Showing posts with label rove. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rove. Show all posts

Tuesday, 30 July 2013

"Bradley Manning" Doesn't Exist

This is what "Bradley" and his defence team if lawyers are willing to concede in military court as established and irrefutable, uncontested fact.

His defence team is formally acknowledging as a statement of fact that during Operation Neptune Spear on 2 May 2011, the US acquired documents from UBL's computer establishing that UBL had requested and received DoD data disclosed by Manning to Assange and posted to Wikileaks, making them public domain.

That's one thing.

This may or may not be true - parts of it may be true, more than likely little or none of it is.

That's fine.

It's a fairly stupid and incriminating act for a lawyer and defendant to put their name to a signed document agreeing to the fact that all of these things are true and they accept them without having been there and witnessing the recovery firsthand, but that's fine.

That's point two of the statement of fact.

Manning is formally and legally acknowledging that from his point of view, this is true.

The problem is point one in the formal statement of fact.

The problem is this.

This isn't true, everyone knows it isn't true, no part of it is true and it's all clearly and completely proven to be untrue.

Here, Bradley Manning and his lawyers are signing a formal admission to the court, for public consumption, putting their names and endorsement in support of the assertion that it IS true, and is indeed an established and agreed upon matter of fact.

It really isn't.

It's a completely lie. 

And "Bradley Manning" is signing totally incriminating formal court declarations supportive of the quite ludicrous notion that not only is it true, it's indisputable and uncontroversial.

All of which is ludicrous if he's actually attempting to defend and justify his actions and avoid punishment.

Which he quite clearly isn't. He's doing the opposite.

But why? Let's deconstruct what he's actually accused of doing:-

People say this is like the Pentagon Papers and Daniel Ellsberg. 

It isn't.

What Ellsberg leaked was a historical report, an internal, comprehensive history of the Vietnam war through to 1969.

It was old information, it was an archival research study intended for reference, he self-censored it before leaking it and all of it was classified below Top Secret.

The reason this is an important distinction to make is that Ellsberg DID have access to Top Secret material - and he didn't leak it. 

He still hasn't, and won't to this day. He leaked classified and sensitive materials, but nothing judged to be injurious to national security. 

No one has ever leaked and published such Top,Secret material because even in civilian court, that's an offence punishable by 30 years to Life.

There have been espionage cases where people have stolen Top Secret material and sold it or given it to a foreign power, but they have never published it in bulk. 

Ostensibly, what "Bradley Manning" did was this - he took mass amounts of the most privileged and sensitive material available and just gave it to a foreign national, without self-censoring it or even checking what he was handing over - there could have been nuclear launch codes in there.

"Manning" didn't self-censor or edit what he gave to Wikileaks to gauge its sensitivity and appropriateness to be made public - Wikileaks did, applying their own arbitrary measure of editorial control on the material.

But all the stuff they didn't publish - which is a lot more - they still have. They may have kept it, they may have sold it. But they still have it.

Manning allegedly (and neither he nor his advocates dispute this) just gave a bunch of Top Secret information to man from another country he had never met.

That's precisely what people in the armed forces are supposed never to do. Because its treason.

My thesis instead is this: if the Pentagon say he did this, if he says that he did this and if his defence counsel say he did this.... 

And yet he STILL isn't YET in the stockade at Fort Mead.... Now, years later after the fact...
Surely to most obvious explanation being overlooked for this glaring incongruity is: 

He Didn't Do This.

And None of This is True.
Hear me out here,

The first point is this : if what he and his defence are saying is true, and that is his defence, then he doesn't have a defence.

He goes to jail, and he goes today, end of story.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice does not have a whilstleblower defence for the disclosure of Top Secret material to foreign nationals.

The second point is this: we KNOW that Julian Assange is an intelligence front.
He's not a leaker and he's not an activist.
He's a fraud.
So, you have to ask the question : if Assange is a fraud, and they know he's a fraud as surely they must, the suspicion has to be raised - is the guy accused of leaking stuff to him also a fraud?

Look at it objectively - are they handling his military trial by the book or are they doing odd things and deviating conspicuously from established operating proceedures?

Answer: Yes, they are.
Is it really reasonable to believe that any serving member of the US Military would really disclose mass bulk Top Secret information to a silver-haired Aussie weirdo with questionable bedroom manners just on a whim?
And is it reasonable to accept that such a person is still not in jail for doing so?

He should have been jailed within days. 

Here we are years later, with no end in sight.

This is Theatre.

from Spike1138 on Vimeo.

Botwatching would appear to confirm I am on to something...

Thursday, 21 February 2013

Dick Cheney - JSOC Targetted Killing of Benzir Bhutto (and un-targeted killing of 157 innocent bystanders)

"Right now, today, there was a story in the New York Times that if you read it carefully mentioned something known as the Joint Special Operations Command -- JSOC it’s called. It is a special wing of our special operations community that is set up independently. They do not report to anybody, except in the Bush-Cheney days, they reported directly to the Cheney office. They did not report to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff or to Mr. [Robert] Gates, the secretary of defense. They reported directly to him. ...

"Congress has no oversight of it. It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on. Just today in the Times there was a story that its leaders, a three star admiral named [William H.] McRaven, ordered a stop to it because there were so many collateral deaths.

"Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us."

Seymour Hersh, University of Minnesota , March 10th 2009

KARACHI, Pakistan, Oct. 19 — Looking pale and shaken the day after she survived a suicide bomb attack, the opposition leader Benazir Bhutto said Friday that she had warned the Pakistani government that suicide bomb squads were going to go after her on her return to the country and that it had failed to act on the information.

Ms. Bhutto did not blame the president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, for the bomb blasts and said extremist Islamic groups who wanted to take over the country were behind the attacks, which killed 134 people.

But she pointed the finger at government officials who she said were sympathetic to the militants and were abusing their powers to advance their cause. She did not identify them on Friday, but said she had in a letter to the government this Tuesday. It was not clear if she was implicating the officials directly or accusing them of dragging their feet on her warning.

“I am not accusing the government, but I am accusing certain individuals who abuse their positions, who abuse their powers,” she said at a news conference of hundreds of journalists in the garden of her home in Clifton, an upscale neighborhood of the southern port city of Karachi.

“I know in my heart who my enemies are,” she added. “There is a poem that says that even if you hide yourself behind seven veils, I can still see your hand.”

While it was not possible to assess the veracity of Ms. Bhutto’s charges, she has long accused parts of the government, namely Pakistan’s premier military intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, of working against her and her party because they oppose her liberal, secular agenda.

Aides close to Ms. Bhutto said that one of those named in the letter was Ijaz Shah, the director general of the Intelligence Bureau, another of the country’s intelligence agencies and a close associate of General Musharraf.

Mr. Shah hung up when asked by telephone for a reaction to the allegations.

Ms. Bhutto seemed careful on Friday not to implicate General Musharraf, taking pains for the time being to preserve the power-sharing arrangement that allowed her to return to Pakistan, and which may make her prime minister for a third time after parliamentary elections in January. She spoke to the president by telephone on Friday.

The ISI has for decades backed militant Islamic groups in Kashmir and in Afghanistan in pursuit of a military strategy established by the former military dictator, Gen. Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, in the 1970s. “I know exactly who wants to kill me,” Ms. Bhutto said. “It is dignitaries of the former regime of General Zia who are today behind the extremism and the fanaticism.”

Before her return, she said a “brotherly country,” which she did not identify, warned her that several suicide squads were plotting attacks against her — one from a Taliban group, one from Al Qaeda, one from Pakistani Taliban and one from Karachi.

That friendly government, she said, had also supplied Pakistan’s government with telephone numbers the plotters were using.

“I would hope with so much information in their hands the government would have been able to apprehend them,” she said, “but I can understand the difficulties.”

Aware of the risks she faced, she said she sent General Musharraf the letter two days before her return, naming “three individuals and more” who should be investigated for their sympathies with the militants in case she was assassinated.

She added that there were more plots against her, including one to infiltrate police guarding her homes in Karachi and the rural district of Larkana in order to mount attacks “in the garb of a rival political party.”

Ms. Bhutto said the street lamps had been turned off Thursday night as her cavalcade inched its way through Karachi, amid perhaps as many as 200,000 supporters and party workers who had turned out to celebrate her return after eight years of self-imposed exile to avoid corruption charges.

The darkness made it difficult, she said, for her security officials to scan the crowd for possible bombers. She did not accuse the government of turning off the lights, but demanded an investigation.

A security official said the government was investigating which group was behind the blasts, and said that five groups of militants from Pakistan’s tribal areas, on the Afghan border, had trained and dispatched suicide bombers for her arrival.

The details of the attack remained disputed on Friday. Ms. Bhutto implied that the two blasts were set off by two bombers. Government officials, who updated the toll to 134 killed and about 450 wounded, said the explosions were caused by one bomber on foot who first detonated a grenade and then blew himself up, scattering a lethal mix of screws, pellets and shrapnel into the dense crowd massed around Ms. Bhutto’s armored truck.

“We have no doubt it was a suicide attack,” the home secretary of Sindh province, Ghulam Muhammad Mohtarem, a retired brigadier, said Friday at a news conference, flanked by the Karachi police chief and other high-ranking police officials.

The target, he agreed, was Ms. Bhutto. “It can’t be definitively said which group was involved but it is one of the extremist groups,” he said.

Baitullah Mehsud, a pro-Taliban militant commander from Pakistan’s tribal areas, who has been accused of threatening to send bombers after Ms. Bhutto, denied that he was involved, Reuters reported.

Ms. Bhutto said the attack was more than an assassination attempt on her, and represented the broader aims of Islamist terrorism. “The attack was not on me,” she said, “the attack was on what I represent, it was an attack on democracy, by those who are against the unity and integrity of Pakistan.”

The blasts killed 50 of the security guards from her Pakistan People’s Party who had formed a human chain around her truck to keep potential bombers away, Ms. Bhutto said.

A woman and a small child were among the dead, she said. A number of senior officials on the truck were also wounded. Officials said six police officers were killed and 20 wounded.

Ms. Bhutto said she had been sitting down at the back of the truck to relieve her swollen feet, and to go over a speech with her political assistant, and so had avoided the force of the blast.

She vowed that she would not be deterred by the attack. “They are saying peace-loving people are not safe to gather,” she said of the militants. “A minority wants to hijack the destiny of this great nation. And we will not be intimidated by this minority.”

“I know who the forces are of militancy, and I know they want to kill me because they are cowards,” she added. “They cannot face the people of Pakistan in the political field.”

She said she had thanked people in the government who also have given her warnings of plots. She appealed for them to continue passing her information.

General Musharraf called Ms. Bhutto on Friday, expressed his “shock and profound grief” and prayed for the safety and security of Ms. Bhutto, the government news agency, the Associated Press of Pakistan, reported.

“The president expressed his firm resolve that all possible steps would be taken and a thorough investigation would be carried out to bring the perpetrators to justice,” the news agency said.

It added that the president had ordered law enforcement authorities to track down the mastermind of the bombings within 48 hours, and had offered a force of special services commandos trained by the United States to Ms. Bhutto for her protection.

Karachi was almost deserted Friday in the aftermath of the attack. Almost all shopping malls and business centers closed for fear of more violence. A crowd gathered at the scene of the blasts to offer prayers on the blood-stained median dividing the road. The heavy smell of dead bodies hung in the air.

At a morgue run by the Edhi Foundation, a private relief organization, bodies wrapped in white shrouds were brought in from hospitals around the city. Distraught relatives milled around to inquire about the dead and missing, covering their noses to escape the stench.

Ali Muhammad, 45, a driver, was standing with reddened eyes near the information room on Friday at noon. He said his 18-year-old nephew Zohaib had been missing since last night.

“We searched in every hospital,” he said, close to tears. “We inquired from every police station. It’s only just now that we have located him here. The body is all blood.”

"I received information that I could be attacked by Hamza Bin Laden, the son of Osama Bin Laden..."

"...Omar Sheikh, the man who murdered Osama Bin Laden..."


Operation Neptune Spear (aka The Bin Laden Raid) was one of the last and most recent JSOC Operations, one of the few carried out by the current administration, due to the afore mentioned concern and alarm over the vast number of collateral deaths.

Even official accounts of Operation Neptune Spear confirm that Hamza Bin Laden was present and confirmed killed at the Bin Laden compound in Abbattobad on May 2nd 2011.

Subsequent statements by ISI have tried to back-peddle this announcement and state instead that
 his half brother Khalid bin Laden was killed and mistaken for Hamza; the US position continues to be that no-one there got out alive and imply that BOTH Khalid and Hamza were killed in the raid.

A Bin Laden was certainly killed in the raid. Just perhaps, almost certainly not Osama Bin Laden.


Saturday, 24 November 2012