Headline News Stories 24/7
Rense.com - Worlds #1 Alternative News Service Your First Source For Reality & Honest Journalism Disclaimer And Fair Use
Steel Frame For Reactor 1 Complete,  
America Must Reject Netanyahu’s War Cry on Iran
Written by Sheldon Richman
Wednesday March 4, 2015
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu came to Washington this week to prepare the Ameri
accessories to murder. You heard from all the ‘Talking Heads’ about what a great job they were doing with the recent ‘fertilizer explosion’ near Waco. Surely, you heard of the ‘coincidental’ drill?
“Originally there was a post describing the drill, saying that it would be complete with actors, who would take almost 200 local hospital beds. The original announcement read:
North Hills Hospital is proud to be hosting one of the largest emergency preparedness drills ever held in the state of Texas this week. We will be partnering with the North Central Texas Trauma Regional Advisory Council (NCTTRAC) and first responders from throughout North Texas to test our equipment and processes so that when a real disaster happens, we’re all ready to respond. (Which as we all know. this disaster has a miraculous chance of happening during the drill and close enough to respond and look good. HEROES! ‘Stead of Scumbags R US. Wink wink, nudge nudge… Drills? US don’t need no stinking drills – for exactly what is happening for US to look good. Makes me wanna’ puke watching TV and these scumbags. Oh, and their prayers for Boston. Which will soon be followed by their ‘prayers’ for Waco. And all the while they never heard of DRILLS. “Drills? – What are you talking about?” is all the ‘herd’ gets.)
This drill is even timelier in the wake of the bombings at Monday’s Boston Marathon. Our prayers go out to the victims involved, and we are proud of the first responders – EMS, fire, police, race workers, and hospital staff – who so bravely cared for the injured.
If you live near North Hills Hospital, you will see a lot of activity in our parking lots over the next three days as the NCTTRAC sets up a mobile 140-bed hospital, along with dozens of ambulances, several AMBUS (multi-patient ambulances), and helicopters. This is only a drill and will simulate a hospital evacuation, something that might be necessary in the event of a tornado, hurricane, earthquake, or prolonged power failure.
Set-up for the drill will take place Tuesday and Wednesday, with the drill occurring on Thursday. At no time will regular patient care be affected, as the drill will use only “actor” patients and be confined to non-patient care areas and the parking lot.” http://intellihub.com/2013/04/18/texas-mass-casuality-drill-apparently-cancelled-following-waco-explosion/
“Waco Explosion: Another Official Drill Goes Live” http://truthalliance.net/Archive/News/tabid/67/ID/10460/Waco-Explosion-Another-official-drill-goes-live.aspx Here’s the link for the coincidental hospital drill. http://northhillshospital.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/this-is-only-a-drill/
“Frame By Frame Analysis of Fertilizer plant explosion in Texas Reveals it was Trigger” “1st . Fire from first Explosion is Blasting out . 2nd Bright Flash From per-detonation , still the main plant has not been triggered . you can see the main planin center still burning , if you…” http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=dc1_1366698921 This is not a warehouse blowing up, appears closer than preceding pictured fire in a flat area of ground? How does an underground storage catch fire and explode from an above ground flame? Frame by frame revealed no missile that I could see. There is clearly the typical nuke pattern mushroom appearing again on solid ground and no sign of structure that I could see previously. But, a mushroom would also be common and very similar to a nuke when large amounts – many tons 30 to 40 on a semi to make a crater for very close detonation of TNT – so you need a lot and it needs to be packed close. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/04/18/what-mushroom-clouds-can-reveal-about-the-waco-explosion/ But, TNT can come no where close to nuke heat and brightness. Note in videos noted that a couple whited out in daylight – has to be ‘WAY BRIGHTER’ than the Sunshine for that to happen during daylight.
Thin Air Explosion in Waco in Slow Motion 2 Camera views http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VHhFERPeHE Here it is super slow motion – fireball comes out of grassland. Note where the fireball is. Then replay and see what there is there to blow up. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApZhT5Xst7I From a different angle it appears the ‘tank’ on the far right is what blew up. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX2zrZsCLf0 Now repeat the playback per noted previously. Here’s one more view – closest fireball found so far. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99DhCLLS7Nw
And then there is this little physics and chemistry problem. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-texas-fertilizer-plant-explosion-deadly “Anhydrous ammonia is a gas… But it won’t burst into flames.”* “Ammonium nitrate is another story. This fertilizer is a gravel-like solid, making it far easier to handle and transport. But when mixed with a fuel and ignited, it becomes a powerful explosive.” “At the Texas fertilizer plant, something else served as a fuel:” This is all correct information pulled from a pile of government propaganda. So apparently the theory is that a gas, that was burning – but left enough to infiltrate Ammonium Nitrate to such a degree that it was equivalent to being soaked in a flammable liquid. Ah, the miracles that happen in drills. (Awaiting new shill discovery of ‘new super duper DEW Thermite Gas’?) * “Anhydrous ammonia – However, ammonia vapor in high concentrations (16 to 25 percent by weight in air) will burn.” And, “Ammonia will combine with mercury to form a fulminate which is an unstable explosive compound.” http://svasd.com/images/1pm_Williams.pdf How this vapor ‘defied the physics of wind on a gas’, “miraculously” escaped the fire that caused it?, or was the cause?, or how Mercury might somehow cause it to be explosive instead of the ‘deflagration mixture’ that it is, still await the BS circular file.
Here we go… More coincidental miracles – US ‘drill teams’ should be ‘Saints’ many times over by now. 63 times, you go to a drill of a massacre, plane crash, etc, et al, the drill somehow becomes a terrorist attack. And it’s always the same: plane drill = plane crash, bomb drill – bomb explosion, shooting drill – shooting massacre, etc. It’s ALWAYS the identical drill for the identical reality. The odds on it happening one or two times is astronomical – same time, same place, same scenario, etc, et al, but 63 times approaches infinity. Hello! Wakey! Wakey! The ‘Rabbit Hole’ is very steep and deep…
How many had to know? The good ole ‘drill boys and girls’ and every person being there – at least those left alive, the media, the police, the EMTs, the Hospital, at least key city, county and state ‘officials’. Who ya’ gonna call? The F!cking B I? LOL. They are as much a part as DHS. They helped set it up, as well as continuing to hide? Who ya’ gonna call? Your Senators? Nah, they wouldn’t know sh!t about the ‘drills’. Congress, the ‘supremes’ court, and the ‘executive branches’, etc, et al, are the very ones supporting, funding and in many cases planning the drills – our ‘highnesses’ of treason and tyranny.
Amazing
* 63 Drills Since 93 – Where the Drill and Reality Were ‘Coincidently’ Identical.
4/18/2013 Terrorist type = ExplosionDead 35Wounded 70Waco, United StatesTerrorist drill = type Mass Casualty
4/15/2013 Terrorist type = Multiple BombingsDead 2Wounded 200Boston, United StatesTerrorist drill = Terrorist Bombing Exercise
12/14/2012 Terrorist type = ShootingDead 28Wounded 2Newtown, United StatesTerrorist drill = Mass Shooter Exercise
10/21/2012 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 28Tel Aviv,IsraelTerrorist drill = Bus Bombing
8/19/2012 Terrorist type = Suicide BombingDead 7Wounded 15Ingushetia, RussiaTerrorist drill = Bombing
7/20/2012 Terrorist type = ShootingDead 12Wounded 58Aurora, United StatesTerrorist drill = Mass Shooter Exercise
2/13/2012 Terrorist type = Car BombingDead 0Wounded 4New Delhi, India CarTerrorist drill = Bombing
12/13/2011 Terrorist type = Murder-SuicideDead 6Wounded 125Liege, BelgiumTerrorist drill = Hostage Exercise in nearby neighborhood.
8/25/2011 Terrorist type = Fire Attack – Fuel and GrenadeDead 55Wounded 10Monterrey, MexicoTerrorist drill = Mexican troops and Federal Police were evacuated from the area of the attack 6 hours prior to attack.
8/18/2011 Terrorist type = Ambush, Shooting, BombingDead 17Wounded 40Beer Sheva, IsraelTerrorist drill = Multiple Attacks on Military Units
7/13/2011 Terrorist type = BombingsDead 20Wounded 130Mumbai, IndiaTerrorist drill = Multiple Bombings
5/3/2011 Terrorist type = BombingDead 11Wounded 40Lohardaga, IndiaTerrorist drill = Police Training Exercise
4/9/2011 Terrorist type = Attempted AssassinationDead 6Wounded 17Alphen aan den Rijn, NetherlandsTerrorist drill = Active Shooter
11/26/2010 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Portland, OregonTerrorist drill = FBI Sting Operation
9/10/2010 Terrorist type = Alleged BombingDead 0Wounded 1Copenhagen, DenmarkTerrorist drill = Police Training Exercise
8/14/2010 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 3Lurgan, Northern IrelandTerrorist drill = Bombing/Evacuation
8/10/2010 Terrorist type = Car BombingDead 0Wounded 0Cookstown, Northern IrelandTerrorist drill = Bombing/Evacuation
8/3/2010 Terrorist type = Car BombingDead 0Wounded 0Derry Northern, IrelandTerrorist drill = Bombing/Evacuation
6/22/2010 Terrorist type = Bombing Attempt/ArsonDead 0Wounded 0Keady, IrelandTerrorist drill = Army Exercise
6/15/2010 Terrorist type = BombingDead 1Wounded 3Simak Province, TurkeyTerrorist drill = Turkish Military Training Exercise
5/18/2010 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Ottawa, CanadaTerrorist drill = Evacuation
3/29/2010 Terrorist type = Suicide BombingDead 40Wounded 100Moscow, RussiaTerrorist drill = Terrorist Bombing
2/24/2010 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Vitoria, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation Exercise
2/13/2010 Terrorist type = BombingDead 16Wounded 60Pune, IndiaTerrorist drill = Bombing in Tourist Area
1/6/2010 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Athens, GreeceTerrorist drill = Evacuation
12/26/2009 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 3Detroit, United StatesTerrorist drill = Official Bomb Squad Drill
7/30/2009 Terrorist type = Car BombingDead 2Wounded 3Calvia, SpainTerrorist drill = Guardia Civil Training
7/22/2009 Terrorist type = Car BombingDead 0Wounded 65Burgos, SpainTerrorist drill = Guardia Civil Training
7/7/2009 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Durango, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation Exercise
5/25/2009 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0New York City, United StatesTerrorist drill = Police Bomb Squad Exercise
3/18/2009 BombingDead 0Wounded 0Athens, GreeceTerrorist drill = Deputy Kyriakos Mitsotakis Evacuated
1/17/2009 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Hernani, SpainTerrorist drill = Police Training Exercise
11/24/2008 Terrorist type = BombingDead 18Wounded 6Baghdad, IraqTerrorist drill = Iraq Trade Ministry Training
11/10/2008 Terrorist type = BombingDead 2Wounded 3South Ossetia. GeorgiaTerrorist drill = EU Monitoring Mission Exercise
2/4/2008 Terrorist type = Suicide BombingDead 1Wounded 9Dimona, IsraelTerrorist drill = Unknown Military Exercise
12/24/2007 Terrorist type = Attempted BombingDead 0Wounded 0Istanbul, TurkeyTerrorist drill = Unknown Sting Operation
5/21/2007 Terrorist type = Attempted BombingDead 0Wounded 0Lynchburg, United StatesTerrorist drill = Unknown Sting Operation
3/3/2007 Terrorist type = BombingDead 5Wounded 0Neiva, ColumbiaTerrorist drill = Bomb Squad Training
12/22/2006 Terrorist type = General AttackDead 0Wounded 0Illinois Shopping Mall, United StatesTerrorist drill = Sting Exercise
8/10/2006 Terrorist type = Attempted BombingDead 0Wounded 0Heathrow Airport, United KingdomTerrorist drill = Sting Exercise
7/31/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Dortmund, GermanyTerrorist drill = Sting Exercise
7/11/2006 Terrorist type = Multiple BombingsDead 209Wounded 417Mumbai, IndiaTerrorist drill = Multiple Bombing Exercises
4/17/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 11Wounded 70Tel Aviv, IsraelTerrorist drill = IDF Bomb Squad Training Exercise
3/7/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 1Santoria, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation
2/28/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Mutriku, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation
2/27/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 1Mungia, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation
2/16/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Trapagaran, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation
2/14/2006 Terrorist type = Car BombingDead 0Wounded 0Northern Spain, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation
1/29/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 1Santutxu, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation
1/26/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Etxebarri, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation
1/24/2006 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 0Nanclares de la Oca, SpainTerrorist drill = Evacuation
7/21/2005 Terrorist type = Multiple BombingsDead 0Wounded 0London, United KingdomTerrorist drill = Bombing
7/7/2005 Terrorist type = Multiple BombingsDead 52Wounded 700London, United KingdomTerrorist drill = Bus Bombing
12/6/2004 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 2Santillana del Mar, SpainTerrorist drill = Training
11/25/2004 Terrorist type = BombingDead 1Wounded 4Oismae, EstoniaTerrorist drill = Police Training
10/8/2004 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 10Paris, FranceTerrorist drill = Embassy Bombings
6/24/2004 Terrorist type = BombingDead 4Wounded 15Istanbul, TurkeyTerrorist drill = Bus Bombing Exercise
4/28/2004 Terrorist type = BombingDead 0Wounded 10Kashmir, IndiaTerrorist drill = Military Training Exercise
2/6/2004 Terrorist type = BombingDead 40Wounded 122Moscow, RussiaTerrorist drill = Bombing Exercise
5/12/2003 Terrorist type = BombingDead 59Wounded 0Znamenskoye, ChechnyaTerrorist drill = Russian Military Training
9/11/2001 Terrorist type = Coordinated Terrorist AttackDead 2973Wounded 10000New York City, United StatesTerrorist drill = Training Drill – Multiple Exercises
4/19/1995 Terrorist type = BombingDead 168Wounded 680Oklahoma City, United StatesTerrorist drill = Terrorist Bombing Exercise
2/26/1993 Terrorist type = BombingDead 6Wounded 1042New York City, United StatesTerrorist drill = FBI Sting Operation
See interactive map here – http://www.mantisintelligence.org/TerrorismInitiate_TrainingExercises.aspx . Although, Citizens Action Network, did the compilation. https://www.facebook.com/Citizens.Action.Network
Related Articles:
Pictures: US Boston Weapon – Both ‘Explosions’ – The Secret of the Pure Fusion Weapon – Li7 – Lithium 7 http://edwardmd.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/photograph-of-boston-fireball-2nd-explosion/
Boston Marathon: The Finish Line For US Treason. Drill Death. Everything Is In Place For Police State. http://edwardmd.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/boston-marathon-the-finish-line-for-us-treason-drill-death-everything-is-in-place-for-police-state-by-ed-ward-md/
Conflicts, Coincidences at the Boston JFK Library http://rense.com/general95/conffc.html
Warning – FEMA Camps are now called Fusion Centers: When you think ‘Fusion’ center – think again – because like 9 11′s ‘Ground Zero’ it may have 2 meanings for them.
…
he ancient New World Order agenda for a centralized totalitarian One World Government?
THE IMPLICATIONS: The Satanic, Sabbatean-Frankis cult uses and exploits Jews as a cover for its conspiratorial and criminal actions. How many regular, innocent Jews are waking up to what is being done in their name?
“It’s all a Jewish Conspiracy!”
I have seen and heard many people write and utter these words in reference to the worldwide conspiracy and the New World Order. Indeed, this idea has been around a long time. It was a central ideological tenet of the Nazis, as well as Nazi sympathizers and apologists. However, hopefully now we are at the point in our understanding where we can cut through the confusion.
Thanks to the recent book The Trigger by David Icke, the work of researchers who have investigated the history and origin of ‘the Jewish race’ (which doesn’t exist), the work of those who have exposed the Khazarian connection to Jewishness and the work of those who have exposed Sabbatean-Frankism cult, we can now talk about this taboo topic with facts, reason and clarity.
We don’t have to blame the many or a collective (the Jews) for the actions of a few. We don’t have to be unfair to all the innocent Jews who have unjustly branded as conspirators when many of them are victims not perpetrators of the grand conspiracy. No, it’s not a Jewish conspiracy, not exactly … it only appears to be so because the inner core of those hiding behind Jews are Zionists, and the inner core of Zionism is Sabbatean-Frankism, a Satanic cult which exploits Jews to achieve its own ends.
The Deliberate Confusion around Jewish Identity: The Triangle of Race, Religion and Nationalism
Jew and jazz player Gilad Atzmon grew up in Israel but once he carried out his forced ‘service’ in the IDF (Israel Defense Forces), he became a changed man. He saw through the one-sided Zionist propaganda. He describes in his book The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics that during the 1982 Israel-Lebanon War, he caught a glimpse of captured POWs.
He writes that “the place was a concentration camp. The inmates were the ‘Jews’, and I was nothing but a ‘Nazi’.” He has since been very outspoken against Israeli behavior and Zionist crime. One of his favorite sayings is that “Jewish power is the power to stop you questioning Jewish power.” Atzmon likes to point out the contradictions and confusion behind Jewish identity. What makes someone Jewish? He claims that Jewish power is displayed through Zionist politics which capitalize on people’s confusion around Jewish identity – the triangle of race, religion and nationalism – and that Zionist powerbrokers claim Jewishness is whatever they find most convenient at the time. “If you try to pin them down, you can’t catch them,” says Atzmon.
The Carefully Cultivated Myth of the Jewish Race and Jewish DNA
For most people, the immediate answer would be that being Jewish means you are either ethnically Jewish (of the Jewish race, with Jewish DNA) or you are religiously Jewish (a follower of Judaism). However, here’s the problem: there’s no such thing as a Jewish race or Jewish DNA.
That is a carefully cultivated myth which suits many purposes. Firstly, it united Jewish people who up until that point had lived in many different countries. Secondly, it transformed the focus of Jewish identity from religion-based to race-based. This prepared the way for Zionism, a political philosophy or nationalistic movement. It is easier to convince a race of people to be nationalistic – to move and create a new homeland – than adherents of a religion. In many interviews such as this 2009 one with RT, Jewish professor and historian Shlomo Sand (author of The Invention of the Jewish People) says that it is simply not scientific to say a ‘Jewish people’ as Jews are connected by customs, beliefs and religion, not race, genetics or DNA. He highlights how the Nazis tried defining Jews racially but that didn’t work, because ultimately they couldn’t define who was a Jew. He points out with great evidence that Jews have always been a religious community which has included many converts.
Orthodox Jewish Rabbis: Zionism Has Hacked Judaism
Many orthodox Jewish rabbis have explained why traditional Judaism is diametrically opposed to Zionism. Judaism and Zionism do not mix, as Zionism violates cherished tenets and commandments of the Torah and is basically a modern settler-colonial exploitation and theft of land, and is often accompanied with a mindset of viewing Arabs as inferior or even sub-human. In presentations such as this, Jewish Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro makes many fascinating points about Jewishness and Zionism which contradict commonly held ideas about them:
– Zionism was NOT created to deal with antisemitism. The truth is Zionism was created to make a Jewish homeland, according to Max Nordau, assistant to Theodor Herzl;– Historically, Jews were just part of the religion of Judaism. You could not be a Jew in any other way. They are not an ethnicity and they are not a race;– The Holy Land of Jewish people is the Torah or the Synagogue, not a geographical location/piece of dirt;– Many Jews converted become to Jews, but how could this be if Jews were a race? You can’t convert to a race;– Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the founder of Jewish terrorist group Irgun (later absorbed into the IDF) and a leader of Revisionist Zionism, was recorded to have said: “The Jewish people are a nasty people.” Jabotinsky profoundly influenced future Israeli leaders Menachem Begin and Benjamin Netanyahu;– the Jewish nationalist movement was very similar to black nationalist movement; they just decided that all black people were a “nation” and that all Jews were a nation. Now Jews didn’t have to be religious, but rather:
1. Loyal to Nation (Israel),2. Speak Hebrew (now a national language not a holy language as it originally was), and3. Fight in the Israeli military;– First Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion said he didn’t believe in the (Jewish) God of the Bible, yet God promised them the land;– Zionists convinced and tricked the Jews that they were a nation, not a religion;– Zionism turned religious Jews into militaristic Jews. Zionism mocked Judaism. It hijacked the definition and essence of Judaism and Jewishness. The messiah of Zionism is the Holocaust (a holocaust museum is set up in every town, more than a synagogue).
Jewish Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss also makes similar points about Jewishness, Judaism and Zionism. This perspective is completely in alignment with the many Jewish groups, organizations and voices which oppose Zionism.
The Khazarian Connection to Jewishness
Hungarian scientist Arthur Koestler wrote a 1976 book The Thirteenth Tribe where he brought the Khazar hypothesis to a wider audience. His hope was to disprove a common Jewish “racial” identity and therefore end antisemitism. In 2012, Israeli researcher Eran Elhaik published a study claiming to prove that the Khazar ancestry was the single largest element in the Ashkenazi gene pool. Shlomo Sand declared himself vindicated. This Jewish media didn’t deny it; there were articles about it in the Haaretz and The Forward. The basic idea is that the Khazars, a Turkic people who lived in a large medieval state called Khazaria in Eurasia near the Caucasus (between the Black and Caspian Seas), converted to Judaism in the 8th century and then migrated to Eastern Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries. Elhaik concluded that Ashkenazi genes were far more heterogeneous than previously thought (by others such as Ostrer who proposed the Rhineland Hypothesis of Jewish ancestry). Elhaik did find a Middle Eastern genetic marker in DNA from Jews, but he stated it could be from Iran, not ancient Judea.
There are clearly massive implications to this information, because the bedrock of the Zionist’s claim is that Palestine used to belong to, and used to be habited, by Jews. This claim is little legal or moral validity as it is (just because my ancestors lived somewhere 2,000 years ago doesn’t mean I can automatically take that land now) – however as the Khazarian connection and origin of Jewishness shows, the claim is not even true anyway.
It’s not a Jewish Conspiracy; It’s the Cult of Sabbatean-Frankism
Judaism and even Jewishness itself was infiltrated and overtaken a long time ago by a strange messiah called Sabbatai Zevi, also spelt Shabbetai Tzvi. Some of the best sources for this information are Christopher Jon Bjerknes, Rabbi Marvin Antelman and Clifford Shack. As you may know, Judaism is a messianic religion, meaning they believe in the concept of a messiah (moshiach) who will come to save them. Any religion which believes in such an idea always leaves the door open for its followers to be emotionally manipulated by hucksters claiming to be ‘The Messiah’ or the ‘Chosen One.’ Sabbatai Zevi was one such individual. In 1665, Sabbatai declared himself the Jewish Messiah; in 1666 (appropriately) he was proclaimed to be the Jewish Messiah by Nathan of Gaza. Sabbatai became so famous and popular that he amassed over 1,000,000 Jewish followers. After his rise to power, he began to abolish many of traditional Jewish ritualistic observances. Wikipedia gives the reason for this as “because, according to a minority opinion in the Talmud, in the Messianic time there would no longer be holy obligations. The fast of the Tenth of Tevet became a day of feasting and rejoicing.” According to Antelman, the Sabbatean-Frankists had a fundamental belief that the Messiah would return either when all people had become good or when all people had become bad. So, they reasoned that they could precipitate the arrival of the Messiah by pursuing the dark path. Therefore, they set about inverting the practices of their own faith. Another interpretation is that Sabbatai’s movement which became known as Sabbateanism was really a form of Satanism since it involved orgies, incest, pedophilia, sacrifice and much more. Satanism is not only characterized by ritual and demonic possession but also by inversion, where everything is turned upside down: bad becomes good, sin becomes virtue, the forbidden becomes the permitted.
The Sabbatean movement was succeeded by Jacob Frank, born in Poland in 1726, who claimed he was the reincarnation of Sabbatai Zevi. The Jewish authorities in Poland excommunicated Frank and his followers due to his heretical doctrines, one of which was the idea of ‘purification through transgression’ (aka ‘redemption through sin’) – i.e. discard and break all traditional norms, rules and mores (more Satanic behavior). The entire movement behind Sabbatai and Frank became known as Sabbatean-Frankism and their adherents Sabbatean-Frankists.
The Donmeh Crypto-Jews
At one point in his life, Sabbatai Zevy was forced by the sultan of Turkey to convert to Islam. Similarly, Jacob Frank converted to Christianity. In both cases, Sabbatean-Frankists maintained their beliefs and culture but outwardly appeared to follow a new religion. The Jews who continued to follow Sabbatai became known as Donmeh Jews (from the Turkish work donme ‘to convert’). These Donmeh Jews eventually rose to great power centuries later. For instance, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the first President of Turkey, was a Donmeh Jew (and a descendant of Sabbatai). The entire House of Saud which today rules Saudi Arabia is descended from Mohammad Ibn Saud (and greatly influenced by Mohammad Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab), who were likely Donmeh Jews (you can read the background to the Jewish roots of the House of Saud here). This explains why Israel and Saudi Arabia have had such a close relationship for years, when you might think they would be fierce enemies. This also explains why the Saudis spearhead and champion Wahhabism, a distorted form of Islam (if you can even call it Islam) which advocates aggression and violence. Saudi Arabia is a veritable fountainhead of terrorism and is easily the biggest state sponsor of terror (apart from the US and Israel of course), even though that label is falsely used to defame Iran.
Taking a step back even further, Sabbatean-Frankist leaders deliberately engineered the introduction of Donmeh Jews into nations which were unified and strong, in order to break them up and change their policy, to make way for the creation of the Zionist state of Israel. With Donmeh crypto Jews in so many places, it has been an understandable mistake that so many people have concluded we live in a Jewish conspiracy when it was really something else altogether. Jews have been used to disguise the real manipulators and their agenda. Christopher Jon Bjerknes writes in his book The Manufacture and Sale of Saint Einstein – The Propaganda of Supremacy on pg.183:
“The racist Zionist failed in their attempts to buy Palestine and populate it with Jewish colonists, because the vast majority of Jews did not want to go to Palestine. The Zionists caused the First World War in order to break up the Turkish Empire and weaken the Moslem nations, which they feared would unite to fight against the formation of a ‘Jewish State’.”
Sabbatean-Frankism: Infiltrate and Control from the Inside
You may have noticed at this point some striking similarities between the way that Sabbatean Frankists infiltrated rival or opposing religions and then gained power from the inside – and the way that the Secret Societies of the NWO have infiltrated key movements and centers of power to rule them from the inside. The reason is because the cult of Sabbatean Frankism is a central thread of the NWO itself. According to Shack, the Rothschilds are descendants of Sabbatai Zevi, which makes perfect sense, since the Rothschilds are probably the most central and powerful NWO family/bloodline and are behind the creation of Israel, home of the inner core of Zionism and Sabbatean-Frankism. Clifford Shack writes this widely-quote passage in The Sabbatean-Frankist Messianic Conspiracy Partially Exposed pg.97:
“Through infiltration, stealth and cunning, this invisible network has come to rule us all. Forty-one years after Shabbatai Zevi’s death, in 1717, they would infiltrate Masonry guilds in England and establish Freemasonry… [Zevi’s successor] Jacob Frank would have a great impact on the inner core of Freemasonry known as the Illuminati, formed in 1776. Freemasonry would become the hidden force behind events like the [American, French and Russian] revolutions, the creations of the UN and Israel, both World Wars (including the Holocaust!), and the assassinations of the Kennedy brothers who, together with their father, tried to thwart the efforts of the network on American soil.”
I have alluded to the Israeli hand in the JFK assassination here, although it was far from the only force involved. Sabbatean-Frankism, Freemasonry, the Illuminati, etc. all pose as one thing and act by infiltrating their targets and overtaking them. It is a textbook perfect example of a host-parasite relationship; the parasite hijacks the host, controls its behavior (for the benefit of the parasite not the host), lives off its life force and often ultimately destroys and kills it, even if that means the parasite risks its own life in killing the host – although it tries to find a new host first to repeat the same process.
Circles within Circles within Circles
Those who have studied the worldwide conspiracy may have noticed a familiar pattern. The true controllers like to arrange themselves as an inner core within a larger group that itself is within a larger organization. G. Edward Griffin spoke about this regarding the Round Table of Cecil Rhodes, a man closely connected to the Rothschilds who did so much to advance his British-led version of the New World Order. Rhodes was behind the creation of the Round Table societies and think tanks including the RIIA, CFR and many others. Griffin stated that Rhodes set things up so there was an outer group that thought it was in charge, but really unbeknown to its members there was a group within that which was guiding it; then, unbeknown to that middle group, there was an even smaller inner group which was guiding it that was really pulling the strings.
The situation is similar with the Jews. Some people superficially believe ‘the Jews’ are running the world, not realizing that there are Zionists within that groups which call the shots. Then, to take things one level deeper, the Sabbatean-Frankists are the group within Zionism that is in charge.
A Jewish Conspiracy? No. A Satanic Cult Ruling the World? Yes
I have been writing for years that black magic rules the world and that we need to expand our awareness and muster up our courage to face that fact that a Satanic cult is pulling the strings of power behind the scenes. Yes, there is obviously a Jewish connection to the NWO conspiracy but it’s not a simple story. There is not exactly a Jewish conspiracy but rather a Sabbatean-Frankist conspiracy. Not all Jews are involved or know about it; in fact, the great majority do not and are being used like all non-Jews. This hidden Secret Society within Judaism and within Zionism practices the Luciferian philosophy of “do what thou wilt” and the Satanic inversion of everything (bad is good, wrong is right). Jews are just a cover for them. Psychopathic Israeli leaders want more Jews to emigrate to Israel, not because they deeply care about Jews (nothing could be further from the truth) but because they simply want more Jewish bodies in Israel so they can maintain their ideal Israeli demographic (having a majority of Jews so it is a Jewish state). They don’t want to lose control of Israel to Arabs, who they consider sub-human.
It’s high time Jews realized the whole game plan here and refused to go along with it, especially with plans rapidly developing to turn Israel into the headquarters of the NWO. Israel does not represent you. Israel is not your nation state. Israel brainwashes its children into thinking that the whole world hates Jews. We do not. Understanding the information in this article can be a relief for those of us who are non-Jewish because now we can explain the real cause of the Jewish concentration of power and the background to the idea of a Jewish conspiracy. It’s time to cut through all the confusion with the sword of truth. Please share this article far and wide, especially with your Jewish friends, so we can come together and stop falling for the ‘antisemitic trap’ laid out by the Sabbatean-Frankists and Satanists who use innocent Jews for their schemes.
https://www.wakingtimes.com/2019/10/14/is-the-new-world-order-a-jewish-conspiracy-no-its-a-satanic-conspiracy/
…
llance, and she occasionally received queries from strangers. She replied to this one and sent her public key — allowing him or her to send an encrypted e-mail that only Poitras could open, with her private key — but she didn’t think much would come of it.
The stranger responded with instructions for creating an even more secure system to protect their sensitive exchanges. Promising information, the stranger told Poitras to select long pass phrases that could withstand a brute-force attack by networked computers. “Assume that your adversary is capable of a trillion guesses per second,” the stranger wrote.
Before long, Poitras received an encrypted message that outlined a number of secret surveillance programs run by the government. She had heard of one of them but not the others. After describing each program, the stranger wrote some version of the phrase, “This I can prove.”
Seconds after she decrypted and read the e-mail, Poitras disconnected from the Internet and removed the message from her computer. “I thought, O.K., if this is true, my life just changed,” she told me last month. “It was staggering, what he claimed to know and be able to provide. I just knew that I had to change everything.”
Poitras remained wary of whoever it was she was communicating with. She worried especially that a government agent might be trying to trick her into disclosing information about the people she interviewed for her documentary, including Julian Assange, the editor of WikiLeaks. “I called him out,” Poitras recalled. “I said either you have this information and you are taking huge risks or you are trying to entrap me and the people I know, or you’re crazy.”
The answers were reassuring but not definitive. Poitras did not know the stranger’s name, sex, age or employer (C.I.A.? N.S.A.? Pentagon?). In early June, she finally got the answers. Along with her reporting partner, Glenn Greenwald, a former lawyer and a columnist for The Guardian, Poitras flew to Hong Kong and met the N.S.A. contractor Edward J. Snowden, who gave them thousands of classified documents, setting off a major controversy over the extent and legality of government surveillance. Poitras was right that, among other things, her life would never be the same.
Greenwald lives and works in a house surrounded by tropical foliage in a remote area of Rio de Janeiro. He shares the home with his Brazilian partner and their 10 dogs and one cat, and the place has the feel of a low-key fraternity that has been dropped down in the jungle. The kitchen clock is off by hours, but no one notices; dishes tend to pile up in the sink; the living room contains a table and a couch and a large TV, an Xbox console and a box of poker chips and not much else. The refrigerator is not always filled with fresh vegetables. A family of monkeys occasionally raids the banana trees in the backyard and engages in shrieking battles with the dogs.
Glenn Greenwald, a writer for The Guardian, at home in Rio de Janeiro.
Greenwald does most of his work on a shaded porch, usually dressed in a T-shirt, surfer shorts and flip-flops. Over the four days I spent there, he was in perpetual motion, speaking on the phone in Portuguese and English, rushing out the door to be interviewed in the city below, answering calls and e-mails from people seeking information about Snowden, tweeting to his 225,000 followers (and conducting intense arguments with a number of them), then sitting down to write more N.S.A. articles for The Guardian, all while pleading with his dogs to stay quiet. During one especially fever-pitched moment, he hollered, “Shut up, everyone,” but they didn’t seem to care.
Amid the chaos, Poitras, an intense-looking woman of 49, sat in a spare bedroom or at the table in the living room, working in concentrated silence in front of her multiple computers. Once in a while she would walk over to the porch to talk with Greenwald about the article he was working on, or he would sometimes stop what he was doing to look at the latest version of a new video she was editing about Snowden. They would talk intensely — Greenwald far louder and more rapid-fire than Poitras — and occasionally break out laughing at some shared joke or absurd memory. The Snowden story, they both said, was a battle they were waging together, a fight against powers of surveillance that they both believe are a threat to fundamental American liberties.
Two reporters for The Guardian were in town to assist Greenwald, so some of our time was spent in the hotel where they were staying along Copacabana Beach, the toned Brazilians playing volleyball in the sand below lending the whole thing an added layer of surreality. Poitras has shared the byline on some of Greenwald’s articles, but for the most part she has preferred to stay in the background, letting him do the writing and talking. As a result, Greenwald is the one hailed as either a fearless defender of individual rights or a nefarious traitor, depending on your perspective. “I keep calling her the Keyser Soze of the story, because she’s at once completely invisible and yet ubiquitous,” Greenwald said, referring to the character in “The Usual Suspects” played by Kevin Spacey, a mastermind masquerading as a nobody. “She’s been at the center of all of this, and yet no one knows anything about her.”
As dusk fell one evening, I followed Poitras and Greenwald to the newsroom of O Globo, one of the largest newspapers in Brazil. Greenwald had just published an article there detailing how the N.S.A. was spying on Brazilian phone calls and e-mails. The article caused a huge scandal in Brazil, as similar articles have done in other countries around the world, and Greenwald was a celebrity in the newsroom. The editor in chief pumped his hand and asked him to write a regular column; reporters took souvenir pictures with their cellphones. Poitras filmed some of this, then put her camera down and looked on. I noted that nobody was paying attention to her, that all eyes were on Greenwald, and she smiled. “That’s right,” she said. “That’s perfect.”
Poitras seems to work at blending in, a function more of strategy than of shyness. She can actually be remarkably forceful when it comes to managing information. During a conversation in which I began to ask her a few questions about her personal life, she remarked, “This is like visiting the dentist.” The thumbnail portrait is this: She was raised in a well-off family outside Boston, and after high school, she moved to San Francisco to work as a chef in upscale restaurants. She also took classes at the San Francisco Art Institute, where she studied under the experimental filmmaker Ernie Gehr. In 1992, she moved to New York and began to make her way in the film world, while also enrolling in graduate classes in social and political theory at the New School. Since then she has made five films, most recently “The Oath,” about the Guantánamo prisoner Salim Hamdan and his brother-in-law back in Yemen, and has been the recipient of a Peabody Award and a MacArthur award.
On Sept. 11, 2001, Poitras was on the Upper West Side of Manhattan when the towers were attacked. Like most New Yorkers, in the weeks that followed she was swept up in both mourning and a feeling of unity. It was a moment, she said, when “people could have done anything, in a positive sense.” When that moment led to the pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, she felt that her country had lost its way. “We always wonder how countries can veer off course,” she said. “How do people let it happen, how do people sit by during this slipping of boundaries?” Poitras had no experience in conflict zones, but in June 2004, she went to Iraq and began documenting the occupation.
Shortly after arriving in Baghdad, she received permission to go to Abu Ghraib prison to film a visit by members of Baghdad’s City Council. This was just a few months after photos were published of American soldiers abusing prisoners there. A prominent Sunni doctor was part of the visiting delegation, and Poitras shot a remarkable scene of his interaction with prisoners there, shouting that they were locked up for no good reason.
The doctor, Riyadh al-Adhadh, invited Poitras to his clinic and later allowed her to report on his life in Baghdad. Her documentary, “My Country, My Country,” is centered on his family’s travails — the shootings and blackouts in their neighborhood, the kidnapping of a nephew. The film premiered in early 2006 and received widespread acclaim, including an Oscar nomination for best documentary.
Attempting to tell the story of the war’s effect on Iraqi citizens made Poitras the target of serious — and apparently false — accusations. On Nov. 19, 2004, Iraqi troops, supported by American forces, raided a mosque in the doctor’s neighborhood of Adhamiya, killing several people inside. The next day, the neighborhood erupted in violence. Poitras was with the doctor’s family, and occasionally they would go to the roof of the home to get a sense of what was going on. On one of those rooftop visits, she was seen by soldiers from an Oregon National Guard battalion. Shortly after, a group of insurgents launched an attack that killed one of the Americans. Some soldiers speculated that Poitras was on the roof because she had advance notice of the attack and wanted to film it. Their battalion commander, Lt. Col. Daniel Hendrickson, retired, told me last month that he filed a report about her to brigade headquarters.
There is no evidence to support this claim. Fighting occurred throughout the neighborhood that day, so it would have been difficult for any journalist to not be near the site of an attack. The soldiers who made the allegation told me that they have no evidence to prove it. Hendrickson told me his brigade headquarters never got back to him.
For several months after the attack in Adhamiya, Poitras continued to live in the Green Zone and work as an embedded journalist with the U.S. military. She has screened her film to a number of military audiences, including at the U.S. Army War College. An officer who interacted with Poitras in Baghdad, Maj. Tom Mowle, retired, said Poitras was always filming and it “completely makes sense” she would film on a violent day. “I think it’s a pretty ridiculous allegation,” he said.
Although the allegations were without evidence, they may be related to Poitras’s many detentions and searches. Hendrickson and another soldier told me that in 2007 — months after she was first detained — investigators from the Department of Justice’s Joint Terrorism Task Force interviewed them, inquiring about Poitras’s activities in Baghdad that day. Poitras was never contacted by those or any other investigators, however. “Iraq forces and the U.S. military raided a mosque during Friday prayers and killed several people,” Poitras said. “Violence broke out the next day. I am a documentary filmmaker and was filming in the neighborhood. Any suggestion I knew about an attack is false. The U.S. government should investigate who ordered the raid, not journalists covering the war.”
In June 2006, her tickets on domestic flights were marked “SSSS” — Secondary Security Screening Selection — which means the bearer faces extra scrutiny beyond the usual measures. She was detained for the first time at Newark International Airport before boarding a flight to Israel, where she was showing her film. On her return flight, she was held for two hours before being allowed to re-enter the country. The next month, she traveled to Bosnia to show the film at a festival there. When she flew out of Sarajevo and landed in Vienna, she was paged on the airport loudspeaker and told to go to a security desk; from there she was led to a van and driven to another part of the airport, then taken into a room where luggage was examined.
“They took my bags and checked them,” Poitras said. “They asked me what I was doing, and I said I was showing a movie in Sarajevo about the Iraq war. And then I sort of befriended the security guy. I asked what was going on. He said: ‘You’re flagged. You have a threat score that is off the Richter scale. You are at 400 out of 400.’ I said, ‘Is this a scoring system that works throughout all of Europe, or is this an American scoring system?’ He said. ‘No, this is your government that has this and has told us to stop you.’ ”
After 9/11, the U.S. government began compiling a terrorist watch list that was at one point estimated to contain nearly a million names. There are at least two subsidiary lists that relate to air travel. The no-fly list contains the names of tens of thousands of people who are not allowed to fly into or out of the country. The selectee list, which is larger than the no-fly list, subjects people to extra airport inspections and questioning. These lists have been criticized by civil rights groups for being too broad and arbitrary and for violating the rights of Americans who are on them.
In Vienna, Poitras was eventually cleared to board her connecting flight to New York, but when she landed at J.F.K., she was met at the gate by two armed law-enforcement agents and taken to a room for questioning. It is a routine that has happened so many times since then — on more than 40 occasions — that she has lost precise count. Initially, she said, the authorities were interested in the paper she carried, copying her receipts and, once, her notebook. After she stopped carrying her notes, they focused on her electronics instead, telling her that if she didn’t answer their questions, they would confiscate her gear and get their answers that way. On one occasion, Poitras says, they did seize her computers and cellphones and kept them for weeks. She was also told that her refusal to answer questions was itself a suspicious act. Because the interrogations took place at international boarding crossings, where the government contends that ordinary constitutional rights do not apply, she was not permitted to have a lawyer present.
“It’s a total violation,” Poitras said. “That’s how it feels. They are interested in information that pertains to the work I am doing that’s clearly private and privileged. It’s an intimidating situation when people with guns meet you when you get off an airplane.”
Though she has written to members of Congress and has submitted Freedom of Information Act requests, Poitras has never received any explanation for why she was put on a watch list. “It’s infuriating that I have to speculate why,” she said. “When did that universe begin, that people are put on a list and are never told and are stopped for six years? I have no idea why they did it. It’s the complete suspension of due process.” She added: “I’ve been told nothing, I’ve been asked nothing, and I’ve done nothing. It’s like Kafka. Nobody ever tells you what the accusation is.”
After being detained repeatedly, Poitras began taking steps to protect her data, asking a traveling companion to carry her laptop, leaving her notebooks overseas with friends or in safe deposit boxes. She would wipe her computers and cellphones clean so that there would be nothing for the authorities to see. Or she encrypted her data, so that law enforcement could not read any files they might get hold of. These security preparations could take a day or more before her travels.
It wasn’t just border searches that she had to worry about. Poitras said she felt that if the government was suspicious enough to interrogate her at airports, it was also most likely surveilling her e-mail, phone calls and Web browsing. “I assume that there are National Security Letters on my e-mails,” she told me, referring to one of the secretive surveillance tools used by the Department of Justice. A National Security Letter requires its recipients — in most cases, Internet service providers and phone companies — to provide customer data without notifying the customers or any other parties. Poitras suspected (but could not confirm, because her phone company and I.S.P. would be prohibited from telling her) that the F.B.I. had issued National Security Letters for her electronic communications.
Laura Poitras filming the construction of a large N.S.A. facility in Utah.
Once she began working on her surveillance film in 2011, she raised her digital security to an even higher level. She cut down her use of a cellphone, which betrays not only who you are calling and when, but your location at any given point in time. She was careful about e-mailing sensitive documents or having sensitive conversations on the phone. She began using software that masked the Web sites she visited. After she was contacted by Snowden in 2013, she tightened her security yet another notch. In addition to encrypting any sensitive e-mails, she began using different computers for editing film, for communicating and for reading sensitive documents (the one for sensitive documents is air-gapped, meaning it has never been connected to the Internet).
These precautions might seem paranoid — Poitras describes them as “pretty extreme” — but the people she has interviewed for her film were targets of the sort of surveillance and seizure that she fears. William Binney, a former top N.S.A. official who publicly accused the agency of illegal surveillance, was at home one morning in 2007 when F.B.I. agents burst in and aimed their weapons at his wife, his son and himself. Binney was, at the moment the agent entered his bathroom and pointed a gun at his head, naked in the shower. His computers, disks and personal records were confiscated and have not yet been returned. Binney has not been charged with any crime.
Jacob Appelbaum, a privacy activist who was a volunteer with WikiLeaks, has also been filmed by Poitras. The government issued a secret order to Twitter for access to Appelbaum’s account data, which became public when Twitter fought the order. Though the company was forced to hand over the data, it was allowed to tell Appelbaum. Google and a small I.S.P. that Appelbaum used were also served with secret orders and fought to alert him. Like Binney, Appelbaum has not been charged with any crime.
Poitras endured the airport searches for years with little public complaint, lest her protests generate more suspicion and hostility from the government, but last year she reached a breaking point. While being interrogated at Newark after a flight from Britain, she was told she could not take notes. On the advice of lawyers, Poitras always recorded the names of border agents and the questions they asked and the material they copied or seized. But at Newark, an agent threatened to handcuff her if she continued writing. She was told that she was being barred from writing anything down because she might use her pen as a weapon.
“Then I asked for crayons,” Poitras recalled, “and he said no to crayons.”
She was taken into another room and interrogated by three agents — one was behind her, another asked the questions, the third was a supervisor. “It went on for maybe an hour and a half,” she said. “I was taking notes of their questions, or trying to, and they yelled at me. I said, ‘Show me the law where it says I can’t take notes.’ We were in a sense debating what they were trying to forbid me from doing. They said, ‘We are the ones asking the questions.’ It was a pretty aggressive, antagonistic encounter.”
Poitras met Greenwald in 2010, when she became interested in his work on WikiLeaks. In 2011, she went to Rio to film him for her documentary. He was aware of the searches and asked several times for permission to write about them. After Newark, she gave him a green light.
“She said, ‘I’ve had it,’ ” Greenwald told me. “Her ability to take notes and document what was happening was her one sense of agency, to maintain some degree of control. Documenting is what she does. I think she was feeling that the one vestige of security and control in this situation had been taken away from her, without any explanation, just as an arbitrary exercise of power.”
At the time, Greenwald was a writer for Salon. His article, “U.S. Filmmaker Repeatedly Detained at Border,” was published in April 2012. Shortly after it was posted, the detentions ceased. Six years of surveillance and harassment, Poitras hoped, might be coming to an end.
Poitras was not Snowden’s first choice as the person to whom he wanted to leak thousands of N.S.A. documents. In fact, a month before contacting her, he reached out to Greenwald, who had written extensively and critically about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the erosion of civil liberties in the wake of 9/11. Snowden anonymously sent him an e-mail saying he had documents he wanted to share, and followed that up with a step-by-step guide on how to encrypt communications, which Greenwald ignored. Snowden then sent a link to an encryption video, also to no avail.
“It’s really annoying and complicated, the encryption software,” Greenwald said as we sat on his porch during a tropical drizzle. “He kept harassing me, but at some point he just got frustrated, so he went to Laura.”
Snowden had read Greenwald’s article about Poitras’s troubles at U.S. airports and knew she was making a film about the government’s surveillance programs; he had also seen a short documentary about the N.S.A. that she made for The New York Times Op-Docs. He figured that she would understand the programs he wanted to leak about and would know how to communicate in a secure way.
By late winter, Poitras decided that the stranger with whom she was communicating was credible. There were none of the provocations that she would expect from a government agent — no requests for information about the people she was in touch with, no questions about what she was working on. Snowden told her early on that she would need to work with someone else, and that she should reach out to Greenwald. She was unaware that Snowden had already tried to contact Greenwald, and Greenwald would not realize until he met Snowden in Hong Kong that this was the person who had contacted him more than six months earlier.
There were surprises for everyone in these exchanges — including Snowden, who answered questions that I submitted to him through Poitras. In response to a question about when he realized he could trust Poitras, he wrote: “We came to a point in the verification and vetting process where I discovered Laura was more suspicious of me than I was of her, and I’m famously paranoid.” When I asked him about Greenwald’s initial silence in response to his requests and instructions for encrypted communications, Snowden replied: “I know journalists are busy and had assumed being taken seriously would be a challenge, especially given the paucity of detail I could initially offer. At the same time, this is 2013, and [he is] a journalist who regularly reported on the concentration and excess of state power. I was surprised to realize that there were people in news organizations who didn’t recognize any unencrypted message sent over the Internet is being delivered to every intelligence service in the world.”
In April, Poitras e-mailed Greenwald to say they needed to speak face to face. Greenwald happened to be in the United States, speaking at a conference in a suburb of New York City, and the two met in the lobby of his hotel. “She was very cautious,” Greenwald recalled. “She insisted that I not take my cellphone, because of this ability the government has to remotely listen to cellphones even when they are turned off. She had printed off the e-mails, and I remember reading the e-mails and felt intuitively that this was real. The passion and thought behind what Snowden — who we didn’t know was Snowden at the time — was saying was palpable.”
Greenwald installed encryption software and began communicating with the stranger. Their work was organized like an intelligence operation, with Poitras as the mastermind. “Operational security — she dictated all of that,” Greenwald said. “Which computers I used, how I communicated, how I safeguarded the information, where copies were kept, with whom they were kept, in which places. She has this complete expert level of understanding of how to do a story like this with total technical and operational safety. None of this would have happened with anything near the efficacy and impact it did, had she not been working with me in every sense and really taking the lead in coordinating most of it.”
Snowden began to provide documents to the two of them. Poitras wouldn’t tell me when he began sending her documents; she does not want to provide the government with information that could be used in a trial against Snowden or herself. He also said he would soon be ready to meet them. When Poitras asked if she should plan on driving to their meeting or taking a train, Snowden told her to be ready to get on a plane.
In May, he sent encrypted messages telling the two of them to go to Hong Kong. Greenwald flew to New York from Rio, and Poitras joined him for meetings with the editor of The Guardian’s American edition. With the paper’s reputation on the line, the editor asked them to bring along a veteran Guardian reporter, Ewen MacAskill, and on June 1, the trio boarded a 16-hour flight from J.F.K. to Hong Kong.
Snowden had sent a small number of documents to Greenwald, about 20 in all, but Poitras had received a larger trove, which she hadn’t yet had the opportunity to read closely. On the plane, Greenwald began going through its contents, eventually coming across a secret court order requiring Verizon to give its customer phone records to the N.S.A. The four-page order was from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a panel whose decisions are highly classified. Although it was rumored that the N.S.A. was collecting large numbers of American phone records, the government always denied it.
Poitras, sitting 20 rows behind Greenwald, occasionally went forward to talk about what he was reading. As the man sitting next to him slept, Greenwald pointed to the FISA order on his screen and asked Poitras: “Have you seen this? Is this saying what I’m thinking it’s saying?”
At times, they talked so animatedly that they disturbed passengers who were trying to sleep; they quieted down. “We couldn’t believe just how momentous this occasion was,” Greenwald said. “When you read these documents, you get a sense of the breadth of them. It was a rush of adrenaline and ecstasy and elation. You feel you are empowered for the first time because there’s this mammoth system that you try and undermine and subvert and shine a light on — but you usually can’t make any headway, because you don’t have any instruments to do it — [and now] the instruments were suddenly in our lap.”
Snowden had instructed them that once they were in Hong Kong, they were to go at an appointed time to the Kowloon district and stand outside a restaurant that was in a mall connected to the Mira Hotel. There, they were to wait until they saw a man carrying a Rubik’s Cube, then ask him when the restaurant would open. The man would answer their question, but then warn that the food was bad. When the man with the Rubik’s Cube arrived, it was Edward Snowden, who was 29 at the time but looked even younger.
“Both of us almost fell over when we saw how young he was,” Poitras said, still sounding surprised. “I had no idea. I assumed I was dealing with somebody who was really high-level and therefore older. But I also knew from our back and forth that he was incredibly knowledgeable about computer systems, which put him younger in my mind. So I was thinking like 40s, somebody who really grew up on computers but who had to be at a higher level.”
In our encrypted chat, Snowden also remarked on this moment: “I think they were annoyed that I was younger than they expected, and I was annoyed that they had arrived too early, which complicated the initial verification. As soon as we were behind closed doors, however, I think everyone was reassured by the obsessive attention to precaution and bona fides.”
They followed Snowden to his room, where Poitras immediately shifted into documentarian mode, taking her camera out. “It was a little bit tense, a little uncomfortable,” Greenwald said of those initial minutes. “We sat down, and we just started chatting, and Laura was immediately unpacking her camera. The instant that she turned on the camera, I very vividly recall that both he and I completely stiffened up.”
Greenwald began the questioning. “I wanted to test the consistency of his claims, and I just wanted all the information I could get, given how much I knew this was going to be affecting my credibility and everything else. We weren’t really able to establish a human bond until after that five or six hours was over.”
For Poitras, the camera certainly alters the human dynamic, but not in a bad way. When someone consents to being filmed — even if the consent is indirectly gained when she turns on the camera — this is an act of trust that raises the emotional stakes of the moment. What Greenwald saw as stilted, Poitras saw as a kind of bonding, the sharing of an immense risk. “There is something really palpable and emotional in being trusted like that,” she said.
Snowden, though taken by surprise, got used to it. “As one might imagine, normally spies allergically avoid contact with reporters or media, so I was a virgin source — everything was a surprise. . . . But we all knew what was at stake. The weight of the situation actually made it easier to focus on what was in the public interest rather than our own. I think we all knew there was no going back once she turned the camera on.”
For the next week, their preparations followed a similar pattern — when they entered Snowden’s room, they would remove their cellphone batteries and place them in the refrigerator of Snowden’s minibar. They lined pillows against the door, to discourage eavesdropping from outside, then Poitras set up her camera and filmed. It was important to Snowden to explain to them how the government’s intelligence machinery worked because he feared that he could be arrested at any time.
Greenwald’s first articles — including the initial one detailing the Verizon order he read about on the flight to Hong Kong — appeared while they were still in the process of interviewing Snowden. It made for a strange experience, creating the news together, then watching it spread. “We could see it being covered,” Poitras said. “We were all surprised at how much attention it was getting. Our work was very focused, and we were paying attention to that, but we could see on TV that it was taking off. We were in this closed circle, and around us we knew that reverberations were happening, and they could be seen and they could be felt.”
Snowden told them before they arrived in Hong Kong that he wanted to go public. He wanted to take responsibility for what he was doing, Poitras said, and he didn’t want others to be unfairly targeted, and he assumed he would be identified at some point. She made a 12½-minute video of him that was posted online June 9, a few days after Greenwald’s first articles. It triggered a media circus in Hong Kong, as reporters scrambled to learn their whereabouts.
There were a number of subjects that Poitras declined to discuss with me on the record and others she wouldn’t discuss at all — some for security and legal reasons, others because she wants to be the first to tell crucial parts of her story in her own documentary. Of her parting with Snowden once the video was posted, she would only say, “We knew that once it went public, it was the end of that period of working.”
Snowden checked out of his hotel and went into hiding. Reporters found out where Poitras was staying — she and Greenwald were at different hotels — and phone calls started coming to her room. At one point, someone knocked on her door and asked for her by name. She knew by then that reporters had discovered Greenwald, so she called hotel security and arranged to be escorted out a back exit.
She tried to stay in Hong Kong, thinking Snowden might want to see her again, and because she wanted to film the Chinese reaction to his disclosures. But she had now become a figure of interest herself, not just a reporter behind the camera. On June 15, as she was filming a pro-Snowden rally outside the U.S. consulate, a CNN reporter spotted her and began asking questions. Poitras declined to answer and slipped away. That evening, she left Hong Kong.
A protest in Hong Kong in support of Edward Snowden on June 15.
Poitras flew directly to Berlin, where the previous fall she rented an apartment where she could edit her documentary without worrying that the F.B.I. would show up with a search warrant for her hard drives. “There is a filter constantly between the places where I feel I have privacy and don’t,” she said, “and that line is becoming increasingly narrow.” She added: “I’m not stopping what I’m doing, but I have left the country. I literally didn’t feel like I could protect my material in the United States, and this was before I was contacted by Snowden. If you promise someone you’re going to protect them as a source and you know the government is monitoring you or seizing your laptop, you can’t actually physically do it.”
After two weeks in Berlin, Poitras traveled to Rio, where I then met her and Greenwald a few days later. My first stop was the Copacabana hotel, where they were working that day with MacAskill and another visiting reporter from The Guardian, James Ball. Poitras was putting together a new video about Snowden that would be posted in a few days on The Guardian’s Web site. Greenwald, with several Guardian reporters, was working on yet another blockbuster article, this one about Microsoft’s close collaboration with the N.S.A. The room was crowded — there weren’t enough chairs for everyone, so someone was always sitting on the bed or floor. A number of thumb drives were passed back and forth, though I was not told what was on them.
Poitras and Greenwald were worried about Snowden. They hadn’t heard from him since Hong Kong. At the moment, he was stuck in diplomatic limbo in the transit area of Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport, the most-wanted man on the planet, sought by the U.S. government for espionage. (He would later be granted temporary asylum in Russia.) The video that Poitras was working on, using footage she shot in Hong Kong, would be the first the world had seen of Snowden in a month.
“Now that he’s incommunicado, we don’t know if we’ll even hear from him again,” she said.
“Is he O.K.?” MacAskill asked.
“His lawyer said he’s O.K.,” Greenwald responded.
“But he’s not in direct contact with Snowden,” Poitras said
When Greenwald got home that evening, Snowden contacted him online. Two days later, while she was working at Greenwald’s house, Poitras also heard from him.
It was dusk, and there was loud cawing and hooting coming from the jungle all around. This was mixed with the yapping of five or six dogs as I let myself in the front gate. Through a window, I saw Poitras in the living room, intently working at one of her computers. I let myself in through a screen door, and she glanced up for just a second, then went back to work, completely unperturbed by the cacophony around her. After 10 minutes, she closed the lid of her computer and mumbled an apology about needing to take care of some things.
She showed no emotion and did not mention that she had been in the middle of an encrypted chat with Snowden. At the time, I didn’t press her, but a few days later, after I returned to New York and she returned to Berlin, I asked if that’s what she was doing that evening. She confirmed it, but said she didn’t want to talk about it at the time, because the more she talks about her interactions with Snowden, the more removed she feels from them.
Poitras and Greenwald are an especially dramatic example of what outsider reporting looks like in 2013. They do not work in a newsroom, and they personally want to be in control of what gets published and when. When The Guardian didn’t move as quickly as they wanted with the first article on Verizon, Greenwald discussed taking it elsewhere, sending an encrypted draft to a colleague at another publication. He also considered creating a Web site on which they would publish everything, which he planned to call NSADisclosures. In the end, The Guardian moved ahead with their articles. But Poitras and Greenwald have created their own publishing network as well, placing articles with other outlets in Germany and Brazil and planning more for the future. They have not shared the full set of documents with anyone.
Snowden’s revelations are now the center of Poitras’s surveillance documentary, but Poitras also finds herself in a strange, looking-glass dynamic, because she cannot avoid being a character in her own film. She did not appear in or narrate her previous films, and she says that probably won’t change with this one, but she realizes that she has to be represented in some way, and is struggling with how to do that.
She is also assessing her legal vulnerability. Poitras and Greenwald are not facing any charges, at least not yet. They do not plan to stay away from America forever, but they have no immediate plans to return. One member of Congress has already likened what they’ve done to a form of treason, and they are well aware of the Obama administration’s unprecedented pursuit of not just leakers but of journalists who receive the leaks. While I was with them, they talked about the possibility of returning. Greenwald said that the government would be unwise to arrest them, because of the bad publicity it would create. It also wouldn’t stop the flow of information.
He mentioned this while we were in a taxi heading back to his house. It was dark outside, the end of a long day. Greenwald asked Poitras, “Since it all began, have you had a non-N.S.A. day?”
“What’s that?” she replied.
“I think we need one,” Greenwald said. “Not that we’re going to take one.”
Poitras talked about getting back to yoga again. Greenwald said he was going to resume playing tennis regularly. “I’m willing to get old for this thing,” he said, “but I’m not willing to get fat.”
Their discussion turned to the question of coming back to the United States. Greenwald said, half-jokingly, that if he was arrested, WikiLeaks would become the new traffic cop for publishing N.S.A. documents. “I would just say: ‘O.K., let me introduce you to my friend Julian Assange, who’s going to take my place. Have fun dealing with him.’ ”
Poitras prodded him: “So you’re going back to the States?”
He laughed and pointed out that unfortunately, the government does not always take the smartest course of action. “If they were smart,” he said, “I would do it.”
Poitras smiled, even though it’s a difficult subject for her. She is not as expansive or carefree as Greenwald, which adds to their odd-couple chemistry. She is concerned about their physical safety. She is also, of course, worried about surveillance. “Geolocation is the thing,” she said. “I want to keep as much off the grid as I can. I’m not going to make it easy for them. If they want to follow me, they are going to have to do that. I am not going to ping into any G.P.S. My location matters to me. It matters to me in a new way that I didn’t feel before.”
There are lots of people angry with them and lots of governments, as well as private entities, that would not mind taking possession of the thousands of N.S.A. documents they still control. They have published only a handful — a top-secret, headline-grabbing, Congressional-hearing-inciting handful — and seem unlikely to publish everything, in the style of WikiLeaks. They are holding onto more secrets than they are exposing, at least for now.
“We have this window into this world, and we’re still trying to understand it,” Poitras said in one of our last conversations. “We’re not trying to keep it a secret, but piece the puzzle together. That’s a project that is going to take time. Our intention is to release what’s in the public interest but also to try to get a handle on what this world is, and then try to communicate that.”
The deepest paradox, of course, is that their effort to understand and expose government surveillance may have condemned them to a lifetime of it.
“Our lives will never be the same,” Poitras said. “I don’t know if I’ll ever be able to live someplace and feel like I have my privacy. That might be just completely gone.”
SOURCE: TIME…
Unlock the full interview here: https://bit.ly/3RCq6ccMolecular geneticist and immunologist Dr. Michael Nehls tells Tucker Carlson how fear-mongering is used...