Showing posts with label Snowden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Snowden. Show all posts

Monday, 5 May 2014


GCHQ from Spike EP on Vimeo.

"On the eve of this year’s Bilderberg meeting, the Anglo-French intelligence bosses have clearly shown their hand with two high-profile attacks on Obama. Wednesday, June 5 marked the liberation of Qusayr, the great Stalingrad of the Syrian terrorist death squads deployed by NATO against Assad. With the rout of these terrorists, the main units of the self-styled Free Syrian Army, along with the Nusra branch of al Qaeda, are likely to face annihilation in the short to medium term.

On the same day that Qusayr fell, the British and French governments hysterically demanded that Obama undertake a total bombing campaign against Syria, whatever the consequences in regard to Russia and other powers. To his credit, Obama is continuing to say no to this lunatic Anglo-French neocolonial adventure. 

On that same June 5, the London-based daily The Guardian, in an article by the expatriate American Glenn Greenwald, hyped a court order from the secret FISA panel of federal judges showing that the US National Security Agency was routinely monitoring the telephone records (including time, locations, call duration, and unique identifiers, but not the contents of the conversations) of possibly unlimited millions of Verizon phone subscribers. Back in the US, reactionary talk show hosts began screaming 

“Obama taps your phones!”

On June 6, again in advance of every other newspaper in the world, The Guardian published another article by Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill revealing that the National Security Agency, under a program called Prism, had obtained direct access to the servers of Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Apple, Youtube, Skype, AOL, and Microsoft, and was busily monitoring the content of e-mails, file transfers, and live conversations. Back in the US, reactionary talk show hosts began screaming, 

“Obama reads your e-mail!”

Under George Bush, warrantless wiretaps and similar illegal programs were revealed by various media organs. These revelations had minimal impact on Bush, whose base was indifferent to civil liberties. 

Obama’s base, by contrast, cares very much, and has been visibly upset by these new reports. 

While strongly condemning these totalitarian programs, we must also not lose sight of who is putting these reports into circulation, and why. 

Phone taps are bad, but a general war in the Middle East leading to a possible Third World War is far worse.

The British and French defense and intelligence establishment (they have virtually merged) want Obama and the American people to take the lead and shoulder the risk in a perilous attack on Syria, in time to preserve the death squads so they can fight another day in another country. 

London and Paris, of course, see themselves as the principal beneficiaries of the breakup of Syria. 

Since Obama is currently blocking their plans, they are bringing up their big guns of scandal, with the center-leftGuardian evidently chosen to take the point, doubtless to obtain more attention among Obama’s leftist supporters. 

(During the initial Clinton scandals of Whitewatergate and Troopergate, the flagship of scandal was the reactionary London-based Daily Telegraph, especially through its columnists Peregrine Worthshorne and Ambrose Evans-Pritchard.)

Coming as they do on the eve of the yearly Bilderberg conference, these scandals stamped Made in England suggest that the majority of this elitist cabal have maintained their anti-Obama line already evident in last year’s meeting, and are using the current gathering to further their plans.

Friday, 12 July 2013

Alan Moore

The surveillance state is nothing new: From Bentham’s panopticon to McGoohan’s Village to “V for Vendetta’s” streetcams to the NSA’s Prism.

Alan Moore:
"To me, one of the biggest surprises of these recent surveillance revelations is how surprised people are. The level of surveillance we’ve had over here for the past 20 years now is ridiculous — and useless, I would add.

Eerily enough, the security cameras on every street corner of Britain was instigated by the incoming Blair government in 1997, which was when I decided, back in 1982 or so, to set the first episode of “V for Vendetta,” which had cameras on every street corner. So yeah, we’ve had those for awhile; they’ve proliferated and multiplied for decades.

More recently, there have been troops of police who have said that all these things are useful for is alienating the public.


They are not actually useful in the prevention of crimes, or even actually apprehending their suspects.

Here’s the thing: If you’re monitoring every single thing that goes on in a given culture, if you have all the information that is there to be had, then that is the equivalent of having none of it.


How are you going to process that amount of information? That’s when you get all these wonderful emerging paradoxes.

Recently over here, there was a case where it was suspected that the people who monitor security screens were taking unnecessary toilet breaks and gossiping when they should be watching us. So it was decided that the only sensible thing to do was to put a security camera in the monitor room. 

“I’m remote from most technology to the point that I’m kind of Amish,” admits the legendarily bearded author without an Internet connection, mobile phone or even a functioning television.
But Alan Moore — the soft-spoken sage behind prescient comics like “V for Vendetta,” “From Hell,” “Watchmen” and many more — nevertheless does have a Kickstarter project up for procuring finishing funds for his short-film series, “Jimmy’s End.” It’s his second trip through the crowd-funding concept, having previously signed up alongside “V for Vendetta” artist David Lloyd, “Maus’s” Art Spiegelman and scores of other talents for Black Mask Studios’ sprawling Occupy Comicsseries, which too started life on Kickstarter. The series started as a photo essay about burlesque for Moore’s indie zine Dodgem Logic with artist (and spouse) Melinda Gebbieand fellow Northamptonian photographer Mitch Jenkins. Jenkins came up with the idea of a short film based on the shoot using the same uncanny characters, then investors asked for a series of short films and maybe a television series, and the next thing you know, the productive Moore had written an interlocking narrative for all of them as well as a feature film spinoff called “The Show
Moore spoke with me by phone from Northampton, the ancient riverside British hood where he lives, about film, comics, funding and seeing Patrick McGoohan’s psy-fi classic “The Prisoner” everywhere we turn. Especially now that our openly secret, often ludicrous surveillance state — which he envisioned decades ago in dystopian influentials like “V for Vendetta,” whose strikingGuy Fawkes mask has become an inextricable part of Anonymous and Occupy’s iconography — has thankfully wormed its way back into the news cycle.

Congratulations, you’re a man of the people, including the people who are now crowd-funding “Jimmy’s End.”
Well, I’m largely unfamiliar with the Internet, and everything connected with it. But Kickstarter was a suggestion that came from Mitch and Lex Records, so I decided to put a toe in the water and see what it was like. We went out to a local medieval abbey to use some of their strange, cavernous chambers for filming the pitch reel. We pretty much made it up and filmed it on the spot, and I hear it’s out there on the Internet now.
It makes sense for you as a way to remain independent.
Certainly, my many years working in the comics industry, creating products that I do not own, has made me rather fierce on the subject of giving up rights. I would much rather that this film did not happen, than happen in a compromised way. Yeah, that approach has obviously ruled out many of the customary ways in which films get funded. In that respect, Kickstarter is a very timely representation of the manner in which projects of this sort can be realized without the necessity of some all-devouring company behind them.
You recently wrote about that history of comics for Occupy Comics, which also began as a Kickstarter project.
While the revolution will be certainly televised, it strikes me that there is a strong possibility that the revolution will also be crowd-funded. If Kickstarter and other enterprises are giving projects like Occupy Comics a chance, then it does suggest there are imaginative ideas out there with incredible use and application across the board. Not just in the arts, but in the sciences as well. It’s an exciting concept, and I look forward to seeing what emerges from it.
Speaking of the revolution, how do you feel it is taking shape, especially given recent exposure of the NSA’s extreme secrecy, whose surveillance state is the opposite of open sourcing and crowd-funding?
There seems to be something going on, even from the briefest appraisal of the news, with the amount of events transpiring. This is such a connected world, it’s useless to isolate any part of it as a discrete phenomenon. You can’t really talk about the problems in Syria, because its problems are global. The waves of discontent and outrage — whether in the Arab countries, or in Brazil, or in America and Europe over the degrees to which its citizens are being monitored — are not separate phenomena. They are phenomena of an emergent world, and the existence of the Internet is one of its major drivers. We have got no idea how it’s going to turn out, because the nature of our society is such that if anything can be invented, then we will invent it. Sooner or later, if it is possible.
So the Internet is changing everything, but I wouldn’t yet want to say for good or ill. I suspect, as ever, that it will be an admixture of both. But we are all along for the ride, even those people like me who do not have Internet connections, mobile phones or even functioning televisions. I’m slowly disconnecting myself. Basically, it’s a feeling that if we are going to subject our entire culture to what is an unpredictable experiment, then I’d like to try to remain outside the petri dish. [Laughs] It’s only sensible to have somebody as a control.
The surveillance state is nothing new: From Bentham’s panopticon to McGoohan’s Village to “V for Vendetta’s” streetcams to the NSA’s Prism.
To me, one of the biggest surprises of these recent surveillance revelations is how surprised people are. The level of surveillance we’ve had over here for the past 20 years now is ridiculous — and useless, I would add. Eerily enough, the security cameras on every street corner of Britain was instigated by the incoming Blair government in 1997, which was when I decided, back in 1982 or so, to set the first episode of “V for Vendetta,” which had cameras on every street corner. So yeah, we’ve had those for awhile; they’ve proliferated and multiplied for decades. More recently, there have been troops of police who have said that all these things are useful for is alienating the public. [Laughs] They are not actually useful in the prevention of crimes, or even actually apprehending their suspects.
Here’s the thing: If you’re monitoring every single thing that goes on in a given culture, if you have all the information that is there to be had, then that is the equivalent of having none of it. [Laughs] How are you going to process that amount of information? That’s when you get all these wonderful emerging paradoxes. Recently over here, there was a case where it was suspected that the people who monitor security screens were taking unnecessary toilet breaks and gossiping when they should be watching us. So it was decided that the only sensible thing to do was to put a security camera in the monitor room. [Laughs] This is answering the question that Juvenal asked so succinctly all those years ago: Who watches the watchmen? The answer is more watchmen! And yet more watchmen watch them, and of course it will eventually occur to them to ask: Can those people who are watching the people doing the watching really be trusted? Much better if they were under surveillance.
That’s the level of absurdity these Orwellian solutions bring to our increasingly complex world. George Orwell’s vision was 1947. Yes, the world was more complex than it had been, but nowhere near as complex as it was going to get. We currently have in Northampton — and I think we might be the first to have it — security cameras in some places that actually talk to you. “Pick that cigarette end up! Yes, you!” [Laughs] Which is so much like Patrick McGoohan’s vision for the Village in “The Prisoner,” all those years ago.
I still think McGoohan’s most underappreciated point from “The Prisoner” is that we are the tyrants.
I remember watching “Fall Out,” that final episode of “The Prisoner,” on I think a Wednesday night when I was around 13. And I can remember that scene where the whole series seems to break down into an absurdist collage. Where McGoohan’s Number Six finally confronts the mysterious Number One, who has been unseen throughout the series but is now a hooded figure. McGoohan pulls off his hood and there is a crude, rubber ape mask underneath. McGoohan pulls off the ape mask, and there is Patrick McGoohan underneath, laughing maniacally. Even at the age of 13, I dimly remember what that meant, that moment when he reveals that they are the same. It was answering the question, “Who is the one who restricts us and makes us all prisoners?” And I think McGoohan’s answer to that was incredibly liberating. It’s us, isn’t it?
Speaking of visionaries, you’re also talking about “Jimmy’s End” in July with Adam Curtis, whose visually arresting documentaries like “The Century of the Self” and“The Power of Nightmares” flawlessly unlocked the psychosocial power and pitfalls of our consumerism and technocracy.
He’s a marvelous man, and one of my favorite filmmakers. I think that “The Power of Nightmares” is the single best piece of documentary television I have ever seen. He was here in Northampton and me and Mitch went for a meal with him, and we got along like a house on fire. He’s a splendid chap. We were talking about the prevalence of zombies in popular culture and how they’re interpreted as the underclass or enslaved consumers.
But I’m tending to think zombies are the perfect metaphor for culture itself. That it is dead, still shambling around looking for brains, and endlessly repeating the things it did in life. I mean, I’m sure it will only be another few years until the moviegoing public gets to learn the exciting story of how high school student Peter Parker had the transformative accident that changed him into the amazing Spider-Man … again. You know? It’s the same stories and same ideas reiterated over and over again. And if we do it in 3-D, if we do it in enough spectacular digital photography, then perhaps people won’t notice that we haven’t had a new idea in decades. Culture is just a shambling zombie that repeats what it did in life; bits of it drop off, and it doesn’t appear to notice. [Sighs hilariously] I tend to think that a good, clean head shot is the only way to work this problem out. [Laughs]
Ha! Wait, so what are we aiming at, if we’re looking to take out our own zombified pop culture with a good, clean head shot?
Ooh, well that’s the question, isn’t it? Probably our own limitations in thinking, our own timorousness in facing the future and taking responsibility for it. OK yeah, I would like to say, “Aim it at Simon Cowell,” or something like that. And while that would likely be a huge improvement, it wouldn’t solve our underlying problem. We are inside us, as always. It’s our way of thinking. Yeah, the head shot should be aimed at ourselves.
And then there’s zombie culture’s disturbing legitimization of the desensitized extermination of others — with confusion as to just who those others happen to be.
That is certainly a worrying phenomenon. If you conscript a bunch of ordinary men or women, put them in uniform, take them to a distant country and tell them, “I want you to go over there and try your best to kill a bunch of people in different uniforms,” the majority who aren’t psychopaths won’t want to do it. We find that an alien thing to do. But if you ask them to kill a virtual enemy … well, that’s no problem. Nobody cares what happens to all those zombies in the shoot-’em-up games, because they’re not real. If you get humans to kill a thousand or 10,000 virtual enemies, and then put them in a real combat situation, it is quite likely that they will become desensitized to the idea of killing, especially with countless virtual walk-throughs.
Technology is always a two-edged sword. It will bring in many benefits, but also many disasters. Because of the complexity of our situation, we cannot predict what things will be until they happen. It’s just part of our responsibility as people in the modern world to do our very, very best to deal with them, and think them through, as they occur.  While I’m remote from most technology to the point that I’m kind of Amish, I have played a couple of computer games — until I realized I was being bloodied with adrenalin over something that wasn’t real. At the end of a couple of hours of very addictive play, I may have procured the necessary amount of mushrooms to save a princess, but I also wasted hours of my life that I’ll never be able to get back. This is the reason I am not on the Internet. I am aware of its power as a distraction, and I don’t have the time for that.
Despite the constant clamor for attention from the modern world, I do believe we need to procure a psychological space for ourselves. I apparently know some people who try to achieve this by logging off, or going without their Twitter or Facebook for a limited period. Which I suppose is encouraging, although it doesn’t seem that remarkable from my perspective. I think that people need to establish their own psychological territory in face of the encroaching world.
Zombies, explained. Speaking of which, have you and Adam talked about working together in the future?
Well, who knows what will happen in the future? Well, except for the Latitude Festival in Suffolk in July, where me and Mitch are going to be showing the four completed films in the “Jimmy’s End” cycle, and talking about it onstage with Adam. We were hoping to show the fifth film as well, for which we are raising the money on Kickstarter. But that is almost certainly not going to happen, even if the Kickstarter helps as much as we hoped it would. But we’ll be talking to Adam about all of the films, and the subjects that spin off from them. But all things are possible, including any future projects with Adam as well. I don’t know, we’ll have to wait and see. We’re both busy men, but we both have a certain admiration for each other’s work and I had a very nice time hanging out with him.
I asked Mitch if Northampton noir worked well as a description of “Jimmy’s End,” and he was cool with it.
Yeah, our little town is black in every sense. I’ve even described it as a black hole on occasion, just in the way it’s very difficult to escape from. You can’t get sufficient velocity to get out of the town before you’re drawn back. I know people here that, if you asked how they came to live in Northampton, they’d just shrug. [Laughs] It’s a place that people end up. We do have a certain amount of darkness in our history, and I find out something new and enormous every day, some of which I’m saving for my novel “Jerusalem,” which is in the final stages. When Adam was down, we talked about some of the rather surprising aspects of Northampton. I pointed out the rusting Victorian gas holder on the edges of my old neighborhood, which is the site where theIndustrial Revolution started, which is where capitalism started. They sound like bold claims, but I think that “Jerusalem” should resoundingly justify them. But yeah, it is a town that invites a noir reading.
Is “Jimmy’s End” a visual psycho-geography of Northampton in the way that your“Unearthing” was a psycho-geography of Steve Moore’s hometown, Shooter’s Hill?
No, it’s different in that, as unlikely as it sounds, “Unearthing” was all true. While faithful to the existing city and sharing pretty much its same history and unusual quirks, the Northampton that we will be hopefully revealing in “The Show” — the feature film we’re trying to make, based off of the “Jimmy’s End” short films — features different characters, events, products, youth cults and other things. There are some real characters from Northampton — some now dead, but we can resurrect them — who will be in interjected into “Jimmy’s End” in small doses.
The biggest difference between the two is that “Jimmy’s End” is fiction but “Unearthing” was a fabulous version of the truth. It was looking at the life of my oldest and dearest friend Steve Moore, interpreting his life as a modern fable. That’s a different process than “Jimmy’s End,” which is a strange but hopefully striking mirror of culture. One of our agendas written on one of my notepads from way back when we started “Jimmy’s End” says, “Let’s steal culture.” There are all these cultural elements that we can parody, if you like, or come up with our own versions of. Somewhere lost in my notes for “Jimmy’s End” are social networking sites, computer games, models of cars, energy drinks, low-fat margarines, a large array of alcohols …
I saw a bottle of Tunguska in “Act of Faith.”
We have a brand of cigarettes called Social Leper. We’ve basically tried to duplicate the entire culture tailored to our story demands. It perhaps is psycho-geography, but the emphasis is probably much more on the psycho than on the geography.
Have you got “The Show” all sketched out, as well?
Better than that, we’ve got a very complete treatment. We know what’s happening scene by scene in “The Show” — and its television series, if there is to be one. Because I’m withering in my scorn for long-running television series that aren’t written or thought out on an episode-by-episode basis. To me, narrative is the most important thing in the world. I deplore the dwindling narrative values of a lot of contemporary culture, where it doesn’t seem to matter if the plot actually makes sense, or if it resolves itself, or if all of the elements introduced resolve themselves. In some long-running television shows today, it’s obvious the writers can’t be bothered to keep track of all of the wild plot twists to keep the audience’s interest. They are non-stories.


October 11, 1919.


I am transmitting herewith a communication which has come to my attention from the Panama Canal, Washington office, relative to the activities of MARCUS GARVEY. Garvey is a West-Indian negro and in addition to his activities in endeavoring to establish the Black Star Line Steamship Corporation he has also been particularly active among the radical elements in New York City in agitating the negro movement. Unfortunately, however, he has not as yet violated any federal law whereby he could be proceeded against on the grounds of being an undesirable alien, from the point of view of deportation. It occurs to me, however, from the attached clipping that there might be some proceeding against him for fraud in connection with his Black Star Line propaganda and for this reason I am transmitting the communication to you for your appropriate attention.

The following is a brief statement of Marcus Garvey and his activities:
Subject a native of the West Indies and one of the most prominent negro agitators in New York;
He is a founder of the Universal Negro Improvement Association and African Communities League;
He is the promulgator of the Black Star Line and is the managing editor of the Negro World;

He is an exceptionally fine orator, creating much excitement among the negroes through his steamship proposition;
In his paper the "Negro World" the Soviet Russian Rule is upheld and there is open advocation of Bolshevism.

J.E. Hoover

DATE: 1/22/69

TO: DIRECTOR, FBI (100-448006)

FROM: SAC, CHICAGO (157-2209) (P)


Reurlet, 1/7/69; Chicago letters 12/24/68 and 1/14/69

ReBulet has been thoroughly studied and discussed by the SAC, the Supervisor, and Agents familiar with facets of the NOI which might indicate trends and possible future direction of the organization. The Bureau's concern is most understandable and suggestions appreciated.

Over the years considerable thought has been given and action taken with Bureau approval, relating to methods through which factionalism among the leadership could be created. Serious consideration has also been given towards developing ways and means of changing NOI philosophy to one whereby the members could be developed into useful citizens and the organization developed into one emphasizing religion - the brotherhood of mankind - and self improvement. Factional disputes have been developed - the most notable being MALCOLM X LITTLE. Prominent black personages have publicly and nationally spoken out against the group - U.S. District Court Judge JAMES BENTON PARSONS being one example. The media of the press has played down the NOI. This appears to be a most effective tool as individuals such as MUHAMMAD assuredly seek any and all publicity be it good or bad; however, if the press is utilized it would appear it should not concentrate on such aspects as the alleged strength of the NOI, immoral activities of the leadership, misuse of funders by these officials, etc. It is the opinion of this office that such exposure is ineffective, possibly creates interest and maybe envy among the lesser educated black man causing them out of curiosity to attend meetings and maybe join, and encourage the opportunist to seek personal gain - physical or monetary - through alignment with the group. At any rate it is felt such publicity in the case of the NOI is not overly effective.


May 15, 1968

SAC, Chicago



DIRECTOR, FBI (100-448006)


ReBulet 4/23/68

Chicago airtel and LBH dated 5/2/68 and captioned "Richard Claxton Gregory" concern a speech by Gregory on 4/28/68 where he noted that "Syndicate hoods are living all over. They are the filthiest snakes that exist on this earth." Referenced Bulet instructed you to develop counterintelligence action concerning militant black nationalist Dick Gregory.

Consider the use of this statement in developing a counterintelligence operation to alert La Cosa Nostra (LCN) to Gregory's attack on LCN. It is noted that other speeches by Gregory also contain attacks on LCN. No counterintelligence action should be taken without Bureau authority.

TJD: pag/mrm


Teletype from New Orleans to Director, [UNREADABLE]/30/68, captioned "Richard Claxton Gregory" reported speech by Gregory referring to the Director and FBI Agents in derogatory terms. The Director noted, on the informative note of [UNREADABLE] teletype which said we would recommend counterintelligence against Gregory when indicated, "Right."

To: SAC, Baltimore
From: Director, FBI

For the information of recipient offices a serious struggle is taking place between the Black Panther Party (BPP) and the US organization. The struggle has reached reached such [illegible] that it is taking on the aura of gang warfare with attendant threats of murder and reprisals.

In order to fully capitalize upon BPP and US differences as well as to exploit all avenues of creating further dissension in the ranks of the BPP, recipient offices are instructed to submit imaginative and hard-hitting counterintelligence measures aimed at crippling the BPP.

Commencing December 2, 1968, and every two-week period thereafter, each office is instructed to submit a letter under this caption containing counterintelligence measures aimed against the BPP. The bi-weekly letter should also contain accomplishments obtained during the previous two-week period [illegible] captioned program.

All counterintelligence actions must be approved at the Bureau prior to taking steps to implement them.

To: SACs
From: Director, FBI (100-448006)


Concerning the first proposal submitted by Detroit, counterintelligence action by San Francisco to capitalize on Huey P. Newton's favorable stand toward homosexuals has already been authorized by the Bureau. The second Detroit proposal to consider directing an anonymous communication to Newton accusing David Hilliard of stealing BPP funds and depositing them in foreign banks does have merit and the Bureau does not concur with San Francisco's observation that this would have little effect since there is no record that Hilliard is skimming large amounts of money. Purpose of counterintelligence action is to disrupt BPP and it is immaterial whether facts exist to substantiate the charge. If facts are present it aids in the sucess of the proposal but the Bureau feels that the skimming of money of money is such a sensitive issue that disruption can be accomplished without facts to back it up.


With respect to two anonymous letters proposed by Los Angeles, Bureau concurs with San Francisco that to include the card of a member of a rival black extremist group in a letter to Hilliard indicating Newton is marked for assassination could place the Bureau in the position of aiding or initiating a murder by the BPP. Accordingly, Los Angeles' proposal identified as "Letter A" is not approved. Los Angeles should reword this letter to convey the same thought without directly indicating that it is from a specific member of a rival group. The letter could imply that the writer would soon get in touch with Hilliard to see what he would pay to have Newton eliminated. Resubmit the revised letter to the Bureau for approval.

SAC, May 15, 1969


Director, FBI


The Breakfast for Children Program (BCP) has been instituted by the BPP in several cities to provide a stable breakfast for ghetto children. ... The program has met with some success and has resulted in considerable favorable publicity for the BPP. ... The resulting publicity tends to portray the BPP in a favorable light and clouds the violent nature of the group and its ultimate aim of insurrection. The BCP promotes at least tacit support for the BPP among naive individuals ... and, what is more distressing, provides the BPP with a ready audience composed of highly impressionable youths. ... Consequently, the BCP represents the best and most influential activity going for the BPP and, as such, is potentially the greatest threat to efforts by authorities ... to neutralize the BPP and destroy what it stands for.

SAnnotateAC, Albany August 25, 1967


Director, FBI


...The purpose of this new counterintelligence endeavor is to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize the activities of black nationalist hate-type organizations and groupings, their leadership, spokesmen, membership, and supporters, and to counter their propensity for violence and civil disorder. The activities of all such groups of intelligence interest to the Bureau must be followed on a continuous basis so we will be in a position to promptly take advantage of all opportunities for counterintelligence and inspire action in instances where circumstances warrant. The pernicious background of such groups, their duplicity, and devious maneuvers must be exposed to public scrutiny where such publicity will have a neautralizing effect. Efforts of the various groups to consolidate their forces or to recruit new or youthful adherents must be frustrated. No opportunity should be missed to exploit through counterintelligence techniques the organizational and personal conflicts of the leaderships of the groups and where possible an effort should be made the capitalize upon existing conflicts between competing black nationalist organizations. When an opportunity is apparent to disrupt or neutralize black nationalist, hate-type organizations through the cooperation of established local news media contacts or through such contact with sources available to the Seat of Government, in every instance careful attention must be given to the proposal to insure the targetted group is disrupted, ridiculed, or discredited through the publicity and not merely publicized...

You are also cautioned that the nature of this new endeavor is such
that under no circumstances should the existence of the program be made known outside of the Bureau and appropriate within-office security should be afforded to sensitive operations and techniques considered under the program.

No counterintelligence action under this program may be initiated by the field without specific prior Bureau authorization.

April 25, 1972


Honorable H.R. Haldeman
Assistant to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.

1 - Mr. A. Rosen
1 - Mr. T. E. Bishop
1 - Mr. E. S. Miller
1 - Mr. R. L. Shackelford
1 - Mr. T. J. Smith (Horner)
1 - Mr. R. L. Pence

Dear Mr. Haldeman:

John Winston Lennon is a British citizen and former member of the Beatles singing group. [REDACTED] Lennon has taken an interest in "extreme left-wing activities in Britain" and is known to be a sympathizer of Trotskyite communists in England.

Despite his apparent ineligibility for a United States visa due to a conviction in London in 1968 for possession of dangerous drugs, Lennon obtained a visa and entered the United States in 1971. During February, 1972, a confidential source, who has furnished reliable information in the past, advised that Lennon had contributed $75,000 to a newly organized New Left group formed to disrupt the Republican National Convention. The visas of Lennon and his wife, Yoko Ono, expired on February 29, 1972, and since that time Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has been attempting to deport them. During the Lennons' most recent deportation hearing at INS, New York, New York, on April 18, 1972, their attorney stated that Lennon felt he was being deported due to his outspoken remarks concerning United States policy in Southeast Asia. The attorney request a delay in order that character witnesses could testify for Lennon, and then he read into the court record that Lennon had been appointed to the President's Council for Drug Abuse (National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse) and to the faculty of New York University, New York, New York.


In view of your low grade... I will not dignify your name with either a Mr. or a Reverend or a Dr. And, your last name calls to mind only the type of King such as King Henry the VIII...

King, look into your heart. You know you are a complete fraud and a great liability to all of us Negroes. White people in this country have enough frauds of their own but I am sure they don't have one at this time anywhere near your equal. You are no clergyman and you know it. I repeat you are a colossal fraud and an evil, vicious one at that. You could not believe in God... Clearly you don't believe in any personal moral principles.

King, like all frauds your end is approaching. You could have been our greatest leader. You, even at an early age have turned out to be not a leader but a dissolute, abnormal moral imbecile. We will now have to depend on our older leaders like Wilkins, a man of character and thank God we have others like him. But you are done. Your "honorary" degrees, your Nobel Prize (what a grim farce) and other awards will not save you. King, I repeat you are done.

No person can overcome facts, not even a fraud like yourself... I repeat — no person can argue successfully against facts... Satan could not do more. What incredible evilness... King you are done.

The American public, the church organizations that have been helping — Protestant, Catholic and Jews will know you for what you are — an evil, abnormal beast. So will others who have backed you. You are done.

King, there is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is. You have just 34 days in which to do it (this exact number has been selected for a specific reason, it has definite practical significance). You are done. There is but one way out for you. You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation.

Date: 4/2Annotate7/70

TO: DIRECTOR, FBI (100-448006)

FROM: SAC, LOS ANGELES (157-4054) (P)


Re San Francisco airtel to the Bureau date 4/23/70,

Bureau permission is requested to publicize the pregnancy of Jean
Seberg, well-known movie actress by (name deleted) Black Panther (BPP)
(deleted) by advising Hollywood "Gossip-Columnists" in the Los Angeles
area of the situation. It is felt that the possible publication of
Seberg's plight could cause her embarrassment and serve to cheapen her
image with the general public.

It is proposed that the following letter from a fictitious person
be sent to local columinists:

"I was just thinking about you and remembered I still owe you a favor.
So ---- I was in Paris last week and ran into Jean Seberg, who was
heavy with baby. I thought she and Romaine [sic] had gotten together
again, but she confided the child belonged to (deleted) of the Black
Panthers, one (deleted). The dear girl is getting around!

"Anyway, I thought you might get a scoop on the others. Be good and
I'll see you soon.


Usual precautions would be taken by the Los Angeles Division to
preclude identification of the Bureau as the source of the letter if
approval is granted.



For maximum effectiveness of the Counterintelligence Program, and to prevent wasted effort, long-range goals are being set.

1. Prevent the COALITION of militant black nationalist groups. In unity there is strength; a truism that is no less valid for all its triteness. An effective coalition of black nationalist groups might be the first step toward a real "Mau Mau" [Black revolutionary army] in America, the beginning of a true black revolution.

2. Prevent the RISE OF A "MESSIAH" who could unify, and electrify, the militant black nationalist movement. Malcolm X might have been such a "messiah;" he is the martyr of the movement today. Martin Luther King, Stokely Carmichael and Elijah Muhammed all aspire to this position. Elijah Muhammed is less of a threat because of his age. King could be a very real contender for this position should he abandon his supposed "obedience" to "white, liberal doctrines" (nonviolence) and embrace black nationalism. Carmichael has the necessary charisma to be a real threat in this way.

3. Prevent VIOLENCE on the part of black nationalist groups. This is of primary importance, and is, of course, a goal of our investigative activity; it should also be a goal of the Counterintelligence Program to pinpoint potential troublemakers and neutralize them before they exercise their potential for violence.

4. Prevent militant black nationalist groups and leaders from gaining RESPECTABILITY, by discrediting them to three separate segments of the community. The goal of discrediting black nationalists must be handled tactically in three ways. You must discredit those groups and individuals to, first, the responsible Negro community. Second, they must be discredited to the white community, both the responsible community and to "liberals" who have vestiges of sympathy for militant black nationalist simply because they are Negroes. Third, these groups must be discredited in the eyes of Negro radicals, the followers of the movement. This last area requires entirely different tactics from the first two. Publicity about violent tendencies and radical statements merely enhances black nationalists to the last group; it adds "respectability" in a different way.

5. A final goal should be to prevent the long-range GROWTH of militant black organizations, especially among youth. Specific tactics to prevent these groups from converting young people must be developed. [...]


Primary targets of the Counterintelligence Program, Black Nationalist-Hate Groups, should be the most violent and radical groups and their leaders. We should emphasize those leaders and organizations that are nationwide in scope and are most capable of disrupting this country. These targets, members, and followers of the:

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC)
Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)
Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM)
Nation of Islam (NOI)

Offices handling these cases and those of Stokely Carmichael of SNCC, H. Rap Brown of SNCC, Martin Luther King of SCLC, Maxwell Stanford of RAM, and Elijah Muhammed of NOI, should be alert for counterintelligence
suggestions. [...]

Thursday, 11 July 2013

NSA Director General Keith Alexander, United States Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM)

On 23 June 2009, the Secretary of Defense directed the Commander of U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) to establish USCYBERCOM. In May 2010, General Keith Alexander outlined his views in a report for the United States House Committee on Armed Services subcommittee:

"My own view is that the only way to counteract both criminal and espionage activity online is to be proactive. If the U.S. is taking a formal approach to this, then that has to be a good thing. The Chinese are viewed as the source of a great many attacks on western infrastructure and just recently, the U.S. electrical grid. If that is determined to be an organized attack, I would want to go and take down the source of those attacks. The only problem is that the Internet, by its very nature, has no borders and if the U.S. takes on the mantle of the world's police; that might not go down so well."

Initial operational capability was attained on 21 May 2010. General Alexander was promoted to four-star rank, becoming one of 38 US Generals, and took charge of U.S. Cyber Command in a ceremony at Fort Meade that was attended by Commander of U.S. Central Command GEN David Petraeus, and Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates.

USCYBERCOM reached full operational capability on 31 October 2010.

The command assumed responsibility for several existing organizations. The Joint Task Force for Global Network Operations (JTF-GNO) and the Joint Functional Component Command for Network Warfare (JFCC-NW) were absorbed by the command.

The Defense Information Systems Agency, where JTF-GNO operated, provides technical assistance for network and information assurance to USCYBERCOM, and is moving its headquarters to Ft. Meade.

In the words of James Bamford who wrote his biography for Wired, "Alexander and the rest of the American intelligence community suffered a devastating defeat when they were surprised by the attacks on 9/11." Alexander's reaction was to order his intercept operators to begin to monitor the email and phone calls of American citizens who were unrelated to terrorist threats, including the personal calls of journalists.

In 2003, he was named deputy chief of staff for intelligence for the U.S. Army. Under his command were the units responsible for Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse in Baghdad, Iraq. 

Testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Alexander called the abuse "totally reprehensible" and described the perpetrators as a "group of undisciplined MP soldiers".

Mary Louise Kelly, who interviewed him later for NPR, said that because he was "outside the chain of command that oversaw interrogations in Iraq", Alexander was able to survive with his "reputation intact".

Alexander became a three-star general. In 2005, Donald Rumsfeld, secretary of defense, named him Director of the National Security Agency. There, according to Bamford, Alexander deceived the House Intelligence Committee when his agency was involved in NSA warrantless wiretapping.

Alexander was confirmed by the U.S. Senate for appointment to the rank of general on May 7, 2010 and was officially promoted to that rank in a ceremony on May 21, 2010. General Alexander assumed command of United States Cyber Command in the same ceremony that made him a four-star general.

He will deliver the keynote address at Black Hat USA in July 2013. The organizers describe Alexander as an :

"In 2010 the U.S. Senate confirmed Gen. Alexander to head U.S. Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM), as a four-star general. The establishment of USCYBERCOM both unified and strengthened the Defense Department's work to protect vital networks and ensure integration of cyber operations.

A highly regarded advocate of battlefield visualization and “data fusion” for more useful intelligence, Gen. Alexander has also led NSA/CSS since 2005. NSA/CSS gives the nation a decisive edge to make information and information technology an asset for the United States and a liability for its adversaries. It applies tools and tradecraft with creativity and agility — maintaining capabilities that exceed what others think is possible. The aim is to discover, make sense of, and securely share information at Net speed. What's more, NSA/CSS measurably improves the security of critical information systems and other operations.

At the helm, Gen. Alexander's depth of experience has made all the difference.

On the whole, he emphasizes, success is measured by how well the government collaborates with partners and customers.

“As our dependence on information networks increases, it will take a team to eliminate vulnerabilities and counter the ever-growing threats to the network. We can succeed in securing it by building strong partnerships between and within the private and public sectors, encouraging information sharing and collaboration, and creating and leveraging the technology that affords us the opportunity to secure cyberspace,” Gen. Alexander said. “Black Hat provides a great venue to have that productive dialogue by bringing together world-class researchers, technical experts, government officials, executives, and students for critical collaboration and education.”

Gen. Alexander continued, “It is my hope that in sharing some of my insights and perspectives with the information security community at Black Hat, we will continue to cultivate the information sharing and collaborative relationships needed to address the cyber threats facing global society.”

Black Hat USA will welcome Gen. Alexander to the stage on July 31, 2013. His keynote will give attendees an unmatched insider's look into the U.S. Cyber Command and the interworkings of offensive cyber strategy.

“General Alexander's role is one of the most unique in the information security field. He manages risk in ways most of us will never understand. The saying, 'walk a mile in my shoes,' will likely never apply for many of us, so hearing his story and perspective on international risk management will be both valuable and inspirational for the next generation of information security professionals,
” explained Trey Ford, General Manager, Black Hat. “We are honored he is joining us this year in Las Vegas.”

Black Hat USA will take place July 27–August 1, 2013, at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas.

Saturday, 6 July 2013

Ultimate Chilling Effects: The Story Behind the Story, Behind Snowden and the NSA Affair....

Aug. 24, 2011

From: KR

To: All Internet Operatives and Interns

Re:  Internet Operations --  For Immediate and Aggressive Implementation


Hello Gang,

You've all been working hard, and it's paying off.  Obama's numbers are plummeting as I type this.  Congratulations all around.  But we can't afford to be complacent now.  

I just want to briefly go over a few Mission Points with you.

1. Main mission:  Infiltrate all liberal web sites, posing as disaffected liberals with liberal-sounding user names, icons and signatures.  (Reference Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, FDR, Smedley Butler, Bill Clinton, etc.)

2. Express.  Disappointment.  With.  Obama.  (Whining pays double!)  (jk!)

3. Push primary challenge.  Push third party.  Push Green.  Push Socialist.  Push write-in voting.  Push non-voting to "send a message."

4. Effective memes/talking points:

"Obama is a DINO."
"Obama is no different than a Republican."
"Obama has sold us out."
"It feels good to vote your conscience."
"It feels good to stick to your principles."
"Don't be trapped into voting for the lesser of two evils."
"We need to punish Obama and the Democrats by not voting."
"We'd be better off with a Republican in the White House."
"Obama is a war-mongering, torturing, corporatist shill."

I simply cannot emphasize this point enough:  No meme is too extreme or radical.  "Obama is worse than Bush!"   "Obama is a war criminal!"  Remember: the reader thinks he is reading the opinion of a fellow liberal.  It's all about peer suggestibility, people.  Keep expanding theOverton Window.   The more you push a radical notion, the more likely a slightly less radical notion becomes acceptable.  Someone else said it this way:  "The bigger the lie, the more likely people will believe it."
So take it over the top.  Absolutely nothing is outside the realm of plausibility.  "Obama is an alien from the planet Negron."  I like it!

The libs are disappointed that Obama hasn't turned America into a socialist paradise by now, but they're lazy and spoiled, not savvy and proactive like us.  They think that by whining on a liberal web site they're engaging in some sort of "activism."   They're "holding Obama's feet to the fire."  They actually believe that DC policymakers or their staffers somehow have the time to read every ridiculous liberal blog.  They don't get it that the only ones reading their whiny little rants are--wait for it--other liberals.  So they're actually doing a whole lot of heavy lifting for us with all their dis-motivating buzz-kill, and we want to encourage them as much as possible.  When your enemy is engaged in a circular firing squad, pass them the ammo!

Look, we suckered all those nutjob Christian fundies out of their votes and their money.   LIberals are almost as easy to fool!

You've done great work so far.  At this point, many of the liberal blog sites are virtually indistinguishable from RedState. (And can you imagine us on RedState trashing our own candidate?  Riiiight.)  On most liberal sites, anyone praising Obama is hounded and laughed out of town.  Seeya later, blackwaterdog!  We, with the help of the libs, have made it uncool to approve of or admit to liking Barack Obama on a liberal web site!  Obama-trashing is now in vogue!  Is this a great country, or what?!

Remember, in 2000, the Greens helped us put George in the White House by chanting that Al Gore was the same as Dubya!  That George W. Bush was the same as the biggest liberal around!  And libs bought that!  They've obviously got a serious masochistic streak, so let's hand them a whip!  (Can you imagine what America would be like today if we'd had that commie wuss Al Gore in the White House for eight years?  Gives me goosebumps!)

The Internet was liberals' most effective weapon against us, for spreading lies and motivating other libs to vote and volunteer and donate, but not any more!   Now the only effect of liberal blog sites is to sap enthusiasm and deter liberals from voting, period.  We have monkey-wrenched our enemy's strength and turned it into a liability.  The Republican Party owes Karl's Keyboard Kommandoes a huge debt of gratitude.  You were instrumental in keeping Democrats home last November,  and look what happened:  we took back the House!   I only wish I could thank you all in person.  Mmmwahhh!

I know most of you work at home, but here at Crossroads I sometimes hear you guys yelling across your cubicles.  "Hey, rec me on Kos!  I'm owning those liberal schmucks!  That's another Prius-load of Dims staying home!  Spurn, baby, spurn!  It's a beautiful thang!"

Gotta love that energy!

But we can't let up now.   Now is the time to work even harder to sow and fertilize discontent out there in lib-land.  The debates have begun and soon a front-runner will emerge for the libs to focus on and sling their mud at, instead of their own guy.  (Go Ricky!  Either or both!  The Ricky/Ricky ticket!  Anybody but that grotesque, hideous beotch from the Klondike!)

If Obama manages to steal a second term, he could be an unfettered loose cannon and inflict irreparable damage on our Republic. Two words:  Supreme. Court.  We just can't afford to let Obama pack the SCOTUS with liberal activist judges.
 The long-overdue Citizens United decision means that finally our friends in business will no longer be muzzled from speaking out politically, so now our voices will have the full force of our resources behind them.   Here at Crossroads we're poised to spend $20 million for ad campaigns spreading the truth, and the sky's the limit.

And we also have to acknowledge the work of our fellow patriots at the RNC and Heritage and CFG and AEI, etc., and all the private grassroots blog-warriors out there as well, such as the excellent Advantage Consultants.  You guys are our Republican Underground, freedom fighters prosecuting our mission in the trenches on a daily basis.  And don't think we don't recognize your commendable job of scrubbing all the filthy liberal lies out of Wikipedia.

Here are some helpful answers to your Frequently Asked Questions:

Q:  Some libs are wise to us.  A Rand Paul staffer got caught on Daily Kos last year.  What if I am called out as a mole or troll?
A:  No problem; actually an opportunity.  Simply accuse the accuser of being a troll for Obama and the DNC, of trying to stifle dissent.   (Libs are suckers for that kind of stuff.)
 Say, "It's not a crime to criticize the president!"  Or, "So I'm not allowed to say anything bad about Obama?"  It's a straw man that works every time.   Try this:   "Nobody's gonna shut me up!  I'm gonna keep on speaking out!  Attica!  Attica!"

Q:  What do I do if the libs confront me with Obama's accomplishments?  What if they start rattling off all the liberal crap he's foisted on the American people?
A:  Just come back with the "warmongering corporatist torturer" bit (I know--he's a piker, he sucks at it, but some of them will actually believe that).   Mere laughing dismissal is often very effective.  Usually all it takes is an LOL.  Call your attackers "Obamabots."  Accuse them of mindless fawning, of worshipping their "saviour."  Dismiss the positive, accentuate the negative.  Reference Paul Krugman and Glenn Greenwald.  We know Obama hosed us on the debt ceiling deal, for example, but the libs think he sold out.  That's the spin we want to push.  And it won't hurt to ramp up the vitriol and nastiness.  We want to make every liberal site an unpleasant place to visit.

Q:  What if some of this criticism does reach Obama's radar and he starts going even more leftist or tries to kick Republican butt?  Won't that backfire on us?
A:  Nothing would be better!  Bring it, O man!  We've already managed to inform a big chunk of the electorate that Obama is in truth an angry, racist, America-hating communist.  If we can goad him to the point where he stops playing rope-a-dope with us and starts acting like the thuggish, belligerent, socialist dictator we know him to be in reality, we win.  We want nothing more than for him to lose his temper and get all pushy and uppity (I love that word!) and uncompromising.  Heck, if he gets uppity enough, we might have some traction on an impeachment move.  Admittedly, it's frustrating that he has kept his cool no matter what we throw at him.  His phony act of being so consistently goddamned adult and steady and reasonable and sober and bipartisan is what has made all our people in comparison look like stubborn, childish, maudlin, jingoistic, perverted, hypocritical, narcissistic, grandstanding, demented, ignorant, freak-show corporatist whores who don't give a shit about America.  And they're not.  Not at all.  Nope.  Not all of them.  No way, Hozay!  

Q:  Is our work really that effective?  I mean, how many people actually read these liberal blogs?
A:  Your work is very effective, or we wouldn't be paying you.  True, the people who visit these liberal sites might be a tiny percentage of the population, but they are the most political, the most likely to get involved in organizing, volunteering and fundraising.  In other words, the core.  If we can raise enough doubts among the core, and constantly reinforce those doubts through peer suggestibility, we will in essence drive a stake through the heart of the Democrat party.  And that is a good day's work, my friends!

Q:  He got Osama bin Laden.  How the hell do we spin that?
A:  Easy:  "Obama assassinated a foreign leader without a trial."  "Obama should be tried for murder before an international court of law."  "They didn't even read bin Laden his Miranda rights, or offer him counseling!"

People, the bottom line is that I don't care what you do, or what it takes.  We get it.  The libs don't.  We know it's all about votes, and the money and enthusiasm and volunteering that gets votes.  The guy who goes to the White House in 2013 will have either an R after his name, or a D.  Do we want the party of Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi and Sherrod Brown in our house, or do we want the party of Grover Norquist, Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Brothers?   So, all eyes on the prize, which is:  Keeping those godless, America-hating libs away from the voting booths!

We want to make this the new theme song of the Democrat party:
(To the tune of the In-N-Out jingle)

Sit it out!
Sit it out!
That's what a Dem-ocrat is
All about!

Onward to the Hundred-Year Majority!

And remember:  The month's top poster wins a dream lunch with KR!

Yours in liberty, free enterprise, and purity of purpose,



8:26 PM PT: Wow, 50 HRs and counting.  I stepped into a nest of rattlesnakes, I guess.  I used to love this site years ago, but now I'm sick over what it has become.  All I tried to do was hold up a mirror, and maybe some here didn't like what they saw.  When so much of the work here is so closely aligned with that of our enemies (yes, the Republican party is my enemy), then I think we need to question what effect we're having.  Of course this is interpreted by some (defensively, I feel) as an admonition to stop criticizing President Obama, and that is completely missing the point.  We are talking mostly to each other here, so a constructive purpose of dissent on DK would be to rally others to action.  What action are we rallying our fellow Kossacks to take?

8:51 PM PT: My greatest disappointment:  Apparently no one got the reference of "Spurn, baby, spurn!"  Didn't anyone here see "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room"?