Archives for category: propaganda

A thumbnail history of a western intelligence asset:

How does Julian Assange both; take credit for the cables release (cablegate) giving important momentum to the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ and deny he had been an agent of US intelligence who’d been instigating and engineering the very same Arab Spring via CIA fronts like Freedom House?

In 2008 the USA Department of State had begun training future Arab Spring leaders in the USA, instructing them how to organize demonstrations via social media, with the assistance of CIA fronts Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy, coordinated with the National Security Council by the Department of State’s Shaarik Zafar.

Subsequent to this, the WikiLeaks Arab Spring fable begins with the 2010 release of diplomatic cables as the demiurge creating a universal movement for democracy in the Arab world. Meanwhile, in 2007 Julian Assange had been the house guest of Miss Egypt, that nations number one corporate prostitute whose commercial sponsor (Pantene) ties directly to Procter and Gamble. Amy Goodman sucks up Assange’s story of Miss Egypt’s concerns for social justice and how he managed live with her literally wedged into American security, and what he was up to supposedly unbeknownst to them:

Amy Goodman: “You lived in Egypt for a time”

Julian Assange: “I lived in Egypt during 2007, so I’m familiar with the Mubarak regime and the tensions within the Egyptian environment. Actually, I was staying at the time, rather unusual circumstance, I was staying in Ms. Egypt’s house. And, Ms. Egypt’s house – other than having paintings of Ms. Egypt all throughout – was clustered right between the U.S. Embassy and the U.N. High Commission with a van outside fueled with 24 soldiers in front of my front door. So, for the type of work we were doing, this seemed to be the ultimate cover to be nested right amongst this”

p__g_egypt-1

^ Assange’s ‘cover’

NOT. You don’t live with Procter and Gamble’s premier Arab World corporate prostitute located between buildings crawling with American, United Nations, and Egyptian security & intelligence, other than with an official nod of approval. I think it’s very clear who was ‘providing cover.’

Timeline:
2007 Assange is living literally next door to the US Embassy in Egypt in an area overrun with American intelligence and security.
2008 the future Arab Spring leaderships’ training in social media is initiated by the USA.
2010 WikiLeaks releases the ‘cables’ inspiring the Egyptian (and other Arab) youth to join the Arab Spring under USA trained leadership, already in place.

Trying to square Julian Assange with his message is like trying to drive a square peg into a round hole. How does this toilet spin? Let’s try:

‘CIA, via Freedom House is training and coordinating the Arab Spring leadership. Julian Assange is releasing cables towards motivating the larger Arab youth to join the Arab Spring under that very same CIA trained and coordinated leadership. What the CIA is doing is bad. What Assange is doing is good.’

Somehow that works for alternative and progressive media.

In espionage, there are three basic means of penetrating and/or using a hostile organization to one’s advantage:

1)  Turning an employee through some means such as blackmail, sex, bribery or appeal to a psychological weakness such as working on someone’s conscience or ideology and convince them to become your organization’s asset (agent/traitor)

2) Using psychology and/or disinformation to convince an organization’s staff to work to your advantage and/or commit acts against its own interests (false flag/sale)

3)  Placing your own officer within the organization as an employee (spy)

Assange’s organization, WikiLeaks, would be the target of each of these methods by multiple intelligence agencies. How do the symptoms stack up? Assange’s judgement, when dealing with what turns out to have been a FBI ‘asset’ (to avoid confusion, we won’t say ‘agent’) ..

“In January 2011, Thordarson was implicated in a bizarre political scandal in which a mysterious “spy computer” laptop was found running unattended in an empty office in the parliament building. “If you did [it], don’t tell me,” Assange told Thordarson, according to unauthenticated chat logs provided by Thordarson.

“I will defend you against all accusations, ring [sic] and wrong, and stick by you, as I have done,” Assange told him in another chat the next month. “But I expect total loyalty in return””

Prior to this, Assange had been warned by a former WikiLeaks ally:

“When Julian met him for the first or second time, I was there,” says Birgitta Jonsdottir, a member of Icelandic Parliament who worked with WikiLeaks on Collateral Murder, the Wikileaks release of footage of a US helicopter attack in Iraq. “And I warned Julian from day one, there’s something not right about this guy… I asked not to have him as part of the Collateral Murder team.”

Now we have to ask; is Assange just stupid or does he tolerate moles in his organization? Which brings us to another glaring inconsistency.

The Guardian had reported concerning the WikiLeaks supposed (reported widely in ‘mainstream’ media) ‘legal expert’ accompanying Edward Snowden, Sarah Harrison, on Snowden’s odyssey to Moscow:

“Despite her closeness to Assange, Harrison may seem a strange choice to accompany Snowden, as unlike several people close to WikiLeaks – most notably human rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson – Harrison has no legal qualifications or background”

Yeah, that’s likely why Snowden faxed perfectly useless asylum requests all over the world from the Moscow airport, not realizing (technically speaking, such as in an embassy) he had to be standing on the territory of the nation he would wish to acquire asylum in.

Now we have to ask again; is Assange just stupid? With a trained expert in international human rights law (asylum expert), Jennifer Robinson, available to WikiLeaks, instead Assange sends a rank amateur, Harrison, who is suddenly a ‘legal researcher’ that didn’t so much as know you cannot make an asylum claim to a nation whose territory you’re not standing on. This smells like an intelligence embed’s cover story.

Now to a stunning example of incompetence:

“Spending time with Assange, it’s hard not to start believing that dark forces are at work. According to him, everyone’s emails are being read. For that reason, he encourages anyone planning to leak a document to post it the old fashioned way, to his PO Box”

From 18 July 2010, when that incredible statement was published by The Independent, about every intelligence agency in the western world (if not the entire planet) arranged to red flag any/all mail addressed to WikiLeaks “PO Box”, except for the fact this would already have been the case. Julian Assange had just invited whistle-blowers, and people with whatever other motivations, to give themselves up to professional forensics analysis (fingerprints, DNA, and other possibilities such as analyzing method used to reproduce leaked information while looking for identity clues, whether USB thumb drive, paper media or whatever.)

assange_independent-1

Then, to the rest of the incredibly irresponsible paragraph:

“It’s ironic that an organisation bent on blowing secrets is itself so secretive, but Wikileaks couldn’t operate without reliable sources. Except that, amazingly, Wikileaks does not verify them. “We don’t verify our sources, we verify the documents. As long as they are bona fide it doesn’t matter where they come from. We would rather not know.””

This invites culled or customized document dumps where there had been  deliberate omissions strategically calculated to mislead. Missing critical components, a collection put together by intelligence agency and dropped on WikiLeaks as an information operation would be a big temptation; recalling former Pentagon liaison to the CIA, Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty speaking of the Pentagon Papers:

[They’re] “unreliable, inaccurate and marred by serious omissions. They are a contrived history”

Who would know better than one of the Pentagon Papers authors? Colonel Prouty goes on to note:

“That I had written parts of some of them proves that they were not genuine Pentagon papers, because my work at that time was devoted to support of the CIA”

Of course most those outside the intelligence world would not know military is the largest CIA cover story for its spies and that all of those in uniform who’d been writing and assembling the Pentagon Papers were working for CIA. That’s the nature of the propaganda beast.

Now, to the recent ‘Russians hacked the election’ and ‘Assange is a Russian agent’ toilet spin coming out of the USA’s mainstream newsrooms. The USA ‘intelligence’ report states:

“Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents.”

Or by implication, let’s blame WikiLeaks and by extension, the Russians, because Assange is so poorly self-disciplined, sloppy, amateur and arrogant, he could be manipulated as an agent for ANYONE. In the case of WikiLeaks, this would appear to be true.

An agent or asset often does not even realize that is the role they serve. It is this last the USA’s intelligence people would have you believe is a possibility relating to WikiLeaks in relation to the so-called hack. But one should not jump to conclusion this phenomenon has Assange working solely for the Russians, just because the report’s disclaimer/weasel words essentially saying ‘if it all turns out to be bs we’re sorry’ weren’t pushed on the public by the long time CIA asset Washington Post:

wapo_hack-1

All major media has run with this Washington Post story. And how would CIA journalism embeds seek to epoxy this story in the wider public’s mind? It would be with followup stories making Russia the boogeyman on a wider range of related issues, particularly if there were little, nebulous or no evidence to back the original. Consequently we have:

wapo_grid_hack-1

“On Friday, the Washington Post published an earth-shattering report that Russian hackers had infiltrated the U.S. electricity grid through a Vermont utility.

“The story’s lede said that a “code associated with the Russian hacking operation dubbed Grizzly Steppe by the Obama administration has been detected within the system of a Vermont utility, according to U.S. officials.”

“It went on to say that while “the Russians did not actively use the code to disrupt operations of the utility, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss a security matter, the penetration of the nation’s electrical grid is significant because it represents a potentially serious vulnerability.”

“Officials said that it is unclear when the code entered the Vermont utility’s computers,” the story added.

“This was huge news, and for good reason. If Russian hackers, or any hackers for that matter, had found their way into the U.S. electricity grid, there would be almost no end to the harm they could cause. Not surprisingly, the Post story spread like wildfire.

“But it turns out that none of it was true. Zip. Zero. Nada.”

And there you have it; “the Post story spread like wildfire.” Too late to stuff that genie back in the bottle. Oh, and that’s the same Washington Post that had been busted for the fake ‘fake news’ story blaming numerous alternative news outlets for pushing Russian propaganda when in fact many were simply reporting what mainstream does not, particularly stories concerning corrupted American institutions. That one (the fake part) is embedded in the larger American psyche as though it were gospel. That’s how propaganda works.

Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post for $300 million. Bezos is also majority owner of Amazon, which holds a $600 million contract with the CIA. Which do you suppose is the better business move for billionaire Bezos? Calling out the CIA on its malfeasance? Or the Post taking CIA scripts for its reporting?

What should one look for if Assange is actually the asset of a western intelligence agency set on framing the Russians?  The 1st clue would be the Washington Post putting plenty of ink into spinning the story, here’s a few samples:

Julian Assange’s claim that there was no Russian … – Washington Post

Assange’s denials, counter-intuitive as this might seem, could be on the up & up and he’s still an intelligence asset. Only not necessarily a Russian intelligence asset, going to:

The 2nd clue would be if there were infighting between cliques in the USA’s national security establishment or a turf war. We have ample indications of that, and there is two distinct possibilities; the first being intelligence operatives aligned with the (pre-election) out of favor NSA-Pentagon-Christian Zionist-Israeli-Kissinger (Trump aligned) intelligence clique laundered the Clinton campaign mails via a disgruntled Sanders supporter through to WikiLeaks to damage Clinton. The second possibility being the leaked mails were solely via a straightforward disgruntled Saunders Democrat; either case causing the (soon to be out of favor) Brennan-Obama-CIA-Brzezinski (Clinton aligned) clique to use the WikiLeaks release to frame Russia and damage Trump.

I’m of the opinion it is Trump aligned intelligence professionals laundered the emails through to WikiLeaks; an organization that has shown itself highly vulnerable to penetration and manipulation, in the main due to the incredible narcissism, arrogance, carelessness and associated poor judgement of Julian Assange.

WikiLeaks likely has been manipulated as an agent by several intelligence agencies on multiple occasions. In fact the organization smells so bad, Vegas should put its bookies on events surrounding Julian Assange.

Meanwhile, try driving this square peg…

On the face of it TOR appears to be a subversive hacktivist site, offering anonymity to anarchists, political dissidents, leakers, internet activists and the underground criminal world. In fact, the systems used on the site were developed by a unit of The US Office of Naval Intelligence as part of US “Public Diplomacy”. Currently TOR’s three biggest sources of funding are: The US Department of Defence, The US State Department and The Board of Broadcasting – another propaganda arm of the US Government”

…into this round hole:

Contact. If you need help using Tor you can contact WikiLeaks for assistance in setting it up using our simple webchat available at: https://wikileaks.org/talk

Tor is a supposedly secure system developed by US intelligence so their ‘color revolutionaries’ (abroad) could communicate securely (without being intercepted by the national governments the USA was looking to overthrow.) Meanwhile it was sales-pitched as a system to elude everyone and everything. No chance. WikiLeaks inviting leaks and communications via Tor is like inviting Uncle Sam to sit at the WikiLeaks kitchen table in WikiLeaks intimate discussions with those providing leaked materials.

Finally, it would be small wonder if Assange denied a childhood cult experience that would call into account plausible frailties integrated to his underlying psychology. Should the horrors of such an experience forgo any public examination? Not if you’re the man who has placed himself in position to demand answers; as to what could be the underlying cause of so many conflicts between proposed facts? Could Assange have lived 3 or so years with a cult member and NOT have been exposed to the cult? There are too many conflicts in what Assange proposes, as opposed to the more established facts, to responsibly look the other way.

Assange’s exposure to the Hamilton-Byrne cult (a.k.a. The Family) as a child is both  admitted and denied. It is (sort of) admitted his step-father was associated with the cult and denied by Assange he had been exposed to the cult. The step-father was in his life from ages 8 to 11, bringing up a photo throwing Assange’s denials into doubt:

assange_cult_photo-1

Drugs, sexual abuse and every child an identical blonde

It’s not often I’ve written on WikiLeaks, however my position hasn’t changed significantly since I’d first written on the subject six years ago. Whether Assange is unaware he’s done the CIA large favors in the past (Assange’s years 8-11 profile like an MKUltra field exercise) or is aware and has woke up to the fact Langley, Virginia, has a habit of stabbing its assets in the  back, is not so important as people knowing WikiLeaks is a living, functioning urban legend … insofar as the image versus the reality –

alternet_assange-1

Screenshot from my old blog deleted by AlterNet, text HERE. Did I get it wrong? Maybe, when considering former CIA officer Robert Steele has flat-out stated Julian Assange has a history of ties to MOSSAD. More likely, in my view, is the idea Assange has served both.

Listen beginning at minute 4:55 on Assange-MOSSAD

*

Note: The group photo with the child Assange (it clearly is Julian) has been around the internet for years and I’ve yet to see it disputed as authentic. It’s almost as though mainstream has decided if they pretend it’s not there, it’ll go away. Consequently, you will only find it at more extreme ‘conspiracy’ websites, which seems to be a means of discrediting the image by default.

*

Related:

Incompetent Espionage & WikiLeaks

Pentagon Papers, CIA and the Lies of Daniel Ellsberg

*

I was looking for an article I’d written some years back, while pulling together information for a piece on Julian Assange (stay tuned), and I stumbled across this piece. With all of the ‘fake news’ propaganda swirling like a toilet spin in the  mainstream news rooms of the USA, here is a flashback to my ‘Stool & Dunce Cap’ blog at Alternet prior to that ‘alternative news’ outlet shutting down my soap box. Recovered via the internet ‘way back machine’, some of the links are dead.

February 2012 has been recorded in the annals of history, and according to my personal philosophy and Native traditions, it is in order to give gifts on the occasion of celebrating my 61st year. This particular gift is a tool created for anyone who wished or dared to pursue penetrating the illusions we are fed by media.

Of the many shameless liars prostituting for fascist, racist killers while pursuing profit in the name of democracy, the New York Times is the head I propose to deliver to my public readership on a platter. Let’s call it a gift of public service to humanity.

That the New York Times is a corporate prostitute frequently fronting CIA propaganda operations, is a matter I have delved into on previous occasion.

Now, the point is to show in a few easy reading pages, how anyone can tear these ‘information operations’ [psy-ops] apart and determine for themselves what is actually behind the story. With the long time CIA associated ‘Freedom House’ in trouble in Egypt in recent days, we can use this Times ‘Freedom House’ friendly propaganda story

Times quote:  “Two of the American groups, affiliated with the Republican and Democratic parties, said they have taught the nuts and bolts of grass-roots organizing, political campaigns and democratic elections to anyone willing to listen, trying to avoid favoring any Egyptian political faction. Another, Freedom House, said it has trained young activists and run international exchange programs. The fourth American group, the International Center for Journalists, does training on how a free press operates”

Gee, if they are teaching them anything like the New York Times operates (more on NYT operation a bit further on), I suggest they read up on former CIA agent Phillip Agee’s analysis of ‘Freedom House’ organizational utility:

Agee quote: ”One may wonder why the CIA would be needed in these programs. There were several reasons. One reason from the beginning was the CIA’s long experience and huge stable of agents and contacts in the civil societies of countries around the world. By joining with the CIA, NED and [US]AID would come on board an on-going complex of operations whose funding they could take over while leaving the secret day-to-day direction on the ground to CIA officers. In addition someone had to monitor and report the effectiveness of the local recipients’ activities. NED would not have people in the field to do this, nor would their core foundations in normal conditions. And since NED money was ostensibly private, only the CIA had the people and techniques to carry out discreet control in order to avoid compromising the civil society recipients, especially if they were in opposition to their governments. Finally, the CIA had ample funds of its own to pass quietly when conditions required”

Now, why would the New York Times presentation be so far removed from reality, when compared to the CIA actuality? A few of the Times controlling influences (Directors) and their associations:

NYT Director Brenda BarnesChicago Council on Global Affairs [formerly Chicago Council on Foreign Relations] which tracks to > National Democratic Institute which is a USA Department of State funded [USAID] front for intelligence agencies and multi-national corporate board room ‘market security’ venture and subject of the article

NYT Director Thomas Middelhoff Bertelsmann AG which has media holdings in, and can influence opinion in, 63 countries around the world

NYT Director Janet RobinsonCarnegie Corporation where Robinson sits with 1% players, including Morgan Stanley and Rothschild bankers

NYT Director William KennardJoint Center for Political and Economic StudiesUnited States Chamber of Commerce which is the USA’s NUMBER ONE 1% corporate policy entity > blatant example here

NYT Director Doreen TobinJP Morgan a 1% player

NYT Director James KiltsMetLife a 1% player

It is likely safe to say the New York Times directors sitting on the boards of MetLife, JP Morgan, Carnegie Corporation, and Bertelsmann AG all in turn hold investments in stocks and these directors have portfolios with a vested interest in propping an overall scheme up.

That you will find bad people with intelligence agency ties in the most unexpected places can be quite disconcerting:

NYT Director Lynn G Dolnick > African Wildlife Foundation leading to research related examples of USAID and intelligence agencies involvement here and here

When the inter-related corporate players actual pecuniary interests are revealed by exposing lateral associations [as opposed to analyzing vertical isolated chains of corporate command and misleading portraits of their head to head relationships to governments] it becomes very clear the entire process is a form of colonialism, with clusters of corporate players making up what amount to modern fiefs.

The USA ‘democracy’ promoting ‘democracy’ provides cover for any number of wealthy sociopath personalities in any given circumstance, ripping off various natural resources concessions in the nations manipulated in the scheme with intelligence agencies and corporate boards calling the shots from where the various players vector.

Meanwhile, less resource rich but strategically located nations are heavily militarized and manipulated to prop up what is in essence a scam organized towards the looting of the innocents, largely upheld with weapons sales subsidized by the USA taxpayer. We fork over the billions in military aid which are then spent to buy weapons from the defense industry which in turn props up the looting of other nations timber, diamonds, oil, et cetera, often bought on the cheap via proxy ‘rebel’ movements [sterling example here].

This racket is becoming clear and it is small wonder there are incessant legislative campaigns to clamp down on the internet with its information freedoms.

The fallout of this corporate colonial ‘get rich[er] quick’ scheme promoted in the guise of ‘democracy’ has produced hatred of the western industrialized nations, hate for the USA particularly, and underlies the birth and spread of the so-called ‘terrorism’ which in turn has been used to justify more and larger ‘security’ programs propping up the very same scheme used during the so-called ‘cold war’ now renamed the ‘war on terror’ in what has becoming a greed based avalanche of world instability.

Combined with current events factoids, Wikipedia and Sourcewatch, anyone with basic internet competence [ability to follow links and do key word searches such as ‘African Wildlife Foundation, MI6, CIA’ or ‘Fossey Foundation, arms trafficking’] and is able to make and organize notes while sifting out blatantly misinformed or amateur articles, can learn to overcome disinformation, do their own analysis, map the corporate activities, identify the rip-offs and peoples exploited by these schemes, all while identifying the actual players and motives behind the New York Times propaganda.

Apply the preceding method and the result is quite clear; the New York Times is but one arm of a mechanism to deceive on behalf of a corporate centered sociopath get-mega-rich[er]-quick scheme of the 1%, exploiting Americans belief in their institutions, any consequence to the USA and actual democracy be damned in process

Since I’d penned this article in 2012, much information has been developed on USA intelligence manipulating media, not least google, time to time, setting filters to screen out information from public access. Noting the horns sprouting on my head, here is Russia’s top search engine, Yandex, which does not mind at all if you search in the Roman alphabet using the English language:

Yandex

*

Mephisto

Business Insider parrots Associated Press who parrots NBC:

The NBC report said that the evidence is “nearly incontrovertible””

putin_ap_nbc_hack_lie_-jpg-1

Further it had been asserted:

“that the intelligence comes from “diplomatic sources and spies working for U.S. allies.” It didn’t identify the countries involved or how they might have such sensitive information from Putin’s inner sanctum”

And those third party spies would be from NATO’s three Chihuahuas? The CIA’s favorite Kiev Nazis? Any nation with leadership subject to CIA blackmail or Russophobe (Poland would be a suspect) intelligence service willing to launder faked intelligence for the CIA? That would be the most likely source of CIA ‘intelligence’ reporting ‘hacked information’ attributed to Putin that most likely was leaked (and almost certainly wasn’t hacked.) So, the CIA has handed the very, very lame (but still dangerous) duck Obama ‘nearly incontrovertible’ evidence … ‘nearly’ meaning in Orwellian dialect the ‘classified’ evidence Putin hacked (the already leaked information) can be refuted, but shouldn’t be, because the CIA says it’s so:

“Professional standards require intelligence professionals to lie, hide information, or use covert tactics to protect their “cover,” access, sources, and responsibilities. The Central Intelligence Agency expects, teaches, encourages, and controls these tactics so that the lies are consistent and supported (“backstopped”). The CIA expects intelligence officers to teach others to lie, deceive, steal, launder money, and perform a variety of other activities that would certainly be illegal if practiced in the United States. They call these tactics “tradecraft,” and intelligence officers practice them in all the world’s intelligence services” -Hulnick & Mattausch, “Ethics and Morality in U.S. Secret Intelligence”

Skills employed in the CIA’s relationships with journalists, do you suppose?

forked tongue professionals

“…the [Central Intelligence] Agency has a whole stable of writers, its favorite magazines and newspapers, its publishing houses, and its “backgrounders” ready to go at all times” – former Pentagon liaison to the CIA Colonel L Fletcher Prouty

Let’s jump back 3 years and look at case where the professional media whores servicing the CIA were actually busted in their lies but this was (why shouldn’t you be surprised) never reported by those same media street-walkers covering the beat. Remember Obama accusing Assad of gassing his own people with sarin nerve agent at Ghouta, Syria, in 2013?

“We do not believe that, given the delivery systems, using rockets, that the opposition could have carried out these attacks. We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these out” -Barack Obama

obama_sarin-jpg-1

“The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media” — former CIA Director William Colby

Yeah, that plays, CNN doesn’t have to worry it will be called out on repeating Obama’s lie to PBS because The New Yorker dropped Seymour Hersh who had to move to the (unknown to Americans) London Review of Books to accomplish reporting:

“…more than ten members of the al-Nusra Front were arrested in southern Turkey with what local police told the press were two kilograms of sarin. In a 130-page indictment the group was accused of attempting to purchase fuses, piping for the construction of mortars, and chemical precursors for sarin…”

hersh_lrb-jpg-1

And we certainly don’t have to worry about NATO member Turkey letting the cat out of the bag it was a NATO nation’s intelligence agency facilitated the sarin attack blamed on Assad because our ally in the ‘war on terror’ shut down the newspaper that dared report the facts:

“Wiretapped phone conversations reveal the process of procuring the gas at specific addresses as well as the process of procuring the rockets that would fire the capsules containing the toxic gas. However, despite such solid evidence there has been no arrest in the case. Thirteen individuals were arrested during the first stage of the investigation but were later released, refuting government claims that it is fighting terrorism”

Zaman_attack.jpg - 1

Where is the western media on this story? Where is ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, New York Times, Washington Post and ‘friends’? Oh, that’s right, they get the facts exactly backwards because:

“You could get a [Washington Post] journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month.” -CIA operative cited in “Katherine The Great” by Deborah Davis

It took a Washington Post blacklisted ‘fake news’ website to blow this next whistle on the CIA:

“Dr. Ulfkotte says the corruption of journalists and major news outlets by the CIA is routine, accepted, and widespread in the western media, and that journalists who do not comply either cannot get jobs at any news organization, or find their careers cut short”

cia_german_press-jpg-1

“There is quite an incredible spread of relationships. You don’t need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are [Central Intelligence] Agency people at the management level.” -William B. Bader, former CIA intelligence officer

Yeah, and it would seem at the LA Times too:

“Email exchanges between Ken Dilanian and public relations officers at the agency were discovered after the Intercept sent a FOIA request to the CIA over its relationship with reporters. In many of the emails, Dilanian promised to provide the agency with positive coverage, often going so far as to change entire drafts of articles based on the CIA’s replies”

cia_vetted-jpg-1

“During the 1976 investigation of the CIA by the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Senator Frank Church, the dimensions of the Agency’s involvement with the press became apparent to several members of the panel, as well as to two or three investigators on the staff. But top officials of the CIA, including former directors William Colby and George Bush, persuaded the committee to restrict its inquiry into the matter and to deliberately misrepresent the actual scope of the activities in its final report”

“Contrary to the notion that the CIA insidiously infiltrated the journalistic community, there is ample evidence that America’s leading publishers and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services”

“The Agency’s relationship with [The New York] Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. [It was] general Times policy … to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible.”

Preceding quotes from ‘CIA and the Media’ by Carl Bernstein. What has changed? Nothing, when it requires a CIA veteran, Melvin Goodman, to blow the whistle on the Washington Post performing fellatio on the CIA at (SURPRISE!) a Washington Post blacklisted ‘fake news’ site:

“David Ignatius, The Washington Post’s self-appointed apologist for the Central Intelligence Agency, has struck again. Last year, Ignatius argued that it was “just plain nuts” to investigate the CIA’s assassination program because “nobody had been killed”

goodman_ignatius-jpg-1

“Propaganda experts in the CIA station in Kinshasa busily planted articles in the Kinshasa newspapers, Elimo and Salongo. These were recopied into agency cables and sent on to European, Asian, and South American stations, where they were secretly passed to recruited journalists representing major news services who saw to it that many were replayed in the world press. Similarly, the Lusaka station placed a steady flow of stories in Zambian newspapers and then relayed them to major European newspapers

“During a staff meeting I voiced my concern to —-, were we on safe ground, paying agents to propagandize the New York press? The agency had recently been warned against running operations inside the United States and propagandizing the American public. —- seemed unconcerned. We were safe enough, he said, as long as we could plausibly claim that our intent was to propagandize foreigners at the United Nations

“The task force worked out the details by cabling New York, Lusaka, Kinshasa, and key European stations. Each delegation opened a bank account in Europe to which European-based CIA finance officers could make regular deposits. Thereafter the CIA could plausibly deny that it had funded anyone’s propagandists in the United States. It would be extremely difficult for any investigators to prove differently

“Director Colby testified before the House Select Committee on Intelligence, saying: “We have taken particular caution to ensure that our operations are focused abroad and not at the United States to influence the opinion of the American people about things from the CIA point of view.” A remarkable statement in view of what we had been doing in the task force (footnoted: Director Colby received copies of all [relevant] cables and memoranda.)”

Preceding quotes from ‘In Search of Enemies‘ by dissident CIA officer John Stockton

back to the Russian ‘hack’ bs

As is typical with CIA propaganda on hot button issues, and it is more than likely tasked idiots at Langley are in frenetic meetings, there are multiple stories that seem to be made up on the go:

“The gist of the Case Against Russia goes like this: The person or people who infiltrated the DNC’s email system and the account of John Podesta left behind clues of varying technical specificity indicating they have some connection to Russia, or at least speak Russian. Guccifer 2.0, the entity that originally distributed hacked materials from the Democratic party, is a deeply suspicious figure who has made statements and decisions that indicate some Russian connection. The website DCLeaks, which began publishing a great number of DNC emails, has some apparent ties to Guccifer and possibly Russia. And then there’s WikiLeaks, which after a long, sad slide into paranoia, conspiracy theorizing, and general internet toxicity has made no attempt to mask its affection for Vladimir Putin and its crazed contempt for Hillary Clinton. (Julian Assange has been stuck indoors for a very, very long time.) If you look at all of this and sort of squint, it looks quite strong indeed, an insurmountable heap of circumstantial evidence too great in volume to dismiss as just circumstantial or mere coincidence”

russia_hack_bs-jpg-1

Pretending for a moment there had been a hack, and assuming a Russian speaker involved, if this were not a false lead planted by a hacker, a Russian speaker pointing to Russia as ‘nearly incontrovertible’ evidence is ludicrous. 30% of Ukraine’s population speaks Russian as their 1st language, most of the rest speak Russian as their 2nd language. Over 30% of Latvians speak Russian at home. Russian is spoken by significant portions of the populace throughout the central Asian republics of the former Soviet Union. Russian is the 1st language of 70% of Belarus’ populace. Millions speak Russian exterior to Russia. What a piece of crap for evidence. Any intelligence agency in the world could be behind the purported hack (if there had been a hack), particularly Poland, Latvia and Ukraine, with an ax to grind for Putin. And if it had been Russian intelligence directing a hack, they’d certainly not have been so sloppy.

What’s more is, if the CIA hasn’t cleaned up its act since CIA officer John Stockwell had penned his exposé ‘In Search of Enemies’, and certainly the CIA has not, it could as easily be the CIA itself had manufactured and laundered ‘evidence’ (provided in closed meetings to congressmen) of a so-called ‘hack’ through a third party for purposes of information operation aimed at a clique in the USA national security apparatus they’re contesting. This could be a Clinton aligned CIA going after Trump aligned national security professionals. In my estimation, the greatest likelihood is, we’re seeing an inside turf war play out in ‘mainstream’ media the CIA has/had a relationship with for a very long time:

“PAO (Public Affairs Office) now has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly and television network in the nation. This has helped us turn some “intelligence failure” stories into “intelligence success” stories, and it has contributed to the accuracy [canned laugh here] of countless others. In many instances, we have persuaded reporters to postpone, change, hold, or even scrap stories that could have adversely affected national security interests or jeopardized sources and methods” -Robert Gates, CIA internal memo (1991)

finally

“Currently, the Post’s coverage of the CIA does not disclose that the newspaper’s sole owner is the main owner of CIA business partner Amazon”

wapo_cia-jpg-1

Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post for $300 million. Bezos is also majority owner of amazon, which holds a $600 million contract with the CIA. Which do you suppose is the better business move for billionaire Bezos? Calling out the CIA on its malfeasance? Or taking CIA scripts for Washington Post reporting?

Disclaimer: This article should not be construed to attribute to the author a preference of Trump over Clinton. In my estimation, both camps are equal opportunist criminals.

*

Narciss-O-Meter

(or how the first-person-personal-pronoun became the love of my life)

This morning ‘I’ went to the Liberty Blitzkrieg blog and read Michael Krieger’s ‘about me.’ We’ll use his example as the introduction to the narciss-o-meter.

“My name is Michael Krieger, and I am the creator and editor of Liberty Blitzkrieg. I’m originally from New York City.

“As far as my academic and professional background, I attended college at Duke University where I earned a double major in Economics and Spanish. After completing my studies in 2000, I took a job at Lehman Brothers where I worked with the Oil analyst in the Equity Research Department.  In 2005, I joined Sanford C. Bernstein where I served as the Commodities Analyst on the trading floor. About halfway through my time there, I started to branch out and write opinions on bigger picture “macro” topics that no one else at the firm was covering. These opinion pieces were extremely popular throughout the global investment community, and I traveled around providing advice to some of the largest mutual funds, pension funds and hedge funds in the world.

“I loved my job, but as time passed I started to educate myself about how the monetary and financial system functions and what I discovered disgusted me. I no longer felt satisfied working within the industry, and I resigned in January 2010.  At that point, I started a family investment office and continued to write macro pieces on economic, social and geopolitical topics. That summer, I drove cross country for six weeks and ultimately decided to leave the crowded streets of Manhattan for the open spaces of Boulder, Colorado, where I currently reside.

“In the years that followed, I gradually recognized that my true passion centers upon writing on issues of significant societal importance given the extremely challenging times we live in. This realization culminated with me losing interest in financial markets and eventually launching this website in early 2012.

“If you are interested in a more detailed description, replete with colorful anecdotes, of how I ended up making this bizarre professional transition, take the time to watch the video below”

Michael Krieger employs the first-person-personal-pronoun ‘I’ no less than 20 times in five paragraphs, composed of 315 words. 315 divided by 20 = 15.75 or ‘I’ on average every 15+ words. Now, I only have picked on Michael because the idea for this satire occurred while reading there. I’ll somehow not be surprised if he scores high on the narciss-o-meter.

TomDispatch’s Tom Englehardt employs the first-person-personal-pronoun ‘I’ no less than 49 times in an article of 3,606 words or once on average every 73.6 words on the narciss-o-meter. I had previously believed his was a record but this is an article lauding the author’s importance in relation to ‘big  events’ so I expect the extra wordiness counts for something. Or maybe it’s just my prejudicial view of Englehardt’s taking CIA liaised Ford Foundation (laundered) money to write propaganda poisoned stories, which it seems is legal in today’s USA, since congress essentially overturned the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 making intelligence agency media lies legal (in 2013.) But I digress…

Over at Porkin’s Policy Review, a random sample:

“In the second hour I update the listeners on the most recent development in the JonBenet case regarding Burke Ramsey’s lawsuit against CBS and Dr. Werner Spitz. Then I move on to the conspiracy culture and the latest attempt at mainstreaming the movement. I talk about the History Channel show Hunting Hitler and the possibility that it is an experiment and operation designed to influence the movement. I talk about the show’s main host, former CIA agent Bob Baer, and the involvement of the Pentagon in the show. I explore the idea that both the CIA and DOD may be trying to influence the way the alt-media/conspiracy culture conducts research and present themselves to the world at large. I also talk about the pitfalls that this presents to us moving forward and being taken seriously”

Six times ‘porky’ uses the first-person-personal-pronoun ‘I’ in 135 words. 135 divided by 6 = ‘I’ every 22.5 words on the narciss-o-meter. But what’s really creepy about ‘porky’ is his promoting Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty as a recommended site at his blog even as he ‘explores’ CIA & Department of Defense media manipulation. Call it the spy versus spy alternative media equivalent of catching your foreskin in your pant’s zipper….

Ok, says me to meself, let’s go for a guy who ‘I’ really admire, Nafeez Ahmed, just to find out:

Nafeez Ahmed, Investigative journalist, recovering academic, tracking the Crisis of Civilisation patreon.com/nafeez. Editor of INSURGE intelligence, Return of the Reich

WOW. 20 words, no personal pronoun, no math, no stupid stuff. Do I agree with Nafeez in every respect? No. But ‘I’ admire his bona fide courage in attacking the 21st Century Nazi meme, head on. ‘I’ recommend everyone who reads here to visit his sites, INSURGE intelligence & Return of the Reich

Now, for the tough part, an unbiased self-evaluation. Method? Go to my 2014 story of exile, for the first time targeting the first-person-personal-pronoun ‘I’ … and ‘I’ expect Nafeez is going to deliver myself a good spanking by comparison.

6,745 words. First-person-personal-pronoun ‘I’ 142 times. Ow, ouch. ‘I’ used the big ‘I’ on average every 47.5 words. The CIA’s fuckin Englehardt beat me. On the other hand, ‘I’ can take consolation in the fact ‘I’ was actually writing about myself as opposed to how important ‘I’ am writing in relation to other people. Uh, this paragraph sort of sucks, ‘I’ seven times in 69 words (includes numbers) [67 divided by 7 = first-person-personal-pronoun ‘I’ every 9.8 words, excepting the ‘I’ in these brackets, all of the preceding parties just stepped on me, face in palm.]

Disclaimer: ‘I’ was not about to go through my story’s nearly 7,000 words more than once to see if ‘I’ had counted correctly… anyone reading here that is anal enough to count through it enough times to come up with the same number twice, is welcome to submit the corrected math via comment –

*

Related:

Zerohedge Drinks The Kool-Aid on Tom Engelhardt’s false-flag journalism

Pentagon Papers, CIA & The Lies of Daniel Ellsberg More on Englehardt’s TomDispatch disinformation

*

Mephisto

Why is the USA media, intelligence agencies and congress in hysteria over “Russian propaganda”? Because the Russians have,  for quite some time, had the absolute upper hand in the growing field of alternative media. How is that?

What the Russians appear to have clearly recognized is how to take advantage of the corrupt nature of the western ‘mainstream’ press, an institution which has been co-opted by western intelligence agencies for a very long time.

The Russian method? It could not be more simple; report the actual facts in the geopolitical contest and when this is inconvenient, practice lies by omission. Here is an example: Both NATO (an extension of the USA) and Russia are contesting Syria over competing energy pipelines, primarily. One from Iran transiting Syria, favored by Russia; the other from Qatar transiting Syria, favored by NATO.

The disadvantage NATO has faced in this competition is Syria controlled by a Russian ally, that is, the government of Basher al-Assad.

Because NATO sponsored Salafist militants to effect ‘regime change’ (the preferred NATO model since 1980s Afghanistan), a large number had, not surprisingly, gone out of control (e.g. Islamic State is a direct result.) Paradoxically, NATO aligned states have pitched the anti-Assad endeavor in terms of a ‘war on terror’, and there are so many NATO lies (and lies to cover lies) in the co-opted western media, the Russians only need to stick to the facts (omitting the pipeline) to ultimately win the propaganda war. What’s more is, Russia further only need stand back and allow western dissident journalists to dig up the real facts on the ground:

  1. NATO’s ‘moderate’ rebels are aligned with al-Qaida…………….. ✓
  2. NATO policy created the conditions for the rise of IS…………… ✓
  3. Western ally Saudi Arabia bankrolls the Salafist extremists……. ✓
  4. NATO member Turkey has protected & supplied IS…………….. ✓

Depending on the geopolitical reality of the day, for instance whether the paranoid ego-maniac Sultan Erdogan of Turkey is behaving well or not, the stories by western dissident journalists that will withstand a close scrutiny are run in Russian or Russia friendly media outlets. The result? Odds are 100:1 you’ll get more reliable information from Russian state TV or Russian sponsored websites than from ABC, CBS, CNN or NBC.

Shoot the messenger

 At the end of the day, the only solution NATO’s main sponsor, the USA, can come up with to protect it’s colossal efforts to deceive and manipulate the western public is to silence dissident journalists by cutting off access to alternative media. Zerohedge on the present proposal:

“On November 30, one week after the Washington Post launched its witch hunt against “Russian propaganda fake news”, with 390 votes for, the House quietly passed “H.R. 6393, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017“, sponsored by California Republican Devin Nunes (whose third largest donor in 2016 is Google parent Alphabet, Inc), a bill which deals with a number of intelligence-related issues, including Russian propaganda, or what the government calls propaganda, and hints at a potential crackdown on “offenders.”

“A quick skim of the bill reveals “Title V—Matters relating to foreign countries”,  whose Section 501 calls for the government to “counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence … carried out in  coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly.”

“The section lists the following definitions of media manipulation:

  • Establishment or funding of a front group.
  • Covert broadcasting.
  • Media manipulation.
  • Disinformation and forgeries.
  • Funding agents of influence.
  • Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
  • Assassinations.
  • Terrorist acts.

“As ActivistPost correctly notes, it is easy to see how this law, if passed by the Senate and signed by the president, could be used to target, threaten, or eliminate so-called “fake news” websites, a list which has been used to arbitrarily define any website, or blog, that does not share the mainstream media’s proclivity to serve as the Public Relations arm of a given administration [see the immediate preceding post, ‘On Fake News‘, at this blog]

Russian victory enhanced

The reactionary moves by the NATO/USA propagandists to having been bested in the game by Russia only sweetens the Russian victory; similar to Erdogan’s over-reaction in cracking down on anyone who doesn’t follow the ruling party line in Turkey, the USA governing elite is sowing ever deepening dissent in the psyche of those Americans actually inclined to think, understand and know for themselves what is actually going on. The sort of reactionary behavior embodied in the color of law [anti-constitutional order represented in the ‘national security state’] governing the United States and its allies destabilizes any society.

Propaganda budget

The USA media mouthpieces are not going to broadcast the American propaganda budget, so let’s turn to Russia’s Sputnik to get the facts:

“Last year, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), the US federal agency responsible for Voice of America and Radio Liberty/Radio Free Europe, among others, requested a substantial budget increase. Seeking a boost of $30 million, the BBG’s budget soared to $751.5 million.

“That was, evidently, not enough money. President Obama’s newly proposed budget for fiscal year 2017 proposes another massive increase in spending for the BBG. If granted, the agency will receive nearly $778 million, a roughly $27 million increase” [over the $30 million boost]

The Russians are willing to broadcast the factual news the USA’s intelligence agency co-opted media mouth-pieces will not. Point made?

Western press propagandizing Americans

How much of the USA’s propaganda budget is actually aimed at Americans?

The newest version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes an amendment that would legalize the use of propaganda on the American public, reports Michael Hastings of BuzzFeed.

The amendment — proposed by Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) and Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and passed in the House last Friday afternoon — would effectively nullify the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, which explicitly forbids information and psychological operations aimed at influencing U.S. public opinion

Huh. And yeah, that was made into law.

Odd bedfellows

Glenn Greenwald’s related, and otherwise excellent piece ‘Washington Post Disgracefully Promotes a McCarthyite Blacklist From a New, Hidden, and Very Shady Group‘ throws a bone to one of the very worst propaganda prostitutes extant on the world-wide-web: Elliot Higgins of Bellingcat. WTF.

*

Related: On Fake News

Exile

A Ronald Thomas West assessment

wapo_cia-jpg-1

“You hypocrite! First take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” -Jesus

The Washington Post has promoted a list of “Russian propaganda” websites [full list] claiming a “Russian propaganda effort” spreading fake news. The problem? Many (most?) of the sites are legitimate sites dispensing news ‘mainstream’ doesn’t cover. How about this instead:

“You could get a [Washington Post] journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month.” -CIA operative cited in “Katherine The Great” by Deborah Davis

Meanwhile:

“During the 1976 investigation of the CIA by the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Senator Frank Church, the dimensions of the Agency’s involvement with the press became apparent to several members of the panel, as well as to two or three investigators on the staff. But top officials of the CIA, including former directors William Colby and George Bush, persuaded the committee to restrict its inquiry into the matter and to deliberately misrepresent the actual scope of the activities in its final report”

“Contrary to the notion that the CIA insidiously infiltrated the journalistic community, there is ample evidence that America’s leading publishers and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services”

“There is quite an incredible spread of relationships. You don’t need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are [Central Intelligence] Agency people at the management level.” -William B. Bader, former CIA intelligence officer, briefing members of the Senate Intelligence Committee

“The Agency’s relationship with [The New York] Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. [It was] general Times policy … to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible.”

Preceding quotes from ‘CIA and the Media’ by Carl Bernstein

“Propaganda experts in the CIA station in Kinshasa busily planted articles in the Kinshasa newspapers, Elimo and Salongo. These were recopied into agency cables and sent on to European, Asian, and South American stations, where they were secretly passed to recruited journalists representing major news services who saw to it that many were replayed in the world press. Similarly, the Lusaka station placed a steady flow of stories in Zambian newspapers and then relayed them to major European newspapers

“During a staff meeting I voiced my concern to —-, were we on safe ground, paying agents to propagandize the New York press? The agency had recently been warned against running operations inside the United States and propagandizing the American public. —- seemed unconcerned. We were safe enough, he said, as long as we could plausibly claim that our intent was to propagandize foreigners at the United Nations

“The task force worked out the details by cabling New York, Lusaka, Kinshasa, and key European stations. Each delegation opened a bank account in Europe to which European-based CIA finance officers could make regular deposits. Thereafter the CIA could plausibly deny that it had funded anyone’s propagandists in the United States. It would be extremely difficult for any investigators to prove differently

“Director Colby testified before the House Select Committee on Intelligence, saying: “We have taken particular caution to ensure that our operations are focused abroad and not at the United States to influence the opinion of the American people about things from the CIA point of view.” A remarkable statement in view of what we had been doing in the task force (Director Colby received copies of all [relevant] cables and memoranda.)”

And going to the conclusion of CIA lawlessness:

“CIA written records become mysteriously vague about the Lumumba assassination plot, the Trujillo assassination plot, and the Schneider assassination plot. In each case there are documents which place CIA officers in supportive contact with the eventual assassins but the link seems to break before the final deed”

And:

“Since the Freedom of Information Act, the agency increasingly uses a system of “soft,” “unofficial,” or “convenience” files for sensitive subjects, especially any involving surveillance of Americans. Such files are not registered in the agency’s official records system, and hence can never be disclosed under the FOIA”

Preceding quotes from ‘In Search of Enemies‘ by CIA officer John Stockton

Recalling CIA officer Stockton’s last two paragraphs (cited in bold above), lets not forget Michael Hastings forward looking tip on what became law in 2013:

“The newest version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes an amendment that would legalize the use of propaganda on the American public, reports Michael Hastings of Buzzfeed.

“The amendment — proposed by Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) and Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and passed in the House last Friday afternoon — would effectively nullify the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, which explicitly forbids information and psychological operations aimed at influencing U.S. public opinion”

Yeah THIS Michael Hastings:

Richard Clarke, the counterterrorism chief under both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, told the Huffington Post that Hastings’s [fatal] crash looked “consistent with a [Mercedes computer hacked] car cyber attack”

Furthermore:

“Hastings’ wife Elise Jordan later confirmed that he had been working on a profile of [Obama’s CIA Director John] Brennan when he [Hastings] died. Although Rolling Stone was expected to publish his article posthumously, the editors have not released his final piece and refuse to answer why”

Clearly because:

“The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media” — former CIA Director William Colby

It would seem then, if the CIA can’t own a significant journalist, the CIA almost certainly can neutralize a significant journalist.

All of the preceding is consistent with former Pentagon liaison to the CIA, the nearly unknown (to the larger American public) whistle-blower, Colonel Prouty’s conclusions:

secret_team-jpg-1

“the [Central Intelligence] Agency has a whole stable of writers, its favorite magazines and newspapers, its publishing houses, and its “backgrounders” ready to go at all times” – L Fletcher Prouty

article updated 17 December 2016

An expanded article built around the CIA-media manipulations with examples HERE

*

Alternative title: Target Iran

Our republic went off the rails with the National Security Act of 1947 and the birth of the national security state. Since, the votes at the boards of Northrop-Grumman, DuPont, Chevron, Unocal, et al, have come to carry more weight in the direction the USA has taken than those votes of any organized political bloc. When the dust has settled, chances are Pence will be the shadow president a-la Dick Cheney and Trump the ventriloquist’s frustrated lap dummy. The national security state (read corporate boards) will keep it’s python’s squeeze on our institutions intact; what remains to be seen is what modifications will be made. The Trump ‘team’ includes some of the nastiest military-industrial and corporate personalities American has on offer in chicken hawks Rudy Giuliani whose dealings with the Mojahedin-e-Khalq has seldom been honestly exposed, and John Bolton who wants a war with Iran. And not least, former US Army intelligence officer and Bill Clinton CIA Director James ‘Bomb Iran & North Korea‘ Woolsey.

What do these personalities hold in common with a google ban on ‘fake news’?  They will never tell you the biggest fake news spigots are CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and MSNBC, outlets that NEVER report on what this is all about; oil and gas, not terrorism as put forward by the western media. The Bush invasion of Afghanistan, where the CIA had (1980s) instigated and supported what became al-Qaida, was about a pipeline. Iraq was about oil where USA policy subsequently caused an al-Qaida branch to morph into Islamic State. The related Syria conflict is about competing pipelines, one favored by Russia, the other favored by NATO. Recalling Robert Kennedy Jr, earlier this year, penned an excellent expose on Syria and the competing pipelines behind that ‘covert’ war waged by the USA employing proxies, including radical Islamist groups aligned with al-Qaida:

“the Russians, who sell 70 percent of their gas exports to Europe, viewed the Qatar/Turkey pipeline as an existential threat. In Putin’s view, the Qatar pipeline is a NATO plot to change the status quo, deprive Russia of its only foothold in the Middle East, strangle the Russian economy and end Russian leverage in the European energy market. In 2009, Assad announced that he would refuse to sign the agreement to allow the pipeline to run through Syria “to protect the interests of our Russian ally.”

“Assad further enraged the Gulf’s Sunni monarchs by endorsing a Russian-approved “Islamic pipeline” running from Iran’s side of the gas field through Syria and to the ports of Lebanon. The Islamic pipeline would make Shiite Iran, not Sunni Qatar, the principal supplier to the European energy market and dramatically increase Tehran’s influence in the Middke [sic] East and the world. Israel also was understandably determined to derail the Islamic pipeline, which would enrich Iran and Syria and presumably strengthen their proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas.

“Secret cables and reports by the U.S., Saudi and Israeli intelligence agencies indicate that the moment Assad rejected the Qatari pipeline, military and intelligence planners quickly arrived at the consensus that fomenting a Sunni uprising in Syria to overthrow the uncooperative Bashar Assad was a feasible path to achieving the shared objective of completing the Qatar/Turkey gas link”

The full essay can be read HERE.

The RFK Jr piece clearly echoes an earlier essay by Gore Vidal and a proposed pipeline USA based multinationals coveted, requiring a war in Afghanistan:

“As it proved, the conquest of Afghanistan had nothing to do with Osama. He was simply a pretext for replacing the Taliban with a relatively stable government that would allow Union Oil of California to lay its pipeline for the profit of, among others, the Cheney-Bush junta.

“Background? All right. The headquarters of Unocal are, as might be expected, in Texas. In December 1997, Taliban representatives were invited to Sugarland, Texas. At that time, Unocal had already begun training Afghan men in pipeline construction, with US government approval. BBC News, (4 December 1997) : `A spokesman for the company Unocal said the Taliban were expected to spend several days at the company’s [Texas] headquarters . . . a BBC regional correspondent says the proposal to build a pipeline across Afghanistan is part of an international scramble to profit from developing the rich energy resources of the Caspian Sea.’ The Inter Press Service (IPS) reported: `some Western businesses are warming up to the Taliban despite the movement’s institutionalisation of terror, massacres, abductions and impoverishment.’ CNN (6 October 1996): `The United States wants good ties [with the Taliban] but can’t openly seek them while women are being oppressed.’

“The Taliban, rather better organised than rumoured, hired for PR one Leila Helms, a niece of Richard Helms, former director of the CIA. In October 1996, the Frankfurter Rundschau reported that Unocal `has been given the go-ahead from the new holders of power in Kabul to build a pipeline from Turkmenistan via Afghanistan to Pakistan . . .’ This was a real coup for Unocal as well as other candidates for pipelines, including Condoleezza’s old employer Chevron. Although the Taliban was already notorious for its imaginative crimes against the human race, the Wall Street Journal, scenting big bucks, fearlessly announced: `Like them or not, the Taliban are the players most capable of achieving peace in Afghanistan at this moment in history.’ The New York Times (26 May 1997) leapt aboard the pipeline juggernaut. `The Clinton administration has taken the view that a Taliban victory would act as counterweight to Iran . . . and would offer the possibility of new trade routes that could weaken Russian and Iranian influence in the region.’

“But by 1999, it was clear that the Taliban could not provide the security we would need to protect our fragile pipelines. The arrival of Osama as warrior for Allah on the scene refocused, as it were, the bidding.”

The full essay can be read HERE

What remains to be seen is, whether this group surrounding Trump, as responsible for the spread of terror via proxy wars abroad as anyone, has determined some dialing back is in order. Clearly the model of covertly supporting Wahabi extremism to effect regime change to benefit big oil & gas has increasingly spun out of control over the decades, since the ultimate stupidity of using religious extremists to wage proxy wars had been initiated in Afghanistan by Robert Gates under Reagan.

Just as large a question is, has Bolton’s, Woolsey’s and Giuliani’s hostility towards Russian ally Iran been tempered? Almost certainly not. Insofar as what the actuality of policy will initiate, a comment of Woolsey is particularly disturbing, as it had been made in the context of Russia and geopolitics…

“I think what Mr. Trump does is much more important than what he says”

considering:

Woolsey chairs the Leadership Council of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an important bastion of hawkish “pro-Israel” advocacy in the United States that has served as an outpost for many well-known rightist ideologues. Among his activities at FDD has been to support the work of its Energy Security” program, which advocates for the United States to break “break the oil monopoly” that helps prop up “regimes and individuals who fund terrorist activities”

Based on open source analysis, it would appear this preceding applies to Iran as opposed to Saudi Arabia. Rabid Iran hater Bibi Netanyahu has a new best friend in Washington. Be informed; Woolsey was a top McCain advisor when McCain mimicked the Beach Boys:

%d bloggers like this: