← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · TexasAnarch

Sign-Use in Terror politics -- "CYA" analysis

Thread ID: 14618 | Posts: 2 | Started: 2004-08-05

Wayback Archive

TexasAnarch [OP]

2004-08-05 06:24 | User Profile

Ridge’s Threat-level finger, McLaughlin’s sphincter – Orange yeeks

““We don’t do politics in the Department of Homeland Security,” Secretary Tom Ridge declared yesterday when questioned about the alert.”  So quoted the New York Times, “New  Qaeda Activity Is Said to Have a Role in Warning,” 8.4.04, A11, under the Secretary’s picture.

As if to say, pardon the cynicism, “Politics? Not us.  Wrong department.  The cell-phone guys already took care of that.”  (Ri-n-n-g.  “Hello Tom,”  “Hello Mother.”  “Homeland Security Secretary Ridge!”  “Yes, mother.”  “There is a little something we need you to do, Tom.”  “Yes, mother.”)  Nope, no politics here.”

Across the centerfold on the left, under a related article on how the decision was made, one picks up:  “Washington, Aug. 3 – Senior White House officials said Tuesday that the decison to raise the threat level was made at a meeting convened at 4 p.m. on Saturday in the White House Situation room.  Many of the Bush administration’s counterterrorism officials, who had scattered for the weekend, had to be plugged in by video teleconference monitors.
“To two Senior White House officials in the meeting, it appeared to be a clear-cut case.”

Did “slam-dunk” came into anyone’s mind, I wonder?

“”I’ve never seen so much pointing in the same direction,” one of the senior officials said, referring to the intelligence that prompted the heightened alert.  “You  think this is probably as rich as it’s ever going to get.  I can tell you, if you don’t warn now, I don’t know when you would.””

Notice the senior official’s use of “you” – to address you (us, his audience, in that affected Tex-ass way they put on), then immediately swap places, so that “you” are agonizing over Big decisions with him (it).

The public needs to know the name of this official, to correct their self-mirrored terror thermostat.  It could be linked directly to C.I.A. (or is that “CYA”) John McLaughlin’s sphincter.  This, in turn would palpate to the 9/11 commission report which comes down the pike with one glaring, staring deficit it takes major shock therapy to get by with,.  The threat of what happens if that deficit gets shouted aloud by a lot of people jerks JM’s cord, squeezing TR’s finger, and Walla!  What more do you need?

Philip Weiss documents the condemning omission in The New York Observer, 8.4.2004, “9/11 Report Misses One Crucial Point:  Mideastern Policy..   Richard Ben Cramer says Commission Missed Boat Blowing Off Israel Policy.”  What the 9/11 Commission does not deal with, “blows off”, the author says, is why Muslims hate us implacably – for US Mideast  policy totally one-sided toward Jews, vrs. Palestinians.  Before quoting and commenting on his argument, notice needs taking of  some resistance the “CYA”’s energetic initiative ran into.   “(A) few law enforcement and intelligence said that the intelligence, at least that had been known at the time the decision was made, seemed to be dated, gong back to 2000 and 2001.  The information was important and worrisome, they said,  but it seemed too out of date, too much like previously known intelligence about Queda’s surveillance methods to be a persuasive indicator of impending attack.”

That means the decision WAS political, a personal judgment call of the analyst  McLaughlin and his interim faction running the agency.  When asked recently about the C.I.A.’s so called “devil’s advocate rule”, to listen to one opposing a proposed dangerous action as vigorously as one defending it, he smirked “If we had listed to a devil’s advocate about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction before invading Iraq, he would have probably been more sure he had WMD’s than we were at the time.”  But that isn’t true.  It ignores what Scott Ritter was saying then, and now.  This shows him lying in public, about a matter of state’s evidence if charges of high criminal conduct can be brought against terror hoax perpetrators.

There must be some punishment for that, not minor.  The shock of the Orange Threat alert level was massive.  A similar event occurred in France recently when an anti-semitic hate crime hoax set off an all-community hate-Muslim campaign.  Prime Minister Chirac first led the indignation, then when learning it was self-inflicted by Mme Lillie le Blanc, said she would be punished appropriately.  7 weeks probation, something like that she got.  Left the already tattered remnants of civil democratic discourse shredded and poisoned.   There is no difference between what she did and what the agency did, if it juiced up a “everybody duck!  Imminent danger!” event they knew was rigged because they rigged it themselves.  Here’s good old Musharaff, cracking down on Islamic militants in Pakistan’s midst, delivering up an Queda cell whiz-kid operative, named Khan, good looker, super-dangerous, probably co$t a bag full of loot.  Millions of Uncle Sam’s greenback dollahs said to be offered over there for... how many?  Is anybody keeping count?  Looks like any decent well run agency could torture the truth out of somebody closer to home a lot cheaper.  But I forget about out the values of outsourcing stuff.

The faction McLaughlin fronts for would be the same as that blown off by the commission.  THIS IS GROUP-THINK SHEILDED BY THE INNER BARRIER OF ‘ANTI-SEMITISM’ AS DEFENSE AGAINST HATRED OF THE JEWS.

This the psychological dynamic connected to the “third rail of American politics”. From Weiss:

[url]http://www.observer.com/pages/frontpage3.asp[/url]

Richard Ben Cramer Says Commission Missed Boat Blowing Off Israel Policy 9/11 Report Misses One Crucial Point: Mideastern Policy by Philip Weiss 000 A month or so back, Bob Kerrey loped in late from a meeting of the 9/11 commission to the New School stage to have a discussion with the author Richard Ben Cramer about his new book, How Israel Lost: The Four Questions. The throaty author offered his keystone for negotiations in the Middle East—“Give back the land”—but the university president shrugged off the suggestion. No one in the Arab world has ever really cared about the Palestinians, he said, and there are no opportunities for young people in the Arab world anyway, that’s the problem. The two men talked past one another.

The commission of which Mr. Kerrey is a member has now published its report, and what was supposed to be an act of soul-searching has been ruined by the same blind spot the former Senator showed onstage. The report skirts America’s one-sided support for Israel over the Palestinians. It says that the Arabs don’t like us because of their own failed societies and the lack of opportunity for young people.

Once again, the Middle East shows itself to be the third rail of American politics. With the exception of retired leaders like Jimmy Carter and George McGovern and brave writers like Richard Ben Cramer, no one dares to open his mouth about what is obviously the main irritant in our relationship with fundamentalist Islam: We are contemptuous of the Palestinians’ rights to self-determination.

“Americans can’t understand why Arabs don’t think of them as honest and decent purveyors of democracy,” Mr. Cramer said. “Well, this is why.” The 9/11 commission report contains just a few quiet mentions of the Palestinian issue, as an aside. Yes, American policy in the Middle East is one of the “staples of popular commentary across the Arab and Muslim world,” but the commission insists on describing that policy as a “choice” we have made, like the choice to invade Iraq.

“Those choices must be integrated,” it says, “with America’s message of opportunity to the Arab and Muslim world.”

That’s crazy. That’s like corporate investors in South Africa back in the 1980’s saying that the policy of tolerating apartheid should be “integrated” with a message of opportunity for young blacks in America. You can’t integrate such things; they are inherently contradictory. And meanwhile, the destruction of hope in the occupied territories is central to the Arab understanding of how our society behaves.

Ignoring this grievance is dangerous to ourselves. As Mr. Cramer’s book shows through the telling of powerful, simple stories, 37 years of occupation have damaged the soul of Israeli democracy

[B]**[/B]

Final points  The frenzied issuing of the nationwide threat began Friday, July 30, release day for the movie The Manchurian Candidate.  One assumes, and I have argued elsewhere, the conjunction is not accidental, but calculated to engage memory-loops through the unconscious. The color code “Orange” is a group trance state token associated with the “shock”, whenever they choose to administer it.  Under its spell, in the trance state, is implanted new post-hypnotic suggestion “signals”, to go with “al Zarquwri”, “Osama Bin Laden,” or whoever’s card turns up.  Now people can recognize the enemy “threatening to penetrate our defenses (barriers, shields).”  I think this pre-programming link is extremely important in the propaganda war, to replace individual’s personal memory with group-think sequencing.

A Shock!  Implant…. (sign uses anchored in memory to trauma, later available for recall-use)  … sequence of violent intervention in the processes of group communication has been imposed upon us in a fake security alert or “drill.”   In the interests of neocon Zionist pro-Israeli, Jew-related politics.

In Presidential politics, the terror threat also deflated the Democrats expected “bounce”, and caused them to trip over themselves to go further than Bush in setting up a new agency – same one’s converting the threat hysteria into “act now to save us” hysteria,

Pennsylvania_Dutch

2004-08-05 11:38 | User Profile

"No way out except through jews"...as Alex Linder says...I wonder where Linder got that quote, or is it his own?