by Robert L. Gisel
By the Congressional Bill CISPA, should it be passed as it is, we stand to lose any remaining Internet privacy to the government. Private information that we share with no one could be relayed to the government as if the 4th Amendment never existed.
The issue of Internet Rights and Protections concerns the province of Man's greatest advancement in the field of communications since the printing press, the technological advent of the World Wide Web.
Growth and progress of civilization is facilitated by a healthy flow of information of the populace. Conversely, favorable concourse and discussion among men is stifled by fascism -- the use of force and fear by governments.
Copyrights and Freedom of Information grant that the utterances of man and his intellectual property require protection as surely as one's castle. The 4th Amendment in the Bill of Rights grants man security in his person, his property, his papers, and effects. America has been a successful leader in the world because the protection of Rights and Freedoms ensures an atmosphere where prosperity blossoms.
The US Dept of Defense wanted to keep ahead of Russia's tech advances in the Space Age so they financed development of networking data relay, the ground work of the Internet. They do not own the Internet, however. That is the hardware systems and programming, the servers, while the World Wide Web is the communication that is relayed.
The WWW (World Wide Web) is historically a recent phenomenon. The Internet handled 1% of telecommunications in 1993, to over 98% today.
Look at this sequence in the history of the world:
1) Writings on rock walls projected communications to numerous others.
2) Clay tablets made the communication portable.
3) Papyrus (paper) allowed creation of books of information.
4) The printing press advanced widespread distribution.
5) With the press came a new era called the Information Age.
6) Computers brought digital information, thus speed and volume of data.
7) Technology brought interchange between terminals, and thus computers.
8) The Internet gave us the means for unlimited and world wide exchange of information.
9) The World Wide Web is an extension and advancement of the intercourse among men.
A large group of individuals together will create considerable confusion if not organized by purpose, direction and a structure including a leader. History has shown us that leaders must have power to rule and power is all too often given a harmful rendition. Then the citizens need protection against their rulers.
Witness this series:
1) People get along together in societies with mutual consideration.
2) Civilization organizes people for cohabitation and cooperative living.
3) The Magna Carta protects the lives and livingness of men against abuses of rulers.
4) The King may not enter your home without your invitation and permission.
5) American pioneers stood for growth of productivity and personal industry.
6) Industry and resourcefulness of individuals thrive in freedom and happiness.
8) The Bill of Rights is a major advance in preserving freedom and rights.
7) The products of creation are recognized as the property of its creator.
8) The recognition of intellectual and property rights boosts economic success in the area.
9) The server owns the service of Internet and its hardware, not WWW content.
10) The Internet provider agrees to respect and accommodate copyright material.
11) The writer owns his own works as intellectual property on the Web.
12) Internet providers grant that personal information is inviolable as is one's home.
13) The Right to Privacy excludes unrestricted government invasion of your privacy.
14) The Web is an organization of The People, not a government one.
15) Web information not public domain is as inviolate as one's property, papers, and effects.
This all changes if this Act is passed. The CISPA does not safeguard against the government using the Internet to spy on private citizens. As it is written there is nothing to stop online companies from sharing your private information with the government, any agency including the military and any intelligence agencies. This means unlimited snooping without due process, a vital protection in our Bill of Rights.
Don't expect Obama to be true to his word and veto it. He also said he would veto the NDAA and then signed it anyway.
The Internet didn't exist when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written. Now this new technology needs due consideration as to how it fits in as a logical extension. It is not hard to figure out. Our Right to Life depends on it.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Little Did We Know, Or Did We?
by Robert L. Gisel
The above image is among what is known as early signs prior to the WTC attacks. It is the cover of the DOJ Counter-Terrorism Manual in use months before 9/11. True, there had been a foiled attempt years earlier to bomb the Towers, but notice that the sights on the Tower in the picture center on the very spot the plane punctured the building. Random coincidence? What are the odds? Evidences of another explanation have been completely overlooked.
Get this lead line:
On November 9, 2001 Osama bin Laden Tells a Saudi Sheik That Unknowing al-Qaeda Members Had Dreams & Visions Forecasting the September 11 Attacks.
This line about "dreams and visions" is, technically speaking, a reliable detection indicator of the possible presence of Pain, Drug, Hypnosis (PDH), as used by the CIA since the MK Ultra program. Bin Laden had been a CIA cooperative from as far back as when they needed him and his followers to push the Russians out of Afghanistan. PDH has been long used by CIA counter-intelligence activities to foment crimes, assassinations and other destructive acts, that were covered up by embedded commands not to remember.
Dreams, visions, visitations in the night, these can be present to an awake individual even when PDH incidents are submerged under the influence of drugs and hypnotic command. You would have to be alert for this to uncover a suspected PDH that would otherwise go unnoticed.
The practice of compelling action by Pain, Drugs and Hypnosis is not new. It traces back as far as the 11th Century when zealot assassins of Hassan-i Sabbah were drugged with hashish and led to a staged "dream" incident of being entertained by a harem of beauties. Sabbah implied himself a profit or sacred leader, and only by following him would they be able to find their way back to this "heaven". In this way he could get them to do his bidding as assassins.
Some very involved counter-intelligence operations have been assisted by the use of PDH. Witness the crazed assassination of Bobby Kennedy. Details clearly showed symptoms of PDH in the assassin. We know the Who and the Why in the greater picture, but this avenue of the How has not been been pursued in that investigation. Restraints might be placed on the use of one of the devout secret tools of espionage if the truth were known.
Abundant evidence illustrates it was impossible for Bin Laden and the al-Qaeda to have pulled off the catastrophic but tidy destruction of three sky scrapers on September 11, 2001, without much highly technical help. There is undeniable evidence of prior knowledge by concerned government and private individuals in the US. These things are not random coincidence. Someone was running a complex but crazy operation. Hidden recruitment by PDH is not an unreasonable assumption.
The oddity that stands out is that Bin Laden, psychotic on his own, nevertheless got all the credit, and blame, and became the object of intense international pursuit yet ran free for a decade. It was convenient having him as the poster child for terrorism to justify two wars, excuse sweeping advances of the police state in the US, and set the stage for ten years of profiteering by the military industrial establishment. One is left with the feeling he was a dupe, shades of Lee Harvey Oswald, who, as you may recall, was conveniently assassinated when he was ready to talk.
There has been sufficient insanity on this planet to evidence that it doesn't take mind control techniques shades of MK Ultra to rear the head of psychosis in bizarre acts. That PDH techniques have been in vogue in the intelligence community raises some reasonable questions. We are not talking conspiracy theories here, this is following a string of empirical knowledge to the forefront.
However this went down, the complete collapse of the WTC Towers and the essentially untouched Building 7, we may never know for sure. The party line we have been fed is no doubt quite apart from the real intrigues that played out in the highest power circles. This, for me, is more than an idle hobby. Making sense of, and speaking out on, these mysteries may have survival value, lest the police state sink any further into the despotic tyranny our War of Independence was fought to attain freedom from.
There has been enough insanity on this planet to know it does take mind control techniques shades of MK Ultra to vent a psychotic head. That PDH techniques have been in vogue in the intelligence community raises some interesting questions. We're not talking conspiracy theories here, this is following empiric knowledge to the forefront.
This writer has long suspected the possibility of an operation by PDH, but this is the first reliable indicator that has come to my attention. In the surrounding circumstances of 9/11 the outpoints are so numerous, the illogical aspects are so telling, that the authoritarian story holds substance like a sieve. The supposition of possible dupes by PDH is a viewpoint not advanced in other commentaries, but this could meaningfully connect the dots. It should be explored with investigative reporting by someone resourceful and connected enough to dig in.
[]
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Libya and Human Rights
by Robert L. Gisel
It will be interesting to see how Ghadafi's regime explains away this latest Human Rights violation to break out in the news. A woman is taken from her car at a checkpoint by Ghadafi Loyalists then apparently held captive, raped repeatedly and beaten. When she finally gets free she rushed to reporters and foreign correspondents in the state arranged hotel to get the message to someone fearing there would be more of the same with no protections from the meyhem. The cat is out of the bag.
So much was revealed in this one incident. First off, she felt she had to rush to the reporters and reach the international press or she would simply disappear for weeks or years. Such fears are not an exclusive of Ghadafi's Libya as our own Homeland Security has been known to do that.
The first response is to kidnap her again, after the Ghadafi undercover police pretending to be hotel staff bludgeon press corps members, smashing their cameras and recorders, who were trying to protect her. You can only call it kidnapping as she is taken by force in obvious violation of rights -- hers and her would be protectors.
Then they attempt a smear campaign of the girl to claim she is insane, a drunk, and a prostitute. Get this: she is actually post graduate law student studying in Tripoli. This is the wrong person to try to exploit.
There was even an attempt to bribe her family to persuade her to recant the charges. The official stance now seems to be that the rapists are being investigated, that this is a criminal matter rather than political, and that some of the suspected rapists are filing counter suit for slander. That's rich. Then again, the state sponsored smear campaign is not slander, evidently, while the covey of undercover "hotel staff" who rushed to get this gal away from the press wasn't political, evidently.
What makes this possible is a major weakness of Human Rights bills needing to be bolstered, that and unchecked criminal behavior bolstered by a lawless totalitarian regime. Anything declared to be a matter of state security, including the labeling of acts and persons as terrorist, in the opinion of the declarer, is considered outside the realm of Human Rights. As soon as one is deemed terrorist by state police organisms, rights are suspended with unreasonable seizure, no Miranda rights, no legal representation nor swift and juried justice. Whether the organization is like the NSA, Homeland Security, the Libyan spy agency Jamahiriya Security Organization, MI-5, the Mossad, SBU, China's MSS, or the Congo's DGSE this above-the-law think is justified as protection of state security. Don't buy it.
Look at the kidnappings that landed up in Quantico. Several hundred of those detainees for years were there as innocents or with so little or no probable cause they were let go. For instance, an innocent farmer whose only crime was to be a mistaken identity was held captive for two years. This the problem with omnipotent powers given to state security -- they can be opinionated, and opinions are not fact. Then there are no checks and balances to correct the injustice when they are wrong.
The 007 mentality has been long glorified by James bond movies and the like where innocents are not locked up or killed. It is simple Hollywood; all those who work for the bad guys and those who work for the good guys. The truth is most secret intelligence agencies mean business, each from it's own viewpoint is well intended and charged with high purpose, meaning it can do no wrong.
Ghadafi's intelligence people are muffing it badly. The hilariuous part is it appears like a B-List movie, a poor one at that, of what they think they should be doing as "that is the way US intelligence does it".
It will be interesting to see how Ghadafi's regime explains away this latest Human Rights violation to break out in the news. A woman is taken from her car at a checkpoint by Ghadafi Loyalists then apparently held captive, raped repeatedly and beaten. When she finally gets free she rushed to reporters and foreign correspondents in the state arranged hotel to get the message to someone fearing there would be more of the same with no protections from the meyhem. The cat is out of the bag.
So much was revealed in this one incident. First off, she felt she had to rush to the reporters and reach the international press or she would simply disappear for weeks or years. Such fears are not an exclusive of Ghadafi's Libya as our own Homeland Security has been known to do that.
The first response is to kidnap her again, after the Ghadafi undercover police pretending to be hotel staff bludgeon press corps members, smashing their cameras and recorders, who were trying to protect her. You can only call it kidnapping as she is taken by force in obvious violation of rights -- hers and her would be protectors.
Then they attempt a smear campaign of the girl to claim she is insane, a drunk, and a prostitute. Get this: she is actually post graduate law student studying in Tripoli. This is the wrong person to try to exploit.
There was even an attempt to bribe her family to persuade her to recant the charges. The official stance now seems to be that the rapists are being investigated, that this is a criminal matter rather than political, and that some of the suspected rapists are filing counter suit for slander. That's rich. Then again, the state sponsored smear campaign is not slander, evidently, while the covey of undercover "hotel staff" who rushed to get this gal away from the press wasn't political, evidently.
What makes this possible is a major weakness of Human Rights bills needing to be bolstered, that and unchecked criminal behavior bolstered by a lawless totalitarian regime. Anything declared to be a matter of state security, including the labeling of acts and persons as terrorist, in the opinion of the declarer, is considered outside the realm of Human Rights. As soon as one is deemed terrorist by state police organisms, rights are suspended with unreasonable seizure, no Miranda rights, no legal representation nor swift and juried justice. Whether the organization is like the NSA, Homeland Security, the Libyan spy agency Jamahiriya Security Organization, MI-5, the Mossad, SBU, China's MSS, or the Congo's DGSE this above-the-law think is justified as protection of state security. Don't buy it.
Look at the kidnappings that landed up in Quantico. Several hundred of those detainees for years were there as innocents or with so little or no probable cause they were let go. For instance, an innocent farmer whose only crime was to be a mistaken identity was held captive for two years. This the problem with omnipotent powers given to state security -- they can be opinionated, and opinions are not fact. Then there are no checks and balances to correct the injustice when they are wrong.
The 007 mentality has been long glorified by James bond movies and the like where innocents are not locked up or killed. It is simple Hollywood; all those who work for the bad guys and those who work for the good guys. The truth is most secret intelligence agencies mean business, each from it's own viewpoint is well intended and charged with high purpose, meaning it can do no wrong.
Ghadafi's intelligence people are muffing it badly. The hilariuous part is it appears like a B-List movie, a poor one at that, of what they think they should be doing as "that is the way US intelligence does it".
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Drawing the Line On Human Rights
by Robert L. Gisel
Contemporary advancements of technology requires the drawing of the lines re Human Rights, newly, to keep abreast of the technological advancements and calls for a broader view of the undeniability of Human Rights.The recent discussions re Internet rights violations was brought to my attention by the public access snippet re Gmail and another on Google Images by Gary North, who links to advice on what to do to increase your protections. Check it out and take the steps to enhance your protections.
The hub-hub is that the Internet communications you store in ISPs are subject to unfettered government perusal of your emails. You can see this in news articles by the web site Threat Levels here, re Gmail and re Google images here. Personally, I hope they enjoyed my letters to President Obama.
In July 2009 I asked Obama's Campaign Manager if the President was on drugs. There was also that sage advice of what to do about the Gulf oil spill, not offensive just no minced words. Still, I don't think he got the memo. Then there was that post with the wry references to Obama and his government pursuing the same old agenda as Bush. The earliest was when Senator Obama was still on the campaign trail and I jumped down his throat for his pro-psychiatric voting record that makes him leader of the pack. These posts notwithstanding in the realm of authors and columnists, a broader view of the meaning of this is warranted.
The 4th Amendment concerning unlawful search and seizure guarantees your rights to your property and effects. That is, except for those government actions that are "above the law", which is why we needed the 4th Amendment in the first place.
Should you ever be so unfortunate as to be deemed a terrorist or somehow a threat to state security, which could be created by any franchised redneck fomenting Homeland Security, you are subject to a suspension of your rights immediately. Being seized and carted of to an unknown location without Miranda protections or a call to your attorney, to be secretly held incommunicado indefinitely, blatantly violates a whole parcel of Rights.
You do not even have to be the person deemed suspect but may only be a relative, friend or acquaintance of someone who has been so unfortunate. You can be completely innocent of any charges and under no reasonable suspicion and could find your emails stored in ISP files under perusal with no court ordered authorization. Of course there is the keyword listen in of electronic phone communications as well. I believe the word for it is police state.
This is a matter of the Right to Life, abrogation of, which is worded as such in the founding papers of the United States but did not get singled out in the Bill of Rights.
Literary directness in the last decade well could have prompted a placement on the scale of dissension by any bureaucrat with more self importance than concern for We The People, where standing up for Human Rights, the Constitution or opposition to oppressive government makes you out be "one them we must keep a watch on".
Proclaiming Free Speech seditious has a long history. In the US it goes back to John Adam's controversial Alien and Sedition Act. So this is an area not without previous concerns.Outspoken instances of freedoms of speech have probably gotten more than a few individuals placed on "the list" in the paranoid wake of the 9/11 fiasco. It also opened precedents for new violations of Human Rights. The advent of new technologies as in the Internet as well as electronic phone communications means a need for defining new legal parameters.
The redefining of Human Rights in these respects is an ongoing battle, which we must win on the side of adequate protections.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Bill of Rights Full Text Revisited
By Robert L. Gisel
One would expect at least our US Congressmen, hence candidates for Congress, to have a good working knowledge of the Constitution and the First Amendment. All other Federal law ensues from these.
This week a debate between campaigning politicians turned to the coverage of Bill of Rights, particularly the First Amendment. Candidate Christine O'Donnell challenges, "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" Her opponent, Chris Coons, an American lawyer and County Executive of the New Castle County, Wilmington, Delaware, asserts it is in the First Amendment with a paraphrased quote of it's first line.
Two points are well made: first, O'Donnell's stating that that specific phrase is not written there but is out of a commentary reference on the expectancy of the separation of these By Thomas Jefferson, and second, when questioned by O'Donnell as to the five freedoms in the First Amendment Coons was only able to name one, religion. That is a pass for O'Donnell
It is not simply politicians, who must be by office and duty committed to the Bill of Rights, but all US citizens need to know the content for their own protection as well as mediation of behavior towards others.
The Bill of Rights are the first ten amendments to the US Constitution.
Amendment I
Amendment II
Amendment III
Amendment IV
Amendment V
Amendment VI
Amendment VII
Amendment VIII
Amendment IX
Amendment X
Read My Blogs:
WhoWouldWrite.blogspot.com
OnceAnAlaskan.blogspot.com
FavoringLife.blogspot.com
ThinkTankMan.blogspot.com
LimitlessEnergy.blogspot.com
RightsFreedomsandRights.blogspot.com
DesignerGeodesics.blogspot.com
FreshAlaskanAir.blogspot.com
One would expect at least our US Congressmen, hence candidates for Congress, to have a good working knowledge of the Constitution and the First Amendment. All other Federal law ensues from these.
This week a debate between campaigning politicians turned to the coverage of Bill of Rights, particularly the First Amendment. Candidate Christine O'Donnell challenges, "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" Her opponent, Chris Coons, an American lawyer and County Executive of the New Castle County, Wilmington, Delaware, asserts it is in the First Amendment with a paraphrased quote of it's first line.
Two points are well made: first, O'Donnell's stating that that specific phrase is not written there but is out of a commentary reference on the expectancy of the separation of these By Thomas Jefferson, and second, when questioned by O'Donnell as to the five freedoms in the First Amendment Coons was only able to name one, religion. That is a pass for O'Donnell
It is not simply politicians, who must be by office and duty committed to the Bill of Rights, but all US citizens need to know the content for their own protection as well as mediation of behavior towards others.
The Bill of Rights are the first ten amendments to the US Constitution.
The Bill of Rights
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
WhoWouldWrite.blogspot.com
OnceAnAlaskan.blogspot.com
FavoringLife.blogspot.com
ThinkTankMan.blogspot.com
LimitlessEnergy.blogspot.com
RightsFreedomsandRights.blogspot.com
DesignerGeodesics.blogspot.com
FreshAlaskanAir.blogspot.com
Friday, September 24, 2010
Who Will Speak for Freedom?
by Robert L. Gisel
At the UN Assembly Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad inferred that "some segments within the U.S. government" should merit investigation for orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. Obama dismisses this as "inexcusable", "offensive" and "hateful", and trafficking in conspiracy theories.
Trafficking in conspiracy theories? Let's get real.
Lively discussion, tolerance of contrary opinions and varying viewpoints, these are the hallmarks of freedom and necessary to a healthy democracy, the kind that formed America in the first place. The kind of democracy that we are supposedly promoting to the world.
Still, in light of the evidence of tampering and cover up concerning the 9/11 incident so logical, to any rational observer, the suggested investigation put before the UN is a contemplation many Americans would agree with. One can expect it to be not well received by someone with something to hide, who has to fear the casting of doubt on an entire time line of fallacious subterfuges with enormous consequences. Ahmadinejad tossed out a challenge which should be of no consequence to someone with nothing to hide.
Who tries to invalidate free speech, pretentiously exhorting it is loony that someone would suggest a truth has been covered up? Yet a whistle blower in the US today, trying to bring to light believed truth about government wrongdoing, is now officially deemed crazy, a "conspiracy theorist" or, worse yet, a "constitutionalist" (defamatorily intended).
And around comes Homeland Security because one has so freely spoken of the unethical politician so devoid of personal integrity.
The truth is the White House tried to push the cover story off on the public and the public didn't buy it. Originally, the present administration acted to distance itself from the Bush cronies that violated what our country stands for and fouled the name of the US on the world scene. Attempting now to continue the lies, carry on the show, maintaining appearances at all cost, will not win Brownie Points for Barack.
I've heard questioning commentary from other peoples around the world, particularly by our Christian allies, why would we tolerate crimes and abuses by our leaders while known facts lay on the table. Is there any good answer to that except that our press is controlled, our government is bought off and the credulity of resident evil is a hard swallow from the main stream. Nevertheless, rejection of the party line is more widespread among reasonable peoples than we are led to believe.
President Obama is, of course, a politician with an eye always on the polls and a hidden agenda from those so mega-rich they are off the records and beyond the radar. Why be shocked at anything he does, especially if he gets re-elected and can really turn the screws, which he will if not thrown out by the populace not willing to go one more round. One only wonders if he will join the ranks in history of despised Presidents along with Bush (who escaped the impeachment submitted) and Nixon (who was impeached). Does he really, really, really think anyone is going to buy Bush's lies just because they come from the incumbents mouth? I'll bet this drops Obama 10 points in the polls of popularity.
One day there will be a day of reckoning and good sense will prevail. A little urgency added to this request might bring results before evil presents us with the demise of the US as we know it, or worse, a new dark ages.
At the UN Assembly Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad inferred that "some segments within the U.S. government" should merit investigation for orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. Obama dismisses this as "inexcusable", "offensive" and "hateful", and trafficking in conspiracy theories.
Trafficking in conspiracy theories? Let's get real.
Lively discussion, tolerance of contrary opinions and varying viewpoints, these are the hallmarks of freedom and necessary to a healthy democracy, the kind that formed America in the first place. The kind of democracy that we are supposedly promoting to the world.
Still, in light of the evidence of tampering and cover up concerning the 9/11 incident so logical, to any rational observer, the suggested investigation put before the UN is a contemplation many Americans would agree with. One can expect it to be not well received by someone with something to hide, who has to fear the casting of doubt on an entire time line of fallacious subterfuges with enormous consequences. Ahmadinejad tossed out a challenge which should be of no consequence to someone with nothing to hide.
Who tries to invalidate free speech, pretentiously exhorting it is loony that someone would suggest a truth has been covered up? Yet a whistle blower in the US today, trying to bring to light believed truth about government wrongdoing, is now officially deemed crazy, a "conspiracy theorist" or, worse yet, a "constitutionalist" (defamatorily intended).
And around comes Homeland Security because one has so freely spoken of the unethical politician so devoid of personal integrity.
The truth is the White House tried to push the cover story off on the public and the public didn't buy it. Originally, the present administration acted to distance itself from the Bush cronies that violated what our country stands for and fouled the name of the US on the world scene. Attempting now to continue the lies, carry on the show, maintaining appearances at all cost, will not win Brownie Points for Barack.
I've heard questioning commentary from other peoples around the world, particularly by our Christian allies, why would we tolerate crimes and abuses by our leaders while known facts lay on the table. Is there any good answer to that except that our press is controlled, our government is bought off and the credulity of resident evil is a hard swallow from the main stream. Nevertheless, rejection of the party line is more widespread among reasonable peoples than we are led to believe.
President Obama is, of course, a politician with an eye always on the polls and a hidden agenda from those so mega-rich they are off the records and beyond the radar. Why be shocked at anything he does, especially if he gets re-elected and can really turn the screws, which he will if not thrown out by the populace not willing to go one more round. One only wonders if he will join the ranks in history of despised Presidents along with Bush (who escaped the impeachment submitted) and Nixon (who was impeached). Does he really, really, really think anyone is going to buy Bush's lies just because they come from the incumbents mouth? I'll bet this drops Obama 10 points in the polls of popularity.
One day there will be a day of reckoning and good sense will prevail. A little urgency added to this request might bring results before evil presents us with the demise of the US as we know it, or worse, a new dark ages.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Intelligence or Counter-Intelligence?
by Robert L. Gisel
Evidently slanderous intelligence makes its way into Bob Woodward's new book "Obama Wars":
Evidently slanderous intelligence makes its way into Bob Woodward's new book "Obama Wars":
'It also reports that the U.S. has intelligence showing that manic-depression has been diagnosed in Afghan President Hamid Karzai and that he was on medication.
'In Kabul, Waheed Omar, Karzai's spokesman, said those allegations were untrue.
' "This is a baseless, inflammatory comment that has its roots in a defaming propaganda campaign against President Karzai's personal integrity, leadership and his stances on matters of Afghan national interests," he said Wednesday. "The president is safe and sound. I can confirm that he takes no medication." '
At best it is a contrary fact, if not counter-intelligence. No doubt Karzai knows enough America's dirty secrets regarding the Afghan war that he could be a threat to the US partisan interests if they fail to subjugate him as a dupe ally. Makes one wonder how much he knows of Bush's degenerate 911 domino fall.
From Chinese spy tech comes the "dead agent". A secret agent who tells lies to the enemy is dead if he is found out. Seeding misinformation is stock in trade for the spy business which lives by intrigues, cabals and subterfuges. In the end US crashed the party in Afghanistan in pursuit of Osama bin Laden, who is far from "a sole gunman" in this affair.
But hey, got to protect those poppy fields, the CIA must have it's financial fix. (Not slander as it is known data that CIA traffics drugs. It's only "coincidence" that the largest drug producing poppy crop in the world is in Afghanistan.)
The truth needs a better council.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
