With the CIA or MOSSAD (your choice) having decided to leak the fact clandestine operations of the two agencies have established a certain degree of fusion, released as a psychological ploy (neither agency is particularly bright these days), it brought into perspective a phenomena I had puzzled over for some time; how it was I’d drawn the attempted lethal attention of both institutions in a matter of two weeks (in the Fall of 2007.) A case of leaked accountability to Newsweek magazine establishes the CIA & MOSSAD were working joint assassinations by February, 2008. In actuality, my case establishes they were already jointly pursuing targets four months previous to this, in October, 2007.
Also, I’d wondered how MOSSAD had taken an interest in my elimination, a simple ‘quid pro quo’ arrangement, although plausible, was never a completely satisfactory answer. Now I believe I know that answer as well; the CIA has a storied history of narcotics trafficking and MOSSAD is implicated as a possible partner back to the era of Iran-Contra:
“By Way of Deception describes the shocking scope and depth of the Mossad’s influence, disclosing how Jewish communities in the U.S., Europe, and South America are armed and trained by the organization in secret ‘self-defense’ units, and how Mossad agents facilitate the drug trade in order to pay the enormous costs of its far-flung, clandestine operation”
As an investigator with a longtime interest in the several western democracies intelligence agencies deep involvement in international narcotics trafficking, motive appears to falls into place. As well, noting the MOSSAD’s international ‘self-defense’ cells funded by this practice closely resemble GLADIO (and likely are modeled after the same), I now must doubt the considerable logistical support required for attempts to take myself out in Europe were limited to fascist Christian elements; in fact Bibi Netanyahu’s MOSSAD fingerprints would appear to be coming into focus, in endeavor joined at the hip with George W Bush & Co, inherited and carried on under Obama:
Of course none of this should ignore what is too often overlooked; the fact Netanyahu and his ilk would never survive to pursue their crime sprees if it were not for some ninety million American conservative Christians, most of whom adopt an ‘Israel can do no wrong’ position because of embracing Biblical literalism, one could call these people ‘millennials.’ The fact this is slightly less that 1/3 of the American demographic doesn’t automatically confer a minority status insofar as the amount of influence they project … for the fact they are largely in solidarity having to with what amounts to their projecting a fait accompli or the idea most of humanity is doomed according to prophecy and that centers on the establishing (re-establishing in their view) a ‘Greater Israel.’ They’re simply better organized than their opposition and probably larger, when taking into account those many Americans who’re alienated from political process or disengaged for whatever other reasons.
This certainly does not excuse Netanyahu but there is plenty of blame (or mental illness, your choice) to go around. It’s not only the Israelis; a rational argument might be made it is not primarily the Israelis are the social drivers (enablers) for the crimes of the state of Israel.
*
^ Dedicated to all narco-killers operating in guise of patriotism
Critical reading to understand nearly all of mainstream media and a good portion of ‘alternative’ media. Arguably, Edward Bernays has done as much to destroy the human spirit in society, in just a few short generations, as the church at Rome had accomplished in two millennia.
Original paper* provided by a contact at Georgetown University, in Washington, DC. Author’s name withheld by request-
Although often taken with a sinister connotation in modern usage, the original meaning of the word propaganda is better described today by the swath of professions encompassing the field of Public Relations. Lobbyists, marketing professionals, media consultants, political pundits, and public affairs liaisons, are just a few examples of the modern professions that have become critical to the success of any organization that must navigate the unsure waters of public opinion.
As the profession of public relations has grown and diversified, the language it uses to describe itself has diversified as well; what would have been called propaganda a century ago is now message management, product marketing, promotional advertising, press releases, off the record, official statements, and most recently; spin. What unites these terms is a focused attempt at capturing the public interest towards some broader goal; sales of a particular product, support for a political candidate, advancement of a religious ideology, or the systematic violation of basic human rights.
Public Relations as a profession and field of study rose to prominence in the U.S. following the success of the Committee on Public Information (“CPI”), commonly known as the Creel Commission, an agency of the federal government established and then later dismantled by President Woodrow Wilson to build public support and enthusiasm for U.S. participation in World War 1. Widely seen as extremely successful, the efforts of the CPI caught the attention of business and political leaders who began to turn to the newly developed concept of a Public Relations Counsel for assistance in manipulating public interest.
As a member of the Creel Commission, Edward Bernays developed the skills he would later use to launch the field of public relations as a professional discipline. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter called Edward Bernays and his contemporary and competitor, Ivy Lee, “professional poisoners of the public mind, exploiters of foolishness, fanaticism and self interest.” Edward Bernays in particular deserves credit for much of the intellectual roots of modern public relations as his academic writings still encompass much of the theory in use today.
As a founding and vocal member of the public relations profession, Bernays lays out ethical guidance for the professional that is fraught with subjectivity and dangerously broad:
“The profession of public relations counsel is developing for itself an ethical code which compares favorably with that governing the legal and medical professions. In part, this code is forced upon the public relations counsel by the very conditions of his work. While recognizing, just as the lawyer does, that everyone has the right to present his case in its best light, he nevertheless refuses a client whom he believes to be dishonest, a product which he believes to be fraudulent, or a cause which he believes to be antisocial. One reason for this is that, even though a special pleader, he is not dissociated from the client in the public’s mind. Another reason is that while he is pleading before the court—the court of public opinion—he is at the same time trying to affect that court’s judgments and actions. In law, the judge and jury hold the deciding balance of power. In public opinion, the public relations counsel is judge and jury, because through his pleading of a case the public may accede to his opinion and judgment.”
The ethical basis that under-girds the profession of public relations as put forth by Bernays contains no reference to any known or accepted ethical theory beyond a tepid comparison with the medical and legal professions. When taken collectively Bernays arguments for the ethical basis of the field of public relations represents at best a loosely utilitarian ethic; grounded only in self-interest and the maintenance and furthering of a career in public relations.
A comparison of the ethical foundation of the legal profession with that of public relations is dubious at best. As he notes himself, Edward Bernays argument glosses over perhaps the most critical difference; that in a court of law, or any legal proceeding for that matter, there is some impartial third party ensuring that the “spin” being put on the facts maintains some subjective basis in reality. The framework offered by Bernays contains no impartial third party keeping the PR man honest beyond the ability of his conscience to weigh his own self-interest and those of his clients against the greater public good.
His comparison does not compare favorably with the Hippocratic oath of “first do no harm” that under-girds the ethical framework of the medical establishment; instead the only criteria for adherence to this code are that the PR professional have some level of belief in the product/service/initiative being promoted, and that he or she avoid tainting their public good name by association with fraudulent products or antisocial purposes.
The parallels Bernays draws between the ethical codes of the legal and medical communities with public relations is without merit because these professions are subject to strict codes of conduct that often carry legal and professional consequences if not strictly adhered to; this is not the case with public relations. The profession of public relations has no such governing body that determines the ethical grounding of a PR initiative beyond public acceptance of the position being offered. Instead of a strictly codified set of rules his ethical framework simply calls upon the PR professional to use his or her own subjective judgment in determining whether or not a particular course of action is ethical.
Bernays argued that effective mass communication is of critical importance to the proper functioning of a democratic society:
“Whatever of social importance is done to-day, whether in politics, finance, manufacture, agriculture, charity, education, or other fields, must be done with the help of propaganda. Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government.”
According to Bernays, the right to petition others to adopt a favorable viewpoint is central to the function of a free and open society and accordingly the effective use of public relations is the grease that allows the wheels of democracy to turn; where persuasion and guile has usurped raw authority as the prime impetus for social action of any kind, whether it be corporate, government, or private interests at stake.
The “engineering of consent” according to Bernays is required in a free society to direct and form the public support required to accomplish any goal; this is, he argues, because the average citizen is individually and collectively mentally ill equipped to grasp let alone make intelligent choices regarding the intricate issues that face leaders of any kind within a modern society.
That an enlightened educated and well informed public is critical to the success of a democratic and free people was highlighted by Thomas Jefferson as a prerequisite for this form of government:
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty and property of their constituents. There is no safe deposit for these but with the people themselves; nor can they be safe with them without information. Where the press is free, and every man able to read, all is safe.”
In making his case for the necessity of public relations Bernays explicitly questions one of the important arguments used in furthering democratic forms of government and one explicitly labeled as critical to those ends by many of the founding fathers of the United States. The constitutional protections afforded a free press and the rights to free speech were not envisaged as a freedom to spin and manipulate by the founding fathers. But rather as protection against interference with the unfettered ability of the public to disseminate the facts surrounding government policy and government action; that given access to these facts citizens could decide for themselves the just or unjust nature of government.
The behavior of US Citizens, who enjoyed particularly high literacy rates relative to the rest of the world at the time he wrote Propaganda, brought Bernays to an entirely different conclusion:
“Universal literacy was supposed to educate the common man to control his environment. Once he could read and write he would have a mind fit to rule. So ran the democratic doctrine. But instead of a mind, universal literacy has given him rubber stamps, rubber stamps inked with advertising slogans, with editorials, with published scientific data, with the trivialities of the tabloids and the platitudes of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each man’s rubber stamps are the duplicates of millions of others, so that when those millions are exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints.”
For Bernays the idea of an enlightened and informed citizenry capable of making intelligent and informed decisions constitutes is little more than a pretty sentiment.
Access to these “rubber stamps” is required when initiating action of any kind in need of a broad base of public support and according to Bernays the public intellect is the last place in which access to them will be found. Bernays argues that propaganda is most effective when directed by scientific (e.g. empirically proven mainly psychological) methodologies aimed at manipulating the emotions, prejudices, preconceptions, social relationships, and unconscious habits of the target audience to bring about a change in or the adoption of a particular viewpoint or call to action.
Bernays then asserts that information is power and that those who can manipulate the modern machinery of communication, which is primarily a conduit for the flow of information, can manipulate society as a whole. That financial means gives access to outsized influence over a free and democratic society is a basic premise put forth by Bernays in making the case for public relations as a profession. The confluence of financial means with power over information constitutes what Bernays calls an “invisible government” that arises informally around those with influence over and access to information either through means of keen intellect, prominent position, or sheer financial muscle. He argues that this unseen influence, enabled largely through the skillful exploitation and manipulation of information, is what provides a free society with a stable ruling class absent the strict hierarchical authority structure in other less free forms of human governance.
It is the job of this informal and amorphous “invisible government” comprised of overlapping spheres of influence, intellect, and financial clout to make important decisions on matters pertaining to the public good. Once these decisions have been made it is the job of the PR professional to go about scientifically and methodically deconstructing if public support can be obtained for the measure under consideration. Focus groups, market research, surveys, and public opinion polling are modern examples of this scientific deconstruction at work.
If the plan under consideration is deemed sellable, a process of what amounts to a professional and very thorough scientific manipulation of the target population is undertaken in an effort to win public support for an idea, program, goal, election candidate, or genocide. This process features at its center an appeal to the irrational meant to move a target audience in a chosen direction through indirect, i.e. manipulative, means; via an appeal to the intellect and understanding of the audience. Consequently the ultimate measure of success in public relations is achieving movement in the desired direction without the subject even being consciously aware of his or her shift in perception.
When viewed collectively Bernays’ argument for the necessity and place of public relations within a democracy results in at best a form of enlightened despotism; where those in key positions of influence decide on matters of import and turn to the public relations profession to win public support through manipulation and guile rather than an informed conversation with an involved citizenry.
When consent is engineered through these methods the end result is artificial; something that did not previously exist or come about organically and is not natively integrated with the host population has been unleashed via overt manipulation. The end result of is often catastrophic and unpredictable for the subjects of these machinations. This is at the heart of what makes Bernays vision of public relations ethically dubious and antithetical to the function of a democratic and free people; he denies the average citizen true franchise and attributes to a lack of intellect the universal human response to strong visual, emotional, and psychological stimuli.
Extreme examples of evil such as Goebbels use of Bernays writings in Nazi Germany to build support for the persecution and eventual extermination of the Jews or the demonizing of Bosnian Croats and Muslims by the Milosevic regime are rare examples of accountability. The events perpetrated by these individuals and their accomplices within media and government illustrate exactly how dangerous it can be to engage in the mass manipulation of society through the use of Bernays style public relations tactics.
Lesser transgressions in spin are generally overlooked or labeled as “reasonable people can disagree”; the rampant and overt consent engineering directed at the American public by the Bush Administration in the lead up to the Iraq war is a good example of this slippery dynamic. Bernays emphasizes the use of facts as central to the effective use of public relations tactics; he held that facts when coupled with the proper packaging and directed at the emotional/psychological aspect of man was the most effective means of procuring public support for any endeavor.
The selective use of facts by the Bush administration in Iraq represents a textbook employment of Bernays public relations methods . The invocation of a “mushroom cloud” as the smoking gun that would attend the failure to contain the regime of Saddam Hussein resonated with a US population steeped in Cold War imagery of an atomic holocaust and primed for action following the traumatic events of September 11th 2001. As Bernays advocated; an appeal to emotion, fear, the irrational and subconscious enabled by the selective use of facts paired with an interpretation geared towards a specific outcome was an effective means of gaining public support for preemptive war.
The coupling of overtly manipulative tactics aimed at what Bernays cousin and mentor Sigmund Freud called the “irrational nature of man” with an outlook that views collective humanity with a degree of intellectual contempt has set the tone for a century of public relations practices. This unfortunate precedent permeates modern public relations and it is my belief that it is contributing at a fundamental level to the increase in public distrust and disillusionment with large powerful organizations of any kind, be they government, private, commercial, non-profit, religious, or secular.
The pervasive use of public relations tactics as embodied by Edward Bernays becomes particularly problematic when in unholy trifecta with the National Defense and National Intelligence communities. The overtly manipulative practices advocated by Bernays can, and in a free society should, only be contradicted by complete access to the facts used to formulate the position being put forth for public consumption. This crossroads of secrecy and a culture pervaded by public relations and the temptation to and acceptance of “spin” as a viable way out of difficult decisions leaves the average citizen not only in the dark about the behavior of the US defense and intelligence establishments but government as a whole.
Given that the defense and intelligence communities under current laws retain the right to classify information for decades if not indefinitely this leaves the average US Citizen in a position of enforced ignorance with regards to the actions of his or her government in contemporary matters of national defense and intelligence collection. Without access to the facts surrounding a given issue the citizen is completely at the mercy of the consent engineer; whose job it is to steer them in a chosen direction through manipulation and guile on behalf of those who purportedly know and are better equipped to understand the issues at hand.
When the source of engineered consent is the government of the United States which wields more financial muscle and informational might than any other single entity in existence little can be done to forestall these tactics when the facts that would illuminate falsehood, artificiality, and bias are closely guarded secrets. Bernays argument for the necessity of public relations within a democracy is shockingly undemocratic because it undercuts the very heart of what constitutes a free and open society and does so through the use of covert and overt manipulation. His argument for the place of public relations within a modern society would reduce the average citizen to an emotional punching bag subject to the constant manipulation of public relations personnel; whose job it is to stimulate in the herd the proper and needed response.
The pervasive nature of public relations in modern society is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy where constant appeals to base instinct and emotion from every conceivable direction are creating a fishbowl of lies in which the American people swim; robbed of the intellectual capacity to make intelligent choices as informed citizens because they are not at the most basic level being allowed to participate.
Examples of this dynamic are found in the deposing of legitimately elected leaders in foreign countries on behalf of US economic interests in places like Guatemala, where United Fruit’s banana monopoly was under threat; or in Iran where the duly elected president Mohammed Mossadeq promised to nationalize the oil industry which was perceived as a threat to US and European economic interests.
In both of these examples public relations tactics were used to spin US actions in these countries as primarily geared toward undercutting the communist threat posed by an expansive Soviet Union during the cold war. This artificiality was spun from the cloth of Edward Bernays public relations playbook and left the public in large part ignorant of the full scope of US interests in deposing legitimately elected foreign leaders. US actions in foreign coups were justified nearly completely on the basis of covert action against Soviet expansion during the cold war. After the fact examination of these incidents has revealed the artificiality of the justifications at issue, but this is far too late to effect policy decisions that have been the source of substantial blow-back for the US in both Latin America and the Middle East.
Unless coupled with full and contemporaneous access to the facts under-girding the policy position being pursued, the use of manipulative public relations tactics that play to the base instincts of a population is unethical to a truly free democratic society. These tactics when used by the government of that society to engineer outcomes outside of full public view is when the practice become not only unethical but abhorrent and smacks uncomfortably of paternalistic despotism.
The relative frequency with which the US public is bombarded with cryptic warnings and carefully packaged statements supporting activities from raw intelligence collection, to unmanned drone strikes, and even outright invasions serves to indicate that these tactics are thriving even today. With the death of Osama Bin Laden the national defense establishment has been busily constructing a strong justification for massive investments in “cyber warfare” technologies as the next profit maker as the war on terror cooled down (but since reheated with policies resulting in the rise of IS.) This effort is showing many of the same signs of consent engineering that are evident after the fact when examining the Bush Administration effort to sell the public and world at large on preemptive war in Iraq.
Perhaps in addition to being known as the father of public relations Edward Bernays also deserves some substantial credit for popularizing the “sheeple” or people as sheep argument; that as a collective humans are no more capable of processing complex ideas than a herd of domesticated animals. Subtle variations on this argument are often used to defend the status quo in our national policies where only those with access to restricted information are allowed, at a functional level, to make critical decisions in these areas. This in and of itself would not be a problem if decoupled from an approach to public relations that relies on fear and manipulation rather than an appeal to the intellect and an attempt to expand the understanding of the American people with regards to the issue under consideration. The widespread use of manipulative public relations tactics on behalf of the US Government when directed towards its own people will continue to be a blatantly unethical violation of the spirit of, if not the letter of, the intent our founding fathers had in drafting the documents that form the basis of our political tradition.
When viewed in this light the modern field of public relations as it is currently practiced is ethically fraught through the use of dubious tactics of manipulation and guile even when the public has access to the facts at hand. Without full and contemporaneous access to the factual basis undergirding a government sponsored consent engineering, effort the modern practice of public relations represents a real and persistent threat to free and democratic forms of governance that place the accountability of the rulers in the hands of the ruled.
This is because without access to the complete informational picture used to formulate particular government policy the citizen is denied franchise through an inability to discern spin and fear mongering from fact and legitimate existential threat. This enforced ignorance ensures that a propagation of the status quo will necessarily result in a population ill prepared to make tough decisions in a complex world, as they have been shut out of the real conversation.
Jefferson amongst other founding fathers of the United States held that an enlightened and informed citizenry is the only safekeeping afforded the liberties, freedoms, and property of a democratic society.
Edward Bernays turns this argument on its head and gives shockingly little credit to the ability of the average citizen to decide for themselves the best course of action in a given situation, and in so doing sows the seeds of demagoguery and despotism achieved through power, financial means, and the skillful manipulation of information directed at herding the public in a desired direction.
From the standpoint of utilitarian ethics, in a true democracy, only the people are allowed to decide what is in their own best interest; and this is a premise Bernays explicitly rejects; it would seem many of Bernays’ contemporary intellectual heirs see it his way too.
Again, for the record, further evidence for the support of Christian Dominion control of NATO. Noting I have been passing relevant intelligence to your institution body for over two full years, my new assessment (pasted in, below) points squarely to elements identical to certain elements behind GLADIO as currently complicit in sustained drive to undermine the secular nature of the Western democracies.
GLADIO crimes, of which the primary facts are well known and understood, go un-prosecuted primarily for the reason of lack of political will or better said, cowardice. Germany has a moral and ethical responsibility to pursue prosecutions of perpetrators behind the Munich bombing and more (detailed in previous communications.) It is your own corrupt intelligence agencies and related political minions, stand in the way.
It is my dedicated intention history will not be kind to yourselves if nothing is done. I will be posting a copy of this communication for public perusal.
The American founders clearly recognized the history and danger of any ‘Christian Dominion’ as eloquently stated by James Madison:
“Experience witnesses that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and virtue of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution”
Also, there was no sense of certainty, on the American founders’ part, there would be an infallible institution of government born of the American revolutionary experiment. When emerging from the Constitutional Convention, the waiting-shouting crowd demanded an answer of Benjamin Franklin, on the form of a new government to be given them. His answer?
“A republic, if you can keep it.”
We couldn’t. The founders were well aware of centuries of Vatican intrigue in relation to manipulating geopolitics, governments and related demands of submission, examples now include demanding authority over the divorce of Henry the VIII to the modern church support of Francisco Franco:
“Franco’s concordat gave state funding to the Church and legally enforced Church teaching. In return, the Vatican … granted him the full version of “royal patronage” (patronato real). This was the ancient privilege of Spanish kings to name bishops and veto appointments down to the level of the parish priest”
The Catholic Church is dominionist by deed. ‘Christian Dominion’ is perhaps most easily described as the ‘rule of God’s law’ trumps the ‘rule of secular law’, Jesus commandment to ‘render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s’ notwithstanding. Practical ‘Christian Dominion’ as employed by the modern church at Rome is evident in several respects; based on a principle of forgiveness of ‘lesser evils’, follows here are four salient examples:
1) Third Reich war criminals, forgiven and protected for the purpose of fighting a greater evil such as ‘godless’ communists. This resulted in the Vatican ‘rat lines’ evacuating tens of thousands of Nazi war criminals to safety and away from prosecutions, in the immediate post World War II years:
“It gets a little crazy,” he said, “when you let one thing [anticommunism] take over to the extent that you forgive everything else” -CIA officer Victor Marchetti
2) Protecting pedophile priests identities, shielding these criminals throughout the world, moving them from parish to parish while protecting them from civil authorities and prosecutions.
“From the time the Paraclete brothers—over the objections of the order’s founder—began treating pedophiles there in 1965, Camp Ped was little more than a recycling center for child-molesting priests. Bishops used it as a holding tank for clerical sickos until they could foist them on new and unsuspecting parishioners. Its miserable track record can be measured in countless children’s ruined lives”
3) In this third instance, you see how the previous two instance combine to demonstrate a model; when an Argentine priest who’d participated hands on in torture interrogations, and murders, of ‘disappeared’ persons, the Church at Rome had allowed him to serve as a parish priest under an alias while a fugitive war criminal. It was only after the priest had been exposed by investigative journals, that he’d been brought to justice.
“The parishioners in the coastal village in Chile knew their priest simply as the Rev. Christián González. Only his accent gave away that he was an Argentine. So it came as a shock to them when he traveled back to Argentina last year and had to face charges here for crimes dating to the military dictatorship of the 1970’s. Under his real name, Christián von Wernich, he is accused of 19 counts of murder and 33 of abduction and torture”
4) This fourth instance reinforces the preceding third instance; providing alias to Rwandan priestscomplicit in genocide and placing them in parishes abroad:
“Accusations that the Catholic leadership acted as apologists for the génocidaire have been buttressed by the involvement of a network of church organisations, from monasteries to missionaries, in helping priests accused of murder in Rwanda to evade justice. Some were hidden away in Europe, taken on under false names as parish priests”
These (linked) preceding instances of modern church history are too similar, too geographically widespread, too often repeated, to be anything less than actual church policy, these facts are NOT anomalies. In each instance, it is a case of ‘rehabilitation through forgiveness’ or “Go and do not sin again” which, according to the factual deeds of church hierarchy, demonstrates ‘God’s law’ trumps accountability to any secular rule of law. If the church forgives, it is the position of the church, that is where accountability ends. This becomes ever-more-so problematic as the litany of criminal behaviors only grows. Church empowered IMPUNITY undermining democracies, is the practical result. This is especially relevant to Opus Dei.
Excluding the rebellious, hyper-radical, extreme fringe of right-wing Catholicism represented in the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), Opus Dei is the mainstay institution for the hardcore religious-right in the church at Rome. Conservatives throughout the Catholic hierarchy defer to Opus Dei, or curry favor with Opus Dei, to position themselves for advancement. Accommodating Opus Dei is a required element for any who aspire to the highest office, the papacy, no matter that person’s church society affiliation. This is matter of fact internal church hierarchy politics and the Jesuit Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s rise cannot be considered an exception.
Opus Dei, which flourished in its early (formative) decades in Franco’s Spain, prior to expanding aggressively into Latin America, points to two events so similar, they cannot be considered to be unrelated.
“In the decade following the end of the Spanish Civil War, an unholy alliance of doctors, priests, and General Francisco Franco’s secret police systematically took thousands of children from vulnerable women known to have supported the Republican cause. These women were often in prison, or their husbands had been killed or were also in jail. It was seen at the time as an effective way of inflicting a lasting punishment on those who had backed the wrong side in the war, at the same time as preventing the appearance of a new generation of “reds” by placing the children in the care of families who supported the new regime”
“Priests and bishops in Argentina justified their support of the government on national security concerns, and defended the taking of children as a way to ensure they were not “contaminated” by leftist enemies of the military, said Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, a Nobel Prize-winning human rights advocate who has investigated dozens of disappearances and testified at the trial”
General Videla himself stated he had the advice of the church in the policies he’d initiated, including the disposition of infant and small children taken from parents the regime had murdered:
“Ex General Jorge Videla said he had “many conversations” with Argentina’s primate, Cardinal Raúl Francisco Primatesta, about his regime’s dirty war against left-wing activists. He said there were also conversations with other leading bishops from Argentina’s episcopal conference as well as with the country’s papal nuncio at the time, Pio Laghi … “They advised us about the manner in which to deal with the situation” said Videla”
Noting General Videla’s naming of Cardinal Primatesta, who refused testimony to any lawful tribunal concerning the crimes of the Argentine junta…
“On his death in 2006 human rights campaigners in Argentina said he took to the grave many of the junta’s secrets after they failed to force him to testify about his dealings with it”
…it is interesting to note an official Opus Dei bulletin [announcement] endorsing and associating with the criminal Cardinal’s activities as recently as 2001:
“Dans la ville de Córdoba (Argentine), le cardinal Primatesta, qui présidait la célébration, a commenté que le bienheureux Josémaria a aidé des milliers de personnes à s’unir à Dieu, chacun à l’endroit où il est”
Translation:
“In the city of Córdoba (Argentina), Cardinal Primatesta, who presided [over] the celebration, said that Blessed Josemaria “has helped thousands of people to unite with God, each in the place where he is” [referring to celebrating the founder of Opus Dei]
A few years later, we discover Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio has filled Cardinal Primatesta’s shoes for the same Opus Dei event:
^ “Archbishop of Buenos Aires and Primate of Argentina, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, presided in the metropolitan Cathedral at a Mass concelebrated with Fr. Patricio Olmos, Regional Vicar of Opus Dei in Argentina”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio DID appear before the tribunal investigating ‘disappeared’ (murdered) persons in Argentina because he’d been fingered by a low ranking Jesuit priest, Fr Yario, as the man responsible for giving him up to the junta to experience five months of torture. A brave liberal Catholic woman investigated Bergoglio’s tetimony and demonstrates Bergoglio stonewalled, prevaricated, refused answers (and we’ve since discovered, outright lied), here is a telling tribunal transcript snippet:
Tribunal: “Did the general of the Jesuits know that there were accusations made against this group [that included Jalics and Yorio]? Did the General [the global head of the Jesuits] share those [critical] views?”
Bergoglio: [no answer]
The article concludes (among other things)
“Under Jorge Mario’s [Bergoglio] leadership, the Society of Jesus [Jesuits in Argentina], was shaped into a theological phalanx of the right-wing dictatorship. Bergoglio did not answer the question put to him about whether the Superior General of the Society of Jesus (worldwide) shared Bergoglio’s critical view of liberation theology and its preferential option to the poor. If so, he would have had to say that the answer was no”
It would appear Bergoglio’s concerns for social justice and the poor are at best superficial or for appearance sake, and at worst, are left outside the door in any case, when it comes to protecting the interests of Opus Dei. Opus Dei is a ‘personal prelature’ answering to the Curia at the Vatican:
“A personal prelature is a Church jurisdiction without geographical boundaries designed to carry out particular pastoral initiatives. At present, the only personal prelature in the Church is Opus Dei”
In effect, Opus Dei or ‘The Work’ is (these days) a society which can be assigned specific errands by the Holy See. However Opus Dei might take issue with that interpretation, at least for public consumption, it does well to recall the organization’s history in relation to collusion with intelligence agencies and consequent ties to false-flag terror carried out by fascist Catholic cells. It was a former CIA director, Bill Colby, had blown the whistle the CIA had employed Opus Deito set up Operation Gladio throughout Western Europe:
“Colby’s story is absolutely correct. Absalon was created in the early 1950s. Colby was a member of the world spanning laymen Catholic organisation Opus Dei, which, using a modern term, could be called right-wing. Opus Dei played a central role in the setting up of Gladio in the whole of Europe”
Keep that thought in your pocket when considering how great a favor Dan Brown had done Opus Dei; when he’d created a mythical cult or far-fetched conspiracy theory detracting from real world crimes with Opus Dei fingerprints .. involving the slaughter of innocents with bombs and machine guns:
These are practically solved murders that have gone un-prosecuted for essentially two facts; 1) the interference of the Western democracies intelligence agencies derailing investigations and 2) the fact of the Catholic hierarchy harboring those very criminal elements devoted to the overthrow of ‘godless’ secularism. Jorge Mario Bergoglio has all of the necessary evidence at his disposal, as the present lead authority over the ‘personal prelature’ of Opus Dei, to produce the criminally complicit fascist cells involved in the slaughter of innocents in Italy, Germany and Belgium, and deliver these killers to justice. What has he done in reality? Promoted Opus Dei to the top levers of power at the Vatican:
“Opus Dei, an official institution of the Catholic Church, at the top is a secret society of international bankers, financiers, businessmen and their supporters. Their goal is the same as other plutocrats – unbridled power – except they use the influence of the Catholic Church and its worldwide network of institutions exempt from both taxes and financial reporting requirements to advance rightwing parties and governments. A year after Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s elevation as head of the Church and his many appointments, the dust has settled. Three cardinals have emerged as the most powerful in this papacy; all have close ties to Opus Dei. Two now control all Vatican finance”
Moving towards the conclusion of this assessment, it does well to recall Argentina by the time Vatican ‘rat lines’ had smuggled thousands of Nazis out of Europe and into that nation:
“In October 1961, Caggiano and the then president of Argentina, Arturo Frondizi inaugurated the first course on counter-revolutionary warfare in the Higher Military College. One of the tasks set in the course was to explain this quotation from the bishop of Verden, Dietrick von Nieken in 1411:
“When the existence of the Church is threatened, it is no longer bound by the commandments of morality. When unity is the aim, all means are justified: deceit, treachery, violence, usury, prison and death. Because order serves the good of the community, and the individual has to be sacrificed for the common good.”
“…among its instructors were priests such as Victorio Bonamín, whom Caggiano had chosen as his associate in the military vicariate general. At the start of the course, the director of the Higher Military College explained that it would be dealing with a new kind of warfare “which we could call ‘internal warfare’”, to be fought “without concern for the means, or scruples, or ethical principles”
The mandatory Nuclear Ethics and Nuclear Warfare session, which includes a discussion on St. Augustine’s “Christian Just War Theory,” is led by Air Force chaplains and takes place during a missile officer’s first week in training at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. St. Augustine’s “Qualifications for Just War,” according to the way it is cited in a PowerPoint presentation, are: “to avenge or to avert evil; to protect the innocent and restore moral social order (just cause)” and “to restore moral order; not expand power, not for pride or revenge (just intent)”
And in light of the preceding, examine recent Opus Dei meddling in American military affairs, falsely attacking the man most responsible for forcing the American military to confront its violation of laws prohibiting religious influences guiding military policies:
“Newsmax said, in an email … that it had removed the article produced by the Vatican-backed Aleteia because the author did not answer questions raised about it.
“The article implied that Mikey Weinstein, Founder and President of the organization, lied or exaggerated his ties with the Reagan White House to raise money to support the civil rights organization head leads. It has 40,000 active duty and veteran service members, of all faiths (about 96% are practicing Christians) and no faith, who want to keep the church out of the military’s business. They campaign aggressively to stop unconstitutional proselytizing throughout the U. S. armed forces and otherwise keep the “God Boys” out of the nation’s military where not to do so would be unlawful
“In the article, written by Mark Stricherz, two officials were quoted challenging Weinstein’s legitimacy.
“Ray Wilson, an archivist at the Reagan White House Library, was quoted as saying records did not show any indication Weinstein worked for the White House. Wilson on Thursday, in a telephone interview, disputed [that] and said he told the author he didn’t have time to make an exhaustive check and a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request should be filed if he wanted an authoritative response.
“University of Minnesota Professor Richard Painter, former deputy legal counsel for Reagan, was quoted as implying that although Weinstein did work for the Reagan White House he was exaggerating his role. Painter said he was asking for a correction from Aleteia”
Evidence for the Aleteia publication denouncing Weinstein connection to Opus Dei is clear, per the publication’s own listing of its ‘research experts’
“Fr. C. John McCloskey, III is a priest of the Prelature of Opus Dei. He currently is Research Fellow of the Faith and Reason Institute in Washington DC”
The question every *truly* rational person on this planet should be asking themselves is, how do you envision a future related to Opus Dei actively working to undermine a man dedicated to keeping religious fanatics hands off of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world?
Forget about Dan Brown’s fantasy conspiracy cult, this is a story of the real Opus Dei:
The American founders clearly recognized the history and danger of any ‘Christian Dominion’ as eloquently stated by James Madison:
“Experience witnesses that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and virtue of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution”
Also, there was no sense of certainty, on the American founders’ part, there would be an infallible institution of government born of the American revolutionary experiment. When emerging from the Constitutional Convention, the waiting-shouting crowd demanded an answer of Benjamin Franklin, on the form of a new government to be given them. His answer?
“A republic, if you can keep it.”
We couldn’t. The founders were well aware of centuries of Vatican intrigue in relation to manipulating geopolitics, governments and related demands of submission, examples now include condemning the Magna Charta, causing a civil war, to demanding authority over the divorce of Henry the VIII, to the modern church support of Francisco Franco:
“Franco’s concordat gave state funding to the Church and legally enforced Church teaching. In return, the Vatican … granted him the full version of “royal patronage” (patronato real). This was the ancient privilege of Spanish kings to name bishops and veto appointments down to the level of the parish priest”
The Catholic Church is dominionist by deed. ‘Christian Dominion’ is perhaps most easily described as the ‘rule of God’s law’ trumps the ‘rule of secular law’, Jesus commandment to ‘render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s’ notwithstanding. Practical ‘Christian Dominion’ as employed by the modern church at Rome is evident in several respects; based on a principle of forgiveness of ‘lesser evils’, follows here are four salient examples:
1) Third Reich war criminals, forgiven and protected for the purpose of fighting a greater evil such as ‘godless’ communists. This resulted in the Vatican ‘rat lines’ evacuating tens of thousands of Nazi war criminals to safety and away from prosecutions, in the immediate post World War II years:
“It gets a little crazy, when you let one thing [anticommunism] take over to the extent that you forgive everything else” -CIA officer Victor Marchetti
2) Protecting pedophile priests identities, shielding these criminals throughout the world, moving them from parish to parish while protecting them from civil authorities and prosecutions.
“From the time the Paraclete brothers—over the objections of the order’s founder—began treating pedophiles there in 1965, Camp Ped was little more than a recycling center for child-molesting priests. Bishops used it as a holding tank for clerical sickos until they could foist them on new and unsuspecting parishioners. Its miserable track record can be measured in countless children’s ruined lives”
3) In this third instance, you see how the previous two instance combine to demonstrate a model; when an Argentine priest who’d participated hands on in torture interrogations, and murders, of ‘disappeared’ persons, the Church at Rome had allowed him to serve as a parish priest under an alias while a fugitive war criminal. It was only after the priest had been exposed by investigative journals, that he’d been brought to justice.
“The parishioners in the coastal village in Chile knew their priest simply as the Rev. Christián González. Only his accent gave away that he was an Argentine. So it came as a shock to them when he traveled back to Argentina last year and had to face charges here for crimes dating to the military dictatorship of the 1970’s. Under his real name, Christián von Wernich, he is accused of 19 counts of murder and 33 of abduction and torture”
4) This fourth instance reinforces the preceding third instance; providing alias to Rwandan priestscomplicit in genocide and placing them in parishes abroad:
“Accusations that the Catholic leadership acted as apologists for the génocidaire have been buttressed by the involvement of a network of church organisations, from monasteries to missionaries, in helping priests accused of murder in Rwanda to evade justice. Some were hidden away in Europe, taken on under false names as parish priests”
These (linked) preceding instances of modern church history are too similar, too geographically widespread, too often repeated, to be anything less than actual church policy, these facts are NOT anomalies. In each instance, it is a case of ‘rehabilitation through forgiveness’ or “Go and do not sin again” which, according to the factual deeds of church hierarchy, demonstrates ‘God’s law’ trumps accountability to any secular rule of law. If the church forgives, it is the position of the church, that is where accountability ends. This becomes ever-more-so problematic as the litany of criminal behaviors only grows. Church empowered IMPUNITYundermining democracies, is the practical result. This is especially relevant to Opus Dei.
Excluding the rebellious, hyper-radical, extreme fringe of right-wing Catholicism represented in the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), Opus Dei is the mainstay institution for the hardcore religious-right in the church at Rome. Conservatives throughout the Catholic hierarchy defer to Opus Dei, or curry favor with Opus Dei, to position themselves for advancement. Accommodating Opus Dei is a required element for any who aspire to the highest office, the papacy, no matter that person’s church society affiliation. This is matter of fact internal church hierarchy politics and the Jesuit Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s rise cannot be considered an exception.
Opus Dei, which flourished in its early (formative) decades in Franco’s Spain, prior to expanding aggressively into Latin America, points to two events so similar, they cannot be considered to be unrelated.
“In the decade following the end of the Spanish Civil War, an unholy alliance of doctors, priests, and General Francisco Franco’s secret police systematically took thousands of children from vulnerable women known to have supported the Republican cause. These women were often in prison, or their husbands had been killed or were also in jail. It was seen at the time as an effective way of inflicting a lasting punishment on those who had backed the wrong side in the war, at the same time as preventing the appearance of a new generation of “reds” by placing the children in the care of families who supported the new regime”
“Priests and bishops in Argentina justified their support of the government on national security concerns, and defended the taking of children as a way to ensure they were not “contaminated” by leftist enemies of the military, said Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, a Nobel Prize-winning human rights advocate who has investigated dozens of disappearances and testified at the trial”
General Videla himself stated he had the advice of the church in the policies he’d initiated, including the disposition of infant and small children taken from parents the regime had murdered:
“Ex General Jorge Videla said he had “many conversations” with Argentina’s primate, Cardinal Raúl Francisco Primatesta, about his regime’s dirty war against left-wing activists. He said there were also conversations with other leading bishops from Argentina’s episcopal conference as well as with the country’s papal nuncio at the time, Pio Laghi … “They advised us about the manner in which to deal with the situation” said Videla”
Noting General Videla’s naming of Cardinal Primatesta, who refused testimony to any lawful tribunal concerning the crimes of the Argentine junta…
“On his death in 2006 human rights campaigners in Argentina said he took to the grave many of the junta’s secrets after they failed to force him to testify about his dealings with it”
…it is interesting to note an official Opus Dei bulletin [announcement] endorsing and associating with the criminal Cardinal’s activities as recently as 2001:
^ “Dans la ville de Córdoba (Argentine), le cardinal Primatesta, qui présidait la célébration, a commenté que le bienheureux Josémaria a aidé des milliers de personnes à s’unir à Dieu, chacun à l’endroit où il est”
Translation:
“In the city of Córdoba (Argentina), Cardinal Primatesta, who presided [at] the celebration, said that Blessed Josemaria “has helped thousands of people to unite with God, each in the place where he is” [referring to celebrating the founder of Opus Dei]
A few years later, we discover Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio has filled Cardinal Primatesta’s shoes for the same Opus Dei event:
^ “Archbishop of Buenos Aires and Primate of Argentina, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, presided in the metropolitan Cathedral at a Mass concelebrated with Fr. Patricio Olmos, Regional Vicar of Opus Dei in Argentina”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio DID appear before the tribunal investigating ‘disappeared’ (murdered) persons in Argentina because he’d been fingered by a low ranking Jesuit priest, Fr Yario, as the man responsible for giving him up to the junta to experience five months of torture. A brave liberal Catholic woman investigated Bergoglio’s tetimony and demonstrates Bergoglio stonewalled, prevaricated, refused answers (and we’ve since discovered, outright lied), here is a telling tribunal transcript snippet:
Tribunal: “Did the general of the Jesuits know that there were accusations made against this group [that included Jalics and Yorio]? Did the General [the global head of the Jesuits] share those [critical] views?”
Bergoglio: [no answer]
The article concludes (among other things)
“Under Jorge Mario’s [Bergoglio] leadership, the Society of Jesus [Jesuits in Argentina], was shaped into a theological phalanx of the right-wing dictatorship. Bergoglio did not answer the question put to him about whether the Superior General of the Society of Jesus (worldwide) shared Bergoglio’s critical view of liberation theology and its preferential option to the poor. If so, he would have had to say that the answer was no”
It would appear Bergoglio’s concerns for social justice and the poor are at best superficial or for appearance sake, and at worst, are left outside the door in any case, when it comes to protecting the interests of Opus Dei. Opus Dei is a ‘personal prelature’ answering to the Curia at the Vatican:
“A personal prelature is a Church jurisdiction without geographical boundaries designed to carry out particular pastoral initiatives. At present, the only personal prelature in the Church is Opus Dei”
In effect, Opus Dei or ‘The Work’ is (these days) a society which can be assigned specific errands by the Holy See. However Opus Dei might take issue with that interpretation, at least for public consumption, it does well to recall the organization’s history in relation to collusion with intelligence agencies and consequent ties to false-flag terror carried out by fascist Catholic cells. It was a former CIA director, Bill Colby, had blown the whistle the CIA had employed Opus Deito set up Operation Gladio throughout Western Europe:
“Colby’s story is absolutely correct. Absalon was created in the early 1950s. Colby was a member of the world spanning laymen Catholic organisation Opus Dei, which, using a modern term, could be called right-wing. Opus Dei played a central role in the setting up of Gladio in the whole of Europe”
Keep that thought in your pocket when considering how great a favor Dan Brown had done Opus Dei; when he’d created a mythical cult or far-fetched conspiracy theory detracting from real world crimes with Opus Dei fingerprints .. involving the slaughter of innocents with bombs and machine guns:
^ Watch beginning about 3 to 4 minutes in
These are practically solved murders that have gone un-prosecuted for essentially two facts; 1) the interference of the Western democracies intelligence agencies derailing investigations and 2) the fact of the Catholic hierarchy harboring those very criminal elements devoted to the overthrow of ‘godless’ secularism. Jorge Mario Bergoglio has all of the necessary evidence at his disposal, as the present lead authority over the ‘personal prelature’ of Opus Dei, to produce the criminally complicit fascist cells involved in the slaughter of innocents in Italy, Germany and Belgium, and deliver these killers to justice. What has he done in reality? Promoted Opus Dei to the top levers of power at the Vatican:
“Opus Dei, an official institution of the Catholic Church, at the top is a secret society of international bankers, financiers, businessmen and their supporters. Their goal is the same as other plutocrats – unbridled power – except they use the influence of the Catholic Church and its worldwide network of institutions exempt from both taxes and financial reporting requirements to advance rightwing parties and governments. A year after Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s elevation as head of the Church and his many appointments, the dust has settled. Three cardinals have emerged as the most powerful in this papacy; all have close ties to Opus Dei. Two now control all Vatican finance”
Moving towards the conclusion of this assessment, it does well to recall Argentina by the time Vatican ‘rat lines’ had smuggled thousands of Nazis out of Europe and into that nation:
“In October 1961, Caggiano and the then president of Argentina, Arturo Frondizi inaugurated the first course on counter-revolutionary warfare in the Higher Military College. One of the tasks set in the course was to explain this quotation from the bishop of Verden, Dietrick von Nieken in 1411:
“When the existence of the Church is threatened, it is no longer bound by the commandments of morality. When unity is the aim, all means are justified: deceit, treachery, violence, usury, prison and death. Because order serves the good of the community, and the individual has to be sacrificed for the common good.”
“…among its instructors were priests such as Victorio Bonamín, whom Caggiano had chosen as his associate in the military vicariate general. At the start of the course, the director of the Higher Military College explained that it would be dealing with a new kind of warfare “which we could call ‘internal warfare’”, to be fought “without concern for the means, or scruples, or ethical principles”
The mandatory Nuclear Ethics and Nuclear Warfare session, which includes a discussion on St. Augustine’s “Christian Just War Theory,” is led by Air Force chaplains and takes place during a missile officer’s first week in training at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. St. Augustine’s “Qualifications for Just War,” according to the way it is cited in a PowerPoint presentation, are: “to avenge or to avert evil; to protect the innocent and restore moral social order (just cause)” and “to restore moral order; not expand power, not for pride or revenge (just intent)”
And in light of the preceding, examine recent Opus Dei meddling in American military affairs, falsely attacking the man most responsible for forcing the American military to confront its violation of laws prohibiting religious influences guiding military policies:
“Newsmax said, in an email … that it had removed the article produced by the Vatican-backed Aleteia because the author did not answer questions raised about it.
“The article implied that Mikey Weinstein, Founder and President of the organization, lied or exaggerated his ties with the Reagan White House to raise money to support the civil rights organization head leads. It has 40,000 active duty and veteran service members, of all faiths (about 96% are practicing Christians) and no faith, who want to keep the church out of the military’s business. They campaign aggressively to stop unconstitutional proselytizing throughout the U. S. armed forces and otherwise keep the “God Boys” out of the nation’s military where not to do so would be unlawful
“In the article, written by Mark Stricherz, two officials were quoted challenging Weinstein’s legitimacy.
“Ray Wilson, an archivist at the Reagan White House Library, was quoted as saying records did not show any indication Weinstein worked for the White House. Wilson on Thursday, in a telephone interview, disputed [that] and said he told the author he didn’t have time to make an exhaustive check and a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request should be filed if he wanted an authoritative response.
“University of Minnesota Professor Richard Painter, former deputy legal counsel for Reagan, was quoted as implying that although Weinstein did work for the Reagan White House he was exaggerating his role. Painter said he was asking for a correction from Aleteia”
Evidence for the Aleteia publication denouncing Weinstein connection to Opus Dei is clear, per the publication’s own listing of its ‘research experts’
“Fr. C. John McCloskey, III is a priest of the Prelature of Opus Dei. He currently is Research Fellow of the Faith and Reason Institute in Washington DC”
The question every *truly* rational person on this planet should be asking themselves is, how do you envision a future related to Opus Dei actively working to undermine a man dedicated to keeping religious fanatics hands off of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world?
Update 12 April 2015: Pope Frances (to date) is standing behind the promotion of the criminal dictator Augusto Pinochet’s military priest, Juan Barros (presided at Pinochet’s funeral), despite the fact Barros shielded one of the church’s most notorious pedophiles
Here you’ll find out (links beneath this introduction) why our intelligence agencies are worse than useless, they are a threat to our well being and to the well being of peoples around the world. Here you’ll find things criminal and beyond that you’d never wish to imagine (if you’re someone like myself who believes real life horror movies are not healthy.)
While a ‘truth commission’ might be a good thing, there can be no pardons or forgoing prosecutions for CIA and military war crimes under international law. I mention this just to be crystal clear on where I stand in relation to what certainly must be many thousands of culpable personalities. And it couldn’t hurt to point to the National Security Act of 1947, the law that sent our republic off the rails. In regards to this, it has been the body of de facto law springing from the consequent ‘national security state’ which has allowed for the supplanting of constitutional principles with a rule by corporate oligarchy .. wherein Monsanto, Raytheon, Chevron, et al, have a greater influence over institutions of government than any constitutional principles ‘of, by and for the people.’ In other words, we no longer live under a rule of law, rather by dictat under ‘color of law’ where patently unconstitutional laws are in force by process of legislative, executive and judicial fiat.
And there is the social psychology factor; wherein the people attracted to careers in the ‘national security state’ are often mentally deranged by narcissism, to a point of stupidity. This can be determined with simple math; the 1st example would be the number of ‘civilian’ (under cover) renditions aircraft (123) and flights (11,000) during the acknowledged renditions program versus the number of ‘black site’ (under cover) prisoners. There are more known ‘renditions’ aircraft than there are acknowledged ‘black site’ prisoners (123 aircraft versus 119 prisoners.) Much investigation remains to be done to determine why there are such glaring apparent discrepancies on the face of events as exposed to now. And where is the accounting for any women renditioned to ‘black sites’ ? Are we to assume there were none? (that would be foolish.)
But the math gets even worse when it comes to having used information extracted by torture having caused an official (wild goose chase) investigation into ‘Black Muslim al-Qaida cells’ in Montana. Montana has 0.6% Black population in a total population of one million. Of 45 million American Blacks, it is estimated 632,500 are Muslim. If 10% of those had al-Qaida sympathies, the chance of finding one of those in Montana is statistically near zero. Y’know, even if I were on the side of the CIA on the issues of our so-called ‘national security’ as presently pursued, I’d have a problem with the people running a program that behave as stupidly as they have at the Counter Terrorism Center.
It’s accurate to more than make inferences comparing American leadership to Nazis, and bringing up Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao to compare our leadership to, is not at all far-fetched; considering how many have died in Iraq as direct consequence of the USA’s action and more actions in too many nations to mention in a short introduction.
The point of assembling these assessments in a different order than they’d been presented in my other collections, is to create another perspective of what is essentially the same territory dealt with in articles throughout this site. This collection, carefully perused, should show an overwhelming ‘preponderance of the evidence’ a criminal cabal embedded within our institutions security apparatus has gained control over our lives; with the Orwellian twist of its morphing over time into a necrotic religious cult.
Here is summation of how CIA information engineering has co-opted democracy in the immediate present; and the question every person of democratic persuasion should ask themselves of the direction we are taking:
This next open source assessment/analysis is a short history of the cabal of Protestant extreme religious conservative American businessmen who managed to embed their corporate interests into the USA security apparatus. As it happens, they’d been busy doing business with Hitler’s Reich in the 1930s, prior to making post WW II integration of American corporate interests to the CIA their priority:
This next assessment points to where we have consequently arrived at behind the scenes; with a focus more or less on the Catholic chapter of what amounts to a criminal religious cult:
This third assessment (with a brief but significant point of psychology made with satire) points to CIA criminal elements continuing efforts at consolidation of operational model to their advantage; sacrificing efficiency for greater ability to operate with impunity, away from oversight & outside the law:
People who conceal crimes will, quite naturally, work to limit exposure when their crimes nevertheless spill into the light of day. Such would be the case of renditions and a clear case of the math not adding up:
Reinforcing the preceding would be the stupidity generated when narcissism allows for not only pursuing leads generated by torture, but failing to grasp how simple math defeats the so-called ‘information’ gained. The satire aspect of the following goes only so far as to illuminate how far removed from reality the CIA has become:
Reflecting on the preceding three pieces particularly, the facts of the matter point to these people have not only gotten away with infamous crimes but have in several cases managed to see themselves promoted to the top of the CIA bureaucratic food chain. This, despite what anyone with a relatively decent education would consider highly unintelligent actions in numerous circumstance of gravity, begs an exam of oversight; that is, we should examine the oversight that has allowed what amounts to malevolent stupidities to simply go on and on:
It follows, the incredible behaviors we see must benefit a wide range of interests, to be sustained. Otherwise, there could be no rational explanation for what amounts to a persevering model of irrational behaviors:
In the case of an socio-economic trap (immediate preceding analysis) depending on a culture of crime rooted in state secrets, entire societies must be manipulated, if only because common people would never put up with where we are degenerated to, corrupt ruling classes are historically the social motivator behind social upheaval and revolution. Does this salient fact make a corrupt ruling class and smarter or temper their behaviors? The simple answer is NO. If that were the case, empires would sustain, as opposed to rise and fall. A ruling class never ceases to move towards greater consolidation of power and that is its downfall; because a tipping point comes they’ve become so filled with arrogance and greed, their very right to exist is questioned. When a ruling class becomes desperate to cling to this power, desperate measures are entertained, in the present case to sustain rule through the consolidation of control with sleight of hand and the related social fear ‘terror’ generates. What’s actually happening certainly isn’t rocket science, it only needed enough information to assemble a picture and bring it into focus, 13 years on 9/11:
Now, if you were able to wrap your head around the fact over 2,200 certified architects & engineers have signed on to form a non-profit organization disputing the official narrative on 9/11 in relation to the WTC Building 7 collapse, consider in intelligence parlance, an ‘asset’ is not necessarily someone who is aware of how they serve the organization(s) that utilize them. AND, it stands to reason the political left would be a target of manipulation, any purported and in some cases self-annointed leadership, particularly, would be coveted as assets. Consequently, ask yourself: Why would Julian Assange state “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11.” Or, let’s step up a notch, to a so-called real journalist: Robert Parry, who is NOT a professionally trained architect or engineer, in an incredibly unprofessional and denigrating article, pointing to loons rather than facts, states “every hour wasted on this strange parlor game means that real crimes and government wrongdoing get neglected” in the face of 2,200 certified architects & engineers stepping up; to state government wrongdoing includes covering up the facts surrounding a deliberate implosion of a modern, 47 floor concrete & steel structure. What should this say to you? Now, we can go deeper down the rabbit hole, to an era of etymology when the word ‘decadent’ referred to more than something so benign as a box of Belgian chocolates. It would come as no surprise if the CIA were to edit Wikipedia in relation to 9/11, but other things they attempt to cover up would make the orgies of Rome seem mild by comparison:
So now, tell me why Daniel Ellsberg, a trained intelligence officer who’d spent two years in Vietnam working for the CIA’s great master of propaganda and covert special operations, Edward Lansdale, does not seem to frequent the real danger zones? Because the actuality is, Ellsberg, as former Pentagon liaison to the CIA, L. Fletcher Prouty had pointed out, had been at the center of a CIA information operation intended to shift the colossal policy failures in Vietnam from the CIA onto the Pentagon? Prouty had not only authored many of the so-called ‘Pentagon Papers’, he’d called them “official lies.” Who would know better? Ellsberg gets plenty of media attention and I’ve yet to see him take us to the actuality of the evil detailed in this articles incorporated essays, evil he should have been aware of. It follows, one should have a look at the blinding power of deliberately cultivated political myths:
Now, tell which of these following so-called ‘whistle-blowers, pundits, and journalists’ has shown the necessary gumption to take on the Doug Coe cult in relation to this essay’s introduction and expose American leaders who admire Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot? You’ve never seen Ray McGovern, Robert Parry, Julian Assange or Daniel Ellsberg take this perverted filth on, the courage to do this comes in the main from the center-right and began with L Fletcher Prouty. Meanwhile, related closet religious extremist criminality runs amok:
With Hillary and Jeb Bush, both of whom dine on swill from the same ‘family’ religious cult trough, the very same CIA and Pentagon embedded religious cult that is sponsor of the so-called National Prayer Breakfast, are your likely choice for the 2016 election, what should that tell you? Where is this necrotic social phenomena taking us as a nation, while the left is fixed on a social justice mania that is an utter misapprehension of reality? These satires, solidly based in social psychology, go to the point:
So, while the criminally insane behind the curtain had run away with our republic, everyone on the left is fixated on the likes of WikiLeaks and injustice to ‘Chelsea’ Manning, which has done precisely NOTHING to penetrate the lunatic religious cult embedded at the CIA and Pentagon, allowing a cabal of criminals to rush us headlong over a cliff because liberals think it’s more important we all should be ‘tolerant’ … despite the fact any ‘Reality Fairy’ would know about the cult that rules us: “Just follow the money and you’ll know about all you need to know, whether you’re impoverished Black, downwardly mobile White or anyone whose circumstance is approaching poverty regardless of race, the bottom line is, these people, none of them, give a rat’s ass about you, because they’re all hypocritical, in one way or another prejudiced, backstabbing & evil, and they’re all the same, whether White, Black, liberal or conservative, many of them are closet racists, they include Blacks that aspire to be privileged Whites, they’re all greedy, narcissistic & vain, they all screw each other behind closed doors, either figuratively or literally, they’ll all tell you what they think you want to hear; tell any lie regardless of their intentions, and above all, they’re all power hungry, they’re all killers and left to their devices, they’ll get us all killed” … and speaking of following the money, where do you suppose international narcotics trafficking plays in funding CIA black budgets and the ‘family’ cult cabal with its insane geopolitical ambitions?
And about those insane ‘black budget’ ambitions CIA and ‘friends’ use to pursue false flag terror and other murders around the world, salient historical examples one, two, three and four, here’s about all you’ll ever need to know about the ‘why’ we all will most certainly die if this madness is allowed to go on so much as another two years, through the next so-called ‘election’ cycle:
Do I have an ax to grind in these matters? You better believe I do, in fact Condoleezza Rice would appear to have personally attempted to oversee my ‘disappearance’ and when that didn’t work, she’d have settled for covert assassination along lines engineered by people who’d worked for Bush and many of them continue working for Obama…
First, use google search: “Chat Exploits” and look at the first several results, you’ll discover ‘chats’ are a hacker’s entry to your computer
Then, read this about language by Diane Feinstein’s committee inserted into a law Obama signed this month:
“Hidden in the law that authorized the government to spend more than it will collect was a part about funding for the 16 federal civilian intelligence agencies. And hidden in that was a clause, inserted by the same Senate Intelligence Committee that revealed the CIA torture, authorizing the National Security Agency to gather and retain nonpublic data for five years and to share it with law enforcement and with foreign governments. “Nonpublic data” is the government’s language referring to the content of the emails, text messages, telephone calls, bank statements, utility bills and credit card bills of nearly every innocent person in America”
Then, read a snippet of Diane Feinstein’s gross hypocrisy in relation to the right’s of people HERE (it’s about quite a bit more than ‘torture’)
“Who did Feinstein vote to confirm to the Federal Appeals court? David Barron, author of Obama’s ‘murder is legal’ theory. Nothing quite like putting people complicit in your crimes on the courts but that is what Obama has done with the generous support of Senator Feinstein:
“The most troubling issue in David Barron’s record is his role as the author of the legal opinion that justified what is rather coldly referred to as “extrajudicial killing” by the United States federal government. Put more plainly, David Barron concocted a legal justification for President Barack Obama, so that the President could order the U.S. military to execute American citizens, because of suspicion of criminal behavior, without any trial or due process”
“Recalling Bush had nominated ‘torture is legal’ Jay Bybee to the Federal bench, let’s go to the thought Senator Feinstein never encountered a 1st, 4th or 5th Amendment FISA violation she did not like, until it was the CIA spying on her committee staff. Then, Feinstein changed the label, in her case these violations are not ok because they are suddenly ‘separation of powers’ violations. The clear indication, based on her record is, violations of the American peoples’ rights are ok, just don’t violate the rights of Feinstein. Reinforcing this would be, Feinstein voted to confirm Valerie Caproni as a federal judge; the very same woman [Caproni] who’d when the FISA Court had rejected a surveillance request, had gone ahead and authorized her FBI agents to target the victim regardless. In all, over the courts first thirty three years, the FISA court had granted 33,942 warrants, with only 11 denials. Let’s make that a de facto 10 denials, recalling the Bush FBI lawyer Caproni nominated to be a federal judge by Obama, with Feinstein voting in favor”
Now, back to what I will name “The Feinstein Clause”…
“authorizing the National Security Agency to gather and retain nonpublic data for five years and to share it with law enforcement and with foreign governments”
…and what is known as ‘back door‘ exploits and how NSA engineers enter into (through firewalls) your computers and your anti-virus-anti-trojan software can do nothing about it even when the company…
“respects and complies with the laws of all countries in which it operates”
…considering Feinstein has made it legal for the NSA to take anything they like and share it with anyone they like.
Now, back to ‘chats.’ I keep chats shut down as a matter of security, it’s simply a matter of common sense. If the NSA had arranged to build back doors into chats and there is no reason to expect they would not, considering their motto of “collect it all“, they’ve built into chats an avenue for any skilled hacker to exploit. Now, google ‘key log.’
“records every keystroke made on your computer on every window, even on password protected boxes”
Now, imagine NSA slips something along the lines of the preceding into your computer, example of opportunity you hand to hackers when you have ‘chat’ enabled in likely any program, whether facebook, gmail, yahoo or now a very interesting new phenomena at WordPress; a ‘help’ chat that cannot be blocked by the user. And even when it has been ‘blocked’ by request for 24 hours (the maximum) it doesn’t seem to actually go away:
At 11:02
Chat pop-up: Howdy, how can we help?
Myself: Go away for 24 hours would help (the pop up never ceases to annoy)
Daniel – WordPress.com: Sorry about that! I’ll remove it. Have a great day!
At 14:13
Chat pop-up: Howdy, how can we help?
Myself: Block for 24 hours would help (the pop-up is an annoyance)
Sandy (at WordPress.com) is typing (according to the chat box)
And then: Oops, our operators have all stepped away for a moment. If you don’t hear back from us shortly, please try again later. Thanks!
23:16
Chat pop-up: Howdy, how can we help?
Myself: go away with blocking chat would be helpful (this is perpetually annoying)
Sam is typing… (according to the chat box)
Sam: Sorry! I can block it for 24 hours, so you won’t see it. 🙂
23:42
Chat box pops back up: Now chatting
Daniel wasn’t able to fully block the chat and Sandy seems to have gotten cold feet. Then Sam is there. The ‘chat’ it would appear is never fully blocked, or cannot be blocked or there is someone does not want it blocked. I’ve seen identical incident too many times for it to be a glitch.
Now, remember this. IF YOU DON’T WANT SOMETHING RECORDED, NEVER TYPE IT. Collect yourself first, because if in a passion of the moment you’ve typed something you think better of, it doesn’t matter if you’ve never posted or mailed it, ‘they’ already have it-
Sound paranoid? So who is the real paranoid? Someone concerned with issues like this, or a United States Senator who believes the government should know your every private expression? Dianne Feinstein is the sick paranoid and criminal who opens you up to hackers and she should be permanently locked in the darkest dungeon the rule of law can muster, that is if we had a rule of law, rather than the ‘color of law‘ that has replaced our so-called leaders ‘oath to uphold’ our Constitution-
Note on the preceding: After claiming there was no means of permanently blocking the chat (due to my complaints), Worpress appears to have indeed permanently blocked the live chat on my account not long after I’d drawn their attention to this post. Does that mean my account is not compromised by the NSA? Of course it does not. My automatic assumption is the NSA has whatever they like.
Nothing is more lethal to democratic institutions than cowardice. Cowardice is a by far greater threat than corruption. This is because those who fear to stand up and be heard not only embolden those who’ve embraced evil, but with a surrender of courage, have taken the first concrete step to joining the ranks of those would rule over us, as opposed to govern for us. To stand down in the face of evil, is a service to evil. This would appear to be the case of German parliamentarians.
This following letter sent on 14 December 2014 to:
Noting I have provided your organization testimonials to my veracity and have been forwarding intelligence to the German parliament for the past two full years, I will remind you of your nation’s obligation under the German Völkerstrafgesetzbuch principle, and the fact you have a certain duties in regards to the rule of law. I notice there is no hesitation to conduct raids and arrests of Islamic radicals in your nation, so why is there no action had been taken in the case of the CIA and this organization’s attempted rendition and assassination of myself on German territory? I have in the past provided the German parliament detailed information in regards to this, including identifying principals and motive. Now, again, as on several previous occasions, I am providing assessment of related criminal activities, pasted in (below) and can be found online at this link:
As well, it must be noted the relationship of Germany to American military generally, and the working relationship of the German intelligence agencies to American intelligence agencies. Certainly they will not voluntarily step up and provide information in this case that is embarrassing and damaging to themselves. It is the undeniable duty of parliament to force accountability and I’ve yet seen no overt indication you are willing to do this. It is my sincere intention yourselves and your institutions and government will be held accountable, if not to the rule of law in the present, then most certainly held accountable to history.
I am requesting the International Criminal Court file this communication with information previously provided.
—
Ron West
“The history of the great events of this world are scarcely more than the
history of crime” –Voltaire
With 119 ‘detained suspects’ acknowledged in Feinstein’s ‘torture report’, the first problem we see is, there are more planes known to have renditioned people than the ‘torture report’ admits had been renditioned. Ignoring the idea the CIA had required use of a separate plane for each rendition (+3 planes), the initial math comes out to 92 flights per prisoner. Let’s toss 1/2 the flights and we have 46 flights per prisoner. Let’s toss 1/2 the flights again, and we have 23 flights per prisoner. Ok, so now we’ve thrown out 75% of the flights by known renditions aircraft and that works out to 25% of the flights would amount to renditions of 2,750 prisoners. So, let’s cut that by half again; if 12.5% of the known flights were renditions, there would be 1,375 kidnapped and or captured persons flown by the CIA. Cut in half again, to 6.25% of flights by planes known to fly renditions, and we should have 688 involuntary ‘transportees.’ If 3% of the flights by KNOWN renditions aircraft, were transporting ONE prisoner each, depending on number of stops, we’d still have up to 344 people (versus Feinstein’s 119), relating to the CIA renditions.
The disparity of the math is too great to give any sense of credibility or reliability to the Feinstein report. And there is no present way of determining whether flights ‘disappearing’ people (dumped at sea) had been employed in the (CIA supported) Latin America junta style:
Now, it stands to reason we don’t have close to all of the planes and flights identified because many of them would have been military. As well, we know the American military has not been even close to fully probed over its own ‘black site’ torture centers, this documentary film’s existence (suppressed in American media) is a singular example:
How many people are missing? We’ll never know so long as the people perpetrating the crimes (CIA-U.S. military) are the people providing access to the information, such as the CIA had in the case of the Feinstein probe. The Feinstein ‘torture report’ can be little more than a ‘we’ll acknowledge as little as possible’ white-wash or professional psychological operation employed for purpose of damage control.
There needs to be an authentic accounting. Many (most?) flights that weren’t to ‘black sites’ were likely military flights to, example given, Guantanamo. And what constitutes a kidnap rendition, as opposed to a battlefield capture or someone handed over by a 3rd party, for instance Pakistan? What are the structures? Aside from inferred black sites in the Senate report identified from other sources (Poland, Romania et al) it is known prisoners were delivered for torture to 3d party nations Morocco, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and Libya and there well may have been a ‘black site’ at Guantanamo separate from the regular detention facility, not to mention strong indicators pointing to Diego Garcia. As well, I’ve seen reports Special Forces in Afghanistan, working with CIA, had numerous small (off record) detention facilities in remote areas where prisoners had been shell-gamed to evade rules, and reports of black site jails on U.S. navy ships. Also there are indications renditions had been scrapped in favor of stepped up assassinations under Obama. The subject of renditions is a longs ways from broken open in any sense of reality.
122 KNOWN aircraft were used in renditions within a database of 11,000 flights (by those aircraft) during the known period of renditions. With 119 ‘detained suspects’ acknowledged in Feinstein’s ‘torture report’, the first problem we see is, there are more planes known to have renditioned people than the ‘torture report’ admits had been renditioned. Ignoring the idea the CIA had required use of a separate plane for each rendition (+3 planes), the initial math comes out to 92 flights per prisoner. Let’s toss 1/2 the flights and we have 46 flights per prisoner. Let’s toss 1/2 the flights again, and we have 23 flights per prisoner. Ok, so now we’ve thrown out 75% of the flights by known renditions aircraft and that works out to 25% of the flights would amount to renditions of 2,750 prisoners. So, let’s cut that by half again; if 12.5% of the known flights were renditions, there would be 1,375 kidnapped and or captured persons flown by the CIA. Cut in half again, to 6.25% of flights by planes known to fly renditions, and we should have 688 involuntary ‘transportees.’ If 3% of the flights by KNOWN renditions aircraft, were transporting ONE prisoner each, depending on number of stops, we’d still have up to 344 people (versus Feinstein’s 119), relating to the CIA renditions.
The disparity of the math is too great to give any sense of credibility or reliability to the Feinstein report. And there is no present way of determining whether flights ‘disappearing’ people (dumped at sea) had been employed in the (CIA supported) Latin America junta style.
How many people are missing? We’ll never know so long as the people perpetrating the crimes (CIA-U.S. military) are the people providing access to the information, such as the CIA had in the case of the Feinstein probe. The Feinstein ‘torture report’ can be little more than a ‘we’ll acknowledge as little as possible’ white-wash or professional psychological operation employed for purpose of damage control.
There needs to be an authentic accounting. Most or nearly all flights that weren’t to ‘black sites’ were likely military flights to, examples given, Bagram and Guantanamo. The point of using civilian jets together with filing false flight plans is to cover criminal activity such as kidnap renditions. A civilian jet points to a kidnap rendition or less often, someone handed over by a 3rd party, for instance Pakistan, as opposed to a battlefield capture. What are the structures? Aside from inferred CIA black sites in the Senate report identified from other sources (Poland, Romania et al) it is known prisoners were delivered for torture to 3d party nations Morocco, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and Libya, there was a ‘black site’ under military control at Bagram and there well may have been a ‘black site’ at Guantanamo separate from the regular detention facility, not to mention strong indicators pointing to Diego Garcia. As well, I’ve seen reports Special Forces in Afghanistan, working with CIA, had numerous small (off record) detention facilities in remote areas where prisoners had been shell-gamed to evade rules, and reports of black site jails on U.S. navy ships. Also there are indications renditions had been scrapped in favor of stepped up assassinations under Obama. The subject of renditions is a longs ways from broken open in any sense of reality.
And there is a large question yet looms .. ‘what had been the fate of the women prisoners’ ?
Well, let’s offer a not so wonderful view of what’s up with the symbiotic relationship between the USA’s military and the USA’s police forces and I’m not talking about giving police charged with ‘protecting schools’ grenade launchers, machine guns and other inappropriate ‘surplus’ equipment. Rather I’m going to write about the altogether wrong sort of meme involved with creating a collective mentality, germinated in the American military and infused into the American ‘civilian’ police.
We’ll go for this short ride employing simple social psychology principles in combination with demographics. When ‘veterans preference’ is imposed on police hiring as a matter of law, and a society such as ours is one recently put through some considerable stresses, economic and social, resulting in both heightened paranoia and less opportunities at well paying jobs, the civilian police forces will become packed with ‘war on terror’ military veterans. This combined phenomena will translate into many veterans who’ve developed an ‘us versus the enemy’ mentality integrated into America’s police forces in relation to community, particularly when ‘community’ is demographically dissimilar to one’s own, and this mindset manifests when Black communities are policed largely by White officers.
Now, we stir into the mix some more unpleasant facts; in today’s America, conservatism has become poisoned by the religious right. A volunteer military is historically attractive to conservative mentality, more so than other outlooks, and this is what will be fed into the police hiring rosters in by far out of proportion (to larger society) numbers. The religious right is primarily White and has undeniable racist roots in a large segment or subculture. But there is more than significant, underlying elements of racism at issue here.
The soldiers advocate-civil rights group Military Religious Freedom Foundation, has determined that somewhere between 28 and 34% of the United States military is presently “Christian Dominionist” or that is to say hardcore or on the right of the religious right. These people do not respect secular democracy, they do not respect people holding opinion of tolerance or diversity, and they most certainly do not respect a civil rights movement traditionally rooted in the left of the political spectrum.
A simple rule of social psychology would be, with an extreme ‘strict father’ model of conservatism upbringing, extreme even by traditional conservative standards, the religious extremist desiring to exercise ‘authority’ is the prototype personality that will most often gravitate to police employ via ‘veterans preference’ … strengthening the hand of those fascist forces rapidly gaining practical control over American society as a whole. Religious-right sympathetic personalities have already gained control over Congress and the Pentagon and by extension, NATO, and now these patently reactionary, militant forces are taking practical control of America’s streets, the Posse Comitatus Act notwithstanding.
Now, as a matter of consequence, our rapidly militarizing police have integrated, and continue to integrate, those personalities most inclined to view the public they were intended to serve as an opposing or threatening force .. with all of the attending impunity they experienced in a hyper-religious military environment; whether an attitude a woman’s rape ‘must’ve been God’s will’ with little motivation to pursue and solve cases or punish perpetrators (except in case of a Black on White rape, that must be prosecuted in any White supremacist ruled society), men whose military background had been poisoned by theological interpretations on the far right by officers who shoved religious motivation down soldiers throats (officers who believe Muslims are ‘the children of Satan’ as taught by the Assemblies of God, example given), soldiers now moved on to bashing in the heads of protestors because they must be liberal, left, deviants, and certainly it translates to White officers policing Black neighborhoods seeing themselves in circumstance little different to occupying a hostile neighborhood in a war zone; where everyone, including children, are not only a threat, but are in no uncertain terms viewed as ‘the enemy.’
At the end of the day, ’veterans preference’, without safeguard to weed out those tens of thousands of “Christian Dominion” personalities whose primary motive is towards an America to be ruled by those ‘chosen by God’ (their own kind, exclusively, who just happen to be mostly White) in patent violation of our constitution, and with attending attitude of our citizens civil rights be damned, is one more large step on the road to societal disintegration ultimately inviting a severity of control along the lines of Franco’s Spain or Pinochet’s Chile (or worse)
A postscript would be, the USA’s constitutional prohibition of any prerequisite ‘religious test’ to serve in government, would appear to have been turned on its head in present circumstance; whereas any applicant for police work in any federally funded force (now days includes nearly all, if not all, police in the USA) could not be questioned or evaluated per a religious belief devoted to the undermining and ultimate overthrow of the secular democratic principle, opening a most unpleasant panorama-
Sent BCC to addresses harvested from the internet:
To the DeSousa families of Goa and Mumbai, India.
This message is in regards to an untold story concerning former CIA officer Sabrina DeSousa. It is not precisely an inquiry although there is an element of request in relation to further information. There will be no follow-up to this mail except in the case of my possible reply to any person expressing a proper and constructive interest.
In the main, this is a mail to inform. I will not presume what action should be taken except to volunteer the thought this is information should find its way into the hands of those members of the DeSousa clan who might be affected. These people may, in turn, wish to correct an injustice they may have been misled into participating in. This could be perhaps be best accomplished with telling their story to a proper news outlet investigative reporter.
I encountered Sabrina DeSousa in Summer, 2008, when living at Wiesbaden, Germany. I had no idea who she was but her face was indelibly marked in my memory because I was being intensively stalked by criminal intelligence agency elements at this time and this factors in circumstance of my encounter with Sabrina. It was mid morning on my typical walk for morning coffee. I was keeping some routines (counter-intuitive) for sake of German law enforcement monitoring myself (I had set this up via a longtime contact, a German lawyer.)
I encountered DeSousa walking towards me, she was dressed partly in casual clothing of south Asia (India style shirt with long, square cut tails, split sides, western trousers), a bit unusual but what really drew my attention was she was giving me a steady sideways look with what I’d call a knowing smile or smirk. There were few people on the street and we passed within six or so meters. Some days or weeks later, when sitting at outdoor cafe, group of what appeared to be ‘tourists’ from south Asia (proper ethnic dress) wandered by, one of them took my photo while trying not to be noticed (which is why I noticed.)
It was several months later I saw Sabrina DeSousa’s photo via following up a story on the Abu Omar case I’d initially read when monitoring the AP Wire (by this time I was in Spain.) This is when I first realized who she was and there is no question it was Sabrina I’d encountered in Wiesbaden. On the possibility the other south Asians were Sabrina DeSousa’s visiting family or acquaintances from Mumbai or Goa, somehow involved by her, I am writing this letter.
I expect Sabrina DeSousa was in the role of scout and/or somehow a coordinator in attempt at extraordinary rendition or assassination of my self, for past anti-corruption work that came too close to the levers of American power. I can’t give a precise date because my laptop had died the following year, but I believe I can reasonably state the encounter with Sabrina was the cusp of August-September, 2008 (possibly July-August) with no more than a few weeks, at most, between encountering DeSousa and the south Asian ‘tourists’ used to get my photo.
My story of the larger circumstance may be read at this link:
In the event you are in a position to be of constructive help to clear up a circumstance that reflects poorly on the DeSousa family name, and wish to take some honorable action towards bringing this case to conclusion in the light of day, I will be happy to provide you with a pdf file of the information provided at the above link (you are free to share.) As appropriate, I can also provide documents attesting to character and veracity (for instance to investigative reporters.)
Also this will be an open letter to all of the DeSousa families of India posted at my website-
My kindest greetings
—
Ronald Thomas West
“The history of the great events of this world are scarcely more than the
history of crime” –Voltaire
Ronald Thomas West 