‘9/11 Truth’ Spun Up in Pentagon Shooting

Posted on

Here we go again …

The questions of 9/11 have gotten a little too hot here lately so we need an event to demonize all those ‘truthers’ who want answers.

John Patrick Bedell

It didn’t take long …..

Pentagon shooter driven by hatred, conspiracy theories

A bitter Californian consumed by hatred towards the U.S. government and conspiracy theories about the 9/11 terrorism attacks opened fire on Pentagon police Thursday night, wounding two before officers cut him down in a fusillade of gunfire.

John Patrick Bedell hated the government and the American military and was convinced the government, not terrorists, destroyed the World Trade Center twin towers in New York and faked the attack on the Pentagon in Washington.

Internet postings by Bedell show he was consumed with conspiracy theories about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in Washington and New York and believed the government killed a Marine {Col. James Sabow*} in California in 1991 to cover up its involvement in illegal actions. {more}

As Predicted, Pentagon Shooting Blamed On 9/11 Truth

Posted Anti-Government Rantings Before Attack

John Patrick Bedell Anti-Military, Anti-Government, Believed 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Pentagon Shooter: Anti-Bush Nut Case and 9/11 Truther

*Semper Fidelis- Col. Sabow

Killed to cover up the government’s drug-smuggling activities?

* The Strange Death of Col. Sabow

* New Revelations in Death of Col. Sabow


The Pentagon Shooter’s Manifesto: A Transcript

In this post I showed you how the Pentagon shooter is an anti-Bush 9/11 Truther. Here is the full transcript of his audio manifesto (transcript prepared by DRJ). Again, this is from December 2006, during the presidency of George W. Bush:

Hello, and thank you for listening.

Justice is a universal desire of conscious individuals. In modern society, critically important organizations work to ensure that justice is established and preserved. Those individuals who work to uphold justice deserve our thanks, our gratitude, and our support. My purpose in this message is to support those who work for justice by addressing matters that any individual within our existing institutions of justice would find difficult or impossible to address.

The most basic principle of economic justice is the protection of private property and the protection of the right to freely exchange that property. Modern governments, however, consistently and routinely violate the rights of property owners with the assumption – the incorrect assumption – that government can utilize property more efficiently than its lawful owners can.

As institutionalized theft by property violation becomes increasingly routine and accepted, it has far-reaching consequences for the character and morality of society as a whole. The injustice of that permeates society and creates disrespect for the law. On the part of ruling elites, the perception is created that society is to be exploited for the benefit of the rulers. Incentives are created to generate and promote ignorance throughout society to conceal the injustice of that. As the institutionalized violence of government is used to violate the rights of individuals to keep and trade their own property, the violation of economic justice inevitably results in the undermining of justice in every other part of society.

Although the establishment of justice and order is a key responsibility of the United States government, the sheer size of the United States economy and the enormous wealth that is devoted to government, makes the United States government a tempting prize for any organization or collection of bandits ruthless and clever enough to seize it. A criminal organization able to conduct its activities from within the center of power of the United States government would have powerful advantages over other criminal groups.

Such an organization, having seized control of the United States government, would derive enormous power from the taxes extracted from the wealthiest society in the history of the world. Such an organization would be able to manage present objections to its corruption with lavish promises of future benefits in a form of generalized bribery. Such an organization, which would necessarily have great financial sophistication, would be able to use the credit of the United States government to issue trillions of dollars of debt to fund its corrupt activities and neutralize objections to its illegitimacy and in so doing, burden the responsible citizens among its victims with crushing financial obligations.

Very importantly, this criminal group could use its control of the United States monetary system to print money to advance its own purposes of theft, control and enslavement. Such an organization would be able to protect its shipments of illicit drugs into the United States while using the power of law enforcement organization to imprison their would-be competitors, and would subsequently be able to distribute those illicit drugs and launder the enormous profits in the huge and minutely-regulated financial markets of the United States. This criminal organization would use its powers to convert military, intelligence and law enforcement bureaucracies into instruments for political control and the domination and subjection of society while discrediting, destroying and murdering honest individuals within those services that work to root out corruption and faithfully serve their fellow citizens.

This organization, like so many murderous governments throughout history, would see the sacrifice of thousands of its citizens in an event such as the September 11th attacks, as a small cost in order to perpetuate its barbaric control. This collection of gangsters would find it in their interests to foment conflict and initiate wars throughout the world in order to divert attention from their misconduct and criminality. The true nature of such a regime would find its clearest expression in Satanic violence currently ongoing in Iraq.

Perhaps worst of all, such an organization would usurp and destroy the historical leadership of the United States toward human freedom and would, while constantly and loudly preaching the glory of liberty, work to lead the world into a new dark age of slavery and terror.

This seizure of the United States government by an international criminal conspiracy is a long-established reality. The murder of the United States President in 1963, the associated murders and institutional subversion, and the manipulation of official inquiries and public opinion was effected by individuals within organizational structures that play a central role in the United States government up to the present day. The coup regime founded with the murder of President John Kennedy utilizes a number of mechanisms to perpetuate its criminal rule.

The most important of these mechanisms is government control of the economy. Government’s enormous tax revenues and even larger government spending give to the coup regime the means and motivation to sustain its rule. The constantly expanding regulation of business makes it possible for the coup regime to further impose its will on private economic activity and conditions the people under its rule to accept whatever totalitarian measures the regime deems necessary. The policies and actions of the coup regime are constantly masked by official deception, as well as the subversion of the free press through infiltration and secret manipulations.

On a deeper level, however, the deceit that the coup regime utilizes to justify its policies is intimately linked with the deceit that is inherent in policies that seize the property of individuals for the benefit of the politically powerful. The most subtle and dangerous of these policies, and therefore most similar rule of the coup regime itself, is the imposition of a paper monetary system throughout the United States. This far-reaching violation of property rights undermines the security of property in a way that works to the benefit of the politically powerful individuals that control the monetary system.

The political and military disasters such as the wars in Vietnam and Iraq that an illegitimate coup regime uses against the people who pay its bills are closely tied to the effects of inflationary paper monetary systems which are themselves intimately linked with financial and political disasters throughout history. The blatant violations of the constitution of limitations on the economic role of the government accomplished through many subtle usurpations over many decades are perhaps even more pernicious than, and are certainly a key motivation for, the violent seizure of the United States government.

In order to establish a firm and lasting basis for justice and sound government, the economic role of the government must be re-examined in every detail. It must be recognized that arguments for government control of the economy and government redistribution of economic resources are generally misguided … or even shameless lies to advance enslavement and conceal theft and murder. Furthermore, it must, once again, be recognized that the most successful means to ensure justice, secure domestic tranquility, and promote prosperity is to ensure the protection of private property.

Thank you for listening.

John Patrick Bedell: Following the Pentagon Shooter’s Trail On-Line

Bedell’s youtube video: Introduction to Information Currency 

Parents of Pentagon shooter warned authorities

Pentagon shooter had a history of mental illness

Pentagon Shooting Coincides With SCOTUS 2nd Amendment Case

will anyone notice?


Admiral Mullen at Fort Campbell: We’re losing and casualties will increase

Posted on

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has his wish with the surge in Afghanistan and traveled to Fort Campbell Monday to ‘encourage’ the 101st airborne before some of them die and some are maimed.

“We live in a time of change, and you are a group, by and large, headed to Afghanistan,” he said.

“For those of you who have been there before, when you go back it will be different,” he said. “Don’t just assume because you’ve had a tour there, it will be the same.”

“We are clearly not winning right now, which means we’re losing,” he said.

Not only is the U.S. losing the war, he said casualties will increase as more troops flood into the region.

“I am sure that we will sustain a level of casualties. I don’t want to be in any way unclear about that,” Mullen said.

Suicide, which has hit Fort Campbell harder than most installations this year, also is a “vexing issue,” Mullen said.

“What is clear now is the pressure of these wars and these deployments have ratcheted up the suicide rate, and we must figure out a way to make it go down,” he said.

Mullen said a lot of the responsibility to reduce the suicide rate will fall on the shoulders of young leaders, who can better identify fellow soldiers who might be experiencing depression or suicidal behavior.

“We all have an obligation to do that,” Mullen said. {more}

That obligation failed again …

CLARKSVILLE, Tenn. 12/8/09 — Police are now saying that two men found shot to death in a Clarksville apartment were a Fort Campbell soldier and his father and they are investigating the deaths as a murder-suicide.

Clarksville police found the bodies Sunday inside an apartment near the gates of the post on the Tennessee-Kentucky state line. According to a police statement, there were no signs of forced entry into the home.

The Leaf Chronicle reported that police have identified the victims as 22-year-old Emanuel Joseph Bluebird and his father, 51-year-old Norman Bluebird.

Kelly Tyler, a spokeswoman for Fort Campbell, said the younger Bluebird was a soldier stationed there.

The Pentagon cult of death will require many more ritualistic sacrifices.

Missile Defense – Keeping the War Machine Happy

Posted on

Who Benefits?

The contractors who always need ‘enemies’ to keep the taxpayer’s money flowing to them.

Russia, by selling missile defense systems to Iran.

Israel, who will want the U.S to supply them the same technology. Free of charge of course and maybe then even sell our technology to Poland…so they won’t feel left out.

Obama and Gates addressed the issue. I’ll summarize.

Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran…

Fact Sheet on U.S. Missile Defense System

No matter what the economic problems are in this country; joblessness, homelessness, poverty, hunger, there’s always plenty of ‘cost effective’ ways to keep the war machine moving along at full speed.

The insane costs of war and the ‘threat’ of war will kill us long before our ‘enemies’ will.

The ‘Toys’ of War

Posted on

Pentagon Talk…Is Mexico Next?

Posted on

https://i0.wp.com/www.annunciationhouse.org/bae/image001.jpg Downtown El Paso viewed from Cuidad Juarez
Ciudad Juarez of Chihuahua with an estimated population of 1,512,354. It stands on the Rio Grande (Río Bravo del Norte), across the border from El Paso, Texas. The two cities form a Metroplex metropolitan area of over 2,700,000 making it the largest international border community in which the first and third worlds meet in such a close proximity.

“The Pentagon is prepared to help the Mexican military employ the same tactics that US forces have applied in counterinsurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Bill Van Auken reports:

Obama and US commander discuss military intervention in Mexico

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen briefed President Barack Obama over the weekend on the so-called drug war in Mexico and the prospect of increased US military involvement in the conflict south of the border.

Mullen had just returned from a six-day tour of Latin America, which took him on his last and most important stop to Mexico City. There he held meetings with Mexico’s secretary of national defense and other top military officials and discussed proposals for rushing increased US aid to Mexico under the auspices of Plan Merida, a three-year, $1.4 billion package designed to provide equipment, training and other assistance to the Mexican armed forces.

In a telephone press conference conducted as he returned from Mexico, Mullen said that the Pentagon was prepared to help the Mexican military employ the same tactics that US forces have applied in counterinsurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The US military, he said, was “sharing a lot of lessons we have learned, how we’ve developed similar capabilities over the last three or four years in our counterinsurgency efforts as we have fought terrorist networks.” He added, “There are an awful lot of similarities.”

With US backing, Mexican President Felipe Calderon has increasingly militarized the country, deploying tens of thousands of troops in areas ranging from Matamoros and Reynosa in the east to Tijuana, Guerrero, Michoacán and Sinaloa in the west.

On the eve of Mullen’s visit, the Mexican military poured some 5,000 additional troops into Ciudad Juarez, across the border from El Paso, Texas, redoubling patrols by combat-equipped units and effectively sealing the city off with roadblocks. Some 2,500 troops had already been deployed in the city last spring.

He said that in his meetings with Mexican military officials he had discussed US aid focusing on “intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance,” or ISR in US military parlance.

He indicated that intelligence-sharing had already been implemented, but that “there are additional assets that could be brought to bear across the full ISR spectrum.”

In the first instance, this could mean the deployment of US manned surveillance aircraft as well as unmanned drones over Mexican territory. It could likewise suggest the deployment of Special Forces units or military “contractors.”

Mullen refused to answer when questioned whether unmanned drones had already been deployed over Ciudad Juarez and other Mexican cities.

read the rest at wsws.org


From Drug War Doublespeak

Through late February and early March, a blitzkrieg of declarations from U.S. government and military officials and pundits hit the media, claiming that Mexico was alternately at risk of being a failed state, on the verge of civil war, losing control of its territory, and posing a threat to U.S. national security.

In the same breath, we’re told that President Calderon with the aid of the U.S. government is winning the war on drugs, significantly weakening organized crime, and restoring order and legality.

None of these claims is true. Instead they are critical elements in waging the hypocritical drug war in Mexico.

Drug-war doublespeak pervades and defines the U.S.-Mexico relationship today. The discourse aims not to win the war on drugs, but to assure funding and public support for the military model of combating illegal drug trafficking, despite the losses and overwhelming evidence that current strategies are not working.

Sorting Reality from Hype

Mexico, and particularly border cities and other key points along the drug routes, has a serious problem. In these places, violence characterizes daily life. But Mexico is not a failed state. It is a tragic example of the results of failed policies-on both sides of the border. Both governments want to obscure this simple fact.

In the past, exaggerated risk assessments, amplified by the media and accompanied by dire warnings to the public, prepare the ground for military intervention. They usually pack hyperbole or outright lies, the most recent example being the “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq.

While military intervention in Mexico is not on the horizon, the recent hype has been accompanied by requests for military build-up on the border. Texas Governor Rick Perry jetted to Washington to ask for $135 million and 1,000 soldiers. Talk of sending more National Guard troops circulated, along with mentions of a border “surge.” The Texas state government announced a rapid-mobilization plan in case Mexico “collapsed,” replete with tanks and aircraft.

After outgoing Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff spoke of a contingency plan for the border, the media wondered aloud whether incoming head Janet Napolitano would be tough enough. She responded by calling the situation a “top priority.” Secretary of Defense Robert Gates called the Mexican drug war “a serious problem.” He raised a maelstrom of protest in Mexico with the announcement that the disappearance of Mexico’s anti-Pentagon biases had cleared the way for tighter cooperation. The U.S. Embassy was forced to issue a press release declaring that the United States had no intention of sending troops into Mexico.

Congress also leapt to respond to the rhetoric. Hearings have been called in both houses, including the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee under Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) who, according to news reports, will be looking for “potential implications for increased terrorist activity.” The committees will likely hear testimony primarily from persons who confirm the perceived threat in lurid and imprecise terms.

the entire article is at Drug War Doublespeak


The Drug War: An Old Mission for the Pentagon

by Jacob G. Hornberger

As the Berlin Wall came crashing down, the Pentagon was desperately in search of a mission. Given the demise of the Soviet Union, which had been the excuse for an ever-growing military-industrial complex for decades, the talk of a “peace dividend” was in the air. “What do we need all that military spending for if the communist threat is now nonexistent?” people were asking.

Wait a minute, cried the Pentagon. We can still find something to do. Just don’t cut our budget. Among the things they proposed was to help wage the “war on drugs.” Of course, that was long before U.S. foreign policy produced the terrorist blowback that resulted in the “war on terrorism” and the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Given the decreasing enthusiasm for the perpetual war on terrorism and the 6-year and 7-year occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan among the American people, the Pentagon is now returning to the old mission that it spoke about soon after the demise of the Berlin Wall. That would be the drug war.

As most everyone knows, the drug war has produced untold violence on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border. Thousands of people, including both government officials and private individuals, are being killed in an all-out war between the drug cartels and Mexican law-enforcement officials. The violence has gotten so bad that it is threatening to spill over into the United States.

Not surprisingly, the crisis is causing U.S. officials, especially those in the Pentagon, to call for U.S. intervention to fix the problem. “The drug cartels are a threat to national security,” U.S. officials are exclaiming. Just recently, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, flew to Mexico to discuss rushing military assistance to Mexico. “We have a sense of urgency about this, ” he said.

Meanwhile, Governor Rick Perry of Texas, a Republican, has jumped on the crisis bandwagon by calling on President Obama to send U.S. troops to the border, perhaps in the hope that they’ll wage the war on drugs in the way they’ve waged the war on terrorism — by busting people’s doors down without warrants, confiscating guns, incarcerating people without due process and trial, and maybe even torturing them into talking about pending drug deals.

Here is how the system works. U.S. government policy produces the conditions for a crisis, which then is used as the excuse for military intervention, which means ever-growing budgets for government officials.

For years, the U.S. government has been exhorting the Mexican government to ramp up the drug war, despite warnings from libertarians and others that doing so would only increase the level of violence.

Now that the Mexican government has complied with U.S. wishes, producing the predictable results, the U.S. government, especially the Pentagon, is now responding in the predictable way — by calling for military intervention, which means ever-increasing budgets for you-know-who.

What’s the 35-year-old drug war really all about? It’s about money and power. Let’s face it: These people are not stupid enough to believe that doing the same thing they’ve done for 35 years is going to produce a different result. The fact is that there are lots of people making big money from the drug war. And no, it’s not just the drug dealers and corrupt Mexican government officials. It’s also corrupt federal, state, and local officials on the U.S. side of the border.

First and foremost are the bribes, especially to law-enforcement people along the border who are paid big money to look the other way. But there is also the “legitimate” money that people make from the drug war — the nice salaries paid to judges, prosecutors, sheriffs, marshals, clerks, and staffs. And, of course, let’s not forget the budgets for the military and the military-industrial complex.

Oh, I forget to mention the other big money that is being made from the drug war — the asset-forfeiture crowd. Those are the public officials whose budgets have soared from the money they have confiscated and stolen from countless people, in the name of the war on drugs. Just ask African-Americans who have had the misfortune of traveling through Tenaha, Texas. They’ve had thousands of dollars taken from them by the cops, without any charges ever being filed against them. What better example of highway robbery than that?

Don’t count on public officials to willingly bring an end to the war on drugs. Like those drug cartels they’re fighting, they’re benefitting too much from it, in terms of bribes, salaries, budgets, and power. The drug-war idiocy will come to an end only when the American people finally declare that enough is enough and demand that the drug war be ended, immediately.

Source: The Future of Freedom Foundation


Let’s not forget that the central banks have a vested interest in the drug trade.

UN Crime Office Says Illegal Drug Money Floated Bank Stocks

The United Nations’ crime and drug watchdog has indications that money made in illicit drug trade has been used to keep banks afloat in the global financial crisis.

Vienna-based UNODC Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa said in an interview released by Austrian weekly Profil that drug money often became the only available capital when the crisis spiralled out of control last year.

“In many instances, drug money is currently the only liquid investment capital,” Costa was quoted as saying by Profil. “In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system’s main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor.” source


And of course our own CIA is involved in drug trafficking and has been for a very long time.
They can’t let the competition get out of hand.

The CIA’s Drug-Trafficking Activities


While allowing some to continue and control the drug trade, the prison system benefits from the low-level busts and imprisonment of ‘patsies.’ A racket of immense proportions.

From Ziofascism: The Prison Lobby


There’s possibly one way to stop all of this madness.
Legalize drugs without taxing them.

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition shows some sanity.



After nearly four decades of fueling the U.S. policy of a war on drugs with over a trillion tax dollars and 37 million arrests for nonviolent drug offenses, our confined population has quadrupled making building prisons the fastest growing industry in the United States. More than 2.2 million of our citizens are currently incarcerated and every year we arrest an additional 1.9 million more guaranteeing those prisons will be bursting at their seams. Every year we choose to continue this war will cost U.S. taxpayers another 69 billion dollars. Despite all the lives we have destroyed and all the money so ill spent, today illicit drugs are cheaper, more potent, and far easier to get than they were 35 years ago at the beginning of the war on drugs. Meanwhile, people continue dying in our streets while drug barons and terrorists continue to grow richer than ever before. We would suggest that this scenario must be the very definition of a failed public policy. This madness must cease!

The stated goals of current U.S.drug policy — reducing crime, drug addiction, and juvenile drug use — have not been achieved, even after nearly four decades of a policy of “war on drugs”. This policy, fueled by over a trillion of our tax dollars has had little or no effect on the levels of drug addiction among our fellow citizens, but has instead resulted in a tremendous increase in crime and in the numbers of Americans in our prisons and jails. With 4.6% of the world’s population, America today has 22.5% of the worlds prisoners. But, after all that time, after all the destroyed lives and after all the wasted resources, prohibited drugs today are cheaper, stronger, and easier to get than they were thirty-five years ago at the beginning of the so-called “war on drugs”. With this in mind, we current and former members of law enforcement have created a drug-policy reform movement — LEAP. We believe that to save lives and lower the rates of disease, crime and addiction. as well as to conserve tax dollars, we must end drug prohibition. LEAP believes that a system of regulation and control of production and distribution will be far more effective and ethical than one of prohibition. We do this in hopes that we in Law Enforcement can regain the public’s respect and trust, which have been greatly diminished by our involvement in imposing drug prohibition. Please consider joining us. source


Pentagon Conspiracy

Posted on

More & More Egregious Fraud


Pentagon Conspiracy: More & More Egregious Fraud  (Feb 25, 2009) So-called “National Defense,”aka Pentagon Fraud, is an ongoing scam in America that continues unabated. In fact, this egregious “privatized” Pentagon fraud has even been increased under the Obama Regime.

“The Bush administration’s Fiscal Year 2009 budget for the Department of Defense came in at $513 billion. That does not include the ongoing costs of the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. It’s by far the largest number in the world. And it represents a huge increase in the baseline budget from where it was in FY2001,” reports Matthew Yglesias.

That’s what happens when Unindicted War Criminals rule America.

“The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was preparing to tell the Pentagon to spend $527 billion — a $14 billion increase — in FY2010. But the Pentagon wanted to spend $584 billion. So they had this effort underway to portray Obama’s $14 billion hike as a $57 billion cut,” Yglesias continues.

Got that? Budget increases are being billed as budget “cuts,” according to the lying Bureaucratic Lackeys of the Pentagon esconced in the OMB.

Congressional Quarterly’s Josh Rogin reports that OMB and the Pentagon have agreed to an even greater increase — $537 billion for the coming fiscal year.

“The new topline figure is $10 billion greater than guidance President Obama’s administration gave to the Pentagon only last month. The increase reflects the effort to incorporate some items previously found in supplemental war funding budgets, the sources said, but does not cover the cost of ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, which will still require additional funding above the base request next fiscal year.”

Even though the Pentagon has lost the War on Iraq and the War on Afghanistan, this insatiable satanic beast wants more…

And guess who’s paying for killing all those brown people overseas?

source: Conspiracy Planet


To conspire to maintain positions of power and the flow of money requires secrecy according to the Pentagon.

Pentagon moves to impose secrecy on budget talks

Pentagon moves to impose secrecy on budget talks AFP/File – US Defence Secretary Robert Gates speaks during a press conference in Kracow, February 20, 2009.

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Senior Pentagon officials have had to promise they will keep the details of the US military budget secret as the Defense Department prepares to make tough cuts on weapons programs, a spokesman said on Wednesday.

In an unprecedented move, Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked top military officers and civilian officials to sign non-disclosure forms in which they agree not to reveal deliberations about the politically charged budget.

“Everybody who’s participating in this process — these are the highest ranking people in this department … were asked to sign an agreement in which they would agree not to speak to any of the matters that they are working on as part of this budget process,” press secretary Geoff Morrell told a news conference.

“This is highly sensitive stuff involving programs costing tens of billions of dollars, employing hundreds of thousands of people and — and go to the heart of national security,” he said.

Members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were among those required to sign, and Gates himself signed the form, Morrell said.

“This is to reinforce the message that indeed this is classified material. These are highly secret discussions. And we should remember that, be mindful of it, and honor it,” Morrell said.

News of the bid to impose secrecy came as President Barack Obama prepares to present his budget request to Congress on Thursday.

Gates has warned he plans to take a hard look at expensive weapons programs, which enjoy the backing of powerful defense firms and lawmakers in Congress.

The non-disclosure forms may carry less legal weight than the strict security clearances already governing top officials and officers. But the defense secretary’s step may have been designed more as a symbolic message to curb leaks about sensitive budget negotiations, analysts said.

Gates is “trying to invoke personal loyalty,” said Michael O’Hanlon at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

“Gates is trying to send the message that if you do that (leak) you’re actually hurting me and I’ll take it as a personal affront and I’m personally asking you not to do it,” O’Hanlon told AFP.

War Propaganda: Fabricating an Outside Enemy

Posted on

Art by David Dees – Deesillustration.com,,,,,,Dees Archive

War Propaganda: Fabricating an Outside Enemy

By kainsa

The Disinformation Campaign

War Propaganda: Fabricating an Outside Enemy

The US intelligence apparatus has created its own terrorist organ-izations. And at the same time, it creates its own terrorist warn-ings concerning the terrorist organizations which it has itself created. In turn, it has developed a cohesive multibillion dollar counterterrorism program “to go after” these terrorist organizations.

Counterterrorism and war propaganda are intertwined. The propaganda apparatus feeds disinformation into the news chain. The terror warnings must appear to be “genuine”. The objective is to present the terror groups as “enemies of America”.

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to fabricate an enemy. As anti-war sentiment grows and the political legitimacy of the Bush Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this illusive “outside enemy” must be dispelled.

Propaganda purports not only to drown the truth but to kill the evidence on how this “outside enemy”, namely Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda was fabricated and transformed into “Enemy Number One”. The entire National Security doctrine centers on the existence of an “outside enemy”, which is threatening the Homeland.

The “Office of Disinformation”

Waged from the Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA, a fear and disinformation campaign was launched. The blatant distortion of the truth and the systematic manipulation of all sources of information is an integral part of war planning.

In the wake of 9/11, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld created the Office of Strategic Influence (OSI), or “Office of Disinformation” as it was labeled by its critics:

The Department of Defense said they needed to do this, and they were going to actually plant stories that were false in foreign coun-tries-as an effort to influence public opinion across the world.(1)

And, all of a sudden, the OSI was formally disbanded following political pressures and “troublesome” media stories that “its pur-pose was to deliberately lie to advance American interests.”(2) “Rumsfeld backed off and said this is embarrassing.”(3) Yet despite this apparent about-turn, the Pentagon’s Orwellian disinformation campaign remained functionally intact:

“[T]he secretary of defense is not being particularly candid here. Disinformation in military propaganda is part of war.(4)

Rumsfeld in fact later confirmed in a November 2002 press interview that while the OSI no longer exists in name, the “Office’s intended functions are [still] being carried out”.5
A number of government agencies and intelligence units-with links to the Pentagon-are involved in various components of the propaganda campaign.

Realities are turned upside down. Acts of war are heralded as “humanitarian interventions” geared towards “regime change” and “the restoration of democracy”.

Military occupation and the killing of civilians are presented as “peace-keeping”. The derogation of civil liberties-in the context of the so-called “anti-terrorist legislation”-is portrayed as a means to providing “domestic security” and upholding civil liberties. And underlying these manipulated realties, “Osama bin Laden” and “Weapons of Mass Destruction” statements, which circulated pro-fusely in the news chain, were upheld as the basis for understanding World events.

The twisting of public opinion at home and around the World had become an integral part of the War agenda. In the months leading up to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Bush Administration and its indefectible British ally had multiplied the “warnings” of future Al Qaeda terrorist attacks.

War propaganda is pursued at all stages: before, during the mil-itary operation as well as in its cruel aftermath. The enemy has to appear genuine: thousands of news stories and editorials linking Al Qaeda to the Baghdad government were planted in the news chain.

War propaganda serves to conceal the real causes and conse-quences of war.

Shortly after the OSI had been officially disbanded amidst con-troversy, the New York Times confirmed that the disinformation campaign was running strong and that the Pentagon was:

considering issuing a secret directive to American military to conduct covert operations aimed at influencing public opinion and policy-makers in friendly and neutral nations…. The proposal has ignited a fierce battle throughout the Bush administration over whether the military should carry out secret propaganda missions in friendly nations like Germany…. The fight, one Pentagon official said, is over ‘the strategic communications for our nation, the message we want to send for long-term influence, and how we do it…. “We have the assets and the capabilities and the training to go into friendly and neutral nations to influence public opinion. We could do it and get away with it. That doesn’t mean we should.”(6)

Feeding Disinformation into the News Chain

To sustain “the War on Terrorism” agenda these fabricated reali-ties, funneled on a day to day basis into the news chain, must become indelible truths which form part of a broad political and media consensus. In this regard, the corporate media-although of this evolving totalitarian system.

In close liaison with the Pentagon and the CIA, the State Department had also set up its own “soft-sell” (civilian) propa-ganda unit, headed by Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Charlotte Beers, a powerful figure in the adver-tising industry. Working in liaison with the Pentagon, Beers was appointed to head the State Department’s propaganda unit in the immediate wake of 9/11. Her mandate was “to counteract anti-Americanism abroad.”7 Her office at the State Department was to:

ensure that public diplomacy (engaging, informing, and influencing key international audiences) is practiced in harmony with public affairs (outreach to Americans) and traditional diplomacy to advance US interests and security and to provide the moral basis for US lead-ership in the world.[8]

The Role of the CIA

The most powerful component of the Fear and Disinformation Campaign rests with the CIA, which secretly subsidizes authors, journalists and media critics, through a web of private founda-tions and CIA sponsored front organizations. The CIA also influ-ences the scope and direction of many Hollywood productions. Since 9/11, one third of Hollywood productions are war movies:

Hollywood stars and scriptwriters are rushing to bolster the new message of patriotism, conferring with the CIA and brainstorming with the military about possible real-life terrorist attacks.(9)

“The Sum of All Fears” directed by Phil Alden Robinson, which depicts the scenario of a nuclear war, had received the endorse-ment and support of both the Pentagon and the CIA.(10)

Disinformation is routinely “planted” by CIA operatives in the newsroom of major dailies, magazines and TV channels. Outside public relations firms are often used to create “fake stories”:

A relatively few well-connected correspondents provide the scoops, that get the coverage in the relatively few mainstream news sources, where the parameters of debate are set and the “official reality” is consecrated for the bottom feeders in the news chain.(11)

Covert disinformation initiatives under CIA auspices are also funneled through various intelligence proxies in other countries. Since 9/11, they have resulted in the day-to-day dissemination of false information concerning alleged “terrorist attacks”.

A routine pattern of reporting had emerged. In virtually all of the reported cases of terrorist incidents (Britain, France, Indonesia, India, Philippines, etc.) the alleged terrorist groups are identified as having “links to Al Qaeda”, without of course acknowledging the fact (amply documented by intelligence reports and official documents) that Al Qaeda is US intelligence asset.



The Secret Downing Street Memo

“The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy”


From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195/02

cc: Defense Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard
Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally
Morgan, Alastair Campbell

Iraq: Prime Minister’s Meeting, 23 July

C [head of British Intelligence MI-6, Sir Richard Dearlove] reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable….

Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intel-ligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

…. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthu-siasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after mili-tary action.

Excerpts from the “Secret Downing Street Memo” to Prime Minister Tony Blair, leaked in May 2005 to the London Times.


The Doctrine of “Self Defense”

The propaganda campaign is geared towards sustaining the illusion that “America is under attack”. Relayed not only through the mainstream media but also through a number of alternative Internet media sites, these fabricated realities continue to portray the war in Afghanistan and Iraq as bona fide acts of self-defense, while carefully concealing the broad strategic and economic objec-tives of the war.

In turn, the propaganda campaign develops a casus belli, a jus-tification, a political legitimacy for waging war. The “official real-ity” (conveyed profusely in George W’s speeches) rests on the broad “humanitarian” premise of a so-called “preemptive”, namely “defen-sive war”, “a war to protect freedom”:

We’re under attack because we love freedom…. And as long as we love freedom and love liberty and value every human life, they’re going to try to hurt us.12)

The National Security Strategy (NSS) includes two essential building blocks:
– The preemptive “defensive war” doctrine,
– The “war on terrorism” against Al Qaeda.

The objective is to present “preemptive military action”-mean-ing war as an act of “self-defense” against two categories of ene-mies, “rogue States” and “Islamic terrorists”:

The war against terrorists of global reach is a global enterprise of uncertain duration…. America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed.

… Rogue States and terrorists do not seek to attack us using conventional means. They know such attacks would fail. Instead, they rely on acts of terror and, potentially, the use of weapons of mass destruction.

… The targets of these attacks are our military forces and our civilian population, in direct violation of one of the principal norms of the law of warfare. As was demonstrated by the losses on September 11, 2001, mass civilian casualties is the specific objective of terrorists and these losses would be exponentially more severe if terrorists acquired and used weapons of mass destruction.

The United States has long maintained the option of preemptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security. The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction-and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend our-selves…. To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively.(13)

In early 2005, the Pentagon called for the development of a more “pro-active” notion of preemptive warfare, where military opera-tions could also be launched not only against a “declared enemy” but also against countries, which are not openly hostile to America, but which are considered strategic from the point of view of US interests. (See Chapter 19.)

How is War Propaganda carried out?

Two sets of eye-popping statements emanating from a variety of sources (including official National Security statements, media, Washington-based think tanks, etc.) are fed on a daily basis into the news chain. Some of the events (including news regarding pre-sumed terrorists) were blatantly fabricated by the intelligence agen-cies. (See Chapters 19 and 20.)

However, once the core assumptions of the disinformation cam-paign have been embedded in the news chain, both the printed press and network TV establish their own self-sustaining routine of fabricating the news.

Disinformation relies on a pattern of reporting which tends to dismiss the substance behind the news. In the months leading up to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the disinformation campaign centered on two simple and catchy “buzzwords”, which were used profusely to justify US military action:

– Buzzword no. 1. “Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda” (Osama) is behind most news stories regarding the “war on terrorism” including “alleged”, “future”, “presumed” and “actual” terrorist attacks.

– Buzzword no. 2.”Weapons of Mass Destruction”(WMD) state-ments were used profusely to justify the “pre-emptive war” against the “State sponsors of terror”-i.e., countries such as Iraq, Iran and North Korea which allegedly possess WMD. Amply documented in the case of Iraq, a large body of news on WMD and biological attacks, were fabricated.

In the wake of the invasion of Iraq, “WMD” and “Osama bin Laden” statements continued to be used. They have become part of the day to day debate, embodied in routine conversations between cit-izens. Repeated ad nauseam, they penetrate the inner consciousness of people, molding their individual perceptions on current events. Through deception and manipulation, this shaping of the minds of entire populations sets the stage-under the façade of a functioning democracy-for the installation of a de facto Police State.

In turn, the disinformation regarding alleged “terrorist attacks” or “weapons of mass destruction” instills an atmosphere of fear, which mobilizes unswerving patriotism and support for the State, and its main political and military actors.

Repeated in virtually every national news report, this stigmatic focus on WMD and Osama/Al Qaeda essentially serves as a dogma, to blind people on the causes and consequences of America’s war of conquest, while providing a simple, unquestioned and author-itative justification for “self defense”.

In the months leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, both in speeches by President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair, as well as in the news, WMD statements were carefully blended into Osama statements. UK Defense Minister Jack Straw had warned in early 2003 “that ‘rogue regimes’ such as Iraq were the most likely source of WMD technology for groups like Al Qaeda.”(14) Also, two months before the March 2003 invasion, a presumed Al Qaeda cell “with links to Iraq” had been discovered in Edinburgh, allegedly involved in the use of biological weapons against people in the UK.

The hidden agenda of “the links to Iraq” statement is blatantly obvious. Its objective was to discredit Iraq in the months leading up to the war: the so-called “State sponsors of terror” are said to support Osama bin Laden. Conversely, Osama is said to collaborate with Iraq in the use of “weapons of mass destruction”.

Prior to the 2003 invasion as well as in its wake, several thousand news reports had woven an “Osama connection” into the WMD stories.

The WMD pretext for waging the war was finally dismissed, shortly before Bush’s Second Term inauguration in January 2005, by which time the justification for having waged the war on Iraq was no longer considered an issue. The media spin behind WMD was never questioned, to the extent that the elimination of WMD is still regarded by public opinion as a central objective of US for-eign policy.

Read More