Difference between revisions of "Intel Today"
m (correctioin) |
(Plane Truth) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
==Covering the truth with layers of lies== | ==Covering the truth with layers of lies== | ||
In matters of espionage and National Security, no one covers the news better than the [[BBC]] or ''[[The Guardian]]''. Day after day, their “presstitutes” will cover the truth under layers of lies until their readers can no longer tell which way is up. The [[Pan Am Flight 103|Lockerbie affair]] is a case in point. The [[Skripal Affair|Skripals’ story]] is another first-rate example. The [[official narrative]] is beginning to look a lot like a Picasso painting from his surrealism period, although without the master’s genius. | In matters of espionage and National Security, no one covers the news better than the [[BBC]] or ''[[The Guardian]]''. Day after day, their “presstitutes” will cover the truth under layers of lies until their readers can no longer tell which way is up. The [[Pan Am Flight 103|Lockerbie affair]] is a case in point. The [[Skripal Affair|Skripals’ story]] is another first-rate example. The [[official narrative]] is beginning to look a lot like a Picasso painting from his surrealism period, although without the master’s genius. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Plane Truth=== | ||
| + | In weekly instalments from May to July 2020, Intel Today published a ten-part summary of [[Ludwig De Braeckeleer]]'s thoughts on the [[Pan Am Flight 103|Lockerbie tragedy]] under the heading "Lockerbie – Three Decades of Lies: J’Accuse…!" | ||
| + | |||
| + | Chapter X posed a very simple question: | ||
| + | |||
| + | "The time has come to finally review the evidence, usually defined as the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. | ||
| + | |||
| + | "What do we really know about [[Pan Am Flight 103]]? | ||
| + | |||
| + | "This reviewing process will be very unnerving as it will force us to ask ourselves a very simple question. | ||
| + | |||
| + | "Knowing that the evidence of the crime was obviously fabricated, could the crime itself be a fabrication? In other words, can we be sure it was a bomb, at all?" | ||
| + | |||
| + | Intel Today concluded with the following theory propounded by [[Carl Davies]] of [http://plane-truth.com/conclusions.htm 'Plane Truth':]{{QB|"The Libyans did not bomb [[Pan Am 103]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | "I believe Section 41, the front section of the plane, broke off from the main fuselage due to metal fatigue failure following a small bomb against the side of the plane. | ||
| + | |||
| + | "This plane was designed to withstand such an event and should have been able to make an emergency landing in Glasgow. | ||
| + | |||
| + | "Who placed that bomb there is still unknown although all of the evidence has not been considered in a court of law."<ref>''[http://plane-truth.com/conclusions.htm "Plane Truth conclusions"]''</ref>}} | ||
| + | Annoyingly, [[Ludwig De Braeckeleer]] remains silent on the two crucial questions about Lockerbie: who bombed [[Pan Am Flight 103]] and why?<ref>''[https://gosint.wordpress.com/lockerbie/ "Lockerbie – Three Decades of Lies: J’Accuse…!"]''</ref> | ||
===Skripals' story=== | ===Skripals' story=== | ||
Revision as of 10:17, 22 July 2020
Intel Today, founded in July 2016 by Ludwig De Braeckeleer, is a website devoted to Intelligence matters.
Intelligence gathering disciplines, according to De Braeckeleer, have long included HUMINT, GEOINT, IMINT, MASINT, SIGINT, TECHINT, OSINT, CYBINT, and FININT.
Then came RUMINT, i.e. Rumour Intelligence: Uranium from Niger, Iraqi WMDs, Curveball and the likes.
Today, we are witnessing the rise of a new “Intel Discipline”: GOSINT which stands for Gossip Intelligence.
Then again, GOSINT also means: Global Open Source Intelligence.[1]
Contents
Covering the truth with layers of lies
In matters of espionage and National Security, no one covers the news better than the BBC or The Guardian. Day after day, their “presstitutes” will cover the truth under layers of lies until their readers can no longer tell which way is up. The Lockerbie affair is a case in point. The Skripals’ story is another first-rate example. The official narrative is beginning to look a lot like a Picasso painting from his surrealism period, although without the master’s genius.
Plane Truth
In weekly instalments from May to July 2020, Intel Today published a ten-part summary of Ludwig De Braeckeleer's thoughts on the Lockerbie tragedy under the heading "Lockerbie – Three Decades of Lies: J’Accuse…!"
Chapter X posed a very simple question:
"The time has come to finally review the evidence, usually defined as the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
"What do we really know about Pan Am Flight 103?
"This reviewing process will be very unnerving as it will force us to ask ourselves a very simple question.
"Knowing that the evidence of the crime was obviously fabricated, could the crime itself be a fabrication? In other words, can we be sure it was a bomb, at all?"
Intel Today concluded with the following theory propounded by Carl Davies of 'Plane Truth':
"The Libyans did not bomb Pan Am 103.
"I believe Section 41, the front section of the plane, broke off from the main fuselage due to metal fatigue failure following a small bomb against the side of the plane.
"This plane was designed to withstand such an event and should have been able to make an emergency landing in Glasgow.
"Who placed that bomb there is still unknown although all of the evidence has not been considered in a court of law."[2]
Annoyingly, Ludwig De Braeckeleer remains silent on the two crucial questions about Lockerbie: who bombed Pan Am Flight 103 and why?[3]
Skripals' story
On 4 March 2018, Sergei and Yulia Skripal were found almost unconscious on a park bench in Salisbury. The UK government immediately alleged that they were poisoned with a nerve agent — Novichok — that could only have been produced in Russia.
Mark Urban — BBC Diplomatic and defence editor — has covered the Skripals case. In May 2018, Urban interviewed the Salisbury Medical staff who treated the Skripals and the BBC produced a documentary: "Skripals doctor: ‘We expected them not to survive’."[4]
The documentary was truly suspicious and one was left wondering why Mark Urban had been chosen to present the piece. He is a former military officer whose contacts seem to be entirely in military and other intelligence services. Most experts would have expected some other BBC journalist to run that piece.
The first clue came on 4 July 2018 when we learned that “diplomatic editor” Mark Urban had met with Russian spy and MI6 asset Sergei Skripal on a number of occasions in 2017. That is right. Mark Urban was investigating the Skripals’ case before there was a Skripals’ case! News before it is news, indeed…
As a young man, Mark Urban served in the Royal Armoured Corps. One of his “Brothers in Arms” was a certain Pablo Miller. Does that ring a bell?
Pablo Miller — who lives near Salisbury where the poisoning attack took place — was an MI6 officer. Miller recruited Sergei Skripal as a high-level asset. Skripal was eventually caught, convicted, imprisoned and later pardoned and exchanged for Anna Chapman and other Russian spies who had been arrested in the US.
In the aftermath of the Skripal incident, the UK government moved quickly to ‘protect’ the identity of Pablo Miller. On March 7, a DSMA-Notice 05 (Personnel and their Families who work in Sensitive Positions) was issued to all UK editors. [A DSMA-Notice is an official request to news editors not to publish or broadcast items on specified subjects for reasons of national security.]
Nevertheless, we learned that Pablo Miller worked with Christopher Steele — another MI6 officer — at “Orbis Business Intelligence”, the company that compiled the controversial dossier on Donald Trump and Russia.
A D-Notice was already issued against British journalists revealing the identity of Christopher Steele. [The use of a D-Notice is not a rare event. But it is not used very frequently either. I believe that a couple of such notices have been issued annually on average in the UK over the last ten years. And we KNOW that at least three of these notices were issued in connection with the Skripal and Orbis stories.]
The BBC and The Guardian lost no time in confusing the issue. On March 8, BBC Gordon Corera tweeted that his sources were certain that no link exists between Skripal and Orbis or Christopher Steele. On the same day, Guardian journalist Luke Harding suggested that Miller never worked for Orbis. These claims were obviously untrue. Pablo Miller had listed his employment by Orbis Business Intelligence on his LinkedIn profile. [This piece of information was quickly deleted.]
The Orbis research on Trump was contracted by a US company — Fusion GPS — and paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
From late 2016 to early 2017, Christopher Steele had repeated contact — with the FBI’s knowledge and approval — with a US Justice Department official named Bruce Ohr, whose wife works for the opposition-research firm Fusion GPS — the firm that hired Steele to research Trump’s Russia ties.
PS: I understand that Philip Cross has already edited the Wikipedia page of Mark Urban.
You may want to read this post: Wikipedia & the Spooks — The Remake? (Update : ‘Philip Cross’ Identified?)
Specifically, on 5 July 2018, Philip Cross deleted the fact that Mark Urban was an ‘orientalist’. To justify the edit, Cross wrote that: "‘orientalist’ can be a form of disparagement.”
Definition — “Orientalism” is a way of seeing that imagines, emphasises, exaggerates and distorts differences of Arab people and cultures as compared to that of Europe and the US. It often involves seeing Arab culture as exotic, backward, uncivilised, and at times dangerous.[5]
Employee on Wikispooks
| Employee | Job | Appointed |
|---|---|---|
| Ludwig De Braeckeleer | Blogger | July 2016 |
Related Document
| Title | Type | Publication date | Author(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document:Justice for Megrahi - is Aamer Anwar capable of getting it? | Letter | 23 April 2021 | Patrick Haseldine | Is Justice for Megrahi achieved by blocking Twitter accounts? Is Aamer Anwar capable of getting Justice for Megrahi? |
Documents sourced from Intel Today
