Hugh wrote:
I've been meaning to start a thread on Hartmann who has some remarkable CIA-type attributes in his biography. His 'the mafia-done-it' book only fuels my interest in his varied career from sheparding special needs children to neurolinguistic programming and living around the world.
He knows too much to ignore the cryptocracy AND exonerate them of JFK's murder, too.
Absolutely. I couldn't agree more. Hartmann's living around the world, especially (the list of places he's lived I've seen include Germany during the 1980s, Russia at the tail-end of the Cold War, Colombia, as well as multivarious other side trips into very non-tourist locations such as Libya, Morocco, etc.) is suspect.
I also wonder (maybe you know something, Hugh, about this?) about the background of Webster Tarpley. Tarpley's got 99% of the accurate interpretations of 9/11 clues woven into a fairly believable narrative. Yet on his RBN (now-defunct; a bizarre COINTELPRO-like story unto itself) Internet radio show, he dropped in a few intermittent whoppers (such as doubting openly that the U.S. landed on the moon -- not what you'd expect from someone who's not very fringe on his very plausible and intelligent 9/11 analysis).
Not to mention: Tarpley regularly broadcast his Internet radio show from such far-flung and wide-world locations as Rome, Paris, and London, and he seemed to be based in Washington, D.C., from whence the majority of his broadcasts originated.
My question about Tarpley is: where does the money come from for all that travel and all that free-time? What is his primary income source? Has he ever indicated a story (or cover-story) for himself?
In the event that Tarpley is a disinfo spook, what does it tell us that some intelligence agency or paramilitary/paraintelligence agency sees a need to provide a Tarpley? For whom is his 99% brilliant analysis and 1% disinformation?
Doesn't the existence of Tarpley-as-disinfo-spook (if he is) tell us (at least) that: (a) somebody's going to great lengths to create firewalls, disinfo ops for the most serious of amateur researchers, and discredit-op timebombs?; (and what type of lengths are those lengths?) (b) somebody somewhere takes
very seriously the potential for 99% of Tarpley's (accurate-portion) narrative to damage the fascist coup; (c) somebody somewhere is leaving no stone unturned/nothing to chance in The Long Coup; (d) somebody somewhere is
very, very serious about the fascist transformation.
I don't want to believe it about Tarpley, but I can't ignore what I see as red flags (and wouldn't an operation smart enough to wage those ultra-driven lengths also be smart enough to avoid the red flags?)...
Nevertheless, Tarpley's also a honeypot for people like me who suspend skepticism when I see the red flags, in an effort to sort out the golden honey from the disinfo (a dangerous enterprise to get seduced into).
I only trust Paul Thompson 100% of the entire 9/11 "Truth" field, and Peter Dale Scott is 99.7% too.
As for Air America, it gives me a headache. It's like watching Jamie Lee Curtis refusing to kill The Boogeyman in John Carpenter's "Halloween." No matter how many times she gets lucky and escapes death, she always drops the knife and lets The Boogeyman resurrect.
Air America is unlistenable.