Hoekstra: 'There will be another attack' - Deutch to blame

by **seemslikeadream** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 1:11 pm

here's some fun from DU Vreeland <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=924780">www.democraticunderground..._id=924780</a>

by **chiggerbit** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 1:37 pm

Weren't Vreeland and Rusty Nelson both arrested in about the same week? Trying to remember where Nelson was arrested. Was there a connection between these two or not? I don't remember. Nelson's explanation for why he was accused of being involved in kiddie porn was suspicious, I thought. They all have an excuse. I sure hope he was smart enough to hide the negatives.

by **rain** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 1:38 pm

I had been doing some research re:Iris that got shelved (7/7?), and had come to the tentative position that she (was) 'suicided' not just because of the context of her work was creating a problem, but possibly specifically due to who she had planned to interview. if you have the time and interest you could start here - <a href="http://www.pomona.edu/pbi/frankgibney.shtml">www.pomona.edu/pbi/frankgibney.shtml</a>

by **Nymarya** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 1:42 pm

Thanks to everyone who gave some background. Iris Chang was a Chinese-American journalist who wrote a book called "The Rape of Nanking." My stepfather was a sinophile and when I was growing up he often made reference to it (notably in telling me never to buy a Japanese car)--he was still angry at the Japanese over the things they did in China that they had yet to acknowledge in the 60s and in fact had not when Chang wrote her book. The book had wideranging international repercussions (see, eg, "Wars of Memory: When Iris Chang wrote ``The Rape of Nanking,'' to memorialize one of the bloodiest massacres of civilians in modern times, she wasn't prepared for the firestorm she started", SF Chronicle 1998 [<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/">www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ar...chronicle/</a> archive/1998/07/26/SC77214.DTL] . She then wrote a history of Chinese-Americans, and then went to work on a major project about the Japanese occupation of the Philipines and the Bataan Death March. She was going to interview people and it was horribly wrenching to hear their stories. The 'official' story was that she had become so depressed she had a breakdown, her young son had to be sent to his grandparents, then she bought a gun and shot herself in the Santa Cruz Mountains. Her suicide/'suicide' came some months after Colin Powell had gone on record as favoring modification of Article 9 of the Japanese constitution, which limits Japan to a small military force. Undoubtedly Chang's new project would have been as controversial as "Nanking" and given a forum for opposition to a more militarized Japan. Her removal was quite timely and convenient. Now, having suffered from severe depression in the past I know how awful it is. However, no matter how bad I felt I stayed alive because at the time I had 3 cats and no one to take them if anything happened to me. I simply did not buy that she would leave her child a legacy like that...unless she was under some kind of 'mind attack' that made her unable to consider other alternatives (like hospitalization in a locked ward till the suicidality passed), OR she had been threatened, either that if she didn't kill herself her loved ones would suffer, or even that if she didn't stop the project something would happen to her family, and given her integrity, the pain of having to betray all the people she had already interviewed was too much. OR, of course, she was lured out and executed. I had already decided I didn't buy the official story when I told a Chinese American woman friend who is about Chang's age and living in the same area of her death; she didn't know Chang but was incredulous, said a Chinese mother would never do such a thing. That's just one person, but the strength of her response, without knowing anything about Chang beyond that she was a Chinese American writer with a young child, impressed me. I have no proof or 'inside info' to offer, only my extreme skepticism whenever a BushCo critic conveniently is removed from the scene (whether by 'accident', 'heart attack' (like Robin Cook), or 'suicide'), and my sorrow for Chang, whose book on Nanking I had read wishing my stepfather was still alive to see the truths he felt had been suppressed and forgotten brought into the light.

by **Nymarya** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:52 pm

proldic, I had not followed your link when I posted the above. I never saw the Benson article, I had personal problems going on last spring and wasn't following the news as carefully as I normally do. Thank you. I am puzzled why she would buy a funky old gun like that if she was serious about killing herself. Is it because of gun purchase laws that disallow them to anyone who has been hospitalized for mental illness within a certain time frame? I wanted to relate a personal story about psych meds...I was going through a terribly stressful period back in 2002 and had trouble sleeping. A friend of mine gave me a medication called Risperdal which he was taking he claimed helped him sleep. I looked it up and it was an anti-psychotic, but he was not psychotic (so I believed then!), so I took one at bedtime. I sat up all night feverishly putting together how everyone I knew, every single person, in three states, were part of a clever plot to drive me to suicide and take everything I owned (believe me, it wasn't much, not worth a plot <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> ). It all fit together PERFECTLY. I was terrified, wondering how to move away before they closed the net around me...I mean I was ready to leave then as the friend who gave me the Risperdal was coming the next day to take me to brunch. To all intents and purposes, I had been converted into a paranoid schizophrenic by the pill. The only thing was--thankfully--I am extremely skeptical, and extremely strong minded. It DID occur to me that I had seen nothing of this clever plot till I took the pill. So I called the one person back East whom I had not been able to tie into the plot at the crack of dawn back there, and asked him to walk me through my 'case' against all my other friends. Instead of yelling at me for waking him or jeering at me, he did so, and patiently pointed out innocent alternative explanations for each 'suspicious' thing. He also, gently, reminded me that I am extremely sensitive to medication, rarely take it unless it has been prescribed and I have done extensive research on it, that perhaps in my desperate need for sleep I had made an error in taking it. One part of my mind did the typical paranoid-schiz thing (AHA, he denies it, he's PART of the plot!") but another part knew he was right. I did manage to get some sleep and when I awoke the drug-induced paranoid psychosis was gone. When my friend came for brunch, instead of my being gone, or huddled inside with the door barred, I told him what had happened and the lesson in it for both of us, don't take meds someone hands you and don't give out your prescription meds yourself like they were Tums. [Edit: forgot to add, later he admitted he was prescribed the Risperdal because he had been hearing voices talking about him. !!!!! Then later he claimed he had multiple personalities, then that he was into a Satanic S&M group--wowser, end of THAT friendship. He needed more than Risperdal to get his gear in one sea-bag.) Anyway--my point is, once someone's brain chemistry, already altered by depression, is subject to psychopharmacology, no one can predict the outcome. This is not to say I buy that there was no chance that Chang was threatened and/or mind controlled into taking her own life. In fact, I feel more strongly about it being so after reading the Benson article. Imagine if while I was in my induced paranoid-schiz state, someone had begun to manipulate me for their own ends...subtly by pretending to be 'helping' me, or by actually threatening me. I mourn for the life of this incredibly courageous young woman who fought to bring buried truths to the world, as well as for the people whose stories she had compiled for her forthcoming book who now have no voice. I wonder how to go about finding out if her research materials are or will be made available to others who might be interested in carrying on the project? ======= Oh, I enjoy an egg myself, yes. They don't make good pets, though; you can never get them in at night. ~Doctor Pratt (played by Peter Sellers), "The Wrong Box"Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=nymarya>Nymarya</A> at: 9/15/05 12:55 pm

by **Dreams End** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:01 pm

Risperdal...my wife took that...turned her into a zombie. Another alleged anti-psychotic, oh hell, forgetting the name, gave her scary hallucinations within fifteen minutes of ingestion. I work with a young person who had been put on Risperdal...went on a ski trip with his parents. He started tripping all right. they had to cancel their vacation because he was so whacked out. Risperdal...the psycho maker!

by **Nymarya** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:53 pm

My FAMILY DOCTOR, self styled 'expert' on depression (translation, did not know squat) put me on Wellbutrin at one point; it made me feel like I just landed on a strange planet in a strange body, looked like earth and like me but didn't feel that way; later found out it's called 'depersonalization'. So she raised the dosage and I had 24 hour rolling panic attacks. Got off it, only several months later to be the witness to a friend literally having a psychotic break at a restaurant, had to go to the john and call her husband on my cell...couple of days later he called to update me on her condition and said her therapist had recently switched her from another antidepressant to...Wellbutrin. Another friend began to have auditory hallucinations that people were standing around corners talking smack about him so he could hear it, but when he ran around the corner to confront them they always disappeared, took him awhile to realize there was no one there and get help. Turned out he too had been depressed and put on...Wellbutrin. Cut to a year or more later, I'm chatting with a professor of psychiatry who says matter of factly "Oh yes, Wellbutrin, can create psychotic symptoms." I'm like, let me get this straight. Mostly functional people suffering from depression are given a drug that in short order gives them rampant psychotic symptoms. Is this how medicine is supposed to be practiced? Do we give someone with a mild tension headache a drug that could make them have a stroke?" He said "Well, presumably [love that, means no studies have been done] this only happens to people with a predisposition to psychosis." OK, I said, then are those not the people who should not get it? But with people who have never been diagnosed psychotic before, there's no way to know they have the predisposition till they GO psychotic. OK, but if there's no way to know, how do we know they went psycho because they were already cracked a bit that way, and not because the drug MADE them psycho? So it's like the headache case, where when the person strokes out you excuse it on the basis of 'predisposition' to strokes, without doing any studies? Maybe people with MILD situational depression should not be given the drug at all when there are many others that don't have that effect? That it should be reserved for people who have already bombed out on everything else that doesn't make you psychotic? Don't ever get in an argument with one of these people, they pull out the old "I went to med school and residency and you didn't" trump card, to which I reply, "Yes, but even so if you give poorly studied drugs with documented major side effects for minor problems then you are a quack, no wait, DOCTOR Quack." Even with the sad state of medicine today, I really do believe that a doctor who gave someone with mild headaches say, Vicodin and they got addicted, or some other bigtime painkiller that had a bad physical side effect, would have a hard time wriggling out of a malpractice suit, but because it's our 'minds' and it's all 'subjective' psychopharmacologists and other neurotransmitter-didlers get away with far more dangerous tinkering. For one thing, NO family doctor should be handing out psych drug samples like they do the lollipops at the reception desk. When I was in law school a kid who had failed to make law review second year OD'd in his car over Christmas break on the antidepressants the school shrink had started him on right before the break. He was left for the month vacation with NO follow up, to the University Health Service or to the nearby University Hospital. As often happens during the early part of treatment, he got worse not better, and took his own life. There was a HUGE uproar about how he had been killed by the stress of law school. I pointed out of the 275 people in our class subjected to the same stress, the only one who celebrated the savior's birthday by going in person to hang out with him had been treated by a QUACK. Maybe not as dramatic a story as "Law school pressures can KILL!" but the true one.

by **antiaristo** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:12 am

<a href="http://whatreallyhappened.com/9-11_katrina.html">whatreallyhappened.com/9-11_katrina.html</a>

by **israelirealities** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 7:09 am

I was also very intrigued and moved by the SF Chronicle's article about her suicide and in fact learning about her entire life. I posted the story in my hebrew Blog. I was surprised to find out that at least 200 people made the effort to read a long article in English (not easy for Hebrew speakers). If made me read more about her in the internet and I am also under the impression she was manipulated. However, according to her own speculations, her mind control started before she wrote the famous account about the Nanking atrocities. I tend to trust her own judgment, that perhaps she was programmed to write the book as well. THis is being done, based on personality analysis, like using a person's courage, high ethical standards and ambition to justice and kind of "leading" them to the proper project. Considering the US's record in creating rifts among nations, this is very possible. I also had the same suspicion with regards to someone like the Canadian JApanese writer Ken Adachi who later committed suicide. He spent some "Strange" time in Maryland...:-) (the Land of mind control). This would make perfect sense to me. Also, that once she realized the extent of control over her life, and the nature and size of the powers she is facing, and the fate of her child IF SHE STAYS ALIVE, that she would be in despair. A little "push" towards suicide is then probable. Also, these victims are sort of "written off" of bear an expiration date, unless they continue to abide, after becoming aware of their position. What creates the despair, i believe, in people who have been thus abused, is the fact that their noble traits were the reason for the abuse, and they start doubting themselves and also feel "spiritually raped". I think we are missing an important link in the process of validating the experience.

by **proldic** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:19 am

I was interested to get your take on the USS Liberty spyship incident. I'm specifically curious about the role of US spying against Israel at the time. My interest relates to how the incident is being used now --politically -- in the US. Am I stretching it trying to make a partial parallel to the Pueblo incident, at least in comparing how people view the two currently?

by **israelirealities** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:51 am

I don't know how the USS pueblo incident is used now in the USA. I can see in the internet that the USS Liberty is extensively used to prove that Israel poses a risk to the USA, somehow, or entertains hostile intentions towards the USA. The USA is spying on Israel all the time, but then this is not called spying for political reasons. It is they who provide the money for this country's military, and probably most of the technology for spying. But, there are numerous problems in the dark, as you can guess. Occasionally, ISraeli media is "guided" to publish something about US spying in order to signal something. Such were the publications recently about "too many antennaes" over the US embassy in Tel Aviv...or, hints about some Mossad guy being executed by CIA years ago, following the Israeli attempt to blow up the US embassy in Cairo (and blame it on the Egyptians) and so forth. A year ago, or so, suddenly the state rehabilitated the guys who were sent to blow up the US embassy in Egypt and gave them decorations and apologized for years of abuse and slander (the official version was that they did it of their own adventurous will). Commentators saw this weird ceremony as a hostile little signal to the USA, possibly in retaliation to the recent AIPAC mess. Most notably, the recent huge campaign to free Pollard, saying that he is being tortured in his prison. And one can find occasional comments that US spies are stealing laptops from high officers (there were two cases of "lost laptops in the last month or so). However, the true extent of US spying and covert activities in ISrael is rarely discussed here. (someone you would get a glimpse, like an israeli ex commando hinted in an interview that the CIA was responsible for the slain body of the Former American Dolphin trainer in Tal Aviv Dolphinarium...etc.). I suspect the CIA is involved in drug dealing here, human experiments, mind control and what not. The official version here is that the Liberty was damaged by mistake, and that the US was at fault in not signaling identity etc. HOwever, my sense of it, because of the people who were on board and their later careers seem to point otherwise. I believe ISrael has a right to set limits to US spying and manipulations here, but they rarely do it here for the right reasons...:-). The ISraeli military wants to have it both ways: rely on US tech and money but also reserve their freedom of action to perform worse atrocities against the mighty enemy, who ever they choose to define that way. This is a very complex issue, you know. Basically, don't forget that CIA orientation would be racist to the bones including against Jews, even those Jews who are disguised as "Israelis" (namely, those new Jews who don't shy from shooting low life black and yellow people ). My take, is that CIA is much more sophisticated than the ISraeli guys (although Mossad people think they are second to God only).

by **chiggerbit** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:56 am

The same Ken Adachi, buddy of the opportunistic Ted Gunderson? When did he die?

by **israelirealities** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:58 am

Surely the USA was spying on ISrael at that time, this was before the "special relationship" but israel was sitting on important US interests, oil and all, and the Americans knew by that time that ISrael possesses nuclear capacities enough to wreak havoc in the region. I suppose at that time too, the US was still worried about the USSR's involvement in ISrael. I was surprised to see, from recently declassified CIA docs (about NAzis getting visas to the USA), that the CIA was monitoring labor union activists from ISrael, who visited the USA for fundraising JEwish money, under the general suspicions of "communists" and communist spies.

by **proldic** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:32 pm

Cool to get more of your take on history and politics here. I'm writing and working at the same time, so these questions are not 100% on point as I'd like, and I'll probably think of better ones later, but I got to get my brain rolling on this somehow. I see this as a very important, if not one of the most important, long-term "meme" battles being fought. The Liberty was obviously attacked by Israel in full knowledge of the fact that it was a US spyship. My point was that the majority of the Euro-US left thinks it was justifiable for the N. Vietnamese to protect their interests against US imperialist spying by the Pueblo, but it seems that the Liberty incident, where you've got a quasi-socialist Israel protecting it's interests against US imperialist spying, is not seen in nearly the same flattering anti-US meddling light by them nowadays. I'm not trying to paint the Israeli military as having the same revolutionary socialist unity as the North Vietnamese, just noting how the current perceptions alter the way people are seing the world stage. Can you give us a brief overview of your opinions re. any internal process that may have changed/changed the perception of Israel from socialist/Soviet-aligned to partner to the US? Is there any significance in the photos of PLO demonstrations from the early '80's with signs saying "Death to Israel and the Soviet Union"? Or is it more along the lines of what Chomsky (no friend of mine, now a leading opinion leader-critic of Israel and friend of Fauression [sp]) said a long time ago about the PLO being simply a "...politically opportunistic, ultra-nationalist" organization. Curious on your take on the development of zionist philosophy within European Jews, esp leading up to post-war. Do you believe it's true that many, if not most, leftist Jews did not initially support the Zionist program? Do you believe this represented a majority of Jews as a whole? How should this shade our views now? Following the historical research, it does seem that both groups (Israeli & Palestinian) were in league with US/Dulles/Nazis to some degree. The Balfour agreement, negotiated by Dulles. But was the role/motivations of those elements, someone like, say, Feivel Kites [sp], comparable to the influence of the Grand Mufti, who could hardly be called an "element"? When and how much did Israel/Mossad corporations/right become a working partner, i.e.: SA, Latin America? How much does this reflect on the will of the Israeli people at the time? Was there a debate, protest, support of Latin American leftists? I see before where you were writing about how much the Israeli citizen is in the dark about what is going on over here? Is comparative analysis valid? Is body count valid? Such as: who's more of a genocide-supporter/US pawn, Israel, or say, Saudi Arabia, or Indonesia for that matter? Then you ask yourself, why not the huge campaign/support network in modern US-Euro left there, at least in comparison to the fervor shown to anti-Z/Israel? Iyo, how much of that mis-prioritization, if it exists at all, is fostered by psychological (i.e. pos. unconscious racist) motivations? So then, what is the "value" of Israel to the NWO, iyo? Do we need to highlight other motivations? Some seem a stretch. Location, for one. Tactical value besides the Suez? Pipelines? Again, my sense says "c'mon". Enslavement of Muslim peoples? Aside from the "occupied territory" and maybe a case could be made for South Lebanon at one time, it seems that it's the other middle-eastern -- Muslim --states that are doing most of that oppression, despite the focus on Israeli imperialism in the US. So it's got to be a political state, for political purposes. D & C. The division of the semites, disruption of socialist revolutionary potential in the ME, backed by CIA destabilization/coups. Iyo, was there ever a possibility of unity between socialist secular mid-east state Muslims & socialist secular Israeli Jews during the '70's? If so, who's more historically culpable in sabotaging that chance? To what degree should we hold Israeli Zionists liable for their own manipulation, compared to the nationalists of post-colonialist democratic-socialist European states, or liberal Catholics, for example? If we do, what are the repercussions they should face for this? What reparations should they make, if any? Have you had a chance to read any of the many discussions on this board regarding the subjects of Israel, Neo-Cons, Nazis, anti-semitism, counter-charges of false-wolf crying, etc? I think it gives a view of the debate and how it's forming in the US, especially among "progressives". What is your take and the take in Israel on the supposed right-wing Israeli boasting about "controlling" the US ala Sharon, which is trumpeted by the anti-Israeli faction here as proof positive that they are in control/dominant. I read somewhere that the accuracy of that statement was disputed, but I think there may have been others as well, no? If there were statements like that made, how accurate do they seem to you? What possible value would Israelis have to let that leak out if it's true? Are the ones who are saying those things trying to isolate Israeli citizens from the rest of the world (opinion)? So now that the Israeli state has been created, and gone through this transmutative political process. What should matter most to us? Is it a case to be made that -- contrary to popular belief -- Israel may not be the favored partner at this time? Should this figure in our take on the US governement here -- as in: "all along, we haven't really been hijacked by neo-cons, they're the ultimate scapegoat, manipulated by the same (anti-semitic) traditonal power structure."

by **hanshan** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:09 pm

proldic - some partials to : so I need to ask: do you really believe that Turner's firings decimated human intelligence gathering? Clinically? Further, should I be getting some sort of value judgement out of the way you phrased it? Here's the Turner data; thought this to be common knowledge, given the informed level of discussion on this board (my mistake) The phraseology was coincident; no value judgements implied. If you wish to apply your own, your choice. American culture nutures & rewards ignorance. That which isn't societally reinforced is inculcated through industrial foods & the predatory practices of Big Pharma w/ the witting & unwitting collusion of the AMA. Caveat emptor <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Turner was further frustrated by the system of Secrecy that kept vital intelligence hermetically contained in bureaucratic "compartments" within the CIA. Not only did he view such secrecy as irrational, he began to suspect that it cloaked a wide range of unethical activities. He became especially concerned with abuses in the espionage division, which he discovered was heavily overstaffed with case officers-some of whom, on the pretext of seeing agents abroad, were disbursing large sums in "expenses" to themselves, keeping mistresses, and doing business with international arms dealers. Aside from such petty corruption, Turner feared that these compartmentalized espionage operations could enmesh the entire CIA in a devastating scandal. The potential for such a "disgrace," as he puts it, was made manifest to him by a single traumatic case that occurred in the 1960's, one which he harks back to throughout his book, and which he uses to justify eliminating the essential core of the CIA's espionage service. In any case, Turner offered his poll-taking idea only as a sop. His real design for the CIA involved effectively abolishing espionage, except as an ad hoc supplement in certain prescribed circumstances, and replacing it with "technical collection," which is information gathered by electronic and image interceptors in satellites, ships in international waters, and other remotely-based platforms. This is a fully understandable preference: espionage, done by human agents who are vulnerable to arrest, is inherently dirty, unethical, unreliable, and potentially explosive; technical collection, performed by machines, is clean, legal, reliable, and invulnerable to scandal. Turner's thesis, which he argues lucidly, is that in recent years "the growth in technological methods of information-gathering," such as satellites and computers, has produced revolutionary gains for American intelligence which render traditional espionage all but unnecessary-except as a backstop for technical collection. Whereas technical collection is based on the leakage from electronic transmissions and physical phenomena, espionage is predicated on human leakage: it seeks to compromise individuals with access to secrets. If successful, it not only forces the individuals illicitly to divulge secrets, but it keeps the enemy from knowing. that his secret has been compromised. In doing so, it often provides the key which enables technical collection to be productive against secret information. For example, the breaking of the German Enigma coding machine in World War 11, which is usually regarded as a triumph of technical collection, proceeded from an unsung espionage triumph. In 1931, French intelligence recruited as a spy a German clerk in the Reich Cipher Center named HansThilo Schmidt. He provided the instruction manual and daily key settings for the Enigma machine over a two-month period. If these cryptography secrets had not been obtained, the German military codes generated by Enigma-though intercepted by the Allies- might never have been deciphered. Espionage, since it is based on human vulnerability, can penetrate even the most heavily guarded repositories of national secrets. Soviet intelligence demonstrated this in the 1950's when -it recruited no fewer than five different American sources in the ultra-secret National Security Agency (NSA), the unit that supplies the codes and ciphers used by the American government. One of these KGB spies, Jack E. Dunlap, the chauffeur for the NSA's Chief of Staff, organized a number of staff officers into a larceny scheme, which allowed him access to the highest level cryptography, the "keys to the kingdom," as one military investigator put it. He delivered this material to his Soviet case officer in the Chief of Staff's limousine (the only car which could leave headquarters without being searched). This human spying made it possible for the Soviet Union to decipher the American data that had been gathered by its technical collection, and also to ascertain many of the targets of American technical collection. In each of these cases, espionage provided secrets that could not be garnered by even the most powerful machines of technical collection. But the distinction between these two modes of intelligence gathering-espionage is unexpected theft from within the enemy's inner sanctum, technical collection is expected interception from outside-was not fully appreciated by Admiral Turner. He was determined to make the espionage branch a part of his technological "team"-al though acknowledging that "it is never easy redirecting the thrust of an established, proud, and successful organization." By the time he left in 1981, he had not only drastically reduced the size and mission of the espionage branch -reassigning its case officers to such activities as poll-taking in friendly nations and servicing the scientific apparatus-but had radically revised the underlying assumptions on which intelligence was evaluated. Sifting this disinformation, which often turned out to be an impossible task, required fitting it into the entire mosaic of reports from the Soviet Union and its allies over an extended period of time. The task also implied some conspiratorial theory of how the KGB operated. Turner rejected this sort of inductive analysis, which he associated with the past "paranoia of the CIA's counterintelligence staff." Instead, Turner preferred to rely on more scientific methods, such as the testing of volunteer Soviet agents by polygraph machines and CIA psychologists. He even provided multimillion dollar allocations from the intelligence budget for research on extra-sensory perception (ESP). All this allowed him to redefine disinformation, as he does in his book, as a threat to the public media rather than as one to the CIA. After discounting much of Soviet disinformation as chimerical, he asserts: "Any disinformation campaign must pass through our own media. Because those media are inherently probing and skeptical, and because there are so many sources of media information in our society, we have built-in defenses." By abnegating the CIA's responsibility for defending against disinformation, Turner automatically downgraded the role of counterintelligence. If misleading messages could be ferreted out through scientific technology by case officers, there was no need for a centralized staff to review the intelligence in a synoptic context-or to supply any sort of "institutional memory." The counterintelligence staff, already purged of most of its long-time staff officers by Turner's predecessor, William Colby, now lost its conceptual raison d' etre. What remained of the counterintelligence function was relegated to police work. According to Turner's redefinition: "The job of counterintelligence is to find those Americans who do become agents of a foreign power." This greatly shrinks the bailiwick of counterintelligence, especially since the FBI, not the CIA, has jurisdiction in America for spy-catching (and the five spies he cites in his chapter on "Counterintelligence" were actually FBI cases).<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/archived/whokilled.htm" target="top">www.edwardjayepstein.com/archived/whokilled.htm</a> Clinically is amusing on many levels but was not within the scope of my original comment. That it happened to mimic something you heard James Baker say that happened to be was catalytic for you & resulted in your extended internal riff on the dispostion of Bob Marley's body (among other images) can be attributed to the serendipitous interphasing of unknown funk. If you were burned in your association w/ Ruppert, as you seem to be alluding to, it comes as no surprise to me. If you gained a greater degree of self-awareness & illumination then it wasn't wasted effort/involvement. Ruppert: <a href="http://www.questionsquestions.net/blog/041019b.html" target="top">www.questionsquestions.net/blog/041019b.html</a> The Great 9/11 Bun & Thigh Roller Deception "A victim of circumstance and “dot com crooks” <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Here we do not believe Zwicker is referencing the friendly folks at Pinnacle Quest, a vehicle for international fraudsters endorsed by Michael C. Ruppert on his website. He also provides them a vigorous defense; perhaps he feels cheating widows and orphans reduces population pressure and so is ultimately all to the good. Ruppert said, “PQI has presented some remarkable information that is totally suppressed in the US. That includes successful treatments for cancer and for many other serious diseases…” Here we note that self-described “Detective-Journalist” Ruppert has apparently slipped in “Clinician” too, when no one was looking. We pictured Andy Griffith in the con man classic Elmer Gantry. Some sample quotes about Ruppert’s fraudster friends: “ Anderson was extradited to the United States a few days ago (December 4, 2002), his brother (Wayne Anderson) was recently sentenced to serve much of the rest of his life in a federal prison, most of his key people have been incarcerated, and his offshore empire has crumbled." “On March 31, 2002, Global officially went out of business, replaced by Pinnacle Quest, International (PQI). At the official introductory gathering at the Hyatt Hotel in Bellevue... " "A lawsuit has already been filed against Pinnacle Quest in Arizona.” "On April 22, 2002, Squaw Valley California residents Terri Yvonne Lewis (42), and Steven Lyle Anderson (37), each pled guilty in US District Court/Fresno to charges related to conspiracy and obstruction of justice. The defendants are children of Wayne Anderson and they were charged with shredding documents and erasing computer files in an effort to thwart a federal grand jury investigation.” “The reality is that Global, much like Investors International, holds seminars in exotic places where the true believers rally round and sing the system’s praises to new initiates while (more or less) independent hucksters promote their particular schemes to the attendees.” “North Dakota issued a cease and desist order to keep the company from doing business there.” “On top of the $1,200 audiotape package, Global members are invited to attend seminars in places like Cancun, Mexico and the Bahamas where independent entrepreneurs pay IGP to make their pitch. The cost of attendance: $6,250. For more than 12 hours a day, the attendees sit through one sales pitch after another for real estate prospects, tax avoidance schemes and high-growth investment opportunities.<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.madcowprod.com/MC6812004.html" target="top">www.madcowprod.com/MC6812004.html</a> This is instructive: Blowback The Costs and Consequences of American Empire by Chalmers Johnson Henry Holt, 2000 <a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blowback_CJohnson/Blowback_CJohnson" target="top">www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blowback_CJohnson/Blowback_CJohnson</a> At best it can be foolhearty to second guess the affects of clinical depression. From circumstantial reports it sounds as if that's what Webb was suffering from. Anything at all could act as a trigger for suicide. While there remain some anomalous peculiarities about his death speculating on them seems somewhat pointless. Styron, William Darkness Visible: A Memoir of Madness <a href="http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/lit-med/lit-med-db/webdocs/webdescrips/styron432-des-.html" target="top">endeavor.med.nyu.edu/lit-med/lit-med-db/webdocs/webdescrips/styron432-des-.html</a> Iris Chang a suicide? Don't believe it. Yakuza involvement? A convenient place to look. ....

Hoekstra: 'There will be another attack' - Deutch to blame

Man Who Says He Predicted Sept. 11 Attacks Arrested

Re: Man Who Says He Predicted Sept. 11 Attacks Arrested

Iris

Iris Chang

Re: Iris Chang

Re: Iris Chang

Doctor as pusher

9/11: Hurricane Katrina

Iris Chang

Israelirealities

US spying on Israel

Re: Ken Adachi

and to your question...:-)

Thanks for your input IR

re: blowback

Who is online