Horowitz and Kane, by their own admission, have publicly declared that they have been actively soliciting the San Francisco FBI Office to “investigate” A. True Ott as a dangerous subversive, hate-mongering, anti-semitic, anti-government, murdering “domestic terrorist Satanist” with a large organization (The Hister) at his direction.
These most-serious charges filed in a FBI field office by these sadist liars are patently false, of course. Just as patently false, tragically, as the bizarre case of patriot Juris Doctor Edgar Steele, who nevertheless is today rotting away in a prison cell for daring to be “stupid enough” to expose the Zionist cabal and to defend pro bono those who are accused of being Aryan Supremacists.
Steele, the clear victim of an organized FBI “Sting” (aka Investigation) with audiotaped “evidence” supposedly covertly taped by a clearly criminally corrupt FBI “undercover informant” was quite obviously manufactured via the latest audio-splicing voice technology (expert witnesses employed to expose this process was indeed used were not allowed by the judge to testify for the defense at trial). It is very probable that similar damning, yet totally false evidence can likewise be manufactured if duly ordered by the filthy-rich, morally bankrupt Khazarian Tribal Chiefs at the so-called Anti-Defamation League. These organized crime gangsters ala Meyer Lansky have no compunction in spending millions of dollars to bribe corrupt law enforcers in order to put away innocent people whose only “crime” is exercising their 1st Amendment rights. Moreover, it would appear that the San Francisco FBI office is the ripest field for this endeavor. HEGELIAN DIALECTIC IN ACTION ONCE AGAIN — Problem + Reaction = Prescribed Solution – in this case to SILENCE one of the innocent Lambs who just happens to have knowledge of the TRUTH and more importantly, is not afraid to bleat loud and long.
Mossad and the Jewish Problem
by Dr. William Pierce
For several years, I have been warning in these broadcasts about the growing infiltration and subversion of American law-enforcement agencies by Jewish pressure groups. This process, which has been going on at a significant rate for more than two decades, accelerated during the Clinton administration, especially after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, when Jewish groups put themselves forward as “experts on terrorism,” based on their experience in repressing Palestinians and on their undercover snooping into dissident groups in the United States. They offered training seminars to the FBI and other Federal police agencies, to various military units, and to state and local police agencies.
“We will show you how to recognize terrorists and potential terrorists and how to deal with them. We will tell you about these dangerous dissident organizations, these ‘hate’ groups, and we will help you to prevent another terrorist bombing, such as the one carried out by Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma City,” the Jewish groups told the police and military agencies. The most visible of these groups was the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, but as we will see, there also were other, less visible Jewish groups at work.
Never mind that Timothy McVeigh had not belonged to any dissident group but had acted solely as an angry individual determined to send the government a message that its behavior in massacring the members of the Branch Davidian church in Waco, Texas, would not be tolerated. Never mind that the Anti-Defamation League and other Jewish groups offering their services really were pushing the military and law-enforcement agencies to shift their emphasis toward the investigation and repression of dissidents and the enforcement of a brand-new category of laws — so-called “hate crime” and “speech crime” laws — rather than toward the prevention of terrorism.
Never mind those things; it was the Clinton era, and Bill Clinton had brought more Jews into the government than any previous President. Jews were riding high in the Clinton administration, from Monica Lewinsky to Madaleine Albright. When the Jews wanted something, the Jews got it, and smart bureaucrats, including those in the military and law-enforcement agencies, knew better than to ask questions.
Bill Clinton’s extraordinary partiality to Jews lasted right up to the moment he left office, with a vastly disproportionate number of the last-minute pardons and commutations of sentences that he issued on January 20 last year going to Jewish criminals. The most notorious of these was the international Jewish super-swindler Marc Rich, who was able to persuade the head Jew in the Anti-Defamation League, Abe Foxman, to intercede with Clinton on his behalf.
All of this partiality has served Mr. Clinton well. In his first year after leaving office, he received $9.2 million in speaking fees, most of it from Jewish organizations. He received $400,000 last year from one Jewish organization alone, the Jewish National Fund, for three speeches. More than nine million dollars for some 70 speeches during the course of a year. Fascinating, isn’t it? You can find more information on Mr. Clinton’s career as a speaker to Jewish groups for huge fees in the June 18 issue of the New York Times, if you look carefully enough.
Well, that was Bill Clinton, a Democrat and a flamboyantly crooked lawyer from Arkansas who appealed to the lowest elements in the electorate and had a love affair with the Jewish mass media. Most voters hoped for more from George Bush and the Republicans. Unfortunately, what we’ve gotten is more of the same. In fact, Jewish infiltration and subversion of our military and law-enforcement agencies has proceeded even faster since Mr. Bush took office. Bush certainly doesn’t need the money from speaking fees, but he nevertheless has given virtual run of the government to Jews. Under Mr. Bush as under Mr. Clinton, what the Jews want the Jews get, and no one in the government has the courage or the integrity to challenge this situation.
We talked last week about the FBI turning loose 200 Israeli espionage agents that it arrested in the United States last year and about its refusal to arrest the anthrax terrorist, who killed five people and terrorized the whole country with his mailings of anthrax-infected letters. In the anthrax case, the FBI still is putting on a big show of trying to find the perpetrator. FBI spokesmen claim that more personnel and resources are allocated to catching the anthrax terrorist than to any other case except the 9/11 attack itself. I claim that this is all a fraud: that the FBI knows who the perpetrator is but has orders not to arrest him, because he is a Jew who carried out the anthrax mailings in an attempt to cast suspicion on Muslims and to generate public hostility against Israel’s enemies. If this became public knowledge, there would be a substantial drop in support among ordinary Americans for Israel and for Mr. Bush’s current war in the Middle East.
The big question is, why would the FBI go along with such a coverup? Even with orders directly from Attorney General John Ashcroft or from George Bush himself, any FBI official who went along with the coverup would be taking a huge risk. Why do that for the sake of Israel? Who would protect the FBI people involved if the coverup got blown? The “partnership” between the Anti-Defamation League and the FBI that both ADL National Director Abe Foxman and FBI Director Robert Mueller have been bragging about doesn’t seem enough to account for such a flagrant dereliction of duty on the part of the FBI. Surely, someone in the FBI would blow the whistle.
Actually, someone has blown the whistle, but you’d hardly know it from reading the news. Of course, there’s been much coverage of one recent FBI whistle-blower, Coleen Rowley, a special agent in the FBI’s Minneapolis field office, in connection with FBI officials ignoring reports she sent to Washington headquarters last August — that was before the September 11 attack — about a suspected terrorist, Zacarias Moussaoui, who was attempting to learn to fly 747 jets. But there’s been very little coverage of another FBI whistle-blower, Sibel Edmonds, and the coverage of her far more alarming revelations has been quite cryptic, to say the least.
There was a story in the Washington Post ten days ago, on June 19, about several FBI whistle-blowers, one of whom was Sibel Edmonds, who worked as a translator of wiretapped messages in the FBI’s Washington, DC, office. Despite her name, Edmonds is, in fact, a Jewess. But she is a rare Jewess, without a very strong sense of loyalty to her tribe. Indeed, an alarmingly high percentage of the FBI’s wiretap translators are Jews, and nearly all of them who translate Middle Eastern languages are Jews. Most of these have a much stronger sense of their Jewishness than does Edmonds, as Edmonds found out when they tried to recruit her into the Mossad, Israel’s super-secret agency for espionage, terror, and assassination.
The Washington Post story relates her account of the recruitment attempts in cryptic language that clearly is intended to avoid mentioning the words “Jew,” “Israel,” or “Mossad,” lest our gallant, little democratic ally in the Middle East or its partisans in this country be cast in a bad light. I’ll now read to you the relevant portions of that June 19 story in the Washington Post:
That whistle-blower, Sibel Edmonds, 32, a former wiretap translator in the Washington field office, raised suspicions about a co-worker’s connections to a group under surveillance. Under pressure, FBI officials have investigated and verified the veracity of parts of Edmonds’ story, according to documents and people familiar with an FBI briefing of congressional staff…. The FBI confirmed that Edmonds’ co-worker had been part of an organization that was a target of top-secret surveillance and that the same co-worker had “unreported contacts” with a foreign government official subject to the surveillance….The FBI said it was unable to corroborate an allegation by Edmonds that she was approached to join the targeted group. Edmonds said she told Dennis Saccher, a special agent in the Washington field office who was conducting the surveillance, about the co-worker’s actions and Saccher replied, “It looks like espionage to me.” Saccher declined to comment when contacted by a reporter.
Edmonds was fired in March after she reported her concerns. Government officials said the FBI fired her because her “disruptiveness” hurt her on-the-job “performance.” Edmonds says she believes she was fired in retaliation for reporting on her co-worker.
Edmonds began working at the FBI in late September [of last year]. In an interview she said she became particularly alarmed when she discovered that a recently hired FBI translator was saying that she belonged to the Middle Eastern organization whose taped conversations she had been translating for FBI counterintelligence agents. Officials asked that the name of the target group not be revealed for national security reasons….
Edmonds said that on several occasions the translator tried to recruit her to join the targeted foreign group. “This person told us she worked for our target organization,” Edmonds said in an interview. “These are the people we are targeting, monitoring.”
Edmonds would not identify the other translator, but the Post has learned from other sources that she is a 33-year-old U.S. citizen whose native country is home to the target group. Both Edmonds and the other translator are U.S. citizens who trace their ethnicity to the same Middle Eastern country. Reached by telephone last week, the woman, who works under contract for the FBI’s Washington field office, declined to comment.
In December, Edmonds said the woman and her husband, a U.S. military officer, suggested during a hastily arranged visit to Edmonds’ Northern Virginia home on a Sunday morning that Edmonds join the group. ‘Are you a member of the particular organization?,’ Edmonds recalled the woman’s husband saying. ‘It’s a very good place to be a member. There are a lot of advantages of being with this organization and doing things together’ — this is our targeted organization — ‘and one of the greatest things about it is you can have an early, an unexpected, early retirement. And you will be totally set if you go to that specific country.’
Edmonds also said the woman’s husband told her she would be admitted to the group, especially if she said she worked for the FBI. Later, Edmonds said, the woman approached her with a list dividing up individuals whose phone lines were being secretly tapped: Under the plan the woman would translate conversations of her former co-workers in the target organization, and Edmonds would handle other phone calls. Edmonds said she refused and that the woman told her that her lack of cooperation could put her family in danger.
Edmonds said she also brought her concerns to her supervisor and other FBI officials in the Washington field office. When no action was taken, she said, she reported her concerns to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility, then to Justice’s inspector general.
“Investigations are being compromised,” Edmonds wrote to the inspector general’s office in March. “Incorrect or misleading translations are being sent to agents in the field. Translations are being blocked and circumvented.”
Government officials familiar with the matter who asked not to be identified said that both Edmonds and the woman were given polygraph examinations by the FBI and that both passed.
I’m sorry that the cryptic language made that report more difficult to understand than it otherwise would have been: a certain unnamed “Middle Eastern country,” an unnamed co-worker of Sibel Edmonds who is a native of that unnamed Middle Eastern country, an unnamed “target organization” in that unnamed Middle Eastern country, and so on. The Washington Post tells us that the cryptic language is necessary “for national security reasons.” That’s certainly a phony excuse. Do you really believe that the folks in the Israeli Embassy reading this article can’t figure out who is being talked about? The real reason for not mentioning names is not to keep the Mossad from finding out that they’re being investigated; it’s to keep any Sally Soccermoms or Joe Sixpacks who might stumble across the story on their way to the comic strips or the sports pages from getting a clue as to who’s really calling the shots at the FBI these days.
Let me just run over the scenario again. After the Oklahoma City bombing, during a time when the FBI was being criticized for letting the bombing happen, Jewish groups promoted themselves as “experts” on terrorism and offered to train FBI agents and other law-enforcement and military personnel. One of these Jewish groups was the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, a group heavily involved in illegal activity and with longstanding ties to Jewish organized crime figures, such as international super-swindler Marc Rich and Las Vegas gangster Moe Dalitz. Another of these Jewish groups was Israel’s espionage and terror organization, Mossad, which specializes in the assassination of Israel’s enemies in other countries, using letter bombs, car bombs, exotic poisons, and trained hit-men armed with silencer-equipped submachine guns.
The impropriety of FBI involvement with either of these Jewish organizations should have been obvious, but in the Clinton era, no bureaucrat in Washington dared say anything critical of Jews or Israel. George Bush has a different style, but no more scruples than Bill Clinton. By the time he became President, the corruption had proceeded so far that it was easy for him to decide to join it instead of trying to lick it. And early in his administration another major terrorist event — that of September 11 — gave Jewish groups another rationale for strengthening their “partnership” with U.S. law-enforcement agencies. With Anti-Defamation League agents working on the outside and redefining the types of criminal activity with which the FBI should concern itself, and Mossad agents working inside and preempting for themselves all investigations of interest to Israel, including all investigations of Israeli espionage, it is no wonder that the FBI’s efficiency, morale, and prestige have plummeted, and things that would have been unthinkable a decade ago — such as refusing to prosecute the members of the largest espionage ring ever broken up in the United States and engaging in an internal coverup of the anthrax terrorism case — could occur.
This is a depressing situation — and as I have warned repeatedly, an extremely dangerous situation. We are in grave danger of losing all of our remaining liberty and soon thereafter becoming extinct as a people, as a race. There certainly is no hope at all of rectifying this situation from the top, through the elected politicians and the top bureaucrats. Did you hear George Bush make his pronouncement on Monday about the conflict between the Jews and the Palestinians? Yasser Arafat, the elected leader of the Palestinians, must go because he has been “tainted by terrorism.” Anyone who, like Arafat, has condoned terrorism is unacceptable as a negotiating partner for the Israelis and must be replaced by someone who has clean hands. Really! I can imagine all of the Jewish leaders, including that “man of peace,” as Bush calls him, Ariel Sharon, rolling on the floor with laughter during Bush’s statement. I would not be surprised if it were Sharon himself, the Butcher of Beirut, the mass murderer of Palestinian women and children, the preeminent terrorist and war criminal in the Middle East, who wrote that statement for Bush.
George Bush is a man utterly without honor, without principles, without a shred of genuine patriotism or racial loyalty. As long as the Jewish media continue to give him good press, he is perfectly content to be Ariel Sharon’s step’n’fetchit and to say and do whatever he is told to say and do. Underneath Bush is Attorney General John Ashcroft, a nutcase religious fanatic whose historical role model is Tomas de Torquemada and who believes that the Jews can do no wrong because that’s what it says in the Bible. And then there is FBI Director Robert Mueller, a pitiful specimen of an unprincipled career bureaucrat indeed, a man who is completely unperturbed by the ongoing Jewish subversion and takeover of the FBI.
Our one basis for hope is the fact that the takeover is not yet complete. If it were complete, there would be no debate, no investigation by some FBI agents of the Mossad, no newspaper articles with cryptic language like the one I read to you from the Washington Post. The fact is there are many FBI special agents who are not happy about what is being done to the FBI. And there are hundreds of thousands of perceptive and intelligent White Americans who also are not happy. Unfortunately, very few of these people have the courage to do or even say anything about what is happening.
And there is one other factor besides a lack of courage, although it is a related factor, and that is the inability to address our problem in a truly fundamental way, a truly radical way. There are many patriotic Americans who would be alarmed to learn that a foreign espionage organization, the Mossad, has infiltrated the FBI and is able to subvert the FBI’s operations, but there are fewer patriotic Americans willing and able to draw the necessary conclusions about the overall role of Jews in America. They see the problem as simply a problem with the Mossad. They resist tying the Mossad problem to the Anti-Defamation League problem and to the problem of Jewish influence in the government generally. They resist seeing the connection between the problem of Jewish influence in the government and Jewish influence in the mass media of news and entertainment.
They resist seeing these things because to see them, to examine them, to think about them and draw conclusions from them, is to become anti-Jewish, anti-Semitic. And they have been so strongly conditioned against that for so long that they simply can’t deal with it. Many who are brave enough and honest enough to speak out about a Mossad problem cannot even think about the much larger Jewish problem of which the Mossad problem is only a relatively small part. And as long as we refuse to think about the problem, as long as we are afraid to think about it, we cannot hope to solve it.
And really, we’d better begin thinking about this problem very soon. Time is running out for America and for our people.
The FBI: Going Rogue
By John W. Whitehead
“The minute the FBI begins making recommendations on what should be done with its information, it becomes a Gestapo.”–J. Edgar Hoover
The history of the FBI is the history of how America–once a nation that abided by the rule of law and held the government accountable for its actions–has steadily devolved into a police state where laws are unidirectional, intended as a tool for government to control the people and rarely the other way around.
The FBI (then named simply Bureau of Investigation) was established in 1908 by President Theodore Roosevelt and Attorney General Charles Bonaparte as a small task force assigned to deal with specific domestic crimes, its first being to survey houses of prostitution in anticipation of enforcing the White Slave Traffic Act. Initially quite limited in its abilities to investigate so-called domestic crimes, the FBI slowly expanded in size, scope and authority over the course of the 20th century.
During World War I, the FBI was tasked with investigating “enemy aliens,” which included anarchists and communists. During World War II, the FBI investigated various radical elements in society, as well as draft evaders and foreign nationals from belligerent nations. The agency also helped enforce the government’s nefarious policy of Japanese internment following the Pearl Harbor attack. In both 1939 and 1943, the FBI received presidential directives to investigate threats to national security. To that end, during the infamous McCarthy era, the FBI became heavily involved in the government’s efforts to expose Americans with ties to communism, conducting surveillance, pressuring employers to hire or fire particular individuals, and feeding information to the media to influence public opinion. By the end of the Korean War, what had once been a small task force of a few dozen agents became an investigative force of 6,200 agents.
Yet it was during the social and political upheaval of the 1960s that the FBI’s transformation into a federal policing and surveillance agency really began, one aimed not so much at the criminal element but at those who challenged the status quo–namely, those expressing anti-government sentiments. According to J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI’s first and most infamous director, “the United States was confronted with ‘a new style in conspiracy–conspiracy that is extremely subtle and devious and hence difficult to understand…a conspiracy reflected by questionable moods and attitudes, by unrestrained individualism, by nonconformism in dress and speech, even by obscene language, rather than by formal membership in specific organizations.’”
Among those most closely watched by the FBI during that time period was Martin Luther King Jr., a man labeled by the agency as the “most dangerous and effective Negro leader in the country.” With wiretaps and electronic bugs planted in his home and office, King was kept under constant surveillance by the FBI from 1958 until his death in 1968, all with the aim of “neutralizing King as an effective Negro leader.” King even received letters written by government agents suggesting that either he commit suicide or the details of his private life would be revealed to the public. The FBI file on King, whom the agency suspected of communism but failed to prove, is estimated to contain 17,000 pages of materials documenting his day-to-day activities. Incredibly, even 40 years later, the FBI maintains a stranglehold on information relating to this “covert” operation: per a court order, information relating to the FBI wiretaps on King will not be released until 2027.
John Lennon was another such activist targeted for surveillance by the FBI. Fearing Lennon might incite anti-war violence, the Nixon administration directed the FBI to keep close tabs on the ex-Beatle, resulting in close to 400 pages of files on his activities during the early ‘70s. But the government’s actions didn’t stop with mere surveillance. The agency went so far as to attempt to have Lennon deported on drug charges. As professor Jon Wiener, a historian who sued the federal government to have the files on Lennon made public, observed, “This is really the story of F.B.I. misconduct, of the President using the F.B.I. to get his enemies, to use federal agencies to suppress dissent and to silence critics.”
Unfortunately, not even the creation of the Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB) by President Ford in 1976 could keep the FBI’s surveillance activities within the bounds of the law. Whether or not those boundaries were respected in the ensuing years, they all but disappeared in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. This was true, especially with the passage of the USA Patriot Act, which gave the FBI and other intelligence agencies carte blanche authority in investigating Americans suspected of being anti-government. While the FBI’s powers were being strengthened, President George W. Bush dismantled the oversight capabilities of the IOB, which was entrusted with keeping the FBI in check.
Even the Obama administration, a vocal critic of the Bush policies, has failed to restore these checks and balances on the FBI. Indeed, the Obama administration has gone so far as to insist that the FBI can obtain telephone records of international calls made from the U.S. without any formal legal process or court oversight. This rationale obviously applies to emails, as well.
Little wonder, then, that FBI abuses keep mounting. Most recently, a report by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) reveals that since 9/11, the FBI has been responsible for at least 40,000 violations of the law. Most of the violations are of “internal oversight guidelines,” while close to one-third were “abuse of National Security Letters,” and almost one-fifth are “violations of the Constitution, FISA, and other legal authorities.” Specific violations include “failure to submit notification of the investigation of a US person to FBI Headquarters for three years… failure to report a violation within 14 days of its discovery [and] continuing to investigate a US person when the authority to do so had expired.”
The FBI’s abuse of National Security Letters (NSL) has been brought to light by both the EFF as well as Justice Department investigations. NSLs were created in the 1970s for espionage and terrorism investigations. In effect, NSLs allow the FBI to bypass the Fourth Amendment’s requirement of a court-sanctioned search warrant in seeking information by allowing an agent to demand information on his or her mere say-so. They were originally intended as narrow exceptions in consumer privacy law, enabling the FBI to review in secret the customer records of suspected foreign agents. However, they have since been used for clandestine scrutiny of American citizens, U.S. residents and visitors who are not alleged to be terrorists or spies. As Barton Gellman noted in a 2005 piece in The Washington Post, “The FBI now issues more than 30,000 national security letters a year, a hundredfold increase over historic norms. The letters–one of which can be used to sweep up the records of many people–are extending the bureau’s reach as never before into the telephone calls, correspondence and financial lives of ordinary Americans.” It has since been revealed that the FBI issued more than 140,000 national security letters between 2003 and 2005, many involving people with no obvious connections to terrorism.
In many cases, many of those now under surveillance by the FBI are ordinary American citizens doing nothing more than exercising their First Amendment right to free speech by criticizing the government. Moreover, according to a previously classified document, the FBI conducted clandestine surveillance on some U.S. residents for as long as 18 months at a time without a search warrant, proper paperwork or oversight. The FBI has also continued to carry out surveillance on groups involved in various protest activities–mainly peace activities. For example, a case of mass raids by FBI agents against peace activists occurred in late 2010. On September 24, the homes of five peace activists in the Minneapolis area were raided by FBI agents at around seven in the morning. The agents filtered through all of the possessions in the activists’ homes and seized electronic devices such as computers and cell phones as well as other documents. Ostensibly, the mission was undertaken in order to investigate possible ties to foreign terrorist groups, but immediate evidence of such a connection was lacking. The activists targeted have been members in the antiwar and labor communities for many years.
Today, the FBI employs more than 35,000 individuals and operates more than 56 field offices in major cities across the U.S., as well as 400 resident agencies in smaller towns, and more than 50 international offices. In addition to their “data campus,” which houses more than 96 million sets of fingerprints from across the United States and elsewhere, the FBI is also, according to The Washington Post, “building a vast repository controlled by people who work in a top-secret vault on the fourth floor of the J. Edgar Hoover FBI Building in Washington. This one stores the profiles of tens of thousands of Americans and legal residents who are not accused of any crime. What they have done is appear to be acting suspiciously to a town sheriff, a traffic cop or even a neighbor.”
The agency’s reach is more invasive than ever, thanks to nearly unlimited resources (its minimum budget alone in fiscal year 2010 was $7.9 billion), the government’s vast arsenal of technology, the interconnectedness of government intelligence agencies, and information sharing through fusion centers–data collecting intelligence agencies spread throughout the country that constantly monitor communications (including those of American citizens), everything from internet activity and web searches to text messages, phone calls and emails. What’s more, you can be sure that the reauthorization of the Patriot Act by Congress will only further legitimize the FBI’s efforts to spy on American citizens, thereby destroying whatever shred of privacy remains.
So where does this leave us?
Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the first to recognize that as a nation we seem to have significantly passed from a nation of laws to a nation of men. Whereas the United States Constitution was once the rule of law, guarding our freedoms and shielding us from government abuses, we have entered a phase in our nation’s life where the government largely operates above the law. The activities of the FBI are a perfect illustration of this.
Yet we would do well to remember that governments primarily exist to secure rights. This idea is central to constitutionalism, which serves to limit governmental power and ensure that the government performs its basic function: preserve and protect our rights, especially our unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and our civil liberties. Otherwise, we are destined to live in a police state.