CENTCOM Commander General McKenzie Calls Drone Strike Killing 10 Innocents in Kabul, a Tragic Mistake – The Signals Intelligence Was Wrong

CENTCOM Commander General McKenzie Calls Drone Strike Killing 10 Innocents in Kabul, a Tragic Mistake – The Signals Intelligence Was Wrong

Earlier today General Kenneth Franklin McKenzie Jr. admitted a claimed U.S. drone strike against the ever evolving and mysterious ISIS-K, actually killed 7 children and three innocent adult civilians. General McKenzie calls it a “tragic mistake.” Four days after the August 29th strike Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called the strike “righteous.”

General McKenzi says he takes “full responsibility”, yet he retains his position.   No one is being held to account. No one at the Pentagon is facing discipline. Both McKenzie and Milley claim it was solid intelligence that led them to watch, follow, and eventually target and kill Zemari Ahmadi, an Afghan relief worker who arrived home. The missile struck his vehicle as his children ran out to welcome daddy home from work, killing all occupants in the car and those in the vicinity.

As noted by Politico “The command now assesses that “it is unlikely” the man and vehicle targeted was affiliated with ISIS-K, the Afghanistan branch of ISIS, or “a direct threat to U.S. forces,” Gen. Frank McKenzie, head of U.S. Central Command, told reporters Friday.”

[embedded content]

.

Many people suspect part of the “intelligence” they used was a tip from their Taliban “partners” at the time.  Ten people killed, including three children.

The other aspect to this situation that raises MASSIVE alarm bells is McZenzie emphasizing this strike was the result of overwhelming “signals intelligence” or SIGINT.   Remember, the Intelligence Apparatus writ large is part of Team-1, and aligned with the State Department.  The White House and Pentagon are part of Team-2.  At the time this took place there was a severe battle to avoid accountability between both teams.

Two Questions:

First – Was the signals intelligence provided by Team-1, purposefully wrong in order to set up the Pentagon (Team-2) with a major crisis and as a result put more of the Afghanistan blame on the DoD and White House?

Second – Did the evidence of that erroneous targeting then arrive at the New York Times after an assist by the background operators of Team-1 to get it to them?

Think about it.

♦ TEAM One – The Department of State is aligned with the CIA.  Their media PR firms are CNN, CNNi and the Washington Post. Their ideology is favorable to the United Nations.  Their internal corruption is generally driven by relationship with foreign actors.  References: Hillary Clinton, Clinton Global Initiative, John McCain, Qatar, Muslim Brotherhood, Samantha Powers, Susan Rice, Cass Sunstein, Brookings Institute, Lawfare, China-centric, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Intel Committee, Council on Foreign Relations.

TEAM Two – The White House is aligned with the Pentagon (DoD) and National Security Council (NSC).  Their media PR firms are domestic in nature. New York Times, Politico, etc.  Their internal corruption is generally driven by domestic influence.  References: Barack Obama, George Bush, Wall St, Big Banks, Multinational Corporations, Defense Contractors, FBI (state police), Judicial Branch, and community activists writ large.

[Presidential elections only affect Team Two (nationalism -v- globalism).  In the modern era Team One is independent.]

Both teams were responsible for the Afghanistan mess.  However, in the aftermath of the mess; and with the situation in/around Kabul gaining massive attention, each team is positioning to avoid scrutiny.  Scrutiny on either team runs the risk of identifying massive institutional corruption; so the objective is to push the spotlight onto the other team.

State Dept. blames White House/Pentagon…. Pentagon/White House looking to avoid sunlight.

Did the DoS/CIA set up the White House and DoD using their knowledge of relief worker Zemari Ahmadi and his family as useful collateral damage?

Source

FDA Advisory Panel Rejects Pfizer Booster Shots

FDA Advisory Panel Rejects Pfizer Booster Shots

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory group who evaluate the efficacy and safety of vaccines have rejected the request for Pfizer booster shots.  However, the White House -desperately trying to push as many needle jabs as possible-  was already on track to being giving booster shots this month.  The implication here is that the White House was not following the recommendations of the FDA or the science.

WASHINGTON DC – A U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panel voted Friday against approval of Pfizer (PFE)/BioNTech’s (BNTX) third dose for the U.S.

The vote comes after a heated debate in recent weeks over the need for booster or additional shots, which both mRNA companies — Pfizer and Moderna (MRNA) — have advocated for.

Dr. Peter Marks, the FDA’s leading expert on vaccines, touched on the controversy in his introductory remarks. “We know that there may be differing opinions of the interpretation of the data regarding the potential need for additional doses, and we strongly encourage all the different viewpoints to be voiced and discussed regarding the data, which is complex, and evolving,” Marks said.

He added the meeting focused on almost real-time analyses compared to what is happening in the world, and the goal remains slowing the spread of COVID-19, which is killing almost 2,000 Americans daily.

The question the advisory panel was given to consider only used the U.S. data, a small dataset, despite the presentations including data from the U.K. and Israel.

Marks instructed the panel to consider all the data, noting, “This is not a legal proceeding, this is a science proceeding, so you can take all the data into account.”

The meeting precedes a September 20 start date for additional doses, announced last month by the White House COVID-19 Response Team, despite U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data showing some Americans are already receiving third doses. Last month, the CDC recommended additional doses for immunocompromised people.

A CDC advisory panel will meet next week to discuss recommendations for who should receive a booster dose. (read more)

This happens on the same day the CDC announce a study [Data Here] showing the Moderna vaccine remained stronger in protecting against hospitalization compared to Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ).

Among U.S. adults without immunocompromising conditions, vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization during March 11–August 15, 2021, was higher for the Moderna vaccine (93%) than the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (88%) and the Janssen vaccine (71%).  (link)

However, Moderna has now highlighted their own diminished benefit study [DATA HERE] showing the vaccine effectiveness wanes after 8 months:

[…] “In the analysis, 88 breakthrough cases of COVID-19 occurred in the more recently vaccinated group (49.0 cases per 1000 person-years) compared to 162 cases in the group vaccinated last year (77.1 cases per 1000 person-years). The reduction in incidence rates for participants vaccinated more recently compared to participants vaccinated last year was 36% (95% CI: 17-52%). A Cox proportional hazards model showed similar results after adjusting for age and risk factors for severe COVID-19. Fortunately, only 19 severe cases were observed. While not significant, there was a numerical trend towards a lower rate of severe cases in the group vaccinated more recently (3.3 per 1000 person-years) compared to the group vaccinated last year (6.2 per 1000 person-years).” (read more)

Once you get locked in the vaccine roller coaster, you ain’t getting off until the ride’s over…

Source

Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Indicted For Lying to FBI While Spreading The False Alfa Bank Trump-Russia Collusion Conspiracy on Behalf of Clinton Campaign

Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Indicted For Lying to FBI While Spreading The False Alfa Bank Trump-Russia Collusion Conspiracy on Behalf of Clinton Campaign

U.S. Special Counsel John Durham has released an indictment [pdf here] of Perkins Coie lawyer Michael Sussmann for lying to federal investigators in 2016 about the people and motives behind his FBI contact.  He failed to tell them his intent was to spread a false Alfa Bank conspiracy theory on behalf of the Clinton campaign.

Working for the Perkins Coie law firm, while under contract with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, partner Michael Sussmann contacted FBI Legal Counsel James Baker to pitch evidence that a Russian bank was in digital communications with servers in Trump Tower.  The Alfa Bank allegation was one of the key components for the ridiculous Trump-Russia narrative put together by the Hillary Clinton campaign.  Sussmann wanted the FBI to investigate Donald Trump, so that Hillary Clinton could push a political fabrication about Donald Trump working with Russians to steal the presidential election.

According to the indictment, Sussmann failed to tell the FBI that he was giving them this information on behalf of the Clinton campaign.  The FBI investigated the claims and found nothing; however, it was the appearance of the investigation that Clinton needed in order to leak/push the Trump-Russia story to the media and stir up the controversy.  There had to be something to the “Trump-Russia” story, because the FBI was investigating it.  That fabricated smear served its intended purpose, and the media ran with it.

With the indictment now public, The New York Times also now admits Michael Sussmann was their source for stories they wrote about Alfa bank:

New York Times – […] In early September, the indictment said, Mr. Sussmann met with a New York Times reporter who would later draft a story about Alfa Bank, and also began work on a so-called white paper that would summarize and explain the researchers’ data and analysis, billing the time to the Clinton campaign.

On Sept. 12, the indictment said, Mr. Sussmann called Mr. Elias, the Clinton campaign lawyer, and spoke about his “efforts to communicate” with the Times reporter about the Alfa Bank allegations. Both billed the call to the campaign. And three days later, Mr. Elias exchanged emails with top campaign officials about the matter. (read more)

[…] Mr. Sussmann also continued to push the Alfa Bank story to reporters. A month before the election, as Times editors were weighing whether to publish an article the reporter had drafted, Mr. Sussmann told him he should show the editors an opinion essay saying the paper’s investigative reporters had not published as many stories regarding Mr. Trump as other media outlets, the indictment said.  (read more)

(Indictment pdf Source)

Perkins Coie is “law firm-1”.  Mark Elias is “campaign lawyer 1”.   The “US Investigative Firm” is Fusion GPS.   “Tech Executive-1” is likely Shawn Henry of Crowdstrike, although there are other possibilities.

In March 2016, Fusion GPS approached Perkins Coie to discuss potential engagement in the development of opposition research on Donald Trump, fully aware that Perkins Coie represented both the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign.

In April 2016, Perkins Coie retained Fusion GPS on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Towards the end of the month, on April 29, Perkins Coie partner Michael Sussmann contacted Shawn Henry of CrowdStrike Services to hire the organization for the Democratic National Committee after a series of phishing e-mails started to affect their employees.

Before June 14, 2016, Sussmann, CrowdStrike Services and the Democratic National Committee carefully crafted a damage control story with regards to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, which Dmitri Alperovitch and Shawn Henry released to Ellen Nakashima at The Washington Post.

On June 14, 2016, Nakashima, with contributions from Tom Hamburger, published the article “Russian government hackers penetrated DNC, stole opposition research on Trump” in The Washington Post.

After the article’s publishing, a number of bipartisan computer scientists — which included “John McCain Republicans” — started to search for Russian infiltrators. The members of the group were scattered across America and were numerous (there were at least nine members). To search for the infiltrators, they used the Domain Name System (DNS).

In late July 2016, a member of the bipartisan computer scientist organisation, known by the alias “Tea Leaves”, discovered potential malware moving from the Alfa Bank server to the Trump Organization server. The information “Tea Leaves” discovered was then circulated among his colleagues.

“Tea Leaves himself told The Intercept that he had to keep his identity and methods a secret because, ‘I run a cybersecurity company and I do not want DDOS and never have we been DDOS, nor do I want other attention.’” — The Intercept

“I also spoke with academics who vouched for Tea Leaves’ integrity and his unusual access to information. ‘This is someone I know well and is very well-known in the networking community,’ said Camp. ‘When they say something about DNS, you believe them. This person has technical authority and access to data.’” — Franklin Foer, Slate

October 31, 2016, Franklin Foer published the article, “Was a Trump Server Communicating With Russia?”, in Slate. This article was then retweeted by Hillary Clinton in a tweet which read: “It’s time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia.”

This was soon followed by a statement from Jake Sullivan, tweeted through Hillary Clinton’s account: “Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank.”

At the same time, days before Election Day 2016, the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee ceased funding Fusion GPS’s research. Fusion GPS then passed Steele’s reports to Marc Elias at Perkins Coie.

The rest, as they say, is history….

Here’s the Indictment:

Source

Florida’s DeSantis Responds to Biden Limiting Florida COVID Therapeutics – Announces Monoclonal Antibody Purchases Directly From Glaxo Smith Kline

Florida’s DeSantis Responds to Biden Limiting Florida COVID Therapeutics – Announces Monoclonal Antibody Purchases Directly From Glaxo Smith Kline

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis responded directly to the White House effort to kill Florida residents by withholding previously agreed shipments of Monoclonal Antibodies.

During a press conference earlier today, Governor DeSantis outlined the issues Florida is facing after the Biden administration instructed the federal offices of HHS to punish the successful therapy and recovery efforts of the sunshine state healthcare system.  DeSantis outlines the purchase agreement that Biden intentionally violated and also the issues created by the federal government now blocking direct purchasing of treatment from the manufacturer.

Additionally, DeSantis noted he has held meetings with ¹GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) to purchase mAb shipments directly from the second source manufacturer in order to work around the roadblocks being presented by the Biden administration.  DeSantis reaffirmed his commitment to stand in the way, and not allow Joe Biden to kill Americans just because he doesn’t like their politics.

[embedded content]

¹For transparency purposes – I worked within Smith Kline doing analytics for the lab researchers working on Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy.

Source

Former Intelligence Branch Officials Do Not Want Big Tech Regulated – Duh, The Fourth Branch of Government is a Partnership With Them

Former Intelligence Branch Officials Do Not Want Big Tech Regulated – Duh, The Fourth Branch of Government is a Partnership With Them

The Fourth Branch of Government is a public-private partnership; they work together.  The U.S. intelligence agencies are collaborative partners with Big Tech {LINK}.  That is why Google, Amazon (owns the cloud),  Facebook, Twitter, Instagram are connected to the portals of the FiveEyes intelligence operations.   Only those who understand the Fourth Branch – have a solid understanding of how it works.  Some have called it “a shadow government“, but it’s not.  We know exactly who they are and how they are operating.

The NSA scoops up all the metadata, but the scale of data is too challenging to filter and review – even with modern algorithms assisting them.  So the Fourth Branch – NSA,CIA, DIA, ODNI etc. work with the data providers to prefilter, flag, monitor and conduct surveillance.  This approach frees up the NSA database crew to focus on cell phone and email communication.

The overall surveillance of public electronic data (an abuse of 4th amendment protections), is a collaboration between the U.S. Government and Big Tech.

That’s why it does not come as a surprise to see a host of former U.S. intelligence community officials rise in opposition today to any regulation upon the Big Tech system they are partnered with.  The list of names is a who’s-who of scheming and conniving Deep State operatives we have written about through the years.  Names including: Leon Panetta (CIA), Dan Coats (ODNI), Mike Morell (CIA), Sue Gordon (ODNI), and even Fran Townsend (DHS/CNN) who we followed during the apex of her obfuscation over Benghazi.

AXIOS – Twelve former top U.S. national security officials are urging Congress to hit pause on a package of antitrust bills in order to consider how breaking up tech companies could harm the U.S. in its competition with China, according to a letter obtained by Axios. (read more)

You will note something very specific about these names.

All of them rose to prominence *AFTER* Barack Obama was installed as president and started working on the modern assembly of the U.S. Fourth Branch of Government {Go Deep}.

Every name on the list was a contributing member of the corrupt and bastardized system that has now resulted in the single most important threat to the United States, our own intel agencies.

The House is looking to curtail the power of Big Tech, but don’t look for too much support from the Senate side.  The Senate actually supports the Fourth Branch of Government and shares power with it.  The Fourth Branch now supersedes the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches.

The Fourth Branch also has access to U.S. election databases {LINK}, and can control the outcomes of electronically recorded voting data in every state.  That level of influence is used to protect itself from the American people.  Ultimately that is why the Fourth Branch must be destroyed.

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)