Archives for category: false flag

Incompetent Espionage & Wikileaks (V)

The wheel is indeed empty, or certainly devoid of truth. Marcy Wheeler at ’emptywheel’ blog believes “the Russians did it”, but there are so many holes in the ‘DNC hack’ story, a government embraced CIA generated conspiracy theory (one that’s going to backfire), Niagara Falls couldn’t keep that sieve filled; no matter intelligence agencies across the spectrum [2] [3] [4] of the liberal democracies are trying to pull the American intelligence agency’s chestnuts out of the fire, Russian hackers here, Russian Hackers there, evil Russian hackers everywhere!

To begin, we only need dissect one short article where Wheeler asserts ‘the Russians did it’ in her:

Why Is Russia Finally Letting (Dubious) Details of Its Involvement in DNC Hack Out?

December 12, 2017 by emptywheel

In recent days there have been a number of stories in Russia implicating the FSB (note, not GRU) in issues related to the DNC hack. First, there was this article from The Bell, claiming that the four Russian treason defendants (two of whom were FSB officers) are being prosecuted because they provided inside information to the US about GRU’s involvement in the DNC hack.

“But it is impossible to identify which specific cyber group or groups were responsible for last year’s Democratic National Committee hack based on technical traces alone, four cyber experts polled by The Bell confirmed. To prove specifically that the GRU was involved, U.S. investigators would have needed inside sources — preferably with access to confidential state matters, one source explained. Mikhailov had that access.

“Relations between intelligence agencies working on the cyber front were strained, one of Mikhailov’s acquaintances said. The FSB and GRU compete for funding and Mikhailov felt the FSB carried out cyber tasks more professionally than the GRU, according to one of his acquaintances.

“He used to say that “the GRU breaks into servers in a brazen, clumsy, and brutish manner and it interfered with his own work”, the acquaintance said. Moreover “the GRU’s hackers didn’t even try to cover their tracks””

The report said that Sergei Mikhailov — who was named (but not charged) the Yahoo hack case — shared information on Russian hackers who wouldn’t work with the FSB with western law enforcement agencies though a cut-out named Kimberly Zenz.

“Mikhailov had been working closely with Western intelligence agencies since 2010. Report written for Vrublevsky said that Mikhailov had leaked sensitive information “on Russian cyber-criminals, who had refused to cooperate with him, to a U.S. citizen”. More specifically, Mikhailov reportedly handed the U.S. citizen — a woman — information on Russian state-sponsored hacker attacks against Estonia and Georgia in 2007 and 2008.

“Burykh says he found that Mikhailov gave the information to Stoyanov, who then passed it on to Kimberly Zenz of the U.S. company iDefense Intelligence. From there, it went to the U.S. Department of Defense”

This 1st (immediate preceding) portion of Wheeler’s article is ok to set up her premise but is mostly notable for one omitted fact; her source, The Bell, is politically aligned with Russia’s most fringe anti-Putin liberal elements, led by the former nationalist turned liberal (western media darling & color revolution hopeful) Alexi Navalny.

Then there’s this story, reporting that a hacker tied to the Lurk group, Konstantin Kozlovsky, hacked the DNC on behalf of the FSB.

Following on this (immediate, preceding) linked story, which is mostly notable for its brevity and rehashing The Bell reporting but referencing another Russian liberal fringe (Navalny aligned) anti-Putin media outlet, Dozhd TV, introduces the name Konstantin Kozlovsky and it’s then we come to the real cheat in Wheeler’s reporting and where in her article things get really interesting:

Then there’s this, from Novaya Gazeta, laying out the news.

This immediate, preceding linked article is, again, the Russian liberal fringe or, Navalny aligned anti-Putin media but perhaps the most credible of the fringe liberal media. The article is in Russian language. It is long, complex, and it certainly does NOT lay out any news, despite Wheeler’s word play on the expression ‘lay out the facts.’ It is most notable for numerous points Wheeler omits to mention. The article’s author, Irek Murtazin, is very careful to emphasize, throughout, nearly everything he is writing is speculation. He mentions there is more than one version of his story. He begins his article with a disclaimer, pointing out almost nothing is known with any certainty, concerning the evidence or any facts surrounding the charges concerning those arrested. He proposes the American version of events is possible but doesn’t give this much credence. He uses many self-referring terms concerning his article’s content that can be translated variously as ‘my impression’, ‘a possibility’, ‘my opinion’ and more. This is a context most westerners will have no ability to discover for themselves and Wheeler construes this for her readers to be “laying out the news

Notably, Murtazin admits the (keep reading) Konstantin Kozlovsky Facebook profile and posting could be a creation of “foreign security service” (implying CIA or  other western intelligence) but he prefers to believe it is a Russian security service creation intended for manipulation and/or damage control. Murtazin’s article clearly indicates this is his opinion only and he has no hard facts to back these presumptions up. He even has his unnamed security services sources specifying ‘possibly’ or ‘it could be.’

NG [Novaya Gazeta, but actually Irek Murtazin’s opinion piece, Wheeler fails to make this distinction] questions — as I do — why this is all coming out now. Of particular interest, it notes that Kozlovsky’s claims were posted in August, but for some reason the hashtags that would have alerted people to the posted claim were not triggering, meaning the information only got noticed (at least in Russia) now.

This (immediate, preceding) omits Murtazin having pointed out Konstantin Kozlovsky had been held in a facility so secure ‘a mouse’ could not leave or arrive unregistered. This is important to note for the fact these may in fact not be (almost certainly are not) Kozlovsky’s claims at all. The impression Wheeler would leave with the inattentive is, the idea there is actual substance to Kozlovsky’s ‘Facebook claims’ when in fact there likely is no substantive element. Wheeler then quotes Murtazin:

“Interestingly, the first materials on this page were posted back in August of this year. And despite the fact that sensational publications were accompanied by tags # CIB, # FSB, # Dokoutchaev, # Mikhailov # Stoyanov, # hackers, # Kaspersky, the existence of a personal page Kozlovsky in Facebook for some reason became known only in early December”

Reinforcing her misleading the reader, Wheeler doesn’t openly or clearly state, or accurately interpret material posited in Murtazin’s article, pointing to the most likely possible of facts; the sound idea Kozlovsky, the imprisoned person, never had anything to do with setting up his own Facebook page. Then:

Here’s the timeline we’re currently being presented with (I’ve made some additions):

“April 28, 2015: FSB accesses Lurk servers with Kaspersky’s help.

“May 18, 2016: Kozlovsky arrest.

“May 19-25, 2016: DNC emails shared with WikiLeaks likely exfiltrated.

“November 1, 2016: Date of Kozlovsky confession.

“December 5, 2016: Arrest, for treason, of FSB officers.

“August 14, 2017: Kozlovsky posts November 1 confession of hacking DNC on Facebook.

“November 28, 2017: Karim Baratov (co-defendant of FSB handlers) plea agreement.

“December 2, 2017: Kozlovsky’s claims posted on his Facebook page.

Note Wheeler does not specify which “additions” are hers, in the preceding, although (at her site) Wheeler attributes the timeline to Murtazin with a blockquote. She previously only uses blockquotes for portions of articles she cites (I’ve added quotation marks where Wheeler is quoting with blockquote at her article, as her entire article is reproduced here in blockquote for purpose of this discussion.) Nowhere in Murtazin’s article does a timeline appear in form Wheeler presents as a quote:

fake block quote - 1

Then Wheeler speculates:

Of particular note, the emails exfiltrated from the DNC and shared with WikiLeaks were probably not exfiltrated until the days immediately after Kozlovsky’s arrest.

Where on earth did Wheeler come up with this? Now, she would have us believe the DNC mails hack was accomplished following Kozlovsky’s arrest, in which case the ‘confession’ posted at Facebook cannot possibly be passed off as accurate, the context and language of the proposed confession precludes this. Is Wheeler insinuating Kozlovsky hacked the DNC from maximum security prison, with a gun to his head, and attempting to attribute this to Murtazin? Finally, Wheeler concludes…

As NG [Murtazin’s opinion piece, actually] notes, this all may well be true (though I wonder why Russia is now letting claims it was involved in the DNC hack go public, after claiming it was uninvolved for so long). But the reason it is coming out now is at least as interesting that it is coming out.

…and her “may well be true” consistently ignores Murtazin has emphasized, not only throughout his article, but particularly in its conclusion, this is entirely speculation absent hard facts (noting none of the prosecution files are public), and his admission of this cannot take into account Wheeler’s twisting of his theory (Murtazin presents his piece as nothing more than a theory), her additions and most notably, omissions. Then, Wheeler can wonder for all of eternity (for her readers’ suggestion susceptible minds) “I wonder why Russia is now letting claims it was involved in the DNC hack go public” when in fact it has not been demonstrated Russia has done any such thing. This is Murtazin speculating, nothing more, coming from a disgruntled former mainstream Russian journalist with the integrity of 10,000 Marcy Wheelers with his admission amounting to ‘I made this all up, maybe it will prove true’ (but it certainly won’t, see section two of this post.) In fact, there is greater chance (even if very slim) the arrests of the Kapersky lab figure and the Russian secret services officers are coincidental and unrelated to the arrest of Kozlovsky, than there is chance (practically none) Kozlovsky hacked the DNC servers. For all we know, the FSB officers arrests & treason charges could relate to corruption concerning the billions of rubles the LURK hacking group had stolen from Russia. Anyone can speculate anything at a point where no one really knows what the evidence is concerning those charged. In the end, the most notable omission of Wheeler is, Murtazin’s theory does not implicate Putin, but proposes a possibility that would point to far down the chain of command, to a mid-level, American spy service directed, traitor embedded in Russia’s FSB; ordering the DNC hack to [apparently] frame the Russians. How’d Wheeler miss that? She couldn’t have. The damning piece of Wheeler’s article is as simple as its’ title; “Why Is Russia Finally Letting (Dubious) Details of Its Involvement in DNC Hack Out?” The plain answer is, Russia hasn’t. Novaya Gazeta, publishing this far-fetched speculation, is certainly not acting on behalf of the Russian state.

Marcy Wheeler is one of the slickest, most underhanded so-called ‘journalists’ this investigator has ever encountered. She comes off as a master propagandist, fully engaged in running a professional ‘limited hangout’ or information operation promoting the USA’s intelligence services line. Her target audience is what I’d call the ‘marginally mainstream alienated’ seeking to know what is actually happening. Those people are both; too often convinced and horribly misinformed.

Note on my methodology: I did not rely on google translate (never a good idea, although I do use this tool to become familiar with the overall gist of a story in foreign language.) In order to actually understand the Russian article by Murtazin, I arranged on three occasions to sit with one of my (several) Russian literate associates, to get at accuracy and the nuance of what Murtazin was trying to say. Once before this composition and twice again following this composition.

Incidental to this, I’m informed the Kozlovsky ‘confession’ (reproduced in the Novaya Gazeta opinion piece by Murtazin) reads in the original Russian like a hybrid geek spy novel/Russian suspense thriller movie trailer, with all of the elements of a criminal-turned-unlucky-super-hero plot; where the protagonist turned world savior Kozlovsky had been served with a task list of accomplishing all the west’s liberal democracies most extreme paranoid cyber-fantasies. The remark was made “they should give this to Spielberg” and this Russian literate friend is not a Putin fan. It follows, Central Intelligence Agency can never provide proper screen credit to its writers, for reason of plausible deniability as it were.

Also, it is noticed Murtazin’s bias is palpable; when Murtazin refers to Russia’s Federal Security Bureau (FSB) as ‘The Lubyanka‘ (a historic Moscow jail and museum where FSB has an office) to associate today’s FSB with Stalin’s political crimes (the comparison is not close.) This is not how you win friends and influence people (or change the system.)

Wrapping up this section on the emptywheel (which reads like an intelligence agency contracted) hit job, we come to question of Marcy Wheeler’s motive, in her ability to take advantage of her readers vulnerability where examples given…

cz
outside comfort zone- V -outside comfort zone
WaPo = CIA media ^                   ^ DNC mails leaked

…’cz’ is the ‘comfort zone’ and the V in the center represents ‘psychological sight.’ As a metaphor, we can say, the eyes are at the point (bottom) of the V and people who depend on certain media and consequent shaped, narrow perception, have their field of vision contained or restricted within the V or comfort zone. The point of working through media to shape perception is to keep the large majority of people inside the ‘comfort zone’, insuring trust in (no matter if undeserved), and support for, geopolitical policy (no matter how insane.) In the event Wheeler, with her habit of sourcing Operation Mockingbird 2.0‘s WaPo & NYT, were herself manipulated (narcissists are brilliant material for this), I’ll be following up on that with a forthcoming satire. Meanwhile, anyone desiring an unbiased take on what’s actually happening, politically, inside Russia by an author who is not socially engineering his material, is not in love with Putin but understands Putin’s method’s better than most, I recommend a read of analyst Gordon Hahn’s assessment HERE.

 

Section Two: Incompetent Espionage and Wikileaks

 

This section is substantially unchanged since it had been posted as “Incompetent Espionage & Wikileaks (III).” It still holds up:

20 February 2018 update: Kim Dotcom weighs in:

16 September 2017 update: Antiwar.com reports:

“Under this deal, which was reported by the Wall Street Journal, Assange would provide conclusive proof that Russia was not the source of hacked emails WikiLeaks published. In return, he would be offered a pardon, or some other assurance that he wouldn’t be prosecuted by the US for involvement in WikiLeaks.

“Rohrabacher brought this deal to the White House Wednesday [13 September 2017], but Chief of Staff John Kelly not only apparently didn’t like the offer, but didn’t tell President Trump that the offer had been made, instead telling Rohrabacher to take the proposal to the intelligence community.

“The intelligence community almost certainly wouldn’t be in a position to offer any sort of amnesty for Assange, which likely means the end of the proposal. Rohrabacher offered to set up a meeting between Assange and a Trump representative, but that too appears to have been dismissed by Kelly”

So, the generals keep Trump sequestered like the Vatican keeps a rampant pedophile priest under wraps; away from any real work and responsibilities (in this case, kept from knowledge of what’s actually going on in the world.) But now, with the Wall Street Journal blowing the whistle, Ivanka should soon be whispering in her daddy’s ear; and what will tell you everything is, what happens next. Suppose Trump keeps his mouth shut and says nothing? This will indicate the absolute completion of the Pence aligned generals capture of the Oval Office.

But the real news here is, Assange provides evidence of his belief that he is personally more important than any unconditional release of information which should stop the Pentagon and NATO’s pursuit of a war footing directed at Russia in its tracks.

Narcissism? Is there a stronger word? Julian Assange, who fancies himself ‘Jesus of the Digital Age’ would appear to be tired of bearing his cross. The Roman’s puppet, King Herod, hasn’t been authorized to provide the pardon and Pontius Pilate’s (read Mike Pompeo’s) people will deliver Jesus of the Digital Age to crucifixtion on behalf of the ‘duopoly’ mob, to satisfy their blood lust. Good luck with the world’s biggest ‘deal-maker’ (read loser) Wikileaks, because you blew it by waiting too long.

The entire sand-castle (a product of Obama CIA Director John Brennan’s imagination facilitated by the ‘Never Trump’ Bush partisans at CIA’s dirty tricks division) the “Russians hacked the election” is finally washing away with an incoming tide. How this plays out is anyone’s guess.

The open question is, how the new information will be leveraged, if it were to actually break into the open widely, with the bad boy Trump essentially captured by the surreal evil that surrounds him. Other than pure evil (e.g. Pence), only a narcissist or a fool would ever desire to be president of this particular republic. In ‘The Donald’, we have both.

1 August 2017 an audio tape is leaked in which Seymour Hersh states the FBI knows it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails:

“What the [FBI] report says is that some time in late Spring… he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that’s in his computer. Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents — of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC” -Seymour Hersh

On 9 August 2017 The Nation magazine publishes a column on a group of independent experts…

“Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year”

…demonstrating the DNC mails were leaked, not hacked.

On 18 August 2017 Antiwar.com reports Congressman Dana  Rohrabacher has met with Assange concerning the DNC mails and [the article] further credibly suggests Assange is holding the DNC leak evidence hostage as a bargaining chip to possibly acquire a pardon for himself and leverage wikileaks into legitimacy with a President of the United States who at this point is owned by the USA’s intelligence agencies, a hare-brained scheme destined to fail. Assange & company waited too long.

But this would fit Julian Assange’s self-centered, persecuted-savior complex which never ceases to amaze, this guy (as well, Craig Murray) has allowed the idiots surrounding Trump to push us towards the brink with Russia, for months. All because Assange is tired of his embassy confinement in London, a circumstance that is entirely his own fault for the fact he didn’t have the self-discipline to keep his dick in his pants (whether Assange’s admitted intercourse was a case of rape or not.)

What’s more is, this blog pointed to strong circumstantial evidence it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails this past January, and recalling this, it still stretches the imagination a former UK ambassador would make an amateur espionage move worthy of a cub scout playing spy. But that’s what Craig Murray had done in the case of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

Seymour Hersh states Seth Rich is the source of the DNC mails. Craig Murray states he had met with the source of the DNC mails. A + B = C:

Craig Murray met with Seth Rich

That Murray would be a high value target for American counter-intelligence to monitor for the reason of his high profile association with WikiLeaks is beyond obvious. For Murray then to state

murray_wikileaks-1

“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

…goes to the practically bizarre when coming from a former United Kingdom ambassador to Uzbekistan. The UK is little different to the USA in the case of embassies providing cover for spies; in which case Murray should at least have some rudimentary espionage understanding such as YOU DO NOT MEET YOUR SOURCE DIRECTLY WHEN YOU ARE A HIGH PROFILE TARGET OF YOUR ADVERSARY’S COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE HUNTING YOUR (in this case, WikiLeaks) SOURCE(S)

Then, we had WikiLeak’s Assange giving what amounts to a ‘Glomar’ ‘I will neither confirm or deny’ response concerning the murder (assassination) of Seth Rich after appearing to suggest Rich was the source of the DNC emails leak:

Beyond this, WikiLeaks offering a $20,000 reward for the solving of the Seth Rich murder is laughable, that’s what an American west coast upscale community would offer for the arrest of a serial killer of the neighborhood’s cats. Two million dollars might get two seconds’ attention of a corruptible counter-intelligence agent with knowledge of a professional hit on Seth Rich, twenty million might even net an inside the agency sucker willing to take the exceedingly high risk to one’s life (almost certain death) that would attend selling out an agency hit man for substantial lucre. In truth, the WikiLeaks reward offer amounted to little more than a tabloid publicity stunt.

Narcissism is a blinding thing; and a self-righteous narcissism is no exception. Ambassador Murray could have every good intention but on the face of it, he had seriously screwed up. Murray and WikiLeaks should have immediately come clean, there was little to lose. Seth Rich was the source, Murray had met with him, and much could have been gained by stating so; there would be nothing given up any intelligence agency involved did not already know. It have been the right thing to do.

Craig Murray stating ‘I had a serious lapse of professional judgement and this resulted in the death of Seth Rich’ would be the most responsible and newsworthy move WikiLeaks could have taken; to counter the CIA’s ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ propaganda lie, in which there is much invested by the agency; and the consequent damage to relations with Russia, and growing threat to what little world peace yet exists, is immense. WikiLeaks should have done the right thing a long time ago and they have not. Why not? Because Assange and WikiLeaks believes Assange’s comfort is more important than world peace. What fucks. This is beyond inexcusable, it’s criminal. But for Murray, there’s more at stake here than just a hit to ego & image.

Murray’s likely role in the DNC leaks case? A personal meeting with Rich to confirm for WikiLeaks Seth Rich was a bona fide insider with authentic material prior to a WikiLeaks cash payment to Rich and arrangements completed for the mails transfer.

Now, it is a question of ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ release the evidence because WikiLeaks waited too long, and let the criminals surrounding Trump consolidate their power while investing deeply in the myth of the Russians hacked the election; a criminal cabal that will up the ante on the world stage to any level necessary to avoid accountability. WikiLeaks Idiots. WikiLeaks Morons.

Meanwhile, Murray subsequently barred from the United States (except that he applies for a visa, typically unnecessary for a British citizen) appears to have been, in a  manner of speaking, a deep state message to Murray: ‘thank you very much for the lapse of judgement, we have taken full advantage with the assassination of Seth Rich and we won’t be requiring your services after this’ (he’d be smart to stay away.)

The really sticky problem for WikiLeaks in this scenario is, Seymour Hersh asserts in the  recorded call WikiLeaks had paid Rich for the leaked documents, damaging or reducing to element of pretense WikiLeaks claims of journalism & providing rationale for deep state prosecutors & judges to find this had been straightforward espionage. But they won’t do it if the Rich-Murray meeting stays buried, a LOT is invested in ‘the Russians did it’ for the public consumption. If it DOES break open, Murray’s ‘goose is cooked.’ It’s now not only WikiLeaks problem in a larger sense, but Murray’s, whether he does or doesn’t admit the assassinated Seth Rich had been the DNC mails source.

Murray’s reputation? C’est la mort.

*

A prime candidate for assassin of Seth Rich HERE

Related articles at: On Wikileaks

 

Before we delve into the dilemma of twin valid but seeming mutually exclusive realities, it does to examine reality itself as a mutating phenomenon. To begin, I’ll point to experience of my own; an inability to recapture in virtual reality [on the internet] a clear image I recall from youtube some 8 to 9 or so years ago. There was a reasonable video in good resolution, not high definition when close-up, but good enough the party who’d uploaded it was able to zoom in [expand] the shot several times and freeze frame it. What the closest frozen [now a still] shot created demonstrated was, so-called ‘Flight 175’ had 1) a pod, clearly a pod, attached using pylon(s), to the right underside of 2) a cargo jet (no row of passenger windows.) It must have been taken down quickly, I couldn’t find it again although I recall trying to find it shortly after; and these days, searching the net, there is no such footage, in fact what footage there is, is entirely different angle and poor resolution…

…the footage I’d seen was from entirely different location or behind Flight 175 looking head on into the south tower, with no commentary and no attribution. But the above ‘extra equipment’ segment from ‘The Ripple Effect’ is still worth a watch.

Did I actually see what I remember? I have no reason to doubt the veracity of my memory but should question myself nonetheless and can easily project others would have doubts. This recalls Thomas Paine:

“It is a contradiction in terms and ideas, to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication — after this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him”

Whether you should believe as I have related is entirely up to you. Insofar as questioning myself, did I dream it? Many people have difficulty distinguishing between something similar to ‘dream’ (memories playing tricks on us) from ‘reality’ and illusionists play on this frailty of human psychology everyday. Intelligence agencies have entire departments devoted to manipulating peoples’ reality by exploiting this phenomenon.

But then, there are so-called ‘evidence based’ realities where facts are, or have been, close at hand with interpretations by multiple professionals, and these professionals have considered the ‘evidence’ in concert with the other professionals (in the same or closely related field) who place similar values or interpretations on the same or related evidence, to arrive at a consensus. This is not necessarily reality per se but is a form of creating collective reality more or less specific to that group and for those outside the group which embrace that particular group’s findings.

So, what then, when two groups of highly trained professionals, from very different fields, look at a macro-body of evidence and come to startlingly  different conclusions? Seeming mutually exclusive conclusions? It happens. And it happens to groups of intelligent people.

Now, when a group of intelligence and law enforcement professionals are convinced al-Qaida, based on what they know to be sound evidence with multiple confirming sources, flew planes into the twin towers, and a group of architects and engineers, based on what they know to be sound evidence, confirmed by multiple engineering principles, are convinced plane strikes are not what brought the towers down and consequently box-cutter wielding Arabs could not have been responsible for 9/11, what is happening?

To begin, innate primate behavior (humans are primates and anthropologists see this same behavior in our closely related chimps) demands each group’s social cohesion be preserved. Accordingly, both groups have staked out their territory and there is little trespassing. In this case, there is also little cross-cultural examination, shared between the groups, precluding common undertaking of resolving the competing portraits of the 911 event. Without this opportunity at ‘brain-storming’ what the actual issues might be, there is stasis.

However ‘intelligence’ is the ‘softer’ science than engineers relying on principles of physics, with much greater risk the interpretations could be off-mark, no matter behavior profiles, multiple sources and wiretaps point to the ‘Arabs’ (primarily Saudis) as the responsible parties. With this in mind, it is interesting to deconstruct a relevant portion of Thomas Drake’s interview (transcript at the link) with Paul Jay and the Real News:

The Man Who Presumed Too Much?

Playing on the Real News title ‘the man who knew too much’, we’ll look at some unscientific assumptions made by Drake, but first I’ll give a short summary of this portion of the interview (video, above.) It is established that, prior to 911, there was adequate intelligence to round up key al-Qaida players who were established (beyond a reasonable doubt) to have communications with al-Qaida (central) abroad, as well Saudi intelligence, and were training to fly planes. It is also established that Dick Cheney had ordered the intelligence agencies (including FBI) NOT to focus on terrorism. More than this, Cheney had established his own clandestine back channels, within the American intelligence apparatus, to independently know what was happening even as he took action to ‘kneecap’ those very intelligence services ability to perform their respective missions via normal channels. As well, Drake asserts Cheney utilized this undermining of intelligence to allow 9/11 be brought off. Now…

JAY: Same thing. Coleen Rowley I’ve interviewed. And maybe we’ll link to her interview so you can find them as we’re doing this. She said in the interview, ’cause I asked her a somewhat similar question, she said the FBI was specifically told, don’t prioritize terrorism, by Cheney. That was actual instructions, that this is not the priority of our administration, which is part of why she says they couldn’t get the FBI’s attention, to really pay attention to what they had found in Minneapolis.

…Paul Jay backs a Drake assertion but Drake replies with patent absurdity…

DRAKE: That still doesn’t matter, though. I realize that’s a huge factor in terms of saying it isn’t, but you’re obligated under the Constitution to provide for the common defense. If you have information that rises to a level that says something is happening and it’s going to be really bad, you’ve got to share it, you’ve got to bring in the key people, you’ve got to take action to prevent it. That’s the whole point. Now, if you–I have argued this. I’ve said this before. That whole process was subverted by Cheney and company.

…what Drake has just done is to hold a technocratic assemblage, built on bureaucratic principle, to a high constitutional ideal that doesn’t so much as exist outside of his own head in the intelligence agency environment; necessarily overlooking 1) the so-called National Security Act of 1947 had become foundation that saw built 2) a ‘color of law’ scheme where a now patently faux constitutional order is become artificial or thespian event for 3) a consolidation of fascism of which the NSA is a structural prop. Demanding (this was Snowden’s misapprehension as well) technocrats in such an environment be constitutionally literate and motivated to a degree they can over-ride instructions with ideals their employment had been designed to subvert from the get-go, is more than a peculiar narcissism, it is oxymoron.

Now, the presumption just gets worse. The new ‘Pearl Harbor’ Cheney desired, to consolidate power in the executive office, is somehow going to take an ‘unknown form’ but recall Drake himself doesn’t seem to realize the NSA itself is part and parcel of the anti-constitutional order:

DRAKE: So the system–what I’m saying: the system itself was essentially set aside. The secret channels were the ones that were utilized. And they [Cheney’s people] knew much better than anybody else that something big was going to happen. They didn’t actually know exact time or date. There was actually more than just passing evidence that they’d [al-Qaida] wanted to do what ultimately happened much earlier. They just weren’t able to make it all happen. We know about all the test flights…”

How is it Drake can, in certain terms, state Cheney’s people didn’t know what or when, only they waited for something big? Because Cheney said so? Certainly Cheney has not. This is a PRESUMPTION. But because Drake is a ‘constitutional narcissist’ (read the entire series transcripts) as opposed to a realist that should be able to step out of his bubble of perception and understand his National Security Agency is, in and of itself, a structure antithetical to constitutional order; his ability to grasp what is actually happening would in any case suffer severe perceptual strictures. Recalling we have (these days) a few thousand architects and engineers have been willing to stick their necks out and dispute planes brought down the twin towers on 9/11, what should Drake have been looking at in relation to the known facts of al-Qaida learning to fly planes and Cheney providing the same cover?

Likely (almost certainly, in this investigator’s mind) it went down something like this: al-Qaida believed they would be able to target, with small planes, American symbols like the Oval Office or other highly symbolic targets but actually had been set up as a patsy for “The Enterprise”, also pulling in Bandar bin Sultan and the Saudis, as further insurance, with the so-called ‘28 pages‘ pointing away from the real culprits. Meanwhile, these next paragraphs by Mark Gorton are a good match to events set out in my own work, the excellent work of Jeff Sharlet, and the work of a Pentagon liaison to the CIA, L Fletcher Prouty:

“George H. W. Bush was such a pivotal deep politician because he bridged two separate worlds. He was a deep CIA insider, a lifelong intelligence operative, and he also came from an elite family and was intimately tied to the East Coast business elite. His father, Prescott, had been managing partner at the Wall Street investment bank Brown Brothers Harriman and also a US Senator. The Bush and Rockefeller families were very close. George H.W.’s grandfather Samuel had been business partners with John D. Rockefeller’s brother, and over the generation the Bush and Rockefeller clans had remained close. Empowered with these dual networks, George H. W. Bush could work within the dark nether-realms of the intelligence community, as well as, the Republican power elite

“Despite his decades long involvement as a deep CIA insider, Bush was falsely brought in as an outsider who could reform the CIA. Bush’s real job was to staunch the flow of secrets out of the CIA and prevent the exposure of the truly explosive evil truths of the now multiple Coups d’état executed by the CIA.

“The Enterprise was a massive 5000 person large hierarchical criminal organization with George H. W. Bush as its CEO. The Enterprise was a multifaceted criminal conglomerate that ran a large number of criminal activities including: drug trafficking, arms trafficking, savings and loan fraud, securities fraud, oil and gas fraud, insurance fraud, and real estate fraud. Embedded within the national security infrastructure and protected from prosecution by corrupted enforcement agencies like the SEC, FBI, DEA, ATF, etc., The Enterprise embarked on a massive criminal romp.

“I have seen no evidence directly linking George H.W. (Poppy) Bush directly to the 9/11 attacks, but just as physicists can detect the presence of a black hole by the actions of other bodies around it, so the massive force of George H. W. Bush in the 9/11 op can be inferred. Many people extremely close to Poppy Bush were actively involved in the 9/11 op, including: his son oldest son, George W. Bush; his youngest son, Marvin Bush; Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Prince Bandar, the Iran Contra network, and the BCCI network.”Mark Gorton

Yet to be determined is Mossad’s role, but we know these groups, The Enterprise and MOSSAD, both, are infected with radical, apocalyptic-messianic forms of Zionism (see the Doug Coe link at this article’s conclusion and the linked “related” section beneath that.)

Meanwhile, here’s a large jet plane flown by remote control (video) (story) in 1984:

Screenshot; plane taking off, flown remotely:

Remotely_flown_jet - 1

Screenshot; pilot remotely flying the large jet:

Remotely_flown_jet2 - 1

Now, considering the hard science of a few thousand architects and engineers (2,963 as of this composition) disputing planes brought down the towers, would it matter whether I recall correctly the (now non-existent) video of a cargo jet, with pod attached, dreamt it up or even lied about what I began this article with? Or, is that a wrong question? None of the preceding would cancel the hard science disputing Arabs with box cutters brought down the towers. Shouldn’t the question rather be what is high profile whistle-blower Thomas Drake’s (and not only Drake’s) mental state; in circumstance the intelligence professional cannot see through their own technocratic culture’s myopia and narcissistic bias?

“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief” -Frantz Fannon

Lastly, do NOT miss the significance of this photo of George H.W. Bush with his (and his son’s) spiritual guru:

“You know Jesus said ‘You got to put Him before mother-father-brother sister? Hitler, Lenin, Mao, that’s what they taught the kids. Mao even had the kids killing their own mother and father. But it wasn’t murder. It was for building the new nation. The new kingdom” Doug Coe

“I would … like to single out Doug Coe, who has been such a guiding light in all of this”George W Bush

*

Related:

America’s Deep State (a foundational history of the George H.W. Bush criminal cabal within the USA’s structure)

Sociopaths & Democracy (a wider, updated view of the George H.W. Bush conceived-chapter of our “Deep State”)

Deep State V (economics & counter-insurgency, the war-profiteering cycle enriching America’s present day Deep State players)

Profits of War (assessment illustrated via Iran-Contra, projected to 9/11, Israeli cooperation with a cell of ‘The Enterprise’ or the CIA operational sector, historically a George H.W. Bush fan club)

*

On 15 December 2017, The New York Times ran an editorial piece by Mikheil Saakashvili, with the NYT altogether neglecting to mention Saakashvili is not only wanted (arrest warrant) in his native Georgia for corruption, abuse of power and shielding murderers from prosecution, but is increasingly implicated in the murders of some 80 police and protestors in February of 2014. This latter, Ukraine event, the so-called ‘Maidan Massacre’, has risen to a level of ‘preponderance of the evidence’ necessary for a civil conviction of Saakashvili under USA law, and were the known, necessary parties [witnesses] available to honest prosecution, almost certainly a criminal ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ conviction could be reached as well. Yet, the Times ran this man’s opinion piece as though he were a lily-white reformer, unjustly persecuted, as Saakashvili claims.

The evidence timeline:

Initially, an intercepted, leaked phone call between the European Union’s Cathrine Ashton and the Estonian foreign minister (verified as authentic by the Estonian), indicates it was a member (or members) of the new USA supported Ukrainian administration were behind the snipers who killed both protestors and police during confrontation in February 2014 at Kiev. (conversation begins about 2 minutes into this youtube posting)

John Kerry had claimed it was the ousted (Russia friendly, Yanukovych) administration behind the snipers.

Subsequently, in April 2015, a Polish MEP (Member of European Parliament), who happens to be a conservative Catholic – indicating an honest man – as opposed to the more typical Polish-Catholic Russophobe, states in a Polish press interview, the Maidan snipers were trained in Poland by USA intelligence services:

Question: “[you are] a supporter of the thesis it was a CIA operation?”

Answer: “Maidan was also our operation. The snipers were trained in Poland”

The original interview transcript in Polish language (Polish online magazine) HERE

A reasonable English language summary of the interview by PRAVDA:

In November 2017, Italian investigative journalist, Gian Micalessin, has interviewed three of the snipers who shot the people in Maidan square. They were Georgians sent to Ukraine by security services people aligned with American allied-educated Mikhail Saakashvili. American Brian Christopher Boyenger ran the sniper operation on location:

 

Excerpts from an expanded English translation of the Italian (the video subtitles are abridged)

“Both [witnesses] Nergadze and Zalogy are linked to former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili”

“All three of our participants say that they were recruited at the end of 2013 by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a Saakashvili military advisor who, after the Maidan action, will move to the Donbass, to lead the so-called Georgian Legion in clashes with ethnic Russian insurgents”

““One day around February 15 [states Alexander] Mamualashvili personally visited our tent. There was another guy in his uniform with him. He introduced him and told us he was an instructor, an American soldier.” The US military veteran Brian Christopher Boyenger, is a former officer and sniper for the 101st Airborne Division. After Maidan, [Boyenger] moves on to the Donbass front, where he will fight in the ranks of the Georgian Legion alongside Mamulashvili”

““We were always in touch with this Bryan, [Nergadze explains] he was a Mamulashvili man. It was he who gave us the orders. I had to follow all his instructions“”

““On February 18 [recalls Zalogy] someone took some weapons to my room. In the room with me there were two Lithuanians, the weapons were unpacked by them.””

This preceding, newest information, begins to bring a larger picture into focus; the Lithuanian snipers, taken together with the American, are consistent with the Polish account of a CIA operation. Brian Christopher Boyenger, in the larger picture, profiles as a CIA paramilitary officer. What’s more is, the Lithuanians are clearly trained per a Georgian witness going on to state…

“the Lithuanians opened the window. One of them fired, one shot, while the other closed the window”

…consistent with the Polish account. This training is reflected in the coordinated action of the two Lithuanians, concealing the location of the sniper fire.

All of the preceding is consistent with one of the Georgians stating…

“The first meeting was with Mamulashvili [was] at the office of the National Movement” [Zalogy said] The Ukrainian uprising in 2013 was similar to the [Pink Revolution] that took place in Georgia years before. We had to direct and guide it using the same pattern used for the “Pink Revolution”

Saakashvili was brought into power by the so-called ‘Pink Revolution’ and this Saakashvili associated veteran’s statement points to old allegations the Pink Revolution had been a CIA engineered event are more than credible.

Now, certain statements of Saakashvili himself, in his Times editorial, are worth examining:

“By November, I, along with a team of my former Georgian colleagues, helped create a new Ukrainian police force. We also completely transformed the corrupt way state contracts were purchased and helped to form the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, a watchdog. At that time, Mr. Poroshenko welcomed our help. He described me as “a great friend of Ukraine” and granted me and other Georgian reformers citizenship.

Several of us were invited to join the Ukrainian government. One became the head of the national police force and another was appointed minister of health. Another Georgian became the deputy director of the anticorruption [sic] bureau”

What appears to have happened here is, Central Intelligence had, subsequent to the 2014 coup and related massacre, used Saakashvili to initiate building a so-called ‘5th column’ into civil Ukrainian security structures, aside from the American trained and supplied (overt, NATO, Pentagon), and battlefield advised (covert, Central Intelligence) military structures. The purpose of penetrating the civil security structures would be, primarily, to build ‘leverage’ within the civil administrative apparatus to better control recalcitrant personalities, President Poroshenko especially, for reasons having to do with the Ukrainians put into power were, in the beginning, too stupid (Svoboda or neo-nazis) to manipulate properly, and in the subsequent case of Poroshenko, too stubborn.

Poroshenko, was willing to bring Saakashvili onboard, they had, after all, been partners in crime to a point of closeness where the only sensible question in any circumstance of betrayal between the two would be ‘et tu Brute?’ But Poroshenko somehow got wind of (was tipped) to what Saakashvili, a long time CIA asset, was actually up to, and began counter-moves to block him, leading to the circumstance of today.

What Poroshenko does understand is, the USA’s pressure to take on the Donbass ethnic Russian rebels will see him deposed and the east of Ukraine lost to the Dnieper River, inclusive of Odessa and Kiev. Putin has made clear the present, Russophobic, regime controlling Kiev, will not be allowed to militarily overrun the ethnic Russian Donbass region of Ukraine. Putin has also stated his military would take Kiev in two weeks time, maximum, if and when a decision is taken to do so. But this is what NATO wants, to further politically isolate Russia as an ‘aggressor’ state and justify its military buildup on Russia’s borders. The NATO problem is Poroshenko gives lip-service to this but doesn’t initiate the wider military action in the rebel region necessary to actually trigger Russia.

What Saakashvili apparently does not understand is, his currency as an asset for the CIA is about expended. Saakashvili’s Central Intelligence asset track record:

1) CIA ‘color revolution’ in Georgia, successful.

2) Led Georgia’s NATO (Condoleezza Rice engineered) proxy war with Russia, 2008, and badly mishandled it.

3) Lost Georgia itself, as a NATO proxy state, with his incompetent handling of domestic fallout from the 2008 war, lost in several absolutely humiliating ways, to Russia.

4) Co-author of CIA ‘color revolution’ (coup) in Ukraine, winter of 2013-14, successful.

5) CIA insertion into Ukraine’s administrative apparatus, 2015-16, mishandled.

6) CIA December 2017 counter-revolution to it’s own February 2014 coup, in progress.

It is this last which bodes very ill for Saakashvili. His score in polls is at 2% or less. There is virtually no chance of success, despite other western intelligence assets (example given, Yulia Tymoshenko of Germany’s Bundesnachrichtendienst, as well, spook controlled groups and NGOs such as ‘civil society’ fronts), offering what amounts to artificial support.

In chess terms, CIA asset Saakashvili has been devalued, from a rook (castle) to pawn, to be sacrificed on the board-game of geopolitics. Saakashvili’s handlers know he cannot win this most recent gambit. What does his sacrifice accomplish? To remind (send a message to) Poroshenko, pointing out who actually calls the shots by demonstrating Poroshenko’s helplessness to deal with Saakashvili. This first part has already been accomplished. The second act should be upcoming assassination of Saakashvili, to be blamed on either Poroshenko or Putin, depending on whether or not Poroshenko begins to ‘play ball’, while ridding the CIA of a badly compromised asset and possible problematic witness, that is Saakashvili, were he to be apprehended in a competent jurisdiction of law and held account to his recently exposed crimes.

Meanwhile, The New York Times, a CIA asset since the days of “Operation Mockingbird“, brings the western world Saakashvili’s (actually the agency’s) ‘cover story’ when neglecting to point out any of the known, compromising facts, concerning Mikhail Saakashvili.

*

Green Cheese - 1

When the Moon is Made of Green Cheese

Alternatively, this essay could be titled ‘The Intercept Takes a Deep, Deep Dive’ and is a continuation of the series on Russophobe Pierre Omidyar’s and his associate Glenn Greenwald’s flagship publication inserting either incredibly incompetent or, alternatively, false flag journalism into the public discourse. Parts one & two linked HERE [1] and HERE [2]

Now, before we delve into The Intercept’s most recent misapprehension of reality, it should be pointed out it doesn’t matter whether the endeavor is result of incompetence or a deliberate misinformation, the result is the same; constructing a false perception for those many liberals and progressives who trust The Intercept, a trust based largely on the reputation of Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald should aggressively address this misinformation because known facts correcting the record, however those facts may be uncomfortable, are there. And I have informed Greenwald by providing those very facts via email (he hasn’t responded.) What are those facts? It is beyond ‘the preponderance of the evidence’ the Russians did not ‘hack’ the DNC mails, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt. It was an insider leak and that leaker was almost certainly Seth Rich, with the leaker’s identity only waiting the speaking out of former United Kingdom Ambassador Craig Murray, who has met with the DNC insider who leaked the mails:

murray_wikileaks-1

Screenshot from Craig Murray’s website ^ of a screenshot quoting Murray at The Guardian: “I know who leaked them, and they certainly are not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

I’ve also emailed Murray on more than one occasion, including this occasion, when I’d stated to him:

“Your silence on the DNC leaker’s identity only reinforces and grows the utter contempt you’re deserving of; considering the damage the western propaganda machine is causing to international relations with the ongoing information operation”

When the moon is made of green cheese is when The Intercept publishes ‘the Russians did it’ propaganda lie in flat contradiction of known facts:

Binney’s claim that the email theft was committed by an insider at the DNC also helps fuel one of the more bizarre conspiracy theories that has gained traction on the right: that the murder of a young DNC staffer last year was somehow connected to the data theft. Binney said he mentioned the case of Seth Rich to Pompeo during their meeting.

“The meeting raises questions about Pompeo’s willingness to act as an honest broker between the intelligence community and the White House, and his apparent refusal to push back against efforts by the president to bend the intelligence process to suit his political purposes. Instead of acting as a filter between Trump and the intelligence community, Pompeo’s decision to meet with Binney raises the possibility that right-wing theories aired on Fox News and in other conservative media can now move not just from conservative pundits to Trump, but also from Trump to Pompeo and into the bloodstream of the intelligence community”

Binney, who independently came to a conclusion, with forensic analysis, matching the statement of Craig Murray, is somehow construed to be poisoning an intelligence agency with a long history of poisoning the media. In other words, when an intelligence professional, William Binney, at odds with ‘the Russians did it’ disinformation pervading American media, and Binney, no matter we all know Donald Trump is a mobster associated douche-bag, points out the facts are on Trump’s side in the DNC mails story, The Intercept claims the moon is made of green cheese and that makes us, all of us following the actual facts that is, right wing conspiracy theorists. Small wonder the CIA invented and promoted ‘conspiracy theory’ as a disinformation method; considering how this sordid business of lies sifts out:

The article is co-authored, and we begin with James Risen who, if you need reminding, was showered with his journalism awards following having blown an espionage story so badly, his employer, the New York Times, had to settle with the injured party. Well, that makes perfect sense in a ‘Christian’ society that rewards its’ losers. Following crucifixion, Risen was rewarded with journalism heaven (forgive the pun on his name, but you should by now know this author.) But then, there is a further odor to Risen; past whistle-blowers have, on occasion, pointed to the NYT (pronounced ‘nit’) bending over to ‘service’ the CIA in its National Security stories. So, it follows, one wonders how James Risen could have a career at NYT and write books on the CIA without smelling like a disinformation asset. The short answer is, he can’t. Especially now that Risen has ignored the most credible witness, Ambassador Murray, in effort to discredit intelligence professional William Binney, and keep ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ media hysteria alive. What a f**k.

“the Times ’ lead articles are not only contentious, if not fabricated, but are virtually devoid of actual news, consisting instead of claims made by US government and other official sources, who are usually unnamed. Bearing headlines such as “More Enemies Of the Kremlin End Up Dead,” “Russian Spies Said to Hack Systems Used in Clinton’s Run,” “Spy Agency Consensus Grows That Russia Hacked DNC,” and “Seeing in Email Breach a Trump-Putin Alliance,” these articles make sweeping and unsubstantiated assertions in order to present a slanted narrative aimed at justifying the reactionary foreign policy machinations cooked up by the US intelligence agencies and the State Department”

I do believe that is exactly what we see now, in the concerned article at The Intercept. Does anyone reading remember “Project Mockingbird”?

Now, recalling this site is about satire, we move on to the other author: Gay celebrity gossip columnist, er, I meant “investigative journalist, author, consultant, and television producer specializing in privacy, civil liberties, and surveillance issues”, Duncan Campbell, who had to have told Glenn Greenwald something like ‘let me slip you a bone(r), and we’ll take down the carrot-top President Moron (bless his little orange head) with a sexed-up story’ … Greenwald: YES! …

boner |ˈbōnər|
noun
N. Amer. informal a stupid mistake.
ORIGIN early 20th cent. (originally US): from bone + -er1.

So, ok, this is a president anyone in their right mind could despise, but ‘stupid mistake’ was lost in translation, because, being British and using the Oxford, Campbell didn’t realize ‘boner’ means something altogether different in American dialect these days. Or maybe it’s Campbell is old enough to be entering senility, the real origin of his stupid mistake. In any case, no matter how this Scots twit partnered with Risen and pitched what is Obama era Central Intelligence media poison with a post-Obama ‘Never Trump’ life of its own, to Greenwald’s Intercept, we have to look at another scenario, a scenario different to The Intercept Omidyar’s Russophobia, and Risen’s incompetence in a career associated with the NYT (pronounced ‘nit’), a known CIA disinformation outlet.

First, recall why America elected Trump, it’s not only what folk on the right could see, Bernies’ progressives and much of the ‘formerly sane’ center were put off by as well:

Hillary oinks - 1

Then, look at what the consequence had been, it’s not only folk on the left looking at this, it is much of the ‘formerly sane’ center can clearly see who the finger on the nuclear trigger belongs to:

It could be as simple as there is little sane insight these days, or that is to say no lie to oneself is too great, when it comes to The Intercept’s embrace of Central Intelligence Agency ‘lifers’ (a bureaucracy no director can control) post-Obama agenda to depose Trump; no matter ethics, morality, democratic principles, none of these, primarily because of the logic behind the American vote:

Some toilet paper is scented. Most toilet paper is flushed. It follows, some flushed toilet paper will smell good:

gag 1 |gag|
noun
a joke, especially one forming part of a comedy act.

or

gag 2 |gag|
verb
choke or retch: he gagged at the septic tank’s aroma.

Either definition is apropos to the candidates of either party, in what amounts to a duopoly case of ‘you can have your joke and we’ll force feed it to you too.’ Subsequently, in American politics, the expression ‘gag me’ should primarily be a case of:

double entendre |ˌdo͞obl ˌänˈtändrə|
noun (pl. double entendrespronunc.same)
a word or phrase open to two interpretations, one of which is usually risqué or indecent.
ORIGIN late 17th cent.: from obsolete French (now double entente), ‘double understanding.’

End

For those unfamiliar with ‘GLADIO’, this is the name assigned a known history of western democracies intelligence agencies unleashing terror on their own citizens for purpose of influencing or manipulating public opinion to the advantage (historically-typically) of the right wing in politics. In the history developed since GLADIO first spilled into the open in Europe in 1990, we see the Central Intelligence Agency was central to setting up the original cells. Although exposed for mass murders falsely blamed on left wing political movements, the initial GLADIO actors were never prosecuted and the apparatus behind GLADIO never shut down. There is a video documentary of GLADIO  (NATO’s secret armies) farther down this page, followed by more print information. Meanwhile, presented here are the holes in the stories of several USA mass shootings, raising the specter of ongoing GLADIO operations –

Most recent update 10 October 2017:

Gunshot victim testimony of what went on from inside the venue matches the previous analysis of multiple shooters:

Las Vegas, gunfire from at least two automatic weapons, analysis:

2nd, 19 second recording, clearly two automatic weapons:

All for the ‘fact’ of a lone shooter who must simultaneously work two automatic weapons like Rambo (and then conveniently commit suicide.) BUT, What I clearly hear is two separate calibers, two rates of fire, the heavier caliber a lower rate of fire at distance but steady, indicating it is belt fed. The lighter caliber with higher rate of fire is much closer and in bursts. It’s been 45 years but you never forget the nature of the noise, in fact you need to learn to accurately interpret the noise because it can give you critical information in a fluid combat circumstance. These are 2 separate weapons without question, employed from distinct locations.

Then, the Las Vegas Sheriff (going ‘off script’, read on) says the shooter had to have had help, at least in pulling the act together (setting it up)

If you follow the Sheriff over the entire (longer, following) interview, what becomes clear is, in his own words, the ‘facts’ he reports are coming from the FBI. Is the FBI corrupt? Oh yes. So, when we hear two automatic weapons discharging from separate locations, you have to look for openings in the ‘lone shooter’ story the FBI is feeding us.

Interesting ‘facts’ are 1) the ‘hero’ security guard is sent packing before the room is breached by the police team. Is this sanitizing witnesses? The other interesting fact is, the Sheriff states there was a second team hauled a large, heavy bag of weapons to the location in the midst of the operation. Is this opportunity to swap out weapons used? Did large quantities of ammo and, spent brass with associated weapons come up to the room and, a belt fed machine gun and associated ammo and spent brass & belt links go back down in that bag? 3) It has been reported there was a full hour passed after the shooting had stopped, with police on location, before the police forced their way into the ‘shooters’ room. This, coupled with ‘the adjacent room’ (adjoining suite) spoken of by the Sheriff, provides plausible separate entry and exit, with ample time to swap out the evidence.

Also, the Sheriff’s investigators don’t have access to the ‘shooters’ girlfriend, all this information will be fed via the FBI who appear have total control over all information.

An interesting aside, the ‘gentlemen’ (includes FBI ‘investigative’ leader) standing behind the Sheriff like minders, while giving very close attention to every reporter and every question asked, pass a note from one to the other at minute 32:17. What couldn’t wait to be known at that moment? These two guys seemed more interested in the reporting than the crime.

The full interview:

Prior ‘gladio’ updates:

Updated 23 July 2016:

GLADIO returns to Munich: “A Munich police spokesman says witnesses have reported seeing three shooters with “long guns” who attacked a McDonald’s in a city mall”

Munich_3_Shooters.jpg - 1

Three gunmen then magically morph into a single shooter who commits suicide: “A teenage German-Iranian gunman who killed nine people in a shooting spree at a busy Munich shopping centre and then committed suicide had likely acted alone, German police said Saturday”

Munich_3_Shooters_(2).jpg - 1

This preceding would appear to be the more recent USA GLADIO model re-exported to Europe; recalling there has never been a satisfactory explanation for how a recently sold in the USA military grade assault rifle was reported to be employed in the Paris Bataclan massacre: “Milojko Brzakovic of the Zastava arms factory told The Associated Press that the M92 semi-automatic pistol’s serial number matched one his company delivered to an American online arms dealer in May 2013. It was not clear how the gun got back to Europe”

As well at the Bataclan, a member of the band stating: “When I first got to the venue and walked in, I walked past the dude who was supposed to be the security guard for the backstage. I immediately went to the promoter and said: ‘Who’s that guy? I want to put another dude on. Eventually I found out that six or so [band security detail] wouldn’t show up at all.”

Moving on to the USA and the recent killing of police in Dallas, immediately, it is apparent the reporting is problematic; with initial reports of multiple snipers firing from elevated positions, which would be consistent with an initial high rate of police casualties. Most of the police appear to have been gunned down in the first minutes. It was also reported the fire (from multiple snipers) was “triangulated” or a professionally set up, coordinated ambush. Former CIA officer & clandestine service Afghanistan veteran William Hurd stated: “When gunfire started exchanging, you had folks in cross positions that were moving towards the target,” the Texas Republican told Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” program. “Usually, most folks that have never been in that situation are going the opposite direction. The level of coordination, there seemed to be some type of triangulation”

This information is also stated by the Dallas Chief of Police: “We believe these suspects were positioning themselves in a way to try to triangulate against officers,” Brown said”

But within 48 hours the narrative had dramatically changed; it is now a ‘lone gunman’ whom the police took care to blow up with a robot after they had him cornered (never-mind they’d initially reported he’d shot himself.) Question: Why, after cornering the suspect, instead of holding out for a negotiated surrender and possible critically important intelligence gains, would they take him out with an explosive device?  How could  the professional police of Dallas, many of them military veterans qualified  to make an accurate first assessment, get it all so wrong as to have to change the entire story?

At San Bernardino; three shooters, tall with athletic build: eye witness account. Of course we all are subsequently informed this was a (conveniently dead) lone gunman…

 

Orlando nightclub shooting; eyewitnesses claim more than one shooter and accomplices preventing escapes, blocking exit doors from the outside, while shooting went on. Of course this morphed into a single, dead shooter…

Orlando eyewitnesses part 1:

Orlando eyewitnesses part 2:

 

The Navy Yard shootings generated initial reports of multiple gunmen at more than one location, but ultimately a single lone gunman is dead at the scene. But this one gets a little stickier; a swat team on location was ordered not to intervene and leave scene of the ongoing shooting: “A tactical response team from the force was told by a supervisor to leave the scene instead of aiding municipal officers, police sources told the BBC”

BBC_Navy_Yard_SWAT.jpg - 1

Aurora: The evidence covered up by law enforcement and the court in the ‘Batman’ theater shooting is nothing short of overwhelming. Video of close eyewitness accounts (<preceding link is expanded witness accounts) clearly detail the shooter(s) had inside help and this evidence is suppressed:

The only difference between the old domestic Gladio which had been western intelligence agencies engineering terror and the current version of domestic Gladio (Gladio B) is the label put on the enemies supposedly responsible; today’s boogeyman is radical Islam whereas previous to the fall of the Soviet Union the terror boogeyman was communism. A fifty minutes documentary of social engineering via GLADIO terror cells employed by intelligence agencies in Europe is a good place to start:

A postscript observation would be concerning historian Daniele Ganser’s otherwise excellent conclusions in his 2004 book NATO’s Secret Armies:

‘Prudent Precaution or source of Terror?’ the international press pointedly asked when the secret stay-behind armies of NATO were discovered across Western Europe following the Gladio revelations in Italy in late 1990.

After more than ten years of research and investigation the answer is now clear: Both. The secret stay-behind armies of NATO were a prudent precaution, as the available documents and testimonies amply demonstrate. Based on the experiences of the Second World War and the rapid and traumatic occupation of most European countries by the German and Italian forces, military experts feared the Soviet Union and became convinced that a stay-behind army could be of strategic value when it came to the liberation of the occupied territory. Behind enemy lines the secret army could have strengthened the resistance spirit of the population, helped in the running of an organised and armed national resistance, sabotaged and harassed the occupying forces, exfiltrated shot down pilots, and gathered intelligence for the government in exile.

Based on the fear of a potential invasion after the Second World War highly placed officials in the national European governments, in the European military secret services, in NATO as well as in the CIA and the MI6 therefore decided that a secret resistance network had to be set up already during peacetime. On a lower level in the hierarchy citizens and military officers in numerous countries of Western Europe shared this assessment, joined the conspiracy and secretly trained for the emergency. These preparations were not limited to the 16 NATO member countries, but included also the four neutral countries in Western Europe, namely Austria, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland, on which the author is preparing a second publication. In retrospect it has become obvious that the fear was without reason and the training had been futile for the invasion of the Red Army never came. Yet such a certainty was not available at the time. And it is telling that the cover of the network, despite repeated exposures in many countries during the entire Cold War, was only blown completely at exactly the same moment when the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed. The secret stay-behind armies of NATO, however, were also a source of terror, as the evidence available now shows. It has been this second feature of the secret war that has attracted a lot of attention and criticism in the last decade, and which in the future will need more investigation and research. As of now the evidence indicates that the governments of the United States and Great Britain after the end of the Second World War feared not only a Soviet invasion, but also the Communist Parties, and to a lesser degree the Socialist Parties. The White House and Downing Street feared that in several countries of Western Europe, and above all in Italy, France, Belgium, Finland and Greece, the Communists might reach positions of influence in the executive and destroy the military alliance NATO from within by betraying military secrets to the Soviet Union. It was in this sense that the Pentagon in Washington together with the CIA, MI6 and NATO in a secret war set up and operated the stay-behind armies as an instrument to manipulate and control the democracies of Western Europe from within, unknown to both European populations and parliaments. This strategy lead to terror and fear, as well as to “humiliation and maltreatment of democratic institutions’, as the European press correctly criticised.

Experts of the Cold War will note that Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies cast a new light on the question of sovereignty in Western Europe. It is now clear that as the Cold War divided Europe, brutality and terror was employed to control populations on both sides of the Iron Curtain. As far as Eastern Europe is concerned, this fact has long been recognised, long before it had been openly declared. After the Red Army had in 1968 mercilessly crushed the social reforms in Prag, Soviet leader Leonid Breschnew in Moscow with his infamous ‘Breschnew doctrine’ had openly declared that the countries of Eastern Europe were only allowed to enjoy ‘limited sovereignty’. As far as Western Europe is concerned the conviction of being sovereign and independent was shattered more recently. The data from Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies indicates a more subtle and hidden strategy to manipulate and limit the sovereignty, with great differences from country to country. Yet a limitation of sovereignty it was. And in each case where the stay-behind network in the absence of a Soviet invasion functioned as a straightjacket for the democracies of Western Europe, Operation Gladio was the Breschnew doctrine of Washington. The strategic rationale to protect NATO from within cannot be brushed aside lightly. But the manipulation of the democracies of Western Europe by Washington and London on a level which many in the European Union still today find difficult to believe clearly violated the rule of law and will require further debate and investigation. In some operations the secret stay-behind soldiers together with the secret military services monitored and filed left-wing politicians and spread anti-Communist propaganda. In more violent operations the secret war led to bloodshed. Tragically the secret warriors linked up with right-wing terrorists, a combination that led – in some countries including at least Belgium, Italy, France, Portugal, Spain, Greece and Turkey – to massacres, torture, coup d’etats and other violent acts. Most of these state-sponsored terrorist operations, as the subsequent cover-ups and fake trials suggest, enjoyed the encouragement and protection of selected highly placed governmental and military officials in Europe and in the United States. Members of the security apparatus and the government on both sides of the Atlantic who themselves despise being linked up with right-wing terrorism must in the future bring more clarity nd understanding into these tragic dimensions of the secret Cold War in Western Europe.

If Cold War experts will derive new data from NATO’s stay-behind network for their discourse on limited sovereignty during the Cold War, then international legal experts and analysts of dysfunctions of democracies will find data on the breakdown of checks and balances within each nation. The Gladio data indicates that the legislative was unable to control the more hidden branches of the executive, and that parliamentary control of secret services is often non-existing or dysfunctional in democracies on both sides of the Atlantic. Totalitarian states have long been known to have operated a great variety of largely uncontrolled and unaccountable secret services and secret armies. Yet to discover such serious dysfunctions also in numerous democracies comes as a great surprise, to say the least. Within this debate of checks and balances military officials have been correct to point out after the discovery of Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind network that there can never be such a thing as a ‘transparent stay-behind army’, for such a network would be exposed immediately in case of invasion and its members would be killed by the invasion force. Parliamentarians and constitutional lawyers meanwhile have been equally correct to emphasise that both the armed forces and the secret services of a democracy must at all times be transparent, accountable, controlled and supervised closely by civilian representatives of the people as they represent the most powerful instruments of the state.

This clash between mandatory secrecy and mandatory transparency, which lies at the heart of the Gladio phenomenon, directly points to the more general question of how much secrecy should be granted to the executive branch of a democracy. Judged from the Gladio evidence, where a lack of transparency and accountability has lead to corruption, abuse and terror, the answer is clear: The executive should be granted no secrecy and should at all times be controlled by the legislative. For a secret government, as it manifested itself in the United States and parts of Western Europe, can lead to abuse and even state terrorism. The growth of Intelligence abuses reflects a more general failure of our basic institutions’, US Senator Frank Church had wisely noted after a detailed investigation of CIA covert operations already in the 1970s. Gladio repeats this warning with a vengance.

It can hardly be overemphasised that running a secret army and funding an unaccountable intelligence service entails grave risks every democracy should seek to avoid. For the risks do not only include uncontrolled violence against groups of citizens, but mass manipulation of entire countries or continents. Among the most far-reaching findings on the secret war, as seen in the analysis, ranges the fact that the stay-behind network had served as a tool to spread fear amongst the population also in the absence of an invasion. The secret armies in some cases functioned as an almost perfect manipulation system that transported the fears of high-ranking military officers in the Pentagon and NATO to the populations in Western Europe. European citizens, as the strategists in the Pentagon saw it, due to their limited vision were unable to perceive the real and present danger of Communism, and therefore they had to be manipulated. By killing innocent citizens on market squares or in supermarkets and blaming the crime on the Communists the secret armies together with convinced right-wing terrorists effectively translated the fears of Pentagon strategists into very real fears of European citizens.

The destructive spiral of manipulation, fear and violence did not end with the fall of the Soviet Union and the discovery of the secret armies in 1990, but on the contrary gained momentum. Ever since the vicious terrorist attacks on the population of the United States on September 11, 2001 and the beginning of the ‘War on Terrorism’ fear and violence dominate not only the headlines across the globe but also the consciousness of millions. In the West the ‘evil Communist’ of the Cold War era has swiftly been replaced with the ‘evil Islamist’ of the war on terrorism era. With almost 3,000 civilians killed on September 11, and several thousands killed in the US-led war on terrorism so far with no end in sight, a new level of brutality has been reached.

Such an environment of fear, as the Gladio evidence shows, is ideally suited to manipulate the masses on both sides into more radical positions. Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaida terror network manipulated millions of Muslims, above all young male adults, to take up a radical position and believe in violence. On the other side also the White House and the administration of George Bush junior has fuelled the spiral of violence and fear and lead millions of Christians and seculars in the United States and in Europe to believe in the necessity and justice of killing other human beings in order to enhance their own security. Yet human security is not being advanced, but on the contrary decays, as the atmosphere is drenched with manipulation, violence and fear. Where the manipulation and the violence originate from and where they lead to, is at times very difficult to dissect. Hitler and the Nazis had profited greatly from manipulation and the fear in the wake of the mysterious Reichstagsbrand in Berlin in 1933, whereupon the Third Reich and Second World War followed. In 2001 the war on terrorism began, and once again radical critics have argued that the White House had manipulated 9/11, the largest terrorist attack in history, for geostrategic purposes.

As people across the globe share a vague sensation ‘that it cannot go on like that’ many search for an exit strategy from the spiral of violence, fear and manipulation. In Europe a consensus is building that terrorism cannot be defeated by war, as the latter feeds the spiral of violence, and hence the war on terrorism is not part of the solution but part of the problem. Furthermore also more high-tech – from retina scanning to smart containers – seems unable to really protect potential targets from terror attacks. More technology might even increase the challenges ahead when exploited for terrorist purposes and asymmetric warfare, a development observable ever since the invention of dynamite in the nineteenth century. Arguably more technology and more violence will therefore not solve the challenges ahead. A potential exit strategy from the spiral of fear, manipulation and violence might have to focus on the individual human being itself and a change of consciousness. Given its free will the individual can decide to focus on non-violent solutions of given problems and promote a dialogue of understanding and forgiveness in order to reduce extremist positions. The individual can break free from fear and manipulation by consciously concentrating on his or her very own feelings, thoughts, words and actions, and by focusing all of them on peaceful solutions. As more secrecy and more bloodshed are unlikely to solve the problems ahead the new millennium seems a particularly adequate time to begin with such a shift in consciousness which can have positive effects both for the world and for oneself.

Following on his excellent deconstructive analysis of GLADIO, Ganser’s epic fail is in the last paragraph where…

A potential exit strategy from the spiral of fear, manipulation and violence might have to focus on the individual human being itself and a change of consciousness. Given its free will the individual can decide to focus on non-violent solutions of given problems and promote a dialogue of understanding and forgiveness in order to reduce extremist positions. The individual can break free from fear and manipulation by consciously concentrating on his or her very own feelings, thoughts, words and actions, and by focusing all of them on peaceful solutions

…naively presuming the class of psychopaths risen to rule from the shadow will somehow magically correct the organic deficit in their personalities. What’s more and what’s worse is, on top of ‘leopards don’t shed their spots’ or criminals do not voluntarily surrender their business models, utterly missing is the ‘how’ that will be required; to weed out a pervasive criminal ‘deep state’ apparatus rooted in every branch and at every level across western democratic institutions. This septic infection of western democratic institutions has become the world’s largest and most entrenched organized crime family, where military-industrial corporate boards are fused with rogue intelligence agencies and ‘terror’ is essential to their bottom line: PROFIT. The stark reality is, generating terror has become a money making venture of such magnitude, were the symbiotic relationship between deliberately generated terror, and the armaments and related industries that derive immense profits from the same, were interrupted, the western culture’s economic engine would collapse.

Insofar as Genser’s ‘non-violence’ proposal, that is well and good, provided it is not manipulated akin to the Gene Sharp model where Ghandi’s moral and ethical principles had been suborned to amoral utilitarian ends based in ‘color revolutions.’ This evil, and those who’ve perpetrated it, must be put away. As well, Genser’s last paragraph should not be construed to allow the GLADIO criminal elements forgiveness along the lines of a ‘truth and reconciliation’ process, which is inconsistent with accountability and the rule of law. If the criminals were to walk free, the principle of deterence is not only rendered meaningless, recidivism would reinfect every institution.

The cycle of revolution attending the ‘rise and fall’ phenomena of the western civilized hierarchies throughout history demonstrates a failed model. At the end of the day, that required going forward will be more along the lines of a ‘reverse’ Social Darwinism where decentralization is the habit and the rule, and all those aspiring to the rise of hierarchy are speedily and effectively squelched; demanding an entirely new social perspective. The impediments to this are formidable.

Example given, rather than initiate a program to convert eastern Europe’s small farmers to organic production, when expanding, the European Union has forced tens (perhaps hundreds) of thousands of small farmers off the land with required equipment and farm to market ‘upgrades’ these small farmers could not afford or had no access to where the infrastructure did not exist, effectively handing ‘food security’ to multinational conglomerates such as Monsanto and Syngenta. Already a new generation is coming up having lost critical knowledge in community self-sufficiency. There have been few less criminal and anti-democratic acts in the annals of democracy; where the actual facts demand surrender of a community right to self-sufficiency. On the pretext of ‘sanitation’ the EU took away the largest source of clean, community produced foodstuffs and has positioned the likes of Monsanto and Syngenta to replace this vanished community produce with product that, were it labelled honestly, would sport a skull and crossed bones.

Every day that passes with these sort of events left unchecked, reduces the chances of intelligent dismantling of a system gone horrendously wrong; sans violence and escalated social trauma. Everyday that passes under the current criminal class of leadership, those GLADIO false flag actors represented in Obama, Cameron, Merkel, Hollande & company, who either cannot or will not look and act beyond the amorality of ‘Realpolitik’ and move on behalf of people rather than a corporate system which feeds on people, compounds the problem.

Each day of deferred action determines increased gravity in coming, inevitable, social collapse. It is the undeniable repeat history of western civilization. Short of intelligent dismantlement, a radical event in the age of the most lethal weapons the world has ever seen, there almost certainly will be no ‘phoenix’ rise from the western civilization’s ashes, this time. C’est la mort.

*

Related:

Deep State IV NATO & Gladio

Deep State V Economics & counter-insurgency

*

Ron10

In any democracy, ethics, self restraint, tolerance and honesty will always take a second seat to narcissism, avarice, bigotry & persecution, if only because people who play by the rules in any democracy are at a disadvantage to those who easily subvert the rules to their own advantage (Ronald’s Maxim)

Jews in the News

“We have become stupidly politically correct, which is the death of comedy. It’s not good for comedy. Comedy has to walk a thin line, take risks, comedy is the lecherous little elf whispering in the king’s ear, always telling the truth about human behavior” -Mel Brooks, 21 September 2017

Now, this preceding famous Jew’s quote via an anti-anti-Semitic website…

Jews_in_the_News - 1

…is linked to Breitbart:

Jews_in_the_News - 1 (1)

So, I already should be confused; Bannon’s allegedly anti-Semitic website (which has at least one ‘self-hating Jew’ columnist) gets a bone toss from an anti-anti-Semitic watchdog while the (accused) anti-Semitic Breitbart and Bannon are roundly warned against by The Times of Israel. Jesus! Could Mel Brooks sort that with comedy?

Mel Brooks very much appreciates the court jester tradition, a tradition under assault from all directions.

Now, what brought out this rant is, former Central Intelligence Agency officer Valerie “of Jewish descent” Plame is racked and pilloried for ‘tweeting’ former CIA officer Phil Giraldi’s column at Unz Review: America’s Jews Are Driving America’s Wars

What we have here is similarly ludicrous to my introduction; A Jew, Ron Unz, is providing a platform, the Unz Review, to an accused anti-Semite, Phil Giraldi, and when Valerie Plame points to Giraldi lambasting the same ‘usual suspects’ unloaded on by famous self-hating Jew Glenn Greenwald…

Jews_in_the_News - 1 (2)

…the press unloads on Plame with what amounts to a ‘journalistic’ rapid fire cannon (HERE, HERE and the academic ‘usual suspect’ HERE.)

‘The Hill’ includes this language:

“The article the former CIA operative linked to argues that the neoconservative foreign policy establishment is largely beholden to American Jews with an attachment to Israel. The article’s author, Philip Giraldi, says American Jews shouldn’t be allowed to make decisions related to Middle East policy”

Glenn Greenwald might argue it is the WRONG Jews allowed to make foreign policy. And that’s where Giraldi ‘stepped on his dick’ (a military expression) and I suspected from the moment I saw the title of his article he’d get blasted, because Giraldi didn’t (and mostly doesn’t) give attention to the manifold traps, where if you’re not watching where you walk, the all-encompassing term ‘Jew’ can lead to; because the word Jew is sort of like the La Brea tar-pit of nouns: whether self-hating Jews, apostate Jews, kinda Jews (not of a Jewish mother, also known as wild oats Jews), agnostic Jews, atheist Jews, Marxist Jews, Reform Jews, Reform-Jews-aren’t-Jews-Jews (hyper-Orthodox Israeli Rabbinate designated Jews), quit screwing over the world Jews (also known as Tikkun Olam Jews), Jews screwed over our world Jews (Sephardic Jews), waiting to be saved from themselves Jews (Bibi Netanyahu and his ilk), evangelizing Jews (also known as Jews for Jesus or cover for MOSSAD assassin Jews), J Street Jews, AIPAC Jews, neocon Jews, neo-liberal Jews (Soros), Jews on the Left, Jews on the right, stand up, sit down, Fight! Fight! Fight! It’s a pity Celebrity Death Match never pitted Glenn Greenwald against Alan Dershowitz, it’d be platinum at youtube:

As much as I’d have preferred a ‘Perfected Jew’ Ann Coulter versus ‘Kinda Jew’ Gloria Steinem death match (with no survivor), there’s no authentic center survives in today’s politically correct world lamented by a real hero: Mel Brooks (may he forever be blessed for Blazing Saddles.)

This brings us back to Giraldi and his ‘platform’ run by Ron Unz. Why is it ‘mainstream’ media fries Plame over Giraldi but neglects to mention Unz is Jewish? Is it because,  example given, Unz Review also hosts ‘Über-Zionist’ and historical revisionist Llana Mercer who states:

“Libertarians err in mistaking the 2,000-year-old Jewish right to the land for a biblically-based, religious claim. The claim is first and foremost historical, although naturally, the Hebrew community’s claim to its ancient homeland can’t be reduced to a title search at the deeds office. Jewish rights to Israel proceed from the original ownership of the land: The original and rightful owners were Jews. The fact that they were killed and exiled by the Romans doesn’t nullify their ownership”

Setting aside the upcoming potential evidence for hypocrisy, in case where Llana doesn’t seem to have read Jewish history from whence Israel had been created by exterminating the Canaanites, this recalls cartoonist Stan Lynde’s joke attributed to a Crow tribal chief:

“This has been Crow land from time immemorial, it was always Crow land, there has never been a time it was not Crow land, that is, ever since we took it from the Shoshones!

Considering:

Canaanite is by far the most frequently used ethnic term in the Bible. In the Book of Joshua, Canaanites are included in a list of nations to exterminate, and later described as a group which the Israelites had annihilated”

One would think a Jew, that is Llana Mercer, would get her own book right, what a shame Louis Black didn’t notice her commonality with certain televangelist Christians:

In fact Israel’s right to exist as a modern state is due solely to certain United Nations acts Arab states are bound by for the very fact the Arab states joined the United Nations and contracted themselves to the western standard of international law. Certainly a case of ‘it sucks for Palestinians’ (particularly going to the Israeli middle finger put to subsequent UN acts) but that’s the shit which actually matters.

And so it is, relating to Plame read Giraldi, an act worthy of politically correct firing squad, no one in ‘mainstream’ notes Ron Unz is a Jew who hosts a Paleo Zionist (read pro-Israel propagandist) who deliberately doesn’t get her history right. Mainstream press would leave the impression Giraldi is hosted by an anti-Israel/anti-Semitic website.

Now again back to Giraldi: I read Giraldi because he’s a spook. Likely Plame read Giraldi because she’s a spook. Now, if Greenwald, far out on the liberal-left, and Giraldi, far out on the conservative-right, finger the same neocons who happen to be Jews, that should inform you they’re onto something. Would it matter if Giraldi were anti-Semitic in the case of his noticing an accurate fact? Or does the fact die to conform Plame to a politically correct history of events? Considering the media phenomenon of ‘hasbara‘ and certain outcome in western press resembling this, professional spy Giraldi’s accusations against western media should merit further investigation:

“Hasbara is a form of propaganda aimed at an international audience, primarily, but not exclusively, in western countries. It is meant to influence the conversation in a way that positively portrays Israeli political moves and policies, including actions undertaken by Israel in the past”

Meanwhile, let’s look at a couple cases of historical, however highly politically incorrect, exemplary causes of anti-Semitism:

The Nakba

“For refugees, camps were shelters for the reconstruction of personal and social life, but were also seen as sites of great political significance, the material testimony of what was destroyed and ‘all that remains’ of more than four hundred cities, towns and villages forcefully cleansed throughout Palestine in the Nakba of 1947-9. This is the reason refugees sometimes refer to the destruction of camps as ‘the destruction of destruction.’ The camp is not a home, it is a temporary arrangement, and its destruction is but the last iteration in an ongoing process of destruction.

“This rhetoric of double negation – the negation of negation – tallies well with what Saree Makdisi, talking about the Israeli refusal to acknowledge the Nakba, has termed ‘the denial of denial’, which is, he says, ‘a form of foreclosure that produces the inability – the absolutely honest, sincere incapacity – to acknowledge that denial and erasure have themselves been erased in turn and purged from consciousness.’ What has been denied is continuously repeated: Israel keeps on inflicting destruction on refugees and keeps on denying that a wrong has been done” –Eyal Weizman: ‘The Least Of All Possible Evils’ (Humanitarian Violence From Arendt To Gaza)

Following on this preceding act, Cairo’s Sephardic Jewish population dropped from 75,000 to less than 100. The Arab world had become anti-Semitic practically overnight (overlooking oxymoron in the term anti-Semitic, Arabs are a Semitic people.)

Meanwhile, about the time indigenous Jews had been abandoning the Arab world on account of blow-back due  to ‘Jewish State’ behavior, Alan Ginsberg had revolted conservative America with exploits disgustingly glorified, in detail, by Jack Kerouac in his ode to debauchery ‘On the Road.’ Ginsberg, his behavior lauded by the New York Times via Kerouac and subsequently his own ‘howl‘, is the one American responsible for more USA anti-Semitism than the entirety of whatever other reasons exist taken together. How this shit is generated and real, is buried within political correctness. Never did a ‘free press’ fuck over more people who happen to be Jews, by generating hate at a single pop with glorifying the personage of Ginsberg, but HEY! that’s ‘free speech’ in America.

If my despise for Ginsberg is anti-Semitic (as a non-Jew, am I entitled to hate a single Jew?), then not only is Giraldi anti-Semitic but so would be Paleo-Zionist Llana Mercer.

If you care to wade through the sewer of anti-Semitism in  the comments at Giraldi’s columns at Unz Review, you’ll see Giraldi, on occasion, show his temper at anti-Semitic accusations, and also you’ll notice those comments bashing the anti-Semite morons who cling to Giraldi’s work like flies attracted to stink, are also allowed to post.

Whether Giraldi is an anti-Semite is probably a matter of interpretation. He doesn’t do well at separating out Jews of differing persuasions is the kinder interpretation, as his terminology is often all too inclusive. But this kinder interpretation could be correct. A big step he could take in the right direction would be to clean up his ‘forum’ (article comments) with disallowing the hate-mongers’ posts. But then, that’s an ‘in principle’ violation of ‘free speech’ in the conservative American tradition. An ACLU case of  ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ or ‘it sucks for Phil.’

Insofar as Ron Unz, a read through a chapter of his American Pravda reveals a self-honesty rare in today’s world; leading one to possibly understand his willingness to entertain spooks, kooks and pukes from across the spectrum of what would otherwise be largely suppressed voices. Clearly, Unz coined the term ‘American Pravda’ for a reason. Beyond this, there are numerous innate political enemies juxtaposed at the Unz Review and that should speak to something.

At the end of the day (and hopefully not the world), Jews are like anyone else; there are good and bad among them, they have their bright and they have their ugly. That just makes us all equal in a geopolitic where everyone uses everyone and certainly the Israelis both use and get used (too willingly) in concert with those Christian Zionist allies fully intending at the end, all Jews will be either converted or dead and a crusader banner flying from the Temple Mount. That’s amazing to me but nobody seems to have a trademark protection on self destructive behaviors.

I have to close this diatribe, and considering the underlying current of the entire business has to do with 3rd parties allegedly fighting Israel’s wars, with spooks in the spotlight, I’ll close with an Israeli spook:

“I am a humbler man today than I was in the 1970s when I joined Israeli intelligence. I’ve learned the hard way that everyone makes mistakes, some of them so big that they are irrevocable. I’ve also changed my view of Israel and the Jewish people. When I was young, I shared with many Israelis a deep nationalistic feeling — the self-righteous and arrogant belief that we were right and everyone else was wrong, that it was more important for Jews and Israel to survive than others, that we were — as the Bible says — the chosen people. I still believe that Jews are chosen. But no longer can I accept the premise on which the Iranian arms deals were based: ‘Better that their boys die than ours.’ People are people. We are all chosen”Ari Ben-Menashe

*

Giraldi’s rebuttal to the controversy in ‘mainstream’ (external link)

Related at this site:

Christian anti-Semitism

Friedman and the ‘Narrative’

Comic story of a ‘kinda Jew’ girlfriend

20 February 2018 update: Kim Dotcom weighs in:

16 September 2017 update: Antiwar.com reports:

“Under this deal, which was reported by the Wall Street Journal, Assange would provide conclusive proof that Russia was not the source of hacked emails WikiLeaks published. In return, he would be offered a pardon, or some other assurance that he wouldn’t be prosecuted by the US for involvement in WikiLeaks.

“Rohrabacher brought this deal to the White House Wednesday [13 September 2017], but Chief of Staff John Kelly not only apparently didn’t like the offer, but didn’t tell President Trump that the offer had been made, instead telling Rohrabacher to take the proposal to the intelligence community.

“The intelligence community almost certainly wouldn’t be in a position to offer any sort of amnesty for Assange, which likely means the end of the proposal. Rohrabacher offered to set up a meeting between Assange and a Trump representative, but that too appears to have been dismissed by Kelly”

So, the generals keep Trump sequestered like the Vatican keeps a rampant pedophile priest under wraps; away from any real work and responsibilities (in this case, kept from knowledge of what’s actually going on in the world.) But now, with the Wall Street Journal blowing the whistle, Ivanka should soon be whispering in her daddy’s ear; and what will tell you everything is, what happens next. Suppose Trump keeps his mouth shut and says nothing? This will indicate the absolute completion of the Pence aligned generals capture of the Oval Office.

But the real news here is, Assange provides evidence of his belief that he is personally more important than any unconditional release of information which should stop the Pentagon and NATO’s pursuit of a war footing directed at Russia in its tracks.

Narcissism? Is there a stronger word? Julian Assange, who fancies himself ‘Jesus of the Digital Age’ would appear to be tired of bearing his cross. The Roman’s puppet, King Herod, hasn’t been authorized to provide the pardon and Pontius Pilate’s (read Mike Pompeo’s) people will deliver Jesus of the Digital Age to crucifixtion on behalf of the ‘duopoly’ mob, to satisfy their blood lust. Good luck with the world’s biggest ‘deal-maker’ (read loser) Wikileaks, because you blew it by waiting too long.

The entire sand-castle (a product of Obama CIA Director John Brennan’s imagination) the “Russians hacked the election” is finally washing away with an incoming tide. How this plays out is anyone’s guess.

The open question is, how the new information will be leveraged, if it were to actually break into the open widely, with the bad boy Trump essentially captured by the surreal evil that surrounds him. Other than pure evil (e.g. Pence), only a narcissist or a fool would ever desire to be president of this particular republic. In ‘The Donald’, we have both.

1 August 2017 an audio tape is leaked in which Seymour Hersh states the FBI knows it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails:

“What the [FBI] report says is that some time in late Spring… he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that’s in his computer. Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents — of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC” -Seymour Hersh

On 9 August 2017 The Nation magazine publishes a column on a group of independent experts…

“Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year”

…demonstrating the DNC mails were leaked, not hacked.

On 18 August 2017 Antiwar.com reports Congressman Dana  Rohrabacher has met with Assange concerning the DNC mails and [the article] further credibly suggests Assange is holding the DNC leak evidence hostage as a bargaining chip to possibly acquire a pardon for himself and leverage wikileaks into legitimacy with a President of the United States who at this point is owned by the USA’s intelligence agencies, a hare-brained scheme destined to fail. Assange & company waited too long.

But this would fit Julian Assange’s self-centered, persecuted-savior complex which never ceases to amaze, this guy (as well, Craig Murray) has allowed the idiots surrounding Trump to push us towards the brink with Russia, for months. All because Assange is tired of his embassy confinement in London, a circumstance that is entirely his own fault for the fact he didn’t have the self-discipline to keep his dick in his pants (whether Assange’s admitted intercourse was a case of rape or not.)

What’s more is, this blog pointed to strong circumstantial evidence it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails this past January, and recalling this, it still stretches the imagination a former UK ambassador would make an amateur espionage move worthy of a cub scout playing spy. But that’s what Craig Murray had done in the case of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

Seymour Hersh states Seth Rich is the source of the DNC mails. Craig Murray states he had met with the source of the DNC mails. A + B = C:

Craig Murray met with Seth Rich

That Murray would be a high value target for American counter-intelligence to monitor for the reason of his high profile association with WikiLeaks is beyond obvious. For Murray then to state

murray_wikileaks-1

“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

…goes to the practically bizarre when coming from a former United Kingdom ambassador to Uzbekistan. The UK is little different to the USA in the case of embassies providing cover for spies; in which case Murray should at least have some rudimentary espionage understanding such as YOU DO NOT MEET YOUR SOURCE DIRECTLY WHEN YOU ARE A HIGH PROFILE TARGET OF YOUR ADVERSARY’S COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE HUNTING YOUR (in this case, WikiLeaks) SOURCE(S)

Then, we had WikiLeak’s Assange giving what amounts to a ‘Glomar’ ‘I will neither confirm or deny’ response concerning the murder (assassination) of Seth Rich after appearing to suggest Rich was the source of the DNC emails leak:

Beyond this, WikiLeaks offering a $20,000 reward for the solving of the Seth Rich murder is laughable, that’s what an American west coast upscale community would offer for the arrest of a serial killer of the neighborhood’s cats. Two million dollars might get two seconds’ attention of a corruptible counter-intelligence agent with knowledge of a professional hit on Seth Rich, twenty million might even net an inside the agency sucker willing to take the exceedingly high risk to one’s life (almost certain death) that would attend selling out an agency hit man for substantial lucre. In truth, the WikiLeaks reward offer amounted to little more than a tabloid publicity stunt.

Narcissism is a blinding thing; and a self-righteous narcissism is no exception. Ambassador Murray could have every good intention but on the face of it, he had seriously screwed up. Murray and WikiLeaks should have immediately come clean, there was little to lose. Seth Rich was the source, Murray had met with him, and much could have been gained by stating so; there would be nothing given up any intelligence agency involved did not already know. It have been the right thing to do.

Craig Murray stating ‘I had a serious lapse of professional judgement and this resulted in the death of Seth Rich’ would be the most responsible and newsworthy move WikiLeaks could have taken; to counter the CIA’s ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ propaganda lie, in which there is much invested by the agency; and the consequent damage to relations with Russia, and growing threat to what little world peace yet exists, is immense. WikiLeaks should have done the right thing a long time ago and they have not. Why not? Because Assange and WikiLeaks believes Assange’s comfort is more important than world peace. What fucks. This is beyond inexcusable, it’s criminal. But for Murray, there’s more at stake here than just a hit to ego & image.

Murray’s likely role in the DNC leaks case? A personal meeting with Rich to confirm for WikiLeaks Seth Rich was a bona fide insider with authentic material prior to a WikiLeaks cash payment to Rich and arrangements completed for the mails transfer.

Now, it is a question of ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ release the evidence because WikiLeaks waited too long, and let the criminals surrounding Trump consolidate their power while investing deeply in the myth of the Russians hacked the election; a criminal cabal that will up the ante on the world stage to any level necessary to avoid accountability. WikiLeaks Idiots. WikiLeaks Morons.

Meanwhile, Murray subsequently barred from the United States (except that he applies for a visa, typically unnecessary for a British citizen) appears to have been, in a  manner of speaking, a deep state message to Murray: ‘thank you very much for the lapse of judgement, we have taken full advantage with the assassination of Seth Rich and we won’t be requiring your services after this’ (he’d be smart to stay away.)

The really sticky problem for WikiLeaks in this scenario is, Seymour Hersh asserts in the  recorded call WikiLeaks had paid Rich for the leaked documents, damaging or reducing to element of pretense WikiLeaks claims of journalism & providing rationale for deep state prosecutors & judges to find this had been straightforward espionage. But they won’t do it if the Rich-Murray meeting stays buried, a LOT is invested in ‘the Russians did it’ for the public consumption. If it DOES break open, Murray’s ‘goose is cooked.’ It’s now not only WikiLeaks problem in a larger sense, but Murray’s, whether he does or doesn’t admit the assassinated Seth Rich had been the DNC mails source.

Murray’s reputation? C’est la mort.

*

A prime candidate for assassin of Seth Rich HERE

Related articles at: On Wikileaks

 

%d bloggers like this: