Archives for category: false flag

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.

*

Related articles at: On Wikileaks

 

I watched the second plane strike live on tv, and since, had seen zoomed in footage (from much closer & different angle) of a cargo model jet dressed up (painted) like a passenger jet hitting the building. This plane had a ‘pod’ attached to its underside, I’ve not seen in any commercial plane model, passenger or cargo, before or since. For myself, when it comes to our government’s ‘stories’ and the same endlessly repeated in the western democracies commercial news, nothing will ever be seen the same; meanwhile a couple thousand trained architects and engineers see things differently too:

“On September 11, 2001, the three worst structural failures in modern history took place when World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7 suffered complete and rapid destruction.

“In the aftermath of the tragedy, most members of the architecture and engineering community, as well as the general public, assumed that the buildings’ destruction had occurred as a result of the airplane impacts and fires. This view was reinforced by subsequent federal investigations, culminating in FEMA’s 2002 Building Performance Study and in the 2005 and 2008 reports by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

“Since 9/11, however, independent researchers around the world have assembled a large body of evidence that overwhelmingly refutes the notion that airplane impacts and fires caused the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7. This body of evidence, most of which FEMA and NIST omitted from their reports, instead supports the troubling conclusion that all three skyscrapers were destroyed in a process known as “controlled demolition,” where explosives and/or other devices are used to bring down a building”

Key Evidence

  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.

The preceding (italicized) from Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth. Follows is my own article from 2013:

Fear of Minor Debris

If you can wrap your head around the fact over 2,200 certified architects & engineers have directly disputed the official report on 9/11, that’s a good start. Now, consider what happened to a 47 story steel & concrete modern structure on the afternoon of 9/11.

No plane hit Building 7, only minor debris

Building 7 is the only modern steel structure in the world purportedly brought down by minor fire, compared to other steel structures surviving much larger & more intense fires.

The 1,500 professionally trained architects & engineers who dispute the government’s WTC Building 7 collapse explanation (above video) has grown to 2,200 professionally trained architects & engineers who dispute the government’s WTC Building 7 collapse explanation (below video)

And an entirely independent BYU scientist draws identical conclusion:

And the highest ranking former intelligence officer yet to speak out on what’s wrong with the 9/11 picture, Major General Stubblebine:

Then,  a five minute explanation of about 10% of what’s wrong with the ‘official’ 9/11 account:

If that gets your interest, at Asia Times there is an exclusive investigative report on 9/11 related ‘put options’ or “insider trading” based on advance knowledge of the attack.

With this evidence, people should look more closely at what had happened on 9/11:

http://architects-engineers.org/

And a big question has remained swept under the rug; how is it several of the supposed ‘hijackers’ subsequently appear to have turned up alive?

“Of the 19 identities assigned by the FBI to the alleged suicide hijackers of the four commandeered jetliners, at least six have been disputed”

Did stolen passports provide their identity? We now know this has been an Israeli method, since a blown operation in Dubai:

“Six more innocent Britons were thrust into the international murder plot of a Hamas leader after it emerged yesterday that their identities had also been stolen. The revelation means at least 12 British identities were cloned to carry out the audacious hit on Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai. Dubai police yesterday identified 15 new suspects over the attack at a luxury hotel, bringing the total number to 26. The assassination, which bears all the hallmarks of a spy novel, is widely believed to be the work of Israel’s feared secret service Mossad”

Perhaps the preceding article is too friendly to MOSSAD with ‘suspected’, it could be stated with some clarity we know most certainly a fake passport scheme was utilized by MOSSAD, on account of a case in Germany:

“The man, using the name Uri Brodsky, is suspected of working for Mossad in Germany and helping to issue a fake German passport to a member of the Mossad operation that allegedly killed Hamas agent Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai in January, a spokesman for the German federal prosecutor’s office told The Associated Press”

In fact, with intelligence agencies using stolen or fraudulently acquired passports for operations, and with strong circumstantial evidence of 9/11 accused hijackers turning up alive, evidence swept under the carpet rather than thoroughly investigated, the identity of every alleged hijacker can be said to be in doubt. And then we have:

“They [FBI] feel the higher echelons torpedoed the investigation into the Israeli New Jersey cell. Leads were not fully investigated”. Among those lost leads was the figure of Dominik Suter, whom the U.S. authorities apparently never attempted to contact. Intelligence expert and author James Bamford told me there was similar frustration within the CIA: “People I’ve talked to at the CIA were outraged at what was going on. They thought it was outrageous that there hadn’t been a real investigation, that the facts were hanging out there without any conclusion”

And:

“What is perhaps most damning is that the Israelis’ [MOSSAD] celebration on the New Jersey waterfront occurred in the first sixteen minutes after the initial crash, when no one was aware this was a terrorist attack. In other words, from the time the first plane hit the north tower, at 8:46 a.m., to the time the second plane hit the south tower, at 9:02 a.m., the overwhelming assumption of news outlets and government officials was that the plane’s impact was simply a terrible accident. It was only after the second plane hit that suspicions were aroused. Yet if the men were cheering for political reasons, as they reportedly told the FBI, they obviously believed they were witnessing a terrorist act, and not an accident”

With just these few preceding tidbits of verifiable information, the official explanation for 9/11 suddenly seems more far-fetched than those claims of some so-called ‘conspiracy’ theorists:

‘War by Deception’

On top of inaccurate identities, the accepting what appears to be a government claim WTC Building 7 died of fright, and uninvestigated [by law enforcement] insider trading of ‘put options’ demanding 9/11 be pulled off as presently written into the record to make a profit, what more is needed to understand the 9/11 Commission engaged in a whitewash?

Fear, nothing more, prevents solving the mystery of Building 7. Every western industrialized national leader who sits silent on Building 7 intelligence reports contributes to a culture of deceit & cowardice

**

My Updated Analysis (notes)

The most likely criminal cabal behind 9/11 finds its roots in the 1980s, when Shimon Peres, with CIA complicity, sought to open a competing channel to arm Iran via the Iran-Contra business model, as noted by Ari Ben Menache’s ‘Profits of War’, and accomplished little more than provide a screen for the 1st (LIKUD aligned MOSSAD) channel; in the event the CIA-MOSSAD joint venture was to spill into the open. It is my opinion this is why George H.W. Bush and Robert Gates’ CIA allowed the 2nd (Peres-Labor) channel to set itself up in business (Reagan’s Vice President Bush had been career CIA and Robert Gates was running the CIA for Bill Casey.) From their point of view, it was a prescient move on account of the difficulty of keeping something as big as this had become, under wraps. In fact, Iran-Contra’s 1st channnel never missed a beat and went on as though the scandal had never broken into the news. What is important to note is, profits from Iran-Contra were funding corrupt political leadership and their programs, in the 1980s, on the Israeli side, Iran Contra was propping up LIKUD and West Bank settlement expansion. On the USA side, Iran-Contra profits was bankrolling the criminal enterprise of the Bush dynasty and associated politics. The cooperation between the intelligence assets on the political right has been longstanding between the American and Israeli entities.

Robert Parry’s journalism notwithstanding, the authentic facts of Iran-Contra were never reported on in mainstream. What had been reported as the most salient facts were essentially a smokescreen. This is reinforced by the fact Newsweek had virulently attacked Ari Ben-Menache’s narrative on publication; not long after presenting Robert Parry’s reporting on Iran-Contra as fact. These are irreconcilable phenomena except in the case of Ben-Menache’s considerably expanded account, undermining the limited picture spoon fed to the public by the press, is correct. The Iran-Contra ‘cover’ story had to be protected, investigations were ongoing and the CIA had engineered damage control. North and Poindexter et al, as complicit and stupid as they were, were nonetheless patsies. Robert Parry’s reporting over the ensuing years reinforces the idea his role, all along, has been that of a disinformation asset, whether willing or unwitting, for the CIA. Parry has moved on to pervert American constitutional history in contradiction of (one could say smearing) the anti-federalists intentions relating to checks on a central government, he had put a lot of energy into being an apologist for the inexcusable Obama (laying blame on neo-cons working for Obama as though Obama were not complicit) and, not least, Parry denies the incontrovertible fact the official 9/11 report white-washed the actual circumstance of the collapse of the twin towers and the several hours later destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 (in the afternoon) of 11 September, 2001.

Recalling Robert McFarlane, Ronald Reagan’s National Security Adviser, had been working for Israeli intelligence, there is practically no position in American government cannot be construed to be at risk of penetration and compromise via AIPAC. How this might play in the events of 9/11 is open to conjecture; Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister on 9/11, was a man possessed of the necessary character to murder three thousand people in a gambit to get the USA to fight Israel’s wars, this much is clear. Whether MOSSAD had co-opted enough key people in the USA security apparatus to bring it off, is not. At odds with the Israelis’ initiating the attacks is the fact of Dick Cheney ordering the New York area air defense shut down for the morning of 11 September, while a ‘coincidental’ exercise was to be run simulating a ‘terrorist attack’ with jet liners crashing into New York sky-scrapers. Could Cheney’s team all have been Israeli assets? It seems unlikely. On the other hand, it is classic Israeli style to use their enemies, wherever possible, to take care of their most dirty work. And America is LIKUD’s enemy in a cold political calculation. Related to this, however MOSSAD and Saudi intelligence might cooperate in common geopolitical interests, most certainly Israel and Saudi Arabia are not friends. Utilizing al-Qaida as a front to initiate the attacks, or utilizing Saudis as patsies for a false-flag ‘terrorist’ attack, either one, is consistent with Israeli style; in the past MOSSAD has laundered operations through the Palestine Liberation Organization for purpose of everything from terrorism for propaganda purposes, to political murders.

An alternative possibility is the Israelis duping the USA’s people into assisting with their operation. The Israelis may have/had the necessary access and certainly the motivation; whereas the Americans have repeatedly demonstrated they are guilty of that particular brand of hubris that is blinding.

Another possible scenario is the USA’s geopolitical intelligence engineers having penetrated an Israeli operation and opened doors for the 9/11 actors, basically rolling out the red carpet for an Israeli run operation, unbeknownst to the Israelis, a covert co-option if you will.

A fourth possibility is a joint venture.

A fifth possibility is the Bush criminal syndicate responsible for 9/11, taking care to frame the Israelis in case the operation were to unravel.

In any of these hypothesis, Rudy Guiliani having located his disaster headquarters in WTC Building 7, is key. Building 7’s demolition can been seen as obliteration of evidence; as it ‘fell down’ on the afternoon of 9/11 and profiles as a deliberately demolished command center.

My own estimation is, based on a history of CIA/MOSSAD cooperation, the fourth and fifth possibilities are most likely, with elements of both integrated to the actual facts. Backstabbing is a common phenomenon in geopolitical dirty play.

What’s almost certain is, the Saudis, no matter how dirty and complicit, were cynically used and Al-Qaida was a minor actor, a dupe and cover story, and was not primarily responsible for 9/11.

Insofar as responsibility & accountability, there is none. These agencies or actors, with the possible exception of al-Qaida, would have access to tactical nuclear weapons or ‘suitcase nukes’ for purpose of false-flag terrorism, were it to come to the likes of a Bibi Netanyahu, or Bush crime syndicate and minions, in effect the associated Doug Coe cult, determinated to up the ante as opposed to face accountability.

That’s where you have Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, and Jeff Sessions, examples given, in the shoes of Dick Cheney, Robert Gates, and John Ashcroft in today’s politic –

*

What follows should be viewed as a more honest ‘part two’ of the preceding post authored by Andreago Ferreira of Akamai Tree blog, noting Andreago Ferreira is a pseudonym, the author does not publish under his authentic identity –

I’d moved on to read part two of the Akamai Tree assessment, part one being on Snowden, part two being on Wikileaks, and one should never be surprised at a second result at seeming cross-purposes with a first result. I spotted several ‘weaknesses’ (read mistakes) in the 2nd article and when I touched on those mistakes with a comment, the ‘mistakes’ morphed into disinformation with the author’s reply.

Akamai - 1

My comment:

There has been a growing ‘preponderance of the evidence’ the DNC mails were leaked by Rich. You can find that in the title ‘incompetent espionage and wikileaks’ at my blog, if interested. Also, the article disappoints in its’ missing ‘the other family’ which Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions (and more) belong to (of ‘C Street’ infamy, exposed by Jeff Sharlet.)

The Snowden piece (part one) is much stronger

Was met with this reply:

As far as I can tell, there is virtually no even remotely compelling evidence that Rich leaked the DNC emails. The ‘forensicator’ report is highly misleading and many of the claims in it are outright false (particularly the claims regarding data transfer rates/download speeds).

Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions are way outside the scope of this blog post as well as the two-part series as a whole, so I really don’t feel as though their exclusion is of any consequence at all or that including them would have added anything to the core points being made here

Clearly, while throwing Snowden (probably deservedly/accurately) and Assange (deservedly but very inaccurately) under the bus, the blog author appears to be shielding Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions, and covering for the assassins of Seth Rich. Oops.

I will address self-labeled “propagandist” Andreago Ferreira’s (I have a screenshot of his old Blogspot ‘about me’) rebuttals to my comment in reverse order, dealing with his following, first:

Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions are way outside the scope of this blog post as well as the two-part series as a whole, so I really don’t feel as though their exclusion is of any consequence at all or that including them would have added anything to the core points being made here

Well, I’m not really certain how Ferreira expects he can drive that particular square peg into this round hole:

Akamai - 1 (1)

If Trump were truly a dire threat to the deep state and the media was entirely in the pocket of the Clinton crime family as the altmedia goons suggest, subtle orders filtered down through media executives and top editors (nearly all of whom play ball with the power-elite and have intelligence connections) would have made sure that Trump be utterly blacked out in the media and treated as a mere nuisance as opposed to a legitimate threat to democracy, guaranteeing that he be relegated to obscurity, as for example Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan were. Political outsiders are simply not given full control of the news cycle. The truth is that Donald Trump, contrary to both the alternative and mainstream media, is a long-time political insider who’s throughout his life had intimate ties to some of the most powerful men in the world and installed into the Oval Office by very same kinds of people his base loathes; he’s the latest in the line of phony political outsiders which includes Ross Perot, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Ted Cruz, etc. and has been thrust into power by an alliance of the American conservative/defense establishment and the international Zionist syndicate under former CIA director and top neoconservative Zionist James Woolsey. These groups are vying for power within the administration as well as consorting and scheming with the liberal “globalist” establishment, which has managed to install numerous members in the administration

His preceding is actually a somewhat astute observation but cannot be squared with excluding Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions as “way outside the scope of this blog post” as Ferreira maintained in his comment/rebuttal of myself. How’s that? It is as simple as his paragraph’s last sentence:

These groups are vying for power within the administration as well as consorting and scheming with the liberal “globalist” establishment, which has managed to install numerous members in the administration

There is no group “vying for power in the administration” more successfully than the group represented in Mike Pence (whose role model is Dick Cheney), the administrations highest ranking member of the Coe cult, also known as ‘The Fellowship’ and ‘The Family’ which now holds the office of the Vice Presidency. Who’re these people? Here’s a small sampling:

Men under the Family’s religio-political counsel include, in addition to Ensign, Coburn and Pickering, Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham, both R-S.C.; James Inhofe, R-Okla., John Thune, R-S.D., and recent senators and high officials such as John Ashcroft, Ed Meese, Pete Domenici and Don Nickles. Over in the House there’s Joe Pitts, R-Penn., Frank Wolf, R-Va., Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., Ander Crenshaw, R-Fla., Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., Jo Ann Emerson, R-Mo., and John R. Carter, R-Texas. Historically, the Family has been strongly Republican, but it includes Democrats, too. There’s Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, for instance, a vocal defender of putting the Ten Commandments in public places, and Sen. Mark Pryor, the pro-war Arkansas Democrat responsible for scuttling Obama’s labor agenda. Sen. Pryor explained to me the meaning of bipartisanship he’d learned through the Family: “Jesus didn’t come to take sides. He came to take over.” And by Jesus, the Family means the Family

Other than Vice President Pence, known top ‘family’ members in the  administration include Jeff Sessions who neatly abandoned Trump, resulting in special counsel Robert Mueller’s ‘the Russians did it’ coming travesty of Justice (Mueller should be famous for what he DID NOT investigate when heading up the FBI, like CIA narcotics trafficking and related money laundering), as well Dan Coats, the Director of National Intelligence, plugging ‘the family’ into American intelligence across the spectrum.

My source closely investigating these people states Mike Pompeo is a suspected member and it would appear Betsy DeVos is aligned and closely collaborating.

Who was present when then president-elect Trump was introduced to the movement’s leader? Mike Pence, who is responsible for General Mike Flynn’s departure from the administration.

coe_trumo_meet-1

Every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1953 has spoken at the breakfast, a point made at the meeting to Trump by the evangelical lay minister Douglas Coe, a leader in The Fellowship religious organization, according to Coons. Also attending the meeting with Trump was Boozman, Vice President-elect Mike Pence, and several of Trump’s faith advisers

Now, somehow these people are outside the purview of Ferreira’s “groups … vying for power within the administration” with his “Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions are way outside the scope of this blog post” despite they’ve not only fired Flynn, and have undermined Trump with stepping out of the  way of appointing Robert Mueller special counsel, they seem to have mostly brought Tillerson to heel (if indeed Tillerson was ever ‘friendly’ towards the Russians) and they’re likely behind having rid Trump of Bannon, related to Pence aligned generals consolidating control; recalling it was General Kelly sent Bannon packing:

Akamai - 1

Now, going to the ‘vying for control’, lets have a look a little closer at who’s actually doing the ‘vying.’ Would you believe Bannon’s nationalists versus the Coe Cult’s (read Pence’s) internationalists?

Akamai - 1 (2)

Khan, meanwhile, told me he was sought out by Doug Coe, head of The Family, the secretive fundamentalist group which, as Jeff Sharlet reported in his book The Family and C Street, facilitates prayer and meetings for the elite politicians and businessmen that group considers to be Jesus’s “key men”

So, we have Coe’s people (preceding) locked into a fight with (Bannon aligned) Islamophobes:

Akamai - 1 (3)

And May’s Sharia panel, which featured former CIA director James Woolsey

Huh. Why does Woolsey ring a bell? Probably because he’s a main bad guy (he TRULY IS bad) picked on by Ferreira, recalling his claiming accurately:

Donald Trump, contrary to both the alternative and mainstream media, is a long-time political insider who’s throughout his life had intimate ties to some of the most powerful men in the world and installed into the Oval Office by very same kinds of people his base loathes […] and has been thrust into power by an alliance of the American conservative/defense establishment and the international Zionist syndicate under former CIA director and top neoconservative Zionist James Woolsey

WHY, then, would self-labeled “propagandist” Ferreira use the classic disinformation technique of simply making a false and unsupported assertion (he’s too savvy not to  know better) of…

Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions are way outside the scope of this blog post

…when Pence and Sessions are clearly big-league players in his:

groups […] vying for power within the administration”

This brings us to the other portion of his comment/rebuttal of my short remarks at his blog:

As far as I can tell, there is virtually no even remotely compelling evidence that Rich leaked the DNC emails. The ‘forensicator’ report is highly misleading and many of the claims in it are outright false (particularly the claims regarding data transfer rates/download speeds)

Because if you were a Clintonista…

Akamai - 1 (1)

^ Ferreira’s old Blogspot ‘about me’

…and Ferreira most certainly is, you’d have a lot invested in ‘the Russians hacked the election’ (a Hillary mantra, and Hillary, by the way, has more than flirted with the Coe cult in the past) and this requires not only supporting the aligned (through pretending they are outside the scope of discussion) Doug Coe cult’s Pence, whose people are also deeply invested in ‘the Russians did it’ bullshit, but also requires covering for the assassins of Seth Rich, the leaker who accordingly needed removed from every sense of reality, not only this life. But first, let’s go to his…

The ‘forensicator’ report is highly misleading and many of the claims in it are outright false (particularly the claims regarding data transfer rates/download speeds)

…and then have a look at what the supporting and dissenting experts say.

Akamai - 1 (4)

Given that the Snowden leaks didn’t really reveal much that we didn’t already know from William Binney, Tom Drake, James Bamford as well as whistleblowers from other agencies and exposes from the ’70s onward about the “Five Eyes”/ECHELON comprehensive electronic surveillance network

Noting Ferreira tossed a bone to both William Binney and Thomas Drake in his part one (the very good Snowden piece), the reader can examine how these two came down on opposite sides of the ‘forensicator report’ Ferreira claims is patently falsified in his comment to me at his Wikileaks article:

Drake’s group, in its challenge on interpretations of evidence, also maintains there is no verifiable evidence the ‘Russians did it’ (the Guccifer claims promoted by Ferreira) but maintain a ‘hack’ (as opposed to a leak) cannot be ruled out:

However, this VIPS memo could have easily raised the necessary and critical questions without resorting to law-of-physics conclusions that claim to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that it was an inside-network copy only and then asserting the “fact” that the Russians (or anybody else for that matter) did not hack the DNC

Binney’s group, in it’s rebuttal, says the Drake group dropped the ball:

Many of the points raised suggest the authors do not fully understand the analysis

Moreover, Binney’s group seems more strongly credentialed in the cyber world of intelligence whereas Drake’s group is more of a straightforward military and/or intelligence background. There’s a bit of crossover in both groups but they appear to be weighted just as stated. One can read the backgrounds of each group at the respective links. In any case, there is clearly a hung jury, but solely reflecting on the technical aspect, bringing us to the HUMIT (human intelligence.) Here is where I have to come down solidly on the side of Binney’s group because they’ve noted the statements of former UK ambassador Craig Murray:

Akamai - 1 (2)

An associate of Assange, former UK ambassador Craig Murray, has said the WikiLeaks source was a leak from an insider. “To my certain knowledge,” said Murray, “neither the DNC nor the Podesta leaks involved Russia.” Oddly, Murray has not been questioned by any US official or journalist

What do you know about that. Wikileaks has pulled some good people into its web, notably Baltsar Garzon who ordered the arrest of Pinochet and hardly could be sympathetic to Clinton or Trump, it was on Obama’s watch he was forced off the bench in Spain via USA pressure for his ‘crusading’ against among other international crimes, the USA’s renditions and assassinations. Another misled soul sucked into the Wikileaks web is Craig Murray, who notably tied (the likely MI6 assassinated) Russian FSB anti-corruption officer Livenenko to uncovering the NATO export of heroin from Afghanistan:

My knowledge of all this comes from my time as British Ambassador in neighbouring Uzbekistan from 2002 until 2004. I stood at the Friendship Bridge at Termez in 2003 and watched the Jeeps with blacked-out windows bringing the heroin through from Afghanistan, en route to Europe. I watched the tankers of chemicals roaring into Afghanistan. Yet I could not persuade my country to do anything about it. Alexander Litvinenko – the former agent of the KGB, now the FSB, who died in London last November after being poisoned with polonium 210 – had suffered the same frustration over the same topic

This Murray guy cannot be ignored. Contrary to honorable, when Ferreira states…

As far as I can tell, there is virtually no even remotely compelling evidence that Rich leaked the DNC emails

…he’d had to ignore not only Murray but my drawing his attention to Murray:

There has been a growing ‘preponderance of the evidence’ the DNC mails were leaked by Rich. You can find that in the title ‘incompetent espionage and wikileaks’ at my blog, if interested

Because this follows is verbatim what I’d drawn propagandist Ferreira’s attention to; what more would one need to know to understand the Akamai Tree blog’s author has not only covered for The Coe cult’s Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions but has covered for the likely assassins of Seth Rich? Not only Craig Murray, but Seymour Hersh has weighed in and they’re the ones who truly can’t get any press:

Incompetent Espionage and Wikileaks

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. Not only would it have been the right thing to do, the only thing at stake here for Murray was a hit to ego & image.

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? [and in this case, Ferreira’s] C’est la mort.

 

 

16 September 2017 updated article HERE

 

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.

*

Related:

Agent Assange

Litmus Test

WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies

 

Re-posted from Cryptome as a public service

The Gentleperson’s Guide to Forum Spies

COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..

There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a ‘uncontrolled forum.’

Technique #1 – ‘FORUM SLIDING’

If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum – it can be quickly removed from public view by ‘forum sliding.’ In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to ‘age.’ Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a ‘forum slide.’ The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a ‘forum slide’ and ‘flush’ the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then ‘replying’ to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting ‘slides’ down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.

Technique #2 – ‘CONSENSUS CRACKING’

A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at http://www.abovetopsecret.com) is ‘consensus cracking.’ To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made – but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger ‘evidence’ or disinformation in your favour is slowly ‘seeded in.’ Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then ‘abort’ the consensus cracking by initiating a ‘forum slide.’

Technique #3 – ‘TOPIC DILUTION’

Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a ‘RESOURCE BURN.’ By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a ‘gossip mode.’ In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to ‘drive in the wedge.’ By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Technique #4 – ‘INFORMATION COLLECTION’

Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a ‘show you mine so me yours’ posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your ‘favourite weapon’ and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite ‘technique of operation.’ From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.

Technique #5 – ‘ANGER TROLLING’

Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes – without the requirement to ‘stage’ a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to ‘lead’ the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you ‘do not care what the authorities think!!’ inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.

Technique #6 – ‘GAINING FULL CONTROL’

It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings – and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the ‘ultimate victory’ as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a ‘honey pot’ gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.

CONCLUSION

Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’ ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just isn’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin — an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.

Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the ‘image’ and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It’s just a job, and they often seem unable to ‘act their role in character’ as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later — an emotional yo-yo.

With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game — where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat ‘freudian’, so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I’m not aware of too many Navy pilots who don’t have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:

a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT – FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.

b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR – there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to ‘get permission’ or instruction from a formal chain of command.

c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay – the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)

One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?

1) The message doesn’t get out.

2) A lot of time is wasted

3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged

4) Nothing good is accomplished.

FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established.

Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country.

Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female.

The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.

This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.

It is the agent’s job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.

In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:

“You’re dividing the movement.”

[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]

This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of “dedication to the cause.” Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she – being truly dedicated to the movement – becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that “on purpose.” It’s amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: “they did that unconsciously… they didn’t really mean it… I can help them by being forgiving and accepting ” and so on and so forth.

The agent will tell the activist:

“You’re a leader!”

This is designed to enhance the activist’s self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.

This is “malignant pseudoidentification.” It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist’s identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist’s vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.

Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.

The goal of the agent is to increase the activist’s general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist’s self-concepts.

The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of “twinship”. It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.

The activist’s “felt quality of perfection” [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim’s own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is “mirroring” them.

The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that “twinship alliances” between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally “lose touch with reality.”

Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be “helpers” endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.

Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist’s narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.

The agent’s expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.

It can usually be identified by two events, however:

First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being “emotionally hooked,” will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.

As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that “the play has ended, the curtain has fallen,” and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.

The fact is, the movement doesn’t need leaders, it needs MOVERS. “Follow the leader” is a waste of time.

A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.

Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:

1) To disrupt the agenda

2) To side-track the discussion

3) To interrupt repeatedly

4) To feign ignorance

5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.

Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.

Saboteurs

Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ….

1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)

2) Print flyers in English only.

3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.

4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support

5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.

6) Confuse issues.

7) Make the wrong demands.

Cool Compromise the goal.

9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone’s time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist’s work.

Provocateurs

1) Want to establish “leaders” to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.

2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.

3) Encourage militancy.

4) Want to taunt the authorities.

5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.

6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be non-violent.

7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.

Informants

1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.

2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).

3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.

4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of commitment.

Recruiting

Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.

Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.

Surveillance

ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.

At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!

Scare Tactics

They use them.

Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up “exposure,” they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.

This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.

If an agent is “exposed,” he or she will be transferred or replaced.

COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.

The FBI counterintelligence program’s stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. “National Security” means the FBI’s security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people’s civil liberties.

Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.

1. Dummy up. If it’s not reported, if it’s not news, it didn’t happen.

2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the “How dare you?” gambit.

3. Characterize the charges as “rumors” or, better yet, “wild rumors.” If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through “rumors.” (If they tend to believe the “rumors” it must be because they are simply “paranoid” or “hysterical.”)

4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.

5. Call the skeptics names like “conspiracy theorist,” “nutcase,” “ranter,” “kook,” “crackpot,” and, of course, “rumor monger.” Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the “more reasonable” government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own “skeptics” to shoot down.

6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).

7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.

8. Dismiss the charges as “old news.”

9. Come half-clean. This is also known as “confession and avoidance” or “taking the limited hangout route.” This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal “mistakes.” This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.

10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.

11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster “suicide” note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven’t reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.

12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?

13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.

14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as “bump and run” reporting.

15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the “facts” furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.

16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges “expose” scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.

17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, “What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?” Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.

*

Truth is seldom pure and never simple -Oscar Wilde

What never ceases to amaze is the flat-out stupidity of the White identity groups rank and file. Consider Germany, where the real Nazis keep their identity concealed and rise to the very top of the pyramid (governance) all-the-while making a great (and believed) pretense of outrage at anyone from the street who dare make a bit of a nostalgic show for German fascism. Meanwhile, German chauvinism has been dominating Europe and economically bleeding ‘fellow’ European Union member nations to death. All thanks to Allen Dulles’ CIA rescuing war criminal Reinhardt Gehlen from justice and putting him at the top of a reconstituted Gestapo intelligence apparatus (staffed with Gestapo & SS veterans) then handed this resurrected monster over to the post-war Federal Republic of Germany as it’s own CIA: the BND or Bundesnachrichtendienst. You can read a bit of this ugly history, impacting today, HERE.

On a larger scale, the USA’s Dulles legacy has behaved much the same. If the German elite will now have the ‘Arab’ problem to exploit in a renewed push for a police state, the USA elite already have the Black/White division that can be exploited to the same purpose. Make no mistake, when the USA’s street violence has risen to a level ‘justifying’ police state tactics and solutions, White identity groups will discover they had been used and discarded like the ignorant stooges they are.

In the American Black experience, this controversy is (with absolute historical validity) perceived as “white privilege.” Outside of Africa (e.g. the USA), I don’t recall any incidence of Blacks owning White slaves.

Insofar as those high profile neo-liberals ‘nominally’ backing the Black Lives Matter and other Black identity movements, these movements should educate themselves in history (other than the history provided by the organs of state) and understand their political backers are derived from a long legacy of elites exploiting Blacks; when given ‘opportunity’ such as a chance to get ahead by abandoning their self-sufficient farms in the rural south to work ‘high paying’ jobs in the industrial north … only to be abandoned in what became ghettos when the elites were no longer profiting from Black labor, factories closed and ‘opportunity’ moved elsewhere. This process repeated, again and again.

Concerning Charlottesville, General Lee is an ironic historical figure to exploit for purpose of civic strife. It was Robert E Lee, through the force of his personality, wide influence over the southern Whites and principled stance he took, post Appomattox surrender, prevented possible decades of Southern guerrilla insurgency from 1865 into the future.

In the American White Experience, General Lee is (for many) about much more than Southern heroics, or alternatively, in the North’s historical revisionism concerning Black slavery and racism (Lincoln would have settled for slavery continuing prior to a political decision taken in the Summer of 1862.) The American civil war was not over some simplistic casus belli but was a complex circumstance that ultimately pit the competing forward visions for the USA by the Federalists and anti-Federalists, perhaps best represented historically in the persons of Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. This was unfinished business and the Federalist heirs absolutely gained the upper hand with the North’s victory. When the South, and by implication, the anti-Federalists lost, it opened the door for future unscrupulous persons to exploit all Americans. You can read a bit on this American tension HERE.

The result of the Northern ‘victory’ had some positive aspect but was not entirely positive. America’s Blacks realized emancipation (if painfully, with decades of Jim Crow to follow), but today the North’s and South’s White progeny, both, are well down the road to economic and civic slavery together with America’s Blacks, Mexican-Americans and all the rest, with the loss of the anti-Federalist authored Bill of Rights, particularly with the loss of the 1st through 8th Amendments to the American Constitution, effectively canceled by the National Security Act of 1947. With that patently unconstitutional law came the CIA (backbone of the deep state), secret courts, warrant-less searches and a general degrading of civil liberties for all. It were never a ‘black & white’ world.

When slave owning Southerners disingenuously took on the anti-Federalist mantle of ‘States Rights’, exploited Southern patriotism and lost, we all lost our future to unscrupulous Northern Federalists, whether we are White, Black, Southerner, Northerner or post-war immigrant.

At the end of the day, it’s all about greed and consolidating power for those who would own us ALL, regardless of race.

One caution I should mention is, however the ‘deep state’ might play racial identity groups off each other, while sincerely not caring about casualties on either side despite the pretense, where they will welcome ANYONE, regardless of race, is all of those who will come over to where the neo-con and neo-liberal converge; in support for modern Federalist feudalism or the power structures propping up the contemporary elite. It’s not only White politicians aligned with Trump and his elite ‘owned’ Ben Carson. It is both sides of the aisle in Congress, it’s Paul Ryan, it’s Nancy Pelosi, it’s Mitch McConnell, it’s Chuck Schumer and, it is the system’s elite servants Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton with their ongoing and abject failure to honestly educate, inspire and effect change.

*

Associated Press puts out John Kerry’s patently false speculation parroted by the fixed Dutch MH 17 investigation’s findings:

“International investigators have concluded that the Buk missile was fired from Russia-backed rebel-controlled territory by a mobile launcher trucked in from Russia and hastily returned”

@ https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-ukraine-leader-wants-justice-plane-victims-095453378.html</blockquote&gt;

In this context it does to remind concerning the USA ‘assistance’ of the Lockerbie bombing case:

“A FORMER Scottish police chief has given lawyers a signed statement claiming that key evidence in the Lockerbie bombing trial was fabricated

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

http://www.scotsman.com/news/police-chief-lockerbie-evidence-was-faked-1-1403341

It was an FBI ‘expert witness’ testified to this ‘evidence’ authenticity in Lockerbie and another bombed flight at odds with the actual facts:

”It is striking to note the similarity of the ‘scientific’ evidence discovered by the FBI’s Tom Thurman in both the Lockerbie and UTA cases. Of the tens of thousands of pieces of debris collected at each disaster site, one lone piece of printed circuit was found and, miracle of miracles, in each case the fragment bore markings that allowed for positive identification: MEBO in the Lockerbie case and TY in the case of UTA Flight 772. Despite the common findings of the DCPJ, the DST and the Prefecture of Police crime laboratory, Juge Bruguière chose to believe Thurman, the expert in fabricating evidence”

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Thomas_Thurman

Speaking of egregious political lies, we have a former policeman says it WAS INDEED a US Navy missile brought down TWA flight 800…

“Unlike Pierre Salinger, who relies on the internet rumors and old FAA tapes, ex-cop turned investigative reporter Jim Sanders uses original first hand scientific evidence and actual U.S. Government documents and inside sources”

 

…recalling the USA attempted cover-up in its Navy’s shoot-down of an Iranian civilian passenger jet:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2014/07/the_vincennes_downing_of_iran_air_flight_655_the_united_states_tried_to.html

And the other incompetent military which previously blew a Russian civilian airliner out of the sky with a surface to air missile? Would you expect Ukraine? US Navy 2 civilian airliners downed to Ukraine military’s 1 (or 2, depending on the actual facts of MH 17)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812

And the bombing of the flight to Venezuela from Cuba? A known CIA asset was the perpetrator:

“In 2015, the US State Department declassified a document which the Miami Herald reported indicated that Luis Posada Carriles was the most likely planner of the 1976 suitcase bombing of Cubana de Aviación Flight 455 that killed 73 people”

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles

When it comes to demonizing the USA’s boogeymen of choice, these days the boogieman is Russia, no propaganda ploy is too low; even so far as to deliberately perpetrate mass murder framing an innocent party –

This sites most read intelligence assessment:

Black Boxes, Dark Arts & Geopolitics

 

A spy vs spy episode

*

%d bloggers like this: