This will be the first installment of
what I hope to turn into a series. The latest focus of my writing
has been to bring to light the fact that there is much more to the
story of recent American history than any of us were initially told by
mainstream sources. This information consists mostly of recently
declassified documents from the CIA and other official departments,
the testimony of those who participated in the various programs in
question, as well as the victims of such programs whose rights and
lives were violated thereby. I also intend to investigate whether or
not the methods used to commit such violations are still being used
in modern-day America.
Though I do not necessarily enjoy
writing about subject matters that may be seen as negative or
demoralizing, I feel that it is my responsibility (as well as the
responsibility of all who consider themselves active American
citizens) to be fully aware of their own political environment so as
to ensure justice, fairness, and freedom for all of us. In order to
ensure this, we must be fully informed.
The Common Secrecy
One commonality we find upon reading on
declassified American history is the fact that many officials and
departments within American governance have been engaged in
perpetuating blatant and definitive crimes (many times, crimes
against humanity), yet very few (if any) ever faced trial or
punishment for these crimes. We find that the typical means of
dealing with these crimes is that they are either ignored and
dismissed, or they are buried and classified in the name of “national
security”, deliberately keeping the American public in the dark and
uninformed of these blatant, ethical infractions.
My intention within this series is to
bring these crimes to light and to call them to the sober attention of
those who believe in the ethical integrity of American governance. I
intend to make the point that any amount of white-collar crime (or
any type of crime), when left unchecked and unpunished for a long
enough period of time, will inevitably grow, spread, and can
eventually consume an entire nation, and that the only way to ensure
justice is to demand transparency and accountability in all aspects
of government. (One interesting fact to note, in American today,
definitive corruption is considered a normal aspect of the system.)
This issue of secrecy has been of
concern for decades by those who appreciate the importance of
transparency in maintaining a free and civil society. Though it may
seem that presently, there are few that advocate for such issues,
there have always been those who have stood for the principle. One
of these men could be considered a trail-blazer in this matter, and
though he may have paid the ultimate price for his fight, he fought
valiantly for the cause of transparency. This man was John F.
Kennedy.
During John F. Kennedy's final speech, he touched on a very sensitive subject that virtually no one has come close to suggesting since. (There are many ordinary citizens who have continued this fight for transparency, but they have, for the most part, been ignored.) During this speech, Kennedy delved into the subject of secret societies subverting the American way and revealed to us all how secrecy posed a greater threat to the people of America than any foreign army. Here is an excerpt from this revealing, and yet forgotten speech.
“The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open
society, and we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed
to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings. We
decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted
concealment of pertinent facts far outweigh the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing
the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary
restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the
survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it, and
there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased
security would be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning
to the very limits of censorship and concealment.
For we are opposed
around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies
primarily on covet means for expanding its sphere of influence; on
infiltration instead of invasion; on subversion instead of elections;
on intimidation instead of free choice; on gorillas by night instead
of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human
and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly
efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence,
economic, scientific, and political operations. Its preparations are
concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined.
Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is
questioned; no rumor is printed; no secret is revealed.”
(President John F. Kennedy at the
Waldorf-Astoria Hotel on April 27, 1961. "The President and the
Press" before the American Newspaper Publishers Association)
Click here to watch JFK's speech...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YafZkjiMpjU
Secret societies who take secret oaths,
who operate and deal in secrecy... These were real concerns from one
of the most respected commanders in chief this country has seen.
These concerns are valid, and this threat of abuse of secrecy is as
real now as it was then. This excessive secrecy is not the way any
truly free country can operate, as any functional and open society
requires full knowledge of the situations in which the voters' right
holds stake. So we see that these secret societies were a serious
concern for JFK, and we also see that not long after this speech, he
was assassinated (Nov. 22, 1963). Not only this, but it seems that
very few (if any) who succeeded him were willing to mention this issue of
secrecy, and pursue it with the same valor that he showed. It also
seems that as the years went on after his death, the U.S., as well as
the much of the world, became more and more similar to
this dire scenario that Kennedy spoke of during his final speech.
With this in mind, the possibility seems quite strong that someone
(or someone's) behind this secret-society issue wanted him out of the
way. (However, at this point, this is only speculation.)
Many years after JFK's premature death,
another man stood up and took the exact same stance, only this time,
it was in greater detail. One cannot say why he himself is still
alive to continue such a quest. (Though they may consider the
possibility that any secret plan, given five decades to either end or to progress, might not be in very much jeopardy due to general
exposure. There still lies the possibility that exposure of the
secrets of the extremely wealthy and resourceful is not dangerous at
all. However, we have not yet reached that point in the discussion.) Still,
this man testified to actions very similar to those about which
Kennedy warned. For those familiar with the name “John Perkins”,
this is not exactly news. Perkins is the author of the
autobiography, “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”, and in this
account, he gives the details of his job as an NSA operative.
According to Perkins, the repugnant secrecy described by Kennedy now
represents the norm in modern-day, American society.
In light of this issue of secrecy, one
may be skeptical that such secrecy
could survive in the “age of information”. However, it must be
realized how many black-budget programs have been initiated and completed, how many
bills that have been either rushed through the voting process, or
hidden completely from the public eye, and how many laws have been
dictated and passed by presidents without any knowledge or consent of the American
people. In light of this, this secrecy must be realized as that fact
that it is. To what degree this secrecy exists is what we intend to
uncover. Let's continue.
An Agenda in Progress
According to John Perkins, this secrecy
is alive and well. As said before, Perkins is an author and former
employee of the NSA and had the position termed “economic hitman”
which basically consisted of traveling to foreign countries and
extorting those countries for their wealth and resources on behalf of
American corporations. Perkins has given many lectures and
interviews, elaborating upon information that falls right in line
with what Kennedy warned about. It would seem that in light of
Perkins' testimony, these plans made in secret have not at all ended,
but have instead, advanced substantially. Below is an example of how
Perkins describes his former job.
“It's been our job to basically cheat third-world countries around
the world out of trillions of dollars... ...and then funnel those
dollars into US corporations, and also a few wealthy people in those
third-world countries.
The most typical
way that we work is that we'll identify a third-world country that
has resources that we covet (the Panama Canal, a labor force in
Haiti, for example... Often, it's oil.), and we'll make an
arrangement with the leaders of that country for them to accept a
loan from the World Bank or its affiliates, and the condition of
that loan is that 90% of it will never leave the United States.
It'll be sent from banks in Washington to banks in Houston, San
Francisco, and New York, where the big engineering firms are.
These companies
then, in association with many others will build projects in this
third-world country like power plants, industrial parks, ports, that
primarily serve the very, very rich people. Usually, these things
don't help the poor people at all. In fact, the countries then
settle with a huge debt that they can't possibly repay, which is part
of the plan.
So at some point,
we economic hit men go back and say, “Look, you owe us a lot of
money. You can't repay your debt. Therefore, sell all of your oil to
our oil companies really cheap, or vote with us in the next U.N. vote
that's critical to us, or provide land for our military base in your
country.” It's a form of slavery, in a way.”
A lecture given by John Perkins on June
15, 2005, at a benefit for One Earth Indigenous Nations Institute,
covered by CSPAN.
To listen to the entire lecture, click
here...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKaYqNRsPkQ
Extortion, bribery, threats,
assassinations, and military assaults... According to Perkins'
first-hand knowledge, these are common tools used in this method of
corporate imperialism.
This is the state of America today. We
still raise the same flag, celebrate the same holidays, and see
the same “support our troops” ads. The appearance of order,
ethical integrity, honor, and respect for equal rights are still
promoted as common-place. We still celebrate the 4th of July, we still listen to the latest
“State of the Union” speeches, and read about or view congressional hearings on TV,
but behind the glamour, the song, and the dance lies something much,
much different than that which appearances reveal. We see the
impoverished state of many third-world nations, and the apparent
efforts that the United States makes to aid these countries, but
behind the scenes, this same governance is contributing to the
destruction and impoverishment of the very nations it claims to be
aiding (as the majority of this “aid” is given exclusively to the
excessively wealthy).
Though this extortion, bribery, and
manipulation may be despicable to learn of, it is only the beginning
of the job of an economic hitman. In this speech, Perkins goes on
to describe an elaborate method of coercing foreign leaders to sell
out their own countries for the sake of avoiding violent opposition
from a deceived American military (as military personnel are usually given a
version of the situation which omits the
financial blackmail, extortion, and monetary transactions happening behind the scenes).
During this
process of bribery, the foreign leader might be offered, drugs,
money, or women. If they bite, the deal is done, at which point
their country basically belongs to American corporations. If they
refuse, then subversive operatives are sent in. These people
(referred to as “the jackals”) commonly start riots, violent
uprisings, or cues. If these uprisings don't convince the foreign
leader to play the game of American corporations, this is when
assassination becomes the plan. If these corporate assassins are
unsuccessful, then the military is sent into the country. The military forces typically decimate the
country's cities, and eventually overthrow the government. This is
the method by which this hitman program operates, and this method
has worked for decades. It is very possible that many of the news stories we hear regarding the
justification for invading foreign nations have often been smokescreens for this economic hitman program.
At this point, we have proven the possibility that there is much more to the dark underbelly of the United States than the average person may know (or want to know). We see that the underlying corruption goes much farther than a simple bride here and there to this or that politician for the sake of an upcoming vote, but that instead, this operation functions with the efficiency of organized crime (though such crime is so enormous, there is no actual law against it, according to Perkins). These are crimes committed and perpetuated by the very people who swore an oath to uphold justice.
We are faced with this grim reality of
organized, criminal activity from the very governance we have
depended upon to take care of this country. The question is, how did
all of this happen without anyone noticing, and attempting to stop
it? The answer is the same as it has always been. When conducting
any secret operation, one does not reveal one's actions to those who
would most certainly oppose them. All questionable and/or unethical
actions are either kept secret or are excused away as irrelevant.
There is a more effective way of dealing with this information which
ensures that few if anyone will oppose the undertaking of these
unethical actions. This brings us to the subject of propaganda.
Getting Our Propaganda Fix
During Kennedy's last speech, he
touched upon the issue of a free and open press. He expressed
concerns of clear manipulation of the press by government interests
who may have had much to lose from the disclosure of certain,
“sensitive” information. In recent times, we have gained more
knowledge about the details of this secrecy, but the main concern was
that concealment of pertinent information cannot, and does not lead
to the healthy, open society which America claims to have. Much of
the information tampering, both then and now may easily be considered
propagandistic in nature. The question is, has the American
governance ever deliberately resorted to propaganda as a means of
swaying public opinion in any given direction. The answer is “yes”.
The fact is that propaganda has a long and intimate history within U.S. governance. It would be somewhat relieving to learn that this distribution of propaganda was limited to foreign nations who were at odds with the United States, but this is unfortunately not the case. According to Wikipedia, the use of American propaganda extends for decades. One such description begins at the onset of the First World War.
World War I
“The first large-scale use of propaganda by the U.S. government
came during World War I. The government enlisted the help of citizens
and children to help promote war bonds and stamps to help stimulate
the economy. To keep the prices of war supplies down (guns,
gunpowder, cannons, steel, etc.), the U.S. government produced
posters that encouraged people to reduce waste and grow their own
vegetables in "victory gardens". The public skepticism that
was generated by the heavy-handed tactics of the Committee on Public
Information would lead the postwar government to officially abandon
the use of propaganda.”
World War II
“During World War
II the U.S. officially had no propaganda, but the Roosevelt
government used means to circumvent this official line. One such
propaganda tool was the publicly owned but government-funded Writers'
War Board (WWB). The activities of the WWB were so extensive that it
has been called the "greatest propaganda machine in history".
Why We Fight is a famous series of US government propaganda films
made to justify US involvement in World War II.
In 1944 (lasting
until 1948) prominent US policy makers launched a domestic propaganda
campaign aimed at convincing the U.S. public to agree to a harsh
peace for the German people, for example by removing the common view
of the German people and the Nazi party as separate entities. The
core in this campaign was the Writers' War Board which was closely
associated with the Roosevelt administration.
Another means was
the United States Office of War Information that Roosevelt
established in June 1942, whose mandate was to promote understanding
of the war policies under the director Elmer Davis. It dealt with
posters, press, movies, exhibitions, and produced often slanted
material conforming to US wartime purposes. Other large and
influential non-governmental organizations during the war and
immediate post-war period were the Society for the Prevention of
World War III and the Council on Books in Wartime.”
The Cold War
“During the Cold
War, the U.S. government produced vast amounts of propaganda against
communism and the Soviet bloc. Much of this propaganda was directed
by the Federal Bureau of Investigation under J. Edgar Hoover, who
himself wrote the anti-communist tract Masters of Deceit. The FBI's
COINTELPRO arm solicited journalists to produce fake news items
discrediting communists and affiliated groups, such as H. Bruce
Franklin and the Venceremos Organization.”
The Iraq War
“In early 2002,
the U.S. Department of Defense launched an information operation,
colloquially referred to as the Pentagon military analyst program.
The goal of the operation is "to spread the administration's
talking points on Iraq by briefing ... retired commanders for network
and cable television appearances," where they have been
presented as independent analysts. On 22 May 2008, after this program
was revealed in the New York Times, the House passed an amendment
that would make permanent a domestic propaganda ban that until now
has been enacted annually in the military authorization bill.
The Shared Values
Initiative was a public relations campaign that was intended to sell
a "new" America to Muslims around the world by showing that
American Muslims were living happily and freely, without persecution,
in post-9/11 America. Funded by the United States Department of
State, the campaign created a public relations front group known as the Council of American Muslims for Understanding (CAMU). The campaign
was divided in phases; the first of which consisted of five
mini-documentaries for television, radio, and print with shared
values messages for key Muslim countries.”
The examples given by Wikipedia span
roughly an entire century of time. From WWI to the Iraq War, every
last one was spurred on by a manipulated public opinion, and the tool
of choice (as always) was propaganda. Considering the fact that this
is openly admitted by a mainstream source such as Wikipedia, one
would find it unreasonable to deny the fact. This makes the notion
of this same tactic of propaganda being used to promote the notorious
“War on Terror” very likely. I don't imagine very many people
needing to be reminded that there were no weapons of mass destruction
to be found, but, as Perkins has revealed, there were plenty of
resources to covet. However, since evidence is what we are looking
for in this matter of propaganda, let's examine some.
On December 23, 2015, Naturalnew.com published an article regarding the issue of American propaganda. This article describes the U.S. government as being the “second largest P.R. firm in the world”, and accurately so. Here is what Natural News had to say.
On December 23, 2015, Naturalnew.com published an article regarding the issue of American propaganda. This article describes the U.S. government as being the “second largest P.R. firm in the world”, and accurately so. Here is what Natural News had to say.
“It's no secret that many people feel that the U.S. Government is
synonymous with all things shady, filled with half-truths, loopholes
and lingo that sounds fancy, but is really a self-serving set of
words designed to offer minimal benefits to the rest of
society.
Supporting these opinions is a finding from an Open the Books report which details what people think about the U.S. government – their public relations activities in particular. In a nutshell, Open the Books, which is described as a "nonpartisan, non-profit organization focused on providing transparency in government," found that the U.S. government spends a shocking amount of money on its public relations efforts. How much, you ask? Enough to report that the "U.S. Government ranked 2nd largest Public Relations Firm in the World"
The report suggests that the U.S.government spent a total amount of about $4.5 billion over the past eight years, which is broken down as follows: 1) some $2.347 billion in salary and bonus payments to federal employees and 2) $2.02 billion spent on outside contractors.”
Supporting these opinions is a finding from an Open the Books report which details what people think about the U.S. government – their public relations activities in particular. In a nutshell, Open the Books, which is described as a "nonpartisan, non-profit organization focused on providing transparency in government," found that the U.S. government spends a shocking amount of money on its public relations efforts. How much, you ask? Enough to report that the "U.S. Government ranked 2nd largest Public Relations Firm in the World"
The report suggests that the U.S.government spent a total amount of about $4.5 billion over the past eight years, which is broken down as follows: 1) some $2.347 billion in salary and bonus payments to federal employees and 2) $2.02 billion spent on outside contractors.”
The article continues to give a
breakdown of how these funds are used in the efforts to sway public
opinion. Following this, the article continues this eye-opening
revelation on government spending for the sake of propagandizing its
own people.
“The Open the Books report explains that their goal is to shed
light on information that's otherwise buried and kept from the public
awareness. As such, they state their belief that "Federal
agencies ... not only resist transparency but often pretend to be
transparent when, in reality, they are engaged in self-promotion. Too
often, they use their charge to disclose information as a cover for
public relations campaigns that are designed to advance their
interests (i.e. their desire for more funding and higher salaries)
rather than the public interest."
So we see that this business of
propaganda is considerably lucrative in nature. If ever governance
intends to behave badly, (according to what history has shown us) it
becomes necessary for the people to remain ignorant or deceived about
such behavior. If this governance would spin this behavior as
necessary for “defending national security”, for example, it
would pass more easily than if the public knew the entire, money-motivated truth.
Therefore it is necessary to convince the public through various means
to ensure their compliance and agreement with the actions of
governance. After all, no government action is able to stand without
the consent of the people.
Related Links
United States Government Formally
Legalizes Propagandization of Its Own Citizens
Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of
2012
We have examined the evidence that the
United States government has been recently and historically engaged
in psychologically manipulating its own people via propaganda, and
reviewed multiple examples of the fact. This is sufficient for the
sake of information. However, to drive such a point home, let's add
one more piece to this body of evidence.
A Play on Media
In 2014, David Heilbroner produced a
documentary entitled, “The Newburgh Sting”. This documentary
would go on to win an Emmy for Outstanding Investigative Journalism,
and there is no mystery as to why. The Newburgh Sting reveals the
shocking reality that many of the instances of violent “terrorism”
in the United State and elsewhere are fictitiously perpetrated either
by hired help or by unsuspecting citizens who end up being entrapped
by authorities. These actions were admittedly perpetrated by the FBI
and are said to function as propaganda to boost public opinion for the advancement of the “war on terror”.
This may sound unbelievable, but these
proposals are not hear-say. They are not speculation or theory.
These are document facts and are supported by video evidence
collected by the FBI themselves during this “sting” operation.
During this documentary, we see several men (none of them Muslim) who come from an
impoverished neighborhood, being bribed ($250,000 each) into
committing a violent act that turns out to be nothing more than a
play. They are handed fake weapons, fake equipment, strung along by
FBI agents undercover, and when they finally do what they were told
to do by the FBI, they are stopped, arrested and put in prison for 25
years. However, it is not necessary to blindly believe these words.
Simply watch the documentary and see for yourself.
Click here to watch The Newburgh
Sting, free on Youtube.
This is definitively, and admittedly fake news presented as real in order to push an agenda that was questionable from the beginning. Once again, we see government agencies propagandizing their own citizens, not for the sake of the common people, but only for the sake of getting ahead on their own budget, and placing their own job security ahead of the respect for human rights. It would seem that the state of American governance is more than willing to break the law for the sake of money. If this is not corruption at its worst, I would say that it's pretty close.
We see here that the issue of
propaganda, as opposed to honest and thorough communication to the
American people, is the norm in the present state of the country.
However, this propaganda is only part of the issue which concerned
Kennedy. One of the main issues he discussed in his final speech was
freedom of the press to provide open, thorough, and unhindered
information to the public, but in modern-day America, this freedom is
virtually nonexistent. The following article from Huffington Post
details a legal investigation into the case of one New York Times
reporter, James Risen, who stood for this freedom of the press.
"They've said
in that there is no reporter's privilege," Risen said. "I
think they want the court to rule on a fundamental constitutional
issue of whether or not there is a reporter's privilege in a criminal
case, which makes this case kind of have a broader import than it
might otherwise have."
"That's why I think it's become a
pretty important case," he continued. "It's a fairly basic
constitutional issue for the press, whether or not there is a
reporter's privilege. It's something a lot of people outside the
press don’t really understand, don't really care about. I think the
basic issue is whether you can have a democracy without aggressive
investigative reporting and I don't believe you can. So that's why
I'm fighting it."
The hardline stand against reporter's
privilege -- the DOJ briefs always put the term in quotation marks --
is a hallmark of the Obama administration's unprecedented crackdown
over leaks. So is trying to throw the book at the alleged leakers.
The Obama administration has charged
six government officials accused of providing classified information
to the media with violations of the Espionage Act, a World War I-era
law intended to prohibit aiding the enemy. That’s more uses of the Espionage Act for that purpose than under all previous presidential
administrations combined.
While the Obama administration hasn't prosecuted those responsible for torture during the Bush years, it is taking a strong stand against a former official believed to have supplied information to the media about use of torture and other controversial tactics during the previous administration."
It seems that there is little concern
from clear and evident crimes against humanity. However, when it
comes to the revelation of those crimes (which were classified per
procedure), there is no mercy for those who reveal them. Not only
does it seem that the present-day governance stands either neutral,
or side with those who commit crimes against humanity, but this modern governance seems
to consider its own citizenry as “the enemy” (hens the misuse of
the Espionage Act).
Another poignant article from The
Guardian details the account of Bradley Manning, the army operative
who passed off information to Wikileaks regarding the United States
active torture program. Manning was subjected to a general
court-martial and faced charges which included aiding and embedding
the enemy. Here is what The Guardian had to say.
“The
conviction of Bradley Manning under the 1917 Espionage Act, and the
US Justice Department's decision to file espionage charges against
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden under the same act, are yet further examples of the Obama
administration's policy of using an iron fist against human rights
and civil liberties activists.
President Obama has been unprecedented
in his use of the Espionage Act to prosecute those whose
whistleblowing he wants to curtail. The purpose of an Espionage
Act prosecution, however, is not to punish a person for spying for
the enemy, selling secrets for personal gain, or trying to undermine
our way of life. It is to ruin the whistleblower personally,
professionally and financially. It is meant to send a message to
anybody else considering speaking truth to power: challenge us and we
will destroy you.
Only ten people in American history
have been charged with espionage for leaking classified information,
seven of them under Barack Obama. The effect of the charge on a
person's life – being viewed as a traitor, being shunned by family
and friends, incurring massive legal bills – is all a part of the
plan to force the whistleblower into personal ruin, to weaken him to
the point where he will plead guilty to just about anything to make
the case go away. I know. The three espionage charges against me made
me one of "the Obama Seven".
In early 2012, I was arrested and
charged with three counts of espionage and one count of violating the
Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA). (I was only the second
person in US history to be charged with violating the IIPA, a law
that was written to be used against rogues like PhilipAgee.)
Two of my
espionage charges were the result of a conversation I had with a New
York Times reporter about torture. I gave him no classified
information – only the business card of a former CIA
colleague who had never been undercover. The other espionage charge
was for giving the same unclassified business card to a reporter for
ABC News. All three espionage charges were eventually dropped.
So, why charge me in the first place?
It was my punishment for blowing the
whistle on the CIA's torture program and for confirming to the press,
despite government protestations to the contrary, that the US
government was, indeed, in the business of torture.
The general issue of ethical failure on
the part of the United States governance becomes more and more clear
each time they falsely accuse brave whistle-blowers like Manning of
aiding the “enemy”. The article continues.
This policy
decision smacks of modern-day McCarthyism. Washington has always
needed an "ism" to fight against, an idea against which it
could rally its citizens like lemmings. First, it was anarchism, then
socialism, then communism. Now, it's terrorism. Any whistleblower who
goes public in the name of protecting human rights or civil liberties
is accused of helping the terrorists.
That the whistleblower has the support
of groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, or the
American Civil Liberties Union matters not a whit. The administration
simply presses forward with wild accusations against the
whistleblower: "He's aiding the enemy!" "He put our
soldiers' lives in danger!" "He has blood on his hands!"
Then, when it comes time for trial, the espionage charges invariably
are either dropped or thrown out.
The administration and its national
security sycophants in both parties in Congress argue that
governmental actions exposed by the whistleblower are legal. The
Justice Department approved the torture, after all, and the US
supreme court said that the NSA's eavesdropping program was
constitutional. But this is the same Justice Department that
harassed, surveilled, wiretapped and threatened Martin Luther King
Jr, and that recently allowed weapons to be sold to Mexican drug
gangs in the Fastand Furious scandal. Just because they're in power doesn't mean
they're right.
Cases like this reveal the fact that
this type of information control is not isolated to a Snowden, or an
Assange. This fascist form of reputation/appearance management of
government seems to be maintained at the expense of anyone who stands
against the unethical practices therein. It does not at all matter
if these courageous individuals have actually broken any law, or
compromised the actual security of the American people. Just and
John F. Kennedy warned during his own era, the goal, then and now, is to silence
decenters, and to bury the mistakes of the corrupted.
Due to the fact that the American
people have been so thoroughly propagandize for such an extended
period of time, one would only be wise to question the validity of
common opinions on governance. If an opinion is based upon the active
“public relations” campaign we are constantly exposed to in media
today, that opinion is not likely to reflect the true state of the
union, but only an ideal fantasy. In order to have the true,
unedited story, one needs not only the frequent multiple alternative,
and reliable sources of information, but to learn these tactics of
manipulation, so as to build an immunity thereto. Add in courage and willingness to face the less-than-ideal reality that
presents them, and the individual can then face the facts.
Related Article
The Anatomy of Propaganda –
Examining Multiple Tactics of Psychological Manipulation in Media
Today
The true state of the union seems to be much
different than that which we hear from any presidential address. The
state can be clearly seen from what we have just explored. Secrecy
on multiple levels for the sake of pushing an agenda of self-serving,
covetous, and exploitative interests. Elitist goals of corporate
domination, and subversion of foreign nations. All while lying to and propagandizing the very citizens that employ these government
perpetrators in the first place. We even see the FBI setting
innocent citizens up, coercing them into breaking the law, entrapping them, and throwing them into prison
under false pretenses.
All of this is perpetrated behind
closed doors for what may be nothing more than promoting economic
domination by American corporations (according to Kennedy, Perkins,
Manning, Snowden, and more). This seems completely opposed to
“liberty and justice for all”. This is textbook fascism. With
this dire situation in mind, the questions become... “What kind of
people would do something like this? Exactly who is responsible?”
...and, “Just what are such people capable of?” (...not to
mention the question of, “What are people like this still doing in
charge?”) In Part 2, we will seek to answer these questions, as
well as many more.
In Part 2, we will be discussing the subject of this global agenda and how the techniques of behavioral modification have been historically used to keep the public under control, and out of the way of the profiteers. We will also discuss a few of the former projects of the U.S. government (Project MK Ultra, MK NAOMI, Mockingbird, ,etc.) and investigate these projects in order to learn whether or not the techniques thereof have truly been put to rest.
For now, I leave you with some food for
thought in the form of a question. What is government? According to
Dictionary.com, government is...
“The political direction and control exercised over the actions of
the members, citizens, or inhabitants of communities, societies, and
states...”
This is the dictionary definition, but
what does this word actually mean? Where did it come from? The answer
might surprise you. To find out, let's take a look at the etymological
origin of this word.
“Govern” - from Latin gubernare "to direct, rule, guide,
govern"
“Ment” - from
Latin ment- "mind" (see mental)
The word translated from Latin to
English means “rule of the mind”, or loosely, “mind control”.
Consider that for a moment. The Latin breakdown of the word we
use to describe the official and organizational guidance structure of
this country translates to “mind control”. Stay tuned for Part 2.
Thanks for reading.
I started DTM because I
feel that informing the masses is the most positive and impactful
thing I am able to do at this point. I work at my articles as though
each one were my job, as I don't quite have the health to keep an
actual job right now. Somehow, I get more energized when I know I'm
having a positive impact in the lives of others.
Right now, I rely upon donations and ads to keep my site going. Ideally, we would live in a world free of the need for money of any kind. We will have that world very soon, I believe, but in the mean time, I depend upon this task to sustain me as I do my best to be dependable to you, my readers. I hope “Discerning the Mystery” is a truly positive and progressive experience for you.
Thank you for your
support.
No comments:
Post a Comment