Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
December 15, 2019

Media Suppressed Evidence Of The OPCW's 'Chemical Attack' Manipulations - There Is Now More Of It

A journalist describes why he resigned when his outlet suppressed his reporting about manipulations within the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

Meanwhile Wikileaks published additional evidence that the OPCW Manufactured A Pretext For War By Suppressing Its Own Scientists' Research:

Leaks from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) prove that the OPCW management ignored or manipulated reports its Fact Finding Mission had written about the April 2018 Douma incident in Syria.
The OPCW management ignored that the technical, chemical and medical analysis of its own specialists exculpated the Syrian government from the allegation that it poisoned some 40 people in Douma by dropping Chlorine canisters from a helicopter.

The new documents published by Wikileaks include the original Interim Report written by members of the Fact Finding Mission of the OPCW who were on the grounds in Douma to investigate that case. The original Interim Report was suppressed by the OPCW management and a rewritten Interim Report and manipulated Final Report were published. They made it look as if the Syrian government was guilty of a chemical attack. At least two whistleblowers have gone public and some 20 OPCW inspectors have internally protested to their management.

From Wikileaks' introduction:

WikiLeaks is also releasing the original preliminary report for the first time along with the redacted version (that was released by the OPCW) for comparison. Additionally, we are publishing a detailed comparison of the original interim report with the redacted interim report and the final report along with relevant comments from a member of the original fact finding mission. These documents should help clarify the series of changes that the report went through, which skewed the facts and introduced bias according to statements made by the members of the FFM.

The well respected Mail of Sunday columnist Peter Hitchens reports of additional details of the case:

The Mail on Sunday can reveal that a senior official at the Organisation for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) demanded the ‘removal of all traces’ of a document which undermined claims that gas cylinders had been dropped from the air – a key element of the ‘evidence’ that the Syrian regime was responsible.
The original interim report also mentioned for the first time doubts about the origin of the cylinders, saying: ‘The FFM [Fact-Finding Mission] team is unable to provide satisfactory explanations for the relatively moderate damage to the cylinders allegedly dropped from an unknown height, compared to the destruction caused to the rebar-reinforced roofs.

The videos from the Douma incident showed the undamaged pressure vessel 'sleeping' on a bed.

Those who said 'Assad did it' never explained this. A highly pressurized cylinder was allegedly dropped from a helicopter flying at considerable height to escape the 'rebels' air defenses. It then allegedly crashed through a re-enforced concrete roof, bounced off the floor and landed on the bed. How did the cylinder end up with having nearly no damage to itself? My learned engineering 'feel' on this says that any pressurized vessel dropped from more than 500 meters (1,640 ft) height would either have ruptured on impact, or it would have bounced off (vid) and not penetrated through the roof. It would have been severely damaged. This is the primary reason why I never considered the alleged Douma 'chemical attack' to be a truthful story. There are many additional facts and indications (see our previous reports linked at the end) that make it obvious that the Douma incident was staged.

Hitchens also reports of more shenanigans at the OPCW. The impact analysis of the cylinder by the FFM engineering member Ian Henderson, published by Wikileaks, was not only suppressed by the OPCW management but eradicated from its records:

But perhaps most shocking of all were the actions of a senior OPCW official whose name is known to The Mail on Sunday and who is known to some of the organisation’s staff as ‘Voldemort’.

Mr Henderson tried to get his research included in the final report, but when it became clear it would be excluded, he lodged a copy in a secure registry, known as the Documents Registry Archive (DRA).

This is normal practice for such confidential material, but when ‘Voldemort’ heard about it, he sent an email to subordinates saying: ‘Please get this document out of DRA … And please remove all traces, if any, of its delivery/storage/whatever in DRA’.

Next to the Mail on Sunday the Italian newspaper la Repubblica is the only other 'western' mainstream outlet that reported on the manipulated OPCW reports. The author of its two pieces says that the OPCW is blocking all requests for comments:

stefania maurizi @SMaurizi - 10:40 UTC · 15 Dec 2019

3. unfortunately, @OPCW has NOT provided any clarification. Throughout the last 18 years of our journalistic profession, we've worked on another important international agency: @iaeaorg, they have always been cooperative. We find the lack of clarifications by @OPCW unacceptable

Other mainstream media have been silent on the OPCW fraud.

A journalist at Newsweek, Tareq Haddad, wrote and tried to publish a piece about the OPCW manipulations. The piece was suppressed by the editors of Newsweek. Haddad, who resigned in protest, now published a recommendable long-read which explains what happened:

Lies, Newsweek and Control of the Media Narrative: First-Hand Account.

The piece is remarkable for what it provides on the working process in today's media. Discussing a different piece he wrote for Newsweek Haddad writes:

[This] raises another serious problem at the publication: editors tell journalists what to report.

This article was assigned to me by Alfred on Newsweek’s internal messaging system, as is commonplace for editors to do, and I felt obliged to report the story, although I had concerns and it is not one I personally would have chosen to do. I raised these concerns with Alfred—whose background is in video editing, not journalism—but instead of ditching the story, a new angle was suggested and a new headline was provided too. Feeling that I couldn’t challenge his authority any further without being rude, I proceeded as best as I could, ...
This practice of editors telling journalists what to write, with what angle and with headlines already assigned is completely backwards and is the cause of numerous problems. How can journalists find genuine newsworthy developments if what to write has already been scripted for them?

I spoke to several Newsweek journalists about this very problem prior to my departure and they shared the same concerns.

In the description of my working process - How Moon of Alabama Is Made - I explained that finding the headline to a piece is one of the very last steps before publishing it:

Then follow the last three tasks - find a headline, write a summarizing intro sentence and formulate the end.

That is simply because serious reporting or analysis of issues can not assume a certain outcome. There are always new aspects to a story which develop only while it is researched and written. To start the writing process with an already assigned headline is not journalism. It is stenography.

Tareq Haddad explains the 'External Control of the Media Narrative' by reflecting on the 'so-called' foreign affairs editor of Newsweek, Dimi Reider:

I glanced at his resume and was honored to be working with such an accomplished foreign affairs journalist. I had genuinely hoped to build a closer relationship to him.

That was why I was so bewildered when he flatly refused to publish the OPCW revelations. Surely any editor worth their salt would see this as big? Of course, I understood that the implications of such a piece would be substantial and not easy to report—it was the strongest evidence of lies about Syria to date—but surely most educated people could see this coming? Other evidence was growing by the day.

But no. As the earlier messages showed, there was no desire to report these revelations, regardless of how strong the evidence appeared to be. Dimi was simply happy to defer to Bellingcat—a clearly dubious organization as others have taken the time to address, such as here and here—instead of allowing journalists who are more than capable of doing their own research to do their job.

It was this realization that made me start to question Dimi. When I looked a little deeper, he was the missing piece.

It turns out that Dimi Reider is a creature trained by the Council of Foreign Relations, the Wall Street's Think Tank, and was the founder and editor of a magazine funded by the Rockefeller Brother's Fund. He is a member of the insider club.

Hadder concludes:

This conflict of interests may be known to other journalists in the trade, but I will repeat: this is unacceptable to me.

The U.S. government, in an ugly alliance with those the profit the most from war, has its tentacles in every part of the media—imposters, with ties to the U.S. State Department, sit in newsrooms all over the world. Editors, with no apparent connections to the member’s club, have done nothing to resist. Together, they filter out what can or cannot be reported. Inconvenient stories are completely blocked. As a result, journalism is quickly dying. America is regressing because it lacks the truth.

Those words are true and they are the very reason why Tareq Haddad will never again be able to work as a journalist in a mainstream 'western' news outlet. Those 'journalists' are not supposed to reveal the truth. It is on us blogger minions to reveal it.

Previous Moon of Alabama coverage of the Douma incident and its aftermath:

April 8 2018 - Syria - Timelines Of 'Gas Attacks' Follow A Similar Scheme (Update II)
April 9 2018 - Syria - Any U.S. Strike Will Lead to Escalation
Apr 11 2018 - Syria - A U.S. Attack Would Be Futile - But Serve A Purpose - by M. K. Bhadrakumar
Apr 11 2018 - Trump Asks Russia To Roll Over - It Won't
Apr 12 2018 - Syria - Threat Of Large War Recedes But May Come Back
Apr 13 2018 - Syria - Manipulated Videos Fail To Launch World War III - Updated
Apr 14 2018 - F.U.K.U.S. Strikes Syria - Who Won?
Apr 16 2018 - Syria - Pentagon Hides Attack Failure - 70+ Cruise Missiles Shot Down
Apr 19 2018 - Syria - Who Is Stalling The OPCW Investigation In Douma?
Apr 20 2018 - Syria Sitrep - Cleanup Around Damascus - WMD Rumors Prepare For New U.S. Attack
Jul 6 2018 - Syria - OPCW Issues First Report Of 'Chemical Weapon Attack' in Douma
Jul 7 2018 - Syria - Mainstream Media Lie About Watchdog Report On The 'Chemical Attack' In Douma
May 13 2019 - Syria - OPCW Engineering Assessment: The Douma 'Chemical Weapon Attack' Was Staged
Nov 16 2019 - OPCW Whistleblowers: Management Manipulated Reports - Douma 'Chemical Weapon Attack' Was Staged
Nov 29 2019 - OPCW Manufactured A Pretext For War By Suppressing Its Own Scientists' Research
Nov 30 2019 - OPCW Manipulation Of Its Douma Report Requires A Fresh Look At The Skripal 'Novichok' Case
Dec 2 2019 - As The OPCW Is Accused Of False Reporting U.S. Propaganda Jumps To Its Help

Posted by b on December 15, 2019 at 13:24 UTC | Permalink


Ah the smell of Amerikan propaganda in the morning. It never stops.

Posted by: jo6pac | Dec 15 2019 13:34 utc | 1

NATO's fake humanitarian pretext catching up to them very interesting piece that fits into the to jo6pac post @ 1 of the smell of propaganda..
It does not matter who publishes smelly propaganda? At the moment there is no way for concerned, affected or just plain good humans to either eradicate the stench or to jail and make liable the producers, inventors, distributors, publisher or the liars that deny the wrongful facts often found in smelly propaganda..

It is a violation of basic human rights to produce false, deceptive or misleading propaganda.. Maybe there will someday be a war on wrongful propaganda and those involved will find themselves labeled Terrorist.

Posted by: snake | Dec 15 2019 14:03 utc | 2

Tellingly, the OPCW scandal is not an issue for the vast majority of Relotius media. Waiting out is the maxim.

Posted by: Pnyx | Dec 15 2019 14:10 utc | 3

Hey *Politifact*:

"...Obama did sign H.R. 4310 into law, also passing the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012. But the bill did not make it legal for independent, private-sector media outlets to present outright false information to the public. Instead, it allowed government-sponsored news like Voice of American to be broadcast in the United States. It removed restrictions on U.S.-generated news from being presented to American audiences.'''"

Oki doki so what about those < cough > "independent, private-sector media outlets" that are blatant 'governement funded fronts' that only 'claim' to be our independent, private-sector media...

Posted by: Jayne | Dec 15 2019 14:26 utc | 4

José Bustani, first director of the OPCW (1997-2002), denounced the reports on Douma. Ex.:

Bustani says he was forced to resign by the US Gvmt in 2002. RT.

“He told me I had 24 hours to resign,” said José Bustani, who was director general of the agency, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in The Hague. “And if I didn’t I would have to face the consequences.” (Quote is from NYT.)

Bustani sued for illegal dismissal via the ILO, and won. (Salary, damages, etc.)

The ‘removal’ vote:

I guess that was the beginning and the end of any genuine attempts at impartial assessment! The very first director was booted by Bolton who is the ‘he’ in the quote above…

Posted by: Noirette | Dec 15 2019 14:52 utc | 5

@ snake | Dec 15 2019 14:03 utc | 2

"It is a violation of basic human rights to produce false, deceptive or misleading propaganda.. Maybe there will someday be a war on wrongful propaganda and those involved will find themselves labeled Terrorist."

In a way, they already have been so labeled. The Nuremberg court found that those who propagandized the population into supporting aggressive war were as guilty as those who carried out the war.

Time for the tumbrel and the blade . . .

Posted by: AntiSpin | Dec 15 2019 16:30 utc | 6

In concert with the manipulation of reports and information from the field, the NATO allied members of OPCW were pushing hard for the additional mandate of attribution of responsibility or blame for alleged CW attacks. This is, as MOA has assessed, a very troubling instance of attempted deliberate false attribution in the interest of war-making - a very serious international crime.

Posted by: jayc | Dec 15 2019 16:45 utc | 7

New WikiLeaks Bombshell: 20 Inspectors Dissent From Syria Chemical Attack Narrative

Posted by: AntiSpin | Dec 15 2019 16:57 utc | 8

Completely backassward 'journalism' from Newsweek. Haddad should be applauded for having the courage not just to call out this charlatanry but the fortitude to bear the inevitable blacklist that will ensue from 98% of his potential employers. Previous to this latest Wikileaks tranche, Newsweek had said Haddad had pitched "a conspiracy theory". Wonder what weasel words they'll say now, or, more likely, just pretend that nothing happened.

Posted by: Don Wiscacho | Dec 15 2019 17:55 utc | 9

thanks b... no wonder the usa-uk want to shut down wikileaks... they can't have the truth on their war crimes coming to light..

that gatekeeper dimi reider - haddads ''editor'' still probably has his job.. meanwhile the truth tellers - haddad and etc - are brandished and removed from the msm... the msm has now become the main propaganda tool of the empire and very few people are striking back at it, out of fear they will be next to axed... this story by b is further proof of just how bad the msm has gotten, as if we didn't know this already, but it gives the details usually missing..

as for the opcw - do they have a shred of credibility left? is this freak ""Voldemort"" still working at opcw? probably.. as narrative manager for the opcw, they can't let him go.. they need to change the title of editor to narrative manager at all these outlets...

Posted by: james | Dec 15 2019 18:45 utc | 10


There were valid and important questions raised about the supposed chemical weapons attacks AT THE TIME that were brushed aside. USA/Trump decided to shoot first and ask questions later.

Trump bragged about the first attack over chocolate cake with Xi.

Yet Democratic Party Keystone Cops impeach Trump for 'Abuse of Power' due to a certain turn of phrase in a phone call. LOL.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Dec 15 2019 20:08 utc | 11

Once again, thanks VERY MUCH for adding the list of previous posts: it's a precious reference.

Posted by: RJPJR | Dec 15 2019 21:35 utc | 12

Shouldn't that be Mail on Sunday?

Posted by: RJPJR | Dec 15 2019 21:42 utc | 13

@ b who ended his posting with
Those 'journalists' are not supposed to reveal the truth. It is on us blogger minions to reveal it.

And similarly, it is on us MoA blog reader minions to pass the truth on as far and wide as we can. We are also challenged to provide ongoing financial support to bloggers like b so that we can continue to be informed of the truth like this posting shares.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 15 2019 23:30 utc | 14

Sputnik reports on the OPCW's lies. IMO isn't very well written, but at least it published the truth.

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 15 2019 23:59 utc | 15

I just ran a search of the New York Times and could not find a single mention of the OPCW whistleblowers. Of course, the Times was in on the game all along. But the nearly total media blackout on the subject means that all but a handful of alert individuals are completely unaware that a massive fraud was perpetrated. I’m trying to figure out how a movement of resistance can form when almost everyone is kept in the dark.

Posted by: Rob | Dec 16 2019 3:51 utc | 16

@ Posted by: Rob | Dec 16 2019 3:51 utc | 16 who wrote
I’m trying to figure out how a movement of resistance can form when almost everyone is kept in the dark.

It is incumbent on us barflies to spread the word and challenge the MSM to start carrying the reports

I have sent the Tareq Haddad link via email to a bunch of "friends" and encouraged them to pass it forward and have now sent both the Tareq Haddad link and the wikileaks link provided in comment # 8 above to a couple of media sites, including Reuters.....grin

If enough MoA barflies bang the drums of exposure, we will make a difference, IMO


Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 16 2019 4:40 utc | 17

@16 rob... its a good question... on the one hand many people do not follow the news, or only in a superficial manner in which if they were asked what is true, they would have to acknowledge they don't know... you have heard the saying a little knowledge is dangerous? that applies to these people.. then there are those who are keenly interested.. for them - the uncertainty over all topics will hang over their heads... then there are those who actually do know what is going on and know they are being duped.. they will always form a very small segment of people.. it is not for us to try to fix the world and all that ails it.. it is out of our hands i see it, and in the hands of forces much greater then us who are playing the forces of good against evil... we can nurture the good as best we can, and leave aside all the evil that will eventually drop away from lack of all the qualities and characteristics that make life sustainable, uplifting and rewarding... i think the biblical statement is one that has always challenged people who try to understand these things, but it is captured in the statement - 'resist not evil'...

i think it is an excellent question you ask... my answer is metaphysical.. perhaps that is more then most would like to hear, but it is how i see it..

Posted by: james | Dec 16 2019 5:13 utc | 18

@18 Can add the willfully blind to that list too.

I got into very long arguments with people on a popular UK PC parts forum (Overclockers UK) which has a general discussion section that had threads about Syria. About 80% of people swallowed the lies completely and argued vociferously against any suggestion that we were on the same side as jihadis and that any of these attacks had been staged.

Even providing direct sources like Ian Henderson's report or the declassified DIA report from a few years ago where the US were cheering on the creation of ISIS couldn't change their minds. I was spreading 'disinformation' and 'Russian talking points'.

Even encountered people defending the Iraq war even after all we know. Assange also deserves everything he gets according to the other posters even after I linked to the UN Rapporteur's comments on his torture and Pilger's summary of the stitch-up; "What do they know? Assange is a rapist" etc. Remarkable really.

War is peace, ignorance is strengh etc.

I've learnt since then it's a waste of time to put so much energy into arguing with people like that.

Maybe best to just spread the info so it gets a wider audience and ignore the nutters that actually believe all this nonsense.

Posted by: evilsooty999 | Dec 16 2019 12:58 utc | 19

it's hard to spread the info when the msm shuts it down. you can ignore a few nutters, but the msm will always produce more.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Dec 16 2019 14:30 utc | 20

@20 Sadly true. The grip the corporate press still has in framing the narrative is very strong and if they don't report on something it's like it hasn't happened to the majority of people. Lying by omission.

I've posted links from here on random forums whenever something to do with Syria or UK/US et al foreign policy comes up and I hear a blatant lie and it's often dismissed as a 'conspiracy theory' website.

Oh well, you can lead a horse to water and all that...

Posted by: evilsooty999 | Dec 16 2019 15:43 utc | 21

I’m trying to figure out how a movement of resistance can form when almost everyone is kept in the dark. Rob.

Yes. That is why it is so important to not only uncover / denounce the lies, warmongering, cruelty, fraud, etc. but to study *particular* examples to come to an understanding of how it all works. So as to be armed for riposte.

And, of course, somehow create new MSM outlets or re-appropriate, hijack old ones. Without that no Resistance or directed, potentially successful action(s) can ever happen.

Look at the Gilets Jaunes - who have free reign say on Twitter and FB.. The French MSM is even worse than say USA MSM, in the sense of more blatant distortions and tighter control, a small clique holds the discourse. The BBC is vile but hopefully ppl are beginning to notice?

Not that I strongly believe there is a big difference between ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ control in this area.

Ex. France, hard. Parliament recently voted to punish with 15K euros fines the use and distribution of any image (photo I suppose) by any means or on any support (internet, etc.) of police, military, or border control personnel, without their explicit agreement.

« Art. 35 quinquies. – Lorsqu’elle est réalisée sans l’accord de l’intéressé, la diffusion, par quelque moyen que ce soit et quel qu’en soit le support, de l’image des fonctionnaires de la police nationale, de militaires ou d’agents des douanes est punie de 15 000 euros d’amende.»

Pictures of cops striking girls on the ground with batons, or dragging old ladies by the hair, etc. makes for rather poor PR.

"A user" posted on another thread:

One of things which concerns me most about this site and most others inhabited by contrarian blokes of a certain age is the way that topics discussed are most often the same topics as those fed to the mugs via corporate media.


Posted by: Noirette | Dec 16 2019 16:39 utc | 22

Talking about suppression and war crimes... reported on an Oz Special Forces soldier who blew the whistle on being ordered to help cover up a suspected war crime committed in AfPak. He reported the war crime circa 4 years ago and had become frustrated by the apparent lack of follow-up by the 'authorities' and insinuations that he was bullshitting. Anyhow, he killed himself over the weekend.

ABC added a startling statistic at the end of the report:
"Ten times as many Oz servicemen involved in recent wars have committed suicide than died during the conflicts in which they served!!??"
Considering that all the recent wars in which Oz soldiers have served & died were part of AmeriKKKa and ZATO's" Fake War Of Terror, it's way past time to ask "WTF is going on, and wrong, with this War Racket?"

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Dec 16 2019 17:15 utc | 23

@2 snake Maybe there will someday be a war on wrongful propaganda and those involved will find themselves labeled Terrorist. The US invented modern propaganda. It is one of the few areas the US still excels at.

"In the 1920s, Joseph Goebbels became an avid admirer of Bernays and his writings – despite the fact that Bernays was a Jew. When Goebbels became the minister of propaganda for the Third Reich, he sought to exploit Bernays’ ideas to the fullest extent possible. For example, he created a “Fuhrer cult” around Adolph Hitler.
Bernays learned that the Nazis were using his work in 1933, from a foreign correspondent for Hearst newspapers. He later recounted in his 1965 autobiography:
They were using my books as the basis for a destructive campaign against the Jews of Germany. This shocked me, but I knew any human activity can be used for social purposes or misused for antisocial ones." Dr. Richard Gunderman

Posted by: goldhoarder | Dec 16 2019 18:27 utc | 24


Jimmy Dore: Pelosi Confronted Over Stunning Impeachment Hypocrisy

Maybe NOW moa readers can see why Trump and the establishment wanted Pelosi as Speaker of House AGAIN.

Trump "meddled" with the election of Speaker of the House by inviting Pelosi to a meeting at the White House to discuss his Wall before the vote for Speaker. This meeting afforded Pelosi an opportunity to grandstand and get lots of favorable Press, like this:

Trump, Pelosi and Schumer brawl over border wall, government shutdown

Note: The headline was later changed from "brawl" to "meet". LOL.

Yet I get such strange reactions when I talk of kayfabe?!?!


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Dec 16 2019 18:55 utc | 25

@ 26 jackrabbit.. besides being ot, you are a pain in the ass in that you make like a broken record constantly.. as your friend, i am telling you to cut it out!!

Posted by: james | Dec 16 2019 18:57 utc | 26


Jimmy Dore makes Pelosi's impeachment of Trump into a partisan issue.

Like many, he doesn't can't see the Deep State forest for the partisan trees.

He fails to see:

1) that Trump helped to elect Pelosi as Speaker;

2) that Pelosi, Hillary and the Democratic establishment were against impeachment of Trump over the Mueller Report;

3) Trump's impeachment comes AFTER the uproar over the Democratic Party establishment's refusal to impeach over the Mueller Report;

4) An impeachment over the Mueller Report would mean public hearings over Russiagate which would could reveal CIA-MI6 meddling in the 2016 US Presidential election.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Dec 16 2019 19:03 utc | 27

james, everyone

It's not my intention to be a pain in the ass. I take back that last line @25.

My comments are in line with the conversation thread about media control.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Dec 16 2019 19:23 utc | 28

thanks jackrabbit..

Posted by: james | Dec 16 2019 20:59 utc | 29


I do accept your friendly advice.

I don't have clear, smoking-gun proof. I don't want press my POV any more than is warranted. I do try to limit it to where it is relevant and hope that, in the fullness of time, the truth is revealed (one way or the other).


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Dec 16 2019 21:25 utc | 30

Well now I have to retract most of my comment @27 too!

It seems that Jimmy Dore 'gets it' more than I had thought.

Having finally reached the end of the Jimmy Dore video that I linked @25, I find this gem @15:22:

And now you know why the Democrats don't mind losing.

Again, this is the leader [Pelosi] .. and Ocasio-Cortez voted for her! To be the leader.

This is their leader!

And by the way, they voted for her after she shifted right. After Nancy Pelosi moved to the right, ALL the democrats voted for her. All the progressives .. th .. they voted for her.

Um.. big mistake. Big mistake. 'Cause what's gonna .. She'd gonna move to right next time!

And their gonna move to the.. keep move to the ... wh .. what the fuck are you doing?!

And what has Nancy Pelosi done to oppose Trump? Th.. this Congressional session? What has she done? They funded his border wall. He .. What has she done to stand up against him? He got his tax cut through, their fast-tracking his judges, .. gave him the Patriot Act .. gave him more spying powers. How are they opposing him?! Their not opposing Trump! .. you know WHY their not opposing Trump? Because they ARE the establishment. And they would have to oppose the establishment to oppose Trump - 'cause that's who Trump represents.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Dec 17 2019 4:35 utc | 31

@ 30 jackrabbit... thanks.. maybe i was a bit harsh.. i appreciate your posts and compliment you in the latest thread on max b where you were right to smell a rat!

Posted by: james | Dec 17 2019 6:07 utc | 32


Not harsh. I was frustrate and the comment was out of line.

I'll say thanks for the shout out here so as to not interrupt the other thread.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Dec 17 2019 6:33 utc | 33

The Anglo American and Western "Free Press" are an Orwellian Free Press.

The more lies they spew--from non-existent Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction to non-existent Syrian "gas attacks"--the more desperately they beat their chest and try to masquerade as a Free Press.

But this Western-controlled "Free Press" is a Free Lie of the first order.

They all deserve to meet the same fate as Julius Streicher, German Nazi newspaper editor, who was eventually put on trial at Nuremberg and then executed.

This same fate is awaiting the Western media information warriors disguised as "journalists" like the New York Times, Washington Post, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Fox News, Sky News, or the BBC.

Posted by: ak74 | Dec 18 2019 16:16 utc | 34

The comments to this entry are closed.