Saturday, July 06, 2013

The fun never stops

All righty, back to political blogging.

Not many days ago, while nursing a cola in a small restaurant overlooking the Chesapeake Bay, I decided to re-acquaint myself with the facts surrounding the strange demise of CIA analyst John Paisley, whose body was fished out of the Bay in 1978. Paisley -- who had ties to the JFK assassination, Watergate, and George H.W. Bush's "Team B" -- was found tied up and weighted down, with a bullet entrance behind his left ear. (He was right-handed.) The local authorities deemed the death a suicide.

Ah, those lovable funsters in the American intelligence community! Without them, what would we do for entertainment?

And the fun never stops...

It's Siggy! To your right, you'll find a picture of Julian Assange with a friend who turned out to be something other than a friend. No, that's not Pugsley Addams all grown up. It's Siggy Thordarson, one of Assange's most trusted associates, who also happened to be an FBI fink. If you look closely at his jacket, you'll notice that he's missing a 6.

How much was Siggy paid to spy on Assange? A whopping five K, which seems just about enough to supply a guy like Siggy with a month's worth of Kanelgifler. But there were side benefits:
The details suggest that Thordarson abused that position in many ways, including setting up a t-shirt sales site, supposedly to benefit Wikileaks, but where all the money went directly to his own bank account.
Sanctuary. Venezuela and Nicaragua have offered asylum to Ed Snowden. These offers came after a hilarious, farcical period during which the U.S. "kidnapped" the President of Bolivia in Vienna because we were convinced that Snowy was on that plane. John Pilger is right: This was an act of piracy. The U.S. also issued an arrest warrant to Ireland, apparently on the theory that an invisible army of pookas managed to sneak the guy out of the Moscow airport.

These Feydeau-meets-Fleming moments have the welcome effect of making the U.S. intelligence community look a little less formidable.

If I were Snowy, I'd stay in Russia. Sure, the Russian government sucks -- always has sucked -- but the culture is rich and fascinating. Difficult language, though.

I recommend this piece by Spencer Ackerman of the Guardian which underscores an important distinction: Snowden is not a spy -- he's a whistleblower. A spy tattles to an enemy government. A whistleblower makes wrongdoing known to everyone. Spies are (usually) paid and (when possible) protected; whistleblowers are usually made to eat shit. Siggy, whose story is told above, was paid and is protected. Our media will never mount a hate campaign against him, even though I find him far more risible.

Is Snowy the bad guy? This piece by one T. Steelman is one of many asking if someone built a Janus-faced Snowman. Basically, the argument derives from Snowden's internet chat trail, which indicates that he used to be pro-Bush and very pro-secrecy. Example, from 2009:
SNOWDEN: HOLY SHIThttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/washington/11iran.html?_r=1&hp

SNOWDEN: WTF NYTIMES

SNOWDEN: Are they TRYING to start a war? Jesus christ they’re like wikileaks

User19: they’re just reporting, dude.

SNOWDEN: They’re reporting classified shit

User19: shrugs

User19: meh

SNOWDEN: moreover, who the fuck are the anonymous sources telling them this?

SNOWDEN: those people should be shot in the balls.
I'm with User19 (whoever he is) on this one. Steelman thinks it mighty damned suspicious that the Snowy one changed his 'tude only after Barack Obama got into office.

It is undeniable that Snowden is a libertarian of the "screw Social Security" ilk. For this reason, he'll never be one of my favorite people:
SNOWDEN: Somehow, our society managed to make it hundreds of years without social security just fine

SNOWDEN: you fucking retards

SNOWDEN: Magically the world changed after the new deal, and old people became made of glass

SNOWDEN: yeah, that makes sense

User11: wow

User11: you are just so fucking stupid
My sentiments exactly, User11. Let us not shed too many tears for Snowy -- if he ran the zoo, the zoo would be much, much worse -- but let us also not be too quick to seek weird-ass conspiratorial explanations where simple ones suffice. The simple explanation is that Snowden changed his mind, at least on the topic of intelligence community overreach. The libertarian websites likely to attract his attention often print pieces critical of the national security state.

To my eyes, the man's current predicament cannot be explained away as theater or legend-building or an 11-dimensional deception operation. The guy took a genuine risk and he is now in genuine trouble because he got the Obama administration genuinely pissed off. If Snowden were a phoney whistleblower -- if he were a "Lee Harvey Snowden" -- his handlers would have prepared (or backstopped) a very different internet trail for him.

Angletonian triple-thinking isn't going to help us make sense of this one.

Is Greenwald the Bad Guy? Speaking of Angletonism, check out this prime example of sick think on Sibel Edmonds' blog. Sibel (of whom I tired years ago) wants you to believe that there is a major rift between Greenwald and Snowden. She also wants you to believe that there are INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT CONTRADICATIONS in the statements Greenwald has made to the press.

I don't need to mount a counterargument. You need merely follow the link and read her words. What she has to say is nonsense based on the over-parsing of simple English-language sentences.
Comments:
"Is Snowy the bad guy?" After reading the linked piece and some comments beneath, I'd say it depends what you define as "bad".

If the libertarian/right-wing on-line comments he has made in the past were all 100% genuine, he'd not be my idea of "a good guy", unless he had one of those "on the road to Damascus" moments - which isn't made clear anywhere as far as I know. If his main intention was to make Obama look bad, his method does seem a tad extreme.

Why didn't he blow the whistle when Bush was in power? Well, I suppose back then he wasn't in a position to access the right kind of material, even if he'd wished to blow the whistle.

His comments about Social Security were cold and thoughtless, but many of his generation probably think the same - and that has nothing to do with the NSA issue anyway.

Although the population should have been aware of what was going on post-Patriot Act it seems they weren't, or if they were they didn't care, hadn't appreciated the scale and extent of what was being done. We at least have Edward Snowden to thank for re-opening the conversation, reminding us. As Daniel Ellsberg said, what we have to keep in mind is that in any future war situation (just or more likely unjust - my addition) , the structure of a full-on police state is ready and waiting.

We have been reminded, and at no small cost to Ed. Snowden. Yet it appears many still do not care!



 
The probability persists, Joseph, that genuinely serious "whistleblowing" threats to the nefarious plans of the National Security State NEVER are awarded the kind of wall-to-wall free publicity Snowden continues to receive from the corporate/fascist mainstream media.

On the contrary, any would-be leakers and tattlers whose "messages" could actually derail big-time false-flag psyops and high-profit warmongering are much more likely to be intercepted quite early, thanks to NSA's long-in-place Total Information Awareness (TM), and "neutralised" far away from the spotlight of what passes for the "daily news".

(Although the bodies of the the Paisleys and Colbys of yesteryear do, sometimes, wash up on shore...)

I still maintain that our Eddie S. is essentially a role-player in an ongoing "power game" between elite factions behind the curtain. Were he not be being protected by some substantial covert-interest centre, he would have never lived to tell us his Libertarian-tinged tale of Damascus-Road conversion.
 
French page, english language.
May be helpfull.
->
http://reflets.info/prism-lets-have-a-look-at-the-big-picture/
 
Nice picture, now popular in Germany
->
http://apps.opendatacity.de/stasi-vs-nsa/
 
The role of Siggy reminds me of Barrett Brown's 'girlfriend' who conveniently turned his webcam off at the time of the arrest and eventual engagement to other Government-tool Adrian Lamo
 
"Not funny, Orwellian"
->
NSA recruitment drive goes horribly wrong
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/shortcuts/2013/jul/05/national-security-agency-recruitment-drive
 
Sibel Edmonds misses the wood for the trees, and her trees are the personalities and exact words of commentators and journalists.

Is Snowden's "leak" done? If so, does that mean his "leaking" is done? Yawn!

Here's something concrete. Here's what Snowden has actually said, and the issue isn't grammar...

QUESTION FROM JACOB APPELBAUM: Do private companies help the NSA?

SNOWDEN:Yes. But it's hard to prove that. The names of the cooperating telecom companies are the crown jewels of the NSA

Has he named those companies yet? No.

It can't be long until people come up with names such as Amdocs. That Israel-friendly company provides 'billing services' for most big telcos in the western world...

...not to mention BT, AT&T, etc. etc. etc.

Everyone without shit for brains knows Facebook is the CIA. Sadly too many of our contemporaries suffer from coprocephaly.

Then of course we get Google...

...and Wikipedia, under loony Randroid Jimmy Wales...

...and Microsoft and Intel...
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?



FeedWind


destiny betrayed ad

destiny betrayed ad

FeedWind











    FeedWind




    FeedWind