Thursday 20th of September 2018

signed by a nobody...

war is hell

The New York Times continues to outdo itself in the production of fake news. There is no more reliable source of fake news than the intelligence services, which regularly provide their pet outlets (NYT and WaPo) with sensational stories that are as unverifiable as their sources are anonymous. A prize example was the August 24 report that US intelligence agencies don’t know anything about Russia’s plans to mess up our November elections because “informants close to … Putin and in the Kremlin” aren’t saying anything. Not knowing anything about something for which there is no evidence is a rare scoop.

A story like that is not designed to “inform the public” since there is no information in it. It has other purposes: to keep the “Russia is undermining our democracy” story on front pages, with the extra twist in this case of trying to make Putin distrustful of his entourage. The Russian president is supposed to wonder, who are those informants in my entourage?

But that was nothing compared to the whopper produced by the “newpaper of record” on September 5. (By the way, the “record” is stuck in the same groove: Trump bad, Putin bad – bad bad bad.) This was the sensational oped headlined “I am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration”, signed by nobody.

The letter by Mister or Ms Anonymous is very well written. By someone like, say, Thomas Friedman. That is, someone on the NYT staff. It is very cleverly composed to achieve quite obvious calculated aims. It is a masterpiece of treacherous deception.

The fictional author presents itself as a right-wing conservative shocked by Trump’s “amorality” – a category that outside the Washington swamp might include betraying the trust of one’s superior.

This anonymous enemy of amorality claims to approve of all the most extreme right-wing measures of the Trump administration as “bright spots”: deregulation, tax reform, a more robust military, “and more” – cleverly omitting mention of Trump’s immigration policy which could unduly shock the New York Times’ liberal readers. The late Senator John McCain, the model of bipartisan bellicosity, is cited as the example to follow.

The “resistance” proclaimed is solely against the facets of Trump’s foreign policy which White House insiders are said to be working diligently to undermine: peaceful relations with Russian and North Korea. Trump’s desire to avoid war is transformed into “a preference for autocrats and dictators”. (Trump gets no credit for his warlike rhetoric against Iran and close relations with Netanyahu, even though they must please Anonymous.)


Read more:

polishing the white teeth of the machine...


written by chris rossini

February 5 2016


We all know how Hollywood and the crony media likes to portray the US military. It's almost always presented as this well-oiled machine, good looking people, white teeth, well-spoken, the whole nine yards. 

Hardly will you see how trillions of taxpayers dollars go up in smoke and how the Pentagon mysteriously "loses" track of where the money goes. No, the actual truth about how government bureaucracy works is not what you'll see in the latest blockbuster film.

Perceptions are critically important when running an operation that forcefully takes money from American citizens. Perception is worth big bucks! As a matter of fact, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter had his hands out this week seeking yet another $600 billion.

Carter says:

Even as we fight today’s fights, we must also be prepared for the fights that might come 10, 20, or 30 years down the road.

Oh really?

This is where perception comes in. The belief that the US military (a) should be fighting for decades to come, and (b) that it's able to sit down and plan 10, 20, and 30 years down the road. 

If this were even remotely true, was it in the US plans for ISIS to exist right now? How about the fact that the Taliban controls more of Afghanistan than at any time since 2001? Was that in the plans?

Obama's "plan" for Iraq was "an Iraq that is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant." Yet, Iraq today doesn't resemble that at all. Obama was supposed to end the Iraq war, yet mission creep has the US with well above 4,000 troops in that country, and the numbers keep climbing. Was all of this in the plans as well?

The "plan" for Libya was to conduct a "humanitarian intervention," yet anyone who looks at Libya now and sees humanitarianism needs to get their eyes checked. Was turning Libya into a cauldron of misery, and yet another magnet for ISIS, in the "plans"?

What if there's a financial crisis in the next 10, 20, or 30 years? Is that factored into the plans? And are we to assume that the American public will still be OK with military interventionism that far into the future? What if non-interventionist ideas reach a critical mass?


Read more:

publishing events ahead of happening...

One day before the a story in the Washington Post unveiled “the clearest evidence so far that the FBI had reason to believe during the 2016 presidential campaign that a Trump associate was in touch with Russian agents,” the FBI’s counterintelligence chief was texting colleagues about “a media leak strategy with DOJ.”

Peter Strzok, former head of counterintelligence at the FBI, texted FBI attorney Lisa Page on April 10, 2017: "I had literally just gone to find this phone to tell you I want to talk to you about media leak strategy with DOJ before you go." On April 11, the Washington Post dropped a bombshell story revealing that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court had issued a secret order to the FBI to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

"The FBI and the Justice Department obtained the warrant targeting Carter Page's communications after convincing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judge that there was probable cause to believe Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power, in this case Russia, according to the officials," Ellen Nakashima, Devlin Barrett and Adam Entous wrote in the Post article.

The newest batch of texts was obtained by North Carolina Republican Congressman Mark Meadows, Business Insider reports.

Meadows wrote in a September 10 letter that Strzok also congratulated Page for two articles appearing in the press that painted a gloomy picture of Trump's ties to Russia vis-à-vis Carter Page.


Read more:


another made up story about a russian...

The United States government retracted its claim that Russian national Mariia Butina had traded sex in exchange for a position at a public interest organization late on Friday. The judge in the case, Tanya S. Chutkan, said on Monday that it took her a mere five minutes to realize the evidence of it was a joke.

Butina is accused by the US government of acting and conspiring to act as an unregistered foreign agent of the Russian Federation and was arrested on July 15, although it wasn't announced until the following day while US President Donald Trump met with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland.

After government prosecutors, led by Assistant US Attorney Erik Kenerson, withdrew their claim that Butina, 29, had used her body to advance the interests of the Kremlin, her defense attorney, Robert Driscoll, filed a motion for the government to reconsider allowing her release on bond. 

In the motion, Driscoll slammed the charges against his client, calling it a "legally and factually weak case based upon an esoteric theory brought against a young woman." On July 25, Driscoll told the court that he doesn't believe the sex allegation against his client to be true, complaining that the government had not offered any evidence to substantiate them but that the claim had nonetheless, become the "big issue in the media."

In an August 24 court filing, Driscoll wrote that the charge painted his client as "some type of Kremlin-trained seductress, or spy-novel honeypot character."


Read more:

the assassin retires...


Admiral William H. McRaven has handed in his resignation from the Advisory Council of Innovation to the Defence Secretary.

It was the US Defense Secretary, Ash Carter, that set up this council in 1996. The motive was to pull the best talent in Silicon Valley’s innovation industries. The Council brings together those with expertise in the intricacies of the Internet and high rank military officials.

Admiral McRaven entered into a head-on conflict with President Trump when Trump withdrew the former CIA Director’s, John Brennan’s, Secret Defence Security Clearance. To express his solidarity with Brennan, McRaven published an article requesting that he too be deprived of his security clearance. The Washington Post published this text [1] on the same day that former senior Intelligence officials also published a text supporting Brennan [2].

After an anonymous article was published in the New York Times [3], this time attributed to a high ranking official in the White House, McRaven was invited to hand in his resignation from the Council that he was sitting on.

Admiral McRaven achieved fame as the leader of Operation, Neptune’s Spear. It is asserted that he assassinated Osama Bin Laden in his dwellings in Abbottabad, Pakistan. This operation had been set up by President Barack Obama and was robustly challenged by Pakistan on two grounds. First, because it was executed in violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty and second, because Osama Bin Laden was not living in Abbottabada, but had died in Afghanistan in 2001. Admiral McRaven had then led the Special Forces (US SoCom). In this regard, he had been heard by the Congress and proudly revealed his practice of political assassinations in 78 countries in the world. President Obama had tasked McRaven with establishing a network with Allied Special Forces in order to be able to assassinate anyone, wherever they might be in the world, in less than 48 hours [4].

John O. Brennan enjoyed a long career at the CIA and worked his way up to the top of the organization (2013-17). He added much muscle to the Agency’s Drone Assassination Programme, working closely with Admiral McRaven to achieve this. In contrast, he clashed with General Michael T. Flynn, Head of Military Intelligence. Once Flynn became the top adviser of National Security of President Trump, he immediately had Brennan removed and tried to reorganize the CIA around its missions of gathering human intelligence, steering it away from liquidating its enemies. Wasting no time, Brennan led the political fight against Flynn and Trump, accusing them of being Russian agents. His secret-defence accreditation was revoked on 15 August 2018.

Anoosha Boralessa


Read more:


see also:

a history lesson: WACL...