Posts Tagged ‘obfuscation’

449625510

Counterpunch has been a blatherpocalypse these past few months. For and against Sanders has been the hot-button topic.

This dude, Andrew Stewart, makes a great case for Sanders by making it easy to reject the hair-brained communist-manifesto rhetoric of himself, Andrew Stewart:

“I am by choice one who describes his politics as anarcho-syndicalist, which I feel has a more tenable chance of being achieved in this country than the parliamentary road.”

So a flavor of anarchist, but he then goes on to praise the Bolshevik revolution in Russia in any number of ways, like that was a noteworthy success we might emulate, only to take it much further this time…?

Stewart says:

“The nationalization of the banks and socialization of the means of production are bare essentials of any real socialist program, regardless of ideological tendency.”

This is false, as Scandinavian countries, and most of the western world for that matter, instituted countless social assistance programs without doing either. The demand to seize the “means of production” in a sweeping totalitarian maneuver is so radical on its face, and so impossible in reality–not to mention undesirable–that it would force a society that resembles North Korea or STASI Germany in order to implement it!

Verdict: Andrew Stewart’s prescription for humanity is a kind of 19th century totalitarianism. His criticism of Sanders is that Bernie is in no position to upend the entire economy of the planet, use military force and come marching in some sort of revolution to please the handful of diehard communists (or anarchists? he seems confused) who will accept nothing less.

So, perhaps Bernie is doing something right.

SANDERS 2016 PALLET 2

cnn-interview-with-russia-today

Wow, CNN has gotten pathetic with its glaring propaganda in place of news. This mook attempts to make much out of the debris field, in the war zone under government attack, and blame that on Putin too.

 

Well the evidence, that the RT voice never gets to elaborate on, being shouted down the whole time (duh), is that it all points to the Kiev Nazi thug government deliberately shooting down the plane. CNN clown phrases this as an either or, with the rebels making a mistake, or the rebels making a deliberate “act of terrorism.” But in CNN universe it’s not possible the Nazi coup regime could have shot it down, despite them having more than two dozen of the BUK missile systems, and them being reported in the east on the day in question.

Chris Cuomo, like most corporate shill fucktards, is no journalist at all.

That entire block of time was wasted on gibberish rather than addressing known evidence of the incident, the lies exposed by Russia all week, and the hiding of air traffic control communications and US spy satellite data. Using blatant, repeated, calls for emotionalism over the victims, this Goebbels light moron exposes himself as unworthy of anyone’s attention, if they actually care to know what happened.

 

chomsky-2013

Noam Chomsky has misled what passes for “the left” in the United States since the September 11th attacks.  His verbal contortions apparently get some traction amongst people who know as little about the actual evidence as he does.

A recent college appearance had Noam slinging the same ignorant blather as he has done for 12 years now, and his reasoning fails due to a) either a complete lack of understanding of international terrorism and its sponsors, or b) dishonesty.

For an alternative perspective there is Senator Bob Graham, who co-wrote the Congressional Joint Inquiry Into the Attacks of September 11th 2001, the most crucial parts of which remain censored to this day (by two administrations).

Luckily Senator Graham has the backbone to tell the public what is being censored: Re-Open the 9/11 Investigation Now

Censoring clear evidence of Saudi state complicity in the 9/11 attacks on America fits the Constitutional definition of Treason.

Chomsky’s response concerning WTC building 7 is dismissive, claiming that 2000 architects and engineers are a “miniscule” number.  Noam swiftly changes tack so that these professionals, who take very real career risks by openly signing the 9/11 statement, are equated with people who learned about physics for an hour on the Internet.  This sleight of hand earns Chomsky a special place in hell for the damage he has willingly done to the US, just on this one issue.  He also makes ridiculous claims about investigating 9/11 being a “safe” topic (another demonstrable lie), as if those who challenge the US government’s 9/11 story are not routinely attacked across the corporate media as well as on so-called “alternative” foundation-funded media.  That architects and engineers would face reprisals for such political activity as this is inconceivable apparently.

But Chomsky’s Big Lie, pretty unique to himself, is a whopper of irrelevant speculation.  His personal musings are given the label “evidence” with total disregard for so much actual evidence it would humble any real scholar.

Noam Chomsky’s political gibberish, which he had the stones to call “evidence that [the unelected Bush regime] weren’t involved” in the 9/11 attacks, rises to a new level of absurdity:

Noam Chomsky’s (Anti) Conspiracy Theory:

  1. BushCo. wanted to invade Iraq.
  2. The alleged perpetrators were Saudis.  Phrased as “They blamed it on their major ally…”
  3. “Unless they’re total lunatics, they would have blamed it on Iraqis…”

There you go.  Noam would have had Central Casting call up some Iraqis to blame the 9/11 attacks on, because… it’s so ridiculous.  It’s astounding that adults, never mind academics in attendance, applauded such foul reasoning.

Here’s an alternative understanding, Noam.  One that actually meshes with the known history of the event and US proxy wars with their partners Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, beginning in 1979 (another uncontroversial fact, see Operation Cyclone).

  1. US “allies” sponsor, train and help radical Sunni militia movements like Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, ISIS, MEK, LIFG, KLA, Chechen separatists…
  2. These groups are not directly controlled by US personnel.  That’s called “plausible deniability,” a term the great professor has apparently never come across at MIT.
  3. The US and partners don’t just want to attack Iraq, Noam.  They want the world, and they want it now.  General Wesley Clark (who helped KLA destroy Serbia and Kosovo btw) told of 7 nations on the Bush regime’s hit list, immediately after 9/11.
  4. The “War on Terror” was not a simple pretext to attack Saddam Hussein, but a new paradigm in the face of a vanquished Soviet Union.  Terrorism replaced communism as the bogey man to open the spigots of unlimited war materiel spending and unlimited surveillance, something MIT might know a thing or two about.

Chomsky has the sense to punt on questions of WTC Building 7, claiming no opinion on the matter (except for his disdain at even being asked).  His opinions of what happened on 9/11 and the geopolitics of empire are hamfisted grasping at straws and desperate squeals from someone who has painted himself into a corner.  Chomsky finds himself in the unfortunate position of being looked to as someone who supposedly knows what he is talking about, and yet his responses reveal that he has no desire to know about the actual September 11th attack operation at all.  That the audience would applaud such mindless obfuscation is indicative of a cult of personality rather than any credibility or superior logic at work.

Chomsky assails the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth for not having enough scholarly papers published, in his opinion, and yet they do what he does.  They use alternative media to get the word out.  This is not an academic question but real life and death struggle for the fate of the world.  US empire, Noam Chomsky should know quite well, exploits the 9/11 event to occupy, threaten and covertly destabilize a large chunk of planet earth.  It is their main military recruitment meme.  It is truly a day that changed history, and Chomsky doesn’t want to know what happened.  He doesn’t care.  He is a flagrant misleader who should have shut his mouth if he lacked the spine to learn the truth.

P.S.

I meant to mention sooner that there is another lie in Chomsky’s statement: “They blamed it on their major ally.”

It is glaringly false on its face, a grotesque mischaracterization.

“They,” the Bush regime, did not “blame it,” 9/11, on their “ally” Saudi Arabia. Quite the opposite, and that’s the problem. They covered it up and redacted the investigation that blames 9/11 on Saudi Arabia. It is this protection of the Saudi regime that’s the central problem. It is also arguably high treason.

Noam Chomsky knows how to string together sentences that are clear and make perfect sense, as well as adhere to the facts. In this case he has gone to opposite land. I have my own hypothesis as to why he’s chosen to toss any credibility he once had over this issue. But the why isn’t as important as showing his statements to be ridiculous, counterproductive, and at odds with the truth and with the millions of people struggling to get the truth out. It is the victim’s families who are the original so-called “truthers” who demanded an independent investigation, only to watch it turn into an obvious and pathetic cover-up. Chomsky finds himself on the wrong side of history, feeding myths to his willfully ignorant followers rather than even acknowledging the cover-up. I have run into several of his ilk who have basically turned off their brains and refuse to even read FBI intelligence reports and the statements of the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on 9/11/01, Senator Graham. They substitute ignorant speculation for the actual hard evidence uncovered by the FBI. And why wouldn’t they? That’s what Chomsky does.

These are supposed to be the critical thinkers, the political opposition, and yet they are carrying water for Cheney et al. Go explain that one if you can.

Rabbit hole.

george-carlin-quotes-funny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4oFY0l63JYI

True American greatness.

“Conspiracy Theory”: Foundations of a Weaponized Term
Subtle and Deceptive Tactics to Discredit Truth in Media and Research
Prof. James F. Tracy

The editorial “gatekeepers” of America operate as if directed by our own Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA put forth their propaganda strategy in the wake of public outrage over the murder of president John F. Kennedy and the subsequent cover-up and fabrications of the (bi-partisan) Warren Commission.

The similarly bi-partisan 9/11 Commission was also a controlled, censored, rigged exercise in obfuscation whose own co-chairman Lee Hamilton admitted on Canadian television, that the commission was “set up to fail.” And fail they did, but that does not prompt a real independent investigation of the 9/11 attacks, the role of “foreign governments” (Senator Bob Graham), or the role of the CIA itself, who helped to hide the “San Diego cell” hijackers from domestic law enforcement for 16 months prior to the attacks.

Here is how the CIA directs editors to respond to the “conspiracy theories” it found problematic, vis a vis JFK:

CIA Document #1035-960
RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report

“Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission’s report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved.”

“This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization.”

“Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of American society.”

“Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization [CIA], for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us.”

“To discuss the publicity problem with [?] and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists.”

“b. To employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.

So, there you have it, the CIA domestic propaganda playbook.

Operation Mockingbird is relevant here.

THE CIA AND THE MEDIA
Carl Bernstein, Rolling Stone, Oct. 20 1977

One last point on the JFK matter–

That memo contains a whopper of a lie. See if you catch it:

“e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person’s choice for a co-conspirator. He was a “loner,” mixed up, of questionable reliability and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service.”

An unknown quantity?

The man who defected to the Soviet Union, married a Russian girl, and was allowed to emigrate back to the United States without issue?

Unknown to intelligence?

Can they seriously type that with a straight face?

“I’m just a patsy.” -Lee Harvey Oswald in custody


  
Jim Garrison’s investigation and subsequent trial, which is the basis of the Oliver Stone film JFK, showed that Oswald was working for FBI and investigating the CIA’s Cuban terrorists in Louisiana. This is more plausible than the claim of document 1035-960, that Oswald was an “unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service.” That claim doesn’t pass the laugh test.

JFK01