How to identify [a] CIA limited hangout op?

Has anybody else been given the impression our new NSA whistleblower is verifying the
obvious, and there is no disclosure of the items that would show just cause for the
indictments against him?

Metaphorically calling out obvious jaywalking, could our new hero be doing an excellent job
of creating controversy again on the genuinely good stuff, and obstructing the real talking
points that need airing with partisan division over vapor?


THANK YOU, BEEZER. THIS SHOULD BE EVERYWHERE.

Call him a Zionapologist, Rogaine junkie, dottering wierdo, flame away all you like--
but where has Dr. Webster Tarpley ever miscalculated geopolitical kabuki, or history?
I think the big grain of salt I needed was the fact that once a Rhodes Scholar, always..
but does it hurt when everybody's dogs are getting chewed up? Fair is fair.

Check this out from PressTV, and I don't recall seeing anything in the stack LIKE it...
I started digesting this on his website last weekend while downloading a GCN stream,
and began to get that veritas pit in my stomach resembling ugly plausible truthfulness...

The operations of secret intelligence agencies aiming at the manipulation of public opinion generally involve a combination of cynical deception with the pathetic gullibility of the targeted populations.
There is ample reason to believe that the case of Edward Joseph Snowden fits into this pattern. We are likely dealing here with a limited hangout operation, in which carefully selected and falsified documents and other materials are deliberately revealed by an insider who pretends to be a fugitive rebelling against the excesses of some oppressive or dangerous government agency.

But the revelations turn out to have been prepared with a view to shaping the public consciousness in a way which is advantageous to the intelligence agency involved. At the same time, gullible young people can be duped into supporting a personality cult of the leaker, more commonly referred to as a “whistleblower.” A further variation on the theme can be the attempt of the sponsoring intelligence agency to introduce their chosen conduit, now posing as a defector, into the intelligence apparatus of a targeted foreign government. In this case, the leaker or whistleblower attains the status of a triple agent.

Any attempt to educate public opinion about the dynamics of limited hangout operations inevitably collides with the residue left in the minds of millions by recent successful examples of this technique. It will be hard for many to understand Snowden, precisely because they will insist on seeing him as the latest courageous example in a line of development which includes Daniel Ellsberg and Julian Assange, both still viewed by large swaths of naïve opinion as authentic challengers of oppressive government.
emphasis by paster

It's a long read, but I humbly submit an inability to stop reading it. The M.O. is
too Pied Piper again, and I want so much to believe this guy is the real deal...
I know, PressTV; and God help us Tarpley again... but for a change let's analyze the
viability of the arguments instead of soak and light the rag. Please help me on this.

Link to the whole article:
www.presstv.ir...

I'm not going to put words in anybody's mouth, boilerplates for the coffee-deprived at 10:30
CDT, or blame Bob Tuskin for trying too hard with a Supertramp song during an incoming
bumper. Ain't important, and we know it. He's talking real world hurt, so am I.

But if in this precariously positioned thread (at least philosophically) I see anything
resembling:"Peace and love will win the day against cruise missiles with 40 or so
kiloton payloads: and I made 3400 pazoozas last week selling timeshares in Iceland
with HooHah Hangouts dot.commie" I'm gonna scream, and make eBay my home page.


And on the partisan devisive crap extends into our sleep, meals, and sometimes even
work. And the fact is there's a box we're supposed to be informed and arguing outside
of, that's rapidly resembling our republic's coffin. I refuse categorically to characterize
or otherwise attempt to morally describe somebody who all of a sudden says "I can't
stand to see him like this.." and takes the pillow away from Jack's face before doing
anything else. Movie's just started, our hero's out of sight.. and one may not have flown
over the cuckoo's nest on this one at all.

Where is he? Hiding, and probably for a good reason. Plant or otherwise he's hotter than
Lisa Ann in a blue teddy. Don't hurt her, she's adorable.

What exactly are the nature and scope of the secrets that would be called sensitive or
already not known? We sure don't know what was in the four flaptops, do we?

Best of all, while we're arguing about what was right or wrong about what he may or may
not have carted off,
what's getting fixed back at the ranch?

Is my internal skeptic growing those itchy twitchy weasel whiskers too quickly?

Thank you for indulging this post; and I now offer my decrepit old earthly form to
the now slathering multitude clamoring to tear me asunder... or asOver.Easy.

This is exactly why I am still on the fence when it comes to this story. People love stories about whistle-blowers, and hang on their every word waiting for an Earth-shattering "kaboom"... which never happens. This government has grown far too underhanded and devious to take anything at face value anymore. It is getting way too much press for me to get any warm-fuzzy feeling at all.

If this young man's motives are pure, I wish him well and hope he gives them chase for a long a$$ time.

If he is a plant or a shill, I doubt that he has much longer before he is "disappeared".

Oh yeah, S&F OP

reply to post by derfreebie


I like the way you write.

This is something to think about, and I've considered.

reply to post by madmac5150


Thanks for the bump, mac.. but more important is that old nagging feeling about
this 'instant darling' thing by a recently b-slapped media. Too convenient, and a lot
of airplay away from some real smoking elephants on the porch recently.
UPSIDE: That dog in the fight from AP could make the gang war in DC ugly without this.

reply to post by derfreebie


I have felt this way from the beginning. Limited hangout. Trust and believe if these revelations were not to be known by the masses they would have drove a steam roller over it and not one MSM outlet would have carried the story. Otherwise they would have carried it years ago. This info has been out there.

And check it out how our "adversaries" (ie CHina and Russia) are weighing in. It stinks to high heaven.

So you know what that means, right...?? Greenwald is an operative as well. Frick, who isn't anymore.

Someone has an agenda behind this thing.

But who has the most to gain? I suppose that would be a place to start!

Originally posted by derfreebie
reply to post by madmac5150

 

Thanks for the bump, mac.. but more important is that old nagging feeling about
this 'instant darling' thing by a recently b-slapped media. Too convenient, and a lot
of airplay away from some real smoking elephants on the porch recently.
UPSIDE: That dog in the fight from AP could make the gang war in DC ugly without this.

Well I used to be "in the government" so I do kinda know how they think. I am just so damned happy that I retired when I did. You wrote a great thread btw... needed no bump from me

Peace

Originally posted by ItCameFromOuterSpace
reply to post by derfreebie

 

I like the way you write.

This is something to think about, and I've considered.

First Line.. 'preciate it immeasurably.

I extol implicitly and unto death by Rulu the opinion of anybody in a
Dollar Store gorilla suit, high class open-toed Dutch oven and what
appears as only ONE antenna from a '53 Merc.
ps God I loved those Universal-International scream flix.

I love Webster Tarpley, read Synthetic Terror years ago. I do not agree with him in totality but I respect his input on the subject. Read him and watch him. He gets a lot of air on RT. Here is where I became suspicious of him. Real recently, there was a podcast with a bunch of invited guests that will be making presentations at the upcoming 9/11 conference in Canada...again.

Anyway...he drowned out any other opinions other than his own. He stifled and suppressed all other interpretations or summaries and basically dominated the podcast. Here is another thing that got my radar up: Every other guest gave exalted praise to Tarpley and excused themselves for their differing opinions. I truly had the feeling of "gatekeeper" more than any other time.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by derfreebie

 

I have felt this way from the beginning. Limited hangout. Trust and believe if these revelations were not to be known by the masses they would have drove a steam roller over it and not one MSM outlet would have carried the story. Otherwise they would have carried it years ago. This info has been out there.

And check it out how our "adversaries" (ie CHina and Russia) are weighing in. It stinks to high heaven.

So you know what that means, right...?? Greenwald is an operative as well. Frick, who isn't anymore.

Time to bump you back, and like Ensign O'Toole always said, "How 'bout that?"
Everything that we're getting from the boob tube anymore is definitely why I threw
mine out two years ago. I watched a recent clip of Putin on Russia Today this afternoon
and he looked bored. Has to tell you this wasn't even a useful honey pot.
They're reaching-- and using a mannequin that's about as solid as cotton candy...
And thanks anyway GB, I'm too broke to be an op. Twenty years ago.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
I love Webster Tarpley, read Synthetic Terror years ago. I do not agree with him in totality but I respect his input on the subject. Read him and watch him. He gets a lot of air on RT. Here is where I became suspicious of him. Real recently, there was a podcast with a bunch of invited guests that will be making presentations at the upcoming 9/11 conference in Canada...again.

Anyway...he drowned out any other opinions other than his own. He stifled and suppressed all other interpretations or summaries and basically dominated the podcast. Here is another thing that got my radar up: Every other guest gave exalted praise to Tarpley and excused themselves for their differing opinions. I truly had the feeling of "gatekeeper" more than any other time.

Amen on that one, as I explained that grain of salt they go racing on in Utah.
Kev Barrett and I will drone away unrelentingly how he dances around Israel,
and any involvement in anything remotely nasty. Chicago is as Chicago protects...

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Someone has an agenda behind this thing.

But who has the most to gain? I suppose that would be a place to start!

Same old Politbureau, different piper. i don't think this guy is going to get any-
where near the long term airplay Assange did just because of zero tidbits.

I've been thinking the same thing, that it's a psyop. There's nothing ground breaking about what snowden released everyone here already knew the government was spying on everyone. The fact that this gets so much attention in the media is a sign that somebody wants to mold and form public opinion, gauge reactions, and see who takes what side. More data for the centers.

The real question is what organization designed this scheme and what do they have to gain by doing so? That leads well..deep into the rabbit hole.

reply to post by derfreebie


Dances around Israel is so right. To not include Israeli intelligence services into the op that was 9-11 is kinda like having pasta without sauce. Tarpley steers way clear of the subject. He won't even entertain discussion and shoots anyone down that brings it up.

To me, one of the best 9-11 researchers out there is Ryan Dawson. He writes for BoilingFrogsPost. But I don't agree with him in totality either but he gets closer than anyone else I have read. And I have read most books out there.

Anyway...Any telling of the story of 9-11 that does not include Israeli intelligence services is sorely lacking.

Mr. Snowden is really going to have to say something to "drops the panties". And when i say "drop the panties" i mean tell us how the NSA is using that information the wrong way.

Otherwise, the White House is going to "national security" you to death and/or say something like PRISM is a small price to pay for the freedom we enjoy

But then again It hurts me that he just downloaded all that info to a usb drive and no bells, whistles, ringing, alarms.. no flags were raised? A sensitive system like that and have a security hole so big you can drive a tractor trailer through it. I hope that contractor had antivirus software better than Norton. Cuz i'd like to know how he downloaded that info and no one knew about it.

Originally posted by cenpuppie
Mr. Snowden is really going to have to say something to "drops the panties". And when i say "drop the panties" i mean tell us how the NSA is using that information the wrong way.

Otherwise, the White House is going to "national security" you to death and/or say something like PRISM is a small price to pay for the freedom we enjoy

That is exactly what I have been thinking... and he is gonna have to drop trow in a BIG way. If he provides documents that connect the dots between the White House, the NSA and PROVES that the info was used to blackmail or coerce, then I will start to believe him... a little.

The best question was brought up earlier in this thread by MysticMushroom: Who has the most to gain?

Similar to another article I read I made a post about it earlier today. It is not that hard to consider. Look at how the story has broken in the media and what facts and revelations have been covered.

Do people care about what is happening as a whole, or are they more focused on the Reality TV aspect of the case. Are people asking their government, "What the hell is going on!?" or are they turning on CNN to see whether or not Snowden will reunite with his girlfriend, 'did he make it out of Russia?' and is on 1 of 5 planes he reportedly took.

The underpinning of the story has seemed to go by the wayside.

It's kind of like, for example, let's say we had a corrupt Police division that was involved in all sorts of nasty stuff. For arguments sake let's say it was involved in extortion, blackmail, racketeering, prostitution, trafficking (human and narco), etc.

Now, the word on the street is getting heavy. The people at the top know it and know it's a matter of time before word gets out. They know there are a few insiders not happy with what's going on, and the lid is halfway off the can of worms.

Instead of coming clean and everyone losing their heads. (Something like what happened to NYPD a couple decades ago when the majority of the force was relieved of duty) they simply choose a scapegoat who comes out as a whistleblower -tells half (a quarter) of the story in a very sanitized version.

A little play and theatre goes on after, people don't focus on the issue and the same actions that happened before go further underground, become more compartmentalized and everyone thinks problem solved.

Is it hard to believe? Yes. Is it possible? Yes.

The post I made earlier.

reply to post by GrantedBail


Snowden - old news.

We're back to climate change! Even though it's been debunked by the scientist that admitted they were lying.

They really think we are this stupid.

Originally posted by Happy1
reply to post by GrantedBail

 

Snowden - old news.

We're back to climate change! Even though it's been debunked by the scientist that admitted they were lying.

They really think we are this stupid.

Whether or not humans have an impact on the climate is up to you to believe. But as far as climate change goes, it happens. It's been happening for a while now.

If it wasn't happening, there'd still be an ice age and I'd have 500 ft of ice over my head.

Your point is noted though... Unless Snowden is going to appear on Dancing with the Stars (Guantanamo Edition), no one really gives a damn.

reply to post by derfreebie

My initial reaction to this Snowden deal was, it provided a way to desensitize people to the idea they are living in a surveillance state. Sort of an unofficial release of information, since they know they couldn't come right out and say it without a full blown uproar. Now they get to reiterate how these "programs" save lives and keep us safe, when in actuality they only keep the "keepers" safe from the masses. It's why the MSM keeps plugging polls saying most people believe Snowden to have acted criminally. Heck, if even a portion of that scenario is true, it was done by this admin to shout out loud and clear to other potential whistleblowers, "We're reading and listening to everything. So we'll know who you are. You won't be able to hide." I mean there were people coming forward day after day. This could be a stratagem to undermine that.

I still hold hope it's what it appears to be of face, but as the days go by with nothing but window dressing, I fear my initial, gut feeling is correct.