Sunday, August 07, 2005

Good Cops, Bad Cops and the Stolen Election

How the 'Stolen' presidential election of 2004 was a carefully-staged PsyOp against the left in the U.S.; how the people who ran this Op are also involved in the Fake 9/11 Opposition; how the G8 turned to good cops; how the Valerie Plame case will pan out; and how a lot more besides.
by Fintan Dunne & Kathy McMahon 7th August, 2005

For most people, the biggest problem with current events is figuring out what is really going on behind the news. For example, how can we tell if Patrick Fitzgerald is for real in his investigation of the Valerie Plame leak?

The answer is illuminated by looking across previous issues as varied as: the G8 London bombings; the Downing St. minutes; the 'stolen' presidential election of 2004; and even the 9/11 attacks. Perhaps that sounds like too wide a net, but it's not. [Is this?: 1 2 3]

Because, the key to working out what is really going on is to be far enough away from the trees to be able to see the wood. In other words, to develop a macroscopic overview of how many events fit together, and confirm this by microscopic analysis of individual events.

There are interesting overlaps between all these events. One is an overlap of people.

Paging Tony Blair

Congressman John Conyers and campaigning lawyer, Jon Bonifaz each played a starring role in the political theatre over both the Downing St. memo and the stolen election. Conyers convened special hearing on both issues and Bonifaz made impassioned speeches at both hearings.

Both issues tanked. The stolen election never made it to the mainstream and the Downing St. memo got eclipsed by those London bombs which coincided with a summit of G8 leaders.

Just bad luck for the left? ....
Or good planning by some other entity? Let's see.
There are more overlaps. Much more.

At that Conyers Downing St. hearing, Congresswoman Maxine Waters said she and others were 'hitting the streets' on the issue. Ray McGovern said 'virtual panic' by planners of the Iraq invasion had led to a decision to fake incriminating WMD evidence against Saddam. Talk of impeaching president George W. Bush was thick in the air.

The hearing was also addressed by Congresswomen Barbara Lee, and Sheila Jackson Lee. A rally in support was headlined by Medea Benjamin, Co-Founder of Global Exchange (and Code Pink), and by William Rivers Pitt, of Progressive Democrats of America.

Paging John Kerry

This troupe of political actors work well together, considering their previous role in the semi-official, congressional hearings on the 'Stolen Election'. Conyers, Waters, both Congresswomen Lee, and Bonifaz had the centerstage then also.

The leading non-Democrats in the affair were the Green Party's, David Cobb and Libertarian, Michael Badnarik --the former fronting many of the key legal actions in Ohio which the Kerry campaign later coyly cojoined. Speaking of fronting, William Rivers Pitt acted as the link man between the Kerry campaign and activists on the internet forum, Democratic Underground.

By the way, the issue of whether the election was stolen was kicked off in large measure by an early, pre-result Zogby poll. The poll had called the election for Kerry and caused the initial disquiet over the validity of the declared result.

And, now the overlaps go on.

Paging Mohammed Atta

Back in October, 2004 the group led a coalition which issued a statement critical of the Kean Commission report into 9/11 intelligence failures. The alliance called for deeper investigation of some 9/11 issues.

Among those signing up to that call were Michael Badnarik, David Cobb, Ray McGovern, Code Pink co-founder Jodie Evans and Global Exchange's Kevin Danaher. Cited as evidence of public disquiet on the issue was again a Zogby poll. This one showed that 66% of New Yorkers wanted a new 9/11 investigation.

Three further overlaps are worth very special mention.
  • First overlap: Pentagon whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg was another who signed on to that 911Truth statement. Besides his recent comradeship with 9/11 whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds (Edmonds is a whistleblower who can't whistle. She is legally barred from doing so.), Ellsberg is previously legendary for his association with the fall of Richard Nixon -under threat of impeachment.

  • Second overlap: Former ambassador Joe Wilson, husband of Valerie Plame, also addressed Conyers' Downing St hearing. And thus, that Plame connection brings us right back to Patrick Fitzgerald --and the question of whether a new 'Watergate' is in the offing --with implications of another impeachment.

  • Quirky, strange-but-true overlap: Signing on to the 911Truth statement was Fred Burks, a presidential interpreter for Bush, Clinton, Cheney, and Gore. (It's quite an interesting list of signatories.)
All the above have been overlaps of people. A small group of people without whom the political left in the U.S. might entirely politically dormant on key controversial issues of our time.

Spam, Spam, Spam

But there is something else connecting all these issues: the Internet.

Mainstream media coverage of these issues has been slight or disparaging. But the internet has been the essential infrastructure of organization and information in all cases. 9/11 skepticism is an internet phenomenon; the stolen election issue was fought mainly on the internet; Downing St was ignored by the mainstream and championed by bloggers.

The internet is important. Politically important in these e-times. That's why George Soros has pumped money into the internet action-group And that's why the political importance of the internet is central to our recent article entitled 'The CIA's Internet Fakes.'

And so, we come to a one final overlap which at last brings in the G8 London bombings -unmentioned since early in this article.

It's a good place to begin making sense of all this, because it introduces a chilling overlap of political technique.

The Protest that Bombed

The Al-Qaida terrorists who were blamed[framed] for carrying out on the London bombings must surely have demonstrated the most exquisitely-timed, politically-counterproductive atrocity of modern times.

The clear political beneficiaries of the bombs, were the G8 leaders gathered a few hundred miles away in Gleneagles, Scotland. It was a propaganda coup for the world's self-appointed super-policemen.

Two of those leaders, Tony Blair and George Bush, were on the ropes with their voters over their continuing occupation of Iraq. Furthermore, they and the rest of the G8 were facing a horde of demonstrators who represented millions more around the world pressuring the G8 for a fair deal on international trade and debt relief for Africa.

The bombs turned the G8 from bad cops to good cops in an instant. The bombs gave Bush and Blair (fronting for the G8) a new reason for continuing the war. The bombs sent packing the huge left-wing horde symbolicaly led by Sir Bob Geldof and Bono --with their globally-supported demands relegated to the political backburner. For them, the timing of the bombs was desperately bad luck. If you believe in bad luck.

On the other hand, removing the Bono-style, rose-tinted glasses for a moment, it was much more likely a classic of cynical, ruthless geopolitical manipulation by G8 leaders who include a secret policeman(Putin) and the son of a secret policeman(Bush).

The chilling political technique, we hinted at earlier was used, not once -but twice. Twice in the one event.

The global campaign on debt relief was political trap from the start. The technique works like this:

Just as in military matters, you never fight an enemy on ground that doesn't suit you. You manouver your enemy into a landscape as disadvantageous as possible. Then you meet and defeat. Similarly, in Machiavellian political manouvering, you don't wait for an issue to get to the point where it is a problem. Well before it gets to that point, you meet the issue head on --but on grounds of your choosing.

Now, the issue of global equity is a problem for an imperial G8 determined on colonial-style exploitation.

So let's say they know in advance that London will be bombed. What better way to meet the issue than by cynically raising hopes in advance, in the sure knowledge these hopes will be dashed, by a bombing which will also reinforce the G8-backed War on Terror? A double-whammy of psychological warfare which serves the short term war support issue and the long term global equity issue.

If that thought is too much for you, stop reading long articles like this and go back to comics.

For the rest of us, the next question is this: can we see signs of the same cynical technique being applied elsewhere?

Unfortunately, we can. Not once -but twice. Twice in the one event. A double-whammy again.

Fool me once...

The 'defeat' of John Kerry in the 'stolen' U.S. presidential election --which in advance had raised such high hopes on the left in the U.S.-- shattered the left psychologically and nipped the U.S. anti-war movement in the bud. So... what if you knew in advance that Kerry would loose?

And let's say you knew that -partly by arrangement with Mr. Kerry, and partly by means of being able to tweak the electronic voting system in the U.S. to ensure a Bush victory. Therefore you know you will send packing a horde of left-wing voters symbolically led by John Kerry, the pied piper of the losing team.

But you still have a problem. The hard-core left activists will not slump off as readily. And they know that you control the electronic votes. So chances are they will immediately start making noise about all that and might spoil the illusion of democracy. So, what to do?

The answer is tactically brilliant. Why not dupe the left twice --using the same tatic and the same person? If the broad mass of voters could be suckered into backing Kerry --only to be stunned by the betrayal, then why not pull the same stunt immediately afterwards on the hard-core activists who remain.

Seed their doubts using a Zogby poll and some provocateurs. Get the plastic John Edwards to make an election night promise that "every vote will be counted." Have the Kerry campaign make ambiguous moves that indicate he is going to challege the result. But then, after weeks of raised expectations, have him fail to deliver. You can't really challenge an elction if the challenger won't challenge, so in the let-down, the issue will fizzle out.

Another double-whammy of psychological warfare which solves a short term electoral issue and shoves to the backburner the issue of your long term ability to steal elections at will.

As I wrote on 3rd November, 2004:
Every vote counts. But, hey! Who's counting? Not Dean, so smoothly to Kerry. So soft the wash of dissent, guided to fall silently on the rocky shores of electronic hardware. So virtual, Democracy. So long. "Follow me," said the Kerry Piper. To an election with No Exit. (Like 2000 -only Ohio)
If that's how things have been working, then it's time to revisit all those overlaps. Starting with the cast and crew on the stolen election gig.

By the way, if you still have doubts this is how things have been working, consider that the G8 bombing was really a triple-whammy. It also buried the issue of the Downing Stree memo -which had raised(not again!) so many hopes in the U.S. I hope you are getting the picture.

I know comics are easier, but this is the real world.

And I know we haven't gotten to answer whether Patrick Fitzgerald is for real. But we are now heading back to overlap-land -where the answer awaits us.

Back in overlap-land, Maxine Waters doesn't need lessons in how to handle stolen election stuff. Because she knows all about it from Haiti. She's a great place to re-visit the issue. Especially as her husband, Sidney Williams leads us to Alpha Phi Omega....

The conclusion of this article will be on Tuesday
as Kathy McMahon has insisted on interviewing
me about the CIA Fakes article. New mp3 HERE.