WaltiSiegrist
9/11 Israeli Terror, die Evidenz
In den Kommentaren sind verschiedene Dokumentationen zusammengetragen
January 06, 2023
911 and Israel's Great Game (Laurent Guyénot)
Caption

Dear Mr. President,

As you said very clearly, the United States is bogged down in a costly quagmire in the Middle East, engaged in covert military operations in countries where there is no real U.S. interest.  We have gained nothing from 17 years of war in which untold thousands have been killed or maimed and entire nations have been devastated.  Our Middle East policy is disastrous and must be changed.  If we don't change our policy we can only expect more of the same – millions more refugees, thousands more dead, trillions more wasted.

In order to correct our policy we need to understand who got us into this mess in the first place.  The 9/11 event as a false flag operation and the War on Terror campaign were both conceived by Israeli military intelligence in the 1970s under the leadership of Menachem Begin, the self-proclaimed "Father of Terrorism" and founder of the Likud party who became prime minister in 1977.  War on Terror doctrine was rolled out in July 1979 at a Netanyahu Institute conference in Jerusalem.  The Israeli trick was to get the U.S. military to neutralize and fragment its enemies, most notably Iraq and Syria, under the pretext of fighting terrorism. Since 1979, this devious plan has been openly promoted by Benjamin Netanyahu.  On 9/11, War on Terror proponent Netanyahu told the New York Times that the terror atrocity was "very good" for U.S.-Israeli relations.

The Israelis have a long history of using false-flag terrorism against the United States:

• 1954 JUL – The Lavon Affair:  Israeli agents place bombs in U.S. and British libraries and institutions in Egypt in a false-flag operation meant to be blamed on the Muslim Brotherhood.

• 1967 JUN – Israeli aircraft and ships attack the defenseless USS Liberty, killing 34 and wounding 171, with the intention of sinking the ship – with no survivors – so that the blame could be assigned to Egypt.

• 1983 OCT – A truck bomb kills 241 Marines in their barracks in Beirut.  Former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky says Mossad knew the details of the truck, the time, and location of the bombing, but only gave a general warning to the Americans.  A nebulous "Islamic Jihad" group is blamed; Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger says U.S. has no knowledge who really did the bombing. This occurred one month after a single Marine stopped an Israeli tank column – some former Marines believe Israel organized the attack.

• 1986 FEB – Mossad plants a radio relay device in an apartment in Tripoli, Libya, to send fake messages that appear to be from the Libyan government; U.S. intelligence is successfully tricked and President Reagan orders bombing of Libya.

1978 – Israeli agent Arnon Milchan's first film features a Boeing 747 crashing into the PanAm building. Months before 9/11 produces a film episode in which remote controlled airplanes hit buildings.

1979 JUL – Netanyahu Institute hosts conference on terrorism calling for U.S. military intervention in Middle East.

1979 – Isser Harel, founding chief of Israeli intelligence, predicts 9/11 attacks in New York City.

1982 FEB– Israeli Likud strategist Oded Yinon plan calls for the “dissolution of Syria and Iraq" and Balkanization of all Arab states.

1983 – Israel creates foe for War on Terror:  Under Ehud Barak, Israeli military intelligence (AMAN) begins arming and training anti-Western Hezb-i-Islami terrorists in Pakistan, including Osama bin Laden.

1987 – Two of Isser Harel’s senior Mossad agents, Avraham Shalom Bendor and Zvi Malkin, get the security contract for World Trade Center; Port Authority cancels the contract when their criminal history is discovered.

1990 – Rejected by Port Authority due to criminal conviction in Israel, Shalom Bendor goes to work for Jules Kroll.

1993 FEB – Zionists manage prosecution of WTC bombing:  Israeli-American Michael Chertoff, U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, plays key role in prosecution. Zionist Judge Michael Mukasey presides over case against "Blind Sheikh." FBI informant Emad Salem is paid one million dollars for his testimony. Media leads public to believe that Muslims want to destroy the Twin Towers.

1993 – After first WTC bombing Kroll Associates gets security contract for the Port Authority and the WTC.

1994 – After losing Saudi and Pakistani support, the Israeli-trained "remainder of Hezb-i-Islami merges into al-Qaeda and the Taliban."

1998 DEC – Philip Zelikow’s Catastrophic Terrorism Study Group publishes report "Imagining Transforming Event" in Foreign Affairs (CFR). Co-authors Ashton Carter and John Deutch work for Global Technology Partners, an exclusive affiliate of Rothschild N.A.

1999 – Hugo Neu creates a global trading division headed by two veteran ferrous metal traders from Marc Rich and Glencore AG in Switzerland. A lot of expense and effort is spent to prepare a network to export scrap iron to Asia while its price is at the lowest level in 50 years. Hugo Neu and the state share the costs of dredging the Claremont channel to allow large ocean-going ships to Asia.

2000 SEP – A Neo-Con group, Project for the New American Century (PNAC) suggests that "a catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" may be necessary to facilitate "the process of transformation" they call for in U.S. military policy. Ten signers of the PNAC document, including Dick Cheney, were in senior positions of the Bush administration in 2001.

2001 – Israeli Mossad company ICTS controls security screening at U.S. Airports on 9/11. Directors include Yair Shamir, son of notorious Israeli terrorist Yitzhak Shamir.

2001 – Israeli intelligence creates false histories for alleged hijackers. Israeli spies posing as "art students" live near hijacker patsies. Duplicate documents are used to create false histories, standard procedure for Mossad false-flag operations.

2001 – Ronald Lauder manages Governor George Pataki’s privatization scheme which includes WTC property. Lauder funds Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy and Strategy at Mossad center (IDC) where Israeli Major General Daniel Rothschild heads Institute for Policy and Strategy.

2001 JUL 24 – Larry Silverstein gets lease for World Trade Center. Silverstein obtains lease thru fellow Zionist agent Lew Eisenberg, chairman of the Port Authority. Silverstein and Eisenberg are both members of UJA board, major Zionist fundraising organization.  Since 1996, Silverstein has close contact with Netanyahu; every Sunday afternoon Netanyahu calls Silverstein. Silverstein immediately raises rents by 40% for the few tenants he has.

2001 SEP 11 – Ehud Olmert, Israel’s deputy prime minister, is on an unreported visit in New York City. Why is it secret? While all civilian planes are grounded, at 4:11 p.m. an El Al Boeing 747 takes off from JFK bound for Tel Aviv.  The flight is authorized by the direct intervention of the U.S. Department of Defense.

9/11 – Alex Brown, a firm with ties to Israeli military intelligence and Yair Shamir’s company Scitex has many of the suspicious "put" options.  "Buzzy" Krongard, executive director of the CIA, headed AB until 1998. His wife works for Rothschild Asset Management.

9/11 – Israeli government receives the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to be in the area of the WTC or Pentagon on 9/11. Odigo, an Israeli messaging company, is used to send warning several hours before attacks.  Four Israelis die at WTC.

9/11 – Five Israelis working for Urban Moving Systems are arrested on 9/11 after being seen photographing and celebrating the attack on the WTC. The fake moving company is later found to be a front for the Mossad. Two of the Israelis are known Mossad.

9/11 – Israeli military chief Ehud Barak interprets 9/11 on BBC and Sky News in London, blaming Osama bin Laden and calling for U.S. to "launch an operational, concrete, war against terror."  Barak is Netanyahu's commander in the Sayeret Matkal, a covert commando force of Israeli military intelligence.  Other Israeli commandos (e.g. Daniel Lewin) are involved in 9/11.  Bin Laden denies responsibility for 9/11.

9/11 – Netanyahu praises 9/11 atrocity to NYT:  “It's very good… it will generate immediate sympathy.” In 2008, he says in Israel: "We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq."

9/11 – An Israeli controls 9-11 investigation. John Ashcroft puts Israeli dual-national Michael Chertoff in charge of 9/11 investigation.  “For day-to-day decisions, Chertoff has the last word.” Destruction of crucial evidence begins immediately.

9/11 – Two Zionist-owned junkyards manage hasty destruction and exportation of evidence using large ships bound for Asia able to load at Hugo Neu because the Claremont Channel has been dredged since 1999. 

Post 9/11 – Zionist with conflict of interest presides over 9/11 lawsuit:  Judge Alvin Hellerstein manages 9-11 tort litigation, while his son is lawyer in Israel with firm that represents ICTS, key defendant in 9/11 litigation. Hellerstein dismisses ICTS and every 9/11 case is settled out of court.

Post 9/11 – Zionists manage compensation funds:  Kenneth Feinberg and Sheila Birnbaum oversee compensation settlements for 9/11 families. Not a single case goes to trial. No 9/11 discovery occurs in court.

2003 MAR – Zionists control 9/11 myth:  Appointed director of 9/11 Commission, Philip Zelikow frames the agenda and decides what evidence the commission sees. A specialist in "public myths," Zelikow comes to commission with complete outline of report – before staff even begins working.

Until 2011 – Israelis construct 9/11 memorial and legacy:  WTC memorial is designed by Israeli Michael Arad, son of Moshe Arad, former Israeli ambassador to the United States.

Until today – Controlled media ignores crucial 9/11 questions and evidence. Media pushes false narrative about 9/11 and the War on Terror while ignoring evidence that disproves the official myth.

Very respectfully,

Christopher Bollyn

 

PHYSICAL EVIDENCE THE TRUCK VAN EXISTED AND BLEW UP .  9/11 Urban Moving

 

https://www.google.com/search?hl=de-CH&q=9+11+mural+van&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSkwEJcSvkR1v0aQ8ahwELEKjU2AQaAAwLELCMpwgaYgpgCAMSKIIOhA6zDeAY1hjXGNwYsA3ZGMcY2DKrJqwmqibXMpUzjz-pJpAh_1CIaMK_1ruaITDcRpODF1A7vGMReBTkW69RE_18PqGMMKAUfRQvj6vIcCtA2NpJ6Kfzw5cPiAEDAsQjq7-CBoKCggIARIE0libjgw&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjA9u_qlqPkAhVEJ1AKHWoDCEIQwg4ILSgA&biw=1212&bih=916

 

https://21stcenturywire.com/2015/09/11/911-revisited-declassified-fbi-files-reveal-new-details-about-the-five-israelis/

 

 

Justfacts911

Am 20.10.2012 veröffentlicht

VON 30 ABONNIERT

 

 

A) PHYSICAL EVIDENCE THE TRUCK VAN EXISTED AND BLEW UP 

Radio police dispatch recording of two Israelis being arrested after they ran from the truck which blew up.   The truck  was described with a 'mural' (picture) on it of a plane and buildings, the men were clearly detained, and it's clear that the truck blew up.

 

 

 

Entire police dispatch which shows the above recording wasn't made up and it came from an actual police recording.

http://web.archive.org/web/20081130094614/http://www.firehouse.com/audio/wtc10.wav

 

Fire dispatch recording requesting help about truck bomb at King and 6th Street.

 

Eyewitnesses to the truck which blew up at King and 6th.

 

 Google maps shows the location of the eyewitnesses, at the corner of 6th and West third Street.   The man in the video points down 6th Street towards King, as he describes the truck that blew up.

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/truckbombmuralvaneyewitnesslocation3.jpg

 

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/truckbombmuralvaneyewitnesslocation1.jpg

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/truckbombmuralvaneyewitnesslocation2.jpg

 

The Mineta Transportation Institute, a US govn't funded institute, admitted the existence of the truck, describing it with a painting of a plane flying in into WTC.   "Middle Eastern" people were detained.     They claim it was an 'innocent delivery truck", but fail to mention the truck blew up and occupants tried to run away prior to the explosion, as the evidence above confirms.

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/mtitruckbombexcuse1-1.png

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/mtitruckbombexcuse2-1.png

 

As demonstrated above, a truck/van blew up and King and 6th Street and the suspects were detained.   

B) WHO DID THE TRUCK BELONG TO AND WHO WERE THE OCCUPANTS

There is some confusion as to why, as the witnesses described, would the Mossad use a van which had a picture on it of a plane diving into New York (or WTC).   Let's look at the evidence.

 

Urban Moving Systems, a front for the Israeli Mossad, was busted on 911, after some of their agents were arrested after being caught filming the 1st plane impact with foreknowledge, and caught with other truck bombs.   This was part of a massive Israeli spy ring working in the US prior to, and during 911.  

 

Dominik Suter, was the Israeli agent who owned and operated Urban Moving Systems located at 3 18th Street, Weehawken, New Jersey.   

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/urbanmovingsystemsgouldstreetcorpbusinessstatus1.jpg

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/urbanmovingsystemsbusinessstatus2.jpg

 

Dominik Suter is also associated with Gould Street Corporation, located at 73-75 Gould Street in Bayonne, NJ.

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/urbanmovingsystemsgouldstreetcorpbusinessstatus1.jpg

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/urbanmovingsystemsgouldstreetcorpbusinessstatus2.jpg

 

Zoom Copter is a company which listed 73-75 Gould Street as their place of business. 

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/zoomcopterUMSconnection.png

Zoom Copter is another Israeli operation, peddling merchandise in malls as a front for its activities on US soil.

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z322/rusqueelin/truckbombmuralvanzoomcopters.jpg

 

Thanks to the blogger at  http://mybigfatanti-zionistlife.blogspot.com/2009/08/9-11-mossad-mall-spies-zoomcopters-and.html for the Zoom Copter research.

 

So the Mossad, Dominik Suter, and Urban Moving Systems had definite connections to a company named Zoom Copters, which sold remote controlled planes and helicopters, along other things, in USA malls.   A business which would have had company vans, and likely a logo advertising their business.   Was this the type of van used on 911?

 

The Israeli Mossad and their front, Urban Moving Systems, used many different vans on 911.   It would appear that they had no worries about the type of van in operation, considering they even used one which had Urban Moving Systems written right on it, at Liberty State Park.

 

Dominik Suter and Urban Moving Systems have clear connection to Zoom Copters, an Israeli operated company.    Considering the overwhelming evidence of multiple Urban Moving System vans being involved on 911 and being part of the operation, the 'picture van' which blew up at King and 6th with 'Middle Eastern men' being caught and detained,  must be Israelis using a Zoom Copter van, and being caught red handed, just like they were on George Washington Bridge, Liberty State Park, and on the Doris Apartment Complex filming the 1st plane strike.

 

ISRAELI ART STUDENTS?

ISRAELI ART STUDENTS?

A topic that has been around for years but not discussed much is that of the Israeli Art Students (Gelatin B-Thing) camping out on the 91st floor of the North Tower (WTC1). The claim is that these “Israeli Art Students” were responsible for the “Preparing of the WTC Destruction”. The New York Times reported that the Art Students were living in the North Tower but claim they were an Austrian stunt group known as Gelatin B-Thing, not Israeli. Let’s look more into who these “Art Students” really were.

Profile: “Israeli art students”

http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=_israeli_art_students_

————

The Infamous Israeli “Art Students” Had No Role in 9/11

http://911review.org/Alex/Isreali_Art_Students.html

————-

THE ISRAELI ART STUDENTS AND MOVERS STORY

http://911review.org/brad.com/ISRAELI_ART_STUDENTS.html

———-

The Israeli “art student” mystery

http://www.salon.com/2002/05/07/students/

http://www.salon.com/2002/05/10/ketcham/

“For almost two years, hundreds of young Israelis falsely claiming to be art students haunted federal offices — in particular, the DEA. No one knows why — and no one seems to want to find out.”

———-

The ‘Israeli Art Student’ Files

http://antiwar.com/israeli-files.php

http://antiwar.com/rep/DEA_Report_redactedxx.pdf

 

 

————

Here are a few of the original sources pushing the Israeli Art Student claims. Some of the information seems to be accurate but there are also many false claims which I will get into more below.

PREPARING THE WTC FOR DESTRUCTION

http://abundanthope.net/pages/True_US_History_108/PREPARING-THE-WTC-FOR-DESTRUCTION_printer.shtml

http://www.conspiracy-cafe.com/apps/blog/show/8636674-preparing-the-wtc-for-destruction

http://www.shakesaspear.com/911whodunnit/

————-

Israeli art students in WTC connected to September 11, 2001.

“ISRAELI STUDENTS/SPY RING penetrated U.S. security – Ecstasy Drug trafficking ring.

Hanan Serfaty was arrested by DEA agents in connection to the Israeli spy ring. What makes him stand out, is that he was listed as being an art student who was apart of the World Views program, which was in the World Trade Center on floors 91 and 92 in the Lower Manhatten Cultural Council.

Serfaty was moving large amounts of cash: he carried bank slips showing more than $100,000 deposited from December 2000 through the first quarter of 2001; other bank slips showed withdrawals for about $80,000 during the same period. Serfaty’s apartments, serving as crash pads for at least two other “art students”, were located at 4220 Sheridan Street and 701 South 21st Avenue. Lead hijacker Mohammed Atta’s mail drop was at 3389 Sheridan Street–approximately 2,700 feet from Serfaty’s Sheridan Street apartment. Hanan was an “art student” who was a former Israeli military intelligence officer who rented two Hollywood apts close to the mail drop/apartment of Mohammed Atta.”

http://911blogger.com/node/21681

——————-

QUESTIONS:

1) Is there any hard evidence that the Art Students camping on the 91st floor of WTC 1, were Israeli?

2) How did these art students get thousands of pounds of incendiary charges inside the buildings without help from WTC Security Firms like Stratesec, Kroll Associates, and the PANYNJ?

3) Do these students have any other suspicious connections or circumstances surrounding their proximity to the crime scene? Did these students have any professional expertise in demolition that would qualify them to manage and orchestrate such a daunting demolition operation?

4) Is it possible that these individuals were intentionally set up with occupancy inside the WTC in order to create a “Red Herring” in order to divert attention away from said Security Companies and their links with CIA and Wall Street?

I can’t seem to find much information on these guys and what they’ve been doing since 9/11 but these are some questions that need to be answered before we can say they were Israeli Demolition experts that rigged the 

 

Dancing Israelis ABC News 2002

9/11 Dancing Israelis and Urban Moving Systems - ABC News 20/20 preview, June 21, 2002

community logo
Join the WaltiSiegrist Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
3
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
Eiweiss-Produktionsfabriken

Nein meine liebe Anita Niederer, da hat es auch zirkuläre DNA drin

#plasmidgate #Placentagate

https://twitter.com/RealWsiegrist/status/1640256004808925186?s=20

00:00:18
00:02:19
Ja, wir sind die Guten

JA, wir haben vor 20 Jahren den Irak angegriffen
JA, wir besetzen den Irak auch heute noch
JA, wir haben um ihr Leben rennende Zivilisten massakriert
JA, dem Mann, der es aufgedeckt hat, drohen wir mit 175 Jahren Haft

Aber in der Ukraine, DA sind wir die Guten. Bitte glaubt uns.

https://twitter.com/MrJonasDanner/status/1637912393442553856?s=20

00:00:27
post photo preview

Rechtsanwalt Philipp Kruse erzählt in diesem lebendigen Referat auf leicht verständliche Weise, warum die Schweiz aus rechtlicher Sicht aus der WHO austreten sollte. Er gibt einen Einblick, wie unsere Regierung immer mehr Macht an die WHO abgeben will, insbesondere mit dem neuen Pandemie-Vertrag, welcher unter anderem die Menschenrechte nicht mehr respektiert...

Soviel zur sicheren Impfung Herr @Berset

Insgesamt deutet alles darauf hin, dass der gemeldete Anstieg der IgG4-Werte, der nach wiederholter Impfung mit den mRNA-Impfstoffen festgestellt wurde, kein Schutzmechanismus ist; vielmehr könnte er Teil des Immuntoleranzmechanismus gegenüber dem Spike-Protein sein, das durch Unterdrückung der natürlichen antiviralen Reaktionen eine ungehinderte SARS-CoV2-Infektion und -Replikation fördern könnte. Die IgG4-induzierte Unterdrückung des Immunsystems durch wiederholte Impfungen kann bei empfänglichen Personen auch Autoimmunkrankheiten, Krebswachstum und autoimmune Myokarditis verursachen.

https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202303.0441/v1

post photo preview
The history of the Neocon takeover of the USA (a 4 part analysis)
By Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould

 

Part 1 – American Imperialism Leads the World into Dante’s Vision of Hell

“The Gate of Hell” by Gustave Doré for Dante’s “Inferno.” (Wikimedia)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inferno_Canto_3_line_9.jpg

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate. (Abandon all hope ye who enter here.)”

—Dante, “The Divine Comedy,” Inferno (Part 1), Canto 3, Line 9

Before the Tomahawk Missiles start flying between Moscow and New York, Americans had better educate themselves fast about the forces and the people who claim that Russia covered up a Syrian government gas attack on its own people. Proof no longer seems to matter in the rush to further transform the world into Dante’s vision of Hell. Accusations made by anonymous sources, spurious sources and outright frauds have become enough. Washington’s paranoia and confusion bear an uncanny resemblance to the final days of the Third Reich, when the leadership in Berlin became completely unglued. Tensions have been building since fall with accusations that Russian media interfered with our presidential election and is a growing threat to America’s national security. The latest WikiLeaks release strongly suggested that it was the CIA’s own contract hackers behind Hillary Clinton’s email leaks and not Russians. The U.S. has a long reputation of accusing others of things they didn’t do and planting fake news stories to back it up in order to provide a cause for war. The work of secret counter intelligence services is to misinform the public in order to shape opinion and that’s what this is. The current U.S. government campaign to slander Russia over anything and everything it does bears all the earmarks of a classic disinformation campaign but this time even crazier. Considering that Washington has put Russia, China and Iran on its anti-globalist hit-list from which no one is allowed to escape, drummed up charges against them shouldn’t come as a surprise. But accusing the Russians of undermining American democracy and interfering in an election is tantamount to an act of war and that simply is not going to wash. This time the United States is not demonizing an ideological enemy (USSR) or a religious one (al Qaeda, ISIS, Daesh etc.). It’s making this latest venture into the blackest of propaganda a race war, the way the Nazis made their invasion of Russia a race war in 1941 and that is not a war the United States can justify or win.

The level and shrillness of the latest disinformation campaign has been growing for some time. But the American public has lived in a culture of fake news (formerly known as propaganda) for so long many have grown to accept fake news as real news. George Orwell saw this coming and here it is. As a big supporter of U.S. military intervention in Cuba and avowed practitioner of “yellow journalism”, in 1897 William Randolph Hearst admonished the illustrator he’d sent to Cuba who’d found no war to illustrate; “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war.” Hearst eventually got his war and America’s experiment in imperialism was off and running.

Americans should know by now that their country’s wars are fertile ground for biased, one-sided, xenophobic, fake news and the United States has been in a permanent state of war since 1941. Although the targets have shifted over the years, the purpose of the propaganda hasn’t. Most cultures are coerced, cajoled or simply threatened into accepting known falsehoods demonizing their enemies during wartime but no matter how frequently repeated or cleverly told—no lie can hold if the war never ends. The legendary Cold Warrior, Time and Life Magazine’s Henry Luce considered his personal fight against Communism to be “a declaration of private war.” He’d even asked one of his executives whether or not the idea was probably “unlawful and probably mad?” Nonetheless, despite his doubts about his own sanity, Luce allowed the CIA to use his Time/Life as a cover for the agency’s operations and to provide credentials to CIA personnel.

Luce was not alone in his service to the CIA’s propaganda wars. Recently declassified documents reveal the CIA’s propaganda extended to all the mainstream media outlets. Dozens of the most respected journalists and opinion makers during the Cold War considered it a privilege to keep American public opinion from straying away from CIA control.

Now that the new Cold War has turned hot, we are led to believe that the Russians have breached this wall of not-so-truthful journalists and rattled the foundation of everything we are supposed to hold dear about the purity of the U.S. election process and “freedom of the press” in America.

Black propaganda is all about lying. Authoritarian governments lie regularly. Totalitarian governments do it so often nobody believes them. A government based on democratic principles like the United States is supposed to speak the truth, but when the U.S. government’s own documents reveal it has been lying over and over again for decades, the jig is up.

Empires have been down this road before and it doesn’t end well. Americans are now being told they should consider all Russian opinion as fake and ignore any information that challenges the mainstream media and U.S. government on what is truth and what is the lie. But for the first time in memory Americans have become aware that the people Secretary of State Colin Powell once called “the crazies”, have taken the country over the cliff.

The neoconservative hitmen and hit-ladies of Washington have a long list of targets that pass from generation to generation. Their influence on American government has been catastrophic yet it never seems to end. Senator J. William Fulbright identified their irrational system for making endless war in Vietnam 45 years ago in a New Yorker article titled Reflections in Thrall to Fear.

“The truly remarkable thing about this Cold War psychology is the totally illogical transfer of the burden of proof from those who make charges to those who question them… The Cold Warriors, instead of having to say how they knew that Vietnam was part of a plan for the Communization of the world, so manipulated the terms of the public discussion as to be able to demand that the skeptics prove that it was not. If the skeptics could not then the war must go on—to end it would be recklessly risking the national security.”

Fulbright realized that Washington’s resident crazies had turned the world inside out by concluding, “We come to the ultimate illogic: war is the course of prudence and sobriety until the case for peace is proved under impossible rules of evidence [or never]–or until the enemy surrenders. Rational men cannot deal with each other on this basis.” But these were not rational men and their need to further their irrational quest only increased with the loss of the Vietnam War.

Having long forgotten the lessons of Vietnam and after a tragic repeat in Iraq that the highly respected General William Odom considered “equivalent to the Germans at Stalingrad,” the crazies are at it again. With no one to stop them, they have kicked off an updated version of the Cold War against Russia as if nothing had changed since the last one ended in 1992. The original Cold War was immensely expensive to the United States and was conducted at the height of America’s military and financial power. The United States is no longer that country. Since it was supposedly about the ideological “threat” of Communism, Americans need to ask before it’s too late exactly what kind of threat does a Capitalist/Christian Russia pose to the leader of the “Free World” this time?

Muddying the waters in a way not seen since Senator Joe McCarthy and the height of the Red Scare in the 1950s, the “Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act” signed into law without fanfare by Obama in December 2016 officially authorizes a government censorship bureaucracy comparable only to George Orwell’s fictional Ministry of Truth in his novel 1984. Referred to as “The Global Engagement Center,” the official purpose of the new bureaucracy will be to “recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed at undermining United States national security interests.” But the real purpose of this totally Orwellian Center will be to manage, eliminate or censor any dissenting views that challenge Washington’s newly manufactured version of the truth and to intimidate, harass or jail anyone who tries. Criminalizing dissent is nothing new in time of war, but after 16 years of ceaseless warfare in Afghanistan, a Stalingrad–like defeat in Iraq and with Henry Kissinger advising President Trump on foreign policy, the Global Engagement Center has already assumed the characteristics of a dangerous farce.

The brilliant American satirical songwriter of the 1950s and 60s Tom Lehrer once attributed his early retirement to Henry Kissinger, saying “Political satire became obsolete [in 1973] when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.” Kissinger’s duplicitous attempts at securing an “honorable peace” in America’s war in Vietnam deserved at least ridicule. His long, drawn out negotiations extended the war for four years at the cost of 22,000 American lives and countless Vietnamese. According to University of California researcher Larry Berman, author of 2001’s No Peace, No Honor: Nixon, Kissinger, and Betrayal in Vietnam, the Paris peace accords negotiated by Kissinger were never even expected to work, but were only to serve as a justification for a brutal and permanent air war once they were violated. Berman writes, “Nixon recognized that winning the peace, like the war would be impossible to achieve, but he planned for indefinite stalemate by using the B 52s to prop up the government of South Vietnam until the end of his presidency… but Watergate derailed the plan.”

The Vietnam War had broken the eastern establishment’s hold over foreign policy long before Nixon and Kissinger’s entry onto the scene. Détente with the Soviet Union had come about during the Johnson administration in an effort to bring some order out of the chaos and Kissinger had carried it through Nixon and Ford. But while dampening one crisis, détente created an even worse one by breaking open the longstanding internal-deep-state-struggle for control of U.S. policy toward the Soviet Union. Vietnam represented more than just a strategic defeat; it represented a conceptual failure in the half-century battle to contain Soviet-style Communism. The Pentagon Papers revealed the extent of the U.S. government’s deceit and incompetence but rather than concede that defeat and chart a new course, its proponents fought back with a Machiavellian ideological campaign known as the experiment in competitive analysis or for short; Team B.

Writing in the Los Angeles Times in August 2004 in an article titled It’s Time to Bench “Team B”, Lawrence J. Korb, a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress and assistant secretary of defense from 1981 to 1985 came forward on what he knew to be the real tragedy represented by 9/11. “The reports of the Sept. 11 commission and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence missed the real problem facing the intelligence community, which is not organization or culture but something known as the “Team B” concept. And the real villains are the hard-liners who created the concept out of an unwillingness to accept the unbiased and balanced judgments of intelligence professionals.”

Part 2 – How Neocons Push for War by Cooking the Books

An 1898 cartoon features newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst dressed as a cartoon character of the day, a satire of their papers’ role in drumming up U.S. public opinion for war by Leon Barritt (Wikimedia)) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PulitzerHearstWarYellowKids.jpg

Most Americans outside of Washington policy circles don’t know about Team B, where it came from or what it did, nor are they aware of its roots in the Fourth International, the Trotskyist branch of the Communist International. Lawrence J. Korb, a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress and assistant secretary of defense from 1981 to 1985 attributed the intelligence failure represented by 9/11 to Team B and had this to say about it in a 2004 article for the Los Angeles Times.

“The roots of the problem go back to May 6, 1976, when the director of Central Intelligence, George H.W. Bush, created the first Team B… The concept of a “competitive analysis” of the data done by an alternative team had been opposed by William Colby, Bush’s predecessor as CIA director and a career professional… Although the Team B report contained little factual data it was enthusiastically received by conservative groups such as the Committee on the Present Danger. But the report turned out to be grossly inaccurate… Team B was right about one thing. The CIA estimate was indeed flawed. But it was flawed in the other direction.”

Korb went on to explain that a 1978 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence review concluded; “that the selection of Team B members had yielded a flawed composition of political views and biases. And a 1989 review concluded that the Soviet threat had been ‘substantially overestimated’ in the CIA’s annual intelligence estimates… Still, the failure of Team B in 1976 did not deter the hard-liners from challenging the CIA’s judgments for the next three decades.”

Now long forgotten, the origins of the Team B “problem” actually stretched back to the radical political views and biases of James Burnham, his association with the Communist Revolutionary Leon Trotsky and the creation of powerful eastern establishment ad hoc groups; the Committee on the Present Danger and the American Security Council. From the outset of the Cold War in the late 1940s an odd coalition of ex-Trotskyist radicals and right wing business associations had lobbied heavily for big military budgets, advanced weapons systems and aggressive action to confront Soviet Communism. Vietnam was intended to prove the brilliance of their theories, but as described by author Fred Kaplan, “Vietnam brought out the dark side of nearly everyone inside America’s national security machine. And it exposed something seamy and disturbing about the very enterprise of the defense intellectuals. It revealed that the concept of force underlying all their formulations and scenarios was an abstraction, practically useless as a guide to action.” (Wizards of Armageddon page. 336) Kaplan ends by writing “The disillusionment for some became nearly total.” Vietnam represented more than just a strategic defeat for America’s defense intellectuals; it represented a conceptual failure in the half-century battle to contain Soviet-style Communism but for Team B, that disillusionment represented the opportunity of a lifetime.

Trotskyist Intellectuals become The New York Intellectuals become Defense Intellectuals

Populated by an inbred class of former Trotskyist intellectuals, the Team B approach represented a radical transformation of America’s national security bureaucracy into a new kind of elitist cult. In the 1960s Robert McNamara’s numbers and statistics justified bad policy decisions, now personal agendas and ethnic grudges would turn American foreign policy into an ideological crusade. Today those in control of that crusade fight desperately to maintain their grip, but only by de-encrypting the evolution of this secret “double government” can anyone understand America’s unrelenting post-Vietnam drift into despotism over the last 40 years.

Rooted in what can only be described as cult thinking, the Team B experiment tore down what was left of the CIA’s pre-Vietnam professional objectivity by subjecting it to politicization. Earlier in the decade, the CIA’s Office of Strategic Research (OSR) had been pressured by Nixon and Kissinger to corrupt their analysis to justify increased defense spending but the Team B’s ideological focus and partisan makeup so exaggerated the threat, the process could never return to normal.

The campaign was driven by the Russophobic neoconservative cabal which included Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Pipes, Richard Perle and a handful of old anti-Soviet hardliners like Paul Nitze and General Danny Graham. It began with a 1974 article in the Wall Street Journal by the famed nuclear strategist and former Trotskyist Albert Wohlstetter decrying America’s supposed nuclear vulnerability. It ended 2 years later with a ritualistic bloodletting at the CIA, signaling that ideology and not fact-based analysis had gained an exclusive hold on America’s bureaucracy.

The ideology referred to as Neoconservatism can claim many godfathers if not godmothers. Roberta Wohlstetter’s reputation as one of RAND’s preeminent Cold Warriors was equal to her husband’s. The couple’s infamous parties at their Santa Monica home acted as a kind of initiation rite for the rising class of “defense intellectual”. But the title of founding-father might best be applied to James Burnham. A convert from Communist revolutionary Leon Trotsky’s inner circle, Burnham’s 1941, The Managerial Revolution and 1943’s The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom championed the anti-democratic takeover then occurring in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy while in1945’s Lenin’s Heir he switched his admiration, if only tongue in cheek, from Trotsky to Stalin.

George Orwell criticized Burnham’s cynical elitist vision in his 1946 essay Second Thoughts on James Burnham, writing “What Burnham is mainly concerned to show [in The Machiavellians] is that a democratic society has never existed and, so far as we can see, never will exist. Society is of its nature oligarchical, and the power of the oligarchy always rests upon force and fraud… Power can sometimes be won and maintained without violence, but never without fraud.”

Orwell is said to have modelled his novel 1984 on Burnham’s vision of the coming totalitarian state which he described as “a new kind of society, neither capitalist nor Socialist, and probably based upon slavery.”

As a Princeton and Oxford educated English scholar (one of his professor’s at Balliol College was J.R.R Tolkien) Burnham landed a position as a writer and an instructor in the philosophy department at New York University just in time for the 1929 Wall Street crash. Although initially uninterested in politics and hostile to Marxism, by 1931Burnham had become radicalized by the Great Depression and alongside fellow NYU philosophy instructor Sidney Hook, drawn to Marxism.

Burnham found Trotsky’s use of “dialectical materialism” to explain the interplay between the human and the historical forces in his History of the Russian Revolution to be brilliant. His subsequent review of Trotsky’s book would bring the two men together and begin for Burnham a six year odyssey through America’s Communist left that would in this strange saga, ultimately transform him into the agent of its destruction.

As founder of the Red Army and a firebrand Marxist, Trotsky had dedicated his life to the spread of a worldwide Communist revolution. Stalin opposed Trotsky’s views as too ambitious and the power struggle that followed Lenin’s death splintered the party. By their very nature the Trotskyists were expert at infighting, infiltration and disruption. Burnham reveled in his role as a Trotskyist intellectual and the endless debates over the fundamental principle of Communism (dialectical materialism) behind Trotsky’s crusade. The Communist Manifesto approved the tactic of subverting larger and more populist political parties (entrism) and following Trotsky’s expulsion from the Communist party in November 1927, his followers exploited it. The most well-known example of entrism was the so called “French Turn” when in 1934 the French Trotskyists entered the much larger French Socialist Party the SFIO with the intention of winning over the more militant elements to their side.

That same year the American followers of Trotsky in the Communist League of America, the CLA did a French turn on the American Workers Party, the AWP in a move that elevated the AWP’s James Burnham into the role of a Trotsky lieutenant and chief advisor.

Burnham liked the toughness of the Bolsheviks and despised the weakness of the liberals. According to his biographer Daniel Kelly, “He took great pride in what he saw as its hard-headed view of the world in contrast to philosophies rooted in ‘dreams and illusions.’” He also delighted in the tactics of infiltrating and subverting other leftist parties and in 1935 “fought tirelessly for the French turn” of another and far larger Socialist Party the SP some twenty thousand strong. The Trotskyists intended “to capture its left wing and its youth division, the Young People’s Socialist League (YPSL),” Kelly writes “and take the converts with them when they left.”

Burnham remained a “Trotskyist Intellectual” from 1934 until 1940. But although he labored six years for the party, it was said of him that he was never of the party and as the new decade began he renounced both Trotsky and “the ‘philosophy of Marxism’ dialectical materialism” altogether. He summed up his feelings in a letter of resignation on May 21, 1940. “Of the most important beliefs, which have been associated with the Marxist Movement, whether in its reformist, Leninist, Stalinist or Trotskyist variants, there is virtually none which I accept in its traditional form. I regard these beliefs as either false or obsolete or meaningless; or in a few cases, as at best true only in a form so restricted and modified as no longer properly to be called Marxist.”

In 1976 Burnham wrote to a legendary secret agent whom biographer Kelly referred to as “the British political analyst Brian Crozier” that he had never swallowed dialectical materialism or the ideology of Marxism but was merely being pragmatic given the rise of Hitler and the Depression.

But given the influential role Burnham would come to play in creating the new revolutionary class of neoconservatives, and their central role in using Trotsky’s tactics to lobby against any relationship with the Soviet Union, it’s hard to believe Burnham’s involvement with Trotsky’s Fourth International was only an intellectual exercise in pragmatism

Part 3 – How the CIA Created a Fake Western Reality for ‘Unconventional Warfare’

“The Evil Spirits of the Modern Day Press”. Puck US magazine 1888 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Puck112188c.jpg ) [Public domain] via Wikimedia Commons

The odd, psychologically conflicted and politically divisive ideology referred to as Neoconservatism can claim many godfathers. Irving Kristol, father of William Kristol, Albert Wohlstetter, Daniel Bell, Norman Podhoretz and Sidney Hook come to mind and there are many others. But in both theory and its practice the title of founding-father of the neoconservative agenda of endless warfare that rules the thinking of America’s defense and foreign policies today might best be applied to James Burnham.

His writings in the 1930s provided a refined Oxford intellectual’s gloss to the Socialist Workers party and as a close advisor to Communist revolutionary Leon Trotsky and his Fourth International he learned the tactics and strategies of infiltration and political subversion first hand. Burnham reveled in his role as a “Trotskyist intellectual” pulling dirty tricks on his political foes in competing Marxist movements by turning their loyalties and looting their best talent.

Burnham renounced his allegiance to Trotsky and Marxism in all its forms in1940 but he would take their tactics and strategies for infiltration and subversion with him and would turn their method of dialectical materialism against them. His 1941book The Managerial Revolution would bring him fame and fortune and establish him as an astute, if not exactly accurate political prophet chronicling the rise of a new class of technocratic elite. His next book The Machiavellians would confirm his movement away from Marxist idealism to a very cynical and often cruel realism with his belief in the inevitable failure of democracy and the rise of the oligarch. In 1943 he would put it all to use in a memo for the U.S. Office of Strategic Services the OSS in which his Trotskyist anti-Stalinism would find its way into the agency’s thinking. And in his 1947 book The Struggle for the World, Burnham would expand his confrontational/adversarial dialectic toward the Soviet Union into a permanent, apocalyptic policy of endless war. By 1947 James Burnham’s transformation from Communist radical to New World Order American conservative was complete. His Struggle for the World had done a French Turn on Trotsky’s permanent Communist revolution and turned it into a permanent battle plan for a global American empire. All that was needed to complete Burnham’s dialectic was a permanent enemy and that would require a sophisticated psychological campaign to keep the hatred of Russia alive for generations.

The rise of the Machiavellians

In 1939 Sidney Hook, Burnham’s colleague at NYU and fellow Marxist philosopher had helped to found an anti-Stalinist Committee for Cultural Freedom as part of a campaign against Moscow. During the war Hook too had abandoned Marxism and like Burnham somehow found himself in the warm embrace of the right-wing of America’s intelligence community during and after World War II. Hook was viewed by the Communist Party as a traitor and “counter-revolutionary reptile” for his activities and by 1942 was informing on his fellow comrades to the FBI.

Selling impoverished and dispossessed European elites on the virtues of American culture was essential to building America’s empire after the war and Burnham’s early writings proved the inspiration from which a new counter-culture of “Freedom” would be built. As veterans of internecine Trotskyist warfare both Burnham and Hook were practiced at the arts of infiltration and subversion and with Burnham’s The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom as their blueprint they set out to color anything the Soviets did or said with dark intent.

As Burnham articulated clearly in his Machiavellians, his version of Freedom meant anything but intellectual freedom or those freedoms defined by America’s Constitution. What it really meant was conformity and submission. Burnham’s Freedom only applied to those intellectuals (the Machiavellians) willing to tell people the hard truth about the unpopular political realities they faced. These were the realities that would usher in a brave new world of the managerial class who would set about denying Americans the very democracy they thought they already owned. As Orwell observed about Burnham’s Machiavellian beliefs in his 1946 Second Thoughts, “Power can sometimes be won or maintained without violence, but never without fraud, because it is necessary to use the masses…”

By 1949 the CIA was actively in the business of defrauding the masses by secretly supporting the so called non-Communist left and behaving as if it was just a spontaneous outgrowth of a free society. By turning the left to the service of its expanding empire the CIA was applying a French Turn of its own by picking the best and the brightest and the creation of the National Security State in 1947 institutionalized it. Assisted by Britain’s Information Research Department the IRD, the CIA recruited key former Soviet disinformation agents trained before the war who had managed non-Communist front groups for Moscow and put them to work. As Frances Stoner Saunders writes in her book, The Cultural Cold War, “these former propagandists for the Soviets were recycled, bleached of the stain of Communism, embraced by government strategists who saw in their conversion an irresistible opportunity to sabotage the Soviet propaganda machine which they had once oiled.”

By its own admission the CIA’s strategy of promoting the non-Communist left would become the theoretical foundation of the Agency’s political operations against Communism for over the next two decades. But the no holds barred cultural war against Soviet Communism began in earnest in March 1949 when a group of 800 prominent literary and artistic figures gathered at New York’s Waldorf Astoria Hotel for a Soviet sponsored “Cultural and Scientific” conference that would sue for peace. Both Sydney Hook and James Burnham were already actively involved in enlisting recruits to counter Moscow’s Communist Information Bureau’s (Cominform) efforts to influence Western Opinion. But the Waldorf conference gave them an opportunity for dirty tricks they could only have prayed for.

Demonstrators organized by a right-wing coalition of Catholic groups and the American legion heckled the guests as they arrived. Catholic nuns knelt in prayer for the souls of the Communist atheists in attendance. Gathered upstairs in a tenth floor bridal suite a gang of ex-Trotskyists and Communists led by Hook intercepted the conference’s mail, doctored official press releases and published pamphlets challenging speakers to admit their Communist past.

In the end the entire conference became a twisted theatre of the absurd and Hook and Burnham would use it to sell Frank Wisner at the CIA’s Office of Policy Coordination on taking the show on the road.

The Congress for Cultural Freedom: By Hook or by Crook

Drawing on the untapped power of the Fourth International, the coming out party came on June 26, 1950 at the Titania Palace in occupied Berlin. Named for Hook’s 1939 concept for a cultural committee, The Congress for Cultural Freedom’s fourteen-point “Freedom Manifesto” was to identify the West with freedom. And since everything about the West was said to be free, free, free then it went without saying everything about the Soviet Union wasn’t.

Organized by Burnham and Hook, the American delegation represented a who’s who of America’s post war intellectuals. Tickets to Berlin were paid for by Wisner’s Office of Policy Coordination through front organizations as well as the Department of State which helped arrange travel, expenses and publicity. According to CIA Historian Michael Warner the conference’s sponsor’s considered it money well spent with one Defense Department representative calling it “unconventional warfare at its best.”

Burnham functioned as a critical connection between Wisner’s office and the intelligentsia moving from the extreme left to the extreme right with ease. Burnham found the Congress to be a place to inveigh not just against Communism but against the non-communist left as well and left many wondering whether his views weren’t as dangerous to liberal democracy as Communism. According to Frances Stoner Saunders, members of the British delegation found the rhetoric coming out of the Congress to be a deeply troubling sign of things to come. “Hugh Trevor-Roper was appalled by the provocative tone… ‘There was a speech by Franz Borkenau which was very violent and indeed almost hysterical. He spoke in German and I regret to say that as I listened and I heard the baying voices of approval from the huge audiences, I felt, well, these are the same people who seven years ago were probably baying in the same way to similar German denunciations of Communism coming from Dr. Goebbels in the Sports Palast. And I felt, well, what sort of people are we identifying with? That was the greatest shock to me. There was a moment during the Congress when I felt that we were being invited to summon up Beelzebub in order to defeat Stalin.’”

The Congress for Cultural Freedom didn’t need Beelzebub, it already had him in the form of Burnham, Hook and Wisner and by 1952 the party was just getting started. Burnham worked overtime for Wisner legitimizing the Congress as a platform for the Machiavellians alongside ex-Communists and even Nazis, including SS General Reinhard Gehlen and his German Army intelligence unit which had been brought into the CIA after the war, intact. E. Howard Hunt, Watergate “plumber” famous as a CIA dirty trickster remembered Burnham in his memoirs, “Burnham was a consultant to OPC on virtually every subject of interest to our organization… He had extensive contacts in Europe and, by virtue of his Trotskyite background, was something of an authority on domestic and foreign Communist parties and front organizations.”

In 1953 Burnham was called upon again by Wisner to reach beyond Communism to help overthrow the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in Teheran apparently because Wisner thought the plan needed “a touch of Machiavelli.” But Burnham’s greatest contribution as a Machiavellian was yet to come. His book The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom would become the CIA’s manual for displacing Western culture with an alternative doctrine for endless conflict in a world of oligarchs and in the end open the gates to an Inferno from which there would be no return.

Part 4 – The Final Stage of the Machiavellian Elites’ Takeover of America

From Trotsky to Burnham, from Burnham to Machiavelli and Machiavelli to neoconservatism, the circle of British imperialism closes

Cover of the 1550 edition of Machiavelli’s Il Principe and La Vita di Castruccio Castracani da Lucca.

public domain wiki commons https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Machiavelli_Principe_Cover_Page.jpg

The recent assertion by the Trump White House that Damascus and Moscow released “false narratives” to mislead the world about the April 4 Sarin gas attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria is a dangerous next step in the “fake news” propaganda war launched in the final days of the Obama administration. It is a step whose deep roots in Communist Trotsky’s Fourth International must be understood before deciding whether American democracy can be reclaimed.

Muddying the waters of accountability in a way not seen since Senator Joe McCarthy at the height of the Red Scare in the 1950s, the “Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act” signed into law without fanfare by Obama in December 2016 officially authorized a government censorship bureaucracy comparable only to George Orwell’s fictional Ministry of Truth in his novel 1984. Referred to as “The Global Engagement Center,” the official purpose of this new bureaucracy is to “recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed at undermining United States national security interests.” The real purpose of this Orwellian nightmare is to cook the books on anything that challenges Washington’s neoconservative pro war narrative and to intimidate, harass or jail anyone who tries. As has already been demonstrated by President Trump’s firing of Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian government airbase, it is a recipe for a world war and like it or not, that war has already begun.

This latest attack on Russia’s supposed false narrative takes us right back to 1953 and the beginnings of the cultural war between East and West. Its roots are tied to the Congress for Cultural Freedom, to James Burnham’s pivot from Trotsky’s Fourth International to right-wing conservatism and to the rise of the neoconservative Machiavellians as a political force. As James Burnham’s The Struggle for the World stressed, the Third World War had already begun with the 1944 Communist-led Greek sailors’ revolt. In Burnham’s Manichean thinking the West was under siege. George Kennan’s Cold War policy of containment was no different than Neville Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement. Détente with the Soviet Union amounted to surrender. Peace was only a disguise for war and that war would be fought with politics, subversion, terrorism and psychological warfare. Soviet influence had to be rolled back wherever possible. That meant subverting the Soviet Union and its proxies and when necessary, subverting Western democracies as well.

The true irony of today’s late stage efforts by Washington to monopolize “truth” and attack alternate narratives isn’t just in its blatant contempt for genuine free speech. The real irony is that the entire “Freedom Manifesto” employed by the United States and Britain since World War II was never free at all; but a concoction of the CIA’s Psychological Strategy Board’s (PSB) comprehensive psychological warfare program waged on friend and foe alike.

The CIA would come to view the entire program beginning with the 1950 Berlin conference to be a landmark in the Cold War not just for solidifying the CIA’s control over the non-Communist left and the West’s “free” intellectuals, but for enabling the CIA to secretly disenfranchise Europeans and Americans from their own political culture in such a way they would never really know it.

As historian Christopher Lasch wrote in 1969 of the CIA’s cooptation of the American left, “The modern state… is an engine of propaganda, alternately manufacturing crises and claiming to be the only instrument that can effectively deal with them. This propaganda, in order to be successful, demands the cooperation of writers, teachers, and artists not as paid propagandists or state-censored time-servers but as ‘free’ intellectuals capable of policing their own jurisdictions and of enforcing acceptable standards of responsibility within the various intellectual professions.”

Key to turning these “free” intellectuals against their own interests was the CIA’s doctrinal program for Western cultural transformation contained in the document PSB D-33/2. PSB D-33/2 foretells of a “long-term intellectual movement, to: break down world-wide doctrinaire thought patterns” while “creating confusion, doubt and loss of confidence” in order to “weaken objectively the intellectual appeal of neutralism and to predispose its adherents towards the spirit of the West;” to “predispose local elites to the philosophy held by the planners,” while employing local elites “would help to disguise the American origin of the effort so that it appears to be a native development.”

While declaring itself as an antidote to Communist totalitarianism, one internal critic of the Program, PSB officer Charles Burton Marshall, viewed PSB D-33/2 itself as frighteningly totalitarian, interposing “a wide doctrinal system” that “accepts uniformity as a substitute for diversity,” embracing “all fields of human thought – all fields of intellectual interests, from anthropology and artistic creations to sociology and scientific methodology;” concluding, “That is just about as totalitarian as one can get.”

Burnham’s Machiavellian elitism lurks in every shadow of the document. As recounted in Frances Stoner Saunder’s The Cultural Cold War, “Marshall also took issue with the PSB’s reliance on ‘non-rational social theories’ which emphasized the role of an elite ‘in the manner reminiscent of Pareto, Sorel, Mussolini and so on.’ Weren’t these the models used by James Burnham in his book the Machiavellians? Perhaps there was a copy usefully to hand when PSB D-33/2 was being drafted. More likely, James Burnham himself was usefully to hand.”

Burnham was more than just at hand when it came to secretly implanting a fascist philosophy of extreme elitism into America’s Cold War orthodoxy. With The Machiavellians, Burnham had composed the manual that forged the old Trotskyist left together with a right-wing Anglo/American elite. The political offspring of that volatile union would be called neoconservatism whose overt mission would be to roll back Russian/Soviet influence everywhere. Its covert mission would be to reassert a British cultural dominance over the emerging Anglo/American Empire and maintain it through propaganda.

Hard at work on that task since 1946 was the secret Information Research Department of the British and Commonwealth Foreign Office known as the IRD.

Rarely spoken of in the context of CIA-funded secret operations, the IRD served as a covert anti-Communist propaganda unit from 1946 until 1977. According to Paul Lashmar and James Oliver, authors of Britain’s Secret Propaganda War, “the vast IRD enterprise had one sole aim: To spread its ceaseless propaganda output (i.e. a mixture of outright lies and distorted facts) among top-ranking journalists who worked for major agencies and magazines, including Reuters and the BBC, as well as every other available channel. It worked abroad to discredit communist parties in Western Europe which might gain a share of power by entirely democratic means, and at home to discredit the British Left”.

IRD was to become a self-fulfilling disinformation machine for the far-right-wing of the international intelligence elite, at once offering fabricated and distorted information to “independent” news outlets and then using the laundered story as “proof” of the false story’s validity. One such front enterprise established with CIA money was Forum World Features, operated at one time by Burnham acolyte Brian Rossiter Crozier. Described by Burnham’s biographer Daniel Kelly as a “British political analyst” in reality the legendary Brian Crozier functioned for over fifty years as one of Britain’s top propagandists and secret agents.

If anyone today is shocked by the biased, one-sided, xenophobic rush to judgement alleging Russian influence over the 2016 presidential election, they need look no further than to Brian Crozier’s closet for the blueprints. As we were told outright by an American military officer during the first war in Afghanistan in 1982, the U.S. didn’t need “proof the Soviets used poison gas” and they don’t need proof against Russia now. Crozier might best be described as a daydream believer, a dangerous imperialist who acts out his dreams with open eyes. From the beginning of the Cold War until his death in 2012 Crozier and his protégé Robert Moss propagandized on behalf of military dictators Francisco Franco and Augusto Pinochet, organized private intelligence organizations to destabilize governments in the Middle East, Asia, Latin America and Africa and worked to delegitimize politicians in Europe and Britain viewed as insufficiently anti-Communist. The mandate of his Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC) set up in 1970 was to expose the supposed KGB campaign of worldwide subversion and put out stories smearing anyone who questioned it as a dupe, a traitor or Communist spy. Crozier regarded The Machiavellians as a major formative influence in his own intellectual development, and wrote in 1976 “indeed it was this book above all others that first taught me how [emphasis Crozier] to think about politics”. The key to Crozier’s thinking was Burnham’s distinction between the “formal” meaning of political speech and the “real”, a concept which was of course grasped only by elites. In a 1976 article Crozier marveled at how Burnham’s understanding of politics had spanned 600 years and how the use of “the formal” to conceal “the real” was no different today than when used by Dante Alighieri’s “presumably enlightened Medieval mind.” “The point is as valid now as it was in ancient times and in the Florentine Middle Ages, or in 1943. Overwhelmingly, political writers and speakers still use Dante’s method. Depending on the degree of obfuscation required (either by circumstances or the person’s character), the divorce between formal and real meaning is more of less absolute.”

But Crozier was more than just a strategic thinker. Crozier was a high level covert political agent who put Burnham’s talent for obfuscation and his Fourth International experience to use to undermine détente and set the stage for rolling back the Soviet Union.

In a secret meeting at a City of London bank in February 1977 he even patented a private sector operational intelligence organization known at the 6th International (6I) to pick up where Burnham left off; politicizing and of course privatizing many of the dirty tricks the CIA and other intelligence services could no longer be caught doing. As he explained in his memoir Free Agent, the name 6I was chosen “Because the Fourth International split. The Fourth International was the Trotskyist one, and when it split, this meant that, on paper there were five Internationals. In the numbers game, we would constitute the Sixth International, or ‘6I’”.

Croziers cooperation with numerous “able and diligent Congressional staffers” as well as “the remarkable General Vernon (‘Dick’) Walters, recently retired as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence,..” cemented the rise of the neoconservatives. When Carter caved in to the Team B and his neoconservative National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski’s plot to lure the Soviets and into their own Vietnam in Afghanistan it fulfilled Burnham’s mission and delivered the world to the Machiavellians without anyone being the wiser. As George Orwell wrote in his Second Thoughts on James Burnham, “What Burnham is mainly concerned to show [in The Machiavellians] is that a democratic society has never existed and, so far as we can see, never will exist. Society is of its nature oligarchical, and the power of the oligarchy always rests upon force and fraud… Power can sometimes be won and maintained without violence, but never without fraud.”

Today Burnham’s use of Dante’s political Treatise, De Monarchia to explain his Medieval understanding of politics might best be swapped for Dante’s Divine Comedy, a paranoid comedy of errors in which the door to hell swings open to one and all, including the elites regardless of their status. Or as they say in Hell, Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate. Abandon hope all ye who enter here.

Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould are the authors of Invisible History: Afghanistan’s Untold Story, Crossing Zero The AfPak War at the Turning Point of American Empire and The Voice. Visit their websites at invisiblehistory and grailwerk

sources:

Part 1: American Imperialism Leads the World Into Dante’s Vision of Hell

Part 2: How Neocons Push for War by Cooking the Books

Part 3: How the CIA Created a Fake Western Reality for ‘Unconventional Warfare’

Part 4 – The Final Stage of the Machiavellian Elites’ Takeover of America

The Essential Saker: from the trenches of the emerging multipolar world

Read full Article
post photo preview
Justiz: Oberste Gerichte versagen in ihrer richterlichen Urteilskraft
Brenner/Esfeld: Gesetze lesen kann der Bürger auch selber
 

Dass die Mühlen der Justiz langsam mahlen, ist bekannt. Wie sie mahlen und was die Konsequenzen sind, kann man jetzt an den Urteilen ablesen, die sich mit den Corona-Massnahmen beschäftigen. Man erinnere sich: Im Zuge der Ausbreitung der ersten Corona-Welle Anfang 2020 erfolgte auch in der westlichen Welt eine weitreichende Einschränkung von Grundrechten und eine Regulierung des sozialen Lebens mit Kontrollen bis weit in die Privatsphäre hinein.

Es mag der verbreiteten Verunsicherung und Panik zuzuschreiben sein, dass solche Eingriffe nicht zu grösserer Empörung geführt haben und die Gerichte, so sie denn angerufen wurden, sich entweder für nicht zuständig erklärten oder wenig Beanstandenswertes festzustellen vermochten.

Fragt man sich, wie aus heutiger Sicht die Beurteilung der Massnahmen aussieht, so fällt nicht nur auf, dass die Gerichte die Grundrechtseinschränkungen nach wie vor für rechtens halten, sondern auch, dass sie dabei eine Rechtsposition einnehmen, die das Potenzial hat, unsere Rechtsstaaten in ihren Grundfesten zu erschüttern.

Dies lässt sich an einschlägigen Urteilen der letzten Zeit aufzeigen – etwa an einem Bundesgerichtsentscheid zur Testpflicht von nichtgeimpftem Personal in Einrichtungen des Gesundheits- und Sozialwesens. Beschwerde eingereicht hatten Mitarbeitende dieser Einrichtungen im Tessin, welche sich gegenüber ihren geimpften Kollegen diskriminiert sahen.

Das Bundesgericht hatte zu beurteilen, ob es mit dem Gleichbehandlungsgrundsatz vereinbar war, die Nichtgeimpften zu Corona-Tests zu zwingen, obwohl bereits zum Zeitpunkt der Anordnung der Testpflicht ersichtlich war, dass eine Impfung keinen Fremdschutz gewährleistet, also auch Geimpfte das Virus weiterverbreiten können.

Der Entscheid des Bundesgerichts geht nun in keiner Weise auf die Sachargumentation der Kläger ein, sondern weist deren Beschwerde unter anderem mit Verweis auf das Epidemiengesetz ab. Bedenklich an diesem Urteil ist, dass das oberste Gericht seine Rechtsfindung damit auf die bescheidene Aufgabe der Gesetzeslesung beschränkt, statt zu der juristisch wesentlichen Frage vorzudringen. Das Gesetz lesen kann jedoch jeder Bürger selbst. Und dass im Artikel 40 des Epidemiengesetzes, auf welchen das Bundesgericht verweist, die Kantonsbehörden ermächtigt werden, den Zugang zu den Einrichtungen zu regulieren, wussten die Beschwerdeführer auch. Worum es ihnen aber ging, nämlich um eine rechtssystematische Prüfung, ob diese Anwendung des zugrunde liegenden Gesetzes durch die kantonalen Behörden rechtmässig war, das wurde hier nicht geleistet. Rechtsphilosophisch bedeutet das die Eingrenzung der dritten Staatsgewalt auf einen rechtspositivistischen Automatismus: Man schafft so das naturrechtliche Fundament, das allein Staaten zu Rechtsstaaten macht, ab. Ein nur formal korrekt beschlossenes und angewendetes positives Recht gibt es auch in Unrechtsstaaten.

Konkret versagt das Bundesgericht in seiner richterlichen Urteilskraft bei der Beurteilung, ob die Behörden das Gesetz verhältnismässig angewendet haben. Ähnlich hatte auch das deutsche Bundesverfassungsgericht auf eine Klage von Pflegekräften reagiert, von denen am Arbeitsplatz ein Impfnachweis verlangt wurde.

Die Richter stellten zwar fest, dass die Impfpflicht in die vom Grundgesetz «geschützte körperliche Unversehrtheit» eingreife, dieser Eingriff jedoch verfassungsrechtlich legitim sei. Auch die im Grundgesetz garantierte Berufsfreiheit sah das Gericht nicht verletzt, obgleich es – die eigene Aussage im tatsächlichen Ergebnis ad absurdum führend – betont, dass das Infektionsschutzgesetz ein Tätigkeitsverbot abstützen könne. So erhielten die freigestellten Pflegekräfte von dem obersten Gericht bestätigt, dass sie ihr Recht der Berufsausübung durch das Impfgesetz verloren haben, dieser Verlust aber rechtens sei.

Solche Schlüsse treten auf, wenn die obersten Gerichte nicht mehr die Kraft aufbringen, die Anwendung der Gesetze auf ihr Fundament zu überprüfen: Lagen im konkreten Fall tatsächlich Umstände vor, die eine Einschränkung der Grundrechte als gerechtfertigt erweisen? Waren die Anordnungen der Behörden der Situation angemessen und somit verhältnismässig?

Wenn die Gerichte solche Fragen nicht unabhängig und ergebnisoffen untersuchen, reduzieren sie ihre Aufgabe auf die Lektüre der Gesetze. Damit machen sich die Gerichte als relevante Staatsgewalt überflüssig und liefern die Bürger wie ein blosser Subsumptionsautomat der Willkür der behördlichen Auslegung von Gesetzen aus.

Andreas Brenner ist Professor für Philosophie an der Universität Basel, zuletzt von ihm erschienen: «CoronaSoma. Leib in Zeiten der Pandemie». Michael Esfeld ist Professor für Philosophie an der Universität Lausanne, zuletzt von ihm erschienen: «Und die Freiheit? Wie die Corona-Politik und der Missbrauch der Wissenschaft unsere offene Gesellschaft bedrohen» (gemeinsam mit Christoph Lütge).

Read full Article
Lipidsenker
Mythos und Realität

Auch der Glaube an die Statine ist offenbar ein bisschen absolute Risikoreduktion, aber vor allem ein Glaube.

Die Patienten müssen entsprechend informiert werden (informed consent)

Eine kurze Zusammenfassung (via Steve Kirsch)

Unsere Studie, die in der Fachzeitschrift JAMA Internal Medicine veröffentlicht wurde, untersuchte 21 Statin-Studien mit 143.532 Teilnehmern und kam zu dem Schluss:

 

Kein einheitlicher Zusammenhang zwischen der Senkung des LDL-Cholesterins (LDL-C) und Tod, Herzinfarkt oder Schlaganfall nach einer Statintherapie.

Nach einer Statintherapie betrug die relative Risikoreduktion für Tod, Herzinfarkt und Schlaganfall 9 %, 29 % bzw. 14 %.

Die entsprechenden absoluten Risikoreduktionen betrugen 0,8 %, 1,3 % und 0,4 % (siehe Grafik).

Der Nutzen von Statinen war minimal, und die meisten Studienteilnehmer, die Statine einnahmen, konnten keinen klinischen Nutzen daraus ziehen.

 

https://open.substack.com/pub/maryannedemasi/p/response-to-a-critique-of-our-statin

 

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2790055

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals