“The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media”–attributed to William Colby, its former Director

A Canadian reporter has introduced a new phrase, “terrorist truthers”, as the initial stage in creating a new semantic club to use against critics of government ops and of false flag attacks.

The reporter, Brian Lilley, has used the occasion of the alleged attack on the Canadian Parliament–almost certainly itself an arranged event–to assail those who do not condemn it as “terrorism”.

While that sounds like typical politics, where right-wingers are eager to politicize such events and left-wingers more cautious and hesitant, a bit more appears to be going on here than that.

Joshua Blakeney, for example, has observed that this event appears tailor-made to be used as a justification to silence critics of Israel. And it also looks as though the phrase, once introduced, will then gradually be extended in meaning to include 9/11 Truthers and 7/7 Truthers, as David Cameron, the UK PM, recently proposed.

In a bizarre performance, Cameron recommended that those who are skeptical of the “official accounts” of 9/11 and of 7/7 should be dealt with has harshly as members of ISIS, which seems rather extreme, considering that ISIS is being bombed and strafed by US and British fighters and bombers. It conjures up the image of having these intellectuals being lined up against the wall and shot for the “thought crimes” of questioning stories the public has been fed by their own governments that are unable to withstand critical scrutiny. So, are we now required to accept fanciful theories that are provably false just because the government supports them or face a firing squad?

The Canadian government tends to regard any criticism of Israel as “terrorism” and is contemplating new laws to affect even internet discussions. When George Galloway went to Gaza and gave donations to unpaid nurses in the hospitals there, he was labelled by the government as a “member of a banned terrorist organization”. Ian Macdonald of the Foreign Service and John McMurtry, a distinguished philosopher, are speaking out about these draconian forms of censorship and violations of freedom of speech, but the situation is appalling.
The Ottawa deception

The proper definition of terrorism is of acts of violence that are intended to instill feat into a target population to make it more amenable to political manipulation. The element of fear is enhanced by the murder of innocent women and especially children, which is why the Sandy Hook hoax has been so effective. Once people are convinced an atrocity has occurred, it becomes extremely difficult to correct false initial impressions. As Mark Twain observed,”It’s easier to fool people that it is to convince them they have been fooled.”

This is not the first time that the Ottawa Sun has been used to convey the message of rejecting the skeptics and depend upon your government. On 27 June 2014, for example, it published “Beware terrorists, not the government”, in which its author, Charles Adler, suggests that its purely “paranoia” to be concerned about the NSA’s surveillance of our phone calls, email messages and financial and medical records. “Osama Bin Laden is dead,” he writes, “but his criminally insane ideology is very much alive.” According to Adler, the problem is not the government, which is there to protect us, but leakers like Edward Snowden, who reveal what’s going on.

As Joshua Blakeney has recently observed, “Israel’s puppet regime in Ottawa wants to use Canadian dollars and the country’s military to help Israel implement the Oded Yinon plan in the Middle East. Ordinary Canadians are waking up to the fact that it is not in Canada’s national interest to be expending her blood and treasure to destroy countries like Iraq and Syria on behalf of Israel. Hence a series of emotive ‘incidents’ were enabled by pro-Zionist actors to a) evoke jingoism among a sufficient number of Canadians so as to make Canadian involvement in the further destruction of Iraq and Syria more tenable and b) enable Orwellian ‘anti-radicalization’ policies to be implemented so the most accurate analysts of Canadian foreign policy can be criminalized for ‘preaching radicalism’ and ‘proselytizing for terrorism’.”
The threat of an Ebola pandemic

There are many reasons to believe that this latest Ebola outbreak is another attempt to instill fear into the American people, possibly with the ultimate objective of using the necessity of maintaining quarantines to impose martial law upon the United States. There are many indications of fakery, including documentaries that show a young man simply lying down and being described as having Ebola, while his father walks away with a handful of cash; after a while, the young man gets up and walks away himself. Or loading an Ebola patient aboard a plane, where the official in charge, who is not wearing a Hazmat suit, sets down a cup of coffee where it could easily be contaminated if the patient were infected. Here is one study of what appears to be going on:

Without taking a definitive stand, Mike Adams of NaturalNews offers a summary of reasons why an Ebola scare could be effective and all-too-easily contrived:

There’s no way for us to really know for sure whether Ebola has been intentionally released anywhere as a weapon, but here are some important things we do know which might be valuable clues:

• Ebola would be ridiculously easy to harvest right now and deploy as a bioterrorism weapon. There’s almost no chance that a person intentionally carrying Ebola would be detected at U.S. entry points unless they were highly symptomatic.

• Ebola is the “perfect” weapon for evil-minded terrorists because it is untraceable, self-replicating and it does not damage the infrastructure of society. (It kills people but doesn’t destroy refineries and bridges, in other words…) It also causes a very large psychological change in society, driving some people into a state of fear and others into a state of preparedness.

• There are many parties that would benefit enormously from an Ebola bioterrorism event. You can probably figure out all the usual suspects yourself, but the list would likely include vaccine companies, population control zealots and anyone in government that wanted to declare medical martial law and benefit from the concentration of power into the hands of the few.

• There is also a reasonable argument circulating now that says the banksters need a scapegoat for the massive market crash (and debt implosion) they’ve been staving off for years with the Fed’s desperate cash pumping. If Ebola gets released, they can allow the crash to unravel while nullifying all financial contract claims because a viral pandemic would be deemed an “act of God.” (There is specific language in nearly all contracts that provide a no-fault out for any such “act of God.”)

• It’s crystal clear right now that the White House is dictating the national media’s downplaying of Ebola news. There might be multiple Ebola infections happening right now at hospitals across America, but news of those outbreaks might be censored in order to prevent the public from losing faith in government right before the mid-term elections. Once the elections are over, it will be interesting to see if there’s an uptick in Ebola coverage.

If you don’t think such a media blackout can occur in a nation with a supposed “free press,” check out the recent nationwide media blackout on the CDC vaccine whistleblower story, which received absolutely zero coverage in the establishment media even though it was one of the largest medical stories of the decade. Make no mistake: When the media is ordered to censor a news story, they censor it across the board and immediately distract the public with something else, usually a juicy celebrity scandal of some kind.

And I have advanced reflections on why Obama might be sending troops into West Africa, as though a virus could be killed by a bullet:

Ebola virus and martial law in the US