Danish Nazi spies forbid to immigrants to have an opinion, the CIA attacked Bernard Madoff, Theresa May misuse terrorism to profit, DemocracyNow about the media coverage of the US war crimes victims in Yemen

25th May 2017 was the first holiday that was not misused by Finn (PET) and Findsen (FE-DDIS) to send 100 spies and get extra paid for the work during holidays. Every weekend and holiday in the last 9 years they sent 3x more spies than usual. This 25th May they sent maybe 10 fake Muslims when I was going to sleep, in the morning 26th again several Muslims, with 3 police cars in 2 minutes. It is again the same story like in the past, if you are Chomsky (white and Jew), you can criticize the Gov and be against the war the whole your life, if you are Martin Luther King (black man supposed to be a slave) and you criticize the Gov, they will destroy your private life and kill you. It is the same in Denmark, they forbid to immigrants to have an opinion, if they have, they set them up and they destroy their life, including poisoning and development of disease. Deviant Nazis are supported by the fake, racist, bribed oversight of intelligence.

Yesterday I watched boring movie (De Niro) about Bernard Madoff and his Ponzi scheme, he was stupid to think that he will just be arrested and that’s all. Rich people who lost billions and millions used the CIA against him, they didn’t send criminals to shoot his family. The CIA set up a judge to him who will send him to the prison in which they can poison him, he had to fight from the moment he stepped into the prison (2009), later one prisoner for the sake of some benefits in the prison broke his bones and cut him, concretely “facial fractures, broken ribs, and a collapsed lung”, and the CIA used prison guards to develop on him the skin disease, the heart attack in 2013 and tumor on kidneys. His son was found dead (hanged), another one died from a tumor that was diagnosed before Ponzi scheme was discovered. As he said, he was not sorry for his victims (billionaires, banksters) because they are predators and they destroyed the life of many people. In any case, he was greedy, the same as they are, he was born in a rich Jew family and didn’t need to make money with a Ponzi scheme, he was just greedy. Other greedy people misused corrupted system against him to make revenge, the CIA was created by the rich to protect their interests, before it was institutionalized as an agency of the Gov. The CIA was created by the rich people, not by the state. And today the same as before 70 years, they protect the economic interests of American billionaires. Therefore, they manufacture terrorism, they never cared for society (slaves that are supposed to produce profits to the riches, if they don’t do it, they are “too much on this world, they can die”). Deviant financial criminals are managing the CIA, if you check the price of the house of the man who signed authorization for tortures, the head of CTC (Counterterrorism Center), you will see he has very rich house, much richer than his salary could allow him to buy. Everything is about profit, even Guantanamo brings them profit, they don’t fight terrorism, they manufacture terrorism.

Theresa May in Britain started to misuse terrorist attack to impose a totalitarian state, it is clear she is corrupted by the CIA and she knew for the attack in advance, she copies what Francois did in France, nearly 4,000 soldiers have been deployed nationwide, it is clear that soldiers on the streets are not solution for terrorism, suicide attackers don’t care for cops and soldiers. Salman Abedi, a 22-year-old British man whose parents emigrated from Libya made the attack and killed 22 teens, some Serbian media say that he was fighting on the side of the opposition groups in Syria against Assad, it means, maybe he passed a training of the CIA in Syria. Some people also blame western colonial politics in Libya i.e. killing of Gaddafi, there were no terrorist groups in Libya during the rule of Gaddafi.

Amy Goodman from DemocracyNow and her colleague Juan, spoke with Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill: What If All Victims of War Received the Media Attention of Manchester Victims? They are doing the job of Pernille Skipper and Enhedslisten, they make attention about the importance of the victims of colonialism, not only the victims from Manchester, they speak how much we would be different if the war crimes are covered by the (western) media like this tragic attack in Manchester. It is copy paste video transcript from https://www.democracynow.org/2017/5/25/scahill_greenwald_what_if_all_victims:

DemocracyNow, Juan Gonzales: While the Manchester story has dominated international headlines, far less attention has been paid to other stories this week involving the deaths of civilians. In Syria and Iraq, U.S.-led or backed airstrikes have killed dozens of civilians in the last week alone. Meanwhile, in Yemen, the human rights group Reprieve says U.S. Navy SEALs killed five civilians during a raid Tuesday night on a village in Ma’rib governorate. To talk more about how the media covers civilian casualties, DemocracyNow speaks with two of the founders of The Intercept: Jeremy Scahill and Glenn Greenwald.

Amy: Glenn, should the Manchester model be used for other victims of war?…airstrikes on Sunday and Monday reportedly killed up to 44 civilians in Mosul. One local journalist said, “the bombing caused the deaths of more than 20 civilians who were burned in their homes, mostly women and children,” the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says U.S.-led airstrikes have killed 225 civilians over the past month, including 44 children.

Glenn: ….you see the name and the story and the grieving relatives of someone who was killed at this concert in Manchester. No matter how rational you are, you feel anger, you feel empathy, you feel so emotionally moved by the horror of the violence that was perpetrated. So, imagine if there was any kind of balance whatsoever, where we knew the names of any of the victims of the indiscriminate violence of our own government, let alone the comprehensive coverage of the victims that is devoted when we are the victims of violence, how much that would affect the perception that we have of the violence that our own government perpetrates. We keep it so abstract. We usually just hear 14 people died. The Pentagon claims that it’s militants and terrorists. It’s left at that. At best, we hear they finally acknowledge four civilians are killed, but it’s kept very ethereal, very distant and abstract. We never learn their names, as you said. We never hear from their families. We never hear their life aspirations extinguished. And if there was just some attention paid to telling the stories of the victims of our own government’s violence, I think there would be a radical shift in how we perceive of ourselves, the role we play in the world and who bears blame in this conflict.

Jeremy: Well, I mean, look at how many times we read or hear reports that the United States has bombed a wedding party or a funeral. And there is never a description of, well, who was the bride, who was the groom, you know, who were the people that were killed, and what were their dreams. It’s unfathomable to me that if we had a wedding party in the United States that was somehow bombed in a terrorist incident, that we wouldn’t know the names of every single person who was killed. We would have heard about where the people were going to go on their honeymoon and, you know, the—what the bride looked like when she was preparing for it. We hear nothing about any of these people that are killed, with our tax dollars, in our name.
Trump just inked this deal with the Saudis for well over $100 billion. It could be as much as $400 billion when it’s all said and done. Defense stocks go to record highs. What does that—what are those weapons going to be used for? They’re going to be used … to destroy Yemen. We don’t think about victims of war in the same way that we talk about victims of school shootings in this country or victims of terrorism when it’s—when ISIS claims responsibility for it. It’s a problem.

Juan: Well, I wanted to ask you, in the broader context, the refugee crisis now that is engulfing Europe—in the headlines, 6 million people waiting to be able to emigrate into Europe. We don’t, in the press, cover what is the basis of this refugee crisis, what the reality is that, when it comes to Iraq, it’s been 20 years of warfare in Iraq. In Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, you have this—in Democratic and Republican administrations. So, basically, it’s been the interventions and the military actions of the West that have created the refugee crisis, destabilized these countries, made it impossible for the people to stay. I’m surprised that more people haven’t left Afghanistan than have already tried to flee to Europe.

Jeremy: Well, it’s much more difficult to get out of Afghanistan. But you’re totally right: The U.S. wars did this.
Glenn: …the number one rule of U.S. media discourse is that whenever there’s violence or attacks, the one thing we don’t want to do is think about the role we played in provoking it. But to make that causal connection when it comes to ourselves—you know, there were warnings that if Iraq—that if the U.K. invaded Iraq or if the U.K. began bombing in Syria, they would have exactly the kind of terrorist attacks that just happened in Manchester. But to talk about the causal connection there becomes instantly taboo. And what that means is that we just don’t examine the policies that are invoked in the name of stopping terrorism that are actually doing more to fuel and provoke terrorism than any other single factor.
Jeremy: Can I just add one small part of this? Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater, who has been serving as a shadow adviser to the Trump administration, he was on Fox News last week in prime time on Tucker Carlson’s show. And the two big points that Erik Prince was pushing, one was we need to put mercenaries in charge of the war in Afghanistan. And he likened it to the British campaign in India, which was a murderous campaign, where Churchill boasted about the use of chemical weapons. So it’s an interesting analog that Prince is using for his proposal on private companies taking over the war in Afghanistan.
But the second point that he made is, the left is completely nuts in the United States … and isn’t it great that Trump has brought these two countries together? What’s interesting about that is that Prince himself is at the tip of the spear of a move to try to monetize the refugee crisis right now. His solution is to get countries and thugs in countries like Libya to get into business with the European Union to actually prevent people from leaving North Africa or parts of the Middle East to come into Europe. And he wants to do it with a privatized maritime force, accompanied by Western military advisers, working with local militias. This whole administration, in a way, is up for sale.

If you want to watch the talk, it starts at 30 minutes 44 seconds: