Tag Archives: CIA - Page 2

LIONEL PODCAST: Pharisaical Self-Righteousness in the Hillary Clinton Camp

It’s a mental illness. An inability and refusal to confront and address the obvious. Hillary Clinton lost. Donald Trump won. In the few weeks Obama has taken every side on every position.  Russia did, Russia didn’t.  Hillary was robbed, Hillary screwed up.  I failed, I was a success.  I have brought hope, there is no hope.  Everything is wonderful, everything sucks.  The FBI is right, the FBI is wrong.  

Hegel is very impressed.  But he’s still waiting for the synthesis.

I’ve been trying to grasp the essential mindset of those who are so viscerally opposed to Trump and his supporters that they seem willing to do anything to express their loathing for them.  Just what is the common factor?  What makes this different from the normal partisanship?

There is no need for modern psychoanalysis.  It can be easily described in an old and well used term: self-righteousness. Pharisaical self-righteousness.  The concept has gone quite out of style, but the phenomenon is very much alive and very well.  Acquaintance with the pharisaical personality has vanished as worldly unfamiliarity with the gospels has grown.  It’s a regrettable gap in our educational system. Lest I frighten the horses with god talk, there is no need for theology to grasp the moral principle under consideration. Relax.

Perhaps this pharisaism can best be seen in Hillary Clinton.  I could multiply examples, but one will suffice.  When, with her insider friends, and with their obvious approval, she called a large portion of Trump supporters “deplorables”, any biblically or even classically literate person would have immediately caught the clear echoes of the saying of the Pharisees, “this rabble is accursed, that knows not the law”.  Here is the dripping contempt, the superiority, the snobbery, the loathing of the little people by those who regard themselves as intrinsically better than others.

Unfortunately this inner rot has spread far beyond Mrs Clinton.  Millennials have been taught since infancy that they are the best, the coolest, and in the words of one young woman, the most moral generation.  Their self deception seems complete.  For all their self supposed ethicality, they do not hesitate to indulge in open displays of spite, rancor and revenge.  Their treatment of Bocelli in this matter is reprehensible, but they do not notice.  They think nothing of depriving this man of his living and his self esteem. He must submit to their will or be given the yellow badge of the outcast.  Their self indulgent weeping and hysterics show a depth of self regard and self pity that I think has not existed before or to this extent.  The attack on the electoral college electors showed this same infantile ignorance of the reasons for the law and the glorification of self interest.  Who threatens another with death for any reason other than an immediate threat to the lives of oneself or one’s family?  Yet these threats are now commonplace over matters of opinion about political traditions, though the threats are unserious and the people making them are cowards who hide behind email.

The most telling example of this self righteousness is the gross misuse of the name Hitler.  Clearly the person Hitler achieved a notoriety for evil that surpasses all others.  Comparing someone to Hitler is the ultimate in moral distancing.  Because Hitler is seen as literally almost infinitely evil, then I, who am not like him, must be at the other end of an infinite scale, and therefore, pretty good, in my own eyes. By calling someone Hitler I don a mantle of self constructed virtue.  Other epithets that end in “ist” or “phobic” serve a similar function.  But the use of “Hitler” is truly the final solution.  It is the personal and moral eradication of someone for whom my disapproval has turned to righteous loathing, to execration, to delation.  I have no problem in wishing them dead.

I know of no solution for this phenomenon.  It is.  Short of some unlikely outbreak of humility we must patiently await the slow ministration of bitter experience to drive this puerile sentiment out of this generation.  The lessons will be painful for all. Perhaps the millennials will obtain grace to at least not pass this odious trait on to their children, if they can spare the time from their own moral preening to bear them.  Yet I must not be overly hard on the millennials.  They came by their self righteousness honestly.  It is their parents and grandparents, my generation, who must ask themselves, “what have we done?”

LIONEL PODCAST: The Courage to Know You’re Right


It’s lonely knowing you’re right. You’re met relentlessly by the simple-minded and trite. They never seem to wonder what’s right or wrong. We just know. 

  • A jazzman today is like a medieval monk on a Scottish island in the middle ages hand copying ancient manuscripts so that an intellectual tradition is not lost during a time when 99.5 % of the population had no clue about ANYTHING. O tempora! O mores! [REFERENCED]

  • FLOTUS told Oprah Winfrey, “Now we’re feeling what not having hope feels like.” Really?! Mrs. O, talking about how her husband sought to imbue Americans with a sense of “hope,” added that “we feel the difference now.” And this: “It has shaken me to my core in a way that I couldn’t have predicted,” Mrs. Obama said at a campaign event in October. Funny . . . my thoughts exactly.

  • Alistener reminded me of the apt lines from Auden. 

    One could go on: Dante, the Beatles, William Morris, Tolkien and so on.

    I advise the Clintons to stay out of the woods.  No good can come of it. The poetry of the woods is darksome and eldritch. (Thank you, Tom.)

Lost in a haunted wood,

Children afraid of the night

Who have never been happy or good.

  • Be a part of the revolution that’s changing the world one brave citizen at a time. #LionelNation

LIONEL PODCAST: CIA/FBI Say No Evidence of Russian Hacking But the MSM Spew Hacking Lies With Renewed Vigor


Create the meme. And keep repeating it. Don’t worry, Americans don’t read, research and have the attention span of a gnat. They don’t question connections alleged as to Putin and Russia somehow affecting and throwing the election. Why would a voter care what Podesta’s emails contained or alleged? It’s preposterous and redefines specious. And your MSM question not and nothing. 

LIONEL PODCAST: Donald Trump Will Be A Great President With Obama Pathetically Ineffectual


Verity. Donald Trump will likely be one of the greatest Presidents of our republic. And Obama one of the most ineffectual. Meanwhile, Hillary apologists are trying to reconfigure the logic anent Trump’s appointees. They’ve nothing to say since abandoning the Russian hack bit.

  • As a trial lawyer I’m rather fond of the notion that when one makes an accusation he bears the burden of proof. As to the suggestion that the election was hacked by Russia or Russian agents or Putin or Kremlin operatives, there has been absolutely no evidence whatsoever of such.
  • Crazed Dems want to provoke war with Russia, claiming they launched an unproven cyber attack against the American franchise.

HERE’S HOW THE TED BAXTER SOCKPUPPET MEDIA WORK

PROLEGOMENON:
“The dog ate my homework” is an English expression purported to be a favorite excuse made by schoolchildren explaining their failure to turn in an assignment on time. The claim of a dog eating one’s homework is inherently suspect since it is both impossible for a teacher to disprove and conveniently absolves the student who gives that excuse of any blame. Although suspicious, the claim is not absolutely beyond possibility since dogs are known to eat—or chew on—bunches of paper. It has grown beyond the educational context, becoming a sarcastic rejoinder to a similarly glib or otherwise insufficient or implausible explanation for a failure in any context.
THE BODY:
(Insert any of the many stock pictures of Vladimir Putin’s atop his trusty steed.)

THE CONCLUSION:
When you blame the dog for eating your homework, you are making a fool of yourself on so many levels. First, you are giving too much credit to the dog. Russian hackers couldn’t have pull this off because they simply could not, as in unable to. Look at all the recent Russian “spy” scandals – from poisoning of Litvinenko in London to Anna Chapman, and many in between. All were botched operations run by clowns with some FSB credentials. Second, you’re not offering any proof of hacking, except that what it led to was not to your liking. Chinese hackers – it’s a different story: CIA had located an actual building from which an organized group of hackers operated, Chinese spies get arrested at Los Alamos, FBI, etc. on a regular basis. These guys are no joke, whereas “the Russians” actually are. And thirdly, by blaming some remote and vaguely defined group of unknown people without any discernible motivation for hacking such a fundamental American institution as Presidential Election, you are undermining the institution itself. And if you are really concerned about the possibility of hacking the Elections, you should first take a hard look at the security of the system guarding it. 

LIONEL PODCAST: Free Speech Under Attack: Deep State Promotes Fake News and False Flag Putin Election Hacking Myths


Prolegomenon. Let us begin with an immutable fact of human behavior, specifically contemporary American behavior. Americans simply hate the truth. The troublesome truth, the uncomfortable and (dare I remind you) the inconvenient truth. Truth that bristles and frightens and awakens and piques. Truth that confronts us with the lie of contemporary fable masked as history. History, as Tolstoy reminds us, would be a wonderful thing if only it were true. Truth would be a wonderful thing if only it were pleasant.

Clean up on aisle nine. Americans prefer sanitized reality with happy endings and controlled outcomes. We hate to be surprised and caught off guard. And we doubly hate to feel stupid and duped. And we will go through great lengths to control our reality. Just look at the complexity of our religions and mythology, our belief systems in astrology and psychics, media, shamans, priests, holy folk, name it. Locus of control is our only master. We hate the idea that we’ve no say in outcome and will gladly manufacture and reverse engineer reality to fit the comfortable matrix. Locus of control is the extent to which humans believe and trust they have power over events in their lives. And they hate to have that control security blanket disrupted. So much so that Americans turn to their sainted and retrofitted media platforms to reframe and readjust reality to comport and fit within the pleasantly tolerable.

Chrome wasn’t built in a day. Americans have come to think that broadcasting channels and platforms are the modality of news expression without thinking what that term even connotes. Today, it’s narrowcasting that compartmentalizes the news and view and perspective into the palatable and intellectually toothsome. Narrowcasting targets specific segments of the targeted public as defined by values, preferences, ideology or sympathies. It’s rooted in great respect as to the postmodern concept that the mass audience is extinct. The crowd has been retooled and downsized. Like-minded distortion and parochial delusion.

Intellectual seizure. Americans have developed a kata of sorts in combating news or ideas that confound and tend to destroy the warmth of misinformation and myth. Enter the conspiracy theory, perhaps the most effective tool in shutting down the intellectually troubling, especially when it hints and suggests governmental duplicity, complicity or deliberate neglect as to the presentation of truth as a platform. Being able to denounce a thought as a conspiracy theory allows the citizen to apply a self-defense choreography to avoid intellectual confrontation. And the history of the concept is worth note. But that requires attention paid.

Enter the theorem. Conspiracy theory is a term that was weaponized in the 60s by the CIA and is still used today as an effective tack to dissuade and distract. And for additional flair, throw in the tinfoil hat reference and you’re on your way as a Company dupe, thwarting active investigation by throwing up he classic intellectual road block. Americans love their news and lore and history neatly packaged amend presented in a tasty, intellectually digestible morsel. And whom have they used heretofore to present the lavish array of amuse-botches? That’s right, the mainstream media (MSM) now caught in the last throes of extinction. The meteor that hit their information planet and sent them off to enjoy the fate of the Pterosaur was the Internet along with an awakened public. It was their smelling salts. It roused hem from intellectual slumber. The Internet killed the media news star, with apologizes to the Ruggles.

LIONEL PODCAST: The Preposterous Farrago of Myth, Propaganda and Fantasy of UBL’s Capture and Dispatch

A farrago of nonsense. Behold the American exceptionalism meme, front and center. A Jerry Bruckheimer Production, if I’ve ever seen one. (And he’s been consulted in the past, as you well know. remember the Jessica Lynch saga?) Well, when it comes to the official narrative of dispatching UBL, it appears there’s another turd in the proverbial narrative punchbowl. Seymour Hersh wrote in essence that the UBL dispatch and capture is 100% Grade-A propagandist bullshit. And with that, the apparatchiks were summoned to appear en masse to trash Ol’ Sy. To the rescue came CNN’s national-security analyst and Obama apologist, Peter Bergen, who ripped Sy Hersh’s story, which ran in the London Review of Books, as a “farrago of nonsense that is contravened by a multitude of eyewitness accounts, inconvenient facts and simple common sense,” causing many in the media to run to their Funk and Wagnalls for the first time in decades. Thanks, CIA, er, CNN!

Why would the CIA lie?It’s all wrong,” claimed the untainted and objective observer former CIA deputy director Mike Morell told CBS News’ Charlie Rose as he pushed his own book. “I started reading the article last night, and I got a third of the way through because every sentence I was reading was wrong.” And what’s more, he never finished the article! This is so old.

The Bin Laden Raid Was A Work Of Fiction, And Barack Obama Should Immediately Resign

A strong headline but I commend to you Mr. Snyder’s bases for such. And in addition, please consider the following. Remember, the weaponization of the term conspiracy theory as this will invariably come up.

Bhutto’s Final Words. In a November 2, 2007, interview less than two months before she would be assassinated, Pakistan’s 11th Prime Minster Benazir Bhutto was asked by Al-Jazeera English reporter David Frost about a letter that she had sent to Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf. The letter outlined who she believed should be investigated in the event of her assassination. While giving her answer, she listed as one of the suspects a “key figure in security . . . a former military officer in Pakistan” who had dealings with, among others, “Omar Sheikh, the man who murdered Osama bin-Laden.” I know what you’re thinking: What would a Pakistani Prime Minster know, right?

But wait, there’s more. Remember the hot one about how Obama and his aids huddled in the situation room to watch UBL dispatched in real-time helmet-cam action. Well, not so fast Sparky! Seems that Hillary may now be eligible for the The Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award for this piece of primo acting. Remember, she’s watching nothing. If you believe Leon Panetta, the CIA chief.

“We had some observation of the approach there, but we did not have direct flow of information as to the actual conduct of the operation itself as they were going through the compound.” Leon Panetta, CIA Director

 

(Telegraph) — The head of the CIA admitted yesterday that there was no live video footage of the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound as further doubts emerged about the US version of events.

Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, revealed there was a 25 minute blackout during which the live feed from cameras mounted on the helmets of the US special forces was cut off.

A photograph released by the White House appeared to show the President and his aides in the situation room watching the action as it unfolded. In fact they had little knowledge of what was happening in the compound.

##

Mr Panetta said: “Once those teams went into the compound I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we really didn’t know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information.

“We had some observation of the approach there, but we did not have direct flow of information as to the actual conduct of the operation itself as they were going through the compound.”

##

Mr Panetta also told the network that the US Navy Seals, rather than Mr Obama, made the final decision to kill bin Laden. 

LIONEL PODCAST: Were the Boston Bombers Double Agents?

Dzhokhar “Jahar” Tsarnaev aka “Flash Bang,” younger bro to “Speed Bump”

Flashbang and Speedbump. The monikers of the Flying Tsaraev Brothers, reputed to have originated from WRKO and the inimitable Jerry Williams. They undoubtedly referred to the demise of the elder bro and the younger, who squirreled away in a boat during the greatest manhunt in recent history, roused from his perch through the invitation of an explosive canister.  This after having scrawled his manifesto on the side of a boat while a martial law beta test was in full swing.

I care not of this creep. I have no sympathy for Flash Bang or his mowed down bro. I don’t think he should receive the death penalty or anyone for that matter. His defense will be that he was lured by his elder frater through duress and coercion and the like. And while there are many conspiracists out there suggesting a host of possibilities including crisis reenactors and the like, I comment not on that and have available data or information on this. What I know is what was printed and reported by the media which the media now ignore altogether. Amazing, huh? But in the meantime we should never forget the horrors and inconceivable sadness that surviving family members and friends have suffered. I just have an insatiable curiosity and need for the truth.Martial law beta test, baby. Let me repeat and be not mistaken, my brothers and sisters, this was an experiment. This was to see how much Americans would endure. And the most pathetic of sights was to see once-proud Bostonians applaud the militarized police who let them out from their homes after cowing in the recesses of their homes to the apparent authority of militarized control measures. Even after 9/11, no one would dare shut down New York. Remember the extent of lockdown to capture two people. In a post-1033 world where we have now sadly become acclimated the sight of police dressed as military, nothing compared to the degree of force and firepower that were exhibited during the manhunt. Go back and look at the images today. It presaged the future. It portended the accepted introduction of military substitution for civilian law-enforcement. No one objected to the degree of the response. Whatever fear or appreciation we had for the notion of martial law evaporated in toto during this event. I still don’t think people truly understand the particular concerns that this event inspired so many liberty conscious Americans. Mission succesful, comrades. 

WTF, indeed. The Boston Globe among many sources quoted multiple sources that the FBI didn’t just get one warning from Russia about Tamerlan Tsarnaev (aka “Speed Bump”), they were in fact warned repeatedly. Always be suspect when the government fails to overreact. When they’re careful and cautious and circumspect. Something’s up.

Russian authorities contacted the US government with concerns about Tamerlan Tsarnaev not once but “multiple’’ times, including an alert it sent after he was first investigated by FBI agents in Boston, raising new questions about whether the FBI should have paid more attention to the suspected Boston Marathon bomber, US senators briefed on the inves­tigation said Tuesday.

The FBI has previously said it interviewed Tsarnaev in early 2011 after it was initially contacted by the ­Russians. In their review, completed in summer 2011, the bureau found no ­evidence that Tsarnaev was a threat. “The FBI requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from” Russia, the agency said last week.

Following a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday, Senator Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, said he believed that Russia alerted the United States about Tsarnaev in “multiple contacts,” including at least once since October 2011.

We were warned. In fact, the New York Times reported that the “F.B.I. did not tell the Boston police about the 2011 warning from Russia about Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the two brothers accused in the Boston Marathon bombings, the city’s police chief said Thursday during the first public Congressional hearing on the terrorist attack.”

But wait, there’s more. It gets better. The Independent reported that “[i]n September 2011, Russia’s FSB sent a cable to the CIA restating their initial warning, and a second note on Tsarnaev was entered on the TECS system, but his name was misspelled ‘Tsarnayev’.”

Now, the money shot. Could the Brothers Tsarnaev have been, in fact, US intel agents cajoled and seduced into working with jihadist terrorists after going undercover behind the lines within their networks? According to at least one article by the Israeli-based intelligence and military news blog DEBKAFile (referenced here) the answer is ABSOLUTELY! It’s time to go deep, kids.

The big questions buzzing over Boston Bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev have a single answer: It emerged in the 102 tense hours between the twin Boston Marathon bombings Monday, April 15 – which left three dead, 180 injured and a police officer killed at MIT – and Dzohkhar’s capture Friday, April 19 in Watertown.

The conclusion reached by DEBKAfile’s counterterrorism and intelligence sources is that the brothers were double agents, hired by US and Saudi intelligence to penetrate the Wahhabi jihadist networks which, helped by Saudi financial institutions, had spread across the restive Russian Caucasian.

Instead, the two former Chechens betrayed their mission and went secretly over to the radical Islamist networks.

By this tortuous path, the brothers earned the dubious distinction of being the first terrorist operatives to import al Qaeda terror to the United States through a winding route outside the Middle East – the Caucasus.

This broad region encompasses the autonomous or semi-autonomous Muslim republics of Dagestan, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Chechnya, North Ossetia and Karachyevo-Cherkesiya, most of which the West has never heard of.

Moscow however keeps these republics on a tight military and intelligence leash, constantly putting down violent resistance by the Wahhabist cells, which draw support from certain Saudi sources and funds from the Riyadh government for building Wahhabist mosques and schools to disseminate the state religion of Saudi Arabia. [e.s.]

The Saudis feared that their convoluted involvement in the Caucasus would come embarrassingly to light when a Saudi student was questioned about his involvement in the bombng attacks while in a Boston hospital with badly burned hands.

Do I have to say it? Saudi Arabia AGAIN! Remember, while the Jurassic media went ballistic on Bibi and his admonitions against Iran, Kerry met with the Saudis who I believe are the “Al Sharpton” of the Middle East. Nothing sticks to them.

One more time. As Global Research reported in May of 2013, “It is clear that Russia’s arrest and expulsion of two CIA agents who were trying to recruit members of the Russian intelligence service fighting against Salafist separatists in the Caucasus is part of a Russian mopping-up operation directed at the CIA’s decades-long covert support for terrorists operating in the Northern and Southern Caucasus.” Anyone?

The media don’t get it yet. When a refrigerator or freezer breaks you don’t notice it until the meat spoils and the ice cream melts. That’s the Jurassic media for you. They simply don’t see what has happened. They’re too busy plunging rulers into snow banks, talking about dresses and treating you like a child. Join me in the revolution. And, no, that’s not just an expression.

LIONEL PODCAST: How the CIA Weaponized the Term “Conspiracy Theory”

“CIA Document 1035-960” was released in response to a 1976 FOIA request by the New York Times. The memorandum delimits a detailed series of actions and techniques for “countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.” It provided the blueprint of discrediting any idea or theory deemed unpalatable or embarrassing with the blanket and dismissive pejorative “conspiracy theory.”

Proem. Nothing will grind to a halt a discussion or disquisition quicker than calling it a “conspiracy theory.” So how did this come to be? Have we always enjoyed this distinction? Or rather, this almost patellar rejection of anything deemed to be the product of an illegal confederation.

It’s the third rail of political discussion. Kryptonite. A mine field. Drop the topic altogether. Don’t go there. Bring up a verboten or sensitive topic and watch what happens if it’s dubbed a conspiracy theory by an audience. All discussions ceases and you are a de facto nut, a loon, whose opinion is baseless and motivation (as well as sanity) is suspect. So where and when did this conspiracy phobia emerge? Was it always a part of our inquiry-killing repertoire? And what exactly is wrong with a conspiracy or theory of one? There are scores of convicted defendants warehoused today for conspiracies. How successful would they have been in seeking to have their convictions overturned by saying “This was just a conspiracy theory!” No, we’ve changed the meaning of the charge. It’s synonymous with insane, baseless, paranoid and baseless. And the transmutation of terminology was deliberate and by design. Courtesy of your CIA.

Your forebears would be livid. Professor Lance deHaven-Smith in Conspiracy Theory in America details “how the Founders’ hard-nosed realism about the likelihood of elite political misconduct—articulated in the Declaration of Independence—has been replaced by today’s blanket condemnation of conspiracy beliefs as ludicrous by definition.” It was ostensibly their deep-seated and well-founded suspicions that gave way to the inspiration and motivation to create our republic, borne from . . . you guessed it, conspiracy theories.

The weaponization of a term. In Conspiracy Theory”: Foundations of a Weaponized Term Professor James F. Tracy explains accordingly. And remember, the CIA under the Allen Dulles was the beginning of the transformation of the agency from intelligence-gathering to that of covert operations. Remember as well that Dulles, no fan of Kennedy, was positioned on the Warren Commission, which today is synonymous with whitewash and distortion.

Conspiracy theory’s acutely negative connotations may be traced to liberal historian Richard Hofstadter’s well-known fusillades against the “New Right.” Yet it was the Central Intelligence Agency that likely played the greatest role in effectively “weaponizing” the term. In the groundswell of public skepticism toward the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA sent a detailed directive to all of its bureaus. Titled “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” the dispatch played a definitive role in making the “conspiracy theory” term a weapon to be wielded against almost any individual or group calling the government’s increasingly clandestine programs and activities into question.

Sound familiar? But even today the same techniques are employed, specifically this favorite argument: Conspiracy on a large scale would be impossible to conceal in the United States. Its synthetic reasoning and the transmission of such as a potent meme to this day serve to divert, obscure and redirect valid considerations and review of critical issues. And along with knee-jerk and Pavlovian false claims of racism and to a lesser extent homophobia, all discussion stops, valid areas of inquiry are sidelined and shelved, discussion ditched and sanity reevaluated. The history of the construction of his meme is mandatory for any truth-loving American who cherishes historical verity.

The latest introduction of the dread theory. So, do you think that conspiracy theory as pejorative weapon of distraction is limited only to truthers, birthers and vaxxers? Think again. Behold the rudiments of distraction.

The Crucifixion of Naomi Wolf for Conspiracy Theory Heresy

Who’s afraid of Naomi Wolf? The NYPD apparently. Here she is arrested in 2011 at Occupy Wall Street for standing lawfully on the sidewalk wearing an evening gown. I didn’t even know that was against the law.

This is the way you treat the author of “Vagina: A New Biography”?! Yep. Naomi Wolf suggested the following on her Facebook page infra. It dares to call into question the authenticity of portions of the ISIS beheading narrative. It happens to repeat the hypotheses and theories of many others. It’s not particularly novel or earth-shattering to you and me, lovers of truth. But it is to the benighted and the profoundly nescient. And who might that be? The media, of course.

This was followed by her clarification in view of the reaction Wolf received. She had to back up and back down, spew apologias and pretend to be contrite if she dared hurt anyone’s feelings. This, of course, is the requisite reaction to anything that may be sound or valid. Just ask Joe Biden who apologized for speaking the truth anent ISIS paymasters. You see, even Joe can’t go off the official storyline. That’s a no-no, Joe-Joe.

My letter to some news outlets:

“Dear Sir or Madam,

I see that the Sydney Morning Herald, Talking Points Memo and the Guardian are all addressing the fact that I, and my citizen journalism community on facebook, has asked for normal journalistic sourcing on the ISIS story.

Some of the coverage distorts the nature of my questions.

I am not asserting that the ISIS videos have been staged. No one can yet know anything for sure about the ISIS videos as they have simply not been independently analyzed, according to the news outlets which we have contacted for more information about the verification process. I am simply reporting what we have had confirmed by public editors of several newspapers: the fact that the videos have only one source and have not been independently verified. This second verification is – or used to be — a normal part of news investigation.

I certainly sincerely apologize if one of my posts was insensitively worded. I have taken that one down.
But that does not mean I don’t stand by the need for all journalists to have two independent sources confirming a major story before they release it as confirmed.

More importantly for journalism and for the long haul facing us as a planet as we react to these videos: I am not saying the ISIS beheading videos are not authentic. I am not saying they are not records of terrible atrocities. I am saying that they are not yet independently confirmed by two sources as authentic, which any Journalism School teaches, and the single source for several of them, SITE, which received half a million dollars in government funding in 2004, and which is the only source cited for several, has conflicts of interest that should be disclosed to readers of news outlets.

Why is this even controversial? There are plenty of reasons for the normal vetting process of news to take place here, as in any news story. There could be plenty of reasons that a violent extremist group may wish to manipulate what it communicates to the rest of the world, and the job of newspapers is independently to verify a news story that is driving massive change — boots on the ground — airstrikes — and most worrying to me, lasting suppression of critical liberties such as the bills that just passed in Australia threatening all journalists there with ten years in prison for national security reporting. I hope, finally, that the nation of my/our request for proper, normal news sourcing is clear.

I will add: a hundred thousand Iraqis and four thousand young and brave American men and women, US soldiers, died terrible deaths — deaths as awful as any depicted right now in these videos — because American reporters and editors did not check on a news stream full of assertions that turned out to be straight-out false, about WMD. At that time reporters and editors simply took dictation from government sources. The false story made it into several major respected news outlets, including one of our most august newspapers, New York Times.

And we rushed to war.

We are here again. It is of course terrible to see videos purporting to show assassinations; it is terrible that anyone is assassinated anywhere. But if we don’t do our jobs as journalists and citizens and check all the news on the basis of which we are being rushed into war — and on the basis of which Australia and Britain are being stripped drastically and speedily of historic freedoms, — then many worse things will happen to children and old people, and to our brave young men and women in that part of the world, than a hundred thousand videos will be able to document. Terrible deaths may be ahead for many innocent people, probably out of camera range, many many multiples of the deaths on the videos I am seeking to double source now, if journalists and editors do not independently verify the news now.
And it will be our fault, as journalists and editors. That is why we should do our job and double source the news.

Thank you — Naomi Wolf”

The gatekeepers speak. As an example of the heat directed towards Wolf, look to the scathing attack she was handed by none other than the literary titan and journalistic crown jewel Vox. Ouch.
Note also that Wolf has issued her response and clarification to the farfetched notion that what we think we know, we may not. That what is presented may require independent verification and dogged journalism. I mean, imagine that! What could ever possess this woman to think for a moment that what we’re told may not be the truth, that it might be exaggerated or obfuscated or bowdlerized or skewed? That something might be used deliberately to enrage and motivate a particular ideology or course of action.

Can you believe this? And while this may fall on deaf ears, questioning facts is not meant as disrespect for a family. But, with all due respect, even if it is, so what? Any inquiry and query based on suspicion or skepticism can and will be viewed as disrespect to someone — the government, society, America, whatever.

The Hegelian Dialectic personified. Klein also noted on Facebook: “The US benefits from … us being SO DAMN SCARED so that our intelligence agencies can take away the last of our freedoms on behalf of corporate interests the way intelligence agencies in the West are doing all over … Britain, Canada, Australia, next NZ … so there you are.”

I’m sorry, but is this supposed to be insane? This is precisely the goal of any government. Haven’t you read the papers, studied history? As Rahm Emanuel now famously put it: “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

And notice that she even goes so far to question the who the folks are of the website SITE as did another dread “conspiracy theorist” of renown Alex Jones did through his website, that, by the by, is replete with source references, citation and links.

Since mid-August 2014 major news organizations have conveyed videos allegedly found online by the SITE Intelligence Group.Unsurprisingly the same media have failed to closely interrogate what the private company actually is and whether the material it promotes should be accepted as genuine.

The Search for International Terrorist Entities Intelligence Group (SITE) was co-founded by Rita Katz in 2001.

In 2003 Katz authored a book, Terrorist Hunter: The Extraordinary Story of a Woman Who Went Undercover to Infiltrate the Radical Islamic Groups Operating in America, which she published using the pseudonym, “Anonymous.”

The CIA manipulating videos?! I’m shocked! The CIA’s already and repeatedly admitted to forging and conspiring to forge a host of videos in the past. This is nothing new. Not to us, that us. The “us,” who reads the truth. Damn! That word again. Truth.

During planning for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the CIA’s Iraq Operations Group kicked around a number of ideas for discrediting Saddam Hussein in the eyes of his people.

One was to create a video purporting to show the Iraqi dictator having sex with a teenage boy, according to two former CIA officials familiar with the project.

“It would look like it was taken by a hidden camera,” said one of the former officials. “Very grainy, like it was a secret videotaping of a sex session.”

The idea was to then “flood Iraq with the videos,” the former official said.

And you certainly must know of the workings of the Rand Corporation, especially in this exercise. (Just pretend you do.) In “Why the Iraqi Resistance to the Coalition Invasion Was So Weak,” you get a peak into the incredible imagination of these folks.

“According to histories of the 2003 invasion, the single most effective ‘information warfare’ project, which originated in the Pentagon, was to send faxes and e-mails to Iraqi unit commanders as the fighting began, telling them their situation was hopeless, to round up their tanks, artillery and men, and go home,” the article states. “Many did.”

Naomi’s not the first to question “ISIS” videos. The Telegraph reported that video of James Foley’s execution may have actually been staged, with the actual murder taking place off-camera. Experts noted that no blood could be seen, even though the knife is seen drawn across the neck area at least six times. “Forensic analysis of the footage of the journalist’s death has suggested that the British jihadist in the film may have been the frontman rather than the killer.”

“After enhancements, the knife can be seen to be drawn across the upper neck at least six times, with no blood evidence to the point the picture fades to black,” the analysis said.

Sounds allegedly made by Foley do not appear consistent with what may be expected.

During Foley’s speech, there appears to be a blip which could indicate the journalist had to repeat a line.

One expert commissioned to examine the footage was reported as saying: “I think it has been staged. My feeling is that the execution may have happened after the camera was stopped.”

However the company, which requested anonymity, did not reach a definitive answer.

It concluded: “No one is disputing that at some point an execution occurred.”

 So, what’s the beef with what she said? What? I’ll answer the question. Nothing.

The Transitive Property of Terror: IS = ISIS = ISIL = Al Nusra Front = Tanzim Qa’edat Al-Jihad fi Bilad Al-Sham = Daʿesh = Jabhat al-Nusra = FSA = al Qaeda = CIA = Saudi Arabia

I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.

All right, kids, from the top. They are one and the same. Different sons, same mother. same ideology, same goal. same pretextual significance. The cornerstone of Hegelian Dialectics. The hodgepodge and amalgam of funny sounding names you’ll never master or care to. And certainly not the American mainstream media. And look who’s front and center, collaborating with the rat Pack of terrorism. Mr. Potter. Johnny Boy. You will never be able to so much as grasp the complexity of the con unless and until you embrace the fact that it is indeed a con. From Charlie Wilson’s war to Zbigniew Brzezinski and al Qaeda and Taliban.

Even the Gipper minded not sidling up with the enemy of my enemy.

Referred to lovingly and euphemistically as “Freedom Fighters,” Ronnie Reagan meets Afghan Mujahideen leaders at the White House. See how easy that is?

The following is an excellent tutorial and bill of particulars as to some of the abecedarian basics of the way it be, as the kids are wont to say. And you’d think that just one media type, just one, would see it wise to explain the rudiments.

America Created Al-Qaeda and the ISIS Terror Group

By Garikai Chengu

Much like Al Qaeda, the Islamic State (ISIS) is made-in-the-USA, an instrument of terror designed to divide and conquer the oil-rich Middle East and to counter Iran’s growing influence in the region.

The fact that the United States has a long and torrid history of backing terrorist groups will surprise only those who watch the news and ignore history.

The CIA first aligned itself with extremist Islam during the Cold War era. Back then, America saw the world in rather simple terms: on one side, the Soviet Union and Third World nationalism, which America regarded as a Soviet tool; on the other side, Western nations and militant political Islam, which America considered an ally in the struggle against the Soviet Union.

The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan, General William Odom recently remarked, “by any measure the U.S. has long used terrorism. In 1978-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the U.S. would be in violation.”

During the 1970′s the CIA used the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt as a barrier, both to thwart Soviet expansion and prevent the spread of Marxist ideology among the Arab masses. The United States also openly supported Sarekat Islam against Sukarno in Indonesia, and supported the Jamaat-e-Islami terror group against Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in Pakistan. Last but certainly not least, there is Al Qaeda.

Lest we forget, the CIA gave birth to Osama Bin Laden and breastfed his organization during the 1980′s. Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, told the House of Commons that Al Qaeda was unquestionably a product of Western intelligence agencies. Mr. Cook explained that Al Qaeda, which literally means an abbreviation of “the database” in Arabic, was originally the computer database of the thousands of Islamist extremists, who were trained by the CIA and funded by the Saudis, in order to defeat the Russians in Afghanistan.

America’s relationship with Al Qaeda has always been a love-hate affair. Depending on whether a particular Al Qaeda terrorist group in a given region furthers American interests or not, the U.S. State Department either funds or aggressively targets that terrorist group. Even as American foreign policy makers claim to oppose Muslim extremism, they knowingly foment it as a weapon of foreign policy.

The Islamic State is its latest weapon that, much like Al Qaeda, is certainly backfiring. ISIS recently rose to international prominence after its thugs began beheading American journalists. Now the terrorist group controls an area the size of the United Kingdom.

In order to understand why the Islamic State has grown and flourished so quickly, one has to take a look at the organization’s American-backed roots. The 2003 American invasion and occupation of Iraq created the pre-conditions for radical Sunni groups, like ISIS, to take root. America, rather unwisely, destroyed Saddam Hussein’s secular state machinery and replaced it with a predominantly Shiite administration. The U.S. occupation caused vast unemployment in Sunni areas, by rejecting socialism and closing down factories in the naive hope that the magical hand of the free market would create jobs. Under the new U.S.-backed Shiite regime, working class Sunni’s lost hundreds of thousands of jobs. Unlike the white Afrikaners in South Africa, who were allowed to keep their wealth after regime change, upper class Sunni’s were systematically dispossessed of their assets and lost their political influence. Rather than promoting religious integration and unity, American policy in Iraq exacerbated sectarian divisions and created a fertile breading ground for Sunni discontent, from which Al Qaeda in Iraq took root.

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) used to have a different name: Al Qaeda in Iraq. After 2010 the group rebranded and refocused its efforts on Syria.

There are essentially three wars being waged in Syria: one between the government and the rebels, another between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and yet another between America and Russia. It is this third, neo-Cold War battle that made U.S. foreign policy makers decide to take the risk of arming Islamist rebels in Syria, because Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, is a key Russian ally. Rather embarrassingly, many of these Syrian rebels have now turned out to be ISIS thugs, who are openly brandishing American-made M16 Assault rifles.

****

ISIS is not merely an instrument of terror used by America to topple the Syrian government; it is also used to put pressure on Iran.

The last time Iran invaded another nation was in 1738. Since independence in 1776, the U.S. has been engaged in over 53 military invasions and expeditions. Despite what the Western media’s war cries would have you believe, Iran is clearly not the threat to regional security, Washington is. An Intelligence Report published in 2012, endorsed by all sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies, confirms that Iran ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Truth is, any Iranian nuclear ambition, real or imagined, is as a result of American hostility towards Iran, and not the other way around.

America is using ISIS in three ways: to attack its enemies in the Middle East, to serve as a pretext for U.S. military intervention abroad, and at home to foment a manufactured domestic threat, used to justify the unprecedented expansion of invasive domestic surveillance.

By rapidly increasing both government secrecy and surveillance, Mr. Obama’s government is increasing its power to watch its citizens, while diminishing its citizens’ power to watch their government. Terrorism is an excuse to justify mass surveillance, in preparation for mass revolt.

****

In fact, more than seventy American companies and individuals have won up to $27 billion in contracts for work in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan over the last three years, according to a recent study by the Center for Public Integrity. According to the study, nearly 75 per cent of these private companies had employees or board members, who either served in, or had close ties to, the executive branch of the Republican and Democratic administrations, members of Congress, or the highest levels of the military.

In 1997, a U.S. Department of Defense report stated, “the data show a strong correlation between U.S. involvement abroad and an increase in terrorist attacks against the U.S.” Truth is, the only way America can win the “War On Terror” is if it stops giving terrorists the motivation and the resources to attack America. Terrorism is the symptom; American imperialism in the Middle East is the cancer. Put simply, the War on Terror is terrorism; only, it is conducted on a much larger scale by people with jets and missiles.

You’re welcome.