Main Menu

Tag Archives | CIA

Dennis Montgomery near death?

An unattributed article at WorldNetDaily this week cites Larry Klayman as saying that Dennis Montgomery is in poor health, and should be deposed before it is too late. Deposed about what, you ask? About the alleged scam he ran on the Maricopa County Sheriff’s office? No, rather about Montgomery’s purported knowledge of NSA surveillance of the US Supreme Court. Klayman wants the court to question Dennis Montgomery in secret, saying according to WND:

The witness, Dennis Montgomery, can testify “about the unconstitutional and illegal surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency that is highly relevant and of crucial important … as he worked closely with these agencies following the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001,” said Klayman.

Montgomery’s poor health adds to the urgency that his testimony be taken now, Klayman has said

Klayman points to Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Ginsberg as surveillance targets that Montgomery could testify to. (Maybe he found this in bar codes in the noise of Al Jazeera TV signals.) Klayman raises the question of whether Roberts is being blackmailed by the Obama Administration.

Klayman sued the president and won a court order that the NSA stop spying on him personally (read more on Klayman v Obama). This motion is part of that that legal proceeding.

Shrimpton gets jail time for false report

Photo of Michael ShrimptonOne of many birther hopes that didn’t pan out, British barrister Michael Shrimpton was convicted and sentenced to 12 months in jail for making a nuclear bomb threat he said was based on information from “European sources.” There was no bomb and the judge was convinced that Shrimpton knew the report was false. The judge concluded:

… Michael Shrimpton, who is not just a harmless eccentric, but a menace has today been sentenced accordingly.

Shrimpton was also noted for his cock-and-bull story about the CIA and Obama’s DNA, and his conviction for having indecent photographs of children on a flash drive.

Read more:

CIA, Secret Service: guarding Obama’s DNA


ObamaDNAWe’ve had a titter over the old Michael Shrimpton video making the birther rounds, about how the CIA collected Barack Obama’s DNA back in 2007 and compared it to his relatives, and found they weren’t related. Why would the CIA do such a thing?

Well, according to a 2012 article in The Atlantic, “Hacking the President’s DNA,” snagging DNA is exactly what the CIA does to world leaders (and we thought we were just listening to their phone calls). Why? Here’s the rationale according to authors Hessel, Goodman and Kotler:

The U.S. government is surreptitiously collecting the DNA of world leaders, and is reportedly protecting that of Barack Obama. Decoded, these genetic blueprints could provide compromising information. In the not-too-distant future, they may provide something more as well—the basis for the creation of personalized bioweapons that could take down a president and leave no trace.

Michael Shrimpton described in his video how very easy it would be to harvest Obama’s DNA from a drinking glass, and that might have been true in 2007, but perhaps not today:

According to Ronald Kessler, the author of the 2009 book In the President’s Secret Service, Navy stewards gather bedsheets, drinking glasses, and other objects the president has touched—they are later sanitized or destroyed—in an effort to keep would‑be malefactors from obtaining his genetic material.

Taitz: Shrimpton wanted money

Michael Shrimpton is all the rage at Birther Report with their new article: “Bombshell: British Intelligence Advisor; Obama Born in Kenya In 1960; CIA DNA Test.”

Shrimpton’s CIA DNA test tale is quite old. I wrote about it the very first month of this blog, in December 2008: “CIA DNA Test Reveals Barack Obama was ADOPTED.” Both then and today, no evidence is offered for the claim, nor any plausible explanation for how anyone knows it. Commenter Dr. Ken notes that the Shrimpton reference to President Medvedev just assuming the presidency in the BR videos dates it back to 2008. Comparing what Shrimpton said in the video with my article, it appears that it’s the same story (for example the detail that alleges Ann Dunham wasn’t pregnant in July of 1961); however, searching for that original story on the Internet associated with Shrimpton’s name returned no results, suggesting to me that Shrimpton got the story from birther accounts on the Internet rather than the other way round.

You can read more details from Shrimpton in this  2012 article at Veterans Today: “Rejection of Obama by the Electoral College” (site is very slow today).

Some of the BR commenters note the lack of evidence, one saying: “Barrister Michael Shrimpton speaks some interesting words. Now he needs to come up with some proofs. Words are not proof of anything….words are only hearsay and speculation.”

Orly Taitz echoes the skeptical theme in an article/press release from her yesterday, “Barrister Michael Shrimpton contacted Attorney Taitz in 2013, however never provided any proof of his statements.” Taitz wrote:

British Attorney Michael  Shrimpton contacted Attorney Orly Taitz a year ago, on February 7, 2013. He claimed that there was a DNA test proving Obama was not connected to Dunhams, his maternal grandparents. When Taitz requested some proof, Shrimpton provided absolutely nothing. Further, Shrimpton was trying to get money from Taitz to bribe officials in Kenya. If he has a DNA test, why does he need to bribe officials in Kenya? Without any proof of his statements Shrimpton might be either an opportunist seeking money or working for a joined CIA-MI6 operation to try to discredit Taitz and others by bringing forward hoaxes. Shrimpton needs to provide some evidence in order to be believed.

Shrimpton is variously described depending on how you view him. Alex Jones had Shrimpton on as a guest on his InfoWars program and provided this brief biography:

Michael Shrimpton, of course, is a national security lawyer, that is barrister, in government matters. He’s written for the Journal for International Security Affairs. He has given advice and briefed the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, that’s the US Senate. He’s given speeches and consulted all over western Europe and the United States. And of course he’s been an invited guest of the State Department.

That program was about allegations that a UK bioweapons expert named David Kelly was murdered by the British government, rather than the official cause of death, suicide. The Wikipedia article on Kelly covers the controversy. Shrimpton also claims that former British Prime Minister Edward Health was a serial pedophile. Shrimpton asserts that the death of Conservative Party’s Christopher Shale was also a political assassination, as was the death of RAF Chief Sir Christopher Moran.

Objective biographical information on Shrimpton is not easy to come by—no Wikipedia article, for example. Citizen WElls News says Shrimpton’s Wikipedia profile was scrubbed. Wikipedia profiles are basically user pages, created by individual Wikipedia editors about themselves1. The Shrimpton profile was indeed deleted back in 2012. Wikipedia profiles are supposed to be created by the subject themself, and this one wasn’t, basically turning the profile page into a biography of a living person without sources. Here’s the deletion discussion (“BLP” is an abbreviation for “Biography of a living person).”

Shrimpton made the mainstream news in 1998 as the representative of a number of luxury car enthusiasts (Shrimpton drives a Bentley) who tried to stop the sale of Rolls Royce to Volkswagen by making higher bid, bankrolled by wealthy investors. In his book about the acquisition, Kidnap of the Flying Lady: How Germany Captured Both Rolls-Royce and Bentley, Richard Feast writes:

And, of course, there was Michael Shrimpton, now leading another consortium called Crewe Motors. His claim to have secured promises of cash worth £490 million could not be ignored … however much a diversion it would prove. In the knowledge that he could rely on institutional investors, if not private ones, to vote for the Volkswagen offer, Chandler called for an adjournment. This gave time to examine the validity of Shrimpton’s claims he had the necessary finance lodged in the Bahamas and Switzerland…. However, Vickers failed to find the proof it needed that the funds were in place.

I include the Volkswagen story primarily because it is about all I could find in the mainstream about Shrimpton.

I think the big question that casts doubt on Shrimpton’s tale is simply, “why would the CIA be testing Barack Obama’s DNA?” The obvious answer is that there is no reason for them to do it.

Shrimpton blogged at The Shrimpton Report during 2012.

1Here’s my Wikipedia profile.

New “Bad” site added:

The Commieblaster site is sort of mashup of sensationalist anti-Communist stuff, finding Communists all over the place (78-81 in Congress alone), and of course centered on “America’s #1 Marxist,” Barack Obama. Here’s a sample:

imageObama Worked for the CIA in Pakistan and Afghanistan. His Dozens of Social Security Numbers were used for Money-Laundering during a Time He Claimed to be at Columbia University (but wasn’t).


Islamic-Raised, Barack Hussein Obama (a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Soebarkah, a.k.a. Harrison Bounel) Perfectly Fits Former FBI Head, J. Edgar Hoover’s Definiton of a Communist. He’s a Teleprompter-Puppeted, Marxist-Leninist, Rabble-Rousing Narcissist. Americans are His Enemy.


SHOCKING! USURPER CAUGHT RED-HANDED! A Law Enforcement Investigation Proved Obama’s Birth Certificate and Selective Service Registration Card are Both Forgeries. Obama Jailed an Officer for Asking to See Them. Obama Claimed He was Born in Kenya for 17 Years. In 2008, while Vetting McCain, Congress Ruled Presidents Must Have Two US Citizen Parents. Obama Signed This Resolution. Obama’s "Birth Certificate" Says His Dad was Kenyan. SO OBAMA’S INELIGIBLE! Let’s Arrest Him Now!

The home page is so huge, you could spend days going through its links. has been added to the list of “Bad” web sites down below.

The birther “Theory of Everything”

OK, I’ve been out mowing grass again; that’s where I get my “big” ideas. The Theory of Everything is sort of the Holy Grail of physics, the quest for a single theory that would unify General Relativity and Quantum Field Theory.

Simulated Larege Hadron Colliger CMS particle detector data depicting a Higgs boson produced by colliding protons decaying into hadron jets and electrons

One of the (many) complaints you’ll hear about birthers on this site is that the birthers lack a coherent narrative. They criticize the standard theory (to be found in a biography of the President, an encyclopedia, or mainstream news article) based on various anomalies they think exist; however, they have never come up with any alternative narrative that fits the facts better, or even comes close to it.

So as I was mowing, I was thinking about how anti-birthers make fun of birthers for two reasons: one reason is to ridicule, belittle, downplay and dismiss them (in lieu of a scholarly dissection) and the other reason is that sometimes they are just funny. It was in that latter sense that I ran through in my mind the article from the King of  Shambhala at Before It’s News. It was his notion that “All the obots here are CIA pai[d] shills” that set me to thinking about a birther “Theory of Everything.”

In order to fit all the disparate birther semi-theories into a grand unified theory, it is necessary to develop a high-level meta-theory to explain the differences. The solution is obvious: posit a single powerful intelligence (PI) behind everything, who through bribery and coercion controls just about all the players in the birther controversy. So, for example, if Mike Zullo gets caught red-handed fabricating evidence, then either Zullo is part of the conspiracy whose role is to misdirect and discredit the birthers, or he is just gullible and the people who feed him theories are under the control of the PI. I mean, how else can you explain birthers still filing 100 lawsuits after 100 of them had been dismissed, if someone wasn’t paying them to do it?

Under the PI theory, it becomes clear that the long-form birth certificate was carefully constructed to mislead the birthers, salted with anomalies to make them waste time looking for more, but none conclusive enough to stand up to expert scrutiny. The Obama’s themself make ambiguous statements about the President’s roots, again to drive the birthers nuts, while leaving others skeptical. You can take your pick of the birthers of note (and I won’t name names here) who are Obama misinformation purveyors.

So then, the obvious conclusion is that the selection of Barack Obama to become president was carefully made, with his skin color and funny name, specifically for the purpose of creating the birther movement, which is actually spurious. The whole reason for the plot is to distract that powerful counterforce lying nascent on the Internet, comprised of true patriots™ and keyboard warriors™ (those immune from the drug-laden chemtrails and fluoride in the drinking water) who if not distracted by Obama would be focused on the real aims of the PI.

Basically, if one just denies all the evidence and all the testimony of folks on both sides, then suddenly everything fits perfectly. The remaining task to complete the theory is to identify the powerful intelligence. I will leave that up to you:

If the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates were polling within 5% of each other, would you vote

  • Hillary Clinton? (58%, 15 Votes)
  • A third-party candidate you believed eligible? (31%, 8 Votes)
  • For the Republican candidate you liked ideologically, but believed Constitutionally ineligible? (12%, 3 Votes)

Total Voters: 26

Loading ... Loading ...