Report unmasks FBI intervention in 2016 elections

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Patrick Martin

FBI Director Christopher Wray: The agency, long suspected of political meddling, has now been caught with the pants down. However expect no solution to these abuses as this is an intra-plutocratic fight, and all billionaires support the police state.


10 December 2019

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he report issued Monday by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz on the FBI investigation into the 2016 Trump election campaign documents the extraordinary political role played by this key police/intelligence agency in influencing the outcome of the 2016 election.

The report underscores the fraud of the effort by the Democrats to impeach Trump on the grounds that he has invited “foreign intervention” into the 2020 elections. The greatest threat to American democracy comes not from Russia or any other foreign country, but from the operations of the military-intelligence agencies of the capitalist state, which do the bidding of Wall Street and the financial aristocracy.

The report shows that the conflict between the CIA-backed Democrats and the fascistic Trump is a fight between two right-wing forces, both implacably committed to the interests of American imperialism and both hostile to the social and democratic rights of the working class.

The Horowitz report begins with the decision by the FBI, on July 31, 2016, to open a preliminary investigation into the relationship between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

This action was triggered by information passed to the FBI by the Australian ambassador to Britain, who encountered a Trump foreign policy adviser, George Papadopoulos, in London. Papadopoulos boasted that Russia had acquired a large number of damaging emails from the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign and would soon make them public.

The bulk of the media coverage of the Horowitz report goes no further than this: his claim that the FBI proceeded properly, according to its own rules and regulations, in opening the investigation, and that political hostility to Trump and the Republicans played no role in that decision.

But far more significant is the context in which this decision was made and the subsequent actions of the FBI operation, given the codename Crossfire Hurricane, over the next three months.

Throughout the period from July through October 2016, the critical final months of the election campaign, the FBI became the focal point of political conflicts within the US ruling elite and the effective arbiter of the struggle between Clinton and Trump, the two most unpopular figures ever to run as major party candidates for the presidency.

The open intervention began on July 5, 2016, when FBI Director James Comey held the press conference at which he publicly cleared Clinton of wrongdoing in relation to her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state, while denouncing her conduct as inexcusably careless.

On July 31, the FBI opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, and on August 10 began individual investigations into Papadopoulos, Carter Page, another Trump foreign policy aide, and Paul Manafort, the campaign chairman. On August 16, General Michael Flynn, the retired head of the Defense Intelligence Agency and Trump’s top national security adviser, was added to the list.

The extraordinary decision to begin investigations into top Trump aides was approved by the entire leadership of the FBI, including Comey, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and General Counsel James Baker.

At the same time, there was public opposition to Trump from the national security establishment, with 50 former top officials, Republican and Democratic, publishing an open letter August 8 denouncing Trump and supporting Clinton.

On August 18, after press reports exposing his role as the highly paid adviser to former Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych—overthrown in 2014 in a US-backed coup—Paul Manafort resigned as Trump campaign chairman, replaced by the openly fascistic Stephen Bannon.

On September 19, the FBI received the Steele dossier, a compilation of unverified and salacious charges against Trump, focused on alleged activities in Moscow. This material was used as the basis for seeking authorization from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a wiretap on Carter Page, who had left the Trump campaign but was the subject of close surveillance for nearly a year afterwards. The FISA court issued the wiretap authorization on October 21, 2016.

Horowitz details no less than seven “inaccuracies” in the FBI application for the wiretap against Page, with an additional 10 “errors” in the three subsequent applications to extend the wiretap for three months at a time. These included serious questions and contradictions in the Steele dossier, which the FBI concealed from the FISA court, including the fact that the dossier was funded by the Democratic Party and, most remarkably, that Page had been working for the CIA when he met with Russian intelligence agents over a ten-year period.

In October 2016, there was a full-scale explosion of factional conflict within the FBI.

Pro-Republican, pro-Trump agents, who reportedly predominated in the ranks and in the leadership of the powerful New York City branch office, fed anti-Clinton material to the press, particularly after the discovery on October 3 of a laptop belonging to former congressman Anthony Weiner but used by Huma Abedin, Clinton’s closest aide, who was then married to Weiner.

On October 28, 2016, Comey sent his unprecedented letter to top Republicans and Democrats on House and Senate committees with national security authority telling them he was reopening the Clinton email investigation because thousands of Clinton emails had been found on Weiner’s computer. This letter, immediately leaked to the press, touched off a political firestorm that undoubtedly contributed to Clinton’s narrow election defeat 10 days later.

The World Socialist Web Site wrote at the time:

This direct intervention into the election by the top police-intelligence agency can only be an expression of deep crisis and profound tensions within the American ruling class and the state. The election as a whole has been dominated by the growth of social anger and antiestablishment sentiment, yet it has ended in a contest between two right-wing representatives of the richest 1 percent who are despised by huge sections of the electorate.

The response to the Horowitz report by President Trump and his political opponents in the Democratic Party has divided along predictable lines, with the Democrats hailing the report as a rebuttal of Trump claims of political bias in the FBI, and key Trump aides, including Attorney General William Barr, issuing denunciations.

Nowhere in either the media coverage or the statements of the warring factions within the ruling elite is there any actual discussion of the significance of the FBI role in the 2016 campaign—and the ongoing intervention of the national security apparatus in the current political crisis over impeachment and the 2020 election campaign.

It is worth pointing out that the Horowitz report demonstrates how easily the FBI can open an investigation with only the slightest “articulable factual basis,” and that FBI and Justice Department guidelines make no requirement for higher standards for “allegations potentially impacting constitutionally protected activity, such as First Amendment rights.”

In other words, the FBI is a law unto itself, and conducts its operations as it pleases, elections and democratic rights be damned. If that is the rule for a prominent and wealthy figure like Trump, one can only imagine what the standard is for targeting individuals from the working class or social and political organizations that oppose the capitalist system.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Patrick Martin is a senior analyst with wsws.org, a socialist organization.



[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读

[google-translator]

black-horizontal

Keep truth and free speech alive by supporting this site.
Donate using the button below, or by scanning our QR code.





And before you leave

THE DEEP STATE IS CLOSING IN

The big social media —Google, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter—are trying to silence us.




Revisiting The FBI’s 2010 Raids Against Political Activists

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Shadowproof


A crucial report from Defending Rights and Dissent on the FBI's political spying brings attention to raids from nine years ago.

Shadowproof is an independent media organization funded entirely by members and donations from readers. For $5/month, you can subscribe to our weekly member newsletter.

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he FBI raided the homes of 23 anti-war, labor, and international solidarity activists in Chicago, Minneapolis, and other parts of the Midwest on September 24, 2010. They were issued grand jury subpoenas and informed they were under investigation for “materially supporting” foreign terrorist organizations.

More than 50,000 pages of materials, including notebooks, family photos, membership lists for antiwar groups, and other political documents, were seized by the FBI and copied for the agency’s records.

All of the activists refused to cooperate with the grand jury. None of the activists were ever charged with crimes. Yet, in the nine years since the raids, the FBI cooked up political cases that were brought against two longtime activists who associated with them: Carlos Montes and Rasmea Odeh.

Kevin Gosztola, who is based in Chicago, covered the raids days after they occurred. He published multiple reports in 2010 and 2011, including profiles of a couple of the activists that were targeted.

The cases of the Midwest 23 receive renewed attention in a report on the FBI’s investigation, monitoring, and surveillance of First Amendment-protected activities.

The report was written by Chip Gibbons and released by Defending Rights and Dissent. It covers political spying since 2010, which is when the Justice Department’s Inspector General Office last conducted a review of the FBI and the First Amendment.

“In the nine years since then, the FBI has repeatedly monitored civil society groups, including racial justice movements, Occupy Wall Street, environmentalists, Palestinian solidarity activists, Abolish ICE protesters, and Cuba and Iran normalization proponents,” the report notes. “Additionally, FBI agents conducted interviews that critics have argued were designed to chill protests at the [2016] Republican National Convention or intimidate Muslim American voters.”

Gibbons makes a crucial point about the manner in which political spying by the FBI is often treated. It is typically seen as part of some “historical epoch” that occurred during the era of J. Edgar Hoover. Or it was part of an “overzealous response” to the September 11th attacks.

“When contemporary accounts of political surveillance are discussed, they are treated as isolated incidents. A report of a Palestinian solidarity activist receiving door knocks from FBI agents is treated as an entirely separate and unrelated event to FOIA revelations about an investigation into environmental activists,” according to Gibbons.


As Gosztola reported, files from the FBI revealed an undercover FBI agent who called herself Karen Sullivan infiltrated the Antiwar Committee (AWC) as they organized a march against the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul. Activists raided in 2010 were associated with this group.

The undercover FBI agent later infiltrated a chapter of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) and passed along information to the FBI about the organization’s private operations.

The report summarizes, “Sullivan appears to have recorded many of her conversations with FRSO members. She claimed she uncovered the FRSO had a secret purpose, plotting to overthrow the U.S. government in a socialist revolution. However, Sullivan does not allege the FRSO had any means or actual plans to do so, and the mere advocacy of revolution is protected by the First Amendment.”

By 2010, the undercover FBI agent faced pressure to develop a case that the Justice Department could prosecute.

Gibbons recounts, “Well into her infiltration, Sullivan turned it into a sting operation and began telling FRSO members that her father had bequeathed her $1,000 to give to the PFLP. She approached numerous members, asking them to accept the money in cash to get it to the PFLP. One member allegedly finally took the cash four months before the raids.”

“Journalist Kevin Gosztola has pointed out numerous problems with the way these statements are interpreted or portrayed in the affidavit. The ‘conspiracy’ was entirely crafted by the undercover FBI agent,” Gibbons adds.

From an affidavit in the FBI files that were unsealed:

On March 4, 2010, UC1 recorded a conversation with [REDACTED]. UC1 told [REDACTED] that UC1’s father had left him/her a package, which included envelopes and a video called “Women in Struggle,” when he recently died. UC1 told [REDACTED] that the video was about women in the PFLP who admitted killing and bombing targets in Israel. UC1 said that his/her father left $1,000 for UC1 to get to the “organization of the women in the video.” [REDACTED] said that they can “get it to our people.” [REDACTED] told UC1 to talk to [REDACTED] at the FRSO Congress meeting in May 2010. [REDACTED] said that “if that’s what you want to do with it, we can get it there” and said that $1,000 “will go far in a place like Palestine.” UC1 said that the $1,000 was for the women “which were the PF.”

To be abundantly clear, the FBI concocted a conspiracy involving a fictional dead father. The undercover agent said their fictional dead father wanted to give some of his estate money to Palestinian resistance fighters, who the U.S. government views as terrorists. This was done to entrap one or more Palestinian solidarity activists so charges of “material support for terrorism” could be filed.

Gibbons outlines several questions that must be asked. The FBI undercover agent purportedly “discovered the FRSO’s secret mission, which was constitutionally protected teaching of standard Marxist-Leninist doctrine, and eventually its alleged material support for terrorism well over a year into her infiltration. Why then was she infiltrating progressive groups in Minnesota in the first place?”

“Why was her infiltration allowed to continue for a full year before she ‘discovered’ the supposed FRSO material support? Much of the information that Sullivan supposedly uncovered through spycraft can be found by searching the FRSO’s website. If Sullivan and the FBI really believed the FRSO had ways to get money to the PFLP, they were surprisingly nonchalant about handing over $1,000 cash to give to the PFLP,” Gibbons concludes.

The documentary that the undercover FBI agent’s father supposedly watched, “Women’s Struggle,” featured Rasmea Odeh.

Odeh was the associate director of the Arab American Action Network (AAAN) in Chicago. She was a member of the PFLP who was arrested in 1969 by Israeli forces and tortured. She immigrated to the United States in 1994, and the State Department knew about her past history.

For two decades, Odeh gained respect in the Chicago community as a women’s rights advocate. But on September 24, 2010, the FBI raided the home of Hatem Abudayyeh, the executive director of AAAN. The Treasury Department froze his bank accounts, and eventually, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago was interested in Odeh. They requested documents from Israel.

The Justice Department charged Odeh in Detroit with immigration fraud in 2013, when she was 66 years old. She fought the case for over three years. The first judge who oversaw her case had donated $2,000 to the Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces (FDIF) in 2006. The defense demanded Judge Paul Borman recuse himself, and he eventually stepped aside in 2014.

Prosecutors renewed their attacks on Abudayyeh’s political activism as he organized demonstrations at the courthouse in support of Odeh. They argued in a motion that Abudayyeh “engaged in a concerted effort” to “improperly sway the jury that will be empaneled.” Prosecutors requested an anonymous jury and juror sequestration.

Odeh was convicted of immigration fraud in November. Her defense appealed, arguing Judge Gershwin Drain improperly blocked Odeh from providing testimony on torture she survived. An appeals court ruled in her favor in February 2016. She was granted another trial.

Yet, it soon became clear the prosecutors would be even more overzealous at trial if Odeh intended to testify about how she was tortured. They planned to spread allegations from the Israeli government that stemmed from statements made during their interrogations against her. Odeh accepted a plea deal in 2017 and was deported.

“She was a scapegoat. She was the victim of a counterintelligence program effort by the FBI and the government to discredit Palestinian solidarity work in the U.S.,” Odeh’s attorney Michael Deutsch declared. “When they couldn’t make a case against any of those people, she was a convenient target for them and to promote this idea that she was a terrorist and snuck into the country, when in fact it was public knowledge. She was a well-known person.”



The other political case stemming from the FBI raids in the Midwest occurred against Chicano activist Carlos Montes. His home was raided on May 17, 2011, by a Los Angeles SWAT team and FBI agents. They broke down his door. Agents and police entered his bedroom and pointed rifles at him.

Montes was escorted to a police car and informed he was suspected of being a felon who purchased guns. He was sent to county jail because of a frame-up attempt that occurred in 1969, when he was a student at the East L.A. Community College.

In college, he was a part of a student movement that demanded the college offer a Chicano studies program. The college refused so students organized a strike. The L.A. County Sheriff and police deployed on the campus with batons and helmets and arrested and beat students.

The rally was broken up by the police. Montes hopped in a car with his friends and returned to his home. Authorities were there when he arrived. Everyone was pulled out of their cars and Montes was arrested. They claimed he “assaulted and battered a cop at the rally.” Montes thought, “What? Why didn’t you arrest me then?” He claims he was framed.

Montes bought a gun in 2002. He was not prosecuted. He bought a gun in 2005. He was not prosecuted. He was charged after September 24, 2010, because he associated with the activists who organized a march against the RNC.

As Gibbons describes, “State-level charges are not in the purview of the FBI, nor were the seized computers likely to reveal much about his registered firearm. An FBI agent present told Montes, “I want to talk to you about the Freedom Road Socialist Organization.”

On June 5, 2012, the local district attorney offered Montes a deal. If he pled “no contest” to a perjury charge, he would receive no jail time and three years of probation and community service. Montes accepted the deal. Activists targeted in the 2010 raids celebrated it as a victory.

This was, like the report declares, part of a pattern of FBI spying on the activism of peace, racial justice, environmental, and economic justice advocates. “In other words, the same political bias the FBI has displayed for decades seems fully intact.”

***

No official body has engaged in a major attempt to challenge the FBI’s routine abuses in the past decade.

Gibbons contends, “Constituencies on the left who traditionally have been skeptical of the FBI as a threat to civil liberties now find themselves as the Bureau’s defenders. Constituencies on the right who have advocated expansive police authority to maintain order, thwart subversion, and counter terrorism now find themselves speaking of the FBI’s potential to be a political police.”

Overall, there is bipartisan complicity and indifference toward FBI abuses. The 2010 FBI raids unfolded under President Barack Obama while Eric Holder was Attorney General. Robert Mueller was still FBI director.

Under President Donald Trump, a counter-subversive president, these are exactly the type of political prosecutions that Trump would love to see the Justice Department bring against activists in order to undermine popular social movements best positioned to challenge him.

Which is why it is crucial to read this report from the Defending Rights and Dissent. Its examples of abuse extend beyond the 2010 FBI raids, and the recommendations for oversight deserve to be taken seriously by progressive groups, as well as the politicians who claim to be on the side of struggles for social justice.

(Photo Credits: Rights & Dissent, groovysoup, StopFBI.net)


[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]



Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读

[google-translator]

black-horizontal

Keep truth and free speech alive by supporting this site.
Donate using the button below, or by scanning our QR code.





And before you leave

THE DEEP STATE IS CLOSING IN

The big social media —Google, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter—are trying to silence us.




Key witness in trial and conviction of police officer Amber Guyger murdered in Dallas

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Kevin Reed

[dropcap]Q[/dropcap]uestions are being raised following the shooting death of Joshua Brown, a key witness in the trial of Amber Guyger, just two days after the former Dallas police officer was sentenced to ten years in prison. Guyger was convicted of murder last Tuesday and sentenced on Wednesday for shooting and killing Botham Shem Jean in his apartment on the night of September 6, 2018 while she was off duty.

Joshua Brown


Brown, 28, who had lived across the hall from Jean in the South Side Lofts, was found with multiple gunshot wounds to his lower body by police at 10:30 p.m. on Friday in the parking lot of his new residence at the Atera Apartments in Dallas. Brown died of his injuries later at Parkland Memorial Hospital.

Brown had given critical testimony in the trial of Guyger that led to her conviction. Guyger said she mistakenly took Jean’s apartment for her own and then shot him thinking he was a burglar. However, Brown, who arrived home at approximately the same time as Guyger entered Jean’s apartment, said that he heard the off-duty officer and Jean talking to each other like they were meeting by “surprise.” Brown said gunshots rang out “right after.”

Joshua Brown testifying during the trial of Amber Guyger

Brown reported that he saw Guyger leave Jean’s apartment and, while she was on the phone, was “crying, explaining what happened, what she thought happened, saying she came into the wrong apartment.” Through his apartment door peephole, Brown said he saw Guyger going back and forth on the phone and that he did not hear any warnings like “Stop! Police.”

Dallas police have so far released very few details about their investigation into Brown’s murder. It has been reported that witnesses told police they saw a silver, four-door sedan speeding away from the Atera Apartment parking lot immediately following the shooting.

Attorney Lee Merritt wrote in a Facebook post Saturday night that Brown “was ambushed at his apartment complex as he got out of his car and shot at close range.” Merritt also said he was told by the medical examiner that Brown had been shot in the mouth and chest, a claim that was later disputed by Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins.

Merritt also tweeted of Brown, “He had no enemies. He worked for a living. We need answers.” The Dallas County Medical Examiner’s office did not respond to requests for additional information on Brown’s death and said an autopsy would be available in 90 days.

The fatal shooting in the chest of 26-year-old Jean, a black man, by white off-duty police officer Guyger and her sentencing to ten years in prison by a black judge—especially given Guyger’s “mistaken apartment” defense—had already generated national attention as a rare conviction of a police officer for murder, which resulted in a lenient sentence.

Guyger, who had been an officer for four years, was fired by the Dallas Police Department shortly after the incident and was then charged with one count of murder by a grand jury. She will be eligible for parole in five years.

The conclusion of the trial also drew attention when the younger brother of the victim, 18-year-old Brandt Jean, requested and was granted permission to embrace Guyger in the courtroom saying, “I forgive you.” This was then followed by an embrace from Judge Tammy Kemp, who also gave Guyger a copy of the Bible.

Led by Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz, who called the courtroom hugs of Guyger an expression of “Christian love,” the political establishment hoped that heightened social tensions in Dallas and other cities across the country would decrease.

However, with the murder of Brown reigniting public concerns, Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson urged calm. “Until we know more about this incident, I encourage everyone to refrain from speculation,” Johnson said. It has been reported that a private citizen has offered a $100,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of Brown’s killer.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Kevin Reed writes fo wsws.org, a socialist publication. 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读

[google-translator]

black-horizontal

Keep truth and free speech alive by supporting this site.
Donate using the button below, or by scanning our QR code.





And before you leave

THE DEEP STATE IS CLOSING IN

The big social media —Google, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter—are trying to silence us.




US Cops Act Like Soldiers, While US Soldiers Police the World

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Local police and foreign-deployed US militaries both practice a kind of “community policing” designed to control and gather intelligence on occupied populations, said Dererka Purnell, a movement lawyer, writer and activist. Purnell recently published an article in War and Peace, titled “Mass Shootings, Militarism and Policing are Chapters in the Same Manifesto.”


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
  Nellie Bailey and Glen Ford are senior editors with Black Agenda Report, the nation's leading Black political analysis journal.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读

[google-translator]

black-horizontal

Keep truth and free speech alive by supporting this site.
Donate using the button below, or by scanning our QR code.





And before you leave

THE DEEP STATE IS CLOSING IN

The big social media —Google, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter—are trying to silence us.




WaPo Warns USA Needs More Narrative Control As Pentagon Ramps Up Narrative Control

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Caitlin Johnstone



[dropcap]D[/dropcap]o you lay awake at night terrified that the Russians are able to control your mind with information warfare while the US government’s slavish devotion to democratic values leaves it powerless to stop them? Me neither. But according to The Washington Post, whose sole owner is a CIA contractor and Pentagon board member bent on hijacking the underlying infrastructure of the economy, we should be.

WaPo columnist David Ignatius, who has been one of the more hyperbolic promulgators of western Russia hysteria in written media, has published an article titled “Why America is losing the information war to Russia” about a new book by former State Department undersecretary for public diplomacy Richard Stengel. Stengel and Ignatius engage in a joyful Red Scare frolic with the exuberance of two little boys with a box of spray paints, each trying to one-up the other in hysterical apocalyptic ominousness about the way evil, authoritarian governments like Russia have been able to weaponize information while freedom-loving democracies can only look on in passive despair.

“The cruel paradox of the Internet, once hailed as a liberating force, is that it empowers governments that control information and enfeebles those that let it run free,” warns Ignatius.

“[Authoritarian governments] have gone from fearing the flow of information to exploiting it,” cautions Stengel. “They understand that the same tools that spread democracy can engineer its undoing.”

Unsurprisingly, at no point during this brotherly romp does Ignatius bother to make mention of the fact that Stengel is actually on record saying he supports the use of propaganda and believes the US government should be using it on its own citizens.


“Basically, every country creates their own narrative story and, you know, my old job at the State Department was what people used to joke as the ‘chief propagandist’ job,” Stengel said last year at an event organized by the shockingly ubiquitous narrative management firm Council on Foreign Relations.

“I’m not against propaganda,” Stengel said. “Every country does it, and they have to do it to their own population, and I don’t necessarily think it’s that awful.”

When an audience member objected to what he’d just heard, Stengel curtly dismissed him and ended the talk.

So anyway, that’s what the CIA/Pentagon/plutocracy-tied Washington Post wants you to be sure of: that evil governments are controlling your mind with information warfare, and that the US government is struggling to rescue you from that fate. Lucky for you, this report just so happens to be coming out at the same time as we’re learning that the Pentagon is already currently working on a program to protect you from wrongthink by controlling your access to information.


A recent Bloomberg article titled “U.S. Unleashes Military to Fight Fake News, Disinformation” reports that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is funding a new project called the Semantic Forensics program with which “the military research agency hopes it can spot fake news with malicious intent before going viral.”

“If successful, the system after four years of trials may expand to detect malicious intent and prevent viral fake news from polarizing society,” Bloomberg reports.

DARPA (formerly ARPA) is a top contender among some very stiff competition for the absolute creepiest of all US government agencies. Journalist Yasha Levine has done a lot of work documenting the way the agency has been intimately involved in internet surveillance since before the internet was even really a thing, beginning in the 1960s with its ARPANET program whose technologies went on to form the foundation of the World Wide Web. DARPA is also engaged in such charming activities as exploring ways to knit AI into human neurology, funding programs to control America’s election infrastructure, pouring billions of dollars into the creation of a robot army and constructing robotic insects which can crawl up walls.

Futurists have long envisioned a utopia where mankind reaps the benefits of soaring technological innovations which will overcome our every obstacle and lead us to an unprecedented state of human thriving. What they failed to account for was sociopathic government agencies like DARPA being intimately involved in those technologies from the very beginning.

Power is being able to control what happens. Absolute power is being able to control what people thinkabout what happens. If you can control what happens, you can have power until the public gets sick of your bullshit and tosses you out on your ass. If you can control what people think about what happens, you can have power forever. As long as you can control how people are interpreting circumstances and events, there’s no limit to the evils you can get away with.

Whoever controls the narrative controls the world. Governments understand this and so do their propagandists, and so, increasingly, do the rank-and-file public. Which is why you’ve now got establishment narrative managers like CNN’s Jim Sciutto saying things like “Let’s please ban the word ‘narrative’ from our discussion of the news and this president. There is only one version of the facts and the truth.” Mass media propagandists would like nothing better than to have people cease paying attention to the concept of narrative and go back to believing that when they turn on CNN they are receiving objective truth from the authoritative arbiters of absolute reality.

But that cat’s out of the bag. What has been seen cannot be unseen. A large number of people are aware that there are some very powerful forces who have a vested interest in controlling the thoughts that are in their head, and that number is growing every day. These powerful forces have responded to this new development by becoming increasingly ham-fisted in regulating the public’s access to ideas and information, and now it’s a race to see if they can slam the gates on us before we escape our cage forever.

_______________________

The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitterthrowing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandisebuying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

This is a dispatch from our ongoing series by Caitlin Johnstone

About the Author

Caitlin Johnstone
is a brave journalist, political junkie, relentless feminist, champion of the 99 percent. And a powerful counter-propaganda tactician.
 


 Creative Commons License  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

THIS WORK IS LICENSED UNDER A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

 





Be sure to get the most unique history of the Russo-American conflict now spanning almost a century!


Nuclear Armageddon or peace? That is the question.

And here’s the book that answers it.
Get the definitive history of the Russo-American conflict today!


black-horizontal