US “Intelligence” Agencies? Don’t Believe a Word They Say (about anything)

•July 18, 2018 • Leave a Comment



The mainstream/corporate US media is having a major temper tantrum after US president Donald Trump not only failed to cancel his summit with Russian president Vladimir Putin (which is the result they desired after dropping a politically-motivated indictment the Friday before the summit), he also failed to go along with the US “intelligence” community and their allegations that Russia is the big, mean ol’ bear trying to gobble up freedom-loving democracies. The mainstream described it as a “slap in the face” of these “intelligence” agencies, but what exactly has the “intelligence” community in the US done to merit any confidence from the American people, let alone a president? The answer is easy:  Nothing.

(You may have noticed already that I’m continually putting “intelligence” within quotations? This is because there is absolutely nothing “intelligent” about the agencies comprising the US intelligence apparatus). The media goes to great lengths to portray these agencies as simply non-partisan, impartial collectors and disseminators of vital information, whose edicts are beyond question and who carry supreme authority. But the people of the US should be at least smart enough to learn from their shameful lying and many fabrications leading up to the Bush regime’s Iraq invasion that these “intelligence” agencies can’t be trusted to tell us the truth.

In politics and especially in my daily path in life, I tend to give relatively new people in my life the initial benefit of the doubt in terms of trust – until they prove me wrong, I’ll trust them, but if they betray my trust, it will almost never be given again. The American public is like a stupid person who keeps on believing someone who continually lies to them, a perpetual situation of running for The same news networks, newspapers, talking heads and pundits, government officials and politicians who lied us into a criminal war just keep on doing it, and most Americans just keep on obeying and believing the lies.

“Intelligence” agencies lie, and they lie often – it is a large part of their job. They are in the business of shaping public (largely through the compliant media), and that agenda has been (at least since 9/11) based on neoconservative ideology. Taking anything these “intelligence” agencies say without verifying it is foolish, but it is commonplace for Americans in 2018.


•November 29, 2015 • Leave a Comment

After shooting down a Russian bomber that was attacking ISIS forces in Syria, the Turkish government steadfastly refused to issue an apology for their act of war, a refusal which prompted retaliatory sanctions against them from Russia. Turkey’s president only recent offered a conditional apology, and here are my thoughts on the situation.

Turkey would never have carried out this attack on the Russian plane without a green light from NATO and by association, the US (don’t let American leaders off the hook because they without a doubt encouraged it). Russian attacks are threatening the oil the Turks have been stealing from Iraq and Syria and they hoped their “show of force” against Russia would convince not to attack ISIS oil convoys headed into Turkey.

Erdogan is a thuggish right-wing brute who has been supporting ISIS from day one. If we were really serious about fighting terrorism (and if ISIS is really the threat to us that we’re told it is), then we’d have punished Turkey years ago.

I bet very few people in September 2001 thought we’d ever be rooting for an al-Qa’ida victory in a foreign country (Syria) and trying to “contain” them as they massacre thousands of people now did we? But that’s exactly where we stand today.

Social Media Commentary

•November 29, 2015 • Leave a Comment

One of my favorite things to do, dating way back to the start of the Internet era, has been to post comments on various political sites in hopes of starting meaningful dialogue with other people and maybe get others to think about some issues differently.

Our corporate-owned media completely whitewashes, omits, and distorts much of the information they are giving to the American public in order to serve the interests of their employers. The Internet and its easy access to information from around the world has been a lifeline for those seeking the full picture, but most Americans still get their information from corporate-owned sources – information which is often blatant propaganda.

I’ll be re-posting some of my comments here on my site along with the relevant article the comment is based on. I’ve had literally thousands of these types of comments over the years and I’ve always wished I had them saved in one place for viewing later. This is the place!

Hiatus ended

•November 19, 2015 • Leave a Comment

Well, I decided today that now is as good a time as any to start posting again – it’s been quite a while! I’ve been busy writing and commenting on various news sites, trying to drop a smidgen of knowledge on a lot of people who otherwise would never hear it. It was mostly a futile gesture though as most people simply don’t believe anything unless it comes from one of the major corporate “news” sites.

There has been a helluva lot going on it the world since I last posted, so let’s get to it!

sucker punch or punching a sucker? sport and the influence of racial perspective

•September 5, 2009 • Leave a Comment

Oregon University running back LeGarrette Blount has earned a name for himself in the media these days, but not for his rushing prowess.  Many have already seen the video clip of Blount punching Boise State’s Byron Hout in the face at the end of Oregon’s defeat, but many have not seen what precipitated Blount’s so-called “sucker punch”.  The cable news networks have repeatedly shown the punch, but have utterly failed to show why the punch happened in the first place.  Take a look at this full video clip and listen closely to the commentary provided by the ESPN analysts.

If you watch what led up to Blount’s punch, it should be clear to any observer that Boise State’s Hout ran up to Blount as he was walking away, said something to him and laid his hands on Blount’s shoulder pads.  Hout turns away from Blount and Blount lays him out with a right jab to the chin.  Now, it goes without saying that it would have been preferable that Blount didn’t react the way he did to the taunting (and it has cost him the rest of the season), but what is striking is how Hout’s unsportsman-like taunting was completely excused and/or ignored by the white-dominated news media and sports establishment!  This is where the race of the players comes in as a big factor (Blount is Black, Hout is white), even though, as usual, many white people will deny race plays a part at all in the perception of what happened.

In the white supremacist paradigm, the Black male is immediately perceived by most whites as being out of control, animalistic, irrational, and most importantly, guilty regardless of the situation; this case is no exception.  The fact that none of the cable news networks deemed it important to show what precipitated Blount’s punch shows that in the eyes of many white folk, Hout’s provocation was irrelevant.  In a world based on white supremacy, there is never any justification for any Black male punching a white guy.

There also has been no talk of punishing Hout for his horrible post-game sportsmanship because in a white supremacist society, white men are rarely ever seen as guilty of anything if a Black male is involved.  Hout’s “punishment”:  Boise State’s coach plans to spend time with Hout this week to discuss what he learned from this incident!  Time and time again, we see white males let off the hook and excuses made for their bad behavior while the book is typically thrown at Black males.

Even though Hout is getting off with no punishment, I hope he enjoys the fact that hundreds of thousands of people have seen him getting knocked the fuck out – as far as I’m concerned, he deserved it.

the next “9/11” is…

•June 4, 2009 • 1 Comment

…very likely being planned presently by the people who brought us the first one.  People who have access to the wheels of federal governments around the world, and the militaries those governments employ to carry out their wishes.  Right now, I think we are being “set-up”, primed for the next big “terrorist” attack.  Here’s why I feel this way.

President Obama is currently touring the Middle East.  Lo and behold!  None other than  Osama bin Laden materializes from the realm of the dead to promote his latest audio recording.  How utterly convenient the timing for Mr. Obama, especially since he is giving a speech in Cairo aimed at assuring the Arab Muslim world that the US government is not acting militarily in their part of the world out of pure malice, racism, or greed. 

I wonder just how many people in the US actually believe Osama bin Laden is still alive?  It should be apparent to anyone that there are a group of powerful people playing us for fools.  The most recent bin Laden videos haven’t even looked like bin Laden (and you don’t have to be a forensics expert to see the obvious), yet no one stops and says “Hey, something’s fishy here?”  How can we, the American people, actually verify the authenticity of the government’s claims?  We can’t.  We are told to accept what they say is true and be happy with it.  Dr. David Ray Griffin has just written a new book looking at the evidence that bin Laden is dead, and why media pundits and journalists are overlooking the obvious.

In addition to the convenient appearance of another bin Laden exclusive, we were recently warned by the dutiful traditional media that the federal government “accidently” released information on the web detailing nuclear sites.  Since we were warned that anyone (think “terrorists”) could have had access to this information during the time it was online, we shouldn’t be surprised if a terrorist took this information to help carry out a nuclear terrorist attack on the US.  After having spent the last three years delving into all the work around the globe investigating discrepancies about 9/11 and the extent to which our elected leaders will go to achieve their goals, I, and many people, have begun to notice certain things repeating themselves.  I feel we are being primed psychologically for the next “attack”.

Show that 9/11 couldn’t have realistically happened the way the government told us it did, and the whole house of cards topples.  The main rationale for everything the US government has done to the people (and in their names around the world) will topple as well.  This thought is scary for most Americans (those who feel anger when a fellow citizen questions the validity of the official account of 9/11), and they draw back in fear of what it implies.  But there are those of us who believe in the righteousness and correctness of justice, the idea that criminals should always be prosecuted for their crimes, that we have questions about 9/11 that haven’t been answered (mostly ignored or ridiculed).

Every day we set aside these questions adds to the damage done to our society.  It diminishes and cheapens the words of the famous documents we profess belief in, making us appear dishonest, incorrigible, and obstinate in the eyes of the rest of the world.  Maybe enough of us will give up our fear of radical change and begin asking some tough questions of our elected officials…

zinn and chomsky, birds of a feather

•November 22, 2008 • Leave a Comment

I’ve always been a fan of historian Howard Zinn and have enjoyed reading his classic opus “A People’s History of the United States” many times.  He and fellow scholar Noam Chomsky have spent literal decades exposing the inner workings of the powerful elite in this country and the mayhem these elite have projected domestically and abroad.  Both deserve a place in the pantheon of leftist scholars, yet I’ve found out the Zinn (like Chomsky), seems to believe that finding those really responsible for the atrocities of 9/11 is of no concern, that people like myself should just “move on”.

They are entirely entitled to their own opinion on the subject, but their blindness to 9/11 truth’s import is disappointing to say the least.  I’ve always imagined these two as representative of Americans who question everything, never taking anything at face value, but it seems even they have their limitations.  My guess at the reasons behind their reluctance to take seriously the questions raised by the 9/11 truth community are few, but I think most of it arises from an obstinate refusal to entertain a narrative that may damage the paradigm they’ve spent their careers pondering.  It seems that in their minds, the elite are more than willing to exert violence to further their aims, but false-flag terrorism is farther than even the ruthless elite dare go (despite evidence to the contrary).

To suggest that the murderers of nearly 3,000 people should be allowed to go free simply because it’s “in the past” is silly.  Witness the long-delayed trials of white supremacists who avoided justice in the sixties only to finally be held accountable.  Is justice not important, Mr. Zinn?  Shouldn’t we seek answers and learn from them so that we may be vigilante against the treacherous pursuit of power at any cost? 

Exposing the real perpetrators behind 9/11 will shine the light on the powerful elite, their shadowy establishments, secret meetings, and their ultimate goals for control of the earth and its people.  It’s boggles my mind why astute men such as Zinn and Chomsky fail to grasp this at all.  Maybe it’s generational…