Let Old Acquaintance Be Forgot
By Greg Reese – AUGUST 12, 2019
PATHOLOGIST CONNECTED TO JFK INVESTIGATION TO CONDUCT AUTOPSY ON EPSTEIN
Let the conspiracy theories commence.
By Paul Joseph Watson – AUGUST 12, 2019
Pathologist Michael Baden, who served as chairman of the House Select Committee on Assassinations’ Forensic Pathology Panel that investigated the assassination of John F. Kennedy, is set to conduct an independent autopsy on Jeffrey Epstein.
“Epstein’s representatives have hired celebrity pathologist Michael Baden to conduct an independent autopsy and they were allowed to observe the autopsy,” reports the Daily Beast.
As chairman of the investigation into the JFK assassination, Baden bolstered the official story that Kennedy was killed by a single bullet, also known as the “magic bullet” theory.
Baden, whose career has revolved around investigating high profile deaths, also testified at the trials of OJ Simpson and Phil Spector.
Some are wondering whether having Baden carry out the autopsy is a good idea given the deluge of conspiracy theories circulating about Epstein’s alleged “suicide.”
“Of course, this may or may not mean anything at all,” comments Vlad Tapes. But getting a coroner connected to these cases doesn’t strike one as the way to lead to confidence in transparency of the process.”
Baden already observed the official autopsy carried out on Epstein by Chief Medical Examiner Barbara Sampson. The results of the autopsy have been delayed “pending further information at this time.”
Facebook ‘News’: A bold step toward total control of reality?
By Helen Buyniski
Facebook‘s plan to hook ad-cash-deprived mainstream outlets on licensing payouts seems to be an attempt to hijack narrative control en route to total domination of the infosphere – the ultimate safe space, Zuckerberg-style.
More than two thirds of American adults get their news from social media at the same time that more than half expectthat news to be “largely inaccurate.” Perhaps sensing a business opportunity, Facebook has moved in to manage that news consumption, reportedly offering mainstream outlets millions of dollars per year to license their content in order to present it to users authoritatively, as “Facebook News” – having long since ceased trusting users to share news among themselves.
But trusting Facebook to deliver the news is like trusting a cheetah to babysit your gazelles – all that’s left at the end is likely to be a pile of bones. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg warned legacy media last year that if they did not work with his plan to “revitalize journalism,” they would be left dying “like in a hospice.”
An offer they can’t refuse? Facebook offers mainstream news millions in licensing fees
Dangling a few million in front of news outlets after depriving them of the advertising cash on which they once subsisted is merely the final step in the process of consolidation and control that began when Facebook removed actual news from its newsfeed in an effort to manage the narrative in the run-up to the 2016 election. A move ostensibly designed to “favor friends and family over publishers,” it instead plunged mainstream and especially alternative media into financial oblivion, setting them scrambling to recoup lost traffic as their place in subscribers’ feeds was taken by cat videos and family snapshots.
Alternative media were further marginalized after Zuckerberg inked a deal with the Atlantic Council – NATO‘s narrative-managers whose board is populated by some of the most notorious warmongers of recent history – who arrived to set the platform straight after it failed to deliver the 2016 election to Hillary Clinton. The group would ensure Facebook played a “positive role” in democracy in the future, a press release promised. Six months later, hundreds of popular political pages had been purged for getting in the way of the Atlantic Council’s version of “democracy.” Several more purges followed, many pages getting the axe for nothing more than espousing views “favorable to Iran’s national interests” or posting content with “anti-Saudi, anti-Israeli, and pro-Palestinian themes.”
Zuckerberg has never hidden his desire to see Facebook become an internet driver’s license, and he has no doubt watched gleefully as French President Emmanuel Macron‘s government weighs requiring citizens to turn over actual identity documents in order to sign up to use Facebook. The platform was the first to adopt an intelligence-agency-friendly “real name policy,” irritating political activists, performers, and others who prefer not to have their social media activity follow them around in real life.
Privacy advocates are currently up in arms over the FBI’s recently-revealed plans to monitor social media platforms in real time. Combined with the recently leaked FBI decision to label all “conspiracy theorists” as potentially-dangerous domestic extremists, this looks an awful lot like a manufactured rationale to spy on the majority of the US population. Yet Facebook has been feeding users’ data to the government for over a decade. It joined the NSA’s PRISM program in 2009, providing the agency with its own convenient backdoor for slurping up the data others have had to hack themselves. Not that that’s been very hard – Facebook admitted last year that data on “most” of its users has been compromised at some point by “malicious actors.”
Facebook’s decision to hire one of the co-authors of the notorious PATRIOT Act as General Counsel earlier this year was touted as a move that would help the company “fulfill its mission.” Which would be what, exactly?
Despite its egregious privacy record, the areas of reality outside Zuckerberg’s control are dwindling rapidly. With the rollout of Facebook’s Libra coin, commerce, too, is falling under the shadow of this menacingly bland figure.
When Zuckerberg was photographed traveling through Middle America several years ago, many pointed out it looked like he was running for president. His announcement around the same time that he had found religion – a vague, made-for-TV, feel-good faith guaranteed not to antagonize anyone – also had the feel of a campaign move. If Facebook – and Zuckerberg’s – history is any guide, he has bigger things in mind for Facebook News than a new tab on the user interface. Every campaign needs a press office, after all…
It doesn’t take a tin-foil hat to smell a rat in Epstein’s ‘way too convenient’ death
By Neil Clark
The death of disgraced financier, pedophile and alleged blackmailer Jeffrey Epstein came just a day after more court documents were unsealed, leading to speculation he may have been “suicided” to stop his case from going to trial.
On Saturday morning, I was discussing Jeffrey Epstein with a friend. “He’ll be bumped off and found dead in his cell,”was my friend’s prediction. “It won’t come to court.”
A few hours later, I went on Twitter to see what was happening in the world and I saw #EpsteinMurder trending.
The whole thing was quite uncanny.
Let’s be honest: has there been a death of a high-profile prisoner whose expiration has been so unsurprising?
Suicide (non-)watch: What we know about Jeffrey Epstein’s death…and what we don’t
Anyone claiming this time last week that Epstein wouldn’t make it to trial because too many very rich and very important people would be dragged in would of course have been dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist.”
But this morning, it’s the “don’t be so stupid, of course he’ll make it to the courtroom” brigade who are looking rather silly – and you could also argue, quite naive.
If this means we get more open discussion on “conspiracy theories,” it can only be a good thing. Here’s why. When it comes to conspiracy theories, there are three types of people. There are well-paid, establishment gatekeepers who routinely use the CT term to gaslight people and close down legitimate debate. At the same time, these gatekeepers are themselves often the biggest pushers of conspiracy theories – but only when it comes to “official enemies.” Let’s not forget that the deadliest conspiracy theory of this century so far was the one suggesting that Iraq possessed WMDs in 2003. It was, by and large, peddled by those who routinely scoff at conspiracy theorists and label them“cranks.” The same people are also very quick to blame Russia for just about everything, regardless of the lack of hard evidence.
The second category are those who seem to believe everything – or at least almost everything – is a conspiracy. The Moon landings were faked. Elvis never died. Sandy Hook never happened. Every terrorist attack is a “false-flag.” I was once accused by someone at a public meeting of being a member of ‘Agenda 21.’ The fact that I didn’t know what she was on about was proof that I was really an ‘Agenda 21 agent.’
The third category – and this is where surely all sensible people are – accept that while not everything is a conspiracy, it’s actually quite daft to think conspiracies never occur, especially when people involved are very wealthy and very powerful and the stakes are extremely high.
Put another way, did you really think, deep down, given who he was, the people who he was associated with – and the nature of the allegations – that Epstein’s case would ever get to court? Be honest. I’d reckon about 90 percent, even though they might not publicly admit it, would entertain serious doubts.
You really don’t have to be overly suspicious – or be a permanent tin-foil hat wearer to smell a rat in this one.
If, as was reported, Epstein did try to kill himself about three weeks ago, why was he taken off suicide watch just six days later? Who made that seemingly baffling decision? If he was still on suicide watch – and the source cited in the New York Times was wrong, why wasn’t his death prevented?
These are only a few of the many questions that need to be answered. What is particularly interesting is the kind of people demanding answers. It’s not just the “usual” suspects who are routinely labeled cranks by the gatekeepers. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio has called Epstein’s death “way too convenient.”
“How many other millionaires and billionaires were part of the illegal activities that he was engaged in?” he asked. Even the BBC website has as its heading of a news story today “Jeffrey Epstein: Questions raised over financier’s death.”
The FBI is investigating the case and who knows, we may get some answers. Perhaps Epstein did after all, kill himself – prisoners facing the prospect of 45 years in jail are quite likely to be depressed; moreover the sociopathic billionaire might even have relished evading justice and depriving his accusers of their days in court. But until more evidence of his suicide comes to light, (and we really do need to see some camera footage), it is reasonable to think that some other explanation is, on balance, more likely.
Taking that line doesn’t make you barmy – just someone who very sensibly breaks with the binary when it comes to“conspiracy theories.”
Tom's Blog 