Disclaimer: This site is *not* affiliated with AIPAC, Ahmed Chalabi, K Street, ClearChannel, or Urban Moving Systems of Weehawken, NJ. In case you were curious. Full disclosure: I have some shares of Apple and therefore I have an Apple bias. Yum. Also got a tiny bit of gold!
Hundreds of billions of dollars, between cash flows and valuations, depend upon the ability of American law enforcement structures avidly maintaining their illusionary belief system about laundered drug money, informants, and banking systems. All of this is normal, they say, it's normal to throw the book at tons of little fish while mysteriously failing to find any really substantial laundered drug money or criminal prosecution for lawyers and bankers involved. The name of the game is to fail gracefully at detecting and punishing drug money in the banking system, to create a PSYOP of coherency on top of countless total ironies, structured protection & utter failures.
By the same token, the US government really always tends to nudge all markets into being dominated by a few big actors, whether "legal" or "gray" or "shadow" - be they milk producers or drug traffickers. They want to minimize the number of PayPals on the market, and the number of major drug players.
At some point it apparently came to pass that formal informant deals with favored cartels would also be inked -- the Sinaloa cartel even officially promoted as the proper dominator of certain "plazas" in public relations items. Because no one really cares about war on drugs policy -- it's not like this horrible policy affects the level of gun violence in North America -- nothing ever gets done about this at the federal level.
It's beginning to finally dawn on people that the secretive Federal Reserve System wire transfer networks - casually known as Fedline & Fedwire -- must somehow be involved [noted in Oct 2010], and I have never seen a single person even bother to claim to the contrary. The banking wire transfer systems are inextricably part of the "protected" drug money laundering system which is "protected" in the same formal way as at least some of these Sinaloa crucial informant thugs. Let's see if state police can pry into the Fed. LOL!!
So anyway, we have hard proof of it in court that Jesus Vicente Zambada-Niebla's attorney was in fact an informant operated expressly to pull intel from Sinaloa into the US government.
The questions: how much the "kingpin" deserves cover from that, especially since he was moving along Fast & Furious guns to waste other cartels & assorted innocent people? How many documents showing underlying protected illegal relationships will the judge force into the public record? How much 'controlled demolition' will the public tolerate in this relatively obscure case?
The whole thing is such a spectacular sham it really calls into question whether federal prosecutors, informants, drug laws and the rest of the charade should even exist in the first place. It is truly a massive stage of fakeness, and frankly none of these people deserve to have any influence over the level of drugs available in society.
Not that drugs are harmless, clearly they all have some negative qualities, but clearly this entire schema is hosed well beyond the point of no return, and can only produce more violence and chemical dependency as it drags us all into hell. There are of course countless rabbit holes involving drug trafficking links with 'deep events' like the CIA, Iran-Contra, 9/11, the Taliban & al-Qaeda etc and I'm not going to get into that much here, though plenty of Iran-Contra related background fills the history of links above. Also as linked here what is the role of NORTHCOM anyway?
Government is the Entertainment Division of the military-industrial complex.
-- attributed to Frank Zappa
The ugly realities of modern electoral politics in America hit home this week with two body blows to self-styled anti-authoritarian political networks: The Ron Paul movement finally hit the brick wall as Rand Paul (R-KY Coal Mines) endorsed Mitt Romney (R-Rich Mormon Mafia) -- utterly shocking & depressing tons of semi-libertarian Republicans along with the entire conservative side of the "Truther" and/or "Liberty" movements.
Days earlier, the Wisconsin recall election against Gov. Scott Walker (R-Petulance) turned in uglier-than-expected numbers as likely thousands of Wisconsinites were stripped of their Constitutional right to vote through ridiculous new regulations -- and of course a bunch of shady electronic voting machines run from a company in a suburban St. Cloud strip mall. Fox News flacks and nasty Gloria Borger/Sarah Palin types cackled that the unruly, rebellious hordes had been licked for good. Now, the Paulistas and the rebellious Cheesehead hordes must ask: what's next?!
Perhaps these movements never had too much in common, though you could find some overlapping supporters. Probably the biggest difference is the Liberty types are pretty darn hostile to mainstream unions while the #OccupyCapitol (which the Dems transmuted into #WIrecall) clearly ended up with unions as its main hub. But they shared a hostility to the party hierarchies, business as usual, and to some extent the elite financial/War Machine domestic & international complexes, which has triggered the financial/austerity crisis by sucking out trillions of dollars.
The anarchist strain in Wisconsin, buttressed mainly by the IWW, complemented the non-interventionist libertarian one that's been rolling since about 2007 -- it showed that the new politics that people are actively hunting for is certainly not statist or socialist in the traditional sense.
UPDATE 5:30PM June 10: I got a response of sorts to the piece sent over twitter by @superbranch which is helpful for illustrating a number of details especially Democratic Party machinations: http://pastebin.com/vKh3tfh6 - Thanks!! I only had a view from a distance for most of this affair, so it's good stuff.
UPDATE 6:10PM June 10: Someone suggested that all anarchists are by definition socialists, though I think of socialism as a statist set of philosophies. In older times some labeled this "state socialism" vs. "libertarian socialism." See an Anarchist FAQ, example Kropotkin: "[s]o long as Socialism was understood in its wide, generic, and true sense -- as an effort to abolish the exploitation of Labour by Capital -- the Anarchists were marching hand-in-hands with the Socialists of that time", etc. & also see Black Flame blog. Also Article IV of the General Bylaws of the IWW Constitution specifically forbids "Political Alliances." "To the end of promoting industrial unity and of securing necessary discipline within the organisation, the IWW refuses all alliances, direct or indirect, with any political parties or anti-political sects, and disclaims responsibility for any individual opinion or act which may be at variance with the purposes herein expressed." Thus while I would say they are still anarcho-syndicalist, they are not formally set up as 'anarchist' per se. I feel I over-generalized in how I characterized the IWW, so sorry about that! (see also The League of Peace and Freedom for an org from that era)
UPDATE June 11: I mentioned prominent libertarian Lew Rockwell & forgot about his purported role in that whole Ron Paul "racist newsletter" narrative -- Rockwell is seen by many as the main ghostwriter in the 1980s newsletters. That stuff was creepy. More info here, here, here, here, here, etc. His newsletter compadre Murray Rothbard wrote "Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature" in 1973 which I think illustrates the not-cool-at-all aspect of these guys that led to the ugly views in those newsletters.
On the Wisconsin Side: Turning A Broad Popular Uprising Into An AFSCME Bargaining Rights Boxing Match
I've never seen such a staggering level of oppositional political energy squandered in this country like I did at the Capitol rally one clear day last spring. That night, as laborites fumed at the Labor Temple meeting hosted by the IWW and drifted downstairs to commence drinking, I collected Wobbly swag and later driving around Madison speculated with friends what could happen if people occupied dozens of sites like they had the Capitol. Or maybe an image of the future arrived early in my mind. Either way, real-world radicalism receded yet again once more into dull, conventional latency. [cartoon by Toles]
Perhaps the greatest achievement of the Republicans (which the Dems of course walked right into) was to narrow down and reframe the scope of the opposition from broad, radical revulsion at burning down virtually all aspects of governance in Wisconsin to a small, deeply mainstream, sore-loser election shitfit over government union bargaining rights.
As a party, the Dems just didn't want -- and probably couldn't understand -- an independent network pushing back, outside their control, a decentralized resistance to the Shock Doctrine. There was a real broad and sturdy community commencing in opposition, and the Dems demanded ideological buy-in, then splintered it into a thousand pieces and cast it to the wind. They couldn't recognize the dignity of people that didn't like either party -- people for whom a Recall and Milwaukee's Mayor Barrett didn't answer their questions.
The Democrats & the motivated Wisconsinites couldn't solve the problem of the pointless election industry. in order to fix anything at all, electoral politics needs to be a consequence of organizing for a better society, not the ultimate goal of organizing in perpetual 2-year cycles. In today's system, we have all our available cash thrown at short-lived election industry organizations that produce almost nothing of lasting value -- but they do make broadcasters richer.
How much more vast and worthy a fight it seemed last year. I was there on "Go Home Day," the day the state Democrats basically told everyone to go home and organize to recall the governor. While successful recalls of some GOP state senators did save the north country from a really bad mining project that would have destroyed an Indian tribe and much else besides, (the deciding GOP senator flipped) - and apparently the Wisconsin Senate did flip to Dem control in another recall around Racine as well, the national media, and the Star Tribune, are quite happy to buy the simple GOP narrative.
While Walker's goose still looked pretty well-and-cooked by early 2012, the Democratic Party of course knew how to biff an opportunity better than anyone. At the infamous Go Home Day, those rally-goers would have done damn near anything. If the senators had called for them to do cool actions around the state every two weeks - not just rallies but actual badass shit - everyone would have gone for it. Instead, the solution was conventional election industry operations and endless, destructive primaries.
It's fitting at least the Senate flipped after all the efforts, since the shockingly illegal abuses of power really came through that body, including violating the state's open meeting law to rail through their union-busting bill. It was classic political overreach that came with Shock Doctrine, slashing corporate taxes, trying to privatize the entire U of Wi system into the "Badger Partnership," (since of course it's one of the few old Germanic-style institutions not entirely oriented to corporatism today), Voter ID to block students and minorities from voting, etc. These sudden, broader conflicts added up to an incredibly attractive, unprecedentedly broad & open class war-type super-conflict across the state, which managed to radicalize thousands of heretofore-discreet firefighters and even police officers to protest in the streets & sleep in the Capitol!
The Democratic Party masters in Washington DC must have been appalled by this uprising. It conflicted horribly with their usual approach of throwing a couple bones to organized labor while screwing over them, the students and rank-and-file Dem activist types as much as possible, as they have year after year, to the benefit of the national security and financial industries.
Chris Cillizza put it in the Fix, probably with great accuracy, that the national Dems did not want to see a recall election: "There was considerable internal discussion and disagreement between Washington and Wisconsin Democrats (and organized labor) about whether to push for a recall election this summer or wait until 2014 for a chance to unseat Walker. (Washington Democrats broadly favored the latter option, Wisconsin Democrats and labor the former)."
More to the point they did not want to see an independent populism rising in this country without Dem political hacks steering it away from their big contributors, such as the Wall Street criminals that have been fleecing the rest of the party base for years. This same dynamic played out again when the federal government through Homeland Security and the FBI, and Democratic mayors coordinated to dismantle the Occupy encampments in late 2011, then the Feds turned to setting up informant based-stings into 2012 in order to psyop the media away from the message that our institutions and politicians have grossly failed us. These stings were synthesized for Mayday and the Chicago NATO Summit, it was no accident.
Now, at least, the problem of post-Citizens United elections financed mainly by the likes of the Koch brothers, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, and corporate treasuries have been laid bare. At the bottom of the tens of millions of dollars pumped into the state by many anonymous entities, Wisconsinites were paid $50 a pop to post yard signs, $20 to attend events, etc., and now at least the people know this is the core truth of modern electoral politics. According to one person I talked to, even Walker campaign workers were depressed by the massive constant cash flow. They knew it was an arrival at a new low. He who has the gold, rules. But who will carry the truth out of cheese country?
And as always, national and local media walk away from shady election practices -- irregularities are nothing but sour grapes and jags in the already agreed-upon narrative everyone's sticking with, kid. Only weirdos like BradBlog care about the hundreds of complaints -- of citizens being stripped of the one available gesture which underpins the entire legitimacy of the system. Maybe those people, lacking a voice in their own governance, will take things to a more direct level. At this point, why shouldn't they rebel against the apparatus? Freedom's just another word for no votes left to lose....
The Dems have a decent shot at keeping the state politically divided, even with the GOP's advantageous redistricting, which for example will add conservative exurban Chicagoans to the Racine district that flipped D last week. The national GOP and the state press probably won't admit it, but the enthusiasm for scorched-earth politics has long worn off and glorious gridlock will return.
I saw on Twitter speculation about a General Strike for Milwaukee -- and a lot of activists apparently haven't enjoyed their tenure working in electoral politics with the Democrats. We could see more direct action - and with a relatively militant street protest in Milwaukee along with an Quebec sympathy march by Occupy Chicago getting beaten down by CPD last week, more radical politics along Lake Michigan is probably in the cards. People signed those recalls for a reason and they're going to want to do something different, to keep organizing against the tidal force of big money.
Et Tu, Rand Paul! Truthers & Liberty Movements lose their vanguard & screech to a halt?
A decidedly different arc of the spectrum finally got the letdown they've been staving off for months this week, and now they too need to put their pieces back together and move along. Antiwar.com's Justin Raimondo had Rand pegged way back in September 2010: he was playing footsie with the neocons but the Paul network people didn't want to believe it. (and mapped the wind-down in February) Today they're reeling -- it seals what they've avoided facing for a couple months, that the GOP nomination is finally out of reach. Here's the man enthusiastically endorsing Mittens:
Seriously, he looks more depressed than anyone I've ever seen touting Republicans on Fox News. But I think the back conversation is also illustrative: Rand Paul has always been clear that Kentucky coal mines are awesome and SOPA was evil & worth opposing. This is the awesome package you get with the Liberty movement.
It is the system itself that is broken, corrupt and defunct. This is the very point of Lew Rockwell, who explained in a recent interview with RT that the government itself is always the problem, and that no government can rescue the People from the problems of government:http://www.prisonplanet.com/lew-rockwell-ron-paul-and-rand-paul-are-d... [.....]Personally, I completely agree with Alex in saying there is no compromise allowed. No doing deals with the devil. If we support liberty, we must deny our support for those who oppose it. We must never allow ourselves to become part of the very system that is destroying our economy, our liberties and our future. It is widely acknowledged now -- even on the political left -- that Obama is a traitor to America, but there is no indication that Romney wouldn't be even worse. He's practically a white version of Obama, with much the same platform: Government-run socialized medicine, high taxes, War on Drugs, secret military prisons, banker bailouts, gun confiscation and so on. Having Romney runs things in Washington will produce no better results than we've already seen over the last four years. It may even be worse, if you can imagine that.
[.....] I am not yet denouncing Sen. Rand Paul, as I still hope there is a double agent aspect to his actions and that somehow he will emerge as a defender of liberty. In my view, his track record has at least earned our patience in observing this situation a little longer. However, if Rand Paul continues down this path without explanation, it is all but clear he will destroy his political career and lose virtually his entire support base -- the very people who put him in the U.S. Senate in the first place.
As with all lovers of liberty, my patience is running out, and I'm beginning to think Lew Rockwell was right all along:All government is inherently evil and destructive, and that we are all foolish to think government can ever be changed through elections.
[bold emphasis his] I'm not exactly an enthusiastic statist, but this isn't really the nation's most productive perspective. Lew Rockwell is probably best described as a hard-core Libertarian, maybe even a Voluntaryist and/or "Market Anarchist" (see the Center for a Stateless Society) which is a set of views most Anarchists vehemently disagree with. Capitalism without the collection of memes and buildings we call a government would really suck even more than it does now. If we can envision a way to somehow finally move out of capitalism and leave capitalism's main organizer, the government, behind with it, that would be a little more balanced.
But this perspective isn't coming out of left field altogether - there's in a reason that Voluntaryist type thinking is more attractive than ever on the American Right and capital-A Anarchism is way more popular than a year ago, mostly thanks to the Occupy Wall Street project that blew up way beyond anyone's expectations.
While there's an escapist quality to libertarianism and anarchism, everyone wants to escape for a reason. There's a tangible sense - backed up with countless examples - that these structures held over us through violence, coercion and endless ranks of nasty little helpers - are utterly indifferent if not outright hostile to our chances of survival, let alone defending our dwindling freedoms. Shocked anyone would feel that way? Without much effort, we can feel a prison state closing in around us, seemingly poisoning everything from our pores to our skies to our souls.
Embitterment with the corporatist two-party system and its agenda of perpetual resource wars under loathsome, almost occult, entities like the IMF and NATO, along with a collapse in the standard of living for tens if not hundreds of millions of Americans, has brought plenty of anger towards government institutions that seem to exist solely to protect corrupt corporate cartels at the expense of smaller players (see the Gibson guitar drama, or FDA's love affair with big pharma), along with running protection for a rapacious and insane financial industry which has defrauded the American people of countless trillions of dollars in assets & hard-won dollars.
But the people feeling most burned this week outside of Wisconsin might be the Truthers who believed in Ron Paul. No one's done more to tie the people who refused to buy the government narrative on the Sept 11 2011 terrorist attacks to the Ron Paul network than Texas radio host Alex Jones.
It's not Ron Paul's fault or Alex Jones' fault that the rest of DC is basically composed of feckless war chickenhawks who are totally hostile to resisting false flags, the war on drugs and other scams of the military-industrial-intelligence-congressional complex. We all know modern COINTELPRO keeps the political discussion locked in a certain box. But was Alex Jones "duped" by Ron Paul? Check this out...
Here's just a classic recent moment worth watching between Jones and the closest thing he has to a mainstream left counterpart, the bookish conspiracy wonk Webster Tarpley. In this video, Alex Jones' years-long campaign to advocate Ron Paul's election shop finally comes to a sputtering end as Tarpley points out a lot of deliciously salient yet in retrospect quite obvious political points from the campaign. For great lulz he says Paul & Romney represent the amiable merger of southern Scottish Rite Freemasonry (a la Secret Sun) and the crypto-Freemasonic beliefs of Mormonism.
Tarpley, who has a quasi-FDR style political outlook has done a lot of nice pieces and books [Synthetic Terror PDF] over the years, and as a former associate of Lyndon LaRouche (also FDR-like in a weird way) he never saw a Anglo-Dutch conspiracy he didn't like to flush out.
Tarpley points out that Ron Paul declined to really attack Romney at all in the GOP debates, generally firing on Romney's leading opponents and also deflecting their anger. With Romney's cousin Huntsman as the opposite left/centrist flank, the good doctor was able to absorb basically all the anti-establishment votes against Romney. When Jones is holding the mic, you can just hear Tarpley saying that Paul ran interference for Romney and Jones ran interference for Paul. OUCH.
Obviously I felt it was beneficial to the country to have Paul challenging the warmongers and exposing their bloodthirsty insanity, the disturbingly unvarnished Id in some of those crowds, and it would have been better to have a Paul vs Obama campaign to force the war & big brother state issues to the fore. But this was never really in the cards, even if Paul would have been a better general election candidate for the GOP than Romney (which he probably would have been).
This, after all, is American electoral politics. Frank Zappa characterized it as the entertainment wing of the military-industrial complex and of course he was right. The intelligence structures are never going to let anyone advance into office who would undo the National Security Act of 1947 and the cultish secret state it initiated to be undone.
They are perfectly happy to keep everything managed under two-party dialectics with tons of corporate money swaying all the big issues. Since we don't have a parliamentary system anywhere in this country, with party lists that would permit minority viewpoints a legislative voice, every interesting electoral project, from Howard Dean or Ralph Nader to Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, become exercises in futility, white knights to rally the less-brainwashed masses & follow off to electoral oblivion with great fanfare. And if things get too close, a few Nixonian dirty tricks and buffer overflows in the voting machines can clean it up in no time.
In the GOP process this year, the anti-Paul people made sure to lock out & dirty-trick as many Paulistas as they could, leading to memorably weird chaos at normally-staid GOP conventions across America. The Romney 'network' is about an inch deep (apart from Bain operatives making trouble China & stuff), while seemingly endless weird networks of lolcats affiliated with the Ron Paul campaign.
In the 2008 cycle, it was insightfully put that the Paul campaign was very deliberately a narrative void or a cipher, so that the Truther groups could happily write themselves into the narrative and identify with it, along with IT nerds, the post-Perot types, and at the darker end, much more creepy prejudiced nativist types & etc. (and this varied heavily state-to-state, with Michigan less creepy than Arizona, etc.).
Unfortunately, because the Truther movement just didn't have a good broad nature in the political spectrum (well it does, but it doesn't operate that way), working with the anti-militarist Paul campaign to recruit and hang onto all those rebelliously-minded people effectively diverted them from possibly amplifying other efforts. He'd talk about false flags and ideals of liberty, but did Paul ever make it clear people needed to get out of their political comfort zone to take on adversaries we all share?
The ideological buy-in needed to become a true believer in electoral politics made rivals of people that could have and should have been allies -- in their own best interests. For example, it drove a wedge between Ron Paul fans who became Rand Paul fans, who liked his deregulatory push on coal mines, against the mountaintop removal activists. That wedge is perhaps the tragedy -- could it be undone?
What if everyone had instead agitated -- in a non-partisan style -- at their state legislatures against the corrupt operations of the federal government, the false flags, the constant stings and setups targeting both left and right, not to mention Muslims? What if they'd done direct actions together in the field against minions of the police state? There was a real biffed opportunity to build a good, multi-level resistance network outside of the traps and pitfalls of electoral politics.
Hopefully the remainders of the 2012 Paul network can pick themselves up and pivot more to more broad social issues, as well as the Big Brother system which is rapidly expanding -- if they can get a handle on how the Federal Reserve, while a keystone, is in many ways just the trade association or front-plate for the politically engaged big banks (with an infinite money printer).
The Big Brother system isn't exclusively government-based either, despite what Lew Rockwell and Mike Adams believe. It's really getting implemented by less than 25 military-industrial contractors with about 300 below that, and another several hundred below them. I can only expect these people to redouble their scrutiny and fierce public resistance, sending many would-be technocratic control freaks running for cover. The gains they made in the formal GOP system will add more wrinkles to what looked like an easy rollout for the prison state.
So now, between Wisconsin and the Truthers and the Ron Paul cats, here we sit, at the long dark teatime of the soul, as Douglas Adams put it. All our shared problems mount and continue to deteriorate -- the usual foibles of humanity, greed, idolatry, the search for white knights to preserve that which never existed in the first place, the hunt for strange new threats from within and without -- all of these are still with us. Ancient Greek historians would chuckle that twenty-some centuries later, we fall for the same damn tricks every time.
Perhaps as they say there is nothing new in the universe, but I've seen a lot of synchronicity. I've seen a lot more pieces fall into place and weirdly line up than I think my traditional atheist mundane-universe perspective could explain. After all, today's militant Dawkins type atheists can't explain too well why evil -- and its handmaiden, war -- impose such a powerful force of their own. Nor can they explain what summons people to such resistance, or on occasion such luck and grace.
Even when dealt those staggering blows -- even when your political projects seemingly turn to dust overnight yet again -- besides the fond memories of fighting the good fight with your comrades, you made new friends, you built new skills, you showed the novices a thing or two. You didn't live on your knees, you threatened the despicable & illegitimate flows of authority. From time to time, you really wigged them out. And yes, you won a victory, two, or three, and inspired a few more.
The challenge, of course, is for all these people to reach outside their comfort zone, to abandon the elections-first perspective and turn to the more difficult project of politics in real time, not the deferred imaginary future image produced by the operatives of election industry, the illusionary catharsis they pitch as tomorrow's ballot box.
After many years of struggling to get her story across to the American public, 9/11 & FBI/national security whistleblower Sibel Edmonds has released " Classified Woman"".
For many years we have tried to track aspects of Sibel's case on this site (older hub page & category) including the role of foreign agents of influence and friends of corrupt foreign powers (frequently neocons) using their government jobs to sell America down the river.
The federal government did everything possible to conceal many aspects of 9/11 including prior intelligence reports, certain corporate fronts (like Giza Technologies which had been used to proliferate nuclear technology) and long-running intel programs like those which built up Islamic fundamentalist militias around Asia and Europe, NATO operations in many cases, an aspect finally revealed in more detail in Sibel's book (which unfortunately I haven't been able to snag yet!).
Part of the problem with privatizing intelligence operations was formalized by Executive Order 12333 from Dec 1981:
2.7 Contracting. Agencies within the Intelligence Community are authorized to enter into contracts or arrangements for the provision of goods or services with private companies or institutions in the United States and need not reveal the sponsorship of such contracts or arrangements for authorized intelligence purposes. Contracts or arrangements with academic institutions may be undertaken only with the consent of appropriate officials of the institution.
.... so thus, as pointed out in the documentary about the Edmonds case, Kill the Messenger (full video), Giza's work to proliferate nuclear technology, if carried out under rules like 2.7 of EO 12333, would have to be covered up by the DOJ even after they went after the Israeli interlocutor for the nuclear goodies (roughly, a limited hangout).
There is a lot more to be added on the case, in particular now how whistleblowers get ever more ruthless treatment under the Obama Administration.
As with former CIA asset Susan Lindauer, who also had 'loose ends' of 9/11 the establishment didn't want to hear about, (special posts one and two), the nastiest tools in the national security toolkit are directed not at nefarious terrorists and evildoers, nor networks of foreign agents-of-influence in the halls of government, but whistleblowers and anyone else 'ruffling feathers' out there.
Bonus factoid - with the NATO Summit from Hell around the corner in Chicago, the powers that be hid Meleck Can Dickerson and Douglas Dickerson in the NATO bureaucracy-octopus in Brussels.
The neocons hid in various places and have re-coalesced in the Romney campaign. Oh, we will have the likes of Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, Eric Edelman and Marc Grossman to kick around again, should we be visited with the misfortune of a Romney presidency.
See also 2009: The new Boiling Frogs Post/Sibel Edmonds site; John Cole on the whole 9/11, Marc Grossman espionage complex etc.
Ah so it's been a decade eh comrades? The skrewing over of emergency personnel has gone almost unnoticed. FDNY member on 9/11 Truth “I support you guys” | We Are Change -- some new stuff has been trickling out -- pretty solid stuff, at that. The glorious official narrative got its booster shot, but noticeably absent from the necro-political media spectacle were all those sickly and/or dead 9-11 first responders. Over time we find more elements that are obviously pretty credible against the official narrative, but it's still difficult to get a larger picture. Let's nosh on some new goodies -- what better time than now?
Ali Soufan describes the situation behind the scenes with the FBI and 9-11 foreknowledge as well as the torture nightmare going on.... obviously Soufan was able to get better intel from captured militants by persuasion than cruel & unusual coercion, but what else is new?
CIA Threats of Federal Prosecution Delay 9/11 Documentary | 911 Truth News - this newly unearthed Rich Blee figure is one of the latest twists on the 9-11 CIA front. This is the project which the Richard Clarke speculation about hoping to flip al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar to the CIA was the reason their identities were buried... however that also doesn't track entirely because they were already in touch with another government operative or 2 (an FBI informant and a likely Saudi government operative)
I'm posting the whole bit as it's one of the more substantial elements in the scheme to surface lately.
On Thursday, the CIA threatened the journalists behind Who Is Rich Blee? with possible federal prosecution if their investigative podcast reveals the names of two CIA analysts at the center of a pattern of obstruction and mishandling of intelligence that many feel would have stopped the 9/11 attacks.
Like FBI agent Ali Soufan and Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer before them, the podcast team, including John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski, are being subjected to intimidation and censorship by government officials over blowing the whistle on the true story surrounding two alleged 9/11 hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar.
The podcast originally scheduled for September 11th release presents a narrative of how three CIA analysts working under Richard Blee, the long unknown former head of CIA’s Bin Laden Station, deliberately misled their colleagues and withheld key intelligence from FBI and the White House regarding the presence of two known Al-Qaeda operatives in the U.S.
Four government investigations into CIA handling of pre-911 intelligence included personal details of the two CIA analysts and their actions. Nowosielski and Duffy deduced the identities of the two as yet unnamed CIA employees from internet research based on details provided from these and other open sources. When the producers used their full names in interviews, interviewees offered no correction. The CIA response provided the final confirmation.
In project updates posted at SecrecyKills.com the producers announced the delay of the podcast and posted background of a complicated case that involves dozens of violations of protocol, intimidation, and incidents of obstruction by the CIA, with the two yet named CIA analysts at the center of many of them.
Author and expert on the subject, Kevin Fenton, documents 35 such incidents between January 2000 and September 11th in his book, Disconnecting the Dots: How 9/11 Was Allowed to Happen.
Pulitzer-prize winner Lawrence Wright, interviewed for the podcast, told producers the actions of one of the unnamed CIA analysts still employed at CIA amounts to obstruction of justice in the FBI’s criminal investigation of the deaths of 17 seaman aboard the USS Cole.
The producers are not the first subject to government censorship over this case. Last month The New York Times reported on CIA efforts to censor an autobiography by Ali Soufan, a front-line FBI counter-terrorism special agent. Prior to 9/11, Soufan was interested in Mihdhar and Hazmi because of links to the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen. The CIA censored references to a passport photo of Mihdhar the CIA had withheld from Soufan, despite three written requests.
Scott Shane of the New York Times reports today that, “Mr. Soufan accuses C.I.A. officials of deliberately withholding crucial documents and photographs of Qaeda operatives from the F.B.I. before Sept. 11, 2001, despite three written requests, and then later lying about it to the 9/11 Commission.”
Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer, interviewed for the podcast, was himself intimidated, demoted and smeared by the Pentagon after he came forward to the 9/11 Commission with details of how, on three occasions, unnamed DoD officials prevented his Able Danger operation from meeting with the FBI prior the attacks.
In 2000 the Able Danger data-mining program placed Mohammed Atta in a Brooklyn terrorist cell but had also placed Hazmi and Mihdhar in a San Diego cell, the epicenter of intrigue around Alec Station’s Rich Blee, Tom Wilshere and the two as yet unnamed subordinates who themselves repeatedly withheld intelligence from the FBI. Though Shaffer was interviewed by 9/11 Commission’s Director Philip Zelikow and staffer Dieter Snell, the Commission left any mention of Able Danger from its final report.
In the planned podcast, 9/11 Commission Chair Tom Kean is asked about a scant footnote to Chapter 6 of the 9/11 Report referring to an intelligence cable, seen by 50 at the CIA, but prevented from reaching the FBI. For Kean the incident was not a case of bungling or intel ‘stovepiping’: “Oh, it wasn’t careless oversight. It was purposeful. No question about that in mind. It was purposeful.”
Whereas Kean explains it as a penchant for secrecy, Richard Clarke, the former head of counter-terrorism at the Bush White House, goes farther suggesting malfeasance and the possibility of illegal CIA-led domestic spying activity. Comments by Clarke released in a video in August led to a formal statement from George Tenet, Cofer Black and Richard Blee, and a response from the producers.
“This was perhaps the closest U.S. intelligence got to foiling the 9/11 plot,” explains Nowosielski, “but instead of stopping the attack, the CIA stopped intel on two high-value targets from getting to the right people, repeatedly. And still the CIA protects the individuals responsible by intimidating those who simply want to know the truth behind a shocking and possibly criminal pattern of obstruction”
In an email Thursday the CIA warned Nowosielski he could be subject to prosecution under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, a law intended to apply to government employees who violate their security clearance and never used to convict journalists.
The producer’s online response: “The Society of Professional Journalists’ code of ethics states that ‘journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know’ and should ‘be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.’ The day that journalists’ exposés of wrongdoing within government agencies require the approval of those government agencies before release, that is the day that transparency and accountability are lost.”
John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski, both graduates of Chicago’s Columbia College Film School, produced the critically acclaimed 2006 documentary “9/11: Press for Truth.”
This is Part 3 of our three-part one-of-a-kind interview series with author and researcher Paul Thompson. For additional background information please visit the complete 9/11 Timeline Investigative Project at HistoryCommons.Org.
Paul Thompson joins us to discuss one of the most blacked-out and censored aspects of Al-Qaeda-CIA connections: The partnership and alliance between the CIA and Al Qaeda and their joint operations in Central Asia, Balkans and Caucasus throughout the 1990’s. Mr. Thompson talks about Al-Qaeda’s Balkans operations, running training camps, money-laundering, and drug running networks in the region, Ayman Al-Zawahiri and his residence in Bulgaria in order to help manage the Al Qaeda effort in nearby Bosnia, the Al Qaeda cells in Chechnya and Azerbaijan, BCCI and more!
Frankly I think at this point it should be noted that George Tenet is just one of many intelligence establishment figures who are members of the Knights of Malta - a key authoritarian little nest of establishment weasels, probably more relevant to geopolitical happenings than, say, the Freemasons :)
This is the truth: The WTC was destroyed by 3 underground thermo-nuclear explosions. They were detonated by the US government who used this as an excuse to lead the US and its allies into invading Afghanistan and Iraq. All these wars and deaths were based on a lie.
Goebbels: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
And when a lot of our young aspiring counter intel people learn that our political system protects Israeli espionage here, they leave government service in disgust, as have many of our best FBI people. It’s a national disgrace. They sold your country out from under you folks. And to get it back, they will need to be hunted down and removed…all of them who have worked with the Israelis. The numbers are huge and the names involved are big. So its not going to be pretty. And if you haven’t figured it out already, they have tons of money, their own private intelligence resources, and they are not going out quietly. They have bet you will be the losers…and to date they have been correct.
“The Israeli government is actively engaged in military and industrial espionage in the United States.” That was the conclusion of a Pentagon administrative judge in 2006. One very good reason why Israel should not receive billions of dollars in military assistance annually is its espionage against the United States. Israel, a Socialist country where government and business work hand in hand, has obtained significant advantage by systematically stealing American technology with both military and civilian applications. US-developed technology is then reverse engineered and used by the Israelis to support their own exports with considerably reduced research and development costs, giving them a huge advantage against foreign competitors. Sometimes, when the technology is military in nature and winds up in the hands of a US adversary, the consequences can be serious. Israel has sold advanced weapons systems to China that incorporated technology developed by American companies—including the Python-3 air-to-air missile and the Delilah cruise missile. There is evidence that Tel Aviv has also stolen Patriot missile avionics to incorporate into its own Arrow system and that it used US technology obtained in its Lavi fighter development program—which was funded by the US taxpayer to the tune of $1.5 billion—to help the Bejing government develop their own J-10 fighter.
The reality of Israeli spying is indisputable. Israel always features prominently in the annual FBI report called “Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage.” The 2005 report, for example, states:
“Israel has an active program to gather proprietary information within the United States. These collection activities are primarily directed at obtaining information on military systems and advanced computing applications that can be used in Israel’s sizable armaments industry.”
I don't really agree with the content at either of these, however there is an uptick in sketchiness & weird tea leaves for Chicago, so I hope that nothing bad befalls the good residents of the Windy City.
April 14-15, 2011 -- UPDATE 1X. Sudden flurry of maritime lien activity in Chicago Maritime liens are filed on vessels for various reasons, including insuring cargo or for non-payment of stevedoring and other port fees. It is all fairly standard fare except for when a dozen or so Chicago and Illinois politicians and other officials file $100 million in maritime liens against the U.S. Department of Treasury.
WMR has discovered that although less than 100 maritime liens had been filed in Cook County since 1985, since March 28 of this year, 11 maritime liens have been filed in Cook County against the U.S. Treasury Department.
Such a development could be easily explained away, except when examining the names of the maritime lien filers in the order that they were filed. It is not known who some of the individuals are who filed the liens since March 28, but they are also listed:
W. Smith (unknown affiliation)Lisa Madigan (Attorney General of Illinois)C. Wallace (unknown affiliation)Richard Michael Daley (outgoing Mayor of Chicago)Chicago Police DepartmentThomas G. Byrne (Commissioner of the Chicago Streets & Sanitation Department; ex-Chicago Police Department)Catherine Hennessy (affiliation unknown, possibly Chicago Police Department)Pat Quinn (Governor of Illinois)Milton R. Sees (former Illinois Department of Transportation Secretary)Jesse White (Secretary of State of Illinois)Ernie Dannenberger (Director of Vehicle Service Department of the Illinois Secretary of State's office)
Filing maritime liens against the US Treasury Department might indicate the future movement of U.S. Navy and/or Coast Guard vessels into Chicago's ports. However, the question looms: As Rahm Emanuel prepares to take over as mayor of Chicago, why was there a sudden flurry of maritime liens filed by top city and state officials a few weeks after Emanuel captured the mayor's seat in the election? With 9/11 rogue Larry Silverstein owning the former Sears, now Willis, Tower; Sam Zell running the Chicago Tribune; Emanuel soon sitting in the mayor's office; and Chicago-based President Obama kicking off his re-election campaign, the seemingly innocent filing of liens may indicate that something else is afoot.
UPDATE 1: Although maritime liens represent a relatively specialized area of the law, the American Bar Association Journal from October 1957 stated in an article that a recognized maritime tax lien has priority over a federal tax lien. Maritime liens can also cover non-vessel property, including buildings.
Unfortunately Chicago is now slated for the G8/NATO summit in 2012, which will likely be another beta test for martial law in America hosted by FEMA, the Secret Service, and of course NORTHCOM (which will apply their shady contingency plans, USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3501 / 3502 like they did at the 2008RNC & 2009 G20.) With Larry "pull it" Silverstein & Rahm Emanuel in the mix, things look chancy!
It's too bad, I have followed a bit of Charlie's views in recent months. We can hope that prominent individuals speaking out against various establishment agendas like Veitch and Alex Jones aren't controlled opposition, or provocateurs placed to send us awry. Unfortunately I have bumped into far too many FBI operatives in recent years to have a non-jaded opinion about anyone.... sail on with your unique blend of ornery British weird politics Charlie, and don't let the documentation against the official story faze you, I guess.
It reminds me a bit of Michael Ruppert, who got kind of fed up with diverging & assorted weird 9/11 stories, even though Crossing the Rubicon still stands as an exceptionally strong & critical work against the official narrative. I find it a bit funny when people set out on Conspiracy Patrol, deeming the hairiest theories (namely, mini nukes, holograms, and the ever popular Space Lazors) Out of Bounds, saying we must keep our 9/11 Truth inquiries into certain avenues. If there is a vast 9/11 coverup still rolling along, surely its establishment controllers must chuckle over the spats and in-fighting that all detract from "decolonizing" our minds entirely :)
There are many other concerns out there today besides an absurdly shady and complicated terrorist attack in New York a decade ago. However it is one of those barometers that you have to place people by... Perhaps South Park was right & the 9/11 conspiracy was itself a government conspiracy :) Used to funnel our concerns into divided dead ends & so forth.
"Is this real world or exercise??" --A memorable quote from air traffic controller on 9-11
Logistically speaking, how the hell did the West start bombing Libya so quickly? A French/NATO military exercise (aka wargame) called Southern Mistral was scheduled for almost the exact same time. Are wargames or exercises a way to create the future using logistics? To manipulate the available courses of action to policymakers?
Let's step back for a sec to consider the shady alternative history of wargames in the last decade.
Pre-Scripting, Wargames and Science Fiction Too! A Quality Tangent...
In June 2001 a NORAD field training exercise called Amalgam Virgo was designed to test US operations against aircraft terrorism, and of course most 9-11 skeptics know that an array of wargames including Vigilant Guardian and FEMA's Tripod II were going on around 9-11. Michael Ruppert knocked this one out of the park originally.
Paraphrasing the classic explanation on oilempire.us, The wargames caused many fighter jets to be in Canada instead of in normal locations on the east coast, where they should have been able to intercept the hijacked planes. Also the wargames work by 'injecting' radar blips for pretend aircraft, so the wargames could have caused so many fake blips that the "good military" couldn't find the real planes.
Additionally new lols have surfaced regarding Canadian & UK role in 9-11, as portrayed in the recent video "Is it Live or is it Livery?" by the AbelDanger.net guys. (Their material is quite interesting but they can't write an introductory paragraph for jack :-P ) They even added more material about Blips on Thursday! AbelDanger points out the overlooked shady Livery Guilds of the City of London have been an organized factor for British power & banking for many centuries. I'd love to make a fictionalized account of their role in things.... anyway back to wargames!
One of the weirder notions in the world of alternative news and conspiracyLols is the idea of 'pre-scripting', wherein notions and events are introduced as fiction into popular culture. Wargames like Amalgam Virgo, and TV shows & movies produced with government support (ie Michael Bay films etc) can all fit in to this pre-scripting idea all too easily. Sadly, the fantasy TV series '24' worked as pre-scripting on all kinds of government officials, indoctrinating them into the false principles of torture.
Arguably this is what guys near the Fabian Socialist utopian scene such as Aldous Huxley, Orson Welles, and before him HG Wells, were really all about. Science fiction was a way to create a vision of the future through seemingly benign public entertainment, to essentially prepare the minds of the public for the once unthinkable.
Aldous' brother Julian Huxley was a classic scheming globalist - in his piece "UNESCO: its purpose and its philosophy" (1947) he apparently wrote (and I'd love to find the full text of this beaster):
“Thus even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.” (Huxley, UNESCO)
The wargames and constant exercises are an indicator of the restless nature of the military complex, and they reflect its goals and aspirations. Just ask anyone living near American exercises by Russia or China how the operations make them feel.
In March 2011, a massive French wargame called Southern Mistral was all set to launch, but they had to go off and bomb Libya at almost the exact same time instead. US Rep. Dennis Kucinich rightly announced how sketchy he thinks this is. (However no one cares about Kucinich, Libya or the debt ceiling because someone in Congress was Sexting! Sexting I tells ya!)
I am reposting the 2 main articles from GlobalResearch.ca because it's damn important to understanding what's going on. Thanks to the indefatiguable Prof. Chossudovsky for laying this one out.
SOUTHLAND :Dictatorship responsible for an attack against France's national interests.
FRANCE :Makes the decision to showits determination to SOUTHLAND (under United Nations Security council resolution n°3003).
UNITED-KINGDOM :Allied country as determined in the bilateral agreement. The United Kingdom supports France through the deployment of its air assets.
NAVARRE :Allied country giving clearance to French and British aircraft to overfly its territory.
OK so basically France is testing bombing the shit out of some country to the South based on a UNSC resolution. I am Jack's lack of surprise. I'll trim out the 'scenario' part of his article as it's the same as above ^
Military operations of this size and magnitude are never improvised. The war on Libya as well as the armed insurrection were planned months prior to the Arab protest movement...
Libya, 19 March 2011. "No Fly Zone" under UN Security Council Resolution 1973: A "Humanitarian War" is Launched.
We were led to believe that the protest movement in Egypt and Tunisia had spread to Libya.
The insurrection in Libya was presented as a spontaneous response to a wave of pro-democracy activism which had swept the Arab World.
In turn, we were led to believe that "the international community" decided in response to these unfolding events, to "protect the lives of civilians" and refer the matter to the United Nations Security Council.
The media then reported that it was only once the UN Security Council had adopted Resolution 1973, that the US and NATO member countries took the decision to intervene militarily in Libya under the "No Fly Zone"...
THE WAR ON LIBYA WAS KNOWN AND DECIDED WELL IN ADVANCE.
MILITARY PLANNING WAS IN "AN ADVANCED STAGE OF READINESS".
UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1973 PERTAINING TO LIBYA WAS ALREADY ON THE DRAWING BOARD, MONTHS PRIOR TO THE ONSET OF THE "PRO-DEMOCRACY" INSURRECTION IN EASTERN LIBYA. ...
Read carefully[" " indicate quotation from "The Southern Mistral 2011" War Games,Scenario)]
On November 02 2010, more than four months prior to the onset of Operation Odyssey Dawn, France and the UK announced the conduct of war games under Operation "SOUTHERN MISTRAL 2011" against "AN IMAGINARY COUNTRY' called "SOUTHLAND", living under a "DICTATORSHIP" which allegedly "was responsible for an attack against France's national interests".
The Franco-British (humanitarian) air operation against "SOUTHLAND" was to be carried out pursuant to an IMAGINARY "UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO: 3003".
The war games were scheduled to start on March 21, 2011. THESE FRANCO-BRITISH WAR GAMES NEVER TOOK PLACE. OPERATION "SOUTHERN MISTRAL" WENT LIVE ON MARCH 19, 2011 (two days prior to the scheduled date).
Below is the exact quote and colors from the Franco-British war games website which is hosted by France's Air Force:
"SOUTHLAND : Dictatorship responsible for an attack against France's national interests.
FRANCE : Makes the decision to show its determination to SOUTHLAND (under United Nations Security council resolution n°3003).
UNITED-KINGDOM : Allied country as determined in the bilateral agreement. The United Kingdom supports France through the deployment of its air assets." (Commandement de la défense aérienne et des opérations aériennes, Southern Mistral 2011: Scenario)
The war games were scheduled to take place from the 21st to the 25 March 2011.
"Six Royal Air Force Tornado GR4s, one tanker Vickers VC-10 and one Boeing E3D will be deployed together with French Air force Mirage 2000Ds, 2000Ns and 2000Cs operating with a fleet of around thirty aircraft including helicopters, Boeing tankers and Awacs radar aircraft.
Air Raid Southern Storm will be commanded and controlled by the National Air Operations Centre (CNOA) of Lyon Mont-Verdun air base (BA 942).
An Air Operations Cell deployed at Nancy air base (BA 133) will follow in real time all the air missions and reproduce the air raids.
Simultaneously, Paratrooper Commando Air 20 (CPA20) will receive its British counterpart in Dijon: the RAF Regiment. Together they will train for air base protection missions on operational theatres in compliance with what is achieved today in Afghanistan.
Furthermore, RAF Regiment members will train in Captieux to helicopters’ air policing measures. These specific procedures are implemented on a daily basis by the Quick reaction Alert FAF air defence helicopters to intervene against “slow movers”."
"An adapted scenario was developed for the exercise.
Based on Western geography, France mostly, an imaginary country was created: SOUTHLAND. An artificial border was drawn inside France to simulate this country."
HESE FRANCO-BRITISH WAR GAMES NEVER TOOK PLACE. OPERATION "SOUTHERN MISTRAL" WENT LIVE ON MARCH 19, 2011 AGAINST "SOUTHLAND".
"Security Council Resolution 3003" = "Security Council Resolution 1973".
"DICTATORSHIP" = "Qadhaffi Regime"
Under the war games scenario Security Council Resolution 3003 was proposed by France, whereas "the real life" UN Security Council Resolution 1973 was proposed by France, the UK and Lebanon.
The only difference of substance is that "SOUTHLAND" (aka Libya), the so-called imaginary Southern country for the war games was inserted inside the territory of Southern France (See Map above THE UK IS GREEN, FRANCE IS BLUE, SOUTHLAND IS RED AND NAVARRE IS ORANGE). (Navarre 'Navarra" designates a region of Northern Spain).
The imaginary location of this imaginary Southern country called "SOUTHLAND" was not really an issue, because the war games were postponed...
The French Air Force announced (in English) the "Suspension of exercise Southern Mistral 2011 [against SOUTHLAND]... Due to the current international events [BOMBING OF LIBYA], exercise Southern Mistral has been suspended." Suspension of exercise Southern Mistral 2011. The French version uses the term Mise en veille which means "put on standby" (Mise en veille de l’exercice Southern Mistral 2011). THE OPERATION WAS NOT "PUT ON STANDBY": THE BRITISH AND FRENCH WAR PLANES WHICH WERE TO BE DEPLOYED AS PART OF OPERATION "SOUTHERN MISTRAL" INCLUDING FRANCE'S MIRAGE 2000 AND BRITAIN'S TORNADO GR4A WERE SENT TO BOMB LIBYA.
France's Mirage 2000 used in Operation Odyssey Dawn against Libya,
slated to be used in the Southern Mistral war games agains "Southland".
Royal Air Force Tornado GR4A slated to be deployed in
the Southern Mistral war games against "Southland".
What can be said regarding these war games, the attacks on Libya and United Nations Security council resolutions 3003 and 1973?....
We invite our readers to think and reflect on the logic of military planning.
Military operations of this size and magnitude are never improvised. The war on Libya as well as the armed insurrection were planned months prior to the Arab protest movement.
On November 2, 2010 France and Great Britain signed a mutual defence treaty, which included joint participation in "Southern Mistral" (www.southern-mistral.cdaoa.fr), a series of war games outlined in the bilateral agreement. Southern Mistral involved a long-range conventional air attack, called Southern Storm, against a dictatorship in a fictitious southern country called Southland. The joint military air strike was authorised by a pretend United Nations Security Council Resolution. The "Composite Air Operations" were planned for the period of 21-25 March, 2011. On 20 March, 2011, the United States joined France and Great Britain in an air attack against Gaddafi's Libya, pursuant to UN Security Council resolution 1973.
Have the scheduled war games simply been postponed, or are they actually under way after months of planning, under the name of Operation Odyssey Dawn? Were opposition forces in Libya informed by the US, the UK or France about the existence of Southern Mistral/Southern Storm, which may have encouraged them to violence leading to greater repression and a humanitarian crisis? In short was this war against Gaddafi's Libya planned or a spontaneous response to the great suffering which Gaddafi was visiting upon his opposition?
Members of the United States Congress are wondering how much planning time it took for our own government, in concert with the UK and France, to line up 10 votes in the Security Council and gain the support of the Arab League and Nato, and then launch an attack on Libya without observing the constitutional requirement of congressional authorisation.
Libya was attacked, we have been told, because Gaddafi allegedly had killed 6,000 of his own people. But is this true? It should be remembered that in 2006, a full 18 years after the Lockerbie bombing, the US lifted sanctions against Libya, which was welcomed back into the international fold.
Now, as Gaddafi faces armed internal opposition backed by a UN Security Council resolution and faces powerful external opposition backed by the military of the US, the UK and France, he is told he must give up power. But to whom? What is the end game?
The US has been dancing around the regime change issue, (since that is not sanctioned by the UNSC Resolution) but as in most cases one has to watch where the bombs are falling to determine whether or not regime change is the policy.
The newest argument for regime change is that if he is not ousted Gaddafi can be expected to attempt Lockerbie-type retaliation against the west in response to the attacks seeking to oust him.
This bloody enterprise is beginning to sound a lot like Iraq: "Saddam was killing his own people, will kill his people, or will kill us if we don"t get him first."
So did the Bush Administration pump up the fears of the American people that we were next, that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and had the intention and capability of attacking the United States.
The Iraq war begins its ninth year at a long term cost to US taxpayers of in excess of $3 trillion.The intelligence making the case for the war was "sexed up". President Bush and Vice President Cheney made a false case for war. An expensive lie. In the name of saving the people of Iraq, we bombed the country, invaded, changed the regime and it is still a carnival of death. In the end it was China, not involved in the war, which received a multi-billion oil deal.
The war in Afghanistan, with no end in sight, has already run a decade and will inevitably cost trillions.
The war against Libya will cost the US $1 billion for the first week.
But we in America are being assured that since Nato is taking over, our role will change. In addition to funding the Libyan war from our own Pentagon resources, the US provides 25% of the funding of Nato, the UK 9.1%, France 8.72%. For all intents and purposes the coalition is handing control of the war over – to itself.
As the funding switches to Nato, we in the US will get the Libyan war at a 75% discount, and our allies in the UK and France will have to pay considerable sums from their own treasuries for a war which is sure to cost billions. Of the 28 members of Nato, I think of Iceland which provides 0.0450 of Nato's military budget. If member nations are assessed accordingly, poor Iceland, whose economy has imploded, will pay $45m for each billion spent on the war in Libya.
Expensive membership dues.
This sleight-of-hand-over to NATO is an attempt to quell popular dissent to the war by making it appear that no one nation is taking up the burden of saving Libya. But it will beg more questions such as who or what is the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and how did they work their way from the North Atlantic to the Gulf of Sidra, not to mention in Afghanistan on the Chinese border?
This war is wrong on so many fronts. The initial stated purpose, protecting Libyan civilians, will soon evaporate as it becomes clear that the war has accelerated casualties and enlarged a humanitarian crisis. Debates over the morality of intervention will give way to a desperate search for answers as to how and when do we get out, and how and why did we get in.
Dennis Kucinich is a Democrat congressman and former presidential candidate
Sweet: CIA Whistleblower & 9/11 covert ops witness sends an important essay for HongPong.com!
National Security Whistleblowers are a tough bunch. Susan Lindauer worked as a CIA asset for many years before 9-11, including issues related to Libya & the Lockerbie bombing, as well as a major backchannel contact to Saddam Hussein's government. Lindauer was one of very few Americans charged under the PATRIOT Act, accused of acting as an agent of influence for Iraq after she tried to blow the whistle on Capitol Hill.
Lindauer fought tenaciously to clear her name and assert in the US court system that she was in fact in the service of the CIA, working the Iraq embassy back into the 1990s, even as coverup specialist handlers like the corrupt Michael Mukasey tried to make sure she fell down the memory hole.
Lindauer has been touring the alternative media in the last couple months but she's pretty thoroughly blacked out of mainstream coverage. She noticed that I have posted links about her story to HongPong.com and asked me to publish the following essay. No problem and thanks for asking! :-D
She's hoping that alternative media can raise more awareness of the way the PATRIOT Act works in conjunction with secret grand juries to crush decent people inside the system, not save Amurrca From Turrurists. Additional info about the scuttled peace deal with Saddam and 9/11 CIA foreknowledge and Mossad "complicity" disclosed by her CIA handler Dr. Fuisz in particular tie right into other alternative narratives for 9/11 already out there. (My general conclusion is that several foreign/military-industrial intelligence networks were involved & this has been covered up thoroughly)
Anyhow enough preamble - let's read a first-person account of this Patriot Act crackdown against an operative who know too much and wouldn't stay on script.
The Patriot Act: When Truth Becomes Treason
By Susan Lindauer, former Asset covering Iraq & Libya and the second non-Arab American indicted on the Patriot Act
Many Americans think they understand the dangers of the Patriot Act, which Congress has vowed to extend 4 more years in a vote later this week. Trust me when I say, Americans are not nearly frightened enough.Unfortunately, Bradley Manning is also subject to some of these rules, so it's important for his supporters to understand what's ahead.
Ever wonder why the truth about 9/11 never got exposed? Why Americans don't have a clue about leadership fraud surrounding the War on Terror? Why Americans don't know if the 9/11 investigation was really successful? Why the Iraqi Peace Option draws a blank? Somebody has known the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden--- or his grave—for the past 10 years. But nobody's talking to the people.
In significant part, that's because of the Patriot Act--- a law that equates free speech with sedition. It's got a big agenda, with 7,000 pages of Machiavellian code designed to interrupt individual questioning of government policy. In this brave new world, free speech under the Bill of Rights effectively has been declared a threat to government controls for maintaining stability. And the Patriot Act has become the premiere weapon to attack whistle blowers and dissidents who challenge the comfort of political leaders hiding inconvenient truths from the public. It's all the rage on Capitol Hill, as leaders strive to score TV ratings, while demogauging their "outstanding leadership performance" on everything from national security to environmental policy.
Truth has Become Treason
But wait---Congress assures us the Patriot Act only targets foreigners, who come to our shores seeking to destroy our way of life through violent, criminal acts. Good, law abiding Americans have nothing to fear. The Patriot Act restricts its powers of "roving wiretaps" and warrantless searches to international communications among "bad guys." Congress has sworn, with hand on heart, it's only purpose is breaking down terrorist cells and hunting out "lone wolf" mad men.
That's what they told you, right? And you believed them? You trust the government. Well, that was your first mistake. With regards to the Patriot Act, it's a fatal one. Would the government lie to you? You betcha! And they have.
The Patriot Act reaches far beyond terrorism prevention. In my home state of Maryland, State Police invoked the Patriot Act to run surveillance on the Chesapeake Climate Action Network dedicated to wind power, recycling and protection of the Chesapeake Bay. They infiltrated the DC Anti War Network, suggesting the group might be a front for "white supremacists," and Amnesty International, claiming to investigate "civil rights abuses." Opponents of the death penalty also got targeted (in case they got violent).
Bottom line: truth tellers who give Americans too much insight on any number of issues are vulnerable to a vast arsenal of judicial weapons typically associated with China or Mynamar. In the Patriot Act, the government has created a powerful tool to hunt out free thinking on the left or right. It doesn't discriminate. Anyone who opposes government policy is at risk
How do I know all this? Because I was the second non-Arab American ever indicted on the Patriot Act. My arrest defied all expectations about the law. I was no terrorist plotting to explode the Washington Monument. Quite the opposite, I had worked in anti-terrorism for almost a decade, covering Iraq and Libya, Yemen, Egypt and Malaysia at the United Nations. At the instruction of my CIA handler, I had delivered advance warnings about the 9/11 attack to the private staff of Attorney General John Ashcroft and the Office of Counter-Terrorism in August, 2001. FBI wire taps prove that I carried details of a comprehensive peace framework with Iraq up and down the hallowed corridors of Capitol Hill for months before the invasion, arguing that War was totally unnecessary.
I delivered those papers to Democrats and Republicans alike; to my own second cousin, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card; and to Secretary of State Colin Powell, who lived next door to my CIA handler. Gratis of the Patriot Act, we had the manila envelope and my hand written notes to Secretary Powell, dated a week before his infamous speech at the United Nations. My papers argued that no WMDs would be found inside Iraq, and that the peace framework could achieve all U.S. objectives without firing a shot.
In short, I was an Asset who loudly opposed War with Iraq, and made every effort to correct the mistakes in assumptions on Capitol Hill.
Then I did the unthinkable. I phoned the offices of Senator Trent Lott and Senator John McCain, requesting to testify before a brand new, blue ribbon Commission investigating Pre-War Intelligence. Proud and confident of my efforts, I had no idea Congress was planning to blame "bad intelligence" for the unpopular War.
Over night I became Public Enemy Number One on Capitol Hill.
Thirty days later I awoke to hear FBI agents pounding on my door. My nightmare on the Patriot Act lasted 5 years--- Four years after my arrest, the Court granted me one morning of evidentiary testimony by two supremely credible witnesses. Parke Godfrey verified my 9/11 warnings under oath. Otherwise, I never got my day in Court.
The Patriot Act's Arsenal to Stop Free Speech
If you care about America and the traditions of freedom, whether you're progressive or conservative, you should be angry about this law.
First come the warrantless searches and FBI tracking surveillance. My work in anti-terrorism gave me no protection. I got my first warrantless search after meeting an undercover FBI agent to discuss my support for free elections in Iraq and my opposition to torture and sexual humiliation of Iraqi detainees. (Sorry guys, body wires don't lie.)
If truth tellers don't get the message to shut their mouths, the Justice Department ratchets up the pressure. Defendants face secret charges, secret evidence and secret grand jury testimony. Throughout five years of indictment, my attorneys and I never got to read a single FBI interview or grand jury statement. Under the Patriot Act, the whistleblower/defendant has no right to know who has accused him or her of what criminal activities, or the dates of the alleged offenses, or what laws got broken.
Of course, I was able to piece together my activities. I knew that "sometime in October, 2001" an Iraqi diplomat gave me the English translation of a book on depleted uranium, which showed how cancer rates and birth defects had spiked in Iraqi children.
And I was quite certain that on October 14, 1999, an Iraqi diplomat asked me how to channel major financial contributions to the Presidential Campaign of George Bush and Dick Cheney. The Justice Department got the date from me, since I reported my conversation immediately to my Defense Intelligence handler, Paul Hoven.
It's unlikely the grand jury knew that, since the Justice Department has the prerogative to keep a grand jury in the dark. In this brave new world, a grand jury can be compelled to consider indictments carrying 10 years or more in prison, without the right to review evidence, or otherwise determine whether an individual's actions rise to the level of criminal activity at all.
That's just the beginning. Once Congress scores an indictment against a political opponent, the Justice Department can force Defense attorneys to undergo protracted security clearances, while the whistle blower cum defendant waits in prison--- usually in solitary confinement or the SHU. After the security clearance, prosecutors have an ironclad right to bar attorneys from communicating communications from the prosecution to the defendant, on threat of disbarment, stiff fines or prison sentence.
Scared yet? Once you get to trial, the situation gets much worse. The Patriot Act declares that a prosecutor has no obligation to show evidence of criminal activity to a jury at all. And the Defense can be denied the right to argue a rebuttal to those secret charges, because it requires speculation that might mislead the jury—or might expose issues that the government considers, well, secret. After all that a Judge can instruct a jury that the prosecution regards the secret evidence as sufficient to merit conviction on the secret charges. The Jury can be barred from considering the lack of evidence in weighing whether to convict.
Think I'm exaggerating? You would be wrong. That's what happened to me. All of it—with one major glitch. All of this presumes the whistle blower's lucky enough to get a trial. I was denied mine, though I fought vigorously for my rights. Instead, citing the Patriot Act, I got thrown in prison on a Texas military base without so much as a hearing—and threatened with indefinite detention and forcible drugging, to boot.
Americans are not nearly afraid enough.
Neither is Congress. As of this week, members of Congress should be very afraid. Anyone who votes to extend the Patriot Act should expect to pack their bags in 2012. They will be targeted for defeat. Above all, the words "freedom" and "Constitution" will never appear in their campaigns without suffering extreme public scorn—never, ever again.
Susan Lindauer is the author of Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq, which reveals details of her CIA team's 9/11 warnings and a comprehensive peace option with Iraq.
Seems like a good time to take a few steps back and look at the last few decades of shady nonsense. Time for a video anthology... Most of these videos are from thefilmarchive's Channel. Really nice!
CIA MK ULTRA documentary 1979 touches on the major bases: (Part 1 of same vid)
The Invisible Sword: Psychological Operations in the US Military: (1995)
Psychological Operations in Support of Internal Defense Programs (1968)
This old Soviet KGB mind control guru, Yuri Bezmenov, tells us a bit how they subvert ideology over decades, and laughs at how strategic Communist subversion has destroyed America!
This one's a gem, Sekrit film declassified CIA Corona Program - the beginning 1970s complete w. classification warning, spy satellites, horn rimmed clean room scientists at General Electric and funky music!
CIA Archives Counter-Intelligence Special Operations - Raids and Searches (1969)
Oliver North At Iran Contra Hearings Parts 1-4 (1987)
Laos and the not-so-secret war among Thailand, Vietnam etc (2 parts)
Warren Rudman tees up this coverup thang known as Iran Contra (3 parts)
SOUND WEAPONS FOR COLLEGE STUDENTS: Our nation is swinging evar more towards a police state, wherein counter-terrorism resources are dedicated to crushing drunken college students in Illinois. I saw goons from this structure at the G20. 4mins: "They're bringing the weapons they use in Afghanistan to the American people as we speak". Correct sir. More info on RTR.
Caught an interesting item on Sibel Edmonds' Boiling Frogs Post about a team of FBI agents who had key clues into the 9/11 conspiracy, serious and specific prior warnings from an Iranian informant and ex-SAVAK officer who was himself a major handler with a deep network of informants around the Pakistan/Afghan and other non-Persian areas of the region. This guy caught specific warnings from two separate deep sources that airplane-related attacks from the Bin Laden crew were on their way. The informant begs the FBI agents, and their Farsi translator Behrooz Sarshar, to put the matter to the highest urgency of counterterror officials. "302 form" records associated to the title "Kamikaze Pilot" were opened in the FBI recordkeeping system.
Sarshar tried to push this stuff to the 9/11 Commission and naturally it was all suppressed and buried till now. Sibel Edmonds also worked with FBI translation operations after 9/11 which led her into the rat's nest of foreign intelligence operatives, many of whom enjoyed "protection" from assorted espionage & terrorism-related crimes due to operations of the neoconservative influence network in key posts.
My overall conclusion on 9/11, supported by a fragmented but voluminous trail of evidence leading many directions, is that the attacks were staged and helped along by a malicious network of international intelligence operatives affiliated with foreign intelligence agencies, including Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel as well as various domestic "usual suspects." All of these people share a general interest in escalating international tensions, war profits and marketing the expansion of scenes of insanity around the world. The Turkish "Ergenekon" or "post-Gladio" rightwing intelligence network, with major neoconservative allies, had its piece of the action -- mainly illustrated by the Sibel Edmonds angle. The Saudis and Pakistan, as pro-western authoritarian governments, have a great deal of influence over the operations of "Salafist" militants across the Mideast and Central Asia, and the ISI's support for Mohammed Atta is well-known. For years there has been enough documentary evidence to support the notion that Israeli intelligence operatives with Mossad guidance were at a minimum shadowing the hijacker cells in Florida and New Jersey. DC journalist Wayne Madsen, who has posted more than a few conspiratorially-minded pieces, recently put up a large special report concluding that several of the 9/11 hijackers were actually Mossad operatives, with Ziad Jarrah the most likely witting operative because 2 more of the Lebanese Jarrah family have more recently been caught operating other Mossad schemes in Israel -- they were Lebanese collaborators during the prior Israeli occupation.
All of these nations have worked jointly -- Saudi, Pakistan and Israel have been pretty tight, and of course Turkey and Israel had a tight strategic alliance that's only recently collapsed. The "Safari Club" which included the US and Saudi Arabia, was another good example of regional intelligence agencies working together in concert after 1976.
I certainly don't conclude that 9/11 actually benefited the peoples of Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan in the long run. 9/11 only benefitted the networks of ruthless subversive militarists and intelligence goons that dominate these countries (not to mention the United States). It's crazy to conclude that "the Jews" or "the Muslims" committed 9/11, as its crazy to say the "militia movement" caused the Oklahoma City bombing. These are networks of weasels and government operatives, cruel people. It's not cultural or religious... Anyway I am including Madsen's 9/11 report after the "Kamikaze Pilots" case. And we're missing a bit of the old Florida-drugs angle (see Hopsicker's Mad Cow for the deets) wherein the pilot network is kind of a spillover from the shadowy long-running CIA-friendly drug pilot operations around Venice Florida, Huffman Aviation, Jack Abramoff's boat casino etc... Like I said it all leads a lot of places.
Is yobbing on about 9/11 productive to social movements? Is all this "conspiracism" (as the Chip Berlet/SPLC "nothing to see here" people call it) dangerous? My basic answer is a bit derived from Peter Dale Scott, that the same sorts of patterns you see in "deep events" surface over and over, either the same players or the same tricks. Thus, if you have a handle on 9/11, you can decode other parallel & smaller schemes a bit more easily -- and you're more prepared when similar tricks happen (like the staged Portland faux bombing to cite a recent one). Allocate your time for these things appropriately, but don't think Weirdness can't strike your town.
Below the fold: First the Behrooz case, then the Madsen Mossad cutout report. Take em for what you will... (Madsen's stated he doesn't mind too much when his stories are reposted, if they are held for @ least 24 hrs)...
One of my favorite analyst/writer type people has been Chalmers Johnson. He passed away on Nov 20th. His books Sorrows of Empire and Nemesis were just fantastic, and it's pretty much due to him that the idea of Blowback got out there - the idea that imperial schemes cause messes that come right back at ya.
Also he was the only person to ever quit the Council on Foreign Relations, which is so damn awesome I can hardly express it.
Even carefully planned actions can have unintended consequences. Let's not do something that ultimately benefits terrorists.
by Chalmers Johnson
From our archives... Common Dreams originally published this Chalmers Johnson article on September 30, 2001, just 3 weeks after the 9/11 attacks. Chalmers died last night at age 79. His voice will be missed.
One of the objectives of terrorism is to provoke the ruling elites of a target regime into disastrous overreaction. When it works, as it has in Israel over the past year, the results can be devastating for all sides. Who does this ultimately benefit? The terrorists.
Carlos Marighella, the Brazilian guerrilla leader whose writings influenced political terrorists in the 1960s and 1970s, explained why. If the government can be provoked into a military response to terrorism, he wrote, this will alienate the masses, causing them to "revolt against the army and the police and blame them for this state of things."
The overreaction doesn't necessarily have to alienate only domestic "masses." If we inflict great misery on innocent people in the Middle East, there will almost certainly be what the CIA refers to as "blowback"--unintended negative consequences of our actions. Vacillating supporters of the terrorists might be drawn into committing terrorist acts. Moderate governments throughout the Islamic world, especially in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, would almost certainly face growing internal dissent and could even be overthrown. Perhaps the prime example of terrorism succeeding is the Philippeville massacre of Aug. 20, 1955, in which Algerian revolutionaries killed 123 French colonials. A conscious act of terrorism carried out by revolutionaries who until then had enjoyed only slight popular backing, the Philippeville massacre led to a massive and bloody retaliation by the French. It also converted a leading French reformer (Jacques Soustelle, then governor-general of Algeria) into an advocate of suppression. The French crackdown eliminated most of the moderates on the Muslim side and caused influential French citizens back home to turn against their country's policies. This chain of events ultimately provoked a French army mutiny, brought Gen. Charles de Gaulle back to power as the savior of the nation and caused a French withdrawal from Algeria. Franco-Algerian relations are still strained today.
No political cause can justify the killing on Sept. 11 of thousands of innocent people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. But neither would our killing innocent people in retaliation be justifiable. Terrorists attack the vulnerable because their intended targets (the military might of a rich country) are inaccessible. By attacking the innocent, terrorists intend to draw attention to the sins of the invulnerable. Like the anarchism of the 19th century, terrorism is propaganda by deed.
The perpetrators of the Sept. 11 attacks are all dead. Now we must identify, apprehend and convict their accomplices. If it is discovered that a state harbored or backed them, then a declaration of war against that state would be appropriate. So far, the available evidence pointing to Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda organization is circumstantial: Bin Laden has issued edicts calling on Muslims to kill Americans; one of the hijackers had ties to the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, whose leader is a known associate of Bin Laden's; and U.S. and German intelligence officers have intercepted telephone conversations in which Al Qaeda groups were told of the attacks. But there has been no evidence linking the attackers to Afghanistan. Of the 19 hijackers, 11 have been identified by the FBI as probably Saudi Arabians, three others as, respectively, an Egyptian, a Lebanese and a citizen of the United Arab Emirates. The countries of origin of the others are unknown.
So far, the United States has reacted to the terrorist attacks with an almost classic repetition of the French blunders following Philippeville. From his first remarks to the nation on the evening of Sept. 11, President Bush has been pointlessly, even comically, belligerent (the U.S. wants Bin Laden "dead or alive," we must "smoke them out of their caves and get them running"). By initially calling his retaliation plan "Operation Infinite Justice," he gave it a needlessly religious and messianic coloration. He seems to lack insight or candor about what we actually face and the seriousness of the problem (we were attacked because we are a "beacon of freedom" and our attackers are without motives, merely "evil doers, those barbaric people"). The president has rebuffed calls from countries such as China and Iran that the U.S. obtain United Nations sanction for its retaliatory actions. Instead, his hyperbole has led thoughtful listeners to question what sort of actions he intends to pursue. "Our war on terror," Bush said to Congress and the nation on Sept. 20, "begins with Al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated." Presumably, the words "global reach" were inserted to reassure listeners that he did not intend to bomb supporters of Irish terrorists in Boston or anti-Castro terrorists in Miami.
The gaffes of the United States and its leaders are not just verbal. On Sept. 15, Congress passed a joint resolution that gave President Bush more sweeping authority than has ever been given to a president. "The president is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001." The appropriate comparisons here are with Abraham Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War, which led to violent protests and court challenges, and to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution of Aug. 7, 1964, which escalated the Vietnam War.
The resolution of Sept. 15 passed the Senate by a vote of 98-0 and the House by 420-1. Whereas two senators voted against the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, this time only one member of Congress, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Oakland), voted no. Now, nearly three weeks after the attacks, consequences of the congressional action have begun to emerge. President Bush has formed the largest air armada since World War II and brought it into position to bomb Afghanistan. He has assembled at least 630 U.S. military aircraft, three times as many as were deployed in the Gulf War against Saddam Hussein. An additional 280 aircraft are on board four U.S. aircraft carriers moving into position, as well as about 120 special forces.
If this armada is used against the hopeless and impoverished people of Afghanistan, there is no doubt that it will produce a general crisis throughout the Islamic world, probably affecting even moderate nations such as Indonesia and Malaysia. The end result will not be "victory" in a "war on terrorism" but a further cycle of terrorist attacks, American casualties and escalation.
What should we do instead? The answers seem obvious. We must recognize that the terrorism of Sept. 11 was not directed against America but against American foreign policy. We should listen to the grievances of the Islamic peoples, stop propping up repressive regimes in the area, protect Israel's security but denounce its apartheid practices in Palestinian areas and reform our "globalization" policies so that they no longer mean that the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. If the United States' only response to terrorism is more terrorism, it will have discredited itself and can expect to be treated as the rogue state it will have become.