WFMU-FM is pod­cast­ing For The Record–You can sub­scribe to the pod­cast HERE.

Mr. Emory’s entire life’s work is avail­able on a 64GB flash dri­ve, avail­able for a con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more (to KFJC). (This is a new feature–the old, 32GB flash­drive will not hold the new mate­r­i­al. Click Here to obtain Dav­e’s 45+ years’ work, com­plete through fall/early win­ter of 2024 and con­tain­ing the Con­ver­sa­tions with Monte .)

“Polit­i­cal language…is designed to make lies sound truth­ful and mur­der respectable, and to give an appear­ance of solid­i­ty to pure wind.”

Mr. Emory has launched a new Patre­on site. Vis­it at: Patreon.com/DaveEmory

FTR#1364 This pro­gram was record­ed in one, 60-minute seg­ment.

FTR#1365 This pro­gram was record­ed in one, 60-minute seg­ment.

NB: The titles of these pro­grams are not exact­ly what is announced in the begin­ning.

Vitezi Rend insignia
Cred­it: Wikipedia

Intro­duc­tion: Don­ald Trump has appoint­ed Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka as his “ter­ro­ism czar” on the Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Coun­cil. Gor­ka not only appears to have links to British intel­li­gence, but ” . . . . Gor­ka was, appar­ent­ly, a sworn mem­ber of Hungary’s neo-Nazi Vitezi Rend, or ‘Order of Heroes,’ a group that the State Depart­ment says was ‘under the direc­tion of the Nazi Gov­ern­ment of Ger­many dur­ing World War II’ and which con­tin­ues to be neo-Nazi in its ori­en­ta­tion. . . .”

With Gor­ka poised to direct any U.S. response to ter­ror­ism, clouds on the hori­zon sug­gest the pos­si­bil­i­ty of a loom­ing mass-casu­al­ty “False-Flag” oper­a­tion, pos­si­bil­i­ty in Lon­don. This is high­ly unap­pe­tiz­ing.

Top­ics of Dis­cus­sion and Analy­sis Include: Gorka’s father Paul, who par­tic­i­pat­ed in the 1956 Hun­gar­i­an upris­ing and claims he was sprung from prison by Vietezi Rend forces; Sebas­t­ian Gorka’s links to British intel­li­gence and Chris Don­nel­ly; A “warn­ing” by the head of Britain’s domes­tic intel­li­gence agency (MI5) that Rus­sia was foment­ing ter­ror­ist inci­dents in the West; The alle­ga­tion that web­cams in Lon­don went black in Sep­tem­ber (IF true, a har­bin­ger of false-flag oper­a­tions?); Analy­sis of the “Novi­chok poi­son­ing” of the Skirpals–a false-flag oper­a­tion blamed on Rus­sia and exe­cut­ed by British intel, appar­ent­ly with CIA assis­tance.

1.“JOHN KIRIAKOU: Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka Is Back” by John Kiri­ak­ou; Con­sor­tium News; 26/11/2024.

This time around, Trump has elect­ed to ignore the F.B.I. secu­ri­ty clear­ance vet­ting process for the sworn mem­ber of Vitezi Rend, a Hun­gar­i­an group that served under the Nazis.

Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka is back.  U.S. Pres­i­dent-elect Don­ald Trump last week named Gor­ka as the administration’s “ter­ror­ism czar” on the Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Coun­cil.  Trump has made a series of dis­as­trous appoint­ments to his admin­is­tra­tion since his elec­tion on Nov. 5.  But this might be the worst.  Don’t remem­ber Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka?

Eight years ago, when Trump was elect­ed pres­i­dent for the first time, Gor­ka was one of his more con­tro­ver­sial appoint­ments as “deputy assis­tant to the pres­i­dent for nation­al secu­ri­ty affairs,” that is, deputy nation­al secu­ri­ty advis­er.  That’s a huge­ly impor­tant posi­tion.  The deputy nation­al secu­ri­ty advi­sor assists the pres­i­dent in man­ag­ing the entire intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty and man­ages the administration’s anti-ter­ror­ism efforts.  But Gor­ka imme­di­ate­ly ran into trou­ble.

As it turned out, Gor­ka was, appar­ent­ly, a sworn mem­ber of Hungary’s neo-Nazi Vitezi Rend, or “Order of Heroes,” a group that the State Depart­ment says was “under the direc­tion of the Nazi Gov­ern­ment of Ger­many dur­ing World War II” and which con­tin­ues to be neo-Nazi in its ori­en­ta­tion.

Gor­ka only became an Amer­i­can cit­i­zen in 2012, and mem­ber­ship should have dis­qual­i­fied him not only from cit­i­zen­ship, but even from enter­ing the Unit­ed States in the first place.

Fur­ther­more, at Don­ald Trump’s 2017 inau­gu­ra­tion, Gor­ka actu­al­ly wore the uni­form and badge of the Vitezi Rend, and the Times of Israel news­pa­per report­ed that he may even have inher­it­ed them from his Nazi grand­fa­ther.

A Jew­ish news­pa­per, The For­ward, broke the news of Gorka’s mem­ber­ship in Vitezi Rend.  It said that the group’s own lead­ers con­firm that Gor­ka took a “life­long oath of loy­al­ty.” (Gor­ka has ignored mul­ti­ple email requests for com­ment.)

Bruce Ein­horn, a retired immi­gra­tion judge and cur­rent pro­fes­sor of nation­al­i­ty law at Pep­per­dine Uni­ver­si­ty, told The For­ward that Gorka’s “silence speaks vol­umes.”  Ein­horn con­tin­ued that Gorka’s “fail­ure to dis­close a mate­r­i­al fact,” his mem­ber­ship in a racist orga­ni­za­tion that pro­motes vio­lence, could under­mine the valid­i­ty of both his immi­gra­tion sta­tus and his claim to U.S. cit­i­zen­ship.  No statute of lim­i­ta­tions exists for such a vio­la­tion.

To make mat­ters even more revolt­ing, accord­ing to The For­ward, men who have sworn alle­giance to the Vitezi Rend are per­mit­ted to take a low­er­case “v” as a mid­dle ini­tial and as a secret sym­bol of broth­er­hood.  Gor­ka used the “v,” sign­ing his name in both his 2008 doc­tor­al the­sis and in his tes­ti­mo­ny before Con­gress in 2011, as “Sebas­t­ian L. v. Gor­ka.”  In the end, the F.B.I. wouldn’t give Gor­ka a secu­ri­ty clear­ance and, after only sev­en months, he was forced to resign.

This time around, how­ev­er, Trump has elect­ed to ignore the F.B.I. secu­ri­ty clear­ance vet­ting process and has announced that Gor­ka will be the deputy nation­al secu­ri­ty advis­er and ter­ror­ism czar.  Peri­od.  The role does not require Sen­ate con­fir­ma­tion and, tech­ni­cal­ly, Trump can sim­ply decree that Gor­ka will receive a top secret secu­ri­ty clear­ance; F.B.I. be damned.

There actu­al­ly has been some fall­out from the appoint­ment.  Michael Anton, a nation­al secu­ri­ty offi­cial in Trump’s first term who was in line to be deputy nation­al secu­ri­ty advis­er took him­self out of con­tention when he was told that there would be a posi­tion wait­ing for Gor­ka, accord­ing to The Wash­ing­ton Post.

The Israeli media, which has long been a source of sup­port for Trump, is furi­ous that an overt anti-Semi­te will hold such a posi­tion of author­i­ty.  And an unnamed mem­ber of the Trump nation­al secu­ri­ty tran­si­tion team told the Post, “Almost uni­ver­sal­ly, the entire team con­sid­ers Gor­ka to be a clown.  They’re dread­ing work­ing with him.”

Gor­ka has been large­ly silent since the elec­tion.  He has only giv­en inter­views to his old friend and col­league Steve Ban­non and, he says, he pro­vid­ed Israel with advice on how to con­front Hamas.  What was that advice?  “Kill every sin­gle one of them.  God bless Israel.  God bless Judeo-Chris­t­ian civ­i­liza­tion.”  That’s a strange posi­tion for a Nazi.

2. “Why Is Trump Advis­er Wear­ing Medal of Nazi Col­lab­o­ra­tors?” by Eli Clifton; lobelog.com; 12/02/2017.

The White House’s omis­sion of Jew­ish vic­tims of the Holo­caust in its state­ment for Holo­caust Remem­brance Day raised objec­tions from Jew­ish groups across the polit­i­cal spec­trum but the Trump administration’s com­bat­ive defense was per­haps the most sur­pris­ing move by a pres­i­den­cy fac­ing record low approval num­bers. Last Mon­day, Deputy Assis­tant to the Pres­i­dent Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka refused to admit that that it may have been poor judg­ment not to specif­i­cal­ly acknowl­edge the suf­fer­ing of Jews in the Holo­caust.

Gor­ka was an odd choice of prox­ies for the White House to put for­ward in defense of its Holo­caust Remem­brance day state­ment.

He has appeared in mul­ti­ple pho­tographs wear­ing the medal of a Hun­gar­i­an group list­ed by the State Depart­ment as hav­ing col­lab­o­rat­ed with the Nazis dur­ing World War II.

When asked on Mon­day whether the White House’s Holo­caust Remem­brance Day state­ment was “ques­tion­able in being the first such state­ment in many years that didn’t rec­og­nize that Jew­ish exter­mi­na­tion was the chief goal of the Holo­caust,” Gor­ka told con­ser­v­a­tive talk show host Michael Medved:

No, I’m not going to admit it. Because it’s asi­nine. It’s absurd. You’re mak­ing a state­ment about the Holo­caust. Of course it’s about the Holo­caust because that’s what the statement’s about. It’s only rea­son­able to twist it if your objec­tive is to attack the pres­i­dent.

That state­ment is par­tic­u­lar­ly note­wor­thy when viewed in the con­text of Gorka’s appar­ent affin­i­ty for a Hun­gar­i­an group with a check­ered past.

Gor­ka, who worked in the UK and Hun­gary before immi­grat­ing to the U.S., was pho­tographed at an inau­gur­al ball wear­ing a medal from the Hun­gar­i­an Order of Heroes, Vitezi Rend, a group list­ed by the State Depart­ment as tak­ing direc­tion from Germany’s Nazi gov­ern­ment dur­ing World War II. . . .

. . . . Eva Balogh, founder of the news analy­sis blog Hun­gar­i­an Spec­trum and for­mer pro­fes­sor of East­ern Euro­pean His­to­ry at Yale Uni­ver­si­ty, con­firmed to LobeL­og the iden­ti­ty of the medal worn by Gor­ka. She said:

Yes, the medal is of the “vitézi rend” estab­lished by Mik­lós Hor­thy in 1920. He, as a mere gov­er­nor, didn’t have the priv­i­lege to enno­ble his sub­jects as the king could do before 1918, and there­fore the “knight­ly order” he estab­lished was a kind of com­pen­sa­tion for him. Offi­cers and even enlist­ed men of excep­tion­al val­or could become knights. Between 1920 and 1944 there were 23,000 such knights. The title was inher­i­ta­ble by the old­est son. I found infor­ma­tion that makes it clear that Gorka’s father, Pál Gor­ka, used the title. How­ev­er, since he was born in 1930 he couldn’t him­self be the one “knight­ed.” So, most like­ly, it was Gorka’s grand­fa­ther who was the orig­i­nal recip­i­ent.

Gorka’s PhD dis­ser­ta­tion lists his name as “Sebestyén L. v. Gor­ka,” which sug­gests that he is car­ry­ing on his father’s title, albeit in an abbre­vi­at­ed for­mat, accord­ing to Balogh.

Mik­lós Hor­thy, regent of the King­dom of Hun­gary from 1920 to 1944, estab­lished Vitezi Rend for both civil­ian and mil­i­tary sup­port­ers of Horthy’s gov­ern­ment. The group was ini­tial­ly open to non-Jews who served in dis­tinc­tion dur­ing World War I.

Although Horthy’s per­son­al views about Jews are still debat­ed, he was explic­it in endors­ing anti-Semi­tism even while show­ing some unease with the pace of the Holo­caust. In an Octo­ber 1940 let­ter to Prime Min­is­ter Pál Tele­ki, Hor­thy said:

As regards the Jew­ish prob­lem, I have been an anti-Semi­te through­out my life. I have nev­er had con­tact with Jews. I have con­sid­ered it intol­er­a­ble that here in Hun­gary every­thing, every fac­to­ry, bank, large for­tune, busi­ness, the­atre, press, com­merce, etc. should be in Jew­ish hands, and that the Jew should be the image reflect­ed of Hun­gary, espe­cial­ly abroad. Since, how­ev­er, one of the most impor­tant tasks of the gov­ern­ment is to raise the stan­dard of liv­ing, i.e., we have to acquire wealth, it is impos­si­ble, in a year or two, to replace the Jews, who have every­thing in their hands, and to replace them with incom­pe­tent, unwor­thy, most­ly big-mouthed ele­ments, for we should become bank­rupt. This requires a gen­er­a­tion at least.

In April 1941, Hun­gary became a de fac­to mem­ber of the Axis and per­mit­ted Ger­man troops to cross Hun­gary for the inva­sion of Yugoslavia. The first mas­sacres of Jews took place in August when SS troops mur­dered between 18,000 and 20,000 Jews with­out Hun­gar­i­an cit­i­zen­ship after they’d been deport­ed from Hun­gary to Ukraine.

By 1944, Hor­thy may have sought to dis­tance Hun­gary from Nazi Ger­many but agreed to deport around 100,000 Jews. The Ger­man army removed Hor­thy from office after it occu­pied Hun­gary. Horthy’s actu­al aware­ness of the fate of Hun­gar­i­an Jews remains unclear. But reports by jour­nal­ists and the State Depart­ment in 1942 are explic­it about the role played and ben­e­fits enjoyed by Vitezi Rend’s mem­bers.

A Jew­ish Tele­graph Agency report from Octo­ber 1942, describes how:

Con­fis­cat­ed Jew­ish real estate in Hun­gary will be dis­trib­uted by the gov­ern­ment among mem­bers of the “Hun­gar­i­an Order of Heroes” it was announced today over the Budapest radio. The order con­sists of sol­diers who dis­tin­guished them­selves in the last World War or in the present war.

“In 1942 there was a so-called ‘land reform,’” said Balogh. “It actu­al­ly meant the expro­pri­a­tion of agri­cul­tur­al lands owned by Jew­ish cit­i­zens. Accord­ing to gov­ern­ment pro­pa­gan­da this move was nec­es­sary to ease social ten­sions in the coun­try­side but as a recent study (2015) shows, most of the land went to “loy­al, mid­dle-class sup­port­ers of the regime, among them mem­bers of the ‘vitézi rend.’”

A Check­ered Lega­cy

The State Depart­ment lists the Order of Heroes as an orga­ni­za­tion that was “under the direc­tion of the Nazi gov­ern­ment of Ger­many.” Mem­ber­ship in such groups dur­ing World War II could make indi­vid­u­als inel­i­gi­ble for U.S. visas. The State Department’s web­site warns that mem­ber­ship in groups under this des­ig­na­tion:

[R]enders inel­i­gi­ble for a visa any alien who par­tic­i­pat­ed in the per­se­cu­tion of any per­son because of race, reli­gion, nation­al ori­gin, or polit­i­cal opin­ion dur­ing the peri­od from March 23, 1933, to May 8, 1945, under the direc­tion of or in asso­ci­a­tion with the Nazi Gov­ern­ment of Ger­many or an allied or occu­pied gov­ern­ment.

Vitezi Rend was banned dur­ing the Sovi­et occu­pa­tion of Hun­gary but reestab­lished in exile. The order was award­ed to mem­bers of the Hun­gar­i­an dias­po­ra and indi­vid­u­als in Hun­gary since 1983. Although appear­ing to large­ly pro­mote Hun­gar­i­an cul­ture and the dias­po­ra, it sought for­eign donors to help fund the con­struc­tion of a stat­ue of Hor­thy in 2011. A fundrais­ing doc­u­ment read, “We have decid­ed after almost sev­en decades to erect a stat­ue in hon­or of our beloved Regent and to remem­ber him, there­fore we ask for your sup­port!”

“In post-World War II Hun­gary, no noble titles of any sort can be offi­cial­ly used,” said Balogh. “The ‘knight­ly order’ no longer offi­cial­ly exists. How­ev­er, right-wing émi­grés kept the order going abroad.”

She lat­er added, “Many sup­port­ers of the Hor­thy regime were enam­ored by the Nazis and Hitler and the ‘knights’ were espe­cial­ly so. Put it that way, after 1948 one wouldn’t have bragged about his father being a ‘vitéz.’ Late­ly, how­ev­er, espe­cial­ly since 2010, it has become fash­ion­able again to boast about such ‘illus­tri­ous’ ances­tors.”

Hor­thy, under Hungary’s cen­ter-right Prime Min­is­ter Vik­tor Orbán, has under­gone a con­tro­ver­sial reha­bil­i­ta­tion, with squares renamed in his hon­or and stat­ues erect­ed.

Gorka’s deci­sion to pub­licly iden­ti­fy with Vitezi Rend rais­es ques­tions about Trump’s advis­er and the administration’s flir­ta­tions with anti-Semi­tism and the alt-right. . . .

2b.“Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka: British intel­li­gence asset?” by Kit Klaren­berg and Max Blu­men­thal; The Gray Zone; 11/25/2024.

Sebas­t­ian Gorka’s involve­ment with British intel­li­gence cost him a secu­ri­ty clear­ance in Hun­gary. His long­time men­tor is a UK spook cur­rent­ly engaged in covert oper­a­tions against Rus­sia. Is the Ukraine hawk and Trump counter-ter­ror appointee oper­at­ing on Lon­don time?

After years in the wilder­ness of right-wing radio, where he flam­boy­ant­ly pro­claimed his loy­al­ty to pres­i­dent-elect Don­ald Trump for years, Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka has final­ly found his way back into Trump’s inner cir­cle, earn­ing an appoint­ment as incom­ing White House counter-ter­ror advi­sor.

Gor­ka served as Trump’s deputy assis­tant advi­sor on nation­al secu­ri­ty issues for eight months in 2017, storm­ing out of his job with a petu­lant res­ig­na­tion let­ter that blamed “forces” with­in the admin­is­tra­tion that did not sup­port Trump’s “MAGA promise.” Dur­ing his brief tenure in the White House, Gor­ka, a Lon­don-born immi­grant, was cred­it­ed with mas­ter­mind­ing the President’s so-called “Mus­lim ban,” which refused admis­sion to the US for cit­i­zens of coun­tries iden­ti­fied as nation­al secu­ri­ty threats.

While Democ­rats have ham­mered Gor­ka as “a far-right extrem­ist” and MAGA syco­phant, he has stood out as a voice of Biden for­eign pol­i­cy con­ti­nu­ity with­in Trump­world, pledg­ing fur­ther aggres­sion against Rus­sia and even greater mil­i­tary aid to Kiev. Dur­ing a Novem­ber 23 inter­view, for exam­ple, Gor­ka promised that “the aid that we have giv­en to Ukraine thus far will look like peanuts” if “the mur­der­ous KGB colonel” Vladimir Putin does not obey Trump’s dic­tates.

Gorka’s full ori­gin sto­ry explains why his views on the Ukraine proxy war track more close­ly with those of the anti-Trump turn­coat John Bolton than incom­ing Vice Pres­i­dent J.D. Vance, who has vowed to nego­ti­ate an end to the con­flict. As this inves­ti­ga­tion will demon­strate, the mind­set of the Transat­lantic pol­i­cy oper­a­tive was mold­ed pri­mar­i­ly through his inti­mate involve­ment in British intel­li­gence circles—not his role with­in the Amer­i­ca First move­ment.

The son of an anti-com­mu­nist Hun­gar­i­an exile, Gor­ka joined a British Army intel­li­gence unit while still in uni­ver­si­ty. When he entered the world of nation­al secu­ri­ty stud­ies, he learned at the knee of a noto­ri­ous­ly con­niv­ing British mil­i­tary intel­li­gence offi­cer named Chris Don­nel­ly, who has ded­i­cat­ed his career to insti­gat­ing con­flict with Rus­sia, and was exposed by The Gray­zone as an archi­tect of the noto­ri­ous Kerch Bridge bomb­ing.

Don­nel­ly per­son­al­ly endorsed Gorka’s PhD the­sis, grant­i­ng him the impri­matur of a top intel­li­gence offi­cer in the British Min­istry of Defence. The rela­tion­ship fueled Gorka’s career with­in the bur­geon­ing Atlanti­cist mil­i­tary infra­struc­ture, yet ulti­mate­ly cost him secu­ri­ty clear­ance in his family’s native Hun­gary, where the country’s Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Office sus­pect­ed him of being a UK spy.

Soon after Gor­ka resigned from the first Trump admin­is­tra­tion, leaked doc­u­ments exposed Don­nel­ly as the founder of a secret, UK state-fund­ed influ­ence oper­a­tion called the Integri­ty Ini­tia­tive, which was aimed at drum­ming up war with Rus­sia through a covert inter­na­tion­al pro­pa­gan­da net­work. A 2017 fund­ing pro­pos­al sub­mit­ted by the Integri­ty Ini­tia­tive to the British Min­istry of Defence promised to deliv­er a “tougher stance on Rus­sia” by arrang­ing for “more infor­ma­tion pub­lished in the media on the threat of Russ­ian active mea­sures.”

When Don­nel­ly vis­it­ed Wash­ing­ton in 2018 to expand his secret ini­tia­tive, the first item on his agen­da was break­fast with Gor­ka. To this day, Gor­ka refus­es to dis­cuss the meet­ing, or any aspect of his rela­tion­ship with Don­nel­ly, erupt­ing with rage at reporters who have dared to inquire about the long friend­ship.

Gorka’s secu­ri­ty clear­ance reject­ed “due to his con­nec­tions with British intel­li­gence” 

Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka grew up in Lon­don in the shad­ow of his father, Paul, an exiled Hun­gar­i­an nation­al­ist activist affil­i­at­ed with the Vitezi Rend, an anti-com­mu­nist order that col­lab­o­rat­ed with Nazi Ger­many dur­ing World War II. Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka blames Kim Phil­by, the British dou­ble agent, for betray­ing his father to the Sovi­ets, lead­ing to his impris­on­ment – and seem­ing­ly expos­ing his father’s role as an MI6 asset. How­ev­er, Paul Gor­ka pro­vid­ed a dif­fer­ent account of his cap­ture in an inter­view with the British his­to­ri­an and Holo­caust revi­sion­ist David Irv­ing, claim­ing Hun­gar­i­an intel­li­gence broke his cell after dis­cov­er­ing papers on one of his cell’s couri­ers.

After mem­bers of Vitezi Rend broke Paul Gor­ka out of prison dur­ing their failed 1956 attempt to top­ple the country’s com­mu­nist lead­er­ship, he found refuge in the UK. From Lon­don, Paul Gor­ka worked for the British gov­ern­ment, help­ing them vet anti-com­mu­nist emi­gres arriv­ing from Hun­gary. Young Gorka’s moth­er, Susan, found part-time work as a trans­la­tor to Irv­ing, the Holo­caust revi­sion­ist his­to­ri­an. She was cred­it­ed as an inter­preter in his 740-page tome, “Upris­ing! One Nation’s Night­mare, 1956,” which por­trayed the CIA and MI6-backed Hun­gar­i­an rebel­lion of 1956 as a worker’s insur­rec­tion against a cor­rupt com­mu­nist lead­er­ship, which hap­pened to be dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly Jew­ish.

With the col­lapse of the Sovi­et bloc, Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka set his sights on a career serv­ing British nation­al secu­ri­ty inter­ests. From 1990 to 1993, Gor­ka served in Unit 22 of the British military’s Ter­ri­to­r­i­al Army Intel­li­gence Corps as an inter­roga­tor. The duties he car­ried out in the intel­li­gence unit lat­er became a source of intrigue, and remain mys­te­ri­ous to this day.

In 1999, fol­low­ing a fel­low­ship at NATO, Gor­ka returned to Hun­gary to advise the first gov­ern­ment of Vic­tor Orban, estab­lish­ing him­self as a promi­nent nation­al secu­ri­ty com­men­ta­tor in the coun­try of his family’s ori­gin. Three years lat­er, when Hungary’s new Prime Min­is­ter Peter Medgyessy faced accu­sa­tions that he had con­duct­ed counter-espi­onage oper­a­tions for the country’s com­mu­nist gov­ern­ment 20 years pri­or, Gor­ka was select­ed to inves­ti­gate the charges on a par­lia­men­tary com­mit­tee. How­ev­er, the country’s Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Office reject­ed the secu­ri­ty clear­ance he need­ed to join the com­mit­tee because, as the Hun­gar­i­an news out­let Ori­go report­ed, it “became risky from a nation­al secu­ri­ty point of view due to [Gorka’s] con­nec­tions with British intel­li­gence.”

As the scan­dal swirled in Hun­gar­i­an media, dra­mat­i­cal­ly dif­fer­ent accounts of Gorka’s involve­ment in British Army intel­li­gence appeared in the media. The UK’s Sun­day Times report­ed that Gorka’s duties in the unit includ­ed gath­er­ing “evi­dence for the war crimes tri­bunal set up after the col­lapse of Yugoslavia.” How­ev­er, Gor­ka claimed to Hun­gar­i­an media, “I nev­er dealt with intel­li­gence… we were tasked with guard­ing key facil­i­ties [in North­ern Ire­land], such as fend­ing off IRA threats.”

It was unclear how Gor­ka could have served in two regions at around the same time, or what his intel­li­gence duties actu­al­ly entailed. When con­tact­ed by Amer­i­can reporters about his ser­vice, the British Mil­i­tary of Defense declined to pro­vide details.

A year after being pub­licly accused of work­ing for British intel­li­gence, Gor­ka left Hun­gary for the US. “My Amer­i­can wife and I woke up one morn­ing and real­ized Amer­i­ca was the future,” he claimed.

Don­nel­ly prais­es Gorka’s “aca­d­e­m­ic excel­lence”

The scan­dal over Gorka’s secu­ri­ty clear­ance received a smat­ter­ing of cov­er­age from lib­er­al blogs when he was appoint­ed to serve dur­ing the first Trump admin­is­tra­tion in 2017. But US media has not writ­ten a word about the much more con­se­quen­tial rela­tion­ship he enjoyed with the British intel­li­gence offi­cer Chris Don­nel­ly.

Don­nel­ly brought Gor­ka under his wing dur­ing the post-Cold War peri­od, while he per­son­al­ly lob­bied for NATO enlarge­ment in for­mer Sovi­et satel­lite states like Hun­gary. The officer’s 2005 work, “Nations, Alliances and Secu­ri­ty,” was edit­ed by Gor­ka, who also wrote its fore­word.

Two years lat­er, Gor­ka pub­lished a PhD dis­ser­ta­tion on “Con­tent and End-State-based Alter­ation in the Prac­tice of Polit­i­cal Vio­lence since the End of the Cold War.” Don­nel­ly, then-chief of the British Min­istry of Defence intel­li­gence unit known as the Advanced Research and Assess­ment Group, authored a glow­ing “exter­nal review” of Gorka’s doc­tor­ate, describ­ing it as “a work not only of aca­d­e­m­ic excel­lence, but also of sig­nif­i­cant cur­rent pol­i­cy rel­e­vance.”

In Octo­ber 2008, Britain’s Ditch­ley Foun­da­tion, which holds reg­u­lar con­fer­ences on the top­ic of British-Amer­i­can rela­tions, con­vened an event in con­junc­tion with the For­eign Office, on “the future of NATO, in Europe and glob­al­ly.” Both Don­nel­ly and Gor­ka appeared on the dis­cus­sion pan­el, along­side spies, high-rank­ing mil­i­tary NATO offi­cials, and law­mak­ers. The meet­ing was “delib­er­ate­ly timed to sit between the Bucharest sum­mit of April 2008 and the 60th Anniver­sary Sum­mit in April 2009.”

The Bucharest sum­mit was where NATO mem­ber states agreed Geor­gia and Ukraine “will become mem­bers of NATO.” Then-US Defense Sec­re­tary Robert Gates has since writ­ten with intense regret about the deci­sion, which laid the foun­da­tions for Russia’s crush­ing of Tbil­isi in a brief war five months lat­er, as well as the cur­rent Ukraine proxy con­flict.

When Gor­ka and his men­tor reunit­ed in Wash­ing­ton almost a decade lat­er, Don­nel­ly was intent on work­ing his con­nec­tions to dri­ve con­flict with Rus­sia.

Below: Chris Donnelly’s pass­port, leaked in the Integri­ty Ini­tia­tive files

Don­nel­ly meets secret­ly in DC with Gor­ka, push­ing war with Rus­sia

Dur­ing Trump’s first term, as the pres­i­dent bat­tled a del­uge of par­ti­san pro­pa­gan­da paint­ing him as a Putin pup­pet, and with Amer­i­can lib­er­als trans­formed overnight into froth­ing Rus­so­phobes, British intel­li­gence gleaned a per­fect oppor­tu­ni­ty to esca­late a sim­mer­ing new Cold War.

On Sep­tem­ber 18, 2018, Integri­ty Ini­tia­tive chief Chris Donel­ly flew into Wash­ing­ton to expand his new covert influ­ence net­work. The fol­low­ing morn­ing, he head­ed straight to break­fast with his for­mer under­study, Sebas­t­ian Gor­ka.

After­wards, Don­nel­ly took a car to the Arling­ton, Vir­ginia offices of CNA, the think tank adjunct of the US Cen­ter for Naval Analy­ses and key Integri­ty Ini­tia­tive “part­ner” in DC, to deliv­er a lengthy pre­sen­ta­tion on “map­ping Russ­ian influ­ence activ­i­ties.”

Leaked files of Donnelly’s Ini­tia­tive list­ed Gorka’s wife, Katharine, as a key con­tact. At the time, she was a senior advi­sor at the Depart­ment of Home­land Secu­ri­ty. (Today, she is the chair of the GOP in North­ern Virginia’s Fair­fax Coun­ty, a hub for pri­vate mil­i­tary and intel­li­gence con­trac­tors).

The same file described how the organization’s clus­ters “engage only very dis­creet­ly with gov­ern­ments, based entire­ly on trust­ed per­son­al contacts…and try to influ­ence them gen­tly.”

On that basis, both Gorkas clear­ly fit the bill for Integri­ty Ini­tia­tive clus­ter mem­bers, even though the covert oper­a­tion played an appar­ent role in sev­er­al pro­pa­gan­da oper­a­tions aimed at destroy­ing Trump and sub­vert­ing his agen­da.

For instance, Integri­ty Ini­tia­tive oper­a­tives were instru­men­tal in cir­cu­lat­ing dis­graced MI6 offi­cer Christo­pher Steele’s bogus “Trump-Rus­sia” dossier at the high­est lev­els of the US gov­ern­ment, and in turn, dis­sem­i­nat­ing it through­out West­ern media. That con­nivance was clear­ly aimed at dele­git­imiz­ing Trump while box­ing his admin­is­tra­tion into a bel­liger­ent stance on Rus­sia.

In Britain, Integri­ty Ini­tia­tive oper­a­tives fraud­u­lent­ly linked the Brex­it referendum’s result to Russ­ian med­dling. In Spain, mean­while, the Ini­tia­tive spread dis­in­for­ma­tion false­ly por­trayjng the Cata­lan inde­pen­dence move­ment as a Russ­ian-con­trolled oper­a­tion, deliv­er­ing a body blow to cor­dial rela­tions between Madrid and Rus­sia.

In March 2021, when grilled by The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive about his secret meet­ing in DC with Don­nel­ly, Gor­ka explod­ed, telling the outlet’s reporter to “go to hell,” and ask­ing “who the hell” they were to ask him about “pri­vate conversations…with a friend.” Gor­ka refused to dis­cuss his bond with Don­nel­ly any fur­ther.

He sim­i­lar­ly ignored ques­tions sent by The Gray­zone through direct mes­sage to his per­son­al Twitter/X account.

Today, Don­nel­ly helps over­see Britain’s clan­des­tine role in the Ukraine proxy war. As The Gray­zone revealed, Don­nel­ly over­saw the blue­prints for the Ukrain­ian ter­ror attack which dam­aged the Russ­ian-built Kerch Bridge in Octo­ber 2022. By design, the bomb­ing was a piv­otal step up the esca­la­tion lad­der.

Now, as Trump sets out to ful­fill his promise to end the con­flict in Ukraine, Don­nel­ly enjoys a direct line to one of the president’s top nation­al secu­ri­ty aides, who hap­pens to be his long­time under­study.

3.“False flag oper­a­tion planned in Europe?”; Anti-Spiegel;  12/04/2024.

Arti­cles keep appear­ing in Euro­pean media warn­ing of an impend­ing “Russ­ian ter­ror wave”. Is this intend­ed to pave the way for a false flag oper­a­tion to final­ly make Euro­peans ready for war against Rus­sia?

The fact that gov­ern­ments and secret ser­vices use false flag oper­a­tions to get their pop­u­la­tions to final­ly get excit­ed about wars that their gov­ern­ment wants is noth­ing new. Just remem­ber the inci­dent in the Gulf of Tonkin, where North Viet­nam is said to have attacked US war­ships, which the US gov­ern­ment invent­ed to make the Viet­nam War more palat­able to the pub­lic.

Or the incu­ba­tor lie that the US gov­ern­ment used to con­vince the pop­u­la­tion in 1991 that an attack on Iraq was a great idea.

These are just two exam­ples where it is com­plete­ly undis­put­ed that West­ern gov­ern­ments have no com­plaints about using false flag oper­a­tions or even com­plete­ly fab­ri­cat­ed lies to pre­pare their pop­u­la­tions for war. I will refrain from list­ing fur­ther exam­ples, but most read­ers will know of oth­ers.

Cur­rent­ly, Euro­pean gov­ern­ments are faced with the prob­lem that their pop­u­la­tions are not pre­pared to enter into an open war with Rus­sia, which is why there has been spec­u­la­tion for months that West­ern intel­li­gence ser­vices are prepar­ing a false flag oper­a­tion with many casu­al­ties some­where in Europe, which they can then blame on Rus­sia.

The effect would be the same as always: the emo­tion­al shock that the event and espe­cial­ly the media cov­er­age caus­es among the pop­u­la­tion will switch off even the last rem­nants of crit­i­cal think­ing and no one will demand a lengthy inves­ti­ga­tion, but will imme­di­ate­ly call for war and revenge.

I am not a fan of such pre­dic­tions, but I have seen a pat­tern in recent months that fits with the pre­vi­ous lies used to dri­ve pop­u­la­tions into war. The pat­tern has always been that the media — cit­ing West­ern intel­li­gence ser­vices, of course — have report­ed again and again about the sup­pos­ed­ly impend­ing dan­ger. When it then hap­pened, they were able to dis­tract from the lie by refer­ring to the pre­vi­ous warn­ings, rather than demand­ing a thor­ough inves­ti­ga­tion before a hasty mil­i­tary response.

We have seen this again in recent months, as the West­ern media are increas­ing­ly report­ing on alleged or alleged­ly planned Russ­ian acts of ter­ror and sab­o­tage in Europe. There is no evi­dence, and often there are not even far-fetched inci­dents, just the warn­ings that the media have from sup­pos­ed­ly con­fi­den­tial intel­li­gence sources.

At the end of August, I already report­ed on this media cam­paign , which is run­ning sub­lim­i­nal­ly but con­tin­u­ous­ly in the West. The car­go plane that recent­ly crashed in the Baltics was also imme­di­ate­ly described by West­ern politi­cians and media as a “pos­si­ble Russ­ian attack”, although there was no evi­dence of this. And it is now undis­put­ed that it was not sab­o­tage, but in all prob­a­bil­i­ty pilot error.

But these reports become embed­ded in peo­ple’s sub­con­scious if they are repeat­ed often enough. And who in the edi­to­r­i­al offices of West­ern media cares about facts?

A par­tic­u­lar­ly grue­some piece of pro­pa­gan­da on the sub­ject has now appeared in the British Express, which I have trans­lat­ed for illus­tra­tion pur­pos­es. I have added com­ments to the arti­cle to demon­strate the audac­i­ty of the pro­pa­gan­da and the lies used.

If this were just an iso­lat­ed case, one could dis­miss it with a smile, but since West­ern media have been report­ing such things for months, I would like to at least point out the dan­ger of a pos­si­bly planned false flag oper­a­tion, which could then be blamed on Rus­sia.

Start of trans­la­tion:

Vladimir Putin plans “mass casu­al­ties” in Europe in revenge for sup­port­ing Ukraine

The head of MI5 warned that Rus­sia was “on a sus­tained mis­sion to wreak hav­oc on British and Euro­pean streets”.

Vladimir Putin is tar­get­ing Europe to cause “mass casu­al­ty inci­dents,” one expert warned.

Rela­tions between Moscow and the West have dete­ri­o­rat­ed com­plete­ly since the Russ­ian inva­sion of Ukraine.

Recent­ly, the Russ­ian despot and his allies in Moscow threat­ened retal­i­a­tion when Britain and the US allowed Ukraine to attack Russ­ian ter­ri­to­ry with their mis­siles. ( Trans­la­tor’s note: What an impu­dence! How can the “Russ­ian despot” threat­en retal­i­a­tion just because the US and UK are fir­ing mis­siles at Rus­sia? One ques­tion: How would Lon­don and Wash­ing­ton react if Rus­sia open­ly fired mis­siles at the US and UK? )

How­ev­er, experts believe that Rus­sia is already attack­ing Britain and oth­er Ukraine allies in Europe.

Keir Giles, senior con­sult­ing fel­low at Chatham House and author of “Who Will Defend Europe?”, gave an exam­ple that shows Putin is more than will­ing to kill peo­ple in Europe if nec­es­sary .

He told the Tele­graph: “It’s impos­si­ble to say how wide­spread this is because we only see what comes to light — and some of what comes to light is acci­den­tal. Some coun­tries are very care­ful to keep it under wraps.”

“We should be con­cerned that Rus­sia is will­ing to con­sid­er an attack in Europe that would cause mass casu­al­ties, as the attack on the plane showed. That was the one ele­ment that was miss­ing from the mur­der­ous sab­o­tage cam­paigns of the past decades. And that is wor­ry­ing.”

Mr Giles was refer­ring to the plane crash near Vil­nius, Lithua­nia, last week. ( Trans­la­tor’s note: As expect­ed, the man from Chatham House is delib­er­ate­ly lying to the pub­lic, because it is now quite clear, espe­cial­ly after ana­lyz­ing radio traf­fic , that the plane crashed due to pilot error. There is no evi­dence of sab­o­tage. So Gilesfrom Chatham House is delib­er­ate­ly lying to con­firm the nar­ra­tive of alleged “Russ­ian attacks” in Europe that British intel­li­gence ser­vices are fuel­ing for some rea­son. And British media, in this case the Express, are will­ing to help.

A crew mem­ber was killed when the car­go plane crashed, hit a house and then burst into flames.

Ger­man Chan­cel­lor Olaf Scholz expressed sus­pi­cion that the crash could have been caused by Russ­ian sab­o­tage, although Lithua­nia denied this. ( Trans­la­tor’s note: What­ev­er Scholz said imme­di­ate­ly after the crash is com­plete­ly irrel­e­vant because it is now clear that there was no sab­o­tage. Not even Russ­ian sab­o­tage. The author of the arti­cle knows this too — if he does­n’t already know this he urgent­ly needs to look for a new job due to incom­pe­tence — but he writes it any­way to lie to the read­ers and feed the desired nar­ra­tive of the Russ­ian ene­my ) .

How­ev­er, West­ern secu­ri­ty agen­cies have claimed that the plant­i­ng of fire­bombs on planes bound for Britain and Ger­many in July was part of a covert Russ­ian oper­a­tion. ( Trans­la­tor’s note: Again, it is West­ern “secu­ri­ty agen­cies” that are push­ing the nar­ra­tive for some rea­son, even though there is not a sin­gle pub­lished and doc­u­ment­ed evi­dence of this so far. )

A DHL ware­house in Birm­ing­ham went up in flames after a pack­age being flown to the UK was alleged­ly rigged with incen­di­ary devices. ( Trans­la­tor’s note: Again, there is no proven link to Rus­sia, just the word “alleged”. Is Rus­sia now to blame for every fire that breaks out in Europe? And there can be no talk of “mass casu­al­ties” when a ware­house goes up in flames with­out any­one being injured. The author sim­ply packs var­i­ous inci­dents that are obvi­ous­ly unre­lat­ed into one arti­cle and sug­ges­tions — of course with­out pro­vid­ing any evi­dence — that Rus­sia is behind all of the inci­dents .)

MI5 Direc­tor Gen­er­al Ken McCal­lum said in a speech last month that Rus­sia was try­ing to cre­ate “chaos ” in Britain .

He said: “We should pre­pare our­selves for the fact that there will con­tin­ue to be aggres­sion in this coun­try.” ( Trans­la­tor’s note: This is also sug­ges­tive pro­pa­gan­da when he speaks of “con­tin­ues”, which sug­gests that some­thing has been going on for a long time, which — as we have seen — is not the case at all. )

“The GRU [Rus­si­a’s mil­i­tary intel­li­gence ser­vice] in par­tic­u­lar is intent on cre­at­ing chaos on British and Euro­pean streets: we have seen arson, sab­o­tage and more. Dan­ger­ous actions car­ried out with increas­ing reck­less­ness . ”

4.“Are they plan­ning a false flag event in Lon­don?” by Alex Krain­er; Alex Krain­er Sub­stack; 11/29/2024.

Very near­ly all of Lon­don’s Web­cams went dark in ear­ly Sep­tem­ber. Why?

Yes­ter­day, as I was final­iz­ing my new report on Great Britain, an update to my August 26 arti­cle “The Com­ing Col­lapse of Britain,” YouTube ran­dom­ly sug­gest­ed to me a short video by one Craig Hous­ton titled, “Why are ALL LONDON web­cams offline...?”

I was near­ly floored: Mr. Hous­ton looked through hun­dreds of Web­cams across Lon­don and could not find a sin­gle one that was live. See for your­self here and here! That’s extreme­ly odd: clear­ly, some­one made the deci­sion to switch them all off — they could­n’t all have failed ran­dom­ly.

One of the web­cams over the West­min­ster bridge dis­played the last image it record­ed: it was on 2 Sep­tem­ber 2024 at 16:51, which at least gives us a clue about when the Heart of Dark­ness went dark to the world. I post­ed a com­ment about this in my Trend­Com­pass report yes­ter­day and one of the read­ers found a work­ing Web­cam at Abbey road. Still, that’s one out of hun­dreds that are still dark.

Why some­one would decide to cut all the web­cams is a mys­tery, and an omi­nous one. Mr. Hous­ton did­n’t offer any expla­na­tions, which is under­stand­able giv­en that he lives in Britain where singing, “kung fu fight­ing,” or silent­ly pray­ing on the side­walk can get you arrest­ed. But where he declined to tread, I’ll ven­ture a guess.

They’re plan­ning a false flag event to blame on Rus­sia

I think it’s the only expla­na­tion that makes any sense to my mind: they are plan­ning a false-flag ter­ror attack on Lon­don which they’ll blame on Rus­sia, so that they can trig­ger an all-out, whole-of-soci­ety mobi­liza­tion by all of the West­ern pow­ers against Rus­sia. Now, if this seems far-fetched, there are now sev­er­al impor­tant ele­ments that fit coher­ent­ly with this sce­nario, start­ing with the gen­er­al geopo­lit­i­cal state of things.

West­ern empire and the UK in par­tic­u­lar, bet heav­i­ly on Ukraine and lost. By now the sit­u­a­tion has become as unde­ni­able as it is hope­less. But West­ern pow­ers aren’t show­ing any incli­na­tion to cut and run, like they did from Viet­nam in March of 1972 or Afghanistan in August 2021.

Today, the West is fac­ing the world’s largest nuclear pow­er with an estab­lished esca­la­to­ry dom­i­nance in the region and a high­ly moti­vat­ed, well trained, bat­tle hard­ened and well equipped force, includ­ing with new, dev­as­tat­ing con­ven­tion­al weapon­ry that eclipses any­thing the West has in its deplet­ed arse­nals. In spite of that, they are still esca­lat­ing. The ques­tion is, why?

In Ukraine, the whole world’s at stake

Ukraine is too impor­tant for them and the stakes could not be high­er. From the impe­r­i­al cabal’s point of view, the prize, in fact, is the whole world. In his paper, “Demo­c­ra­t­ic Ideals and Real­i­ty,” Sir Hal­ford Mackinder wrote that, “Who rules East Europe com­mands the Heart­land; who rules the Heart­land com­mands the World-island; who rules the World-island con­trols the world.”

By World-island, Mackinder meant the Eurasian land­mass. His the­o­ret­i­cal frame­work remained the foun­da­tion of for­eign pol­i­cy for British and Amer­i­can gov­ern­ments to this very day, as we learned as recent­ly as 2018 from Wes Mitchell, Pres­i­dent Trump’s Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of State for Euro­pean and Eurasian Affairs. In a brief­ing to the U.S. Sen­ate For­eign Rela­tions Com­mit­tee, he made it explic­it that the “cen­tral aim of the Administration’s for­eign pol­i­cy is to defend US dom­i­na­tion of Eurasian land­mass as the fore­most US nation­al secu­ri­ty inter­est and to pre­pare the nation for this chal­lenge.”

Mitchell also said that the Admin­is­tra­tion was “work­ing with our close ally the UK to form an inter­na­tion­al coali­tion for coor­di­nat­ing efforts in this field.” These views are not just idle mus­ings of aca­d­e­mics or enter­tain­ment for think tanks. The real­i­ty on the ground con­firms that this is indeed how the impe­r­i­al cabal regards the out­come of the bat­tle for Ukraine. From the begin­ning of the war, a few of their lieu­tenants voiced the entrenched mind­set:

• ”If we lose in Ukraine, the world order we cre­at­ed 80 years ago will crum­ble” — then US Chief of Staff Mark Mil­ley, April 2022
• “If we lose in Ukraine, we will lose the world for decades. Defeat in Ukraine could be the begin­ning of the end of the gold­en age of the West.” — Mateusz Moraw­iec­ki, Poland’s Prime Min­is­ter in a TV address, April 2023.
• “If Ukraine los­es, world order will be estab­lished by our ene­mies” — for­mer NATO Sec­re­tary Gen­er­al (1999–2003) and mem­ber of the House of Lords of the British Par­lia­ment George Robert­son in The Tele­graph, Jan. 2024
• “If Ukraine falls it would be a cat­a­stro­phe for the West, it would be the end of West­ern hege­mo­ny and we will have no one to blame but our­selves.” — Boris John­son, in a short video mes­sage, April 2024

It is unlike­ly that the empire’s vest­ed inter­ests will qui­et­ly accept this “cat­a­stro­phe.” This is why they are esca­lat­ing provo­ca­tions against Rus­sia, des­per­ate­ly hop­ing that the Rus­sians will strike at a NATO mem­ber nation, cre­at­ing the pre­text to invoke Arti­cle 5 of the NATO Treaty and unleash a uni­fied response where the col­lec­tive West would con­front Rus­sia in a whole-of-soci­ety effort and hope­ful­ly snatch a vic­to­ry out of the jaws of defeat.

Some­times provo­ca­tions work and they trig­ger the intend­ed response. . . .

Cre­ate a help­ful wave of nation­al indig­na­tion!

But there are cir­cum­stances when a gal­va­niz­ing event must be orches­trat­ed to det­o­nate the greater con­flict, and the list of known exam­ples through his­to­ry is very long. Here’s just a few cas­es:

• The Manchuria, or “Muk­den” Inci­dent. In Sep­tem­ber 1931, Japan­ese troops set off a small explo­sion on a train track owned by a Japan­ese com­pa­ny, then blamed it on Chi­na in order to jus­ti­fy the inva­sion of Manchuria.
• Attack on Glei­witz Radio sta­tion in Sep­tem­ber 1939: the Nazis shelled the sta­tion and accused Pol­ish troops for the deed, giv­ing Hitler the pre­text to launch the inva­sion of Poland
• Oper­a­tion North­woods in March 1962. The oper­a­tion was shut down by Pres­i­dent Kennedy, but the US Joint Chiefs of Staff planned a cam­paign of ter­ror against civil­ian tar­gets in Mia­mi in order to “cre­ate a help­ful wave of nation­al indig­na­tion” and lead to a US inva­sion of Cuba.
• Gulf of Tonkin Inci­dent in August 1964. Two US destroy­ers sta­tioned in the Gulf of Tonkin radioed that they had been tar­get­ed by the North Viet­namese forces, trig­ger­ing US Con­gress to pass the “Gulf of Tonkin Res­o­lu­tion” and autho­rize Pres­i­dent John­son to go “all in” in Viet­nam.
• “Sep­tem­ber 11” ter­ror attacks in 2001. They helped the Bush 43 admin­is­tra­tion launch their excel­lent Glob­al War on Ter­ror and rad­i­cal­ly reduce civ­il lib­er­ties at home.
• Ghou­ta Chem­i­cal attack in August 2013. Orches­trat­ed by West­ern proxy force with the help of the British-led and ISIS-staffed White Hel­mets, a chem­i­cal attack on civil­ians in Ghou­ta was blamed on Bashar Al Assad’s forces. Had the charge stuck, it would have crossed the “red line” for U.S. and NATO inter­ven­tion in Syr­ia

The exam­ples are very numer­ous. A new false flag attack, aimed at trig­ger­ing World War III against Rus­sia would­n’t be unusu­al in the con­text of his­to­ry. If the pop­u­la­tion is tak­en by sur­prise and the peo­ple gen­uine­ly believe the offi­cial nar­ra­tive about the attacks, this does invari­ably cre­ate the “help­ful waves of nation­al indig­na­tion,” allow­ing the coun­try’s lead­ers to wrap them­selves in the flag, promise jus­tice at what­ev­er cost, and start mov­ing the pieces irre­versibly toward the desired mil­i­tary esca­la­tion.

Alex Krain­er’s Sub­stack is a read­er-sup­port­ed pub­li­ca­tion. To receive new posts, con­sid­er becom­ing a free or paid sub­scriber.

Top of Form

Bot­tom of Form

I believe that this is the rea­son why West­ern pow­ers are encour­ag­ing Ukraine to strike into Rus­sia with their mis­siles, even though there is almost noth­ing to be gained. Such esca­la­tion only makes them direct­ly involved as bel­liger­ents in the con­flict. This is why incred­i­bly, the U.S. is sud­den­ly dis­cussing pro­vid­ing Ukraine with nuclear Weapons. They may hope that Rus­sia will respond impul­sive­ly, but they know that Vladimir Putin almost cer­tain­ly won’t take the bait. That’s where the false flag comes in, prob­a­bly in the shape of the det­o­na­tion of a nuclear weapon in Lon­don.

I can’t imag­ine how this could be done. There should be a very rig­or­ous cus­tody con­trol chain with every war­head ware­housed in any West­ern pow­er. But if such weapons were giv­en to Ukraine, that’s where the cus­tody chain would end. From there, nuclear devices could be free to roam and drift back into the Heart of Dark­ness to serve their false flag pur­pos­es, per­haps on spe­cial CIA or MI6 flights, or per­haps in ordi­nary ship­ping con­tain­ers.

Sup­pose if such a device were det­o­nat­ed from a ship­ping con­tain­er on a ship, a train or a truck, some Web­cam might catch the event. But if all the Web­cams were dark, the news – which will have their sto­ries script­ed before­hand – can report that it was a Russ­ian mis­sile, and it would be very unlike­ly that any­body could ever prove oth­er­wise. If such images ever did sur­face, they’d almost cer­tain­ly be few and they could be quick­ly traced and removed from cir­cu­la­tion.

That time the actors read out their lines out of sequence, reveal­ing that the news were script­ed in advance of events.

Switch­ing off all Web­cams in Lon­don can’t be a ran­dom event. It requires an expla­na­tion. Mine is a guess, but if there’s a dif­fer­ent coher­ent expla­na­tion for why all of Lon­don’s Web­cams went dark in ear­ly Sep­tem­ber, I can’t even begin to imag­ine it.

It’s time to be brave…

Today is Thanks­giv­ing and it almost pains me to share these dark mus­ings. For one thing, I could be wrong — that much is obvi­ous. And then it’s a down­er – it’s noth­ing to be thank­ful for. But if I hap­pen to be right... The one way false flag events can fail is if the pub­lic sees through them.

False flag plan­ners must ambush the peo­ple and shock them from the clear blue skies. A spec­tac­u­lar event like 9/11 will have a pow­er­ful impact on peo­ple’s emo­tions and in that moment they’ll be sus­cep­ti­ble to decep­tive nar­ra­tives. That “help­ful wave of indig­na­tion” will mate­ri­al­ize. But if the pub­lic is fore­warned and expects that a false flag might take place, they might sus­pect that it was “an inside job,” and the attack could blow back into the con­spir­a­tors’ faces. I have there­fore decid­ed to take risk of ruin­ing my Amer­i­can read­ers’ long week­end and to also risk embar­rass­ing myself.

5.“The CIA/MI6 Skri­pal Con­spir­a­cy Exposed” by Kit Klaren­berg; A Clos­er Look on Syr­ia Sub­stack; 11/17/2024.

All my inves­ti­ga­tions are free to access, thanks to the gen­eros­i­ty of my read­ers. Inde­pen­dent jour­nal­ism nonethe­less requires invest­ment, so if you took val­ue from this arti­cle or any oth­ers, please con­sid­er shar­ing, or even becom­ing a paid sub­scriber. Your sup­port is always grate­ful­ly received, and will nev­er be for­got­ten. To buy me a cof­fee or two, please click this link.

On Octo­ber 14th, a much-delayed inquiry into the mys­te­ri­ous death of Dawn Sturgess, a British cit­i­zen who died in July 2018 after reput­ed­ly com­ing into con­tact with Novi­chok nerve agent left in Eng­land by a pair of Russ­ian assas­sins, final­ly com­menced. Already, the pub­lic show tri­al has unearthed tan­ta­lis­ing evi­dence grave­ly under­min­ing the offi­cial nar­ra­tive of the poi­son­ing of GRU defec­tor Sergei Skri­pal and his daugh­ter Yulia in Sal­is­bury, in March that year.

These rev­e­la­tions emerged despite the British state’s best efforts to sab­o­tage the inquiry, and cur­tail its abil­i­ty to ascer­tain the truth. For one, the Skri­pals have been pre­vent­ed from tes­ti­fy­ing, despite for­mal­ly request­ing to do so. Such is the appar­ent risk of Russ­ian intel­li­gence attempt­ing to tar­get the pair anew, not even their video-record­ed police inter­views from the time can be entered into evi­dence. Mean­while, the urgent ques­tion of what British intel­li­gence and secu­ri­ty ser­vices knew, and when they knew it, will not be explored.

Yet, pri­ma­ry source evi­dence indi­cat­ing British spies and their Amer­i­can coun­ter­parts were well-aware the two Rus­sians accused of attempt­ing to mur­der the Skri­pals were vis­it­ing Britain in advance of their arrival has lain in plain sight for years. Whether such fore­knowl­edge implies the CIA and MI6 were in real­i­ty behind the abortive hit remains a mat­ter of inter­pre­ta­tion — but that the CIA and MI6 sought to exploit the Rus­sians’ pres­ence in Sal­is­bury for malign pur­pos­es appears beyond doubt.

In Jan­u­ary 2021, US watch­dog group Amer­i­can Over­sight released hun­dreds of pages of emails sent to and from the per­son­al address of Mike Pom­peo, CIA direc­tor Jan­u­ary 2017 — April 2018. In many cas­es, the emails were offi­cial Agency com­mu­ni­ca­tions dis­cussing mat­ters of extreme sen­si­tiv­i­ty, con­duct­ed off-books. The records — heav­i­ly redact­ed under the US Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Act — show that on March 1st 2018, Pom­peo was approached by two high-rank­ing CIA oper­a­tives, who asked for a per­son­al meet­ing on a “very urgent mat­ter”. They explained:

“A very pos­i­tive oppor­tu­ni­ty is with­in reach but requires your engage­ment because of the urgency…I am con­vinced that this is a very promis­ing oppor­tu­ni­ty.”

Pom­peo respond­ed in the affir­ma­tive, and the meet­ing went ahead ear­ly the next morn­ing. Under­lin­ing their covert summit’s impor­tance, the emails indi­cate CIA high-rankers were prepar­ing to pitch the “pos­i­tive oppor­tu­ni­ty” to the Agency’s chief from the ear­ly hours of March 2nd. Eeri­ly, the ini­tial email request­ing Pompeo’s sig­noff on the plot was sent less than half an hour after Rus­lan Boshi­rov and Alexan­der Petrov, Skripal’s alleged assas­sins, pur­chased plane tick­ets from Moscow to Lon­don Gatwick for their Sal­is­bury vis­it.

The mys­tery of how Boshi­rov and Petrov, two pur­port­ed­ly false per­sonas con­coct­ed by Russ­ian intel­li­gence with vir­tu­al­ly no paper­trail tes­ti­fy­ing to their exis­tenc, were able to secure dif­fi­cult-to-obtain mul­ti-entry visas to Britain has nev­er been ade­quate­ly explained. Indeed, it should’ve been impos­si­ble for the pair to vis­it the coun­try, based on estab­lished rules and reg­u­la­tions. We are thus left to pon­der if the two men walked into a trap cooked up by the British — and once ensnared, MI6 sought to embroil the CIA in their con­nivance.

‘Strong Option’

Who emailed Pom­peo is redact­ed, although then-CIA deputy direc­tor Gina Haspel is an obvi­ous can­di­date. A long­stand­ing Rus­sia hawk, who cut her Agency teeth recruit­ing spies in the Sovi­et Union in the years before its col­lapse, she served as the CIA’s Lon­don sta­tion chief twice — from 2008 — 2011, and 2014 — 2017. Sergei Skri­pal arrived in Britain in July 2010 via a grand spy swap dur­ing her first tenure, which was nego­ti­at­ed by Haspel’s long­time col­lab­o­ra­tor Daniel Hoff­man, then-CIA Moscow sta­tion chief. He was among the very first sources to pub­licly blame Rus­sia for the Sal­is­bury inci­dent.

Dur­ing Haspel’s “unusu­al” sec­ond spell in Lon­don, Skripal’s endur­ing con­nec­tion to his home­land, and yearn­ing to return, would’ve been well-known to British intel­li­gence. Serendip­i­tous­ly, BBC vet­er­an Mark Urban inter­viewed the GRU defec­tor through­out the year pri­or to his poi­son­ing. He record­ed that Skri­pal was “an unashamed Russ­ian nation­al­ist, enthu­si­as­ti­cal­ly adopt­ing the Krem­lin line in many mat­ters, even while sit­ting in his MI6-pur­chased house.” Coin­ci­den­tal­ly, Urban once served in the same tank reg­i­ment as Pablo Miller, Skripal’s MI6 recruiter/handler, and Sal­is­bury neigh­bour.

More­over, for­mer Krem­lin offi­cial Valery Moro­zov, an asso­ciate of the GRU defec­tor like­wise exiled to Britain, claimed days after the poi­son­ing that Skri­pal remained in “reg­u­lar” con­tact with Moscow’s embassy in Lon­don, and met with Russ­ian mil­i­tary intel­li­gence offi­cers there “every month”. He also flat­ly repu­di­at­ed any sug­ges­tion the pur­port­ed nerve agent attack on Sergei and Yulia was Moscow’s doing:

“Putin can’t be behind this. I know how the Krem­lin works, I worked there. Who is Skri­pal? He is noth­ing for Putin. Putin doesn’t think about him. There is nobody in Krem­lin talk­ing about for­mer intel­li­gence offi­cer [sic] who is nobody. There is no rea­son for this. It is more dan­ger­ous for them for such things to hap­pen.”

That this infor­ma­tion was not shared with Haspel stretch­es creduli­ty. The Wash­ing­ton Post has report­ed how her time in Britain made her the per­son­al “linch­pin” of the CIA’s rela­tion­ship with MI6, the Agency’s “most impor­tant for­eign part­ner.” Her British col­leagues gushed to the out­let, “she knows them so well…they call her the ‘hon­orary UK desk offi­cer’.” Haspel reg­u­lar­ly drew on this expe­ri­ence to “sta­bi­lize the transat­lantic alliance” between Lon­don and Wash­ing­ton, which was fre­quent­ly strained while she was CIA direc­tor May 2018 — Jan­u­ary 2021.

This fric­tion result­ed in no small part from Trump legit­i­mate­ly accus­ing British chaos agents of “con­spir­ing with Amer­i­can intel­li­gence to spy on his pres­i­den­tial cam­paign,” charges that “rat­tled the British gov­ern­ment at the high­est lev­els.” Strik­ing­ly, a cit­ed exam­ple of Haspel sta­bil­is­ing CIA rela­tions with MI6 pro­vid­ed by WaPo was con­vinc­ing a high­ly reluc­tant Pres­i­dent to back the West­ern-wide expul­sion of Russ­ian diplo­mats, encour­aged by Lon­don in the Sal­is­bury incident’s wake.

How Haspel pressed Trump over Sal­is­bury was revealed in April 2019. The New York Times report­ed that the Pres­i­dent at first down­played Skripal’s alleged poi­son­ing and refused to respond, believ­ing the appar­ent attack to be “legit­i­mate spy games, dis­taste­ful but with­in the bounds of espi­onage.” How­ev­er, Haspel suc­cess­ful­ly lob­bied Trump to take the “strong option” of expelling Russ­ian embassy staff in the US, by pro­vid­ing him with British-sourced “emo­tion­al images”:

“Haspel showed pic­tures the British gov­ern­ment had sup­plied her of young chil­dren hos­pi­tal­ized after being sick­ened by the Novi­chok nerve agent that poi­soned the Skri­pals. She then showed a pho­to­graph of ducks British offi­cials said were inad­ver­tent­ly killed by the slop­py work of the Russ­ian operatives…Trump fix­at­ed on the pic­tures of the sick­ened chil­dren and the dead ducks. At the end of the brief­ing, he embraced the strong option.”

‘Oper­a­tion Foot’

The New York Times exposé caused a stir upon release, not least because the “emo­tion­al images” described had nev­er hith­er­to been pub­lished or referred to in the main­stream media. While the Skri­pals giv­ing bread to three local boys to feed ducks in Salisbury’s Avon Play­ground on March 4th 2018 was ini­tial­ly wide­ly report­ed, no media out­let, gov­ern­ment min­is­ter, spokesper­son, health pro­fes­sion­al or law enforce­ment offi­cial had ever pre­vi­ous­ly claimed chil­dren and/or water­fowl were in any way “sick­ened” after com­ing into con­tact with Novi­chok. The reverse, in fact.

On March 26th that year, the Dai­ly Mail record­ed that the boys giv­en bread by the Skri­pals — one of whom appar­ent­ly ate some — were “rushed to hos­pi­tal for blood tests amid fears they’d been poi­soned,” but prompt­ly dis­charged after being giv­en “the all-clear.” More­over, two days after the New York Times arti­cle was pub­lished, British health offi­cials issued a state­ment not only refut­ing the report entire­ly, but deny­ing any chil­dren were admit­ted to hos­pi­tal in Sal­is­bury as a result of Novi­chok expo­sure at all.

Sub­se­quent­ly, the New York Times rad­i­cal­ly amend­ed its piece, remov­ing any sug­ges­tion Haspel showed Trump pho­tos of Novi­chok vic­tims pro­vid­ed by the British. In fact, the news­pa­per reverse-fer­ret­ed, she had “dis­played pic­tures illus­trat­ing the con­se­quences of nerve agent attacks, not images spe­cif­ic to the chem­i­cal attack in Britain.” The ques­tion of whether the afore­men­tioned images did exist, and were forged by British intel­li­gence for the explic­it pur­pose of bounc­ing Trump into a hos­tile anti-Rus­sia stance, remains open five-and-a-half years lat­er.

After all, British spies had been plan­ning and hop­ing for a mass defen­es­tra­tion of Russ­ian diplo­mats glob­al­ly, as a pre­lude to all-out war with Moscow, for years by that point. In Jan­u­ary 2015, MI6/NATO front the Insti­tute for State­craft (IFS) pub­lished a doc­u­ment set­ting out “poten­tial levers” for achiev­ing “regime change” in Rus­sia, span­ning “diplo­ma­cy”, “finance”, “secu­ri­ty”, “tech­nol­o­gy”, “indus­try”, “mil­i­tary”, and even “cul­ture”. One “lever”, which IFS list­ed thrice, stat­ed:

“Simul­ta­ne­ous­ly expel every [Russ­ian] intel­li­gence offi­cer and air/defence/naval attaché from as many coun­tries as pos­si­ble (glob­al Oper­a­tion Foot).”

Oper­a­tion Foot saw 105 Sovi­et offi­cials deport­ed from Britain in Sep­tem­ber 1971. Sev­er­al main­stream media out­lets ref­er­enced this his­toric inci­dent when report­ing on Lon­don suc­cess­ful­ly cor­ralling 26 coun­tries — includ­ing, of course, the US — into expelling over 150 Russ­ian diplo­mat­ic staff in response to the Sal­is­bury inci­dent in March 2018. As a result, IFS got one step clos­er to its long­stand­ing objec­tive of “armed con­flict of the old-fash­ioned sort” with Rus­sia, which “Britain and the West could win.”

Fast for­ward to today, and Britain and the West are on the verge of los­ing that con­flict once and for all. Mean­while, the Sal­is­bury incident’s ever-fluc­tu­at­ing offi­cial nar­ra­tive con­tin­ues to shift rad­i­cal­ly, in ways large and small. Con­trary to all pri­or media reports on the mat­ter, the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry has now been told one boy giv­en bread by the Skri­pals to feed ducks actu­al­ly “got sick” as a result, and he and his friends “were unwell for a day or two after­wards.”

This fresh rewrit­ing neat­ly ties in with the high­ly con­tro­ver­sial claim, unflinch­ing­ly clung to by British author­i­ties, that the Skri­pals were poi­soned with Novi­chok smeared on the door­knob of Sergei’s home on the morn­ing of March 4th 2018, before head­ing into Sal­is­bury. As sub­se­quent inves­ti­ga­tions will show, avail­able evi­dence — includ­ing Yulia Skripal’s own hos­pi­tal bed tes­ti­mo­ny — points unmis­tak­ably to the pair being attacked else­where, at a dif­fer­ent time and by anoth­er means entire­ly, with British and Amer­i­can intel­li­gence square in the frame.