Archives for posts with tag: The Intercept

Green Cheese - 1

When the Moon is Made of Green Cheese

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hillary oinks - 1

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

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

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

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


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

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

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


The Intercept’s “Attention Federal Employees: If You See Something, Leak Something” with its’ ‘how to’ leak, provides potential leakers with some resoundingly bad advice:


“Begin by bringing your personal computer to a Wi-Fi network that isn’t associated with you or your employer, like one at a coffee shop. Download the Tor Browser. (Tor allows you to go online while concealing your IP address from the websites you visit.)

To point one “Begin by bringing your personal computer…” you should NEVER use your personal computer but should have a computer untraceable to you for the specific purpose of secure transfer of unauthorized information. A computer you’ve never used for anything else. A computer you’ve never so much as browsed or emailed from concerning anything else. A computer you’ve taped over the camera lens and disabled the microphone before you booted it for the first time in a location away from home. And then searched it for, and disabled, any GPS or geographic locator programs. A computer you’ve never so much as been online with except as an anonymous person sending off the leaked material away from locations you typically are associated with (and away from anyone you know.) Why?

As a person with access to sensitive or classified information requiring a security clearance, you’re already a perceived threat and anything goes in the so-called national security state. Your personal computer could already have an undetectable ‘key log’ trojan together with a ‘call home’ (NSA) trigger if you were ever to visit certain sites (like The Intercept or a tor browser download.) DO NOT TRUST your personal device.

You can avoid ‘digital fingerprints’ by printing out paper copies of documents that are then photographed and converted to jpg files, with a camera that is untraceable to you, prior to loading the reformatted documents into your ‘leak device.’

Everything you are processing a sensitive leak with should be sanitized (untraceable to yourself), laptop, printer, camera, and thumbdrive (wear gloves, fingerprints can transfer via a camera’s digital image!)

Insofar as Tor, NO CHANCE it is secure from government prying (2nd example of USA penetration of Tor HERE.)

What I’m trying to tell the honest leaker reporting crimes and/or unconstitutional behaviors is, you have to beat what a veteran FBI agent had to say in “Spycraft for Hacks

“[T]he Internet is a sieve, and a goldmine for lawful and unlawful penetration through technical means by law enforcement. Never use the Internet or email for any kind of contact with a source if your beat is national security because it creates too many electronic trails, all of which are traceable and usually recoverable by even the newest rookie FBI cyber-agent”

By using your garage sale or yard sale or used, bought for cash anywhere (or stolen but definitely not a good idea) no one knows to be associated with you laptop, together with  creating a counterfeit email account (a random dead person’s details would do) only ever used with the leak computer, you may avoid many plausible and unknown dangers and a few known ones; for instance ‘tor’ having been developed by United States Naval Intelligence and continues to be funded by the USA’s Department of Defense. With taking the proper precautions, you don’t need ‘tor’ or ‘secure drop’ (secure? Belly laugh.)

The intercept goes on: “You can access our SecureDrop server by going to [http://y6xjgkgwj47us5ca.onion/] in the Tor Browser. This is a special kind of URL that only works in Tor. Do NOT type this URL into a non-Tor Browser. It won’t work — and it will leave a record.

Yeah, and using the Naval Intelligence developed ‘tor’ could ‘copy’ you straight to DoD and friends, recalling NSA is run by Department of Defense. Did you have tor when you visited the website to download it? No, or you wouldn’t have go there for the download. Bingo! The NSA has you ‘recorded’ downloading tor on your personal laptop. Dumb shit.

And this next, in the era of ‘warrantless’ searches, is beyond stupid:

“If that is too complicated, or you don’t wish to engage in back-and-forth communication with us, a perfectly good alternative is to simply send mail to P.O. Box 65679, Washington, D.C., 20035, or to The Intercept, 114 Fifth Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, New York, 10011. Drop it in a mailbox (do not send it from home, work or a post office) with no return address”

You just gave up not only your possibly traceable leaked information but as well a postmark, possible DNA and fingerprints to federal law enforcement. The postmark points to possible surveillance video capture, your DNA is in so much as an eyelash hair you missed and you had better have been perfect with not leaving so much as a single fingerprint, not only on the envelope but its’ contents.  Who could reasonably expect material addressed to the Intercept would not be intercepted? A naif.

The ‘spycraft for hacks’ author comes up short on this point:

“Use the U.S. mail. Many journalists are unaware of the existence of mail covers, which are formal requests to the Postmaster that allow the postal service to record certain information — but only that information on the outside of the envelope. To get at its contents requires probable cause that evidence of a crime is contained within the envelope and a search warrant. Of course, “accidental” openings can and do occur. So be careful what you say in your letter”

It would be no ‘accident’ if the USA’s FISA court had issued a blanket warrantless (or secret ‘warranted’) search authorization for all of the mail coming to the organization publishing the Snowden NSA revelations. But the ‘spycraft’ article is dated May, 2013 and Snowden’s leaks were not revealed until June. FBI veteran David Gomez might wish he had the article back a mere month following Foreign Policy publishing his Spycraft for Hacks.

“Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead” –Benjamin Franklin


A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired paralegal/investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption and human rights. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background is primarily social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire –

How Dumb is the CIA Part Four:

fourth estate |fɔrθ əsˈteɪt|
noun (the fourth estate)
the press; the profession of journalism: copy desks are held together by the bad-news contingent of the fourth estate

With the ‘fake news’ caper recently backfiring on the CIA and suddenly many people, previously devoted to the USA’s ‘fourth estate’, questioning what, if anything, can be believed in mainstream media when it comes to matters of intelligence… it seems an opportune time to examine the mythology generated by the American intelligence concerning Osama Bin Ladin.

According to this Guardian story from November, 2001:


“Two months before September 11 Osama bin Laden flew to Dubai for 10 days for treatment at the American hospital, where he was visited by the local CIA agent”

The article goes on:


“Bin Laden has often been reported to be in poor health. Some accounts claim that he is suffering from Hepatitis C, and can expect to live for only two more years.

“According to Le Figaro, last year he ordered a mobile dialysis machine to be delivered to his base at Kandahar in Afghanistan”

Moreover, according to French intelligence speaking with Le Figaro (picked up by the Guardian), Osama had visits with at least 2 CIA contacts during his 10 days in the hospital urology department in the summer of 2001, as well, Bin Laden met with the head of CIA allied Saudi intelligence. Hardly the behavior profile expected of an agency in relation to (at that time) a 12 years hunted terrorist per the legend of CIA asset Bin Laden turning on the agency; following on the CIA-Bin Laden-Saudi longtime anti-Soviet cooperation in 1980s Afghanistan.

Concerning Bin Laden’s 2001 state of Health; Pakistan has modern health care facilities and excellent doctors. Bin Laden traveling from Pakistan to Dubai for expert care in the American Hospital urology department speaks to a very serious health deterioration a few months prior to the American invasion. Bin Laden having a portable dialysis machine delivered to his base in Kadahar, Afghanistan, a year previous to this, poses serious complications for any narrative of his survival in the intense hardship Bin Laden supposedly survived at between the fall of Kabul and the conclusion of the battle of Tora Bora at the end of 2001:


“Usually, each hemodialysis treatment lasts about four hours and is done three times per week. A type of hemodialysis called high-flux dialysis may take less time. You can speak to your doctor to see if this is an appropriate treatment for you”

Bin Laden is reported to have fled Kabul for Tora Bora a few days prior to Kabul’s fall 13 November 2001. The battle of Tora Bora began 6 December and concluded 17 December 2001. Being generous with a survival timeline, if we put Bin Laden on the run from Kabul and under subsequent siege at Tora Bora for a period of a month, presumably Bin Ladin has paused for dialysis a dozen times in one of the most inhospitable and under-developed regions of South Asia. This would require his mobile dialysis machine to accompany Bin Laden over a primitive and rough mountain road (built with explosives and simple bulldozer by Bin Laden more than 15 years previous to  this), with generator and fuel. Then Bin Laden gets his dialysis treatment in a shallow cave, under siege, while bombs are raining down on his position, over 11 days in December. This at an elevation of 14,000 feet with subzero Fahrenheit (-18 or more Celsius) temperatures common. Despite the urban legend put out by USA intelligence of Tora Bora as a sophisticated, self-sufficient complex, a Special Forces soldier on location tells a different story:


“Again, with the caves, they weren’t these crazy mazes or labyrinths of caves that they described. Most of them were natural caves. Some were supported with some pieces of wood maybe about the size of a 10-foot by 24-foot room, at the largest. They weren’t real big. I know they made a spectacle out of that, and how are we going to be able to get into them? We worried about that too, because we see all these reports. Then it turns out, when you actually go up there, there’s really just small bunkers, and a lot of different ammo storage is up there”

Through all of this, culminating at a primitive, oxygen starved 14,000 feet elevation (4,200+ meters), deeply freezing, unsanitary environment under explosives raining down on his position for 11 days, we are supposed to assume Bin Laden received his necessary regular dialysis without complication or malfunction.

We know already American intelligence had either egregiously lied about the sophistication of the complex at Tora Bora or, perhaps had fallen to disinformation or, by far most likely, simply has a vivid imagination (no stupidity, no matter how immense, should be ruled out concerning the CIA’s ‘war on terror’, an incredible example HERE.)

It had been (by operatives on location) discovered that Tora Bora was set up to shelter no more than 200 people, maximum. Is the CIA lead officer who’d initiated the battle for Tora Bora, Gary Berntsen, a self-aggrandizing liar or merely possessed of vivid imagination? Self-professed “cowboy” Berntsen reports Osama had retreated to Tora Bora with 1,000 people in his entourage. Bin Laden would have known he could provide shelter for no more than 200 of his fighters at Tora Bora. Another CIA square peg driven into a round hole we are supposed to believe is a good fit.

Berntsen goes on to report he called in a strike with a BLU-82 which:


“The blast produces over pressure of 1,000 pounds per square inch, close to that of a tactical nuclear weapon. It can be felt miles away”

Now, it doesn’t require a degree in rocket science to determine what this weapon would have done dropped on a mountainside of shallow caves modified into unsophisticated or basic bunkers. The shock-wave alone would have decimated the inhabitants. This was on top of waves of B-52 carpet bombing of the so-called Tora Bora ‘complex.’ Enough ordinance had been dropped on the primitive bunker complex at Tora Bora to flatten a small city. Supposedly Osama, and his required, functioning dialysis machine, survived all of this to escape by hiking out.

Despite CIA Officer Berntsen maintaining he missed extinguishing Bin Laden at Tora Bora (actually Berntsen appears to have directed the operation by radio-phone from the relative safety of Kabul, despite the numerous inclusive use of ‘we’ in his Tora Bora battle description-narrative), because he lacked competent resources, the more likely scenarios are; Bin Laden died at Tora Bora, blown to bits by a BLU 82 or, Bin Laden was never at Tora Bora and the CIA is too stupid to realize this or too cowardly to admit they don’t know whether Bin Laden was at Tora Bora and if he was, what happened to him.

Imagine you’re leading the CIA team that has every reason to believe (with the CIA this could be solely in one’s imagination) Bin Laden was blown to tiny bits. But you actually cannot know. The fear of Bin Laden turning up alive is too much for you to risk the humiliation of stating Bin Laden almost certainly died at Tora Bora and later shown to be wrong. The consequent default presumption (the coward’s position) has to be Bin Laden escaped. This is almost certainly the concealed premise underlying CIA Officer Berntsen’s reporting.

Based on the original Direction générale de la sécurité extérieure (DGSE or French CIA) reporting via Le Figaro, picked up by the Guardian, a reasonable case can be made a seriously ill Bin Laden never returned to Afghanistan from Pakistan after his treatment at the American Hospital in Dubai only five months previous to the bombing of Tora Bora. This would actually make much more sense if indeed Bin Laden were to have lived to be assassinated by the Americans in 2011. But this narrative also has serious problems. Supposedly the last electronic intercept of Bin Laden was in 2001 (presuming this was the CIA report of captured shortwave radio communications at Tora Bora) but the NSA describes this as ‘possible’ as opposed to confirmed. There is no rationale for ‘possible’ given but one might reasonably presume this is because the NSA does not trust the CIA narrative concerning Bin Laden at Tora Bora and the NSA itself did not pick up this radio traffic:


“When asked if, after 9/11, the NSA ever saw “reflections of UBL [Usama Bin Laden] himself or members of his inner circle in SIGINT,” Darby responded, “[o]ur loss of SIGINT access to bin Laden actually occurred prior to 9/11 — it happened in 1998” with one possible exception in 2001

Setting aside this ‘possible’ communications intercept the NSA cannot or will not confirm, together with presuming Bin Laden survived because he was not at Tora Bora, it is possible Bin Laden lived to be assassinated later; at Abbottabad, Pakistan, in 2011.

The first problem with this scenario is, if the CIA covered up the salient fact of Osama’s absence at Tora Bora, there is little reason to believe any subsequent CIA Bin Laden narrative absent hard evidence and the hard evidence of the 2011 Abbottabad raid has been deeply buried:


“Adm. William McRaven, the nation’s top secret special operations commander, ordered the Department of Defense to purge its computers of all files on the Navy SEALs raid on bin Laden and send them to the CIA. This decision was only recently revealed in a draft report by the Pentagon’s inspector general –and expunged from the final version– which was obtained and published last week by the Project on Government Oversight. The almost-secret decision to transfer the files, ostensibly done to protect the identities of the SEALs involved (the same SEAL team whose members have already begun writing best-selling books and granting tell-all interviews), was made under the pretense that the SEALs were effectively working for the CIA while conducting the raid, and thus all the files were CIA records.  

“That’s the government’s take, anyway. What the transfer really did was ensure that the files would be placed in the CIA’s operational records, a records system that –due to the 1984 CIA Operational Files exemption[*]— is not subject to the FOIA and is a black hole for anyone trying to access the files within. The move prevents the public from accessing the official record about the raid, and bypasses several important federal records keeping procedures in the process”


* 50 USC [United States Code] 431, also known as the ‘1984 CIA Operational Files exemption’, states:

“The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, with the coordination of the Director of National Intelligence, may exempt operational files of the Central Intelligence Agency from the provisions of section 552 of title 5 (Freedom of Information Act) which require publication or disclosure, or search or review in connection therewith”

Consequently, with any hard evidence entirely expunged from the Department of Defense records, and sealed away from the press and public purview by Central Intelligence, we are limited to sorting through the several, literally littered with lies, official and unofficial narratives.

The first to seriously attempt a comprehensive challenge of the 2011 Abbottabad raid narrative is Seymour Hersh. Hersh allows Bin Laden was actually killed at Abbottabad but then Hersh attacks the official narrative on several accounts. Hersh states the biggest lie that had been uncovered is the Pakistanis’ did not know of the USA raid in advance but here is where I disagree with his assessment. If, as Hersh asserts, and this seems entirely credible, the CIA played no role whatsoever in discovering Bin Laden’s whereabouts and in fact it was a former ISI (Pakistan’s CIA) officer tipped the USA to Bin Laden’s presence at Abbottabad…


“…that the CIA did not learn of bin Laden’s whereabouts by tracking his couriers, as the White House has claimed since May 2011, but from a former senior Pakistani intelligence officer who betrayed the secret in return for much of the $25 million reward offered by the US…”

…this raises the distinct possibility the CIA had been taken in by a ‘dangle’ or an officer from ISI deliberately providing CIA with information that has underlying motive or purpose intended in some manner to cross or compromise the Americans. In this possible case, the CIA claiming they had discovered the whereabouts of Bin Laden is the by far bigger lie, because of these implications:

  1. If indeed Bin Laden was alive and at Abbottabad, the CIA 10 years manhunt expending countless man-hours and many, many millions of dollars had been an entirely incompetent waste of resources.
  2. Pakistan wanted to be rid of Bin Laden but didn’t want credit for killing him and used a dangle to hand off the Bin Laden assassination to the Americans with plausible denial of Pakistani involvement.
  3. Pakistan’s ISI had other, ulterior motive for pulling the Americans into the Abbottabad raid.

Going to the 3rd possibility, it is entirely plausible the Pakistanis’ had long since come to the conclusion Bin Laden had not survived the bombing at Tora Bora and decided it was time to humiliate the CIA and/or be done with the ‘living’ Bin Laden legend.

Motive for humiliating the CIA could easily stem from the Americans badly embarrassing the Pakistanis by breaking into the open the Pakistan based Khan nuclear black market, an incredibly incompetent endeavor in the hands of the CIA. These sort of events between intelligence agencies do NOT go without reprisal:


“Fallout by Americans Catherine Collins and Douglas Frantz tells the story of the illicit nuclear procurement network created by Abdul Qadeer Khan, a metallurgist who is widely considered the father of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program”

In this light, it is justified to examine the actions we know were taken by the Americans in the aftermath of the Abbottabad raid.

In the beginning, there were so many conflicting lies coming out of the administration as to lead one to suspect the raid had not produced expected result and no one knew what to do except make up stories in what amounted to a panicked environment. Numerous journalists, including Seymour Hersh and several journalists at The Intercept, have had a field day picking these official lies (and ‘unauthorized’ accounts) apart.

Next, we know JSOC boss Admiral McRaven had any records of hard evidence buried at the CIA and put beyond reach of any lawful Freedom of Information demands.

Then, things gets interesting. According to the American accounts, only a few operatives saw Bin Laden during the Abbottabad raid,  with most of those preoccupied with securing the 3rd floor room, prior to Bin Laden’s face deliberately obliterated with weapons fire, permanently removing any opportunity at photographic identification. For that one simple act, it can never actually be known whether this were indeed Bin Laden. Why?

If indeed, as Hersh has asserted, the Bin Laden location at Abbottabad had been given up by a Pakistani intelligence officer, the CIA planners of the Abbottabad raid would have to have had a contingency plan if in fact it turned out Bin Laden was not present at the raided compound and they’d been set up by ISI. Obliterating the face of the suspect almost immediately (within a very few seconds of the ‘target’ in view) making identification necessary by DNA which according to is easily counterfeited:


“The researchers showed that with the use of basic equipment and know-how, anyone can obtain artificial DNA that can be incorporated into genuine human blood or saliva, or directly planted at a crime scene.

“Current forensic procedure fails to distinguish between such samples of blood, saliva and touched surfaces with artificial DNA,” the scientists wrote in an article recently published by “Forensic Science International: Genetics,” a scientific journal.

“Elon Ganor is CEO and co-founder of Nucleix, an Israeli company specialised in DNA analysis that conducted the research. She says it doesn’t take much to produce large quantities of artificial DNA.

“You can take a used cup of coffee or a cigarette butt, send it to a laboratory, and for a relatively small sum of money have their DNA identified, produced and sent back to you in a test tube,” he told AFP on Wednesday.

“The DNA samples, which are produced using a standard technique called whole genome amplification, can then be planted at a crime scene.

“Researchers at Nucleix also demonstrated how one could implant DNA into real blood by using a centrifuge to separate red and white blood cells and placing the DNA in the former, giving the blood a new profile.

“As part of the experiment, a sample of the modified blood was sent to a laboratory in the United States that works with FBI forensic teams, which failed to catch the forgery”

The presumed dead Bin Laden with an obliterated face was, according to official accounts, rather rapidly buried at sea (unrecoverable for future analysis) but had been positively ‘identified’ with a DNA ‘match.’

In the case of the purported Bin Laden’s face immediately obliterated, the lead SEAL had shot Bin Laden but was immediately preoccupied with securing the room and it was one of two SEAL team members who’d surprised everyone on the team with abandoning their assigned roles and instead burst immediately onto the scene behind the lead SEAL and immediately blew off the already shot and prostrate Bin Laden’s face as though this were a critical, assigned objective. Was this incredibly unprofessional act concerning two of those among the most well trained commandos in the world actually a clandestine assignment? A CIA assignment unknown even to fellow team members? Both of these SEAL members subsequently have left the service and are prostituting themselves by getting wealth and attention with “I killed Bin Laden” claims while calling each other liars. Bissonette is purported to be the greater liar of the (according to others present) two self-aggrandizing liars. A perfect obfuscation serving a distraction from the facts in the public mind. The SEAL who actually first shot Bin Laden (but didn’t blow his face off) isn’t talking. Distracted with securing the room, he didn’t have time to positively identify just who it was he had just shot:


“Conflicting accounts have emerged about how many other SEALs fired rounds into bin Laden’s lifeless body, though one former SEAL Team 6 leader who viewed the body in Jalalabad told me the body appeared to be intact aside from the chest wound and obliterated face.

“The SEALs had been specifically asked to avoid shooting bin Laden in the face. O’Neill’s decision to canoe the al Qaeda leader made him unrecognizable. A SEAL who spoke Arabic interviewed bin Laden’s wives and daughters until he was able to get two positive identifications”

The problems with Hersh’s and the Intercept accounts are manifold.

Hersh’s American sources were limited to mission training and after action reports. It could well be those sources fed Hersh a mix of fact and fiction without knowing they were feeding Hersh disinformation concerning a mission the CIA and JSOC, in after action reports, could never admit had been engineered by ISI to humiliate the Americans; with the plausible benefit to the Pakistanis being rid of a (possibly long dead) Bin Laden with Bin Laden’s demise pinned on the Americans who could never admit not only had they failed but they also had been duped. Insofar as Hersh’s Pakistani sources, they could easily have their interpretation wrong as well, if the Bin Laden raid were in actuality an ISI initiated sting operation. One incidence Hersh probably gets right is the tip the supposedly seized (by the SEALs) computer records and other materials from Abbottabad is a fairy tale.

In the case of the Intercept interviews with SEAL Team 6 members, they would never be able to admit they did not get Bin Laden, and in fact with Bin Ladin’s face almost immediately “obliterated”, most of them could not even know.

With a history of incredible incompetence and numerous egregious lies coupled with removing any evidence from independent exam, taken together with failures surrounding the JSOC and their CIA mission leadership, none of what we read can be taken at face value, none of it. Not the questioning of Bin Laden’s wives and children to ascertain identity, not the proposed Bin Laden children reputedly born since 2001, and most certainly not the end result claimed by the Americans pertaining to the 2011 raid on the compound at Abbottabad.

Did Bin Laden die at Tora Bora? We don’t know. Did Bin Laden die at  Abbottabad? We don’t know.

When the Las Vegas bookies open odds on the issue, my money will be on Bin Laden dead for 10 years prior to the excruciatingly stupid CIA actors planning and executing the 2011 raid at Abbottabad, Pakistan.


How Dumb is the CIA (all episodes)


A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired paralegal/investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption and human rights. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background is primarily social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire –

The Intercept Takes A Dive, Episode 2

Call this one ‘the Iranian (Pierre Omidyar) who owns a Jew (Glenn Greenwald) that pimps a Polack (Marcin Mamoń)’ in a case that is, prima facie, an information operation. With focus having come to the fact of Pierre Omidyar, The Intercept’s bankroller, has funded elements in Ukraine leading to the overthrow of the Yanukovich regime, a de facto support contributing to the present civil war, clearly Omidyar has been supporting the side of those now constituting the regime in Kiev. How will The Intercept spin it’s bending over to take billionaire ‘Shah-man’ Omidyar’s shaft from behind?

The Intercept previously hosting Askold Krushelnycky (see ‘The Intercept Takes A Dive‘) struck me as similar to The Nation hosting Bob Drefuss or the Washington Post providing a platform to David Ignatius; a professional liar does not add a ‘fair and balanced’ perspective (recalls FOX NEWS) but merely tosses a monkey wrench into the gears of truth.

Now we have some famous Polish journalist (famous in Poland, in any case), Marcin Mamoń, has been taken on by The Intercept, and he somehow manages to screw Greenwald while in the same moment giving Omidyar a blow-job:


This newest one reads as though it’d been scripted by the brighter minds of western intelligence; following initial references to “Russian backed [ethnic Russian] separatists” suddenly the language changes:

“When Kolomoisky saw that the Russians might capture Dnipropetrovsk”


“When the Russians stopped approximately 120 miles short of Dnipropetrovsk, Kolomoisky suddenly lost interest and stopped paying the volunteer battalions”


“There are suspicions that his location was betrayed to the Russians”


“They came to a small village called Chernukhino, where they stumbled upon Russian soldiers. There was shooting, and the Chechens killed a few Russians — the rest of the Russians withdrew. The Russians, however, managed to give the village’s coordinates to their artillery, and soon all hell broke loose”

So, it goes like this: Russians, Russians, Russians, Russian soldiers, Russians, Russians, Russians.


Proof? Or is everyone on the side opposed to Kiev “Russian” for the sake of Mamoń’s journalism? The bias (at the least) is palpable; the forceful point in subliminal psychology being driven home is ‘these are Russian soldiers.’ The CIA psy-ops people have to be high-fiving over at Langley. The Intercept just morphed Ukrainians who happen to be ethnic Russian separatists: into Putin’s army in the Donbass region of Ukraine.

Notable neglect  in the coverage is; even if his volunteer troops are not expecting to be paid, how does the Chechen commander feed, transport and keep his 500 man battalion provided with ammunition, if his benefactor had dumped his force months previous to this? War is an incredibly expensive business. Villagers handing out cabbage and sausages just won’t get the job done. There has to have been serious alternative financing, and that is skirted with a vague reference to ‘help’ from the ‘Ukrainian people.’

Insofar as the point of the Kiev aligned volunteer battalions, Mamoń’s thesis is, these are a case of ‘the chickens come home to roost’ for Putin. Their ties to Islamic State coupled to the Ukrainian authorities at Kiev not only tolerate them, but somehow must be logistically supporting them, doesn’t really enter the picture. His article imparts a sort of strange rehabilitation worthy of those western Ukrainian fascists who worship Stephan Bandera. A kind of ‘they were justified’ rationale overlooking these are rank criminals and committed terrorists.

At the end of the day, I don’t give a rat’s ass if Marcin Mamoń is on easy terms with Chechen militants & big-shot Islamic State personalities, and neither should Glenn Greenwald be impressed; this Mamoń guy smells BAD and his ‘Eau de Omidyar’ is distinct in the air; if everyone on the Donbass region’s separatist side is Russian, we can just as easily make the case (more accurately) many, many fighters on the Kiev side are Nazi, that is with the exception of certain Chechen fighters, hosted by Kiev, and at least some apparently provided courtesy of the Islamic State.

Ukraine for Dummies


The Intercept was too good to be true, now having published a rank propaganda piece worthy of the BBC news

The Intercept Takes A Dive

I sent this in a mail to Glenn Greenwald, as well submitted it as a comment (that did not post) at the article:

Reads like a BBC propaganda piece

And with that short mail concerning the (above linked) article at The Intercept, you will discover a short, shallow piece that parrots a Ukrainian (Kiev) narrative claiming Ukrainian forces have downed a Russian surveillance drone. What’s wrong with this picture? As a former qualified operator of an American surface to air missile system (Improved HAWK) I can tell you right off this is a surface to air missile systems test drone and not a surveillance model. It is as simple as the color. A surveillance drone will be painted to blend with the sky. The Russians are not going to beg Kiev’s forces to shoot down one of their surveillance drones by sending it overhead painted bright orange.

Now, to the article’s author; Askold Krushelnycky. Firstly, in his own words, he was clearly in the camp of the so-called ‘Orange Revolution’ (a CIA instigated ‘color revolution‘ or part of the ‘democracy’ investment Victoria Nuland had reported the USA spent $5 billion on) putting him squarely in political opposition to the Russian ethnic majority of the Donbass region of Ukraine. So much for impartiality.

Secondly, Krushelnycky is first generation British of Ukrainian “refugee” descent, opening the question of whether Krushelnycky is of Stephen Bandera aligned stock. Most of the Ukrainian nationals who were allowed into the USA, Canada and Britain after WW II were radical right wing who’d supported Hitler in Ukraine, including an ethnic Ukrainian division of Waffen SS rescued in the thousands. Did The Intercept do a background check on Krushelnycky? I doubt it.

Thirdly, Krushelnycky is reporting from Mariupol, the Kiev held area where Right Sector (Ukrainian Nazis) has its own independent ‘Azov’ battalion. If he were inclined to report factually (particularly in relation to Azov battalion provocations), he’d have immediate problems with these people. Not to mention Kiev has pushed so many outrageous lies, Kiev propaganda compares well to Roger Rabbit; insofar as reality.

Fourthly, and here it gets very sticky for The Intercept, Pierre Omidyar, The Intercept’s bankroller, has funded elements in Ukraine leading to the overthrow of the Yanukovich regime, a de facto support contributing to the present civil war. Clearly Omidyar has been supporting the side of those now constituting the regime in Kiev, which also so happens align with the politics of Intercept reporter Krushelnycky. Glenn Greenwald has claimed Omidyar’s support for the parties ruling in Kiev will make no difference in the reporting coming out of The Intercept; but actions here speak louder than words … I had actually been wondering why reporting on Ukraine had been conspicuously absent at The Intercept and now we have a shallow, rank propaganda piece worthy of those very whores of journalism Greenwald & friends have so eloquently bashed elsewhere.

The Intercept hosting Askold Krushelnycky is like The Nation hosting Bob Drefuss or the Washington Post providing a platform to David Ignatius; a professional liar does not add a ‘fair and balanced’ perspective (recalls FOX NEWS) but merely tosses a monkey wrench into the gears of truth-

C’est la vie.


The Intercept Takes A Dive Episode 2 ‘Eau de Omidyar’

Ukraine for Dummies


The proposal in this essay “In fact it is perfectly possible by the time Snowden had traveled to Moscow with Harrison, he may no longer have been in possession of the documents at all” in fact had been almost immediately established as the case in fact, when Snowden stated he was no longer in possession of any NSA documents when he’d traveled to Russia, in his Moscow interview with NBC

It is a near impossible task to try and wipe egg off someone’s face, that is, if that someone doesn’t care to acknowledge the facts, if the facts shake their foundation in reality or they are simply willfully stubborn. When egg yolk has dried on ceramic, those of you who know how to wash dishes will know to use fingernails, or risk scratches and look for the steel wool. So this analysis is going to be abrasive to the idealists in the peace movement and associated journalists concerned with social justice. And it is an attempt to pull Glenn Greenwald’s chestnuts out of the fire, before they are reduced to ashes by counter-espionage and damage control spooks. Good luck with that, is the cynical admonition to myself, because this one might get eggs thrown at me with a vengeance.

Our present story begins precisely 11 months ago, 23 June 2013, when The Guardian had reported concerning the WikiLeaks supposed (reported widely in ‘mainstream’ media) ‘legal expert’ accompanying Edward Snowden, Sarah Harrison, on Snowden’s odyssey to Moscow:

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

Yeah, that’s likely why Snowden faxed perfectly useless asylum requests all over the world from the Moscow airport, not realizing (technically speaking, such as in an embassy) he had to be standing on the territory of the nation he would wish to acquire asylum in. But it gets by far more interesting. As I’d pointed out in my piece ‘WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies‘…

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

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

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

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

Typically there would be each of these approaches assessed individually and in various combinations and/or variants when planning an operation. WikiLeaks would be vulnerable to this on several counts”

…now, we will look at this a bit more closely in a related development of the past several days.

On 19 May, 2014, the new venture of Greenwald (among others) ‘The Intercept’ published a piece based on the Snowden NSA documents, concerning MYSTIC sub-project SOMALGET, detailing how entire nations are being prepared for TOTAL surveillance of phone traffic, inclusive of all audio conversation. The apparent ‘pilot program’ of laboratory test animals is the Bahamas and an unnamed nation (in the intercept article.)


^NSA illustration via The Intercept

Almost immediately, Julian Assange (@WikiLeaks) and Greenwald were in a ‘twitter’ spat over Greenwald with-holding the 2nd nations name, Assange claiming Greenwald’s rationale for following long established journalism protocol to protect at risk persons by with-holding information was essentially selling out. AND THEN, WikiLeaks (Assange) threatened to reveal the nation’s name, if The Intercept and Greenwald refused to do so .. and subsequently named Afghanistan. What we see here, on its face, is brilliant counter-espionage work, of a nature so serious a threat to Greenwald (and others) journalism at The Intercept, as to appear to send Greenwald to Moscow to meet with Snowden, or so rumor would have it:

^Destination Moscow (in closing remarks by hostess)

The problem with WikiLeaks naming the unnamed country? Now, the ‘mainstream’ (CIA manipulated) media can claim in full on attack on Greenwald and the others at The Intercept, these journalists have no credibility insofar as security of content concerning the NSA documents in their possession. As well, there most certainly will be assessment of possibility to link Greenwald (and others at The Intercept) to any criminal case being developed against Assange. Touche, NSA! Counter-espionage has drawn blood.

Now to the question .. how did WikiLeaks acquire the name of Afghanistan? WikiLeaks isn’t saying. But first suspicion would naturally fall on close Assange confidant Sarah Harrison who’d been with Snowden ’24/7′ for weeks while Snowden was sorting out where he might be able to safely stay (having to ultimately settle on Russia.) I believe this is the least likely scenario, however we will go there first. It’s as simple as Sarah Harrison would have stole the documents from Snowden. If that were the case, WikiLeaks has all of the Snowden NSA disclosures and they don’t dare admit they’d violated Snowden’s trust. If Greenwald is indeed in Moscow meeting with Snowden, it would go to exploring this possibility. But I doubt this is what happened, not because WikiLeaks would not have stolen the documents if they could have, but because I expect Snowden was smart enough to secure the documents throughout Sarah Harrison’s stay with him, not every possible ‘honey-pot’ or using a woman in seduction for operational purposes is going to be successful. Whether Harrison were Assange’s mole or a British intelligence agent or double agent, Snowden was not a good candidate to fall for this sort of operation when it is demonstrable Snowden’s own girlfriend had no idea what he was  up to in the months and days leading up to his revelations and flight. The man is well disciplined in the rules of personal secrecy attending espionage. In fact it is perfectly possible by the time Snowden had traveled to Moscow with Harrison, he may no longer have been in possession of the documents at all. But the brilliant aspect of this, from the point of view of counter-espionage and exploiting public perception is, it will appear the documents were not secured and Greenwald & Laura Poitras can be pilloried as irresponsible and endangering the USA’s national security, inclusive of putting lives at risk, possibly to a point of building a criminal case. Meanwhile, if Greenwald had traveled to Moscow, he is barking up the wrong tree.

The more likely scenario is quite straightforward. The NSA arranged to ‘leak’ the information concerned to WikiLeaks, for clear intent of going after Greenwald and The Intercept with PsyOps, sowing distrust and misleading the principal players in a counter-operation that will be highly publicized propaganda.

So, one might ask, how can leaking the nation’s name, Afghanistan, almost certainly laundered via some CIA embed or ‘social justice’ source known to WikiLeaks, square with the USA purportedly concerned for the lives put at risk? Here is where the cynicism of evil plays in the world of spy craft; people at the top, certainly inclusive of Obama’s CIA Director John ‘Kill List‘ Brennan, NSA associates and ‘friends’ play the game of ‘trade-offs.’ The people whose lives are ‘at risk’ due to the disclosures will be relatively low level assets, easily expendable technicians. They are suddenly fodder for the greater gain of going after Greenwald and damaging The Intercept. It is actually as simple as that. If some of these technicians are killed, so much the better from the point of view at the top, that will be frosting on the cake of working to destroy (and likely pursue a frame-up with criminal charges) those persons who initially broke the Snowden story and facilitated the NSA documents release.

To Glenn & Co at The Intercept, welcome to the real world of spies.

Related stories:

Above Top Secret How (not) To Leak

WikiLeaks and Spy Agencies Probable information operations

%d bloggers like this: