Connect with us

World News

Cops Illegally Raided His House. This Is What Happened When He Fought Back




On Sept. 30, 2020, a SWAT team burst into the Henderson County, Indiana home of Chris Reiter under a falsely obtained warrant. Reiter’s girlfriend, Tiffany Napier, was severely injured as police ransacked the house, ultimately finding nothing before departing without acknowledging any wrongdoing on their part. Reiter has since filed a lawsuit alleging violations of his constitutional rights, and dedicated himself to helping others hold police accountable. Reiter’s efforts recently led to another arrest when he attempted to help the father of a victim of abuse by Clarksville police. Chris Reiter and Tiffany join Police Accountability Report to discuss their efforts to seek justice.

Studio: Stephen Janis
Post-Production: Stephen Janis, Cameron Granadino


Taya Graham:  Hello, my name is Taya Graham, and welcome to the Police Accountability Report. As I always make clear, this show has a single purpose: holding the politically powerful institution of policing accountable. And to do so, we don’t just focus on the bad behavior of individual cops. Instead, we examine the system that makes bad policing possible.

And today, we will achieve that goal by showing you this video of a man who had been the victim of police brutality attempting to file a complaint against the cops who abused him. But it’s what happened when he tried to hold police accountable that is even more alarming; pushback by the same department that reveals just how hard it is for civilians to fight back against police overreach.

But before we get started, I want you watching to know that if you have video evidence of police misconduct or brutality, please share it with us and we might be able to investigate for you. Please reach out to us. You can email us tips privately at and share your evidence of police misconduct. You can also message us at Police Accountability Report on Facebook or Instagram, or @eyesonpolice on Twitter. And of course, you can always message me directly @tayasbaltimore on Twitter or Facebook. And please help us out by giving a like or a share or a comment. And you know I read your comments and that I appreciate them. Okay, we’ve gotten that out of the way.

Now, as I already made clear at the beginning of the show, our primary job is to hold cops accountable. It’s a process we take very, very seriously. That’s why we do our best to document and share what we learn to empower you, the people who watch us. But sometimes it’s worth taking a moment to remind ourselves why this is so important, and how many people across the country risk their liberty to do so.

It’s also worthwhile to acknowledge that holding police to account often entails pushback from other institutions like the mainstream media and politicians. Which is why I’m showing you the video you are seeing now because it tells a tale of a person who has faced not just a botched raid, false arrest, and the injury of his loved ones. He also was arrested when he later tried to help someone else hold police accountable. If it sounds like a twisted tale, it is. But it’s also a case that embodies both the spirit and the serious obstacles to watching cops, how hard it is to push back against their overreach and fight for our rights regardless, and how some people simply endure no matter what.

The story starts with this video. It depicts the moment when a Southeast Indiana regional SWAT team descended on the home of Chris Reiter in Waynesville, Indiana, on Sept. 30 of 2020. According to a lawsuit filed by Mr. Reiter, the SWAT team was serving a falsely obtained warrant searching for drugs. A warrant, we will learn later, had little to do with illegal narcotics, to say the least. But that didn’t stop the battery of officers in full battle gear from violently entering their home. Just watch.


Tiffany Napier:  I’m coming.

Chris Reiter:  Hold on.

Tiffany Napier:  I’m coming. Wait!

Chris Reiter:  Hold on. Hold on.

Tiffany Napier:  Wait.

Chris Reiter:  Hey, we’re opening it! [Commotion in background]

Tiffany Napier:  Wait! Please wait!

Chris Reiter:  Okay, whoa.

SWAT Officer 1:  Step out!

Tiffany Napier:  [Shouting in background] Oh my God! Oh my God! Oh my God!


Taya Graham:  Now, it’s worth noting, no drugs were found. And, as I already said, the lawsuit alleges that police instigated the militarized tactics you are seeing over something other than a crime. But even though the search was far from fruitful, the cops still manhandled Chris Reiter’s girlfriend, Tiffany, who you couldn’t see, but you can hear, and they threatened their family dog. Take a look.


Chris Reiter:  What in the hell?

Tiffany Napier:  [Commotion in background] Oh my God! Oh my God! Oh my God!

SWAT Officer 1:  Come out with your hands up! Hands up.

Tiffany Napier:  Oh my God. Please don’t shoot him!

SWAT Officer 1:  Come here. Stand behind me. Show me your hands. Put your hands up. You’re fine. Come here. Come here.

Chris Reiter:  Record.

Tiffany Napier:  [Wailing] Why are there so many cops here?


Taya Graham:  Still, even though police could not find any hint of drugs, even though Mr. Reiter and his girlfriend Tiffany Napier had not broken the law, the officer continued to search and harass both of them. Just look.


Chris Reiter:  What’s the warrant for, before you go in? I don’t even know what the warrant is.

Dude, I thought y’all shot.

SWAT Officer 1:  No.

SWAT Officer 2:  No.

Chris Reiter:  I was like, what the fuck are they shooting for?

SWAT Officer 1:  I think that’s why you delayed, because you were coming out [inaudible].

Chris Reiter:  Well, hell yeah. I thought you were going to shoot me.

SWAT Officer 1:  I know, man. I’m like, at least I’m going to be looking [inaudible] if I got it on TV. [Laughs]

SWAT Officer 2:  I’ll read it after. Okay?

SWAT Officer 1:  Yeah.

SWAT Officer 2:  Whatever you need, man.

SWAT Officer 1:  Yes, sir. [Sound of handcuffs clicking]

Taya Graham:  Now, after a lengthy search turning up nothing, and after handcuffing Chris and injuring Tiffany, the officers simply departed without a word, without an apology, not even acknowledging the unnecessary risk and trauma the entire ordeal had inflicted on the family. It was only after Chris filed this lawsuit that the officers involved were finally forced to confront the truth about what had actually occurred and the real motivation behind it.

Now, Stephen has been reviewing the court documents, and I will be discussing with him later what this says about the case. I will also be talking to Chris and Tiffany about how this raid was not just suspect, but also prompted by the mainstream media’s obsession with policing and the need to use it as fodder for a boundless appetite to be entertained.

But first, I want to show you another incident that happened after the raid, an encounter with police that occurred after Chris decided it was time to dedicate his life to holding police accountable. That’s because the video you’re watching now shows Chris helping a disabled man file complaints against officers who had injured his son during an arrest.

Chris had agreed to serve as a guide for the elderly gentleman who was seeking some justice from the Clarksville Police Department; that department, he alleged, had abused his son during an illegal arrest. However, when they arrive, almost immediately, there is pushback. Just look.


Chris Reiter:  Yep. Can you hear me? Oh, can you hear me? Yeah, we’ll try this one more time. We need some assistance out here, please, if there’s a clerk available. Okay. Yeah, probably. Would you mind coming out and speaking with us, sir? Well, we’re going to have to talk about an incident that we’re going to need records on.

Dispatcher:  Okay. Well, you won’t be able to get any records today.

Chris Reiter:  Well, I still want to request them today.


Taya Graham:  When cops on the scene suddenly produced a warrant to arrest him, it seemed like, once again, the police department was acting in bad faith. Just look.


Chris Reiter:  I made the call about two or three minutes ago. All they’ve got to do is come out and get this document. But I did request for them to give us the CAD report as well as the actual police report on that incident that they would have by [inaudible]. 

Oh, there you are. I’m Chris.

Police Officer:  John.

Chris Reiter:  Nice to meet you, John.

Police Officer:  Well, would you mind turning around and putting your hands behind your back? You have an active warrant.

Chris Reiter:  For what?

Police Officer:  From 1999. Possession of marijuana.

Chris Reiter:  You’re full of shit.

Police Officer:  No, I’m not.

Chris Reiter:  Yeah, you are.

Police Officer:  Turn around.

Chris Reiter:  I have never had marijuana.

Police Officer:  Turn around. Put your hands behind your back.

Chris Reiter:  All right. Joe. Yeah, he can film.

Police Officer:  You’ve got to put that phone down.

Chris Reiter:  I don’t even do marijuana. You guys are doing this to try and get a lawsuit, ain’t you?


Taya Graham:  And guess what? They were. Turns out the warrant was for a marijuana possession charge from 1999 for a man with a last name that sounds the same as Reiter, but was spelled with two Es and a D. I’m not kidding. These cops were so intent on retaliating against Chris, they tried to arrest him for someone else’s crime.

Now, Chris was eventually released after he pointed out the error, but not before police had again inflicted him with the trauma of the arrest of an innocent man. But before I talk to Chris and his girlfriend Tiffany about how all these troubling encounters with police have affected them and the consequences for their lives, I’m joined by my reporting partner, Stephen Janis, who’s been looking into the case and reviewing the documents and reaching out to police for comment.

Stephen, thank you so much for joining me.

Stephen Janis:  Taya, thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

Taya Graham:  First, you’ve been reviewing the court documents related to the lawsuit regarding the raid. What have you learned?

Stephen Janis:  Well, I’ve learned that this has got to be the most flimsy pretext I’ve ever seen. If you look at the lawsuit, the entire justification for the raid had to do with some property disputes over an estate. It’s absurd to go in there with flash grenades, with an AR-15, injuring people, violence. But it is really indicative of the misuse of SWAT resources, and the whole law enforcement-industrial complex obsession with militarized policing. It is really, indisputably, a bad, bad SWAT raid.

Taya Graham:  Now, there was also another party working behind the scenes that may have played a role in the raid. It’s something we’re familiar with on this show, which we call copaganda. Can you talk a little bit about that?

Stephen Janis:  A famous cultural theorist, Neil Postman, said, “We are going to amuse ourselves to death.” Well, in this case, it is literal, because this sheriff had been on several cop shows, including Live PD, and was trying to pitch another cop show. And the way he was going to make this great fodder entertainment was to raid these poor people’s houses and literally almost kill them. You’re looking at one of the worst amalgamations of American excess, the law enforcement-industrial complex on one side, and the criminal justice system on the other side, creating some sort of horrible suffering stew of people’s misery that’s put up and put on the screen for our own entertainment. It’s despicable.

Taya Graham:  Finally, you reached out to the police regarding Chris’s second false arrest. What are they saying?

Stephen Janis:  Well, they’re not saying a lot right now, but I think just watching this shows exactly what we’re talking about in the show over and over and over again: That these tools that are supposed to be able to hold police accountable, the paperwork you can fill out, the civilian review boards, are just down the street from us, they really don’t mean anything if a guy can arrest you when you show up. Police continually use the tools of law enforcement, of criminality, to retaliate against critics. And that, to me, really is about as un-American as it gets. This is very problematic.

Taya Graham:  And now to get more on what happened during the raid and his efforts to hold police accountable going forward, and to hear how this has impacted both of them, I’m joined by Chris Reiter and Tiffany Napier. Thank you both for joining me.

Chris Reiter:  Thanks for having us, Taya.

Tiffany Napier:  Thank you for having us. 

Taya Graham:  First, tell me about the incident when you went to make this complaint or records request. Why were you there and who were you with?

Chris Reiter:  Well, I was with the father of a victim of police brutality, an excessive force case that’s actually made mainstream. An investigation is being done by the Fedson it. But my activism that I started due to being a victim of police brutality in the past led me to creating the YouTube channel, which in turn victims reach out to me now. The person that I was with was the father, his name is Joe. His son had fled the police in Kentucky, and when they caught up to him, they lost all control. They yanked him out of the car and just beat the boy to a pulp. There were two Hardin County Kentucky officers and a couple of Post 4 state police. I believe it’s Post 4. It might be Post 5. I think it’s Post 4.

Tiffany Napier:  No, it’s four.

Chris Reiter:  But the beating was really, really bad, Taya. Just for example, the kid got hit 32 times that we counted with the flashlight, with the big Maglite. He was tased four times, four cycles. He had been in the car with his girlfriend at the time, which, I later learned that she was pregnant. And I was told that it was reported that she was also tased just sitting in the passenger seat, doing nothing at all, wasn’t even involved in any of it.

What I was doing was he had told me that he was intimidated by the police, and that when he did try to go and file grievances and stuff, they scared him out of there. And so I told him, hey, I’m not scared of them. I’ll go with you and I’ll file one myself. So I did. I strapped up all my camera equipment and I went with him.

Taya Graham:  You were there to make a complaint on the behalf of a police brutality victim and his family. When did things suddenly go south?

Chris Reiter:  Pretty much right off the bat, Taya. They weren’t very happy that we were there. As soon as they found out we were there to do a grievance – I’m talking about the police – They weren’t happy with our presence. You can tell it was not going to go real well. But the dispatcher, which is how you communicate, there’s a phone in the lobby. And to be able to contact the supervisor that we needed, you’d have to go through this dispatcher over this intercom system. The dispatcher got short with me and said that they were going to call a road patrol officer in when I specifically asked for a supervisor for nothing more than to file a grievance. I knew then that that was an intimidation factor, that they were going to send an armed officer in uniform to come and confront us. That was pretty much at the point I knew it was getting ready to go south.

Taya Graham:  You were there exercising your rights to petition the government for redress of grievance. How did this turn into an arrest?

Chris Reiter:  That’s a good question, Taya. I’m still not real sure how it turned into an arrest, but I’ll tell you what they said. They came out, the armed officer in uniform came out, and I was talking to the supervisor. I’d just turned in the grievance complaint form to the supervisor, filled out and done. The officer comes out and he says, you’re under arrest for a warrant from 1998. Now, I had no idea what he was talking about. I didn’t know what he was talking about. And I hadn’t identified either. My first question obviously was how would you have a warrant for somebody…? You don’t even know who I am?

He starts presenting. He puts me in the handcuffs, and I’m under arrest at that point. But I stood on my rights. I knew not to offer anything unconstitutionally against myself. I told them, I do not give consent to a search. I told them that they’re not to shut my cameras off, so on and so forth. And they violated all of them. I was in handcuffs. He was shutting my cameras off. He was going into my pockets and getting ID. And he said, yep, that matches. Well, he was talking about my name, okay?

And Taya, I carry an audio recording device that’s about this big, and it looks like a USB drive. And the officer didn’t realize that it was an audio recorder. Later after I got out of jail, we listened to what was recorded on that device. And the officer explained, he actually admitted to a conspiracy with his supervisor at that time. I later learned what they had done. He said it into the mic.

He said that they had ran my license plates on my vehicle, which was parked in a public parking lot. I wasn’t in it. I wasn’t attached to it. But they had figured out what vehicle we came from, ran my license plates, and he admits to fabricating details to create a warrant, to create an arrest is what he had said. Long story short, it could have been an old case file that maybe was similar in nature, the name was close, but there were details that had to have been later added to create a warrant.

Taya Graham:  Do you think this warrant was manufactured to retaliate for your filing complaints and having a police accountability channel?

Chris Reiter:  Yes, absolutely. In my personal opinion, Taya, I absolutely think they fabricated the whole thing. There’s more details that I haven’t… Well, I’ve published them. The address that they said from the original charge? Never existed. There’s never been that address ever.

Tiffany Napier:  Nope.

Chris Reiter:  The whole story just falls apart on their end.

Taya Graham:  How has this impacted you and Joe? I would imagine there are financial costs for you, attorney’s fees, car impound, bail, et cetera. And this must have been intimidating for Joe as well.

Chris Reiter:  Joe is intimidated. He’s a strong guy. He stands up for his family and his son and his rights and all that. He’s got a good poker face. But behind the scenes, Joe is just a really sweet man who doesn’t want any confrontation with anybody. And he did get intimidated by that.

Taya Graham:  This is not your first encounter with law enforcement. There was a terrible incident where your home was raided. Who came into your home, and was this a no-knock warrant?

Tiffany Napier:  Well, it was Clark County Sheriff’s Department, and they were assisted by the Southern Indiana Regional SWAT team. When they came, it was supposed to be a knock and talk warrant. They were supposed to announce, talk to us, have a conversation. They executed it as a no-knock warrant. They did not announce themselves. They came at dark, and they used a battering ram. That’s how they knocked on our door.

Taya Graham:  So Chris, they enter your home with a battering ram in a very aggressive way. What happened next? What did they say to you?

Chris Reiter:  Well, the first thing was our dog. We had just gotten a new pitbull. He was a puppy, too. Full of excitement. Well, when they were trying to bust the door in, they weren’t successful on the first hit or two. It was obviously a battering ram. It was really hard, shook all the pictures on the walls and everything. Well, the dog went flying to the door. He ran straight to the door. Good dog. And then I’m apparently a good dog too, because I jumped straight up and ran right to the door with him. I didn’t even grab a gun or anything. I just ran to the door in my pajamas. Taya, it got scary.

I instinctively opened the door, and when I did, they fired a weapon. I’m almost positive it was an AR. I’ve got a lot of experience with guns. I’ve done a lot of shooting. I’ve shot several ARs. To me, that was the shot of an AR. Now, thankfully, it must not have been pointed at me, but the area that it was fired in is just a small eight-foot by four-foot porch, an enclosed porch. I could feel the repercussion. I felt it in my chest.

My first thought was that I had been shot because the lasers were all over my body. There were all these SWAT teams completely decked out in all their military gear, and the lasers were all over me. And then bam, the shot went off. That’s what I opened the door to was that, was the firing of the weapon with the lasers. And I immediately thought I was hit. I kind of felt my chest, and then I thought, no, no, they shot Diesel. I looked down at the dog and he was still barking away at them. He wasn’t down. I thought, okay, well, they didn’t shoot us.

Well, then I realized I had kind of instinctively pushed the door back shut again. I screamed, stop shooting, stop shooting. There’s a viewing window on our door and I put my hands in it and I said, please don’t shoot anymore. And then I started opening the door back up. Well, I could hear Tiffany coming behind me, who had started recording. I didn’t know that she was behind me recording, but I heard her come running.

And then I actually was being addressed by one of the officers who had calmed down quite a bit when I reopened the door. I was working with him. He said, put your hands behind your back. Stay calm. Turn around. I was doing all those things. I put my hands behind my back for him, and as soon as he clicked the second handcuff, this huge six-foot-four, 300 pound guy with a ponytail jumped over the rail of the porch, grabbed me in a full nelson. He had his gun in his hands, and he was dragging me out to the porch, hitting me in the head with this gun, fighting me. And I was not resisting. I worked with him as much as I could to prove to everyone that I was not fighting, but I was getting beat up, Taya, by this man.

I ended up just taking a face dive in handcuffs with this 300 pound man on me, and just straight to the concrete face first. Well, when I did, I looked up and I realized that the SWAT team members were now coming to beat me up too. They jumped in thinking he needed help, I don’t know. But they came in and they started hitting me with their guns while I was face first in handcuffs on the pavement. And Donovan, the big guy, we later learned was Donovan Harrid, he cracked me in the head as hard as he could with the butt of his pistol. And she came to the door at that point with her camera. She was holding her phone recording it. The last thing I remember actually hearing at that point was Donovan yelling, no recording, and jumping off of me and running towards her. And I’ll let her take over from here.

Taya Graham:  Tiffany, I can hear in the audio that you were concerned for your animals and for Chris. Do you have any idea what was going on? And also, we hear you scream on the audio. What happened then?

Tiffany Napier:  Well, I had no clue who could have possibly been at our door. And I had no clue who could have been so angry that they were making our whole house shake when they were at the door. It was pure chaos whenever I went outside. I seen that they had Chris, and I was trying to record that. And whenever they did find out, well, Donovan Harrid, right whenever he found out that I was recording, I don’t know if you can see it in the recording. Well, I seen him coming right at me. And at that moment, I didn’t have my phone in my right hand anymore. I had switched it over to my left. What he ended up grabbing whenever he was trying to grab the phone was my hand. And whenever he went to pull it, you could see if you were there, you could see him. It was all of his force coming down, and I was up on our step and he pulled me so hard that it pulled me down off of the step. And that’s whenever my T-12 was re-fractured and my right rotator cuff was torn.

Taya Graham:  We hear this blood-curdling scream in the audio. When did you realize that you had a serious injury?

Tiffany Napier:  Well, the pain that I felt, it was instant. Anybody that’s experienced any type of fracture or break, you know it, you feel it. You know that there’s definitely something wrong. I don’t think that I was feeling it to the full extent of the damages I received because I had a lot of adrenaline going on. There was a lot of fear I was experiencing. And once that started wearing off, then I started feeling the injuries a lot more, and that’s whenever I started asking, can you guys get me an EMT? My adrenaline’s apparently wearing off. I’m starting to really hurt. And they told me, just wait until this is over, and that’s the only answer I got. They never got me any sort of EMT.

Chris Reiter:  They refused us throughout the entire five and a half hours they were here. I don’t mean to interrupt, but…

Tiffany Napier:  No.

Chris Reiter:  It was intense, because it was about 15 minutes in, she started saying, guys, I’m hurt. And their answer was, well, you’re going to be fine. We’ll be out of here soon. They kept saying things like that, everything’s going to be okay. You’re fine. Well, she wasn’t fine, Taya.

Tiffany Napier:  I wasn’t okay.

Chris Reiter:  After the event, when we finally did go to the hospital on our own – The police never did get us EMTs.

Tiffany Napier:  No.

Chris Reiter:  Her new image showed a for sure new big fracture as well as he had pulled her arm so hard that he had actually also hurt her rotator cuff.

Taya Graham:  This is just absolutely horrifying, and I am so sorry that you went through this, but there is insult to this injury. You two were supposed to be TV content, right? This raid was supposed to end up being entertainment.

Chris Reiter:  Apparently, Taya. Yeah. The sheriff of Clark County, Indiana, he is the author of the show 60 Days In. I’ve done a lot of research on this, but they got their start by having their moment of fame being on Live PD, the television show, Live PD. And then they did the eight or 10 years of Jamie’s show, Jamie Noel’s show, which was 60 Days In.

And I learned later that they were canceling the contract for 60 Days In and that this same team, this agency, the people that broke in our door, were trying out for new content so they can create a show that they call Narcoland. What they’ve been doing is they have been executing these no-knock raids in hopes to find drugs so that they can have content for their new TV show that they’re pitching to replace the TV show 60 Days In.

They’re executing these without doing their due diligence to even know if these warrants are substantial. What’s the word? Substantiated. They’re not actually substantiating these warrants. What they’re doing is they’re trying to rush to beat a timeframe that’s required for this new TV show’s content to be produced.

Tiffany Napier:  Basically they’re just going out and filming and then creating their PC to fill in the blank space.

Chris Reiter:  On the legal side.

Tiffany Napier:  Yeah.

Chris Reiter:  They’re coming backwards and trying to make a probable cause after the fact.

Tiffany Napier:  Yeah, to fit their narrative.

Chris Reiter:  Because they’ve already busted in people’s doors. That’s what they’re doing. If they get the slightest little inclination that someone might have drugs in their home, this team is just busting in their house and expecting to find drugs. And I’m sure the camera crew is just one vehicle behind them. And that’s how they did the Live PD when they did this area. The camera crew would follow the police. The police would initiate, and then after a few minutes of the police interaction, then here would come the camera crew out of their SUV or whatever that was following.

We didn’t see the SUV here that night, but one of the officers that came in was wearing… It was a strap. I’ll always remember it. It said Vivitar on the strap. And the camera was just this little cheap, something you would buy at Target. I’m assuming the only reason that he could have had this camera on him, because it wasn’t the professional one they used for the raids. This was his own personal little camera. The only thing he could have needed that for would’ve been B-roll content. I think they intended on recording a little bit with their own little devices, and then the camera crew was probably going to come in.

Taya Graham:  Were either of you ever charged with anything?

Chris Reiter:  That’s two different questions. No, we were not charged with anything. There was nothing to charge us with.

Tiffany Napier:  They tried to get you for your trash can.

Chris Reiter:  Not to say they weren’t making attempts. They were desperate to find a reason to charge.

Tiffany Napier:  Yes.

Chris Reiter:  They were doing everything from questioning her, trying to get her to incriminate me, telling her to say that I beat her up or hurt her back.

Tiffany Napier:  Well, Donovan Harrid and another officer pulled me off to the side and they were like, we heard that you had hurt your back previously. I said, yeah. Well, we were told that Chris did that whenever he beat you up. I was like, no. And they kept questioning me, asking me the same thing. I was like, are you wanting me to lie to you? I was like, is that what you’re trying to get me to do is to lie? Because I’m not going to do that. But yeah.

Chris Reiter:  They made a lot of attempts like that, Taya. This doesn’t compare to that, that was obviously the most egregious. But I have a trash can that I’d purchased from the city I lived in 10 years ago. And I purchased the trash can, but it still has the city name on the side of it. One of the things that one of the officers wanted to arrest me for, he was talking to the other cops. He said, his trash can’s from Jeffersonville. Can we arrest him for that? And the other cops kind of laughed at him and said, no. Well…

And then they said, but can you produce a receipt? Can you produce a receipt? I got lucky and actually had the receipt in my computer. I showed them a receipt for a trashcan from 10 years ago, but they didn’t have anything to charge us with. Okay? There was no charges whatsoever, but the warrant was actually… They fabricated the reason. They thought we had drugs. They were told by a source that I’m not going to name, but we know who it was, who lied to the detectives and said that her and I were involved in the Mexican mafia distributing and manufacturing drugs from our basement.

That was what they were really here for. But what they used was my uncle had just passed away and he left me the executor of a piece of his will. Well, actually the whole will, but specifically there was a motorcycle and trailer that he wanted to make sure that I maintained, like I chose what to do with it. Either I was to keep it for myself, or… It was his will. That was what they created their reason for being here on.

They actually ended up taking it, Taya. They took the motorcycle that my uncle had just passed away and left to me. I wasn’t going to keep it anyway, but I wasn’t just going to sell it either. I planned on honoring my uncle’s life with that motorcycle. I wanted to do a paint job in his memory and let his bike crew ride it for memorials and charity events and things like that. That was actually what I was planning on doing with it. But they took it because they had to do something to cover for their falsification of all this. They never gave it back. I never got it back, even though they knew it was mine before they ever took it.

Taya Graham:  Now, I think one of the most troubling aspects of this case is not just what it says about policing as an institution, but how we are creating a form of law enforcement that literally creates more problems than it solves. What do I mean? Well, consider the often quoted and perhaps not fully understood maxim called Chekhov’s gun. It’s an idea credited to the venerated Russian playwright, Anton Chekhov. Chekhov was known for writing famous plays like The Cherry Orchard, which depicted the trials and tribulations of life in Russia during the latter half of the 19th century. But he’s also famous for an idea he espoused to fellow writers about how to approach the act of writing itself.

In a series of letters, he described a rule that if you introduce something in the first act of the play, you better do something with it by the third. To illustrate his point, he described a pistol hanging on the wall at the beginning of a play, which he used to make the case for a rule of thumb now called, as we said, Chekhov’s gun. “If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall,” he wrote, “Then in the following one, it should be fired. Otherwise, don’t put it there.”

Now, I know we’ve just entered one of those PR moments where you’re scratching your head and saying, tTaya, why are you talking about a long-dead Russian playwright? What does Anton Chekhov have to do with policing in America in the 21st century? That’s a fair question. Let me try to answer.

I think the point Chekhov was trying to make is more profound than it seems. For him, the gun represents not just a prop, but an idea. That is, the implications of the gun are both manifold and simple. It is a vehicle for violence, and its presence portends it.

Now, I’m not a Chekhov scholar, and I’m sure there are many who will argue correctly that Chekhov’s point was that you don’t introduce things into a drama that you don’t use, that it should have meaning or purpose or it shouldn’t be there. But I think it’s interesting that this concept, however one might interpret it, was illustrated by using a gun. Because that same concept, that by introducing an idea, it ultimately must be used, can be applied to both fiction and reality, particularly when it comes to how much money and resources this country dedicates to training police with militarized tactics and the idea that spending espouses.

Case in point is the current controversy over something called Cop City. It’s a proposed $90 million training complex planned for construction on the outskirts of Atlanta that is currently facing pushback from activists and residents alike. The conflict, though, is not just over the fact that the construction is being funded by a group of anonymous donors, and it’s not solely focused on the notion that while millions are being spent on police training in Atlanta, Atlanta is suffering through one of the worst affordable housing shortages in the country. No, there is much more to the objections to this tribute to American policing set to be built on an old growth forest than just money and priorities.

What’s also raising serious concerns is the type of training police partisans hope to undertake at this facility. For example: urban combat scenarios, high speed chases, SWAT raids, sniper training, the list goes on. The point is this, to reference my favorite movie, Cop Land, this destination resort for warrior cops is going to further the idea that has made American law enforcement so problematic: that somehow, for some reason, police are in a pitched and ongoing battle with the people they purport to serve.

How many times have we witnessed unnecessary and extravagant SWAT raids like the one experienced by Chris and Tiffany, only to later learn that there was some nefarious or untoward reason to conduct it other than public safety? How many times have cops lied to conduct risky intrusions on private property and an innocent person ends up traumatized or dead? Just think of Breonna Taylor, where cops conducted an illegal no-knock raid in Memphis, Tennessee, and shot her six times, even though she had never committed a crime.

In fact, an analysis by the American Civil Liberties Union found that of the roughly 45,000 SWAT raids conducted in 2014, only 7% – That’s right, 7% – involved hostage taking or barricade situations that was the original justification for SWAT teams in the first place.

My point is that building a shrine to militarize policing is putting the proverbial Chekhov’s gun in their hand and saying, you better use it. In other words, the idea of a Cop City is just as potent as the thing itself, which is why opponents of Cop City are working so hard to prevent the 90-acre complex from being built in the first place. It’s like Chekhov’s gun on the wall. An idea that starts with training police with a military mentality ends up inevitably to it being used, even if the circumstances don’t warrant it.

Like the gun on the wall, training cops to stomp around like urban warriors strapped with flash grenades and automatic weapons gives them the idea that that’s the whole point. And thus, they become a lethal solution in search of a problem. It is hard to conceive of a more anti-community policing message than Cop City. It is impossible to countenance a more pro-militarized policing statement than a training base better equipped than your average public school or community library.

What do you think is going to come from arming cops to the teeth and teaching them to rappel down buildings? Officer friendly standing on the corner handing out lollipops? I don’t think so. And that’s why Cop City and the idea behind it should be considered as more than just a debate over how much or how little to spend on policing. That’s why we need to examine the proposal to tear down an old growth forest so law enforcement can chase each other around as more than a matter of resource allocation or budgeting.

My point is that the Cop City is an idea, so to speak, about both what American policing is, and more importantly, who we are. It is an expression of the idea that there is part of America that does not have Constitutional rights, that we the people are, in fact, inevitably divided into groups: one that is policed, and one that isn’t.

I think the best way to illustrate the danger of a facility like Cop City is to refer to the words of our colleague Eddie Conway. As many of you may already know, Eddie, a former Black Panther and political prisoner, passed away a few weeks ago at the age of 76. He was a tireless advocate for the people, a community builder, and a champion of civil rights. And to me, a mentor, a friend, an inspiration, and a colleague who I will miss dearly, to say the least.

But Eddie was also a writer who published several books about his experiences in the struggle against injustice and inequity. And there is a quote from his book that was read as part of his eulogy that I’ve been thinking about ever since. It was an excerpt from his book Marshall Law: The Life and Times of a Baltimore Black Panther. And in it he tells a story of militarized policing that prompted a realization that would change his life forever. Eddie was serving in the army in Germany at that time. He was preparing to request to go to Vietnam to avenge the death of his friend who had died there. While he was just about to sign the papers to leave, he picked up a copy of the military newspaper Stars and Stripes. And this is how he described that moment that changed his life forever:

“On the front page,” Eddie wrote, “Was the photo of a Black woman on a street corner in Newark, and in the center of the street there’s an army personnel carrier. This was a picture of the so-called Newark Riot. I saw one of those box tanks with treads. On top of that thing is a 50 caliber machine gun and a belt of bullets, the kind we used to wear around our necks, but it was pointed at the Black women. I was a medic. I knew the damage those 50 caliber bullets could do, and I knew if you pressed that button, it would go off 25 to 50 times before you could stop it. I looked at that weapon, I looked at the women. There was this little white soldier that was sitting in that tank and he was pointing it at these Black women. And I thought, ‘Something is wrong here. The army, my army, is pointing machine guns at Black women. One of them could be my mom.’ And right there, looking at that picture, I woke up.”

Goodbye, Eddie Marshall Conway. We love you and we’ll remember you forever. And thank you for helping to build a better future for all of us.

I want to thank my guests, Chris Reiter and Tiffany Napier, for speaking with me, and for their patience with me during some of my technical difficulties. Thank you both so much. And of course, I have to thank intrepid reporter Stephen Janis for his writing, research, and editing on this piece. Thank you, Stephen.

Stephen Janis:  Taya, thanks for having me. I really appreciate it.

Taya Graham:  And of course, I have to thank my mods and friends of the show, Noli Dee and Lacey R, for their support. Thank you. And my super patrons, including David K, Matter of Rights, John R, Lewis P, Chris R, Pineapple Girl, and Shane Bushta. We appreciate you, and I will thank every single patron personally in our next livestream.

And I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct or brutality, please share it with us and we might be able to investigate. Please reach out to us. You can email us tips privately at and share your evidence of police misconduct. You can also message us at Police Accountability Report on Facebook or Instagram, or @eyesonpolice on Twitter. Of course, you can always message me directly @tayasbaltimore on Twitter or Facebook. And please like and comment. I really do read your comments and appreciate them.

And if you can, we do have a Patreon link called Accountability Reports pinned in the comments below. If you feel inspired to donate, please do. We don’t run ads or take corporate dollars, so anything you can spare is greatly appreciated. My name is Taya Graham, and I am your host of the Police Accountability Report. Please be safe out there.

Maximillian Alvarez:  Thank you so much for watching the Real News Network, where we lift up the voices, stories, and struggles that you care about most. And we need your help to keep doing this work, so please tap your screen now, subscribe, and donate to the Real News Network. Solidarity forever.

World News

Australian National Review – Every Christian In America Is A Target Now





Every Christian in America is a Target Now

By Michael

This is what happens when you systematically suck all of the values out of a society.  There is utter lawlessness in the streets, and violence can literally erupt anywhere.  On Monday, a mass shooter ruthlessly gunned down six Christians at a private Christian school in Nashville, Tennessee.  The shooter once attended the school, but after leaving the school the shooter developed a deep hatred for the Christian values promoted there.  Unfortunately, this incident is a microcosm of what is going on in our society as a whole.  Countless voices are stirring up great hatred for the Christian faith, and all of that hate was inevitably going to result in great violence.

When I was growing up, I never imagined that someone would come in to a Christian gathering and start shooting.

But now every Christian in America is a potential target.

If you are a Christian, you will need to be on guard whenever you attend any type of a Christian event from this point forward.

I wish that this wasn’t true, but ignoring the reality of the world that we live in now could get you killed.

Prior to Monday, I am sure that most of those that worked at The Covenant School in Nashville never imagined that something like this would ever happen.  The following comes from NBC News…

Three children and three staff members — whose ages ranged from 9 to 61 — were killed at a private Christian school in Nashville on Monday before the shooter, a heavily armed 28-year-old woman, was killed by police, authorities said.

The shooting unfolded at The Covenant School on Burton Hills Boulevard where officers “engaged” the attacker, described by Metropolitan Nashville Police Chief John Drake as a former student at the school.

Actually, NBC News is guilty of “misgendering” the shooter, because “Aiden” has not identified as a woman for quite some time…

And it is also being reported that the shooter “had a manifesto and detailed maps of the school”…

Police said the “lone zealot”, who lived in Nashville, was armed with two assault-type rifles, a pistol and a handgun.

Hale had a manifesto and detailed maps of the school, and entered the building by shooting through a door before the killings.

I can guarantee you that this story will disappear from the news cycle faster than other mass shootings, because it is not a story that the corporate media will be eager to tell.

But the truth is that violence against Christians and Christian institutions is on the rise.

The corporate media is always trying to convince us that political violence from the right is such a threat, but the numbers tell us that political violence is far, far more likely to come from the left.  Here is just one example…

There have been 22 times more attacks against pro-life groups since the leak in early May of a draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade compared to attacks on pro-choice organizations, new data show.

“The overwhelming narrative in the media is the claim those on the right are responsible for most of the politically motivated violence in the U.S. It has been a theme in the news media after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision was leaked, with many claiming that there was disproportionate violence against pro-choice providers. But a review of cases shows over 22 times more violence against pro-life advocates,” John Lott, the founder and president of the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), told Fox News Digital on Monday.

In recent years there have been hundreds of attacks on police by radical leftists, and one lunatic actually put a “bounty” on more than 9,300 Los Angeles police officers…

Three Los Angeles police officers are suing the owner of, accusing him of publishing their photos on his website and putting out a “bounty” on them.

It is the first legal action stemming from the Los Angeles Police Department’s release of the names and photos of almost every sworn officer — more than 9,300 officers, including some who work undercover — as part of a public records request. A police watchdog group posted the images online last Friday.

But these days attacking those that are promoting traditional values has become even trendier than attacking the police.

Sadly, this is happening all over the western world.  Just check out what happened when Posie Parker attempted to hold a public event in New Zealand the other day…

So what was her crime?

She believes that a “woman” is a biological woman.

If you don’t agree with her, then make your case.

But don’t get violent.

Sadly, the “woke crowd” has become so angry and so violent that you can’t even have a rational discussion with them about any of these issues.  I really like how this guy put it…

If you do not go along with their agenda, they will seek to punish you however they can.

In fact, a bill that has just been introduced in the Minnesota legislature would actually take children away from parents that do not allow their kids to get “gender-affirming health care”…

Minnesota lawmakers have advanced legislation introduced by a transgender representative that could strip custody from parents who do not support their child changing genders.
The bill, HF 146, moved forward with a vote of 68-62, along party lines.

The bill says that the state can claim temporary emergency jurisdiction over a child if they are in the state and “the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care.” It is meant to prevent law enforcement from removing a child from parental custody based on an order made outside the state.

This is what we are becoming as a nation.

And the values that this nation was founded upon are rapidly disappearing…

Patriotism, religious faith, having children and other priorities that helped define the national character for generations are receding in importance to Americans, a new Wall Street Journal-NORC poll finds.

The survey, conducted with NORC at the University of Chicago, a nonpartisan research organization, also finds the country sharply divided by political party over social trends such as the push for racial diversity in businesses and the use of gender-neutral pronouns.

People often wonder why I talk about “values” so much.

This is why.

Our country is decaying from within, and most people don’t seem to care.

But if we don’t stand up now while we still can, eventually just about everything that we love about America will be completely gone.

Continue Reading

World News

Australian National Review – The Trump Campaign’s Collusion With Israel





The Trump Campaign’s Collusion With Israel

By James Bamford

While US media fixated on Russian interference in the 2016 election, an Israeli secret agent’s campaign to influence the outcome went unreported.

“Roger, hello from Jerusalem,” read the message from the Israeli secret agent. Dated August 12, 2016, it was addressed to Roger Stone—at the time a key player in Donald Trump’s presidential election campaign. “Any progress? He is going to be defeated unless we intervene. We have critical intel. The key is in your hands! Back in the US next week.” Later, the agent promised, “October Surprise coming!”

While the American media and political system fixated on Russian President Vladimir Putin and his armies of cyber warriors, trolls, and bots, what was completely missed in the Russiagate investigation of 2016 was the Israeli connection. No details of it were ever revealed in the heavily redacted Mueller Report. Nor was there any mention of an Israeli plot in the similarly redacted Senate Intelligence Committee Report on collusion charges in the 2016 election, or in any of the indictments or trials stemming from the Russia charges. Nor did any mention of Israeli involvement ever leak into the press. Yet I can reveal here the details of an elaborate covert operation personally directed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that aimed to use secret intelligence to clandestinely intervene at the highest levels in the presidential election on behalf of Trump.

Shadowy hints of the plot only became visible with the little-noticed release in 2020 of a heavily redacted May 2018 FBI search warrant and its accompanying affidavit. As part of the Mueller investigation, the bureau had conducted an extensive search for any foreign interference in the 2016 election, and the warrant was directed at securing the Google accounts of a mysterious Israeli agent acting under the direction of someone identified as “PM.” The FBI agent who wrote the affidavit noted, “I believe ‘PM’ refers to the ‘Prime Minister.’”

In the spring of 2016, no issue was more important to Benjamin Netanyahu than Donald Trump winning the White House. The GOP presidential candidate was key to everything he was after, from ending the Iran nuclear agreement, to recognizing Jerusalem—rather than Tel Aviv—as Israel’s capital, to continuing the occupation of Palestine. But November was months away, and there was no guarantee Trump would win. In the meantime, Netanyahu was under mounting pressure from President Barack Obama to finally resolve the issues surrounding Palestine. Leading the charge on behalf of Obama was Secretary of State John Kerry, who was equally determined to find a solution after many years of trying.

Kerry was not alone. The Middle East Quartet, a group formed to mediate the Palestine-Israel peace process that included representatives from the United Nations, the European Union, the United States, and Russia, was also seeking a solution to the issues surrounding the occupation—and it was about to release a report that was expected to be highly critical of Israel. With so much on the line, Netanyahu appears to have made a drastic decision. He would dispatch a discreet, highly trusted aide, armed with critical intelligence, to covertly “intervene” in the US election to help put his man Trump in the White House. Based on the FBI documents, the intelligence appears to have consisted of advance knowledge of Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and it may have included confidential details from the stolen e-mails. It was likely obtained by Israeli eavesdropping operations that were targeting secret Russian communications, as well as those of WikiLeaks.

Although the affidavit did not specify any individual defendants, the numerous potential criminal charges laid out in the FBI documents spoke to the seriousness of the Israeli plot. They included violation of the foreign contributions ban, which prohibits foreigners from contributing money or something of value to federal, state, or local elections. Other charges included aiding and abetting, conspiracy, wire fraud, and attempted conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Still another charge, “unauthorized access to a protected computer,” indicates Israel may have conducted illegal hacking operations. Based on the e-mails and text messages contained in the documents, the conspiracy began in the late spring of 2016, when it was beginning to appear that Trump had a good chance of winning the Republican nomination.

This was also when the FBI and the media began focusing heavily on possible Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, as a result of Moscow’s hacking of the DNC and the Clinton campaign. But while the Mueller investigation was never able to conclusively demonstrate any collusion with Russia, the FBI did uncover hard evidence of extensive collusion between close Trump associates and the highest levels of the Israeli government.

Donald Trump speaking at a campaign press conference at the AIPAC Policy Conference

Common cause: Donald Trump speaking at a campaign press conference at the AIPAC Policy Conference in Washington, DC in 2016.

On the sixth floor of a concrete-and-glass high-rise just south of Tel Aviv, behind a door marked “Unit 17” in Hebrew, political operatives plot newer and more creative ways to use fraud to win elections across much of the planet. The 16-story Azrieli Business Center in Holon is home to Archimedes Group, a private intelligence company that boasts that it can “change reality according to our client’s wishes.” Those clients stretch from Africa to Latin America to Southeast Asia.

In Nigeria in 2018, the company’s campaign of lies and misinformation helped reelect former military coup leader Muhammadu Buhari as president. Hired by other would-be presidents and politicians around the world in at least 13 countries, Archimedes soon had 3 million people following its phony Facebook and Instagram accounts. It even created bogus “fact-checking” accounts to lie about its fake news stories, claiming they were based on solid facts.

But in May 2019, Facebook caught on to the various scams and removed 265 Facebook and Instagram accounts from the orbit of the Archimedes operation. “Archimedes Group,” it said, “has repeatedly violated our misrepresentation and other policies, including by engaging in coordinated inauthentic behavior. This organization and all its subsidiaries are now banned from Facebook, and it has been issued a cease and desist letter.”

Archimedes is hardly alone. An Israeli government official told the Times of Israel that outsourcing fake news and voter manipulation is a growth industry in Israel because many young Israelis who serve in intelligence units in the army are trained in the use of “avatars,” or fake identities, on social media. The Israeli government appears to have made no effort to halt or even curb the activity. Such inaction may be deliberate, since a number of the groups that engage in voter manipulation have close ties to the intelligence and defense agencies, possibly providing Netanyahu an opportunity to secretly manipulate foreign elections to Israel’s benefit.

In fact, a recent multinational journalistic investigation revealed that Israel has become a world center for the export of election fraud, fake news, hacking of private e-mails, and disinformation. Connections were discovered between private intelligence firms and both Israel’s Ministry of Defense and the firm Cambridge Analytica, which illegally collected data from more than 87 million Facebook users for use in the 2016 presidential campaigns of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.

The eight-month international collaborative project involved journalists from 30 news outlets, including Israel’s Haaretz, the UK’s Guardian and Observer, France’s Le Monde, Germany’s Der Spiegel, and Spain’s El Pais. They discovered an Israel-based “global private market in disinformation aimed at elections,” according to The Guardian. Among the individuals unmasked was Tal Hanan, a former Israeli special forces operative and the head of a secretive organization with the code name “Team Jorge” whose specialty was weaponizing disinformation worldwide “to covertly meddle in elections without a trace,” said The Guardian.

Hanan told the undercover reporters that his services had been used in Africa, South and Central America, the US, and Europe, and that his company had completed “33 presidential-level campaigns, 27 of which were successful.”

What was not revealed in this investigation, however, was the separate and far more covert operation undertaken by Netanyahu and his secret agent to clandestinely manipulate America’s 2016 presidential election for Netanyahu’s own political purposes.

Jerusalem attorney Isaac Molho

A discreet man: Jerusalem attorney Isaac Molho is one of Netanyahu’s oldest and most trusted advisers.

For years, the man Netanyahu relied on to do battle with Kerry and the Quartet was his top personal aide, Isaac Molho, a secretive and shadowy private attorney who was trusted with the prime minister’s most sensitive missions. “There has probably never been a person in the history of this country in such a desirable position as Isaac Molho,” Haaretz noted. “He enjoys almost complete silence from the media…. On Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s instructions, Molho undertakes sensitive missions to countries with which Israel has no diplomatic ties. The Mossad supplies him with logistical backing, security and transport.”

Some of Molho’s assignments are too sensitive even for the Mossad—a fact that has at times frustrated those at the spy agency. “The Mossad gritted its teeth over the past eight years while watching the diplomatic missions carried out by Isaac Molho, without any requirement to take a polygraph test and as a private citizen with business and other affairs that are not subject to civil service regulations,” Haaretz said. In addition to national loyalty, Molho, whose wife is Netanyahu’s cousin, may even be acting out of family loyalty.

Although the secret agent’s name was redacted from the FBI’s search warrant, his profile, as outlined in the accompanying affidavit, is strikingly similar to that of Isaac Molho. Like Molho, who was described by Haaretz as a “discreet man for sensitive missions,” the secret agent is described as highly trusted and very close to Netanyahu. Most important, at one point, according to the affidavit, the agent was summoned from the US to Rome at a moment’s notice to be by Netanyahu’s side on a date the Israeli prime minister was conducting negotiations with John Kerry in the Italian capital over Palestine. This critical role was for many years played exclusively by Molho. In addition, the agent referred to in the warrant had enough clout and authority to direct the actions of two other high-ranking Israeli officials involved in the clandestine operation to influence the results of the US election. Molho did not respond to The Nation’s request for comment.

The key for the Israeli agent was finding a back door—a covert channel—to Trump. Roger Stone, long a key Trump aide, fit the bill. Although Stone had formally left the campaign, he and Trump spoke frequently and confidentially. For these calls, Trump would often use the phone of his security director, Keith Schiller, “because he did not want his advisers to know they were talking,” according to Sam Nunberg, a political adviser who served on Trump’s 2016 election campaign. Stone energetically supported Israel’s harsh occupation of the Palestinian territories and its bellicose stance toward Iran; following Trump’s speech at an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in March 2016, Stone noted approvingly that “Donald Trump is a radical Zionist.”

Another Trump aide heavily involved in the conspiracy, according to the FBI documents, was Stone’s associate Jerome Corsi, who appears to have been the original contact who connected the Israelis to Stone. An ultraconservative journalist with a doctorate in political science from Harvard and the author of a shelf of books harshly critical of liberals and Democrats, Corsi was a leading literary light of the extreme right. He gained fame in 2004 for his “swiftboating” attacks on the military record of then–presidential candidate John Kerry. The secret agent was particularly drawn to Corsi’s adulation of Israel and support for its belligerence toward Iran.

Hiding behind his online pseudonym “jrlc,” Corsi was also a virulent Islamophobe. Posting on the conservative forum, he has called Islam “a virus” and “a worthless, dangerous Satanic religion” and has written that “Islam is a peaceful religion as long as the women are beaten, the boys buggered, and the infidels killed.”

After Corsi provided contact information to Stone, the secret Israeli agent and Stone connected. Then, on May 17, the agent wrote, “Hi Roger, I hope all is well. Our dinner tonight for 7PM is confirmed. I arrive at 4PM. Please suggest a good restaurant that has privacy.” The original plan was for Stone and the agent to meet alone, but Stone wanted to bring Corsi along as backup. “I am uncomfortable meeting without Jerry,” Stone wrote, and then rescheduled the dinner for the next day.

According to the FBI warrant, the same day that Stone communicated with the Israeli agent, he began Googling some very strange terms, including “guccifer” and “dcleaks.” It would be nearly a month before those same terms would make headlines around the world. On June 14, The Washington Post reported that the DNC had been hacked by Russian government agents. The next day, someone calling himself “Guccifer 2.0” took credit for the attack. He claimed to be an American hacktivist, but according to a Justice Department indictment in July 2018, he was actually a Russian GRU employee. Soon afterward, the website DCLeaks—another front for the GRU—began releasing hacked Democratic Party documents.

The timing implies that the Israeli agent was Stone’s most likely source of confirmed details of a Russian cyberattack on the DNC, a month before it became known to anyone outside of the Kremlin and the GRU. If that’s the case, there are two critical questions: How did the Israeli agent know, and why was he revealing the details to a close associate of Trump rather than to the Obama administration, Israel’s supposed ally?

On May 18, the day after Stone’s Google searches, Stone, Corsi, and the Israeli agent met for dinner at the 21 Club on 52nd Street in New York City. The restaurant, which features a balcony lined with painted iron lawn jockeys, was a regular Trump hangout. At the top of the agent’s agenda was getting Stone to quickly set up a confidential meeting with the candidate. The next day, the agent pressed Stone in an e-mail: “Did You Talk To Trump This Morning? Any News?” But Stone was coy. “Contact made—interrupted—mood good.”

Then, in early June, according to the Senate Intelligence Committee Report, Stone learned that Julian Assange, the head of WikiLeaks, was about to release something “big.” Stone relayed the details to Rick Gates, Trump’s deputy campaign manager, and told him that Assange appeared to have Clinton’s e-mails. Yet it wasn’t until later, on June 12, that Assange would publicly announce that WikiLeaks had “emails relating to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication.”

These were the first of many tips to Stone that appear to have come from his new Israeli friend. Two days later, the DNC announced that it had been hacked by Russia. The day after that, Stone again Googled “Guccifer” and “dcleaks,” hours before Guccifer 2.0 publicly claimed responsibility. On June 21, as Guccifer released more documents, the Israeli agent notified Stone that he was in New York accompanied by a senior official and would like a meeting with Trump. “RS: Secret,” said the message, according to the FBI documents. “Cabinet Minister [redacted] in NYC. Available for DJT meeting.”

Other parts of the message were also redacted, but in the affidavit the FBI revealed the cabinet minister’s official title: “According to publicly-available information, during this time [redacted] was a Minister without portfolio in the [redacted] cabinet dealing with issues concerning defense and foreign affairs.” At the time, the only minister without portfolio in the Israeli government was Tzachi Hanegbi, one of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s oldest and closest confidants, and Wikipedia (the likely source of the FBI agent’s “publicly- available information”) uses nearly identical language to describe him. Israeli press reports at the time indicated that Hanegbi was in the United States on that date as part of a delegation attending the unveiling of Israel’s new F-35 stealth fighter jet.

Married to an American from Florida and fluent in English, Hanegbi previously held a post as minister of intelligence supervising Mossad and Shin Bet, the Israeli internal security service. The question is, why would a high-level confidant of Netanyahu’s, with an intelligence background and close American links, seek a secret meeting with a US presidential candidate?

Trump had been busy, hustling from city to city on the campaign trail and hitting several rallies a day. Taking valuable time to meet a couple of Israeli contacts was not a high priority, especially without any idea what the meeting would be about. So, on June 25, Hanegbi returned to Israel. “Roger, Minister left,” said the Israeli agent. “Sends greetings from PM. When am I meeting DJT? Should I stay or leave Sunday as planned?” The next day, Stone replied, “I would not leave as we hope to schedule the meeting mon or tues.”

One possible explanation of the agent’s sense of urgency was Obama’s and Kerry’s increasing pressure on Netanyahu to resolve the Palestinian issue. A key element of that solution would be agreeing to negotiate an equitable division of Jerusalem, since both sides claimed it as their capital. But if his secret agent could confidentially meet with Trump and get a commitment that, if elected, he would support keeping Jerusalem undivided, then Netanyahu could ignore Obama. An election win for Trump, therefore, would also be a win for Netanyahu. Especially since the candidate was already fully committed to another key issue for Netanyahu: canceling the nuclear deal with Iran.

Trump and Netanyahu

A united front: Trump and Netanyahu participate in a joint statement in the East Room of the White House in 2020.

Suddenly, there was a change in plans. According to the FBI documents, the agent was ordered by Netanyahu to postpone the appointment with Trump and instead get on the next plane for Rome. In a last-minute effort to find a solution to Jerusalem and the Palestinian issue, meetings in the Italian capital were set up between Netanyahu, Kerry, and the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini. Netanyahu wanted his aide, the agent, at his side. At the meeting, the elephant in the room was a forthcoming report by the Middle East Quartet. It was expected by all to be extremely critical of Israel for its apartheid settlement policies and its treatment of the occupied Palestinians.

The night before the meeting, Netanyahu and Kerry met for dinner at Pierluigi, a popular seafood restaurant in Piazza de Ricci, a block from the Tiber. “What is your plan for the Palestinians?” Kerry asked as the prime minister began chain-smoking a batch of thick Cuban cigars. “What do you want to happen now?” Netanyahu offered a vague response involving a regional initiative, but Kerry wasn’t buying it. “You have no path of return to direct talks with the Palestinians, or a channel to talks with Arab countries,” Kerry told the prime minister, according to Haaretz. “You’ve hit the glass ceiling. What’s your plan?” he asked again. But Netanyahu may well have had one: to use his agent, perhaps sitting with them at that very table, to help put Trump in the White House.

On June 28, after the meeting in Rome had concluded, the agent quickly dashed off another message to Stone: “RETURNING TO DC AFTER URGENT CONSULTATIONS WITH PM IN ROME. MUST MEET WITH YOU WED. EVE AND WITH DJ TRUMP THURSDAY IN NYC.”

The meeting with Trump was rescheduled for 1 pm on Wednesday, July 6, before the candidate took off for a rally in Sharonville, Ohio. The Israeli agent flew to New York the day before and checked into the St. Regis, the French Beaux Arts–style hotel on East 55th Street. The next morning, he had planned to rendezvous with Stone in the lobby for a pre-meeting discussion. “At the St Regis With Lt General. Waiting For You Thank You,” he wrote.

But there were problems involving secrecy. Stone, at his home in Florida, had come down with a bad cold and was too ill to travel, so he arranged for Corsi to make the introduction. That made the Israeli agent uncomfortable because of the sensitive nature of the discussion. “I have to meet Trump alone,” he said, and they agreed that Corsi would leave after the introduction. There was still another problem, however. The meeting was meant to be secret, but the agent was accompanied by an Israeli lieutenant general. So once again the meeting had to be postponed.

Who was this lieutenant general? Unlike in the United States, where the highest military rank is a four-star general, in Israel it’s a three-star lieutenant general, and there is only one, the chief of the General Staff, the commander in chief of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)—the equivalent of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. At the time, that was Lt. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot. But it’s unlikely that Eizenkot was the person waiting in the lobby of the St. Regis to meet with Trump. Eizenkot had little to do with the election—and had actually sided with Obama on the issue of Iran. In January 2016, he said that the nuclear deal “had actually removed the most serious danger to Israel’s existence for the foreseeable future, and greatly reduced the threat over the longer term.”

Instead, it may have been Eizenkot’s predecessor, Benny Gantz, who had retired as head of the IDF in February 2015 but still held the rank of lieutenant general in the reserves and was often referred to by his military title. He was in charge of the IDF during Israel’s war on Palestinians in Gaza in 2014. It was a war that produced a “vastly disproportionate” number of civilian deaths: 1,400 of the nearly 2,300 people killed in the conflict, according to Human Rights Watch. Gantz would later boast that “parts of Gaza were sent back to the Stone Age.”

In May 2020, Gantz would become the second-most-powerful person in Israel under Netanyahu, as the alternate prime minister. At the time of the canceled meeting with Trump, however, he was the chairman of Fifth Dimension, an Israeli private intelligence company run by a former deputy head of Mossad, with another former Mossad member as CEO.

Fifth Dimension wasn’t the only Israeli spy company with close ties to Israeli intelligence. Another was Psy Group, a private intelligence firm that operated under the motto “Shape Reality.” Earlier that year, on behalf of the Ministry of Strategic Affairs, Psy Group had carried out Project Butterfly, a covert operation that spied on and attacked Americans who supported the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. In April 2016, it offered Trump campaign official Rick Gates another secret operation, Project Rome. The subtitle of the six-page proposal clearly spelled out its objective to covertly interfere with the US presidential election: “Campaign Intelligence & Influence Services Proposal.”

Secrecy was paramount. “We recommend keeping this activity compartmentalized and on need-to-know basis since secrecy is a key factor in the success of the activity,” the proposal said. “Due to the sensitivity of some of the activities and the need for compartmentalization and secrecy, Psy Group will use code names.” Trump was called “Lion,” Hillary Clinton was “Forest,” and Ted Cruz was “Bear.” “This document details the services proposed by Psy Group for the ‘Lion’ project between now and July 2016,” the proposal noted, referring to the period of the US primaries.

The Project Rome proposal read like an official Ministry of Strategic Affairs or Mossad operational document, referring to “multisource intelligence collection,” “covert sources,” “automated collection and analysis,” and an “intelligence dossier on each target, including actionable intelligence.” “Once the information has been uncovered or extracted, it is delivered to the Influence platform for use in the campaign as needed,” the proposal said.

Project Rome’s “Influence+ process” platform involved targeting American voters through “authentic-looking 3rd party platforms”—that is, fake news sites—and also through the use of “tailored avatars,” thousands of phony social media accounts on platforms such as Facebook. “The purpose of these platforms is to engage the targets and actively convince them or sway their opinion towards our goals.” The “targets” were unwitting American voters. “The team will include over 40 intelligence and influence experts,” the document said. Then there were what internal company e-mails called “physical world ops like counter protesters, hecklers, etc.” The techniques were nearly identical to those used by the Israeli firms Archimedes Group and “Team Jorge” to secretly throw elections around the world.

The price tag for the operation was $3,210,000, with another $100,000 for media expenses and $400,000 more for “negative opposition.” It appears that Gates, wisely, passed on Project Rome. The key players behind Psy Group later formed a new Israeli company, Percepto International. Also investigated by the international journalism collaboration, it was labeled “an Israeli factory for online deception” by Haaretz.

Despite the Trump campaign’s rejection of Project Rome, covert high-level approaches to Roger Stone to get directly to Trump continued.

“Hi Roger,” the Israeli agent wrote on July 8. “Have you rescheduled the meeting with DJT? The PM is putting pressure for a quick decision.” Stone wrote back that Trump would not be back in New York until after the Republican National Convention, so the meeting would have to be postponed until then. He added, “Sorry about the fiasco last week, however you can’t just bring the General without tell[ing] me.”

As Trump stormed the Midwest for votes, Guccifer 2.0 was making final preparations for another major release of documents. On July 14, Guccifer sent WikiLeaks an e-mail titled “big archive,” with a one-gigabyte encrypted attachment. Four days later, on July 18, the WikiLeaks Twitter account notified Guccifer the data had been received and that release of the hacked DNC e-mails was planned for later in the week.

On or around the next day, Donald Trump was in his New York office venting at the press for its criticism of his wife Melania’s Republican convention address the night before. There were accusations that she had borrowed passages from a speech by Michelle Obama. At some point, however, according to Trump attorney Michael Cohen’s Senate Intelligence Committee testimony, Trump took a phone call from Roger Stone.

“Roger, how are you?” said Trump.

“Good,” Stone replied. “Just want to let you know I got off the telephone a moment ago with Julian Assange. And in a couple of days, there’s going to be a massive dump of e-mails that’s going to be extremely damaging to the Clinton campaign.”

Trump was pleased. “Uh, that’s good. Keep me posted,” he said into a small black speaker box on his desk. Sitting nearby was Michael Cohen. “Do you believe him? Do you think Roger really spoke to Assange?” Trump asked.

“I don’t know,” Cohen said. “Roger is Roger, and for all you know, he was looking on his Twitter account. I don’t know the answer.”

In the end, neither Mueller’s team nor the FBI could ever find any substantive or conspiratorial communications between Stone and WikiLeaks. He had exchanged a few innocuous messages with Guccifer, later reviewed by the FBI, but there was no indication of how Stone could have known what he knew—which left only one apparent explanation: that the information had been passed to him by Netanyahu’s agent. As in the case of the DNC hack, the information was 100 percent accurate. There was never any evidence that Stone learned of the releases from either WikiLeaks or the Russians, but during that period both he and Jerome Corsi were in contact with the Israeli agent. Israel’s version of the NSA, Unit 8200, which employs some of the most highly trained signals intelligence specialists in the world and is equipped with advanced intercept capabilities, may well have been surveilling Russia and WikiLeaks.

Three days later, on July 22, as Hillary Clinton was preparing to announce her choice of a running mate on the eve of the Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks released approximately 20,000 e-mails stolen from the DNC. “I guess Roger was right,” Trump told Cohen. Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager, agreed. Sitting on the tarmac in his plane, about to take off for his next rally, Trump delayed the flight for half an hour to work the messages into his speech. Hungry for more, he later told Manafort to keep in touch with Stone about future WikiLeaks releases.

On Wednesday, July 29, the Israeli agent was back in touch with Stone and Corsi and eager to connect with Trump now that the convention was over and he was the Republican nominee. “HI ROGER,” the agent wrote. “HAVE YOU SET UP A NEW MEETING WITH TRUMP? I PLAN TO BE BACK IN THE US NEXT WEEK. PLEASE ADVISE. THANK YOU.” Stone sent a message to Manafort about finding a time to communicate, writing that there was “good shit happening.” The next day, the two spoke on the phone for 68 minutes. The following day, July 31, Stone had two phone calls with Trump that lasted over 10 minutes.

Then on Tuesday, August 2, despite previous failed attempts to connect with Assange, Corsi was nevertheless able to send a detailed message to Stone about WikiLeaks’ future plans:

Word is friend in embassy plans 2 more dumps. One shortly after I’m back. 2nd in Oct. Impact planned to be very damaging…. Time to let more than Podesta to be exposed as in bed w enemy if they are not ready to drop HRC. That appears to be the game hackers are now about. Would not hurt to start suggesting HRC old, memory bad, has stroke—neither he nor she well. I expect that much of next dump focus, setting stage for Foundation debacle.

Corsi later told Stone that there was “more to come than anyone realizes. Won’t really get started until after Labor Day.” The details, including the first indication that Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was a target, were coming from somewhere other than Assange.

“Roger—As per PM we have one last shot before moving on,” the Israeli agent wrote to Stone on August 9. “Can you deliver? History will not forgive us. TRUMP IN FREE FALL. OCTOBER SURPRISE COMING!” What the “October Surprise” consisted of was left unexplained, but the implication was that there would be a spectacular new release of stolen e-mails, possibly centering on Podesta.

Three days later, the agent was even more frantic. He sent Stone his “hello from Jerusalem” message, promising that his government was prepared to “intervene” in the US election to help Trump win the presidency and offering to share critical intelligence to make it happen. Stone replied cryptically: “Matters complicated. Pondering.” Then, the following week, on August 20, Corsi suggested a meeting with the secret agent to determine “what if anything Israel plans to do in Oct.”

From the messages, it appears that Israel either had its own October Surprise planned or was aware of Guccifer’s planned release of the Podesta e-mails before the election. The day after Corsi suggested meeting with Netanyahu’s agent, Stone for the first time publicly indicated that Podesta would soon become a target of WikiLeaks—thereby predicting the event six weeks before it happened. “Trust me, it will soon the [sic] Podesta’s time in the barrel. #CrookedHillary,” said his tweet. Since neither Assange nor Guccifer was a source for either Corsi or Stone, the tweet once again points to the Israeli agent who was in communication with both of them about the October Surprise.

The prospect of an October Surprise, along with the offer of critical intelligence, apparently got Trump’s attention. On September 25, he and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, met privately with Netanyahu and Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer in his Trump Tower penthouse. Later that day, he publicly announced that if he was elected, his administration would finally “recognize Jerusalem as the undivided capital of the State of Israel.” Since 1947, there has been virtual unanimity within the international community—and among US presidents—that the future of Jerusalem must be the subject of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. Now Trump was vowing to trash that consensus, along with the Palestinians, and support Netanyahu’s agenda. Whether Trump and the Israeli agent ever met in person is unclear. By late summer, Stone and Corsi were becoming increasingly concerned about potential charges, and to eliminate a paper trail they began meeting only in private with the agent. What is very clear, however, is that in the end Netanyahu got what he wanted—and so did Trump.

Around the same time, Stone had a conversation with Paul Manafort, who by then had left the campaign but stayed in communication with Trump’s political circles. According to Manafort’s later Senate Intelligence Committee testimony, Stone told him that “John Podesta was going to be in the barrel,” repeating the claim he made by tweet on August 21, and that “there were going to be leaks of John Podesta’s emails.” A few days later, on September 29, Stone called Trump, who was on the way to New York’s LaGuardia Airport in his black bulletproof limo. After concluding the call, Trump told Rick Gates, who was sitting next to him, that “more releases of damaging information would be coming.”

On October 7, WikiLeaks unleashed 2,050 Podesta e-mails that were damaging to Hillary Clinton and her campaign—just as Stone had predicted a month and a half earlier. But Stone’s concern about potential criminal charges seems to have turned into outright paranoia. Given that he had no close links to Assange or the Russians, the likely focus of his concerns were his numerous communications with the Israeli secret agent. After all, Stone had discussed clandestine foreign intervention in a presidential election, had made arrangements for Trump to meet a foreign agent, and had predicted the October Surprise. The prospect that authorities might look into any of these actions could certainly have been sufficient to rattle his nerves.

By secretly assisting Netanyahu’s agent in an attempt to make contact with a presidential candidate—aware that he intended to interfere in the US election on behalf of his country—both Stone and Corsi could have faced serious charges as agents of a foreign power under Section 951 of the criminal code, which makes it a crime to covertly assist a foreign government without registering.

Even before WikiLeaks released the Podesta e-mails in October, Stone and Corsi seemed to become nervous that someone would discover their back channel. Soon after the “Podesta’s time in the barrel” tweet in August, Stone and Corsi tried to find a way to somehow account for that unique insight. On August 30, Corsi said in his 2019 book Silent No More, “I suggested Stone could use me as an excuse, claiming my research on Podesta and Russia was the basis for Stone’s prediction that Podesta would soon be in the pickle barrel.” He added, “I knew this was a cover-story, in effect not true, since I recalled telling Stone earlier in August that Assange had Podesta e-mails that he planned to drop as the ‘October Surprise.’” The next day, Corsi said, he e-mailed to Stone “a nine-page background memorandum on John Podesta that I had written that day at Stone’s request.”

Following the Podesta dump, the cover-up became more frantic. Stone ordered Corsi to delete e-mails related to Podesta and hid his own communications with Corsi about WikiLeaks. Stone also pointed a finger at Randy Credico, a onetime friend who had a radio program in New York, as his back channel to WikiLeaks. Credico had interviewed Assange on his program, but that was four days after Stone’s tweet about Podesta’s upcoming time in the barrel. Credico denied under oath that he had acted as a back channel for Stone, and there was never any evidence to show he had.

In a predawn raid on January 25, 2019, heavily armed FBI agents stormed Roger Stone’s Fort Lauderdale, Fla., home and placed him under arrest. He was charged with seven criminal offenses, including one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements, and one count of witness tampering. Later that day, Stone was released on a $250,000 signature bond. Defiant, he said he would refuse to “bear false witness” against Trump. Finally, on November 15, 2019, after a weeklong trial and two days of deliberations, Stone was convicted on all counts and sentenced to 40 months in federal prison. But on July 10, 2020, a few days before Stone was to turn himself in, Trump commuted his sentence, personally calling him with the news.

Throughout this chain of events—including the trial, the Mueller Report, and the nearly 1,000-page Senate Intelligence Committee Report—no hint of the involvement of Israel was made public. Despite the clear violations of US law and months of clandestine, high-level attempted interference in the presidential election, no details were released, and no congressional hearings or investigations took place. Nor was there ever a hint in the press, which remained transfixed by Russia.

Continue Reading

World News

Australian National Review – Governance By Artificial Intelligence:The Ultimate Unaccountable Tyranny: The Elites Will Present AI As The Great Adjudicator, The Pure And Logical Intercessor Of The Correct Path; Not Just For Nations And For Populations At Large But For Each Individual





Governance By Artificial Intelligence:The Ultimate Unaccountable Tyranny: The elites will Present AI as the Great adjudicator, the Pure and Logical Intercessor of the Correct Path; Not Just for Nations and For Populations at Large But for Each individual

By Brandon Smith

It’s no secret that globalist institutions are obsessed with Artificial Intelligence as some kind of technological prophecy. They treat it as if it is almost supernatural in its potential and often argue that every meaningful industrial and social innovation in the near future will owe its existence to AI. The World Economic Forum cites AI as the singular key to the rise of what they call the “Fourth Industrial Revolution.” In their view, there can be no human progress without the influence of AI algorithms, making human input almost obsolete.

This delusion is often promoted by globalist propagandists.  For example, take a look at the summarized vision of WEF member Yuval Harari, who actually believes that AI has creative ability that will replace human imagination and innovation.  Not only that, but Harari has consistently argued in the past that AI will run the world much better than human beings ever could.

Harari’s examples of AI creativity might sound like extreme naivety to many of us, but he knows exactly what he is doing in misrepresenting the capabilities of algorithms.  Games like chess and Go are games of patterns restricted by rules, there only so many permutations of these patterns in any given scenario and AI is simply faster at spotting them than most humans because that is what it is designed to do by software creators.  This is no different that solving a mathematical equation; just because a calculator is faster than you does not mean it is “creative.”

There is a big difference between cognitive automation and cognitive autonomy.  AI is purely automation; it will play the games it is programmed to play and will learn to play them well, but it will never have an epiphany one day and create a new and unique game from scratch unless it is coded to do so.  AI will never have fun playing this new game it made, or feel the joy of sharing that game with others, so why would it bother?  It will never seek to contribute to the world any more than it is pre-programmed to do.

The manner in which globalists hype AI is very tactical, however.  When Harari claims that many people will become part of the “useless class” once AI takes over the economy, he is hinting at another globalist ideology based on elitism – Transhumanism.  The goal of transhumanism is to one day merge human bodies and human minds with technology and AI, and only a limited group of people will have the resources to accomplish this (the globalists).

Are you afraid of becoming part of the “useless class”?  Well, if you scrape and beg and serve every whim of the elitist establishment then maybe you will be lucky enough to get implants which allow you to interface with AI, and then your future employment and “usefulness” will be secured.  Doesn’t that sound nice?

But, like all the visions of narcissists there are delusions of godhood and then there is reality.  I continue to have serious doubts that AI will ever be legitimately autonomous or legitimately beneficial to humanity in any way beyond having the ability to calculate quickly within mathematical rules. Speedy data analysis can be useful in many areas of science, but it’s not really proof of autonomous intelligence, and algorithms can be predictive but not any more predictive than human beings looking at the same statistical data. There is nothing about AI that is impressive when one considers what little it actually accomplishes.

AI is a toy, a parlor trick, not a living entity with independent observations and conclusions. And, it’s certainly not a god-like being capable of showering us with scientific ambrosia or building a perfect civilization.  I predict that a society dependent on AI will actually stagnate and remain trapped in stasis, never really inventing anything of much value and never progressing.  It will only ever be concerned with homogenization – The merging of people with the algorithm.  That is where ALL the society’s energies will go.

As a point of reference to why AI is overrated, all we have to do is look at the behavior of AI programs like ChatGPT; the algorithm has been discovered on numerous occasions to contain extreme political biases always leaning to the far-left, including biases based in beliefs not backed in any way by scientific evidence. Interestingly, ChatGPT will even at times display a seemingly hostile response to conservative concepts or inconvenient facts. The bot will then DENY it is giving personal opinions even when its responses are consistently pro-leftist.

How is political bias possible for a piece of software unless it was programmed to display that bias? There is no objectivity to be found in AI, nor any creativity, it will simply regurgitate the personal opinions or biases of the people that created it and that engineered how it processes data.

Unlike a typical human teenager that seeks to adopt the opposing social or political beliefs of their parents in order set themselves apart, AI will never metaphorically dye its hair blue, pierce its nose and proclaim itself vegan – It will always do what its creators want it to do.  Another example of this dynamic is AI art, which essentially steals the stylistic properties of numerous human artists entered into its database and copies them. While imitation might be considered the highest form of flattery, it’s not the same as creativity.

This might not sound like much of a problem when it comes to a simple chatbot or the making of cartoons. But, it’s a massive problem when we start talking about AI influencing social and governmental policies.

The globalists argue that AI will be everywhere – In business, in schools, in corporate operations, in scientific enterprises, and even within government. It MUST run everything. Why? They don’t really say why other than to make vague promises of incredible advancements and previously unimaginable benefits. To date, there have been no profound innovations produced by AI, but I suppose pro-AI propagandists will say that the golden age is “right around the corner.”

The uses for AI are truly limited to helping humans with simple tasks, but there is still a cost. A self driving car might be great for a person that is physically handicapped, but it can also be a crutch that convinces a population to never learn to drive themselves. By extension, AI is in a lot of ways the ULTIMATE crutch which leads to ultimate tyranny. If people are convinced to hand over normal human processes and decision making opportunities to automation, then they have handed over their freedoms in exchange for convenience.

More importantly, if algorithms are allowed to dictate a large portion of choices and conclusions, people will no longer feel a sense of accountability for their actions. Regardless of the consequences, all they have to do for the rest of their lives is tell themselves they were only following the suggestions (or orders) of AI. The AI becomes a form of external collectivized conscience; an artificial moral compass for the hive mind.

But who will really be controlling that moral compass and bottle-necking the decisions of millions of people? Will it be the AI, or the elites behind the curtain that manipulate the algorithm?

For many people this probably sounds like science fiction. Yes, there have been many fictional imaginings of what the world would be like in the shadow of AI – I would highly recommend the French New Wave film ‘Alphaville’ as one of the most accurate predictions on the horrors of AI and technocracy. However, what I am warning about here is not some far off theoretical future, it is already here. Take a look at this disturbing video on AI from the World Government Summit:

These are the blatant goals of globalists in plain view, with a sugar coating to make them more palatable. I wrote about the motivations of the elites and their worshipful reverence for AI in my article ‘Artificial Intelligence: A Secular Look At The Digital Antichrist’. That piece was focused on the philosophical drives that make globalists desire AI.

In this article I want to stress the issue of AI governance and how it might be made to appeal to the masses. In order to achieve the dystopian future the globalists want, they still have to convince a large percentage of the population to applaud it and embrace it.

The comfort of having a system that makes difficult decisions for us is an obvious factor, as mentioned above. But, AI governance is not just about removing choice, it’s also about removing the information we might need to be educated enough to make choices. We saw this recently with the covid pandemic restrictions and the collusion between governments, corporate media and social media. Algorithms were widely used by web media conglomerates from Facebook to YouTube to disrupt the flow of information that might run contrary to the official narrative.

In some cases the censorship targeted people merely asking pertinent questions or fielding alternative theories. In other cases, the censorship outright targeted provably factual data that was contrary to government policies. A multitude of government claims on covid origins, masking, lockdowns and vaccines have been proven false over the past few years, and yet millions of people still blindly believe the original narrative because they were bombarded with it nonstop by the algorithms. They were never exposed to the conflicting information, so they were never able to come to their own conclusions.

Luckily, unlike bots, human intelligence is filled with anomalies – People who act on intuition and skepticism in order to question preconceived or fabricated assertions. The lack of contrary information immediately causes suspicion for many, and this is what authoritarian governments often refuse to grasp.

The great promise globalists hold up in the name of AI is the idea of a purely objective state; a social and governmental system without biases and without emotional content. It’s the notion that society can be run by machine thinking in order to “save human beings from themselves” and their own frailties. It is a false promise, because there will never be such a thing as objective AI, nor any AI that understand the complexities of human psychological development.

Furthermore, the globalist dream of AI is driven not by adventure, but by fear. It’s about the fear of responsibility, the fear of merit, the fear of inferiority, the fear of struggle and the fear of freedom. The greatest accomplishments of mankind are admirable because they are achieved with emotional content, not in spite of it. It is that content that inspires us to delve into the unknown and overcome our fears. AI governance and an AI integrated society would be nothing more than a desperate action to deny the necessity of struggle and the will to overcome.

Globalists are more than happy to offer a way out of the struggle, and they will do it with AI as the face of their benevolence. All you will have to do is trade your freedoms and perhaps your soul in exchange for never having to face the sheer terror of your own quiet thoughts. Some people, sadly, believe this is a fair trade.

The elites will present AI as the great adjudicator, the pure and logical intercessor of the correct path; not just for nations and for populations at large but for each individual life. With the algorithm falsely accepted as infallible and purely unbiased, the elites can then rule the world through their faceless creation without any oversight – For they can then claim that it’s not them making decisions, it’s the AI.  How does one question or even punish an AI for being wrong, or causing disaster? And, if the AI happens to make all its decisions in favor of the globalist agenda, well, that will be treated as merely coincidental.

Continue Reading