There was collusion to subvert the will of the American voters in the 2016 election alright, but it wasn’t Russia it was Great Britain. All of the ridiculous charges Theresa May has made against Russia are lies, particularly the latest accusation that the wily Russians chemically poisoned ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. The scurrilous, reckless lies of the spy agencies are designed to incite World War III. These spy agencies must be held accountable for their treasonous actions and there needs to be a dismantling the intelligence juggernaut called the 5-Eyes. From The Guardian:
History of 5-Eyes – explainer
Partnership forged in wartime to monitor enemy radio transmissions now scoops up data about ordinary citizens
During the second world war intelligence officers from Britain and the US would crouch over bulky radio transmitters listening in on crackling enemy exchanges. In the years since then, communications technology has changed drastically – and intelligence gathering is far easier in the digital age. But despite the changes it is the same agreement that still governs the sharing of signals intelligence between Britain, the US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada – known in shorthand as the "5-Eyes" countries…
“In the days when the agreement was put together, your main source of signals was high-frequency radio that could be transmitted for several thousand kilometres around the world, so you had a whole network of stations to monitor HF radio…”
“As communications moved into much much higher of the frequency spectrum with mobile phones and then cell phones, they moved into facilities that could intercept those much shorter range signals, so there has been an evolution which has matched the change in means of communications,” Ball says.
Intelligence gathering has developed even further with digital communication interceptions, and as leaked NSA documents have shown, Australia has been operating listening posts around the Asia-Pacific region, passing data back to the US.
But high-frequency radio transmissions are vastly different from the internet, in both form and purpose. The executive director of the Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre, David Vaile, says the internet should not be seen as a medium designed for this kind of mass data collection. "With the vast amount of information that's exposed online there is a greater need for more protection," Vaile says. The original agreement was created to share information about intelligence gathered on foreign countries, not domestic surveillance. But that purpose and the scope of the intelligence being gathered also appears to have changed…
The 1946 agreement specifically related to "foreign intelligence", which is defined as "all communications of the government or of any military, air, or naval force, faction, party, department, agency, or bureau of a foreign country, or of any person or persons acting or purporting to act therefor, and shall include communications of a foreign country which may contain information of military, political or economic value". It specifically excludes the US, the British Commonwealth and nations, and the British empire from the scope of this sort of information.
But we now know from documents provided by the whistleblower Edward Snowden that the NSA has been able to retain vast amounts of data from Britain and other 5-Eyes nations, allowing information about ordinary citizens to be caught up in the dragnet.
In a draft 2005 directive in the name of the NSA's director of signals intelligence, the agency prepared policies that would enable spying on 5-Eyes partners, even without permission of the other country: “[The March 1946 UKUSA agreement] has evolved to include a common understanding that both governments will not target each other's citizens/persons. However, when it is in the best interest of each nation, each reserved the right to conduct unilateral Comint action against each other's citizens/persons…
This shift in the agreement is what Vaile says is one of the most serious risks, because it helps facilitate spying on the citizens of other parties to the agreement. "If you actually did want to spy more on the local people then it appears that with co-operation of the other partners this is easier, because they would have the legal right in their own domestic law to treat the citizens of the other countries as foreigners, and that appears to be where the rot has set in."
Yep, that is where “the rot set in" and British and American intelligence agencies began spying on ordinary citizens for political reasons. After the 911 attacks took place under W. Bush’s watch we were told we needed an Orwellian Homeland Security Agency to coordinate our security efforts. It’s time to get rid of that boondoggle. From New Republic:
Dismantle the Department of Homeland Security
The case for abolishing the wasteful, incompetent, and abusive mega-agency has become especially urgent under Trump.
The Department of Homeland Security’s first problem is its name… “The word ‘homeland’ is a strange word,” Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld mused to his staff in one of his infamous “snowflake” memos in February 2001. “‘Homeland’ Defense sounds more German than American. Also, it smacks of isolationism, which I am uncomfortable with.”
But after the September 11 attacks, the George W. Bush administration rallied around the phrase to describe its anti-terrorism efforts… The White House established an umbrella Office of Homeland Security under former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, then proposed the creation of a massive, Cabinet-level department by the same name to oversee the nation’s domestic security.
It’s now been more than 15 years since the U.S. government reorganized itself in response to a terrorist attack committed by 19 people. International terrorism’s threat to the United States has largely receded: Al-Qaeda is a remnant of its former self, and the Islamic State has been largely defeated in Iraq and Syria. At the same time, the bloated Department of Homeland Security turned into a boondoggle—an opinion shared across the political spectrum for years.
As the tenth anniversary of 9/11 approached, in a paper for the libertarian Cato Institute, David Rittgers argued that the department’s unusually broad mandate is a recipe for waste and inefficiency. “This arrangement has not enhanced the government’s competence,” he wrote. “Americans are not safer because the head of DHS is simultaneously responsible for airport security and governmental efforts to counter potential flu epidemics.”
Matt Mayer, a Homeland Security official under President George W. Bush, argued in 2015 that DHS has too much responsibility. “It goes without saying that I observed up-close the dysfunction, turf battles, and inherent limitations in an entity that does so much,” he wrote in Reason magazine…
Rittgers and Mayer both called for eliminating DHS and distributing its responsibilities among various independent agencies… But the last year has seen the emergence of a deeper problem than mismanagement. Under Trump, some of the department’s agencies have turned openly abusive towards vulnerable members of American society. The case for abolishing DHS has never been more urgent…
Homeland Security has been incompetent, wasteful, redundant, and abusive—and Congress knows it. The result was a sprawling new federal bureaucracy. In its current form, DHS employs almost a quarter-million people and doles out tens of billions of dollars in grants and programs each year… In all these efforts, DHS has been either incompetent, wasteful, redundant, or abusive—and Congress knows it…
But lawmakers are hesitant to cut funding for a department designed to fight terrorism, and reports of wasteful spending abound… A damning 2012 Senate Homeland Security Committee report found that the 77 fusion centers scattered across the United States “often produced irrelevant, useless or inappropriate intelligence reporting to DHS, and many produced no intelligence reporting whatsoever.”
Funny that the 5-Eyes never detected the chatter that was occurring before the 911 attacks. But then Tony Blair and George W. Bush were planning on attacking Iraq before the 911 attacks took place. It was Tony Blair who provided the “sexed up” intelligence report on Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. No one ever paid a price for the British intelligence lies. Now Theresa May is claiming Vladimir Putin poisoned the Skripals with the weapon of mass destruction Novichok. From Executive Intelligence Review:
Former British Diplomat Craig Murray Debunks Russia Nerve Agent Allegations
March 15, 2018 (EIRNS)—Former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray has debunked the allegations about a Russian poison nerve agent on his website, using sources he says he cannot disclose now. However, he charges that “The Novichok Story Is Indeed Another Iraqi WMD Scam,” as the headline of his blog reads.
Basically, the U.K. government is claiming that former Russian GRU turned MI6 double agent Sergei Skripal was killed by “Novichok,” a substance no one has ever seen and whose existence is even doubted, so that if indeed it was used, this would be the first time, and British experts wouldn’t be able to identify it. Furthermore, they should have delivered a sample to the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), of which the U.K. is member.
He summarized his conclusions as follows:
· Porton Down [the U.K. government laboratory dealing with chemical weapons] has acknowledged in publications that it has never seen any Russian ‘Novichoks.’ The U.K. government has absolutely no ‘fingerprint’ information, such as impurities, that could safely attribute any sample to Russia.”
· Until now, neither Porton Down nor the world’s experts at the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) were convinced ‘Novichoks’ even exist.
· The U.K. is refusing to provide a sample to the OPCW.
· ‘Novichoks’ were specifically designed to be able to be manufactured from common ingredients on any scientific bench. The Americans dismantled and studied the facility that allegedly developed them. It is completely untrue only the Russians could make them, if anybody can.
· The Novichok program was in Uzbekistan, not in Russia. Its legacy was inherited by the Americans during their alliance with [Uzbek President Islam] Karimov, not by the Russians.”
Yep, same bullsh*t different day. This collaboration of the British and American intelligence seems to be clownish at best. If there were a free press in either country they wouldn’t be able to get away with this crap. This is just another attempt to start WWIII. From Paul Craig Roberts:
Lies Can Lead To War
Notice that the governments of the US, UK, France, and Germany did not require any evidence to decide that the Russian government used military-grade nerve gas to attack two people on an English park bench and a UK policeman. It makes no sense. There is no Russian motive.
The motive lies in the West. It is the latest orchestration in the ongoing demonization of Russia. The demonization is a huge boost to the power and profit of the military/security complex and prevents President Trump from normalizing relations. The military/security's budget and power require a major enemy, and Russia is the designated enemy and will not be allowed to escape that assigned role.
The false accusations against Russia are damaging the Western countries that make and support the accusations. There has never any evidence provided for any of the accusations. Consider them: the Malaysian airliner, Crimea, the polonium poisoning of a Russian in the UK, Putin's alleged intention to restore the Soviet Empire, Russiagate and the stealing of the US presidential election, other charges of election theft or interference. The current Skripal poisoning. Accusations abound, but never any evidence. Eventually even insouciant Western peoples begin to wonder about the transformation of evidence-free accusations into truth.
What do leaders and peoples of the few independent and sovereign countries think when they see a signed condemnation of Russia for poisoning a long-retired UK double-agent without a scrap of evidence by the political heads of the four major Western countries? What do the Chinese think? The Iranians? The Indians?
We know that the Russians are beginning to think that they are being set up by demonization for invasion, as was Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad, Yemen, and the attempt on Iran. It is finally dawning on Russia that all these accusations are not some kind of mistake that diplomacy can straighten out, but, instead, the setting up of Russia for military attack.
So many lies spread by British and American intelligence it’s hard to keep up. Oh, and that dodgy dossier of British Intelligence lies that was given to John McCain to bring an FBI eager to publish was just a bunch of hooey. It was all part of the collusion between British intelligence and the FBI to launch a witch hunt against President Donald Trump. From The Federalist:
REVEALED: Peter Strzok Had Personal Relationship With Recused Judge In Michael Flynn Case
Text messages obtained by The Federalist show that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page conspired to collude with Judge Rudolph Contreras, a FISA judge who presided over Michael Flynn's guilty plea and was later removed from the case.
Newly discovered text messages obtained by The Federalist reveal two key federal law enforcement officials conspired to meet with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) judge who presided over the federal case against Michael Flynn. The judge, Rudolph Contreras, was recused from handling the case just days after accepting the guilty plea of President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser who was charged with making false statements to federal investigators.
The text messages about Contreras between controversial Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) lawyer Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, the senior FBI counterintelligence official who was kicked off Robert Mueller’s special counsel team, were deliberately hidden from Congress, multiple congressional investigators told The Federalist. In the messages, Page and Strzok, who are rumored to have been engaged in an illicit romantic affair, discussed Strzok’s personal friendship with Contreras and how to leverage that relationship in ongoing counterintelligence matters.
“Rudy is on the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]!” Page excitedly texted Strzok on July 25, 2016. “Did you know that? Just appointed two months ago.”
“I did,” Strzok responded. “I need to get together with him.”
“[He] said he’d gotten on a month or two ago at a graduation party we were both at.”
Contreras was appointed to the top surveillance court on May 19, 2016, federal records show.
The pair even schemed about how to set up a cocktail or dinner party just so Contreras, Strzok, and Page could speak without arousing suspicion that they were colluding. Strzok expressed concern that a one-on-one meeting between the two men might require Contreras’ recusal from matters in which Strzok was involved.
“[REDACTED] suggested a social setting with others would probably be better than a one on one meeting,” Strzok told Page. “I’m sorry, I’m just going to have to invite you to that cocktail party.”
“Have to come up with some other work people cover for action,” Strzok added.
“Why more?” Page responded. “Six is a perfectly fine dinner party.”
It is not known whether the proposed party happened as planned.
While working as one of the top counterintelligence officials at the FBI, Strzok reportedly took part in the FBI’s interview of Flynn on January 24. Flynn later pleaded guilty to one charge of providing false information to federal investigators. Strzok later left the FBI to join Mueller’s special counsel team, which obtained the indictment of Flynn.
Flynn’s guilty plea was accepted in federal court by Contreras on December 1, 2017. The New York Times reported the next day that Strzok, who left the FBI to work for special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, had been removed from the case by Mueller due to inappropriate text messages between Strzok and another federal official, now believed to be DOJ attorney Lisa Page.
On December 5, 2017, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to FBI director Christopher Wray demanding text messages from Strzok as well as any notes he took regarding his interviews with Flynn. Contreras was recused from the Flynn case on December 7, 2017, and the case was reassigned to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, according to federal court documents.
Neither Contreras nor federal judiciary officials have publicly indicated the reason for Contreras’ removal from the case. Contreras’ office declined to comment on inquiries asking about his relationship with Strzok, or why he was not recused from the Flynn case until after he had accepted Flynn’s guilty plea…
Hmmm, so Strzok, the senior FBI counterintelligence official set up Flynn how much more corrupt could the FBI get? That is just the tip of the iceberg. The whole Mueller investigation is a set up to remove America’s elected President and replace him with one more liking to British Intelligence, the FBI and CIA. The set up began in July right around the time that the British government was planning on banning Trump from Britain. Oh there was collusion in America’s 2016 Presidential election alright, but it wasn’t between Trump and Russian President Putin, it was between the British government and Obama’s FBI and CIA. Nice.
By Patricia Baeten