Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - administrator

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 668


By B.N. Frank

Trouble has actually been brewing for California utility company, Pacific Gas &Electric (PG&E) for many years now.  It’s not only about deadly wildfires and planned blackouts either.

In 2015hundreds of their “Smart” Meters simultaneously exploded in Stockton, CA after a truck caused a power surge.
Insurance companies have been suing the utility after their “Smart” Meters caught fire.
Customers took legal action against them when they became sick after the company installed “Smart” Meters on their homes.

So it’s perfectly understandable that many Californians are fed up with the company – hence a new beer named after their frustration.



From KTLA:

Anger over devastating California wildfires sparked by Pacific Gas & Electric power lines is coming to a head — in a beer. And an outcry is brewing.

Steve Doty, owner of Shady Oak brewery in Santa Rosa, announced a new beer called “F— PG&E,” describing it on Facebook last week as “a classic California pale ale, featuring Cashmere and Simcoe hops and a touch of malt sweetness.”

Issues with utility “Smart” Meters – including fires and explosions – aren’t isolated to PG&E.  There are also countless reports worldwide of people getting sick after utility “Smart” Meters have been installed.

Tens of millions of “Smart” Meters have been installed by different utility companies so they have likely already been installed on your home and throughout your community.  Hundreds of thousands of them have also been recalled or replaced due to failure, malfunctioning, overheating, “planned obsolesce”, and obviously fires and explosions.

All things considered, “F— Smart Meters” might also be a great name for a new beer or bumper sticker or whatever.  Bottoms up!

Activist Post reports regularly about utility “Smart” Meters and other unsafe technology.  For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:

Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
EMF Safety Network
Environmental Health Trust
Smart Grid Awareness
Take Back Your Power
The People’s Initiative
Wireless Information Network

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By The Conscious Resistance

Derrick Broze goes over a new report released by Pew Research Center which claims a strong majority of Americans believe they are being spied upon and tracked by private companies and the government on a regular basis.

Source:Most Americans Believe They Are Being Tracked by Corporations and the Government



The Conscious Resistance Network is an independent media organization focused on empowering individuals through education, philosophy, health, and community organizing. We work to create a world where corporate and state power does not rule over the lives of free human beings.

Derrick is the founder of TCRN.

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By Chris Menahan

The arrest of Jeffrey Epstein’s prison guards “proves his death was a suicide” and “should end all the conspiracy theories surrounding” his death, at least according to this report from Fox News citing former New York City police commissioner Bernard Kerik.

From Fox News, “Arrest of Epstein prison guards proves his death was suicide: Former NYC police commissioner”:

Former New York City police commissioner Bernard Kerik said that the indictment of two prison guards on duty the night Jeffrey Epstein died should end all the conspiracy theories surrounding the convicted sex offender’s death.

Epstein was discovered dead in a cell of the Metropolitan Correctional Center in downtown New York City on the morning of August 10. The New York City chief medical examiner’s office ruled that his death was the result of a suicide, but that did not put an end to speculation.

[…] Prosecutors wrote in the indictment that no one appeared to enter the area where Epstein was being held in the hours before he was found dead.

“As reflected on video obtained from the MCC’S internal video surveillance system, at approximately 10:30 p.m. on August 9, 2019… Noel briefly walked up to, and then walked back from, the door to the tier in which Epstein was housed… As confirmed by the video… this was the last time anyone, including any correctional officer, walked up to, let alone entered, the only entrance to the tier in which Epstein was housed until approximately 6:30 a.m. on August 10.”



Remember, we were told by Reuters that two cameras “malfunctioned” outside of Epstein’s cell.

Now this third camera — which we’re not being shown — allegedly shows one of the guards “briefly walked up to, and then walked back from, the door to the tier in which Epstein was housed.”

According to Kerik, that’s cased closed!

“The camera evidence defuses the conspiracy theories. At the beginning of each tour there is a bed check… Epstein was the only guy in the cell and he’s alive at 10:30 p.m. and there’s been nobody in the area.” said Kerik.

In Fox Nation’s “The Twisted World of Jeffrey Epstein,” Kerik said that the New York City facility was known to be problematic, and while the circumstances of Epstein’s death may appear suspicious to some, he understands that an inmate suicide is possible.

“The MCC in New York City is notorious for being understaffed,” he told Fox Nation. “When facilities are understaffed you have forced or mandated overtime. In this case, I understand that the corrections officers and the civilian staff — they were doing steady doubles and when that happens you are going to have people that fall asleep.”

“There are all irregularities to an outside person that would seem conspiratorial,” he concluded. “It’s jail. It’s prison. The reality is it happens. Unfortunately, it happened with the highest-profile prisoner in the [bureau of prisons].”

That’s almost word for word the exact same bull**** Ben Shapiro tried to push on his audience in the immediate wake of Epstein’s “suicide.”



By Matt Agorist

Warrick County, IN — What would you do if you found a creepy device attached to your car that looked like something used to track you? Would you simply leave it there and go on about your business? Or, would you remove it? Well, a man in Indiana chose the former and removed it. It turned out to be a GPS tracker and because it was placed their by police, this man is now being charged with theft. He’s now fought his case all the way to the state Supreme Court.

Since 2012, it has been unlawful for police departments to attach GPS tracking devices to vehicles without first obtaining a warrant, thanks to a ruling by the US Supreme Court. Despite outlawing warrantless applications of GPS trackers, TFTP has reported on several cases in which this still happens. However, this is not one of them. The Warrick County Sheriff’s Office legally obtained a warrant and placed a GPS tracker on Derek Heuring’s car in July of 2018.

The Warrick County Sheriff’s Office suspected Heuring of being drug dealer, so they began tracking his every move. But after a week, Heuring discovered the GPS device and removed it.



According to court documents,

One week later, the GPS device stopped signaling its location. When police went to retrieve the device from Heuring’s vehicle, it was missing. Police obtained a search warrant for Heuring’s residence, alleging that there was probable cause to believe he had committed theft of the device.

Police did find the device inside Heruing’s home. They also found methamphatamine and drug paraphernalia. He was subsequently charged with dealing meth and theft of a GPS device. After his arrest, Heuring moved to have the evidence suppressed citing the illegal nature of the search because police never had probable cause to ever believe there was a theft.

Heruing’s defense argued that the device could’ve simply fallen off or malfunctioned. Even if he did “steal” the device, it was on his property and he couldn’t have known for sure that it belonged to the government. As Arstechnia points out:

It wasn’t exactly labeled as the property of the Warrick County Sheriff’s Office. Most important, it’s not clear that taking an unwanted device off your car is theft—even if you know who it belongs to.

Unfortunately for Heruing, the Warrick Superior Court denied Heuring’s motion to suppress evidence recovered from the searches. On an interlocutory appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress. Now, his case is going before the highest court in the state and it seems he may have some justices on his side.

“I’m really struggling with how is that theft,” said Justice Steven David during recent oral arguments.

“If somebody wants to find me to do harm to me and it’s not the police and they put a tracking device on my car and I find a tracking device and I dispose of it after stomping on it 25 times, I would hope they would not be able to go to a local prosecutor and somehow I’m getting charges filed against me for destroying someone else’s property,” Justice David said.

However, the state disagrees — and is applying a double standard. The government concedes that if a private party did put a GPS tracking device on your vehicle, it would not be theft to remove it. But since they are the almighty state, it doesn’t work that way with them — you’re just supposed to know it’s the state’s and leave it be. By removing it and preventing tracking, Heuring was depriving the government of the use of its property — even if he didn’t know it was the government’s GPS device.

If Heuring successfully argues his case before the state Supreme Court, he could successfully beat the theft charges for the GPS as well as the meth dealing charges. The court is still considering the case which could be precedent-setting in nature.

As mentioned above, the state putting GPS trackers on people’s cars is surrounded in controversy. As TFTP reported, Silicon Valley resident Yasir Afifi discovered an FBI tracking device on his car when he took it for an oil change. Alarmed and curious about what it might be, Afifi posted photos of the device online, asking members of Reddit whether it was a bomb, or possibly an FBI tracking device.

Afifi soon learned the source of the device when he was visited by a large group of FBI agents who had seen his posts online, and wanted their device back. The FBI took their device and never mentioned why it was on this innocent man’s car, nor whether or not they had a warrant.

When they aren’t being used to track innocent computer scientists in Sillicon Valley, police are using GPS trackers to spy on their political opponents. In 2014, local Councilmen Jim Righeimer, Stephen Mensinger and Gary Monahan were targeted by police unions because they had a number of political disagreements, specifically in regards to police budgets.

A lawsuit that was later filed by Righeimer and Mensinger, claiming private detectives, working on behalf of the local police unions and their partner law firm, planted a GPS device on Righeimer’s car and attempted to have him wrongfully arrested for driving under the influence. It would eventually be proven and former police officers Chris Lanzillo and Scott Impola were charged with illegal use of a tracking device, false imprisonment by deceit, conspiracy to commit a crime and falsely reporting a crime.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project, where this article first appeared. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Minds.

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By India McKinney

With federal agencies set to run out of money this week, House lawmakers today passed a short-term funding bill that contained a nasty surprise. Tucked into the end of this must-pass legislation, in a section titled “Other Matters,” is language reauthorizing three Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authorities currently set to expire on December 15, 2019. The new expiration date would be March 15, 2020.

The extension of these surveillance authorities, even for three months, is bad enough. Hiding the language in the back of a must-pass funding bill shows a patent disregard for the importance of this issue.

One of the expiring authorities in question is Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act. Section 215 has become synonymous with the NSA’s database of billions of telephone records, known as the Call Detail Records (CDR) program, but it actually has an even wider scope. In addition to authorizing ongoing collection of telephone records, Section 215’s “business records” authority allows the government to obtain a secret order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) requiring third parties to hand over any records or other “tangible thing” if deemed “relevant” to an international terrorism, counterespionage, or foreign intelligence investigation.



Since 2006, EFF has been suing over the government’s mass surveillance programs, including the bulk collection of billions of Americans’ domestic telephone call detail records (showing who called whom and when). In 2013, thanks to the Snowden revelations, Congress and the public were shocked to learn that the executive branch had relied on Section 215 to conduct this mass surveillance program. After a federal appeals court ruled that the government’s interpretation of Section 215 was “unprecedented and unwarranted,” Congress passed the 2015 USA FREEDOM Act to amend Section 215 to stop mass surveillance of Americans’ telephone records. Instead, the law limited the government’s collection records of calls within “two hops” of a “specific selection term.” It also included an expiration date on the authorities to force Congress to revisit these programs in 2019.

However, in 2018, the NSA announced that it received large numbers of CDRs it should not have had access to under USA FREEDOM, and that these “technical irregularities” began in 2015. Despite this, the NSA encountered yet another “overcollection” incident just months later. As a remedy, the NSA deleted every record it had collected since the technical irregularities began and announced that it had voluntarily stopped the CDR program entirely.

Earlier this fall, both in response to these revelations and because the authority for the programs are expiring, both the House Committee on the Judiciary and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary called witnesses from the NSA, the FBI and the DOJ to discuss Section 215. The witnesses told both Committees they were requesting the renewal of the legal authorization for CDR program – that they had voluntarily shut down – because it might be useful one day. Additionally, the witnesses confirmed that the 215 “business records” provision may allow the government to collect sensitive information, like medical records, location data, or even possibly  footage from a Ring camera. Both Committees appeared rightfully skeptical.

Even outside of the hearings, the DOJ, FBI and NSA have also been slow to respond to requests for information from concerned Representatives and Senators. Senator Wyden sent a letter to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in July 2019 asking about the collection of sensitive geolocation information using Section 215 and only received a reply in November. Similarly, Senators Leahy and Lee sent a letter to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General in July seeking more information about overcollection of CDRs and have yet to receive a response.

It’s clear that relying on the NSA to remedy its failures to stay within the law as passed by Congress is insufficient and that additional oversight and transparency measures are desperately needed. EFF and other civil liberties advocates were hopeful Congress would take this well-timed opportunity to enact real reform and necessary transparency.

Instead, Congress hid an extension of these authorities in a funding bill, without debate and without consideration of meaningful privacy and civil liberties safeguards to include. While we are very disappointed in this decision, we will continue to push Congress to pass real reform regarding this invasive surveillance authority in March 2020.

This article was sourced from

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By Tyler Durden

When one thinks of pensions crisis, the state of Illinois – with its woefully underfunded retirement system which issues bonds just to fund its existing pension benefits – usually comes to mind. Which is why it is surprising that the first state that may suffer substantial pension cuts is one that actually has one of the world’s best-funded, and most generous, pension systems.

According to the FT, millions of Dutch pensioners are facing material cuts to their retirement income for the first time next year as the Dutch government scrambles to avert a crisis to the country’s €1.6 trillion pension system. And while a last-minute intervention by the government may avoid significant cuts to pensions next year – and a revolt by trade unions –  if only temporarily, the world finds itself transfixed by the problems facing the Dutch retirement system as it provides an early indication of a wider global pensions funding shortfall, not to mention potential mass unrest once retirees across some of the world’s wealthiest nations suddenly finds themselves with facing haircuts to what they previously believed were unalterable retirement incomes.



At the core of the Dutch cash crunch is the ECB’s negative interest rate policy, which has sent bond yields to record negative territory across the eurozone, and crippled returns analysis while pushing up the funding requirements of Dutch pension funds.

Ahead of a parliamentary debate on Thursday on this hot topic issue, the Dutch minister for social affairs and employment, Wouter Koolmees, will write to lawmakers to outline his response to the pension industry’s problems, the FT reported.

In order to offset the ECB’s NIRP policy, Shaktie Rambaran Mishre, chair of the Dutch pension federation which represents 197 pension funds and their members, said that contributions might have to rise by up to 30% over the next few years, an outcome which will lead to outrage among existing working-age employees who will suffer a surge in the pension costs. Absent a dramatic increase in benefits contributions, “as things stand, around 2 million people are facing cuts from next year,” she added.

Predictably, trade unions have already held protests and strikes this year over the potential cuts to pensions and have threatened more action if the government does not step in. “We expect some relief next week and if not we will mobilise,” said Tuur Elzinga, lead pensions negotiator at FNV, the biggest Dutch union.

Protesters marching in The Hague in June hold a banner that reads ‘A good pension is matter of decency’

The Netherlands – one of the Eurozone’s richest nations – is hardly alone in this predicament, as the ongoing debate reflects broad concerns about the impact of low interest rates among the Eurozone and Japan, as ageing populations and longer life expectancy have put pension systems across the world under great strain. A report last week from the Group of Thirty, a club for current and former policymakers, warned of a $15.8tn shortfall in funding to support the ageing populations of the world’s 20 biggest countries.

And if there is one way to guarantee riots among the world’s richest nations, it is to inform pensioners that their benefits are suddenly being “haircut.”

In some ways, the Netherlands has one of Europe’s most generous retirement systems: at its core, it represents a basic pay-as-you-go state pension as well as employer-run pension scheme which together provide workers with about 80% of their average lifetime wages when they retire. The US and UK have similar systems, but Dutch pension funds are more generous and must use a lower risk-free rate to value their liabilities, forcing them to hold more assets.

See: 177 Different Ways to Generate Extra Income

Unfortunately, the lower Dutch risk-free rate is not low enough, and as a result about 70 employer-run pension funds with 12.1m members had funding ratios below the statutory minimum at the end of September, according to the Dutch central bank. And here lies the rub: if funds have ratios below the legal minimum for five consecutive years or have no prospect of recovering to a more healthy level, they must cut their payouts. Interest rates have rebounded slightly in recent weeks, but many funds are still facing cuts.

Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom

   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
#mc_embed_signup  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */

Claim Your FREE Issue Today!


In other words, in making a select handful of European stockholders rich courtesy of NIRP and QE, Mario Draghi is threatening the pensions of hundreds of millions of retired European workers.

So what, if any, is the solution?

Last week, Rabobank reported that the Minister of Social Affairs is supposedly willing to prevent a large part of the pension benefit cuts of 2020, as the government is reportedly willing to lower the minimum coverage ratio from 100% to 90% for one year. This temporary measure can be seen as a pause button, which buys time for:

Pension funds to hopefully recover over the next year. For pension funds, a rise in their risk-free rate term structure which is used to discount their liabilities (EUR 6m swap rates) would be most helpful
Continuing to work out the details of the Pension Reforms announced in June 2019. Unions, employer representatives and the opposition parties were against pension cuts because this would undermine the goals set out in the Pension Reforms.

Cutting pensions is a very sensitive and unpopular measure especially for politicians because the government has the ability to change the rules by changing the law. This is especially hard in times where there is no economic downturn, because it makes it more difficult to explain and justify the cuts. One can only imagine what will happen to Dutch pensions during the next Eurozone recession, when the ECB will be forced to cut rates even more negative in the process threatening even more pension haircuts.

While this pause would, in theory, prompt some pension funds to reduce their matching portfolio or hedge ratio in anticipation of pension cuts, not many pension funds already acted on the threat of these cuts according to Rabobank. Therefore, this temporary measure will have a limited effect on the investment behaviour of pension funds because:

Pension funds are typically big and are long term investors, meaning they take time to react to certain events
Most pension funds have a fixed risk budget. This risk budget is maximised by regulation and is fixed at the moment the coverage ratio drops below the required coverage ratio. This means if a pension fund would want to increase its risk toward for example equity, it often has to reduce risk somewhere else in the portfolio
Possible pension cuts are based on the policy coverage ratio which is the 12th month average of the coverage ratio. This further reduces the incentive for a temporary risk-on or risk-off strategy.

What’s next? On 21 November 2019 the official plans will be discussed in parliament, although Rabobank does not expect any additional changes that would affect investment behavior of pension funds. However, as the Dutch bank admits, “there are some challenging times ahead in the pension reform discussions” and it expects possible big changes this time next year. Chief among them: the risk free rate term structure that is used to discount the liabilities will likely change in every possible reform scenario, although it is unclear how much lower it can drop.

As the FT notes, a group of 10 academics wrote to parliament recently calling on the Dutch government not to raise the risk-free rate, arguing this would be at the expense of younger workers as “the assets pot will be a little bit more empty each year”. Others, however, think the government will intervene. “I expect that politically the cuts will not happen,” said Lex Hoogduin a professor at the University of Groningen and a former board member of the Dutch central bank, who did not sign the letter.

“But this is just kicking the can down the road as eventually they won’t be able to afford the payouts that people expect,” said Mr Hoogduin. And the people have Mario Draghi – and now Christine Lagarde – to thank for it.

This article was sourced from

Image credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By B.N. Frank

The good news is that the committee who proposed this has been terminated.

The bad news is that national parks are still considering nonsense that would accommodate visitors at the expense of wildlife and nature.

From KIRO7:

Supporters said the change would boost revenue and encourage more people to stay overnight.

“Today we had to kind of go to different coffee shops to try to get signal and get Wi-Fi to find our way around and try to figure out where we were going to go, so the Wi-Fi really appealed to me a lot,” said Mount Rainier visitor Abby Gray.

Other visitors aren’t fans of the idea.



“Don’t mess it up, don’t mess it up,” said Rena Watkins. “No doubt in my mind that it would disrupt the system and we don’t need that, we don’t need it. Just come out here and see this stuff the way it is and the way it was meant to be.”

“I think it would cause more noise, more trash, less of the natural beauty,” said Jeb Watkins.

The National Park Service said more than 9.2 million people stayed at campgrounds last year. Many of those visitors are younger and more diverse than in the past.

NPS said the plan isn’t to modernize every campground, but to create a “second-century campground experience.”

In the proposal, parks could nominate their own campgrounds to be part of a modernization pilot program. Five to 10 locations could be chosen as soon as Dec. 1.

Research has determined that all sources of wireless radiation – including cell towers and WiFi – are biologically and environmentally harmful.  That’s why many environmentalists have been fighting cell tower installation at national parks (see 1, 2).  That’s why WiFi SHOULD NOT be installed in Yellowstone or any other national park.

National parks are supposed to be protected places.  They are NOT supposed to be exploited by businesses.  They are not supposed to be sacrificed for increased revenue.  Perhaps younger and more diverse visitors would be accepting and appreciative of that if it was explained to them.  After all, many of them are very eco-conscious already.

The deadline for public comments is November 29.

Image credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By Elias Marat

Swedish prosecutors have dropped the ongoing investigation into a 2010 rape allegation made against WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange, citing the weakening of evidence over the course of nine years since the alleged incident occurred.

A Swedish woman had accused him of the crime which she said took place in August 2010 after she met the Australian during a conference in Stockholm.

Assange, who has steadfastly denied the accusation, had dodged extradition to Sweden for seven years after being given refuge at the Ecuadorean embassy in London.



In April, Ecuador’s government allowed British police to enter the embassy and arrest the 48-year-old shortly following the release of a batch of documents allegedly implicating Ecuadorean President Lenin Moreno in corruption.

Since then, Assange has been held at the maximum-security HMP Belmarsh prison in London on a 50-week sentence of breaching bail conditions for seeking refuge at the embassy. While he was due to be released in September after serving out his term, a judge ruled that he should remain incarcerated due to his “history of absconding.”

The U.S. government is seeking the extradition of Assange to the United States on 18 charges, including allegations of conspiracy to hack into computers in the U.S. If convicted of these charges, which include violating the Espionage Act, he would face a sentence of up to 175 years in prison.

Assange’s defenders claim, however, that he is simply being sought due to his role in the release of scandalous information implicating Washington in a range of crimes, including serious war crimes.

In June, then-U.K. Home Secretary Sajid Javid approved the U.S. extradition request.

Swedish authorities reopened the 2010 rape investigation following his eviction, which had previously been closed on the grounds that it was impossible for the courts to reach Assange. In September, Swedish prosecutors announced that they had questioned seven witnesses regarding the case and that the Wikileaks founder was suspected of rape.

Swedish deputy director of public prosecutions, Eva-Marie Persson, announced the decision to “discontinue the investigation regarding Julian Assange” on Tuesday, according to Swedish website the Local.

A statement published by Sweden’s prosecution authority noted:

The reason for this decision is that the evidence has weakened considerably due to the long period of time that has elapsed since the events in question.

Persson stressed, however:

I would like to emphasize that the injured party has submitted a credible and reliable version of events.

Her statements have been coherent, extensive and detailed; however, my overall assessment is that the evidential situation has been weakened to such an extent that there is no longer any reason to continue the investigation.

WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson welcomed the move to drop the investigation, stating:

“Let us now focus on the threat Mr. Assange has been warning about for years: the belligerent prosecution of the United States and the threat it poses to the First Amendment.”

In a tweet, the organization founded by Assange said:

While the world knows Julian’s name has been cleared in Sweden, he is sitting in a cell in Belmarsh prison, probably unaware of the news. The Prison cancelled all visits today. Don’t Extradite Assange!

By Elias Marat | Creative Commons |

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By Tyler Durden

So much for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization… though we might note that when it previously bombed Belgrade, assisted in the occupation of Afghanistan, and toppled Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, any sense or concern for overstepping its mandate or ‘mission creep’ was clearly lost altogether.

As if seeking expansion into Eastern Europe, the Balkans, and potentially the Caucuses were not enough, now the Cold War military alliance is eyeing expansion into space. This is the focus of the following new report  not in The Onion but in Bloomberg entitled, ‘NATO Is Poised to Expand Its Remit to Include Outer Space’ which introduces:

NATO intends to make space an “operational domain” along with air, land, sea and cyber, according to Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

The move, to be approved at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers on Wednesday, would bring all five areas within the scope of the alliance’s collective-defense commitment and comes as member countries seek to address fresh internal political splits.



Stoltenberg described to reporters on Tuesday: “Space is of great importance for our civilian societies and for any military operation,” and described space expansion as ‘essential,’ saying further: “It’s about communications, it’s about navigation, it’s about data imagery. Space is essential for almost everything we do.”

So now Article 5 will be invoked to defend a NATO member’s claim to a chunk of the moon, or Mars? Again, the NATO chief didn’t just describe the prospect as an interesting project or avenue for future potential, but as “essential”. NATO ministers have over the past year been discussing a an overarching future space policy, so it’s nothing new; however, the suggestion that it’s now essential to the mission might come as a surprise to member states.

Despite deep cracks in the alliance, especially after it’s second largest military controversially invaded northern Syria last month, and following charged statements earlier this month by France’s Emmanuel Macron to The Economist wherein he described NATO as suffering “brain death”, it appears Stoltenberg is exploring new domains to keep the alliance relevant.

This also comes after Trump’s longtime pressure for European capitals to increase defense spending, shouldering more of the burden.

All of this suggests Macron had it right in his controversial prior remarks to the British weekly magazine: “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO.” It’s also worth recalling that he had even questioned the Article Five collective defense guarantee when pressed on the issue: “I don’t know,” he answered.

Again, Stoltenberg’s new space comments suggest an alliance in desperate search of new missions on new frontiers. More via Bloomberg:

“We need more European efforts on defense, but not as an alternative, not as something that is replacing NATO,” Stoltenberg said.

He called NATO’s plan to integrate space into the alliance’s operations a “defensive” step, saying it would be a “clear sign that we continue to strengthen our deterrence and defense.”

Though as the report notes, “Stoltenberg said NATO has no intention of putting weapons in space.” But how else will NATO theoretically exercises “deterrence and defense” in outer space?

As NATO foreign ministers meet on Wednesday in Brussels to consider a range of issues, it’ll be interesting to see if Stoltenberg’s space comments gain any further traction or are seriously taken up.

This article was sourced from

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By The Conscious Resistance

Derrick Broze breaks down a new resolution signed by 11,000 scientists from around the world.


World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency
Critics blast a proposal to curb climate change by halting population growth
The Globalists Are Openly Admitting To Their Population Control Agenda – And That’s A Bad Sign…



Derrick is the founder of TCRN.

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By The Last American Vagabond

It should be a huge red flag when Mike Pompeo and others of his ilk stand up and say that they are on the side of protesters.

While it is understandable that there is an uprising over the recent massive spike in gas prices, the violent aspect to it must be called into question.

The Last American Vagabond takes a closer look at what is being said in Iranian media that is NOT being said in mainstream Western media.



This is an excerpt of The Daily Wrap Up 11/18. Full Episode Can Be Seen Here:…

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By John W. Whitehead

“When a man unprincipled in private life[,] desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper . . . despotic in his ordinary demeanour — known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty — when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity — to join in the cry of danger to liberty — to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion — to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day — It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may ‘ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.’”—Alexander Hamilton

By all means, let’s talk about impeachment.

To allow the President or any rogue government agency or individual to disregard the rule of law whenever, wherever and however it chooses and operate “above the law” is exactly how a nation of sheep gives rise to a government of wolves.

To be clear: this is not about Donald Trump. Or at least it shouldn’t be just about Trump.



This is a condemnation of every government toady at every point along the political spectrum—right, left and center—who has conspired to expand the federal government’s powers at the expense of the citizenry.

For too long now, the American people have played politics with their principles and turned a blind eye to all manner of wrongdoing when it was politically expedient, allowing Congress, the White House and the Judiciary to wreak havoc with their freedoms and act in violation of the rule of law.

“We the people” are paying the price for it now.

We are paying the price every day that we allow the government to continue to wage its war on the American People, a war that is being fought on many fronts: with bullets and tasers, with surveillance cameras and license readers, with intimidation and propaganda, with court rulings and legislation, with the collusion of every bureaucrat who dances to the tune of corporate handouts while on the government’s payroll, and most effectively of all, with the complicity of the American people, who continue to allow themselves to be easily manipulated by their politics, distracted by their pastimes, and acclimated to a world in which government corruption is the norm.

Don’t keep falling for the Deep State’s ploys.

This entire impeachment process is a manufactured political circus—a shell game—aimed at distracting the public from the devious treachery of the American police state, which continues to lock down the nation and strip the citizenry of every last vestige of constitutional safeguards that have historically served as a bulwark against tyranny.

Has President Trump overstepped his authority and abused his powers?

Without a doubt.

Then again, so did Presidents Obama, Bush, Clinton, and almost every president before them.

Trump is not the first president to weaken the system of checks and balances, sidestep the rule of law, and expand the power of the president. He is just the most recent.

If we were being honest and consistent in holding government officials accountable, you’d have to impeach almost every president in recent years for operating “above the law,” unbound by the legislative or judicial branches of the government.

When we refer to the “rule of law,” that’s constitutional shorthand for the idea that everyone is treated the same under the law, everyone is held equally accountable to abiding by the law, and no one is given a free pass based on their politics, their connections, their wealth, their status or any other bright line test used to confer special treatment on the elite.

When the government and its agents no longer respect the rule of law—the Constitution—or believe that it applies to them, then the very contract on which this relationship is based becomes invalid.

Although the Constitution requires a separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government in order to ensure accountability so that no one government agency becomes all-powerful, each successive president over the past 30 years has, through the negligence of Congress and the courts, expanded the reach and power of the presidency by adding to his office’s list of extraordinary orders, directives and special privileges.

All of the imperial powers amassed by Barack Obama and George W. Bush—to kill American citizens without due process, to detain suspects indefinitely, to strip Americans of their citizenship rights, to carry out mass surveillance on Americans without probable cause, to suspend laws during wartime, to disregard laws with which he might disagree, to conduct secret wars and convene secret courts, to sanction torture, to sidestep the legislatures and courts with executive orders and signing statements, to direct the military to operate beyond the reach of the law, to operate a shadow government, and to act as a dictator and a tyrant, above the law and beyond any real accountability—were inherited by Donald Trump.

These presidential powers—acquired through the use of executive orders, decrees, memorandums, proclamations, national security directives and legislative signing statements and which can be activated by any sitting president—enable past, president and future presidents to act as a dictator by operating above the law and beyond the reach of the Constitution.

Yet in operating above the law, it’s not just the president who has become a law unto himself.

The government itself has become an imperial dictator, an overlord, a king.

This is what you might call a stealthy, creeping, silent, slow-motion coup d’état.

This abuse of power has been going on for so long that it has become the norm, the Constitution be damned.

There are hundreds—make that thousands—of government bureaucrats who are getting away with murder (in many cases, literally) simply because the legislatures, courts and the citizenry can’t be bothered to make them play by the rules of the Constitution.

Unless something changes in the way we deal with these ongoing, egregious abuses of power, the predators of the police state will continue to wreak havoc on our freedoms, our communities, and our lives.

It’s the nature of the beast: power corrupts.

Worse, as 19th-century historian Lord Acton concluded, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about a politician, an entertainment mogul, a corporate CEO or a police officer: give any one person (or government agency) too much power and allow him or her or it to believe that they are entitled, untouchable and will not be held accountable for their actions, and those powers will eventually be abused.

We’re seeing this dynamic play out every day in communities across America.

A cop shoots an unarmed citizen for no credible reason and gets away with it. A president employs executive orders to sidestep the Constitution and gets away with it. A government agency spies on its citizens’ communications and gets away with it. An entertainment mogul sexually harasses actors and actresses and gets away with it. The U.S. military bombs civilian targets and gets away with it.

Abuse of power—and the ambition-fueled hypocrisy and deliberate disregard for misconduct that make those abuses possible—works the same whether you’re talking about sexual harassment, government corruption, or the rule of law.

Twenty years ago, I was a lawyer for Paula Jones, who sued then-President Clinton for dropping his pants and propositioning her for sex when he was governor of Arkansas. That lawsuit gave rise to revelations about Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky, a 21-year-old intern at the White House, and his eventual impeachment for lying about it under oath.

As Dana Milbank writes for The Washington Post:

We didn’t know it at the time, of course. But in Bill Clinton were the seeds of Donald Trump. With 20 years of hindsight, it is clear… Clinton’s handling of the Monica Lewinsky affair was a precursor of the monstrosity we now have in the White House: dismissing unpleasant facts as “fake news,” self-righteously claiming victimhood, attacking the press and cloaking personal misbehavior in claims to be upholding the Constitution…. Clinton set us on the path, or at least accelerated us down the path, that led to today.

It doesn’t matter what starts us down this path, whether it’s a president insisting that he get a free pass for sexually harassing employees, or waging wars based on invented facts, or attempting to derail an investigation into official misconduct.

If we continue down this road, there can be no surprise about what awaits us at the end.

After all, it is a tale that has been told time and again throughout history about how easy it is for freedom to fall and tyranny to rise, and it often begins with one small, seemingly inconsequential willingness on the part of the people to compromise their principles and undermine the rule of law in exchange for a dubious assurance of safety, prosperity and a life without care.

For example, 86 years ago, the citizens of another democratic world power elected a leader who promised to protect them from all dangers. In return for this protection, and under the auspice of fighting terrorism, he was given absolute power.

This leader went to great lengths to make his rise to power appear both legal and necessary, masterfully manipulating much of the citizenry and their government leaders.

Unnerved by threats of domestic terrorism and foreign invaders, the people had little idea that the domestic turmoil of the times—such as street rioting and the fear of Communism taking over the country—was staged by the leader in an effort to create fear and later capitalize on it.

In the ensuing months, this charismatic leader ushered in a series of legislative measures that suspended civil liberties and habeas corpus rights and empowered him as a dictator.

On March 23, 1933, the nation’s legislative body passed the Enabling Act, formally referred to as the “Law to Remedy the Distress of the People and the Nation,” which appeared benign and allowed the leader to pass laws by decree in times of emergency.

What it succeeded in doing, however, was ensuring that the leader became a law unto himself.

The leader’s name was Adolf Hitler, and the rest, as they say, is history.

Yet history has a way of repeating itself.

Hitler’s rise to power should serve as a stark lesson to always be leery of granting any government leader sweeping powers.

Clearly, we are not heeding that lesson.

“How lucky it is for rulers,” Adolf Hitler once said, “that men cannot think.”

The horrors that followed in Nazi Germany might have been easier to explain if Hitler had been right. But the problem is not so much that people cannot think but that they do not think. Or if they do think, as in the case of the German people, that thinking becomes muddled and easily led.

Hitler’s meteoric rise to power, with the support of the German people, is a case in point.

On January 30, 1933, Hitler was appointed chancellor of Germany in full accordance with the country’s legal and constitutional principles. When President Paul von Hindenburg died the following year, Hitler assumed the office of president, as well as that of chancellor, but he preferred to use the title Der Füehrer (the leader) to describe himself. This new move was approved in a general election in which Hitler garnered 88 percent of the votes cast.

It cannot be said that the German people were ignorant of Hitler’s agenda or his Nazi ideology. Nazi literature, including statements of the Nazi plans for the future, had papered the country for a decade before Hitler came to power. In fact, Hitler’s book Mein Kampf, which was his blueprint for totalitarianism, sold more than 200,000 copies between 1925 and 1932.

Clearly, the problem was not that the German people did not think but that their thinking was poisoned by the enveloping climate of ideas that they came to accept as important.

At a certain point, the trivial became important, and obedience to the government in pursuit of security over freedom became predominant.

As historian Milton Mayer recounts in his seminal book on Hitler’s rise to power, They Thought They Were Free, “Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. There was no need to. Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about—we were decent people‑—and kept us so busy with continuous changes and ‘crises’ and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the ‘national enemies’, without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us.”

The German people were not oblivious to the horrors taking place around them. As historian Robert Gellately points out, “[A]nyone in Nazi Germany who wanted to find out about the Gestapo, the concentration camps, and the campaigns of discrimination and persecutions need only read the newspapers.”

The warning signs were definitely there, blinking incessantly like large neon signs.

“Still,” Gellately writes, “the vast majority voted in favor of Nazism, and in spite of what they could read in the press and hear by word of mouth about the secret police, the concentration camps, official anti-Semitism, and so on. . . . [T]here is no getting away from the fact that at that moment, ‘the vast majority of the German people backed him.’”

Half a century later, the wife of a prominent German historian, neither of whom were members of the Nazi party, opined: “

  • n the whole, everyone felt well. . . . And there were certainly eighty percent who lived productively and positively throughout the time. . . . We also had good years. We had wonderful years.”

In other words, as long as their creature comforts remained undiminished, as long as their bank accounts remained flush, as long as they weren’t being discriminated against, persecuted, starved, beaten, shot, stripped, jailed and turned into slave labor, life was good.

This is how tyranny rises and freedom falls.

The American kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves) has sucked the American people down a rabbit hole into a parallel universe in which the Constitution is meaningless, the government is all-powerful, and the citizenry is powerless to defend itself against government agents who steal, spy, lie, plunder, kill, abuse and generally inflict mayhem and sow madness on everyone and everything in their sphere.

This dissolution of that sacred covenant between the citizenry and the government—establishing “we the people” as the masters and the government as the servant—didn’t happen overnight. It didn’t happen because of one particular incident or one particular president. It is a process, one that began long ago and continues in the present day, aided and abetted by politicians who have mastered the polarizing art of how to “divide and conquer.”

Unfortunately, there is no magic spell to transport us back to a place and time where “we the people” weren’t merely fodder for a corporate gristmill, operated by government hired hands, whose priorities are money and power.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, our freedoms have become casualties in an all-out war on the American people.

So yes, let’s talk about impeachment, but don’t fall for the partisan shell game that sets Trump up as the fall guy for the Deep State’s high crimes and misdemeanors.

Set your sights higher: impeach the government for overstepping its authority, abusing its power, and disregarding the rule of law.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People  is available at Whitehead can be contacted at [email protected].

Publication Guidelines / Reprint Permission

John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact [email protected] to obtain reprint permission.




The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Kaspersky, Operation Safe Escape and seven other organizations today launched the Coalition Against Stalkerware to unite and mobilize security software companies and advocates for domestic abuse victims in actions to combat and shut down malicious stalkerware apps.

Stalkerware, a type of commercially available surveillance software, is installed on phones without device owners’ knowledge or consent to secretly spy on them. The apps track victims’ locations and allow abusers to read their text messages, monitor phone calls, see photos, videos, and web browsing, and much more. It’s being used all over the world to intimidate, harass, and harm victims, and is a favorite tool for stalkers and abusive spouses or ex-partners.

Groups supporting targets of domestic abuse are seeing a growing number of victims seeking help about stalkerware. According to Kaspersky, the number of its antivirus users finding stalkerware on their devices rose by 35%, from 27,798 in 2018 to 37,532 in 2019. The threat landscape for stalkerware has also widened, as Kaspersky has detected 380 various forms of stalkerware in the wild in 2019—31% more than a year ago.



The Coalition Against Stalkerware aims to provide help for victims and bring leaders in antivirus technology together to establish best practices for ethical software development. As a first step, the coalition’s founding members have created a proper definition of stalkerware—distinguishing it from surveillance software used for legitimate purposes—and reached consensus on criteria for detecting it.

Going forward, the coalition will work together to call attention to and warn people about the apps, educate consumers about how stalkerware works and how to spot and remove it on phones, provide online resources and help for stalkerware victims, and push antivirus makers to build stalkerware detection into their products.

The coalition launched an online portal today,, with links to stalkerware survivor stories, a map identifying states with anti-stalkerware laws, and groups that provide support and services for victims of domestic violence.

Further, the group will work with law enforcement and lawmakers on the federal, state and local level to enforce existing statutes, or enact new ones, to protect people against stalkerware and hold stalkerware vendors and abusers accountable.

“This malicious software is being marketed as a way to check if your partner is cheating on you, or monitor teens and children, but the truth is spyware is explicitly marketed to stalkers and bad actors,” said  EFF Cybersecurity Director Eva Galperin. “The apps have made it all too easy for domestic abusers and violent ex-partners to intimidate, threaten, and invade safe spaces of their targets, who are at risk of physical abuse.”

Founding coalition partners include Avira, EFF, European Network for the Work with Perpetrators of Domestic Violence, G Data Cyber Defense, Kaspersky, Malwarebytes, NNEDV, Norton Lifelock, Operation Safe Escape, and Weisser Ring.

Most stalkerware isn’t available through app stores; rather it’s available for download on dedicated websites for as little as $7 a month. But stalkerware can still find its way into app stores by posing as child- or employee-monitoring software. In July Google removed seven apps designed to surveil people from Play Store. Last month the Federal Trade Commission brought its first case ever against developers of a stalkerware app for compromising users’ privacy and security.

“Our cellphones contain intensely private information, and having full access to them is like having full access to our minds. We want to see these apps disabled, disrupt development of new ones, and have stalkerware operators and abusers prosecuted and even jailed for illegally accessing and collecting highly personal, private digital information,” said Galperin.

For more about the

For more about stalkerware:

Contact Eva Galperin




By Joziah Thayer

On October 7th, President Donald Trump announced that U.S. troops would be leaving Syria. This announcement knocked Warhawks off their perches in our nation’s capital. General Jack Keane went on Fox News and called Trump pulling out of Syria a “strategic blunder” for the president. The next day after appearing on Fox News and criticizing Donald Trump. Jack Keane went to the White House to have a meeting with Trump about U.S. troops leaving Syria.

Although reports came out that General Jack Keane’s meeting with Trump left an “impression” on the President, Trump did not change his mind on withdrawing troops from Syria. It wasn’t until a week later on October 14th, when General Jack Keane and Senator Lindsey Graham, convinced President Trump to stay in Syria.



General Jack Keane showed President Trump during this second meeting maps of the oil fields in Syria. If this sounds familiar to you, that is because General Jack Keane also showed President Trump maps of the rare earth minerals in Afghanistan when Trump threatened to remove troops from Afghanistan earlier this year. President Trump came out of this second meeting with Graham and Keane with a different narrative about America’s role in Syria. It went from overthrowing Assad to defeating ISIS than to defending Israel, and now our troops’ mission is to protect oil fields in Syria?

General Jack Keane would instantly profit if the United States were to continue to occupy parts of Syria because he is involved in companies that are in the business of changing the energy infrastructure in the Middle East. Jack Keane is the chairman of AM General, which makes military vehicles for the United States government.  Jack Keane is the chairman of the Institute For The Study Of War, and the co-founder of IP3 International, which is an energy consulting firm. In the past, General Keane has served as the Director of General Dynamics and was a strategic advisor to Academi, the military contractor convicted of war crimes in Iraq in 2007.

AM General is currently under a five-year 2.2 billion dollar contract that they signed with the U.S. military to build 11,500 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles back in 2017. According to a report in the South Bend Tribune, AM General has 250,000 Humvees in more than 60 countries. Many will argue that the U.S. military does not use the Humvee any more, but this does not address the fact that many other nations still do. Nor does it address the fact that the U.S. Military signed a five-year contract worth 2.2 billion to build 11,500 Humvees for the U.S. military two years ago.

In 2017 Jeff Adams, the spokesman for AM General, stated that the contract is “absolutely a clear signal of the global demand for these vehicles in the future.” It is unethical for any president to take advice for an active military operation from any person who will benefit financially from that military operation. General Jack Keane will not only profit from AM General but also the energy consulting firm he co-founded IP3 International.

The House Oversight Committee’s investigation into IP3 International and the Trump administration’s role in trying to transfer nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia is still ongoing.

Since 2017, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings—who served as Ranking Member of the Committee—has been seeking information about the Trump Administration’s efforts to transfer U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia, the actions of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn in these efforts, and the role of IP3 International, a private company that assembled a consortium of U.S. companies seeking to build nuclear plants in Saudi Arabia.

Even if we disregard the conflict of interest involving General Jack Keane, AM General, and President Trump’s decision to keep troops in Syria to “protect the oil,” there is a much bigger conflict of interest involving Jack Keane and IP3 International. Members of Trump’s administration including Jared Kushner, Micheal Flynn, and Senator Lindsey Graham were all promoting a new “Marshall Plan” for the Middle East as part of Jared Kashner’s “Deal Of The Century” to bring peace between Israel and Palestine.

IP3 International is currently under Congressional investigation for trying to sell nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. As part of this probe, the Oversight Committee uncovered documents that indicate a violation of the Atomic Energy Act (Page 22).

IP3 officials traveled to Saudi Arabia in December 2016—after the election and before the inauguration—to solicit a $120 million investment from then-Saudi Deputy Crown Prince MBS in exchange for a 10% stake in IP3. The documents suggest that IP3 was soliciting these funds by highlighting its close ties to General Flynn and the support of the incoming Trump Administration for IP3’s plan to transfer U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. In direct communications with General Flynn, IP3 officials wrote that: “much of our confidence derives from how emphatically positive your message expressing your—and the President Elect’s—support for the Marshall Plan, was received by the leadership of KSA. (Page 17-Staff Report: Corporate and Foreign Interests Behind White House Push to Transfer U.S. Nuclear Technology to Saudi Arabia)

General Jack Keane has a direct financial interest in any policy decisions involving the Middle East; this is public information, and an indisputable fact. IP3 International, the energy consulting company General Jack Keane co-founded in 2016 during Donald Trump’s election campaign, has hundreds of millions of reasons to keep our armed forces in the Middle East. IP3 International didn’t just advise the Trump administration on their Marshall Plan for the Middle East, it is IP3 International’s plan entirely. Trump’s Marshall Plan for the Middle East should be described as IP3 International’s Marshall Plan for the Middle East.

Written by Joziah Thayer. You can find more of my articles at, where this article first appeared, and – Please Follow me on Twitter @ Dapeaple

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.




By John Vibes

Biographer for the Royal Family, Lady Colin Campbell, recently appeared on ITV’s Good Morning Britain where she defended Prince Andrew against claims of pedophilia.

In her defense of the disgraced prince, Campbell pointed to the “prostitution” charge that Jeffrey Epstein was convicted of in 2008, and attempted to downplay the fact that the girls were underage by suggesting that he was simply hiring sex workers.

“You all seem to have forgotten that Jeffrey Epstein, the offense for which he was charged and for which he was imprisoned, was for soliciting prostitution from minors. That is not the same thing as pedophilia,” Campbell told a shocked panel Monday morning.



Host Piers Morgan immediately challenged her claims, saying:

If you solicited a 14-year-old for prostitution, you’re a pedophile.

You’re procuring an underage girl for sex. That’s what he was convicted of. I’m sorry, I’m sorry, with respect, that is nonsense.

Campbell then immediately attempted to backpedal, claiming that a distinction must be made between a minor and a child.

“Was he? 14? Well, I’m not justifying Jeffrey Epstein. Pedophilia, I suspect there’s a difference between a minor and a child,” she said.

“A 14-year-old is a child. Legally, she’s a child,” Morgan replied.

Campbell then admitted that the prince may have “made many mistakes,” but insisted that his only mistake was being too clueless to realize that one of his closest friends was a predator.

“You can’t criticize someone because they aren’t as bright as you would like them to be,” she said.

The controversy surrounding Prince Andrew has grown since his Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis. In the interview, the prince gave a variety of bizarre excuses and defenses for the accusations against him, including a claim that he could not sweat due to a rare physical condition.

He also denied knowing about the trafficking victim, Virginia Giuffre—formerly known as Virginia Roberts—despite appearing in photos with her when she was under the age of 18. However, he has previously suggested that these photos are “doctored.” Photographic evidence has been uncovered showing that the prince does, in fact, sweat. He also claimed that even though he did not remember meeting the victim on the night that she said, he does vividly remember his alibi, saying he went to a Pizza Express in Woking before returning home that night.

“Going to Pizza Express in Woking is an unusual thing for me to do, a very unusual thing for me to do. I’ve never been… I’ve only been to Woking a couple of times and I remember it weirdly distinctly,” he said.

The interview was so disastrous for the Royal Family that one of Prince Andrew’s PR advisors quit in response to the broadcast. And to make matters even worse, a video clip from 1984 recently resurfaced showing Johnny Carson, then-host of The Tonight Show, making a joke about Prince Andrew being a pedophile.

None of this looks good for the Royal Family.

By John Vibes | Creative Commons |

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 668