Sunday, September 30, 2018

What War Hero? McCain Was Executed for Treason!

*******
John Kasich accidentally admits John McCain was executed
Patriot Awakening
Published on Sep 6, 2018
*******

Why Trump Was Forced to Hide McCain's Execution
Published on Sep 3, 2018
*******
John McCain Was Executed for Treason
Thursday, September 6, 2018
In case you are not aware, and most are NOT John McCain was EXECUTED for Deep State Crimes.
Before he was EXECUTED, he sang like a bird in a deal to protect his family.
That is why the MSM is throwing out the praise for him. (part of the deal)
That is also why 1,700 military police are being sent to Gitmo right now.
Gitmo is being expanded and they are pulling retired military judges and sending them there to assist in this process.
There will be military tribunals for years…to have trials and execute all the criminals convicted of Sedition, Treason and Espionage against the American people.
We have not even seen the tip of the iceberg yet. (hold on to your hats)
In an nutshell: if you are part of the deep state aka the illuminati aka the cabal aka the swamp…you are done!
You have two options: commit suicide…or death in Gitmo. (choose now…or don’t)
Emigrate While You Still Can! Learn More...
This is an excerpt from President Trumps latest E.O.(edited)
American Digital News EXECUTIVE ORDERS: Sedition, Treason, Espionage…Court Martial’s & …
MILITARY TRIBUNALS While everyone was once again distracted and not paying attention, our President was finishing up a few more things in preparation for what is to come.
*******
Trump Opens McCains Treasonous Can of Worms
By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor
July 20, 2015

Over the weekend, “the Donald” backed down on his attacks on McCain, calling “Hanoi John” a “war hero.”
However, Donald is not going to be able to close the can of worms he opened.  Today, McCain is trying to wrap himself in the POW flag for cover.  POWs had never been rock star heroes before, quite the opposite.  These are people who surrendered to the enemy, people suspected of collaboration and worse.  With Korea, POWs became the shame of America with many “brainwashed” into following communist doctrines.
American POWs from Vietnam were the bloody flag Richard Nixon wrapped himself in, on the advice of Henry Kissinger, part of a ploy to divert attention from his endless personal failings which included his agreement with North Vietnam that let them keep and later execute hundreds of American POWs.  1205 American POWs were kept by North Vietnam according to records recovered at the end of the Cold War.  President’s Clinton and Yeltsin instituted a search of Russia’s gulags looking for their remains with no success.  In 1993, armed with testimony from a former high ranking Czech security official, I proposed a systematic search of archives in Prague that recorded the fate of 200 missing US POWs from Vietnam but was blocked by Senator John McCain.
33 POWs faced execution for treason after Vietnam until Nixon pardoned all POWs.  McCain was on the list of the 33, in fact at the head of it.
Here are the facts as we know them:
According to Colonel Ted Guy, John McCain’s commander as a POW, McCain collaborated with the enemy.
McCain is accused of giving information that led to the downing of 60 US aircraft
McCain is accused of training North Vietnamese air defense personnel
McCain is accused of making over 30 propaganda broadcasts against the US, broadcasts he moved to have classified when he was elected to the senate
These 4 accusations are the only real and supportable accusations against McCain.  The evidence for these acts exists and is substantial.  What is stranger still is McCain’s longtime war against veterans, other POWs and their families.  When John was a bit younger and better capable of looking after himself, he was often both verbally and physically abusive to POW families, POW activists and veterans.  We hear nothing of these brutal outbursts of McCain’s though they continue to this day, now taken as the ravings of a mental defective.
The door Donald opened should be kept open.  We need to examine the POW phenomenon.  After Vietnam, we allowed Nixon to glorify POWs while abandoning hundreds.  The facts came to light during the late 1990s when tapes of conversations between Nixon and Kissinger were made public, for moments, with Kissinger admitting that American POWS held outside North Vietnam, in Laos, Cambodia and the South, were purposefully not included in the agreements, a number Kissinger put at over 200.
These tapes were cleaned from the media and are not available to even researchers, were such interested parties to exist, which they do not.
Vietnam was a useless war.  I served in Vietnam as a Marine combat infantryman and know the war well close up.
Those of us that served felt abused and exploited and suffered far worse at the hands of Nixon and subsequent leaders who backed away from those of us who served as honorably as possible while engaging in a nutty frenzy of POW worship.
Trump is right, those who surrender are generally not heroes.  Some were however, like Ted Guy, a man taken on the ground fighting, killing 4 of his captors.
Guy, however, is only one of many thousands, many many thousands, from Vietnam that should have received some aspect of recognition in a war where many more thousands lived like gods.  Vietnam was a scam, drugs, prostitution, black market, the best food and hottest parties in the world for many who came home from the war with medals on their chests for doing nothing whatsoever.
I might add, the Saigon press club war correspondents were the worst of all, living like kings on little boys and little girls while being occasionally flown for “10 minutes of war” with a general, then back to the clubs and brothels.  They all should have been locked in FEMA camps, were such things to exist.
As for the Donald, he should demand that, minimally, the American public be able to hear McCain’s broadcasts and see the records of his debriefing and read the statements made against him by other POWs, including and especially Colonel Ted Guy.
This man, if you wish to call him that, “McCain” has been allowed to destroy America’s security for two generations, along with friends like “light loafer Lindsey” Graham and others.
In one instance alone, the F35, McCain has personally destroyed America’s defense capabilities for 25 years.  This is his plane, his project, his monstrosity.

There hasn’t been a defense scam in decades that hasn’t had his hand prints on it.  Time for Trump to get serious and show some backbone.  McCain is a hard target, time for Trump to stop bashing the easy guys and take this one on.
*******
Also See:

John McCain Was No War Hero!

(Part 1)
28 August 2018
and
(Part 2)
39 September 2018
and

A Closer Look at Some American Politicians!

(Part 1)
06 November 2015
and

Can John McCain be the Next President?

03 August 2008
*******

Saturday, September 29, 2018

John McCain Was No War Hero! (Part 2)

*******


*******

McCain "His Own Terms"?
WHITE RABBIT NEWS
Published on Sep 8, 2018
*******

The Truth About Senator John McCain
No Bullshit
Published on Aug 27, 2018
*******

College professor calls Sen. McCain a 'war criminal'
Fox News
Published on Jul 24, 2017
*******

John McCain Busted! 'Misfiled' CIA Recording Proves His Entire Career Built On a Lie
Published on Aug 10, 2016
*******

Trump: McCain Not a 'War Hero'
Wall Street Journal
Published on Jul 20, 2015
*******
John McCain: War Criminal, Not War Hero
By dacason
September 2018
“John McCain: Personally Responsible For Deadliest Fire In U.S. Naval History” (read more)
By CounterPunch, 8/29/2018
I hate the gooks,” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) doubled down when asked on the 2000 presidential campaign trail about his continued use of the racist slur for Vietnamese people. “I will hate them as long as I live.”
In the mind of the settler-colonialist, the white invader is always the victim and the people he invades, occupies, expels or exterminates are always the aggressors, going all the way back to the Native American genocide. McCain was never able to understand that in Vietnam, as in just about everywhere else they went, Americans were the invaders, not the victims. Even as McCain deserves praise and perhaps even admiration for the manner in which he endured the unendurable while imprisoned in Vietnam, we conveniently forget what he was doing when he was shot down over Hanoi. That day, US warplanes were bombing and strafing a light bulb factory in the densely populated capital, where thousands of innocent men, women and children were being killed by relentless American aerial attacks.
One Man’s Terrorist…
Bombing civilian targets is a war crime. It was a war crime in Vietnam and it was a war crime in Serbia too, one of the at least 13 countries McCain wanted to bomb, bomb, bomb over the course of his congressional career. As Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and other NATO powers waged the 1999 air war against the Serbian people in order to preserve the alliance’s “credibility,” McCain supported the brutal bombing campaign, which targeted utilities, hospitals, apartment buildings, nursing homes, railways, bridges, marketplaces and media outlets. Here’s a little refresher on the Geneva Convention:
It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove, or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies, and irrigation works.
McCain had previously backed bombing Iraq’s water purification plants during the first Gulf War, a war crime later proven to be part of a US plan to cripple that country’s infrastructure through sanctions that 
killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, many of them children. Many would call this an act of terrorism, but McCain was never one to shy away from supporting terror when he felt it necessary. He personally donated $400 to Nicaraguan Contra rebels while angrily declaring that “historians will look back and view the vote that cut off… aid to the Contras as a low point in United States history.” Congress banned such aid after widespread reports of horrific Contra atrocities like this one:
Rosa had her breasts cut off. Then they cut into her chest and took out her heart. The men had their arms broken, their testicles cut off. They were killed by slitting their throats and pulling the tongue out through the slit.
Of course, one man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter, or perhaps both at once. The People’s Mujahedin of Iran, better known by its Farsi acronym MEK, was a State Department-designated terrorist group that had previously assassinated half a dozen US officials back when it was fighting the Shah’s regime. After the Shah’s ouster, MEK waged a guerrilla terror war against the Islamic Republic, endearing it to US leaders including McCain who supported and arranged secret training for its fighters in Nevada.
In 2009, McCain was part of a delegation of conservative senators who traveled to Libya to meet longtime dictator Muammar Gaddafi, who briefly flirted with US rapprochement after agreeing to scrap his weapons of mass destruction program. McCain even promised to help the Gaddafi regime acquire US weapons. But the Libyan love affair was short lived and by 2011 McCain was a leading voice for war against Libya, accusing Gaddafi of having “American blood on his hands.” Then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton was more than willing to amplify McCain’s war call, pressing a reluctant Barack Obama to add Libya to the Bush-beating list of countries he bombed.
The Woman and the Ape
Iran was a longtime target of McCain’s threats, with the senator infamously channeling his inner Beach Boys on the presidential campaign trail in 2007. McCain’s animus toward Iranians, a nation whose people are among the most America-loving in the world, bordered on pathological. Upon learning that $158 million worth of American cigarettes were exported to Iran in violation of US sanctions he 
quipped, “maybe that’s a way of killing them.”
Oh, McCain was a joker, all right. Here’s one of his greatest hits: during his initial run for Senate back in 1986, McCain asked a Washington, DC audience if they’d heard “the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die?” Ready for the knee-slapping punchline? “When she finally regained consciousness and tries to speak,” McCain continued, “her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, Where is that marvelous ape?’”
McCain’s periodic misogyny spared no one. During a 1992 campaign stop, his wife Cindy playfully noted that the then-56-year-old was losing his hair. “At least I don’t plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt,” he lovingly retorted. It was more than just shocking words — when it came to issues of reproductive rights, equal pay, workplace discrimination and sexual harassment, McCain repeatedly demonstrated a disdain for women that’s been forgotten in all the lofty eulogizing.
No to MLK Day, Veterans and 9/11 First Responders
His relationship with black people was just as fraught with controversy. McCain vehemently opposed the national Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, a popular move in a state known for its racism but a shock to millions of Americans who watched McCain vote against the holiday even after President Ronald Reagan finally approved it. He also supported flying the Confederate flag at the South Carolina capitol and, more importantly, consistently pushed policies and actions that fueled racial economic disparities and the disproportionate mass incarceration of people of color.
What’s arguably most confounding about the recent media fawning over McCain is the myth-making surrounding his record on veterans’ issues. Lost amid all the gushing over McCain’s patriotic service is the fact that he voted dozens of times against funding for veterans’ health care and other crucial services, claiming they were “too expensive.” Yet McCain had no problem waging and expanding the never-ending “War on Terror” that has cost more than a million lives and more than $5 trillion taxpayer dollars. McCain’s reluctance to spend public funds to care for the men and women who put their lives on the line while fighting to advance the government’s agenda is indeed curious given it was the public who financed his own education at the United States Naval Academy.
Also too expensive for McCain’s taste was the 9/11 first responders’ health care bill, which provided life-saving medical care for the thousands of police officers, firefighters, paramedics and others who selflessly rushed to the burning Twin Towers that fateful morning and who suffered from deadly cancers and other diseases years later. A watered-down version of the bill was ultimately passed after months of Republican objection.
Grading McCain
McCain surely gets an “A+” grade from the military-industrial complex, for endless war spending was always a top priority for McCain. Taking care of those who fight, and who are physically and mentally maimed by fighting, not so much. That’s likely why the nonpartisan Disabled American Veterans graded him a 2 out of 10 for his poor record on veterans issues, and why Afghanistan Veterans of America gave him a “D” for, among other travesties, voting against additional body armor and PTSD funding for troops.
He also gets an “F” for peace. McCain seemed to deplore peacemakers. When activists interrupted a congressional appearance by Henry Kissinger, who 
promoted and protected genocide, illegal wars and invasions, military coups, terrorism and torture on every inhabited continent, McCain ordered Capitol police to remove the “low life scum.” Not Kissinger, mind you, but rather the protesters. Ask yourself, who are “low life scum,” those, like Kissinger and McCain with the blood of millions of innocent men, women and children on their hands, or those trying to stop such slaughter?
War Hero? War Criminal.
John McCain is only a “hero” in the settler-colonialist mind. By the letter of the law, he was a war criminal. We Americans may praise McCain for opposing Bush-era waterboarding, or for standing up to the bigot who called Obama a Muslim at a campaign rally, or for casting the deciding vote that saved millions of Americans’ health insurance. Yet one is reminded of Chris Rock reality-checking a black man boasting about how he pays his child support and stays out of jail. “You’re supposed to pay your child support, you’re supposed to stay out of jail,” the comedian retorts. Well, you’re supposed to be against torture and racism and people dying because they can’t afford insurance. In a sane world, these things wouldn’t even be up for debate.
Alas, this is no sane world and so we see the surreal, Orwellian spectacle of a war criminal hailed as a war hero, of a warmonger praised by purported peace-lovers like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, of someone who staunchly opposed MLK being fondly remembered by the NAACP and by America’s first black president. Americans have short, convenient memories. We also love lionizing monsters, from Columbus to Andrew Jackson to Henry Kissinger. In a nation built upon a foundation of genocide and slavery and maintained through global militarism, Olympic feats of mental gymnastics are regularly performed in service of empire. McCain faithfully served the empire and will be rewarded with a lofty place in the official narrative. But in the annals of truth, the John McCain story will read quite differently.
Brett Wilkins is editor-at-large for US news at Digital Journal. Based in San Francisco, his work covers issues of social justice, human rights and war and peace. 
*******
Is John McCain A True American Hero?
by Servando Gonzalez
Sep 29, 2018
After the death of Senator John McCain, most members of the mainstream media, right and left, who lately do not seem to agree on anything, surprisingly agreed in their opinion that, despite some minor character flaws, John McCain was a true American hero.
Well, I am sorry, but I have to express my humble dissenting opinion.
I am not going to refer here some stories circulating on the Internet about McCain’s expertise in destroying several million dollars of U.S. property. Nor I am going to mention his behavior as a privileged guest of the Hanoi Hilton, which gained him the nickname “songbird” McCain, much less at his role in the cover-up to abandon American POWs in Vietnam.
Also, I am not going to try to rationalize why he fought so hard to destroy the Tea Party or why he facilitated the victory of impostor Barry Soetoro and betrayed his running mate Sarah Palin in an effort to destroy her political career as a potential presidential candidate. I have not studied these allegations in detail and I have no strong proof to offer. What I am going to do, though, is to show a series of easily verifiable facts, so you can reach your own conclusions.
As a member of the U.S. military, and later as an elected member of the U.S. Congress, John McCain took at least twice an oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Nevertheless, during his political career, he not only worked hard to destroy the Constitution but, since 2001, he officially appeared in the Council on Foreign Relations’ membership rosters as an active member.[1]
If you still don’t know it, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is one of the most anti-American organizations in the world, whose members have consistently advocated the cancellation of the Constitution, the opening of the U.S. borders, the elimination of U.S. sovereignty, and the fusion of the U.S. into a community of nations they call the New World Order.
But don’t trust my words. See for yourself. I could provide dozens of pages of this organization’s betrayals but, due to space limitations, I will only quote the most blatant ones.
The Council of Foreign Relations was created in 1921. Bankers Otto Kahn and Paul Warburg were on the original board of CFR directors. Funding for the CFR was provided by bankers John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, Bernard Baruch, Jacob Schiff, Otto Kahn and Paul Warburg. Firms Kuhn, Loeb & Co. and the Rothschilds contributed to the project through their front agents, the Rockefellers.
In 1922, the CFR began the publication of its official theoretical organ, the magazine Foreign Affairs. Soon after, the magazine became a sort of crystal ball, forecasting the direction in which the U.S. and the world were heading. In its very first issue, Foreign Affairs published an attack on the U.S. sovereignty, an article by Philip Kerr stating: “Obviously there is going to be no peace or prosperity for mankind as long as the earth remains divided into 50 or 60 independent states and until some kind of international system is created.”
On November 8, 1924, in a speech at the International House in New York, CFR member John D. Rockefeller Jr. stated “… some day … no one will speak of ‘my country,’ but …. of ‘our world.’” On October 28, 1939, CFR member John Foster Dulles [later U.S. Secretary of State], proposed in an address that America must lead the transition to a new order of less independent, semi-sovereign states bound together by a league or federal union. He proposed that this could be reached by laws, propaganda, and education.
In 1941, CFR agents Lewis Mumford, Reinhold Niebuhr and Herbert Agar published The City of Man: A Declaration of World Democracy, in which they expressed their belief that, “Universal peace can be founded only on the unity of man under one law and one government. … All states, deflated and disciplined, must align themselves under the law of the world-state … the new order … when the heresy of nationalism is conquered and the absurd architecture of the present world is finally dismantled.”
In 1942, Chairman of the National Council of Churches and CFR founder John Foster Dulles, issued a report claiming that “a new order of economic life is both imminent and imperative,” and calling for … “a world government, strong immediate limitation of national sovereignty, international control of all armies and navies, a universal system of money, world-wide freedom of immigration, progressive elimination of all tariff and quota restrictions on world trade and a democratically controlled world bank.”
On May 2, 1943, Supreme Court Justice Owen J. Roberts (CFR), told the Philadelphia Enquirer: “An international government, with police power over every individual citizen in the nations belonging to it … is the only way.” The next year, a confidential CFR memorandum to the State Department reads: “The sovereignty fetish is still so strong in the public mind that there would appear to be little chance of winning popular assent to American membership in anything approaching a superstate organization. Much will depend on the kind of approach which is used in further popular education.”
In 1945, Saturday Review editor Norman Cousins (CFR) published Modern Man is Obsolete. In his book, Cousins states: “We even debate the question of ‘surrendering’ some of our sovereignty — as though there is still something to surrender. There is nothing left to surrender. There is something to gain. A common world sovereignty … would mean that no state could act unilaterally from the central authority as a method to achieve its aims. … There is no need to discuss the historical reasons pointing to and arguing for world government.”
In 1947 CFR agents James P. Warburg and Norman Cousins established the United World Federalists, to endorse “the efforts of the United Nations to bring about a world community favorable to peace.” They also expressed their goal to expand the U.N. into a world-government, the establishment of an international “peace force” and a world income tax. On February 7, 1950, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Paul Warburg (CFR), son of CFR founder James Warburg, prophesied: “We shall have world government whether or not you like it —by conquest or consent.”
In 1952, commemorating the 30th anniversary of its creation, Foreign Affairs published “Reflections on Our National Purpose,” a leading article by CFR member Kingman Brewster Jr. In it, he expressed his idea that the U.S. national purpose should be to abolish the American nation. That same year, in response to growing concern regarding the illicit, conspiratorial activities of the CFR, the U.S. Congress created a Special Committee on Tax Exempt Foundations (commonly referred to as the Reece Committee). The final report in 1954 stated that the Committee found that the CFR controlled most of them and its aim was to abolish national sovereignty and “overly propagandizes the globalist concept.” Its two main objectives are world government and global banking.
In a July, 1958, article entitled “School for Statesmen,” Harper’s columnist Joseph Kraft (CFR), wrote: “The CFR was founded for the purpose of promoting disarmament and submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government.” The next year, CFR agent James Warburg published The West in Crisis. In it, he proclaimed: “A world order without world law is an anachronism … a world which fails to establish the rule of law over the nation-states cannot long continue to exist. We are living in the perilous period of transition from the era of the fully sovereign nation-state to the era of world government.”
In 1962 Nelson Rockefeller (CFR) gave a series of lectures at Harvard University in which he called for a world federation of countries, a new world order to shape the events. According to him, “The nation-state, standing alone, threatens in many ways to seem as anachronistic as the Greek city-state eventually became in ancient times.” In April 1971, Bryn Mawr College president Harris L. Wofford (CFR), said: “Is there any greater anachronism than the so-called sovereign nation-state?
In 1975, a majority of Senators and Representatives of both Republican and Democrat parties, among them CFR members George McGovern, Clairborne Pel, Christopher Dodd, Les Aspin, and Patricia Schroeder, signed a Declaration of Interdependence written by historian Henry Steele Commager (CFR), which proclaimed: “Two centuries ago our forefathers brought forth a nation; now we must join others to bring forth a New World Order. … Narrow notions of national sovereignty must not be permitted to curtail that obligation.”
In his 1984 book The Power to Lead, James McGregor Burns (CFR) recognized the fact that to carry out their plans the CFR conspirators needed to get rid of the Constitution: “Let’s us face reality. The framers [of the U.S. Constitution] have simply been too shrewd for us. The have outwitted us. They designed separate institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail bridges, tinkering. If we are to “turn the Founders upside down” — we must directly confront the constitutional structure they erected.”
In The Secret Constitution and the Need for Constitutional Change, a 1987 book sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation, Arthur S. Miller stated what the CFR conspirators really had in mind: “Nationalism should be seen as a dangerous social disease. A new vision is required to plan and manage the future, a global vision that will transcend national boundaries and eliminate the poison of nationalistic solutions. A new Constitution is necessary.”
The July 20, 1992, issue of TIME magazine published “The Birth of the Global Nation,” an article by CFR Director Strobe Talbott. According to him, “All countries are basically social arrangements. No matter how permanent or even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary. Perhaps national sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”
In his 1996 memoirs, A Reporter’s Life, CFR member Walter Cronkite stated: “If we are to avoid a catastrophe, a system of world order — preferably a system of world government — is mandatory. The proud nations someday will … yield up their precious sovereignty.”
On April 2001, President George W. Bush (CFR) attended the Quebec Summit of the Americas, accompanied by CFR agents Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick. Amazingly, New York Times writer David E. Sanger (CFR) let the cat out of the bag in an article about the Summit entitled, “News Analysis: Biggest Obstacle to Selling Trade Pact Is Sovereignty.”
In 2005, a CFR Study Commission, which included William Weld (CFR), Doris Meissner (CFR), and Robert Pastor (CFR), produced a document entitled “Building a North American Community.” It detailed a 5-year plan for the establishment of a common security perimeter around Canada, the United States, and Mexico, and the eventual fusion of the three countries into a single one, the North American Union, with a common currency, the Amero. This would be the initial step for the creation of the American Union, which would extend from Alaska to Patagonia.
On June 20, 2011, CNNWorld published an article by CFR mouthpiece Fareed Zakaria with the revealing title “Is it Time to Update the U.S. Constitution?” In it, Zakaria expressed his masters’ opinion that the U.S. Constitution does not reflect the new times in America and needs to be updated.[2]
A September 5, 2018 anonymous editorial piece published by the New York Times (a.k.a. The Toilet Paper of Record), shamelessly called John McCain  “A lodestar for returning honor to public life and our national dialogue.” Adding, “Mr. Trump may fear such honorable men, but we should revere him.”
Obviously, the Council on Foreign Relations is an organization of traitors, not honorable men, and John McCain was for many years one of its proudest members. So, he may have been a lodestar, though not for the American people but for the anti-American traitors at the CFR
Now, was he a true American hero? Reach your own conclusions and make your own judgment.
© 2018 NWV – All Rights Reserved
E-Mail Servando Gonzales: servandoglez05@yahoo.com
Footnotes:
The CFR has acknowledged the fact that they have secret members, so I don’t discount the possibility that McCain joined the organization at an earlier date.

For more detailed information about the CFR’s treasonous activities see Servando Gonzalez, I Dare Call It Treason: The Council on Foreign Relations and the Betrayal of America.
*******
John McCain tributes 'way over the top,' says Rolling Stone reporter
Matt Taibbi says McCain's 'decency' was 'overwhelmed by his support for military action over the years'
U.S. Sen. John McCain, pictured here in streets of Baghdad on April 1, 2007, has died of brain cancer at the age of 81. (Sgt. Matthew Roe/10th Public Affairs Operations Center via Reuters)
Sheena Goodyear
CBC Radio
September 4, 2018
John McCain has been valorized as a war hero and bipartisan maverick who embodied the spirit of patriotism, freedom and duty — but political journalist Matt Taibbi says he actually represents a much darker set of American values.
McCain, a Republican senator, U.S. presidential candidate and Vietnam prisoner of war, died last week from brain cancer at the age of 81. His 
memorial service on Saturday featured powerful tributes from his political friends and foes, alike.
Taibbi, who recently wrote about McCain's military hawkishness for Rolling Stone, spoke to As It Happens guest host Helen Mann on Monday. Here is part of their conversation.
Tell me your reaction last week when you saw all the tributes pouring in for John McCain.
I covered John McCain on the campaign trail and I didn't have anything against him, personally. ...  I even liked him a little bit.
But the coverage of his passing, I thought, was way over the top.
I lived in Russia for a very long time. In fact, I studied in the Soviet days, and some of my former colleagues from that time even said that they hadn't seen anything like this on Soviet TV.
This is a very popular senator. He was considered by many to be a war hero. Did you expect anything less?
There's a bit of a changing narrative about John McCain.
Up until very recently, I wouldn't say that he was terribly popular, especially with the kind of people who would identify themselves as mainstream Democrats.
Particularly because John McCain, up until recently, was credited with helping usher in the Trump era because of his choice of Sarah Palin [as his presidential running mate] in 2008.
Do you think he could have foreseen that by appointing Sarah Palin?
They didn't choose Sarah Palin because they particularly liked her politics or because they thought it was a good idea.
The campaign was desperate. They were way behind in the polls, and they felt they needed, you know, a quote-unquote Hail Mary. And they knew that there was this huge, enthusiastic reactionary streak within their own party that they were trying to capture.
McCain himself, he personally disliked that wing of the party, but he embraced it anyway in an attempt to get elected. And, yes, I think they did know what they were doing.
McCain and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, left, attend a campaign rally at Pima County Fairgrounds on March 26, 2010, in Tucson, Ariz.
You talk about his support for U.S. military intervention in places like Iraq. Why is that so egregious to you?
Our invasion of Iraq is still the central foreign policy disaster of our time.
McCain, personally, was a product of the previous big foreign policy disaster in American history — Vietnam. He returned from that war and immediately supported president [Richard] Nixon's illegal bombing of Cambodia.
He really, with very rare exceptions, never looked at a foreign policy problem where he didn't view the solution as invasion or intervention or bombing.
He was the first person in Congress to propose invading Iraq, and that's very, very significant.
Most mainstream politicians at the time ultimately ended up supporting the invasion, regardless of party. Why is his support so significant in your mind?
It's significant because he was really the first person to go there on the congressional side. ... And he was one of the last people to see that the war had been a mistake.
Does the fact that he was willing to stand up against torture at a time that so many Republicans weren't indicate that, perhaps, he had evolved from his more militaristic tendencies?
I actually was in Congress in 2005 and 2006 during the debate on torture ... and I remember actually being impressed by John McCain's speeches on the subject and his seeming steadfast insistence that there should be no allowance of torture anywhere.
But it turned out years later that his actual record on the subject was a little bit mixed, as in the Senate, he brokered a compromise that allowed a carve-out for enhanced interrogation techniques by the CIA.
Three former Presidents - Obama, Bush and Clinton - were at the service for John McCain. But not the current one. Donald Trump wasn't wanted there. And several people at the service took thinly veiled swipes at Trump. We delve more into that with political analyst and consultant Rina Shah. 8:38
How much do you think the praise we saw, the accolades delivered in McCain's death, are about more than him? About a desire to stick with the idea of American exceptionalism?
I think it has a lot to do with that. I think it has a lot to do with Donald Trump. McCain, for a variety of reasons, became a symbol of anti-Trumpism.
I was covering the Trump campaign as well, and there was the universal consensus of everybody who was covering Trump that his remarks about McCain — that he likes people who weren't captured — would not be a survivable series of remarks by an American politician, because you can insult anybody in America except veterans.
But Trump survived it and McCain became a symbol.
I think a lot of the outpouring of support for McCain that we've seen this week has a lot to do with people in Washington trying to show their disapproval of the person in the White House.
In your mind, is there anything that shines from John McCain's legacy?
He did have some very excellent moments as a candidate.
The moment where he refused to go along with a woman who dismissed Barack Obama as an Arab, and he took a hit politically for doing it, but it was the right thing to do. There was an underlying decency about McCain.
Politically it was, for me, overwhelmed by his support for military action over the years.
Written by Sheena Goodyear. Produced by Chris Habord. Q&A has been edited for length and clarity.
*******
Also See:

John McCain Was No War Hero!

(Part 1)
28 August 2018
and

A Closer Look at Some American Politicians!

(Part 1)
06 November 2015
and

Can John McCain be the Next President?

03 August 2008
*******

Friday, September 28, 2018

Would Your Government Perform Mass Brainwashing On the Public?

*******

LIVE: Government Mind Control Technology is Real
Blackstone Intelligence Network
Streamed live on Jul 25, 2018
*******

What Mind Control & Mass Brainwashing Look Like [mirrored]
Raymond7779
Published on Apr 2, 2018
*******
9-11 as Trauma Brainwashing
by Henry Makow,  Ph.D
September 24, 2018
Events like the holocaust, Hiroshima, Pearl Harbor, the JFK assassination and 9-11 are used to trauma brainwash society and change the direction of history.
It takes a traumatic event to change the course of history.
In a 2003 article, I reflected on this and on my personal brainwashing.
by Henry Makow Ph.D
(henrymakow.com)
In an article entitled "Why Hiroshima was Bombed", William Jones makes a convincing case that Japan was ready to surrender before the US dropped two nuclear bombs killing over 300,000 people.
Jones argues that in reality the bombs were dropped to alter the world's mental state.
The power of this new weapon had to be demonstrated in a devastating manner, to convince all nations to accept the straitjacket of "world government," he writes.
Mind control works by subjecting the victim to intense trauma (sexual abuse, electroshock, the torture or murder of others), which causes the mind to disassociate and splinter into multiple "alter" personalities. These are individually programmed to perform specific tasks.
War in general, and atrocities like Hiroshima, in particular, are traumatic events on a global scale. Humanity was brutalized. In a state of "disassociation," humanity was programmed to fear nuclear annihilation (the Cold War) and to accept huge military expenditures and the United Nations.
Similarly, the same cabal staged the attack on the World Trade Centre in order to create maximum trauma.
The buildings, symbols of American prosperity, disintegrated in a controlled demolition creating pictures of panicked New Yorkers fleeing an avalanche of smoke and debris. These images were played over and over on television.
The graphics for "America's New War" were ready and waiting.
In a state of dissociation and shock, Americans were programmed to believe that Muslim terrorists were responsible for this outrage.
Unquestioning, Americans accepted a totalitarian program of "security" measures which are in fact designed to deal with future domestic resistance to global government.  Americans docilely accepted huge military expenditures and wars aimed at robbing largely defenseless countries of their resources.
MY MIND CONTROLLED GENERATION
I was born in 1949. Until age 50, I was confused and somewhat dysfunctional because I relied on the mass media for my world view. In retrospect, I think my whole generation was subject to a mind control program.
I suspect it was developed by the Tavistock Institute for Human Relations in England and administered through the CIA and Rockefeller foundations through their control of education and the mass media.
The London-based Tavistock Institute is the central coordinating body for the cabal's mind control network. It was founded in 1922 by the British military to wage psychological warfare. Techniques developed for enemy populations were soon deployed at home. For the very wealthy, we are the enemy.
The mass media is used to maintain domestic psychological control. According to Dr. John Coleman, the directors of the US TV networks, major newspapers and publishers were all handpicked by British intelligence (which organized the CIA.) For example, before becoming head of CBS, William Paley was trained in mass brainwashing techniques at Tavistock. (The Committee of 300; pp. 248-249)
As a youth, I used to lie in bed at night reading magazines like Time and Newsweek from cover to cover. Somehow I became dysfunctional.
I learned there was something unbearably corrupt and empty about social values and institutions, especially capitalism, Christianity and the family. I could not participate in such a society.
Anything wholesome ("straight") was derided. I was bored with anything "normal." I was only attracted to "crazy" women.
Feminism relieved me of responsibility to support and lead a family. I didn't understand masculinity or know how to relate to women. In a developmental limbo, I was free to search for "truth."
Occasionally I had moments of lucidity: "Shouldn't I try to become part of the establishment instead of fighting it?" Due to the pressures of conformity, I quickly dismissed these intuitions.
As part of the "anti-war" movement and "counterculture", I imagined I was fighting the "establishment" when in fact I was its pawn.
The New York Times and Washington Post and the TV networks promoted the anti-war movement. These newspapers are instruments of the British-based Anglo American cabal and its CIA and CFR branches. When they don't want to promote something, they don't cover it.
The Vietnam War was a trap designed to weaken the United States, demoralize its people and enrich the banking and defense cartels. (I see the misguided war against the Muslim world in similar terms.)
The assassinations of JFK, RFK and Martin Luther King traumatized millions of people. When the cabal ordered Lyndon Johnson not to seek re-election in 1968, the steam went out of the anti-war movement.
Demonstrations at the Democratic Party convention in Chicago were brutally repressed by Mayor Daley's cops.
At once, millions of young people like me gave up on social change and decided to "turn inward." Conveniently, the CIA had prepared for this eventuality by spreading LSD everywhere. Timothy Leary invited us to "turn on, tune in and drop out."
Thus the idealistic generation, to which I belong, heir to our parents' hope for a better post-war world, was neutralized.
We "turned on," we "dropped out" but few of us really "tuned in."
You cannot become "enlightened" if you are ignorant and indifferent to what is happening on the planet. Enlightenment requires discernment of the realm of "maya" (illusion). Maya is the web of power and deceit that controls the world.
Enlightenment requires an active quest for truth in this world.
WHY ARE WE BRAINWASHED?
We are being prepared for the tyranny of one world government. No armies from abroad are invading us. We are being subverted from within.
"Prove it!" people say.
When I return home to find my house ransacked and my possessions were stolen, I don't need to prove I was robbed. I can see the evidence all around me.
I can see the destruction of the family and the resultant suffering due to the deceitful government attack on heterosexual identity. I can see the media convincing women that they will find fulfillment in careers instead of families.
I can see that civic values are no longer taught in schools; religion, national identity, and history are also suppressed. Instead, children are indoctrinated to kowtow to minorities and experiment with homosexuality. People are distracted by sports, entertainment and trivia, junk food for the soul. There is little honest discussion of our predicament, little effort to educate and uplift.
Communist (feminist) impostors have taken over the humanities at universities. Who would study with professors who think the truth is a function of power, and unknowable? Education by definition is the pursuit of truth.
The intelligentsia has sold out. Most artists and novelists wander in a desert of their own subjectivity. The mass media offers little reportage on the elites and on the new world order. Dissenting voices are marginalized.
Did anyone ask if we wanted globalization, official feminism, diversity, and multiculturalism? Were these ever election issues? These directives were delivered to politicians and media by the CIA and elite foundations.
All of this and more is foretold in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. If you haven't read it, you should.
Whether this document is a fraud, whether Jews Jesuits or Illuminati are behind it, a plan for world tyranny is taking effect and it bears an eerie similarity to this one.
A network of British aristocratic families, Rothschild and Rockefeller oil and finance, and satanic secret societies organized in "think tanks," foundations and intelligence agencies are behind it. They have been creating havoc for a long time and using mind control and the mass media to keep us in the dark.
*******
Donald Trump, Political Mass Hypnotist?
Ralph Benko
Nov 28, 2015
Donald Trump continues to sound a lot like Saul Alinsky.
Also comes Dilbert creator Scott Adams plausibly claiming that Trump literally is a "Master Wizard" using hypnosis on us. As one of "us" I considered this theory worth examining. The evidence shows that Donald Trump is, in fact, using technique indistinguishable from hypnosis.
First: Trump as Alinsky. Byron York recently presented A brief theory of Trump’s outrageousness:
Then Trump got to the heart of the matter. "The word compromise is absolutely fine. But if you are going to compromise, ask for about three times more than you want. You understand? So when you compromise, you get what you want."
The identical sentiment was shared in Rules for Radicals wherein Saul Alinksy wrote:
But to the organizer, compromise is a key and beautiful word. It is always present in the pragmatics of operation. It is making the deal, getting that vital breather, usually the victory. If you start with nothing, demand 100 percent, then compromise for 30 per cent, you're 30 per cent ahead.
I recently pointed out here that Trump actively employs 12 of Alinsky’s 13 tactical rules. This almost surely is a matter of “great minds working alike” rather than Trump being directly influenced by Alinsky's teachings (as indeed were the young Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton).
Now something even more interesting than Trump emulating Alinsky has come to light. In a recent interview with Reason TV, Scott Adams, “prolific author, blogger, and creator of the massively popular comic strip Dilbert:
[T]he media are being trolled by a skilled manipulator, or in Adams's parlance, a Master Wizard. …
"What I [see] in Trump," says Adams, is "someone who was highly trained. A lot of the things that the media were reporting as sort of random insults and bluster and just Trump being Trump, looked to me like a lot of deep technique that I recognized from the fields of hypnosis and persuasion."
One such technique is what Adams describes as a "linguistic kill shot," in which Trump uses an engineered set of words that changes or ends an argument decisively. According to Adams, when Trump describes Jeb Bush as low energy, Carly Fiorina as robotic, or Ben Carson as nice, he's imprinting a label you already feel about these people. They're not random insults, but linguistic kill shots that you can never get out of your mind.
Similarly, where the media see random insults, Adams sees Trump creating a significant polling gap between those who attack him and those who compliment him, resulting in chilled aggression from his opponents. Trump, says Adams, uses "anchors," which are big, visual thoughts that drown out any other argument.
Trump may not be alone in employing political hypnosis. The Journal Sentinel Online reports that a 
A group targeting former U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold has a new ad out portraying him as hypnotist trying to make the public forget his past votes.The ad by the anti-Feingold Wisconsin Alliance for Reform shows him dangling a stopwatch as if he were hypnotizing viewers to forget his votes for tax hikes, immigration reform and … Obamacare.
There is no hard evidence that Donald Trump (or Russ Feingold) received training in hypnosis. Pace Adams, it is far more likely that Trump, especially, has a natural gift, developed by his work in reality television. As the Washington Post’s Frances Stead Sellers recorded in What Trump Learned On The Apprentice:
“I’ve never had lessons,” Trump said. “I’ve always felt comfortable in front of a camera. Either you’re good at it or you’re not good at it.”The show’s climatic boardroom meetings, he said, in characteristically boastful form, were a reflection of his natural talents.“It was 100 percent ad lib,” he said. “Directly from me.”Some who got to know Trump through the show say they have not been surprised in recent months to watch him perform in similar fashion on different stages. Trump, for instance, regularly holds forth before packed auditoriums with seemingly stream-of-consciousness speeches that captivate his audiences.Just how does Trump "captivate his audiences"? Hypnosis would explain it to perfection.
Hypnosis has absolutely nothing to do with a swinging pocket watch. The swinging watch is an obsolete device — and cultural cliché — for inducing a hypnotic state. Hypnosis simply involves gently inducing a reverie, a state like a daydream: deep relaxation coupled with heightened alertness, while engaging the faculty of the imagination and softened analytic faculty, coupled with the power of suggestion. First rate politicians routinely employ this technique.
Hypnosis is a lot like yoga and meditation. In fact it historically is related to these, the word itself having been coined by 19th century Scottish surgeon James Braid, the father of modern hypnosis, whose work clearly demonstrates his close study of both. Like yoga and meditation hypnosis is moving through the “Rogers production adoption curve.”
Hypnosis, like sushi, is moving out of “fringe” or “risky” into “new” and even “hot.” Hypnotism was placed under a dark cloud  in popular imagination by George du Maurier, in his 1894 novel Trilby. This book now is long forgotten but was an international sensation, a Harry Potter of its era.
You may never have heard of Trilby. You have heard of its anti-hero, the sinister hypnotist Svengali, a fictional character devised by du Maurier. "Svengali" entered, and still haunts, the popular imagination.
Hypnosis’s sinister characterization was perpetuated by Hollywood as a fantastic trope.  Consider such classic films as The Manchurian Candidate. (Happy 100th, Ol’ Blue Eyes!)
Believing in Hollywood myths of hypnotism is akin to believing in Dracula, werewolves, and zombies. These make for a great pulp entertainment. As often is the case with Hollywood (as in Washington) dramatic license trumps facts.
So? Are Trump (and Feingold) really using hypnosis?
What is hypnosis? What’s its relevance to politics?
Short answers: Trump is using something indistinguishable from hypnosis. Feingold, perhaps, too. Understanding hypnosis is relevant if it is being used, in this political campaign, on us.
What is hypnosis? Dilbert creator Scott Adams blogged about hypnosis, in which he was thoroughly trained, a decade ago in his Dilbert Blog:
I describe the state of hypnosis as acquiring a power. The subject has all of his regular faculties operating plus he gains some more, if he has no objection to those new powers. For example, a subject under hypnosis would get a little extra power in one or more of these areas:1. Extra relaxation2. Extra imagination3. Extra focusThose extra powers don’t sound like much, but they are. …About one person in five can experience what hypnotists call “the phenomena.” For those people, their powers of imagination become so strong it is almost indistinguishable from reality.
Key word: Imagination.
Ben Franklin, long ago, was made a royal commissioner in France. He, among other leading savants, was appointed by King Louis XVI to a royal commission to investigate a precursor to hypnosis, Mesmerism. The Commission’s report disposed of the claim that it was based in an invisible force called “animal magnetism.”
The Commission concluded that “the chief causes of the affects are contact, imagination, and imitation.”
Key word: Imagination.
We need not go back to the 18th century. One of the most esteemed psychologists of the 20th century was Stanford professor Ernest Hilgard.
Hilgard and his wife founded, and directed for over 20 years, the Laboratory of Hypnosis Research at Stanford. The American Psychological Association named its Lifetime Achievement Award for Hilgard. This rather neatly offsets hypnosis’s sinister reputation. Hilgard once succinctly defined hypnosis as “believed-in imagination” (personal communication to Michael Yapko, PhD).
Key word: Imagination.
When a political figure appeals to our imagination that is indistinguishable from hypnosis.
Consider Napoleon. He observed:
What a thing is imagination! Here are men who don't know me, who have never seen me, but who only knew of me, and they are moved by my presence, they would do anything for me! And this same incident arises in all centuries and in all countries! Such is fanaticism! Yes, imagination rules the world. The defect of our modern institutions is that they do not speak to the imagination. By that alone can man be governed; without it he is but a brute.
Donald Trump, in his presidential (and perhaps Russ Feingold in his senatorial) race, speaks directly to the voters’ imagination. This is nothing more, or less, than political hypnosis. The "hypnosis hypothesis," even better than Byron York’s “brief theory of Trump’s outrageousness,” may explain Trump’s persistence as the Republican front runner.
Imagination is powerful. That said hypnosis may not be sufficient to carry Donald Trump all the way to nomination or election.
"Believed-in-imagination" —  hypnosis — can be used to great political effect. Still, political hypnosis has limits with which Napoleon ultimately failed, and with which Donald Trump may yet have, to reckon. Yet hypnosis is a force very much to be reckoned with.
As Napoleon said, more than once, "Imagination rules the world."
Consider the "hypnosis hypothesis."

I am the editor-in-chief of the Committee To Unleash Prosperity's Supply Side Blog; founder of the Prosperity Caucus, and, with Charles Kadlec, co-editor of the Laissez Faire Books edition of Copernicus's Essay on Money. Follow me on twitter @TheWebster. I also authored "... MORE
*******