James Bamfords New Article

[StarmanSkye]

Proldic said:<br><br>""Neocon subversion of the US intelligence agencies" is a sad pathetic myth repeated by people who can't face reality."<br>Sounds exactly like a presumptively-authoritarian disinfo soundbite. <br><br>Is Proldic disseminating his own value-added myth?<br><br>"This is what the US intelligence agencies want you to think."<br>Hmmm ... Or is THIS what Proldic wants you to think?<br><br>No evidence or fact-based argument or considered reason -- just a sly word-to-the-wise 'suggestion'.<br><br>"Don't play the fool."<br><br>The voice of experience?<br><br>Insinuation, manipulation, intimidation -- Tools of the 'trade'?<br><br>Starman<br>YOU know, aka Blind as a Billygoat Neoliberal Intellectual Masturbator --<br> <p></p><i></i>

[proldic]

Sorry for snapping on you before. True. <br><br>I don't know who you are, really. You may be an amalgam of two or three different people in my mind. Are you the one who tends not to separate paragraphs enough for my old-fogy eyes? Tell me now -- are you pro or anti new-age? Pro or anti peak oil? Pro or anti Nazi? ABC analyst?("anything-but-class")? Mixed bag? Pure evil? Good friend from a nearby town? My cousin? I don't fucking know anymore. Never claimed I did.<br><br>OK sometimes (HA!) my levels get maxxed, but that was just what I felt at the time. Sorry. Tell me where it is and I'll go delete it, maybe. I can't say I was wrong, just that as far as my post here, man, I got no fucking agenda besides LOVE. 'eartical love for the sufferer, SEEN?<br><br>As far as <!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Neocon subversion of the US intelligence agencie<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->, I don't understand (or don't have the <br>time-smarts to break down) why you don't/won't see the current danger, historical fallacy, and banal evil of that view... <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[maggrwaggr]

The people responsible for 9/11 do not have a loyalty to the U.S.<br><br>Bushco and their gang do not consider us "their people". <br><br>They consider themselves to be "politicians without borders".<br><br>They are more loyal to their rich and powerful friends around the world, i.e. Saudi Arabia, heads of multinational oil companies, than they are to little ants like us.<br><br>Bushco uses the United States to its own end, uses our military to its own end, and uses its treasury to its own end.<br><br>They don't care about us anymore than they care about all the Iraqis they've slaughtered.<br><br>So when somebody says "the united states wasn't behind the 9/11 attacks" I say "what United States?" <br><br>There's more to the United States than just one simply, monolithic government.<br><br>I think it's obvious, but I find it's a common misconception among a lot of people<br> <p></p><i></i>

[Gouda]

My review of Bamford's article: 2 1/2 stars.<br><br>Several points: <br><br>1) I can see how this appeals to the Rolling Stone demographic. If I squint my eyes funny, it resembles a subtle recruitment ploy, at least a recruitment of opinion, promoting a "legit" world of covert ops, in general. (In my opinion, "legit" intelligence work in service of heinous policy ain't good for nuthin'.) He paints the work of the Rendon group, pitchfork and all, as an edgy, rock’n’roll, jet-setting, money-making, image-crafting, back-stage pass type of operation. He writes it like he is describing Sid taking out Nancy. So I was reading, thinking, wow this Rendon guy is a horribly unscrupulous scumbag, but he kind of rocks, and wouldn’t that be a cool gig to have, in secret! Or, 'if I were him, I would inject some integrity into the operation.' <br><br>For readers with conscience, but with little background in or knowledge of history or deep politics, the danger is that the portrayal of Rendon as a foul operator (and trend) in an extremely alluring, exciting underworld sets up a bias for americans rightly interested in america's best interest: one ought support, or hope for, the reform and re-instatement of the role of the CIA, after their initial mistake in hiring Rendon in 1991 because this is easily much better than engaging the world Rendon/Pentagon/outsourcing-style. He is saying, "take back intelligence and psyops from the Pentagon and their outsourced jackals." And then what? He leaves us with no way of thinking about alternatives to the horrid evolution of the corporate-military-spook complex, the nature of our state that feeds the need for it - a phenom which had a wonderful run, PRE-RENDON. <br><br>In this article, anyway. I have not read Body of Secrets or his other books. Just looking at the interview and this article and giving my impressions. <br><br>2) Interesting outtakes here. Has our fine American establishment been duped into wars? <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>What the Kuwaitis wanted was help in selling a war of liberation to the American government -- and the American public.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> Rendon proposed a massive "perception management" campaign designed to convince the world of the need to join forces to rescue Kuwait.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>"From day one," Rendon says, "Chalabi was very clear that his biggest interest was to rid Iraq of Saddam." Bruner, who dealt with Chalabi and Rendon in London in 1991, puts it even more bluntly. "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Chalabi's primary focus," he said later, "was to drag us into a war</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->."<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>And again, we must see it as CIA infighting with the DIA. We should back the CIA. Bad Pentagon. (But shouldn’t we back instead accountability, a huge audit of the entire mess, the missing trillions, & independently examination of all black projects, for starts?!) <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>"The Rendon Group is not in great odor in Langley these days," notes Bruner. "Their contracts are much more with the Defense Department."<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>3) The power of Bin Laden, 911 nightmares, again:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Rendon's influence rose considerably in Washington after the terrorist attacks of September 11th. In a single stroke, Osama bin Laden altered the world's perception of reality -- and in an age of nonstop information, whoever controls perception wins.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Did OBL do that? Wow. And what is he saying here? He is saying that <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>somehow</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> we need a better way than Rendon to remedy OBL's head start in perception management in the War on Terror. He accepts the premise of the "War on Terror", despite the fact that he should know better, knowing how psyops and false flags work, having 'exposed' operation Northwoods etc.. weird weird weird. <br><br>4) Bamford, as former ABC producer, siding with the MSM? Big bad Rendon is responsible in part for the media being kept from the truth? <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>To coordinate the operation, Rendon opened an office in London. Once the Gulf War began, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>he remained extremely busy trying to prevent the American press from reporting on the dark side of the Kuwaiti government,</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> an autocratic oil-tocracy ruled by a family of wealthy sheiks.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br> <p></p><i></i>