ingredients for adverse reactions include: casein, to which some children are allergic; MSG—an excitotoxin; thimerosal-ethyl mercury; aluminum; formaldehyde; gelatin; and polysorbate 80.

You might be wondering:
Why some of the doctors don’t say anything about the risk of DTaP Vaccine?
That is a question that many of us, still wondering! Maybe they just is just not convenient for them that we know about the risk of these vaccine
To take the vaccine debacle further, most of the mandated vaccines for infants and children, contain many of the above ingredients, which must be stopped from being injected into infants, toddlers, teens and even adults!

It’s time for Congress to rescind the “Get out of Jail Free” card for vaccine makers and stop the aggressive onslaught of the Autism Spectrum Disorder that is depriving children of a fulfilling life and ruining families emotionally, financially, and physically to the point of parents divorcing because of the stresses of ASD in a family.

It’s about time vaccines are publicly acknowledged by the feds and the media for all the health damages they have caused. Just check out the CDC’s VAERS reports and the vaccine damage payouts by the HHS/HRSA. According to a new report published on March 1, 2017, by the department of health and human services of the United States, about $ 3,363,282,409.21 have been paid for vaccine adverse reactions and deaths from 1989 to 2017 so far.



Trump: ‘We’ll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon’

Let's hope this is a promise Trump will keep. It's not the first time Trump has come out against the never ending wars being waged in our name. During the Presidential campaign, Trump frequently criticized this policy and intimated he would change it. Instead, we got more. The majority of Americans have expressed their disapproval of the war policy in numerous polls. None-the-less, the wars go on and increase.

This time, Trump made sense. He correctly observed that we have thrown trillions of dollars down a rat hole. He also stated that this money could have been spent here at home. There are many areas desperately needing attention.

So we'll see. We've been lied to so many times that one can be forgiven when they say “we'll believe it when we see it”. We should leave Syria. We never should have gone there in the first place and that goes for the other 160 nations where we maintain a military presence. Let's hope it's not too late.

Bruce                                                    New World Order News


RT–President Donald Trump has made a surprise announcement that US forces will be withdrawing from Syria, citing the defeat of Islamic State and the need to defend US borders and rebuild “crumbling” infrastructure.

“We’re coming out of Syria very soon. Let the other people take care of it now,” Trump said during a speech in Richfield, Ohio on Thursday, dedicated to his infrastructure initiative.
Evan McMurry
Pres. Trump: "We'll be coming out of Syria very soon. Let the other people take care of it now...We're going to have 100% of the caliphate, as they call it —sometimes referred to as land. We're taking it all back."
2:46 PM - Mar 29, 2018

The US spent $7 trillion in the Middle East, Trump said, describing how the US would build schools only for insurgents to destroy them, while there was no funding to build schools in Ohio.

“We build a school, they blow it up. We rebuild the school, they haven’t blown it up yet, but they will,” he said.
The president also pointed out the “wall” and 32,000 US troops guarding the border between North and South Korea, while the US border with Mexico was not likewise protected.

“Is there something a little bit wrong with that?” he asked the crowd.
Trump’s remarks about Syria are in line with what he said last month, at a press conference in Washington with Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull.
“We’re there for one reason: to get ISIS and get rid of ISIS, and to go home,” the US president had said. “We’re not there for any other reason and we’ve largely accomplished our goal.”

However, this goes against the previous pronouncements of his subordinates at the State Department and the military.
In January, then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson outlined a plan that envisioned extended US presence in Syria to ensure a peaceful transfer of power to a “post-Assad leadership.” In December last year, the Pentagon said US troops would remain in Syria for “as long as we need to, to support our partners and prevent the return of terrorist groups.”



I just don't know what to say. This article reveals the U.S. government in cooperation with the British government, has established a bio-weapons lab at Porton Down in England. As one reads about the hundreds of thousands of experiments and views the pictures, many emotions may well up. Shame, outrage, shock, sadness and disgust are just a few. What has happened to us? Better said, what has happened to humanity? Is there no limit to the depravity that exists in some? Is there no conscience in those who go along just to have a job or position of importance?

Anyway, as much as I desire to reveal things that no one else will touch, you may want to think long and hard before going on.

Bruce                                     New World Order News

Dilyana Gaytandzhieva is a Bulgarian investigative journalist and Middle East Correspondent. Over the last two years she has published a series of revealing reports on weapons smuggling. Two months ago South Front published her investigation into the Pentagon bio laboratories in 25 countries across the world. Her current report provides an overview of the Pentagon-funded experiments at the secretive UK military laboratory Porton Down near Salisbury, where an ex-Russian spy and his daughter were allegedly poisoned with a nerve agent.
By Dilyana Gaytandzhieva exclusively for SouthFront

The Pentagon has spent at least $70 million on military experiments involving tests with deadly viruses and chemical agents at Porton Down – the UK military laboratory near the city of Salisbury. The secretive biological and chemical research facility is located just 13 km from where on 4th  March  former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found slumped on a bench following an alleged Novichok nerve agent poisoning.

The Porton Down Lab is located just 13 km from the site where Sergei Skripal and his daughter were found and from where they were rushed to hospital.
Information obtained from the US federal contracts registry reveals that the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has funded a number of military projects performed at the UK Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), or Porton Down, over the last decade. Among them: experimental respiratory infection of non-human primates (marmosets) with Anthrax, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, Western equine encephalitis virus, and Eastern equine encephalitis virus. The US Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has also funded experiments on animals which were exposed to chemical agents such as Sulfur Mustard and Phosgene gas. Phosgene gas was used as a chemical weapon during World War I where it was responsible for about 85 % of the 100,000 deaths caused by chemical weapons.
DTRA has also been granted full access to DSTL scientific and technical capabilities, and test data under a 2011 contract for the collaboration and exchange of scientific and technical capabilities with the UK Ministry of Defence.

At least 122,000 animals used for military chemical and biological experiments at Porton Down
Animal experiments are classified as confidential in the UK. Under section 24 of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, it is a criminal offence to disclose certain information about animal experiments in the UK.
Data obtained via the Freedom of Information Act though gives an idea of the dimensions of military chemical and biological experiments carried out at Porton Down. A total of 122,050 animals have been exposed to deadly pathogens, chemicals and incurable diseases over the last decade (2005-2016).

Monkeys being used in warfare agent testing at Porton Down in the past
Animals used include mice, guinea pigs, rats, pigs, ferrets, sheep, and non-human primates. Some of the deadly experiments have been sponsored by the Pentagon under contracts between DSTL and DTRA. Scientists at Porton Down have infected, or poisoned, animals in order to measure time to death and lethal dose of exposure. In practice, the possible use of the researched virus/chemical gas as a weapon.

Marmoset monkeys are experimentally infected at Porton Down with Ebola, Anthrax, Marburg Virus and other deadly pathogens. Scientists measure time to death and lethal dose of exposure to the bio agent. Photo credit: Vic Pigula

Ebola as bioweapon
12 Marmoset monkeys were experimentally infected with the Ebola virus, via aerosol, at Porton Down under a Pentagon-funded project – Experimental respiratory infection of marmosets with Ebola virus Kikwit (the Zaire strain of the Ebola virus which killed more than 245 people in Zaire, now Democratic Republic of Congo, in 1995). The project was part of a $6.3 million DTRA program running at Porton Down from 2012 to 2016 – Development of common marmoset models for category A/B pathogens and product evaluation in marmosets.

Source: Experimental Respiratory Infection of Marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) With Ebola Virus Kikwit, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Volume 212, 1 October 2015

The experiment’s stated goal was to measure the lethal dose of exposure and time to death meaning that the Ebola virus Kikwit was researched for its potential as a bioweapon. All infected marmoset monkeys died from 6 to 10 days after exposure to the Ebola virus.

The Pentagon also funded studies on the deadly Marburg virus:  a $2.6 million project – Experimental respiratory Marburg virus haemorrhagic fever infection in the common marmoset, and another $1.4 million project – Marburg virus model development, which were undertaken at Porton Down in 2017. This virus causes viral hemorrhagic feverand is listed as a Category A Bioterrorism Agent. All infected monkeys died from 8 to 10 days. The aim of the studies was to examine the dose and time to death for animals exposed to aerosolized Marburg virus.

Source: Experimental respiratory Marburg virus haemorrhagic fever infection in the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus), International Journal of Experimental Pathology
Under another $4.8 million project, funded by DTRA, Porton Down scientists along with the Pentagon contractor Mapp Biopharmaceutical tested Susceptibility and lethality of Western Equine Encephalitis Virus in mice when infected by the aerosol route. Mapp Biopharmaceutical is an American pharmaceutical company, which has developed an Ebola vaccine from the tobacco plant. According to the study, aerosol infection is the likely route of exposure to Western Equine Encephalitis Virus in a biowarfare scenario.

12 Marmoset monkeys were infected with anthrax at Porton Down during an experiment funded by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The study, Experimental respiratory anthrax infection in the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus), aimed at determining the lethal dose needed to kill 50% of the animals or the so called LD50 indicator. The value of LD50 for a substance is the dose required to kill half the members of the tested population after a specified test duration. Six of the monkeys died from anthrax from 40 to 140 h.

Source: Experimental respiratory anthrax infection in the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus), US National Library of medicine

Chemical agent tests
British military scientists were funded by DTRA to perform Chemical Agent system testing as part of a $39.7 million Pentagon program (2012-2017) at Porton Down. Documents prove that the US Department of Defense Agency – DTRA funded animal experiments with chemical agents at the secretive British military lab.

In 2016 Porton Down scientists along with their colleagues from the US Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense published the results of a joint study Acute Gene Expression Profile of Lung Tissue Following Sulfur Mustard Inhalation Exposure in Large Anesthetized Swine. According to the funding information, this work was supported by two contracts with the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (US Department of Defense). During the experiment at Porton Down 16 pigs were exposed to mustard gas for about 10 minutes, at 12 h post exposure the animals were killed (three of them died during the experiment due to complications) and a full post-mortem examination performed in order to determine the lung damage caused by the sulfur mustard inhalation.

Sulfur mustard  is a chemical warfare agent that was first used on the battlefield in World War I. It has been classified as a Class 1 human carcinogen, meaning that it can also cause cancer. Mustard agents were regulated under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention as substances with no use other than in chemical warfare.

The last use of Sulfur mustard in battle was confirmed in Syria in 2016. According to the BBC, Islamic State (ISIS) jihadists used mustard gas against government forces in Deir-ez-Zor. The same chemical gas was confirmed to have been used by ISIS against Kurds in Northern Iraq. According to The Independent, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) confirmed that laboratory tests had come back positive for sulfur mustard, after around 35 Kurdish troops fell sick on the battlefield in August 2015.

Iraqi soldiers captured a cache of chemical weapons  from ISIS in Qayarah, Iraq, the rockets tested positive for sulfur mustard, October 2016. (Source: Ed

Alexander/BLACKOPS Cyber)
According to information obtained from the US Federal contracts registry, Porton Down scientists 5 months ago completed a $ 2 million military program involving chemical gas experiments on animals. This program was funded by the US Department of the Army on behalf of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense (USAMRICD) and was launched in 2008 and further extended in 2012. The work on the program included Phosgene Gas tests. Amongst them – Continued Model Development to Establish Reproducible Phosgene Injury at 24 Hours. According to the program documents, the purpose was to monitor the development of acute lung injury following phosgene exposure. Phosgene gas was used extensively as a chemical weapon, most notably during World War I.

Coincidence: Guinea pigs at Porton Down and at the home of the poisoned ex-spy
Tests using nerve agents VX and VM on guinea pigs were  carried out at Poton Down in 2015. The project was funded by the UK Ministry of Defence. Interestingly, ginea pigs were also found at Sergei Skripal’s home in Salisbury, just a few kilometers away from the secretive chemical and biological military lab. A photo of the Skripals’ pets – a cat and guinea pigs, was posted by his daughter Yulia on Facebook.

Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, photos: Facebook

Guinea pigs were found in the house of the poisoned ex-spy in Salisbury, just a few kilometers away from Porton Down, where such guinea pigs were used for nerve agent chemical tests.

In a 2015 report to the UK parliament the UK Ministry of Defence does confirm the use of animals for military chemical and biological experiments. The ministry states: “DSTL is proud to deliver cutting-edge science and technology for the benefit of national defence and security. Part of its work is to provide safe and effective countermeasures against the threat posed by chemical and biological weapons and to enhance the treatment of conventional casualties on the battlefield, which could not currently be achieved without the use of animals”.

Porton Down scientists test chemical gas on London Tube passengers
Chemical gas was released on thousands of unsuspecting commuters during a military experiment on the London Underground, documents reveal. These chemical tests were performed in 2013 by scientist from Porton Down.

Porton Down scientists released chemical gas on the London Underground in 2013.
The UK government never informed the British public of the military experiment on the London Underground. Thousands of people were exposed to chemical gas without their knowledge. Nor did the Ministry of Defence ask for their consent to participate in such military experiments. Information about the project can be obtained from a 2016 US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) document entitled Environmental Assessment of Proposed NYC Subway Tracer Particle and Gas Releases for the Underground Transport Restoration Project.
5 PFTs, SF6 and Urea were released on the London Underground in 2013 in the form of liquid aerosol droplets. Source: US Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

The document provides information about other programs running in the USA and UK from 2005 to 2016. Among them are the London Underground chemical trials. They were conducted by the Defense Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), also known as Porton Down.
Information obtained from the UK government contracts registry confirms that Porton Down scientists conducted a study involving access to the London tube under a 3-year contract with the London Underground (2011-2014). The content of the project is not specified though.

According to the contract documents, the London Underground cannot communicate “on these matters with any media representative unless specifically granted permissions to do so. In the event that the Contract becomes classified the Contractor must safeguard information. Before publishing information to the general public, Porton Down may redact any information that would be exempt from disclosure if it was the subject of a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act”.

The London Underground is prohibited from public disclosure of information about the Porton Down project without permission, according to the contract documents. Source:

The controversial military laboratory was investigated for chemical and biological experiments on humans in the past. Up to 20,000 people took part in various trials from 1949 to 1989. In 2008, the UK Ministry of Defence paid 360 veterans £3 million without admitting liability.

Ronald George Maddison  was a twenty-year-old Royal Air Force engineer who died while undergoing tests with sarin at Porton Down in 1953,  according to declassified military documents.

Powder dissemination of chemical or biological agents
Presently Porton Down scientists produce and test dissemination of biological and/or chemical agents as they did in the past, documents from the UK government contracts registry reveal. Although the information is redacted, it still raises questions as to why the UK military needs to develop a new technique for dissemination of chemical or biological agents via the inhalational route. A private contractor – Red Scientific Ltd, was awarded a £50,000 contract in 2012 “to explore techniques that could be used to manipulate the flow ability of dry powders, principally to understand the delivery of solid particulate by inhalation, and to apply a variety of innovative powder manipulation techniques to a specific irritant powder (provided by DSTL)”.  If the work in 2012/13 proves to be successful there is potential for a second phase to be pursued in 2013/14 examining other powder materials with the same techniques, the contract documents reveal.  The project’s stated goal is marked improvement in the efficiency of aerosolisation over current techniques used at DSTL.

DSTL has awarded a private contractor to explore more advanced techniques for powder dissemination of chemical/biological agents. Source:
DSTL has also tested dissemination techniques in wind tunnels. A private company – NIAB Trading Ltd, was awarded a £12,020 contract to provide facilities and expertise to assist with wind tunnel assessments.

Such experiments involving the release of bacteria were conducted in the UK in the past during the joint UK-US military operation DICE. A declassified US Army document reveals that a series of 24 field trials took place off the coast of Portland and in Lyme Bay in the UK in 1975. Each field trial involved the spraying of massive bacterial aerosols from a converted Land Rover. Although the US and UK joined the UN Conventions on the prohibition of chemical and biological weapons, documents prove that their military programs have never ended.

Porton Down scientists conducted field tests in 1956. The masks on their faces allowed the collection of warfare simulants which had been sprayed from aircraft. Photo credit: Imperial War Museums

US official lied in Brussels about the Pentagon biolaboratories
Robert Kadlec, Assistant Secretary at the US Department of Health, categorically denied the existence of an American bio-weapons program at a seminar on the threat of biological and chemical weapons. The event was organized by the European Parliament on 7th March in Brussels. Asked why the information about the US military bio-laboratories in 25 countries bordering on Russia, China and Iran (the Pentagon’s main rivals) is classified, Kadlec responded: “They are not classified, they are openly available to anyone who wants to look at them.”
Documents about the Pentagon offshore bio-laboratories prove him wrong though.

[Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack Reveals $70 Million Pentagon Program At Porton Down] [Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack Reveals $70 Million Pentagon
Program At Porton Down] [Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack Reveals $70 Million Pentagon Program At Porton Down]
According to the 2005 Agreement between the US DoD and the Ministry of Health of Ukraine the Ukrainian government is prohibited from public disclosure of sensitive information about the US program. The Pentagon has been operating 11 biolaboartories in Ukraine.

Porton Down is just one of the Pentagon-funded military laboratories in 25 countries across the world, where the US Army produces and tests man-made viruses, bacteria and toxins in direct violation of the UN convention. These US bio-laboratories are funded by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under a $ 2.1 billion military program– Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP), and are located in former Soviet Union countries such as Georgia and Ukraine, the Middle East, South East Asia and Africa.

The Pentagon-funded military facilities are not under the direct control of the host state as the US military and civilian personnel is working under diplomatic cover. The local governments are prohibited from public disclosure of sensitive information about the foreign military program running on their own territory. Without being under the direct control of the host state, these Pentagon bio-laboratories put the health of the local population at risk and must be closed.



One of the biggest disappointments in American education is the reduction or outright removal of the study of history. The study of history is vital in educating us as to the benefits or problems associated with policies proposed today in society. We could look back to the Roman Empire. There are many similarities between ancient Rome and the U.S. Both of the nations controlled much of the known world. Both used their military to enforce their will in trade. Both occupied territory well beyond their own borders. Both used the resources of other lands to support their own lifestyles.

What about the fall of the Roman Empire? Rome was never really conquered by a foreign power. Rome self destructed. Towards the end, Rome ran up huge debt. Rome had to remove precious metal content from their coins. Roman citizens became more and more reluctant to serve in the military. Eventually, Rome was unable to afford far flung military operations. Rome itself, was invaded and sacked by barbarians on several occasions.

The subject article covers the huge expense involved in, what Eisenhower said is, “The military industrial complex”. Directly and indirectly the military industrial complex sucks around 1 trillion dollars from the U.S. economy. If those in charge had a knowledge of the history of Rome, they would know that this kind of spending, with never ending wars all around the world, is totally unsustainable. Russia, China, Iran or North Korea don't have to fire a shot. They only have to wait. We are destroying ourselves.

Bruce                               New World Order News

Authored by Jeff Thomas via,
The first panacea for a mismanaged nation is inflation of the currency; the second is war. Both bring a temporary prosperity; both bring a permanent ruin. But both are the refuge of political and economic opportunists.
—Ernest Hemingway

Military spending is the second largest item in the US federal budget after Social Security. It has a habit of increasing significantly each year, and the proposed 2019 defense budget is $886 billion (roughly double what it was in 2003).

US military spending exceeds the total of the next ten largest countries combined. Although the US government acknowledges 682 military bases in 63 countries, that number may be over 1,000 (if all military installations are included), in 156 countries. Total military personnel is estimated at over 1.4 million.

The reader could be forgiven if he felt that a US military base was rather unnecessary in, say, Djibouti or the Bahamas, yet the US Congress will not allow the closure of any military bases. (The Bi-partisan Budget Act of 2013 blocked future military base closings under the argument that they’re all essential for “national security.”) And Congress has a vested interest in keeping all bases open and consuming as much in tax dollars as possible (more on that later).

Of course, those bases need to be kept well-stocked with small arms, tanks, missiles and aircraft. Yet, in spite of the admittedly incredible number of US military bases across the globe, the additional stockpile of weaponry is so great that the government has difficulty finding places to put it all.
One storage location is pictured in the photo above - Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Arizona. In spite of the size of the photo, it shows only a portion of the aircraft located there. (And bear in mind, such aircraft often cost over $100 million each.)

If asked, the military states that, although these aircraft are in dead storage and many have never seen any use whatever, they might possibly be called up for service, “if needed.” Of course, if they’re needed, they’re unlikely to be of use if located in Arizona. And, in addition, they may not be useful for warfare, as war technology has moved on since the days when such aircraft designs were suitable.

It’s been said that generals are forever fighting the last war, and this is certainly true. Even a layman can observe that such conventional aircraft will never see use, as they serve no purpose in modern warfare.

And yet, these storehouses are being dramatically added to every year.
This year, production will be increased for the F-35 and F/A-18 aircraft. To get an idea of the cost of such expansion programmes, the F-35 Joint Strike aircraft alone will cost $400 billion for 2,457 planes. However, most of this cost will be for development and testing, not the planes themselves.
To save you the arithmetic, that’s about $162 million per plane. (I’m guessing that Henry Ford might have been able to produce them a bit more cheaply. It’s difficult to imagine what they could possibly be made out of to justify their extraordinary price tag.)

But, even though a staggering amount of money is spent on such aircraft, only to then send them to storage facilities at some point, why not, at the very least, sell off the surplus cheaply or scrap them and close down the costly bases that warehouse them?

Well there’s a bit of a snag there. If they were to be scrapped, it would be necessary to admit that they weren’t really necessary. And if they weren’t necessary, why were they purchased?

It may well be that the answer lies in the fact that the military industrial complex is a major political contributor, paying heavily into the campaign funds of both political parties.

It’s probably safe to say that, in doing so, they’re likely to expect something in return, and of course, that’s just what they get. As stated above, the “defense” budget is far beyond what it would cost to defend the US, and ridiculously so.

However, as far as the military industrial complex is concerned, the ideal situation might be for the US to enter into a policy of perpetual warfare with vaguely-stated military goals, and to do so on many fronts globally. If Congress were to approve a budget that would allow for that, the amount of kickback to the military industrial complex would not only be maximized, but it would be ongoing, from one year to the next.

So, is that what has occurred?
Well, if we look back at say, World War II, the most costly war in history, we see a war that was fought on three continents and cost the lives of between fifty and eighty million people, yet it was concluded a mere four years after the US joined.

By comparison, the undeclared war with Afghanistan has been a minor one, costing roughly 150,000 lives. Again, based upon arithmetic, as compared to World War II, it should theoretically have taken just over two months to conclude, yet to date, it’s been ongoing for seventeen years, and its daily cost has far exceeded that of a world war.

So, are we to conclude that the US military has become so inept that it can’t fight a war and win, no matter how much firepower they have and no matter how much time it takes?

If this is not the case, then there’s only one other conclusion to draw. (As Sherlock Holmes often said, “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”)

In this case, what remains is that winning the war is not the objective and, in fact, never was the objective. The objective would be to consciously create perpetual warfare; to extract billions in tax dollars each year from the electorate, in order to pass the revenue on to the military industrial complex in the form of armaments contracts. Whether those armaments are needed, or even useful, would be of minimal importance.

In recent years, the US military has gone far beyond its original concept of “defense.” It’s invaded more countries than ever before in its history, often with no direct provocation whatever, on the basis of “making the world safe for democracy.” (It should be borne in mind that invading a country, largely destroying it, then installing a puppet government is not exactly “democracy.”) In addition, these have not been actual “wars,” as, under US law, only Congress can declare war and has not done so since 1942.

In addition, the “enemy” in each case has been vague indeed. The US is not at war with any country specifically, but with “terrorism,” a non-specific enemy, one that’s even more vague than George Orwell described when writing 1984.

If nothing succeeds like success, it’s also true that nothing exceeds like excess. If this thought is troubling now, it will be even more troubling when the US makes good on its threat to attack North Korea, a small country next door to China, or to invade Iran, an ally of both China and Russia.
When the fur really starts to fly, it will be highly doubtful if the American taxpayer is able to pony up the further cost of a true world war, which would be far beyond what they’re shouldering at present.

And, since the loser in a war is almost always the country that runs out of money first, and the US is for all purposes broke, the outcome of such a war would not be in favour of the US.
*  * *
You don’t have to sink with the US… There are practical steps you should take to prepare—before America makes a dangerous military move. Get the details straight from Jeff in our guide to Surviving and Thriving During an Economic Collapse.



Never mind that. Russia did it. The hysteria sweeping our government masters and the mediawhores is dragging us all to a nuclear war. They have to be insane. Sadly, their insanity will victimize us all. We are told to believe the British government when they say Russia did the poisoning. We are all eager to see the evidence. After all, if we would be accused of a crime, they would have to present evidence. Then the evidence would be presented to a jury. Only after that verdict would the accused be found guilty or not guilty. No, we don't do that. Our government masters says something and we are supposed to believe they never lie.

Actually, the opposite is true. Almost everything they say is a lie. Remember Saddam's weapons of mass destruction? Much of the false info came from the British government. Recently it was revealed that the Dodgy Dossier, alleging salacious conduct on the part of Donald Trump during a Moscow visit emanated from a former MI6 agent --- more lies. Then we have the continuous bombardment of “Russian collusion” that has turned out to be totally false.

So now we are expected to, not only believe the British government, but also be prepared to go to war based on all this crap they are shoveling our way. By the way, this latest fiction claiming the poisoning could only be done by Russia has a little problem. The alleged poison, Novichok, has actually been manufactured by --- wait for it ---- a British government weapons lab 7 MILES FROM THE POISONING INCIDENT! The British government says there is no way the poison could have left the facility. Do we have their word on that?

Bruce                                                       New World Order News

Porton Down lab claims no toxins could have escaped it’s “four walls,” but has never denied the possession of the nerve agent used on the Skripals, the Russian Embassy said, urging the UK to disclose its chemical warfare program.

The origin of the mysterious nerve agent, used on March 4 to poison former Russian double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury, has been the main point of contention in the unraveling international scandal. While Britain claims that the alleged A-234 nerve agent – also known as Novichok – was a Soviet development and thus could only have been used by Russia, Moscow contends that the chemical has since been studied by numerous parties and could have been re-engineered elsewhere, including in the UK itself.

[© Gustavo Valiente] Exposed: Court documents cast doubt on Boris Johnson’s claim nerve gas is in ‘no doubt’ Novichok
Last week, in an interview with the BBC, Russia’s ambassador to the EU, Vladimir Chizhov, noted that a secret military research lab at Porton Down, which is located roughly seven miles from the scene of the incident, could have manufactured the deadly agent. Among its other military-related research, the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) specializes in Chemical, Biological and Radiological warfare.

In an attempt to refute the claim, which challenges the British narrative of the Skripal case, the BBC visited the DSTL research lab, where Chief Executive Gary Aitkenhead firmly denied that any deadly nerve agents could have escaped the “four walls” of the military facility.

“We would not be allowed to operate if we had lack of control that could result in anything leaving the four walls of our facility here,”Aitkenhead told BBC on Friday. “There’s no way that agent would have left. We have complete confidence that nothing could have come from here out into the wider world.”
The wording of the statement by the lab’s chief executive, however, suggests the military research facility is indeed involved in manufacturing deadly agents, the Russian embassy in London noted, pointing out that Aitkenhead also failed to deny DSTL’s possession of the 'Novichok' nerve agent.

“This amounts to admitting that the secret facility is a place where new components of military-grade poisons are being researched and developed,” the Russian Embassy said in a statement. “Most notably, Mr Aitkenhead did not deny the existence of chemical weapons stocks. Apparently, they include the A-234 agent [of the Novichok family of agents] that, according to official British statements, was used to poison the Skripals.”

British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, during his March 19 interview with German Deutsche Welle (DW), “hinted” that DSTL has stocks of the deadly agent, the Russian mission in London also noted. In fact, Johnson not only hinted, but directly confirmed that the Porton Down laboratory is in possession of 'Novichok'. When asked by DW if DSTL had any chemical “samples” to compare the collected evidence with and back Russian involvement accusations, Johnson replied, “They do.”

Russia has repeatedly dismissed the narrative that the substance, thought to be a Soviet-era invention, was an exclusively Russian “project.” Moscow insists that in post-Soviet times, countries such as the UK, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Sweden, and even the US studied it and expressed interest in researching and developing the toxin.

The Russian side also repeatedly requested the UK Foreign Office to tone down its hasty speculations and to launch a joint investigation into the case. Earlier this week, OPCW agents arrived in Britain to begin their probe into the March 4 poisoning. On Tuesday, OPCW Director-General Ahmet Uzumcu said that it will take “another two to three weeks to finalize the analysis.”

On Saturday, the Russian embassy reiterated the “demand for full information on the Salisbury poisoning investigation to be provided and for the Porton Down military poisons programme to be fully disclosed.”



Guess where the money is coming from? Yes, some comes from taxes, but more than half has to be borrowed. What if half of your budget for the next year depended on new debt? Those of us who have had problems with debt know the answer. You go broke. Apparently, many have drunk the Kool Aid in thinking that the U.S. will never fail no matter what stupid things we do.

Remember the tax cut? Actually, when you break it down, it doesn't amount to that much for the average taxpayer, but guess what? Thanks to the recent increase in interest rates (the most recent was yesterday), it's all gone. Higher payments for cars, houses and other financed purchases will wipe out any benefit from the tax cut, but there's more. The just signed budget has to devote more money to pay the increased interest rate on the more than 21 trillion dollars in debt.

Want more? The new budget gives an increase to the Pentagon of 80 billion dollars. No, never mind the trillions of dollars the military has “lost”. No, we don't know where it went, but we need more. No, never mind the 300+ billion dollars spent on the F35, that is still not combat ready. No, never mind the illegal wars being fought all over the world that we can't win and wouldn't know what “winning” is if it happened.

The subject article written by Peter Schiff sums it up. He says ‘Americans Are BROKE’. I wish I had a solution, but I'm afraid the mismanagement of our government masters has made that impossible.

Bruce                                                            New World Order News

Financial analyst Peter Schiff says there’s a big problem with the economy even though the mainstream media is reporting that rising interest rates are a good thing.  The problem, however, is that Americans are broke, and those interest rates could have a major impact on some of our wallets.
“The bad news is, we are going to live through another Great Depression and it’s going to be very different. This will be in many ways, much much worse, than what people had to endure during the Great Depression,” Schiff says. “This is going to be a dollar crisis.”

“When you are talking about the magnitude of the debt we have, that extra money [raising interest rates] is big. That’s going to be a big drain on the economy to the extent that we have to pay higher interest to international creditors…a lot of this phony GDP is coming from consumption, while the average American who is consuming is deeply in debt and they are going to impacted dramatically in the increase in the cost of servicing that debt…given how much debt we have, and how much debt is going to be marketed the massive increase in supply will argue for interest rates that are higher.” –Peter Schiff
Retail sales “unexpectedly” fell again in February even though most media outlets are touting a booming economy that can support raising the interest rates. It was the third straight monthly drop and the first time the US economy has seen three straight months of declining retail sales since 2012.
Sales fell 0.1% in February even though analysts had expected an uptick of 0.3%.According to CNBC, households cut back on purchases of motor vehicles and other big-ticket items, pointing to a slowdown in economic growth in the first quarter. But Peter Schiff won’t sugarcoat this one for us: Americans are broke.

And the worse things get, the less investors seem to notice.
What makes matters even worse is on Friday, we got the “too good to be true” and “just what the doctor ordered” Goldilocks jobs report that said 1 million people got jobs. Schiff said this “good news” report doesn’t make any sense, actually.

“So why didn’t any of those million people take their paychecks and spend them at a retailer? I mean, Trump is talking about all the great jobs, and all the raises that people have, and all the tax cuts. Why are retail sales down for three months in a row?” –Peter Schiff

Unfortunately, we also saw Americans running up record high levels of debt at the same time that the government is running massive deficits.
Last month, the New York Fed released the latest data on US household debt, revealing it has grown to a record $13 trillion. So yes, Americans have been spending, but they’ve been putting a lot of it on plastic. Credit card balances grew by $24 billion in the last quarter of 2017 alone. Could it be that Americans have maxed out the plastic?
At some point, a house of credit cards will collapse.

Schiff is hard on Donald Trump too, and rightfully so.  Lower taxes are always a good thing, the lower the better, in fact.  But Republicans refused to cut any government spending while instead, increasing it to the point of running massive deficits, making them worse than Democrats when it comes to being fiscally conservative.

The cold truth is that a back plan is needed, and most Americans don’t have that.  Many would be in some serious trouble during a financial downturn, and the country is most definitely headed that way.



Notice that this story barely received a mention from the mediawhores. No, we want to know about another lawsuit against Trump from somebody that says he was inappropriate 20 years ago. Never mind the fact that world war 3 may destroy all life on this planet. I know. I've covered this before, but this story is new.

The Russians are well aware of the fact that the U.S. is providing weapons, supplies and yes, chemical weapons to the so-called moderate rebels in Syria. They detonate chemical weapons, then we express outrage and blame Assad. Just this week the Russians announced that they took possession of several tons of chemical weapons held by the rebels. No matter! Let's keep poking the Russians until they fight back. Keep in mind that they know if they fight back, it will be almost impossible to keep it limited.

The purpose of all of the anti-Russian hysteria trumped up over the past year and a half is to prepare you for war. They need to get you real mad so you will send your sons and daughters and your money to fight this upcoming war. It's worked before. They have lied us into war before and there is no reason to believe this method won't work again. Meanwhile, we are just one incident away from giving them what they want. By the way ---- why are we in Syria again?

Bruce                               New World Order News

With these words, Colonel-General Rudskoy, the head of the Main Headquarters of the General Staff of the Russian Federation (the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff) turned to all beloved and deeply respected America.
Today, a meeting of the Ministry of Defense of Russia was held, at which Rudskoy made the following speech:

"Even earlier, a few days ago, Valery Gerasimov, the chief of the Russian General Staff, made an open statement to all the world's media.

In his address, Comrade Gerasimov said that Russia is aware of the impending sabotage in the Eastern Guta region. The opposition, controlled by a coalition led by the United States, is preparing to use the world's banned chemical weapons.

We told you that we are aware of the facts that "actors" and equipment were already brought into the alleged attack area, with the help of which the whole world was later to see a film about how the troops of the government of Syria, that is, the army of Assad, violate the world legislation and applies chemical weapons against civilians.

So, at the moment, our intelligence has replenished, in connection with which we simply have to warn:

First. All that humanitarian aid of the Western coalition, which was supposed for civilians of East Hut, suffering from terrorists, was directly at the disposal of these same terrorists. (Continued below Ad)

Not only that the Western coalition provided the militants with everything necessary, so it also contributed to their ranks being replenished. How? It's simple. Terrorists give the civilians food, in exchange for their assistance.

The second. We have data that are not doubted that fifty kilometers from the US military base (near the town of At-Tanf), American specialists are training specially formed groups of terrorists whose mission is to conduct provocative actions using banned chemical weapons in the southern part of the country .

Earlier this month, these militant detachments were sent to the area of ​​the settlement of Deraa, which is under the control of the "Free Army of Syria".

And now, these units are directly preparing to commit provocations, preparing explosives with poisonous chemicals.

The plan is also clear: after a series of such explosions, charges will be brought against government troops. Thus, the US is trying to "untie one's own hands," to launch aggressive actions against the Assad regime.

We absolutely know that everything necessary for the manufacture of poisonous shells has already been brought to the southern part of de-escalation. By the way, all imported was disguised as humanitarian aid to private American companies.

Also, the militants were provided with fuses, which were brought under the guise of tobacco.

At the disposal of terrorists there are twenty containers with a substance like chlorine, which will be used in alleged provocative attacks.
All the preparatory measures are thoroughly masked, and the consequences of the attacks are planned to be widely publicized.

The main purpose of these provocations is to strike a large-scale strike by the US Army through the territory of Syria, in particular on government and state facilities.

We are also aware of the stages of preparation for this blow. In several sea squares, the United States creates an enhanced grouping, which is armed with cruise missiles.

So, in connection with all of the above, we consider it our duty to inform you that the Russian General Staff is very closely monitoring all changes in the situation concerning Syria.

We are also obliged to warn that if, on the west side, a blow to Damascus is struck, in the government quarters, among which are servicemen of the Russian army.

And not only servicemen, but also diplomatic employees, advisers, military police and the Center for Conciliation of the parties.

So, if this blow is, in this case, the Russian side will strike back not only on the missiles themselves, which will not have time to reach the target, but also on the square from where these missiles will be launched.

This we guarantee.

Thank you for attention."

On Saturday, the Hal Turner Radio Show web site outlined sudden and dramatic events which led Russia to conclude the U.S. is planning a major attack upon Syria.  That timeline of events appears HERE.
Late Sunday, the Hal Turner Radio Show web site outlined the bolstering of US Navy forces by 13 surface vessels and six submarines of NATO countries, which were just finishing exercises.  That story appears HERE.

The risk of miscalculation between major powers active in Syria has never been higher than today. The situation is critical
The events on Saturday and Sunday, as well as today's speech by General Rudskoy has not been mentioned EVEN ONCE by the regular mass-media in the United States or in Europe.  Citizens of the West of blissfully unaware of just how close we are to the physical breakout of World War 3.
It is not surprise that the media is silent; they do the bidding of certain elements of government; the same elements now getting us farther into troubles in places we don't belong.

If the American people started hearing about this on regular mass-media, there would be a public outcry to put a halt to it.  The elements within government perpetrating these shenanigans do not want the public to know, in order to prevent that public outcry.  They want the eruption of war to be sudden and FRIGHTENING, so citizens will be scared, and will quietly fall-in-line and do what government tells them.

Please spread links to this article to everyone you know or care about.  We are perhaps only DAYS AWAY from the outbreak of something horrible.
Below is video of another Russian General explicitly warning his forces will not only shoot down US Missiles fired at Syria, but will also ATTACK THE SHIPS WHICH LAUNCH THEM!

This is a direct statement of intent to attack American warships for launching another cruise missile attack against Syria; and they already have proof the US is arranging a phony chemical weapons attack as the basis to justify US action.
Here is the video with sub-titled translation:



The subject article covers the continuing decline in retail sales. Although our government masters continue to claim there is no inflation, we know better. Ironically, one of the largest contributors to inflation is the government. Rising taxes from Federal, State, County and City adds up to a significant bite in our wallets. Then there are cities like Chicago and Providence, that brag about sending their police out to increase their ticket writing on every little thing they can think of.

Then we have health care. Under the disastrous Obamacare, premiums have doubled and tripled, while deductibles have increased to the point where the average person cannot even afford the deductible and co-pays. Wages have risen only a tiny bit. Social Security payments have been nearly flat for years. The result is less disposable income. Less money for stores. Less money for trips. Less money for entertainment and less money for food and shelter.

Our government masters don't get it. They think we have tons of money so all they have to do to balance their budget is find more creative ways to take more of our money. Meanwhile we do not operate under any such delusion. There is only so much money. There is only so much debt one can access. When that runs out, so does our economic system. We are rapidly approaching that.

Bruce                           New World Order News

Retail sales declined month over month for three consecutive months.
The last time there were three consecutive monthly declines in Retail Sales was in 2015.
The consumer is stretched and it’s starting to show up in the data as we have been forecasting at EPB Macro Research.

Each month, the Census Bureau publishes the Advanced Monthly Retail Trade report. The Advance Monthly and Monthly Retail Trade Surveys (MARTS and MRTS), the Annual Retail Trade Survey and the Quarterly E-Commerce Report work together to produce the most comprehensive data available on retail economic activity in the United States.

This is one of the most important macroeconomic reports as it pertains to the consumption side of the economy. Consumption is about 70% of the total economy so the retail sales report provides critical insight into the health of the economy on a relatively high-frequency basis.
The retail sales control group, the number that feeds into the GDP report, increased growth slightly to 4.18%. This number is not adjusting for inflation. The chart below clearly shows periods of accelerations in growth and decelerations in growth that have been closely correlated to the broad economic cycle.

Retail Sales Control Group Year-Over-Year Growth:
The economy decelerated materially in terms of retail sales growth from the 2015 peak until today. Over the last three to six months, there was a slight recovery in the growth rate of retail sales but there is not enough evidence to say a new trend is formed or that the downward trend will continue.
The only thing we can discern from the data is that the economy is growing at a slower pace than 2015 and the recent data is fairly trendless in terms of retail sales growth. Based on the plethora of other growth slowing data points, the probability is that the growth rate of retail sales will resume the downward trend.

Real retail sales, adjusted for inflation, also shows a broad cycle rollover from the 2015 peak. As previous cycles show, the lead-lag time from the cycle peak to the recession can vary, but once the cycle peaks, it is unlikely to see growth surpass the previous high for the cycle. It is therefore unlikely, despite the narrative, that retail sales growth or overall growth will surpass the 2015 level.
In fact, based on the data, the short-term peak in growth is in the rear-view mirror. There was a short-term peak in January 2017 and the economic data has been weak since then. After inflation, retail sales are growing at 2.12% year over year relative to almost 5% in 2015.

Real Retail Sales Control Group (Smoothed CPI) Year-Over-Year Growth:
Similarly, the peak in growth and subsequent decline can be seen in the most powerful growth category, online retail sales growth. The peak in growth was in 2015 and while the growth rate is still ‘good’, the economy has empirically decelerated since the 2015 peak.

Online Retail Sales Growth:
The spread between headline inflation and core inflation also shows signs consistent with economic slowdowns and headwinds to retail sales. The spread below attempts to capture the impact on higher oil prices to the retail sales and consumption basket. If oil is rising faster than core inflation, the consumer margin declines and if oil is rising slower than core inflation, this is a tailwind to overall consumption growth.
Historically, you can see the spread increasing and therefore, the consumer margin shrinking into each recession. Today, the spread is increasing as oil prices rise faster than overall inflation, negatively impacting the retail sales consumption basket for consumers.
Headline – Core Inflation Spread:
The Atlanta Fed GDP forecast has dropped down to 1.8% for Q1 2018, slowing moving in line with our growth slowing forecast over the past several months.

Atlanta Fed GDP Now:
Many long-term followers are aware that I have been calling for a significant slowdown in consumption due to the stretched position of the average US consumer.

In December 2017, I wrote a research note titled, “The Consumer Is Maxed Out – A Theme To Watch In 2018”
In that research note, my main points arguing for a future slowdown in growth included credit growth far in excess of income growth, low personal savings rate, and rising interest expenses.

Below is a small excerpt from that report in December 2017:
There are many indicators that are strongly suggesting the consumer is running out of steam and consumption growth will be weaker in 2018 than in 2018. The economy, despite the tax cuts, is likely to slow in 2018, exacerbated by aggressive Federal Reserve policy. The peak for this cycle has already been registered, noted by the yellow box. It is always possible for income growth to accelerate materially, but the historical evidence suggests that the peak in income growth is behind us, and we will start to see decelerations in income growth as we are near the end of a 100+ month economic expansion, the second longest on record. The consumer is already completely maxed out in terms of spending. The personal savings rate hit a new low, down to 2.9%.

Personal Savings Rate:
There is essentially no room for the savings rate to go much lower, so consumption has to go down or credit has to increase in order to maintain consumption growth.

If the savings rate goes up, consumption must fall. Consumers are limited in the amount of credit they can accumulate. If consumers are reaching for credit and are fully maxed out, and that has equated to flat consumption growth of 2.7%, that is a very weak underlying economy.
I will update the key metrics including credit growth, the savings rate and income growth below.
Consumer credit growth decelerated materially from 2016 to the middle part of 2017. As euphoria in the stock market (SPY) rose in the latter part of 2017 along with general positive ‘hopes’ for the economy, hopes that have yet to materialize, consumers felt more comfortable increasing credit growth, despite a lack of income growth.

Consumer Credit Growth:
Current consumer credit growth is increasing at a pace of roughly 5.6% annually. As credit growth accelerates, personal interest payments increase leaving less disposable income for savings and consumption.
Total income, which includes dividends, interest, wages, government programs etc., can be thought of as the consumers’ ‘revenue’ or top line.
From the top line, less personal current taxes to find disposable personal income.
The hope for the Trump economy is that the personal taxes line shrinks, leaving more money for savings, consumption and other productive uses of capital rather than paying interest on the debt, a low-velocity use of capital.

While it is very early and it will likely take several months for the impacts of the tax cut to trickle through the economic data, the data as of now shows no evidence of rising income growth and in fact, the data is pointing to the contrary with weak consumption numbers for the January and February reporting periods.

After subtracting personal taxes from total income, all other expenses are deducted and the final number left is the ‘personal savings rate’.
As the data empirically shows, consumers are reducing savings, increasing credit and that STILL results in negative consumption growth month over month and decelerating year-over-year growth.
If the consumer was ‘healthy’, why has the personal savings rate dropped to decade lows?

Personal Savings Rate:
The bulls of the economy fail to prove where the marginal consumption will come from. Yes, tax cuts are in effect and will likely lower personal taxes but the data is very clear that for one reason or another, consumers desire to increase credit and save less.
It would be another story if credit increased and savings declined yet consumption growth soared. That is not what is happening.
Disposable income growth per capita, NOT adjusted for inflation, is currently increasing at a pace of 3.2% annually.
Disposable Income Growth Per Capita:

It is not a challenge to see that credit growth of 5.6% with income growth of 3.2% is not a sustainable situation and eventually, credit growth will have to slow, savings will have to rise and consumption, therefore, by the simple definitions of the metrics, will have to decline.
It is possible that we are seeing the early stages of a multi-year decline in consumption growth that has started with declines in growth for January and February. It may be slightly early to call that trend definitively, but one can be significantly more confident in the assertion that consumption growth has little to no chance to materially accelerate with a savings rate of 3%, income growth of 3% and credit growth of 5.6%.



Back in 1948, in a vote by the UN, Jewish residents from all over the world were given land in Palestine. They used the example of the holocaust in Germany as a justification for creating their own land. In 1930's and 40's Germany, discrimination against Jews was a State policy. Even incarceration and killing was practiced. We all know the history. If we accept this conduct as appalling, then we must conclude that any State which engages in this conduct is equally appalling.

The subject article concludes that the State of Israel has become a replica of the persecution experienced by many Jews in Germany. Now, if you are Palestinian, you are subhuman by law. You do not have basic human rights. You can be jailed without charges. You can be judged guilty without a trial. You can have your house bulldozed and taken by the State. You can be denied health care. You can be forbidden to go to work. Your children can be denied education. If you are assaulted or killed, the perpetrator will most likely, not be punished. All this and more is commonplace and is rarely covered by the mediawhores and Israel could not survive if it wasn't for billions of dollars supplied by U.S. taxpayers.

Bruce                                                New World Order News

More than a decade ago, US President Jimmy Carter warned that Israel was practising apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territories. But in truth, it would be more accurate to say Israel itself is an apartheid state

By Jonathan Cook
March 19, 2018 "Information Clearing House" -  North from Nazareth’s city limits, a mile or so as the crow flies, is to be found an agricultural community by the name of Tzipori – Hebrew for “bird.” It is a place I visit regularly, often alongside groups of activists wanting to learn more about the political situation of the Palestinian minority living in Israel.

Tzipori helps to shed light on the core historic, legal and administrative principles underpinning a Jewish state, ones that reveal it to be firmly in a tradition of non-democratic political systems that can best be described as apartheid in nature.

More than a decade ago, former US president Jimmy Carter incurred the wrath of Israel’s partisans in America by suggesting that Israeli rule over Palestinians in the occupied territories was comparable to apartheid. While his bestseller book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid” broke a taboo, in many ways it added to the confusion surrounding discussions of Israel. Since then, others, including John Kerry, when US secretary of state, and former Israeli prime ministers Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak, have warned that Israeli rule in the occupied territories is in danger of metamorphosing into “apartheid” – though the moment of transformation, in their eyes, never quite seems to arrive.

It has been left to knowledgeable observers, such as South Africa’s Archbishop Desmond Tutu, to point out that the situation for Palestinians under occupation is, in fact, worse than that suffered by blacks in the former South Africa. In Tutu’s view, Palestinians under occupation suffer from something more extreme than apartheid – what we might term “apartheid-plus”.

There is a notable difference between the two cases that hints at the nature of that “plus”. Even at the height of apartheid, South Africa’s white population understood that it needed, and depended on, the labor of the black majority population. Israel, on the other hand, has a far more antagonistic relationship to Palestinians in the occupied territories. They are viewed as an unwelcome, surplus population that serves as a demographic obstacle to the political realization of a Greater Israel. The severe economic and military pressures Israel imposes on these Palestinians are designed to engineer their incremental displacement, a slow-motion ethnic cleansing.

Not surprisingly, Israel’s supporters have been keen to restrict the use of the term “apartheid” to South Africa, as though a political system allocating key resources on a racial or ethnic basis has only ever occurred in one place and at one time. It is often forgotten that the crime of apartheid is defined in international law, as part of the 2002 Rome Statute that created the International Criminal Court at The Hague. An apartheid system, the statute says, is “an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime”. In short, apartheid is a political system, or structure, that assigns rights and privileges based on racial criteria.
This definition, it will be argued in this essay, describes the political regime not only in the occupied territories – where things are actually even worse – but in Israel itself, where Jewish citizens enjoy institutional privileges over the 1.8 million Palestinians who have formal Israeli citizenship. These Palestinians are the remnants of the Palestinian people who were mostly dispersed by the 1948 war that established a Jewish state on the ruins of their homeland. These Palestinian citizens comprise about a fifth of Israel’s population.

Although it is generally understood that they suffer discrimination, the assumption even of many scholars is that their treatment in no way undermines Israel’s status as a western-style liberal democracy. Most minorities in the west – for example, blacks and Hispanics in the U.S., Asians in the U.K., Turks in Germany, and Africans in France – face widespread prejudice and discrimination. Israel’s treatment of its Palestinian minority, it is claimed, is no different.
This is to profoundly misunderstand the kind of state Israel is, and how it relates to all Palestinians, whether they are under occupation or Israeli citizens. The discrimination faced by Palestinians in Israel is not illegal, informal, unofficial, or improvised. It is systematic, institutional, structural and extensively codified, satisfying very precisely the definition of apartheid in international law and echoing the key features of South African apartheid.
It was for this reason that the United Nations’ Economic Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) published a report in 2017 concluding that Israel had “established an apartheid regime that dominates the Palestinian people as a whole”, including its Palestinian citizens. Under severe pressure from Israel and the US, that report was quickly retracted but the reality of apartheid in Israeli law and practice persists.

This argument is far more controversial than the one made by President Carter. His position suggests that Israel developed a discrete system of apartheid after the occupation began in 1967 – a kind of “add-on” apartheid to democratic Israel. On this view, were Israel to end the occupation, the apartheid regime in the territories could be amputated like a gangrenous limb. But if Israel’s treatment of its own Palestinian citizens fits the definition of apartheid, then it implies something far more problematic. It suggests that Jewish privilege is inherent in the Israeli polity established by the Zionist movement in 1948, that a Jewish state is apartheid-like by its nature, and that dismantling the occupation would do nothing to end Israel’s status as an apartheid state.

Separate and unequal
Tzipori was founded by Romanian and Bulgarian Jews in 1949 as a moshav, a socialist agricultural collective similar to the kibbutz. It specialized in dairy production, though most of its inhabitants long ago abandoned farming, as well as socialism: today its 1,000 residents work in offices in nearby cities such as Haifa, Tiberias and Afula.

Tzipori’s Hebrew name alludes to a much older Roman city called Sephoris, the remains of which are included in a national park that abuts the moshav. Separating the moshav from ancient Sephoris is a large pine forest, concealing yet more rubble, in some places barely distinguishable from the archeological debris of the national park. But these ruins are much more recent. They are the remnants of a Palestinian community of some 5,000 souls known as Saffuriya. The village was wiped out in 1948 during the Nakba, the Arabic word for “catastrophe” – how Palestinians describe the loss of their homeland and its replacement with a Jewish state.

The Palestinians of Saffuriya – an Arabized version of “Sephoris” – were expelled by Israel and their homes razed. The destruction of Saffuriya was far from an isolated incident. More than 500 Palestinian villages were ethnically cleansed in a similar fashion during the Nakba, and the ruins of the homes invariably covered with trees. Today, all Saffuriya’s former residents live in exile – most outside Israel’s borders, in camps in Lebanon. But a proportion live close by in Nazareth, the only Palestinian city in what became Israel to survive the Nakba. In fact, according to some estimates, as much as 40 percent of Nazareth’s current population is descended from Saffuriya’s refugees, living in their own neighborhood called Safafri.
Nowadays, when observers refer to Palestinians, they usually think of those living in the territories Israel occupied in 1967: the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. Increasingly, observers (and the various peace processes) overlook two other significant groups. The first are the Palestinian refugees who ended up beyond the borders of partitioned Palestine; the second are the 20 percent of Palestinians who managed to remain on their land. In 1948, some 150,000 survived the Nakba – a figure far higher than intended by Israel’s founders.

They included 30,000 in Nazareth – both the original inhabitants and refugees like those from Saffuriya who sought sanctuary in the city during the fighting. They avoided expulsion only because of a mistake. The commander who led the attack on Nazareth, a Canadian Jew called Ben Dunkelman, disobeyed an order to empty the city of its inhabitants. One can guess why: given the high profile of Nazareth as a center of Christianity, and coming in the immediate wake of the war crimes trials of Nazis at Nuremberg, Dunkelman presumably feared that one day he might end up in the dock too.
There were other, unforeseen reasons why Palestinians either remained inside Israel or were brought into the new state. Under pressure from the Vatican, a significant number of Palestinian Christians – maybe 10,000 – were allowed to return after the fighting finished. A further 35,000 Palestinians were administratively moved into Israel in 1949, after the Nakba had ended, when Israel struck a deal with Jordan to redraw the ceasefire lines – to Israel’s territorial, but not demographic, advantage. And finally, in a far less technologically sophisticated age, many refugees who had been expelled outside Israel’s borders managed to slip back hoping to return to villages like Saffuriya. When they found their homes destroyed, they “blended” into surviving Palestinian communities like Nazareth, effectively disappearing from the Israeli authorities’ view.

In fact, it was this last trend that initiated a process that belatedly led to citizenship for the Palestinians still in Israel. The priority for Israeli officials was to prevent any return for the 750,000 Palestinians they had ethnically cleansed so successfully. That was the only way to ensure the preservation of a permanent and incontrovertible Jewish majority. And to that end, Palestinians in surviving communities like Nazareth needed to be marked out – “branded,” to use a cattle-ranching metaphor. That way, any “infiltrators,” as Israel termed refugees who tried to return home, could be immediately identified and expelled again. This “branding” exercise began with the issuing of residency permits to Palestinians in communities like Nazareth. But as Israel sought greater international legitimacy, it belatedly agreed to convert this residency into citizenship.

It did so through the Citizenship Law of 1952, four years after Israel’s creation. Citizenship for Palestinians in Israel was a concession made extremely reluctantly and only because it served Israel’s larger demographic purposes. Certainly, it was not proof, as is often assumed, of Israel’s democratic credentials. The Citizenship Law is better understood as an anti-citizenship law: its primary goal was to strip any Palestinians outside the new borders – the vast majority after the ethnic cleansing of 1948 – of a right ever to return to their homeland.

Two years before the Citizenship Law, Israel passed the more famous Law of Return. This law effectively opened the door to all Jews around the world to immigrate to Israel, automatically entitling them to citizenship.

Anyone familiar with modern US history will be aware of the Supreme Court decision of 1954 in the famous civil rights case Brown v. Board of Education. The judges ruled that the creation of separate public schools for white and black pupils was unconstitutional, on the grounds that “separate is inherently unequal”. It was an important legal principle that would strike a decisive blow against Jim Crow, the Deep South’s version of apartheid.

If separate is inherently unequal, Israel’s segregated structure of citizenship is the most profound form of inequality imaginable. Citizenship is sometimes referred to as the “foundational right” offered by states because so many other basic rights typically depend on it: from suffrage to residency and welfare. By separating citizenship rights on an ethnic basis, creating an entitlement to citizenship for  Jews with one law and denying most Palestinians citizenship with another, Israel institutionalized legal apartheid at the bedrock level. Adalah, a legal rights group for Palestinians in Israel, has compiled an online database listing Israeli laws that explicitly discriminate based on ethnicity. The Law of Return and the Citizenship Law are the most significant, but there are nearly 70 more of them.

Citizenship and marriage
Ben Gurion was prepared to award the remnants of the Palestinians in Israel this degraded version of citizenship because he assumed this population would pose no threat to his new Jewish state. He expected these Palestinian citizens – or what Israel prefers to term generically “Israeli Arabs” – to be swamped by the arrival of waves of Jewish immigrants like those that settled Tzipori. Ben Gurion badly miscalculated. The far higher birth rate of Palestinian citizens meant they continue to comprise a fifth of Israel’s population.
Palestinian citizens have maintained this numerical proportion, despite Israel’s strenuous efforts to gerrymander its population. The Law of Return encourages – with free flights, financial gifts, interest-free loans and grants – any Jew in the world to come to Israel and instantly receive citizenship. More than three million Jews have taken up the offer.

The Citizenship Law, on the other hand, effectively closed the door after 1952 on the ability of Palestinians to gain citizenship. In fact, since then there has been only one way for a non-Jew to naturalize and that is by marrying an Israeli citizen, either a Jew or Palestinian. This exception is allowed only because a few dozen non-Jews qualify each year, posing no threat to Israel’s Jewish majority.

In practice, Palestinians outside Israel have always been disqualified from using this route to citizenship, even if they marry a Palestinian citizen of Israel, as became increasingly common after Israel occupied the rest of historic Palestine in 1967. During the Oslo years, when Palestinians in Israel launched a legal challenge to force Israel to uphold the naturalization of their spouses from the occupied territories, the government hurriedly responded by passing in 2003 the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law. It denied Palestinians the right to qualify for Israeli residency or citizenship under the marriage provision. In effect, it banned marriage across the Green Line formally separating Palestinians in Israel from Palestinians under occupation. The measure revealed that Israel was prepared to violate yet another fundamental right – to fall in love and marry the person of one’s choice – to preserve its Jewishness.
‘Nationalisation’ of land

Most citizens of the United States correctly assume that their citizenship and nationality are synonymous: “American” or “US”.
But the same is not true for Israelis. Israel classifies its citizens as holding different “nationalities”. This requires rejecting a common Israeli nationality and instead separating citizens into supposed ethnic or religious categories. Israel has recognized more than 130 nationalities to deal with anomalous cases, myself included. After I married my wife from Nazareth, I entered a lengthy, complex and hostile naturalization process. I am now an Israeli citizen, but my nationality is identified as “British”. The vast majority of Israeli citizens, on the other hand, hold one of two official nationalities: Jewish or Arab. The Israeli Supreme Court has twice upheld the idea that these nationalities are separate from – and superior to – citizenship.

This complex system of separate nationalities is not some arcane, eccentric practice: it is central to Israel’s version of apartheid. It is the means by which Israel can both institutionalize a separation in rights and obscure this state-sanctioned segregation from the view of outsiders. It allows Israel to offer different rights to different citizens depending on whether they are Jews or Palestinians, but in a way that avoids too obvious a comparison with apartheid

South Africa. Here is how.
All citizens, whatever their ethnicity, enjoy “citizenship rights”. In this regard, Israel looks – at least superficially – much like a western liberal democracy. Examples of citizenship rights include health care, welfare payments, the domestic allocation of water, and education – although, as we shall see, the picture is usually far more complex than it first appears. In reality, Israel has managed covertly to subvert even these citizenship rights.
Consider medical care. Although all citizens are entitled to equal health provision, hospitals and major medical services are almost always located in Jewish communities, and difficult for Palestinian citizens to access given the lack of transport connections between Palestinian and Jewish communities. Palestinian citizens in remote communities, such as in the Negev (Naqab),  are often denied access to basic medical services. And recently it emerged that Israeli hospitals were secretly segregating Jewish and Palestinian women in maternity clinics. Dr Hatim Kanaaneh, a Palestinian physician in Israel, documents these and many other problems with health care in his book “A Doctor in Galilee”.

More significantly, Israel also recognizes “national rights”, and reserves them almost exclusively for the Jewish population. National rights are treated as superior to citizenship rights. So if there is a conflict between a Jew’s national right and a Palestinian’s individual citizenship right, the national right must be given priority by officials and the courts. In this context, Israel’s rightwing justice minister, Ayelet Shaked, observed in February 2018 that Israel should ensure “equal rights to all citizens but not equal national rights.” She added: “Israel is a Jewish state. It isn’t a state of all its nations.”

The simplest illustration of how this hierarchy of rights works can be found in Israel’s citizenship laws. The Law of Return establishes a national right for all Jews to gain instant citizenship – as well as the many other rights that derive from citizenship. The Citizenship Law, on the other hand, creates only an individual citizenship right for non-Jews, not a national one. Palestinian citizens can pass their citizenship “downwards” to their offspring but cannot extend it “outwards,” as a Jew can, to members of their extended family – in their case, Palestinians who were made refugees in 1948. My wife has relatives who were exiled by the Nakba in Jordan. But with only an individual right to citizenship, she cannot bring any of them back to their homes now in Israel.
This distinction is equally vital in understanding how Israel allocates key material resources, such as water and land. Let us consider land. Israel has “nationalized” almost all of its territory – 93 percent. Palestinian communities in Israel have been able to hold on to less than 3 percent of their land – mostly the built-up areas of their towns and villages – after waves of confiscation by the state stripped them of at least 70 percent of their holdings.
It is not unprecedented in western democracies for the state to be a major land owner, even if Israel’s total holdings are far more extensive than other states. But Israel has successfully masked what this “nationalization” of land actually means. Given that there is no recognized Israeli nationality, Israel does not hold the land on behalf of its citizens – as would be the case elsewhere. It does not even manage the land on behalf of Jewish citizens of Israel. Instead the land is held in trust for the Jewish people around the globe, whether they are citizens or not, and whether they want to be part of Israel or not.
In practice, Jews who buy homes in Israel effectively get long-term leases on their property from a government body known as the Israel Lands Authority. The state regards them as protecting or guarding the land on behalf of Jews collectively around the world. Who are they guarding it from? From the original owners. Most of these lands, like those in Tzipori, have been either seized from Palestinian refugees or confiscated from Palestinian citizens.

A democratic facade
The political geographer Oren Yiftachel is among the growing number of Israeli scholars who reject the classification of Israel as a liberal democracy, or in fact any kind of democracy. He describes Israel as an “ethnocracy”, a hybrid state that creates a democratic façade, especially for the dominant ethnic group, to conceal its essential, non-democratic structure. In describing Israel’s ethnocracy, Yiftachel provides a complex hierarchy of citizenship in which non-Jews are at the very bottom.

It is notable that Israel lacks a constitution, instead creating 11 Basic Laws that approximate a constitution. The most liberal component of this legislation, passed in 1992 and titled Freedom and Human Dignity, is sometimes referred to as Israel’s Bill of Rights. However, it explicitly fails to enshrine in law a principle of equality. Instead, the law emphasizes Israel’s existence as a “Jewish and democratic state” – an oxymoron that is rarely examined by Israelis.
A former Supreme Court judge, Meir Shamgar, famously claimed that Israel – as the nation-state of the Jewish people – was no less democratic than France as the nation-state of the French people. And yet, while it is clear how one might naturalize to become French, the only route to becoming Jewish is religious conversion. “Jewish” and “French” are clearly not equivalent conceptions of citizenship.

Netanyahu’s government has been trying to draft a 12th Basic Law. Its title is revealing: it declares Israel as “the Nation-State of the Jewish People”. Not the state of Israeli citizens, or even of Israeli Jews, but of all Jews around the world, including those Jews who are not Israeli citizens and have no interest in becoming citizens. This is a reminder of the very peculiar nature of a Jewish state, one that breaks with the conception of a civic citizenship on which liberal democracies are premised. Israel’s ethnic idea of nationality is closely derived from – and mirrors – the ugly ethnic or racial ideas of citizenship that dominated Europe a century ago (and are in places being revived). Those exclusive, aggressive conceptions of peoplehood led to two devastating world wars, as well as providing the ideological justification for a wave of anti-semitism that swept Europe and culminated in the Holocaust.

Further, if all Jewish “nationals” in the world are treated as citizens of Israel – real or potential ones – what does that make Israel’s large minority of Palestinian citizens, including my wife and two children? It seems that Israel regards them effectively as guest workers or resident aliens, tolerated so long as their presence does not threaten the state’s Jewishness. Ayelet Shaked, Israel’s justice minister, implicitly acknowledged this problem during a debate on the proposed Nation-State Basic Law in February. She said Israel could not afford to respect universal human rights: “There is a place to maintain a Jewish majority even at the price of violation of rights.”

The hierarchy of citizenship Yiftachel notes is helpful because it allows us to understand that Israeli citizenship is the exact opposite of the level playing field of formal rights one would expect to find in a liberal democracy. Another key piece of legislation, the Absentee Property Law of 1950, stripped all Palestinian refugees from the 1948 war of their right to any property they had owned before the Nakba. Everything was seized – land, crops, buildings, vehicles, farm implements, bank accounts – and became the property of Israel, passed on to Jewish institutions or Jewish citizens in violation of international law.

The Absentee Property Law applied equally to Palestinian citizens, such as those from Saffuriya who ended up in Nazareth, as it did to Palestinian refugees outside Israel’s recognized borders. In fact, as many as one in four Palestinian citizens are reckoned to have been internally displaced by the 1948 war. In the Orwellian terminology of the Absentee Property Law, these refugees are classified as “present absentees” – present in Israel, but absent from their former homes. Despite their citizenship, such Palestinians have no more rights to return home, or reclaim other property, than refugees in camps in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.

Residential segregation
Although Tzipori was built on land confiscated from Palestinians – some of them Israeli citizens living close by in Nazareth – not one of its 300 or so homes, or its dozen farms, is owned by a Palestinian citizen. In fact, no Palestinian citizen of Israel has ever been allowed to live or even rent a home in Tzipori, seven decades after Israel’s creation.

Tzipori is far from unique. There are some 700 similar rural communities, known in Israel as cooperative communities. Each is, and is intended to be, exclusively Jewish, denying Palestinian citizens of Israel the right to live in them. These rural communities control much of the 93 percent of land that has been “nationalized”, effectively ensuring it remains off-limits to the fifth of Israel’s population that is non-Jewish.

How is this system of ethnic residential segregation enforced? Most cooperative communities like Tzipori administer a vetting procedure through an “admissions committee”, comprising officials from quasi-governmental entities such as the Jewish Agency, the Jewish National Fund and the World Zionist Organization, which are there to represent the interests of world Jewry, not Israeli citizens. These organizations – effectively interest groups that enjoy a special, protected status as agents of the Israeli state – are themselves a gross violation of the principles of a liberal democracy. The state, for example, has awarded the Jewish National Fund, whose charter obligates it to discriminate in favor of Jews, ownership of 13 percent of Israeli territory. A Jew from Brooklyn has more rights to land in Israel than a Palestinian citizen.

For most of Israel’s history, there was little need to conceal what the admissions committees were doing. No one noticed. If a Palestinian from Nazareth had applied to live in Tzipori, the admissions committee would simply have rejected the applicant on the grounds that they were an “Arab”. But this very effective mechanism for keeping Palestinian citizens off most of their historic homeland hit a crisis two decades ago when the case of the Kaadan family began working its way through Israel’s court system.

Adel Kaadan lived in a very poor Palestinian community called Baqa al-Ghabiyya, south of Nazareth and quite literally a stone’s throw from the West Bank. Kaadan had a good job as a senior nurse in nearby Hadera hospital, where he regularly treated Jewish patients and had on occasion, he told me when I interviewed him in the early 2000s, helped to save Israeli soldiers’ lives. He assumed that should entitle him to live in a Jewish community. Kaadan struck me as stubborn as he was naïve – a combination of personality traits that had got him this far and ended up causing Israel a great deal of legal and reputational trouble.

Determined to give his three young daughters the best opportunities he could manage, Kaadan had built the family an impressive villa in Baqa al-Ghabiyya. While I sat having coffee with him, one of his daughters played the piano with a proficiency that suggested she had a private tutor. But Kaadan was deeply dissatisfied with his lot. His home was grand and beautiful, but Baqa was not. As soon as the family stepped outside their home, they had to wade into the reality of Palestinian life in Israel. Kaadan was proof that it was possible for some Palestinian citizens, if they were determined and lucky enough to surmount the many obstacles placed in their way, to enjoy personal success, but they could not so easily escape the collective poverty of their surroundings.

Like many other Palestinian citizens, Kaadan was trapped by yet another piece of legislation: the Planning and Building Law of 1965. It advanced a core aim of Zionism: “Judaizing” as much land as possible. It achieved this in two main ways. First, communities in Israel were only recognized by the state if they were listed in the Planning Law. Although nearly 200 Palestinian communities had survived the Nakba, the law recognized just 120 or them.
The most problematic communities, from Israel’s point of view, were the dispersed Bedouin villages located among the remote, dusty hills of the semi-desert Negev, or Naqab, in Israel’s south. The Negev was Israel’s biggest land reserve, comprising 60 percent of the country’s territory. Its vast, inaccessible spaces had made it the preferred location for secretive military bases and Israel’s nuclear program. Israel wanted the Bedouin off their historic lands, and the Planning Law was the ideal way to evict them – by de-recognizing their villages.

Today the inhabitants of dozens of “unrecognized villages” – home to nearly a tenth of the Palestinian population in Israel – are invisible to the state, except when it comes to the enforcement of planning regulations. The villagers live without state-provided electricity, water, roads and communications. Any homes they build instantly receive demolition orders, forcing many to live in tents or tin shacks. Israel’s aim is to force the Bedouin to abandon their pastoral way of life and traditions, and relocate to overcrowded, state-built townships, which are the poorest communities in Israel by some margin.

Starved of resources
In addition to creating the unrecognized villages, the Planning and Building Law of 1965 ensures ghetto-like conditions for recognized Palestinian communities too. It creates residential segregation by confining the vast majority of Palestinian citizens to the 120 Palestinian communities in Israel that are officially listed for them, and then tightly limits their room for growth and development. Even in the case of Palestinian citizens living in a handful of so-called “mixed cities” – Palestinian cities that were largely “Judaized” after the Nakba – they have been forced into their own discrete neighborhoods, on the margins of urban life.

The Planning Law also drew a series of blue lines around all the communities in Israel, determining their expansion area. Jewish communities were awarded significant land reserves, while the blue lines around Palestinian communities were invariably drawn close to the built-up area half a century ago. Although Israel’s Palestinian population has grown seven or eight-fold since, its expansion space has barely changed, leading to massive overcrowding. This problem is exacerbated by Israel’s failure to build a single new Palestinian community since 1948.

Like the other 120 surviving Palestinian communities in Israel, Baqa had been starved of resources: land, infrastructure and services. There were no parks or green areas where the Kaadan children could play. Outside their villa, there were no sidewalks, and during heavy rains untreated sewage rose out of the inadequate drains to wash over their shoes. Israel had confiscated all Baqa’s land for future development, so houses were crowded around them on all sides, often built without planning permits, which were in any case almost impossible to obtain. Illegal hook-ups for electricity blotted the view even further. With poor refuse collection services, the families often burnt their rubbish in nearby dumpsters.

Adel Kaadan had set his eyes on living somewhere better – and that meant moving to a Jewish community. When Israel began selling building plots in Katzir, a small Jewish cooperative community located on part on Baqa’s confiscated land, Kaadan submitted his application. When it was rejected because he was an “Arab”, he turned to the courts.

In 2000, the Kaadans’ case arrived at the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court. Aharon Barak, the court’s president who heard the petition, was the most liberal and respected judge in Israel’s history. But the Kaadans’ case was undoubtedly the most unwelcome he ever adjudicated. It placed an ardent Zionist like himself in an impossible situation.

On one hand, there was no practice in Israel more clearly apartheid-like than the ethnic-based residential exclusion enforced by the admissions committees. It was simply not something Barak could afford to be seen upholding. After all, he was a regular lecturer at Yale and Harvard law schools, where he was feted, and had often been cited by liberal counterparts on the US Supreme Court as a major influence on their judicial activism.
But while he could not be seen ruling in favor of Katzir, at the same time he dared not rule in the Kaadans’ favor either. Such a decision would undermine the core rationale of a Zionist Jewish state: the Judaization of as much territory as possible. It would create a legal precedent that would throw open the doors to other Palestinian citizens, allowing them also to move into these hundreds of Jewish-only communities.

Childhoods apart
Barak understood that much else hung on the principle of residential separation. Primary and secondary education are also segregated – and largely justified on the basis of residential separation. Jewish children go to Hebrew-language schools in Jewish areas; Palestinian children in Israel go to Arabic-language schools in Palestinian communities. (There are only a handful of private bilingual schools in Israel.)

This separation ensures that educational resources are prioritized for Jewish citizens. Arab schools are massively underfunded and their curriculum tightly controlled by the authorities, as exemplified by the 2011 Nakba Law. It threatens public funding for any school or institution that teaches about the key moment in modern Palestinian history. Additionally, teaching posts in Arab schools have historically been dictated by the Shin Bet, Israel’s secret police, to create spies and an atmosphere of suspicion in classrooms and common-rooms.

A side-benefit for Israel of separation in residency and education is that Palestinian and Jewish citizens have almost no chances to meet until they reach adulthood, when their characters have been formed. It is easy to fear the Other when you have no experience of him. The success of this segregation may be measured in intermarriages between Jewish and Palestinian citizens. In the year 2011, when the Israeli authorities last issued statistics, there were only 19 such marriages, or 0.03 percent. Israeli Jews openly oppose such marriages as “miscegenation”.

In fact, Israel is so opposed to intermarriages, that it prohibits such marriages from being conducted inside Israel. Mixed couples are forced to travel abroad and marry there – typically in Cyprus – and apply for the marriage to be recognized on their return. Notably, the 1973 United Nations Convention on Apartheid lists measures prohibiting mixed marriages as a crime of apartheid.

Residential separation has also allowed Israel to ensure Jewish communities are far wealthier and better provided with services than Palestinian ones. Although all citizens are taxed on their income, public-subsidized building programs are overwhelmingly directed at providing homes for Jewish families in Jewish areas. Over seven decades, hundreds of Jewish communities have been built by the state, with ready-made roads, sidewalks and public parks, with homes automatically connected to water, electricity and sewage grids. All these communities are built on “state land” – in most cases, lands taken from Palestinian refugees and Palestinian citizens.

By contrast, not one new Arab community has been established in that time. And the 120 recognized Palestinian communities have been largely left to sink or swim on their own. After waves of confiscation by the state, they are on the remnants of private Palestinian land. Having helped to subsidize housing and building programs for millions of Jewish immigrants, Palestinian communities have mostly had to raise their own money to install basic infrastructure, including water and sewage systems.

Meanwhile, segregated zoning areas and separate planning committees allow Israel to enforce much tougher regulations on Palestinian communities, to deny building permits and to carry out demolition orders. Some 30,000 homes are reported to be illegally built in the Galilee, almost all of them in Palestinian communities.

Similarly, most of the state’s budget for local authorities, as well as business investment, is channeled towards Jewish communities rather than Palestinian ones. This is where industrial areas and factories are built, to ensure greater employment opportunities for Jewish citizens and to top up Jewish communities’ municipal coffers with business rates.

Meanwhile, a central government “balancing grant” – intended to help the poorest local authorities by redistributing income tax in their favor – is skewed too. Even though Palestinian communities are uniformly the poorest in Israel, they typically receive a third of the balancing grant received by Jewish communities.

Residential segregation has also allowed Israel to create hundreds of “national priority areas” (NPAs), which receive preferential government budgets, including extra funding to allow for long school days. Israeli officials have refused to divulge even to the courts what criteria are used to establish these priority areas, but it is clearly not based on socio-economic considerations. Of 557 NPAs receiving extra school funding, only four tiny Palestinian communities were among their number. The assumption is that they were included only to avoid accusations that the NPAs were designed solely to help Jews.

Israel has similarly used residential segregation to ensure that priority zoning for tourism chiefly benefits Jewish communities. That has required careful engineering, given that much of the tourism to Israel is Christian pilgrimage. In the north, the main pilgrimage destination is Nazareth and its Basilica of the Annunciation, where the Angel Gabriel reputedly told Mary she was carrying the son of God. But Israel avoided making the city a center for tourism, fearing it would be doubly harmful: income from the influx of pilgrims would make Nazareth financially independent; and a prolonged stay by tourists in the city would risk exposing them to the Palestinian narrative.

Instead the north’s tourism priority zone was established in nearby Tiberias, on the Sea of Galilee, a once-Palestinian city that was ethnically cleansed during the Nakba and is now a Jewish city. For decades investors have been encouraged to build hotels and tourist facilities in Tiberias, ensuring that most coachloads of pilgrims only pass through Nazareth, making a brief hour-long stop to visit the Basilica.

Although Nazareth was very belatedly awarded tourism priority status in the late 1990s – in time for the Pope’s visit for the millennium – little has changed in practice. The city is so starved of land that there is almost no room for hotels. Those that have been built are mostly located in the city’s outer limits, where pilgrims are unlikely to be exposed to Palestinian residents.

Public transport links have also privileged Jewish communities over Palestinian ones. The national bus company Egged – the main provider of public transport in Israel – has established an elaborate network of bus connections between Jewish areas, ensuring that Jewish citizens are integrated into the economy. They can easily and cheaply reach the main cities, factories and industrial zones. Egged buses, however, rarely enter Palestinian communities, depriving their residents of employment opportunities. This, combined with the lack of daycare services for young children, explains why Palestinian women in Israel have long had one of the lowest employment rates in the Arab world, at below 20 percent.

Palestinian communities have felt discrimination in the provision of security and protection too. Last November the government admitted there was woefully inadequate provision of public shelters in Palestinian communities, even in schools, against missile attacks and earthquakes. Officials have apparently balked at the large expense of providing shelters, and the problem of freeing up land in Palestinian communities to establish them. Similarly, Israel has been loath to establish police stations in Palestinian communities, leading to an explosion of crime there. In December Palestinian legislator Yousef Jabareen pointed out that there had been 381 shootings in his hometown of Umm al-Fahm in 2017, but only one indictment. He said the town’s inhabitants had become “hostages in the hands of a small group of criminals.”

In all these different ways, Israel has ensured Palestinian communities remain substantially poorer than Jewish communities. A study in December 2017 found that the richest communities in Israel – all Jewish – received nearly four times more welfare spending from the government than the poorest communities – all Palestinian. A month earlier, the Bank of Israel reported that Palestinian citizens had only 2 percent of all mortgages, in a sign of how difficult it is for them to secure loans, and they had to pay higher interest charges on the loans.

Among the 35 member states of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Israel has the highest poverty rate. This is largely because of high rates among Palestinian citizens, augmented by the self-inflicted poverty of Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, most of whose men refuse to work, preferring religious studies. In evidence of how Israel has skewed welfare spending to benefit poor Jews like the ultra-Orthodox, rather than Palestinian citizens, only a fifth of Jewish children live below the poverty line compared to two-thirds of Palestinian children in Israel.'

'Socially unsuitable’
Back at the Supreme Court, Aharon Barak was still grappling with the conflicting burden of Zionist history and the expectations of American law schools. The judge understood he needed to fudge a ruling. He had to appear to be siding with the Kaadan family without actually ruling in their favor and thereby creating a legal precedent that would let other Palestinian families follow in their path. So he ordered Katzir to rethink its decision, warning that it could not keep them out on religious or national grounds.

The Jewish community did rething its policy, but not in a way that helped Barak. Katzir responded that they were no longer rejecting the Kaadans because they were Arab, but because they were “socially unsuitable.” Barak knew that would not wash at Yale or Harvard either – it too obviously sounded like code for “Arab”. He ordered Katzir to come back with a different decision regarding the Kaadans.

The case and a few others like it dragged on over the next several years, with the court reluctant to make a precedent-setting decision. Quietly, behind the scenes, Adel Kaadan finally received a plot of land from Katzir. Unnerved, cooperative communities across the Galilee started to pass local bylaws – insisting on a “social suitability” criterion for applicants – to pre-empt any decision by the Supreme Court in favor of the Palestinian families banging at their doors.

By 2011, it looked as if the Supreme Court was running out of options and would have to rule on the legality of the admissions committees. At that point, the government of Benjamin Netanyahu stepped in to help out the court. There was no statutory basis for the admissions committees; they were simply an administrative practice observed by all these hundreds of Jewish-only cooperative communities. The Netanyahu government, therefore, pushed through an Admissions Committee Law that year. It finally put the committees on a statutory footing, but also made them embarrassingly visible for the first time.

As the parliament backed the legislation, reports in the western media labeled it an “apartheid law” – conveniently ignoring the fact that this had been standard practice in Israel for more than six decades.

A petition from the legal group Adalah against the new law reached the Supreme Court in 2014. Barak had by this time retired. But in line with his aversion to issuing a ruling that might challenge the racist underpinnings of Israel as a Jewish state, the judges continued not to make a decision. They argued that the law was too new for the court to determine what effect the admissions committees would have in practice – or in the language of the judges, they declined to act because the law was not yet “ripe” for adjudication. The ripeness argument was hard to swallow given that the effect of the admissions committees in enforcing residential apartheid after so many decades was only too apparent.
Even so, the legal challenge launched by the Kaadans left many in the Israeli leadership worried. In February 2018, referring to the case, the justice minister Ayelet Shaked averred that in “the argument over whether it’s all right for a Jewish community to, by definition, be only Jewish, I want the answer to be, ‘Yes, it’s all right’.”

Two modes of apartheid
It is time to address more specifically the nature of the apartheid regime Israel has created – and how it mirrors the essence of South Africa’s apartheid without precisely replicating it.

Close to the forest planted over the ruins of the Palestinian homes of Saffuriya is a two-storey stone structure, an Israeli flag fluttering atop its roof. It is the only Palestinian home not razed in 1948. Later, it was inhabited by Jewish immigrants, and today serves as a small guest house known as Tzipori Village. Its main customers are Israeli Jews from the crowded, urban center of the country looking for a weekend break in the countryside.
Scholars have distinguished between two modes of South African apartheid. The first was what they term “trivial” or “petty” apartheid, though “visible” apartheid conveys more precisely the kind of segregation in question. This was the sort of segregation that was noticed by any visitor: separate park benches, buses, restaurants, toilets, and so on. Israel has been careful to avoid in so far as it can this visible kind of segregation, aware that this is what most people think of as “apartheid”. It has done so, even though, as we have seen, life in Israel is highly segregated for Jewish and Palestinian citizens. Residence is almost always segregated, as is primary and secondary education and much of the economy. But shopping malls, restaurants and toilets are not separate for Jewish and Palestinian citizens.

The same scholars refer to “grand” or “resource” apartheid, which they consider to have been far more integral to apartheid South Africa’s political project. This is segregation in relation to the state’s key material resources, such as land, water and mineral wealth. Israel has been similarly careful to segregate the main material resources to preserve them for the Jewish majority alone. It does this through the establishment of hundreds of exclusively Jewish communities like Tzipori. As noted previously, almost all of Israel’s territory has been locked up in these cooperative communities. And in line with its Zionist sloganeering about making the desert bloom, Israel has also restricted the commercial exploitation of water to agricultural communities like the kibbutz and moshav. It has provided subsidized water to these Jewish-only communities – and denied it to Palestinian communities – by treating the commercial use of water as a national right for Jews alone.

A thought experiment using Tzipori Village guest house neatly illustrates how Israel practices apartheid but in a way that only marginally differs from the South African variety. Had this bed and breakfast been located in a white community in South Africa, no black citizen would have been allowed to stay in it even for a night, and even if the owner himself had not been racist. South African law would have forbidden it. But in Israel any citizen can stay in Tzipori Village, Jew and Palestinian alike. Although the owner may be racist and reject Palestinian citizens, nothing in the law allows him to do so.

But – and this is crucial – Tzipori’s admissions committee would never allow a Palestinian citizen to buy the guest house or any home in the moshav, or even rent a home there. The right a Palestinian citizen has to spend a night in Tzipori Village is “trivial” or “petty” when compared to Israel’s sweeping exclusion of all Palestinian citizens from almost all the country’s territory. That is the point the scholars of South African apartheid highlight in distinguishing between the two modes of apartheid. In this sense, Israel’s apartheid may not be identical to South Africa’s, but it is a close relative or cousin.

This difference is also apparent in Israel’s treatment of suffrage. The fact that all Israeli citizens – Jews and Palestinians – have the vote and elect their own representatives is often cited by Israel’s supporters as proof that Israel is a normal democratic country and cannot therefore be an apartheid state. There are, however, obvious problems with this claim.

We can make sense of the difference by again examining South Africa. The reason South African apartheid took the form it did was because a white minority, determined to preserve its privileges, faced off against a large black majority. It could not afford to give them the vote because any semblance of democracy would have turned power over to the black population and ended apartheid.

Israel, on the other hand, managed to radically alter its demographic fortunes by expelling the vast majority of Palestinians in 1948. This was the equivalent of gerrymandering the electoral constituency of the new Jewish state on a vast, national scale. The exclusion of most Palestinians from their homeland through the Citizenship Law, and the open door for Jews to come to Israel provided by the Law of Return, ensured Israel could tailor-make a “Jewish ethnocracy” in perpetuity.

The Israeli-Palestinian political scientist Asad Ghanem has described the Palestinian vote as “purely symbolic” – and one can understand why by considering Israel’s first two decades, when Palestinian citizens were living under a military government. Then, they faced greater restrictions on their movement than Palestinians in the West Bank today. It would be impossible even for Israel’s keenest supporters to describe Israel as a democracy for its Palestinian citizens during this period, when they were under martial law. And yet Palestinians in Israel were awarded the vote in time for Israel’s first general election in 1949 and voted throughout the military government period. In other words, the vote may be a necessary condition for a democratic system but it is far from a sufficient one.

In fact, in Israel’s highly tribal political system, Jews are encouraged to believe they must vote only for Jewish Zionist parties, ones that uphold the apartheid system we have just analyzed. That has left Palestinian citizens with no choice but to vote for contending Palestinian parties. The one major Jewish-Arab party, the Communists, was in Israel’s earliest years a significant political force among Israeli Jews. Today, they comprise a tiny fraction of its supporters, with Palestinian citizens dominating the party.

With politics so tribal, it has been easy to prevent Palestinians from gaining even the most limited access to power. Israel’s highly proportional electoral system has led to myriad small parties in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset. All the Jewish parties have at various times participated in government in what are effectively rainbow coalitions. But the Palestinian parties have never been invited into an Israeli government, or had any significant impact on the legislative process. Israel’s political system may allow Palestinian citizens to vote, but they have zero political influence. This is why Israel can afford the generosity of allowing them to vote, knowing it will never disturb a tyrannical Jewish-majority rule.

Palestinian parliament member Ahmed Tibi has expressed it this way: “Israel is a democratic state for Jewish citizens, and a Jewish state for Arab citizens.”
‘Subversive’ call for equality

But increasingly any Palestinian presence in the Knesset is seen as too much by Israel’s Jewish parties. When the Oslo process was initiated in the late 1990s, the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships agreed that Israel’s Palestinian citizens should remain part of Israel in any future two-state arrangement. In response, Palestinian citizens began to take their Israeli citizenship far more seriously. A new party, Balad, was established by a philosophy professor, Azmi Bishara, who campaigned on a platform that Israel must stop being a Jewish state and become a “state of all its citizens” – a liberal democracy where all citizens would enjoy equal rights.

This campaign was soon picked up by all the Palestinian political parties, and led to a series of documents – including the most important, the Future Vision of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel – demanding major reforms that would turn Israel into either “a state of its citizens” or a “consensual democracy”.
The Israeli leadership was so discomfited by this campaign that in 2006 the prime minister, Ehud Olmert, held a meeting with the Shin Bet. Unlike usual meetings of the secret police, this discussion was widely publicized. The Israeli media reported that the Shin Bet regarded the so-called Future Vision documents as “subversion” and warned that they would use any means, including non-democratic ones, to defeat such a campaign for equal rights.
A year later, when Bishara – the figurehead of this movement – was out of the country on a speaking tour, it was announced that he would be put on trial for treason should he return. It was alleged that he had helped Hizbullah during Israel’s 2006 war with Lebanon – a claim even the Israeli newspaper Haaretz dismissed as preposterous. Bishara stayed away. Effectively, the government and Shin Bet had declared war on efforts to democratize Israel. As a result, most Palestinian politicians turned the volume down on their demands for political reform.

However, their continuing presence in the Knesset – especially as a succession of governments under Netanyahu has grown ever-more rightwing – has enraged more and more Jewish legislators. For years, the main Jewish parties have used their control of the Central Elections Committee to try to prevent leading Palestinian politicians from standing in parliamentary elections. However, the Supreme Court has – by ever-narrower margins – repeatedly overturned the CEC’s decisions.

Avigdor Lieberman, the Soviet-born Israeli defense minister who has been leading the attack on Palestinian legislators, managed to push through a Threshold Law in 2014 that raised the electoral threshold to a level that would be impossible for any of the three large Palestinian parties to surmount. But in a major surprise, these very different parties – representing Communist, Islamic and democratic-nationalist streams – put aside their differences to create a Joint List. In a prime example of unintended consequences, the 2015 general election resulted in the Joint List becoming the third largest party in the Knesset.

For a brief while, and to great consternation in Israel, it looked as if the List might become the official opposition, providing Palestinian legislators with access to security briefings and the right to head sensitive Knesset committees.

The pressure to get rid of the Palestinian parties has continued to intensify. In 2016 the Knesset passed another law – initially called the Zoabi Law, and later renamed the Expulsion Law – that allows a three-quarters parliamentary majority to expel any legislator, not because they committed a crime or misdeed but because the other legislators do not like their political views. The law’s original name indicated that the prime target for expulsion was Haneen Zoabi, who is now the most prominent member of Bishara’s Balad party.

According to commentators, it will be impossible to raise the three-quarters majority needed to approve such an expulsion. But in a time of war, or during one of the intermittent major attacks on Gaza, it seems probable that such a majority can be marshaled against outspoken critics of Israel – and supporters of a state of all its citizens – like Zoabi.

In fact, it only requires the expulsion of one member of the Joint List and the other members will be placed in an untenable position with their voters. They will be in the Knesset only because the Jewish Zionist legislators have chosen not to expel them – yet. This is why the Haaretz newspaper referred to the Expulsion Law as the first step in the “ethnic cleansing of the Knesset.”

As Israeli officials seem increasingly determined to abolish even the last formal elements of democracy in Israel, the country’s Palestinian leaders are finding themselves with limited options. Their only hope is to bring wider attention to the substantial democratic deficit in the Israeli polity.
In February, responding to the government’s moves to legislate a Basic Law on “Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people”, Knesset member Yousef Jabareen submitted an alternative Basic Law. It was titled “Israel, a democratic, egalitarian, and multi-cultural state”. In any western state, such a law would be axiomatic and redundant. In Israel, the measure stood no chance of gaining support in the Knesset except from legislators from the the Palestinian parties.

Jabareen admitted in an interview that the bill would be unlikely to secure backing even from the five members of Meretz, by far the most leftwing Jewish party in the parliament. Optimistically, he observed: “I want to hope that Meretz will be among them [supporters]. I have shared with Meretz a draft of the bill, but I have not asked them at this stage to join, in order to give them time to mull things over.”

There could hardly be a more ringing indictment of Israeli society than the almost-certain futility of seeking a Jewish legislator in the Knesset willing to support legislation for tolerance and equality.



The subject article briefly covers the history of the war in Syria --- not to be confused with the war in Iraq, the war in Libya, the war in Afghanistan and the war in Ukraine. There is one thing however, that all of these wars have in common: We started all of them.

Anyway, the war in Syria has been going on for more than 6 years. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people have been killed. The supposed culprits, Al-Qaeda, Isis, Isil, Al-Nusra et all, could not have started, let alone continued this fight, without the funding and training supplied by the taxpayers of the U.S. I know, no one asked any of us if we wanted to send our sons and daughters into these places or pay for it, but of course, they do what they want when they want.

None of these places pose any threat to the U.S. whatsoever. If we are so worried about the radicals, maybe we should stop bombing their countries, thus giving formerly disinterested people a reason to hate us.

Bruce                                New World Order News


It was seven years ago this week that the conflict in Syria began. How might it have developed without the negative role played by Western powers and their regional allies?

Beware the Ides of March, the old saying goes. The 15th of March down the ages has seen not only the assassination of Julius Caesar and the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia; it was also the day, in 2011, that the conflict in Syria began.

According to the standard narrative, it was the intransigence and brutality of the Assad government (always referred to as a ‘regime’) that plunged Syria into chaos. But while it’s true that there was genuine discontent with the government for a number of valid reasons seven years ago, the divisions within Syria could have been overcome without much bloodshed, had certain countries not worked to sabotage any peaceful solutions to the crisis.

 ‘Not proxy’: Lavrov says US, British, French special forces ‘directly involved’ in Syria war
Faced with a direct threat to its rule, the Assad government showed it was willing to make compromises. As early as March 26, 2011, the BBC was reporting that the government had released more than 200 political prisoners. There were also amnesties announced in May and June.

Not only that but important political changes were introduced as Assad acknowledged in a televised address that demands for reform were legitimate.
In February 2012, a new constitution, which ended the Ba’ath Party’s 40-year monopoly of power, was overwhelmingly endorsed in a national referendum. Article 8 of the new constitution stated: “The political system of the state shall be based on the principle of political pluralism, and exercising power democratically through the ballot box.”

But these democratizing measures, which went far further than any “reforms” made by the US/UK’s authoritarian ally Saudi Arabia, and which have been praised, were loftily dismissed by the West.

It may have only been in the summer of 2011 when Western leaders were openly declaring “Assad must go,” but the truth is that regime change had been on the agenda for a long time.

We know from WikiLeaks that as early as December 2006 US officials were discussing how to destabilize the Syrian government. A cable from US Ambassador to Syria William Roebuck discussed the "potential vulnerabilities" of the Assad administration and the "possible means to exploit them."
One of the "possible means" was to seek to divide the Shia and Sunni communities in Syria. In a section entitled PLAY ON SUNNI FEARS OF IRANIAN INFLUENCE, the ambassador wrote:
"There are fears in Syria that the Iranians are active in both Shia proselytizing and conversion of, mostly poor, Sunnis. Though often exaggerated, such fears reflect an element of the Sunni community in Syria that is increasingly upset by and focused on the spread of Iranian influence in their country through activities ranging from mosque construction to business." 

SANA] Syria War: What the mainstream media isn’t telling you about Eastern Ghouta
The date of the cable is highly significant. 2006 was the year that Israel, the US’s closest ally in the region, went to war in Lebanon but despite its clear military superiority, didn’t succeed in defeating Hezbollah. If Israel was to succeed in the future, the Syrian-Hezbollah-Iran axis would have to be broken.

In a television interview, former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas said that Britain had been preparing to send gunmen into Syria two years before the anti-government protests of 2011 and identified Syria’s “anti-Israel stance” as being critical.

Of course the US and its allies had to pretend that what they were really after in Syria was ‘democracy.’ But had they genuinely wanted this, they would have supported and encouraged Assad’s reforms and sided with opposition figures who wanted peaceful, democratic change and not an armed uprising. Instead they did all they could to escalate the crisis, flooding the country with arms and facilitating the influx of radical Islamist fighters from many other countries.

The Western intervention in Syria, in pursuance of violent regime change, has been massive.
In June 2015, the Washington Post reported:  “At $1 billion, Syria-related operations account for about $1 of every $15 in the CIA's overall budget... US officials said the CIA has trained and equipped nearly 10,000 fighters sent into Syria over the past several years — meaning that the agency is spending roughly $100,000 per year for every anti-Assad rebel who has gone through the program.”

At the same time, attempts to solve the conflict diplomatically were repeatedly sabotaged by the insistence that ‘Assad must go’ and by stepping up support for anti-government forces. Take the Kofi Annan peace plan in 2012.

“Within days of Annan’s peace plan gaining a positive response from both sides in late March, the imperial powers openly pledged, for the first time, millions of dollars for the Free Syrian Army; for military equipment, to provide salaries to its soldiers and to bribe government forces to defect. In other words, terrified that the civil war is starting to die down, they are setting about institutionalizing it,” noted my fellow Op-ed contributor Dan Glazebrook in Al-Ahram Weekly.

The help given to ‘rebels’ looked to be tilting the conflict in the favor of the regime-changers. While Western leaders warned of the dangers of hardline Islamist terrorism at home, they welcomed the gains made by such groups in Syria. A declassified US intelligence report from August 2012 admitted that “The Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI (al-Qaeda Iraq) are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.” The report said that “AQI supported the opposition from the beginning.” It also predicted the establishment of a “Salafist principality in Eastern Syria” and said that this is “exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”

Russia’s lawful intervention in September 2015, in defense of secular Syria, where people of all religions could once again live in peace, proved to be a game-changer and helped push back the advances made by Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) and other radical terrorist groups. The war could have been brought to an end in 2016, had the US and its allies given up with their regime change obsession and allowed Syrian forces, aided by their allies, regain control of the whole country. But they didn’t.

In September 2016, with the ‘rebels’ on the back-foot, another ceasefire was agreed between then US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov.

Again it came to nothing. As I wrote here: “While the S.A.A. [Syria Arab Army] had to halt its advances ‘rebels’ carried on with their attacks. In one 24-hour period Russian General Vladimir Savchenko said there had been no fewer than 55 rebel attacks, leading to the deaths of 12 civilians.”

And one week after the so-called ceasefire had started, US-led air raids ‘accidentally’ killed 62 Syrian soldiers at Deir ez-Zor. “From the very beginning there have been many of those, including in the US administration, seeking to break down these agreements,” lamented Lavrov. The fact is that the US hadn’t been serious about wanting an end to hostilities, and only wanted to use the ‘ceasefire’ as a cover for rearming/regaining ground.

As the Syrian government moved to liberate eastern Aleppo, the regime-changers became increasingly hysterical. In the UK, neocon Labour MP John Woodcock, a former chair of Labour Friends of Israel, called the Morning Star newspaper “traitorous scum” for using the word “liberation.”

But Aleppo was liberated and life slowly got back to normal. We’ve seen similar cries of “something must be done” by the regime-changers as Syrian forces move in to recapture rebel-held Eastern Ghouta. But interestingly the same people are, by and large, silent on the humanitarian catastrophe affecting Yemen. ‘Human rights’ only concern them when transgressions can be blamed on an ‘Official Enemy’ of the West.
Earlier this month, neocon writer Max Boot opined in the Washington Post: “The way to save lives, I’ve sadly concluded, is to let [Syrian President Bashar] Assad win as quickly as possible. Aleppo was a charnel house in 2016. But now that it has fallen to Assad’s forces, pictures are circulating of civilians strolling through its rebuilt public park. It’s terrible that they have to live under Assad, but at least they’re alive. Tyranny is preferable to endless and useless war.”

But other regime-changers still prefer “endless and useless war” to an Assad victory and further democratic reforms. Unless that changes, the bloodshed will only continue.



It wasn't until the early 1900's that government began to take control of the schools. In 1980, the then candidate, Ronald Reagan, promised to abolish the Department of Education. ( Another promise broken). Sadly, in concert with the government takeover of education, tests on educational performance began to decline. Today, American students are behind many nations in performance, including some 3rd world countries.

So, here we go again! The subject article covers an Ohio student being suspended for refusing to leave school and participate in the anti-gun demonstrations by public school students nationwide. I'm sorry, but my tax dollars are supposed to be spent teaching our children at school, not leaving school to partake in political demonstrations.

There are many school systems around the nation that graduate students that would have been considered functionally illiterate a generation or 2 ago. Instead of responding to alarm bells relating to the epidemic of ignorance among our youth, our government masters are busy indoctrinating our children with social nonsense revolving around the gay lifestyle, transgender-ism, Russia phobia, hate Trump and so on. Never mind learning to obtain skills to earn a living. Become a sheep and pester the rest of us to provide non-gender specific wash rooms.

If you want your child to soar ahead of the pack, keep them home and teach them yourself.

Bruce                                       New World Order News

A high school student in Hilliard, Ohio, didn’t want to pick sides in the contentious gun debate surrounding Wednesday’s “National Walkout,” so he stayed in class instead of joining the largely anti-gun protest or an alternative “study hall.”

Hilliard Davidson High School senior Jacob Shoemaker was then reportedly slapped with a suspension.

The student argued that divisive politics have no place in America’s schools and he refused to take sides in the debate, according to the Associated Press.
10TV/Jacob Shoemaker

Shoemaker's suspension citation was posted online, possibly by a friend, and the story quickly went viral.

“Student refused to follow instructions after being warned repeatedly by several administrators,” the letter said. “Student not permitted on school property.”

School district spokesperson Stacie Raterman said official policy prohibited school officials from leaving Shoemaker unattended in the building for “security reasons,” 10TV reported.

While Shoemaker said he didn't expect for his actions to generate so much attention, he is prepared to accept the consequences of his decision.



I commented on the nomination of these 2 before. One is the head of the CIA moving into Secretary of State. The other was a torture master who has a warrant out for her arrest. In the subject article Rand Paul of Kentucky has announced his opposition to these nominees. I believe he is motivated by conscience. Oh, that we had more representatives who are motivated by conscience!

As the votes begin to line up on these nominations we see the same old stuff. Republicans vote as their party dictates, the Democrats vote in opposition to the Republicans. This is repeated on almost all legislation. Did you vote for your Congressman thinking that his or her vote would be dictated by the party? I'm guessing no. They are supposed to represent the wishes of those in their district. This is just another example of how we in America have no say in how we are governed.

So back to my first point ---- These upcoming votes should be votes of conscience. They are not and there is a good reason. Our government masters have no conscience.

Bruce                            New World Order News

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said on Wednesday he would oppose President Trump's nominations of CIA Director Mike Pompeo to be secretary of State and CIA Deputy Director Gina Haspel to lead the spy agency.
Paul said that he will oppose the nominations and "do everything I can to block" them.

"My announcement today is that I will oppose both Pompeo's nomination and Haspel's nomination," Paul said.
Paul is the first Republican to come out against the two nominations, which were announced by Trump on Tuesday. Last year, he was the only Republican to vote against Pompeo for CIA director.

The senator pointed to his previous statement that Pompeo doesn't believe "enhanced interrogation techniques" to be torture, as well as his support for the Iraq War, in explaining his opposition. 

"I'm perplexed by the nomination of people who love the Iraq War so much that they would advocate for a war with Iran next. I think it goes against most of the things President Trump campaigned on," he said. 

Paul said he is opposing Haspel due to her involvement in the enhanced interrogation program during the George W. Bush administration. He said she showed "joyful glee at someone who is being tortured." 
"I find it just amazing that anyone would consider having this woman at the head of the CIA," Paul said. 

Paul's opposition to Pompeo complicates, but doesn't sink, his path to leading the State Department.
Republicans have an 11-10 advantage on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, making Paul a key vote.

If Paul votes no during the panel's deliberations and every Democrat opposes him, committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) will be forced to decide if he'll move Pompeo's nomination to the floor anyway.

Corker said last year that ousted Secretary of State Rex Tillerson would also get a vote before the full Senate even if his panel split. At the time, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) was viewed as a potential swing vote.

Corker signaled on Wednesday that Pompeo would get a full Senate vote even if Paul opposed him and split the committee. 
"We have multiple ways of reporting people. We've had this type of thing come up in the past," he said. 
He added that reporters "should let us play it out" and "I know of one member thus far that's going to vote no."

Paul's defection could also force Republicans to rely on Vice President Pence, or Democrats, to get Pompeo through the full Senate.
Assuming every Republican senator but Paul supports Pompeo, as they did for his current CIA post, and every Democrat opposes, the Senate would split 50-50.

The absence of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who is undergoing treatment for brain cancer and hasn't voted in months, could further complicate Pompeo's nomination.

If McCain doesn't return and Paul votes no, that would leave Republicans short, at a 49-50 vote, forcing them to win over a Democrat.
Pompeo could win over Democratic votes, though he'll likely face a tighter vote than he did last year when he was confirmed to lead the CIA.
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on Tuesday that he was not actively urging his caucus to oppose Pompeo or Haspel but said the two picks will face "unanswered" and "outstanding" questions.

Fourteen Democrats, including Schumer, and Independent Sen. Angus King (Maine), supported Pompeo to lead the CIA.
But several have indicated they are reconsidering their votes, or remaining on the fence, until Pompeo's hearing before the Foreign Relations Committee next month.

"I'm not taking a position until we hear from him, but there are lots of outstanding questions," Schumer told reporters.
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), who also supported Pompeo for his CIA post, said, "There are a number of us who voted for him last time who are actively reconsidering."

And King said he would reserve his decision on the Secretary of State position until Pompeo had a hearing.
Paul isn't on the Intelligence Committee, which will handle Haspel's hearing.
But it appears increasingly likely Republicans will need help from Democrats to get her confirmed. 
In addition to Paul's questions, McCain said Haspel "needs to explain the nature and extent of her involvement in the CIA’s interrogation program during the confirmation process."

"Any nominee for Director of the CIA must pledge without reservation to uphold this prohibition, which has helped us to regain our position of leadership in the struggle for universal human rights—the struggle upon which this country was founded, and which remains its highest aspiration," McCain said in a statement.

No Democrats have formally said they will oppose Haspel, but several have raised concerns about her involvement in the interrogation program.
If Paul votes no, and McCain is absent, leadership will need to win over every other GOP senator and at least one Democrat in order for Pence to cast a tiebreaking vote.

Paul signaled that he wasn't sure if other GOP senators would oppose Haspel adding "it depends on the solidarity of the Democrats."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she is undecided but spoke relatively positively about Haspel on Tuesday.
The California senator told reporters that they have "spent some time" together, including having dinner.

"Everything I know is she has been a good deputy director. ... I think hopefully the entire organization learned something from the so-called enhanced interrogation program," she said.



Today the government masters in Britain join the anti-Russian hysteria. A double agent residing in England was poisoned a couple of weeks ago. Right on cue British officials have blamed Russia. This is on top of Russian meddling in the U.S. election, Russian meddling in the Brexit referendum and Russian hacking of Democrat National Committee computers. Oh, let's not forget Assad gassing his own people. None of these charges have any evidence proving them. Never mind that. We need to go to war and you are going to pay for it and send your sons and daughters to fight it.

I think I speak for a majority of those in England and The United States. Dear government masters: WE DON'T BELIEVE YOU! We don't believe anything you say and we're certainly not going to let you plunge us and the rest of the world into a war that may end all life on this planet. If you are hell bent on starting a war with Russia, China and unnamed others, I suggest you fight it yourselves.

Bruce                            New World Order News

“In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.” — Fidel Castro

The Russians, in their anxiety to show the West how friendly they are, left Washington with a toe hold in Syria, which Washington is using to reopen the war. The Russians’ failure to finish the job has left Washington’s foreign mercenaries, misrepresented in the American presstitute media as “freedom fighters,” in a Syrian enclave. To get the war going again, Washington has to find a way to come to the aid of its mercenaries.

The Trump regime has found, or so it thinks, its excuse in the revival of the Obama regime’s fake charge of Syrian use of chemical weapons. This made-up lie by the Obama regime was put to rest by Russian intervention that made sure there were no Syrian chemical weapons. Indeed, if memory serves, Russia delivered the chemical weapons to the US for destruction. Little doubt Washington still has them and will use some of them with their Syrian markings for what appears to be a coming false flag attack that can be blamed on Assad. In other words, Washington will create a “situation,” blame Assad and Putin, and with or without congressional authorization introduce US intervention in behalf of Washington’s mercenaries.

If we can believe James Mattis, the retired US Marine General who is US Secretary of Defense, Syria, a country without chemical weapons and in need of none in its mopping up operations against Washington’s mercenaries, is using chlorine gas “against its own people,” exactly the same phrase as the Obama regime used when Obama tried to orchestrate an excuse to attack Syria. Mattis said that he is receiving reports of chlorine gas use by Assad while simultaneously saying he has no evidence of gas use, much less by the Syrian Army.

The US Secretary of Defense actually accused Syria of “targeting hospitals” with chlorine gas even though he admits there is no evidence. Mattis went on to accuse Russia of complicity in killing civilians, an endeavor in which the US excels.

Stephen Lendman reports that CIA Director Pompeo “suggested a US attack on Syrian forces may be forthcoming, saying Trump won’t tolerate CW [chemical weapons] attacks, adding he hasn’t made a decision on the latest reports about chlorine gas use.”

US Secretary of State Tillerson joined the orchestrated allegation even though he admitted there was no evidence.
Of course, there has not been any chlorine gas use unless by the Washington-supplied mercenaries. But facts are not important to Washington. What is important to Washington is Israel’s demand that Washington destroy Syria and Iran in order to get rid of Hezbollah’s supporters so that Israel can seize southern Lebanon.

No doubt that other interests are in on the plot. Oil companies that want to control the location of oil and gas pipelines, the crazed neocons married to their ideology of American World Hegemony, the military/security complex that needs enemies and conflicts to justify its massive budget. But it is Israel’s determination to expand its boundaries and water resources that set all of the Middle East conflict in motion.

Does Russia understand this, or is the Russian government preoccupied with eventually winning acceptance by the West as a part of the West? If the latter, the world is heading for nuclear war.The Russian government does not seem to understand that its pusillanimous response encourages Washington’s aggression and, thereby, is driving the world to the final war.

Every time Russia fails to finish the job, as in Syria and Ukraine, Russia does not win Washington’s friendship, but extends to Washington yet another run at prevailing in the conflict that Washington initiated. Washington will not slack off until Washington is halted in its track, something that Russia does not seem willing to do. Consequently, Washington continues to drive the world to nuclear war.

When will the Russians notice that literally everyone in the Trump regime is issuing threats to Russia— Mattis, Tillerson, Nikki Haley, government spokespersons, the UK PM and UK Foreign Secretary. Yet the Russians still speak about their “partners” and how much they want to get along with the West.

There is no prospect whatsoever of the British going to war against Russia. The entirety of the UK would be instantly wiped out, yet the UK PM issues ultimatums to Russia.

Here is what Finian Cunningham has to say about the British prime minister threatening Russia.
The entire Western world is insane. As Michel Chossudovsky says, the Western politicians and presstitutes who serve them are driving the world to extinction.

Note: It appears that the military/security complex is closing its grip on the Trump regime. Secretary of State Tillerson has been fired and is being replaced by CIA Director Pompeo. Gina Haspel, the new CIA Director, is the person who oversaw the CIA’s secret torture prisons in Thailand.



If this were a dream, it would be a nightmare. I certainly didn't like Tillerson very much. He was one, in a long line of, incompetent bureaucrats with enormous power. I am glad he's gone. So, one down, 10,000 to go, but it gets worse. In replacing Tillerson, Trump has nominated pro Israel, CIA head, Mike Pompeo. Just what we need, the head of an international criminal organization taking one of the most important positions in the world.

But there's more ---- Replacing Pompeo at the CIA comes Gina Haspel. The subject article answers the question “Who is Gina Haspel”? Before you read the article let me ask the following question: What would happen to you if you oversaw the kidnapping and torture of innocent people and then destroyed evidence of those events? In the case of Gina Haspel, she has been given one of the most important, powerful and well paying jobs in the world overseeing thousands of employees.

Bruce                                               New World Order News

As CIA director Mike Pompeo moves to become the United States’ secretary of state, deputy director Gina Haspel has been nominated to lead the agency. If confirmed by the Senate, she will become the first woman to run the CIA.

Haspel’s nomination will be controversial; she played a leading role(paywall) in running a US torture site abroad and later destroyed the evidence of it.
In 2002, she oversaw a secret prison in Thailand that tortured two terrorism suspects. That torture took place within the CIA’s “extraordinary rendition” program, in which suspected terrorists are sent to US allies, and interrogated in “black sites” on their soil.

One of the men, known as Abu Zubayda, was waterboarded 83 times in one month and was slammed into walls by the head. He was deprived of sleep and kept in a coffin-like box. Interrogators later decided he didn’t have any useful information.

ProPublica found that Haspel personally signed cables to CIA headquarters that detailed Zubayda’s interrogation.
CIA videos of the torture were destroyed in 2005, on the orders of a cable drafted by Haspel. Her then-boss Jose Rodriguez, the CIA’s director of operations for counterterrorism, signed off on the order. “The cable left nothing to chance. It even told them how to get rid of the tapes,” he wrote in his memoir, according to ProPublica. “They were to use an industrial-strength shredder to do the deed.”

The European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, a Berlin-based NGO, has been pushing Germany’s public prosecutor to arrest Haspel for her role in the torture program.

She is not the only member of the administration with a questionable record on the matter: Trump himself has publicly flirted with the idea of the US returning to the use of torture, claiming that waterboarding “works.” He was reportedly persuaded by defense secretary Jim Mattis that the method is an ineffective intelligence tool.

New secretary of state Mike Pompeo has also defended US torture. In 2014, when senator Dianne Feinstein, then chair of Senate Intelligence Committee, released a comprehensive condemnation of the CIA’s torture program, Pompeo attacked the report, saying, “Senator Feinstein today has put American lives at risk,” and described agents who had tortured people as “heroes, not pawns in some liberal game.”


FITTON: More than enough evidence to warrant arrest and prosecution of Hillary Clinton. ICYMI: At least 18 classified emails were found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop –this was covered up by FBI/DOJ/State for over a year.

The title of the subject article is self explanatory. As a rule, I don't post most of the articles relating to the “investigations”, “hearings”, predictions of indictments and so on relating to Hillary and her gang. As I have said in the past, these go no where. They never go anywhere. It's all theater. Crooked Hillary and the rest would have been arrested many years ago if there were serious investigators and representatives with integrity. There are very few, if any, representatives with integrity.

So here we have Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch. Here is a man of integrity. He isn't a party hack and has no stake in the political sideshow. That is why those in power continually stonewall his efforts or try to ignore him altogether. The headline makes the claim that there was, and is, more than enough evidence to arrest Hillary. Yes, Tom, we know that. We also know why this hasn't happened and won't happen. It's because we are ruled by crooks.

Bruce                         New World Order News




No, this isn't a misprint. Over the past several months we have heard a lot of threats from President Trump towards North Korea. He has even threatened to “totally destroy” the nation.

I have to admit that I have a difficult time trying to figure out where Trump is going. Maybe that is what he wants. Some dismiss his rhetoric as some sort of mental instability. His track record in business suggests that is not true. In his book, “The Art of the Deal” he makes the point that the opening demand in a negotiation is often unreasonable.

So back to North Korea. We all know that a war against North Korea will be incredibly bloody. Yes, we can destroy the nation, but the cost would be too high. Our military knows this, Trump knows this and South Korea knows this. Seoul is within range of the thousands of artillery batteries in the North. It is a city of over 20 million people. A war with the North would devastate the South economically and maybe cost 10's of thousands of lives. There is no way in hell they want that and Trump knows that. Threaten the North and watch the South squirm. Now we have the North and South talking. Maybe they have thought about reunification. Now Trump says he will meet with Kim Jong-un. If the North and the South reunify, there goes the problem and 20,000 American troops come home and with them billions of dollars of expense.

It's all speculation at this point, but it's the only solution that makes sense.

Bruce                                    New World Order News

North Korea would freeze nuclear, missile testing during talks
Jason Ditz Posted onMarch 8, 2018CategoriesNewsTagsNorth Korea, Trump

President Trump has announced that an offer conveyed to the United States from North Korea by way of South Korea’s visiting delegation, initially speculated to be a proposal for direct talks, is “almost beyond that,” and stands to be one of the most significant diplomatic proposals in decades. The offer was announced publicly by South Korea’s National Security Adviser Chung Eui-Yong.

North Korea is inviting President Trump to directly meet with Kim Jong-un, with the two talking about North Korea disarming its nuclear program. North Korea added that they would pause nuclear and missile development during the talks.

South Korea’s delegation of high-ranking officials visiting Pyongyang earlier this week was an historic move. A meeting between Trump and Kim would be far, far more important, which could reasonably be called the biggest diplomatic measure on North Korea since the Korean War.

President Trump was calling this Thursday revelation a “major announcement.” According to Chung Eui-Yong, President Trump says his intention is to meet Kim “by May,” which would be quite a rapid turnaround for such a high-profile meeting.



You may think this subject article was made up. Think again. You can't make this stuff up. Getting back to the Parkland shooting ------ Not only did 4 Broward County officers hide behind their cars while children were being slaughtered in their school, not only did the hierarchy of the Broward County Sheriffs department order a “stand down” while the shooting was taking place, but, 2 Miramar Police Department swat team officers have been suspended for going into the school to try to stop the shooter from killing any more children.

There was a time when these 2 officers would be considered heroes. I think most of us would hope that time is now. Not in South Florida. Maybe not in a not in a lot of places. So let's sum up what some of our government masters want: They want us to turn in all of our weapons. They want us to call the police when we are threatened by a life threatening attack. They want their police to wait for orders when a mass shooting is taking place. They will punish anyone who tries to stop a shooting in place.

No thank you government masters. I reserve the right to defend myself and my family. I also have no need of your police if all they're good for is traffic patrol. Better yet, if police are forbidden from protecting the public in an active shooting, I don't need them. It would be better to save the cost of the salary, car, weapons, uniforms and benefits and put that money into education or something that benefits us.

Bruce                         New World Order News

The Miramar police have suspended two members from the SWAT team who responded to the school shooting without orders.
Miramar, FL – The Miramar Police Department has suspended two officers from their SWAT team for responding to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting without having orders to do so.

When the first reports of an active shooter came out, the Miramar officers were in training in Coral Springs, nearby the Parkland high school, and they rushed to assist in stopping the carnage that left 17 students and faculty fatally shot, and another 16 wounded, on Valentine’s Day, the Miami Herald reported.

The police response to the mass shooting at the school – specifically that of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office – has been highly criticized for the incident commander’s failure to use updated active-shooter response methods.

Broward County Sheriff’s Captain Jan Jordan has been criticized for ordering officers to set up a perimeter rather than sending them in to stop the shooter, whose whereabouts were still unknown.

Several police officers and medics have reported that they believed more lives were lost because the incident commander wouldn’t let them respond earlier.

Some critics have called the officers who stayed outside and waited for permission to enter “cowards,” but now Miramar police are punishing two members of their own elite unit who did rush toward danger to try to save students' lives.

Miramar Police Detectives Jeffrey Gilbert and Carl Schlosser were suspended from the Miramar SWAT team eight days after the shooting in Parkland, according to the Miami Herald.

Both remain on active duty with the department, but working in different capacities, the Sun-Sentinel reported.
“Effective immediately you have been suspended from the SWAT Team until further notice,” Miramar SWAT team commander Captain Kevin Nosowicz wrote in a Feb. 22 memo. “Please make arrangements with the training department to turn in your SWAT-issued rifle.”

The memo said Det. Gilbert and Det. Schlosser acted “without the knowledge or authorization from your chain of command” and created an “officer safety situation due to dispatch not knowing your location or activity” by heading to the massacre-in-progress independently.

A Miramar PD spokesperson told Blue Lives Matter, "Miramar PD had numerous officers and a victim advocate respond, without incident. The two SWAT officers temporarily suspended from the SWAT team, but not active duty, were not suspended for responding, but for NOT advising that they responded. They did not advise prior to self-dispatching, during the incident, nor immediately following. This is an officer safety issue, a violation of policy and goes against incident command training and the best practices learned from other mass casualty / shooting incidents."
The Broward County police union disagreed strongly with discipline being levied against the detectives.

“While it may have been a violation of policy to not notify their supervisors that they were going there, their intentions were brave and heroic, I think,” Broward County Police Benevolent Association (PBA) President Jeff Marano told the Sun-Sentinel on Wednesday.

But Broward County law enforcement officials have said that it’s more important to have an organized response to an emergency situation, after more than 2,000 officers responded to the scene of an active shooter at Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport on Jan. 6, 2017.

The after-action report of the incident, which left five people dead and six others wounded, recommended a unified command structure with better communication in the future, to combat confusion caused by a massive influx of law enforcement officers to the scene, according to the Miami Herald.

Miramar Police Public Information Officer Tania Rues told the Miami Herald in an email that her department had dispatched several uniformed officers and a victim advocate to “assist” Broward County sheriff’s deputies at the high school.

However, Rues said the Broward County Sheriff’s Office (BSO) had said it did not need assistance from Miramar’s SWAT team.
“Miramar Police command staff placed our SWAT team on stand-by pending a request for additional assistance from BSO,” Rues wrote in the email. “[BSO] did not make a request for Miramar’s SWAT team based on their need at the time.”

Miramar Police Officer Kevin Gonzalez also was suspended from the SWAT team after having been accused of being linked to several social media posts that put the city and police in a negative light, the Sun-Sentinel reported.

Officer Gonzalez was suspended for violating the department’s social media policy and the code of conduct, Rues said.
A source told the Miami Herald that the posts questioned why Miramar’s SWAT team was not sent to confront shooter Nikolas Cruz, and said that the posts may have been made by Gonzalez’s girlfriend.



The 2 subject articles cover the latest, in the ludicrous program of disarmament of the American people. The first subject article covers the NAACP proposing the disarmament of all Americans. Apparently, those proposing this are totally ignorant of history affecting blacks.

After the civil war came an “open season” on blacks. For the most part blacks were either unable or forbidden to carry weapons. In 1871 the National Rifle Association was founded. There were several reasons for this, but one of the results was to champion the second amendment and with it, the right of all people, of all races to own weapons. In the case of the recently liberated blacks, the ability to defend themselves had become an absolute necessity. In fact, the founding of the Black Panthers in the 1960's demanded the right to carry weapons for self defense. The 2nd subject artilce covers other points.

So here comes the NAACP. This is supposed to be an organization to promote the rights and opportunities for blacks. Never mind that. Time to disarm. That way blacks in Chicago, Detroit and Baltimore can become target practice for anyone, black or white. For over 300 years blacks were forbidden to possess weapons, under penalty of death. There were reasons for that.

Bruce                            New World Order News

NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson called for a national gun confiscation program in a syndicated column through Black Press USA on Monday.
Comparing recent school shootings to the violence and discrimination black students faced after the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision, Johnson wrote that “fear and terror still exist in our children’s classrooms” because of the “National Rifle Association and the politicians [sic] that support them.”

“Given the disproportionate damage gun violence is having on our communities, the NAACP has advocated for sane, sensible laws, to help eliminate or at least to decrease the damage and death caused by gun violence. Requiring universal background checks on all gun sales and transfers, banning military-style, semi-automatic assault guns, enacting tough, new criminal penalties for straw purchasers and gun traffickers, and allowing the Center for Disease Control to research gun violence as a major public health issue are just a few of the reasonable steps lawmakers could take to stem the tide of gun-related deaths in neighborhoods across the nation,” Johnson wrote.

The leader of America’s oldest civil rights organization noted that gun violence is the leading killer of young black Americans, but declined to note that a significant portion of these deaths is caused by illegal weapons.

“Over 80 percent of gun deaths of African Americans are homicides. Roughly speaking, 1 out of every 3 African American males who die between the ages of 15 and 19 is killed by gun violence. African American children and teens were less than 15 percent of the total child population in 2008 and 2009 but accounted for 45 percent of all child- and teen-related gun deaths. These numbers are tragic and intolerable, but most of all they are preventable,” Johnson wrote.

The column went on to celebrate Australia’s gun confiscation policy that largely banned all semi-automatic weapons, which was strictly enforced with strong sentencing.
“Australia’s success story is an example for us all. America will remain a deadly nation for our children, its schools caught in the crossfire, unless we insist politicians and the NRA curb their lobbyist efforts and allow the creation of policy that acts in the best interests of public safety.”

On September 28, 1868, a mob of Democrats massacred nearly 300 African-American Republicans in Opelousas, Louisiana. The savagery began when racist Democrats attacked a newspaper editor, a white Republican and schoolteacher for ex-slaves. Several African-Americans rushed to the assistance of their friend, and in response, Democrats went on a “Negro hunt,” killing every African-American (all of whom were Republicans) in the area they could find. (Via Grand Old Partisan)

Which brings us to today…
Asshat Jason Whitlock, the Kansas City columnist whose article on Jovan Belcher‘s murder-suicide inspired an anti-gun rant by NBC’s Bob Costas, now says that the pro-Second Amendment National Rifle Association is “the new KKK,” Newsbusters’ Tim Graham reported Monday.
Obviously, Whitlock is as ignorant as he is offensive.

The NRA actually helped blacks defend themselves from violent KKK Democrats in the south, not the other way around.

Ann Coulter wrote about the history of blacks and the NRA back in April.
This will give you an idea of how gun control laws worked. Following the firebombing of his house in 1956, Dr. Martin Luther King, who was, among other things, a Christian minister, applied for a gun permit, but the Alabama authorities found him unsuitable. A decade later, he won a Nobel Peace Prize.
How’s that “may issue” gun permit policy working for you?

The NRA opposed these discretionary gun permit laws and proceeded to grant NRA charters to blacks who sought to defend themselves from Klan violence — including the great civil rights hero Robert F. Williams.

A World War II Marine veteran, Williams returned home to Monroe, N.C., to find the Klan riding high — beating, lynching and murdering blacks at will. No one would join the NAACP for fear of Klan reprisals. Williams became president of the local chapter and increased membership from six to more than 200.

But it was not until he got a charter from the NRA in 1957 and founded the Black Armed Guard that the Klan got their comeuppance in Monroe.
Williams’ repeated thwarting of violent Klan attacks is described in his stirring book, “Negroes With Guns.” In one crucial battle, the Klan sieged the home of a black physician and his wife, but Williams and his Black Armed Guard stood sentry and repelled the larger, cowardly force. And that was the end of it.
As the Klan found out, it’s not so much fun when the rabbit’s got the gun.

The NRA’s proud history of fighting the Klan has been airbrushed out of the record by those who were complicit with the KKK, Jim Crow and racial terror, to wit: the Democrats.

Sadly, asshat Whitlock will get away with his outrageous lies.
The early KKK Democrats would be proud.



It's happening all over. Facebook, Google and Youtube are banning thousands of videos and articles mentioning any one of a number of “forbidden” topics. This modern day “book burning” should send shivers down the back of anyone who treasures freedom.

I have posted a link to this interview with Fetzer. I wouldn't be surprised if this gets taken down. After all, we can't have people finding out that we're lying. I will keep track and make a copy just in case it becomes unavailable.

Isn't it interesting that those educated idiots on the left use the term “Fascist” without knowing what it means. It's also interesting that they think Fascism is a term associated with subjugation of the populace, then denies freedom of speech to those with whom they disagree.

Bruce              New World Order News




It used to be that Americans looked forward to the Oscars. Gone are the days of Hollywood glamour and the celebration of achievement of cinema. It's a new generation in Hollywood and they have totally lost touch with their public. Now it's a celebration of leftist propaganda and the gay and transgender agenda. Those who suffer through the long, tedious, multi-hour program are subjected to the non-stop talking points most are sick of hearing.

So we have multi-millionaires who masquerade as compassionate liberals. They are against gun control, but employ body guards with guns. They promote open borders for anyone who desires to come here, but do not open their mansions to those same people. They love higher taxes for us, but employ high priced accountants to avoid parting with any of their millions.

The subject article gives the verdict. Ratings for this tired fiasco were at a record low. Maybe this will translate into financial losses for the Hollywood elite. What will they do if they actually have to work a regular job for their living?

Bruce                                               New World Order News

The Oscars continue to be less golden.
ABC’s broadcast of the 90th Academy Awards on Sunday night drew a 18.9 rating in metered market results, down 15 percent versus last year’s ceremony to mark a fourth straight year of decline.
Oscars 2018: Best/Worst Moments

That 18.9 overnight rating, which covers the primetime hours (and thus not the final stretch of big awards), represents an all-time low, placing beneath the 21.9 that the 2008 ceremony pulled.

Update: In fast nationals sure to adjust up due to the live nature of programming, the Oscars drew 24.4 million total viewers and a 6.4 demo rating, down 16 and 26 percent from last year’s prelim numbers. The 2017 telecast eventually went on to report in finals 32.9 million total viewers — a nine-year-low — and a 9.1 demo rating.

Final update: Per finals, the Oscars delivered 24.4 million total viewers, down 26 percent year-over-year to mark all-time lows.
The Shape of Water was this year’s big winner, amassing four total wins (including for Best Picture and director Guillermo del Toro), followed by the World War II drama Dunkirk, which grabbed gold three times. (See complete winners list.)

Jimmy Kimmel (whose opening monologue earned an average TVLine reader grade of “B”) for a second straight year lorded over the proceedings, which included a star-studded trip across the street to crash a movie screening, an appearance by three of disgraced film titan Harvey Weinstein’s accusers, Best Actress winner Frances McDormand inviting you to Google “inclusion rider” and a powerfully pointed rap by Common.


71% Of Military Age Americans Too Sick To Join, Study Says

This is the title of today's subject article. While our government masters are starting wars all over the world and planning world war 3, a few, very minor details have emerged. It appears that our young people are too sick to join the military. Unlike the generation of the Vietnam war and previous wars, our youth may not be able to take the training necessary, let alone the riggers of combat. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe this is entirely their fault. We only have to look at the massive vaccination program and the deluge of prescription drugs to understand why the health of our young people is declining.

We also have to look at the condition of our new, space age, weapons. The F35 has already cost the American taxpayer hundreds of billions of dollars. As if that weren't bad enough, the plane barely functions. There are so many problems that they are too numerous to list here. Ships, tanks and other weapons are constantly breaking down and that's before they even go into combat against a comparable opponent.

I have called those in power, “insaniacs”. There is no upside to the push for world war 3 --- not militarily, not economically. It seems that all 2018 America knows how to do is destroy. Ironically, the end of this might be our own destruction.

Bruce                                       New World Order News


The United States is now facing a security crisis the likes of which it has never faced before. Although we are awaiting the attempts to blame it on them, it’s hard to see how the State Department or the corporate media can pin this on on the Russians.

According to a new study by the Heritage Foundation, nearly 71% of young U.S. citizens are ineligible to serve in the military. To be more specific, out of 34 million people, between the ages of 17 and 24, more than 24 million are unable to join the military. Sixty percent of those ineligible to join are ineligible due to health problems or physical fitness. Around one-third are too obese.
Indeed, 27% of young Americans are “too overweight for military service.”

“The obesity issue is the most troubling because the trend is going in the wrong direction…by 2020 it could be as high as 50%,” said Major General Allen Batschelet, former Commander of U.S. Army Recruiting Command “back in 2015, “which means only two in ten would qualify to join the Army.”
Other common health concerns are hearing and eyesight problems, asthma and mental illness.

The study also shows that a quarter of those unfit for military service, are due to intelligence factors and are unable to complete their high school education and lack a “basic understanding of written and cognitive skills…to complete an organized program.”

The research points out that these individuals are considered unfit despite the fact that the military routinely accepts people who do not complete their high school education and “rarely pass the armed forces qualification test.”
Another 10% were ineligible due to a criminal record.

The national security issue comes to play when one realizes that this stunning commentary on the intellectual, mental and physical health of the United States will lead to a very serious shortage of recruits for the military, meaning that the U.S. military will suffer from a lack of manpower.
All ready, the U.S. Army is having a hard time meeting its 2018 goal of enlisting 80,000 volunteers.

Army Major General Malcolm Frost, Commander of the Army’s Initial Military Training Command, publicly stated in 2017, that “I would argue that the next existential threat that we have… is the inability to man our military.”

One highly important point to mention, is that the southern states, who have traditionally supplied the military with the largest amount of recruits, are experiencing even more concerning health issues than their Northern and Western counterparts.

South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee and Texas are “significantly less fit, and consequently are more likely to encounter training related injuries and recruits from other U.S. states,” according to recent research conducted by the Citadel, the U.S. Army Public Health Center and the American Heart Association.

The southern states mentioned above make up more than 37% of new recruits.

Thus, Americans’ poor health, dropping IQ and mental instability have reached such a proportion that it is now a national security issue.
While there are many other factors at play in regards to national security and the ability to man the military, such as an expansive military presence across the world and a constant state of warfare – America must begin to make drastic changes in its food supply, healthcare and culture unless it wants to do to itself what no outside power is capable of doing.

[brandon] Brandon Turbeville – article archive here – is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He is the author of six books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies,Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria,and The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President. Turbeville has published over 1,000 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at)



I have posted 2 articles. One is an article covering, what is described as, “A new trend is sweeping the nation”. This new trend is putting a red light in your front or rear porch fixture to proclaim your house as gun free. You just can't make this stuff up. I really hope the author is incorrect in saying this trend is sweeping the nation. Are there that many people that stupid? I hope not.

My second article is an answer to the first. In Seattle, there has been a rash of armed robbers breaking into homes, terrorizing the occupants and stealing contents from the homes. No, the police have made no arrests. So, for all those violent criminals in Seattle and elsewhere, the leftist fruitcakes have made it easy for you. Just look for the red light and come on in. I might point out that here, in east Tennessee there has been no such rash of home invasions. Yes, there are some and yes, there are some criminals who wind up shot by the would be victim. Now, that's gun control!

Bruce                                    New World Order News

A new trend is sweeping the nation. It’s called “red lighting”. Activists are changing their normal white porch light bulbs with special red bulbs letting the world know This is a gun free home.

According to Jane Seymore, director of operations for the Department of Protecting Everyone (DOPE), we will soon see millions of homes adorned with red bulbs.


So far many of America’s largest retailers have been selling out of the red bulbs more quickly than they can stock them. “We can’t get them in fast enough. They are flying off the shelves.” Claims Bill Barskey president of marketing research for Walmart, “As soon as we get them in there is a line of well-intentioned people buying them up.”

Not everyone is excited about this idea. Our reporters spoke with Americans on the street to get their opinions and they were mixed.




As we all are immersed in the sea of red protective lights be sure to remember that the red light means a gun free zone so all of you would-be attackers and thieves please leave your guns at the door.


[second amendment]
No need for self-defense mechanisms such as firearms, folks! Nothing to see here, move along. The police will keep you safe!
By Jason Rantz at A violent series of armed robberies have hit the Seattle’s Beacon Hill where three, armed men kicked in doors and held residents hostage while they ransacked the victims’ homes. There have been no arrests.

The first home invasion occurred in the early morning of February 16 where three masked suspects armed with guns broke into a home on Alamo Place South, where three roommates reside. The suspects, male Hispanics in their 20s, kicked in doors to the rooms of three roommates, held guns to their heads, and demanded money and drugs. According to the police report, the trio originally broke into the residence via an unsecured window on the south side of the home.

The second home invasion occurred the very next night — this time on 22nd Ave South, not far from the first robbery. According to the police report, three masked men, armed with pistols and a shotgun, broke into the home. One man was home alone at the time. Again, the suspects held a gun to his head and rummaged through the home. The victim was restrained with a plastic zip-tie, which held the victim’s feet together.

The suspects each took turns guarding the man while the other two ransacked the home. According to the report, “As each suspect guarded him they placed the firearms to his head and lower back.”

In this case, one of the suspects shot the victim with a taser, one probe hitting the man in the jaw, and the other his shoulder. The report says:

“The suspects continued to demand money and valuables, spraying him in the eyes with an unknown chemical before departing his room. As the suspects were leaving [his] room [the victim] heard a gun shot, just outside of his room.”

The suspects laughed at the victim as they sprayed his face with what may have been lighter fluid. Police, using a K9 unit, were unable to track the suspects. A semi-automatic pistol and magazines, plus a 20-gauge shotgun, were stolen in this robbery.

Though the Seattle Police Department does not believe the public is at risk, it’s possible that more cases will be tied to these three suspects. And while police haven’t yet officially tied these two cases to each other, it’s hard not to note the similarities.

“Detectives are still working to see if the two cases are, in fact, the same suspects,” said Detective Patrick Michaud. “We hope to have more on that as soon as tomorrow (Tuesday) morning.”

It didn’t take long after I posted this for people to reach out, including one Seattle police officer who expressed frustrating over these robberies. “At least once week we have home-invasion robberies,” the officer explained. “We’re routinely catching people and then having to release them … when they’re juveniles.”

The officer described a system of catch and release due, in large part, to “restorative justice.”
“I hate to point the finger at other people in the process … but we will do the job and the prosecutor’s office is taking a line that ‘We won’t hold these kids,’ according to the source, who says judges will release juveniles up until their third offense, wiping the slate clean.”
And that exact same thing, releasing minors who commit violent offenses, is not occurring in just Washington state.

In Oklahoma I have a 19-year-old thug living on my street who committed multiple firearm offenses as a prohibited possessor and minor. He even broke into my neighbor’s home and my neighbor shot at him (but missed the target). Mommy bailed the thug out each time and he never did any hard time for his gun crimes. And gun control laws didn’t stop him from obtaining another firearm.

Tell me, #GunControlNow crowd, why you would want me to be defenseless should this thug try and break into my home?



They're all still there. All of the high ranking bankers are still there even though many have plead guilty to laundering drug money. Many were intimately involved in fraud leading to the collapse of the banking system in 2008. Hillary Clinton is still there even though her many, many crimes have been documented. Huma Abadin is still there even though she was involved in putting top secret information on her computer. Loretta Lynch is still there, even though she had an illegal meeting with Bill Clinton prior to her exonerating Hillary.

Yes they're all still there and the investigations and rumors of investigations go on and on and on and on. So, Donald Trump has criticized the latest “do nothing” Attorney General. So what! If you are so dissatisfied with him, why is he still there? Why are any of them still walking around?

The latest survey shows maybe 15% of Americans approve of Congress. I think that's too high. I don't know anybody who approves of Congress, yet they're still there. We have elections and right after, there is evidence of massive vote fraud and nothing happens.

Sadly, the American dream is coming to an end. We are on the verge of world war 3 and a financial collapse. It is painfully obvious that not only will our government masters do nothing about it, but many of their actions encourage it.

Bruce                                New World Order News


President Donald Trump again attacked beleaguered Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Wednesday, this time for not ordering the Justice Department to investigate the agency’s use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in its Russia probe.

Sessions instead has asked the department’s inspector general to investigate the matter, Trump said. The Office of the Inspector General said it’s aware of a referral from the Justice Department and declined further comment.“Why is A.G. Jeff Sessions asking the Inspector General to investigate potentially massive FISA abuse?” the U.S. president wrote in a tweet that was also critical of the IG,Michael Horowitz. “Will take forever, has no prosecutorial power and already late with reports on Comey etc. Isn’t the I.G. an Obama guy? Why not use Justice Department lawyers? DISGRACEFUL!”

Horowitz is investigating the FBI and Justice Department’s handling of an investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email arrangements.
Trump fired FBI director James Comey last year in part, he said, because of that investigation.
‘Fair, Fact Centric’

The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Trey Gowdy, who regularly clashed with the Obama administration and Clinton, defended Horowitz as an impartial investigator.

“I have had a number of interactions with Inspector General Horowitz, including as recently as earlier this month,” Gowdy said in a statement. “He has been fair, fact centric, and appropriately confidential with his work.”

“He was confirmed by the U.S. Senate without a single dissent,” Gowdy said. “I have complete confidence in him and hope he is given the time, the resources and the independence to complete his work.”

The Justice Department declined to comment on Trump’s tweet, spokesman Ian Prior said in an email. The Office of Inspector General says on its website that it’s “a statutorily created independent entity whose mission is to detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct in DOJ programs and personnel, and to promote economy and efficiency in those programs.”

Fact-Checking Dueling Claims on Alleged Bias in the Russia Probe
Sessions told reporters on Tuesday that the inspector general would look into Republican claims that FISA standards were abused in the early stages of the FBI investigation into Trump campaign associates and ties to Russians. Trump’s decision to weigh in adds new fuel to concerns about presidential interference that could undermine the Justice Department’s independence.

“The inspector general will take that as one of the matters they’ll deal with,” Sessions said on Tuesday, concluding that it is “just the appropriate thing.”
Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee, led by Chairman Devin Nunes, have alleged that the FBI and Justice Department were biased against Trump in their handling of the probe into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential campaign. A memo that the Republican lawmakers released on Feb. 2 asserts that officials relied primarily on an unverified dossier prepared by former British spy Christopher Steele to obtain a surveillance warrant on Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser on Trump’s campaign. The dossier was largely funded by Clinton’s campaign and Democrats.

Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee, led by their top-ranking member, Adam Schiff, disputed the claims in their own memo, released in redacted form on Saturday.

Democrats say the Steele dossier wasn’t part of the FBI’s decision to open its counterintelligence investigation, which began in July 2016, well before the bureau received the dossier in September of that the year. While the dossier was cited in the FBI’s initial FISA warrant application in October 2016, the bureau “cited multiple sources to support the case for surveilling Page” and made only “narrow use” of information from Steele’s sources, according to the Democratic memo.

Page had been on the FBI’s radar for many years and a Russian intelligence officer targeted him for recruitment, according to the Democratic memo. The Page warrant was also renewed three times -- in January 2017, April 2017 and June 2017 -- which requires evidence that the surveillance was bearing fruit.


I don't usually post videos, but this is a must see. As you watch this, ask yourself this question: If guns were banned, what would have happened here? Here's a hint: The robber would probably still be armed and the women would not be.

Bruce                                  New World Order News



The subject article covers an extensive review of contradictions in the “official story” on the Parkland school shooting. An investigation of an horrendous crime such as this should leave no stone unturned. Every lead should be thoroughly investigated. Every question should be answered and nothing should be assumed to be a fact until it is proven.

Guess what? None of these principles are being followed. There is no investigation, just an attempt to validate the public statements. No questions are being answered. In fact the mediawhores are not only failing to publicize those questions, they are removing posts and videos from those who are investigating. We have police who are now claiming they were ordered to stand down. We have teachers who say they were informed there was going to be a shooting drill before the actual event took place. We have eyewitnesses that say there were multiple shooters. We have one eyewitness that said she was standing right next to, accused shooter,  Nikolas Cruz, while someone else was shooting.

No, nothing to see here. Just move on.

Bruce                                 New World Order News




On the surface the subject article wouldn't have any connection to a government banning gun ownership for its' citizens, but not so fast. Our founding fathers wrote, on several occasions, that the main reason for the second amendment was to protect the citizens from an encroaching tyranny which could occur from a central government. Yesterday, I pointed out a couple of such examples. Once the citizens are disarmed, what's to stop government from removing the rest of your freedoms? What's to stop them from grabbing you off the street and throwing you into jail for expressing your opinion? What's to stop them from, oh, I don't know, throwing you into jail if you criticize big pharma for their ineffectual and potentially dangerous vaccine program?

Hold on to your hats. Here it is. The subject article covers an Australian law which essentially says the following: Australian nurses and midwives who dare to speak out against the dangers of vaccinations on social media or in person will be prosecuted, the Australian government has warned, urging members of the public to report vaccine skeptics to the authorities. They could be sentenced to up to 10 years in jail.

Maybe you agree that people shouldn't criticize vaccine safety. What you should be worried about is the government being able to throw you into jail for your speech. Maybe the Australian's would revolt if it goes that far --- Oh, wait! They already gave up their weapons. It has been said, the second amendment protects the first amendment.

Bruce                                             New World Order News

Australian nurses and midwives who dare to speak out against the dangers of vaccinations on social media or in person will be prosecuted, the Australian government has warned, urging members of the public to report vaccine skeptics to the authorities.

Medical professional face a jail sentence of 10 years for expressing doubt about the effectiveness of vaccinations or urging further studies into vaccine safety. Opponents of the new law claim free speech and scientific integrity is under attack in Australia by a government that has been bought and paid for by Big Pharma.

“With no exceptions we expect all registered nurses, enrolled nurses and midwives to use the best available evidence in making practice decisions. This includes providing information to the public about public health issues,” Chair of the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia (NMBA) Dr. Lynette Cusack said in a statement.

The NMBA has called on Australians to report nurses or midwives promoting anti-vaccination – ‘anti-vaxxers’, as they’re known colloquially.

“The board will consider whether the nurse or midwife has breached their professional obligations and will treat these matters seriously,” the statement said.

“Any published anti-vaccination material and/or advice which is false, misleading or deceptive which is being distributed by a registered nurse, enrolled nurse or midwife (including via social media) may also constitute a summary offence under the National Law and could result in prosecution by AHPRA [Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency.]”

One of the strongest supporters of vaccination, Victoria’s Health Minister Jill Hennessy, has no time for parents who believe vaccine safety requires further study in order to ensure they are safe for our children.

Describing vaccine skeptics as “brain dead sheep“, the politician said:

“They are an organized movement, largely stemming from the United State of America that are hell bent on misleading parents that vaccinations are unsafe.

“That’s a dangerous message and one I’m going to continue to fight. Vaccinations save lives,” the minister concluded.
According to the new laws, parents who don’t immunize their kids may stop receiving childcare benefits. Only people with solid medical reasons are exempt from the crackdown.



The subject article covers a suggestion from Donald Trump to allow teachers and employees in schools to carry weapons. Before you succumb to an hysterical reaction, it should be pointed out that there are educational institutions that are doing just that. There are also legislatures around the country that are submitting legislation to allow that. By the way, have you heard of any mass shootings in those schools where employees have weapons?

So here are some questions:

If someone breaks into your house with a gun and shoots at you or your family, would you like to have the opportunity to shoot back, or would you like legislation to ban all guns?

Has there been a single incident of a shooter attacking a police station, military base, NRA meeting or other building where it is known to have armed occupants?

How are those nations and U.S. cities that are, or did, ban guns doing? ( Mexico, China, The Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Pol Pot's Cambodia, New York, Washington, D.C., Chicago)

How are the top 2 nations, besides the U.S., that doesn't restrict gun ownership doing? (Norway and Switzerland).

How many crimes have been prevented in a year by individuals lawfully carrying a firearm? (O.K. I'll help. Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense.)

I would never presume to make a law that requires gun ownership, but in the early days of our Republic, the law required just that. I do however, want the option to defend myself and my family, with a firearm, if I so desire.

Bruce                                                                 New World Order News

President Donald Trump has floated the idea that arming teachers and school staff could prevent future massacres, as he met with Florida school shooting survivors, who demanded changes and solutions.
TrendsDonald Trump, Florida school shooting

“If you had a teacher with, who was adept at firearms, they could very well end the attack very quickly... And we’re going to be looking at it very strongly, and I think a lot of people are going to be opposed to it, I think a lot of people are going to like it,” Trump said at a ‘listening session’ at the White House on Wednesday, that included some Florida school shooting survivors.

While Trump’s controversial proposal is still up for discussion, the US president noted that such a practice has a high success rate on airplanes. Undercover Federal Air Marshals carry weapons on many US flights. Trump somehow estimated that just 20 percent of teachers and staff armed with guns could effectively thwart potential attacks on school property.

“The attack has lasted on average about three minutes. It takes 5-8 minutes for the responders, for the police to come in,” Trump said, explaining the argument for arming school staff.

“You’d have a lot of people who would be armed, who would be ready,” Trump said. “They may be Marines that left the Marines, left the Army, left the Air Force, and they are very adept at doing that. You’d have a lot of them and they would be spread evenly throughout the school.”

Last Wednesday, a teenager armed with an AR-15 opened fire on students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, killing 17 people and injuring over a dozen more. The perpetrator, identified as 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, was detained shortly after the shooting and later confessed to the crime.

Students, parents and family members of Florida massacre victims raised their voices at the commander-in-chief, urging the president with tears in their eyes to find a solution to the gun problem, which continues to plague US schools.

Responding to their pain, Trump promised to be “very strong on background checks” and place a “very strong emphasis”on mental health as part of the solution to the deadly problem. “It's not gonna be talk like it has been in the past. It's been going on too long. Too many instances. And we're going to get it done,” Trump said.

Not everyone welcomed Trump's idea of arming teachers. Mark Barden, the father of one of the victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre in Connecticut, noted that any would-be shooter “is not going to care if there’s someone there with a gun” working at the school premises.



So what are they hiding? In the case of the Florida shooting, they are hiding inconsistencies in the official government story. One of the subject articles covers a mediawhore orgy over an alleged student, David Hogg, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL. Researchers have found some disturbing contradictions in the bio of David Hogg. There is evidence that he actually graduated from a high school in Redondo Beach, California in 2015. There is also a video where Hogg is identified as an actor in a video posted some time earlier in Redondo Beach. Then his father is an FBI agent and his mother is an employee of CNN. He also made a video concerning the shooting before it actually happened.

So what is the response from the mediawhores? First they pull the video and dozens of others from youtube. Then, and you're going to love this one, they dust off the tired, old, discredited, sophomoric, “conspiracy theorist” name calling. Let's count the number of times they use that term in their very short article, shall we? O.K. I counted 7. I also read about the mental condition of those who question the official story. Here's what's missing. There are no answers to the questions being asked. No, we don't do that. We never answer any questions. We only call you names and censor your publications.

No, nothing to see here, just move on. Oswald killed Kennedy all by himself. North Vietnamese gunboats attacked a U.S. destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin, 80+ men, women and children committed suicide at Waco, Texas by burning themselves to death, 3 steel reinforced skyscrapers all collapsed in one day due to a kerosene fire ( the third building didn't even have a kerosene fire), Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, and if you ask any questions, whatsoever, you're (wait for it) A CONSPIRACY THEORIST.

Bruce                                    New World Order News


David Hogg, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL, has been outspoken about the proliferation of guns in the United States—and politicians’ inaction on gun control—after seeing 17 of his classmates killed by a school shooter. For speaking up, he’s been targeted by right-wing commentators and outright conspiracy theorists have their knives out for the 17-year-old.

On Tuesday, a YouTube user who goes by “mark m” uploaded a video showing David Hogg being interviewed by a local TV station in Redondo Beach, CA, as a witness to a dust-up with a lifeguard over a boogie board. “DAVID HOGG THE ACTOR....” the video’s caption read.

The video became so popular so quickly that YouTube named it as “#1 on trending.”

In the video, Hogg and a friend argued with a Redondo Beach lifeguard after his friend placed his boogie board on top of a trash can. Now, conspiracy theorists have seized on the clip as evidence that Hogg is not a high school student but a rather a paid “crisis actor” who moves from tragedy to tragedy (because, evidently, it’s impossible for a Florida high school student to also visit a beach in California). 

After Splinter reached out to YouTube for comment on the video, the site took the video down somewhere between 10:30 and 11 am EST on Wednesday. YouTube’s community guidelines don’t explicitly restrict content that promotes unfounded conspiracy theories, but a notice left where the video was says it violated the site’s policies “on harassment and bullying.”

The video uploading giant, which is owned by Google, has clearly struggled to stem the tide of conspiracy theory content on its site in the wake of the Parkland shooting:

Even after YouTube removed the video, plenty of content from conspiracy theorists remained live. Here’s a sample of other YouTube videos that come up when you search David Hogg’s name:

See that little gray check mark next to The Alex Jones Channel? That means YouTube has “verified” Jones, a man who also believes the Sandy Hook shooting that killed 20 children was a false-flag operation.

The conspiracy theory has gotten so much attention that Hogg had to address the claim in a CNN interview, telling Anderson Cooper: “I’m not a crisis actor.”

Remember, it’s not just anonymous 4chan trolls and Alex Jones acolytes who are spreading these wildly offensive conspiracy theories about teenage survivors of a horrific school shooting. Donald Trump Jr. has been promoting conspiracy theories about Hogg on his Twitter account, including the idea that because Hogg’s father is a retired FBI agent, his son’s outrage about the lack of gun control in the U.S. is a political stunt to discredit the president.
And on Tuesday, a legislative aide to Florida state Representative Shawn Harrison emailed a local reporter to claim that Hogg and another Parkland survivor were not students, but “actors that travel to various crisis when they happen.”

It’s a good reminder that we live in a country filled with heavily armed, mentally unstable conspiracy theorists—some of whom just happen to be related to the president.

Update, 1:20 p.m. ET: In a statement to Splinter, a YouTube spokesperson said:
This video should never have appeared in Trending. Because the video contained footage from an authoritative news source, our system misclassified it. As soon as we became aware of the video, we removed it from Trending and from YouTube for violating our policies. We are working to improve our systems moving forward.



The subject article covers over 100 examples of the U.S. meddling in the elections of 60 different nations since 1946. Of course, the mediawhores and our government masters don't want to talk about that. No, instead they talk and talk and talk about the so-called Russian meddling in our elections. After more than a year, there is absolutely no evidence of this, whatsoever. In fact, the evidence shows that these accusations come from the Clintons. I guess if the Clintons say the moon is made out of green cheese, we can count on the mediawhores parroting that for years.

There are a couple of other things regarding interference in the affairs of another nation. The first is bombing and invading. As bad as election interference is, bombing a nation into the stone age while killing multiple thousands of their citizens is worse. The second thing is Israeli interference in our elections and domestic affairs. Not only do the Israeli's admit it, they are proud of it. We have many Senators and Congressmen who openly brag about their allegiance to Israel. ----- And you wonder why we are involved in so many wars in the middle east.

Bruce                                        New World Order News

A Russian parliamentary commission has prepared a report that lists over 100 cases of US interference in other nations’ internal affairs since the end of World War Two.

“We have counted approximately 100, about 101 or 102 absolutely verified and recorded facts of American involvement in the sovereign affairs of over 60 UN member-nations since the approval of this organizations’ charter that bans any such involvement – since 1946 till this day,” the head of the upper house Commission for Protection of State Sovereignty, Senator Andrey Klimov, was quoted as saying on Monday by TASS.

The senator named one particular example from the list – the 1973 coup d’état in Chile that installed Augusto Pinochet as a military dictator and as a result of which the country’s parliament was dissolved and numerous human rights violations were committed. “Every such fact has a multitude of episodes of the US interference,” he noted.

Klimov told TASS that the annual report would be finalized and released at the end of the month, and added that senators were preparing a different edition which would be distributed among a “closed circle of persons” and which would not be released to the wider public in the foreseeable future.

[© Alexey Vitvitsky] Russia lists 9 media outlets as foreign agents, including Voice of America, Radio Liberty
At the same time, Klimov noted that not all cases of US involvement in other nations’ affairs could be formally described as such and thus were not included in the report. As an example, he named Donald Trump’s inauguration speech, in which the US president said that Washington was constantly meddling in other nations’ affairs and called for an end to such practices. “And these were the words of an inaugurated president, the commander-in-chief of the US military forces, who had been briefed through all files,” he said.

Another example was the 2003 speech of George W. Bush in which the then-US president urged change in political regimes in between 40 and 50 foreign countries.

The upper house commission for monitoring and countering foreign nations’ attempts to influence internal Russian politics was formed in mid-2017. Back then, upper house Speaker Valentina Matvienko said that attempts to meddle in Russia’s internal affairs had been ongoing for years and that up to $100 billion was sent to Russia from abroad annually to sponsor "political activities." "We know the consequences of such meddling... and will not allow anyone to threaten Russia's sovereignty," she said.



I brought this up last week after the school shooting in Florida. The widespread use of psychotropic drugs by our youth is the only factor that has changed in the past generation. If it were solely about guns, then easier gun purchase with more usage of guns by average citizens would result in more mass shootings, not fewer.

From the founding of our republic to just a generation ago, our nation's gun laws were far more permissive than they are now. Indeed, when I went to school ( a long time ago ), one could actually bring a rifle to school and put it in a locker or leave it in their car. Pistols could be purchased without any background check at a wide variety of retailers. Yet, there were virtually no school shootings. Mass shootings were unheard of.

The subject article covers the fact that almost all school shooters were under the influence of psychotropic drugs. Our mediawhores and government masters pay no attention to this. After all, there are billions of dollars in getting our children dependent on drugs. Also, if the people get too “uppity”, we don't want them to have the ability to oppose government.

Bruce                            New World Order News

Whille mass killers generally have guns in their hands, another commonality is that they often have psychiatric drugs in their blood. The difference, though, is that it isn't guns that have the side effect of "homicidal ideation."

If you develop digestive problems after a change in diet, do you look for the cause in foods you always ate or the new ones you started eating? While the answer is obvious, this common sense is painfully uncommon when analyzing the new phenomenon of continual mass shootings: Many blame the long-present “foods” — guns in this case — and ignore the new diet whose embrace coincided with the problem. And part of what’s new is the widespread use of psychiatric drugs.

As a case in point, the Parkland, Florida, shooter (I won’t use his name and help provide the fame he craved), who murdered 17 on Valentine’s Day, was on medication for emotional issues, his aunt related. This is now a familiar story, too. As’s David Kupelian put it Thursday, the following is par for the course: As information about a “perpetrator emerges, a relative confides to a newspaper that the ‘troubled youth’ who committed the mass murder was on psychiatric medications — you know, those powerful, little understood, mind-altering drugs with fearsome side effects including ‘suicidal ideation’ and even ‘homicidal ideation.’”

Yet, Kupelian laments, the media have little appetite for exploring this issue. Politicians don’t, either. Unlike with guns, legal drugs aren’t a sexy issue that can be used to scare people and win votes. Moreover, as The Guardian reported last year, “Pharmaceutical companies spend far more than any other industry to influence politicians,” having poured “close to $2.5bn into lobbying and funding members of Congress over the past decade.” This dwarfs the “gun lobby’s” political contributions, mind you.

But what about pharmaceuticals’ contributions to mass shootings? Of course, correlation doesn’t mean causation, but it can provide clues as to where causation may lie — and the correlation between mass shooters and psychiatric drug use certainly exists.

Consider Newtown, Connecticut, killer Adam Lanza (I will provide the names of perpetrators of older incidents), who killed 26 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2013. He also was on medication, according to family friend Louise Tambascio. That’s all we heard about it, however; as Kupelian points out, there “was little journalistic curiosity or follow-up.”

But there should be. As Kupelian also informs, “Fact: A disturbing number of perpetrators of school shootings and similar mass murders in our modern era were either on — or just recently coming off of — psychiatric medications.” He then provides some examples (all quotations are Kupelian’s):

• “Columbine mass-killer Eric Harris was taking Luvox — like Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Effexor and many others, a modern and widely prescribed type of antidepressant drug called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs.” Along with fellow student Dylan Klebold, Harris shot 13 to death and wounded 24 in a headline-grabbing 1999 rampage. “Luvox manufacturer Solvay Pharmaceuticals concedes that during short-term controlled clinical trials, 4 percent of children and youth taking Luvox — that’s one in 25 — developed mania, a dangerous and violence-prone mental derangement characterized by extreme excitement and delusion.”

• Twenty-five-year-old Patrick Purdy murdered five children and wounded 30 in a schoolyard shooting rampage in Stockton, California, in 1989. He’d been taking “Amitriptyline, an antidepressant, as well as the antipsychotic drug Thorazine.”

• “Kip Kinkel, 15, murdered his parents in 1998 and the next day went to his school, Thurston High in Springfield, Oregon, and opened fire on his classmates, killing two and wounding 22 others. He had been prescribed both Prozac and Ritalin.”
WND’s Leo Hohmann adds to the picture, having reported in 2015 (all quotations are his):

• “Aaron Ray Ybarra, 26, of Mountlake Terrace, Washington, allegedly opened fire with a shotgun at Seattle Pacific University in June 2014, killing one student and wounding two others.” Ybarra “said he’d been prescribed with Prozac and Risperdal to help him with his problems.”

• “Jose Reyes, the Nevada seventh-grader who went on a shooting rampage at his school in October 2013 was taking a prescription antidepressant [Prozac] at the time….”

• “Navy Yard shooter Aaron Alexis sprayed bullets at office workers and in a cafeteria on Sept. 16, 2013, killing 13 people including himself. Alexis had been prescribed [generic antidepressant] Trazodone by his Veterans Affairs doctor.”

• “In 1988, 31-year-old Laurie Dann went on a shooting rampage in a second-grade classroom in Winnetka, Ill., killing one child and wounding six. She had been taking the antidepressant Anafranil as well as Lithium, long used to treat mania.”

• “In Paducah, Kentucky, in late 1997, 14-year-old Michael Carneal, son of a prominent attorney, traveled to Heath High School and started shooting students in a prayer meeting taking place in the school’s lobby, killing three and leaving another paralyzed. Carneal reportedly was on Ritalin.”

• “In 2005, 16-year-old Jeff Weise, living on Minnesota’s Red Lake Indian Reservation, shot and killed nine people and wounded five others before killing himself. Weise had been taking Prozac.”

• “47-year-old Joseph T. Wesbecker, just a month after he began taking Prozac in 1989, shot 20 workers at Standard Gravure Corp. in Louisville, Kentucky, killing nine. Prozac-maker Eli Lilly later settled a lawsuit brought by survivors.”
And there are many, many more examples.

Of course, also relating to correlation, there’s a chicken-or-egg question here: Is it that taking psychiatric drugs makes a person more likely to go crazy and commit murderous rampages, or is it that crazy people who are candidates for committing murderous rampages are more likely to be prescribed psychiatric drugs? In reality, most likely it’s both.

The truth is that because the human mind is complex and not wholly understood, taking mind-altering drugs is a risky proposition. Drug companies acknowledge this, too, mind you — just not very publicly. As Kupelian writes after relating the case of Andrea Yates, who drowned her five children in 2001 while on the antidepressant Effexor:

In November 2005, more than four years after Yates drowned her children, Effexor manufacturer Wyeth Pharmaceuticals quietly added “homicidal ideation” to the drug’s list of “rare adverse events.” The Medical Accountability Network, a private nonprofit focused on medical ethics issues, publicly criticized Wyeth, saying Effexor’s “homicidal ideation” risk wasn’t well publicized and that Wyeth failed to send letters to doctors or issue warning labels announcing the change. And what exactly does “rare” mean in the phrase “rare adverse events”? The FDA defines it as occurring in less than one in 1,000 people. But since that same year 19.2 million prescriptions for Effexor were filled in the U.S., statistically that means thousands of Americans might experience “homicidal ideation” — murderous thoughts — as a result of taking just this one brand of antidepressant drug. Effexor is Wyeth’s best-selling drug, by the way, which in one recent year brought in over $3 billion in sales, accounting for almost a fifth of the company’s annual revenues.

Then, after mentioning the case of 12-year-old Paxil user Christopher Pittman’s murder of his grandparents, Kupelian informs that “Paxil’s known ‘adverse drug reactions’ — according to the drug’s FDA-approved label — include ‘mania,’ ‘insomnia,’ ‘anxiety,’ ‘agitation,’ ‘confusion,’ ‘amnesia,’ ‘depression,’ ‘paranoid reaction,’ ‘psychosis,’ ‘hostility,’ ‘delirium,’ ‘hallucinations,’ ‘abnormal thinking,’ ‘depersonalization’ and ‘lack of emotion,’ among others.”

In fact, as Ch 2 WCGH reported in 2009, “One study shows a quarter of all children on drugs such as Paxil and Zoloft become dangerously violent and/or suicidal.” Below is a 2011 news report on the subject by WCNC.COM 6 News; it includes the story of Christopher Pittman.
Of course, if these drugs pose such a threat, there should be a stream of high-profile lawsuits, right? Wrong. To avoid the bad exposure this would bring, drug companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars settling claims out of court and often cloak them with confidentiality agreements.

Having said this, it’s unlikely that psychiatric drugs are entirely to blame for mass shootings, for much has changed during the last many decades. We’ve seen a decline in faith and rise in moral relativism/nihilism, which relates the notion that right and wrong are mere “perspective”; entertainment has become increasingly decadent and mindlessly violent (note that the Internet’s rise fairly closely coincided with the start of continual mass shootings); the family has continued to break down, and Americans today, immersed in electronics, are often more connected to things than people; and the fame committing a massacre brings can be alluring to lonely, disturbed people, thus breeding copycat crimes, to name just a few factors. It’s a systemic problem.

Nonetheless, adding mind-altering drugs to this equation adds up to nothing good, and this brings me to my story. I knew a good-natured man who was the epitome of even-temperedness, who had some problems and was prescribed an antidepressant by a psychiatrist (who’d never treated him before). Well, he swallowed one pill — and only one, ever. In his case, that was all it took. Fifteen minutes later, he flew into a rage and was never the same again. Mental instability, irrationality, and some violent episodes — in a word, insanity — would define the rest of his life.

Famed psychiatrist Sigmund Freud once believed that cocaine, legal during his younger days, was the best cure for depression there’d ever been. “Bayer Heroin” was once advertised as a remedy for all sorts of ailments. Today, with one out of six Americans on some psychiatric medication, we ought to perhaps bear in mind that just because a drug is on the right side of the law doesn’t mean it won’t bring you to the wrong side of sanity’s line.




The U.S. government has really been put into a corner with this latest development. As Turkish military forces close in on Kurds occupying the Syrian area of Afrin, the Kurds and the Syrian government have reached an agreement to let Syrian forces to enter Afrin, thus agreeing to allow Syria to regain control of this area.

So we have the U.S. saying it wanted to deploy a 30,000 man force to protect the Afrin area for the Kurds. Then we have Turkey sending their military into Syria to attack the Kurds. Then we have the U.S. double crossing the Kurds. Then we have U.S. forces attacking Syrian military forces approaching the area. Now we have the Kurds and Syria forming an alliance and the U.S. illegally occupying Syrian territory, managing to make enemies out of everyone. Turkey hates us. The Kurds hate us. The Russians hate us. The Iranians hate us. Hezbollah hates us. Syria hates us.

Why are we there again? As the fighting continues, who exactly, is the U.S. going to fight and why? It could be that all of the divergent forces in Syria have determined that their first priority is getting the U.S. out. Why are we there again?

Bruce                                           New World Order News

The Syrian government is reportedly set to deploy troops to the northern district of Afrin, which has been the target of a month-long Turkish offensive, as part of an agreement with the Kurdish militants operating there.

Citing “special” sources, Lebanon’s Al Mayadeen broadcaster reported Thursday that Damascus had reached an agreement with militants of the People’s Protection Units (YPG) to station troops in Afrin with the aim of countering Turkish military attacks.

Russia’s Sputnik news agency also quoted a source familiar with the situation as saying that Syrian forces would enter the flashpoint region within “the next few days.”

“The agreement has been reached on the deployment of the Syrian Armed Forces at the Syrian-Turkish border in Afrin in the north of Aleppo in the next few days. The agreement was reached between the Syrian government and the Kurds,” the source said.

According to Sputnik, the US, a longtime supporter of the anti-Damascus Kurdish militants, has no knowledge of the deal.
Ankara views the YPG as a terror organization linked to the homegrown militants of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which has been fighting for autonomy on Turkish soil over the past decades.

Angered by a Washington plan to set up a 30,000-strong Kurdish force at its doorstep, Turkey launched on January 19 the so-called Operation Olive Branch in northern Syria to cleanse those regions of the YPG, which forms the primary component of the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).
This January 28, 2018 file photo, Turkish troops take control of Bursayah hill, which separates the Kurdish-held enclave of Afrin from Azaz, Syria. (By AP)
Turkey has threatened to expand its military operation to the nearby Kurdish-controlled Syrian city of Manbij and beyond to the Iraqi border. It has also warned the US, its NATO ally, to halt its support for the Kurds or risk confronting Turkish forces on the ground in Syria.

In an exclusive report on February 11, Reuters said the Kurdish militants controlling Afrin are getting indirect assistance from Syrian government forces in the face Turkish assaults.

Kino Gabriel, the SDF spokesman, said the “fundamental route” to get reinforcements to Afrin is via government forces, adding, “There are understandings between the two forces ... for the sake of delivering reinforcements.”

The developments come a few weeks after Kurdish authorities in the Afrin district appealed to the government of President Bashar al-Assad to send troops and help defend them against the Turkish incursion in line with protecting Syria’s sovereignty.
PressTV-Syrian Kurds appeal to Assad in face of Turkish incursion

Kurdish authorities in Syria’s Afrin district call on the Syrian government to send troops to protect the country’s sovereignty against a Turkish military incursion.

The Syrian government has given a degree of authority to the Kurdish regions to run their own affairs in the face of a foreign-backed militancy. The US, however, has used the vacuum to establish a foothold in those regions with the help of militants.
Assad has described US-sponsored Kurdish armed elements as “traitors” to the nation but has also denounced Turkish incursions as an act of aggression.



I waited a day to let some of the “dust” settle. As usual, the official story is beginning to unravel. The accused shooter has been labeled a “white supremacist” and the lone gunman. Well, the first label has already been refuted as propaganda. Nikolas Cruz's heritage is Hispanic with a Cuban origin. Hardly a “white supremacist”. I have also posted an article quoting students who were there that there were multiple shooters. One student said he was talking to Cruz as gun fire erupted and Cruz was not holding a weapon at that time.

It has also been revealed that Cruz may have been autistic and was taking psychotropic medication.

So, one the one hand, he was this mastermind who planned this horrific crime and on the other hand he was this autistic kid under the influence of psychotropic drugs.

Stay tuned.

Bruce                               New World Order News

Harris was put on psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Northern Illinois University had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Virginia Tech had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Stockton had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Navy Yard had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Ft. Hood had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Isla Vista had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Paducah had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at UCC had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Aurora had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Tucson had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Tallahassee had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Kauhajoki had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Fresno had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Jokela had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Red Lion had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at Ikeda had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
The killer at El Cajon had been prescribed psychiatric drugs. 
Nikolas de Jesus Crux had been prescribed psychiatric drugs.