I’m looking for honest input to get an idea of where people are on some serious issues. These affect nearly all decisions that will help form our future. If you can, take a few minutes and answer any or all with as little or as much information you care to contribute.
GOP Scandal Tied To Iran-Contra Drug Trafficking
- Has the Intelligence Agency(ies) been responsible for the creation and existence of al Qaeda and other groups?
- Has IA been responsible for covert funding of operations through illegal means, such as drugs, gambling or other nonrecordable activities?
- Has IA shifted their financing into high tech software and internet industries? Is this part of the syndicate financing the Abramoff scandal?
- Did IA and justice departments have the 9/11 suspects either under surveillance or working as operatives or both?
- Are the majority of claimed WOT arrests and convictions based on false evidence and actually keeping relatively innocent people wrongly jailed?
- Is the WOT actually a way to cover up or silence witnesses from covert operations and activities in the past?
- In all of the above, has it been a history of other countries’ IA working in partnership with US on these matters?
- Would it do more harm than good to investigate all of this?
- Is Miles O’Brien from CNN a Mockingbird and used to explain away the airline attacks in the past as well as covering the WOT/bin Laden stories?
- Did you know it’s recently been put into law as a prosecutable offense to ‘annoy under an anonymous name’ on the internet?
# Has the Intelligence Agency(ies) been responsible for the creation and existence of al Qaeda and other groups? Partially, I would guess, and perhaps indirectly, through the funding of the Afghani resistance in the Soviet war.
# Has IA been responsible for covert funding of operations through illegal means, such as drugs, gambling or other nonrecordable activities? No knowledge of that, other than the one story about reporter in CA who did the Contra/Crack stories and then committed (suicide?).
# Has IA shifted their financing into high tech software and internet industries? Is this part of the syndicate financing the Abramoff scandal? Know knowledge of this.
# Did IA and justice departments have the 9/11 suspects either under surveillance or working as operatives or both? I believe I’ve heard that some suspects had been surveilled. Haven’t heard anyone was an operative.
# Are the majority of claimed WOT arrests and convictions based on false evidence and actually keeping relatively innocent people wrongly jailed? I don’t have good data to cite, but my sense is in reading papers daily, that almost all WOT arrests/cases/trials have ended in acquittal and release of suspects, leading me personally to believe the larger “War on Terror” is completely crap.
# Is the WOT actually a way to cover up or silence witnesses from covert operations and activities in the past? Haven’t even heard this proposed by anyone. You are the first Rumi.
# In all of the above, has it been a history of other countries’ IA working in partnership with US on these matters? I just suspect that most foreign intelligence agencies work together. Absolutely no knowledge of this.
# Would it do more harm than good to investigate all of this? Not in my view. What is wrong with a little investigation.
# Is Miles O’Brien from CNN a Mockingbird and used to explain away the airline attacks in the past as well as covering the WOT/bin Laden stories? I couldn’t pick Miles O’Brien out of a line-up, but the more I watch the MSM the less I trust it as an objective source. The actual active use as part of “conspiracy” surrounding “War on Terror?” I’ve got zero knowledge of that.
# Did you know it’s recently been put into law as a prosecutable offense to ‘annoy under an anonymous name’ on the internet? I’ve tried to read the actual statute, with little success. Fucking things are so convoluted a second-rate lawyer can’t find the operative language. So all knowledge is second hand, and I have the sneaking suspicion that this story has been blown out of proportion a bit in blogland. I could be wrong here. But my state stalking law has always used the word “annoy” and can apply to contacts via the Internet. I’ve actually defended a case on 1st amendment grounds and one, in the days before message boards were called blogs. So I guess I still have enough faith in the system to believe that the Constitution will prevail over blatant bullshit designed to shut down you political speech. That might be the one freedom that you have when this country is completely dotted by brown-shirts, because, in my humble opinion, the freedom of speech meshed with the tyranny of state-corporate-controlled mass media is more of a method of controlling the masses (by making them believe they are free) than it is a means of actually conducting a democracy. I could be wrong about all of this. It is just a pet theory.
Hope this was helpful. Fun survey.
Thank you. I respect your opinions and appreciate your participation.
For those unfamailiar with the change in law and an attempt to understand it, here’s a link.
Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called “Preventing Cyberstalking.” It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet “without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy.”
http://news.com.com/2010-1028_3-6022491.html
5 years ago I would not have given it as much thought. After so many situations of this administration setting up and then acting sneakily to gain control of people it’s difficult to not consider it. I don’t think it’s for political free speech as much as it is protection from discovery and prosecution.
I have no specific knowledge of any possible connection I’ve mentioned above. All I have to go by is an intuition of what makes sense. There is a credible argument that can be made that all of those possibilities might be true.
What is your recollection of the associations between Bush41 and Don Aronow?
Don Aronow — Doesn’t ring a bell in my memory.
He receives only a brief mention here but do you have any thoughts on this excerpt in general?
No. I don’t have enough context to comment much. I remember writing my first political letter when the Hart “Monkey Business” thing happened. I was in the Army and sent a letter to the editor of the Tacoma paper. Can’t recall its name. But they published the worst example of “BostonJoe” writing you will ever see.
But look at what you’ve accomplished since that first letter.
As I dig into any of the details of the recent political conflicts it always seems to circle back to the Bush41-Reagan-Contra era and in turn recycles back again in sets of 20 years.
# …responsible for the creation and existence of al Qaeda and other groups? Absolutely we have done this historically from the deals with the French and Native Americans during the colonial period forward – that ultimately backfired on us.
# …responsible for covert funding of operations through illegal means, such as drugs, gambling or other nonrecordable activities? See first answer yep no question about it.
# Has IA shifted their financing into high tech software and internet industries? They’ve always played in the high tech world…
#….Is this part of the syndicate financing the Abramoff scandal? Not sure – I think they are separate issues.
#…Did IA and justice departments have the 9/11 suspects either under surveillance or working as operatives or both? Under surveillance probably – working as operatives – I’d have to put on my conspiracy theory hat for that but possible if not probable.
# Are the majority of claimed WOT arrests and convictions based on false evidence and actually keeping relatively innocent people wrongly jailed?
Presumption of evidence that is a strong leap – I’m not sure they arrested based on evidence other than speculation….tin foil is getting tight here!
# Is the WOT actually a way to cover up or silence witnesses from covert operations and activities in the past? That would be my presumption need to loosen my tin foil hat a little….
# In all of the above, has it been a history of other countries’ IA working in partnership with US on these matters? Some yes, some no, not all to the degree the US has….
# Would it do more harm than good to investigate all of this? Truth is not dangerous except to oppressors
# Is Miles O’Brien from CNN a Mockingbird and used to explain away the airline attacks in the past as well as covering the WOT/bin Laden stories? Don’t follow CNN so I have no opinion on this.
# Did you know it’s recently been put into law as a prosecutable offense to ‘annoy under an anonymous name’ on the internet? Yes but the question is how that would be interpreted under existing judicial review – different places different interpretations as to ‘annoy’. My wind chimes might ‘annoy’ the neighbors but is it prosecutable if they don’t know my name?
Interesting series of questions….
Thanks for all of the time, thought and energy that went into your reply.
I don’t mind being a tin-foiler but I don’t think it always applies. I think most folks consider that to be a theory of deliberate premeditation from a single concept, i.e the neoconservative pNAC for global supremacy. What I offer as a theory is the intricacies of deceptive methods to achieve a greater goal and the iclusion of others along the way.
As an example, look at the Iran-Contra scandal. In simplest terms, it was an operation of the government’s intelligence agencies acting with implied consent to execute an illegal plan of political subversion. Some still consider them heroes but others still call it all some conspiracy theory to slam the government. Maybe the initial goal of countering a potential global political threat was sincere but as it snowballed into a network of organized criminal activity it became impossible to control. It could be that some good people got caught up in covering for what they thought was best for the country. Others were forced to cover along or be forced out of their career and so it multiplied.
The truth only has to be told once while a lie requires new truths to be falsely manufactured.