A very worthwhile Bernie Sanders article entitled "How Corporate Media Threatens Our Democracy" was posted today at InTheseTimes.com. Irrespective of reader political affiliation I hope everyone will take the time to read and reflect on his words, personal experiences, and insights in dealing generally with media agents. In no way does this literary effort sanction POTUS' current attitude toward journalists.
In August of 2016 attorney Barry Pollack posted a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch asking that the Department of Justice's investigation of Julian Assange be closed.and any pending charges be dismissed. The letter is self-explanatory and can be read in its entirety at this link: https://www.docdroid.net/1CJRtOg/20160816-letter-to-us-attorney-general-loretta-e-lynch.pdf.html.
This might in large part explain why Julian Assange reportedly offered to turn himself in for extradition to the U.S. should President Obama decide to grant clemency to Chelsea Manning—which POTUS did today. In any case this tale bears watching. It's complex, far from over, and [in our opinion] as yet lacking perceptible justice.
So far the actions of Julian Assange and Wikileaks consistently warrant accolades and esteem. Nonetheless Julian Assange remains unjustly and illegally corraled—paraphrasing the U.N.—thanks to Swedish non-charges and a European Arrest Warrant [for questioning] as arguably rashly authorized by U.K. anti-terrorism legislation.
In any case if it weren't for involuntary transparency these days America would have little meaningful transparency at all. Despite government anti-whistleblower campaigns, involuntary transparency efforts are widely-recognized as being in the best public interests. The need for official secrecy is directly proportional to official deceit and not much else.
If you haven't read the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of 6 January 2017, entitled "Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections", please do so by clicking the link provided here.
If there is anything at all to learn from this report it is that a major house cleaning is long overdue in America's "intelligence" communities. On a composite basis hundreds of billions (with a "B") taxpayer dollars are allocated annually to the organizations generating this tripe. If this ICA is the best they can do it's pitiful return on investment.
Roughly half the ICA, "Annex A", attempts to denigrate a decade-old news organization whose international readership has grown in leaps and bounds merely by reporting more facts with less spin than its western counterparts. For example: ignoring facts, The Washington Post (WAPO) recently spiked its sales with two bogus anti-Russian stories. Despite learning that approach from federal government, WAPO cannot compete well against RT without truth.
The entire ICA is speculative judgment. so "Annex B" is the "horseshit disclaimer". It cursorily explains to the reader how speculative judgments are given degrees of credence in the absence of reasonable proof and how the highest degree of confidence is apt to be wrong. In other words "none of the propaganda herein can be substantiated but its what we want to believe so don't hold us accountable for enormous errors". Again, taxpayer money was used for this.
Hans Christian Andersen showed us the importance of alternative narratives in "The Emperor's New Clothes", a tale in need of frequent retelling in contemporary America. .
For the record the US has interfered in 81 foreign elections since the second world war, while the Soviet Union or Russia has interfered in 36 according to researcher Don Levin. Many believe any [still unsubstantiated] Russian impact on the recent U.S. election to be inconsequential. Today Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper seemed more concerned with verisimilitude issues than electioneering, and he seemed most defensive about spook "disparagement".
No one has injured the credibility of the "intelligence" communities more than Clapper and ex-NSA Director Keith Alexander when they lied to Congress in front of video recorders about NSA mass surveillance. Clapper had been given his question in advance and had ample opportunity after the hearing to correct the record nevertheless eventually [once Edward Snowden proved him a liar] claimed to have "misspoke" yet failed to immediately vacate his office. Consequently it seems disingenious for him to criticize others for "disparaging" the nation's intelligence communities. No one has done more to undermine "public trust and confidence in the Intelligence Community" than James Clapper and Keith Alexander and the Administration that sanctioned their abominable conduct. It remains unclear why "good, motivated people" might desire to work subservient to perjurers irrespective of impunity.
Today Clapper was testifying [truthfully?] to Congress on global cyberthreats—a hearing which from all reports appears to have been a CYA PR exercise rallying support for organizations arguably contemporarily undeserving of such solicitations. During that hearing unsubstantiated narratives were embellished and promulgated by officials and the sole-mentioned seeker-of-truth, Julian Assange, was ignominiously disparaged. Wikileaks and Julian Assange have not been seen lying to the public however members [heads] of the "intelligence" communities and relevant organizations have.
Clapper also suggested reviving the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) "on steroids" to counter an alleged "information war" with Russia. USIA was a once fashionable now defunct U.S. propaganda organ nominally devoted to "public diplomacy". Rather than going through all the trouble, expense, and futility of resurrecting a dinosaur, America might give a go to funding and rewarding the restoration of excellence in U.S. journalism. Since the citizenry learns from government, DNI could pave the way by providing irrefutable proof of his Russian allegations rather than expecting everyone to buy in to a prevaricator's innuendo—like WAPO does.
Worldwide audiences are weary of less-than-candid official narratives. Relatively unfettered media are just now beginning to synchronically blossom into a Nemesis.
America's Russian hysteria is being fed and fanned by so-called "intelligence" agencies. The intelligence briefing promised to President-elect Trump early this week has been delayed until Friday. Fridays are days characteristically used by officials to release controversial information while minimizing associated hoopla. Once briefed, Trump may or may not take public issue with the "intelligence" thesis. Our belief is that the case is weak and the stakes are high. The spooks will be throwing everything they can muster into this briefing to try and herd a reluctant most-valuable-player into the fold.
Millions have died in the Middle East and north Africa because of US-instigated influence wars against anyone and everyone opposing Yankee desires. To facilitate reasonable trade with Russia and Iran and others in the vicinity of conflict is to strengthen those nations economically and consequently is in direct conflict with intelligence guidelines like the Wolfowitz doctrine and/or the policy of containment so fashionable among western nations since WWII. Certainly trade expansion is anathema to perpetual operations sustaining the adversarial relationships necessary to maintaining spook-lucrative illusions of looming bogeymen.
In 2017 we expect the involuntary transparency boom to introduce astounding revelations about western back-room shenanigans—a critical service for the masses. Stay tuned.
In any case western media's war on truth and accompanying denigration of Russia has exceeded all previous bounds. The Washington Post (WAPO) appears to be leading the charge. WAPO's most recent bogus article about Russian hackers penetrating an electric grid in Vermont was picked up around the western world. Despite being recanted by WAPO, the bogus facts remain viewable even today on many western outlets1—cunningly maligning Russia to massive audiences for at least 5 consecutive days. Far better journalistic integrity is found at RT.COM.
1The words "including BBC" removed 01/04/2017 at 15:30 CST since the article could no longer be found at BBC sites at that time.
We start the new year atypically in agreement with Donald Trump who has misgivings about any significant Russian involvement in America's election process..
Back in December we suggested the outgoing administration to be blarneying about Russian plots in order to sow "seeds of doubt, where doubt is cast on the whole [election] process"—which is the downside that James Clapper claimed to worry about most as readily-influenced people began to wildly speculate about Vladimir Putin's personal involvement in the U.S. election process. Well, lame ducks POTUS and Clapper have managed to escalate electioneering doubt exponentially.
Instead of promoting national unity through commendable leadership, U.S. "intelligence" communities have opted for complicity in spreading doubt and dissention through innuendo and orchestrated silence without credible underpinnings. Presumably this is because they are subservient to a globally-recognized public liar who is immensely beholden to his savior POTUS for precluding prosecution when Clapper misled Congress and the American people over mass surveillance, arguably using the DNI office for political gain as perhaps is the case even today—now there's some well-placed, well-deserved innuendo.
Regardless, once again the compliant MSM has been easily manipulated with unsubstantiated official allegations and is enthusiastically reporting pure speculation as fact. Even The Atlantic went to press discussing "How Trump Made Russia's Hacking More Effective" while absurdly discussing Putin's "risk" in using the alleged approach and while cavalierly attributing the alleged "hacks" to "Russian spy services" and all the while admitting they have no knowledge of either motive or modus operandi.
On the other hand retired U.S. spooks with substantial knowledge of similar operations, and who are members of Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), have published a memorandum disputing most MSM reporting. Their memorandum is required reading for anyone with even mild interest in the subject matter because, as the memorandum states, the authors' ethos is "simply, to tell it like it is—without fear or favor".
Since Julian Assange has publicly disavowed Russian involvement, and since the "intelligence" communities have produced no concrete evidence, no unequivocal public statements, no briefings of congressional oversight committees, and since William Binney and friends believe these "intelligence" claims to be bogus, we will require reasonable proof of Russian hacking before getting on the bandwagon. Successfully executed this Russian plot ploy could be seen retroactively as de-legitimizing Trump and saving NATO revenue streams with a single blow.
In any case, U.S. government officals have public track records of mendacity with impunity. Julian Assange, Wikileaks, William Binney, and VIPS do not.