Welcome to Sott.net
Mon, 20 Jan 2020
The World for People who Think

Cowboy Hat

JFK Assassination Anniversary: Oswald Murder Witness Speaks

Witness to Lee Harvey Oswald's Murder Gives Exclusive Interview to WhoWhatWhy
James Leavelle
© Arne Hodalic/eyevine/ZUMAPRESS.com
James Leavelle, shown here at age 83 on November 11, 1993. Leavelle is the former Dallas police officer who was responsible, on November 24, 1963, for escorting Lee Harvey Oswald from Dallas city jail to county jail. At precisely 11:21 AM, a man suddenly emerged from the bustling crowd, aimed the barrel of a .38-caliber revolver point blank into Oswald’s chest, and fired. Oswald collapsed.
The detective who was handcuffed to Lee Harvey Oswald on November 24, 1963, when Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby, provided several revelations in an exclusive interview he granted WhoWhatWhy. The conversation took place two months before his death on August 29 of this year.

This Friday is the 56th anniversary of John F. Kennedy's death, allegedly at the hands of Oswald; Sunday is the anniversary of Ruby's slaying of Oswald in the Dallas Police Department garage.

One striking contention offered by retired Dallas Police Department (DPD) Detective James Leavelle, almost in passing, was that he took notes while interviewing Oswald.

This contrasts with the official position that no police department notes or recordings exist.

Star of David

Did Israel Kill the Kennedys?


Comment: 56 years ago today, John F Kennedy, the United States of America's first and last Catholic president, was assassinated in broad daylight in Dallas, Texas. Most people don't need convincing that he wasn't killed by a lone gunman who 'just didn't like him', but most research into the terrible event has assumed that the president's murder was a purely 'homegrown' affair. French author Laurent Guyénot has a tantalizing new theory that may account for why this faulty assumption has gone unquestioned for so long...


Kennedys Israel
Introduction

Just after midnight of June 6, 1968, Senator Robert Kennedy was assassinated in a backroom of the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. He had just been celebrating his victory at the California primaries, which made him the most likely Democratic nominee for the presidential election. His popularity was so great that Richard Nixon, on the Republican side, stood little chance. At the age of 43, Robert would have become the youngest American president ever, after being the youngest Attorney General in his brother's government. His death opened the way for Nixon, who could finally become president eight years after having been defeated by John F. Kennedy in 1960.

John had been assassinated four and a half years before Robert. Had he survived, he would certainly have been president until 1968. Instead, his vice-president Lyndon Johnson took over the White House in 1963, and became so unpopular that he retired in 1968. Interestingly, Johnson became president the very day of John's death, and ended his term a few months after Robert's death. He was in power at the time of both investigations.

And both investigations are widely regarded as cover-ups. In both cases, the official conclusion is rife with contradictions. We are going to sum them up here. But we will do more: we will show that the key to solving both cases resides in the link between them. And we will solve them beyond a reasonable doubt.

Comment: This is an intruiging angle on the JFK assassination, that there was a plot within the plot. We thought as much occurred on 9/11, with an 'Israeli double-cross' taking the Bush gang by surprise and 'binding' them to effectively conduct a cover-up on behalf of perps who had escalated the false-flag attacks to a whole other level.

It makes sense then that there would be historical precedent for such a ruse. At long last, the 'LBJ-did-it' vs the 'CIA-did-it' wings of JFK assassiantion research come together in a logical synthesis.


Family

The Great Ideological Lie of Diversity

diversity is our strength
If you are a Canadian faculty member, there is a reasonable chance that you recently received an email or letter from Statistics Canada. The Survey of Postsecondary Faculty and Researchers was designed to assess what has come to be known as "diversity" among the groups targeted, in consequence of a commitment made by the three Canadian research granting councils, under guidance from the federal Liberal government, to increase "diversity" among those receiving funding. It has long been the case that research funding was dependent, as much as possible, on two factors, both intensely meritocratic: the research record of the applicant and the quality of the proposed research. That appears about to change.

The fact of this occurrence motivated me to try my hand at writing a critique of the concept of diversity, which is a very slippery term. What it truly means is "let's aim for fewer white men in positions of authority," which would be a fine idea if race and sex were reasonable criteria by which to judge applicants, and if it wasn't motivated by a broad set of "progressive" beliefs, which include the idea that we live in an oppressive patriarchy and that men who work now should be required to step back so that a litany of hypothetical, definable and prejudicial historical wrongs might be righted (this even though those who do the righting weren't those who committed the prejudicial crimes, so to speak, and those who benefit not those who were the victims). There was even a recent article in Nature, a magazine that was once, with Science, one of the two unquestionably most influential scientific journals, suggesting male scientist should voluntarily delay their career advancement so that their underprivileged colleagues (underprivileged despite their status as university professors) could catch up and justice properly served.

X

Why The World Needs a Google Detox

no google
In this interview, Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies, who worked as a senior software engineer at Google and YouTube for over eight years, shares his inside knowledge of this global monopoly, revealing why Google is not a reliable source of information anymore.

Google's monopoly over search is matched by a continued reassurance that it is an unbiased search platform. Google is actively suppressing and censoring information, proving it is anything but unbiased.

While some of the information revealed is related to politics, you can read about my views about the two-party U.S. federal government here.


Comment: For the video, as well as links to the transcripts, visit Mercola.com here.


Comment: Excellent article. The things that Vorhies has exposed on what has quickly become the most evil corporation on the face of the planet (move over Monsanto) are truly earth-shattering.

See also:


SOTT Logo Radio

Objective:Health #37 - Big Tech Censors Natural Health Sites - With Scott Ogrin of Scottie's Tech Info

O:H header
Any regular readers of Sott.net, Mercola.com, GreenMedInfo and a number of other alternative health news websites are no-doubt familiar with the fact that alternative health information is being censored, deranked or flatly banned by a number of Big Tech platforms. Google, Facebook, Wikipedia, Pinterest, even MailChimp have all been exposed recently for taking a firm stand against their user's freedom to have access to the health information they may wish to see.

Today we're joined again by Scott Ogrin of Scottie's Tech.Info to give us the techie take on the nefarious agenda of Big Tech to control the information flow and steer public perception towards official consensus reality. We cover the latest whistleblower releases of Zach Vorhies, Dr. Robert Epstein and more.

It's a scary world, and one that is becoming increasingly difficult to navigate! Join us on this edition of Objective:Health where we cover the latest machinations of the technocracy!


And check us out on Brighteon!


For other health-related news and more, you can find us on:

♥Twitter: https://twitter.com/objecthealth
♥Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/objecthealth/

And you can check out all of our previous shows (pre YouTube) here.

Running Time: 01:17:30

Download: MP3 — 70.3 MB


2 + 2 = 4

4 Feminist Lies That Are Making Women Miserable

Stressed woman
Twenty years ago, I wrote my first book about why women can't "have it all," or at least all at once, despite what the culture tells them. (Hint: It's because no one, male or female, can perform two full-time jobs simultaneously without the bottom falling out.)

At the time, the so-called Mommy Wars were raging. Women everywhere who'd been sold a bill of goods by their feminist mothers and mentors were either lamenting the futility of being able to successfully work full-time outside the home while maintaining a healthy marriage and family life, or they were defending their choice to work full-time by insisting children do fine in round-the-clock substitute care.

Since then, the messages to women about how to have a happy life — as it relates to love and sex, work and family — have merely served to make women miserable. Not only are they unhappier than their mothers and grandmothers ever were, they're significantly more stressed out; much more so than men.

None of this has done anything to help men and women find their way to one another. Dating in America is all but dead, and marriage is at an all-time low. While there's more than one reason for this sad state of affairs, at the heart of it are the lies feminists have been telling for years. Here are four, in no particular order.

Bullseye

Bolivia Coup Led by Christian Fascist Paramilitary Leader And Millionaire - With Foreign Support

Union Juvenil Fascists Bolivia coup

Bolivian coup leader Luis Fernando Camacho is a far-right multi-millionaire and an ultra-conservative Christian fundamentalist groomed by a fascist paramilitary notorious for its racist violence
Bolivian coup leader Luis Fernando Camacho is a far-right multi-millionaire who arose from fascist movements in the Santa Cruz region, where the US has encouraged separatism. He has courted support from Colombia, Brazil, and the Venezuelan opposition.

When Luis Fernando Camacho stormed into Bolivia's abandoned presidential palace in the hours after President Evo Morales's sudden November 10 resignation, he revealed to the world a side of the country that stood at stark odds with the plurinational spirit its deposed socialist and Indigenous leader had put forward.

With a Bible in one hand and a national flag in the other, Camacho bowed his head in prayer above the presidential seal, fulfilling his vow to purge his country's Native heritage from government and "return God to the burned palace."

"Pachamama will never return to the palace," he said, referring to the Andean Mother Earth spirit. "Bolivia belongs to Christ."

Red Pill

Pathologizing Conspiracy Theories is The Psychopathic Government's Way of Suppressing Dissent

Conspiracy theory definition
© Department of Politics and International Relations
The term 'conspiracy theory' has long been used to discredit anyone pointing out collusion between powerful people, but efforts to pathologize dissent as 'conspiracism' are doomed to collapse under the weight of reality.

Conspiracy theories are divisive, dangerous, even evil, according to the mainstream media. They cause "violence, including terrorism," former Obama administration official Cass Sunstein notoriously declared, and the FBI's Phoenix field office recently reiterated. They're a way for ignorant people to make sense of the world, academics cry, or a holdover from the caveman era, when primitive man had to suspect enemies around every corner. More recently, they've been described as a way for white people to deal with demographic changes.

But conspiracies are everywhere in American politics today in a way that is nearly impossible to ignore. Convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's sweetheart deal, given an open-door 13-month sentence despite evidence of abusing and trafficking scores of girls ("he belongs to intelligence," the prosecutor later claimed he was told), the machinations of the so-called Deep State ("thank God for the Deep State!" ex CIA director John McLaughlin chuckled, live on CSPAN), and the CIA's fomenting of coups around the world are just the tip of a massive iceberg we are told does not exist except in the minds of crazy or backward people - one on which the ship of state has wrecked itself again and again.

USA

Peak Hubris

Capitol Hill
"Hubris" is defined as rash and foolish pride, a dangerous overconfidence, manifested with arrogance. The Deep State vaunts our "exceptionalism", and since Reagan's "City on a HIll" trope Americans have been assured by all succeeding Presidents that ours is the "indispensible nation". The word describes the way America sells itself to the world, and has for generations.

The yawning cognitive gap between our nomenklatura's relentless self-promotion and its pathetic history of botched, humiliating failures in every single act of Imperial overreach, demands examination. Are we at Peak Hubris? When exactly should the hubris of a vicious, lying, sloganeering criminal state be identified as what it is, a cover for unhinged stupidity?

Comment: Chances are, the end of 'pax Americana' will be marked by major global chaos and destruction of several different kinds.


Alarm Clock

Resignation of Bolivia's Evo Morales Was No Victory for Democracy, but a US-Sponsored Coup

Bolivia coup
Evo Morales, an indigenous leader who bucked the IMF and condemned US imperialism, has been pressured by the military to resign after winning an election. Yet Washington calls this blatant coup in Bolivia a victory for democracy?

Morales was re-elected as Bolivia's president on October 20. The coup-backing Organization of American States (OAS) wasn't pleased and went ahead and interfered in the electoral process of a sovereign nation - as the US itself does so well - issuing a report that the vote result wasn't satisfactory.The heavy funding from the US surely has no influence on OAS policies...

In any case, on November 10, President Morales first announced a new election. Later that day, he announced his resignation, naming as reason the recent brutality of Bolivia's right-wing opposition, including "kidnapping and mistreating" families of indigenous leaders and burning down the homes of public officials.
"I resign from my position as president so that (Carlos) Mesa and (Luis Fernando) Camacho do not continue to persecute socialist leaders."
Morales was clear that his move was solely due to the violence incited opposition leaders. However, it soon became clear that this was a coup, not a resignation.