Monday, June 17, 2013

Told You So:  New World Order Proceeds On Schedule -  Answering More (Than Assange's) Questions About the Media's New Favorite Treasoner (Leaker)



If you haven't figured out yet why all the great leakers leave 9/11 alone . . . you've got some more surprises upcoming.

UK's Cameron Rallies World Leaders to N.Ireland

Sweeping US-EU Trade Talks To Start in July

Investors Guess Fed's Actions, Push Stocks Higher

Food Companies Work To Make It Look Natural

Billionaire's Coal Struggles Irking Biz Owners


"When you do business with a billionaire, you think you are going to get paid," said Lee Kersey, owner of M&D Electrical Supply in Hazard. Kersey said Justice's companies owe him about $240,000 for work dating back to January 2012, but he has not filed a suit. Kersey, who has about eight employees, said he received a check for $28,000 in February.

Timothy Bates, a lawyer in Hindman, Ky., sued Justice subsidiary Kentucky Fuel Corporation last year for about $16,000. His client, who did some excavating work, received payment after the suit was filed.

Referring to the other lawsuits, Bates said: "There's definitely a pattern, I'll say that."

I had a very good friend who interviewed with Monsanto back in the prehistoric 70's, who when trying to answer my urgent, excited questions upon returning said with great solemnity, "S . . ., you don't want to know what their plans are. Really, S . . ., I'm not kidding, you just don't . . . want . . . to . . . know."

Thanks for the tip, Liz. My best friend from long ago. And to your husband, who worked for Exxon-Mobil, and nodded sadly but affirmatively when questioned about them that his company was adopting very similar plans for the future too.

Food and Energy. Hmmm. And they were just two industries then among so many.

Anyone mentioned the continuing devastation of union representation for workers or the purposive dissolution of small (competing) businesses lately? Maybe Cass Sunstein will enlighten us further. (Joke!)

Am I getting too ambiguous for you yet? Let me make one thing plain: IT WASN'T A BUG/DEFECT/GLITCH IN THE USA RECONSTRUCTING-FINANCE PLAN, IT WAS A FEATURE. (Getting through yet? Loud enough to penetrate?)

And Obama has been a surprise only to those who believed the campaign rhetoric necessary to acquire enough left-wing votes to win. And if that's not enough for you yet, remember Cheney's self-serving grimace upon leaving the White House grounds after the Obama Inauguration, and his words about who Obama will be/really is, which are now reported proudly by the friendly news corps.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

He keeps saying things like, “If you are a journalist and they think you are the transmission point of this info, they will certainly kill you.” Or: “I fully expect to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.” He also keeps stressing what he will lose: his $200,000 salary, his girlfriend, his house in Hawaii. These are the kinds of messages that the police state would LIKE journalists to take away; a real whistleblower also does not put out potential legal penalties as options, and almost always by this point has a lawyer by his/her side who would PROHIBIT him/her from saying, ‘come get me under the Espionage Act.”
Finally in my experience, real whistleblowers are completely focused on their act of public service and trying to manage the jeopardy to themselves and their loved ones; they don’t tend ever to call attention to their own self-sacrifice. That is why they are heroes, among other reasons. But a police state would like us all to think about everything we would lose by standing up against it.

Imagine my pleasant surprise when I found out that Naomi Wolf had the same funny impressions that I did about the latest government betrayer.

Naomi Wolf: My Creeping Concern That the NSA Leaker Is Not Who He Purports To Be


Posted on June 14, 2013 by willyloman

Naomi Wolf

I hate to do this but I feel obligated to share, as the story unfolds, my creeping concern that the NSA leaker is not who he purports to be, and that the motivations involved in the story may be more complex than they appear to be. This is in no way to detract from the great courage of Glenn Greenwald in reporting the story, and the gutsiness of the Guardian in showcasing this kind of reporting, which is a service to America that US media is not performing at all. It is just to raise some cautions as the story unfolds, and to raise some questions about how it is unfolding, based on my experience with high-level political messaging.\


Some of Snowden’s emphases seem to serve an intelligence/police state objective, rather than to challenge them
.

 a) He is super-organized, for a whistleblower,  in terms of what candidates, the White House, the State Dept. et al call ‘message discipline.’ He insisted on publishing  a power point in the newspapers that ran his initial revelations. I gather that he arranged for a talented filmmaker to shoot the Greenwald interview. These two steps — which are evidence of great media training, really ‘PR 101″ — are virtually never done (to my great distress) by other whistleblowers, or by progressive activists involved in breaking news, or by real courageous people who are under stress and getting the word out. They are always done, though, by high-level political surrogates.

 b) In the Greenwald video interview, I was concerned about the way Snowden conveys his message. He is not struggling for words, or thinking hard, as even bright, articulate whistleblowers under stress will do. Rather he appears to be transmitting whole paragraphs smoothly, without stumbling. To me this reads as someone who has learned his talking points — again the way that political campaigns train surrogates to transmit talking points.

 c) He keeps saying things like, “If you are a journalist and they think you are the transmission point of this info, they will certainly kill you.” Or: “I fully expect to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.” He also keeps stressing what he will lose: his $200,000 salary, his girlfriend, his house in Hawaii. These are the kinds of messages that the police state would LIKE journalists to take away; a real whistleblower also does not put out potential legal penalties as options, and almost always by this point has a lawyer by his/her side who would PROHIBIT him/her from saying, ‘come get me under the Espionage Act.”

Finally in my experience, real whistleblowers are completely focused on their act of public service and trying to manage the jeopardy to themselves and their loved ones; they don’t tend ever to call attention to their own self-sacrifice. That is why they are heroes, among other reasons. But a police state would like us all to think about everything we would lose by standing up against it.

 d) It is actually in the Police State’s interest to let everyone know that everything you write or say everywhere is being surveilled, and that awful things happen to people who challenge this. Which is why I am not surprised that now he is on UK no-fly lists – I assume the end of this story is that we will all have a lesson in terrible things that happen to whistleblowers. That could be because he is a real guy who gets in trouble; but it would be as useful to the police state if he is a fake guy who gets in ‘trouble.’

 e) In stories that intelligence services are advancing (I would call the prostitutes-with-the-secret-service such a story), there are great sexy or sex-related mediagenic visuals that keep being dropped in, to keep media focus on the issue.
That very pretty pole-dancing Facebooking girlfriend who appeared for, well, no reason in the media coverage…and who keeps leaking commentary, so her picture can be recycled in the press…really, she happens to pole-dance? Dan Ellsberg’s wife was and is very beautiful and doubtless a good dancer but somehow she took a statelier role as his news story unfolded…


f) Snowden is in Hong Kong, which has close ties to the UK, which has done the US’s bidding with other famous leakers such as Assange. So really there are MANY other countries that he would be less likely to be handed over from…

g) Media reports said he had vanished at one point to ‘an undisclosed location’ or ‘a safe house.’ Come on. There is no such thing. Unless you are with the one organization that can still get off the surveillance grid, because that org created it.


h) I was at dinner last night to celebrate the brave and heroic Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights. Several of Assange’s also brave and talented legal team were there, and I remembered them from when I had met with Assange. These attorneys are present at every moment when Assange meets the press — when I met with him off the record last Fall in the Ecuadoran embassy, his counsel was present the whole time, listening and stepping in when necessary.

Seeing these diligent attentive free-speech attorneys for another whisleblower reinforced my growing anxiety: WHERE IS SNOWDEN’S LAWYER as the world’s media meet with him? A whistleblower talking to media has his/her counsel advising him/her at all times, if not actually being present at the interview, because anything he/she says can affect the legal danger the whistleblower may be in. It is very, very odd to me that a lawyer has not appeared, to my knowledge, to stand at Snowden’s side and keep him from further jeopardy in interviews.

Again I hate to cast any skepticism on what seems to be a great story of a brave spy coming in from the cold in the service of American freedom. And I would never raise such questions in public if I had not been told by a very senior official in the intelligence world that indeed, there are some news stories that they create and drive — even in America (where propagandizing Americans is now legal). But do consider that in Eastern Germany, for instance, it was the fear of a machine of surveillance that people believed watched them at all times — rather than the machine itself — that drove compliance and passivity. From the standpoint of the police state and its interests — why have a giant Big Brother apparatus spying on us at all times — unless we know about it?

And no one.

No one.

Mentions the elephant in the room (all rooms really now) overpopulation solutions.

But I'm, of course, just using reason.

Good common sense, they say.

So sue me.




Thank the gods for Canadians.



And one guy from Duluth.

5 comments:

mistah charley, ph.d. said...

i disagree with naomi wolf's false flag hypothesis re snowden

regarding why he would go to hong kong:

===
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/12/why-is-edward-snowden-in-hong-kong/

briefly: Lindorff writes "as someone who has spent almost seven years in China and Hong Kong"

Snowden has put China's leaders in his debt AND

He has protected himself by stating he has information that could be very harmful to US intelligence gathering efforts

===

why doesn't he have a lawyer at his elbow when making statements? maybe he realizes that once the feds have him in custody they won't let him go, so the "legal issues" raised by what he might say now are moot

===

why is he so "on message" in his communications? because he's a really smart guy -leaving high school early is consistent with this, in my opinion

===

his girl friend pole dances? well, this is the 21st century - in the clip i saw on youtube she didn't take off any clothes - no big deal

also, he left her behind - if he does end up living in exile in hong kong, or china, or iceland, or switzerland, she can rejoin him if it's mutually agreeable - time will tell

mistah charley, ph.d. said...

and on another point, regarding the potential mismatch between global population and available necessary inputs (food, fuel, water) - don't worry about it, Nature will produce a balance - and equilibrium will inevitably be restored, sooner or later, one way or another - even without action directed at the highest level and implemented by disciplined organizations

Suzan said...


Don't worry you say. It'll work itself out, you imply.

Thanks for the input, MC, but, please, enlighten me further as to why I should trust their brilliances to address these problems positively for the 99% when they did such a bang-up job on the financial (planned financial) disasters (for the 1%).

I guess they do tend to always work out for the 1% though, don't they?

I think the wisest course for me would be to continue to reserve judgment there until I get some more solid evidence.

And it's not looking good from here.

Again, thanks for your thoughts.

mistah charley, ph.d. said...

hi, Suzan - when i say "don't worry...Nature will produce a balance"


i am NOT saying "trust their brilliances to address these problems positively for the 99%" -

so far as i know, promoting the general welfare is not their primary objective -

rather, you should trust the people at the levers of power to do what they think is in their short-term best interest

and when i say "Nature will produce a balance" i am expressing my faith that the biosphere will continue functioning - not that our species will continue to retain its current dominant role

and when i say "don't worry" i don't mean "be optimistic" - i mean "do something other than worrying" -


options include "eat, drink and be merry" or "pray without ceasing" or "love whomever happens to be around to be loved" or "self-regulate your attention so that it is maintained on immediate experience, thereby allowing for increased recognition of mental events in the present moment...and adopt a particular orientation toward one’s experiences in the present moment, an orientation that is characterized by curiosity, openness, and acceptance"*




*Scott R. Bishop, Mark Lau, Shauna Shapiro, Linda Carlson, Nicole D. Anderson, James Carmody, Zindel V. Segal, Susan Abbey, Michael Speca, Drew Velting & Gerald Devins (2004). "Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition". Clinical Psychology: Science & Practice 11 (3): 230–241.

Suzan said...

Well, yes, of course.

In the end, everyone dies.

So things do work out.

meh