Chelsea and Delores - can we trust the state secrets the 'ladies' exposed or is there another agenda at play?

Otherwise known as Bradley Manning and David Shayler - the spies who came in from the cold, dressed as women. Are we being played?

Before Bradley/Chelsea Manning, there was David Shayler/Delores Kane. What are the chances of two high profile whistleblowers convicted of revealing security secrets, both being transgender, considering trans people make up less than 1% of the worldwide population? Maybe these men were chosen specifically because of their gender bending proclivities or perhaps it was forced on them by their masters in intelligence gathering to undermine their message or as a punishment for stepping out of line. It’s quite possible that trans people are more likely to divulge classified information because they’re fed up with pretending to be somebody they’re not and want it all on the table, prosthetic breasts an all. Or maybe it’s all just an act, part of the gig in the secret service. Can we trust the revelations that Manning and Shayler released to the public, exposing the bad behaviour of intelligence agencies in the Middle East and how it rebounds on all of us? Let’s break down what we know.

With just three days to go before his second term in the White House ended, Barack Obama commuted Bradley Manning’s 35 year prison sentence to seven years, ensuring his release from jail in May 2017, just months after Donald Trump took over the reins. The awkward intelligence analyst entered prison as Bradley and exited as a more confident Chelsea. What changed?

Nearly two decades earlier, across the pond in London, David Shayler had somehow avoided a lengthy prison sentence for breaching the Official Secrets Act after exposing MI5 and MI6’s meddling in Libyan affairs (there’s a Manchester Arena link which I’ll get to later). He got off lightly with a few months behind bars, eventually presenting himself to the media in a micro mini and ginger wig as Delores Kane while announcing he was the messiah. 'I am here to show humanity the way and to show unconditional love and that includes murderers and pederasts (pedos),’ he told The Mail in December 2010. Did something change in prison?

We’re told these pair of wardrobe whizzes were always this way since childhood. Maybe they were. It’s just odd they both ended up being high profile whistleblowers of state secrets. This warrants further investigation. Look away now Tom Secker who seems to think Shayler’s tranny moment ‘is the least interesting thing about him, the least important, but it’s the thing you pick up on and use against him. This suggests you’re a bigot,’ he told me in an effort to minimise the strangeness of the spy in drag claiming to be Jesus.

I beg to differ Secker. The tranny thing just might be the most important aspect to pick up on and most certainly can’t be ignored, try as you might. Shayler’s ex-girlfriend and former spy Annie Machon blamed the intelligence services for Shayler’s ‘condition’. Maybe she’s right.

Back to Bradley Manning and in an op-ed for the Guardian newspaper upon his release from prison, the former US army intelligence officer, calling himself Chelsea E Manning in the byline, claimed Obama’s legacy was ‘not bold enough’ when it came to queers, trans, muslims, browns and immigrants (his words). Manning wrote:

The one simple lesson to draw from President Obama’s legacy: do not start off with a compromise. They won’t meet you in the middle. Instead, what we need is an unapologetic progressive leader.

A progressive leader like ice-cream licking, kiddy sniffing Joe O’Biden and his queerer than queer rainbow coloured policies? Obama’s third whirl in the White House witnessed the US army go full Priscilla, Queen of the Desert and saw children targeted with puberty blockers, drag queen story hour and the butchery of trans surgery, all under the banner of diversity and inclusiveness.

At the time of Manning’s foray into journalism for The Guardian, Donald Trump took offence on behalf of Obama, bizarrely. In a tweet he wrote: “Ungrateful TRAITOR Chelsea Manning, who should never have been released from prison, is now calling President Obama a weak leader. Terrible!”

Surely Trump agreed that Obama was a weak leader. Why stick up for his supposed enemy? The tweet exposes a chilling side to Trump. The Orange One would have no issue locking up whistleblowers of state secrets and throwing away the key. It also reveals he’s perfectly comfortable with US troops misbehaving on foreign soil as long as the end justifies the means. So much for President Peace and Love.

Conversely, Bradley Manning is a problematic protagonist. He comes with his own woke agenda but the information he released to Wikileaks, for Julian Assange to publish, helped expose human rights violations by the US army and the CIA in Iraq and Afghanistan. That’s a big deal.

In this interview with Channel 4 News (Oct 21, 2022), Manning reveals he’s not a fan of JK Rowling (surprise, surprise) which makes you wonder if the transgender debate is genuine or part of an overall pantomime to create sides that don’t always fall into black and white categories, a divide and conquer tactic. Few could agree with the horror show that is trans surgery or men taking women’s medals in sport yet well done Bradley Manning for exposing the corruption of Middle Eastern warfare, in a great shade of red lipstick. It’s complicated.

As a side note, I don’t buy the JK Rowling’s story that she was this single mum writing her little book in a café in Scotland and just happened to become world famous through graft and determination. She’s a front woman for introducing millions of children to the underworld of black magic and spell casting. The sustained promotion of her franchise shows she’s working with a large team behind her. Rowling knew what she had to do to hit the big time in the social credit score system for writers. She ticked every box. It was no accident. Her role in the trans debate is highly questionable as a result. There’s another agenda at play. Isn’t there always? Harry Potter is a whole other day’s discussion so let’s just park that there for now.

So back to the main thrust of the article, can we believe the information released to the public by David Shayler and Bradley Manning considering their change of attire (and apparent gender) once the secrets were out in the open? Their initial classified material seems solid enough when cross referenced, but the level of publicity surrounding their stories warrants caution. Perhaps the tranny thing was a way of diluting the message so it’s not taken seriously by the masses, while acting as a humiliation ritual for Manning and Shayler. Or maybe it was a way of disguising the truth in fancy dress.

It certainly turned me off Shayler’s message initially, not helped by his Messiah complex or his misleading commentary on say the 7/7 London bombings (thanks Secker) - but on closer inspection of his initial claims, he seems to be revealing important information. It looks like British intelligence really were interfering in Libyan affairs while fostering home grown terrorists with an axe to grind against their host country. This knowledge is of great value and pertinent to this day for those of us paying attention to migrant crimes, especially when it comes to the Islamic threat and to Salman Abedi and the Manchester Arena bombing.

Yet here is David Shayler, at the UFO DATA Magazines 2006 Conference of all places, getting the word. They have to tell us, apparently. They’ve just picked a setting that will turn off the middle ground and make Shayler look batty. At least in the context of 2006. Aliens are up next for the new regime, no longer considered fringe territory, to push through the New World Order and the concept of global citizens against space invaders. Back then, UFOs were for the hard core conspiracy theorists.

“As time went on in the service I saw more and more things going wrong. I saw how MI5 and MI6 had conspired to allow a Libyan terrorist to come live in Britain and he’d been allowed to set up a terrorist network in this country,” Shayler tells his audience. How many more of these type of networks have been encouraged to take root across Europe by interfering intelligence agencies and to what end? This is the real line of enquiry, not phoney false flag investigations and lead to preposterous conclusions and vilify real victims.

Thanks to my ole pal Tom Secker, we know the Abedis were well connected to this Libyan group that Shayler describes in his talk and indeed to MI5 and MI6. Let’s not forget, Salman and his brother Hashem hitched a ride from Libya aboard the Royal Navy’s HMS Enterprise in August 2014. The Abedi family visited Libya in 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 according to the Manchester Bombing Inquiry but officials never quite explained what they were doing there or why all these visits were allowed to pass under the radar.

On his website, Spyculture.com Secker asks: Was Manchester Arena Bomber Salman Abedi Working for MI5?

One possibility is that the British secret state approved of if not outright encouraged Abedi’s insurrectionary associations. His father, Ramadan, was part of Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), a terrorist organisation that proclaimed allegiance to Osama bin Laden. Formed by veterans of the Mujahideen’s battle against the Red Army in Afghanistan, in the mid-1990s it attempted to assassinate Muammar Gaddafi, allegedly with the support of MI6.

This is an area where conspiracy theorists have been encouraged to steer clear of with the help of counterintelligence operatives who dismiss any Islamic terror attacks as false flags that enlist crisis actors to bring in draconian new laws. It seems to do the trick too. Those of a conspiratorial mindset are encouraged to mock victims and believe they were picked up by spooks in A&E departments to take part in a bit of theatre, even the dead ones.

It’s certainly one way of diverting attention from how intelligence agencies meddle in foreign countries, stirring up and financing insurrections while allowing trouble to brew on home soil. Their finger prints are all over the Manchester Arena bombing but it’s easier if critical thinkers adopt the victimless false flag approach rather than analyse these chaos merchants. It gets the intelligence agencies off the hook and neutralises appropriate responses while falsely accusing the innocents caught up in the mayhem. The no bomb and no victims conclusion is a lot more palatable than dealing with the treachery of intelligence agencies aiding and abetting home grown terrorists and covering up their role with misleading information planted on purpose.

There are so many competing agendas in the mix, we have to be careful not to get suckered in and lose our grip on reality or pick on the wrong people because of suggestion or intentionally deceptive narration over images.

Did something happen to Manning and Shayler in prison that made them take on a female persona? Possibly. Frankly neither are trustworthy sources but there appears to be some truth in there and it’s worth deciphering.

Manning showed us why Muslims might be angry with western nations because of unjustified attacks in their home countries and Shayler showed us how intelligence agencies actively finance insurrections and offer refuge to Islamic fighting groups who pose a threat to their host nations.

Counterintelligence among the alternative media would have us believe there is no Islamic threat in Western countries, that it’s all just staged terror with no real victims. Go back to sleep, in other words.

Fact is, our rogue governments are inviting in mostly men from countries not only incompatible with, but openly hostile to our own, while intelligence agencies wreak havoc abroad, stirring up division and hatred.

What’s the end game?

Chelsea and Delores seem to have done us a favour. Thanks ladies.

Support independent journalism and buy Aisling a coffee HERE. Thank you.