Archives for posts with tag: disinformation

wapo_cia-jpg-1

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

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

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

Meanwhile:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And going to the conclusion of CIA lawlessness:

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

And:

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

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

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

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

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

Yeah THIS Michael Hastings:

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

Furthermore:

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

Clearly because:

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

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

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

secret_team-jpg-1

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

article updated 17 December 2016

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

*

On Alternative Media

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

The preceding paragraph illuminates a social phenomena played by corporate owned mainstream media, taking advantage of people everyday. ‘Alternative media’ is meant to circumvent this but in fact often is a wolf dressed in the proverbial sheep’s clothing. Here is why:

All of the ‘alternative’ news outlets (all of those with any degree of independence and significant readership in any case) will be targets of the several competing intelligence agencies wishing to shape discourse. The ability of the agencies to do this will depend on the environment, awareness, personality, sympathies and approach of the producers. Zerohedge is (my perhaps imperfect assessment) far less manipulative than, example given, TomDispatch (a blatant case) but no matter the outlet there is always some degree of risk the consumer will absorb deliberate disinformation. Additionally, ideological alignment will play in the alternative outlets, no matter how clean. Information is shaped both by conscious effort and unconscious influences.

I would place zerohedge in that category where anti-corporate, libertarian ideology (yes, there is such a thing, as opposed to corporate controlled or manipulated ‘libertarian’ tea party, e.g. Koch brothers) shapes its discourse on the right, over on the left there are also examples, for instance Global Research, Voltaire Net and more recently The Intercept are all to some extent shaped by ideology or personal prejudices. Of course intelligence agencies will look at every opportunity to exploit these outlets. The Intercept appears to have been co-opted rather quickly by western intelligence via its bank-roller Pierre Omidyar; particularly on the Ukraine discourse (Glenn Greenwald’s disclaimers notwithstanding.)

In cases of more insidious perversion of information, a common modus operandi is to associate events that cannot be concealed with the wrong party (false flag is pervasive method of disinformation) and embed facts together with inventions in the discourse. Consortium News is a past master at this, for instance Robert Parry consistently shaping the discourse to point to incompetent or maverick Ukrainian military downing MH 17 with a Buk surface to air missile, as opposed to the Ukrainian SU 25 combat jet which he steadfastly refuses to so much as mention much less consider. The point of method like this can be to create a face saving or less damaging escape for the western aligned parties in the event the initial propaganda efforts blaming Russia fall apart. Better some drunk or incompetent Ukrainian military performed the shoot down in the public eye (in the western intelligence view) than a Ukrainian air force jet on orders from Kiev. A secondary possible effect (the CIA would hope) is when, more likely than if, considering the incompetence involved, the west’s MH 17 story falls apart, the Russians will allow for the alternative line put forward by someone like Parry in return for concessions in the ‘spirit’ of so-called ‘Realpolitik’ where cynical geopolitical deals will necessarily determine truth must be the first casualty.

Another method is to play on peoples’ sense of helplessness while steering them away from the essential reality and attending motivations by keeping them preoccupied with outrage. That’s Tom Engelhardt’s method. A short research pulls up CIA associated funding underlying TomDispatch, originating with Ford Foundation grants, laundered via The Nation Institute (The Nation is another long time intelligence penetrated organization, host of disinformation puppet Bob Dreyfuss.)

Just a few short but critical examples. The best one can do with all of this is to keep track of the metadata threads (facts within events than cannot be denied) while being careful not to be sucked into the attending spin. Assembling a focus this way, you seldom will get a perfect picture but done competently, one should certainly get a far clearer understanding of what’s actually going on.

A footnote would be, the Russians recognize the western press is so corrupt, they don’t need to much engage in overt deceits but more or less stick to the facts surrounding events (as much as possible) to gain credibility, and when this is not an option, their preferred fallback technique is ‘lies by omission.’ The western consumer taking in RT gets a much better deal than the eastern consumer lapping up the Helsinki based, western mainstream media clone misnamed ‘The Moscow Times.’

ve42

Robert Parry’s false flag journalism is classic example of professionally engineered disinformation; utilizing method that attacks false narrative with alternative false narrative:

Spreading the Left’s Anti-Federalist Urban Legend

Poison Fruit Supports the official 9/11 narrative (and more)

Poison Fruit Encore 1 Flight MH-17 disinformation

Poison Fruit Encore 2 Flight MH-17 disinformation (and more)

Poison Fruit Encore 3 On Robert Parry’s Iran-Contra reporting

The CIA And Nonviolent Resistance

The outstanding questions are, how this came about, and especially the extent to which Robert Parry is knowingly complicit; or that is to ask, are Parry’s claimed ‘sources’ manipulating him, or is he taking prepared scripts? Although I cannot rule out the possibility Parry is in denial and consequently ripe for being unwittingly manipulated, this seems unlikely. I am strongly of the opinion he is knowingly pushing out scripted material.

In espionage there are three basic means (and several possible combinations thereof) to penetrate and/or use a hostile organization or movement to one’s advantage:

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

2)  Placing your own officer within the organization or dissident movement as an employee or activist (spy)

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

My take is, Robert Parry’s work within the so-called ‘alternative media’ and ‘dissident’ movements profile as a probable category 1) with Ray McGovern playing supportive role of 2) in combination with 3)

Robert Parry had crossed one of the most evil and powerful men on the planet, George H.W. Bush, with his reporting on the 1980 October Surprise. You typically don’t pull something like that off and live to tell. My hypothesis is, Robert Parry’s is a case where the George H.W. Bush criminal cabal (integrated to the CIA’s clandestine services) had managed to turn him, with blackmail and/or threats, into a CIA asset.

One purpose Robert Parry serves, in common with players Ray McGovern, Daniel Ellsberg and Julian Assange, is to draw attention away from the central core of the corruption and its minions behind empire; that is the several cells of an exclusive club within the western intelligence agencies:

Sociopaths & Democracy

Their purpose is pointing people away from this hyper-right-wing Christian religious club’s coup at the Pentagon and related intelligence agency cells responsible for a metastasized GLADIO false-flag terror apparatus spread via ‘democracy’ throughout the globe. Former Pentagon liaison to the CIA, Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, had labeled this deep state cult ‘The Secret Team’ and described it as a “new religion.” Investigative reporter Jeff Sharlet has documented the related Doug Coe cult extensively. Seymour Hersh and more have touched on it. It has both Catholic & Protestant chapters that overlap with Opus Dei and Assemblies of God (and other sects.) This endeavor had begun in the 1930s with Hitler sympathetic-religious businessmen, bankers & armaments industry personalities (overlapping with spy agencies) organized into cells based on intelligence security model. Their immediate post WW II rescue of the  3rd Reich intelligence apparatus, subsequently integrated to the several western democracies intelligence agencies, is the prima facie cause behind, and evolved to the present, covert rule over our nations and lives.

The goal of an elite, weaponized (Nazi inspired) Christian hierarchy usurping western democratic institutions (an international endeavor based in powerful corporate board interests integrated to our most powerful law enforcement, intelligence agency and military personalities) is nearly within reach for what amounts to a self-annointed extreme Christian religious cult-international criminal syndicate. That goal is rule by corporations guided by a global Christian-cult ‘chosen’ elite.

On the political and intelligence sides, initial key players were Allen and John (Foster) Dulles:

The Dulles brothers were traitors -Justice Arthur Goldberg

Subsequent ‘annointed’ leaders have been George Herbert Walker Bush; who in turn mentored Robert Gates, Gates was a shepherd minding George W. Bush & subsequently played baby sitter to Barack Obama. Gates bowed out and handed affairs to David Petraeus who’s tenure became complicated for undisclosed reasons (never mind the ‘affair’ cover story) and had to hand off the responsibility to John Brennan who may or may not have had his successor chosen to now.

Alternative media ‘cult personalities’ such as Robert Parry, Ray McGovern, Daniel Ellsberg and Julian Assange, all serve to divert attention away from this necrotic phenomena-

 

spyVspy

A spy versus spy episode

So, Robert Parry writes another ‘I’m trying hard to pull Obama’s chestnuts out of the fire & everything is the fault of neo-cons’ tripe article. In his article, Parry makes this dubious claim relating to the downing of MH-17:

“Soon after the shoot-down, I began hearing indirectly from U.S. intelligence analysts that their investigation was actually going in a different direction, that there was no evidence that the Russians had supplied such sophisticated weapons, and that suspicions were focusing on extremist elements of the Ukrainian government. I’m further told that President Obama was apprised of this intelligence analysis”

Robert Parry has, over time, suggested (based on his ‘sources’) everything from it was ‘drunk Ukrainian soldiers‘ to ‘rogue nationalists‘ used a Buk surface to air missile to down MH-17. Now, Parry claims he hears ‘indirectly’ from analysts with innuendo it was out of control radical-right Ukrainian nationalists shot down MH-17 with a Buk missile, an alternative, face-saving emergency exit engineered for Team Obama who is responsible for Joe Biden and John Kerry’s rabid anti-Russia rhetoric and actions in relation to Ukraine; not to mention separate Joe Biden and John Brennan visits coinciding with undermining early cease-fires in the conflict. Noting if Obama want the rhetoric translating to upcoming hostility dialed back, that is exactly what would happen. The rhetoric has not been dialed back, NATO is promoting war in Ukraine and every intelligence agency in the world knows it was a Ukrainian combat jet downed MH-17 in a false flag operation .. not to mention this (yours truly) former intelligence professional (freelancing in the present.)

Judging from his articles, Parry next book should be titled “How I re-twisted America’s twisted narrative’

Refuting other points in the new Parry spiel, Obama had previously backed down from bombing Syria because of a ground-swell of opposition at home threatened ‘business as usual’, not because he was anxious to be rescued by Putin. And Parry neglects to mention Obama is on the ‘remove Assad’ track again, now in concert with NATO’s Turkey (despite twisted denials to the contrary) where it will be Turkey expected to do much of the heavy lifting; after little more than a pause for breath and retooling of the same imperial strategy in which Obama has never demonstrated himself a truly reluctant player. Obama had hired a neo-liberal-neo-con team (Rice-Power/Brennan-Hagel would be examples) and has never hesitated over supporting policy propping up American imperialism.

Parry is like a rear guard for ‘hope’ that never in fact existed; a ‘legend of hope’ that was little more than a packaging ploy to distract from the realities Parry never delves into; the numerous clandestine dirty wars the USA is pursuing around the world under Obama, particularly in Africa:

Deep State V (economics & counter-insurgency)

If Parry were intending to go to the criminal core of American imperialism, rather than focus alternative media readers’ attention on familiar and comfortable targets, detracting from what’s actually going on, he’d delve into the real danger zone:

Deep State IV (sociopaths & democracy)

If Robert Parry’s mission were other than following intelligence agency disinformation diktat, he’d foreclose on the Buk surface to air missile used to down MH-17 line of professional propaganda; as well lift the ever shrinking fig-leaf on Obama’s full complicity in America’s criminal acts .. a fig leaf so small in reality, it defies the Black ‘package’ stereotype:

Obama_package

“Their judgment was based more upon blind wishing than upon any sound pre-vision; for it is a habit of mankind to entrust to careless hope what they long for, and to use sovereign reason to thrust aside what they do not fancy” -Thucydides

Ukraine for Dummies

Related:

Spreading the Left’s Anti-Federalist Urban Legend

Poison Fruit Supports the official 9/11 narrative (and more)

Poison Fruit Encore 1 Flight MH-17 disinformation

If Russia Were To Back Down on MH 17 ? False Flags & Geopolitics

Poison Fruit Encore 3 On Robert Parry’s Iran-Contra reporting

The Nation

^ The Nation Magazine’s journalistic twin

No, I’ve not become an unabashed supporter of Marine Le Pen. And I am not in love with Putin’s conservatism in every respect. But the thing is, when truth is trashed by the neo-liberal left, it should be exposed equally as to any truths trashed by the neo-conservative right. Where Putin, Le Pen and Farage stand head and shoulders above Obama, Hollande, Cameron and Merkel is, Putin, Le Pen and Farage have some degree of principled ethics which are actually meant to be put into practice, as opposed to the political lies of the western political personalities and pundits, so easily and naturally expressed (and exposed I might add.)

The so-called ‘left-liberal-progressive’ “NATION” magazine has become, over this past decade, a shameless disinformation yellow sheet (or ‘rag’) little better than the “National Enquirer” in respect to factual reporting. Hosting guests such as Zbigniew Brzezinski, and with columnists such as Robert ‘Bob’ Dreyfuss, recalls George Orwell…

“The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which”

…considering the neo-liberal foreign policy wonks cannot be distinguished from the neo-conservative, let alone distinguish for themselves the difference between a legitimate conservative and a Nazi. I had already dealt with Brzezinski’s geopolitical lies and now it is Dreyfuss turn. Dreyfuss opens his 30 May 2014 column at The Nation with:

“The scary fascists who, according to Russia, have taken over Ukraine since the “coup d’état” and ousted the former president didn’t do too well. Who did do well were the actual scary fascists in Western Europe who were supported by, well, Russia. According to one report:

“”The supposed reservoirs of reactionary thinking in Western Ukraine generated an embarrassing 1 percent of the vote for Oleh Tyagnibok of ultra-nationalist Svoboda Party and less than 1 percent for Dmitry Yarosh of the new Right Sector party that sprung up during the protests. A story run by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency notes that Tyagnibok and Yarosh together received fewer votes than Vadim Rabinovich, a Jewish candidate who captured a little over 2 percent of the ballots””

“There’s no doubt that Svoboda and Right Sector are bad actors. But the overweening propaganda from Moscow claiming that Kiev is being ruled by “fascists” is now proved to be ridiculous. (Not that Moscow’s propaganda since the Ukraine crisis erupted has been anything but ridiculous, starting with its claims that it wasn’t invading Crimea and its claims that it isn’t secretly behind the eruption of ersatz “people’s republics” in Eastern Ukraine’s Donets Basin region.)”

This sort of drivel is why I’d long since cancelled my subscription to The Nation. In fact Svoboda still has 37 seats in parliament and five ministries in the CIA supported, putsch installed regime in Kiev. But somehow Dreyfuss would have us all believe one recently elected candy oligarch, who has not dropped a line coming from the authentic fascists holding Parliament and larger government hostage in Kiev, is a substitute for Fall elections, before we can know the rest of the story. At the pace things are moving in Ukraine, Fall is a very long ways off.

And then Dreyfuss goes on:

“Meanwhile, the elections for the European Parliament—admittedly, a weak institution—reflect a troubling shift toward right-wing, fascist-leaning and ultra-nationalist politics in several European countries, including France and Great Britain. While some left-leaning parties did well, too, the biggest gains were made by parties such as the UK Independence Party, France’s National Front and a pair of far-right Greek parties. As I wrote in this space on May 21, Russia has formed an anti-EU alliance of convenience with many of these self-same fascist parties in Europe”

In fact the UK Independence Party is quite a long a stretch to compare to the neo-nazis in Kiev. It is only recently UKIP has been smeared as fascist and racist, when it became apparent voters were turned off by the neo-conservative/neo-liberal partnership of Cameron-Clegg and wanting nothing to do with the neo-liberal legacy of Tony Blair represented in the Labor Party, had turned to the man who was making desperately desired common sense on an out of control European Union: Nigel Farange.

Marine Le Pen’s National Front is another long stretch to compare to avowed neo-nazis such as the Ukrainian Svoboda party. Marine Le Pen’s political philosophy:

“advocates to “restore the political framework of the national community” and to implement the direct democracy which enables the “civic responsibility and the collective tie” thanks to the participation of public-spirited citizens for the decisions. The predominant political theme was the uncompromising defence of a protective and efficient State, which favours secularism, prosperity and liberties. She also denounced the “Europe of Brussels” which “everywhere imposed the destructive principles of ultra-liberalism and Free trade, at the expense of public utilities, employment, social equity and even our economic growth which became within twenty years the weakest of the world””

Compare this preceding to the facts as laid out by renown scholar Robert English, commenting on Ukraine’s Svoboda and Right Sector controlling events from Kiev:

“These are groups whose thuggish young legions still sport a swastika-like symbol, whose leaders have publicly praised many aspects of Nazism and who venerate the World War II nationalist leader Stepan Bandera, whose troops occasionally collaborated with Hitler’s and massacred thousands of Poles and Jews.

“But scarier than these parties’ whitewashing of the past are their plans for the future. They have openly advocated that no Russian language be taught in Ukrainian schools, that citizenship is only for those who pass Ukrainian language and culture exams, that only ethnic Ukrainians may adopt Ukrainian orphans and that new passports must identify their holders’ ethnicity — be it Ukrainian, Pole, Russian, Jew or other”

To conflate the Ukrainian Svoboda & Right Sector with UKIP & LePen’s National Front, labeling them collectively fascist, and this is what Dreyfuss attempts to do, lends an understanding to the conservative alliance of Putin, Farage and LePen… they all share in common being smeared by western media elements. In fact were there any truth in Dreyfuss’ assertions (and Western media generally) concerning the character of UKIP & National Front, they would be on the side of Kiev rather than Putin. In fact Marine Le Pen rejects the NDP & Golden Dawn extreme right or neo-nazi parties Dreyfuss insinuates are consistent or complicit with Le Pen’s National Front in the Europen Parliament. The more honest facts of the matter are, Germany’s support of Kiev is factually sympathetic to the neo-nazi Svoboda party, with Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats authentic Nazi legacy in cooperation with known neo-nazis, is well documented. Recalling the election for Ukrainian parliament are put off to Fall and neo-nazis remain in control of Ukraine in the meanwhile, Dreyfuss stating…

“the overweening propaganda from Moscow claiming that Kiev is being ruled by “fascists” is now proved to be ridiculous”

…is simply the worst sort of ‘overweening’ propaganda.

I’ll simply go on to note as an analyst of many years, what Dreyfuss presents in his article falls under the process of invention (fantasy.) On the other hand, Russian propaganda works because it employs a superior technique to western propaganda. The Russian method is minimal omissions of fact in the narrative, whereas the western method is largely broadcasting inventions. At the end of the day, when it comes to thinking people willing to cross check a few facts, the Russians omitting 10% of the reality, or less tampering with the facts, is by far superior to the western press, in this case Dreyfuss inventing 90% of the picture or better said, illusion. In fact RT (Russian TV) has been providing reliable video of the new Ukrainian National Guard (i.e. Svoboda militia) indiscriminately shooting civilians. Nothing quite like ‘seeing is believing.’ The Nation could do better but has a long ways to go, to become as competent as Russian propaganda. They cannot match the Russians when it so happens the facts more or less line up on Putin’s side… or better said, so long as the editorial board at the Nation is willing to insult people’s intelligence with the rot we see in articles like Dreyfuss presents.

Meanwhile, there are stories the Nation doesn’t touch with a ten foot pole, like how Obama is pursuing liberal/criminal policy wonk Zbigneiw Brzezinki’s ‘grand chessboard’ strategy of cornering and attempting to isolate Russia. Or how creating insurgencies prop up the western economies and how Ukraine plays in that.

You’ve heard of ‘you are what you eat’? The Nation would prefer ‘you are what you think.’ Unfortunately, in the case of the USA supported putsch regime in Ukraine, they’d like you to think along the lines of George Orwell’s observation:

“In the case of a word like DEMOCRACY, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of régime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way”

The Nation, per Orwell’s observation, demonstrates itself a consciously dishonest publication

Ukraine for Dummies

 

S1

Ronald Thomas West is a former U.S. intelligence professional

Robert Parry and the Relativity of Truth
(Poison Fruit)

I’m not a fan of Robert Parry. This is not a disclaimer, rather it is a healthy aversion to disinformation that comes of both training and experience. What put me on to Robert Parry was an article at Consortium News on the history of the American ‘framers’ of our constitution, reproduced elsewhere (notably at ‘truth-out’), which I took some time to dissect and rebut. Looking back at the article and with only a few strokes of the keyboard, I notice Parry fancies himself an American constitutional scholar.

In one article Parry writes:

“In other words, the Right’s modern interpretation of the Founding Principles was not shared by the key Framers of the Constitution. Instead, the Right’s position on the Constitution apes the opposition to the Constitution by the Anti-Federalists, who warned that the new federal structure would subordinate the states to the central government and endanger slavery in the South.

“Despite that real history, today’s Right has largely succeeded in distorting the Founding Narrative to convince millions of lightly educated Americans that – by joining with the Tea Party – they are defending the Constitution as the Framers devised it when, in reality, they are channeling the views of those who fiercely opposed the Constitution”

Parry is hammering on disingenuous theme of the American federalists versus anti-federalists, essentially overlooking the dynamic between the two which had led to a COMPROMISE between the factions. Parry altogether omits what that compromise had been meant to accomplish, the ratification of our federal constitution with added checks on central power by avenue of an agreed upon ‘Bill of Rights’ to be subsequently and separately submitted for ratification subsequent to our constitution’s adoption by the several states. Parry writes as though these two philosophies were mutually exclusive phenomena but in fact they’d been fused into one document by separate but closely related process.

I write in my rebuttal of Parry’s presumed authority on the issue:

“I somehow doubt the anti-federalist 4th amendment concerning privacy had anything to do with propping up slavery, a given example of motivation in the anti-federalists’ actual intentions. Or the prohibition of a bill of attainder. Or the right to petition for redress. Or the right to confront your accuser. To name but a few provisions of the first through eighth amendments”

I’d been adjunct professor of American constitutional law at one of Europe’s most prestigious universities, Johannes Guttenberg University, and at the university’s law school at that (Summer semester 2008.) As well, I received high marks as instructor. That doesn’t happen without a firm historical understanding of our founding document’s underpinnings. And outside the religious right, I’d never before seen such rank historical revisionism in relation to our constitution as that put forward by Robert Parry. Beyond irony, Parry’s patent disinformation regarding our founding document is aimed at the very religious right whose disinformation he attacks (with his own disinformation.)

But this subsequent article is not as much about Parry’s disseminating patent lies concerning the origins and intent of the USA’s founding charter, as much as the preceding influencing myself having a bit more close look on his reporting concerning Ukraine. The constitutional issue is the material that had placed Robert Parry’s work in my sights.

In this essay, we will briefly look at two of Robert Parry’s recent works on Ukraine; “Ukraine’s ‘Dr Strangelove’ Reality” & “What Obama Can Do To Save Ukraine”, and distill further instance where he misleads his many readers.

In the mentioned ‘Dr Strangelove’ article by Parry, he puts forward a seemingly reasonable assessment of the situation in Kiev in relation to the neo-nazi element but nonetheless falls short:

“Though clearly a minority, Ukraine’s neo-Nazis remain a potent force that is well-organized, well-motivated and prone to extreme violence, whether throwing firebombs at police in the Maidan or at ethnic Russians trapped in a building in Odessa.

“As vengeance now seeks vengeance across Ukraine, this Nazi imperative will be difficult to hold down, much as Dr. Strangelove struggled to stop his arm from making a “Heil Hitler” salute”

The problem with this closing assessment is suggesting this “minority” element will be difficult to control (clearly true), without overtly stating the neo-nazi elements are without question purposely empowered by the regime in Kiev (and by clear implication, the USA.) I am saying the neo-nazis have been deliberately unleashed and Parry misses this (or deliberately glosses it over.) Ok, so this is a strong statement on my part. But if you take time to look deeply into Svoboda with its five ministries in Kiev (Parry counts four, perhaps he doesn’t count the deputy Prime Minister), it is clear this is NOT a neo-nazi ‘minority’ playing in the regime, it is according to a honest research a neo-nazi empowered coalition:

“One of the “Big Three” political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was “fighting for truth.” In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok’s deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called “the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center.” According to Per Anders Rudling, a leading academic expert on European neo-fascism, the self-described “socialist nationalist” Mykhalchyshyn is the main link between Svoboda’s official wing and neo-Nazi militias like Right Sector”

I have a larger problem with the second mentioned article by Parry; “What Obama Can Do To Save Ukraine” and its suggestions that mislead the ordinary reader. In this ‘Ukraine light’ analysis, Parry quotes an ‘unnamed diplomat’ as though the diplomat’s words were gospel:

“I was told by one senior international diplomat who was on the scene that after the Feb. 22 putsch, Western officials scrambled to help the shaken parliament cobble together a new government to avoid having a bunch of unsavory right-wing thugs become the de facto rulers of Kiev”

But in fact that is exactly what we have; a bunch of unsavory right wing thugs HAVE become the de facto rulers in Kiev. In an otherwise seeming thoughtful dissecting of the New York Times biased coverage, Parry slips in an unattributed quote that softens his attack on false narrative. The reader without training in psychological ploy can take this preceding quote delivered by Parry to mean somehow the ‘Western officials’ managed to circumvent a de facto neo-nazi rule when in fact they had not.

Parry follows his preceding with:

“that means that the legitimacy of the acting government in Kiev is open to debate, not a flat-fact, as the Times would have you believe”

MISLEADING CONCLUSION. There should be no “open to debate” because it has been clearly established the coup d’état regime in Kiev is patently neo-nazi empowered and the real “flat-fact” is the Kiev regime must therefore be illegitimate, without equivocation. What Parry has done here, when attacking the New York Times false narrative, is to feed the reader alternative false narrative. This is precisely what Parry had done when attacking the constitutional narrative of the religious-right; noted at the beginning of this essay.

Following on this section of the Parry article, he allows a very reasonable assessment of Putin but then goes off into some high philosophical moral argument as if Obama could find in his ‘higher-self’ the courage of a JFK. I cannot help but wonder how it is Robert Parry could give a fair assessment of Putin and then blow it with proposing Obama has the wherewithal to discover in himself character traits he has never once demonstrated after six years in office. This is pure Obama fantasy fed to a public that has been fed Obama fantasy from the get go.

And now the clincher, Parry’s concluding paragraph:

“The question now regarding Ukraine and the possibility of a new Cold War is whether Obama can pick up Kennedy’s torch of peaceful understanding – and see the world through the eyes of the ethnic Russians in Donetsk as well as the pro-European youth in Kiev – recognizing the legitimate concerns and the understandable fears of both”

In fact “the pro-European youth in Kiev”, do not play in the equation, at all, in the present circumstance, in fact no one does other than now regime integrated neo-nazis:

“An Anarchist group called AntiFascist Union Ukraine attempted to join the Euromaidan demonstrations but found it difficult to avoid threats of violence and imprecations from the gangs of neo-Nazis roving the square. “They called the Anarchists things like Jews, blacks, Communists,” one of its members said. “There weren’t even any Communists, that was just an insult”” (read it at salon.com)

What Robert Parry does with his journalism is string people along with ‘hope’ that has no foundation in reality. He softens the geo-political facts in relation to the criminal acts of the USA and deflects attention from the most critical points. The facts are, Obama will do nothing to effectively control the Siamese twin that is the CIA-Department of State and the horrors it is unleashing in Ukraine. The factual reality is, neo-nazi rule in Kiev, thinly disguised, will be utilized to deliberately provoke Putin endlessly, until the entire caper implodes/explodes in one way or another. To call it any other way is simply dishonest.

Why isn’t the ‘Christian al Qaida’ embedded at the Pentagon (not to mention at CIA, Department of State, et al) focused on in the work of Parry? It’s not only highly relevant, it’s not as though every element of information pointing to this severe danger is buried at sea, any good investigator can turn up the ample facts. As well, I’d been asked about Parry’s past investigative journalism (Iran Contra & the 1980 ‘October Surprise’) apparently not squaring with his support for the official version of 9/11… my reply:

“I’d simply note ‘truth’ cannot be entirely suppressed in every instance, in which case it must be ‘managed.’ Perhaps Parry came to the conclusion he did not wish to be ‘webbed’ (Gary Webb shot himself in the head TWICE, superman could do that…) Insofar as the official version of 9/11, Building 7 doesn’t fit the narrative. One need not have answers as to what actually happened to grasp there can be no honest embrace of the official version. What I’ve noticed about Parry and his bosom buddy [Ray] McGovern is, they consistently ‘soften’ hard facts and avoid taking the reader into the more dangerous back alleys where you’re more likely to find the real dirt”

Parry had poo-pooed when supporting the incredible government fantasies fed the public on the collapse of Building 7:

“After the fire and devastation spread next door to Building Seven, Bush’s team also detonated explosives there to bring down that smaller tower”

Ignoring independent professional investigators and established structural science, a by far more far-fetched scenario than the conspiracy theorists put forward, is the government scenario Parry supports; Building 7 is the only major modern steel reinforced, concrete pillar supported structure in the world to collapse from a mediocre fire, essentially claiming Building 7 died of fright:

Parry observes in his Obama article:

“Not only would Obama have to come down off the U.S. “high horse” and admit that his own administration has been guilty of spinning the facts – waging “information warfare” – but he’d have to recognize that Putin’s cooperation is essential to bringing this increasingly bloody crisis under control. Obama would also have to admit that Putin was not the cause of the Ukraine mess”

To become a trustworthy source of information, Robert Parry would have to do something remarkably similar; admit his own patent disinformation. A good beginning would be retracting his several articles on the federalist vs anti-federalist founders’ original intent in relation to our constitution and move on to endorsing Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

On 11 May, I left this comment at Parry’s Consortium News 10 May 2014 Article “Burning Ukraine’s Protesters alive

“Nice to see Robert Parry drop the ‘stupid stuff’ in his reporting, since I’d posted this one:

https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2014/05/08/poison-fruit/

^ But still needs to clean up his act and fire whoever is feeding him patent bs”

The comment was taken down by the site before the day was far gone, so there is no indication of open to a wider understanding, rather continuing deceptive narrative (at the least.) Returning to Parry’s attack on the anti-federalist founders, there is no more insidious example of psychological ploy to undermine American civil liberties than to subliminally associate the founding principles underpinning our historic freedoms with slavery; by a research narrowly focused on the bigotry of the founders’ era and in the same moment ignoring the far greater sentiment of noble intent. Robert Parry does exactly that.

Note to Ray McGovern, you could be next

*

Related:

Poison Fruit (collection) Robert Parry’s false flag journalism

*

S1

Ronald Thomas West is a former U.S. intelligence professional

Noteworthy (dis)Information Operations

(other than Alex Jones, ABC, FOX, CNN & Co)

Washington Post launders (based on the historical record) what is almost certainly a CIA propaganda project to discredit legitimate alternative news outlets.

Eric Zuesse writing for the Russian site Strategic Culture posts an article that should make the Russians’ faces turn red; while fully aware it was Turkish intelligence (MIT) facilitated delivery of the sarin precursors chemicals which originated in Turkey and provided the rockets used by jihadi militants to murder 1,400 Syrians at Ghouta in August 2013, Zuesse ‘pens’ blame on Hillary Clinton via the CIA’s Libyan arms pipeline to Syria and cites Seymour Hersh as a source for his article’s assertion. Zuesse had already known (personal correspondence) the sarin did not originate in Libya but was provided by a Turkish chemicals company. The question the Russians should be asking themselves is, why frame the established international criminal Hillary Clinton, whose known crimes are many, with superfluous accusation that can’t hold up? What’s the point? The result is Strategic Culture damaged as a credible information outlet and in the meanwhile a case made Strategic Culture has been subverted to serving NATO & Turkey’s purpose; where it can be accurately stated attention has been diverted from the actual perpetrators of a NATO linked war crime.

Kick-ass Cookies publishes the official CIA history of the JFK assassination cover-up (back to the old ‘blame Cuba’ bs) as though it were gospel truth. I left the comment ‘why not just take your material from a David Ignatius novel.’ The CIA method is to publish revisionist history in classified format for ‘inside’ consumption; then ‘quietly’ declassify the same – thus appearing to take responsibility while in actuality pumping disinformation out to alleviate questions in the minds of their own agency personnel in endeavor that ultimately is intended to cover the criminal tracks of the worst of the agency’s legacy.

*

LiveLeaks.com; at ‘LiveLeaks‘ Paul Moriera’s film ‘Masks of the Revolution’ had been accompanied by this patent disinformation, since taken down:

“Documentary: Ukraine – Masks of revolution. Eng. Subs. VPE presents highly anticipated, contorversial (to some) documentary about so called Maidan revolution. Movie itself has been produced by high ranking agents of Kremlin inside of French Canal+ TV channel”

^ This small snippet (blatant lie, actually) is a smoking gun LiveLeaks is penetrated/co-opted by western intelligence; intent on discrediting Moreira’s work. This film has Kiev’s ‘authorities’ (empowered by CIA backed neo-nazis) squealing like electrocuted pigs, so it hit a nerve.

*

Vice and MI6 Example of how news outlets spawn disinformation operations on behalf of intelligence agencies in geopolitics

*

The Myth of Daniel Ellsberg, a mole on the left. Daniel Ellsberg is an intelligence agent fingered by a former Pentagon Liaison to the CIA, L Fletcher Prouty, as the center of a conspiracy at the CIA to shift responsibility of the Vietnam war policy failures from  CIA to Pentagon. Supports disinformation operations and its agents, notably WikiLeaks & Julian Assange:

Julian Assange manipulated by intelligence agencies, WikiLeaks is at the center of distracting from truly serious issues, deflecting attention from the most egregious criminal actors and actions behind the scene in Washington, such as the Doug Coe cult which poses the most significant internal danger to western democracies and is never touched by Assange (or Ellsberg & McGovern.)

Ray McGovern provides inaccurate analysis, deflecting responsibility from those most responsible for criminal policy at CIA. For instance Ray McGovern’s analysis consistently keeps the focus off the boss of his former agency, John Brennan, who is the real mover behind the curtain relating to what is going on in Ukraine. McGovern focuses on John Kerry who is nothing more than the voice of Foghorn Leghorn, a paid cartoon actor, and Victoria Nuland who wouldn’t have permission to break wind on the subject of Ukraine without John Brennan approved blueprints

Robert Parry spreading the left’s Anti-Federalist urban legend. A bosom buddy of Ray McGovern, the Poison Fruit  collection breaks down Robert Parry’s false flag journalism where Parry attacks false narrative with alternative false narrative, one of the most insidious method of disinformation.

The CIA And Nonviolent Resistance on intelligence engineered misreporting

Zero Hedge Drinks The Kool Aid Zero Hedge picks up TomDispatch and then (update) goes on to publish an article giving impression the “28 pages” will point to Saudi Arabia as the sole responsible party for 9/11 (altogether ignoring Dick Cheney’s role)

The Intercept Takes A Dive Worthy of a BBC propaganda piece

Elliot Higgins on MH 17 New disinformation? (oh yes)

On Edward Bernays & Propaganda  Critical reading

Wikipedia edited by CIA and numerous military-industrial & for profit corporations

CIA busted by Snowden leak Former DCI William Colby’s old quote “The CIA owns everyone of any significance in major media” is as true today as when he made the statement many years ago; The Intercept has published information catching mainstream media red handed vetting their stories with the Central Intelligence Agency. Related: CIA & The Media Carl Bernstein & The Intercept, then & now

The Daily Beast shill platform for noteworthy neo-con/neo liberal professional personalities like Bernard-Henri Levy, propping up the most dangerous warmongers & their policies

TruthDig slips mainstream disinformation into an ‘alternative mainstream news’ format, for instance when the egotistical social moron Donald Trump questions McCain’s (highly questionable) reputation as a war hero, TruthDig is right there to defend the neo-fascist war monger McCain. Trump being an idiot doesn’t necessarily mean he called that particular shot wrong.

Mark Galeotti intelligent, personable disinformation master, with a focus  on crime in geopolitics that is almost entirely one sided. Develops a portrait of Russia’s underworld in relation to Kremlin politics and absolutely panders to a pro-Western bias in the process. Critical insights challenging his work are disallowed in comments at his blog

Sylvia Longmire sanitizes the narrative on the drug cartels, ignores the deep and longstanding USA intelligence involvement and no mention of the rampant, related USA corruption

Robert Dreyfuss at the Nation Magazine; employing patent disinformation technique

2 paragraphs daily a sort of condensed neo-con/neo-liberal devotional to the moral inversions of empire, pretty much 100% dedicated to salvation of those necrotic ideals, policies and personalities most invested in humanitarian violence in service of greed. Articles often authored by PhDs, going to show authentic intelligence (no pun intended) is not necessarily going to be discovered in academia.

National Public Radio Launders CIA information operations

VICE News Frequent CIA friendly, professional disinformation integrated to editorials, panders to a mostly Russo-phobic conservative audience

The Moscow Times is a New York Times clone pandering to anti-Russian propagandists in area of foreign policy particularly. The fact of the site not blocked in Russia makes a lie of western media claims of draconian Russian censorship of press outlets-

endthelie.com CIA friendly, professional disinformation aimed at average IQ of 90, articles linked to and quoting mainstream media outlets. Initial criticisms might be posted by comment moderators but trolls assigned to comments for purpose of assassinating persons with valid criticisms and moderators who do not post intelligent rebuttals

Small Wars Journal claims the following…

“We do not screen articles for conformance with a house view; our only position is that small wars are wicked problems warranting consideration of myriad views before action, to inform what will no doubt be imperfect decisions with significant unintended consequences”

but in fact panders to military industrial ‘in house’ projects to keep ‘small wars’ going with failed counter-insurgency policies:

“In spite of the rushed and uncertain character of the Afghan force development, the president chose to provide the minimum recommended mix of U.S. advisors, enablers, and counterinsurgency forces recommended by ISAF for only one year.  This, in spite of the fact that the U.S. military has consistently understated the need for advisors, aid, and prolonged effort in their past plans in Vietnam, Iraq, and other operations

…from ‘think tanks’ such as CSIS with corporate friends like Condoleezza Rice and General James Jones.

WhoWhatWhy.org and Russ Baker, putting new spin on the lies of 9/11. Having emailed Baker some perfectly reasonable tips suggesting examining his material and support…

Hi Russ

Been checking out your stuff, some of it pretty appealing. But then, (full disclosure) I notice some suspect persons on your board;

Daniel Ellsberg and his largely un-investigated relationship to Edward Lansdale, here’s a snippet

http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/03/08/will-the-real-daniel-ellsberg-please-stand-up/

Robert Dreyfuss whose Ukraine reporting is so CIA friendly as to be disgusting. His longtime Ford Foundation (CIA) funded ‘Nation Institute’ turns out all sorts of disinformation such as the professional handwringing TomDispatch misdirecting people from the real danger zones.

As I’m typing this, I’ve been listening to your recent radio interview ‘refugees, 9/11 and more’ relating to the Saudi elements concerning 9/11 and invite a read of:

https://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2015/09/18/28-pages-of-misdirection/

If interested, here is my story:

https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2014/02/24/the-alpha-chronology/

I would simply note many unsuspecting people are what are termed ‘assets’ in spy craft, despite the fact of a sincere belief in what they’re engaged in. The courageous ones will look deeper when apprised of certain possibilities…

Ron West

http://ronaldthomaswest.com

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

…I received a perfectly equivocating reply (he forbid me to share) including patently absurd advice on my mental state.

to be continued…

*

f5

%d bloggers like this: