View to a Kill 3

(This is becoming a veritable franchise!)

Obama promised us a picture of the bullet riddled head of Osama bin Landen.  Did he think such a picture would be proof of the death of bin Laden?  Hard to say.  Obama rescinded the offer almost immediately after he made it.  Obama may be the smartest guy in the White House since Richard Nixxon.

However, for the rest of us (of ordinary endowments) living in the age of Photoshop, a picture is no proof of anything.  The same, of course, goes for sound recordings, film, video, and any other medium of communication.  As far as testimonials go, they’ve been known to be completely worthless ever since people became aware of how the repetition of a story by different story tellers becomes ever more altered on each telling.

If Obama threw Osama into the sea, then the least ‘fakeable’ artifact, that could have been used to prove that the SEAL mission took place in the (ever changing) way the official narrative describes, has been lost. 

That being the case:  nobody’s description of events is any more credible than anybody else’s!  (Don’t ask me to trust you, I don’t even know you.)

Further, explanations coming from the military and the intelligence communities are the LEAST credible as these communities are trained, sworn, and very well paid to cover up the ‘reality’ of all sorts of events and situations and things.  Their very raison d’être rules out their ever giving a complete and truthful account of any efforts they undertake.  Then, there’s the matter of ‘psychological warfare’ or ‘psyops’ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_warfare).  And last, but not least, information in the intel communities is ‘compartmented’ (on a ‘need to know’ basis) so that nobody but a handful of ‘people’ at the tops of the various agencies and contracting corporations know ‘the whole story’ (so that they may be able to manipulate—for a time—our general understanding history).  I almost wrote, “our common understanding of history”, until I realized (a second later) that the mil-intel-corporate community’s understanding of history is replete with testimonials of their efforts and actions (including ‘counter-intelligence’ and 'psyops') while the history known to those outside of that community has those testimonials redacted!

So, here we all are.  All of us, freed from the truth by the secrecy and lies of our, so called, leaders! 

(Oh, by the way, never let anyone in the mil-intel-police-corporate community put you ‘on the line’ to ‘tell the truth’.  What could that even mean in their world where they manufacture ‘the truth’ as part of their secret business!  Compelling us to ‘tell the truth’ is just a form of intimidation or ‘sick kicks’!  Just remember:  whatever you think ‘the truth’ is, it is probably something else and the mil-intel-police-corporate community can make anything they want out of what you think!  The police and the courts do it to ‘inner city youth’ on a routine basis with barely a whimper from the press or ‘the general public’-- http://www.ehow.com/info_8400307_reid-american-criminal-investigation-process.html.)

So, let me proffer a conjecture.

I find it absolutely non-credible that the CIA, NSA, and Mil Intel would go to all the trouble and effort they assert they put into finding Osama (including moving in next door) just to kill Osama! 

Could the president and the mil-intel ‘leadership’ be so STUPID as to ORDER a kill for the one guy who could:   (a) explain what Al-Qaeda is currently ‘cooking up’, (b) describe Al-Qaeda’s whole communications network, (c) describe all of the ‘up and coming’ talent that’s been recruited over that last few years, (d) explain how he and his associates pulled off 911, and LAST BUT NOT LEAST:  (e) explain the relationship between Al-Qaeda and Pakistan’s ISI (especially since we seem to be itching to go to war with Pakistan over this question)?

Now, let’s say the president and the mil-intel ‘leadership’ weren’t so stupid and ordered the CIA/SEAL team to capture Osama.  Then the question becomes:  was Team 6 (or whoever) so incompetent that they FUBAR’d the mission and killed Osama (and the wife he threw at them)?  And, if the CIA/SEAL team FUBAR’d the mission, wouldn’t they cover it up?  And even if they didn’t, wouldn’t the so called, leaders, cover it up?

So, PrezO, which is it?  You or Team whoever?  Or both?  Is it stupidity or just incompetence requiring a cover up?

Or…are you lying??? 

It would be contradictory to ask you to ‘tell the truth’, given what I wrote above.  So, I’ll just leave things at this question.

However, guess what:

I DON’T BELIEVE ANYONE FUBAR’d! 

Osama simply got tired of being sidelined and imprisoned by his associates, who had turned against him, and rejected his suggestions for future operations.  He used his couriers to make an arrangement with the CIA to ‘spring’ him and cover up the fact.  His family will probably get some of that $25M bounty.  (We’ll have to keep an eye on how well they live in the future.)

While the SEALS’ mouths are sealed and the CIA is ‘completely innocent always’ and NSA has ‘no such awareness’, Obama knows (something), and it’s eating at his ‘liberal soul, brother’ to tell the truth!  (Wait a minute…that again!  Why does this keep coming up??)  On second thought, given PrezO’s success record at keeping his campaign promises…maybe not so much.

Whatever…the easiest conjecture is that this lie will eat at the heart of the next Obama administration, just as the Kennedy assassination did Johnson’s and Watergate did Nixon’s.  And, roughly around the same time that historians find out that Oswald didn’t kill Kennedy (by himself, at least), they’ll find that Osama bin Laden died an older man under WITSEC somewhere in the Nevada desert and got a proper burial for his part in bringing down Al-Qaeda.

View To A Kill 2

Oh, here we go (again)!  

< http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/54162.html > 

So now we’re told an unarmed bin Laden was killed while ‘resist’n’.  I’ve heard that one before. (When did Osama become a black man?)  Oh, well.  Let’s see, Carney also said there’re no pictures of the burial at sea we can see.  They’ve given us a lot of information in haste.  (Which means the story will change again…and again…and again…). 

A reporter asked how bin Laden resisted? 

I’d sure like to have seen an unarmed old man with kidney problems 

<http://www.medcitynews.com/2011/05/bin-laden-didnt-have-kidney-disease-morning-read/>

resisting a CIA/SEAL team, 

hand to hand, so effectively that they got scared and had to blow him away!  Osama must have really kicked some butt!

Quite obviously, they’d have kept him around to find out who in the ISI was ‘putting him up’ so ‘large’.  Gentle reader, this story is 100% U.S. BS (just like the beef).  Speaking of which:  ‘Where’s the beef?’

Where’s my head????????? 

Prez O promised me a head!!!!!!!!  I want my head!!  I don’t care how grizzly it is (I’ve gotten use to the grizzly moma).  Oh, I know what happened to that head!  

Who does O think he is, Sam Peckinpah?

Bring me my damn head!   Bring me the head of Alfredo bin Laden! 

Top ten (pretty good) reasons for President Obama to win The Nobel Peace Prize:

10. Searching for a way to slow nuclear proliferation in Asia.

9. Working with the rest of the world to address Global Warming.

8. Deploying a fairly first rate Secretary of State.

7. Trying to restart the failed Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

6. Starting the stand down in Iraq. (Better late than never.)

5. Clamping down, a teeny-weenie, on the unconstitutional wire-tapping of the American public of the Bush administration.

4. Shutting down the CIA's international rendition-torture-prison program.

3. Attempting to close Guantanamo Bay which is stain upon the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

2. Upholding the sanctions against torture in our various codes of conduct.

1. Showing unbelievable forbearance and tolerance and adherence to the American principles of freedom of speech and assembly in not lashing out at the American right wing KKK and smashing them into dust with all the powers an American president can bring to bear against treason in a time of war!


Bravo, Mr. President!

Panetta and the CIA

Either Leon Panetta doesn't know what he is doing or he doesn't know what he's talking about
or he doesn't write these essays.

he writes in "Congress and the CIA: Time to Move On" By Leon Panetta
Sunday, August 2, 2009:

"Last month, at a meeting overseas of intelligence service chiefs, one of my counterparts from a major Western ally pulled me aside. Why, he asked, is Washington so consumed with what the CIA did in the past, when the most pressing national security concerns are in the present? It was a very good question."

actually, it's not a good question at all. it's a question that only a simpleton would ask. why?

because, it's obvious that what the cia has done in the past will affect the world in the future.

consider the iranian revolution that kicked out the cia cronny sha palavi and installed the ayatola Khomeini!

consider the cia's backing of the authoritarian take over of argentina and the cia's assissination of the elected socialist president salvador allende.

consider the cia's role in vietnam and cambodia that lead right up to the victory of north vietnam over the croony stooge governments of the south and the take over of the Khmer Rouge of cambodia and the ensuing slaughter.

consider all of the bloody dictators the cia installed all over africa in the war against communism in the 1960s. that's left nothing but basket-case countries ripe for al-Qaeda.

consider the cia's arming of the al-Qaeda in the war against the commies in afghanistan.
well...you know what that led to!

Panetta writes:

"In its earliest days, the Obama administration made policy changes in intelligence that ended some controversial practices. The CIA no longer operates black sites and no longer employs "enhanced" interrogation techniques."

Oh yeah? Prove it! Panetta can't prove anything. No one working in the intel community can prove anything about what they do because its all classified. This is a very stupid situation. All anyone who leads this community can do is to ask the public to 'trust' them. And why should we? Do they trust us? Do they trust you? (Try getting a job in one of the agencies!)

Panetta writes:

"I recognize that there will always be tension in oversight relationships, but there are also shared
responsibilities. Those include protecting the classified information that shapes our conversations. Together, the CIA and Congress must find a balance between appropriate oversight and a recognition that the security of the United States depends on a CIA that is totally focused on the job of defending America."

How about the cia finding greater transperancy? This idea that "the security of the United States depends on a CIA" is no more than a matter of conjecture! Here I would definitely ask for proof!

Panetta writes:

"The time has come for both Democrats and Republicans to take a deep breath and recognize the reality of what happened after Sept. 11, 2001."

Hey Panetta, that is the question!! What did happen after Sept. 11, 2001?

Panetta writes:

"The question is not the sincerity or the patriotism of those who were dealing with the aftermath of Sept. 11."

Oh yes it is!!!!! These intel types tried to (and probably have) put into place all of the technical apparatus of an authoritarian state. (Chinese, eat your hearts out!)

Panetta writes:

"The country was frightened, and political leaders were trying to respond as best they could. Judgments were made. Some of them were wrong."

Panetta gets one right!

Panetta writes:

"But that should not taint those public servants who did their duty pursuant to the legal guidance provided."

Wait, so is Panetta saying that because these people did their jobs wrong and made bad judgments, they shouldn't be tainted? If not for doing their jobs wrong and making bad judgments, when should they be tainted? For doing their jobs correctly? Is there a CIA award
for doing your job wrong and making bad judgments?

Dear reader, try doing your job wrong and making bad judgments! See what happens to you!

Panetta writes:

"The last election made clear that the public wanted to move in a new direction."

Yes, that's true, but the new direction was not suppose to be the same old 'sweep it under
the rug' of the bush administration.

Panetta writes:

"Intelligence can be a valuable weapon..."

Wait, intelligence can also be used to avoid harm and harming, if you know what you're doing. When was intel 'weaponized'?

"...but it is not one we should use on each other."

tell that to ashcroft.

when an intelligence group is allowed to run counter-intelligence operations and dis-information operations, it's products are going to go everywhere and eventually come back to the home population. These sorts of operations are very hard to 'contain'. start lying and it comes right back to munch your sitter.

Panetta writes:

"As the president has said, this is not a time for retribution. Debates over who knew what
when -- or what happened seven years ago -- miss a larger, more important point: We are a nation at war in a dangerous world..."

Yes, but who are we really at war with? Who made it so dangerous? al-Qaeda or the american right-wing? who's done more damage? who's killed more people? who's running the 'tea bagging parties' and inciting treason and revolt? al-Qaeda or the american right-wing?

Panetta writes:

"Unlike the effort I canceled in June, our present tools are effective, we use them aggressively to go after our enemies, and Congress has been briefed on them."

Prove it! Let's us see how the CIA, NSA, and NRO really work. how about some tours?

Panetta writes:

"I also know that we can learn lessons from the past without getting stuck there. That is what the American people expect. The CIA is ready to do its part."

Panetta is dead wrong here. You never get stuck in the past because an understanding of the past changes the present and changing the present changes what the future would have been without the understanding of the past!

As for what the "American people expect", we really don't expect much out of the CIA. They seem to miss the mark every time. (If the don't, then show us!)

Why is it our public leaders can't think better than high schoolers? my guess is that the 'group think' that goes on in these organizations destroys a person's capabilities to reason on their own, unless that person is extraordinary (which Panetta really isn't). Panetta is just an ordinary guy. Not a bad guy. Not particularly morally courageous. But, this is true of all of the people in the current administration that i'm familiar with.