lewrockwell--2020-09-21--1 Million + People Download Study Showing Heavy Aluminum Deposits in Autistic Brains

What Happened : In 2018 , Professor of Bioinorganic Chemistry at Keele University , who is considered one of the world ’ s leading experts in aluminum toxicology , published a paper in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine & Biology showing very high amounts of aluminum in the brain tissue of people with autism .
Exley has examined more than 100 brains , and the aluminum content in these people is some of the highest he has ever seen and raises new questions about the role of aluminum in the etiology of autism .
Five people were used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ males and one female , all between the ages of 14-50 .
Each of their brains contained what the authors considered unsafe and high amounts of aluminum compared to brain tissues of patients with other diseases where high brain aluminum content is common , like Alzheimer ’ s disease , for example .
It ’ s now been downloaded by more than 1 million people .
The photo below was posted recently via his Instagram account .
Here is a summary of the study ’ s main findings : Thimerosal : Let the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Best Price : $ 18.01 Buy New $ 15.93 -All five individuals had at least one brain tissue with a “ pathologically significant ” level of aluminum , defined as greater than or equal to 3.00 micrograms per gram of dry brain weight ( μg/g dry wt ) .
( Dr. Exley and colleagues developed categories to classify aluminum-related pathology after conducting other brain studies , wherein older adults who died healthy had less than 1 μg/g dry wt of brain aluminum . )
-Roughly two-thirds ( 67 % ) of all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ content .
-Aluminum levels were particularly high in the male brains , including in a 15-year-old boy with ASD who had the study ’ s single highest brain aluminum measurement ( 22.11 μg/g dry wt ) —many times higher than the pathologically significant threshold and far greater than levels that might be considered as acceptable even for an aged adult .
-Some of the elevated aluminum levels rivaled the very high levels historically reported in victims of dialysis encephalopathy syndrome ( a serious iatrogenic disorder resulting from aluminum-containing dialysis solutions ) .
-In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cells ( 80/129 ) , whereas aluminum deposits in females were primarily extracellular ( 15/21 ) .
The majority of intracellular aluminum was inside non-neuronal cells ( microglia and astrocytes ) .
-Aluminum was present in both grey matter ( 88 deposits ) and white matter ( 62 deposits ) .
( The brain ’ s grey matter serves to process information , while the white matter provides connectivity . )
-The researchers also identified aluminum-loaded lymphocytes in the meninges ( the layers of protective tissue that surround the brain and spinal cord @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the vasculature , furnishing evidence of aluminum ’ s entry into the brain “ via immune cells circulating in the blood and lymph ” and perhaps explaining how youth with ASD came to acquire such shockingly high levels of brain aluminum .
The Vaccine Court : The ... Rohde , Wayne Buy New $ 17.99 Following up this paper , Exely recently published recently published a paper titled “ The role of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines raises issues that deserve independent , rigorous and honest science.
” In their publication , they provide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety of aluminium-based vaccine adjuvants , like that of any environmental factor presenting a risk of neurotoxicity and to which the young child is exposed , must be seriously evaluated without further delay , particularly at a time when the CDC is announcing a still increasing prevalence of autism spectrum disorders , of 1 child in 54 in the USA.
” In the interview below , Exley answers a lot of questions , but the part that caught my attention was : We have looked at what happens to the aluminum adjuvant when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shown that certain types of cells come to the injection site and take up the aluminum inside them .
You know , these same cells we also see in the brain tissue in autism .
So , for the first time we have a link that honestly I had never expected to find between aluminum as an adjuvant in vaccines and that same aluminum potentially could be carried by those same cells across the blood brain barrier into the brain tissue where it could deposit the aluminum and produce a disease , Encephalopathy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ produce the more severe and disabling form of autism .
This is a really shocking finding for us .
The interview is quite informative with regards to aluminum toxicology in general , but if you ’ re interested in the quote above , you can fast forward to the twelve minutes and thirty seconds mark .
Why This Is Important : There are many concerns being raised about aluminum in vaccines , and where that aluminum goes when it ’ s injected into the body .
Multiple animal studies have now shown that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t exit the body but travels to distant organs and eventually ends up in the brain where it ’ s detectable 1-10 years after injection .
When we take in aluminum from our food or whatever however , the body does a great job of getting rid of it .
Miller ’ s Review ... Miller , Neil Z .
Best Price : $ 8.32 Buy New $ 14.48 When you inject aluminum , it goes into a different compartment of your body .
It doesn ’ t come into that same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course it can ’ t because that ’ s the whole idea of aluminum adjuvants , aluminum adjuvants are meant to stick around and allow that antigen to be presented over and over and over again persistently , otherwise you wouldn ’ t put an adjuvant in in the first place .
It can ’ t be inert , because if it were inert it couldn ’ t do the things it does .
It can ’ t be excreted because again it couldn ’ t provide that prolonged exposure of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dr Christopher Shaw , University of British Columbia .
( source ) Furthermore , federal health regulatory agencies have not appropriately studied the aluminum adjuvants mechanisms of action after injection , it ’ s simply been presumed safe after more than 90 years of use in various vaccines .
It ’ s also important to note that A group of scientists and physicians known as The Physicians For Informed Consent ( PIC ) have discovered a crucial math error in a FDA paper regarding the safety of aluminum in vaccines .
If you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about injected aluminum not exiting the body , and more information about aluminum in vaccines in general , you can refer to THIS article , and THIS article I recently published on the subject that goes into more detail and provides more sources , science and exampels .
The Takeaway : When it comes to vaccine safety , why does mainstream media constantly point fingers and call those who have concerns “ anti-vax conspiracy theorists ?
” Why don ’ t they ever address the science and concerns being raised that paint vaccines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never been painted in ?
What ’ s going on here ?
Would more rigorous safety testing of our vaccines not be in the best interests of everybody ?
Who would ever oppose that and why ?

What Happened: In 2018, Professor of Bioinorganic Chemistry at Keele University, who is considered one of the world’s leading experts in aluminum toxicology, published a paper in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine & Biology showing very high amounts of aluminum in the brain tissue of people with autism. Exley has examined more than 100 brains, and the aluminum content in these people is some of the highest he has ever seen and raises new questions about the role of aluminum in the etiology of autism. Five people were used in the study, comprising of four males and one female, all between the ages of 14-50. Each of their brains contained what the authors considered unsafe and high amounts of aluminum compared to brain tissues of patients with other diseases where high brain aluminum content is common, like Alzheimer’s disease, for example.
It’s now been downloaded by more than 1 million people. The photo below was posted recently via his Instagram account.
Here is a summary of the study’s main findings:
Thimerosal: Let the Sc... Kennedy Jr., Robert F. Best Price: $18.01 Buy New $15.93 (as of 02:45 UTC - Details) -All five individuals had at least one brain tissue with a “pathologically significant” level of aluminum, defined as greater than or equal to 3.00 micrograms per gram of dry brain weight (μg/g dry wt). (Dr. Exley and colleagues developed categories to classify aluminum-related pathology after conducting other brain studies, wherein older adults who died healthy had less than 1 μg/g dry wt of brain aluminum.)
-Roughly two-thirds (67%) of all the tissue samples displayed a pathologically significant aluminum content.
-Aluminum levels were particularly high in the male brains, including in a 15-year-old boy with ASD who had the study’s single highest brain aluminum measurement (22.11 μg/g dry wt)—many times higher than the pathologically significant threshold and far greater than levels that might be considered as acceptable even for an aged adult.
-Some of the elevated aluminum levels rivaled the very high levels historically reported in victims of dialysis encephalopathy syndrome (a serious iatrogenic disorder resulting from aluminum-containing dialysis solutions).
-In males, most aluminum deposits were inside cells (80/129), whereas aluminum deposits in females were primarily extracellular (15/21). The majority of intracellular aluminum was inside non-neuronal cells (microglia and astrocytes).
-Aluminum was present in both grey matter (88 deposits) and white matter (62 deposits). (The brain’s grey matter serves to process information, while the white matter provides connectivity.)
-The researchers also identified aluminum-loaded lymphocytes in the meninges (the layers of protective tissue that surround the brain and spinal cord) and in similar inflammatory cells in the vasculature, furnishing evidence of aluminum’s entry into the brain “via immune cells circulating in the blood and lymph” and perhaps explaining how youth with ASD came to acquire such shockingly high levels of brain aluminum. The Vaccine Court: The... Rohde, Wayne Buy New $17.99 (as of 04:05 UTC - Details)
Following up this paper, Exely recently published recently published a paper titled “The role of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines raises issues that deserve independent, rigorous and honest science.” In their publication, they provide evidence for their position that “the safety of aluminium-based vaccine adjuvants, like that of any environmental factor presenting a risk of neurotoxicity and to which the young child is exposed, must be seriously evaluated without further delay, particularly at a time when the CDC is announcing a still increasing prevalence of autism spectrum disorders, of 1 child in 54 in the USA.”
In the interview below, Exley answers a lot of questions, but the part that caught my attention was:
We have looked at what happens to the aluminum adjuvant when it’s injected and we have shown that certain types of cells come to the injection site and take up the aluminum inside them. You know, these same cells we also see in the brain tissue in autism. So, for the first time we have a link that honestly I had never expected to find between aluminum as an adjuvant in vaccines and that same aluminum potentially could be carried by those same cells across the blood brain barrier into the brain tissue where it could deposit the aluminum and produce a disease, Encephalopathy (brain damage), it could produce the more severe and disabling form of autism. This is a really shocking finding for us.
The interview is quite informative with regards to aluminum toxicology in general, but if you’re interested in the quote above, you can fast forward to the twelve minutes and thirty seconds mark.
Why This Is Important: There are many concerns being raised about aluminum in vaccines, and where that aluminum goes when it’s injected into the body. Multiple animal studies have now shown that when you inject aluminum, it doesn’t exit the body but travels to distant organs and eventually ends up in the brain where it’s detectable 1-10 years after injection. When we take in aluminum from our food or whatever however, the body does a great job of getting rid of it. Miller’s Review ... Miller, Neil Z. Best Price: $8.32 Buy New $14.48 (as of 04:45 UTC - Details)
When you inject aluminum, it goes into a different compartment of your body. It doesn’t come into that same mechanism of excretion. So, and of course it can’t because that’s the whole idea of aluminum adjuvants, aluminum adjuvants are meant to stick around and allow that antigen to be presented over and over and over again persistently, otherwise you wouldn’t put an adjuvant in in the first place. It can’t be inert, because if it were inert it couldn’t do the things it does. It can’t be excreted because again it couldn’t provide that prolonged exposure of the antigen to your immune system. – Dr Christopher Shaw, University of British Columbia. (source)
Furthermore, federal health regulatory agencies have not appropriately studied the aluminum adjuvants mechanisms of action after injection, it’s simply been presumed safe after more than 90 years of use in various vaccines.
It’s also important to note that A group of scientists and physicians known as The Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC) have discovered a crucial math error in a FDA paper regarding the safety of aluminum in vaccines.
If you want to access the science and studies about injected aluminum not exiting the body, and more information about aluminum in vaccines in general, you can refer to THIS article, and THIS article I recently published on the subject that goes into more detail and provides more sources, science and exampels.
The Takeaway: When it comes to vaccine safety, why does mainstream media constantly point fingers and call those who have concerns “anti-vax conspiracy theorists?” Why don’t they ever address the science and concerns being raised that paint vaccines in a light that they’ve never been painted in? What’s going on here? Would more rigorous safety testing of our vaccines not be in the best interests of everybody? Who would ever oppose that and why?


lewrockwell--2020-09-21--The Lasting Pain From Vietnam Silence

The Lasting Pain From Vietnam Silence

Ecclesiastes says there is a time to be silent and a time to speak .
The fortieth anniversary of the ugly end of the U.S. adventure in Vietnam is a time to speak and especially of the squandered opportunities that existed earlier in the war to blow the whistle and stop the killing .
While my friend Daniel Ellsberg ’ s leak of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 eventually helped to end the war , Ellsberg is the first to admit that he waited too long to reveal the unconscionable deceit that brought death and injury to millions .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ naivetÃ© and then cowardice , I waited even longer until my own truth-telling no longer really mattered for the bloodshed in Vietnam .
My hope is that there may be a chance this reminiscence might matter now if only as a painful example of what I could and should have done , had I the courage back then .
Opportunities to blow the whistle in time now confront a new generation of intelligence analysts whether they work on Iraq , Syria , Afghanistan , ISIS or Iran .
Incidentally , on Iran , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decade : courageous analysts led by intrepid ( and bureaucratically skilled ) former Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence Thomas Fingar showed that honesty can still prevail within the system , even when truth is highly unwelcome .
Levi ’ s Men & rsquo ... Buy New $ 58.80 The unanimous intelligence community conclusion of a National Intelligence Estimate of 2007 that Iran had stopped working on a nuclear weapon four years earlier played a huge role in thwarting plans by President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney to attack Iran @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office .
Bush says so in his memoir ; and , on that one point , we can believe him .
After a half-century of watching such things closely , this is the only time in my experience that the key judgment of an NIE helped prevent a catastrophic , unwinnable war .
Sadly , judging from the amateurism now prevailing in Washington ’ s opaque policymaking circles , it seems clear that the White House pays little heed to those intelligence officers still trying to speak truth to power .
For them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t just wring your hands , with an “ I did everything I could to get the truth out.
” Chances are you have not done all you can .
Ponder the stakes the lives ended too early ; the bodies and minds damaged forever ; the hatred engendered against the United States ; and the long-term harm to U.S. national interests and think about blowing the whistle publicly to prevent unnecessary carnage and alienation .
I certainly wish I had done so about what I learned of the unconscionable betrayal by senior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ More recently , I know that several of you intelligence analysts with a conscience wish you had blown the whistle on the fraud “ justifying ” war on Iraq .
Spreading some truth around is precisely what you need to do now on Syria , Iraq , Ukraine and the “ war on terror , ” for example .
I thought that by describing my own experience negative as it is and the remorse I continue to live with , I might assist those of you now pondering whether to step up to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , before it is again too late .
So below is an article that I might call “ Vietnam and Me.
” My hope is to spare you the remorse of having to write , a decade or two from now , your own “ Ukraine and Me ” or “ Syria and Me ” or “ Iraq and Me ” or “ Libya and Me ” or “ The War on Terror and Me.
” My article , from 2010 , was entitled “ How Truth Can Save Lives ” and it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like WikiLeaks or , say , Consortiumnews.com , existed 43 years ago , I might have risen to the occasion and helped save the lives of some 25,000 U.S. soldiers , and a million Vietnamese , by exposing the lies contained in just one SECRET/EYES ONLY cable from Saigon .
I need to speak out now because I have been sickened watching the herculean effort by Official Washington and our Fawning Corporate Media ( FCM ) to divert attention from the violence and deceit in Afghanistan , reflected in thousands of U.S. Army @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s ) , WikiLeaks and Pvt .
Bradley Manning .
After all the indiscriminate death and destruction from nearly nine years of war , the hypocrisy is all too transparent when WikiLeaks and suspected leaker Manning are accused of risking lives by exposing too much truth .
Besides , I still have a guilty conscience for what I chose NOT to do in exposing facts about the Vietnam War that might have saved lives .
The sad-but-true story recounted below is offered in the hope that those in similar circumstances today might show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ muster in 1967 , and take full advantage of the incredible advancements in technology since then .
Under Armour Men & rsquo ... Buy New $ 32.98 Many of my Junior Officer Trainee Program colleagues at CIA came to Washington in the early Sixties inspired by President John Kennedy ’ s Inaugural speech in which he asked us to ask ourselves what we might do for our country .
( Sounds corny nowadays , I suppose ; I guess I ’ ll just have to ask you to take it on faith .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the spirit and ambience were fresh , and good . )
Among those who found Kennedy ’ s summons compelling was Sam Adams , a young former naval officer out of Harvard College .
After the Navy , Sam tried Harvard Law School , but found it boring .
Instead , he decided to go to Washington , join the CIA as an officer trainee , and do something more adventurous .
He got more than his share of adventure .
Sam was one of the brightest and most dedicated among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he acquired a very lively and important account , that of assessing Vietnamese Communist strength early in the war .
He took to the task with uncommon resourcefulness and quickly proved himself the consummate analyst .
Relying largely on captured documents , buttressed by reporting from all manner of other sources , Adams concluded in 1967 that there were twice as many Communists ( about 600,000 ) under arms in South Vietnam as the U.S. military there would admit .
Visiting Saigon during 1967 , Adams learned from Army analysts that their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ placed an artificial cap on the official Army count rather than risk questions regarding “ progress ” in the war ( sound familiar ? )
.
It was a clash of cultures ; with Army intelligence analysts saluting generals following politically dictated orders , and Sam Adams aghast at the dishonesty , consequential dishonesty .
From time to time I would have lunch with Sam and learn of the formidable opposition he encountered in trying to get out the truth .
Commiserating with Sam over lunch one day in late August 1967 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Westmoreland ’ s incentive to make the enemy strength appear to be half what it actually was .
Sam gave me the answer he had from the horse ’ s mouth in Saigon .
Adams told me that in a cable dated Aug. 20 , 1967 , Westmoreland ’ s deputy , Gen. Creighton Abrams , set forth the rationale for the deception .
Abrams wrote that the new , higher numbers ( reflecting Sam ’ s count , which was supported by all intelligence agencies except Army intelligence , which reflected the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in sharp contrast to the current overall strength figure of about 299,000 given to the press.
” Abrams emphasized , “ We have been projecting an image of success over recent months ” and cautioned that if the higher figures became public , “ all available caveats and explanations will not prevent the press from drawing an erroneous and gloomy conclusion.
” Coofandy Mens Casual D ... Buy New $ 29.87 No further proof was needed that the most senior U.S. Army commanders were lying , so that they could continue to feign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Equally unfortunate , the crassness and callousness of Abrams ’ s cable notwithstanding , it had become increasingly clear that rather than stand up for Sam , his superiors would probably acquiesce in the Army ’ s bogus figures .
Sadly , that ’ s what they did .
CIA Director Richard Helms , who saw his primary duty quite narrowly as “ protecting ” the agency , set the tone .
He told subordinates that he could not discharge that duty if he let the agency get involved in a heated argument @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key issue in wartime .
This cut across the grain of what we had been led to believe was the prime duty of CIA analysts , to speak truth to power without fear or favor .
And our experience thus far had shown both of us that this ethos amounted to much more than just slogans .
We had , so far , been able to “ tell it like it is.
” After lunch with Sam , for the first time ever , I had no appetite for dessert .
Sam and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ protect the agency.
” And , having served in Vietnam , Sam knew first hand that thousands upon thousands were being killed in a feckless war .
What to Do ?
I have an all-too-distinct memory of a long silence over coffee , as each of us ruminated on what might be done .
I recall thinking to myself ; someone should take the Abrams cable down to the New York Times ( at the time an independent-minded newspaper ) .
Clearly , the only reason for the cable ’ s SECRET/EYES @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our most senior generals regarding “ progress ” in the war and deprive the American people of the chance to know the truth .
Going to the press was , of course , antithetical to the culture of secrecy in which we had been trained .
Besides , you would likely be caught at your next polygraph examination .
Better not to stick your neck out .
I pondered all this in the days after that lunch with Adams .
And I succeeded in coming up with a slew of reasons why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mortgage ; a plum overseas assignment for which I was in the final stages of language training ; and , not least , the analytic work , important , exciting work on which Sam and I thrived .
Better to keep quiet for now , grow in gravitas , and live on to slay other dragons .
Right ?
One can , I suppose , always find excuses for not sticking one ’ s neck out .
The neck , after all , is a convenient connection between head and torso , albeit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focus of my concern was a figurative one , suggesting possible loss of career , money and status not the literal “ necks ” of both Americans and Vietnamese that were on the line daily in the war .
But if there is nothing for which you would risk your career “ neck ” like , say , saving the lives of soldiers and civilians in a war zone your “ neck ” has become your idol , and your career is not worthy of that .
I now regret giving such worship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did I fail the neck test .
I had not thought things through very rigorously from a moral point of view .
WT02 mens Jogger in Ba ... Buy New $ 18.88 As a condition of employment , I had signed a promise not to divulge classified information so as not to endanger sources , methods or national security .
Promises are important , and one should not lightly violate them .
Plus , there are legitimate reasons for protecting some secrets .
But were any of those legitimate concerns the real reasons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SECRET/EYES ONLY ?
I think not .
It is not good to operate in a moral vacuum , oblivious to the reality that there exists a hierarchy of values and that circumstances often determine the morality of a course of action .
How does a written promise to keep secret everything with a classified stamp on it square with one ’ s moral responsibility to stop a war based on lies ?
Does stopping a misbegotten war not supersede a secrecy promise ?
Ethicists use the words “ supervening value ” for this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And is there yet another value ?
As an Army officer , I had taken a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies , foreign and domestic .
How did the lying by the Army command in Saigon fit in with that ?
Were/are generals exempt ?
Should we not call them out when we learn of deliberate deception that subverts the democratic process ?
Can the American people make good decisions if they are lied to ?
Would I have helped stop unnecessary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the not-really-secret , SECRET/EYES ONLY cable from Gen. Abrams ?
We ’ ll never know , will we ?
And I live with that .
I could not take the easy way out , saying Let Sam Do It .
Because I knew he wouldn ’ t .
Sam chose to go through the established grievance channels and got the royal run-around , even after the Communist countrywide offensive at Tet in January-February 1968 proved beyond any doubt that his count of Communist forces was correct .
When the Tet offensive began , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Adams drafted a caustic cable to Saigon saying , “ It is something of an anomaly to be taking so much punishment from Communist soldiers whose existence is not officially acknowledged.
” But he did not think the situation at all funny .
Sam kept playing by the rules , but it happened that unbeknown to Sam Dan Ellsberg gave Sam ’ s figures on enemy strength to the New York Times , which published them on March 19 , 1968 .
Dan had learned that President Lyndon Johnson was about to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war into Cambodia , Laos and up to the Chinese border perhaps even beyond .
Later , it became clear that his timely leak together with another unauthorized disclosure to the Times that the Pentagon had requested 206,000 more troops prevented a wider war .
On March 25 , Johnson complained to a small gathering , “ The leaks to the New York Times hurt us .
We have no support for the war .
I would have given Westy the 206,000 men.
” Ellsberg also copied the Pentagon Papers the 7,000-page top-secret @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1945 to 1967 and , in 1971 , he gave copies to the New York Times , Washington Post and other news organizations .
In the years since , Ellsberg has had difficulty shaking off the thought that , had he released the Pentagon Papers sooner , the war might have ended years earlier with untold lives saved .
Ellsberg has put it this way : “ Like so many others , I put personal loyalty to the president above all else above loyalty to the Constitution and above obligation to the law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to humankind .
I was wrong.
” And so was I wrong in not asking Sam for a copy of that cable from Gen. Abrams .
Sam , too , eventually had strong regrets .
Sam had continued to pursue the matter within CIA , until he learned that Dan Ellsberg was on trial in 1973 for releasing the Pentagon Papers and was being accused of endangering national security by revealing figures on enemy strength .
Which figures ?
The same old faked numbers from 1967 !
“ Imagine , ” said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaking faked numbers , ” as he hustled off to testify on Dan ’ s behalf .
( The case against Ellsberg was ultimately thrown out of court because of prosecutorial abuses committed by the Nixon administration . )
After the war drew down , Adams was tormented by the thought that , had he not let himself be diddled by the system , the entire left half of the Vietnam Memorial wall would not be there .
There would have been no new names to chisel into such a wall .
Sam @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nagging remorse that he had not done enough .
In a letter appearing in the ( then independent-minded ) New York Times on Oct. 18 , 1975 , John T. Moore , a CIA analyst who worked in Saigon and the Pentagon from 1965 to 1970 , confirmed Adams ’ s story after Sam told it in detail in the May 1975 issue of Harper ’ s magazine .
Moore wrote : “ My only regret is that I did not have Sam ’ s courage .
The record is clear .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , of outright dishonesty and professional cowardice .
“ It reflects an intelligence community captured by an aging bureaucracy , which too often placed institutional self-interest or personal advancement before the national interest .
It is a page of shame in the history of American intelligence.
” Tanks But No Thanks , Abrams What about Gen. Creighton Abrams ?
Not every general gets the Army ’ s main battle tank named after him .
The honor , though , came not from his service in Vietnam , but rather from his courage in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , leading his tanks through German lines to relieve Bastogne during World War II ’ s Battle of the Bulge .
Gen. George Patton praised Abrams as the only tank commander he considered his equal .
As things turned out , sadly , 23 years later Abrams became a poster child for old soldiers who , as Gen. Douglas McArthur suggested , should “ just fade away , ” rather than hang on too long after their great military accomplishments .
In May 1967 , Abrams was picked to be Westmoreland ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year later .
But Abrams could not succeed in the war , no matter how effectively “ an image of success ” his subordinates projected for the media .
The “ erroneous and gloomy conclusions of the press ” that Abrams had tried so hard to head off proved all too accurate .
Ironically , when reality hit home , it fell to Abrams to cut back U.S. forces in Vietnam from a peak of 543,000 in early 1969 to 49,000 in June 1972 , almost five years after Abrams ’ s progress-defending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some 58,000 U.S. troops , not to mention two to three million Vietnamese , had been killed .
Both Westmoreland and Abrams had reasonably good reputations when they started out , but not so much when they finished .
Comparisons can be invidious , but Gen. David Petraeus is another Army commander who has wowed Congress with his ribbons , medals and merit badges .
A pity he was not born early enough to have served in Vietnam where he might have learned some real-life hard lessons about the limitations of counterinsurgency theories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one took the trouble to tell him that in the early Sixties we young infantry officers already had plenty of counterinsurgency manuals to study at Fort Bragg and Fort Benning .
There are many things one can not learn from reading or writing manuals , as many of my Army colleagues learned too late in the jungles and mountains of South Vietnam .
Unless one is to believe , contrary to all indications , that Petraeus is not all that bright , one has to assume he knows that the Afghanistan expedition is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though , he has chosen the approach taken by Gen. Abrams in his August 1967 cable from Saigon .
That is precisely why the ground-truth of the documents released by WikiLeaks is so important .
And it ’ s not just the WikiLeaks documents that have caused consternation inside the U.S. government .
Investigators reportedly are rigorously pursuing the source that provided the New York Times with the texts of two cables ( of 6 and 9 November 2009 ) from Ambassador Eikenberry in Kabul .
[ See Consortiumnews.com ’ s “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even today ’ s far-less independent New York Times published a major story based on the information in those cables , while President Barack Obama was still trying to figure out what to do about Afghanistan .
Later the Times posted the entire texts of the cables , which were classified Top Secret and NODIS ( meaning “ no dissemination ” to anyone but the most senior officials to whom the documents were addressed ) .
The cables conveyed Eikenberry ’ s experienced , cogent views on the foolishness of the policy in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eventual decision to double down on the Afghan War .
( That , of course , is pretty much what the President ended up doing . )
Eikenberry provided chapter and verse to explain why , as he put it , “ I can not support [ the Defense Department ’ s ] recommendation for an immediate Presidential decision to deploy another 40,000 here.
” Such frank disclosures are anathema to self-serving bureaucrats and ideologues who would much prefer depriving the American people of information that might lead them to question the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for example .
As the New York Times/Eikenberry cables show , even today ’ s FCM ( fawning corporate media ) may sometimes display the old spunk of American journalism and refuse to hide or fudge the truth , even if the facts might cause the people to draw “ an erroneous and gloomy conclusion , ” to borrow Gen. Abrams ’ s words of 43 years ago .
Remember “ Baghdad Bob , ” the irrepressible and unreliable Iraqi Information Minister at the time of the U.S.-led invasion ?
He came to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Morrell ’ s chaotic , quixotic on Aug. 5 regarding the WikiLeaks exposures .
The briefing was revealing in several respects .
Clear from his prepared statement was what is bothering the Pentagon the most .
Here ’ s Morrell : “ WikiLeaks ’ s webpage constitutes a brazen solicitation to U.S. government officials , including our military , to break the law .
WikiLeaks ’ s public assertion that submitting confidential material to WikiLeaks is safe , easy and protected by law is materially false and misleading .
The Department of Defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solicitation of this type.
” Rest assured that the Defense Department will do all it can to make it unsafe for any government official to provide WikiLeaks with sensitive material .
But it is contending with a clever group of hi-tech experts who have built in precautions to allow information to be submitted anonymously .
That the Pentagon will prevail anytime soon is far from certain .
Also , in a ludicrous attempt to close the barn door after tens of thousands of classified documents had already escaped , Morrell insisted that WikiLeaks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media in its possession .
Even the normally docile Pentagon press corps could not suppress a collective laugh , irritating the Pentagon spokesman no end .
The impression gained was one of a Pentagon Gulliver tied down by terabytes of Lilliputians .
Morrell ’ s self-righteous appeal to the leaders of WikiLeaks to “ do the right thing ” was accompanied by an explicit threat that , otherwise , “ We shall have to compel them to do the right thing.
” His attempt to assert Pentagon power in this regard fell flat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chose the occasion to remind the Pentagon press corps to behave themselves or face rejection when applying to be embedded in units of U.S. armed forces .
The correspondents were shown nodding docilely as Morrell reminded them that permission for embedding “ is by no means a right .
It is a privilege.
” The generals giveth and the generals taketh away .
It was a moment of arrogance , and press subservience , that would have sickened Thomas Jefferson or James Madison , not to mention the courageous war correspondents who did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the generals can control the “ embeds ” ; they can not control the ether .
Not yet , anyway .
And that was all too apparent beneath the strutting , preening , and finger waving by the Pentagon ’ s fancy silk necktie to the world .
Actually , the opportunities afforded by WikiLeaks and other Internet Web sites can serve to diminish what few advantages there are to being in bed with the Army .
What Would I Have Done ?
Would I have had the courage to whisk Gen. Abrams @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1967 , if WikiLeaks or other Web sites had been available to provide a major opportunity to expose the deceit of the top Army command in Saigon ?
The Pentagon can argue that using the Internet this way is not “ safe , easy , and protected by law.
” We shall see .
Meanwhile , this way of exposing information that people in a democracy should know will continue to be sorely tempting , and a lot easier than taking the risk of being photographed lunching with someone from the New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over these past 43 years , supervening moral values can , and should , trump lesser promises .
Today , I would be determined to “ do the right thing , ” if I had access to an Abrams-like cable from Petraeus in Kabul .
And I believe that Sam Adams , if he were alive today , would enthusiastically agree that this would be the morally correct decision .
My article from 2010 ended with a footnote about the ( SAAII ) , an organization created by Sam Adams ’ s former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to hold up his example as a model for those in intelligence who would aspire to the courage to speak truth to power .
At the time there were seven recipients of an annual award bestowed on those who exemplified Sam Adam ’ s courage , persistence and devotion to truth .
Now , there have been 14 recipients : Coleen Rowley ( 2002 ) , Katharine Gun ( 2003 ) , Sibel Edmonds ( 2004 ) , Craig Murray ( 2005 ) , Sam Provance ( 2006 ) , Frank Grevil ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , Julian Assange ( 2010 ) , Thomas Drake ( 2011 ) , Jesselyn Radack ( 2011 ) , Thomas Fingar ( 2012 ) , Edward Snowden ( 2013 ) , Chelsea Manning ( 2014 ) , William Binney ( 2015 ) .

Ecclesiastes says there is a time to be silent and a time to speak. The fortieth anniversary of the ugly end of the U.S. adventure in Vietnam is a time to speak and especially of the squandered opportunities that existed earlier in the war to blow the whistle and stop the killing.
While my friend Daniel Ellsberg’s leak of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 eventually helped to end the war, Ellsberg is the first to admit that he waited too long to reveal the unconscionable deceit that brought death and injury to millions.
I regret that, at first out of naivetÃ© and then cowardice, I waited even longer until my own truth-telling no longer really mattered for the bloodshed in Vietnam. My hope is that there may be a chance this reminiscence might matter now if only as a painful example of what I could and should have done, had I the courage back then. Opportunities to blow the whistle in time now confront a new generation of intelligence analysts whether they work on Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, ISIS or Iran.
Incidentally, on Iran, there was a very positive example last decade: courageous analysts led by intrepid (and bureaucratically skilled) former Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence Thomas Fingar showed that honesty can still prevail within the system, even when truth is highly unwelcome. Levi’s Men&rsquo... Buy New $58.80 (as of 05:21 UTC - Details)
The unanimous intelligence community conclusion of a National Intelligence Estimate of 2007 that Iran had stopped working on a nuclear weapon four years earlier played a huge role in thwarting plans by President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney to attack Iran in 2008, their last year in office. Bush says so in his memoir; and, on that one point, we can believe him.
After a half-century of watching such things closely, this is the only time in my experience that the key judgment of an NIE helped prevent a catastrophic, unwinnable war. Sadly, judging from the amateurism now prevailing in Washington’s opaque policymaking circles, it seems clear that the White House pays little heed to those intelligence officers still trying to speak truth to power.
For them I have a suggestion: Don’t just wring your hands, with an “I did everything I could to get the truth out.” Chances are you have not done all you can. Ponder the stakes the lives ended too early; the bodies and minds damaged forever; the hatred engendered against the United States; and the long-term harm to U.S. national interests and think about blowing the whistle publicly to prevent unnecessary carnage and alienation.
I certainly wish I had done so about what I learned of the unconscionable betrayal by senior military and intelligence officers regarding Vietnam. More recently, I know that several of you intelligence analysts with a conscience wish you had blown the whistle on the fraud “justifying” war on Iraq. Spreading some truth around is precisely what you need to do now on Syria, Iraq, Ukraine and the “war on terror,” for example.
I thought that by describing my own experience negative as it is and the remorse I continue to live with, I might assist those of you now pondering whether to step up to the plate and blow the whistle now, before it is again too late. So below is an article that I might call “Vietnam and Me.”
My hope is to spare you the remorse of having to write, a decade or two from now, your own “Ukraine and Me” or “Syria and Me” or “Iraq and Me” or “Libya and Me” or “The War on Terror and Me.” My article, from 2010, was entitled “How Truth Can Save Lives” and it began:
If independent-minded Web sites, like WikiLeaks or, say, Consortiumnews.com, existed 43 years ago, I might have risen to the occasion and helped save the lives of some 25,000 U.S. soldiers, and a million Vietnamese, by exposing the lies contained in just one SECRET/EYES ONLY cable from Saigon.
I need to speak out now because I have been sickened watching the herculean effort by Official Washington and our Fawning Corporate Media (FCM) to divert attention from the violence and deceit in Afghanistan, reflected in thousands of U.S. Army documents, by shooting the messenger(s), WikiLeaks and Pvt. Bradley Manning.
After all the indiscriminate death and destruction from nearly nine years of war, the hypocrisy is all too transparent when WikiLeaks and suspected leaker Manning are accused of risking lives by exposing too much truth. Besides, I still have a guilty conscience for what I chose NOT to do in exposing facts about the Vietnam War that might have saved lives.
The sad-but-true story recounted below is offered in the hope that those in similar circumstances today might show more courage than I was able to muster in 1967, and take full advantage of the incredible advancements in technology since then. Under Armour Men&rsquo... Buy New $32.98 (as of 05:21 UTC - Details)
Many of my Junior Officer Trainee Program colleagues at CIA came to Washington in the early Sixties inspired by President John Kennedy’s Inaugural speech in which he asked us to ask ourselves what we might do for our country. (Sounds corny nowadays, I suppose; I guess I’ll just have to ask you to take it on faith. It may not have been Camelot exactly, but the spirit and ambience were fresh, and good.)
Among those who found Kennedy’s summons compelling was Sam Adams, a young former naval officer out of Harvard College. After the Navy, Sam tried Harvard Law School, but found it boring. Instead, he decided to go to Washington, join the CIA as an officer trainee, and do something more adventurous. He got more than his share of adventure.
Sam was one of the brightest and most dedicated among us. Quite early in his career, he acquired a very lively and important account, that of assessing Vietnamese Communist strength early in the war. He took to the task with uncommon resourcefulness and quickly proved himself the consummate analyst.
Relying largely on captured documents, buttressed by reporting from all manner of other sources, Adams concluded in 1967 that there were twice as many Communists (about 600,000) under arms in South Vietnam as the U.S. military there would admit.
Dissembling in Saigon
Visiting Saigon during 1967, Adams learned from Army analysts that their commanding general, William Westmoreland, had placed an artificial cap on the official Army count rather than risk questions regarding “progress” in the war (sound familiar?).
It was a clash of cultures; with Army intelligence analysts saluting generals following politically dictated orders, and Sam Adams aghast at the dishonesty, consequential dishonesty. From time to time I would have lunch with Sam and learn of the formidable opposition he encountered in trying to get out the truth.
Commiserating with Sam over lunch one day in late August 1967, I asked what could possibly be Gen. Westmoreland’s incentive to make the enemy strength appear to be half what it actually was. Sam gave me the answer he had from the horse’s mouth in Saigon.
Adams told me that in a cable dated Aug. 20, 1967, Westmoreland’s deputy, Gen. Creighton Abrams, set forth the rationale for the deception. Abrams wrote that the new, higher numbers (reflecting Sam’s count, which was supported by all intelligence agencies except Army intelligence, which reflected the “command position”) “were in sharp contrast to the current overall strength figure of about 299,000 given to the press.”
Abrams emphasized, “We have been projecting an image of success over recent months” and cautioned that if the higher figures became public, “all available caveats and explanations will not prevent the press from drawing an erroneous and gloomy conclusion.”
Coofandy Mens Casual D... Buy New $29.87 (as of 05:21 UTC - Details) No further proof was needed that the most senior U.S. Army commanders were lying, so that they could continue to feign “progress” in the war. Equally unfortunate, the crassness and callousness of Abrams’s cable notwithstanding, it had become increasingly clear that rather than stand up for Sam, his superiors would probably acquiesce in the Army’s bogus figures. Sadly, that’s what they did.
CIA Director Richard Helms, who saw his primary duty quite narrowly as “protecting” the agency, set the tone. He told subordinates that he could not discharge that duty if he let the agency get involved in a heated argument with the U.S. Army on such a key issue in wartime.
This cut across the grain of what we had been led to believe was the prime duty of CIA analysts, to speak truth to power without fear or favor. And our experience thus far had shown both of us that this ethos amounted to much more than just slogans. We had, so far, been able to “tell it like it is.”
After lunch with Sam, for the first time ever, I had no appetite for dessert. Sam and I had not come to Washington to “protect the agency.” And, having served in Vietnam, Sam knew first hand that thousands upon thousands were being killed in a feckless war.
What to Do?
I have an all-too-distinct memory of a long silence over coffee, as each of us ruminated on what might be done. I recall thinking to myself; someone should take the Abrams cable down to the New York Times (at the time an independent-minded newspaper).
Clearly, the only reason for the cable’s SECRET/EYES ONLY classification was to hide deliberate deception of our most senior generals regarding “progress” in the war and deprive the American people of the chance to know the truth.
Going to the press was, of course, antithetical to the culture of secrecy in which we had been trained. Besides, you would likely be caught at your next polygraph examination. Better not to stick your neck out.
I pondered all this in the days after that lunch with Adams. And I succeeded in coming up with a slew of reasons why I ought to keep silent: a mortgage; a plum overseas assignment for which I was in the final stages of language training; and, not least, the analytic work, important, exciting work on which Sam and I thrived.
Better to keep quiet for now, grow in gravitas, and live on to slay other dragons. Right?
One can, I suppose, always find excuses for not sticking one’s neck out. The neck, after all, is a convenient connection between head and torso, albeit the “neck” that was the focus of my concern was a figurative one, suggesting possible loss of career, money and status not the literal “necks” of both Americans and Vietnamese that were on the line daily in the war.
But if there is nothing for which you would risk your career “neck” like, say, saving the lives of soldiers and civilians in a war zone your “neck” has become your idol, and your career is not worthy of that. I now regret giving such worship to my own neck. Not only did I fail the neck test. I had not thought things through very rigorously from a moral point of view. WT02 mens Jogger in Ba... Buy New $18.88 (as of 05:21 UTC - Details)
Promises to Keep?
As a condition of employment, I had signed a promise not to divulge classified information so as not to endanger sources, methods or national security. Promises are important, and one should not lightly violate them. Plus, there are legitimate reasons for protecting some secrets. But were any of those legitimate concerns the real reasons why Abrams’s cable was stamped SECRET/EYES ONLY? I think not.
It is not good to operate in a moral vacuum, oblivious to the reality that there exists a hierarchy of values and that circumstances often determine the morality of a course of action. How does a written promise to keep secret everything with a classified stamp on it square with one’s moral responsibility to stop a war based on lies? Does stopping a misbegotten war not supersede a secrecy promise?
Ethicists use the words “supervening value” for this; the concept makes sense to me. And is there yet another value? As an Army officer, I had taken a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
How did the lying by the Army command in Saigon fit in with that? Were/are generals exempt? Should we not call them out when we learn of deliberate deception that subverts the democratic process? Can the American people make good decisions if they are lied to?
Would I have helped stop unnecessary killing by giving the New York Times the not-really-secret, SECRET/EYES ONLY cable from Gen. Abrams? We’ll never know, will we? And I live with that. I could not take the easy way out, saying Let Sam Do It. Because I knew he wouldn’t.
Sam chose to go through the established grievance channels and got the royal run-around, even after the Communist countrywide offensive at Tet in January-February 1968 proved beyond any doubt that his count of Communist forces was correct.
When the Tet offensive began, as a way of keeping his sanity, Adams drafted a caustic cable to Saigon saying, “It is something of an anomaly to be taking so much punishment from Communist soldiers whose existence is not officially acknowledged.” But he did not think the situation at all funny.
Dan Ellsberg Steps In
Sam kept playing by the rules, but it happened that unbeknown to Sam Dan Ellsberg gave Sam’s figures on enemy strength to the New York Times, which published them on March 19, 1968. Dan had learned that President Lyndon Johnson was about to bow to Pentagon pressure to widen the war into Cambodia, Laos and up to the Chinese border perhaps even beyond.
Later, it became clear that his timely leak together with another unauthorized disclosure to the Times that the Pentagon had requested 206,000 more troops prevented a wider war. On March 25, Johnson complained to a small gathering, “The leaks to the New York Times hurt us. We have no support for the war. I would have given Westy the 206,000 men.”
Ellsberg also copied the Pentagon Papers the 7,000-page top-secret history of U.S. decision-making on Vietnam from 1945 to 1967 and, in 1971, he gave copies to the New York Times, Washington Post and other news organizations.
In the years since, Ellsberg has had difficulty shaking off the thought that, had he released the Pentagon Papers sooner, the war might have ended years earlier with untold lives saved. Ellsberg has put it this way: “Like so many others, I put personal loyalty to the president above all else above loyalty to the Constitution and above obligation to the law, to truth, to Americans, and to humankind. I was wrong.”
And so was I wrong in not asking Sam for a copy of that cable from Gen. Abrams. Sam, too, eventually had strong regrets. Sam had continued to pursue the matter within CIA, until he learned that Dan Ellsberg was on trial in 1973 for releasing the Pentagon Papers and was being accused of endangering national security by revealing figures on enemy strength.
Which figures? The same old faked numbers from 1967! “Imagine,” said Adams, “hanging a man for leaking faked numbers,” as he hustled off to testify on Dan’s behalf. (The case against Ellsberg was ultimately thrown out of court because of prosecutorial abuses committed by the Nixon administration.)
After the war drew down, Adams was tormented by the thought that, had he not let himself be diddled by the system, the entire left half of the Vietnam Memorial wall would not be there. There would have been no new names to chisel into such a wall.
Sam Adams died prematurely at age 55 with nagging remorse that he had not done enough.
In a letter appearing in the (then independent-minded) New York Times on Oct. 18, 1975, John T. Moore, a CIA analyst who worked in Saigon and the Pentagon from 1965 to 1970, confirmed Adams’s story after Sam told it in detail in the May 1975 issue of Harper’s magazine.
Moore wrote: “My only regret is that I did not have Sam’s courage. The record is clear. It speaks of misfeasance, nonfeasance and malfeasance, of outright dishonesty and professional cowardice.
“It reflects an intelligence community captured by an aging bureaucracy, which too often placed institutional self-interest or personal advancement before the national interest. It is a page of shame in the history of American intelligence.”
Tanks But No Thanks, Abrams
What about Gen. Creighton Abrams? Not every general gets the Army’s main battle tank named after him. The honor, though, came not from his service in Vietnam, but rather from his courage in the early day of his military career, leading his tanks through German lines to relieve Bastogne during World War II’s Battle of the Bulge. Gen. George Patton praised Abrams as the only tank commander he considered his equal.
As things turned out, sadly, 23 years later Abrams became a poster child for old soldiers who, as Gen. Douglas McArthur suggested, should “just fade away,” rather than hang on too long after their great military accomplishments.
In May 1967, Abrams was picked to be Westmoreland’s deputy in Vietnam and succeeded him a year later. But Abrams could not succeed in the war, no matter how effectively “an image of success” his subordinates projected for the media. The “erroneous and gloomy conclusions of the press” that Abrams had tried so hard to head off proved all too accurate.
Ironically, when reality hit home, it fell to Abrams to cut back U.S. forces in Vietnam from a peak of 543,000 in early 1969 to 49,000 in June 1972, almost five years after Abrams’s progress-defending cable from Saigon. By 1972, some 58,000 U.S. troops, not to mention two to three million Vietnamese, had been killed.
Both Westmoreland and Abrams had reasonably good reputations when they started out, but not so much when they finished.
And Petraeus?
Comparisons can be invidious, but Gen. David Petraeus is another Army commander who has wowed Congress with his ribbons, medals and merit badges. A pity he was not born early enough to have served in Vietnam where he might have learned some real-life hard lessons about the limitations of counterinsurgency theories.
Moreover, it appears that no one took the trouble to tell him that in the early Sixties we young infantry officers already had plenty of counterinsurgency manuals to study at Fort Bragg and Fort Benning. There are many things one cannot learn from reading or writing manuals, as many of my Army colleagues learned too late in the jungles and mountains of South Vietnam.
Unless one is to believe, contrary to all indications, that Petraeus is not all that bright, one has to assume he knows that the Afghanistan expedition is a folly beyond repair. So far, though, he has chosen the approach taken by Gen. Abrams in his August 1967 cable from Saigon. That is precisely why the ground-truth of the documents released by WikiLeaks is so important.
Whistleblowers Galore
And it’s not just the WikiLeaks documents that have caused consternation inside the U.S. government. Investigators reportedly are rigorously pursuing the source that provided the New York Times with the texts of two cables (of 6 and 9 November 2009) from Ambassador Eikenberry in Kabul. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “ Obama Ignores Key Afghan Warning .”]
To its credit, even today’s far-less independent New York Times published a major story based on the information in those cables, while President Barack Obama was still trying to figure out what to do about Afghanistan. Later the Times posted the entire texts of the cables, which were classified Top Secret and NODIS (meaning “no dissemination” to anyone but the most senior officials to whom the documents were addressed).
The cables conveyed Eikenberry’s experienced, cogent views on the foolishness of the policy in place and, implicitly, of any eventual decision to double down on the Afghan War. (That, of course, is pretty much what the President ended up doing.) Eikenberry provided chapter and verse to explain why, as he put it, “I cannot support [the Defense Department’s] recommendation for an immediate Presidential decision to deploy another 40,000 here.”
Such frank disclosures are anathema to self-serving bureaucrats and ideologues who would much prefer depriving the American people of information that might lead them to question the government’s benighted policy toward Afghanistan, for example.
As the New York Times/Eikenberry cables show, even today’s FCM (fawning corporate media) may sometimes display the old spunk of American journalism and refuse to hide or fudge the truth, even if the facts might cause the people to draw “an erroneous and gloomy conclusion,” to borrow Gen. Abrams’s words of 43 years ago.
Polished Pentagon Spokesman
Remember “Baghdad Bob,” the irrepressible and unreliable Iraqi Information Minister at the time of the U.S.-led invasion? He came to mind as I watched Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell’s chaotic, quixotic press briefing on Aug. 5 regarding the WikiLeaks exposures. The briefing was revealing in several respects. Clear from his prepared statement was what is bothering the Pentagon the most. Here’s Morrell:
“WikiLeaks’s webpage constitutes a brazen solicitation to U.S. government officials, including our military, to break the law. WikiLeaks’s public assertion that submitting confidential material to WikiLeaks is safe, easy and protected by law is materially false and misleading. The Department of Defense therefore also demands that WikiLeaks discontinue any solicitation of this type.”
Rest assured that the Defense Department will do all it can to make it unsafe for any government official to provide WikiLeaks with sensitive material. But it is contending with a clever group of hi-tech experts who have built in precautions to allow information to be submitted anonymously. That the Pentagon will prevail anytime soon is far from certain.
Also, in a ludicrous attempt to close the barn door after tens of thousands of classified documents had already escaped, Morrell insisted that WikiLeaks give back all the documents and electronic media in its possession. Even the normally docile Pentagon press corps could not suppress a collective laugh, irritating the Pentagon spokesman no end. The impression gained was one of a Pentagon Gulliver tied down by terabytes of Lilliputians.
Morrell’s self-righteous appeal to the leaders of WikiLeaks to “do the right thing” was accompanied by an explicit threat that, otherwise, “We shall have to compel them to do the right thing.” His attempt to assert Pentagon power in this regard fell flat, given the realities.
Morrell also chose the occasion to remind the Pentagon press corps to behave themselves or face rejection when applying to be embedded in units of U.S. armed forces. The correspondents were shown nodding docilely as Morrell reminded them that permission for embedding “is by no means a right. It is a privilege.” The generals giveth and the generals taketh away.
It was a moment of arrogance, and press subservience, that would have sickened Thomas Jefferson or James Madison, not to mention the courageous war correspondents who did their duty in Vietnam. Morrell and the generals can control the “embeds”; they cannot control the ether. Not yet, anyway.
And that was all too apparent beneath the strutting, preening, and finger waving by the Pentagon’s fancy silk necktie to the world. Actually, the opportunities afforded by WikiLeaks and other Internet Web sites can serve to diminish what few advantages there are to being in bed with the Army.
What Would I Have Done?
Would I have had the courage to whisk Gen. Abrams’s cable into the ether in 1967, if WikiLeaks or other Web sites had been available to provide a major opportunity to expose the deceit of the top Army command in Saigon? The Pentagon can argue that using the Internet this way is not “safe, easy, and protected by law.” We shall see.
Meanwhile, this way of exposing information that people in a democracy should know will continue to be sorely tempting, and a lot easier than taking the risk of being photographed lunching with someone from the New York Times.
From what I have learned over these past 43 years, supervening moral values can, and should, trump lesser promises. Today, I would be determined to “do the right thing,” if I had access to an Abrams-like cable from Petraeus in Kabul. And I believe that Sam Adams, if he were alive today, would enthusiastically agree that this would be the morally correct decision.
My article from 2010 ended with a footnote about the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII), an organization created by Sam Adams’s former CIA colleagues and other former intelligence analysts to hold up his example as a model for those in intelligence who would aspire to the courage to speak truth to power.
At the time there were seven recipients of an annual award bestowed on those who exemplified Sam Adam’s courage, persistence and devotion to truth. Now, there have been 14 recipients: Coleen Rowley (2002), Katharine Gun (2003), Sibel Edmonds (2004), Craig Murray (2005), Sam Provance (2006), Frank Grevil (2007), Larry Wilkerson (2009), Julian Assange (2010), Thomas Drake (2011), Jesselyn Radack (2011), Thomas Fingar (2012), Edward Snowden (2013), Chelsea Manning (2014), William Binney (2015).
Reprinted with the author’s permission.


lewrockwell--2020-09-21--The Power-Mad Clowns Of the Johnson Junta Want To Totally Supress a Coronavirus – Which Has Never Be

The Power-Mad Clowns Of the Johnson Junta Want To Totally Supress a Coronavirus – Which Has Never Been Achieved in History

Months ago , I predicted that we would all come to hate the narrow , bossed-about new life the Government wants to force us to live .
I was wrong .
Most people have far too readily accepted limits to their lives which the world ’ s tyrannies would once have hesitated to impose on their citizens .
Well , have you had enough yet ?
Because the Johnson Junta has only one tool in its box .
That tool is restriction .
And it has only one aim , one that has never been achieved by any state in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total suppression of a coronavirus .
Who would have thought that the rule of clowns would be so unfunny ?
TAPULCO Mens Long Slee ... Buy New $ 25.99 But it now looks as if this will go on for ever , unless we can somehow lead these people away to secluded rest homes where kindly nurses can indulge their wild power-fantasies with soothing repetitions of ‘ Yes , dear ’ , cold compresses and cups of Ovaltine .
It is certainly increasingly dangerous for them to be out and about .
Take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I know I have laughed at him in the past as a sort of crazy prep-school headmaster raging at his tiny pupils .
But for goodness sake , the man is a Cabinet Minister , and he has real power over us .
He can smash up your business , make you stay at home , part you from your nearest and dearest at the ends of their lives , destroy your wedding plans , wreck your education , ruin your holiday , take away your job , set the police on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ badge across half your face .
He can and he does .
And he has taken leave of the truth .
On Friday morning , Mr Hancock said that the number of hospitalisations for Covid is doubling every seven to eight days .
Levi ’ s Men & rsquo ... Buy New $ 25.02 Now , ‘ hospitalisations for Covid ’ is a slightly tricky figure .
It may well be affected by the Government ’ s endless futile , frantic hunt for signs of a disease which has largely vanished from among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that you feel just fine , thank you .
Deaths , a figure very hard to massage , are low and remain low after a long fall from their peak on April 8 .
People must at all costs be distracted from this fact .
I have to wonder about the hospital admission figures , given the slipperiness of the Government throughout this episode .
Could it be that people who have tested positive for Covid in one of Mr Hancock ’ s vast trawls , but who go into hospital mainly for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total ?
I wouldn ’ t be a bit surprised .
Could it be that our hospitals are being encouraged to admit mild cases for observation , which they would previously have sent home ?
Who knows ?
Just guessing .
But then we come to the hospitalisation figures .
Yes , they have edged up a bit since mid-August .
But bear in mind that in March they were regularly more than 2,500 a day .
Donald Trump 2020 Hat ... Buy New $ 14.99 On August 1 , the total of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On August 8 it was 78 .
On August 15 it was 38 .
On August 22 it was 25 .
On August 29 it was 52 .
On September 5 it was 94 .
On September 12 it was 143 .
This is hardly an established pattern .
Now , I know , because the Health Department told me , that if you took a different and much shorter date range ( August 24 , 41 ; August 31 , 52 ; September 7 , 84 ; September 14 , 172 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back up their claim .
I ’ d have thought ‘ every seven or eight days ’ meant over a far longer period than that .
‘ Every ’ is a powerful word .
But , as I said to the Ministry spokesperson who manfully tried to persuade me that his boss ’ s claim of hospitalisations doubling every week had been honest , it seems to me to be unscrupulous panic-mongering , which would shame a banana republic .

Months ago, I predicted that we would all come to hate the narrow, bossed-about new life the Government wants to force us to live. I was wrong.
Most people have far too readily accepted limits to their lives which the world’s tyrannies would once have hesitated to impose on their citizens.
Well, have you had enough yet? Because the Johnson Junta has only one tool in its box. That tool is restriction.
And it has only one aim, one that has never been achieved by any state in the history of the world – the total suppression of a coronavirus. Who would have thought that the rule of clowns would be so unfunny? TAPULCO Mens Long Slee... Buy New $25.99 (as of 06:01 UTC - Details)
But it now looks as if this will go on for ever, unless we can somehow lead these people away to secluded rest homes where kindly nurses can indulge their wild power-fantasies with soothing repetitions of ‘Yes, dear’, cold compresses and cups of Ovaltine. It is certainly increasingly dangerous for them to be out and about.
Take the Health Secretary, Mr Matthew Hancock. I know I have laughed at him in the past as a sort of crazy prep-school headmaster raging at his tiny pupils. But for goodness sake, the man is a Cabinet Minister, and he has real power over us.
He can smash up your business, make you stay at home, part you from your nearest and dearest at the ends of their lives, destroy your wedding plans, wreck your education, ruin your holiday, take away your job, set the police on you for refusing to wear a pro-Government badge across half your face. He can and he does.
And he has taken leave of the truth. On Friday morning, Mr Hancock said that the number of hospitalisations for Covid is doubling every seven to eight days. Levi’s Men&rsquo... Buy New $25.02 (as of 06:01 UTC - Details)
Now, ‘hospitalisations for Covid’ is a slightly tricky figure. It may well be affected by the Government’s endless futile, frantic hunt for signs of a disease which has largely vanished from among us, and whose main symptom is that you feel just fine, thank you.
Deaths, a figure very hard to massage, are low and remain low after a long fall from their peak on April 8. People must at all costs be distracted from this fact.
I have to wonder about the hospital admission figures, given the slipperiness of the Government throughout this episode. Could it be that people who have tested positive for Covid in one of Mr Hancock’s vast trawls, but who go into hospital mainly for other reasons, get added to this total?
I wouldn’t be a bit surprised. Could it be that our hospitals are being encouraged to admit mild cases for observation, which they would previously have sent home? Who knows? Just guessing.
But then we come to the hospitalisation figures. Yes, they have edged up a bit since mid-August. But bear in mind that in March they were regularly more than 2,500 a day. Donald Trump 2020 Hat ... Buy New $14.99 (as of 05:29 UTC - Details)
On August 1, the total of Covid hospital admissions in England was 50. On August 8 it was 78. On August 15 it was 38. On August 22 it was 25. On August 29 it was 52. On September 5 it was 94. On September 12 it was 143. This is hardly an established pattern.
Now, I know, because the Health Department told me, that if you took a different and much shorter date range (August 24, 41; August 31, 52; September 7, 84; September 14, 172) you could – sort of – back up their claim. I’d have thought ‘every seven or eight days’ meant over a far longer period than that. ‘Every’ is a powerful word.
But, as I said to the Ministry spokesperson who manfully tried to persuade me that his boss’s claim of hospitalisations doubling every week had been honest, it seems to me to be unscrupulous panic-mongering, which would shame a banana republic.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-09-22--The War on Assange Is a War on Truth

The War on Assange Is a War on Truth

It is dangerous to reveal the truth about the illegal and immoral things our government does with our money and in our name , and the war on journalists who dare reveal such truths is very much a bipartisan affair .
Just ask Wikileaks founder Julian Assange , who was relentlessly pursued first by the Obama Administration and now by the Trump Administration for the “ crime ” of reporting on the crimes perpetrated by the United States government .
Assange is now literally fighting for his life , as he tries to avoid being extradited to the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for violating the “ Espionage Act.
” While it makes no sense to be prosecuted as a traitor to a country of which you are not a citizen , the idea that journalists who do their job and expose criminality in high places are treated like traitors is deeply dangerous in a free society .
To get around the First Amendment ’ s guarantee of freedom of the press , Assange ’ s tormentors simply claim that he is not a journalist .
Then-CIA director Mike Pompeo declared that Wikileaks was a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Ironically , that ’ s pretty much what the Democrats say about Assange .
The Most Dangerous Man ... Fowler , Andrew Best Price : $ 2.26 Buy New $ 19.49 Earlier this month , a US Federal appeals court judge ruled that the NSA ’ s bulk collection of Americans ’ telephone records was illegal .
That bulk collection program , born out of the anti-American PATRIOT Act , was first revealed to us by whistleblower Edward Snowden just over seven years ago .
That is why whistleblowers and those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Were it not for Snowden and Assange , we would never know about this government criminality .
And if we never know about government malfeasance it can neve be found to be criminal in the first place .
That is convenient for governments , but it is also a recipe for tyranny .
While we might expect the US media to aggressively come to the aid of a fellow journalist being persecuted by the government for doing his job , the opposite is happening .
As journalist Glen Greenwald wrote last week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Assange extradition trial .
Why would they do such a thing ?
Partisan politics .
Journalists – with a few important exceptions like Greenwald himself – are no longer interested in digging and reporting the truth .
These days they believe they have a “ higher calling.
” As Greenwald puts it , “ If you start from the premise that Trump is a fascist dictator who has brought Nazi tyranny to the US , then it isn ’ t that irrational to believe that anyone who helped empower Trump ( which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be imprisoned , hence the lack of concern about it.
” That may seem like a good idea to these journalists in the short term , but for journalism itself to become an extension of government power rather than a check on that power would be deeply harmful .
We can not have a self-governing society as was intended for our Republic if the government , with the complicity of the mainstream media , decides that there are things we are not allowed to know about it .
President Trump should end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Assange…and on all whistleblowers and their publishers .
The Best of Ron Paul

It is dangerous to reveal the truth about the illegal and immoral things our government does with our money and in our name, and the war on journalists who dare reveal such truths is very much a bipartisan affair. Just ask Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who was relentlessly pursued first by the Obama Administration and now by the Trump Administration for the “crime” of reporting on the crimes perpetrated by the United States government.
Assange is now literally fighting for his life, as he tries to avoid being extradited to the United States where he faces 175 years in prison for violating the “Espionage Act.” While it makes no sense to be prosecuted as a traitor to a country of which you are not a citizen, the idea that journalists who do their job and expose criminality in high places are treated like traitors is deeply dangerous in a free society.
To get around the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press, Assange’s tormentors simply claim that he is not a journalist. Then-CIA director Mike Pompeo declared that Wikileaks was a “hostile intelligence service” aided by Russia. Ironically, that’s pretty much what the Democrats say about Assange. The Most Dangerous Man... Fowler, Andrew Best Price: $2.26 Buy New $19.49 (as of 03:07 UTC - Details)
Earlier this month, a US Federal appeals court judge ruled that the NSA’s bulk collection of Americans’ telephone records was illegal. That bulk collection program, born out of the anti-American PATRIOT Act, was first revealed to us by whistleblower Edward Snowden just over seven years ago.
That is why whistleblowers and those who publish their information are so important. Were it not for Snowden and Assange, we would never know about this government criminality. And if we never know about government malfeasance it can neve be found to be criminal in the first place. That is convenient for governments, but it is also a recipe for tyranny.
While we might expect the US media to aggressively come to the aid of a fellow journalist being persecuted by the government for doing his job, the opposite is happening. As journalist Glen Greenwald wrote last week, the US mainstream media is completely ignoring the Assange extradition trial.
Why would they do such a thing? Partisan politics. Journalists – with a few important exceptions like Greenwald himself – are no longer interested in digging and reporting the truth. These days they believe they have a “higher calling.”
As Greenwald puts it, “If you start from the premise that Trump is a fascist dictator who has brought Nazi tyranny to the US, then it isn’t that irrational to believe that anyone who helped empower Trump (which is how they see Assange) deserves to be imprisoned, hence the lack of concern about it.”
That may seem like a good idea to these journalists in the short term, but for journalism itself to become an extension of government power rather than a check on that power would be deeply harmful.
We cannot have a self-governing society as was intended for our Republic if the government, with the complicity of the mainstream media, decides that there are things we are not allowed to know about it. President Trump should end the US government’s war on Assange…and on all whistleblowers and their publishers.
The Best of Ron Paul, MD


US Mideast Mirage

The Trump administration , desperate for some good news , just manufactured its own news by confecting a ‘ peace ’ deal between Israel and a bunch of pipsqueak Arab monarchies – just in time for November US elections .
The Gulf monarchies – the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain – that signed this agreement are so frightened of neighboring Iran that they would happily have opted for Israeli rule rather than welcome the angry , unforgiving Iranians , who call the Gulf Arabs ‘ traitors , cowards and backstabbers , ’ a sentiment shared by much of the Arab @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little sheikdoms on a map .
But many evangelical voters , who have a comic-book view of the Mideast , will think the Trump administration has achieved a major feat by supposedly bringing peace to the Holy Land .
Cynics , among them many Israelis , will likely scoff at such falafel in the sky thinking .
Oman is expected to sign the new accord .
American Raj : America ... Eric Margolis Best Price : $ 9.95 Israel remains intent on expanding its borders to gobble up all of what was historic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million Palestinians will remain stateless .
Israel also has its eye on fertile parts of Syria and Lebanon .
As I suggested in my book on Mideast strategy , ‘ American Raj , ’ the key beneficiaries of any Arab-Israeli peace deal would be Israel ’ s bankers , businessmen and arms makers .
If a decent peace deal can be made with the Palestinians , the doors of the entire Muslim world ( a fifth of humanity ) will be opened to Israel ’ s commerce and finance .
This will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than the West Bank ’ s scrubby slopes .
But to do so , Israel ’ s hard right and religious extremists will have to lessen their demands for Arab land and water – that is , what they term , Greater Israel .
Just as difficult and obdurate will be Trump ’ s evangelical core voters who want to see a mythical Biblical Israel recreated , paving the way for the return of the Messiah and earth ’ s fiery destruction .
The United Arab Emirates , population just under 10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The rest of its people are mainly Indians and Pakistani coolies , giving rise to the old bon mot that Dubai and Abu Dhabi are the world ’ s best Indian-run cities .
Titus , Trump and the T ... Reinstein , Josh Buy New $ 18.95 Non-Arab members of the UAE are treated like slaves .
They are paid a pittance , poorly fed , and live in squalor .
Non-Arabs have no rights .
Arab citizens don ’ t have any rights either , just a better standard of living @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the early 1970 ’ s when I worked for a leading US firm that smuggled high-end cosmetics and perfumes into India , Pakistan and the USSR via Dubai ’ s busy port .
Back in the day , Britain ’ s intelligence agency , MI6 , controlled Oman and its royal rulers .
Similarly , the CIA today exercises great influence over Kuwait , Saudi Arabia and Jordan , not to mention Egypt and Morocco .
Tiny Qatar maintains a degree of independence in the face of Saudi threats and efforts by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The big Mideast deal ballyhooed by Trump and Co. is in reality a phony peace between secretly allied Gulf States and Israel .
They have been playing footsie for over a decade .
It is not primarily about peace but about Iran and arms sales to the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia that they have no idea how to use .
Weapons sales are a protection payoff to Washington , which has important bases in Qatar , the UAE , Oman , Saudi Arabia and Israel .
What next ?
Will Trump declare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US to ‘ contain ’ China ?
As for peace in the Mideast , recall the biting words of Roman historian Tacitus , ‘ where they make a desert they call it peace.
’ That is what awaits over five million Palestinian refugees , not a new dawn promised by the Trump administration .
The Best of Eric S. Margolis

The Trump administration, desperate for some good news, just manufactured its own news by confecting a ‘peace’ deal between Israel and a bunch of pipsqueak Arab monarchies – just in time for November US elections.
The Gulf monarchies – the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain – that signed this agreement are so frightened of neighboring Iran that they would happily have opted for Israeli rule rather than welcome the angry, unforgiving Iranians, who call the Gulf Arabs ‘traitors, cowards and backstabbers,’ a sentiment shared by much of the Arab world.
Few Americans could find these little sheikdoms on a map. But many evangelical voters, who have a comic-book view of the Mideast, will think the Trump administration has achieved a major feat by supposedly bringing peace to the Holy Land. Cynics, among them many Israelis, will likely scoff at such falafel in the sky thinking. Oman is expected to sign the new accord. American Raj: America ... Eric Margolis Best Price: $9.95 (as of 06:15 UTC - Details)
Israel remains intent on expanding its borders to gobble up all of what was historic Palestine and its water resources. Five million Palestinians will remain stateless. Israel also has its eye on fertile parts of Syria and Lebanon.
As I suggested in my book on Mideast strategy, ‘American Raj,’ the key beneficiaries of any Arab-Israeli peace deal would be Israel’s bankers, businessmen and arms makers. If a decent peace deal can be made with the Palestinians, the doors of the entire Muslim world (a fifth of humanity) will be opened to Israel’s commerce and finance. This will be a huge bonanza worth orders of magnitude more than the West Bank’s scrubby slopes.
But to do so, Israel’s hard right and religious extremists will have to lessen their demands for Arab land and water – that is, what they term, Greater Israel. Just as difficult and obdurate will be Trump’s evangelical core voters who want to see a mythical Biblical Israel recreated, paving the way for the return of the Messiah and earth’s fiery destruction.
The United Arab Emirates, population just under 10 million, is only 10% Arab. The rest of its people are mainly Indians and Pakistani coolies, giving rise to the old bon mot that Dubai and Abu Dhabi are the world’s best Indian-run cities. Titus, Trump and the T... Reinstein, Josh Buy New $18.95 (as of 03:08 UTC - Details)
Non-Arab members of the UAE are treated like slaves. They are paid a pittance, poorly fed, and live in squalor. Non-Arabs have no rights. Arab citizens don’t have any rights either, just a better standard of living.
I remember these tiny city states from the early 1970’s when I worked for a leading US firm that smuggled high-end cosmetics and perfumes into India, Pakistan and the USSR via Dubai’s busy port.
Back in the day, Britain’s intelligence agency, MI6, controlled Oman and its royal rulers. Similarly, the CIA today exercises great influence over Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, not to mention Egypt and Morocco. Tiny Qatar maintains a degree of independence in the face of Saudi threats and efforts by the Trump people to crush it.
The big Mideast deal ballyhooed by Trump and Co. is in reality a phony peace between secretly allied Gulf States and Israel. They have been playing footsie for over a decade. It is not primarily about peace but about Iran and arms sales to the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia that they have no idea how to use. Weapons sales are a protection payoff to Washington, which has important bases in Qatar, the UAE, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Israel.
What next? Will Trump declare a trans-Pacific alliance between Tonga and the US to ‘contain’ China?
As for peace in the Mideast, recall the biting words of Roman historian Tacitus, ‘where they make a desert they call it peace.’ That is what awaits over five million Palestinian refugees, not a new dawn promised by the Trump administration.
The Best of Eric S. Margolis


lewrockwell--2020-09-22--Mandatory Mask Wearing Is Silent Terrorism Meant for Psychological Submission

“ If you are too weak to give yourselves your own law , then a tyrant shall lay his yoke upon you and say : ” Obey !
Clench your teeth and obey !
” “ And all good and evil shall be drowned in obedience to him.
” Since when is depriving the body and mind of oxygen , and breathing in expelled carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) good for the health of humans ?
Since when is wearing a partial face covering that is multiple times more porous than can protect against any virus penetration helpful ?
Since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not psychologically damaging ?
Since when is it legitimate and not hypocritical for the state to outlaw Muslim women from wearing head and face coverings that are part of their culture , and in the same breath force all Americans to cover their faces with a mask ?
Since when does any politician have any right to dictate to an entire population that they have to wear masks or any other type of clothing ?
Since when in this day and age did absolute slavery of all become a mainstay of American society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ de la Boetie Best Price : $ 7.00 Buy New $ 7.00 Forced mask wearing due to political control over people is a major aspect of the tyrannical response to this fraudulent virus ‘ pandemic.
’ Social distancing , forced testing , quarantines , mandated business closings , temperature checks , mass surveillance , and any number of other atrocious invasions of privacy are all demeaning and oppressive , but the state and local orders supported by the national political and ‘ health ’ organizations to wear masks , is especially instructive of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is as clear as day , and is being implemented not only as a test of mass societal compliance , but also to force people apart and to remove closeness , expression , and emotion from the human psyche .
This is a purposeful state exercise with the intent of destroying the spirit of the American public , leaving only a society of unfeeling and obedient drones awaiting the next order handed down from on high .
As bad as the ruling and political class ’ s totalitarian response to this so-called emergency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the pathetic reaction by the people of this country .
For a population that has long claimed superiority status over all others on earth , thinking that they were exceptional , most all bowed down to false state authority as if they were slaves bowing to a master .
This is akin to a religious reaction that could only be possible if the people now believe that the state is God .
Why else would so many voluntarily allow themselves and their families to be destroyed by complying with orders to not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would so many be humiliated at every turn because they were too frightened to question such draconian measures being implemented without even a trace of truth evident .
How could the very people that have had their lives purposely destroyed by the state they sanction and support , ignore all the lies that have been exposed over and over again about this pandemic hoax ?
How could any thinking human not be able to see the absurd nature of this scam called Covid-19 ?
How does any population in mass get to this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Against Masks ... Heckenlively , Kent Buy New $ 12.99 The state ’ s gaining compliance of mandatory mask wearing is the ultimate test of herd acquiescence to rule , and will be used as the gauge by the claimed elite ruling authority to see just how far the state can go in its efforts to subdue the American public .
It will also act as a guide for all future atrocities planned by the monsters at the top of the control pyramid .
This will include the timing of the release of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When most everyone is more frightened of this fake virus than losing all freedoms , the vaccine will magically appear .
That will happen in the next few months , unless it is made available right before the farcical presidential election to enhance the chances of the incumbent .
Regardless of when it is released , it will be based on a political decision , not on any impossible efficacy of the tainted concoction designed to harm in order to advance a particular agenda .
This entire fiasco and long-planned manufactured pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and perpetuate a global reset that will include cataclysmic changes to all humanity .
This requires economic destruction worldwide , total population conformity , a new and restructured monetary system , mass tracking and tracing to gain a total surveillance state worldwide , and a controlled technocratic infrastructure buildup beginning in all large cities , with expansion outward over time .
The U.S. is the head of the snake , and when the U.S. power elites gain total control of this population , the rest of the world will fall in line .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance the world has at this time to avoid this oligarchic global dictatorial overthrow , but currently , this is one of the least resistant and weakest populations on earth .
This dynamic will have to change before any successful dissent can take shape .
The Invisible Enemy Garrett , Mr. Gregory L ... Buy New $ 26.94 The first order of business should be the elimination of all mandated mask wearing .
This could be easily accomplished if large numbers of people simply quit wearing masks .
In any free society , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faux protection would be up to each and every individual .
If any real private business chose to require it or not , that would be their choice , but no one would be required by government at any level to wear or not wear any face covering .
In other words , no one should comply with any government order issued by any threat of force .
Since government does unfortunately exist , it could legitimately suggest ideas for the public , but without any assigned requirements whatsoever .
That would leave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be .
In the far distant past , when the people of this country understood the necessity and sanctity of freedom , the government in areas of restriction of the people was left impotent .
As I wrote recently in this article : “ Power and control are the underlying aspects and core convictions of all government action .
The government , even though the more powerful ruling class of banking , corporate , and wealthy claimed elites control it , is the enforcement arm of the real power .
Government therefore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and by tearing down government power , the top tier of the ruling class become exposed and vulnerable , and more unprotected .
So mass resistance against government can lead to tearing down the system of power and control , and help to lead us back to more freedom and less oppression.
” Complacency and conformity are useless , and will lead only to servitude .
The time for action is now or never .
The Best of Gary D. Barnett

“If you are too weak to give yourselves your own law, then a tyrant shall lay his yoke upon you and say:” Obey! Clench your teeth and obey!” “And all good and evil shall be drowned in obedience to him.”
Friedrich Nietzsche
Since when is depriving the body and mind of oxygen, and breathing in expelled carbon dioxide (CO2) good for the health of humans? Since when is wearing a partial face covering that is multiple times more porous than can protect against any virus penetration helpful? Since when is hiding all expression from others not psychologically damaging? Since when is it legitimate and not hypocritical for the state to outlaw Muslim women from wearing head and face coverings that are part of their culture, and in the same breath force all Americans to cover their faces with a mask? Since when does any politician have any right to dictate to an entire population that they have to wear masks or any other type of clothing? Since when in this day and age did absolute slavery of all become a mainstay of American society?
The Politics of Obedie... Etienne de la Boetie Best Price: $7.00 Buy New $7.00 (as of 05:45 UTC - Details) Forced mask wearing due to political control over people is a major aspect of the tyrannical response to this fraudulent virus ‘pandemic.’ Social distancing, forced testing, quarantines, mandated business closings, temperature checks, mass surveillance, and any number of other atrocious invasions of privacy are all demeaning and oppressive, but the state and local orders supported by the national political and ‘health’ organizations to wear masks, is especially instructive of the real agenda sought. That agenda is as clear as day, and is being implemented not only as a test of mass societal compliance, but also to force people apart and to remove closeness, expression, and emotion from the human psyche. This is a purposeful state exercise with the intent of destroying the spirit of the American public, leaving only a society of unfeeling and obedient drones awaiting the next order handed down from on high.
As bad as the ruling and political class’s totalitarian response to this so-called emergency has been, it pales in comparison to the pathetic reaction by the people of this country. For a population that has long claimed superiority status over all others on earth, thinking that they were exceptional, most all bowed down to false state authority as if they were slaves bowing to a master. This is akin to a religious reaction that could only be possible if the people now believe that the state is God. Why else would so many voluntarily allow themselves and their families to be destroyed by complying with orders to not work to sustain their livelihoods? Why would so many be humiliated at every turn because they were too frightened to question such draconian measures being implemented without even a trace of truth evident. How could the very people that have had their lives purposely destroyed by the state they sanction and support, ignore all the lies that have been exposed over and over again about this pandemic hoax? How could any thinking human not be able to see the absurd nature of this scam called Covid-19? How does any population in mass get to this sorry state of ignorance?
The Case Against Masks... Heckenlively, Kent Buy New $12.99 (as of 04:52 UTC - Details) The state’s gaining compliance of mandatory mask wearing is the ultimate test of herd acquiescence to rule, and will be used as the gauge by the claimed elite ruling authority to see just how far the state can go in its efforts to subdue the American public. It will also act as a guide for all future atrocities planned by the monsters at the top of the control pyramid. This will include the timing of the release of the coming poisonous and deadly Covid vaccine. When most everyone is more frightened of this fake virus than losing all freedoms, the vaccine will magically appear. That will happen in the next few months, unless it is made available right before the farcical presidential election to enhance the chances of the incumbent. Regardless of when it is released, it will be based on a political decision, not on any impossible efficacy of the tainted concoction designed to harm in order to advance a particular agenda.
This entire fiasco and long-planned manufactured pandemic has been staged in order to initiate and perpetuate a global reset that will include cataclysmic changes to all humanity. This requires economic destruction worldwide, total population conformity, a new and restructured monetary system, mass tracking and tracing to gain a total surveillance state worldwide, and a controlled technocratic infrastructure buildup beginning in all large cities, with expansion outward over time. The U.S. is the head of the snake, and when the U.S. power elites gain total control of this population, the rest of the world will fall in line. That is why Americans are the best chance the world has at this time to avoid this oligarchic global dictatorial overthrow, but currently, this is one of the least resistant and weakest populations on earth. This dynamic will have to change before any successful dissent can take shape.
The Invisible Enemy Garrett, Mr. Gregory L... Buy New $26.94 (as of 05:21 UTC - Details) The first order of business should be the elimination of all mandated mask wearing. This could be easily accomplished if large numbers of people simply quit wearing masks. In any free society, wearing or not wearing a mask for faux protection would be up to each and every individual. If any real private business chose to require it or not, that would be their choice, but no one would be required by government at any level to wear or not wear any face covering. In other words, no one should comply with any government order issued by any threat of force. Since government does unfortunately exist, it could legitimately suggest ideas for the public, but without any assigned requirements whatsoever. That would leave the governing system emasculated, as it should be. In the far distant past, when the people of this country understood the necessity and sanctity of freedom, the government in areas of restriction of the people was left impotent.
As I wrote recently in this article:
“Power and control are the underlying aspects and core convictions of all government action. The government, even though the more powerful ruling class of banking, corporate, and wealthy claimed elites control it, is the enforcement arm of the real power. Government therefore, is the closest to the people, and by tearing down government power, the top tier of the ruling class become exposed and vulnerable, and more unprotected. So mass resistance against government can lead to tearing down the system of power and control, and help to lead us back to more freedom and less oppression.”
Complacency and conformity are useless, and will lead only to servitude. The time for action is now or never.
The Best of Gary D. Barnett