Posts Tagged ‘peter dale scott’
by stuartbramhall in Attacks on Civil Liberties
Victim of Facebook Censorship
Peter Dale Scott, professor emeritus at UC Berkeley and one of the most esteemed researchers of the murky JFK assassination and CIA involvement in cocaine trafficking, recently had his Facebook account inactivated, along with a eighteen other activists who either challenged current US gun control initiatives or the the official version of events at Sandy Hook Elementary School (see * below for full list). After this evoked howls of protest from fellow activists, I’m happy to report Professor Scott’s Facebook account has been restored.
It didn’t occur to me to question that Adam Lanzo was the sole “lone nut” gunman at Sandy Hook Elementary School until I learned about the blatant Facebook and Twitter censorship of members who challenged the official story. After doing a little research I discovered that Jim Fetzer, another former academic and respected assassination researcher, has written quite comprehensively regarding the blatant inconsistencies and anomalies in the narrative Newtown police have presented to the public. As Fetzer stresses in many of the articles, it’s clear the real enemy here is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), not the National Rifle Association (NRA).
“Clare’s” blog at http://youcanknowsometimes.blogspot.ca/ provides the most comprehensive and well documented list of Sandy Hook inconsistencies and anomalies. After looking at the massive amount of information she has amassed, I agree with Fetzer: the evidence doesn’t add up.
Fetzer co-authored his most recent (December 28th) article Sandy Hook: Huge Hoax and Anti-Gun “Psy-Op” with Dennis Cimino, a former US Navy electronic systems troubleshooter. The article briefly summarizes many of the inconsistencies in the official narrative. First we are told the mother was a former teacher and Adma Lanzo a former student at Sandy Hook – then we learn neither had any prior link with the school. We are told the principal called the local paper about the shooting – then it comes out she was one of the first victims killed. The police immediately determine there is only one shooter. Yet police radio reports refer to a second suspect being apprehended at the scene and a police helicopter video shows yet a third suspect being tracked in the woods. The article goes on to cite many other embarrassing mistakes that the police have been compelled to correct.
Fetzer also authored a much more controversial article, Did Mossad death squads slaughter American children at Sandy Hook?, in Veterans Today. It seems to have been written in response to an unfortunate headline the Iranian news outlet Press TV gave an earlier article Mossad death squads slaughtered American children at Sandy Hook. The Veterans Today article is much more detailed and carefully documented. It cites a substantial amount evidence suggesting the Obama administration is preparing for a massive civil unrest scenario in the US
Among other evidence Fetzer cites (aside from the stuff we already know about, like suspension of habeas corpus and most of the Bill of Rights and Obama’s executive order granting him the right to summarily execute American citizens without due process of law) are the 300+ FEMA camps that have been established, the 30,000 drones Congress has authorized for domestic surveillance and the recent acquisition by the Department of Homeland Security of more than 1.5 billion rounds of .40 caliber hollow-point ammunition (which is not even permissible in warfare under the Geneva Conventions – see Feds explanation of hollow point bullets raises more questions).
Since DHS doesn’t conduct operations abroad, Fetzer argues the hollow points must have been acquired for domestic consumption. More over with the recent determination by the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (3 October 2012) that the US faces no current on ongoing domestic terrorist threat, he reasons they are intended for use against Americans.
His argument that the Mossad was involved in the Sandy Hook massacre, on the other hand, seems a little far-fetched based on the limited evidence. At the moment all he has to go on is evidence of Mossad involvement in similar false flag psy-ops operations. For example 911 (which Ryan Dawson summarizes quite eloquently in War of Deception)
And the attacks on the Benghazi embassy in Libya resulting in Ambassador Stevens’ murder. (See Counterpsyops.com]
That’s not to say conclusive evidence won’t be forthcoming over time. At the very least it’s troubling that Facebook (presumably at the behest of US intelligence) is trying to purge the accounts of bloggers challenging gun control initiatives or presenting an alternative version of the Sandy Hook massacre.
*Kurt Nimmo (account suspended)
Aaron Dykes (account inactive)
Brandon J. Raub (account inactive)
Michael F Rivero (account inactive)
Anthony J Hilder (account inactive)
William Lewis (account inactive)
Richard Gage (account inactive)
William Rodriguez (account inactive)
Infowar Artist (account inactive)
We are Change (account inactive)
Wacboston At Twitter (account inactive)
Michael Murphy Tmp (account inactive)
Robert M Bowman (account inactive)
Peter Dale Scott (account inactive)
Jason Infowars (account inactive)
Mike Skuthan (account inactive)
Packy Savvenas (account inactive)
Sean Wright (account inactive)
Katherine Albrect (account inactive)
Cross posted at Daily Censored
by stuartbramhall in The Global Economic Crisis
Thanks to the recession and debt crisis, progressives seeking to end the failed War on Drugs have some curious bedfellows, including the ultra-conservative Cato Institute, grassroots Tea Party groups and even mainstream Republicans. Drug Policy Alliance founder and executive director Ethan Nadelmann draws interesting parallels between the decision to end the Prohibition on alcohol during the Great Depression in the 1930s and recent calls to end the prohibition on marijuana – and possibly other drugs (http://reason.com/blog/2011/04/15/reasontv-drug-policy-alliances)
Like Prohibition during the 1930s, the War on Drugs is an immense burden on cities and states forced to lay off teachers and cops due to budget deficits. On June 23, Representatives Ron Paul and Barney Frank made the first attempt to tackle this fiscal disaster on a national level with the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011. The goal of HR2306 isn’t to legalize marijuana, but to remove it from the register of federally controlled substances, while allowing the states how to regulate it. Obama, predictably, opposed the bill, insisting the War on Drugs is working.
Six weeks ago analysts predicted HR 2306 had no chance of getting out of committee. However the recent debt downgrade and market crash means there’s a whole new ball game in Washington. Former sacred cows, such as defense spending, are no longer sacred with the market down more than 7%. Lawmakers who oppose legislation that could save taxpayers $9-41 billion dollars annually (according to a 2010 Cato Institute Study) will have a hard time answering to voters in 2012.
Pouring Money Down a Rat Hole
Drug policy experts across the board recognize that using the criminal justice system to “punish” drug addicts – as when Prohibition was used to punish alcoholics – is like pouring money down a rat hole. Studies show that criminalizing addictive drugs, significantly worsens the drug problem, in part by creating a highly lucrative black market. The financial incentive for drug dealing and money laundering is so massive that criminal penalties are no deterrent.
It’s not just corner dealers we’re talking about. Judging from past Department of Justice indictments for drug money laundering, nearly all major financial institutions in the US and some in Europe have a piece of the action (Merrill Lynch, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Union Bank, Bank of America, American Express, Wachovia, Thomas Cook, Citibank, Chemical Bank, Chase Manhattan, Barclays, Deutsche Bank, among others – I blog about specific dates and fines at http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2010/05/06/the-scope-of-corporate-drug-money-laundering/). Moreover the CIA role in trafficking heroin from Vietnam, Southeast Asia and Afghanistan and cocaine from Central America has been well documented by the 1986 Kerry Committee report, Alfred McCoy, Peter Dale Scott and Gary Webb.
The Only Solution is Reducing Demand
As retired Missouri Supreme Court Chief Justice and former police commissioner Ray Price pointed out at the 2011 American Bar Association (ABA) meeting in Toronto, the only effective strategy for curbing the drug problem is to lessen demand through prevention and treatment. According to Price, decriminalizing addictive drugs enables us to shift resources from criminal justice to public health, where they will do real good. At the same time it puts criminal dealers out of business, as with bootleggers in the 1930s, reduces crime and makes streets safer.
During the ABA Drug Control Panel, Price revealed that the federal government currently spends $26 billion annually across several agencies on the War on Drugs. Of this 34% goes to treatment, 7% to treatment and 36% to support local law enforcement. Cities and states spend around $30 billion annually on the drug war, with only $9.5 billion of this coming from the federal government.
To be continued.
by stuartbramhall in Challenging the Corporate Media, Things That Aren't What They Seem
Since the October 2008 economic collapse, American workers have faced an unprecedented “austerity cuts,” with major hits on their livelihoods and labor and pension rights. Yet Americans, unlike the rest of the world, don’t respond by taking to the street in the millions. Why is this? Many progressive pundits are deeply dismayed at the apparent passivity and apathy of the American public. Others, myself included, feel the power elite has been laying the groundwork for decades for a totalitarian takeover (also known as fascism) of democratic government.
The Deep State, Peter Dale Scott’s term for shadowy network of government officials and corporate elite that secretly steers foreign and domestic policy behind the façade of democracy (see http://www.voltairenet.org/article169316.html), seems to rely on two main strategies in suppressing opposition to their agenda. The first involves the indoctrination, via a multibillion dollar public relations industry, of two generations of Americans with a passive, non-engaged consumerist mentality. The second involves a vast interlocking network of left gatekeeping foundations that totally dominate progressive organizing in the US.
Progressive media critics have written extensively about the corporate takeover of the mainstream media that has facilitated censorship of anti-corporate news and the total saturation of American life with pro-corporate messaging. The role of left gatekeeping foundations, which may be even more critical in suppressing organized dissent, receives scant attention, even in the “alternative” media (e.g. the Nation, Democracy Now, the Progressive, Mother Jones). This may relate to the heavy reliance of these outlets on left gatekeeping foundations for much of their funding.
The CIA Funds Both the Right and the Left
I first learned that the Nation was indirectly funded by the CIA through Sherman Skolnick’s investigation of the 990 and 990A tax returns of the Ford Foundation and other allegedly “liberal” foundations that were funding them. Skolnick felt this was the main reason for the Nation’s rabidly dismissive attitude towards the scrupulous research of Peter Dale Scott, Carl Oglesby, Sylvia Meagher and other scholars into the role US intelligence played in both Kennedy assassinations, the Martin Luther King assassination and other so-called “conspiracies” involving government criminal activity.
I was unaware of the domestic “counterinsurgency” role – involving a range of “Cointelpro”-type functions – of left gatekeeping foundations prior to reading Webster Tarpley’s Barack H. Obama: the Unauthorized Biography. It’s really impossible to understand who Obama is or his policy choices without understanding that the so-called liberal foundations that gave him his political start in Chicago had the same fundamental pro-corporate agenda that has characterized his presidency. An agenda underscored by the funding these and similar foundations receive from right wing, CIA-linked foundations.
The Role of the CIA in Protecting Corporate Interests
I think it’s also essential here to clarify what the CIA is and who they represent. Their official function is to gather intelligence overseas, though it’s an open secret that they also engage in international “counterinsurgency” activities: they covertly influence foreign elections (via advertising and paying local campaigners); they create political instability and even “color” revolutions, by funding and training opposition groups (as in Libya); they organize military coups to overthrow democratically elected governments (as in Guatemala, Chile, Iran and Indonesia); they organize and fund mercenary armies (often by collaborating with them in narcotics trafficking) Afghanistan) to overthrow democratically elected governments; they torture suspected Islamic terrorists; and they covertly assassinate foreign political leaders and labor and human rights activists.
According to the corporate media spin, the CIA does all this to protect the American public from Communists, Muslims, immigrants or whatever bogeyman the corporate media happen to be serving up on the six o’clock news. However a careful study of their history shows that the CIA operates exclusively to support and protect corporate interests. The CIA was initially started by Wall Street lawyers (Allen Dulles, a former United Fruit Company board member, and Frank Wisner) and largely recruits its leadership from Yale, Harvard, Princeton and other Ivy League Schools. When it assassinates a foreign leader overthrows a democratically elected government in Chile, Indonesia, Iran or Guatemala, it does so for the benefit of Wall Street companies who want access to that country’s natural resources (the 1954 coup in Guatemala followed Arbenz’s attempt to nationalize a United Fruit Company plantation), cheap labor and markets.
Oh No, Another Conspiracy Theory
Although both Tarpley and Skolnick are often dismissed as conspiracy-obsessed wing-nuts, the fundamental role left gatekeeping foundations play in progressive American politics isn’t a half baked conspiracy theory. There is an extensive, carefully documented body of research into why these foundations were formed and why they knowingly agreed to be co-opted by the CIA.
To be continued.
by stuartbramhall in Things That Aren't What They Seem
In 1984, Obama left Business International Corporation (BIC), a known CIA front engaging in economic espionage (see http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2011/04/02/the-president-with-no-past-obamas-electability-in-2012/), to move to Chicago, where he became a civil rights lawer. From that point on, he only had indirect links with the CIA, through his involvement “left gatekeeping” foundations like the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and the Gamaliel and Wood Foundations. His “official” biography reveals that he first gained public prominence as the first chairman of the board of the “liberal” Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC). However strong links between CAC and Chicago’s business elite, as well as their successful attacks against teachers’ unions (by empowering Local School Councils to fire hundreds of teachers and principals), raise serious questions about CAC’s “liberal” credentials. This becomes especially significant in light of Obama’s appointment of former Chicago school district CEO and school privatization champion Arne Duncan as director of the Department of Education (see http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2011/03/21/obamas-neoliberal-stance-on-charter-schools/).
As Webster Tarpley points out in Barack H. Obama: the Unauthorized Biography, one of the strongest supporters of CAC was Chicago corporate mogul Thomas Ayers. By an amazing coincidence, Ayers was the father of the former Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers. Nevertheless Tom Ayers has impeccable corporate credentials, which include heading Commonwealth Edison for seven years in the seventies, and serving on the board of General Dynamics, Searle, Chicago Pacific, Zenith, Northwest Industries, First National Bank of Chicago and the Chicago Tribune.
Bill Ayers, the Ex-Weatherman Terrorist
Stranger still Bill Ayers, the ex-Weatherman terrorist, wrote the grant to secure Annenberg funding for the CAC and credits himself as one of its co-founders. He was also influential in getting his friend Barack Obama, a 34 year old with no education credentials, appointed as CAC’s first chairman. Obama’s annual salary as board chairman was $70,000 (in addition to his substantial income from his law practice).
All this raises the tricky question of how Bill Ayers transformed himself from a bomb making terrorist facing the death penalty to a tenured Professor of Education at the University of Illinois-Chicago and pre-eminent education reformer. Many former Students for a Democratic Society (from which the Weathermen formed their splinter group) believe the Weather Underground was actually created by US intelligence, with the objective of discrediting, fragmenting and/or shutting down SDS. This view is substantiated by FBI documents that came to light in 1973 that reveal the role of agent provocateurs in instigating much of the violence attributed to the Weathermen. Ayers successfully used this evidence to get his weapons and bomb making charges dismissed.
The Difference Between a CIA Front and a Left-Gatekeeping Foundation
BIC, where Obama worked after graduating from Columbia in 1983, was considered a CIA front, as it engaged directly in economic intelligence gathering, which it shared with the CIA. The role of so-called left-gatekeeping foundations revolves less around intelligence gathering than around a variety of “counterinsurgency” activities aimed at suppressing genuine grassroots organizing.
These left gatekeeping foundations are an integral part of what professor Peter Dale Scott refers to as the “Deep State,” a complex network of corporate elites and government officials that secretly steers foreign and domestic policy behind the facade of democracy. Although the Ford Foundation and other foundations have openly collaborated with the CIA since the early fifties, it’s a subject that receives little attention in either the mainstream or so-called “alternative” media. I blog about this at “Affirmative Action: Nixon’s Brainchild” http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2010/07/24/affirmative-action-nixons-brainchild/ and “Lessons from the East German Stasi” http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2010/07/28/lessons-from-the-east-german-stasi/.