Credibility of Cyber Firm that Claimed Russia Hacked the DNC Comes Under Serious Question


Source: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com
Michael Krieger
March 23, 2017

Before I get to the meat of this post, we need to revisit a little history. The cyber security firm hired to inspect the DNC hack and determine who was responsible is a firm called Crowdstrike. Its conclusion that Russia was responsible was released last year, but several people began to call its analysis into question upon further inspection.

Jeffrey Carr was one of the most prominent cynics, and as he noted in his December post, FBI/DHS Joint Analysis Report: A Fatally Flawed Effort:

The FBI/DHS Joint Analysis Report (JAR) “Grizzly Steppe” was released yesterday as part of the White House’s response to alleged Russian government interference in the 2016 election process. It adds nothing to the call for evidence that the Russian government was responsible for hacking the DNC, the DCCC, the email accounts of Democratic party officials, or for delivering the content of those hacks to Wikileaks.

It merely listed every threat group ever reported on by a commercial cybersecurity company that is suspected of being Russian-made and lumped them under the heading of Russian Intelligence Services (RIS) without providing any supporting evidence that such a connection exists.

Unlike Crowdstrike, ESET doesn’t assign APT28/Fancy Bear/Sednit to a Russian Intelligence Service or anyone else for a very simple reason. Once malware is deployed, it is no longer under the control of the hacker who deployed it or the developer who created it. It can be reverse-engineered, copied, modified, shared and redeployed again and again by anyone. In other words — malware deployed is malware enjoyed!

If ESET could do it, so can others. It is both foolish and baseless to claim, as Crowdstrike does, that X-Agent is used solely by the Russian government when the source code is there for anyone to find and use at will.

If the White House had unclassified evidence that tied officials in the Russian government to the DNC attack, they would have presented it by now. The fact that they didn’t means either that the evidence doesn’t exist or that it is classified.

If it’s classified, an independent commission should review it because this entire assignment of blame against the Russian government is looking more and more like a domestic political operation run by the White House that relied heavily on questionable intelligence generated by a for-profit cybersecurity firm with a vested interest in selling “attribution-as-a-service”.

Nevertheless, countless people, including the entirety of the corporate media, put total faith in the analysis of Crowdstrike despite the fact that the FBI was denied access to perform its own analysis. Which makes me wonder, did the U.S. government do any real analysis of its own on the DNC hack, or did it just copy/paste Crowdstrike?

As The Hill reported in January:

The FBI requested direct access to the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) hacked computer servers but was denied, Director James Comey told lawmakers on Tuesday.

The bureau made “multiple requests at different levels,” according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a “highly respected private company” would get access and share what it found with investigators.

“We’d always prefer to have access hands-on ourselves if that’s possible,” Comey said, noting that he didn’t know why the DNC rebuffed the FBI’s request.

This is nuts. Are all U.S. government agencies simply listening to what Crowdstike said in coming to their “independent” conclusions that Russia hacked the DNC? If so, that’s a huge problem. Particularly considering what Voice of America published yesterday in a piece titled, Cyber Firm at Center of Russian Hacking Charges Misread Data:

An influential British think tank and Ukraine’s military are disputing a report that the U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has used to buttress its claims of Russian hacking in the presidential election.

The CrowdStrike report, released in December, asserted that Russians hacked into a Ukrainian artillery app, resulting in heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine’s war with Russian-backed separatists.

But the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) told VOA that CrowdStrike erroneously used IISS data as proof of the intrusion. IISS disavowed any connection to the CrowdStrike report. Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense also has claimed combat losses and hacking never happened.

The challenges to CrowdStrike’s credibility are significant because the firm was the first to link last year’s hacks of Democratic Party computers to Russian actors, and because CrowdStrike co-founder Dimiti Alperovitch has trumpeted its Ukraine report as more evidence of Russian election tampering.

How is this not the biggest story in America right now?

Yaroslav Sherstyuk, maker of the Ukrainian military app in question, called the company’s report “delusional” in a Facebook post. CrowdStrike never contacted him before or after its report was published, he told VOA.

VOA first contacted IISS in February to verify the alleged artillery losses. Officials there initially were unaware of the CrowdStrike assertions. After investigating, they determined that CrowdStrike misinterpreted their data and hadn’t reached out beforehand for comment or clarification.

In a statement to VOA, the institute flatly rejected the assertion of artillery combat losses.

“The CrowdStrike report uses our data, but the inferences and analysis drawn from that data belong solely to the report’s authors,” the IISS said. “The inference they make that reductions in Ukrainian D-30 artillery holdings between 2013 and 2016 were primarily the result of combat losses is not a conclusion that we have ever suggested ourselves, nor one we believe to be accurate.”

In early January, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense issued a statement saying artillery losses from the ongoing fighting with separatists are “several times smaller than the number reported by [CrowdStrike] and are not associated with the specified cause” of Russian hacking.

But Ukraine’s denial did not get the same attention as CrowdStrike’s report. Its release was widely covered by news media reports as further evidence of Russian hacking in the U.S. election.

In interviews, Alperovitch helped foster that impression by connecting the Ukraine and Democratic campaign hacks, which CrowdStrike said involved the same Russian-linked hacking group—Fancy Bear—and versions of X-Agent malware the group was known to use.

“The fact that they would be tracking and helping the Russian military kill Ukrainian army personnel in eastern Ukraine and also intervening in the U.S. election is quite chilling,” Alperovitch said in a December 22 story by The Washington Post.

The same day, Alperovitch told the PBS NewsHour: “And when you think about, well, who would be interested in targeting Ukraine artillerymen in eastern Ukraine? Who has interest in hacking the Democratic Party? [The] Russia government comes to mind, but specifically, [it’s the] Russian military that would have operational [control] over forces in the Ukraine and would target these artillerymen.”

Alperovitch, a Russian expatriate and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council policy research center in Washington, co-founded CrowdStrike in 2011. The firm has employed two former FBI heavyweights: Shawn Henry, who oversaw global cyber investigations at the agency, and Steven Chabinsky, who was the agency’s top cyber lawyer and served on a White House cybersecurity commission. Chabinsky left CrowdStrike last year.

CrowdStrike declined to answer VOA’s written questions about the Ukraine report, and Alperovitch canceled a March 15 interview on the topic. In a December statement to VOA’s Ukrainian Service, spokeswoman Ilina Dimitrova defended the company’s conclusions.

In its report last June attributing the Democratic hacks, CrowdStrike said it was long familiar with the methods used by Fancy Bear and another group with ties to Russian intelligence nicknamed Cozy Bear. Soon after, U.S. cybersecurity firms Fidelis and Mandiant endorsed CrowdStrike’s conclusions. The FBI and Homeland Security report reached the same conclusion about the two groups.

If the company’s analysis was “delusional” when it came to Ukraine, why should we have any confidence that its analysis on Russia and the DNC is more sound?

Answer: We shouldn’t.

Read More At: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com

The Op: Unelected Agents Now Infiltrating ‘Critical Infrastructures’

Massive Collection Of Data
A covert op for the ages: Technocracy United
Technocracy: “control of society by a technical elite”

technocracy
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
January 9, 2017

Note to readers: the people in charge of, yes, running the future are counting on a populace who can’t think beyond a few weeks or months. That’s their ace in the hole. The long-term future must always seem blurry and vague—and a waste of time to consider. Why? It’s obvious. The people in charge are always building the long-term future, brick by brick, and if very few citizens can grasp what it looks like, how can they object or resist or sound an alarm?

If you want to illegally take over an area, you need to invent an external threat justifying the takeover. We’ve been seeing exactly that recently, as Russia has suddenly been painted as a hostile force trying to destroy our “open democracy.”

Therefore, the Department of Homeland Security is now in charge of US elections, to “combat the Russian hackers.”

And it isn’t only elections.

In the release, last Friday, that gave control of US elections to the Department of Homeland Security (a naked coup), we also have this, from ABC News:

“A 2013 presidential directive identified 16 sectors as critical infrastructures, including energy, financial services, health care, transportation, food and agriculture and communications.”

“The designation announced Friday places responsibilities on the Homeland Security secretary to identify and prioritize those sectors, considering physical and cyber threats against them. The secretary is also required to conduct security checks and provide information about emerging and imminent threats.”

ABC got it wrong. The responsibilities (excluding elections) placed on the head of Homeland Security weren’t invented last Friday. They kicked off in 2013, and they represent a technocratic op to infiltrate and exert power over every aspect of American life.

The 2013 Policy Directive, issued by President Obama, was titled: “Critical Infrastructure Security and Review.” It enumerated no less than 16 areas of so-called US “critical infrastructure” where Homeland Security would muscle in:

Chemical; Commercial Facilities; Communications; Critical Manufacturing; Dams; Defense Industrial Base; Emergency Services; Energy; Final Services; Food and Agriculture; Government Facilities; Healthcare and Public Health; Information Technology; Nuclear Reactors, Materials, and Waste; Transportation Systems; Water and Wastewater Systems.

These are the areas where the head of Homeland Security is expected to “manage risk and strengthen security.” HS will also, of course, take charge of integrating and monitoring ALL the data networks of these 16 sectors.

It sounds reasonable to the average person. But the true theme is control. Planning, control, execution. Move in on these areas and exert operational command from the top.

This IS, in fact, the technocratic blueprint for global management of a new system. We’re talking about the re-engineering of society.

Capturing the 16 areas (and their data) above was always the long-term aim, when the Department of Homeland Security was invented in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. If you recall, there was considerable grousing then about the word “Homeland,” because it emitted a strong whiff of Fascism.

If the goal is engineering a new society—and it is—all systems of data collection, communication, and surveillance must be gathered under one roof.

The social and political engineer (aka the technocrat) views every person (unit) as a biological machine that must be profiled six ways from Sunday, for the purpose of inserting him into an overall pattern. As Patrick Wood explains in his brilliant book, Technocracy Rising, “[technology] is being rapidly implemented…to exhaustively monitor, measure and control every facet of individual activity and every ampere of energy delivered and consumed in the life of such individual[s].”

In truth, the Dept. of Homeland Security is spearheading a movement to connect, cross reference, and integrate every major apparatus of data- collection in both the private and public sectors.

This is the ongoing op.

It is not partisan. It flies the banner of no political party. It pretends to protect the citizenry.

But, in fact, it is the major long-term threat to the citizenry.

It is planning a national and global civilization that does not ask for permission to exist.

No one is voting, because if a vote were required, and people were informed about what is really happening, they would overwhelmingly reject technocracy.

Which is why new enemies must be invented on a continuous basis—to justify the “proactive measures that will keep us safe.”

Homeland Security, with its 240,000 employees and its 24 agencies, is in the business of securing untold trillions…

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
______________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The Alleged “Russian Hacking” Story Changes AGAIN

fakenews

Source: ZeroHedge.com
January 5, 2017

Today at 9:30 am, senior U.S. intelligence officials face questions at a Senate hearing that will be dominated by the intelligence community’s assessment that Russia meddled in the presidential election to help Donald Trump win. Participating will be James R. Clapper, Jr., Director Of National Intelligence. Marcel J. Lettre II, Under Secretary Of Defense For Intelligence and Admiral Michael S. Rogers, USN, Commander, United States Cyber Command.

The Armed Services Committee’s cyber threats hearing on Thursday comes a day before the president-elect is to be briefed by the CIA and FBI directors — along with the director of national intelligence — on the investigation into Russia’s alleged hacking efforts. Trump has been deeply critical of their findings, even appearing to back controversial WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s contention that Russia did not provide him with hacked Democratic emails.

The committee’s session is the first in a series aimed at investigating purported Russian cyber-attacks against U.S. interests and developing defenses sturdy enough to blunt future intrusions. “We will obviously be talking about the hacking, but the main thing is the whole issue of cybersecurity,” the committee’s Republican chairman, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, said ahead of the hearing. “Right now we have no policy, no strategy to counter cyberattacks.”

More importantly, however, the hearing comes hours after Reuters reported overnight that U.S. intelligence agencies obtained what they considered to be conclusive evidence after the November election that Russia provided hacked material from the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks. However, in the latest change of the narrative, this time the allegation is that Russia provided the hacked data through a third party, three U.S. officials said on Wednesday.

Wikieaks was quick to highlight that according to the report, US officials admitted that the Wikileaks “source” was not Russia, and that the goal posts now shifted to the source’s source:

In keeping with the theme of providing no proof to the general public, the officials declined to describe the intelligence obtained about the involvement of a third-party in passing on leaked material to WikiLeaks, saying they did not want to reveal how the U.S. government had obtained the information. So just trust them, please.

The shift in the narrative is curious because as a reminder, officials had concluded “months earlier” that Russian intelligence agencies had directed the hacking, but had been less certain that they could prove Russia also had controlled the release of information damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. It now appears that along with lack of evidence, the attention has shifted to an “intermediary” as being the responsible party .

In an interview with Fox News, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said he did not receive emails stolen from the DNC and top Hillary Clinton aide John Podesta from “a state party.” Assange did not rule out the possibility that he got the material from a third party.

Trump on Wednesday sided with Assange and again questioned the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia tried to help his candidacy and hurt Clinton’s.

Concern by U.S. officials over the hacking first spiked in August, when intelligence agencies concluded that Russian intelligence, with the direction of President Vladimir Putin, had been trying to disrupt and discredit the presidential and congressional elections. Obama in August rejected recommendations from some of his advisors to disclose the Russian link and take some limited covert action as “a shot across Putin’s bow to knock it off,” one official with knowledge of the matter said. Instead, Obama warned Putin privately, arguing that a similar private message to Chinese President Xi Jinping had reduced Chinese hacking into U.S. agencies and companies.

Ultimately, the additional intelligence informed U.S. President Barack Obama’s decision to retaliate on Dec. 29 by expelling 35 suspected Russian spies and sanctioning two Russian spy agencies, four intelligence officers and three companies, a decision that capped four months of debate at the White House about how to respond.

So far not a shred of evidence has been provided confirming the Kremlin’s involvement in the matter, aside from some Ukrainian malware code exposed in a 13-page joint DHS/FBI report which could be purchased by anyone online.

The Russian Hacking Meme: Trump & A Coming Showdown With The CIA?

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell PhD
January 7, 2017

In the last two News and Views from the Nefarium I’ve been concentrating not only on the geopolitical realignments that the coming year(s) portend, but also on the international and domestic realignments that are concomitant with them, including what I have been calling “international mafia wars,” as the neo-con globalist-Atlanticist factions within various great powers attempt to hold on to power and chorale and channel their unanticipated opposition into policies acceptable to them. In that  vein, consider the following stories shared by various readers here:

Trump on Alleged Russian Hacking: I know things others don’t

As this RT article citing Sean Spicer points out, the Russian hacking meme has been getting all the attention – no doubt in part in an attempt to de-legitimize the election results – while Chinese hacking has been downplayed, if it is mentioned at all:

Political retribution? Trump press sec questions Russia sanctions, brings up unanswered ‘China hack’

And finally, these articles from our friends at  The Daily Bell about a possible looming battle between the incoming Trump administration and the CIA:

Supposed Russian Hack Further Illustrates the Divide Between CIA and Trump

http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/supposed-russian-hack-further-illustrates-the-divide-between-cia-and-trump/embed/#?secret=5OOGExhWeM

A similar story is being reported by Zero Hedge:

Trump Is Working On A Plan To Restructure, Pare Back The CIA And America’s Top Spy Agency

And finally, this find, by one alert reader of this website:

US Govt Data Shows Russia Used Outdated Ukrainian PHP Malware

https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/embed/#?secret=irF84cJ0qg

Note the conclusion of the last article:

The IP addresses that DHS provided may have been used for an attack by a state actor like Russia. But they don’t appear to provide any association with Russia. They are probably used by a wide range of other malicious actors, especially the 15% of IP addresses that are Tor exit nodes.

The malware sample is old, widely used and appears to be Ukrainian. It has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence and it would be an indicator of compromise for any website.

The relationship of the malware sample, originating from the Ukraine, raises unpleasant but necessary questions: since it it widely known that the USA was a main sponsor of the events in the Ukraine that overthrew a legitimate (if corrupt) government with a new (and even more corrupt) government. That question is rather obvious: could the entire hacking meme have been an attempt at a “cyber false flag” originating in the West to embarrass Russia? Possibly, but here our criticism of the hacking meme and a Russian origin for the hacking, works in reverse: if the Russians were unlikely to have used such a clumsy method, perhaps the West would be to. And as the conclusions point out, the mere use of addresses in Russia does not, as any hacker knows, mean that Russia is the one using them. In effect, it proves nothing.  And we must hold out the possibility of non-state actors, and such a possibility would fit well with my “emergent international Mafia wars” hypothesis, as factions of Globaloneyists and the fascist sympathizers in various nations’ deep states close ranks.

In my high octane speculation of the day, it appears that what is looming here is a showdown between Mr. Trump and his deep state supporters, and the neo-con factions within the American intelligence community, represented by the CIA (which, let it be noted, is not a monolithic anti-Trump agency either, if one takes the pre-election revelations of Dr. Steve Pieczenik at face value). The Daily Bell suggests this looking showdown:

It seems obvious at this point that the CIA and Trump have entirely different positions when it comes to Russian maliciousness, which Trump downplays while the CIA works to advertise it.

But the issue is even more serious than that.

The larger issue is one we’ve been talking about for 15 years or more. The CIA is accountable to overseas banking interests in the City of London, not to American intelligence operations. The latter accountability is just a smokescreen.

The split has now become public knowledge and Trump is being directly threatened as a result.

Such statements strongly imply a showdown is looming, and give even more credence to those stories that Mr. Trump has retained his private security for protection, and of course, they give credence to those rumors that perhaps even Russian speznaz units are running security interference for Mr. Trump without his knowledge or involvement. If so, then this means that Mr. Trump is very aware of the power blocs aligned domestically against him, and give strong support to those rumors that he, like Mr. Kennedy, may be planning to reign in the agency. Unlike Mr. Kennedy, it appears that Mr. Trump is not so naive to believe he can do so without his own private and trusted security.

Time of course, will tell, and this is definitely a case of “you tell me.”

See you on the flip side.

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
_____________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Deutsche Well: Cyber Attacks On Russian Financial Institutions…

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
December 8, 2016

While everything else has been going on, it seems that Russian financial institutions were again under cyber-attack according to this story that appeared in the English-language service of Deutsche Welle (carried also on AP and Reuters), in this story shared by Mr. M.M.:

Russia repels cyber attack on financial systems: FSB

This comes after a TASS story by Yuri Smityuk that appeared on Dec. 2:

Russian banks expect a powerful cyber attack and prepared to repel them

What caught my attention, however, was the Deutsche Welle story, and these items:

Russia’s security agency thwarted a cyber attack aimed at destabilizing the country’s financial system, according to the agency’s statement Friday.

The Federal Security Service (FSB), said unnamed attackers planned to flood Russian social networks with comments and send mass text messages with false comments warning of the imminent collapse of major banks and financial systems in the country.

The FSB received information on “plans by foreign secret services to carry out large-scale cyberattacks from December 5,” it said in a statement.

It said the attacks would originate from computer servers in the Netherlands owned by Ukrainian company BlazingFast, based in Kiev.
(Emphasis added)

Then, later in the story, we find this piece of confusing information:

Two people in Ukraine, believed to be in control of the 900,000 hacked devices that formed the massive “AVALANCHE” botnet, were arrested as part of a series of police raids in 10 countries, German authorities announced on Thursday. German leaders hinted at Russian involvement.

The leader is left with the lingering impression that the Ukrainian attack mentioned in the fourth paragraph of the article is the same network that had two of its leaders arrested in the 10-country international raid, which Germany is maintaining had Russian involvement, leading to the possibility that Russia staged an attack on itself, and blamed it on hackers in Kiev, The Ukraine.

In today’s world, anything is possible of course.

However, in this case, I don’t think that scenario is at all plausible. There’s another high octane scenario that I think lurks in between the lines of those first four paragraphs. For the sake of argument, let’s accept the FSB’s (Federalnaya Sluzhba Bezopaznosti Rossiyskoi Federatsii, Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation) explanation here at face value, namely, that the attacks originated in the Ukrainian company BlazingFast, through servers in the Netherlands. For the Ukraine to launch a cyber-attack on Russian banks and its banking system – even through a corporate cats paw, on its own is absurd. It would only fuel the tensions between the Ukraine and Russia, and hand Mr. Putin yet another talking point on the whole western-instigated mess there. Meanwhile, Germany was strongly hinting that Russia was behind the attacks:

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com
_____________________________________________________________

Profile photo of Joseph P. Farrell

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

 

Is The Game Plan Revealed? Germany Contemplates Conscription, Domestic…

 IS THE GAME PLAN REVEALED? GERMANY CONTEMPLATES CONSCRIPTION, DOMESTIC ...
Source:GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
August 29, 2016

Many people, including many in Germany and the rest of Europe, shared this article with me, and frankly, I find it both disturbing and darkly revealing:

Germany Debates Putting “Troops On Streets” To Protect Against Terrorism

The opening paragraphs say it all here:

The quiet German militarization continues to escalate.

One day after Germany’s DPA broke the news that the Merkel government is considering “bringing back nationwide conscription in times of crisis”, such as situations in which the country needs to “defend NATO’s external borders”, strongly hinting at the possibility of a future war, which in turn followed this weekend’s shocking announcement that Germans should prepare to stockpile several days of food and water “in case of an attack of catastrophe” as part of the country’s revised “Civil Defense Concept, today NBC reports that “Germany Debates Putting Troops on Streets to Protect Against ISIS.

To be sure, plans to involve soldiers in counterterrorism operations. and the suggestion troops could also be used to beef up security in public places, have proved controversial in a country only seven decades “removed from totalitarian rule that’s still grappling with guilt from the Nazi era.” However, Wolfgang Bosbach, a lawmaker from Merkel’s CDU party, dismissed an such concerns.

“During the recent terror threat in Munich the German armed forces, and also the military police, were put on alert,” he told NBC News. “They have been deployed in other crises, so why should the military not help with domestic security as well?”

There is, of course, push-back, and rightly so, from concerned German politicians:

Yet despite the seeming acceleration by Germany to militarize at any cost, some more sover voices did emerge, such as that of Christian Moelling, a security expert at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, told NBC News that conservative politicians appeared to be trying to capitalize on recent events as they sought to achieve their longstanding goal of allowing the military to deploy within the country’s borders.

He noted that since the end of World War II, high hurdles had been established governing how the armed forces can be used and was skeptical that any push to change that would be successful.

“To use Germany’s military for interior security, including the use of force, would necessitate a large majority for a constitutional change, and this majority doesn’t exist,” Moelling said, adding that at least two-thirds of parliamentarians would have to approve such a measure.

It can, however, quickly be achieved should there be a few more terrorist attacks on German soil, which will promptly provide the needed cover if not to change the constitution, than to implement an indefinite state of emergency, bypassing such pesky things as laws. As a reminder, France has had once since last November.

And there you have it: just create so many “incidents” by allowing the “eager-to-kill” refugee a free hand to do so and, voila, decree and state of emergency.

But what I find intriguing here is that the root problem – flooding Europe with non-assimilating, and in some cases, radicalized, refugees – is not being addressed. Rather, it is being used as the crisis of opportunity to (1) expand the military (in this case, Germanys’), (2) expand and militarize domestic police, and (3) rule under emergency. In other words, the refugee crisis serves as the modern Reichstag fire.

Of course, Chancellorin Merkel is herself largely responsible for the mess, and one doesn’t hear or see any indication from her that she wants to change her policy or has any desire to do so, and this suggests that the real goal all along was to create the primary conditions for the creation of a vastly expanded military – remember that German industrial and defense leaders want to triple the size of Germany’s military by 2025 – and the conditions for its domestic use.

This much seems obvious, at least in Germany’s case. So where’s the high octane speculation here? As most regular readers here know, and if you’ve been following my interviews over the years, I’ve also strongly suspected that the Islamic world was being “set up,” and used as a crisis of opportunity not only to delay and marginalize the voices of reform within it, but also to drive domestic policy in the West. In the latter case, it should be recalled that France and Germany both have committed to the creation of a joint European-wide military and certain corporate mergers have already transpired in aid of this agenda. So where does the refugee crisis fit in? It fits because it does two things: (1) it creates a “counter-culture” against which Europeans can unite to defend “European culture,” i.e., it serves the creation of a European cultural identity, which currently the EU lacks, and (2) it creates the conditions for the expansion of national militaries and their integration. I’m relatively confident that the game plan is being revealed here, for the very simple reason that the problem these measures are designed to address could be  more simply, and possibly more cheaply, addressed simply by closing European borders. Europe, in short, is being used as a test bed.[Bold Emphasis Added In Bottom 5 Paragraphs]

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
_________________________________________________________________

Profile photo of Joseph P. Farrell
Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

The Deep State: False Flag Attacks by Richard Dolan

TheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
August 28, 2016

In this following segment academic and historian Richard Dolan gives a synopsis of False Flags in relation to our culture.

Richard Dolan is among the world’s leading UFO researchers, historians, and publishers. He has written four groundbreaking books. These include two volumes of history, UFOs and the National Security State [Read Review Here], an analysis of the future, A.D. After Disclosure, and most recently UFOs for the 21st Century Mind, which provides a fresh treatment of the entire subject. He has appeared widely on television, has lectured around the world, and is a frequent guest on radio shows such as Coast-to-Coast AM. He also hosts two radio shows: The Richard Dolan Show and The Effed Files, and is the publisher of Richard Dolan Press, which features the work of many leading thinkers exploring alternative realities in our world. Find him at http://richarddolanpress.com.

Richard Dolan begins at the 2:00 Minute mark or so.