image edited by Web Investigator – Aerial view of Masada showing the Roman ramp.
Have archaeologists proven the ancient tale of mass suicide in the Judaean desert or twisted science for political end?
In 73 or 74 CE, 960 Jewish zealots – men, women and children – committed suicide on top of the mountain of Masada by the Dead Sea in Israel rather than be captured by the Romans. The story, told by the Roman historian Josephus, is one of the most famous from antiquity. But did it actually happen? Yigael Yadin, the late Israeli archaeologist from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who excavated the site in the mid-1960s, said that it did. Moreover, he also said that the objects found during his dig proved it. His subsequently published book, Masada: Herod’s Fortress and the Zealots’ Last Stand (1966), was a bestseller.
It was no secret that Yadin’s excavations at sites in Israel, such as at Hazor in the 1950s and at Masada in the 1960s, were in part undertaken in the hope of reinforcing Jewish claims to the land by linking them to biblical stories and other famous events. Some have long charged Yadin with a political agenda detached from the truth – and cast a shadow over his interpretations of the finds at Masada and elsewhere in the Levant. In 1995 and 2002, Nachman Ben-Yehuda, a sociologist also at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published his own interpretation of the finds from Masada in two separate books – The Masada Myth and Sacrificing Truth. He concluded that Yadin had been incorrect in many of his interpretations, perhaps deliberately so, in the interest of creating a nationalist narrative to help the young state of Israel forge an identity for itself.
Subsequently, Amnon Ben-Tor, who is now the Yigael Yadin Professor of Archaeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and who had excavated with Yadin at Masada, published a spirited defence of Yadin and his findings, titled Back to Masada (2009). In this book, Ben-Tor went through the archaeology again, dismissing each of Ben-Yehuda’s points and basically confirming Yadin’s point of view.
Yet the dispute goes on. The story of Masada is more than just a story of the archaeological excavations. It is an example of how archaeologists use historical information to supplement what they find during their excavations and to flesh out the bare details provided by the archaeological discoveries. Yadin made particular use of the writings of Flavius Josephus – the Jewish general turned Roman historian who wrote two books about the Jews in the first century CE and who is the primary source for what might have taken place on top of Masada nearly 2,000 years ago. And Masada shows how the relationship between archaeology and the historical record cuts both ways; since we cannot be certain that Josephus’s discussions are 100 per cent accurate, we can use archaeology to corroborate – or to challenge – the ancient text.
Masada also serves as a cautionary tale about using (or misusing) archaeological evidence to support a nationalistic agenda, as some scholars have suggested Yadin did. The debate over Masada involves the trustworthiness of Josephus’s account; the credibility of Yadin, perhaps the most famous of all Israeli archaeologists; and the influence of nationalism on the interpretation of archaeological discoveries. Whom do we believe? How should we view this seemingly tragic, heart-wrenching ancient site and event? And can we ever tap evidence from thousands of years in the past to establish the origins, legal claims and birthright of peoples today?
Masada is a tall mountain with a flat plateau on top, longer than it is wide, rising high above the surrounding dry and arid desert. It has been a tourist attraction ever since Yadin’s excavations in the mid-1960s. Hundreds of tourists per day now roam around the ruins on top of the mountain – half a million visit every year. It is the second most popular tourist site in Israel, after Jerusalem, and was named a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 2001.
It lies at the southern end of the Dead Sea, far to the south of Qumran and most of the caves in which the Dead Sea Scrolls were found. The top is accessible on foot only via a narrow winding track known as the Snake Path, which leads 400 metres (1,300 feet) up the front face of the massif and the Roman siege ramp still in place on the western side. It gets so hot here that rules have been put in place instructing tourists that they may begin the climb only if it is before 9:30 in the morning. After that, there’s too much chance of getting dehydrated during the ascent. Those who begin climbing before dawn are rewarded by one of the most spectacular sunrises they will ever see, but most tourists opt to ride up in the cable cars that have been installed, gliding above the Snake Path and waving to those below…
War with Iran is on the cards as the administration of US President Donald Trump takes an overly aggressive stance against the Islamic Republic. Without doubt, the 2016 US presidential election left the nation deeply divided and polarized. Trump has been in office for around 3 weeks and there are still many people protesting against him. His brash style and EOs (Executive Orders) have some horrible unintended consequences, such as his 90-day immigration order (called a “Muslim ban” by some) resulting in a 5 year old getting handcuffed and separated from his parents. Amidst all of this engineered disorder, there is a serious danger lurking: Trump is taking the US on a sure course to war with Iran. Trump said on numerous occasions throughout his campaign that he would not rule out the use of nuclear weapons, and on Feb. 2nd 2017 he warned Tehran that “nothing is off the table.”
Before we get to the all the signs indicating that war with Iran is on the books, it is important to remember why the US and its masters are targeting Iran. Firstly, Iran has become the arch-enemy of the Saudi-Israeli alliance because it is the one country militarily and economically strong enough to challenge their dominance of the Middle Eastern region. There is no love lost between Israel and Iran, who have traded insults and threats for decades; meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and Iran are home to the 2 sides of the Sunni-Shia conflict within the Muslim world (Saudi Arabia – Sunni, Iran – Shia). Trump is a Zionist down to his very bone marrow and DNA, and evidently also afraid to take on the Saudis who were conspicuously omitted from EO immigration ban of 7 nations.
Secondly, Iran has been openly supportive of the fight against Zionism (by funding Hezbollah in Lebanon) and against the Sunni extremist group ISIS (the pet Frankenstein of the US). The US now under Trump has accused Iran as being the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world, but this is completely untrue. Iran has been a counterweight to radical Sunni Islam, extremism and violence.
Thirdly, Iran has forged a tight alliance with Russia and China in defiance of the Zionist-Anglo-American New World Order which seeks to impose a unipolar One World Government on the world, with the international bankers at the helm. Iran remains one the few countries in the world without a Rothschild-owned central bank. It refuses to bow to the will of the US or to allow the US to place its imperial military bases within its territory.
The following 11 signs below show that war with Iran is, unfortunately, shaping up to fast become a reality unless people quickly wake to to the game plan:
War with Iran Sign #1: Which Path to Persia? US follows the Zionist Think Tank Plan
The Brookings Institution is another PNAC-neocon-Zionist (and with links to Zbigniew Brzezinski) think tank which drives US foreign policy. In its 2009 analysis paper Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran, it advocated the US make a deal with Iran, then renege on the deal (making it look like Iran was refusing something very reasonable), and then attack Iran with support from the international community:
” … any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context — both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it. The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer — one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.” – pg. 39
(Hat tip to Tony Cartalucci for alerting people to this years ago.)
War with Iran Sign #2: Iran on the “Muslim Ban” List but Saudi Arabia Not
I have talked about the so-called “Muslim ban” in an earlier article where I made the point that technically it’s not a Muslim ban. However, here I want to emphasize that if the real point of the travel ban were to stop terrorists, then why on Earth is Saudi Arabia not on the list? Trump referenced 9/11 when talking about this travel ban, and even according to the official 9/11 narrative (a fairy tale no doubt, but this is what some people believe), Saudi Arabia was the source of 15 of the 19 alleged hijackers! However, the US and Saudi Arabia have many deals involving weapons, oil, petrodollars, US military bases, funding and training of ISIS and more, so I guess it’s a little too truthful and inconvenient to put them on the list. Ditto for Israel. Saudi Arabia and Israel export the most terrorism, but it’s Iran that makes it on the list …
About the Author
Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com (FaceBook here), writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance
**Sources embedded throughout article.
This article (11 Signs War with Iran is Imminent) was originally created and published by The Freedom Articles and is re-posted here with permission.
The Illuminati (Cabalist) Jews who run Hollywood have found another
weapon in their war on humanity. It is a “comedy” that details the squalid sex lives of 20-something girls who are feminist roadkill, (i.e. victims of feminist ideology.)
“Girls,” which won “Best Comedy” at the Golden Globe Awards in 2013, is spreading worldwide like a virus. Its writer, producer and star, Lena Dunham, 30, who won “Best Actress,” has used her wit and chutzpah to market her dysfunctional life as emblematic of her generation.
While most people squirm at the many nauseous sex scenes and the general vacuity of these girls, many in the worldwide audience will miss the intended irony. They will accept Dunham as a role model.
Lena Dunham is rich ( worth $12 million) and famous. How bad could her lifestyle be?
The Illuminati reward their Illuminati Jewish “change agents” with book contracts. This is where Obama made his millions. Dunham got a $3.7 million advance from Random House for a proposal for an advice book based on her personal history of psychotherapy, anorexia, child molestation (her younger sister), promiscuity and feminist indoctrination.
She can be compared with Betty Friedan (The Feminine Mystique), Helen Gurley Brown (Sex and the Single Girl), Eve Ensler (The Vagina Monologues) and Darren Starr ( Sex in the City.) (Interesting that Obama’s mother’s Jewish father was also a Dunham.)
The Illuminati “Culture Division” use these people to normalize the perverse and ugly. It’s all part of humanity’s induction into their satanic cult — Jewish Cabalism– which reverses good and evil, making sick seem healthy.
What do women really want? They want emotional and material security. They want love, commitment, marriage and children. But feminism has taught them to seek careers instead, (because marriage and family are “oppressive.”)
Young women today are dysfunctional because their minds are at war with their natural instincts.
In the bad old days, men had to court and marry a woman to get sex. He had to love her. Now, thanks to feminism, women give their bodies first and hope someone eventually will love them afterward. Feminists call this “empowerment.”
Lena Dunham’s generation is a mess because women aren’t equipped to compete in the rat race and be wives and mothers too. Their instincts are telling them one thing, and society another. They have been deliberately sabotaged.
(It’s a question of priority. Someone has to make family number one. That doesn’t mean women shouldn’t have careers. And of course, not all women want families.)
In a healthy society, a train wreck like Lena Dunham would be a painful embarrassment. But in a satanically possessed society, she is the new normal.
Lena gets a STD from the loser and has a vaginal exam. Meanwhile her friend is having an abortion but miscarries while having sex with a pick up.
Lena has a job interview but sabotages her chances by making an offensive wisecrack. And on it goes, copious animal coupling with a catalog of relationship permutations, female neuroses and toilet accidents.
Now see how they make this seem chic. (Season Six Trailer)
We are supposed to love this spectacle for the quips. The girls talk like they are in an English Lit seminar but the dialogue is often quite good: “Bisexuals and Germans are the only people you are allowed to hate these days.” “You said I made you feel like a giant clit.” “My boyfriend is so respectful, he is beginning to feel like a weird uncle.”
A lot of the credit should go to Jennifer Konner, an experienced writer and story editor. I only wish she and Dunham could devote their talents to presenting a positive model. Instead of sentimentalizing the problem, I’d like to see them analyze and solve it. But then the show would be canceled.
In the 1950’s, TV presented functional families and positive role models.
Today, TV is a cesspool of obscenity and soft core porn; zombies, vampires and the occult; Armageddon, violence and gore, all designed to degrade humanity and normalize the sick and ugly.
Obviously pedophiles, Neocons, and other New World Order agents will never forgive Putin because he is making those people look really bad. If those people are pursuing a satanic ideology, says Putin, then they are in “the path to degradation.”
…by Jonas E. Alexis
Can you think of any Western politician who can entertain questions even from virulent opponents for four hours? Has any Western leader been able to do that in recent memory? How about George W. Bush? Obama? Perhaps Angela Merkel?
Well, Vladimir Putin has been able to do just that. In fact, he did exactly that at the end of last month. Throughout his speech and discussion, Putin again brought the moral issue back on the political table, which inexorably is at the root of nearly all the current political conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere. Putin certainly did not fail to deliver:
“Many Western states have taken the way where they deny or reject their own roots, including their Christian roots which form the basis of Western civilization. I
“n these countries, the moral basis and any traditional identity are being denied – national, religious, cultural and even gender identities are being denied or relativized.”
The fact that he raised the gender identity issues, which he said “are being denied or relativized,” is a pointed rebuke to Satanism, which basically articulates the promiscuous idea that morality should not play any role in identifying gender and that pedophilia is simply a relic of the past.
This is also a pointed rebuke to leading Satanists like Sigmund Freud and Wilhelm Reich, who postulated that sexual liberation should be pursued at any cost. Reich meant it when he postulated in his Sexual Revolution:
“The first precondition for the improvement of human and sexual relationships is the absolute break with those moral views which base their commandments either on allegedly supernatural arrangements or on arbitrary law or simply tradition. The laws of morality should also be founded on the insights gained by progressive science.”
Like the French encyclopedists, Reich deliberately fell into the trap that true science can really contradict morality, when in fact morality is essentially the cornerstone or the pillar upon which true scientific enterprise is based. He was not the only one to have deliberately fallen into that trap. Charles Darwin actually beat him to the punch.
Darwin excluded morality from his intellectual project, and, as expected, quickly ended up living in blatant contradiction. “Everything in nature,” says Darwin, “is the results of fixed laws.” Darwin came to this conclusion because he began to embrace what biographers Adrian Desmond and James Moore call “a terrifying materialism,” according to which “the human mind, morality, and even belief in God were artifacts of the brain…”
In that sense, Darwin believed that morality was created, not discovered, by evolution. According to historian of biology Peter J. Bowler, Darwin
“was trying to turn morality into a branch of biology through the proposal that our instinctive behavior can only be understood as a product of natural processes that have adapted us to a particular way of life based on the family unit as a means of raising children.”
If everything, including morality, is the artifact of the brain, if our behavior is “instinctive, programmed by evolution into the very structure of our brains,” and if “morality is merely the rationalization of these social instincts,” then there is no moral responsibility. We simply cannot condemn immoral acts and immoral people like Benjamin Netanyahu and oligarchic empires like Goldman Sachs.
There is more, Darwin believed that “man’s mind had emerged from the worm’s in the first place. This was the crux.”
If morality is out of the equation, then what is left is basically strife, force, and might. In short, survival of the fittest. Darwin meant it when he said:
“There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man.
“It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.”
It is no accident that Darwinism and Capitalism have a kindred spirit. As historian of biology Peter J. Bowler points out, Darwin
“projected the competitive ethos of capitalism onto nature and then bent all his observations to fit into the pattern imposed by his own mind. Darwin did not discover natural selection: he invented it and then sold it to a world that was only too willing to see its own values provided with a ‘natural’ justification.
“The scientists’ efforts to portray Darwin as a purely objective researcher are merely a device used to conceal the ideological foundations of science itself.”
Darwin complicated things when he declared that he “would rather be descended from a heroic little monkey that sacrificed her life than from a savage ‘who delights to torture his enemies, offers up bloody sacrifices, practices infanticide without remorse, treats his wives like slaves, knows no decency, and his haunted by the grossest superstitions.’”
So, which is it, Darwin?
Philosophically and ideologically, Darwin wants to be cruel to the “imbeciles.” In fact, he said quite explicitly that the “imbeciles” ought to be eliminated. Yet practically the same Darwin was complaining that the “savages” shouldn’t delight in torturing each other. Darwin did not even accept the idea that morality could be “objective and universal”! In fact, he believed that “The natural world has no moral validity or purpose.”
To this very day, Darwin’s intellectual children like Bradley A. Thayer still haven’t solved the internal contradiction that exists in their own weltanschauung which they desperately want to be true.
When all is said and done, Darwin preferred to live in contradiction rather than allowing moral duty to guide his thinking. He posited the claim that the “imbeciles” do not deserve to live, but he repudiated people who put that idea to practice.
Objective morality does not exist and even infanticide has a Darwinian mechanism, but it is bad for savages to commit infanticide and to practice human sacrifices. What’s more interesting is that Darwin thought that it was wise to impose that “objective” law upon the savages!…
Among the many other landmark events that took place in 2016, the United States military dropped a whopping 26,171 bombs in foreign nations. This is hardly good news for those on the receiving end, and as conflict spreads in the Middle East and government pushes for all out war with Russia and China, ordinary Americans, those who foot the war bill with tax money, have some soul-searching to do.
Are the values this nation was founded on best shared with the world through violence and destruction? Has American ingenuity in all matters of science and productivity been eclipsed by out capacity to exert the will of the oligarchy though police actions and indiscriminate bombing? Is there ever a moment when enough is enough, and we admit that bombing people doesn’t create peace or achieve the aspirations of a free and moral people?
As reported by McClatchyDC:
“The U.S. dropped 26,171 bombs last year, 3,027 more than 2015.
According to an analysis of Defense Department data from the Council on Foreign Relations, a non-partisan think tank, the majority of the bombs were dropped in Iraq and Syria. The U.S. leads an international coalition fighting the Islamic State group in both countries and has carried out air operations in attempt to reduce the area controlled by the terrorist organization.
Nearly the same amount of bombs were dropped in Syria (12,192) and Iraq (12,095) last year.” [Source]
This amounts to an average of just under 72 bombs a day for the year.
What makes this achievement even more remarkable is that most of these munitions were supposedly dropped on ISIS, a terrorist organization that even members of the U.S. Congress say is being funded covertly by the United States.
What makes this achievement even more remarkable is the fact that at present the U.S. is not legally at war with any nation, therefore all of the bombs fell on nations and people which are not engaged in open conflict against the U.S.
“How incredible is this… the United States is technically not at war with any country right now but dropped more than 26,000 bombs in just 2016 and this under a “anti-war” President. We have an entire generation of Americans who have lived only under a system of “perpetual war”. The time is long overdue to redefine these issues.” –Ben Swann
Finally, what makes this achievement even more outstanding is the cognitive dissonance associated with the fact that the U.S. maintains the illusion of being a peaceful nation and all of these bombs, as well as the hundreds of thousands of bombs dropped in the last eight years were done so during the administration of a Nobel Peace Prize winner. This is Orwellian double-think at its finest.
“I should welcome almost any war, for I think this country needs one.” -President Theodore Roosevelt
Prescient enough as it is, the above statement by Theodore Roosevelt is even more astonishing now when you consider the attitude of defense contractors, who view the possibility of world war III as a potentially great business opportunity.
The American public and the world have long since been warned of the dangers of allowing the military industrial complex to become such an integral part of our economic survival. The United States is the self-proclaimed angel of democracy in the world, but just as George Orwell warned, war is the health of the state, and in the language of newspeak, democracy is the term we use to hide the reality of the nature of our warfare state.
About the Author
Isaac Davis is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com and OffgridOutpost.com Survival Tips blog. He is an outspoken advocate of liberty and of a voluntary society. He is an avid reader of history and passionate about becoming self-sufficient to break free of the control matrix. Follow him on Facebook, here.
This article (72 Bombs a Day – How the U.S. Spreads Democracy and Freedom) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Isaac Davis and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.
The Western media in chorus is accusing the Syrian government and its allies including Russia and Iran of “crimes against humanity” for having liberated Aleppo from the clutch of Al Qaeda terrorists. “Putin and Assad could face justice for war crimes in Syria” according to the Washington Post.
In the media coverage of Aleppo, the Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists are casually described as opposition “rebels” waging a “revolution” against the government of Bashar al Assad, who is portrayed as a “dictator”.
The media propaganda campaign has gone into high gear. The words “Al Qaeda”, “Al Nusra” or “terrorists” are simply not mentioned in recent media reports. It never happened. “Opposition rebels” committed to democracy have been crushed by the Russians, according to “authoritative” media sources.
According to reports, there were no terrorists in Aleppo. The “rebels” are now being portrayed as the victims of Russian aggression. These are the same terrorists who are the object of Obama’s alleged “counterterrorism” campaign, which is largely intent upon protecting the terrorists.
Lies by Omission
There is no mention of the fact that East Aleppo has been occupied by Al Qaeda affilated entities (which are on the EU and US State Department “terror lists”) and that these terrorists –which are now portrayed as “freedom fighters’– have committed countless atrocities against civilians. And these atrocities are now casually being blamed on the Syrian, Russian and Iranian forces which liberated Aleppo.
For four years East Aleppo has been occupied by Al Qaeda, which had established a regime of terror and destruction. The media has portrayed the terrorists as “the moderate” opposition.
Syria: A US-NATO Sponsored Terrorist Insurrection Initiated in March 2011
The evidence amply confirms that Washington has supported the terrorists from the very outset. The influx of Salafist mercenaries commenced in the Southern city of Daraa on the border with Jordan in mid-March 2011.
Moreover, in an August 2011 report, Israeli intelligence news (Debka) confirmed that NATO and the Turkish High Command were involved in recruiting Mujahideen mercenaries throughout “the Middle East and the Muslim world”, while providing the rebels with an vast array of weapons:
“NATO strategists are thinking more in terms of pouring large quantities of anti-tank and anti-air rockets, mortars and heavy machine guns into the protest centers… ” (Debka) .
The terrorists are the foot-soldiers of the Western military alliance. Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA. The Islamic State (ISIS-Daesh) was originally an Al Qaeda affiliated entity (Al Qaeda in Iraq) created by US intelligence with the support of Britain’s MI6, Israel’s Mossad, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Presidency (GIP).
Obama’s Counter-Terrorism Campaign is a Fraud
Obama’s counter-terrorism bombing campaign directed against the Islamic State (ISIS-Daesh) initiated in August 2014 is fake.
If they had wanted to eliminate ISIS-Daesh, they could have bombed their convoys of Toyota pickup trucks when they crossed the desert from Syria into Iraq in June 2014. The Syro-Arabian Desert is open territory. With a fleet of state of the art jet fighter aircraft (F15, F22 Raptor, F16) it would have been –from a military standpoint– ”a piece of cake”, a rapid and expedient surgical operation, which would have decimated the Islamic State convoys in a matter of hours.
The issue mentioned above has never been raised by military analysts. It has never received media coverage.
Needless to say that if they had eliminated the ISIS convoy in June 2014, Obama’s “Counterterrorism” initiative entitled “Operation Inherent Resolve” would not have been required.
The unspoken objective of Obama’s “counterterrorism” campaign was to provide a pretext and a justification for the extensive bombing of Iraq and Syria.
According to CENTCOM, more than 31,900 targets were the object of US bombings over a period of more than 2 years, and the ISIS has yet to be defeated.
The counterterrorism bombing campaign was instigated to destroy Iraq and Syria rather than defeat the ISIS.
Foreign Mercenaries and Western Special Forces
Amply documented, these various terror formations in Syria, the most important of which are Jabhat Al Nusra (recently renamed Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, “Front for the Conquest of the Levant”), and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS-Daesh) are largely composed of foreign mercenaries, recruited, trained and financed by the Western military alliance.
Western special forces –often hired by private mercenary outfits– are embedded within the ranks of these terror formations. These special forces are in permanent liaison with their US-NATO-Israeli counterparts.
The various terror organizations are instruments of US-NATO. The US, France, Britain, Germany, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Israel are the “State sponsors” of Al Qaeda and the ISIS.
Money and weapons are channeled to the terrorists. The US and its allies use arms trafficking –i.e. the unregulated illicit trade in light weapons through private traders including organized crime–, to channel large amounts of weapons and ammunition to the terrorists inside Syria.The Berlin Terror Attack
Terror Attacks in Western Cities
Now let us turn our attention to the Berlin terror attack (December 19, 2016), which coincided chronologically with the Liberation of Aleppo.
Within less than an hour of the occurrence prior to the conduct of a police investigation, the Western media in chorus concluded without a shred of evidence that ISIS-Daesh was behind the attack….