Another Former Analist
From PrisonPlanet ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern "does not rule out Western involvement in this week's Askariya mosque bombing in light of previous false flag operations that have advanced hidden agendas of the ruling elite."
Certainly the ruling elite have performed false flag ops (911 comes to mind) to advance a hidden agenda but in the case of the mosque bombing I do have to ask if there's a possibility the bombing might be the work of Iraq's former "ruling elite," considering the billion$ in funding and training the US for 20 years so generously supplied former CIA asset Saddam Hussein. Where did all Saddam's loyal well-trained republican elite guards go? Are they willing to fight for that Hussein look-alike on trial now? Is there any chance troops loyal to Saddam might want to fight a guerrilla war with the US, since historically the US is less than stellar on the ground; performing best when bombing and incinerating the enemy "back to the stone age."
McGovern … "suggested that Posse Comitatus, the law that forbids the military to take on a policing role within the US, is being systematically overthrown." Suggested huh? I've blogged more than once, and I quote myself,
"U.S. Code Sections 331 through 334. Section 332 states: "Pursuant to the presidential power to quell domestic violence, federal troops are expressly exempt from the prohibitions of Posse Comitatus Act, and this exemption applies equally to active-duty military and federalized National Guard troops."
The military has long been released from Posse Comitatus rules if needed to "quell domestic violence" or any disaster that might trouble us, if so ordered by a president. What part of "expressly exempt" do folks not understand?
McGovern continues ""Not only have the top ranks of the intelligence community been politicized and corrupted, so has the army. The military establishment is goose stepping around, saluting the President …"
Get a clue Homer McG, read Smedley Butler. The military has always been "politicized." And incidentally, perhaps he forgets his own military experience, but the military is required to salute the CIC.
Other notable quotes: " "As I look at the top Pentagon brass, I have to conclude that unlike my days as a US army officer, those folks have been so politicized that if the US President told them to go ahead and exercise police functions in this country they would go ahead and salute and they would do it, and that's really scary." …. McGovern concurred that staged terror has long been used by our governments … Concerning 9/11 McGovern declared that although he is still in two minds, he is deeply suspicious of the official version of events and "there is certainly a cover up."
Ray McG sprinkles in terms like "hidden agendas" and "goose stepping" that give us wingnuts goosebumps and confirms our worst suspicions and predictions of how corrupted the government and military. I just think it neater than hell that a 27 year CIA veteran analyst comes forward and confirms so many theories about the ruling elite, you know, now that he's no longer one of their waterboys. He is no longer part of anything the government would stage, right?
6 comments:
I don't understand what you have against Ray McGovern.
Is it possible that not everyone with a career working for the Powers has read Smedley Butler? Furthermore, Butler himself had a longer career working for the PTB, and rose to a much higher position, than did McGovern. Do you suspect Butler, too, of having had a hidden agenda?
Is it inconceivable to you that someone could have a change of heart or have their mind opened/ RMcG roamed the halls of Congress in an orange jumpsuit, etc. -- you probably read it, too. Quite a sophisticated covert op, no?
Your conjecture about the mosque bombing is certainly plausible, as is McGovern's. He "doesn't rule out Western involvement" -- seems like a reasonable position.
Yes, you may have gotten there first, but is there no room for those who catch on later?
Anon and On
Anon,
McGovern served under LBJ, Nixon, Reagan, and Bush I. If he saw nothing under those creeps and criminals that awoke his conscience - I conclude he has no conscience and is merely playing a role, reading his script. Listening to one's conscience at his age is not performed for the good of the common man, but for self-assuage, or perhaps another assignment. He's told nothing, done nothing other than support some of the more popular theories on the "left."
McGovern wrote daily briefings for Daddy Bush, was senior analyst for Reagan, and never said a disparaging political word between 1980-92. Nor under Clinton or the first years of Bush II.
Even Smedley Butler may have been a ruse to satisfy the "left" of his day, but I lean toward believing he was "telling all" as it was easier pre-WWII to speak up. Our current intel system was not as entrenched in running policy and politics for the PTB; CIA not even created yet.
The writer at this site has some interesting things to say about McGovern.
Ray, like many many others out there of late, is a plant. Giving us the appearance and hope of "dissent." Making us feel comfortable and hopeful and sitting on our haunches.
Kate,
Thanks for the refresher course -- I read some of the Francisco Gil-White expose and it's persuasive in deconstructing Cannistrano and McG. I knew not to trust Cannistrano, but I hadn't known that McG has been such a "media darling." Being more aware of that would have raised the usual red flag for me. I was napping about McG and not looking or thinking deeper about it, because he pushes some good buttons (nine-eleven, torture, etc.).
However, I don't entirely trust your reference (Gil-White) because he often doth defend the nation-state of Israel too much. In the piece you linked, he refers to a McG editorial in Sep. '01 in the CSM in which he says McG referred to "the Jews" (Gil-White's quotes). I checked and in McG's editorial there is "our Israeli friends" but no "the Jews."
But anyway, do you think that the mind-f*** being perpetrated on the US sleople has gotten that sophisticated? McG is "playing a role" as you said? I should add that I was placing zero hope in the ability of McG to directly change the current course of the powers. I have no such illusions that Empire will be deterred in that manner.
And if he is trying to assuage his conscience (a la McNamara?) can't his actions be inadvertently doing some good OTHER than motivating people to be complacent? Or maybe an unintended consequence, a "blowback"? Rhetorical questions.
Anon
anon,
I agree 100 percent with you regarding Gil-White. I often subscribe to the professor's conclusions on public figures but I do not usually see the motive as a conspiracy against "the Jews."
As for sophicated psyops, a nation knowing more about the Simpsons than the constitution doesn't require much complexity. McG and others are for the benefit of folks like you and me. I know I can sit and give the brother or sister an amen and agree with the rhetoric but at the end of the day nothing changed. Chomsky, Parenti, many many "leftists" push my buttons right – but I've been reading them for decades and they say what I want to hear. However, only a few such characters are allowed on stage – to appease the likes of me and my leanings. I know they're part of the control package for the appearance of democracy. Perhaps not knowingly for most of them. I've grown rather bored with the major names these days as they've said the same about Vietnam, Nicaragua, El Salvador, every intervention. Pretty much just changing the locale. Many tone down the speech or are completely silent when the leader committing the atrocities is a democrat (Clinton) or immensely popular (Reagan).
Only one thing will directly change the course we're on – we the people. But without honest leadership and solidarity of the lower classes, change is not likely. As you say, the Empire will not be deterred. The PTB know that, they only need keep pretending there are voices of high level "dissent" and make sure no true leaders arise, and apparently that's been easy the last 40 years. But, I never say never b/c who knows what voice has yet to be heard from we the people.
Kate,
Yes, I think you're right about all this.
I don't know if you're a subscriber to Mike Ruppert's website, but he just posted a commentary regarding a newspaper article about how James Woolsey (ex-Chief Spook) wowed (and wooed) an audience of lefties, tree-huggers [the article's own words] etc. in Eugene, Oregon with his visionary views on our energy future. (Oregon, by god!)
The newspaper article begins thusly: "You wouldn't have thought it possible: a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency drawing a standing ovation from a room full of left-leaning environmentalists right here in Eugene."
Nuff said, eh? If you're interested, I can cut and paste the article for you.
Anon
[gary l]
gary,
I haven't read Ruppert in quite a while. I concluded he too is shining shoes for the CIA/ruling elite - knowingly or unknowingly.
But would like to read the piece if you want to cut and paste. Thanks.
Post a Comment