Decenber 2015 AD

---

Reject both

Capitalism

and Socialism

---

Sub-Title: As the two definitions are applied in today's world, reject them both.

Jewish Socialists like Bernie Sanders nicely say what Stalin wanna-bes constantly harp on in much less nice ways. that -- the filthy rich Capitalists are subjugating us all....

....While people opposed to Jewish Socialist Bernie Sanders are defending Capitalism and saying that Communists want to subjugate us all.

Fact is that, today, Americans are being subjugated under both.

---

Part 1

Socialist Aspects of America

---

Well, we'll just go straight to the hard-core wing of socialism -- communism.

Communism advocates for

1) Class warfare,
2) Demands property to be publicly owned, and
3) Demands each person works and is paid according to his ability and need.

We are pretty much there now.

Class Warfare:

The other thing we call ourselves, Democratic, means that the majority rules.  However, the majority rules nothing in this country.

Today, we are all about class warfare where the minority rules.

The Jewish minority in particular.

The state famously subjugates, by way of class warfare, the desires and needs of the majority over the desires and needs of the minority classes to which the state has decided to give special protection. These are the state protected classes of blacks, women, Hispanics, homosexuals and now Muslim immigrants

When the need arises, there is also class warfare pushed between the classes of young and old, rich and poor, husband and wife, parent and child, and just plain old persecution against the entire majority class of Christians.

Need we add that the entire class of Israel is protected at all costs, even though it is an entirely different state.

NOTE: As an aside, the Constitution only protects three classes and none other. The religious minority and the political minority are both classes of Americans protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
The class of the States of the United States and hence the people of the States are given special protections in numerous places within the Constitution. Everything else in the Constitution applies to individuals, not groups or classes. 

Property Publicly Owned:

Not so obvious, but what company can operate in America today without first looking to the real boss, the State, for its marching orders.

The real estate property industry has numerous state rules on buying, selling, and rental, and when it comes to selling to protected minorities, the State is all powerful.

The medical device and pharma industry are totally dictated by the state in the form of the FDA.

The people's medical care is now totally dictated by the state in the form of Obamacare. Retired people get Medicare treatments straight from the state already, with socialists chomping at the bit to spread this to everyone.

The airline industry is totally dictated by the state in the form of the FAA -- and now TSA.

The insurance industry is totally dictated by the state by way of licensing. And what other industry or what individual operates without insurance?

The huge military industry in this country does exactly what its sole customer, the state, dictates it to do.

The biggest employer in many towns is the state's publicly owned operations, in the form of:

1.  school teachers and administrators,
   
2.  librarians,
   
3.  park and recreation employees,
   
4.  street maintenance crews,
   
5.  policemen,
   
6.  firemen,
   
7.  judges, prosecutors, and detectives,
   
8.  motor vehicle division employees,
   
9.  county clerks,
   
10.  building inspectors
    
11.  and endless other public employees, 
12. ...not mentioning federal workers such as people in
    
13.  the military,
    
14.  the post office,
    
15.  the IRS office, and
    
16.  the swarm of federal bureaucrats in endless federal politburos.

Works and paid according to his ability and needs:

American socialists deviate a little here when adjusted for classes. Pay is not determined according to ability should the pay be that of one of the State's protected minorities. In this case, a job and its pay are required by the state, despite the lack of ability.

Another place American socialists hugely deviate from true communism, is that our socialists do not demand all workers even have a job. 

American socialists demand that people get paid even if they do not work.

In the ultimate "pay according to your needs", the State welfare department directly gives needed food, health care, dental care, housing, clothing, heat and cooling, and all the other needs of the people, should they decide they cannot or will not work to support themselves or their families.

As for traditional socialist communism "pay according to needs", need we go to state dictated -- minimum wage laws?   How about overtime rules? 

Then there are requirements of the State for companies to pay into an unemployment fund, so that workers can be paid "according to his needs" should he be laid-off.

The state does not just use "the stick" in dictating pay needs, it also uses "the carrot" quite liberally in the form of favorable tax relief.

The tax carrot is used to softly dictate the state's ideal for retirement plans, sick leave, and medical benefits for the workers.

---

Part 2

Capitalist Aspects of America

---

Capitalism is routinely stated as an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

This is what I have fought for all my life, but I have to ask... "Who are the private owners?"

A great example of the problem with a pure definition of Capitalism can be highlighted by the break-up of the Jewish-created Soviet Union of SOCIALIST STATES.

Americans thought that we had defeated Communism, but all we did was create an evil and corrupt form of Capitalism in Russia, I will call Oligarch Capitalism.

The former Jewish Commissars who had previously controlled the entire Soviet economy, now placed those state assets directly into "private" hands.

Those "private owners for profit" turned out to be mostly Jewish as well.

The infamous (and Jewish) Russian Oligarchs were Vladimir Gusinsky, Boris Berezovsky, Mikhail Friedman, Mikhail Khoderkovsky, Alexander Smolensky and Roman Abranovich.

(Yes, to be complete, there were a few non-Jewish oligarchs, such as Vladimir Potanin, Vladimir Vinogradov, and Platon Lededev)

Vladimir Putin came along in January of 2000 and straightened all this out, returning control of major natural resources such as oil, STOLEN by the Jews, to the state. But at least now, property would be controlled by Russian Christians, and with Putin in power, the wages of Russian Christians climbed from $1,000 per year at his inauguration to $10,000 per year only a few short years after taking control of the country.

The one industry all governments have grappled with is who controls the industry of the press, which includes radio, TV, movies, Internet, in addition to all printed materials.

Jews administering Communism of course always insist upon the state controlling the press so they can run appropriate propaganda campaigns.

But what about the American press being in the hands of "private owners for profit" ?

Do we not have Jewish oligarchs in the press industry?

Do they not run a propanganistic and a virtual monopolistic media?

When all of Hollywood, Broadway, broadcast media, print media, and Internet portals are controlled by Jews, how is it that Jewish Oligarch Capitalism in America will have any better results than Communism in Russia or for that matter, Oligarch Capitalism in Russia?

In both cases, propaganda is fed to the majority by a very small minority who get to dictate foreign and domestic policy in this country.

When NBC claims the builder of Rockefeller 30 Rock, Donald Trump, is deemed a racist for wanting to deport Hispanics, so they fire him from the "Miss America Pageant" and "Celebrity Apprentice", does that mean the NBC really objects to the politics of Trump?

Can NBC really be against this NBC celebrity, New York City One Per center, favorite son, when NBC invites Trump to host the paragon of liberalism, "Saturday Night Live"?

(For the record, I don't know if Trump actually built 30 Rock, but he did build a whole lot of buildings for Jewish NYC 1%ers who liked his work - and liked him.)

All major broadcasters are from New York City and they are all controlled by Jews.

How is Jewish Oligarch Capitalism any better than Jewish Communism?

I can go on and on about the influence of America's own brand of Jewish Commissars, such as the Jewish Wall Street stockbrokers who handle most of our 401K and pension funds, buying up majority stocks in American companies and placing their fellow Jewish Commissar henchmen on the Board of Directors.

Again, how is Jewish Oligarch Capitalism any better than Jewish Communism?

How are you, Mr. and Mrs. Christian Republican America, better off having Jews control the lion's share of private property in this country, or you, Mr. and Mrs. Christian Democrat, better off having Jews control your socialist government through the MSM?

---

---

You can read further at	The Problem
You can read further at	Guide to "Checks and Balances"
You can read further at	The Solution
Write us at	letters@thechristiansolution.com

---

Article located at:
I think we now know why the CIA and FBI missed the Paris attacks.

If the CIA Director, the former CIA Director and the head of the FBI all cannot corrrectly connect the dots on this small bit of intellignce about the impact of Edward Snowden in the Paris attacks, then I want to know how in the hell they ever qualified for these jobs in the first place?

This is why they cannot outfox an Islamiscist with an IQ of 60.

And from this, we can deduce who has blood on their hands.

---

Before we get into Pulitzer Prize winner Glenn Greenwald's rebuttal to all this crying for a renewed expansion of spy powers, we need to set up the playing field.

First off, there was no evidence that the Paris Muslim terrorists used encryption of any kind, due to the fact that the Paris Muslim terrorists were largely related to each other or close neighbors and unlikely to have used encryption.

Instead, they probably just talked face to face with each other.

But does not stop our intelligence agencies from twerking us to hand over more of our privacy and freedom to "protect us" from all the Muslim Terrorists whom they are PROUDLY allowing entry into our country.

Oh, and this is all the fault of Edward Snowden.

1.   FBI Director James Comey, reiterated on Wednesday the need for the intelligence community to have access to encrypted data in order to detect threats to national security. "If we're going to be good at what we do, we need to have cooperate better (between the government and the Internet providers). In the absence of effective cooperation, we are left in law enforcement like police officers patrolling a street with 50 ft high walls on either side." 

1.   CIA Director John Brennam has suggested that revelations about mass spying have made it harder to find terrorists. Saying of Edward Snowden, "Any unauthorized disclosures that are made by individuals who have dishonored the oath of office that they raised their hand and attested to undermines this country's security".

1.   Former CIA director R James Woolsey was a little more blunt, telling MSNBC: “I think Snowden has blood on his hands from these killings in France.”

---

---

Glen Greenwald calls intelligence agencies liars (at 19:11 minutes)


Evidence-driven reasons why what the intelligence agencies are saying are utterly false:

1.   2002 Bombing of the nightclub in Bali
2.   2004 and 2005 attacks on the trains in Madrid and London
3.   2009 mass shooting spree in Mumbai
4.   2013 attack on the Boston Marathon
   

The terrorists have known for decades that we are spying on them.  Americans thought the spying was only overseas.

What Edward Snowden taught us (22:08)

What Edward Snowden taught the world is not that the U.S government was trying to spy on the terrorists, everyone knew that including the terrorists. What the Snowden revelation showed the world was that it isn't just the terrorists they were spying on, but everybody in the world.

Proof of Lies about Snowden reforms at 22:30

The incredibly mild reforms resulting from the Snowden revelations, where it was implied by CIA director Brennam that the reforms were blinding them, did not actually hamper or hinder Intelligence detection of the upcoming Paris attack.


U.S. Government itself bears responsibility for strengthening ISIS at 23:45


Snowden did not release any secrets at 25:50

The New York Times itself published many many Snowden documents.

This is a really important point.

All these people want to say that Edward Snowden is to blame and even has blood on his hands because of what he revealed to the world.

Edward Snowden himself did not reveal a single document to the public.  He could have uploaded them to the Internet or made them public in other ways.

He came to the leading journalists and said, "I'm not the one who should be making decisions on what should be released to the public."  I want you, the leading editors at the leading newspapers to decide which of these documents should be published."

So an honest assessment is to blame the media journalists at the New York Times and the Boston Globe and others for the Paris attacks.

Too many Journalists are mindless servants to the government at 29:00

Their Journalist jobs are secured and their careers advanced when they kneel down and crawl on their hands and knees over to these officials and get whispered into their ears what they are supposed to say and they go and print it.

Former CIA Director Woolsey is a lying neo-con at 31:36 Woolsey.32:07  Greenwald

It’s absolutely remarkable that James Woolsey, of all people, is the person who has been plucked to be the authoritative figure on the Paris attacks by leading media outlets such as CNN and MSNBC news, when he is by far one of the most extremist and radical neoconservatives ever to be puked up by the intelligence world. He not only was one of the leading advocates of attacking Iraq, he was one of the leading proponents of all of the lies that led to that invasion, and has been calling for war and other sorts of really extremist policies, and disseminating lies to the American people for decades. And so, to hold him out as some sort of authority figure, some kind of like respected elder intelligence statesman, on these attacks is just exactly the sort of thing we’ve been talking about, which is the state of the American media. Not one person has challenged anything that he said. 

Former CIA Director Woolsey is the one with blood on his hands

And so, I think if you want to talk about who has blood on their hands, personally, I would look first to ISIS, the people who actually shot those people in the Paris streets. It’s really weird. Usually after a terrorist attack, nobody is allowed to suggest that anybody has blame other than the terrorists themselves. But for some reason, in this case, leading establishment figures and journalists feel free to go around detracting—distracting attention from ISIS and saying, "No, it’s not ISIS that has blood on their hands, it’s Edward Snowden." For some reason, that’s now allowed. So, if that’s what we’re doing, if that’s the game we’re playing, I would look to the U.S. government first, because they failed to find the plot despite huge amounts of money and unlimited power to do so, and because they’ve done all sorts of things to strengthen the group that apparently bears responsibility for this attack.

The US government knew a Caliphate was forming

One of the three most important military officials of the entire war on terror, General Flynn, who was the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency... is saying that the U.S. government knew that by creating a vacuum in Syria and then flooding that region with arms and money, that it was likely to result in the establishment of a caliphate by Islamic extremists in eastern Syria—which is, of course, exactly what happened. They knew that that was going to happen, and they proceeded to do it anyway. So when the U.S. government starts trying to point the finger at other people for helping ISIS, they really need to have a mirror put in front of them, because, by their own documents, as that extraordinary clip demonstrates, they bear huge responsibility for that happening, to say nothing of the fact that, as I said, their closest allies in the region actually fund it.

The US cause chaos and instability, destroyed the economy, infrastructure

And then, just to take a step further back, The Washington Post six months ago reported what most people who pay attention to this actually know, which is that what we call ISIS is really nothing more than a bunch of ex-Baathist military officials who were disempowered and alienated by the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent instability that it caused, and then the policies of the—the sectarian policies of Prime Minister Maliki in basically taking away all of the power of those ex-Baathists in favor of Shiite militias and Iran-aligned militias and the like. And so, essentially, what I think everybody at this point understands is that the reason there is such a thing as ISIS is because the U.S. invaded Iraq and caused massive instability, destroyed the entire society, destroyed all of the infrastructure, destroyed all order, and it was in that chaos that ISIS was able to emerge. So, again, if you’re looking for blame, beyond ISIS, the U.S. government is a really good place to look.

The Media are big corporations needing positive relations with the US Government

So, as far as why the media is willing to sort of spread these claims so uncritically, I mean, you know, there are complicated reasons. I mean, one is that the media itself is very nationalistic, and they get wrapped up and caught up in the sort of uber-patriotism and jingoism as much as non-journalists do, and see the world through that lens. Another is that they spend a huge amount of time with these government officials. They are in the same socioeconomic sphere. They talk to them all day and night, because that’s where they get their stories from, is the ones that are fed to them by officials. And so they see the world through their lens and also, at the same time, want to serve them and please them in order to continue to get sources. A lot of these people are people who work for large corporations, and large corporations want to keep positive relations with the U.S. government, and so report favorably on them rather than in a way that would anger the government, because that’s not in their interest to do.I think we now know why the CIA and FBI missed the Paris attacks.

If the CIA Director, the former CIA Director and the head of the FBI all cannot corrrectly connect the dots on this small bit of intellignce about the impact of Edward Snowden in the Paris attacks, then I want to know how in the hell they ever qualified for these jobs in the first place?

This is why they cannot outfox an Islamiscist with an IQ of 60.

And from this, we can deduce who has blood on their hands.

---

Before we get into Pulitzer Prize winner Glenn Greenwald's rebuttal to all this crying for a renewed expansion of spy powers, we need to set up the playing field.

First off, there was no evidence that the Paris Muslim terrorists used encryption of any kind, due to the fact that the Paris Muslim terrorists were largely related to each other or close neighbors and unlikely to have used encryption.

Instead, they probably just talked face to face with each other.

But does not stop our intelligence agencies from twerking us to hand over more of our privacy and freedom to "protect us" from all the Muslim Terrorists whom they are PROUDLY allowing entry into our country.

Oh, and this is all the fault of Edward Snowden.

1.   FBI Director James Comey, reiterated on Wednesday the need for the intelligence community to have access to encrypted data in order to detect threats to national security. "If we're going to be good at what we do, we need to have cooperate better (between the government and the Internet providers). In the absence of effective cooperation, we are left in law enforcement like police officers patrolling a street with 50 ft high walls on either side." 

1.   CIA Director John Brennam has suggested that revelations about mass spying have made it harder to find terrorists. Saying of Edward Snowden, "Any unauthorized disclosures that are made by individuals who have dishonored the oath of office that they raised their hand and attested to undermines this country's security".

1.   Former CIA director R James Woolsey was a little more blunt, telling MSNBC: “I think Snowden has blood on his hands from these killings in France.”

---

---

Glen Greenwald calls intelligence agencies liars (at 19:11 minutes)


Evidence-driven reasons why what the intelligence agencies are saying are utterly false:

1.   2002 Bombing of the nightclub in Bali
2.   2004 and 2005 attacks on the trains in Madrid and London
3.   2009 mass shooting spree in Mumbai
4.   2013 attack on the Boston Marathon
   

The terrorists have known for decades that we are spying on them.  Americans thought the spying was only overseas.

What Edward Snowden taught us (22:08)

What Edward Snowden taught the world is not that the U.S government was trying to spy on the terrorists, everyone knew that including the terrorists. What the Snowden revelation showed the world was that it isn't just the terrorists they were spying on, but everybody in the world.

Proof of Lies about Snowden reforms at 22:30

The incredibly mild reforms resulting from the Snowden revelations, where it was implied by CIA director Brennam that the reforms were blinding them, did not actually hamper or hinder Intelligence detection of the upcoming Paris attack.


U.S. Government itself bears responsibility for strengthening ISIS at 23:45


Snowden did not release any secrets at 25:50

The New York Times itself published many many Snowden documents.

This is a really important point.

All these people want to say that Edward Snowden is to blame and even has blood on his hands because of what he revealed to the world.

Edward Snowden himself did not reveal a single document to the public.  He could have uploaded them to the Internet or made them public in other ways.

He came to the leading journalists and said, "I'm not the one who should be making decisions on what should be released to the public."  I want you, the leading editors at the leading newspapers to decide which of these documents should be published."

So an honest assessment is to blame the media journalists at the New York Times and the Boston Globe and others for the Paris attacks.

Too many Journalists are mindless servants to the government at 29:00

Their Journalist jobs are secured and their careers advanced when they kneel down and crawl on their hands and knees over to these officials and get whispered into their ears what they are supposed to say and they go and print it.

Former CIA Director Woolsey is a lying neo-con at 31:36 Woolsey.32:07  Greenwald

It’s absolutely remarkable that James Woolsey, of all people, is the person who has been plucked to be the authoritative figure on the Paris attacks by leading media outlets such as CNN and MSNBC news, when he is by far one of the most extremist and radical neoconservatives ever to be puked up by the intelligence world. He not only was one of the leading advocates of attacking Iraq, he was one of the leading proponents of all of the lies that led to that invasion, and has been calling for war and other sorts of really extremist policies, and disseminating lies to the American people for decades. And so, to hold him out as some sort of authority figure, some kind of like respected elder intelligence statesman, on these attacks is just exactly the sort of thing we’ve been talking about, which is the state of the American media. Not one person has challenged anything that he said. 

Former CIA Director Woolsey is the one with blood on his hands

And so, I think if you want to talk about who has blood on their hands, personally, I would look first to ISIS, the people who actually shot those people in the Paris streets. It’s really weird. Usually after a terrorist attack, nobody is allowed to suggest that anybody has blame other than the terrorists themselves. But for some reason, in this case, leading establishment figures and journalists feel free to go around detracting—distracting attention from ISIS and saying, "No, it’s not ISIS that has blood on their hands, it’s Edward Snowden." For some reason, that’s now allowed. So, if that’s what we’re doing, if that’s the game we’re playing, I would look to the U.S. government first, because they failed to find the plot despite huge amounts of money and unlimited power to do so, and because they’ve done all sorts of things to strengthen the group that apparently bears responsibility for this attack.

The US government knew a Caliphate was forming

One of the three most important military officials of the entire war on terror, General Flynn, who was the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency... is saying that the U.S. government knew that by creating a vacuum in Syria and then flooding that region with arms and money, that it was likely to result in the establishment of a caliphate by Islamic extremists in eastern Syria—which is, of course, exactly what happened. They knew that that was going to happen, and they proceeded to do it anyway. So when the U.S. government starts trying to point the finger at other people for helping ISIS, they really need to have a mirror put in front of them, because, by their own documents, as that extraordinary clip demonstrates, they bear huge responsibility for that happening, to say nothing of the fact that, as I said, their closest allies in the region actually fund it.

The US cause chaos and instability, destroyed the economy, infrastructure

And then, just to take a step further back, The Washington Post six months ago reported what most people who pay attention to this actually know, which is that what we call ISIS is really nothing more than a bunch of ex-Baathist military officials who were disempowered and alienated by the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent instability that it caused, and then the policies of the—the sectarian policies of Prime Minister Maliki in basically taking away all of the power of those ex-Baathists in favor of Shiite militias and Iran-aligned militias and the like. And so, essentially, what I think everybody at this point understands is that the reason there is such a thing as ISIS is because the U.S. invaded Iraq and caused massive instability, destroyed the entire society, destroyed all of the infrastructure, destroyed all order, and it was in that chaos that ISIS was able to emerge. So, again, if you’re looking for blame, beyond ISIS, the U.S. government is a really good place to look.

The Media are big corporations needing positive relations with the US Government

So, as far as why the media is willing to sort of spread these claims so uncritically, I mean, you know, there are complicated reasons. I mean, one is that the media itself is very nationalistic, and they get wrapped up and caught up in the sort of uber-patriotism and jingoism as much as non-journalists do, and see the world through that lens. Another is that they spend a huge amount of time with these government officials. They are in the same socioeconomic sphere. They talk to them all day and night, because that’s where they get their stories from, is the ones that are fed to them by officials. And so they see the world through their lens and also, at the same time, want to serve them and please them in order to continue to get sources. A lot of these people are people who work for large corporations, and large corporations want to keep positive relations with the U.S. government, and so report favorably on them rather than in a way that would anger the government, because that’s not in their interest to do.I think we now know why the CIA and FBI missed the Paris attacks.

If the CIA Director, the former CIA Director and the head of the FBI all cannot corrrectly connect the dots on this small bit of intellignce about the impact of Edward Snowden in the Paris attacks, then I want to know how in the hell they ever qualified for these jobs in the first place?

This is why they cannot outfox an Islamiscist with an IQ of 60.

And from this, we can deduce who has blood on their hands.

---

Before we get into Pulitzer Prize winner Glenn Greenwald's rebuttal to all this crying for a renewed expansion of spy powers, we need to set up the playing field.

First off, there was no evidence that the Paris Muslim terrorists used encryption of any kind, due to the fact that the Paris Muslim terrorists were largely related to each other or close neighbors and unlikely to have used encryption.

Instead, they probably just talked face to face with each other.

But does not stop our intelligence agencies from twerking us to hand over more of our privacy and freedom to "protect us" from all the Muslim Terrorists whom they are PROUDLY allowing entry into our country.

Oh, and this is all the fault of Edward Snowden.

1.   FBI Director James Comey, reiterated on Wednesday the need for the intelligence community to have access to encrypted data in order to detect threats to national security. "If we're going to be good at what we do, we need to have cooperate better (between the government and the Internet providers). In the absence of effective cooperation, we are left in law enforcement like police officers patrolling a street with 50 ft high walls on either side." 

1.   CIA Director John Brennam has suggested that revelations about mass spying have made it harder to find terrorists. Saying of Edward Snowden, "Any unauthorized disclosures that are made by individuals who have dishonored the oath of office that they raised their hand and attested to undermines this country's security".

1.   Former CIA director R James Woolsey was a little more blunt, telling MSNBC: “I think Snowden has blood on his hands from these killings in France.”

---

---

Glen Greenwald calls intelligence agencies liars (at 19:11 minutes)


Evidence-driven reasons why what the intelligence agencies are saying are utterly false:

1.   2002 Bombing of the nightclub in Bali
2.   2004 and 2005 attacks on the trains in Madrid and London
3.   2009 mass shooting spree in Mumbai
4.   2013 attack on the Boston Marathon
   

The terrorists have known for decades that we are spying on them.  Americans thought the spying was only overseas.

What Edward Snowden taught us (22:08)

What Edward Snowden taught the world is not that the U.S government was trying to spy on the terrorists, everyone knew that including the terrorists. What the Snowden revelation showed the world was that it isn't just the terrorists they were spying on, but everybody in the world.

Proof of Lies about Snowden reforms at 22:30

The incredibly mild reforms resulting from the Snowden revelations, where it was implied by CIA director Brennam that the reforms were blinding them, did not actually hamper or hinder Intelligence detection of the upcoming Paris attack.


U.S. Government itself bears responsibility for strengthening ISIS at 23:45


Snowden did not release any secrets at 25:50

The New York Times itself published many many Snowden documents.

This is a really important point.

All these people want to say that Edward Snowden is to blame and even has blood on his hands because of what he revealed to the world.

Edward Snowden himself did not reveal a single document to the public.  He could have uploaded them to the Internet or made them public in other ways.

He came to the leading journalists and said, "I'm not the one who should be making decisions on what should be released to the public."  I want you, the leading editors at the leading newspapers to decide which of these documents should be published."

So an honest assessment is to blame the media journalists at the New York Times and the Boston Globe and others for the Paris attacks.

Too many Journalists are mindless servants to the government at 29:00

Their Journalist jobs are secured and their careers advanced when they kneel down and crawl on their hands and knees over to these officials and get whispered into their ears what they are supposed to say and they go and print it.

Former CIA Director Woolsey is a lying neo-con at 31:36 Woolsey.32:07  Greenwald

It’s absolutely remarkable that James Woolsey, of all people, is the person who has been plucked to be the authoritative figure on the Paris attacks by leading media outlets such as CNN and MSNBC news, when he is by far one of the most extremist and radical neoconservatives ever to be puked up by the intelligence world. He not only was one of the leading advocates of attacking Iraq, he was one of the leading proponents of all of the lies that led to that invasion, and has been calling for war and other sorts of really extremist policies, and disseminating lies to the American people for decades. And so, to hold him out as some sort of authority figure, some kind of like respected elder intelligence statesman, on these attacks is just exactly the sort of thing we’ve been talking about, which is the state of the American media. Not one person has challenged anything that he said. 

Former CIA Director Woolsey is the one with blood on his hands

And so, I think if you want to talk about who has blood on their hands, personally, I would look first to ISIS, the people who actually shot those people in the Paris streets. It’s really weird. Usually after a terrorist attack, nobody is allowed to suggest that anybody has blame other than the terrorists themselves. But for some reason, in this case, leading establishment figures and journalists feel free to go around detracting—distracting attention from ISIS and saying, "No, it’s not ISIS that has blood on their hands, it’s Edward Snowden." For some reason, that’s now allowed. So, if that’s what we’re doing, if that’s the game we’re playing, I would look to the U.S. government first, because they failed to find the plot despite huge amounts of money and unlimited power to do so, and because they’ve done all sorts of things to strengthen the group that apparently bears responsibility for this attack.

The US government knew a Caliphate was forming

One of the three most important military officials of the entire war on terror, General Flynn, who was the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency... is saying that the U.S. government knew that by creating a vacuum in Syria and then flooding that region with arms and money, that it was likely to result in the establishment of a caliphate by Islamic extremists in eastern Syria—which is, of course, exactly what happened. They knew that that was going to happen, and they proceeded to do it anyway. So when the U.S. government starts trying to point the finger at other people for helping ISIS, they really need to have a mirror put in front of them, because, by their own documents, as that extraordinary clip demonstrates, they bear huge responsibility for that happening, to say nothing of the fact that, as I said, their closest allies in the region actually fund it.

The US cause chaos and instability, destroyed the economy, infrastructure

And then, just to take a step further back, The Washington Post six months ago reported what most people who pay attention to this actually know, which is that what we call ISIS is really nothing more than a bunch of ex-Baathist military officials who were disempowered and alienated by the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent instability that it caused, and then the policies of the—the sectarian policies of Prime Minister Maliki in basically taking away all of the power of those ex-Baathists in favor of Shiite militias and Iran-aligned militias and the like. And so, essentially, what I think everybody at this point understands is that the reason there is such a thing as ISIS is because the U.S. invaded Iraq and caused massive instability, destroyed the entire society, destroyed all of the infrastructure, destroyed all order, and it was in that chaos that ISIS was able to emerge. So, again, if you’re looking for blame, beyond ISIS, the U.S. government is a really good place to look.

The Media are big corporations needing positive relations with the US Government

So, as far as why the media is willing to sort of spread these claims so uncritically, I mean, you know, there are complicated reasons. I mean, one is that the media itself is very nationalistic, and they get wrapped up and caught up in the sort of uber-patriotism and jingoism as much as non-journalists do, and see the world through that lens. Another is that they spend a huge amount of time with these government officials. They are in the same socioeconomic sphere. They talk to them all day and night, because that’s where they get their stories from, is the ones that are fed to them by officials. And so they see the world through their lens and also, at the same time, want to serve them and please them in order to continue to get sources. A lot of these people are people who work for large corporations, and large corporations want to keep positive relations with the U.S. government, and so report favorably on them rather than in a way that would anger the government, because that’s not in their interest to do.

---

---

The Christian Solution ^©             First Release: March 15, 2008