Darren Weeks
Coalition to Govern America
November 14, 2014
The infamous hacker who is stated to have tormented members of the Bush family, Colin Powell, and other "prominent Americans" by hacking into their e-mail accounts, is now serving a seven year prison sentence for his crimes at a maximum security prison. There are a number of things that bother me about this story.
First, and most basic, is his nick-name. The hacker, whose real name is Marcel-Lehel Lazar, went by the hacker name "Guccifer". This has always bothered me because it sounds very similar to Lucifer, and, knowing the occult, demonic nature of the power brokers, I detected it as a red flag that this operator might be one of theirs.
He was interviewed recently by the New York Times, who published an explanation, this week, of the name. It removes all doubt as to the intent of the nick-name. Emphasis below is mine.
The hacker who signed off as Guccifer (pronounced GUCCI-fer) — a nom de guerre coined, he said, to combine “the style of Gucci and the light of Lucifer” — turned out to be Marcel-Lehel Lazar, a jobless 43-year-old former taxi driver. He had no expertise in computers, no fancy equipment, only a clunky NEC desktop and a Samsung cellphone, and no special skills beyond what he had picked up on the web.
Reading those words, I recollected who else of importance might have a fascination for Lucifer. One of those people was Saul Alinsky, who, in his book Rules for Radicals wrote,
Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer.
Why is Alinsky so important? He was a community organizer in Chicago and the role model to a young Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton was also an admirer of Alinsky's, to the point where she wrote her senior thesis on him — a fact that was carefully suppressed during the Clinton years in the White House. Alinsky is also interviewed in 1972 by Playboy magazine, in which he stated that, if given the option, he would choose Hell over Heaven.
PLAYBOY: Having accepted your own mortality, do you believe in any kind of afterlife?
ALINSKY: Sometimes it seems to me that the question people should ask is not “Is there life after death?” but “Is there life after birth?” I don’t know whether there’s anything after this or not. I haven’t seen the evidence one way or the other and I don’t think anybody else has either. But I do know that man’s obsession with the question comes out of his stubborn refusal to face up to his own mortality. Let’s say that if there is an afterlife, and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to hell.
PLAYBOY: Why?
ALINSKY: Hell would be heaven for me. All my life I’ve been with the have-nots. Over here, if you’re a have-not, you’re short of dough. If you’re a have-not in hell, you’re short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I’ll start organizing the have-nots over there.
PLAYBOY: Why them?
ALINSKY: They’re my kind of people.
Given the fact that this man was the role model to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and the many other Luciferian / Occult connections this writer is aware the Establishment power brokers possess, my suspicions pique when I hear a name like Guccifer.
Adding fuel to the fire are things like his "qualifications" to be a hacker, as outlined in the Times quote above...
...jobless 43-year-old former taxi driver... no expertise in computers, no fancy equipment... no special skills...
This was the man who allegedly exposed George W. Bush's weird "self-portraits", brought out potential affairs and indiscretion among other high-ranking officials and celebrities? Sounds about as likely as Edward Snowden, with his background and qualifications, being able to waltz into one the most secretive agencies in the world and single-handedly obtain the mounds of top-secret evidence he is alleged to have acquired, then have safe passage to escape the reaches of those same intelligence agencies without any repercussions. This may be believable movie material, but not for real life.
As I was about to dismiss the whole story as yet another CIA propaganda plant, I then read the chilling words:
Before agreeing to answer questions from The New York Times in prison, where he shares a cell with four others, including two convicted murderers, he read out a lengthy handwritten statement that he said explained the purpose of his hacking.
A potpourri of conspiracy theories about the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the 1997 death of Princess Diana and alleged plans for a nuclear attack in Chicago in 2015, it said: “This world is run by a group of conspirators called the Council of Illuminati, very rich people, noble families, bankers and industrialists from the 19th and 20th century.
Now we're to believe that the Guccifer hacker was a member of the patriot community? He had "conspiracy theories" about 9/11 — which is the media's way of discrediting anyone who doesn't believe the official story — which is anyone with an ounce of sense, if they really look at the evidence. The Princess Diana "accident" was something that many, including myself, always found very mysterious and questionable. Those events are both in the past however. More noteworthy, and troublesome, is the future event that is casually mentioned and glossed right over by the Times writer.
...alleged plans for a nuclear attack in Chicago in 2015...
Given our community organizing president's roots, and his former chief-of-staff's placement in the Windy City, one would think it to be worthwhile to expand upon that loaded sentence a bit more.
Read the full New York Times interview here: www.nytimes.com/2014/11/11/world/europe/for-guccifer-hacking-was-easy-prison-is-hard-.html
