Posts Tagged ‘lying’

a-lie-can-travel-half-way-around-the-world-while-the-truth-is-putting-on-its-shoes-mark-twain

J. Giambrone

We are in dire straits with an all-out assault on science, evidence and reason coming out of the White House all day long, every day now. The direct attack on science is part of a much-wider trend.

Science is imperfect and the truth has no billionaire backer fighting for it. The deck is stacked in the other direction.

FUD

Fear Uncertainty Doubt:

Fear, uncertainty and doubt (often shortened to FUD) is a disinformation strategy used in sales, marketing, public relations, talk radio, politics, religious organizations, and propaganda. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information and a manifestation of the appeal to fear.

…By spreading questionable information about the drawbacks of less well known products, an established company can discourage decision-makers from choosing those products over its own, regardless of the relative technical merits.

President FUD is the living embodiment of these…

View original post 327 more words

GettyImages-5640861591454201951.jpg

Washington Post exposing CIA?

Basically what we already knew: the CIA is full of shit, and cannot be trusted to tell anyone the truth about anything, not even its own officers…

Washington Post:

Beyond the internal distrust implied by the practice, officials said there is no clear mechanism for labeling eyewash cables or distinguishing them from legitimate records being examined by the CIA’s inspector general, turned over to Congress or declassified for historians.

‘Eyewash’: How the CIA deceives its own workforce about operations

Now I want you to try and analyze this information, in light of clear revelations that the CIA deceives people, including its own workforce. There’s what the CIA employees THOUGHT they were doing by hiding the 9/11 hijackers, and then what they ACTUALLY were doing…

 

 

Counter-terrorism Advisor to the White House (“Terror Czar”) Richard A. Clarke:

“It’s not as I originally thought, which was that one lonely CIA analyst got this information and didn’t somehow recognize the significance of it. No, fifty, 5-0, CIA personnel knew about this. Among the fifty people in CIA who knew these guys were in the country was the CIA director.”

“Unless someone intervened to stop the normal automatic distribution, I would automatically get it… For me to this day it is inexplicable why, when I had every other detail about everything related to terrorism, that the director didn’t tell me, that the director of the counter-terrorism center didn’t tell me, that the other 48 people inside CIA that knew about it never mentioned it to me or anyone in my staff in a period of over 12 months… We therefore conclude that there was a high-level decision inside CIA ordering people not to share that information.”

“There was not a lack of information sharing. They told us everything – except this.”

“THIS” = Hijackers living in San Diego for 16 months prior to 9/11, the people who allegedly flew a plane into the Pentagon on Sepbember 11th, 2001.

jerry-seinfeld-advertising-speech

I love advertising because I love lying,” he said. As if that weren’t damning enough, he continued: “I think spending your life trying to dupe innocent people out of hard-won earnings to buy useless, low-quality, misrepresented items and services is an excellent use of your energy.”

Holes-in-911-Report

Cover-up, lying, treason that continues to this very day, that’s what I’ll always remember about 9/11. Anyone who hasn’t intensely studied this issue, as in a college-level course, should start with Senator Bob Grahsm’s call for reopening the investigation. Graham wrote the initial investigatory report for the Congress, the one that has been censored (those 28 pages about Saudi sponsorship of the hijackers) for 13 years and counting.

nextgov-medium

 

Obama’s NSA Is Lying About Spying on Congress, Lawmakers Charge

 

Hey congress, here’s a hint: 7 letters, starts with “i”

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmw4G5q1OkE&feature=player_embedded

Impeach and arrest.

What Diane Feinstein and Mike Rogers would prefer not to hear or understand:

 

4th Amendment to the US Constitution

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.

 

treasonous-Feinstein-Rogersy

 

 

brad-manning-trial-jpg_56940_20130604-951

 

Julian Assange breaks down this assault on freedom, thought and accountable governance.  The US military is calling 24 witnesses to TESTIFY IN SECRET against US Citizen and whistleblower Bradley Manning.

As I was literally BLOCKED from reading this article at its original source “wikileaks.ch” in a Cyberwar that rages silently as we speak, I am posting Julian Assange’s statement in its entirety (mirror).

JULIAN ASSANGE, FOUNDER OF WIKILEAKS:

“As I type these lines, on June 3, 2013, Private First Class Bradley Edward Manning is being tried in a sequestered room at Fort Meade, Maryland, for the alleged crime of telling the truth. The court martial of the most prominent political prisoner in modern US history has now, finally, begun.

It has been three years. Bradley Manning, then 22 years old, was arrested in Baghdad on May 26, 2010. He was shipped to Kuwait, placed into a cage, and kept in the sweltering heat of Camp Arifjan.

“For me, I stopped keeping track,” he told the court last November. “I didn’t know whether night was day or day was night. And my world became very, very small. It became these cages… I remember thinking I’m going to die.”

After protests from his lawyers, Bradley Manning was then transferred to a brig at a US Marine Corps Base in Quantico, VA, where — infamously — he was subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment at the hands of his captors — a formal finding by the UN. Isolated in a tiny cell for 23 out of 24 hours a day, he was deprived of his glasses, sleep, blankets and clothes, and prevented from exercising. All of this — it has been determined by a military judge — “punished” him before he had even stood trial.

“Brad’s treatment at Quantico will forever be etched, I believe, in our nation’s history, as a disgraceful moment in time” said his lawyer, David Coombs. “Not only was it stupid and counterproductive, it was criminal.”

The United States was, in theory, a nation of laws. But it is no longer a nation of laws for Bradley Manning.

When the abuse of Bradley Manning became a scandal reaching all the way to the President of the United States and Hillary Clinton’s spokesman resigned to register his dissent over Mr. Manning’s treatment, an attempt was made to make the problem less visible. Bradley Manning was transferred to the Midwest Joint Regional Correctional Facility at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

He has waited in prison for three years for a trial — 986 days longer than the legal maximum — because for three years the prosecution has dragged its feet and obstructed the court, denied the defense access to evidence and abused official secrecy. This is simply illegal — all defendants are constitutionally entitled to a speedy trial — but the transgression has been acknowledged and then overlooked.

Against all of this, it would be tempting to look on the eventual commencement of his trial as a mercy. But that is hard to do.

We no longer need to comprehend the “Kafkaesque” through the lens of fiction or allegory. It has left the pages and lives among us, stalking our best and brightest. It is fair to call what is happening to Bradley Manning a “show trial.” Those invested in what is called the “US military justice system” feel obliged to defend what is going on, but the rest of us are free to describe this travesty for what it is. No serious commentator has any confidence in a benign outcome. The pretrial hearings have comprehensively eliminated any meaningful uncertainty, inflicting pre-emptive bans on every defense argument that had any chance of success.

Bradley Manning may not give evidence as to his stated intent (exposing war crimes and their context), nor may he present any witness or document that shows that no harm resulted from his actions. Imagine you were put on trial for murder. In Bradley Manning’s court, you would be banned from showing that it was a matter of self-defence, because any argument or evidence as to intent is banned. You would not be able to show that the “victim” is, in fact, still alive, because that would be evidence as to the lack of harm.

But of course. Did you forget whose show it is?

The government has prepared for a good show. The trial is to proceed for 12 straight weeks: a fully choreographed extravaganza, with a 141-strong cast of prosecution witnesses. The defense was denied permission to call all but a handful of witnesses. Three weeks ago, in closed session, the court actually held a rehearsal. Even experts on military law have called this unprecedented.

Bradley Manning’s conviction is already written into the script. The commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces, Barack Obama, spoiled the plot for all of us when he pronounced Bradley Manning guilty two years ago. “He broke the law,” President Obama stated, when asked on camera at a fundraiser about his position on Mr. Manning. In a civilized society, such a prejudicial statement alone would have resulted in a mistrial.

To convict Bradley Manning, it will be necessary for the US government to conceal crucial parts of his trial. Key portions of the trial are to be conducted in secrecy: 24 prosecution witnesses will give secret testimony in closed session, permitting the judge to claim that secret evidence justifies her decision. But closed justice is no justice at all.

What cannot be shrouded in secrecy will be hidden through obfuscation. The remote situation of the courtroom, the arbitrary and discretionary restrictions on access for journalists, and the deliberate complexity and scale of the case are all designed to drive fact-hungry reporters into the arms of official military PR men, who mill around the Fort Meade press room like over-eager sales assistants. The management of Bradley Manning’s case will not stop at the limits of the courtroom. It has already been revealed that the Pentagon is closely monitoring press coverage and social media discussions on the case.

This is not justice; never could this be justice. The verdict was ordained long ago. Its function is not to determine questions such as guilt or innocence, or truth or falsehood. It is a public relations exercise, designed to provide the government with an alibi for posterity. It is a show of wasteful vengeance; a theatrical warning to people of conscience.

The alleged act in respect of which Bradley Manning is charged is an act of great conscience — the single most important disclosure of subjugated history, ever. There is not a political system anywhere on the earth that has not seen light as a result. In court, in February, Bradley Manning said that he wanted to expose injustice, and to provoke worldwide debate and reform. Bradley Manning is accused of being a whistleblower, a good man, who cared for others and who followed higher orders. Bradley Manning is effectively accused of conspiracy to commit journalism.

But this is not the language the prosecution uses. The most serious charge against Bradley Manning is that he “aided the enemy” — a capital offence that should require the greatest gravity, but here the US government laughs at the world, to breathe life into a phantom. The government argues that Bradley Manning communicated with a media organization, WikiLeaks, who communicated to the public. It also argues that al-Qaeda (who else) is a member of the public. Hence, it argues that Bradley Manning communicated “indirectly” with al-Qaeda, a formally declared US “enemy,” and therefore that Bradley Manning communicated with “the enemy.”

But what about “aiding” in that most serious charge, “aiding the enemy”? Don’t forget that this is a show trial. The court has banned any evidence of intent. The court has banned any evidence of the outcome, the lack of harm, the lack of any victim. It has ruled that the government doesn’t need to show that any “aiding” occurred and the prosecution doesn’t claim it did. The judge has stated that it is enough for the prosecution to show that al-Qaeda, like the rest of the world, reads WikiLeaks.

“Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people,” wrote John Adams, “who have a right and a desire to know.”

When communicating with the press is “aiding the enemy” it is the “general knowledge among the people” itself which has become criminal. Just as Bradley Manning is condemned, so too is that spirit of liberty in which America was founded.

In the end it is not Bradley Manning who is on trial. His trial ended long ago. The defendent now, and for the next 12 weeks, is the United States. A runaway military, whose misdeeds have been laid bare, and a secretive government at war with the public. They sit in the docks. We are called to serve as jurists. We must not turn away.

Free Bradley Manning.

 

wikileaks-dns-prhibited07c1f39e_aa_kangaroo_court

 

eric-holder-2

Congress Investigates Lies of Attorney General

The DOJ seems to have taken a sizable gamble in exercising the Espionage Act to keep its surveillance of members of the press a secret, and the Daily Mail’s source into an ongoing Congressional probe indicates that the Attorney General may still bear the brunt of the blame

Ben Swann again, this time directly putting Obama in the hot seat. The president sidesteps the unconstitutional murder of several American citizens by simply claiming that he never “confirmed” these happened at all. History is certainly written by the victors. It didn’t happen unless the president writes it up himself. So, no impeachable crime there.

He also tries to obfuscate his signing statement about NOT going after Americans for unconstitutional “indefinite detention” while ignoring the question about his own legal team challenging the federal court injunction against same.

Obama’s take on Syria is Goebbels worthy. The US and its partners have turned Syria into a killing field. Their paid mercenaries and Jihadis engage in ethnic cleansing, rape and the murder of children. This has no bearing on the president’s fictional presentation of the situation. Nor does his rosy assessment of war crimes perpetrated against Libya, and the collusion with Libyan terrorist group LIFG enter the discussion. Nor the 60,000+ dead in that country, the Al Qaeda victories or the use of the same officially designated terrorist group LIFG in Syria today.

On the torture issue, Obama’s half-truth is a lie so insidious that it demands further inspection. Obama claims to have banned torture. By this he means that he banned torture by US personnel. His policies explicitly maintained the practice of “rendition” or “torture by proxy” — the practice of sending suspects to other nations to be tortured on behalf of the United States. Obama has clearly NOT banned torture, as he claims here, but simply made it a covert, black-op, unaccountable to the American people and kept behind the scenes. This is an improvement?