THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS ASKING FOR A GOVERNMENT BAILOUT VIA CENSORSHIP

screen-shot-2016-12-09-at-10-35-32-am

The current controversy is different. Many people in Washington are irate over Wikileaks — not because the email were untrue but because they proved what many had long suspected . . . that Washington is a highly corrupt place full of truly despicable people. For people who make their living on controlling media and information, it was akin to the barbarians breaching the walls of Rome. So the answer is to call for government regulation to combat what will be declared “fake” news or propaganda. It is only the latest effort to convince people to surrender their rights and actually embrace censorship. 

– From Jonathan Turley’s: Washington Post Issues Correction To “Fake News” Story

Watching Hillary Clinton attack “fake news” and calling for legislative action against free speech she doesn’t like got me thinking. Why is she doing this? Yes, it’s obviously related to her notorious personality trait of never taking responsibility for anything and attaching herself to an invented controversy in order to deflect blame for her monumentally embarrassing loss to Donald Trump. But there’s more going on here. A lot more.

To set the stage, we need to examine the types of people who are most jumping on the “fake news” meme. What you’ll find is that it’s a who’s who of the most contemptible and corrupt people in America. As Glenn Greenwald so accurately noted in his piece published earlier today:

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

But the problem here goes way beyond mere hypocrisy. Complaints about Fake News are typically accompanied by calls for “solutions” that involve censorship and suppression, either by the government or tech giants such as Facebook. But until there is a clear definition of “Fake News,” and until it’s recognized that Fake News is being aggressively spread by the very people most loudly complaining about it, the dangers posed by these solutions will be at least as great as the problem itself.

Just in case you think the above is an exaggeration, is there an individual in America more distrusted and more widely viewed as a compulsive liar than Hillary Clinton? The list of her outright lies is nearly endless (see: Video of the Day – Watch Hillary Clinton Lie for 13 Minutes Straight). Not only that, but Hillary Clinton was more than happy to promote obvious fake news stories one week before the election. Here’s the most egregious example:

Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank.

This was fake news, but somehow I doubt Hillary will be looking for Congress to take her to task for legitimizing and spreading it.

Then there’s the downright comical example of Brian Williams. You know, the NBC anchor who literally lost his job for promoting fake news about himself (see: NBC’s Brian Williams is Forced to Admit His Tale of Being on a Downed Helicopter in Iraq Was Pure Fantasy). Now he is one of the “esteemed pundits” railing against the terror of fake news. You can’t make this stuff up.

 

The Hill reports:

MSNBC anchor Brian Williams, who lost his job with NBC’s nightly news for exaggerating details of his time reporting in Iraq, slammed President-elect Donald Trump and members of his transition team for spreading fake news throughout the election.

Pure comedy, but let’s get serious. At this point, I want to direct your attention to what is perhaps the most astute commentary on the fabricated “fake news” push to date. The following was the concluding paragraph to Jonathan Turley’s, Washington Post Issues Correction To “Fake News” Story:

The current controversy is different. Many people in Washington are irate over Wikileaks — not because the email were untrue but because they proved what many had long suspected . . . that Washington is a highly corrupt place full of truly despicable people. For people who make their living on controlling media and information, it was akin to the barbarians breaching the walls of Rome. So the answer is to call for government regulation to combat what will be declared “fake” news or propaganda. It is only the latest effort to convince people to surrender their rights and actually embrace censorship. 

This perfectly describes what is going on at the most macro level, and reminded me exactly of what Wall Street did in the aftermath of its destruction of the U.S. economy during the financial crisis. Faced with a potential loss of their fortunes, jobs and reputations, Wall Street invented a meme that the industry needed to be bailed out without consequences in order to “save Main Street.” This was one of the most brazen, yet successful examples of propaganda I have witnessed in my entire life.

Wall Street got exactly what it wanted and then some. It proceeded to pay out record bonuses the very next year (2010) and not a single executive was held accountable or went to jail. Free market capitalism was completely suspended in order to save some of the wealthiest and most privileged people in America. They used the levers of the state to save themselves and preserve this key segment of status quo power.

Fast forward eight years, and we witness yet another spectacular status quo failure. Due to its clownish and completely inaccurate coverage of the 2016 election, the mainstream media and the pundit class generally completely torched its reputation. As a result, alternative, independent media is eating their lunch. Rather than accept the consequences of this historic failure, legacy media has decided to take a page from the Wall Street playbook. They are asking for a government bailout. However, this bailout is far more dangerous than the one which preceded it.

While the Wall Street bailout consisted of showering financial criminals with infinite sums of money until they were once again masters of the universe, the media is asking for a bailout via censorship. Yes, that’s right. Hillary Clinton and other status quo fake news peddlers are actively asking for Congressional action in order to silence their competition.  This isn’t just about protecting the status quo narrative for the sake of maintaining a transparently false manufactured reality. It’s equally about preserving the status, wealth, reputation and careers of individuals whose failures should have landed them on the street, unemployed for their almost incomprehensible and well documented incompetence. Just like we continue to suffer from incompetent criminal elites on Wall Street, the media now wants to build a similar government-sponsored wall around itself. Such an outcome would be an unmitigated disaster for this nation.

Instead, what we actually need in this country (and what I expect to happen) was perfectly articulated in a recent article by Nathan J. Robinson in his must read article in Current Affairs titled, The Necessity of Credibility. He writes:

Yet it is telling that after the election, the people who were most wrong during the campaign are still producing voluminous commentary. No outlet that wanted to regain trust and build audiences would be keeping such people on its staff. But “pundit tenure” is powerful. Thus is also likely that the quest for credible media will necessitate the creation of new media. CNN and The Washington Post have never shown a particularly encouraging capacity for introspection and self-improvement, and it’s unlikely that they’re contemplating major internal overhauls in their mission and accountability practices. Their institutional imperatives consist, after all, largely of seeking views and clicks. For them, the 2016 election was a success rather than a failure. A lot of people, after all, tuned in. Why should they do things any differently? Thus it would be useful to have fresh, truly independent outlets, ones that disclose their biases, are transparent in their methods, and are constantly trying to improve themselves rather than simply pursuing the same useless sensationalism and empty horse-race punditry. 

 

The US: A Dead Nation Walking — Paul Craig Roberts

Here is an informative article by Dmitry Orlov: http://www.cluborlov.com

I use the writings of Orlov and The Saker as checks on my own conclusions.

maxresdefault

In his article Orlov concludes that the United States is a dead nation, still walking, but no longer a uni-power. I agree with Orlov that US weapon systems are more focused on profits than on effectiveness and that Russia has superior weapons and a superior cause based on protection rather than dominance. However, in his assessment of the possibility of nuclear war, I think that Orlov under-appreciates the commitment of Washington’s Neoconservatives to US world hegemony and the recklessness of the Neoconservatives and Hillary Clinton. Washington is incensed that Russia (and China) dare to stand up to Washington, and this anger crowds out judgment.

Orlov, also, I think, under-estimates the weakness in the Russian government provided by the “Atlanticist Integrationists.” These are members of the Russian elite who believe that Russia’s future depends on being integrated with the West. To achieve this integration, they are willing to sacrifice some undetermined amount of Russian sovereignty.

It is my conclusion that Washington is aware of the constraint that the desire for Western acceptance puts on the Russian government and that this is why Washington, in a direct thrust at Russia, was comfortable orchestrating the coup that overthrew the elected Ukrainian government. I believe that this constraint also explains the mistakes the Russian government made by refusing the requests of the Donetsk and Luhansk republics to be reincorporated as parts of Russia, where the territories formerly resided, and by the premature withdrawal from Syria that allowed Washington to resupply the jihadists and to insert US forces into the conflict, thus complicating the situation for Russia and Syria.

Orlov sees Russian advantage in the ongoing conflict between Kiev and the breakaway republics as the conflict could be leading to the collapse of the US puppet government in Kiev. However, the disadvantage is that the ongoing conflict is blamed on Russia and feeds Western anti-Russian propaganda. It also makes Russia look weak and unsure of itself as if the Western criticism of Russia’s reincorporation of Crimea has struck home and Russia is afraid to repeat it by accepting the pleas of the break-away republics.

Moreover, if the Russian government had accepted the requests of Donetsk and Luhansk to return to Russia from which they were artificailly separated, not only would the conflict have been ended, but also the Ukrainian people would have realized the disaster caused by Washington’s coup against their government, and Europe would have realized from decisive Russian action that it was not in Europe’s interest to provoke Russia in behalf of Washington. The correct Russian response was prevented by the Atlanticist Integrationist desire to appease Washington.

In contrast to Orlov, The Saker underestimates Russian military strength, but he does understand the constraints placed on Russian decisiveness by the Atlanticist Integrationists, who seem to count in their ranks the economic establishment including the central bank and perhaps the prime minister himself. Putin does not seem to be overly concerned with what appears to me to be a fifth column of Washington’s agents as Putin himself has placed heavy bets on achieving accommodation with the West. However, Putin has cracked down on the US-financed NGOs that have tried to destabilize Russia.

Western reporting and think tank and university reports on Russia are propaganda and are useless to understanding the situation. For example, in the current issue of The National Interest Thomas Graham, who had the Russian desk on the National Security Council during the George W. Bush regime, attributes the “destabilization of eastern Ukraine” to “Russia’s annexation of Crimea.” He avoids mentioning the US-orchestrated overthrow of an elected Ukrainian government and that Crimea voted overwhelmingly (97 percent) to rejoin Russia when faced with the Russophobic government Washington established in Kiev.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-sources-russian-conduct-17462

According to Graham, the foul deed of Russia’s acceptance of a democratic outcome upset all of Washington’s very friendly, supportive, and hopeful attitudes toward Russia. With all of Washington’s “assumptions that had guided America’s Russia policy” irreversibly dashed, it is no longer possible to maintain that Russia “is a suitable partner for addressing global issues.” Graham goes on to define Russia as a problem because Russia favors a multi-polar world to a uni-polar world run by Washington.

It is possible to read Graham’s repeat of the propaganda line as Graham genuflecting before the Neoconservatives before going on quietly in a low-key manner to attack their hegemonic attitude toward Russia. In his concluding paragraph Graham says that Washington must find a new approach to Russia, an approach of balance and limits that rejects “resort to force, which would be devastating given the destructive power of modern weaponry.”

All in all, it is an artful argument that begins by blaming Russia’s response to Washington’s provocations for a dangerous situation and concludes with the argument that Washington must adjust to Russia’s defense of her own national interests.

It is reassuring to see some realism creeping back into Washington attitudes toward Russia. However, realism is still a minority view, and it is highly unlikely that it would be the view of a Hillary regime.

In my opinion, the chance of nuclear war from Neoconservative intention, miscalculation or false launch warning remains high. The provocations of US/NATO military forces and missile bases on Russia’s borders are reckless as they build tensions between nuclear powers. It is in times of tension that false warnings are believed and miscalculations occur. In the interest of life on earth, Washington should be de-escalating tensions with Russia, not building them. So far there is no sign that the Neoconservatives are willing to give up their hegemonic agenda for the sake of life on earth.

TRUMP EXPOSED – Owned by Rothschids – Controlled by the Israeli Mossad & US. CIA

 

Money Laundering with CIA and MOSSAD connections .. thats what no one is talking about. Thats right .. the trail is there, I am clear that Trump is neck deep in this with his owners the Rockefeller’s and Rothschild’s. There will be very little that trump could do even if he really means what he says what he means, to bring industry back to these shores. This sell off of American Manufacturing was deliberate. This guy Trump is an AIPAC ZIONIST 100% ISRAEL EVERYTHING owned and controlled by the BANKERS.
THE ROCKEFELLERS AND ROTHSCHILS HAVE BEEN HAVING THEIR WAY WITH CHINA FOR OVER A 100 YEARS.
They are not gonna let these jobs come back, they’ve been making to much money because of it.

Trump – ZIONIST CRYPTIC – Foreign Policy Speech EXPOSED

 

As I have Spoke out about my views on all Political Candidates. I could not nor would not endorse anyone on the Election Menu. Everyone of them are toeing the line of Propaganda of Israeli/Rothschild’s Agenda .. This would be everything that comes out of the media and each and every politician Including But not limited to Trump or Hillary, but every one of them that I have seen!!

Trump is a master at BRANDING as good as the best of them. He has spent his entire life perfecting this technique and the results of his greatness in this art, shows in his overwhelming Success in his Presidential bit for the White House.

In this video evaluation of Mr. Trump’s own ability to understand that people are awakening to the Israeli/Rothschild’s Agenda!!
My Own Proclamation to this and in my opinion based on the historical dealings with the Rothschild’s and their Ancestry. Their banking, dealings in War and how they run their Operators. Trump will give them everything that they demand from him. I believe this to all be just “Smoke and Mirrors” and that Trump already knows he must not get outta line.

This is not a time to play around,Don’t fall for the PSYOP Social Manipulation. The TRUMP phenomena .. its really no different than Obama campaign BS.

Soros Trains Socialists To Combat Populists, Brags About Propaganda To Brand Police As Racist, Runs Online Voting In Utah And Across The US, Gives $650,000 In Cash To BLM For Fomenting Violent Revolution

Leaked Soros Memo: Refugee Crisis ‘New Normal,’ Gives ‘New Opportunities’ For Global Influence

images

A leaked memo from left-wing financier George Soros’s Open Society Foundations argues that Europe’s refugee crisis should be accepted as a “new normal,” and that the refugee crisis means “new opportunities” for Soros’ organization to influence immigration policies on a global scale.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/15/leaked-soros-memo-refugee-crisis-new-normal-gives-new-opportunities-for-global-influence/#ixzz4HXUnfqiK

Open Society Foundation leaks show funding of training to combat populist parties and shut down free speech

Leaked documents from the Open Society Foundations show the group to have actively trained socialist MEPs to combat populist parties and shut down free speech.

A series of documents leaked from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations have revealed a number of startling revelations about the work of the NGO when it comes to combating what they refer to as “xenophobic parties” in countries around Europe. According to at least one document the foundations has been calling for the censorship of language in the European parliament they term as hateful and have been actively working with various socialist members of the European parliament to train them on how to  combat “xenophobic populism.”

The leaked document entitled, “The Open Society European Policy Institute Outcomes and Activities Update”from December 2015 to February 2016 describes the various topics and initiatives the Open Societies foundations’ European policy institute (OSEPI) is trying to push through the European parliament and other European governments.

Under the heading of equality and anti-discrimination the document provides insights into how the foundation operates and it’s relationships with politicians. Not only does the foundation claim to want to put a stop to populist parties but is also actively training socialist MEPs in the European parliament. The report states, “OSEPI organised a follow-up training session for Socialist MEPs on how to counter xenophobic populism in the parliament.”

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/08/16/soros-group-trained-socialists-combat-will-people/

SOROS GROUP BRAGS ABOUT PROPAGANDA TO BRAND POLICE AS RACIST…

The Open Society Foundations, through it’s “Xen fund” has bragged about being the only group to fund reports and advocacy accusing European police of discrimination toward minority groups.

A document entitled “OSIFE-Justice Initiative Portfolio Review – Ethnic Profiling in Europe” shows a coordinated effort to fund reports and advocacy to accuse European Police of discriminatory behaviour. This follows revelations in the United States that Mr. Soros and his foundation have been actively funding groups who are aggressive toward police, accusing them of discriminatory behavior toward minorities.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/08/16/soros-group-brags-accusing-european-police-discriminatory-policies/

Soros Chairs Firm Running Online Voting in Utah and across the US

Smartmatic Group, an electronic voting firm whose worldwide headquarters is located in the United Kingdom, will be running the online balloting process in the Utah Republican Open Caucuses on Tuesday.

The chairman of Smartmatic’s board, Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, currently serves on the board of George Soros’s Open Society Foundation and has close ties to the billionaire.

The Wall Street Journal dubbed the Republican party’s online adventure on Tuesday as “one of the biggest online votes conducted so far in the U.S.” and the “largest experiment with online presidential voting since 2004, when Michigan allowed Democrats to vote in a party caucus via the Internet.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/20/soros-board-member-chairs-firm-running-online-balloting-for-tuesdays-utah-caucuses/

Investment Bankster Terrorism: Hacked Soros Memo: $650,000 In Cash to Black Lives Matter For Motels, Meals and Bullets. It’s time to arrest Soros for fomenting violent revolution

George Soros’s Open Society Institute viewed the 2015 Baltimore unrest following the death of Freddie Gray as opening a “unique opportunity” to create “accountability” for the Baltimore police while aiding activists in reforming the city, according to hacked documents reviewed by Breitbart Jerusalem.

The documents further confirm that the Open Society last year approved $650,000 to “invest in technical assistance and support for the groups at the core of the burgeoning #BlackLivesMatter movement.”

The information was contained in a detailed 69-page Open Society report on the agenda of an Open Society U.S. Programs board meeting held in New York October 1 to October 2, 2015.

The report directly states the Open Society views the Baltimore unrest last year as a crisis that can be utilized to carry out the organization’s agenda.

The document states:

The killing of Freddie Gray in April helped spawn weeks of peaceful protests by Baltimore residents and allies from the #BlackLivesMatter movement that were temporarily interrupted by a period of unrest that lasted less than 48 hours and resulted in some injuries and millions of dollars in property damage to neighborhood businesses. While many lamented the damage done, the overwhelming sentiment is that the uprising has catalyzed a paradigm shift in Baltimore that offers opportunities for major justice reforms.

In particular, recent events offer a unique opportunity to accelerate the dismantling of structural inequality generated and maintained by local law enforcement and to engage residents who have historically been disenfranchised in Baltimore City in shaping and monitoring reform. Building on our existing networks and programs, OSI-Baltimore will focus investments on: 1) creating a culture of accountability for policing in Baltimore, recognizing the pervasive racism, disrespect and lawlessness that gave rise to recent events; and 2) building the capacity of activists in Baltimore to demand and achieve immediate and long-term reforms.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/16/hacked-soros-memo-baltimore-riots-provide-unique-opportunity-reform-police/

Look how he dictates to the puppet US president obarry
http://soros.dcleaks.com/view?…

Elitist Soros is the global puppet master of the European Parliament stage, the German Government, the British Government, the American Government and the Brazilian Government just to name a few obvious ones.

In the USA Soros pulls the strings of the Democrat Party (= CPUSA action arm), the Obama Administration, the Hillary Clinton campaign, the entire echelon of the RINO Establishment of the Republican Party and through his organizations the local and state governments.

Whatever Soros doesn’t control, Zuckerberg and the other minor Elites control alongside the control exercised by the Muslim Brotherhood and the Sunni Block rising out of Saudi Arabia.

POWER CORRUPTS. ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY. ELITES DELENDI SUNT.

It is time to transfer the power back to and redistribute it equally amongst all individuals in each country.

It is through the mechanisms of Communism / Fascism / Socialism that Elitists are able to control the masses — hence their persistent support of these political agendas.

American Originalist Constitutionalism was specifically designed to hinder elitist ambitions and over-concentration of power in one individual, thus providing the very set of principles that undermines Soros’ and the Elitists goals — hence the Elitists and Soros’ persistent and aggressive efforts to destroy American Originalist Constitutionalism.

James Howard Kunstler: Racketeering Is Ruining Us

Understanding why there are all those hands in your wallet
by Adam Taggart

If you don’t understand what’s causing a particular problem, then it’s pretty difficult to come up with an effective solution.

Author, commentator and longtime friend-of-the-site James Howard Kunstler returns to our podcast this week to discuss the importance of accurate diagnosis — in this case, of the scourge he sees as accelerating America’s downslide into economic and social decline: Racketeering.

More associated with the organized crime bosses of a century ago, it’s not a word used often these days. But that doesn’t diminish in any way its relevance to and impact on our lives today:

The disorders in politics that we’re seeing now are really expressions of the larger disorders in our economic life and our financial life. That just happens to be the avenue that the expression is coming out of. Another point I’d like to make is that the reason that people are against Hillary or dumping on Hillary or don’t like her, is because she’s a poster child for racketeering. I encourage people who are talking about our circumstances and people who are interested in the news and election, to use the word racketeering to describe what’s going on in this country. You really need the right vocabulary to understand exactly what’s going on.

Racketeering is just pervasive in all of our activities. Not just in politics but in things even like medicine and education. Obviously the college loan scheme is an example of racketeering. Anybody who has to go to an emergency room with a child whose broken their finger or something, is going to end up with a bill for $20,000. You know why? Because of medical racketeering. And so, these are really efforts to money-grub by any means necessary, often in ways that are unethical and probably illegal. Let’s use that word racketeering to describe our national situation.

And let’s remember by the way, the activities of the central banks is just another form of racketeering. Using debt issuance and attempting to control interest rates in order to conceal our inability to generate the kind of real wealth that we need to continue as a techno-industrial society.

Societies have a really hard time understanding what they’re doing, articulating the problems that they face and coming up with a coherent consensus about what’s happening, and coming up with a coherent consensus about what to do about it. Combine that with another quandary, the relationships between energy and the dead racket for concealing real capital formation. I like to reduce it to one particular formula that is pretty easy for people to understand. It’s a classic quandary: that oil priced at over $75 a barrel in today’s dollars tends to crush economies, and oil priced under $75 a barrel in today’s dollars tends to crush oil companies. There is no real sweet spot between those two places. We’re ratcheting between them and each one of them entails a lot of destruction. That’s a terrible quandary that we’re in and it’s being expressed in banking and finance…and the people in charge of those things don’t really know what else to do except continue the deformation of institutions and instruments.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/james-howard-kunstler-racketeering-is-ruining-us/

DOCUMENTS CONFIRM CIA CENSORSHIP OF GUANTÁNAMO TRIALS

 

“Why in the name of heaven is the US military torturing when they know that the tortured person will say anything his torturers want him to say to get the torture to stop?!?

Because this wasn’t about what the tortured had done or not done; it was about eliciting confessions with which to justify the continued use torture.

I would like to politely remind our military and civilian leadership that when we, as a country, torture, or outsource torture, we demonstrate to the world that Americans are complete, abysmal hypocrites when it comes human rights, democracy, and the moral treatment of prisoners of war.

And I would also like to politely remind our military and civilian leadership that when we, as a country, torture, or outsource torture, this gives carte blanche for foreign countries which really don’t like the American government that much, to torture our civilian and military personnel.”

Please do take a moment to reflect on that, won’t you?!

hqdefault

 

IN JANUARY 2013, during the military trial of five men accused of plotting the 9/11 attacks, a defense lawyer was discussing a motion relating to the CIA’s black-site program, when a mysterious entity cut the audio feed to the gallery. A red light began to glow and spin. Someone had triggered the courtroom’s censorship system.

The system was believed to be under the control of the judge, Col. James Pohl. In this case, it wasn’t.

“The 40-second delay was initiated, not by me,” Pohl said. He was referring to the delayed audio feed, which normally broadcasts to the press and other observers seated in the gallery. The gallery is cut off from the courtroom by three layers of soundproof Plexiglas. “I’m curious as to why. … If some external body is turning the commission off under their own view of what things ought to be, with no reasonable explanation, then we are going to have a little meeting about who turns that light on or off.”

Later, Pohl said the censorship was the work of an “OCA,” short for “Original Classification Authority.” In the future, he said, no external body would be permitted to unilaterally censor what was happening in his courtroom.

Many have speculated that Pohl’s “OCA” is in fact the CIA. That speculation is now confirmed with the release of three new documents by The Intercept.The documents show the evolution of secret rules governing what is and is not allowed to be discussed before the military court at Guantánamo.

All three of the declassified documents are marked “secret” and were distributed to defense attorneys and Pentagon-employed courtroom security officers. The documents clearly identify CIA as the OCA for torture-related information at the Guantánamo military commission proceedings.

Dean Boyd, who heads the CIA’s public affairs office, referred questions about the January 2013 censorship incident to the Pentagon. Lt. Col. Valerie Henderson, a Pentagon spokesperson, declined to comment. “I don’t have anything to offer you beyond what is written in [the court] transcript,” she said.

This page from a 2008 CIA guidance document designates as top secret the “treatment of detainees,” their “conditions of confinement,” and certain “false allegations of torture,” which were later shown to have merit.

Another CIA spokesperson confirmed the dates of the guidance, which are not given in two of the three documents.The first guidance document is from spring of 2008.

The second document is from late spring or early summer of 2009.

The third document is from September 2011.

The Intercept obtained the documents through an ongoing Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the CIA and other federal agencies. Yale Law School’s Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic is providing legal representation for the request.

The term “OCA” is a placeholder that can refer to multiple agencies, but with respect to the rendition and torture program, Guantánamo observers have assumed for some time that it means the CIA. A defense lawyerasserted the connection in open court, and it has previously been hinted at in several other documents. At the end of January 2013, Judge Pohl issued a ruling declaring that there would be no more outside censorship of the tribunals. “It is the judge that controls the courtroom,” he said.

The courtroom’s internal censorship system, including the Plexiglas and audio delay, continues to this day. But assuming Judge Pohl’s order is enforced, the CIA no longer has the power to decide when to cut the courtroom audio, as it did in January 2013.

“The Department of the Defense runs the courtroom, but CIA owns a lot of the information,” said attorney James Connell III, who is representing Ammar al-Baluchi before the tribunal. Baluchi, whose torture at multiple overseas black sites was depicted in the film Zero Dark Thirty, is one of five men who stand accused of plotting the 9/11 attacks and now face the death penalty.

What appears to be a 2015 version of a similar CIA guidance document was released by OpenTheGovernment.org last year. Unlike the older guidance documents released by The Intercept today, the sections addressing the CIA’s black-site and rendition programs are completely redacted.

The CIA calls its classification rules “guidelines … to be applied throughout the legal process.” They are intended to provide the Pentagon-employed court security officers with “general direction about when national security information may be at issue, … triggering the need for protection.”

Much of what the CIA sought to keep out of open court effectively constrained the detainees’ ability to give an account of their own torture at the hands of the CIA and officials from other countries where they were held.

At first, these prohibitions were broad, but they grew narrower over time. The oldest guidance document, from 2008, prohibits talking about “conditions of confinement of detainees” and “treatment of detainees,” although “general allegations of torture are unclassified.” By this time, the CIA had released three of the names of detainees subjected to waterboarding. Though the CIA continues to insist those three were the only ones waterboarded, the claim is tenuous at best. According to the 2008 guidance, no other detainee could talk about waterboarding. Anyone who did, wrote the CIA, was lying, and even the existence of those lies was secret.

“Allegations of waterboarding by any detainees other than the three … are false allegations and are TS//SCI,” the guidance states.

In other words, even the alleged lies of other detainees who claimed to have been waterboarded were designated top secret and “sensitive compartmentalized information,” a higher-level classification than top secret alone. And yet many of these allegations, which the CIA’s guidance kept out of the tribunals for years, were later shown to have merit.

“In effect, the government was making the chilling and breathtaking assertion that it owned and controlled detainees’ memories of torture, whether true or false,” said Ashley Gorski, a staff attorney with the ACLU, who reviewed the newly released guidance documents.

“We stand by the document,” Dean Boyd, director of the CIA’s public affairs office, wrote in an email.

The 2008 guidance identifies CIA’s own “Original Classification Authority” as having the power to declassify statements by detainees. Other officials and agencies likely have some say as well. The 2011 and 2009 guidance say that the president and director of national intelligence can also declassify information related to the torture program; the 2008 guidance suggests that the power was delegated even further.

Seventy-six men are still held at Guantánamo. Sixteen are “forever prisoners,” who have not been charged by the court but are considered too dangerous to be candidates for release. President Obama’s self-imposed deadline to close the prison is more than six years past due.

Initially, the purpose of Guantánamo was to extract useful intelligence from high-level detainees to aid the war on terror. The orders to subject detainees to torture — or what the George W. Bush administration euphemistically called “enhanced interrogation” — came from the White House. It fell to the CIA to carry them out. The agency’s initial intelligence-driven mission got muddled up by other motives — revenge against al Qaeda, the avoidance of political fallout, control over the flow of information to Congress and the public, and later, by the problem of what to do with the detainees themselves.

Today’s legal environment is more open to detainees giving accounts of their own torture, according to Joseph Margulies, an attorney who represents Abu Zubaydah, one of the three men who the CIA admits having waterboarded.

“It is our position that the United States government has confirmed that Abu Zubaydah’s first-person account of his treatment is not classified,” Margulies said. “Therefore he ought to be allowed to disclose it.” As evidence of the shift, he pointed to the release of the Senate torture report summary, accounts of torture taken down by lawyers representing Majid Khan, and filings in Salim v. Mitchell, a lawsuit brought against two psychologists who designed the torture program as contractors for the CIA.

Connell, the attorney representing Ammar al-Baluchi, said that he welcomed the shift toward openness at Guantánamo but that the rules were still too restrictive. “The most important information for accountability is who did what and where they did it. Until that information is declassified, there will never be accountability for the CIA’s torture program.”

Top photo: The United States military courtroom at Camp Justice, where the U.S. military held its war court for the five Guantánamo Bay prisoners accused of helping orchestrate the September 11 terror attack. June 27, 2013, Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

 https://theintercept.com/2016/08/15/documents-confirm-cia-censorship-of-guantanamo-trials/

Last place CNN caught again purposely lying trying to support Hillary Clinton

Talk about dishonesty. No wonder CNN is in last place and is the most distrusted cable news channel on television. Check out these two photos and you’ll never want to watch this station again.

Dallas shooting false timeline – Many More than 2 People Involved

Fox News gives inaccurate timeline and order of sequences. Missing others as key to this event

We are losing our country to a bunch of International Crime Syndicate, operatives: Wake Up America. Are we so blind that we can no longer see what is really going on in this country?

Robert Steele: Has Trump Accepted A $20B Bribe From Lynn Rothschild To Throw The Election? Or Is He Just A Big Ego With No Vision & A Rotten Staff? UPDATE 4

Remember the claim that Trump was about to drop out? It was a hoax to discourage his supporters. The same with the recent claims that Hillary is ahead on the polls by double digits.

This is just more of the same; a Nixonian dirty trick by a politician who learned at the feet of the master.

There are two schools of thought about the current collapse of the Donald Trump campaign for the presidency.

One school of thought — the one favored by the smart connected money — is that Lynn Rothschild has made Trump an offer he could not refuse: $20B to disrupt the GOP nomination process and if nominated, to throw the race by any means necessary so that Hillary Clinton can be crowned “Her Royal Highness” as Maureen Down has so elegantly hinted in her recent New York Times article, The Perfect G.O.P. Nominee.

Click on Image to Enlarge

Click on Image to Enlarge

Combined with the Clinton ability to subvert the US Government (Barack Obama may have been promised a nomination to be a Supreme Court Justice, and perhaps even Chief Justice after Roberts gets an offer he cannot refuse, to retire; the Attorney General and the FBI Director are simply owned by the Clintons and the Rothschilds); and the Clinton ability to use the same electronic voting fraud against Trump  that she used against Bernie Sanders (as confirmed by Stanford University, withadditional details from Jon Rappoport), this is the most logical explanation for Trump blowing an almost certain landslide against Clinton.

Historical note: Sidney Blumenthal was in the room in 2000 when Warren Christopher relayed the bribe offer to Al Gore from Wall Street. The words Sid has used to sum up that offer to others are reproduced, third hand, below: Continue reading “Robert Steele: Has Trump Accepted A $20B Bribe From Lynn Rothschild To Throw The Election? Or Is He Just A Big Ego With No Vision & A Rotten Staff? UPDATE 4”