Friday, 29 November 2013

A Pre-Conspiracy Theory: A Very Important Article by an Obamabasher



I’m going to engage here in a thought experiment which may make some readers a little queasy, but bear with me.

It’s been half a century since the wrenching experience of having a charismatic young president cut down by bullets in what most Americans apparently still believe was a dark conspiracy by elements of the US government unhappy with the direction he was taking the country in international affairs.

Certainly powerful people like ex-CIA Director Allen Dulles and some of the nation’s top generals, not to mention executives of what prior President Dwight D. Eisenhower had labeled the military industrial complex were outraged that in his third year in office Kennedy was trying to dial back the Cold War, to reduce or even end the threat of actual nuclear war, and that he was even thinking of pulling US troops out of Vietnam and of reaching some accommodation with Fidel Castro’s Cuba.

Today we can read analyses like this that compellingly argue that the assassination of President Kennedy was orchestrated by those in the ruling elite who opposed such moves towards peace by a president who had campaigned for office as a hard-line cold warrior.

What then are we to make of recent actions by President Obama, who since his election has been a supporter of aggressive, even criminally aggressive militarism in Latin America, the Middle East and Africa, but who, in recent months has been taking steps that appear, at least on their face, to be aimed at tamping down American belligerence?
Take his surprising back-down from a threatened attack on Syria. That prospective war at one point was only two days from being launched, with US ships and planes in place surrounding Syria, all fueled, armed and awaiting orders from the commander in chief.

Hawks in the Pentagon, CIA and the President’s own National Security Council, and the Israeli government and its US lobby, the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) were pushing hard a US air attack on the government and the military of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, along with direct military support for the Islamic militants battling his regime. Then suddenly, in an address to the nation, the president did a volte-face and announced that he was backing a Russian peace initiative that called for an internationally supervised program to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile. The Neocons in Washington erupted in fury that their latest war was aborted. Their rage was echoed by AIPAC and by Israel’s right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

This peace move was followed by another shocker: the temporary six-month nuclear agreement just negotiated between a US-led group of six nations (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany), and Iran. This deal, coming after 34 years of enmity and conflict between the US and Iran, reportedly requires Iran to scale back and limit its uranium enrichment program, while continuing to produce fuel-grade uranium — which the Iranians have insisted all along is for the peaceful development of nuclear power, not the making of a nuclear weapon. In return the US and Europe have agreed to begin dismantling the economic sanctions which, under US leadership, have been crippling Iran for years.

Again, the Neoconservatives in Washington are braying that Obama is “selling out” Israel and “appeasing” the mullahs who rule Iran. Israel’s government and the Saudi Arabian monarchy are both denouncing the agreement. But the president is calling it a good deal. He’s right. And if a permanent agreement can be hammered out in the coming months, it will effectively end the looming threat of a war of aggression by the US and Israel against Iran — a war that would likely ignite the whole Middle East, and that could possibly spiral out of control into a global conflict.

So, here’s my question, for those on the left who will no doubt scoff at these recent decisions by the president and say that the US remains the world’s biggest threat to peace: If this president, like Kennedy before him, were to be assassinated, would we be willing to accept the inevitable claim that some lone crackpot racist had done him in? Or would we not be digging around looking hard for evidence that a cabal of warmongers inside the government, the Pentagon and in the military industrial complex, had acted to prevent a president who had seen the light from dialing back the nation’s bellicose war-mongering?

I think the answer is clear.

If readers want to see this dark line of thinking as this writer’s having been suckered into believing that Obama is becoming what his grossly premature Nobel Peace Prize implied he was — a genuine opponent of war — go ahead. The truth is that I remain very skeptical on this point. It would take a lot more action on his part for me to say that.

After all, under Obama’s leadership the US military and the CIA are still launching drone attacks in countries like Yemen and Pakistan, the State Department is in the process of imposing a deal on Kabul allowing the US to continue to continue posting 15,000 US troops in Afghanistan for another decade, American soldiers are actively engaged in a secret war in Colombia, the CIA is seeking to subvert elected governments in Venezuela, Bolivia and other Latin American nations, the US Navy is being beefed up in the western Pacific to confront an increasingly assertive China, and of course, the Pentagon budget is continuing to grow, instead of being cut down to a size appropriate to a nation that clearly faces no military threat. As well, the alphabet soup of intelligence agencies continues to grow in size and power.

Still, as we re-examine the old evidence and look at new evidence that strongly suggests President Kennedy was murdered by a cabal of warmongers within the bureaucracy because he had decided to seek peace instead of endless war, it is worth considering whether this current president, fifty years on, may have decided, midway into his second term, to attempt the same thing. If true, there is reason to worry about his own safety, particularly given the enormously more powerful secret agencies that have been nurtured since 9-11, including during Obama’s own first five years in the White House.

Wednesday, 27 November 2013

JFK50: 1963

1963 - Final Trailer from Spike EP on Vimeo.

https://vimeo.com/spikeepproductions/

http://spikethenews.blogspot.co.uk

The Party of God



"We are the sons of the ummah (Muslim community) – the party of God (Hizb Allah) the vanguard of which was made victorious by God in Iran. There the vanguard succeeded to lay down the bases of a Muslim state which plays a central role in the world. 

We obey the orders of one leader, wise and just, that of our tutor and faqih (jurist) who fulfills all the necessary conditions: Ruhollah Musawi Khomeini. …

We are an umma linked to the Muslims of the whole world by the solid doctrinal and religious connection of Islam, whose message God wanted to be fulfilled by the Seal of the Prophets, i.e., Muhammad. Our behavior is dictated to us by legal principles laid down by the light of an overall political conception defined by the leading jurist. …


"As for our culture, it is based on the Holy Koran, the Sunna and the legal rulings of the faqih who is our source of imitation.

Christians and Jews differ with Muslims concerning the interpretation of the unity of God and the personality of God. 

Despite that, the Qur'an commands: Turn to the principle of unity—the unity of God and the unity of mankind. 

We interpret this to mean that we can meet with Marxists on the common ground of standing up to the forces of international arrogance; we can meet nationalists, even secular nationalists, on the common ground of Arab causes, which are also Islamic causes. Islam recognizes the Other. …

So Islam does not negate the Other; it invites the Other to dialogue."



I quote The Enemy:

Hezbollah was conceived by Muslim clerics and funded by Iran following the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and was primarily formed to offer resistance to the Israeli occupation.

Its leaders were followers of Ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of 1,500 Iranian Revolutionary Guards that arrived from Iran with permission from the Syrian government.

Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto listed its four main goals as "Israel's final departure from Lebanon as a prelude to its final obliteration", ending "any imperialist power in Lebanon", submission of the Phalangists to "just rule" and bringing them to trial for their crimes, and giving the people the chance to choose "with full freedom the system of government they want", while not hiding its commitment to the rule of Islam.

Hezbollah leaders have also made numerous statements calling for the destruction of the State of Israel, which they refer to as the "Zionist entity".


I Like the Pope



AT LEAST two Popes in the latter half of the 20th Century were murdered by Catholic Conservatives with connections to US and NATO intelligence due to the perception they were "soft on Communism";

John-Paul I was poisoned, largely due to his firm intention to clean out the Vatican Bank of Freemasons, Mafiosi and international arms traffickers, but ALSO because of his perceived tendency towards Communist appeasement - the only foreign trip outside the walls of the Vatican he made during his month-long papacy was to give a speech of friendship and in support of the Communist Mayor of Rome, and he was also expected to liberalise the Church's position on birth control, divorce and homosexuality, whilst clamping down and opening up regarding the Church's policy on pederast priests.

His death came amid the building Polish crisis behind the Iron Curtain, resulting in the election of the first non-Italian Pope in over 450 years (the last one was Dutch, and poisoned) - many at the time suggested Zbignew Brezinski was responsible.

When John Paul II's conciliatory approach towards Brezhnev began to bear fruit, a hit team connected with NATO Intelligence out of a Turkey assembled to deliver to him a warning shot from the Curia. 

Lennon



There's nothing you can do that can't be done
Nothing you can sing that can't be sung
Nothing you can say, but you can learn how to play the game.

It's easy

Nothing you can make that can't be made
No one you can save that can't be saved
Nothing you can do, but you can learn how to be you in time.

It's easy

Nothing you can know that isn't known
Nothing you can see that isn't shown
Nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be.
It's easy

All you need is love.

JFK50 / MOCKINGBIRD : Coop the Spook of CNN and the House of Vanderbilt


"And of course, the White House press corps is here.  I know CNN has taken some knocks lately, but the fact is I admire their commitment to cover all sides of a story, just in case one of them happens to be accurate."

 (Laughter and applause.)

President Barack Obama, 2013 White House Correspondent's Dinner.

Agentwatch








Tuesday, 26 November 2013

Squirrel


In Norse mythology, Ratatoskr is a red squirrel who runs up and down with messages in the world tree, Yggdrasill, and spreads gossip. 

In particular, he carried messages between the unnamed eagle at the top of Yggdrasill and the wyrm Níðhöggr beneath its roots.




JFK50: Evidence of Revision





"MindWar...is, in fact, the strategy to which tactical warfare must conform if it is to achieve maximum effectiveness. The MindWar scenario must be preeminent in the mind of the commander and must be the principal factor in his every field decision. Otherwise he sacrifices measures which actually contribute to winning the war to measures of immediate, tangible satisfaction. (Consider the rational for 'body counts' in Vietnam).
...

"In its strategic context, MindWar must reach out to friends, enemies, and neutrals alike across the globe -- neither through primitive "battlefield" leaflets and loudspeakers of PSYOP nor through the weak, imprecise, and narrow effort of psychotronics - but through the media possessed by the United States which have the capabilities to reach virtually all people on the face of the Earth. These media are, of course, the electronic media -- television and radio. State of the art developments in satellite communication, video recording techniques, and laser and optical transmission of broadcasts made possible a penetration of the minds of the worlds such as would have been inconceivable just a few years ago. Like the sword Excalibur, we have but to reach out and seize this tool; and it can transform the world for us if we have the courage and the integrity to civilization with it. If we do not accept Excalibur, then we relinquish our ability to inspire foreign cultures with our morality. If they then desire moralities unsatisfactory to us, we have no choice but to fight them on a more brutish level.
...

"Unlike PSYOP, MindWar has nothing to do with deception or even with 'selected' -- and therefore misleading -- truth. Rather it states a whole truth that, if it does not now exist, will be forced into existence by the will of the United States. The examples of Kennedy's ultimatum to Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis and Hitler's stance at Munich might be cited. A MindWar message does not have to fit conditions of abstract credibility as do PSYOP there; its source makes it credible. As Livy once said: 'The terror of the Roman name will be such that the world shall know that, once a Roman army had laid siege to a city, nothing will move it -- not the rigors or winter nor the weariness of months and years -- that it knows no end but victory and is ready, in a swift and sudden stroke will not serve, to preserve until that victory is achieved.'
...

"For the mind to believe in its own decisions, it must feel that it made those decisions without coercion. Coercive measures used by the operative, consequently, must not be detectable by ordinary means. There is no need to resort to mind-weakening drugs such as those explored by the CIA; in fact the exposure of a single such method would do unacceptable damage to MindWar's reputation for truth. Existing PSYOP identifies purely-sociological factors which suggest appropriate idioms for messages. Doctrine in this area is highly developed, and the task is basically one of assembling and maintaining individuals and teams with enough expertise and experience to apply the doctrine effectively. This, however, is only the sociological dimension of target receptiveness measures. There are some purely natural conditions under which minds may become more or less receptive to ideas, and MindWar should take full advantage of such phenomena as atmospheric electromagnetic activity (12), air ionization (13), and extremely low frequency waves (14)."


















William Hague Cautions Against More Israeli False Flag Attempts.


"He also stressed the role of “limited” sanctions relief and discouraged “anyone in the world” from taking measures “that would undermine the agreement.” "


Hmm. Who could he *possibly* mean....?


Eddie Daly, any ideas...?


According to the Guardian:

” “The leaked US diplomatic cables reveal a particular intelligence interest in Alan Duncan, at the time shadow minister for prisons. Duncan, a former oil trader who is now international development minister, is gay. He once shared a London flat with William Hague, who has felt obliged to deny public speculation about his own sexuality.

“A 22 January 2010 cable was signed off by Elizabeth Pitterle, head of intelligence operations. She thanked the London embassy for its intelligence on Duncan’s “friendship with … William Hague”, saying it was “particularly insightful and exceptionally well timed, as analysts are preparing finished products on the Conservative leadership for senior policymakers”.

“The cable called for further intelligence on “Duncan’s relationship with Conservative party leader David Cameron and William Hague”, and asked: “What role would Duncan play if the Conservatives form a government? What are Duncan’s political ambitions?”

Here is the cable in full:

” Friday, 22 January 2010, 13:29

C O N F I D E N T I A L STATE 006439
NOFORN
SIPDIS
EO 12958 DECL: 01/22/2035
TAGS PINR, UK
SUBJECT: (C/NF) KUDOS AND FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FOR
BIOGRAPHIC AND PERSONALITY REPORTING ON UK SHADOW MINISTER FOR PRISONS ALAN DUNCAN (C-RE9-02552)
REF: LONDON 002656
Classified By: ELISSA G. PITTERLE, DIRECTOR, INR/OPS

1. (C/NF) WASHINGTON ANALYSTS GREATLY APPRECIATED POST’S BACKGROUND AND BIOGRAPHIC REFTEL ON SHADOW MINISTER FOR PRISONS ALAN DUNCAN. ANALYSTS FOUND THE INFORMATION REGARDING DUNCAN’S MIDDLE EAST EXPERTISE, AS WELL AS COMMENTS ON HIS FRIENDSHIP WITH SHADOW FOREIGN SECRETARY WILLIAM HAGUE PARTICULARLY INSIGHTFUL AND EXCEPTIONALLY WELL-TIMED AS ANALYSTS ARE PREPARING FINISHED PRODUCTS ON THE CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP FOR SENIOR POLICYMAKERS. ANALYSTS WOULD APPRECIATE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON ALAN DUNCAN AS TIME AND RESOURCES PERMIT.

A. (C/NF) WHAT IS DUNCAN’S RELATIONSHIP WITH CONSERVATIVE PARTY LEADER DAVID CAMERON AND WILLIAM HAGUE?

B. (C/NF) WHAT ROLE WOULD DUNCAN PLAY IF THE CONSERVATIVES FORM A GOVERNMENT?

C. (C/NF) WHAT ARE DUNCAN’S POLITICAL AMBITIONS?

2. (U) PLEASE CITE C-RE9-02552 IN THE SUBJECT LINE OF REPORTING IN RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS. CLINTON”.

They might want to look again at William Hague’s role in the UK Government.

Should he really be in charge of the FCO?

Willie’s not the man we think he is.

He’s a bloody liability.

http://www.fagburn.com/2010/11/wikileaks-2-alan-duncan-william-hague.html

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/05/01/thatcher-hague-brittan-dolphin-square-and-the-operation-pallial-link/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/william-hague-and-the-dolphin-square-gym/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/william-hague-and-the-dolphin-square-gym/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/06/11/hypocrite-hague/

http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/alan-duncan-william-hague-david-cameron.html

http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/satanic-savile.html

willie and mags

Margaret Thatcher is dead.

Or is she?

We have our suspicions.

No matter.

For now, let’s retrace her links to the infamous Dolphin Square complex.

In the 1990′s the now-defunct Scallywag journal, published details of a vile boy brothel being used there by politicians and other VIP’s.

Children were being supplied to the paedophile ring by John Allen, also know as Sister Latex.

There is strong evidence that Operation Pallial should be linking Dolphin Square to the North Wales care home scandal.

According to Justice Denied:

” The  letter written below is penned  by Simon Regan  Editor of Scallyway Magazine   who’s  half  Brother  Angus  James Wilson,  co-founder of Scallywag,   died  in Cyprus in 1994 whilst the magazine  was investigating  the elite paedophile ring operating in North Wales children’s homes and beyond.

In his letter Simon documents Scallywag’s investigation into the North Wales Child Abuse scandal   and the tragic  cover-up by the Courts and the Establishment.

Whilst the Police stole  the affidavits the  abused children had made,  naming their high profile abusers,  the notes of the interviews were kept by investigator Andrea Davison  only to be seized  by the Derby and North Wales Police in January 2010.   http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/andrea-davison-jimmy-savile-serco-and.html

Now that this paedophile ring, which Jimmy Savile procured for, is being exposed its time that the Police returned the Affidavits and the notes of these interviews.  The names given by these abused children, some of whom died tragically, should be investigated anew but who can be trusted to do the investigation?

The daily mail recently  wrote   this article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2224167/Former-Minister-says-Thatcher-aide-paedophile-preyed-boys-home–Hague-known.html which opened up the whole North Wales Child abuse scandal up again.  William Hauge   and other Members of the  last Tory  Government  covered up the fact the  Peter Morrison MP  Thatcher’s close friend  and aide was named by children in the North Wales children’s homes as being a  child abuser linked to an elite  paedophile ring.

The Waterhouse Report

By Simon Regan

20 February 2000

The fact that the Waterhouse report went as far as it did is highly commendable, and obviously long overdue. But the trouble with any investigation which tries to break through a ‘cult of silence’ is the lingering doubts that it will ever get down to the whole full truth of the matter. Waterhouse is probably merely the tip of the iceberg.

The report suggests there is ‘no evidence’ that Freemasonry had anything to do with the scandal. Yet there were two inadequate and inconclusive police inquiries, including one into a senior officer, by a force in North Wales riddled with freemasons.

There was a consistent lack of initiative on the part of the local Clwyd CC in the face of overwhelming evidence of consistent child abuse at Bryn Estyn, ostensibly because the council insurers advised against any action. This in itself insults democracy in a way that borders on the criminal. By a policy of non-action, both the police and the council became embroiled in a blatant cover-up.

Anyone who has even vaguely become acquainted with paedophilia knows very well that they will go to the ends of the earth to keep their activities absolutely secret. They are professional experts in covering their tracks.

In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed. Most of these interviews were extremely harrowing and disturbing, but were gently and sensitively conducted over pub lunches where the victim could relax. We subsequently persuaded ten of them to make sworn affidavits which we proposed to use as back up to half a dozen paedophile stories we later published.

Two of these young men, who had been 14-years-old at the time, swore they had been not only introduced to the paedophile ring operating in the Crest Hotel in Wrexham but had later been escorted on three or four occasions to an address in Pimlico where they were further abused.

We took them separately to Pimlico and asked them to point out the building where this had taken place. They were both positive in their identification. It turned out to be the private flat of a well known, and since highly discredited lobbyist who later went into obscurity in some disgrace because of his involvement with Mohammed al-Fayed and the ‘cash for questions’ scandal. At the time we ran a story entitled ‘Boys for Questions’ and named several prominent members of the then Thatcher government. These allegations went to the very top of the Tory party, yet there was a curious and almost ominous lack of writs.

The lobbyist was a notorious ‘queen’ who specialised in gay parties with a ‘political mix’ in the Pimlico area – most convenient to the Commons – and which included selected flats in Dolphin Square. The two young men were able to give us very graphic descriptions of just what went on, including acts of buggery, and alleged that they were only two of many from children’s homes other than North Wales.

There was, to my certain knowledge, at least one resignation from the Conservative office in Smith Square once we had published our evidence and named names.

Subsequently, over a rent dispute which is still a matter of litigation, Dr. Julian Lewis, now Conservative MP for New Forest (East) but then deputy head of research at Conservative Central Office in Smith Square, managed to purchase the contents of our offices, which included all our files. It had been alleged that we owed rent, which we disputed, but under a court order the landlords were able to change the locks and seize our assets which included all our files, including those we had made on paedophiles. It was apparently quite legal, but it was most certainly a dirty trick.

All of a sudden very private information, some of it even privileged between ourselves and our lawyer during the John Major libel action, was being published in selected, pro-Conservative sections of the media.

Subsequently, during a court case initiated by Lewis, I was able in my defence to seek discovery of documents and asked to see the seized files. The paedophile papers were missing. This is a very great shame, because Sir Ronald Waterhouse certainly should have been aware of them.

I believe that the secrecy the Establishment wraps around itself easily equals that of the paedophiles. They really do look after each other and quite professionally cover their tracks.

The real trouble about exposing paedophiles is that former victims of child abuse make lousy witnesses. By the very nature of the abuse, when they are rudely shoved out into the wide world (one of the witnesses, Stephen Messham, for example, was released on his sixteenth birthday on Christmas day after two years of abuse, and had to sleep rough on the streets for four and a half months), they are often deeply psychologically disturbed.

Some of the extreme cases commit suicide, many more were sexually disorientated in the worst possible way. Some became gay prostitutes, others drug addicts, and in nearly every case, at some stage, they needed lengthy counselling. Marriages quickly disintegrated in psychological turmoil and a lot of former victims had real difficulties raising their own children. There are very few victims of child abuse who come out of it without deep scars.

It was all very well for us to take statements from former victims in the cosy atmosphere of a pub lunch, but put them up against an agile and eminent QC whose sole task is to discredit them, and they quickly crumble, even break down in tears. Many former victims now have criminal records of some kind, owing almost exclusively to the abuse itself, and the barrister will brutally exploit this as evidence that the witness is unreliable and tainted. Faced with the choice of a clearly neurotic young man who quickly falls down in the witness-box, and a smooth, experienced, erudite and often highly respected culprit, juries tend to give the accused the benefit of the doubt.

I watched it in the now famous Court 13 at the High Court during the libel action between former Supt. Gordon Anglesey and Private Eye (and others) when, despite the fact that under cross-examination, Anglesey had to admit that his evidence did not correspond with his own notebooks, the ‘other side’ subsequently tore the five main prosecution witnesses to pieces in a monumental act of judicial harassment. Like the whole story of child abuse in North Wales and elsewhere, it broke my heart.”

Simon Regan (deceased) was editor of Scallywag Magazine.

We now know Leon Brittan was passed a dossier about a VIP abuse ring by brave MP Geoffrey Dickens.

Leon Brittan was in Thatcher’s cabinet at the time.

There are lots of rumours circulating about Leon’s predilections.

We now know William Hague was in charge of the enquiry into North Wales child abuse which was a whitewash.

There are lots of rumours circulating about William’s predilections.

William Hague used to live at Dolphin Square.

William Hague has been Thatcher’s political toyboy since he was 16 years old.

How much did Thatcher know about VIP child abuse?

How much did Thatcher know about Brittan and Hague’s alleged predilections?

Has she just died a most convenient death?

Isn’t it about bloody time we found out?


Monday, 25 November 2013

JFK50: None Dare Call it Treason

Plucked at random from Ron Paul's Facebook feed:



General Paul Vallely is the co-author of "From Psy-Op to Mind War" with Gen. Michael Aquino, the MK-Delta Satanist, and is a core contributor and advisor to Fox News.



"From PSYOP to Mindwar: The Psychology of Victory" is a military paper on psychological warfare, written by Lt. Col. Michael Aquino and Col. Paul E. Vallely in 1980. It was sent, writes Aquino, "to various governmental offices, agencies, commands and publications involved or interested in PSYOP." I think it bears a close read now, because it describes a top-down psychological conditioning Americans may find familiar. And it's not insignificant to note that co-author Vallely is now senior military analyst for FOX News. 

Who is Aquino? A since-retired Lieutenant Colonel, Military Intelligence, and special-forces officer. Also, for many years, an avowed Satanist, and founder of the "Temple of Set." Aquino's name frequently appears in ritual child abuse cases which appear to have military-intelligence sanction or protection - the Franklin and Presidio scandals, for instance (A good introduction to Aquino and this subject is "Uncle Sam Wants Your Children":http://davesweb.cnchost.com/pedo3.html - part three of "The Pedophocracy," which begins here:http://davesweb.cnchost.com/pedo1.html ). Aquino has never been convicted, so is either innocent or well protected.

And who is Vallely? "The senior military analyst for FOX News Channel and guest on many nationally syndicated radio talk shows, Paul E. Vallely retired in 1991 from the U.S. Army as Deputy Commanding General, U.S. Army, and Pacific in Honolulu, Hawaii." 
http://www.kepplerassociates.com/speakers/vallelypaul.a... 

Aquino has said that "assorted cranks tried to make a public issue out of this paper just because of its catchy title.... That paper had no connection to MK-Ultra, nor Paperclip, nor any crazy Nazi experiments."

Even if one believes Aquino, and dismisses suggestion that he is part of covert-sanctioned research into occult mind control (another CIA interest inherited from the Nazi doctors rescued by Project Paperclip), the implications of "Mindwar" are fairly chilling. And rather familiar, I should think, to anyone living through the Bush years. 

Here's a .pdf of "From Psyop to Mindwar" which Aquino has posted, with a new introduction, on his "Temple of Set" website:
http://www.xeper.org/maquino/nm/MindWar.pdf 

Some excerpts:


"MindWar...is, in fact, the strategy to which tactical warfare must conform if it is to achieve maximum effectiveness. The MindWar scenario must be preeminent in the mind of the commander and must be the principal factor in his every field decision. Otherwise he sacrifices measures which actually contribute to winning the war to measures of immediate, tangible satisfaction. (Consider the rational for 'body counts' in Vietnam).

...

"In its strategic context, MindWar must reach out to friends, enemies, and neutrals alike across the globe -- neither through primitive "battlefield" leaflets and loudspeakers of PSYOP nor through the weak, imprecise, and narrow effort of psychotronics - but through the media possessed by the United States which have the capabilities to reach virtually all people on the face of the Earth. These media are, of course, the electronic media -- television and radio. State of the art developments in satellite communication, video recording techniques, and laser and optical transmission of broadcasts made possible a penetration of the minds of the worlds such as would have been inconceivable just a few years ago. Like the sword Excalibur, we have but to reach out and seize this tool; and it can transform the world for us if we have the courage and the integrity to civilization with it. If we do not accept Excalibur, then we relinquish our ability to inspire foreign cultures with our morality. If they then desire moralities unsatisfactory to us, we have no choice but to fight them on a more brutish level.

...

"Unlike PSYOP, MindWar has nothing to do with deception or even with 'selected' -- and therefore misleading -- truth. Rather it states a whole truth that, if it does not now exist, will be forced into existence by the will of the United States. The examples of Kennedy's ultimatum to Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis and Hitler's stance at Munich might be cited. A MindWar message does not have to fit conditions of abstract credibility as do PSYOP there; its source makes it credible. As Livy once said: 'The terror of the Roman name will be such that the world shall know that, once a Roman army had laid siege to a city, nothing will move it -- not the rigors or winter nor the weariness of months and years -- that it knows no end but victory and is ready, in a swift and sudden stroke will not serve, to preserve until that victory is achieved.'

...

"For the mind to believe in its own decisions, it must feel that it made those decisions without coercion. Coercive measures used by the operative, consequently, must not be detectable by ordinary means. There is no need to resort to mind-weakening drugs such as those explored by the CIA; in fact the exposure of a single such method would do unacceptable damage to MindWar's reputation for truth. Existing PSYOP identifies purely-sociological factors which suggest appropriate idioms for messages. Doctrine in this area is highly developed, and the task is basically one of assembling and maintaining individuals and teams with enough expertise and experience to apply the doctrine effectively. This, however, is only the sociological dimension of target receptiveness measures. There are some purely natural conditions under which minds may become more or less receptive to ideas, and MindWar should take full advantage of such phenomena as atmospheric electromagnetic activity (12), air ionization (13), and extremely low frequency waves (14).



The Results of the 1980 Election are now in...


Carter Wins.


“Reagan won because he ran against Jimmy Carter.

If he ran unopposed he would have lost.”


― Mort Sahl


 

  

In an earlier and more decorous age, a crude word—even if uttered by a President—would surely not be deemed fit to print. O tempora, O mores! When Jimmy Carter told a group of Congressmen at a White House dinner last week that if Senator Edward Kennedy runs against him in 1980, "I'll whip his ass," most major news organizations hastened to quote the remark in living off-color.

Though Federal Communications Commission regulations prohibit obscenity or gross indecency, an FCC spokesman said that broadcasting Carter's broadside was in no way actionable. Radio stations across the country generally played uncensored interviews with the Congressmen who overheard Carter's statement. A few television newscasts, though, avoided mention of the indelicate word. Jim Ruddle, anchorman at Chicago's WMAQ-TV, used the term posterior, and Tom Brokaw of NBC'S Today show mumbled slyly about a "three-letter part of the anatomy that's somewhere near the bottom." CBS's Roger Mudd alluded to Carter's remark without quoting it directly, but a copy of the New York Post's anatomically correct front-page headline was projected on a screen behind him.

The Post was one of few major newspapers to put the entire quote in a banner headline. Most of the others were not far to the posterior. The Los Angeles Times and Chicago Sun-Times managed to get the crucial word in a headline, and the full quote in the story. "We don't bandy about with words if they come from the President," said Los Angeles Times Managing Editor George Cotliar. "Without [the quote] there is no story."

Other papers played it coy. CARTER FLEXES HIS WHIP ARM winked Boston's Herald American, which used the quote. In its headline, the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner used three dots instead of the verboten word, then spelled it out in the story. Said Managing Editor Mary Anne Dolan: "It seemed an intriguing way of handling it. Just like a woman being more alluring in lingerie than in the nude."

One of the few papers to avoid using the word altogether was the ever circumspect New York Times, which last made censorship history by excising the word screw from a story about Carter's 1976 Playboy interview ("a vulgarism for sexual relations," substituted the Times). This time the paper buried the quote on page 26 and left a dash where the word ass should have been. "If the Times gives up its ass, it will have to be for a better story than this," chuckled Executive Editor A.M. Rosenthal. "I just think it was more fun not to use it when everybody else did."

It was certainly more intriguing—or confusing—to Times readers.



October Surprise








JFK50: The View from The Kremlin