Much of the world has tired of government deceit and the rest of the world is tiring incrementally. Well before RT's relatively comprehensive report about Turkey's downing of the Russian Su-24, all circumstantial evidence has pointed to U.S. knowledge and perhaps unofficial blessing of what has always appeared to be a preplanned attack. It seems a shame that U.S. products and technology were used in this unnecessary attack and a much greater shame that analogous wartime products are constantly supplied to Turkey who selectively sends them on to terrorist organizations apparently with U.S. encouragement. [Turkish journalists revealing arms shipments are facing charges of espionage after alleging the country's intelligence services supplied arms shipments to Islamist rebels in Syria.] In any case Turkey never for a minute suspected Russia's Su-24 to threaten Turkish resources, lives, or property—shooting it down was grandstanding pure and simple, and ostensibly toward lame purpose.
It was Associate Justice Brandeis who warned us in 1914 that "Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example." Nowadays the lies and misrepresentations don't stop at official boundaries. According to MOON of Alabama the revered U.S. PBS provided a bit of deception on its own recently. Unable to find videos substantiating America's claim of destroying 116 oil tankers in Syria, PBS decided to show footage of the Russian air force destroying upwards of 500 Syrian tankers. Unfortunately this was done during an interview with U.S. military personnel and without clarifying that the bombing video is Russian, not U.S.. In other words currently there is no proof at all that the U.S. has destroyed any Syrian tankers at all—raising an interesting point. Maybe James Clapper will just verbally announce it to be fact. Who could question that? Credibility.
Back in 2013 a robust and autonomous news organization might have enthusiastically challenged the wisdom of permitting public liars to continue heading-up America's two most prestigious U.S. "intelligence" billets. Thanks to American hero Edward Snowden both the Director of National Intelligence and the NSA Director were revealed as serial public liars caught red-handedly disemminating lies, inacurracies, and perhaps a bit of wishful-thinking to a gullible public and an ultimately pliable, supportive, and essentially apathetic Congress.
Yesterday, as if it might be surprising, the NYT finally raised questions about the validity of formal military "intelligence" being disseminated, even in official U.S. circles: Here is one direct quote from that article: "This past summer, a group of Centcom analysts took concerns about their superiors to the inspector general, saying they had evidence that senior officials had changed intelligence assessments to overstate the progress of American airstrikes against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS." WOW, How astounding does it get? You mean those who lie openly in public with the expectation of impunity might twist the truth of official documents created in secrecy? If only to keep the public karma good and the revenue flowing freely? My my.
And remember that drone assassination targets are picked using communications metadata which is notoriously unreliable yet eventually approved at the highest of "intelligence" levels. Having known accomplished liars in the approval loop cannot build confidence among Middle East residents—everyone of whom are potential targets. If the NYT had aggresively championed truth back in 2013 resulting policy and personnel changes in U.S. "intelligence" circles might have precluded the necessity for yesterday's "news" about bogus facts.
Here's an idea: let's blame Snowden— even though policies and procedures for general overseas communications collection have not changed one iota since 2013 and even though, unlike Snowden, U.S. "intelligence" officials seem to consistently lie in public and private to everyone within earshot.
Congressman Miller has presented here what appears to be the current GOP position on Syrian refugees which characteristically directs blame to the current Administration's lack of planning for an overstated immigrant vetting problem in order to play on the fears of American citizens and appear rationally opposed to helping the unfortunate souls who have been uprooted and displaced as a direct or indirect result of ill-advised U.S. foreign policies at least since WWII. Politics and fear, the GOP will make you safer—HA—the GOP first brought us invasions of sovereign nations supported by lies, kidnapping, torture, Middle East power vacuums, illegal incarcerations, shameful and ineffective GITMO and all the other conditions condusive to the flourishing of ISIS or ISIL and other acronyms coined by the Chief Liar of U.S. "intelligence" [Clapper]. Hard working individuals upheaved by U.S. shortsightedness are in desperate need of some benefits from those contemporarily well-concealed U.S. Christian values.
It seems shameful that the U.S House of Representatives can enthusiastically provide blessings, nurture, and FUNDING for all those ill-advised U.S. policies like oppression, regime change, sanctions, bombing, assassinations, torture, and needless slaughter over at least a 70 year period and then not find a reasonable way to help the victims of that U.S folly. I'll stand with any POTUS veto of GOP legislation erecting fresh hurdles for Syrian and Iraqi refugees trying to enter the U.S.—should there be one.
There is no doubt that U.S policies have culminated in the greatest refugee crisis since WWII and the U.S. bears enormous responsibility for 2015's Middle East chaos—and characteristically without accountability. Growing numbers of those offended seem to be trying to find equally-ill-conceived ways to create accountability. Ideologies are not defeated with force and all the tit-for-tat belligerence is an enormous waste of time, energy, resources, and life.
Unfortunately the U.S. harbors enervated diplomacy and detente skills and since WWII Congress has given the bulk of discretionary annual revenues to the military-industrial-surveillance coffers nurturing incremental militarization of the nation despite Ike's 1961 warnings. Now every U.S. problem is viewed as a nail by the-not-so-far-behind-the-scenes hammers-in-charge. Like Chalmers Johnson said in 2007 in the prologue to Nemesis: "Unfortunately, our political system may no longer be capable of saving the United States as we know it, since it is hard to imagine any president or Congress standing up to the powerful vested interests of the Pentagon, the secret intelligence agencies, and the military-industrial complex."
Yesterday RT.COM reported that Wikileaks has published evidence that over half the roughly 3 billion dollars in "funds...to help disabled people find jobs...[went] to defense contractors and other large corporations that did not have many disabled employees...newly released audio files support the claim that more than half of the labor placed by SourceAmerica under the program went to the Department of Defense and contractors like Boeing and Lockheed Martin".
Of course anyone with first hand experience in and around the military-industrial gang knows this is nothing unusual—definitely not "news". Funds legislatively allocated for various purposes frequently end up being conveniently redirected to reward the entrenched who "play ball". Overall the system appears extremely corrupt and highly competent small businesses on the outside [deemed "uncontrollable"] seem often irrationally yet effectively demonized or disparaged early-on their associations with government programs. All of government procurement is procedure driven and there seems to be no reasonable procedure for handling excellence in timely results. Competence threatens that status quo.
Surely everyone at sometime or another has encountered procurement corruption stories stemming from activities within the highest military procurement levels.
Many astute earthings—even a few Americans—recognize James Clapper and Keith Alexander to be accomplished public liars who back in 2013 appear to have intentionally misled Congress, the American people, and the rest of the world about covert and arguably unconstitutional "intelligence" activities including heretofore needless mass surveillance of private citizens. Despite multiple untruths Keith Alexander, a West Point graduate, was allowed to retire from the U.S. armed forces without flag-rank reduction. James Clapper too was not forced to resign his office and continues his questionable rhetoric as Director of National Intelligence even to this day. Apparent lack of personal courage, and disregard for the office he holds, compel him to declare that he "misspoke" rather than "lied through his teeth" about mass surveillance. Nevertheless when "intelligence" officials speak the general public tries to listen—in spite of both poor official track records and readily-available public information about the culture of deceit which underpins "intelligence" agencies and facilitates freewheeling operations funded by massive revenue streams which cannot be audited.
Unfortunately yesterday's ludicrous assertion by CIA director John Brennan that Edward Snowden's disclosures are somehow responsible for Friday's Paris attacks will be well-received by those who fail to recognize government actions as anti-social rather than social. In official circles every contingency becomes an opportunity to expand government power thereby contributing to sole core business goals of self-aggrandizement and expansion. Exploitation of French grief and misfortune in order to shortsightedly convince citizenries to "roll over" for mass surveillance might be politically expedient nevertheless is arguably traitorous in America. From this vantage point Edward Snowden appears to be of far greater value to this once enviable nation than does either John Brennan or a like minded James Woolsey—both of whom champion an organization which practices remotely controlled assassinations of secretly-defined secretly-selected "suspects" who are denied both due process and historically inherent protections of international borders [thereby aiding and abetting ISIL recruiters]. "Intelligence" lawlessness and desire for outlaws' revenge will never end before effective non-militarized oversight is implemented. In the meantime, the spooks will always blame someone else for anything undesirable in proximity to their perennially expanding purview—which facilitates their perennially expanding revenue streams..
Yesterday U.S. Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of Orange County, California, told senior US "diplomats" that America's failure to favorably consider ongoing Russian proposals for cooperative Middle East efforts has been detrimental to U.S. interests and devastating to Syria "Had we been working with the Russians all along in good faith, I believe the situation in the Middle East would have been totally different, and better, more stable...The double standard that we've been judging Russia...is just overwhelming". The quotes are taken from a very worthwhile read posted by RT.COM.
Meanwhile at yesterday's Potomac, Maryland, fund-raiser again according to RT.COM President Obama stated that "The measure of strength internationally is not simply by how many countries we're occupying, or how many missiles we're firing, but the strength of our diplomacy and the strength of our commitment to human rights and our belief that we've got to cooperate with other countries together to solve massive problems like terrorism, but also like climate change"—which might explain in large part why U.S world supremacy seems to be waning with momentum now that her diplomacy appears ineffective and orchestrated, her respect for human rights perpetually ravaged since earlier administrations, and her cooperation with other countries seemingly confined to rapacious allies conjoined at the head through the cohesive power of public plunder; but you won't hear any of that constructively dissected in lame-stream.
America no longer funds critical investigative journalism and lame-stream reflects the preemptive censorship of abject militarization. Consequently more and more American audiences are turning to outside news sources like Al Jazeera, RT, UK's The Guardian, and even sometimes BBC. News audience growth seems directly proportional to the quality and quantity of truths presented—RT audiences have mushroomed in the past decade and continue to expand. "Just 10 years ago, US media enjoyed a virtual monopoly over the hearts and minds of the global village to promote the 'NATO narrative,' as it were. Now the US media 'masters of the universe' want to return to the vaulted golden days of journalism when they ruled the airwaves...If there is one thing that the severely monopolized, homogenized and fanaticized US corporate-owned media despises more than anything, it is competition", says American writer and journalist Robert Bridge from Moscow.
Senator John McCain is big on propaganda and unfortunately seems not so enthusiastic about truth.. One protege from warmongering McCain's so-called Institute for International Leadership has recently suggested a number of ill-advised actions published in the Washington Post presumably as "viable" despite promoting additional international discord while putting RT out of business in the West. Voices of reason have responded and a part of this piece by Margarita Simonyan, editor in chief of RT was published in the Washington Post.
Yesterday RT.COM posted a brief interview with retired USAF Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski. who publicly suggested the placing of U.S. special operations personnel on-the-ground in Syria is yet another ill-advised strategic ploy—something believed by many military observers. The RT.COM article is well worth reading in its entirety because Ms. Kwiatkowski has the virtual balls to fiercely and objectively criticize her former employer: "...remember that it is an illegal act to send our troops into Syrian space, air space or ground space, without the permission of the government of Syria...we don't have permission of the Syrian government to put those troops there at all. They are there illegitimately. So when they get killed or injured or harmed we have a problem in a diplomatic sense...certainly, you can't say that anything the Pentagon is doing in the Middle East is well planned. They themselves admit this... it is such a game that they are playing—no good results for our people, no good results for the Syrian people." Read the article for additional valuable insights.