Category Archives: Zionism

The National Security State, UFOs and The Thing We Dare Not Name

A quote from the blog, CiteLibre:

“We think we’re Luke Skywalker,” says a friend of mine, “when we’re actually Darth Vader.” America is a country with a bad conscience, nominally a republic and free society, but in reality an empire and oligarchy, vaguely aware of its own oppression, within and without. I have used the term national security state” to describe its structures of power. It is a convenient way to express the military and intelligence communities, as well as the worlds that feed upon them, such as defence contractors and other underground, nebulous entities. Its fundamental traits are secrecy, wealth, independence, power, and duplicity.

This is from a post concerning the National Security State, UFOs and conspiracy theories; why it’s so easy to maintain secrecy when most folks claim, “How can the government, inept as it is, maintain secrecy for over 60 years?”

Here’s how:

The UFO cover-up (precisely the right phrase) is one secret among many within the American national security state. Like other areas within its domain, the UFO problem has been handled secretly, with great deception, and significant resources. The secrecy stems from a pervasive and fundamental element of life in our world: that those who are at the top of the heap will always take whatever steps necessary to maintain the status quo.

1. Secrecy. Nearly everything of significance undertaken by America’s military and intelligence community in the past half-century has occurred in secrecy. The undertaking to build an atomic weapon, better known as the Manhattan Project, remains the great model for all subsequent activities. For four years not a single member of Congress even knew about it, although its final cost exceeded the then-incredible total of $2 billion. During and after the Second World War, other important projects, such as the development of biological weapons, the importation of Nazi scientists, terminal mind control experiments, nationwide interception of mail and cable transmissions of an unwitting populace, infiltration of the media and universities, secret coups, secret wars, and assassinations all took place far removed not only from the American public, but most members of Congress and a few Presidents. Indeed, several of the most powerful intelligence agencies were themselves established in secrecy, unknown by the public or Congress for many years.

2. Wealth. Since the 1940s, the U.S. Defense and Intelligence establishment has had more money at its disposal than most nations. In addition to official dollars, much of the money is undocumented. From its beginning, the CIA was engaged in a variety of off-the-record “business” activities that generated large sums of cash. The connections of the CIA with global organized crime (and thus de facto with the international narcotics trade) has been well-established and documented for many years. [6] In addition, the CIA maintained its own private airline fleet which generated a tidy sum of unvouchered funds primarily out of Asia. Finally, much of the original money to run the American intelligence community came from very wealthy and established American families, who have long maintained an interest in funding national security operations important to their interests.

3. Independence. In theory, civilian oversight exists over the U.S. national security establishment. The President is the military Commander-in-Chief. Congress has official oversight over the CIA. The FBI must answer to the Justice Department. In practice, little of this fond theory applied during the period under review. One reason has to do with the secrecy: the compartmentalization of information within military and intelligence circles. “Top Secret” clearance does not clear one for all Top Secret information. Sensitive information is available on a need to know basis. Two CIA officers in adjoining rooms at the Langley Headquarters can be involved in completely different top secret activities, each completely ignorant of the other’s doings. Such compartmentalization not only increases secrecy, but independence from the wrong (e.g. official) kinds of oversight.

Great latitude of activity is not merely the prerogative of the CIA. During the 1950s, President and five-star general Dwight Eisenhower effectively lost control of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The situation deteriorated so much that during his final two years in office, Eisenhower asked repeatedly to get an audience with the head Strategic Air Command to learn what America’s nuclear retaliatory plan was. What he finally learned in 1960, his final year in office, horrified him. If a revered military hero such as Eisenhower could not control America’s nuclear arsenal, nor get a straight answer from the Pentagon, how on earth could Presidents Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, or Nixon regarding comparable matters?

4. Power. Secrecy, wealth, and independence add up to power. Through the years, the national security state has gained access to the world’s most sophisticated technology, sealed off millions of acres of land from public access or scrutiny, acquired unlimited snooping ability within U.S. borders and beyond, conducted overt or clandestine actions against other nations, and prosecuted wars without serious media scrutiny. Domestically, it maintains influence over elected officials and communities hoping for some of the billions of defence dollars.

5. Duplicity. Deception is a key element of warfare, and when winning is all that matters, the conventional morality held by ordinary people becomes an impediment.

These are excerpts from Richard M. Dolan’s book National Security State: An Unclassified History Volume One: 1941 to 1973. “

CiteLibre: Secrecy about UFOs and Extraterrestrials show true color of an aspiring US Global Empire

Hat Tip

_______________________________

The Thing We Dare Not Name:

“The truth never suits Israel’s flag-wavers and stooges. They have to twist it or strangulate it.
When Mr. Ahmadjinedad got up to speak at the UN racism conference the British Ambassador, Peter Gooderham, was among those who walked out in the worst show of diplomatic bad manners this century. Gooderham is reported to have said that “such inflammatory rhetoric has no place whatsoever in a United Nations conference addressing the whole issue of racism and how to address it.
“As soon as President Ahmadinejad, started talking about Israel, that was the cue for us to walk out. We agreed in advance that if there was any such rhetoric there would be no tolerance for it.” Referring to the Iranian leader’s accusation of Israeli racism he added: “That is a charge we unreservedly condemn and so we had no hesitation at that point in leaving the conference hall.
“TV inquisitor Jeremy Paxman asked Gooderham the difference between Zionism and racism, to which he replied that Zionism is a political movement and racism is something else – we recognize it when we see it.
The trouble is, these characters don’t recognize it at all. Nor are they daily on the receiving end, as the Palestinians are, of Israel’s brutal racist policies. Nor were they under Israel’s genocidal blitzkrieg on Gaza that vaporized and incinerated women and children in their hundreds and blew their body-parts to kingdom-come.”

The USSR had their Gulag, South Africa had their apartheid “reservations.”

Why can’t we call this what it is for crying out loud?

No, The Zionists Have No Stranglehold

___________________________________

 

Advertisements

Hillary, History and Real “Psi”-Ops

Israel plans to present U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with a series of “red lines” it wants Washington to incorporate into its planned dialogue with Tehran about Iran’s nuclear program.

Clinton arrived in Israel Monday night and will meet with various Israeli officials Tuesday.”
___________________________

Well that certainly didn’t take long.

I agree with nolocontendere , it certainly didn’t take long at all!

Clinton In Israel To Receive Her Instructions

_________________________

For the old Kurdish shepherd, it was just another burning hot day in the rolling plains of eastern Turkey. Following his flock over the arid hillsides, he passed the single mulberry tree, which the locals regarded as ‘sacred’. The bells on his sheep tinkled in the stillness. Then he spotted something. Crouching down, he brushed away the dust, and exposed a strange, large, oblong stone.

The man looked left and right: there were similar stone rectangles, peeping from the sands. Calling his dog to heel, the shepherd resolved to inform someone of his finds when he got back to the village. Maybe the stones were important.

They certainly were important. The solitary Kurdish man, on that summer’s day in 1994, had made the greatest archaeological discovery in 50 years. Others would say he’d made the greatest archaeological discovery ever: a site that has revolutionised the way we look at human history, the origin of religion – and perhaps even the truth behind the Garden of Eden.

goebeklitepi30309

 

This is wonderful just for the very fact it exists and throws all prevailing theories of how ancient peoples built monuments and their antiquity.

I’m not sure about the “Garden of Eden” idea, but this gives insight on how cultures change and whether human beings are capable of radical paradigm shifts.

Do these mysterious stones mark the site of the Garden of Eden?

______________________________

In the movie Push, civilians with psychic powers—people who can manipulate thoughts, see the future, or toss objects with their minds—find themselves on the run from a shadowy government agency intent on using their beautiful minds for military purposes. Pure Hollywood hokum, right? Slow down. Retired Army Colonel John Alexander—once a Special Forces commander in Vietnam—knows differently. You see, he was once one of the key members of Stargate—a U.S. intelligence agency designed to prove that psychics could be more effective Cold War weapons than spy satellites or wire taps. The most unsettling part? He was right…

The post is an interview with Colonel Alexander about Project Stargate, an actual project using ESP during the 1970s and 1980s to spy on the Soviet Union.

It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if we’re still using ‘psi’-ops to spy on others.

Even if the Pentagon denies it.

The True Story Behind Push

________________________

Week of January 19th, 2009

As the time ticks down to the end of one of America’s most reviled regimes, (Carter’s Administration is thrown in with this bunch, but I can’t see why when compared to Bu$hco’s) , the US is ready to inaugurate its first African-American President, a true novelty given the nation’s history, but probably inevitable none-the-less.

History is my profession (more like a hobby) by training, so I’m interested in the symbolism that pervades the incoming Obama Administration and how it might relate to future of the US.

Symbolism? What? How could the future President Obama be related to esoteric symbolism in any way, much less the relationship thereof?

According to Chris Knowles of  The Secret Sun , Obama’s “election” might actually have been preordained as a reincarnation of the “Osiris Cult” and is full of Masonic “Phoenix Rising” symbolism.

Crazy? Maybe. Knowles isn’t the only one to point out the obvious. Check this out at Red Ice Creations. Change? The Velvet Glove instead of The Mailed Fist maybe.

Not to mention the Inauguration is taking place after The Martyred Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s nationally recognised birthday. Osiris/Christ Resurrection and Phoenix Rising symbolism here folks? Sweet syncronicity!

Coincidence? Hmmm…

Even if one doesn’t believe in esoteric relationships, syncronicity and symbolism, it doesn’t matter one bit if you’re just one of the masses.

Because the people who are actually pulling the strings of finance, politics, religious institutions and yes, science, surely do!

BAB/Dad2059 😎

___________________________________________________________

Continue reading →

Congressional Vigilantes

From TruthNews.us :

“The view that 9/11 has “changed everything” is unfortunately all too true. It has unleashed American paranoia, institutionalized mistrust of foreigners, and created a fantasy universe in which a US beset by enemies must do anything and everything to counter the alien threat. If it were a sane world, it would be difficult to imagine why anyone would believe that a Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act is even necessary. The United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars in strengthening law enforcement and intelligence capabilities against terrorists and has every tool imaginable to investigate and make arrests. It has created a whole new bloated and dysfunctional branch of government in the Department of Homeland Security. What is not needed is groups of congressionally empowered vigilantes roaming the country at will looking for “homegrown terrorism”

This act will truly spell the end of the American Republic and announce to the whole world the American Federal Empire is in fact a reality.

The Act states; “…the United States will soon have to deal with home grown terrorists and that something must be done to anticipate and neutralize the problem. The act deals with the issue through the creation of a congressional commission that will be empowered to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and designate various groups as “homegrown terrorists.” The commission will be tasked to propose new legislation that will enable the government to take punitive action against both the groups and the individuals who are affiliated with them.”

The Act was proposed by Democrat Jane Harmon of California and passed in the House October 24th by the votes of 405 to 6. That’s quite the landslide. And guess who gets to approve it next? Joe”mentum” Lieberman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee. How convenient. Then the bill gets final Senate approval. It might even be approved by now.

The result will be a roving band of congressional commission members traveling across the country, at tax-payer expense of course, determining what groups are terrorists, or who isn’t. Great. Of course there’s no oversight committee assigned to track these people, so if you piss the government off at any time in the future, the committee puts you into the “homegrown terrorist” category. Surprise, surprise, surprise.

This is the modern version of the Spanish Inquisition, which really wasn’t a religious pogrom, but a political one (but the Catholic Church wholeheartedly supported the effort because it targeted Muslims and Jews). Again, history repeats itself because the targets are primarily, you guessed it, Muslims. But anyone who gets in the way will find themselves in one of the 39 Halliburton camps or any of the 130 underground facilities out West. Nobody will be left out.

Somewhere in a hellish parallel universe Mussolini is chuckling to himself.

Musings of an Anti-Zionist Jew, Update

From Tomdispatch:

I often think of the letters that come into the Tomdispatch email box as the university of my later life — messages from around the world, offering commentary, criticism, encouragement, but mainly teaching me about lives (and versions of life) I would otherwise know little or nothing about. Then again, the Internet has a way of releasing inhibitions and, from time to time, the Tomdispatch email box is also a sobering reminder of the mindless hate in our world — of every sort, but sometimes of a strikingly anti-Semitic sort, letters that are wildly angry and eager, above all, to shut down or shut up commentary or debate of any sort.

It’s ironic, then, that the threat of sparking such “anti-Semitism,” as well as charges of being functionally anti-Semitic, have been used for a long time in this country as a kind of club to enforce, within the Jewish community, an exceedingly narrow range of correct opinion on Israel and its behavior in the world. In recent months, such attacks from within the Jewish establishment seem to have escalated whenever any professor or critic steps even slightly out of line, and the recent controversial book, The Israeli Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John Mearsheimer and Steven Walt has caused a little storm of consternation. Tony Karon, who runs the always provocative Rootless Cosmopolitan website, suggests that these attacks may not be what they seem, that the need to turn back every deviation from Jewish orthodoxy may actually reflect a loosening of control within the political world of American Jews, and a new opening, a Jewish glasnost.

It has always been my opinion that the majority of Jewish-Americans actually hate Zionism and are loath to be connected in any way, shape or form of the term. They also hold AIPAC in low esteem as well and feel that the organization doesn’t truly represent their interests at all. And they would be correct.

There are varying forms of Zionism in historical references. The ones that Jewish-Americans have a problem with are Socialist Zionism and Labor Zionism . Both are tied to the kibbutz movement and has close ties to the Commune concept in Marxism. Decidedly anti-capitalist anyways.

I’ve never had a beef with a Jewish State. But I do think it was a bad idea to put a Zionist colony full of European Jews into the Middle East. Ulterior motives are obviously glaring here. The Truman Administration took all of 15 minutes to recognize the new State of Israel. Hmmm…

Read all of Tony Karon’s article here. Read it straight from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.

Update:

From Guardian Unlimited:

Given the reception John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt received for their London Review of Books essay last year on what they called the Israel Lobby, it would have been understandable had they crawled away to a dark corner of their respective academic institutions to lick their wounds. Their argument that US foreign policy has been distorted by the stultifying power of pro-Israeli groups and individuals was met with a firestorm of protest that has smouldered ever since.

The authors were assailed with headlines such as the Washington Post’s: “Yes, it’s anti-semitic.” The neocon pundit William Kristol accused them in the Wall Street Journal of “anti-Judaism” while the New York Sun linked them with the white supremacist David Duke.

The row became a focal point of a much wider debate about the limits of permitted criticism of the state of Israel and its American-based supporters that has ensnared several academics and writers, including a former president. Jimmy Carter was castigated earlier this year when he published a plea for a renewed engagement in the Middle-East peace process under the admittedly provocative title, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. He was labelled an anti-semitic “Jew hater” and even a Nazi sympathiser. Meanwhile, a British-born historian at New York University, Tony Judt, has been warned off or disinvited from four academic events in the past year. On one occasion, he was asked to promise not to mention Israel in a speech on the Holocaust. He refused.

For Walt, the explosion of criticism after the LRB publication in March 2006 struck particularly close to home as two members of his own Harvard faculty turned on him. Ruth Wisse, professor of Yiddish literature, compared Walt and his University of Chicago co-author’s work to that of a notorious 19th-century German anti-semite. Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard criminal law professor who represented OJ Simpson, charged them with culling some of their references from neo-Nazi websites.

Given the battering he has taken, Walt is remarkably upbeat. “We were surprised by how nasty it got,” says the Harvard professor. “The David Duke reference, the neo-Nazi websites – these were intended to smear us and swing attention on to us rather than to what we were saying. It wasn’t pleasant, but it never made me doubt what we had written or doubt myself.” Standing tall in the face of attack is one thing; to raise your head above the parapet for a second round is quite another. But that is what the Mearsheimer/Walt double act are doing: they have gone on the offensive with the publication of a book-length version of their original treatise.

As night follows day, the dispute has started anew. The New York Sun has dedicated a section of its website to the controversy; Dershowitz has revved up again, calling the book “a bigoted attack on the American Jewish community”; and Abraham Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League, has gone to the trouble of writing his own book in riposte – and it’s in the bookshops a week before The Israel Lobby appears.

There is one obvious question to put to Walt: why do it to yourself? Wasn’t one stoning enough? “We did ask ourselves, did we want to go through this again?” he admits, but only to add: “It didn’t take us all that long to figure out we had more to say and it was our job to say it.”

I’m sure I’ll be pilloried also and linked to neo-Nazis by the neocon-munists. The proverbial pot calling the kettle black cliche.

I don’t care. I only post political stuff once a week. I like to make it worth my time.

Articles of Faith