Archives for the year of: 2015

The Novice

July 1, 2015 //

The Novice

There was a novice Hand Game player who showed great promise. He also was a soul of good intentions. With his beginning understanding of this game, he sought one of his family’s medicine men, to ask for a ‘power’ of ‘protection’ when he played.

He knew enough to approach this teacher in the correct way and said what it was he wished to acquire. The medicine man told him to return in a few days. When he did so, the medicine man handed him a necklace with a tiny bit of a buckskin bag attached and told him ‘wear this when you play.’

As it happened, this young man also had a young friend in dire trouble, his luck had been persistently failing him. Motivated from good intentions, he handed his necklace to this friend and told him how he’d received it. This true friend of the young man was exceedingly grateful for the ‘protection.’

But the friend’s luck didn’t get better, it got by far worse. But knowing he could trust the source of the ‘protection’ he’d received, he told himself he only needed to believe more strongly in the protection and so it went like that, his luck kept going downhill, rapidly, and he kept telling himself he only needed to believe more strongly until all was a perfect disaster.

When the novice Hand Game player checked in with his dear friend, to see how things might be going, he was shocked. Returning to the medicine man, he explained what he had done and the result.

The medicine man took awhile and finally spoke to the novice.

“My boy” he said “The Hand Game is a game of sorcery. When you asked for protection as a player, I provided something specific to that. It is a bit of severe bad luck in your necklace I gave you immunity to, to ward off the seers from the opposing side. It is meant to damage their sight when attempting to see through you. It was never meant to protect you otherwise, it is only meant to protect bones you’re hiding, from the divination. It was intended to destroy another person’s luck.”

Life in Indian Country

Categories Author

Reuters & A Fixed Verdict

June 24, 2015 //

David Kenneth Roy Thomson, 3rd Baron Thomson of Fleet is a British peer and Canadian media magnate. He is chairman of Thomson Reuters. He currently resides in Toronto, Ontario. Thomson is listed as one of the wealthiest people in the world with an estimated net worth of 22 billion

When named chairman of Thomson Corp., he expressed the desire to become more involved in its business. That didn’t happen. Today, much of his attention is focused on real estate and currency trading

Today David (his family fortune estimated at 25.6 billion in 2015) is the figurehead chairman of the merged Thomson-Reuters. One wonders, as one of the world’s wealthiest men plays a somewhat pseudo but real life Monopoly game’s minor role, while managing real estate for the super-rich, that and a hobby of trading currency, how it is his majority owned media conglomerate has become the playground of western intelligence agencies information operations and he apparently has precisely nothing to say about how his business is run; when feeding world class geopolitical lies to the western democracies electorates. Perhaps we can draw a parallel with Louis XVI of France, a man who preferred tinkering with clocks and left his kingdom to be run by less than worthy minions. Should the baron be paying closer attention to what he apparently has no say in? That is to say Reuters playing a geopolitical sleight-of-hand that does incredibly nasty and foolish things pushing our very small world to an ever more dangerous brink:

EXCLUSIVE – International tribunal looks like best chance for MH17 justice – Dutch sources

* Dutch public demand action on Malaysian jet downed over East Ukraine

* Of 298 passengers and crew killed, two-thirds were Dutch

* Main challenge is to get Ukrainian rebel and Russian cooperation

* Tribunal could put Russia on the spot at U.N. Security Council

AMSTERDAM, June 23 (Reuters) – The Netherlands is discussing with its allies an international tribunal to prosecute those suspected of downing a Malaysian airliner over rebel-held eastern Ukraine last year, sources familiar with the discussions have told Reuters

Ok, so Russia wanted an IMPARTIAL international authority investigating MH 17 from the get go. What’s wrong with this picture? Reuters goes on:

A trial in Ukraine itself appears a non-starter, since the pro-Russian rebels are as unlikely to attend as the Russian government, which sympathises with and influences them but strenuously denies involvement in the incident or the rebellion. And, while Dutch law provides a form of universal jurisdiction for war crimes, the downing of a civilian airliner during a civil war, possibly by mistake, is not a good legal fit. Malaysia, the flight’s destination, is even farther from the crime scene. Other legal options are still being considered, the sources said, but an international tribunal, rather than a domestic court, is seen as providing the greatest chance of success.

Well, that’s interesting, a sort of ‘we venue shopped and nothing looks good enough’, as well not mentioning the Ukrainian authority at Kiev should be disqualified because that regime is a suspect but instead Reuters is insisting the ‘rebels’ wouldn’t attend proceedings in Kiev without mentioning the ‘rebels’ (or for that matter, Russians) couldn’t possibly attend in what would clearly be a beyond biased or absolutely hostile jurisdiction with a monumental conflict of interest. And why is a Dutch court with a principle of universal jurisdiction ‘not a good legal fit’ ?? ‘Not a good legal fit’ is a broad statement, with no attending explanation. Is it because some courts cannot be depended on to arrive at predetermined conclusions? And then we are informed:

For now, the investigation into the crash continues, and Dutch prosecutors have said they do not expect to issue indictments until after the Dutch Safety Board releases a report in October detailing how the plane was downed. But the prosecutors have narrowed their focus to the theory that the plane was shot down by a Russian-built BUK surface-to-air missile fired from an area held by pro-Russian forces

So, ‘the prosecutors’ (who appear to be afraid of their own courts) are holding to a line that has been largely built on social media ‘evidence’ that is easily debunked but this fact of discredited narrative is never reported on by Reuters (or any of the other large western corporate media.) But then you have a Dutch journalist questions how it is the Ukrainian authorities (Ukraine is a suspect in the downing of MH 17) are able to launder the fact it is actually Ukraine running the investigation under color of Dutch authority, and what is more, this Dutch cover authority is absolutely uninterested in eye-witnesses who’ve stepped forward when their accounts do not fit the Western press narrative. The Dutch journalist consequently goes to Russian media with an account Western media refuses to cover…

…and what is worse, the Dutch cover authority has actually advertised for witnesses that fit the western press narrative because these are witnesses they’ve not been able to find. Here Reuters claims these (to now) non-existent witnesses should meet the Dutch (cover) investigators’ “lead scenario”, a Russian or ‘rebel’ Buk surface to air missile downed MH 17, the most far fetched of possibilities. When it comes to advertising for witnesses custom fit to meet a certain scenario, this is inviting false or ‘rewarded’ testimony. Now, back to the Reuters ‘exclusive’ on the proposed international tribunal and where the ‘nuance’ is lost:

But since an international court would require backing from the U.N. Security Council, Russia would be forced either to acquiesce or to use its veto and risk being seen as the main obstacle to justice in a mass killing of civilians

What the Reuters reporter fails to inform his readers is, Russia could be placed in an impossible position in a case where Security Council resolutions are routinely politicized by, and often fail to pass on account of proposed language. If the resolution were, for instance, to demand any United Nations tribunal created require ‘interested parties’ (e.g. Ukraine) be integral to the process and have a say in any ‘finding of fact’, or demand the much politicized and prejudiced ‘Dutch investigation’ be a basis on which the tribunal proceeds, the entire process becomes a propaganda exercise in what would become just another iteration of conviction by media with little regard for any element of truth. As a matter of fact, this is exactly what the Reuters article has set out to do. And then we have the real ‘kick truth in the teeth’ for a conclusion:

The closest analogy might be the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, when Pan Am flight 103 was blown out of the sky over Scotland, killing all 243 people onboard. Two Libyan secret service agents were handed over by Libya’s late leader Muammar Gaddafi under the pressure of broad economic sanctions. They were put on trial in the Netherlands under Scottish law, and one was convicted

Contrast the (preceding) Reuters conclusion to what is common knowledge in intelligence circles but certainly will not be pursued by the intelligence assets employed at Reuters:

^ The retired officer – of assistant chief constable rank or higher – has testified that the CIA planted the tiny fragment of circuit board crucial in convicting a Libyan for the 1989 mass murder of 270 people

The article (linked to the screenshot, above) goes on to state:

The officer, who was a member of the Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland, is supporting earlier claims by a former CIA agent that his bosses “wrote the script” to incriminate Libya

That whistle-blow went nowhere because of a geopolitical predetermination, where out of control and by far too powerful or rogue intelligence agencies manufacture the evidence, to insure prefabricated outcomes and where officials with a vested interest in their own survival do not challenge what amounts to ‘predestination’ irrespective of real justice. Just as it is intended the prefabricated case against Russia will be rammed through whilst perpetrating a world class lie on the western democracies electorates; ‘justifying’ the transition of a recently created ‘rapid reaction force’ from 4,000 to 40,000 troops on Russia’s frontiers.

Who benefits?

Western corporate oligarchy, plain and simple, with a roll call of long familiar names: Lockheed-Martin in 1st place, Boeing in 2nd and BAE Systems of Britain in 3rd … add your favorite here _______________ or example given, Raytheon’s interceptor missile sales to Poland, with Raytheon benefiting from the NATO build-up on Russia’s borders.

A report here cites General James Cartwright, who was elected to a paid position on Raytheon’s board of directors while serving on the Defense Policy Board. Admiral Gary Roughead also served on the Defense Policy Board while joining the board of Northrop Grumman.

Eighty percent of generals retiring from 2004 to 2008 took these sort of employment positions, according to a separate Boston Globe investigation. And the fact many of the Pentagon’s generals believe in literal Armageddon as a matter of their extreme ‘Christian Dominion’ cult belief certainly can’t help with any future sane decision making.

Insofar as supportive media, Thomson-Reuters plays a powerful role in intelligence agency information operations promoting geopolitical tensions benefiting the military-industrial (and ‘associates’ e.g. Chevron, Barrick Gold, et al, add nausea) stocks from Frankfurt to London to Montreal to Wall Street. All the while our ‘billionaire Baron’ Thomson plays Monopoly like Louis XVI tinkered with clocks … with his ’empire minions’ busy promoting potentially deadly geopolitical tensions, perhaps a bit too easily pointing to World War III. Would it make a difference whether ‘The Baron’ knows what’s actually going on with his media conglomerate? Probably not. How is it these corrupt people have acquired such an immense and perverted power, exercised with near total impunity? How is it no authority stands up to this? Ask yourself.

Black Boxes, Dark Arts & Geopolitics

Economics & Counterinsurgency

A Sociopaths & Democracy Project

Tags Reuters, Thomson Reuters

Categories information operations

Litmus Test

June 20, 2015 //

So, WikiLeaks has begun releasing the ‘Saudi Cables’ and wouldn’t you know it, that comes the very next day after Saudi Arabia has begun a serious process of ‘entente cordiale’ with Russia. A truly ‘whaddaya know’ moment. I could leave the entire subject there but, some people would appreciate the facts spelled out.

Per part two of a recent, preceding post at this site, Truth Jockeys, it is noted there had been a sea change in the ruling family of Saudi Arabia this past year, where at the beginning of 2014, with the rise of Islamic State, the Prince Bandar Sultan (American neocon aligned) faction that had long controlled Saudi Arabia’s intelligence and external security apparatus, after decades of doing CIA dirty work, had finally begun to be put out of business. The CIA’s brain-child (what became Prince Bandar’s pet project) and asset but now seriously compromised al-Qaida, represents a functional relationship that suddenly vanishes like a vapor evaporates. By now, the CIA no longer has Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency to launder its operational objectives incorporating Salafist militia, a habit finally having gone horrifically wrong with the birth of Islamic State, a very real existential threat to the Saudi kingdom.

This not so small development combines with another recent geo-political change, Obama’s beginning thaw with Iran (initially, the nuclear issues to be set aside.) Obviously the Saudis have had an up close and personal encounter with reality, face to face as they are rounding up returned Salafist veterans of Iraq & Syria, for execution:

“the royal orders were a clear message to Saudi fighters, civilians and military alike, principally in Syria, but also in Iraq, Lebanon, and other places. It meant that a harsh fate awaits them if they decided to come back home. To avoid the grim destiny and severe punishment, they had to remain outside the borders and continue their mission until they perish or get dispersed in other fighting arenas, much like the first contingent of Arab Afghan fighters and those who emerged in Iraq after 2003, in Lebanon after the Nahr al-Bared war at the end of 2007, and those currently in Syria following the agreement between Saudi intelligence chief Bandar bin Sultan and former CIA chief David Petraeus in the summer of 2012″ [the link may be slow loading via internet archive]

What would the Saudi king’s message have been to Putin? ‘Ok, so we understand we cannot trust the USA to have our back, it’s a bitter lesson. We’ll help you kill off the CIA’s Salafist insurgencies (uh, sorry for facilitating that) plaguing Russia and its border states and you will work to keep a resurgent Iran off our back, understanding there is no love lost there .. and by the way, how can we help with the Iranians killing off Islamic State in Iraq?’ Or something along those lines.

And the very next day, following this meeting, WikiLeaks begins releasing the ‘Saudi Diplomatic Cables’ and one of the first picked up in the Western press concerns Saudi dirty tricks campaigns in Iran. Huh. Whaddaya know bout that.

The litmus test will be, whether the Saudi cables released detail the Petraeus-Brennan CIA cooperation-coordination with Prince Bandar’s Saudi intelligence, utilizing Salafist militia (since 2012) to undermine Assad with resulting rise of Islamic State and blow-back into Iraq:

“Frequently the man who carried out dirty jobs, Bandar bin Sultan surrounded himself with strict regulations in relation to the royal family and its allies, especially the US. It should be remembered that Bandar was absent from major political decisions on more than four occasions since being appointed as general secretary of the National Security Council in 2006. His absence each time was due to a conflict within the royal family or the failure of a mission warranting the suspension of his political activity. His return in July 2012, alongside former CIA Director David Petraeus, was his final bet on the success of his political future

“Bandar had been bold enough to invest all his cards, including al-Qaeda, to win the deal of his life by overthrowing the Syrian regime. However, a royal order issued on February 3 criminalizing all Saudi fighters, civilians and military, was an indirect announcement of the failure of Bandar’s mission and the need to get him entirely out of the picture. The period following the royal decree concerning the fighters was merely in preparation for the royal decree ending his political career”
[the link may be slow loading via internet archive]

If these facts are not revealed in the released cables, the finger can be pointed squarely at WikiLeaks for implementing a USA intelligence (or possibly MOSSAD) post-Putin meeting retaliatory attack on Saudi Arabia, as a warning against mending relations with Russia (never was there a greater empire stooge in this one man’s assessment, than WikiLeaks’ Assange.)

Update 30 January 2017: What had the Saudi cables revealed concerning the CIA-Petraeus-Saudi intelligence-Bandar bin Sultan known cooperation with al Qaida in Syria nearly two years on WikiLeaks publishing? Answer: Nothing. Let me spell it out: N O T H I N G.

Truth Jockeys

WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies

Tags Islamic State, Saudi Arabia, Saudi Cables, WikiLeaks

Categories CIA

No Snowflake in an Avalanche

June 19, 2015 //

Review of No Snowflake in an Avalanche by Mikey Weinstein, originally posted to amazon.com in 2012 –

This book is a damning indictment of the cowardice of men in leadership, a testament to the courage and sacrifice of those they presume to lead. For anyone who’d thought a nascent and growing extreme fundamentalism in the USA merely a threat, this book should make them think again and should rightfully frighten and galvanize to action anyone concerned a cult within our military can both: break the mentality of, and train a young officer for future assignment to launch nuclear weapons.

Where to begin? I could write essays on multiple subjects of peril this book has only scratched the surface of, yet that scratch bleeds profusely throughout its pages. It may seem odd to some that, for me, the most striking and empathetic passages of the book is a wife and mother with Multiple Sclerosis surrendering her dream of a life as uncomplicated as possible, as a matter of principle, giving up her pursuit of happiness and the American Dream to take on the malignant social cancer infesting and infecting what must ultimately be what our nation is judged by in the eyes of today’s world; The perception of American empire, the Armed Forces of the United States of America.

As I write, I know empathy, suffering Neuro-Behcets Syndrome, a mimic Multiple Sclerosis. My own desire has been many years wishing only to live out those years I have left in peace, but no, a narcissism of arrogance circumstantially known as fundamentalist Christian dominionism has dictated my duties according to conscience as well. Yes’m, I understand and know empathy in our common alliance against evil.

The human dimension is profound, the humiliation, the grief, the sacrifice and the fighting back against stacked odds at every turn for those ethical civilian and military warriors detailed in this book.

Where to begin? Striking is the thought, here is the true story’s protagonist with impeccable conservative credentials, Michael L. ‘Mikey’ Weinstein, breaking down every stereotype and smashing every barrier in a focused, concerted effort which, if successful, and there is no guarantee of success, should win the admiration of dyed in the wool liberals, feminists particularly, and people of every sane persuasion. Mikey has marched a long march to arrive on the cusp of achieving immortality in history. I am moved by his story and, by my own independent research, towards expending precious drops of my own small reservoir of life force to help Mikey achieve his goals.

This is no small achievement in its own right that a man, Mikey Weinstein, would have come so far in his personal evolution as to overcome his history of working to keep Iran-Contra from spilling into the open under Reagan, to win my avowed admiration. But here again is a striking moment, it was my own experiences as a soldier had turned me against wars altogether, no different to Howard Zinn. Mikey fits the same mold, only we each have our separate timelines to fated evolution and goals.

Mikey’s goal is quite straight forward. To take the American military, the most lethal military in the world by far, out of the hands of and keep it out of the hands of, what can only be accurately described as Madmen. Any such endeavor is highly worthy of my liberal support.

Where to begin? Critically important, the book makes a case for young American service women and men dying in vain on account of the narcissism, and nothing more, of those General Officers and politicians trusted with our soldiers care at the highest levels of these United States of America’s institutions, whether at the level of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or sitting in either house of Congress.

This last will be the focus of my essay; I will leave the several other critically important subjects to the insights of other reviewers. I cannot speak to nukes as an expert, there are better qualified to speak to contemporary military/civilian life, but one thing I had dusted off and polished these past several years were my intelligence analysis skills. Here follows my analysis, in lockstep with the books conclusions, insofar as how deeply penetrated and compromised our military’s highest offices and ranking officer corps have become by dominionism and will yet cost us dearly in American lives and blood.

In my day, our Special Operations Forces had not yet become pervasively criminalized. We saw ourselves more along the lines of an elite Peace Corps working the most hazardous territories of a Cold War world. Critical to our mission was pacification of populace in the areas we worked, and pacification is and was a straightforward word. We worked to bring peace to neighborhoods in conflicts. John Wayne stereotype aside, the military aspects were honest endeavor to provide self-defense training to remote villages with an objective the populace could not be easily exploited by irregular militia, but that was never going to be accomplished in any case, except that we understood and respected and even integrated to the local customs and culture. That we had elite and lethal training was primarily survival oriented, yes there were the occasional ‘special operation’ to perhaps decapitate the leadership of a particular guerrilla group or undertake sabotage behind enemy lines in the course of our work, examples given, but this was the exception, not the rule. Primarily our superior skills were required to operate small teams in areas where we might meet with considerably stronger numerical force. The highly honed and elite skills of the 1960s and 1970s Green Berets teams were more often than not, more than equal to any larger irregular force. If vastly out numbered, we knew how to inflict savage and costly casualties on our pursuers in the course of evasion. In our pacification work, Action Anthropology was the norm of the day. We integrated to our human and social environment. We were armed educators, medical providers and social workers. We were not primarily meant to be offensive; to the contrary, restraint was a big piece of our discipline and training. Cowboy mentalities were not tolerated.

It is quite clear things have changed away from this focus, dramatically, for the military applications of special operations forces, in the approximately four decades since Vietnam.

In the span of a few hours or so in Iraq, one Special Forces team leader, inflamed by watching the ‘Passion of the Christ’, instigated an incident that effectively made a war zone of an entire neighborhood and radicalized several hundred, perhaps several thousand Muslims. This commissioned officer had used a bullhorn to have “Jesus kill Mohammed” blared into a Muslim neighborhood, and when the perfectly predictable reaction was everyone with a gun in that area of the city showing up to shoot at this moron, a weapon that could blow through the front and back wall of a house was turned on the neighborhood homes by the Special Forces team.

Many of those consequently radicalized Iraqis no doubt turned to local militia and offered their services to train to kill our regular American soldiers over this one of many [unpunished] incidents of Christian extremism provided elite training. Our ‘elite’ forces had just accomplished the absolutely criminal act of getting more Americans killed in future battles. This is the criminalization of our special operations forces by extremist Christian fundamentalist commanders. Who are those commanders? I will name two.

General William G. Boykin. A rabid fundamentalist Christian, his career in special operations is littered with tactical disasters. It would seem his only qualifications to have advanced throughout his career are his ‘belief in God.’ That and his belief in his special operations crusaders. With these mentalities at the top of command, what is promoted under you will be a solid corps of those with shared bigoted beliefs. General Boykin, since his retirement in 2007, had to be ‘dis-invited’ from speaking at West Point Academy on account of his virulent hatred of all things and people that are ‘not Christian or not Christian enough.’ Consider it is today’s special operations trained veterans who move into SWAT jobs in your local and state police force, are hired by Blackwater [then Xe Corp, now Academi, a lot of changed identities over a string of fundamentalism motivated crimes] and other de facto corporate militia, join the CIA and FBI or simply become mercenaries. These people with elite training and extreme belief will be getting many more Americans killed over a long haul ahead of us and not only in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. Their numbers are only growing, thanks in large part to:

General Patraeus. It is common political knowledge in Washington DC that President Obama had appointed General Patraeus to head the CIA as a means of sidelining the General’s political ambitions over serious concerns Patraeus would hook up with the likes of Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman in a run against Obama for the presidency in 2012. Either way you have it, a commander-in-chief, whether a military veteran or not, is a sword that can cut two ways. Obama’s naiveté in military affairs, having never served, is the 2nd worst possible circumstance in an America where naked fundamentalist ambition has overtaken the leadership of American military command structures, outside an out and out fundamentalist president. That Obama would, as a matter of political expediency, appoint Patraeus to head up the CIA with its out of control Operational Division working in close concert with the radicalized and criminalized Christian extremist special operations forces of today’s American military, is simply asking for disaster. General Patraeus was key [together with Robert Gates] in convincing Obama to radically beef up the USA’s special operations forces, at a time it was already decided the overall troop numbers would have to be reduced.

General Patraeus has had a close association with special operations forces throughout his career. Since Patraeus appointment to DCI [Director of Central Intelligence or CIA] Admiral William H McRaven, now overall boss of the special operations forces which these days are routinely assigned to CIA operational missions, has requested his forces be allowed to operate outside the traditional Department of Defense channels. This is, no doubt, a sleight-of-hand grab for these elite forces away from normal supervision via established Department of Defense structures, and away from oversight by Admiral McRaven’s professional associate CIA Director Patraeus. This cannot be a good thing.

The myth of General Patraeus in the public purview is a demonstrable tactical lie. In fact the ‘surge that turned around the war in Iraq’ for which he became famous was at best a deceit along the lines of a shell game or bait and switch. General Patraeus beefed up the American force, momentarily disrupted the insurgency with an all out push that could not be sustained in any case, and then pulled the bulk of the American forces back to their bases and took the Americans, for the first time, largely out of public circulation before the insurgents could regroup. It is this removing the American soldiers from the everyday Iraqi life which had dramatically dropped the violence in Iraq, nothing more. The same could have been accomplished in 2004, and honestly at that, were it not for literally crusading extremist neo-con commanders and secular officers afraid to speak out and challenge the status quo at the CIA and Pentagon, to call a spade a spade, a career ending move. It is truly Faustian, if you speak out your career is over and you have been weeded from the ranks which only become more Christian extremist with the favored or ‘blessed’ replacements, if you keep your mouth shut, it all evolves towards fascism regardless.

Moving over to Afghanistan, notoriously there have been many special operations forces crimes, inclusive of attacking a wedding where fleeing women and kids had been shot in their backs, cold blooded murders. We pay the Afghans compensation but the root problem of anti-Islam fundamentalism is never effectively addressed and the hate for the Americans only spreads. General Patraeus has had a large hand in keeping these American special operations independent of NATO, effectively exercising impunity and generating a strengthened Taliban when the Americans are seen as a worse curse.

Now, we are seeing the full fruition of the crusading mentality and criminal anti-social behaviors with the ‘burning of the Koran’ riots in Kabul triggering a long pent up but growing frustration of the Afghan people as a whole. No Snowflake in an Avalanche points towards the inevitable conclusion: Our fundamentalist neo-con Generals, in the guise of patriotism, have handed an untrained Obama a perfect storm. This is no accident.

The book’s holdings are consistent with the preceding scenario I have drawn for the reader from my knowledge of social psychology, special operations intelligence and tactics. The book meticulously documents the facts of the extremism in our military leadership; it is a well written book, concise and cohesive to the points of sedition and treason at the highest levels of the United States Armed Forces and matches my independent assessment of these past several years, summarized in the preceding.

No Snowflake in an Avalanche by Michael L. ‘Mikey’ Weinstein and David Seay

Review by Ronald Thomas West, Vietnam Veteran, recipient of the United States Army Commendation Medal (individual citation) & the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry (Brigade Aviation, 199^th Light Infantry Brigade, unit citation.) Subsequent to extended tour of Vietnam, Ronald served as non-commissioned officer in charge, operations & intelligence, Detachment 1, Company C, 5th Battalion, 19^th Special Forces Group. Ronald also achieved Distinguished Graduate status at the Hawk Improved Missile program at the U.S. Army Missile School, Ft Bliss, Texas.

Ronald’s family tree has soldiers serving in nearly every period of American conflict including the Civil and American Revolutionary Wars. Immediate family members who have served in the military include both grandfathers, his father, uncle, brother, nephew and two of his three sons.

Ronald is co-author [together with Dr Mark D Cole] of the Mueller-Wilson report [International Law/Human Rights.] Today he is a medically retired investigator and blogger on intelligence (primarily.)

You may purchase ‘No Snowflake in an Avalanche’ at Amazon

Tags Mikey Weinstein, Military Religious Freedom Foundation

Categories treason

Truth Jockeys

June 18, 2015 //

Ok, so now I’ve come up with a new terminology, that is “Alternative Mainstream Media.” I’m certain someone else has come up with similar terminology, it would only make sense in a world where we have ‘truth jockey’ spin. Maybe ‘truth jockeys’ is the better invention to describe ‘alternative mainstream media.’

There is an American concept of law, that is ‘lie by omission’ defined at uslegal.com:

A lie of omission is an intentional failure to tell the truth in a situation requiring disclosure. An example could be a seller’s failure to note a known defect on a real estate disclosure form

Now, is it not (question) the business of those who claim to be ‘alternative news’ to be publishing those most damning facts concealed by mainstream media from a public that has rapidly become as dumb as a box of rocks due to the incessant stream of lies fed to them? And in the process of feeding the aforementioned constant stream of lies, how much of this can be construed to be partnered to lies of omission?

By comparison, how would ‘honest’ media personalities judge what is ‘newsworthy’ and what is so compellingly dangerous to publish as to make a value judgement of ‘we’re not going to cover this’ for the sake of, example given, public order? When in possession of ‘state secrets’, what is a determination of what should be published and what should not, other than a value judgement? What qualifies any given journalist or publication to make a value judgement? At what point does a value judgement cross the line into the territory of ‘lie by omission?’ Who determines that? And how is that determined? By a closed group of people making a collective value judgement? What purpose, other than serving as an ‘alternative’ classification review board, do journalists serve, when making a value judgement over what materials can be released and which cannot?

Now, on top of all of this, where do politics come into play? Over on the right, Sibel Edmonds despises Graham Fuller (she makes a compelling case) for his design of an Islamic insurgency in western China, I appreciate Graham Fuller’s stance on USA policy failures in Afghanistan, as well I consider Eric Margolis to be a consummate idiot in matters of Asia and despise his overweening narcissism relating to his own ‘chicken hawkish’ tale of how he escaped service in Vietnam even as he promotes the urban legend of how the ARVN saved Saigon during 68 Tet (a compelling propaganda lie.) Others on the right consider Margolis some legendary truth-teller.

Over on the left, Julian Assange (retched be his name, yes, I deliberately omitted the ‘w’ when spelling retch) dismisses 9/11 with “I’m constantly annoyed by false conspiracy theories” while Daniel Ellsberg (once CIA, always CIA) staunchly defends Assange while in the same moment calling aspects of 9/11 a coverup .. for instance in the case of Sibel Edmonds revealing the fact Bin Laden was a CIA asset up to the time of 9/11. But that’s the only safe route for Ellsberg (once CIA, always CIA) to take, when actually setting out to reinforce another lie, the lie Bin Ladin was responsible for 9/11 .. probably not the direction Sibel Edmonds intended the discourse to take and precisely why Ellsberg ‘had her back’ (irony) when he took up her revelation and ran with it. Meanwhile, Glenn Greenwald worships Daniel Ellberg (once CIA, always CIA) whilst one of his side-kicks, Laura Poitras, is in love with the Assange (a greater empire stooge there never was) story and if I read the cards correctly, is about to be suckered into working (unbeknownst to Poitras) as an intelligence ‘asset’ with delivering that moron film credibility he never deserved, meanwhile her ‘firstlook.org’ colleague, Jeremy Scahill, somehow was suckered into an ‘it’s all about me’ film called ‘Dirty Wars’ which simply served to bury all of the good work he’d accomplished with penning an excellent book of the same name. What a brilliant idiot.

In the center of this ‘tip of the iceberg’ (skipping over the disinformation specialists tandem of Robert Parry and Ray McGovern) alternative media dysfunction, where some of the world’s most brilliant criminal sociopaths serving intelligence agencies are assigned to undermining the facts (Ellsberg is a past grandmaster), somehow we’re supposed to just sit back and believe what the ‘alternative mainstream media’ journals such as Media Lens and The Intercept tell us. Which brings me (more or less) to the point of this essay.

Media Lens, when writing a quite excellent and accurate story, The Sunday Times and The Death of Journalism, well worth a read, when punishing Rupert Murdoch’s rag The Sunday Times [London] for parroting British Intelligence Services in a blatantly false attack on Snowden, in the same moment opened themselves and all of ‘alternative mainstream media’ to charge of ‘lies by omission.’ And going one step further, Media Lens when defending Greenwald’s reporting, opened Greenwald’s organization First Look and its flagship publication The Intercept to the charge of hypocrisy. All without so much as telling any lie or misrepresenting any fact.

The charge of hypocrisy is as easy as a look at the absolutely true statements of Ryan Gallagher and Glenn Greenwald whom Media Lens quotes in relation to the Sunday Times smear of Snowden (the first quote in the following Media Lens excerpt is The Intercept’s Ryan Gallagher)

‘the Sunday Times story raises more questions than it answers, and more importantly it contains some pretty dubious claims, contradictions, and inaccuracies. The most astonishing thing about it is the total lack of scepticism it shows for these grand government assertions, made behind a veil of anonymity. This sort of credulous regurgitation of government statements is antithetical to good journalism.’

But perhaps the most comprehensive demolition came from Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who met Edward Snowden in Hong Kong, and who was primarily responsible for bringing Snowden’s whistleblowing to public attention. Greenwald writes:

‘the entire report is a self-negating joke. It reads like a parody I might quickly whip up in order to illustrate the core sickness of western journalism.’

This ‘sickness’ is summed up by:

‘the formula that shapes their brains: anonymous self-serving government assertions = Truth.’

This is raw submission to power with the result that:

‘government officials know they can propagandize the public at any time because subservient journalists will give them anonymity to do so and will uncritically disseminate and accept their claims.’

As Greenwald observes, there is a long history of anonymous government accusations and smears being laundered through the media whenever damaging information is revealed by whistleblowers.

All well, good, accurate and important information .. with one small problem. The assertions are precisely what The Intercept had done as well; when The Intercept published the article “Ukrainian Forces Recover Downed Russian Drone”, an article in its entirety vetted with the language:

“according to Ukrainian forces”

“said the battalion’s deputy commander, whose nom de guerre is Artem”

“One of the battalion’s men”

“he said”

“But the source, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to speak on the record”

“The Ukrainian side, however, said”

[nom de guerre] “Artem said”

“according to [nom de guerre] Artem”

The Intercept reporting in this case has an even larger problem; the appearance of a BIG conflict of interest in the reporter, Askold Krushelnycky, a staunch ‘color revolution’ fan with a highly dubious record of not only writing for the Kiev Post but also the propaganda rag ‘Foreign Policy’ (see his list of contributions HERE) which was the information operation of the State Department aligned Carnegie Endowment until it had been sold to The Washington Post in 2008. And the Washington Post? I cover that (and more) in my previous reporting on the false flag journalist/Intercept reporter Krushelnycky in my article on an alleged ‘Russian Drone’ “The Intercept Takes a Dive”

Now, to the article’s author; Askold Krushelnycky. Firstly, in his own words, he was clearly in the camp of the so-called ‘Orange Revolution’ (a CIA instigated ‘color revolution‘ or part of the ‘democracy’ investment Victoria Nuland had reported the USA spent $5 billion on) putting him squarely in political opposition to the Russian ethnic majority of the Donbass region of Ukraine. So much for impartiality.

Secondly, Krushelnycky is first generation British of Ukrainian “refugee” descent, opening the question of whether Krushelnycky is of Stephen Bandera aligned stock. Most of the Ukrainian nationals who were allowed into the USA, Canada and Britain after WW II were radical right wing who’d supported Hitler in Ukraine, including an ethnic Ukrainian division of Waffen SS rescued in the thousands. Did The Intercept do a background check on Krushelnycky? I doubt it.

Thirdly, Krushelnycky is reporting from Mariupol, the Kiev held area where Right Sector (Ukrainian Nazis) has its own independent ‘Azov’ battalion. If he were inclined to report factually (particularly in relation to Azov battalion provocations), he’d have immediate problems with these people. Not to mention Kiev has pushed so many outrageous lies, Kiev propaganda compares well to Roger Rabbit; insofar as reality.

Fourthly, and here it gets very sticky for The Intercept, Pierre Omidyar, The Intercept’s bankroller, has funded elements in Ukraine leading to the overthrow of the Yanukovich regime, a de facto support contributing to the present civil war. Clearly Omidyar has been supporting the side of those now constituting the regime in Kiev, which also so happens align with the politics of Intercept reporter Krushelnycky. Glenn Greenwald has claimed Omidyar’s support for the parties ruling in Kiev will make no difference in the reporting coming out of The Intercept; but actions here speak louder than words … I had actually been wondering why reporting on Ukraine had been conspicuously absent at The Intercept and now we have a shallow, rank propaganda piece worthy of those very whores of journalism Greenwald & friends have so eloquently bashed elsewhere.

The Intercept hosting Askold Krushelnycky is like The Nation hosting Bob Drefuss or the Washington Post providing a platform to David Ignatius; a professional liar does not add a ‘fair and balanced’ perspective (recalls FOX NEWS) but merely tosses a monkey wrench into the gears of truth

Now, shall we all stand up and uncritically applaud Glenn Greenwald’s perfectly honest comments recited in the Media Lens article? And bury the hypocrisy? You decide, meanwhile, let’s move on to our brilliant ‘alternative mainstream media’ sin of lies by omission, in my perspective, a by far more damning indictment and the real thrust of this article.

Part Two

Conspicuously missing from ‘alternative mainstream media’ is some particularly damning information from a Defense Intelligence Agency assessment that had found its way into the public domain. The circumstance of the information’s release appears to have been what amounts to raw political agenda combined with incredible ineptitude.

Judicial Watch, an organization with more in common with the religious right generals at the Pentagon than with actual judicial accountability, went after documents it wished to use to undercut Hillary, focusing on her tenure as Secretary of State. This is straightforward motivation in American politics, it’s a dirty game and Hillary’s tenure as head of the Department of State had been one of the most aggressive, criminal and incompetent in the history of United States foreign policy, the present basket-case that is Libya is evidence prima facie. So, Judicial Watch went after whatever documents a lottery by lawsuit might produce. But whoever was in charge of document selection and redaction, in their desire to please (a lawsuit from the left would never turn up the forthcoming information), overlooked (as did Judicial Watch) the full implications of a few sentences of a 2012 Defense Intelligence Assessment on CIA initiated policy (we’ll come to that) in Syria:

“the West, Gulf countries and Turkey support the opposition…

Ok, so that’s no big secret, this has been common knowledge but then you get the larger context:

“…there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in Eastern Syria .. and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime…”

Whoa! Alternatively stated, this would also accurately read ‘we’ll create a supportive circumstance handing Eastern Syria to Al-Qaida to bugger Assad.’ And then the kicker; the DIA assessment accurately predicts the outcome:

“ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq…”

Which is exactly what happened, all on Hillary’s watch and what better dirt to pile on Hillary’s (very desirable) political grave than the fact she had initiated policy directly responsible for the rise of Islamic State and consequently Iraq coming apart at the seams (again.) But wait, let’s not jump to a sole, simplistic conclusion. When Department of State wants a hatchet-job accomplished, whether a ‘color revolution’ initiated, or an insurgency created, they turn to their Siamese twin, that is the CIA. Department of State decides what needs done, the CIA decides how to go about it. Enters the scene, stage (hard) right, David Petraeus, in a play that could easily have been ghost-written by Robert Gates.

Robert Gates, who’d practically run the CIA under the tenures of Bill Casey and William Webster during the Reagan era, and moved on to the director’s position under Bush I, was responsible for the creation of al-Qaida when setting up a Salafist insurgency to fight the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, working in concert with (long time intelligence career operative) Prince Bandar (‘Bush’) of Saudi Arabia. It does here to draw a parallel to the Defense Intelligence Agency assessment pointing out American intelligence (CIA) working since 2011 to facilitate Salafist militia (al-Qaida) taking control of Eastern Syria. Related to this, it should be noted here Sibel Edmonds testimony to the 9/11 commission remains classified secret on account of she’d informed the commission the CIA had maintained a working relationship with Osama Bin Ladin up to 11 September 2001. There is evidence in the public record backing Sibel’s account, a 2001 Guardian article, citing Le Figaro reporting on a DGSE (French CIA) leak where it is divulged the CIA had met with Bin Ladin as recently as the Summer of 2001 in Dubai (we’ll come back to this.)

Only yesterday (17 June 2015) Ash Carter, the USA Secretary of Defense, and General Dempsey, the Pentagon’s Chairman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified to a somewhat hostile House Armed Services Committee concerning the failure of the USA to produce any legitimate result with building the ‘moderate’ Free Syrian Army. Ash Carter had no sound answer to account for what amounts to no actual result where the programs to now have seen little other than the people the USA recruited to the ‘moderate opposition’ have taken the weapons and training and promptly defected to either Islamic State or Al-Nusra (Al-Qaida.) General Dempsey had, meanwhile, lied through his teeth when he informed the committee this training:

which officials have said is taking place in Jordan and Turkey, had just started and that it was still too soon “to give up on it.”

The (CIA friendly) Reuters piece (cited above) makes no mention of Carter and Dempsey pressed on the failures of a program which has gone on at least since its design in 2011 and implementation in 2012, and begins coming apart in 2014:

Frequently the man who carried out dirty jobs, Bandar bin Sultan surrounded himself with strict regulations in relation to the royal family and its allies, especially the US. It should be remembered that Bandar was absent from major political decisions on more than four occasions since being appointed as general secretary of the National Security Council in 2006. His absence each time was due to a conflict within the royal family or the failure of a mission warranting the suspension of his political activity. His return in July 2012, alongside former CIA Director David Petraeus, was his final bet on the success of his political future.

Bandar had been bold enough to invest all his cards, including al-Qaeda, to win the deal of his life by overthrowing the Syrian regime. However, a royal order issued on February 3 criminalizing all Saudi fighters, civilians and military, was an indirect announcement of the failure of Bandar’s mission and the need to get him entirely out of the picture. The period following the royal decree concerning the fighters was merely in preparation for the royal decree ending his political career

Prince Bandar’s Al-Qaida is directly descended from the Bin Ladin militia Robert Gates (together with Prince Bandar) had worked with, when creating the ‘Afghanis’ (Arab volunteer fighters in Afghanistan), also known generically as Salafist militia. Now, after seeing the same model applied to Syria by Robert Gate’s protege Petraeus, together with the same Bandar, the Saudis realized what had happened with the consequent rise of Islamic State and the subsequent dangers posed to the kingdom. Six months into 2015 and a record 100 executions…

the royal orders were a clear message to Saudi fighters, civilians and military alike, principally in Syria, but also in Iraq, Lebanon, and other places. It meant that a harsh fate awaits them if they decided to come back home. To avoid the grim destiny and severe punishment, they had to remain outside the borders and continue their mission until they perish or get dispersed in other fighting arenas, much like the first contingent of Arab Afghan fighters and those who emerged in Iraq after 2003, in Lebanon after the Nahr al-Bared war at the end of 2007, and those currently in Syria following the agreement between Saudi intelligence chief Bandar bin Sultan and former CIA chief David Petraeus in the summer of 2012.

…anyone informed as to the facts should realize returning Saudi Salafist Syria and Iraq veterans are being rounded up for elimination, a direct result of David Petraeus applying the Gates-Bandar ‘Aghani’ model in Syria, resulting in the rise of Islamic State, predicted by the 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency assessment.

In fact this joint USA-Saudi training, arming and supplying Salafist militia to bolster al-Qaida in Syria has been based out of Jordan and Turkey since the logistics had been pulled together by the CIA in 2012. The Syrian ‘moderate opposition’ had been a front to launder Salafist militia all along, when handing the East of Syria over to al-Qaida. Any authentic ‘moderates’ would have nothing to do with taking Assad’s regime down, after witnessing the aftermath of Iraq. John Brennan kept the Salafist insurgency program going after Petraeus departure, the only question outstanding is, how well informed had POTUS been, Obama has a reputation for handing foreign policy off to subordinates. Only this past fall has there been ‘aboveboard’ funds announced by Obama, provided to try and bring the program under control and give it a legitimate cover. This is what General Dempsey is referring to, when he states the program had just started and that it was still too soon “to give up on it” (speaking of lies by omission.)

Figuring this stuff out isn’t rocket science, so how’s our ‘alternative mainstream media’ been doing to now? Keeping you all informed?

Epilogue

Back to Bin Ladin, Robert Gates and the CIA, there’s a bit of post script in order. Al-Qaida has been a CIA ‘asset’ since its creation had been a joint endeavor of Gates and Prince Bandar in 1980s Afghanistan. Closely aligned throughout the ensuing decades with Saudi intelligence, though not exactly on cordial terms with the CIA, al-Qaida has liaised with CIA on too many occasions to detail in this article in the cause of ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend.’ However it does well to note many of the ‘CIA liaised’ ‘Salafist’ actions have been pointed at Russia, China and nations incorporated to their sphere of influence.

In regards to Bin Ladin, when the CIA had met with him in Dubai in Summer 2001 (according to French intelligence) it was determined Bin Ladin was gravely ill, required regular dialysis and the medical prognosis was, Bin Ladin had, at most, two years to live. It is unlikely Bin Ladin survived the stresses of the American invasion of Afghanistan. He was likely dead within a few weeks, the stresses combined with unlikely ability to keep dialysis going (imagine his dialysis machine following him over and through the mountains on a mule) almost certainly cut his two years projected survival span off in the Hindu Kush, a result of the CIA had finally turned on Bin Ladin and framed him for 9/11. Since, a virtual Bin Ladin had been kept alive until it no longer served (created for the public) reality. This is why there is so much controversy surrounding his (non) death in 2011. As the numerous lies fall apart, new lies have to be concocted, more lies to supplant the failed lies until all is a perfect tangle of lies it is hoped (by the CIA) no one will ever sort through (people at the CIA delude themselves every day.) So, where is ‘alternative mainstream media’ at in regards to this? French intelligence had quite accurately pointed to a soon to be dead Bin Ladin in 2001.

This brings us to 9/11. How is it ‘alternative mainstream media’ is silent on the fact over 2,200 certified architects and engineers have stated, in no uncertain terms, the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, as explained by the United States, is an “impossibility.”

Here follows my email to the editor of Media Lens, copied to Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Ryan Gallagher and reads just so:

Re: Defense Intelligence Agency assessment (attached)

Hello Media Lens

Read your story on Murdoch’s putrid rag and Snowden. Good stuff. But your organization (among other ‘alternative mainstream’ new outlets) still ducks the 9/11 whitewash, right?

Meanwhile, how about something on the fact it was western democracies utilizing Al-Qaida as a ‘strategic asset’ led to the rise of Islamic State?

“the West, Gulf countries and Turkey support the opposition…

“ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq…”

Does courage in journalism come in degrees? Just curious.

Ron West
http://www.ronaldthomaswest.com

Meanwhile, I recommend taking your reading to Sibel Edmonds ‘Boiling Frogs Post‘ .. as opposed to the cowardice of Media Lens on 9/11 or The Intercept founded on money from a neo-Nazi supporting fascist billionaire named Pierre Omidyar. It’s not that I would agree with Sibel in every detail, it’s about Sibel turned down a multi-million dollar settlement from the USA to not talk about her experiences and discoveries when working as an FBI translator in the USA’s so-called ‘war on terror’

Litmus Test On WikiLeaks ‘Saudi Cables’ release

Tags Glenn Greenwald, Media Lens

Categories Uncategorized

Letter to German Parliament

June 16, 2015 //

Sent to:

Hans Christian Stroebele <hans-christian.stroebele@bundestag.de>, gregor.gysi@bundestag.de, ulla.jelpke@bundestag.de, irene.mihalic@bundestag.de, michael.hartmann@wk.bundestag.de, Armin Schuster <armin.schuster@bundestag.de>, armin.schuster.wk@bundestag.de, norbert.lammert@bundestag.de, peter.hintze@bundestag.de, Johannes Singhammer <johannes.singhammer@bundestag.de>, edelgard.bulmahn@wk.bundestag.de, ursula.schmidt@wk.bundestag.de, petra.pau@bundestag.de, claudia.roth@bundestag.de, marieluise.beck@bundestag.de, omid.nouripour@bundestag.de, stefan.liebich@bundestag.de, niels.annen@bundestag.de, roderich.kiesewetter@bundestag.de

Re: Defense Intelligence Agency Assessment

To the several parliamentarians:

I wish to draw your attention to the attached (pdf file) 2012 document created by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) concerning Syria. In this document you will find the language:

“the West, Gulf countries and Turkey support the opposition…

“ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq…”

My assessment here:

Bitter Frosting, Poisoned Cake

Relevant to this assessment, and the attached DIA document pointedly predicting the rise of Islamic State as direct result of the western democracies utilizing al-Qaida as a ‘strategic asset’ to isolate Syria’s Assad, I will note it was on David Petraeus watch at CIA when this policy had been implemented. David Petraeus is a known person of interest in war crimes in Iraq, feeding the sectarian civil war several years prior to his tenure at CIA aggressively pursuing policy leading to the rise of Islamic State:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/mar/06/james-steele-america-iraq-video

David Petraeus is also identified as an extremist endorsing a Christian military by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, and had been a part of that Pentagon cabal exercising impunity in the face of law mandating a secular military. But perhaps more interesting to your institution is, the present German defense minister’s name on a roster including that of the alleged criminal David Petraeus:

Bilderberg Attendees

I believe it is not only in the interest of the German people, but all of humanity, to demand answers of the present CDU/CSU/SPD coalition government of Frau Merkel as to the extent of German intelligence, not only possible military, participation in a crime of supporting al-Qaida, leading to the rise of Islamic State, as well demand answers as to any ongoing activities inimical to the general welfare of the western democracies in what is rapidly becoming an ever more dangerous world.

Ron West

What’s behind the spies & political lies?

“The history of the great events of this world are scarcely more than a history of crime” -Voltaire

Tags Al Qaida, IS, ISI, ISIL, ISIS, Islamic State

Categories CIA, treason

Bitter Frosting, Poisoned Cake

June 15, 2015 //

^ Your Pentagon tax $ at work

If you’re in the business I’ve been in, there can, at times, be little pleasure in being proven right. This post could be the last addition to my open source collection ‘The Arab Spring for Dummies’, with a Defense Intelligence Agency document backing my Arab Spring (Syria) assertions; little different to the House of Representatives finding the Ukrainian regime at Kiev has incorporated neo-Nazis to its’ military (see immediate preceding post ‘Kiev’s Nazis‘) having vindicated much or most of my analysis on the subject of Ukraine, and has made further attention to these subjects largely unnecessary.

‘Tyler Durden’ (what a pity Brad Pitt sold out to Chevron and blew his brilliant legacy) over at ‘zero hedge’ has reposted a damning article on the USA’s policy of utilizing al-Qaida as a ‘strategic asset’ in the effort to overthrow Assad in Syria. While the article merely reinforces essential conclusions developed with open source at this blog, what is remarkable is the fact of the article at zero hedge pointing to a Defense Intelligence Agency assessment confirming the facts from the inside.

What is confirmed is, the ‘western powers’ (USA & certain EU or NATO states) along with the Gulf states (Saudis, et al) and Turkey (Israel and Jordan play as well) funded, trained and armed al-Qaida while fully aware of the potential for this to combine several terror groups into what has become Islamic State. Specific language in the DIA assessment includes:

“the West, Gulf countries and Turkey support the opposition…

And finally, in a case of ‘chickens come home to roost, the (2012) DIA assessment predicts a spillover of the Salafist entity the western democracies essentially created (Islamic State) from Syria into a partitioned Iraq with Sunni and Shia entities engaged in civil war…

“ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq…”

…and that is exactly the fight on the front of today’s mainstream news, sans the preceding information.

And by way of farewell to the subject at this blog, don’t forget, if you’ve read here before, you likely read the facts here first. Meanwhile, here is the Defense Intelligence Agency document:

The Arab Spring for Dummies

Tags Islamic State

Categories crime

Kiev’s Nazis

June 14, 2015 //

^ Kiev’s neo-Nazi military adviser on Interpol’s wanted list

The United States House of Representatives, when amending and passing House Resolution 2685, has made what amounts to a finding of fact, admissible in court, determining the authority at Kiev, Ukraine, has incorporated neo-Nazi militia to its National Guard:

11 June 2015 Washington DC – Late yesterday evening, the U.S. House of Representatives considered H.R. 2685, the “Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2015.” During consideration of the legislation, Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) and Congressman Ted Yoho (R-Fla.) offered bipartisan amendments to block the training of the Ukrainian neo-Nazi paramilitary militia “Azov Battalion,” and to prevent the transfer of shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles—otherwise known as Man-Portable Air-Defense Systems (MANPADS)—to Iraq or Ukraine

While the facts of the neo-Nazi elements incorporated to the regime at Kiev had been widely known, what the House Resolution effectively has done is, to put the United States on record as providing military aid to a government, Ukraine, that has an active branch of the National Socialist political movement incorporated to its armed forces. Clearly this establishes Kiev as a neo-Nazi regime. The logic is simple; either Kiev has positively sanctioned neo-Nazis by incorporation of the Azov Battalion to its’ military engaged in the Donbass region or, a neo-Nazi militancy, stemming from Ukraine’s Interior Ministry and its’ National Guard, rules Kiev. Either way, it makes liars of the professional propagandists of NATO, The European Union and The United States, per the example of Voice of America:

“For about a decade, the U.N. General Assembly committee that deals with human rights has voted each year on a Russian-drafted resolution condemning the glorification of Nazism and Neo-Nazism and all forms of racism, xenophobia and intolerance.

“The non-binding resolution receives wide-support – this year 115 countries voted in favor of it – while the United States and Canada traditionally vote against it and the European Union countries abstain

The EU has a decade of history abstaining, this would be a clear indicator of not only tolerance but now we know a clear and unequivocal support for fascism with the ongoing support of the EU for Ukraine. As well…

“The United States, which annually rejects the resolution for reasons including language that could be interpreted to limit free speech and assembly, this year also expressed “alarm” over Russia’s “recent efforts to vilify others by loosely using terms such as “Nazi or “Fascist”

…not only recalls Russia’s losses at the hands of the Nazis are second to none; but soundly establishes the USA executive via its’ propagandists, John Kirby and Marie Harf at Department of State particularly, as representing a willful support of National Socialism.

Beyond this, there is stanch NATO support for Ukraine and what amounts to an internationally outlawed ideology of National Socialism, with Germany’s participation absolutely damning –

Germany’s Martyrs of the Maidan

Sociopaths & Democracy

Ukraine for Dummies

Tags Azov Battalion, European Union, H.R. 2685, Ukraine

Categories Uncategorized

About Clowns

June 14, 2015 //

With nearly 1,000 American military bases scattered across our planet and USA special operations forces in more than 130 countries, how does much of the world perceive the USA and Pentagon?

If you watch closely, you’ll get a brief glimpse of a world famous clown (and there should have been a photo-shopped, clown montage of our generals, Petraeus & Odinero particularly, not only the ‘National Prayer Breakfast’ General James ‘the reverend jim’ Jones & his side-kick Condoleezza, as well, Obama would make a good clown.)

A more complete (but by far from comprehensive) roster of criminal clowns subject to arrest & prosecution in the USA if there were a rule of law enforced:

George H.W. Bush, Barack Obama, George W Bush, Joe Biden, Dick Cheney, Hillary Clinton, Ed Meese, Condoleezza Rice, Susan Rice, Robert Gates, Jeh Johnson, Douglas Feith, Frank Gaffney, John Bolton, William Graham, William McRaven, Mike Sulick, Stephen Kappes, Valerie Caproni, James O’Dea, William Kristol, Mark Grossman, Michael Morrell, Eric Holder, David Addington, John Rizzo, Michael Mukasey, Sabrina DeSousa, Erik Prince, Peter King, Sylvia Maruffi, Stephen Hadly, John Brennan, Keith Alexander, Victoria Nuland, Spencer Abraham, Gale Norton, John Ashcroft, Theodore Olson, Alex Acosta, Bradford Berenson, Ralph Boyd, Michael Chertoff, Paul Clement, Daniel Collins, Viet Dinh, Noel Francisco, Sarah Hart, Brian Jones, Brett Kavanaugh, Thomas Sansonetti, Eugene Scalia, Larry Thompson, Edward Whelan, James Comey, Antonin Scalia, John Kerry, James Woolsey, Clarence Thomas, Diane Feinstein, Cofer Black, Dennis Blair, Donald Rumsfeld, General James Jones, David Barron, Michele Bachmann, John Kerry, Tom Donilon, David Walter, Vince Langan, David Patraeus, James Clapper, Robert Mueller, Gary Berntsen, Jose Rodriguez, Ted Cruz, Alfreda Bikowski, Chuck Grassley, Jack Quinn, Bobby Inman, Russ Robinson, Jason DeYonker, Dean Bosacki, Tom Katis, Jim DeMint, Lindsey Graham, James Inhofe, John Thune, Pete Domenici, Don Nickles, Joe Pitts, Frank Wolf, Zach Wamp, Robert Aderholt, Ander Crenshaw, Todd Tiahrt, Marsha Blackburn, Jo Ann Emerson, John R. Carter, Mike McIntyre, Mark Pryor, Charles Schumer, Joe Lieberman, John McCain, George Tenant, Samuel Alito, Michael Hayden, John Yoo, Jay Bybee, Shannen Coffin, Samatha Power, John Roberts, Nancy Pelosi, William Burns, Orrin Hatch, Richard Epstein, Frank Easterbrook, Kenneth Starr, and many more, for conspiring in, aiding and abetting, ordering, facilitating and/or covering up Color of Law (extra-judicial) murders .. as well conspiring or aiding and abetting in the subversion of the USA’s constitutional order –

The Satires

Tags clowns, Pentagon

Categories Morons

Condensed for the Absolutely & Truly Dense

June 13, 2015 //

At a certain level, it’s pretty funny Plato had it wrong and Indians running around in breech-cloths had it right. Here’s one to print out and give to people to think about:

The theoretical physicist Bernard d’Espagnat states: “The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment”

Consider that and then have a look at how it is Indians were thinking:

“In 1918 Christian missionary A. McG. Beede took Yale graduate Harry Boise to the Standing Rock Sioux and Turtle Mountain Chippewa reservations on separate occasions, where Boise explained scientific ideas to tribal leaders. Beede wrote in his report that both groups immediately understood the concepts without difficulty, saying: “There is no difficulty in leading an old Teton Sioux Indian to understand the ‘scientific attitude’ that the processes that give rise to phenomena may be more and more known by man and may be, to some extent, controlled by man, and that in this way the forces of nature may become a mainspring of progress in the individual and in the human race. The idea of atoms and electrons is easy and pleasing to an old Indian, and he grasps the idea of chemistry.” -Vine Deloria, Evolution, Creationism, and Other Modern Myths

The two tribal groups spokesmen replied to Harry Boise, following discussion among themselves:

”The ’scientific view’ is inadequate to explain … how man is to find and know a road along which he wishes and chooses to make this said progress, unless Manitoo by his spirit, guides the mind of man, keeping human beings just and generous and hospitable” -Rising Sun, Chippewa

“The knowledge and use of any or all the powers of the objects on Earth around us, is as liable to lead a man wrong as to lead him right, because it is merely power, with no way of knowing how to use it correctly- except that spirit is with a man’s spirit for the light” -Red Tomahawk, Sioux

When Rising Sun says ‘Manitou by his spirit’ he is speaking of collective creation, our very surroundings are intelligence integrated to nature. When Red Tomahawk says ‘spirit is with a man’s spirit’, he is saying the same thing, both these men, at the end of their cultures’ many millennia era of knowledge, are looking at what d’Espangnat stumbles upon nearly 100 years later; recognizing consciousness embodied in our surroundings plays in everything we experience.

Moreover, Red Tomahawk is discriminating between intimate knowledge of any object’s raw power, and an understanding of the nature of something, recognizing these are distinct things. His understanding (different to the European concept) opens to the possibility of allowing for the trees, stones, or for that matter, everything surrounding us, to possess consciousness and to ‘know’ purpose exterior to our (western) self-centered cultural shaping. And it is only when this door of understanding is opened, we can know how to listen, know the ‘timing’ (the knowledge of creation as synchronized, to grasp nature as a living clock), and to ‘see’ our way through, as the nearly extinct Native thought embodied in now past elders so often attempted to point out to us, when pointing to ‘it’s all related.’

Now days, when modern Indians hear, say or think the words ‘Our Creator’ .. they think along the lines of ‘god.’ Well, they missed it. When the old people of past times stated ‘Our Creator’, they were looking at our surroundings, at the very expressions nature has given birth to, at a process which nurtures and sustains us. These days, truth be told, Native peoples have become as dumb as the Whiteman. Who’d have expected stupidity could be a contagious disease (looking around you, anyone?)

Post script would be, it wouldn’t matter if you had all the technical ceremonial knowledge on earth memorized, if you don’t grasp the preceding in a practical approach to life, you’re just dumb

Tags synchronicity

Categories Morons

Share this:

EXCLUSIVE – International tribunal looks like best chance for MH17 justice – Dutch sources

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

All well, good, accurate and important information .. with one small problem. The assertions are precisely what The Intercept had done as well; when The Intercept published the article “Ukrainian Forces Recover Downed Russian Drone”, an article in its entirety vetted with the language:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: