Connect with us

Alternative News

Lest We Forget: A Story Of Child Abuse, Satanism & Injustice

Published

on

Important Note: Everything presented here is derived from the book “The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism and Murder in Nebraska” by John DeCamp, and from the Discovery Channel’s documentary, which never aired, “Conspiracy of Silence.” Although it’s a long article, much more information can be found in the book. I decided against directly quoting the victim-witnesses on their detailed experience with sexual abuse and satanism due to its extreme graphic content. (* indicates a false name)

advertisement - learn more

“This case (Franklin) is so much bigger than you think. It goes to the very highest levels.” – William Colby, former Director of the CIA, who was found dead in a lake near his cottage.

The events surrounding the fall of the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union marked one of the darkest periods in the history of the State of Nebraska. What began as a financial scandal – approximately $40 million was missing from the credit union – turned into something much worse when its manager Larry King, along with other prominent citizens, were alleged to be involved in pedophilia, child pornography, child prostitution, drug trafficking, and satanism. Due to the lack of interest shown by law enforcement, these serious allegations would never have been investigated if not for the Nebraska State Legislature and their investigative committee – headed by Senator Loran Schmidt – which hired Gary Caradori as their lead investigator. King, who was the centrepiece of the investigation, was a rising star in the Republican Party. An officer of the National Black Republican Council, King sang the national anthem at both the 1984 and 1988 GOP national conventions. At the 1984 convention, he threw an extravagant party attended by all the republicans. Maureen Reagan, daughter of President Ronald Reagan, was seen on King’s arm the whole night.

Webb’s House Of Horror

The road to discovery into Nebraska’s underworld began when reports first emerged of child abuse at Jarrett and Barbara Webb’s foster home. Jarrett was a board member of the Franklin Credit Union and Barbara was Larry King’s cousin. Being foster parents, the Webb’s had a number of children under their roof, including kids they adopted, and a number of them often tried to escape due to the physical and sexual abuse by Jarrett and Barbara. One of those kids was Nelly Patterson* Webb, an adopted daughter, who fled to her grandmother’s house in November ’85. Eventually, social workers removed Nelly from the Webb’s home and transferred her to another foster family. Two months later, State Patrol Investigator Jane Tooley interviewed Nelly at the Washington County Sheriff’s office. In Tooley’s report, Nelly describes the physical and sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of Jarrett Webb, beginning around the age of 9 or 10.

Youth Care Worker Julie Walters also interviewed Nelly, and her sister Kimberley Patterson* Webb, in March ’86 after they talked about kids being abused at Boys Town, an orphanage where Larry King was a contributor and Walters was employed. In Walters’ 50-page report, the Webb’s pricey lifestyle is described. Although Jarrett Webb admitted to making only $32,000 a year, the house they owned was lavishly furnished. Mrs. Webb owned a four carat diamond ring, a full-length fur coat, custom-made dresses and expensive accessories. When they hosted a party, it included caterers and limousines. Larry King is mentioned when Nelly tells Walters how her and the other kids were “forced” to go with him to “meetings/parties at the Omaha Girls’ Club.” King also threw parties at his home where Nelly witnessed pedophilia, homosexuality, group sex and drug usage. At one of these parties, Joey Patterson* Webb, Nelly’s brother, told her about the money he made “working for Larry King.”

Nelly also told Walters she traveled to various cities with Larry King, including New York, Chicago, and Washington D.C. She claimed to have met George Bush Sr., Vice President at the time, and saw him attend one of King’s parties. At this party, there was enhanced security, with each guest required to swipe a card to verify their identity. After talking with the Webb sisters, Walters asked people from Boys Town what they knew about Larry King. “On the outside, he has all the appearance of an upstanding citizen, but underneath he is very dirty,” said one unidentified person. Another person Walters asked said, “Omaha has a very large underworld and he’s a very powerful man nationally. Maybe he doesn’t have all the connections personally, but he knows the people who do.”

advertisement - learn more

Loretta Smith

The next person to come forward was Loretta Smith.* At the time, she was a patient at Richard Young Hospital where she told a therapist about incidents of child pornography and devil worshipping. In June ’88, Officer Irl Carmean of the Omaha Police Department was brought in to interview Loretta. According to Carmean’s report, Loretta explained to him how she became involved in pornography at the age of 9 years old. She was invited to a party by some older friends of hers where she met a male adult who convinced her to go back to his house to pose for some pictures. She then talked about visiting the Omaha Girls Club (OGC) with friends Nelly and Kimberly Webb, who also did some “modeling,” and that they would go on “field trips” to professional studios where they would pose nude. She stated that leaders of the OGC, both male and female, were there and they would make threats against her and her family if she refused to participate. Loretta then talked to Carmean about devil worshiping in which she began participating, with both minors and adults, at the age of 10 or 11, and told him drugs and nude photography was involved as well. She brought up the name of Larry King as being a participant and supporter of these activities and said he hosted drug and sex parties at his home. Officer Carmean then assured Loretta he would be back and instructed her to recall as much information as she could before then; however, he would not return.

As Loretta became more comfortable with the hospital personnel, she revealed more about her past to them. In a report given to the legislative committee, Loretta explained to the staff how a child could become mixed up in cult activity. She told them it was a gradual process that started when she met a guy at the OGC named Ray who would take her and several other girls out to an abandoned building to smoke a joint. After weeks of getting high with Ray, he then invited the girls to a party. At this party, there were men in their mid-thirties who would sit and talk with the young girls about their problems. Eventually, after they drank enough alcohol to become intoxicated, the men and girls would sleep with each other. The parties went on for six months before the men took the girls to what they called “power meetings,” where they were told they needed to “kill something they loved to gain power.” At these meetings, candles were lit, unusual markings were drawn on the walls, clothes with upside down crosses were worn, and the leader would always wear a black cape. What proceeded over the months and years were, in effect, satanic rituals where Loretta witnessed human sacrifices, cannibalism and the mutilation of animals.

No One Will Investigate

Immediately after Carmean’s interview with Loretta, his supervisor Sgt. Ken Bovasso spoke with Loretta’s psychiatrist Dr. Kay Shilling. According to Bovasso’s write up, Shilling told him Loretta only gave Carmean general information, but she was comfortable enough that she would be willing to talk with him again. Bovasso ensured Shilling that Carmean would conduct another interview soon, but Carmean never did. As Loretta began to reveal more details to the hospital personnel, they started contacting the OPD, urgently calling for someone to come and speak to Loretta, but, to their bewilderment, no one came. Foster Care Review Board (FCRB) Director Carol Stitt testified before the legislative committee, “Loretta’s psychiatrist contacted the police in Omaha and asked them to come. Loretta’s personal care worker, Ken Stoner, contacted the police. Richard Young employee Kirstin Hallberg contacted the police, as well as Adrienne Hart, who is Kirstin’s supervisor. All those people had made contact and nothing was being done.” According to FCRB official Dennis Carlson, Carmean told him previously that they were conducting a “super-sensitive” investigation into Larry King because they believed it was possible the OPD had been compromised. Carmean told Carlson that Police Chief Robert Wadman had come to their Robbery and Sex Unit directly asking them if they were investigating Larry King. Eventually, the FCRB learned that Carmean was transferred to the Research and Planning department, and as far as they knew, the investigation into Larry King had ended.

Left holding the bag, Carol Stitt went to Attorney General Robert Spire, after receiving the go-ahead from Governor Kay Orr. Spire ensured Stitt that they would do everything in their power to help and he assigned the case to his assistant Bill Howland. But as the months passed with little progress, Stitt and Carlson paid Howland a visit where it became obvious that Howland wasn’t investigating. Stitt described this meeting to the legislative committee, “It became clear to me that if Mr. Howland had ever read the materials . . . it was a long time ago. He didn’t know major players’ names in the case . . . Dennis did some rather tough questioning and it became clear to both of us that nothing had occurred.” FCRB official Burrell Williams described their frustration, “I think we became really baffled and puzzled on what was going on when you get all this information in front of you and nothing had, or is being done about it.” With the hope of an investigation fading and frustration boiling over, little did Carol Stitt and the rest of the FCRB know that Larry King would soon be taken away in handcuffs.

Legislative Committee Investigates

November 4, 1988 was when the FBI, IRS and NCUA (National Credit Union Administration) raided the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union and closed its doors for good. Close to $40 million was missing from a credit union that had only $2.6 million in assets; the liabilities were shown on a secret set of books. Upon hearing the news, Senator Loran Schmidt introduced a resolution into the Nebraska State Legislature for an investigative committee to find out what happened with the money. Soon after, Senator Schmidt received an anonymous phone call in his office, “I was advised not to pursue the investigation because it would lead, I was told, to the highest levels of the Republican Party.” Undeterred, Schmidt became the chairman of the committee once the resolution passed. During the first meeting held by the committee, Senator Ernie Chambers – who represented the district where Franklin was founded and heard the rumors of Larry King – told the committee the investigation would not only dig into financial misconduct, but would also investigate allegations regarding sexual and physical abuse of children by people connected with Franklin. On December 19, the FCRB submitted their files pertaining to the Webb foster home and Loretta Smith and testified before the committee. After three hours of testimony, the senators spoke to the press about what they heard. “The information brought tears to my eyes,” Senator Schmidt said, “I do not cry easily and I was not the only person that was moved.” Senator Chambers was irate about the lack of investigation, “With this type of information, it is inexcusable that action had not been taken of an investigative nature. People were not contacted that should have been. Leads were not followed up that should have been followed up. My feeling is that the whole thing is being sat upon and nothing was done.”

After the committee’s first investigator had produced very little with his investigation, the committee hired their second investigator, Gary Caradori, in August ’89. By following various leads, Caradori was able to locate four more victim-witnesses claiming to have been abused by Larry King and others. They were Alisha Owen, Troy Boner, Danny King, and Paul Bonacci. On video recordings, each of them gave a sworn statement about what they experienced or witnessed, which included sex parties, pedophilia activity, child prostitution, child pornography, drug usage and trafficking, and interstate transporting of children. Specifically, Alisha said she started at the age of 14 when boys from Boys Town took her to a party. She claimed Robert Wadman, the Police Chief, was the father of her child and that he was a satanist. Troy Boner was lured in when a friend told him how he could make a lot of money and drove him to Alan Baer’s house where he would engage in sexual activity with Baer for money. Troy would admit to performing this act of “recruiting” on his friends, at the behest of Baer, which included Danny King. Danny King had a hard time remembering his past, and it became clear to Caradori this was because of his heavy drug use at a young age. In fact, Danny had failed to tell Caradori what month followed December. Paul Bonacci suffered from multiple personality disorder, a condition where a new personality is created within the mind through a self-defense mechanism of disassociating during a very traumatic experience. This literally splits the mind and creates a new person within it. Paul was first abused at the age of 6 years old, and witnessed many horrific acts of satanism; Paul claimed that Larry King and Alan Baer were members of a satanic cult. The most popular names of the perpetrators given by the victim-witnesses were as follows: Larry King, Harold Andersen, Alan Baer, Robert Wadman, Peter Citron, P.J Morgan, Eugene Mahoney, Theodore Carlson, Tom McKinney, and Ron Gilbert.

Friends In High Places

The prominence of the perpetrators involved was the main reason why the case received so much attention. Larry King, manager of the credit union since 1970, was a rising star in the Republican Party. Harold Andersen was the former editor and current publisher of the Omaha World-Herald. He was also the chairman, president, or board member of many foundations, committees, and companies; most notably, he was on the Board of Directors for the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank from 1973-1979 and was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Alan Baer was a well-known, wealthy businessman and philanthropist, and was a financier for the Ak-Sar-Ben organization. Peter Citron was a media personality and columnist for the Omaha World-Herald. P.J Morgan, Robert Wadman, and Eugene Mahoney were, respectively, Mayor, Police Chief, and Game and Parks Commissioner for the city of Omaha. Mahoney was considered “the most powerful politician in Nebraska” but worked behind the scenes in making or breaking political careers. Theodore Carlson was a judge; Tom McKinney was a lawyer. Ron Gilbert, mentioned only by Troy Boner when he discussed a trip to California, was a Hollywood producer.

In the beginning of the committee’s investigation, Senator Schmidt warned his fellow senators the investigation could be bigger than Larry King, “No one person could have masterminded this without the compliance and the acquiescence and cooperation of a number of people, some of whom had to be in official positions . . . I do not want anyone to say I want to be on this committee, then all of the sudden say, wait a minute, I don’t want to walk through that minefield with you because that is what it will very likely prove to be.” Senator Chambers added, “What Larry King is doing is the tip of an iceberg and he’s not in it by himself. One thing I told the Attorney General . . . is that I don’t want Larry King to commit suicide and I don’t want any accidents that will take him out. What he’s doing he has not done by himself and couldn’t do by himself.”

Harold Andersen was one of Larry King’s biggest supporters. He was the chairman of the advisory board to the Franklin Credit Union, and he co-chaired its fundraising drive – money which was used for an addition to the credit union that included a bedroom. Also, Andersen’s Omaha World-Herald frequently ran stories that built up King’s character and portrayed him as a model citizen. Robert Wadman, the Police Chief of Omaha, swore under oath that he barely knew Larry King. But according to King, and later confirmed by Wadman, the police chief granted him an extraordinary favour when he returned a briefcase to him that was seized by police in a drug raid. Wadman would brush this off and insist that it was nothing special. When questioned about the fact that he could call up the police chief and get a piece of evidence released, King replied, “I felt that I could call anyone in this city.”

Before the scandal broke, in a September 7, 1988 interview with Omaha Weekly Metropolitan, King said this about his friends, “They were the key to my success. I had really great, great people who were counselors and teachers, who were over some of the major companies in the city . . . so I have to say the Omaha Power Structure has some of the best people to work with.” Caradori was able to get a better picture of Larry King’s friends when he talked to Sheila McGuire, former manager of the French Cafe, who moved to California. The French Cafe was a night spot partly owned by Larry King and was named by victim-witnesses as a place where pedophilia activity occurred. Over the phone, she told Caradori she would host parties upstairs in her apartment for Larry King and his friends. As written in Caradori’s transcript, Sheila said, “If Larry King investors wanted drugs, booze, children or hookers we’d get them . . . King took good care of the local and out of town high rollers. If you had money to invest at Franklin, King would cater to your most deranged perversion. And, let me tell you another thing, the boys in the boardrooms around Omaha are shitting in their brogans. If this case gets cracked open, the list of involved will read like a who’s who. King and his crew ruined a lot of children’s lives.” A businessman is successful by being prudent and smart with his money. If one was planning on depositing hundreds of thousands of dollars into a credit union, more often than not, they would do their homework and run a background check on those involved. It wouldn’t take long for someone to hear the same warning signs Julie Walters heard when she asked around about Larry King, but the Franklin Credit Union was financially supported by many of Omaha’s corporate leaders and businesses.

The Knights Of Ak-Sar-Ben

The Knights of Ak-Sar-Ben is a civic and philanthropic organization founded in 1985 and based out of Omaha, Nebraska. It is the central committee of the corporate elite of Omaha, and its members are corporate leaders from a diverse range of industries. Spell Nebraska backwards and you get Ak-Sar-Ben. Every year Ak-Sar-Ben members celebrate the crowning of the “King of Ak-Sar-Ben,” usually an older corporate executive. In 1991, the King of Ak-Sar-Ben was accused-perpetrator Eugene Mahoney. At these and other social events, they imitate pagan ceremonies, and sometimes the men dress in woman’s clothing or like “Egyptian Goddesses.” Throughout its years of operation, the Franklin Credit Union received millions of dollars in the form of deposits and contributions from corporations whose executives were members of Ak-Sar-Ben. Bill Fitzgerald, Knight of Ak-Sar-Ben and president of Commercial Federal Savings and Loans, was mentioned by Larry King in his September 7th interview as a good friend who often gave him advice. Insurance giant Mutual of Omaha placed funds in the credit union, and Thomas Skutt, its chief executive, co-chaired the $1.3 million fundraising drive for Franklin, along with Harold Andersen. The credit union had two boards, the small one included Larry King, Jarrett Webb and others, while its advisory board, chaired by Harold Andersen, included executives from corporations with Ak-Sar-Ben members. Furthermore, the Credit Union could not have functioned for one day without the compliance of Nebraska’s largest bank, FirsTier. Every dollar that went into Franklin went into its account at FirsTier, including the missing $40 million. With only $2.6 million in assets on the official books, FirsTier had to have known about the irregularities going on with the amount of withdrawals. During the heyday of Franklin, the board of FirsTier Bank included Alan Baer.

The Heat Is On

After the victim-witnesses gave their sworn statements, the committee turned over their Caradori tapes to law enforcement. Suddenly, word got out to the public of what was on the tapes and the names brought up by the victim-witnesses. The case turned into a media frenzy as articles in the Omaha World-Herald started attacking and discrediting the victim-witnesses in a way that prevented anyone else from coming forward. The committee was blamed for leaking the contents of the tapes and was accused of acting irresponsibly throughout the investigation. Taking the most heat was Investigator Caradori, but it wasn’t his credibility that was under threat, it was his life. In January ’90, he wrote to the Nebraska Secretary of State Alan Beerman, “We – my employees and myself – have been followed and questionable situations have arisen during this investigation. Threatening situations have resulted numerous times. Why? Am I too close to something they do not want to become public?” During his investigation, someone broke into Caradori’s home, his vehicles were tampered with, and his phone had been tapped.

In early July ’90, Caradori called Senator Schmidt to tell him about a new piece of evidence he came across. “We’ve got them!” he said. There’s no way they can get out of it now.” Unfortunately, this new piece of evidence would never see the light of day, as Caradori and his son A.J died in a plane crash when Caradori was flying his personal plane back home from the MLB all-star game. Official word was that the plane exploded on impact, but a farmer in Lee County, Illinois reported seeing a flash of light, hearing an explosion, and then seeing the plane dive to the ground; the wreckage scattered over three-quarters of a mile. Senator Schmidt would later tell the Lincoln Journal that Caradori had been trying to obtain some compromising pictures of the accused perpetrators. Also, leads into satanic cultism and Washington, D.C were on his radar.

The Infamous Grand Jury

On July 23, 1990, 12 days after Caradori’s death, the Douglas County Grand Jury issued its report on its findings of the Franklin case. Its decision as shown in the Omaha World-Herald headline banner: “Grand Jury Says Abuse Stories Were a ‘Carefully Crafted Hoax.’ ” In the 42-page report, it said, “We find no credible evidence that any child sexual abuse, interstate transportation of minors, drug trafficking, or participation in a pornography ring by King or other Franklin officials or employees.” It acknowledged that Larry King had embezzled funds for personal use, but deferred to federal authorities to handle the matter. The grand jury elected to indict Alan Baer on the petty charge of pandering – he would pay a small fine – but found no connection with King or Franklin. Peter Citron appeared before the grand jury and was found to have sex with male minors, but this was related to another case where he was indicted and convicted; the grand jury found no connection with King or Franklin. Then, in a most surprising turn of events, the grand jury indicted Alisha Owen and Paul Bonacci on perjury charges. The reason for this decision was the recantation by Troy Boner and Danny King of their original stories. The grand jury said it recommended to the Washington County Attorney’s office to charge Jarrett Webb with third-degree sexual assault of a minor, but they did not believe Nelly Patterson Webb on allegations of organized child abuse or prostitution. They acknowledged that Loretta Smith suffered greatly, but stated that “the perpetrators of such abuse may never be known.” In its report, the grand jury attacked the people who sided with the victim-witnesses and supported the investigation, including the senators, social workers, journalists, and members of the Concerned Parents group. In unorthodox fashion, the grand jury elected to clear the names of Judge Theodore Carlson, Harold Andersen, Eugene Mahoney, P.J Morgan, and Thomas McKinney, absolving them of any wrong-doing. With regards to Police Chief Wadman, it said, “We now look upon Owen as the perpetrator and Wadman as the victim.” Indicative of its motive, the grand jury admitted to spending most of its time and effort refuting the videotaped testimony, and concluded, “There is no doubt after reviewing all relevant evidence, that the story of sexual abuse, drugs, prostitution and judicial bribery presented in the legislative videotapes is a carefully crafted hoax, scripted by a person or persons with considerable knowledge of the people and institutions of Omaha, including personal relationships and shortcomings.” It accused Caradori, now deceased, as the main perpetrator behind the hoax.

The grand jury’s report was met with disgust. Head of Concerned Parents Trish Lanphier said, “This is a sick grand jury. Turning the victim into the perpetrator. This is so classic.” Viewer phone-in poll by Omaha television station KETV channel 7 showed a 10-1 viewer dissatisfaction of the grand jury’s report, with over 3000 responses. Not surprisingly though, the World-Herald declared the grand jury’s report a success with editorials in its July 29 and Aug 2 papers reading, “Grand Jury Did Its Job; Insults are Intolerable” and “Schmidt Panel Can’t Duck Responsibility In Hoax,” respectively. But there were a number of important explanations the grand jury failed to give regarding its report: (1) Why they decided to indict the two witnesses who stood by their testimony and not the two witnesses who said they were lying; (2) How Paul Bonacci could be part of Caradori’s hoax when he first reported being abused by Harold Andersen, Larry King, and Alan Baer to the OPD in 1986, two years before the start of the Franklin investigation; (3) How one of the perpetrators (Larry Jr.) could be a “fictitious character,” as they put it, when he was named by at least 4 different witnesses, over the period of 3 years; (4) Why the grand jury spent most of their time discrediting the testimonies instead of investigating Caradori’s many leads, totalling 291 potential witnesses.

The grand jury’s prosecutor in charge, retired Judge Samuel Van Pelt, was described in the March 12, 1990 Lincoln Journal as a “hired gun for the state” by 43 neighbours of Arthur Kirk (Nebraska farmer and political activist who was killed by State Patrol SWAT team). Van Pelt, the judge presiding over the Kirk case, found the SWAT team acted in self-defense. On cue, with its March 17, 1990 edition, the World-Herald came to Van Pelt’s defense in an editorial titled, “Van Pelt’s Report on Kirk Followed the Evidence.” Three people who testified before the Douglas County Grand Jury charged that Van Pelt intimidated them and tried forcing them to change their story. Paul Bonacci said to the legislative committee, “They kept telling me that if I stuck to my story they were going to make me be in trouble for it.” Alisha Owen found testifying before the grand jury extremely difficult, saying “It was the hardest three days of my life almost.” This was coming from someone who experienced sexual abuse, had been in a mental hospital and attempted suicide. Her lawyer added, “It was always go around the circle and it was accusatory more than trying to get the facts out and let the chips fall where they may.” A Jane Doe witness testified before the committee, “Basically he was using me as, like a dummy witness because he had figured out that I didn’t have or know about any of the information the grand jury was dealing with. So it seemed to me like he was going to use me to discredit Alisha.” Senator Schmidt added his experience with the grand jury, “Most of the questions that were asked of me . . .  had little or nothing to do with the scope of the investigation.”

The FBI Plays Dirty

In the beginning, after the child abuse stories first surfaced and it appeared Police Chief Wadman could not be trusted, Senator Schmidt went to see Nick O’Hara, the regional head of the FBI. O’Hara made it clear that Robert Wadman was a very close friend. “You f— with Bob Wadman, you f— with the FBI,” was how he put it. Sheriff Dick Roth later told Schmidt, “Nick O’Hara of the FBI and Robert Wadman are closer than nineteen is to twenty.” In an article from the May 12, 1990 edition of the Omaha World-Herald, it was said the FBI investigation into Franklin went as far back as 1987, but, according to testimony given to the committee, the FBI was only concerned with the financial issues related to Larry King and weren’t investigating the child abuse allegations. In Caradori’s notes from March 14, 1990 he speaks with a man from the accounting firm auditing Franklin on behalf of the government, “A large amount of pornographic material was taken out of the credit union, including videos and photographs depicting sexual acts. I was told that if Friedrichs* or any of the other people working for the CPA firm that was contracted by the government would say anything, that they would automatically lose their jobs.”

Alisha Owen, as well as her parents, testified before the committee that the FBI had given her former lawyer, Pam Vuchetich, a proposal that if Alisha recanted her story they would be able to get her out of prison (bad check conviction) and wouldn’t charge her with perjury. The FBI instructed her to say Gary Caradori had set the whole thing up and provided her with scripts of what to say. Also in her testimony, she recalled an incident where Vuchetich arranged a phone conversation between Alisha and Troy after telling Alisha that Troy had recanted his story, and it seemed to her like they were trying to set her up. “So I asked him, why are you doing this? And he – and he said, Alisha I’m scared, I don’t know what to do, tell me what to do. And then he asked me, quote, unquote, do you think we’re going to get any money?” After the phone call, Alisha found out both Vuchetich and Troy were at the FBI’s office during the phone call.

On the day of Gary Caradori’s death, Troy Boner made a phone call to Sandie Caradori, Gary’s wife, giving his condolences, and telling her “they” made him take back his story. Sandie implored Troy to tell the truth, to which he agreed. The next day, the FBI went to Gary’s investigation firm with a subpoena for all his records. Sandie asked the agents if Troy tried speaking with them. After pleading for an answer, the agents finally confirmed to her that Troy had spoken with them, but said, “We can’t waste our time with him. He has lost all credibility.” Before his death, Gary Caradori commented to the Franklin committee about his frustration with law enforcement, specifically the FBI; he indicated to them his belief that the FBI was sabotaging his investigation. Every lead and piece of evidence that Caradori discovered had to be submitted to law enforcement and the FBI. Karen Ormiston, Caradori’s assistant, added, “There must be some kind of provision which allows the State of Nebraska to retain its information so that there is not a probable cover-up when this stuff is turned over to the federal level. It is my sincere hope that the federal agencies cannot just walk all over the state agencies, especially since we have given them everything we have yet we have been allowed to see nothing they have. This in itself has not only prolonged the investigation, but it has also been a major factor in that the FBI does seem to get to our leads since they do have a lot of manpower. I do feel that the leads turned over to the FBI have effectively been stonewalled as it pertains to this investigation.”

No Happy Ending Here

“Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.” – Benjamin Franklin 

Unfortunately, but not surprisingly – as is so often the case when threatening those who hide in the shadows – justice was not served in the Franklin case. The only perpetrator to serve any jail time because of the Franklin investigation was Larry King, and that was for embezzlement of funds. After serving 10 years, Larry King is now a free man. Alisha Owen served 4 1/2 years for perjury before being paroled by the Nebraska Parole Board by a vote of 5-0. The charges of perjury against Paul Bonacci were dropped. Troy Boner wrote and signed an affidavit explaining how the FBI threatened him to recant his original testimony, and how he believed the death of his brother was a message sent to him, but he too would face a fate similar to others connected to Franklin, and be found dead in a hospital, bleeding from the mouth.

The victim-witnesses testified to taking trips with Larry King to Washington, D.C for sexual purposes. Paul Bonacci told Caradori in his videotape testimony that he went on two trips to Washington with King, where he had sex with older men who he felt were part of the Republican Party because King was trying hard to “get in with the higher ups.” Why were local law enforcement, the judicial system, and the FBI acting as major obstacles to the investigation? Why did the Discovery Channel decide, last minute, to pull the plug on airing its documentary about the Franklin case when they had already financed it? Many people involved in the case suspected that Franklin was just a small piece of a bigger picture. If the case had been properly investigated by the authorities, and more pieces allowed to be discovered, who knows just how ugly the picture would prove to be.

You Can Help Stop The 5G Infrastructure

We plan to investigate the telecom industry, it’s ties to politics, and expose its efforts to push 5G while ignoring the dangers and without proper safety testing, but we can't do it without your support.

We've launched a funding campaign to fuel our efforts on this matter as we are confident we can make a difference and have a strong plan to get it done.

Check out our plan and join our campaign here.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

NSA Whistleblower Speaks About Julian Assange & The ‘Shadow Government’

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Longtime high-ranking NSA employee William Binney shares his thoughts on the arrest of Julian Assange and who is really in control.

  • Reflect On:

    Why do we continue to believe that a president can make changes? Why do we continue to elect and vote without addressing the real issue behind decisions made in politics? Why not address the secret government and its stranglehold on politics?

Even to this day, if you tell people there is an ‘invisible government,’ or a shadow government that’s international in scope, they may call you a conspiracy theorist or give you a funny look. This is in large part due to the lack of education, particularly self education, of a population who is trained to go to school, get a job and ‘enjoy’ life. Sure, that’s all fine and dandy, but to deny and condemn a thought or an idea without any investigation is definitely the height of ignorance. Not only is it the height of ignorance, it also prevents humanity from moving forward. In order for us to move forward, we must properly identify our problems, and it doesn’t help when the most important problems that need to be identified are not even believed as a result of mass brainwashing and lack of education. No one is thinking for themselves, instead they simply rely on establishment media, which has been nothing but a massive propaganda machine since its inception.

The idea of a shadow government doesn’t only come from statements made by a number of global politicians and ‘world leaders,’ it’s been proven by policy changes and decisions that are not in favour of the people or the planet, which expose how our federal regulatory agencies are run by rogue interests. The CDC and the “Spider Papers” are one of many great examples, along with multiple whistleblowers from multiple agencies.

Political parties no longer support the people, and it’s hard to say if they ever really did. Government and politics are now simply, as president Theodore Roosevelt emphasized, “tools of corrupt interests which use them in martialling [sic] to serve their selfish purposes.” He flat out stated that “Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.”

This is the unseen power that exists today. Roosevelt wasn’t the only one, in his farewell speech President Eisenhower warned about the rise of misplaced power that “exists” and will “persist” within the military industrial complex.

Not long ago, President Vladimir Putin explained how, after a president in the United States is elected, “men in dark suits” come in and basically run the show. (source)

According to President Woodrow Wilson:

advertisement - learn more

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it. (The New Freedom, A Call For The Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People, Written in 1913)

It seems that  John F. Hylan, Mayor of New York City from 1918-1925 was correct in saying that “the real menace of our Republic is the invisible government, which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation.”

At the end of the day, if you follow the money, it’s not hard to see who this “invisible government” that so many have referred to is. One thing is quite clear, it doesn’t seem like they have too much concern for humanity or planet Earth. There is so much evidence showing that the global financial elite (various members of big politics, corporations, Hollywood, Royal Families, people in positions of great power, the Vatican, etc.) are engaged in some very psychopathic behaviour. But are you really surprised? Look at the world and its systems and all aspects that surround humanity… it’s truly a reflection of psychopathic ‘leaders.’ And it’s a reflection of us being totally oblivious to it as a result of mass brainwashing. Still, in many cases, we support and stand up for these systems, and accept no other way… We refuse to acknowledge things that any fairly intelligent person should be able to see with a bit of investigation.

This is why I felt the need to share the interview below of William Binney. Binney is a former high ranking intelligence official with the National Security Agency who turned whistleblower after more than 30 years with the agency. He blew the whistle, like Edward Snowden did, after 9/11 on the agency’s mass data collection and surveillance programs, along with J. Kirk Wiebe and Edward Loomis, two other employees at the agency.

Since then, he has been quite outspoken and has helped shed light on several other matters. He’s also stated that the NSA surveillance programs have nothing to do with keeping the population safe, but are rather means to further continue “total population control.” (source)

This would make sense, and it also corroborates with all of the evidence proving the connections between terrorist organizations and the government/military industrial complex, including evidence proving their involvement in the funding, support, and creation of these organizations. Despite all of this, they still claim to be “going after” the same terrorists they’re supporting in the name of democracy.

In the interview below, Binney also references the shadow government in regards to Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, specifically regarding his recent arrest and detainment.

Below is a quote from the interview:

To me, this is simply a continuation of the takeover of the world by the shadow governments of the world and their relationships internationally. They’re always there, they don’t get voted in and out. They control all the information that gets fed to the president, for example, to make decisions. They can tailor what they want him him to do by focusing certain information to him and and keeping others away like shadow blocking. You don’t allow other opinions to get to him so that he doesn’t have the opportunity to see another view. They have most of the mainstream media under wraps and doing what they want them to do now, but it’s kind of like the nail in the coffin that says, ‘if you ever do something that exposes all the crimes we’re committing or any of the criminality that we’re doing behind the scenes, if you ever do that, we’ll get to you.’

In the interview he also mentions how they use “national security” as an excuse to do everything in secret, and how it’s become a name used to justify secrets that are very unethical and wrong.

And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. – JFK (source)

There is a lot of good food for thought, so be sure to check out the interview.

“The message is to everybody else in the world, either you conform to what we tell you to do, or we’ll do this to you.”

The Takeaway

The influence from the ‘secret government’ is exactly why we see so many Presidents speaking out against certain things during their campaigns, and then all of a sudden they do a one hundred eighty degree flip on their promises once they’re in office. Presidents, along with other politicians, are most likely blackmailed, extorted, brainwashed, or kept away from certain narratives and perspectives. Most of them have been nothing but puppets for the global elite. Some do this willingly, and others unknowingly. If one thing is true about global politics, it’s that what we are presented with is far from the truth with regards to what’s really going on behind the scenes.

You Can Help Stop The 5G Infrastructure

We plan to investigate the telecom industry, it’s ties to politics, and expose its efforts to push 5G while ignoring the dangers and without proper safety testing, but we can't do it without your support.

We've launched a funding campaign to fuel our efforts on this matter as we are confident we can make a difference and have a strong plan to get it done.

Check out our plan and join our campaign here.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

The Anatomy of Conspiracy Theories

Published

on

Whether you believe in conspiracy theories or not, we can all agree that the use of the term has exploded in media and in conversation. The question is, why? Are we now using the term “Conspiracy Theory” more indiscriminately and on more platforms than previously? Are we, as a society, simply becoming unhinged and absurd? Are seemingly nonsensical stories, for some unknown reason, starting to resonate with people? Or are some conventional narratives getting challenged because some of these “alternative” explanations are in fact accurate, despite the fact that conventional sources refuse to acknowledge them as even potentially valid? Notice that the last two possibilities are different sides of the same coin. If you think  “conspiracy theorists” are unhinged, it is highly likely that they are suspicious of your sanity as well. Both sides insist that they are right and that the other has been hoodwinked. Note that if you choose to not pick a side, you are, by default, allowing the conventional narrative to perpetuate. That is how convention works. 

Merriam-Webster defines the term conspiracy theory as “a theory that explains an event or situation as the result of a secret plan by usually powerful people or groups”. The key elements of this definition remain consistent across all authoritative lexicons: the group responsible for an event must be powerful and covert. However, if we refer to the Wikipedia definition as of 11/2018 a new element emerges: “A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy—generally one involving an illegal or harmful act supposedly carried out by government or other powerful actors—without credible evidence.”

When an explanation is labeled a “Conspiracy Theory,” by today’s definition, it has no evidence to support it. An explanation with no supporting evidence is a hypothesis, not a “theory.” “Conspiracy Theory,” as it is used today, is thus an oxymoron. These “Conspiracy Theories” we seem to hear about everyday should really be called “Conspiracy Hypotheses.” More concerning is that the “Conspiracy Theory” label identifies an explanation as inherently baseless. Given this linguistic construct, where is there room for a conspiracy that is in fact true?

There is also something troubling about using the term “credible” in the definition of conspiracy theory. Legally, evidence that is credible is that which a reasonable person would consider to be true in light of the surrounding circumstances. If evidence suggests an explanation that seems at the surface to be unreasonable, how does a reasonable person avoid automatically labeling the evidence not credible? If we are not careful, the credibility of the explanation and resultant conclusions would then determine the credibility of the evidence that supports it. Is this really so important? Perhaps you are quick to see that with this approach, our understanding of what is true and real can never evolve. If any evidence arose that radically disproved our understanding or eroded our faith in trusted institutions we would automatically discard it as “not credible” and remain entrenched in our accepted paradigm. “Credible” evidence cannot be a necessary requirement of a theory that challenges what is credible to begin with.

To better illustrate this, let us consider an old but very real “conspiracy theory.” About 400 years ago, European civilization was emerging from centuries of scientific and philosophical stagnation known as the dark ages. What more befitting a place for such a renaissance to occur than the center of the universe? You see, the idea that the Earth was one of eight planets revolving around a star that is orbiting the center of one of hundreds of billions of galaxies would have been absurd in Europe in the sixteenth century. Any sane person could see that the Sun and the Moon and every celestial body rises in the East and sets in the West. At that time, if someone went about proposing the idea that everything rises and falls because the Earth was spinning, they would have been laughed out of the tavern. Would that person be a conspiracy theorist? They are not proposing that “powerful actors are carrying out a harmful act,” they are merely suggesting an alternative explanation for what is observed. However, the implication of their suggestion seems to incriminate the authority on such matters as ignorant of the truth or, possibly, the perpetrators of a lie. The possibility of a conspiracy has now been introduced.

Now, let us say that this person claims to have proof of their absurd theory. Would you have taken the time to examine the evidence or would you have been more likely to dismiss them without further consideration? The very idea that they could be right would have been not just silly or heretical, but inconceivable to many, if not all. How could the evidence be credible if it implied something inconceivable? Dismissing their idea would have seemingly been the most logical and, therefore, the smartest thing to do.

advertisement - learn more

When Galileo Galilei appeared in 1610 armed with a rudimentary “telescope,” few would peer into it. He claimed that the refractive properties of the pair of “lenses” would allow you to see things at great distances very clearly. With it one could see Jupiter and its moons revolving around the giant planet just as our moon revolves around Earth. How enchanting! The difficulty would arise when you put the telescope down: your feet would no longer be planted on the previously immovable center of creation. Would you have looked into his telescope? What would have been the harm in taking a peek? Certainly the fear of being proven more gullible than most would have been on your mind. What about the fear that he might be right?

Imagine what must have been going through Galileo’s mind after his monumental discovery. He saw irrefutably that the entire model of the universe had been completely misconceived. One just has to look. Most did not. I can only imagine how hard he must have tried to convince anyone to simply stop, look and listen to what he had discovered. At the time, Galileo was the Chair of Mathematics at the University of Padua and had previously held the same post at the University of Pisa. Despite his bonafides and reputation as a solid contributor to the Italian renaissance, his discovery would likely have died in obscurity if it weren’t for the support of an influential family, the Medicis, who offered Galileo a platform from which he could spread his theory. It was only through allying himself with political power that he was able to slowly generate interest in his heliocentric model of the solar system. His proposition eventually caught the attention of the Catholic church, who initially warned him to desist. Eventually, he was brought to trial in the Roman Inquisition 23 years after his discovery. At the age of 70, the intrepid mathematician and astronomer was allowed to return home if he agreed to recant his story. Instead Galileo chose to spend the rest of his years in prison because he believed that that would be the only way to get people to open their eyes.

Did it work? It did not. Galileo died incarcerated while Europe continued to slumber under stars that moved around them. By today’s standards, Galileo would have been labeled a Conspiracy Theorist from the day he announced his findings until he was proven right fifty years after his death.  When the Principle of Gravitational Attraction eventually became widely accepted as true, the church had to retract their position because the motions of the stars and planets could not be explained under Newton’s laws. 

On the other hand, Galileo is credited with being the father of not only observational astronomy, but of the scientific method as well. The scientific method demands that one tests an explanation without bias towards an outcome. All data is considered before deductions are made. When all other explanations have been proven wrong, the only explanation remaining becomes a theory. The theory persists as long as all subsequent experiments continue to uphold it. This is how we ultimately know what we know and have an inkling of what we don’t. If I had to choose a posthumous title for myself, “The Father of the Scientific Method” is one I could die with. Galileo is credited with this honorific not only because he valued it more than his freedom, but because he had the discipline to regard evidence objectively despite how unimaginable the implications were. This is how a body of knowledge expands. By considering the validity of the evidence first, we then can accept what was previously unimaginable, otherwise what we know tomorrow will be no different than what we know today.

All conspiracy theorists are not Galileos. Neither are all conspiracy theories true. However, can we be certain that all of them are false? At their very core, all conspiracy theories directly or indirectly point at a central authority acting covertly and simultaneously at the media for either missing it or looking the other way. This, of course, is unimaginable, as we all know the government can make mistakes but would never do anything intentionally harmful to its citizens and then hide it. Even if they did, somebody would come forward and the media would let us know about it. This is why such a deception could never occur. The idea that your lover could be in bed with your best friend is inconceivable. Evidence of such a thing would not be credible. Dismissing all conspiracy theories seems logical and therefore seems like the smartest thing to do. 

In “Sapiens”, Yuval Harari proposes an explanation for why our species, Sapiens, out fought, out thought and out survived all other Homo species on the planet. He suggests that it was our unique ability to describe and communicate situations and events that had no basis in reality which set us apart. In other words, we could tell stories and they could not. By uniting under a common idea, story or even myth, thousands (and now thousands of millions) of Sapiens could come together with a shared purpose, identity or belief system to disband our cousins who were as individuals more sturdy and just as cunning but not nearly as good at cooperating as we were. This advantage, Harari proposes, has not only led our species to eventual supremacy over all others, but has also allowed us to form communities, governments and global alliances. 

Siding with the majority has served us well–until it hasn’t. One only needs to revisit the history of Galileo and basic astronomy to understand this. In actuality, the first observant minds woke up to the fact that the Earth went around the sun and not the other way round nineteen centuries before Galileo did. The Greek mathematician, Aristarcus, is thought to be the first Western person to place the Sun in the middle of a “solar system” in 270 BC. A human being traveled to the moon just 360 years after Galileo “discovered” what Aristarcus had shown nearly two millennia before. How many centuries was this journey delayed because an alternative explanation in ancient Greece became a “conspiracy theory” against authority and convention?

This poses an intriguing question. Is there something hardwired in our behavioral patterns that push us towards conformist narratives and away from alternative ones at a precognitive level? Is it this tendency that gave rise to our enhanced ability to unite that keeps us in “group-think” more than we should be? How do we know we are looking at the world objectively and rejecting alternative belief systems from a purely rational basis? How does one know whether one is biased or not?

One way is to apply the scientific method. The scientific method demands that every possibility, no matter how outlandish, is tested for its veracity and dismissed only when it can be proven wrong. Without this objective pursuit of truth, misconceptions can persist indefinitely, just as the geocentric model of the universe did. Interestingly, Aristarcus was allowed to retain his theory because he lived at a time and place where philosophers, mathematicians and scientists were revered, protected and free to pursue their notions. The freedom ancient Greek society afforded its scientists only endured for a few centuries after Aristarcus lived. In Galileo’s day, the Roman Catholic church had been presiding over such things as facts for well over a thousand years. His incontrovertible proof was suppressed by the power that had the most to lose.

These days, establishing the facts of the matter may not be as easy as we presume. Conspiracy theorists claim to have proof just like the debunkers do. How do we know that the proof offered on either side is valid? Who has the time to apply the scientific method? It certainly seems safer to go with the conventional narrative because surely there are more rational minds in a larger group. Though it seems a reasonable approach, it may be in fact where we misstep. By deferring to others, we assume the majority will arrive at the truth eventually. The problem is that those in the majority who are trained to examine evidence objectively often must take a potentially career-ending risk to even investigate an alternative explanation. Why would an organization be willing to invest the resources to redirect their scientific staff to chase down and evaluate evidence that will likely endanger their reputation with the public without any upside? Thus, conventional narratives survive for another day, or in the case of an Earth-centered universe, for a couple of thousand years.

Whether or not you are not a “conspiracy theorist” we can all agree that there is a possibility, however slight, that some conventional narratives could be wrong. How would we know? Is there a source that we can trust 100%? Must we rely on our own wits? A short inquiry into this question can be disquieting. Most of us must admit that our understanding of history, science and geopolitics are merely stories that we have been told by people, institutions or media that we trust explicitly or implicitly. Because most of us are not authorities on anything, it would be impossible to overturn any conventional narrative with an evidentiary argument. Challenging these paradigms is necessarily left to others. Generally speaking, there is no real reason to argue with convention if everything is seemingly unfolding acceptably. But what if you wanted to know for yourself ? Is there any way to ever really know the truth without having to have faith in someone or something else?

There may not be. However, it is also naive to believe that if someone, scientist or not, was in possession of evidence that challenged our deepest held beliefs that it would take root in the ethos on its own. Galileo enjoyed unsurpassed credibility as one of Italy’s foremost mathematicians. He also possessed irrefutable, verifiable and reproducible evidence for his revolutionary theory, yet the convention he was challenging did not crumble through his discoveries. History has shown us that it makes no difference how valid a point is; truth emerges only when someone is listening

So, rather than seeking to independently validate or refute what we are being told, it becomes more productive to ask a different question: How biased is our society by historical standards? How does our society regard alternative theories? Do we let them co-exist with convention as the ancient Greeks did? Do we collectively invest resources to investigate them openly? Or do we dismiss, attack and vilify them as was done in the papal states in Galileo’s time? Which kind of society is more likely to get it right? Which runs the greater risk of being hoodwinked in the long run? Which is more free?

You Can Help Stop The 5G Infrastructure

We plan to investigate the telecom industry, it’s ties to politics, and expose its efforts to push 5G while ignoring the dangers and without proper safety testing, but we can't do it without your support.

We've launched a funding campaign to fuel our efforts on this matter as we are confident we can make a difference and have a strong plan to get it done.

Check out our plan and join our campaign here.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

US House of Representatives Investigating if the Government Created Lyme Disease As A Bioweapon

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A New Jersey lawmaker suggests the government turned ticks and insects into bioweapons to spread disease, and possibly released them. He is not the only one who believes so.

  • Reflect On:

    This is not the only example of supposed human experimentation on mass populations by the government

There are a number of subjects that were once considered ‘conspiracy theories,’ which are now no longer in that realm. ‘Conspiracy theories’ usually, in my opinion, arise from credible evidence. The implications, however, are so grand and so mind-altering that many may experience some sort of cognitive dissonance as a result. One of the topics often deemed a ‘conspiracy theory’ is weaponized diseases, and the latest example comes from an approved amendment that was proposed by a Republican congressman from New Jersey. His name is Chris Smith, and he instructed the Department of Defence’s Inspector General to conduct a review on whether or not the US “experimented with ticks and insects regarding use as a biological weapon between the years of 1950 and 1975” and “whether any ticks or insects used in such experiment were released outside of any laboratory by accident or experiment design.”

The fact that Smith brought this up shows that any intelligent person who actually looks into this has reason to believe it’s a possibility, yet mainstream media outlets are ridiculing the idea, calling it a conspiracy instead of actually bringing up the points that caused Smith to demand the review.

The fact that the amendment was approved by a vote in the House speaks volumes. Smith said that the amendment was inspired by “a number of books and articles suggesting that significant research had been done at US government facilities including Fort Detrick, Maryland, and Plum Island, New York, to turn ticks and insects into bioweapons”.

Most people don’t know that the US government has experimented on its own citizens a number of times. All of this is justified for “national security” purposes. National security has always been a term used as an excuse to prolong secrecy, justify the government’s lack of transparency, and create black budget programs that have absolutely no oversight from Congress.

For example, on September 20, 1950, a US Navy ship just off the coast of San Francisco used a giant hose to spray a cloud of microbes into the air and into the city’s famous fog. The military was apparently testing how a biological weapon attack would affect the 800,000 residents of the city.The people of San Francisco had absolutely no idea. The Navy continued the tests for seven days, and multiple people died as a result. It was apparently one of the first large-scale biological weapon trials that would be conducted under a “germ warfare testing program” that went on for 20 years from 1949 to 1969. The goal “was to deter [the use of biological weapons] against the United States and its allies and to retaliate if deterrence failed,” the government later explained. Then again, that’s if you trust the explanation coming from the government.

This could fall under the category of human subject research. It’s still happening! A dozen classified programs that involved research on human subjects were underway last year at the Department of Energy. Human subject research refers broadly to the collection of scientific data from human subjects. This could involve performing physical procedures on the subjects or simply conducting interviews and having other forms of interaction with them. It could even involve procedures performed on entire populations, apparently without their consent.

advertisement - learn more

Human subjects research erupted into national controversy 25 years ago with reporting by Eileen Welsome of the Albuquerque Tribune on human radiation experiments that had been conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission, many of which were performed without the consent of the subjects. A presidential advisory committee was convened to document the record and to recommend appropriate policy responses.

When it comes to Lyme disease, the Guardian points out that:

A new book published in May by a Stanford University science writer and former Lyme sufferer, Kris Newby, has raised questions about the origins of the disease, which affects 400,000 Americans each year.

Bitten: The Secret History of Lyme Disease and Biological Weapons, cites the Swiss-born discoverer of the Lyme pathogen, Willy Burgdorfer, as saying that the Lyme epidemic was a military experiment that had gone wrong.

Burgdorfer, who died in 2014, worked as a bioweapons researcher for the US military and said he was tasked with breeding fleas, ticks, mosquitoes and other blood-sucking insects, and infecting them with pathogens that cause human diseases.

According to the book, there were programs to drop “weaponised” ticks and other bugs from the air, and that uninfected bugs were released in residential areas in the US to trace how they spread. It suggests that such a scheme could have gone awry and led to the eruption of Lyme disease in the US in the 1960s.

This is concerning. It’s a story that, for some reason, instantly reminded me of the MK ultra program, where human subjects were used for mind control research.

If things like this occurred in the past, it’s hard to understand why someone would deem the possibility of this happening again a ‘conspiracy theory.’ What makes one think this wouldn’t be happening again, especially given the fact that there is sufficient evidence suggesting it is?

Lyme disease is also very strange. If you did get it, you probably wouldn’t know immediately – unless you’re one of the chronic sufferers that have had to visit over 30 doctors to get a proper diagnosis. Lyme disease tests are highly inaccurateoften inconclusive or indicating false negatives.

Why? Because this clever bacteria has found a way to dumb down the immune system and white blood cells so that it’s not detectable until treatment is initiated. To diagnose Lyme disease properly you must see a “Lyme Literate MD (LLMD).” However, more and more doctors are turning their backs on patients due to sheer fear of losing their practices! Insurance companies and the CDC will do whatever it takes to stop Chronic Lyme Disease from being diagnosed, treated, or widely recognized as an increasingly common issue.

You can read more about that here.

The Takeaway

It’s becoming more apparent that our government as well as our federal health regulatory agencies are extremely corrupt. There are a number of examples to choose from throughout history proving this. The fact that something like this doesn’t seem believable to the public is ridiculous and further enhances and prolongs the ability for the powerful elite and the government to continue conducting these activities. Awareness is key.

You Can Help Stop The 5G Infrastructure

We plan to investigate the telecom industry, it’s ties to politics, and expose its efforts to push 5G while ignoring the dangers and without proper safety testing, but we can't do it without your support.

We've launched a funding campaign to fuel our efforts on this matter as we are confident we can make a difference and have a strong plan to get it done.

Check out our plan and join our campaign here.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod