Just As Intended: The U.S. Election Is Tearing Us To Shreds - by Suzie Dawson
The only credible narrative about the US election is that both the main candidates were shit and the system is fundamentally broken.
Hi everyone :)
One of the commenters on another article I posted wanted to know - what do I think of Trump? What do I think of Clinton? Having already covered this in long form, I decided that for today's post I would dig out the below article from my archives, which was published just a few months shy of the 2016 US General Election.
It pleases me to realise when I look back over my old articles that I still stand by every word.
The fallout from the 2016 election has been socially catastrophic, not just for America, but for the World. It feels like the election that never ends. Likewise, it has cleaved the activism world in two, as countless people who should have known better, fell for the endless puppetry theatre and neatly divided themselves into either of the two main camps.
But some of us didn't, and continue to defy the Divide and Conquer regardless. I am one :)
So without further adieu, here is my take on Trump, Clinton, WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald, in the context of the horror movie that was the 2016 US general election.
Love,
Suzie
Just As Intended: The U.S. Election Is Tearing Us To Shreds
The only credible narrative about the US election is that both the main candidates are shit and the system is fundamentally broken.
The third-party candidate, while enjoying organic growth in public support, is largely blacklisted by media and in the last election cycle was handcuffed to a chair for a prolonged period of time in order to prevent her from participating in the Presidential debates at all.
In the backwards Orwellian nightmare we live in, exercising common sense or stating things as they quite plainly are and thus expressing views that oppose the monied and complicit status quo, is deemed a 'radical' and untenable position.
Radical because too few have the proverbial balls to openly speak their mind or own the full extent of their true opinions in public, making those of us who do a rarity.
Untenable because doing so makes you a target for relentless persecution or worse; a deterrent which is highly effective against those who treasure their public perception or persona, possessions, property, prosperity or (perceived) privacy above the need to appease their conscience by calling a spade a spade, honouring their humanity and openly advocating for the sociopolitical evolution we so desperately need.
It was only a few years ago that millions of people were emboldened to speak up and demand radical (read: common sense) change. The relative speed with which they were largely subdued and corralled back into the political mainstream is frankly shocking and testament to the lethal efficiency of the systems of social control that surround us.
Even Occupy Has Forgotten What Occupy Is About
"No true democracy is obtainable when the process is determined by economic power." - The Occupy Wall Street General Assembly
The founding declaration of Occupy Wall Street needs to be periodically revisited, to remind us of what birthed the movement.
It is poignantly read below, by Keith Olbermann.
Unfortunately, the societal conditions described remain to this day and have become even further entrenched; exacerbated by the passage of time. Every word of the founding statement holds true, yet the spirit of resistance in which it was authored, has been mostly co-opted by the same politicians and organisations who it once critiqued and decried.
During Occupy, the idea that our main social media accounts - @OccupyWallSt & @OccupyWallStNYC would be used to congratulate politicians, would have led to a massive outcry, but we have become so used to the blatant co-option of our movement that few barely even notice it anymore.
"Our Revolution Endures" etched in the colours of a political party, above a "Paid For By Bernie 2016" campaign disclaimer makes a complete mockery of the word revolution:
"Not the billionaires" it says inside parentheses, the words spelled out in a pale grey scale - as if, as I predicted in December 2015 that he would, Bernie hasn't just sold his campaign supporters out to Hillary and the very same billionaires he spent so long decrying.
I got the month wrong - April rather than July - but it was clear from the outset that Bernie Sanders was B.S.
Occupy was born of the betrayal of the broken promises of Obama.
Of course the elites knew that ruse would work again. It always has. Generation after generation, we never learn.
And thus - when the politician full of attractive rhetoric eventually sells us out - the cycle of disillusionment, civic rage and institutional violence, oppression and then political co-option renews.
It isn't revolution at all.
It's a cycle and it's perpetual. Manufactured by the elites. They just pull the levers and watch it spin, around and around again.
I smelled it coming when the compositional horror story that is the band "Nickelback" released the song "Edge of a Revolution." I can't even embed the video here because it is so revolutionary that anyone who uploads it to You Tube is instantly hit with a copyright notice and removal.
Bless her soul, even Jill Stein isn't immune to using the word 'revolution' to describe a political campaign. I retweeted and liked the tweet despite it, because I also think if Bernie was worth his salt that in the wake of the betrayal, he would have joined Stein and not Clinton.
The real revolution started by Occupy and not yet finished can be quantified in the bodies of the literal dead - the hopes crushed, the houses lost, the citizens exiled, the relationships and careers destroyed, the homeless re-disenfranchised by the evictions, the property stolen and destroyed.
Every time a politician says the word 'revolution' that is all I see. Tents being ripped to shreds, the People's library being hauled away in rubbish trucks ultimately paid for by the same People whose will was being subverted, whose dreams lay shattered.
Those who gave everything they were and had, to bring the movement to prominence, only to be completely betrayed and violated by the societal infrastructure that was supposed to protect us.
We are spat on every time the language of our struggle is misappropriated for temporary political gain.
The Age Of Hypocrisy
This is the age of hypocrisy that we live in. We know the political process is bullshit - we knew it in 2011. Prior generations knew it, railed against it and lost, just like us. But here we all are, participating in it once again nonetheless.
I know full well that it is all just a great big reality TV show. But I have still voted every election cycle of my adult life.
Most of the people who know me, with the exception of those few who are in even deeper trouble for their honesty and principles than I am, would tell you I am the most 'radical' person they have ever met.
Yet even I find myself writing tweets and articles - albeit criticisms, including this one - that feed the electoral monster just by giving it breath.
My own inadvertent complicity scares me almost as much as the corruption and the collusion behind the political farce - because it indicates the level of saturation of the message that participation in the political process - even the critique of it - is a requirement of a properly functioning democracy.
But we knew in 2011 that the process was irredeemably broken.
Just like we knew it in 2000. In 1986. In 1963. In 1935.
George Bush's brother handing him the presidential election was "democracy" in action.
JFK getting shot in the head on live TV. That was "democracy" in action.
Wall Street making billions while everyone else goes bankrupt. Police beating, pepper-spraying and mass arresting protesters, while "protecting" a bronze bull statue. That was "democracy" in action.
The same nepotism, grand larceny, financial crimes and human rights violations that the USA accuses everyone else of but themselves. That, is "democracy" in action.
We don't need or want it and desperately have to find a way to get free of the political mousewheel, for good.
In a real revolution, no one would be allowed to own luxury holiday homes in seven different cities that sit empty 50 weeks per year, while retirees and veterans sleep on park benches.
Every bedroom in the White House would be open to homeless families.
Public money paid for every luxury in that building, yet the public are restricted from even seeing the inside of it let alone enjoying it.
All politicians, including the U.S. presidents are the same ilk of usurpers, usurists and tinpot dictators that they so frequently decry.
A real revolution would put direct democracy into the hands of everyone, and undermine the power of the few.
It is long overdue.
Snowden Nailed It
The U.S. election is an illusion of choice and that fact, at least, is more widely accepted than ever before.
Edward Snowden's publically expressed distaste for both political candidates tracks back quite some time.
WikiLeaks Led The Charge
Julian Assange and WikiLeaks' criticism of Trump tracks back even further.
Largely as backlash for the wildly successful #DNCLeak, the world's corporate press are currently accusing WikiLeaks of essentially being a front for Russian hackers and/or favouring Trump.
Yet in a September 13, 2015 interview with Assange by Argentinian newspaper Página/12, Assange was asked about his opinion of Trump.
A rough translation of his response was:
I look at it from the following perspective. I followed Hillary Clinton for years, you know that I have a personal issue with Hillary because she was Secretary of State when we published diplomatic cables and more recently emails refused to disclose. And she is much more warlike than Obama. What happened in Libya, the destruction of that country and the collapse of its state, it was mostly a war of Hillary. Hillary was behind it all. Pentagon generals opposed to intervene but Hillary pushed for that bombing. So now comes in Donald Trump, who is more 'guerrero' than Hillary. So whoever wins will be even more aggressive than Obama. The Trump phenomenon is interesting. At this time there is not a massive flood of Latin Americans wanting to enter the United States. Then it is interesting to see where does this phenomenon. Trump is appealing to the same grotesque nationalism can be seen in discussions on refugees in Australia and Europe. The issue of immigrants really was not on the agenda significantly until Donald Trump began to lift. The rest of the Republican Party has more decency and more willing to like voters Hispanic roots.[Note: The Google translation of the word 'guerrero' made little sense so I left the word in Spanish and linked to another translation of that specific term which seems to explain it]
More recently, Assange made his feelings even more plain:
If essentially calling Donald Trump "Gonorrhea" isn't enough to convince you - time for more hard evidence than merely opinion.
WikiLeaks, it turns out, as part of the very same leak they are copping so much criticism for, actually published Donald Trump's donor list.
WikiLeaks - A Library Besieged By Barbarians
For the Empire, WikiLeaks getting 16,202 retweets on a single tweet is a nightmare from hell. Especially when the tweet in question was an epic release of US government insider information from inside the political party of the sitting US president.
The corporate media are no doubt equally apopleptic over WikiLeaks getting 14,304 retweets on a tweet like this:
Even the spelling mistake couldn't stop such a pertinent point about the obvious mass media politically-motivated collusion and hypocrisy from going viral.
Yet politically-motivated collusion is what those already proven to be engaged in, are so eager to accuse WikiLeaks of. Along with a slew of associated accusations that ultimately just serve to distract from the actual content of the disclosures, which have been catastrophic for the Democrats.
Their subsequent National Convention has devolved into nothing short of a circus, as disillusioned Democrats find their voices and raise them in unison.
Julian Assange has famously compared WikiLeaks to the ancient Library of Alexandria. A colossal treasure trove of authentic documentation - a catalogue of human knowledge and historical documents, unmatched in modern times and besieged by barbarians who wish to bury, burn or suppress that knowledge by any means possible.
The barbarians in question are a who's-who of the military industrial complex, as well as politicians in positions of significant power in many governments around the world who have been embarrassed, inconvenienced or angered by WikiLeaks publishing hidden truths.
The Greenwald 'Slate' Interview
Hyped by Snowden last night, was this 99% amazing interview with my favourite journalist, Pulitzer Prize-winner Glenn Greenwald.
His insights are really welcome and the interview is filled with original thought.
The interview debunks a slew of the criticisms against WikiLeaks.
On leaks versus hacks:
Information is constantly stolen by intelligence agencies the world over, for their own ends - yet when it is "stolen" and released to the public for the public good, the same governments who profit from the antics of their intelligence agencies, suddenly take affront at the methods by which the information in the releases are obtained.
Greenwald tackles this beautifully, with his comparison to Ellsberg and The Pentagon Papers:
With regards to criticisms (which are prevalent but for which no actual evidence has been provided by critics - only conjecture) that WikiLeaks withheld the DNC release until the most politically expedient time, for maximum damage - Greenwald entirely debunks the theory, stating that -if- this was done, that it is a common practice for news media to withhold stories, for a variety of reasons.
"I think there is a lot of hypocrisy going on in criticizing WikiLeaks for that." - Glenn GreenwaldThe journalist presses him on the issue, but Greenwald stands strong in the face of continued questioning. He goes on to tackle some of the major anti-Trump talking points also; pointing out that criticism of NATO's interventionist escapades (especially post-Libya) and a desire to tone down the aggression against Russia does not actually make Trump an agent of Russia - that these are legitimate aspects of foreign policy debate that should be had regardless of who is standing.
The pushback gets even firmer when Greenwald states:
Burn!
It gets better. Reading the next part, I'm literally applauding in my seat. Finally, finally, a major mainstream figure is speaking the righteous rage of the people, without co-opting the message to a particular political platform.
The quote is so incredible it really needs to be read twice.
The reason [Brexit] resonated is that people have been so fucked by the prevailing order in such deep and fundamental and enduring ways that they can't imagine that anything is worse than preservation of the status quo. - Glenn GreenwaldAbsolutely correct and this sham of an election is just adding fuel to the fire.
America saw martial law in how many states last year? Three? Four? Neither Clinton nor Trump are going to address any of the prevailing social conditions that have led to that situation. As was made famous by the Occupy Oakland activist and livestreamer BellaEiko - and as I have heard repeated so many times by people around the globe - "Shit is FUCKED UP and BULLSHIT!"
I don't usually litter my articles with swear words and neither does Greenwald usually propagate them in his interviews either. But this is the level of frustration we are experiencing.
Nothing meaningful has changed since 2011. And we are all sick to death - literally - of that. No justice - no peace.
The Slate interview is long and comprehensive and there is a ton more worthy content in it than what is discussed above. It is well worth your time to read.
Old Grudges Rehashed
Unfortunately the debunking of so much of the anti-WikiLeaks hysteria has been predictably overshadowed by the singular criticism Greenwald upheld - and not for the first time.
In a media environment where few words and fast output equals easy money for beleaguered "journalists" - a single tweet by Snowden often spirals into global news.
Few journalists are interested in the "big picture" unless it can be explained in a paragraph or two and in a way that aligns with their own strategic career goals.
At a time when the temperature of establishment rage towards WikiLeaks is well past boiling point, it was inevitable that any criticism levelled at them by a usually sympathetic figure, or anyone who may have been viewed as an ally, would be immediately picked up and capitalised upon.
And whoomp - there it is:
Snowden sharing the Greenwald interview? 610 retweets. Snowden concurring with the singular Greenwald criticism of WikiLeaks? 5,100 retweets.
Which really makes you wonder how many people lauding the criticism actually bothered to read the full interview.
But the point Snowden was making isn't new. He's said it all along.
Snowden's tweet counts 138 characters. (Yes, I'm such a geek as to have checked). Which might account for some of the problematic language. Being, the diminutive "helped", when WikiLeaks has arguably engineered, advanced and championed their field, at extreme risk and sacrifice; and the inflammatory "hostility".
Hostility unfairly implies emotion rather than ideology, at least to my reading.
The tweet itself generated plenty of hostility - predictably dividing respondents into three categories - those who agree with WikiLeaks on principle, those who agree with Snowden on principle, and those who don't want to see them criticising each other for whatever reason, and just want them to play nice and get along.
The emotiveness of the tweet is reminiscent of counter-criticisms that track back years regarding Snowden's strategy for his release of information. I think both parties are so conditioned to receiving torrential waves of abuse regarding their every choice and utterance, that they are understandably tender from the constant bruising.
Snowden and Assange are not silly people. They are in fact, the smartest and most strategic thinkers on the planet. Neither are prone to rashness. They know full well the impact and consequence of their actions. I suspect there is likely much more at play than meets the eye, more than any of us observing can know or guess at.
The Slippery Slope
WikiLeaks' immediate and biting retort focused on the ideology of digital curation - selective redacting or editing of content.
The issue of curation is an interesting one to me, because in order to have curation, you must have a curator, or curators.
Snowden often makes the point of the behemoth surveillance apparatus - that it isn't just about who controls the infrastructure and calls the shots now - but who will in the future.
The logical answer would be to have an editorial board, but in these times of freedom of information organisations being under siege - what guarantee is there that any such board would also remain in tact?
We have just witnessed the wholesale firing of the entire board of the Tor Project - or to be politically correct - their "graciously stepping down" en masse... on the back of revelations of a Central Intelligence Agency employee literally having left the agency one day and started work at Tor the next.
WikiLeaks is arguably THE most under-threat journalistic organisation in the entire world. (Which for the record, Greenwald has covered extensively in a long string of brilliant articles about the US persecution of Assange, WikiLeaks and associates).
So the question for me is, where would the curation start and where would it end? Every person has their own ideas of precisely how such curation should or could be done and it would be extremely difficult to get a unified consensus on every single instance.
For their particular threat model, having one fixed rule that can provide a benchmark and carry on for future generations seems the safe bet.
Then of course, there is the significant issue of resourcing. WikiLeaks has been under a historic banking blockade for years now. They can't place ads in newspapers and hire staff. They rely on an extemely rare breed of people who are willing to quite literally dedicate their lives and risk losing everything they have, in order to skill share with the organisation.
It is high risk and often thankless work.
That they manage to produce what they do, under the circumstances they are daily confronted with, is frankly miraculous. None of their detractors could compete with their output. None are. Their tally was at over 10,000,000 documents some time last year. Over a dozen major releases in 2015 alone.
Many, many stones are cast but who can even begin to claim achievements on a similar scale?
It's not even just a matter of their journalistic output - they somehow not only manage to keep their head above water while facing unprecedented levels of danger, obstruction, interference, infiltration, oppression and difficulty - but they also support others who are endangered.
Recently, they have constantly had the stuffing kicked out of them by some staff at organisations who they continue to support and promote on their pages.
At what point do we actually collectively pause, consider what they endure in a field few else are endeavouring to compete in and have the graciousness to say THANK YOU WIKILEAKS!!!!!!!!!!
Their publishing models and releases have been capitalised on by multiple news organisations who have made bank off their work and then stabbed them in the back. Yes, I'm looking at you New York Times and The Guardian, in particular.
News organisations all around the world have their own SecureDrop installations - and what is the genesis for the concept? WikiLeaks.
Brother Vs. Brother, Org Vs. Org, Friend Vs. Friend
I recently said on Twitter: "The US election is a public exercise in Divide & Conquer and the extent to which it is working is frankly depressing."
I can't help but wonder how many people all over the United States are falling out with each other over the Trump-vs-Clinton dichotomy. How many family members. How many workmates? Employers and employees? Siblings? Lovers? Husbands and wives?
Does this ridiculous, unnecessary side show result in divorces? Broken homes? Is the price really worth it?
What exactly do the public stand to gain?
The obvious irrationality of both candidates, and their unsuitability for office, is so obscene it would be hilarious if it weren't so horrific.
The wife of an impeached president versus a casino, golf club and supermodel tycoon. And it's even worse: this is the reality that few will confront, but everyone is really having to subliminally reconcile regardless:
The image on the left is a Huffington Post article begging people not to turn a blind eye to the current child rape allegations against Trump.
The image on the right is a Free Beacon article containing leaked audio of Clinton bragging about how she got a child rapist's 30-year possible sentence reduced to 2 months time served.
The devastating follow-up article by The Daily Beast is a really, really hard read, including details of the traumatic ordeal of the victim and the manipulation and callousness she subsequently suffered.
Journalism In The School of Hard Knocks
Many people, especially this year, have been referring to me as an investigative journalist. I actually wouldn't call myself that, because I'm not classically trained in investigative journalism and that hasn't been my primary focus.
Nearly 5 years ago now, I began reporting live from events then blogging about them afterwards. News spotting in my spare time. Keeping a close eye on what was happening to our fellow independent media teams in occupations around the world and working with them to the best of my ability.
Amplifying for anyone I felt wasn't getting the attention for their issues that they deserved.
I morphed into a long-form journalist by necessity - in a chronically nepotistic media microcosm (New Zealand) - telling as many people as possible about the corrupt political and media antics being wielded against people in my home town of Auckland. It wasn't really journalism so much as whistle-blowing. Over and over and over again. Whistle-blowing on police, on civic authorities, on the intelligence agencies, on the military industrial complex.
I eventually came to the conclusion that that is what a good journalist is. Someone who blows the whistle and never stops.
It's usually circumstantial rather than deliberate. I get curious and dig, or I accumulate scraps of information over a protracted period of time, or I witness things myself. My mental data-microwave goes "DING!" and out pops an article.
Overall what drives me is the realisation that I'm in a unique position to contribute and I feel morally obliged to, despite the obvious drawbacks.
Whenever our media team was burning out, overtired, overstressed, suffering from lack of resources and the strain constantly imposed upon us by state and private agencies and saboteurs - when we really didn't feel like going on anymore - we would look at each other and say, "if not us, then who?" Then we'd get off our butts and go do it all again. That is the spirit in which I write.
I think the real reason I am being described as an investigative journalist is because I have a habit of unearthing significant information that corporate media haven't or won't. What few realise is how easy that is to do, and what an indictment it is on the mainstream press that they so often either fail at it, or refuse to look.
How did I find out WikiLeak's position on Trump? I searched "@WikiLeaks" + "Trump" on Twitter.
The idea that the dozens if not hundreds of journalists falsely accusing WikiLeaks of being a front for Russia and/or Donald Trump didn't do the same thing, is astonishing. Or that if they did, that they didn't amplify the obvious.
But among the learned and free thinkers - there is consensus. Assange thinks, as does Snowden, and apparently Greenwald, that Trump is as bad as Clinton.
For what it's worth, so do I.
As Greenwald stated in the Slate interview, much better than I could:
I think in general there is no effort on the part of media elites to communicate with [Trump sympathisers] and do anything other than tell them that they are primitive, racist, and stupid. And if the message being sent is that you are primitive, racist, and stupid, and not that you have been fucked over in ways that are really bad and need to be rectified, of course those people are not going to be receptive to the message coming from the people who view them with contempt and scorn. I think that is why Brexit won, and I think that is the real danger of Trump winning. - Glenn GreenwaldAs for the accusation that WikiLeaks is in league with Russia... that has already long since been dealt to. It is an unfounded and ridiculous allegation. A smear.
If only the mainstream media would get the memo and cast off their willful blindness.
But that is merely wishful thinking. while money, promotions and status remain largely bestowed upon those most beholden to the corporatocracy that are the true string-pullers, the shadow governments of the West.
And while the vanguard of the people; namely WikiLeaks and Julian Assange; remain Public Enemy Number One.
Written by Suzie Dawson
Twitter: @Suzi3D
Official Website: Suzi3d.com
Journalists who write truth pay a high price to do so. Suzie lives in exile in Russia with her children and due to her status as an asylum seeker is unable to seek conventional employment. If you respect and value this work, please consider helping to support Suzie’s efforts via credit card or Bitcoin donation at this link. Thank you!
Presidents are selected, not elected. The powers that shouldn't be control both parties and ask us to elect one of two evils, it's a total sham.
Assange and Snowden fall into the same category as Trump and Clinton, they are controlled by the same people. I know that many people view Assange and Snowden as freedom fighters but they aren't. They are telling us what they have been told to tell us. Yes there is lot's of truth in there but the shill Alex Jones also spreads a lot of truth. If they didn't they would be too easy to identify.
I've written a comprehensive 4 part blog (part 5 coming soon) on why I believe Assange & Wikileaks are controlled. It's right on my homepage for anyone that is interested in seeing a side of Assange that you probably haven't seen before. Please don't shoot my comments down before looking at the evidence that I have presented.
Statue of Assange, Snowden & Manning in Berlin
This statute is located at Alexander Platz - one of Berlin's largest and busiest transportation hubs. Berlin’s City Hall and the former East German parliament building are nearby.
Few locations in Berlin are more visible.
Q: Why would the German Government (a US ally), approve the erection of a statute of 3 people, that almost every Government in the world regards as criminals?
A: Because all 3 of them are working for the Government!
That is my opinion. I did not arrive at this conclusion hastily and certainly not because of a statue. It is just one of many pieces of evidence that I presented in my Assange series.
Now things are getting interesting!
Two of the best researched people on Steemit are in total disagreement about something I've long wondered about.
I don't trust Julian "911 wasn't a false flag" Assange an inch either...
"Assange and Wikileaks make the Zionist-fueled Obama hype look minuscule; like rain drops in an ocean. Wikileaks, touted and fully endorsed by the Zionist media, has become the peak of resistance and dissidence. The greatest whistleblower in the history of whistleblowing. Assange has been elevated to god status, eclipsing rock stars and movie stars. Wikileaks cannot be questioned. Assange cannot be investigated. Everything the organization does is for the good of the people, and everything Assange says is absolute 100% fact."
http://uprootedpalestinians.blogspot.co.nz/2010/12/wikileaks-is-zionist-poison-ii.html
WikiLeaks is the number 1 target of the CIA in the world.
WikiLeaks is not upheld by MSM, they are smeared and lambasted by the MSM every single day.
There are hundreds of examples of this on https://twitter.com/WLTaskForce and I myself have thoroughly debunked multiple WikiLeaks and Assange smears - you can see this at https://contraspin.co.nz
WikiLeaks - and Assange in particular - have spoken out against Israel multiple times. This is completely ignored by these smears.
I have never ever heard Assange say that he believes the official story of 9/11. This discussion point is the same one that has been used to try to discredit Greenwald and others for years. "Well why don't they talk about x, why don't they talk about y, why don't they talk about z." This technique is called "Whataboutism". It's a distraction technique from what they are actually experts in and do talk about.
What I do is study source documents from WikiLeaks and Snowden. Here's a classic example for you of the types of critically important information I have found in the WikiLeaks files, that no MSM will report on, and that contain information that no one - ESPECIALLY ISRAEL - whose security agencies purchasing of directed energy weapons are evidenced in the source documents- ever wanted to see the light of day:
https://decipheryou.com/2015/06/24/hacking-team-directed-energy-weapons-now-operationally-feasible/
We can argue supposition and narrative smears on a blog or we can read the source documentation. I prefer the latter, so that's what I do in my journalism!
Thanks for that, I'll read it all before commenting further, other than to say the series of posts that Steemtruth did about Assange was not a smear piece - that is some full on research, all posted here on Seemit five months ago - real investigation.
I can fully understand why you will disagree with it, but dismissing it just won't cut the mustard - it's REALLY good!
https://steemit.com/wikileaks/@steemtruth/deconstructing-julian-assange-and-wikileaks-his-childhood-in-a-cult
by the way - here's the full passage from the Assange interview in question:
"His obsession with secrecy, both in others and maintaining his own, lends him the air of a conspiracy theorist. Is he one? "I believe in facts about conspiracies," he says, choosing his words slowly. "Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It's important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news." What about 9/11? "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud." What about the Bilderberg conference? "That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. We have published their meeting notes."
Couple that with WikiLeaks Twitter search history on the term "9/11" - where they serve up evidence on the Saudi connections, intel agencies and surveillance connections, release half a million law enforcement 9/11 pager recordings, and TONS of other stuff... and it paints a very different picture to what @steemtruth is promoting
He has simply chosen to attack the man instead of addressing the actual content of the WikiLeaks files. Classic government tactic. Become a WikiLeaks supporter and advocate and see what happens to you. You will learn very quickly that WikiLeaks is a target, but that people who attack and undermine WikiLeaks are not.
Wikileaks has a very suspicious lack of content about the Rothschilds , zionism, use of energy weapons on 911, and it seems to keep crashing when I search for certain words - such as holocaust - but it works fine on others, like Hilary Clinton.
I have no idea how the site works and couldn't find anything I was looking for - I was mostly looking for stuff linking 911 to zionists which really shouldn't be that hard to find when it's all over the rest of the internet...
PS - I know there are two sides to this and I'm open minded - so here is part of your side - John Pilger - but there really are two sides!
http://johnpilger.com/articles/getting-julian-assange-the-untold-story
I am close enough to those circles to tell you that like me and even more than me, they are genuinely targeted and put through hell on a daily basis. Assange is at serious risk of dying in front of our eyes, he is not working for any government, in fact he is loathed (and feared) by them. The backstory to the statue, which travelled all of Europe, is available at the sculptor's Twitter account Anything To Say
If you follow my DecipherYou series or have read the Snowden docs (the actual docs not the MSM reporting on them) you will know full well that there is no way in holy hell that the US government would EVER want any of the info in them getting out to the public. Likewise if you study WikiLeaks documents.
Go to You Tube, type in "Decipher You" and educate yourself on the actual information that these men have put their lives on the line to reveal.
Suzi, I believe that you have been targeted and harassed, and I am very sorry that you have been put through this treatment. I also believe that the info and t s dox that have been released are true. I am also very thankful that those guys leaked them. As for their true reasons behind these actions, I would like to believe there own words are truth. The problem is, I have no way of knowing that for a certainty. The Powers at be have been at this game for a very, very long time. They are experts at the long con. All I know for a certainty is that if they actually did want these men to be dead then only God himself would be able to protect them from their reach. They have an unlimited supply of fiat currency. That, in and of itself is enough to get access to nearly anyone. Not to mention the tech and ops that Snow did not have access to. There is a reason everything is so compartmentalized with “need 2 no” levels assigned. I like them both and appreciate their contribution to the world. For me to 100% rule out the possibility that they were/are controlled leaks, would be an exercise of cognitive dissidents.
The fact remains that Snow is still alive and he was in the system. The system doesn’t like turncoats. Examples need to be made. Car crashes, heart attacks, muggings, and suicides usually befall those who worked for, then exposed them. Surly they would have known that sooner or later someone would leak and who’s telling what levels that person would be at. But if they can control and time the leak. The would be leaker’s are much less likely to risk their life if 99% of the truth was already out. With the proper plan in play the media could spin it to where the masses just didn’t care. So after a controlled leak even if a real leaker was to release the last 1% the masses are already bored with and programmed to disregard this old news. I’m defiantly not saying that they are a controlled leak, but the possibility is far to great for me to discount it, on the merit of good intel.
I would like to stress that I am not saying that they were/are a controlled leak. In fact I really like Snow, watch him whenever I can. But I can't allow my feeling to get in to way of viewing all the angles.
That's a very wise way to approach this matter, and any other matter.
Thank you. Unfortunately this way of thinking is the only way we can attempt to defend our minds from the never ceasing darts of deceptions thrown at us each day.
@suzi3d I wrote this for you. I am very interested in your response. I did not mean for it to be an attack, Please forgive me if you took it as such. Would you grace me with a reply? You are the leader of a Party I am very interested in, and want to see where you stand on viewing all the angles.
Snowden did not tell us anything that William Binning (the man responsible for developing PRISM) didn't tell us 15 years earlier. Binning was not splashed all over the mainstream media like Snowden was because real truth tellers rarely get worldwide media exposure. Even the New York Times told us that the Govt was spying on us way back in 2005. The mainstream media alerted the sheep to what some of us had known for years so it's natural for them to think that he is a good guy because he was the person that they heard it from but the 'revelations' were already in the public domain for over a decade for those that were awake and paying attention.
I've studied Assange and Wikileaks more than most and without rose colored glasses. My blog is very detailed and I believe that is difficult for anyone to support Assange once they've read it but some still do, that's brainwashing for you.
Assange tried to raise $5 million from George Soros before Wikileaks opened for business and the email trail proving it is in Part 4 of the series. Assange was raised in a cult called 'The Family', he was working for NASA and DARPA in the 90's. Assange hacked under the name 'mendax' which means liar!
The list goes on and on, these are just a few points.
Assange supports the official 9/11 narrative and I doubt that he is stupid enough to not know that it was an inside job. We are all free to believe what we want to believe but Assange is going to disappoint many of his supporters if/when they wake up to him. Just like Trump supporters that are still in denial about his bona-fides.
Assange is working with the MSM and the MSM does not work with truth tellers - they drive agendas and work with agents like Assange and Snowden. If these guys were truth tellers they'd be dead by now, like Bill Cooper. Assange is a shill, a CIA mega-horn that trumpets their propaganda.
I know that these guys have a lot of fanboys but it is nothing more than a very compelling and effective psyop I'm afraid. Please don't take the truth personally, it is after-all just my opinion and one is free to research my findings or ignore them.
I too know these circles and they are absolutely not working for any government as I have told you before. Snowden didn't reveal anything we didn't know that was going on. But his leaks provided confirmation that the mass surveillance state was operating especially on a global scale revealing the Five Eyes. Although, Michael Riconisciuto revealed PROMIS years before and Sherman Skolnick revealed the FBI's Carnivore program which was a precursor to XKeyscore. In fact Carnivore operated exactly like Xkeyscore did except Carnivore was restricted for emails. PROMIS/Inslaw was essentially government selling software bundled with spyware to foreign governments to spy on them. Then there was the Church Hearings where the CIA was found to be spying on the American people. Spying isn't new its been going on for years but Snowden revealed the current capabilities as Suzie said. Not sure how you think Wikileaks is a psyop when Podesta's emails were leaked along with the DNC's emails and voicemails. This was all against Hillary mind u there wouldn't be a CIA run operation against HRC. Deepstate wanted Hillary to win the election so much so they tried hacking states for her scanning various servers. As well as switching votes from Trump to Hillary. Trump was a pied piper in a sense as JA has said but he was a much better choice then HRC. With HRC as president, we would be in WW3 right now with Russia and China. Both were horrible choices, but to dismantle the deep state u need a loose cannon so maybe my sources are right to state "Trump is the hand grenade we need."
Trump is a puppet and he will make Israel great while he destroys America and the rest of the world. Russia and China are controlled by the same people that control America. I know that Assange & Snowden are agents.
When either of them comes out (incl Trump) and blows the lid on 9/11, the Federal Reserve, and Israel then I will take another look at it. I won't hold my breath.
We know that the Federal Reserve is a customer of the NSA and receives SIGINT, because of the Snowden documents. Yet again, you haven't bothered doing the reading or watching the Decipher You series, so you don't realise that your own comments are the opposite of reality.
That's not a reply. Stop dodging the tough questions. That's what shills, actors and deceived people do. No disrespect intended.
Assange is on record supporting the offical 9/11 findings. His links to George Soros before Wikileaks launched. His silence on the Federal Reserve and central banking racket that has enslaved humanity. His relationships with MSM. His work with NASA & DARPA and his links to an Australian Cult called The Family.
If Assange wanted to bring every Govt in the world to it's knees he would blow the lid on 9/11, the Fed and central banks, and Israel. He hasn't done it and I suspect that he won't - unless his handlers tell him otherwise.
Humanity is enslaved by the Fed and the manufactured War on Terror and the net is tightening day by day yet Assange is completely silent. These two revelations would change society forever and Assange knows it but he does nothing about it, just like the other shills.
If you are being honest with yourself you will ask yourself why Assange is silent on the most important issues - the issues that could bring down the Deep State quicker than almost any other issue.
Instead, he gives them some Podesta and Clinton emails instead and get Trump into office so that we can keep the masses attention away from the real issues - that's Assange's job and he's very good at it!
I'm not here to troll. I have better things to do. I made my point in the hope that you were open (without knowing how you'd respond) but you aren't open and that's your prerogative. Thanks for the chat. It's ok to disagree, it doesn't mean that I disrespect your work or other things that you may write about. It's just that we are miles apart on this one!
Sorry but the things you say are just completely ridiculous and largely unsourced.
The MSM beats the shit out of Assange and WikiLeaks every single day. The idea that you try to associate with him with an MSM agenda, when the Guardian completely betrayed WikiLeaks and has been smearing them for years (James Ball, Luke Harding & co in particular), the New York Times leaked WikiLeaks publication schedule to the US government, and the major TV channels give airtime to people saying that he should be droned to death etc etc
WikiLeaks has repeatedly called out MSM complicity with US intelligence agencies
According to the MSM Assange is a treasonous fascistic child-molesting serial rapist.
By smearing him, you are actually serving the same interests that the MSM are, whether you realise it or not.
The fact (unconfirmed) that some of his childhood, which was known to be transient (which is not a crime) was spent in a commune, has nothing to do whatsoever with the actual documents WikiLeaks publish.
The fact that you don't understand who Bill Binney actually is (Binning?!??) or what he did at NSA is pretty remarkable.
You accuse Assange of being Zionist-aligned when the only reason I know that Israeli security agencies purchased directed energy weapons from US weapons manufacturers is FROM THE WIKILEAKS FILES
You accuse me of not wanting to know the truth but what I asked in my responses for you to do was to actually read the Decipher You series which has uncovered dozens of never-before-published-by-MSM findings from the Snowden files which are of critical importance and significance. You didn't bother.
I also linked you to our You Tube series where you can watch us studying the source documents in real time. You didn't bother.
Yet you are totally prepared to waste time ranting on here. Not much of a truther, dude. Truthers do the work, do the reading, view everything available, and then make conclusions.
They don't just smear whistleblowers and journalists on erroneous "Whataboutism" pretexts - they STUDY THE SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
You should try it :)
Fantastic comment from a great researcher.
Only thing is re this AK: "Snowden didn't reveal anything we didn't know that was going on"
He revealed a shit ton of stuff we didn't know and dozens of irrefutable examples of this are in the Decipher You series that I keep referring @steemtruth to but which he seems to ignore. There has also been significant Disobedient Media reporting on it
Once again, the links are:
https://decipheryou.com
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPf90W3gtZzt2HN0pIJapViLYqgdb6NAG
And all this 'Assange is a Zionist' nonsense is ridiculous. Has he even bothered going to https://wikileaks.org and typing 'Israel' into the search box??
When I did that search the results looked pretty pro israel to me - certainly no mention of all the evil stuff..
Sorry, but "Snowden did not tell us anything that William Binning (the man responsible for developing PRISM) didn't tell us 15 years earlier." is just a total lie.
If you had read the Decipher You content I linked you to, or watched the last 20 episodes of us literally studying the source documents live online, you would know how silly your response is.
P.S. Binney loves Snowden, but that's irrelevant, because if you'd done your homework and actually read the source documents you'd know your post is nonsense.
And by the way - Binney didn't develop PRISM, he developed THINTHREAD. You really have a lot of learning to do.
ThinThread was the forerunner to TrailBlazer and PRISM. I suspect that you knew this and just wanted to divert the conversation away from the uncomfortable points that I raised.
I think that you are dealing in semantics and ignoring the the fact that Assange is on record supporting the offical 9/11 findings. His links to George Soros before Wikileaks launched. His silence on the Federal Reserve and central banking racket that has enslaved humanity. His relationships with MSM. His work with NASA & DARPA and his links to an Australian Cult called The Family.
If Assange wanted to bring every Govt in the world to it's knees he would blow the lid on 9/11, the Fed and central banks, and Israel. He hasn't done it and I suspect that he won't - unless his handlers tell him otherwise.
Humanity is enslaved by the Fed and the manufactured War on Terror and the net is tightening day by day yet Assange is completely silent. These two revelations would change society forever and Assange knows it but he does nothing about it, just like the other shills.
I have no beef with you. When I read your post I simply thought that you were deceived. So I commented and shared some of what I knew in case you were open to the truth. I now know that you aren't so I won't be bothering you.
The best agents (like Assange) tell a lot of truth which is why so many people believe in them. Very few people stop and ask:
When you see the left hand move look at the right hand - that's how the game is played.
If you aren't willing to provide very good answers to the points that I've raised then we should leave it at that. All the very best and I mean that sincerely.
There is 23,012 results for the Federal Reserve Bank of America in the WikiLeaks Files.
But you wouldn't know that, because you've never even bothered going to WikiLeaks and typing "Federal Reserve Bank of America" into the search bar, let alone reading the documents, or asking yourself "would the Fed be happy about these documents being public?".
Instead you just blow a bunch of wind on my blog. Sad.
Is the material on Wikileaks actually of any use to anyone? - it seems to be an endless stream of meaningless data - more distraction than evidence. Maybe only a researcher could find anything of interest while 99.00% of people are going to roll their eyes about and make meeping noises
Or go to https://decipheryou.com and read the synopses of our findings from the first 3 batch releases of the Snowden files. They completely lay bare the FVEY intelligence apparatus; methodologies, business relationships, targeting processes, technologies, and countless other critically important pieces of information we wouldn't otherwise have.
I still am reserving judgment on this topic. I often have thought this is a very big possibility. That being said I am thankful for them for putting the info out. It is possible that it was a controlled leak but I could not be certain either way. It was nice to be able to have hard evidence to show people who for years thought that people were just to paranoid about gov collecting everything. I'm interested to read your findings, time permitting. Either way I like truth wherever I can find it. Personally I won't put my full trust into anyone I have not had the opportunity to know and question in person. Patriot or shill, at this time it really doesn't matter if the information is true.
I don't believe anything unless I've investigated it for myself. I don't need to meet them but I do need to research them. If you want to know what the MSM won't tell you about Assange you should find this interesting. This is part 1 of 4.
https://steemit.com/wikileaks/@steemtruth/deconstructing-julian-assange-and-wikileaks-his-childhood-in-a-cult
Julian Assange saves the lives of whistleblowers and at-risk journalists, like Amin Huseynov and Snowden among others you will never even have heard of.
It's very sad that blogs like the above undermine his legitimate efforts.
The Snowden JTRIG documents outline precisely how GCHQ and other agencies create smear blogs to discredit targets. Although some misguided people do the same type of thing, which is ultimately a boon to the intelligence agencies, who will literally applaud the above effort.
It would be great if you could stop using my blog page to promote smear pieces on people who have risked their lives for humanity, thanks
There is really nothing I can add to this thread. My gut tells me anyone who is going to be reading this, is very much aware of the Hoax that is the political system in the US.
In NZ I am hoping that this last election will wake up enough people to the Lab. vs Nat. narrative and hopefully will start voting for more smaller parties. I just fear that most Kiwi's just can't be bothered. The media here runs a tight ship and doesn't deviate from the narrative much at all. You don't even really get the left/right versions of the corporate news which can at times can stray from the official narrative(allowing people to question it all). Most people I talk to here are scared to look at news online because it "can't be trusted" but they are happy to eat up every drop that is feed to them on the television.
But I do have hope that this forced union of lab/nz 1st/greens let people see that we do have more than two choices. Kiwi's like @theouterlight give me hope. Thank you @suzi3d for taking the time to compile all this information.
You are so welcome, yes @theouterlight is such an awesome guy, I love him to bits.
And you're totally right. The NZ mainstream media are completely manufactured junk, tabloid nonsense. I have an entire blog called The Spin Bin at which I have been comprehensively debunking their nonsense for years.
I actually have another huge article in the works about NZ media conduct during the 2017 election so keep your eyes peeled for that. You can also (spoiler alert) expect to see some unorthodox and overdue moves out of the so-called "minor parties" this year (the real minor parties as opposed to the major parties that the NZ media tried to call minor parties so it could push its Lab-Nat duopoly)
Thanks for reading!
Found him and followed him now
https://steemit.com/@theouterlight
Holy crap check this out: https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&q=9%2F11%20from%3Awikileaks&src=typd
Blows the "Assange doesn't care about 9/11" smear completely out of the water
They've been circulating documented evidence about it all along
Another great post - you have only been on Steemit a week and already things are getting interesting - I agree with the anti Assange comments myself, but disagreements that this can be how discussions move forward
Instead of reading supposed truther's opinions of Assange, go to WikiLeaks and type "Israel" "Federal Reserve Bank of America" etc into the search bar and press enter.
You will find mind-blowing things that are not only ignored by the MSM, but enrage the governments and agencies who are exposed by them and completely debunk the smears of Assange that have been seeded in the "truther" community, examples of which you see strewn all over the comments section on this page.
How convenient that the MSM won't cover Israel and the Fed. Assange could use social media and video to get anyone message that he wanted to get out, but only if he wanted to and he doesn't.
Assange said that 9/11 was a false conspiracy.
Source: Belfast Telegraph, July 19, 2010
So you've gone from claiming Assange supports Israel (debunked) to Assange is in bed with the MSM (debunked) to "how convenient the MSM don't publish on it"
You need to spend a lot more time reading the actual documents leaked by WikiLeaks and Snowden and a lot less time regurgitating smears on their individual characters
WOW - thanks to your nonsense I just discovered WikiLeaks history of 9/11 truth-telling.
Incredible. cc @An0nkn0wledge @theouterlight look at the below link you guys, mountains of phenomenal stuff
https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&q=9%2F11%20from%3Awikileaks&src=typd
I'm with you Suzi! We have to work as a team to make things happen. I'm glad I found you on steemit and you can count on my upvote to help you on your way! You let me know if there is anything I can do to help. I'm looking for a campaign to work on. Have Laptop will Travel + mad skills.
Political @suzi3d
Regard from Aceh
Well, I am glad that Chump got elected.
It has thrown a big ole monkey wrench into the works.
The people pushing Hitlery weren't just saying "vote for Hitlery," they were painting a world of "women are powerful", "women wouldn't send their sons to war", "women are more caring" and this world view is what they desired (and would have never got), and when it didn't happen their whole world view was destroyed. And no one has told them that they need to deprogram from the brain washing.
Hiltery would have been more of the same Bush-Bill-Bush-Obomba, but Chump has taken a giant stick, stuck it in the pot and stirred. This is probably the best result we could have hoped for.
Oh, they have been told. :)
In the DecipherYou series we found proof in the NSA documents of them being behind both Bush's UN speech for the invasion of Iraq and also Colin Powell's.
They literally brag to each other about it in the documents.
Clinton vs Trump is just a puppet show for the cameras. The true power still remains with the unelected intelligence agencies, who are still pulling all the strings behind the scenes. Trump might annoy them, but he sure as hell isn't abolishing them.