-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector-

HAVEN'T READ ALL YET, LOOKS OK THOUGH



Paranoid shift 

By Michael Hasty 
Online Journal Contributing Writer

January 10, 2004--Just before his death, James Jesus Angleton, the legendary
chief of counterintelligence at the Central Intelligence Agency, was a
bitter 
man. He felt betrayed by the people he had worked for all his life. In the
end, 
he had come to realize that they were never really interested in American
ideals 
of "freedom" and "democracy." They really only wanted "absolute power."

Angleton told author Joseph Trento that the reason he had gotten the
counterintelligence job in the first place was by agreeing not to submit
"sixty 
of Allen Dulles' closest friends" to a polygraph test concerning their
business 
deals with the Nazis. In his end-of-life despair, Angleton assumed that he
would 
see all his old companions again "in hell."

The transformation of James Jesus Angleton from an enthusiastic, Ivy League
cold 
warrior, to a bitter old man, is an extreme example of a phenomenon I call a
"paranoid shift." I recognize the phenomenon, because something similar
happened 
to me. 

Although I don't remember ever meeting James Jesus Angleton, I worked at the
CIA 
myself as a low-level clerk as a teenager in the '60s. This was at the same
time 
I was beginning to question the government's actions in Vietnam. In fact, my
personal "paranoid shift" probably began with the disillusionment I felt
when I 
realized that the story of American foreign policy was, at the very least,
more 
complicated and darker than I had hitherto been led to believe.

But for most of the next 30 years, even though I was a radical, I
nevertheless 
held faith in the basic integrity of a system where power ultimately resided
in 
the people, and whereby if enough people got together and voted, real and
fundamental change could happen.

What constitutes my personal paranoid shift is that I no longer believe this
to 
be necessarily true.

In his book, "Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower," William
Blum 
warns of how the media will make anything that smacks of "conspiracy theory"
an 
immediate "object of ridicule." This prevents the media from ever having to
investigate the many strange interconnections among the ruling class--for
example, the relationship betweJumping and en the boards of directors of
media 
giants, and the energy, banking and defense industries. These unmentionable
topics are usually treated with what Blum calls "the media's most effective
tool--silence." But in case somebody's asking questions, all you have to do
is 
say, "conspiracy theory," and any allegation instantly becomes too frivolous
to 
merit serious attention.

On the other hand, since my paranoid shift, whenever I hear the words
"conspiracy theory" (which seems more often, lately) it usually means
someone is 
getting too close to the truth.

Take September 11--which I identify as the date my paranoia actually
shifted, 
though I didn't know it at the time.

Unless I'm paranoid, it doesn't make any sense at all that George W. Bush,
commander-in-chief, sat in a second-grade classroom for 20 minutes after he
was 
informed that a second plane had hit the World Trade Center, listening to
children read a story about a goat. Nor does it make sense that the Number 2
man, Dick Cheney--even knowing that "the commander" was on a mission in
Florida--nevertheless sat at his desk in the White House, watching TV, until
the 
Secret Service dragged him out by the armpits.

Unless I'm paranoid, it makes no sense that Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld 
sat at his desk until Flight 77 hit the Pentagon--well over an hour after
the 
military had learned about the multiple hijacking in progress. It also makes
no 
sense that the brand-new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff sat in a
Senate 
office for two hours while the 9/11 attacks took place, after leaving
explicit 
instructions that he not be disturbed--which he wasn't.

In other words, while the 9/11 attacks were occurring, the entire top of the
chain of command of the most powerful military in the world sat at various
desks, inert. Why weren't they in the "Situation Room?" Don't any of them
ever 
watch "West Wing?" 

In a sane world, this would be an object of major scandal. But here on this
side 
of the paranoid shift, it's business as usual.

Years, even decades before 9/11, plans had been drawn up for American forces
to 
take control of the oil interests of the Middle East, for various
imperialist 
reasons. And these plans were only contingent upon "a catastrophic and
catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor," to gain the majority support of
the 
American public to set the plans into motion. When the opportunity presented
itself, the guards looked the other way . . . and presto, the path to global
domination was open.

Simple, as long as the media played along. And there is voluminous evidence
that 
the media play along. Number one on Project Censored's annual list of
underreported stories in 2002 was the Project for a New American Century
(now 
the infrastructure of the Bush Regime), whose report, published in 2000,
contains the above "Pearl Harbor" quote.

Why is it so hard to believe serious people who have repeatedly warned us
that 
powerful ruling elites are out to dominate "the masses?" Did we think Dwight
Eisenhower was exaggerating when he warned of the extreme "danger" to
democracy 
of "the military industrial complex?" Was Barry Goldwater just being a
quaint 
old-fashioned John Bircher when he said that the Trilateral Commission was
"David Rockefeller's latest scheme to take over the world, by taking over
the 
government of the United States?" Were Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt or
Joseph 
Kennedy just being class traitors when they talked about a small group of
wealthy elites who operate as a hidden government behind the government?
Especially after he died so mysteriously, why shouldn't we believe the late
CIA 
Director William Colby, who bragged about how the CIA "owns everyone of any
major significance in the major media?"

Why can't we believe James Jesus Angleton--a man staring eternal judgment in
the 
face--when he says that the founders of the Cold War national security state
were 
only interested in "absolute power?" Especially when the descendant of a
very 
good friend of Allen Dulles now holds power in the White House.

Prescott Bush, the late, aristocratic senator from Connecticut, and
grandfather 
of George W Bush, was not only a good friend of Allen Dulles, CIA director,
president of the Council on Foreign Relations, and international business
lawyer. He was also a client of Dulles' law firm. As such, he was the
beneficiary of Dulles' miraculous ability to scrub the story of Bush's
treasonous investments in the Third Reich out of the news media, where it
might 
have interfered with Bush's political career . . . not to mention the
presidential careers of his son and grandson.

Recently declassified US government documents, unearthed last October by
investigative journalist John Buchanan at the New Hampshire Gazette, reveal
that 
Prescott Bush's involvement in financing and arming the Nazis was more
extensive 
than previously known. Not only was Bush managing director of the Union
Banking 
Corporation, the American branch of Hitler's chief financier's banking
network; 
but among the other companies where Bush was a director--and which were
seized by 
the American government in 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act--were
a 
shipping line which imported German spies; an energy company that supplied
the 
Luftwaffe with high-ethyl fuel; and a steel company that employed Jewish
slave 
labor from the Auschwitz concentration camp.

Like all the other Bush scandals that have been swept under the rug in the
privatized censorship of the corporate media, these revelations have been
largely ignored, with the exception of a single article in the Associated
Press. 
And there are those, even on the left, who question the current relevance of
this information. 

But Prescott Bush's dealings with the Nazis do more than illustrate a family
pattern of genteel treason and war profiteering--from George Senior's sale
of TOW 
missiles to Iran at the same time he was selling biological and chemical
weapons 
to Saddam Hussein, to Junior's zany misadventures in crony capitalism in
present-day Iraq. 

More disturbing by far are the many eerie parallels between Adolph Hitler
and 
George W. Bush: 

A conservative, authoritarian style, with public appearances in military
uniform 
(which no previous American president has ever done while in office).
Government 
by secrecy, propaganda and deception. Open assaults on labor unions and
workers' 
rights. Preemptive war and militant nationalism. Contempt for international
law 
and treaties. Suspiciously convenient "terrorist" attacks, to justify a
police 
state and the suspension of liberties. A carefully manufactured image of
"The 
Leader," who's still just a "regular guy" and a "moderate." "Freedom" as the
rationale for every action. Fantasy economic growth, based on unprecedented
budget deficits and massive military spending.

And a cold, pragmatic ideology of fascism--including the violent suppression
of 
dissent and other human rights; the use of torture, assassination and
concentration camps; and most important, Benito Mussolini's preferred
definition 
of "fascism" as "corporatism, because it binds together the interests of
corporations and the state."

By their fruits, you shall know them.

What perplexes me most is probably the same question that plagues most
paranoiacs: why don't other people see these connections?

Oh, sure, there may be millions of us, lurking at websites like Online
Journal, 
>From the Wilderness, Center for Cooperative Research, and the Center for
Research on Globalization, checking out right-wing conspiracists and the
galaxy 
of 9/11 sites, and reading columnists like Chris Floyd at the Moscow Times,
and 
Maureen Farrell at Buzzflash. But we know we are only a furtive minority,
the 
human remnant among the pod people in the live-action, 21st-century version
of 
"Invasion of the Body Snatchers."

And being paranoid, we have to figure out, with an answer that fits into our
system, why more people don't see the connections we do. Fortunately, there
are 
a number of possible explanations.

First on the list would have to be what Marshal McLuhan called the "cave art
of 
the electronic age:" advertising. Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's Karl Rove, gave
credit for most of his ideas on how to manipulate mass opinion to American
commercial advertising, and to the then-new science of "public relations."
But 
the public relations universe available to the corporate empire that rules
the 
world today makes the Goebbels operation look primitive. The precision of
communications technology and graphics; the century of research on human
psychology and emotion; and the uniquely centralized control of triumphant
post-Cold War monopoly capitalism, have combined to the point where "the
manufacture of consent" can be set on automatic pilot.

A second major reason people won't make the paranoid shift is that they are
too 
fundamentally decent. They can't believe that the elected leaders of our
country, the people they've been taught through 12 years of public school to
admire and trust, are capable of sending young American soldiers to their
deaths 
and slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent civilians, just to satisfy
their 
greed--especially when they're so rich in the first place. Besides, America
is 
good, and the media are liberal and overly critical.

Third, people don't want to look like fools. Being a "conspiracy theorist"
is 
like being a creationist. The educated opinion of eminent experts on every
TV 
and radio network is that any discussion of "oil" being a motivation for the
US 
invasion of Iraq is just out of bounds, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a
"conspiracy theorist." We can trust the integrity of our 'no-bid"
contracting in 
Iraq, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a "conspiracy theorist." Of course,
people sometimes make mistakes, but our military and intelligence community
did 
the best they could on and before September 11, and anybody who thinks
otherwise 
is a "conspiracy theorist."

Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole assassin of JFK, and anyone who thinks
otherwise 
is a "conspiracy theorist."

Perhaps the biggest hidden reason people don't make the paranoid shift is
that 
knowledge brings responsibility. If we acknowledge that an inner circle of
ruling elites controls the world's most powerful military and intelligence
system; controls the international banking system; controls the most
effective 
and far-reaching propaganda network in history; controls all three branches
of 
government in the world's only superpower; and controls the technology that
counts the people's votes, we might be then forced to conclude that we don't
live in a particularly democratic system. And then voting and making
contributions and trying to stay informed wouldn't be enough. Because then
the 
duty of citizenship would go beyond serving as a loyal opposition, to
serving as 
a "loyal resistance"--like the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War, except
that 
in this case the resistance to fascism would be on the side of the national
ideals, rather than the government; and a violent insurgency would not only
play 
into the empire's hands, it would be doomed from the start.

Forming a nonviolent resistance movement, on the other hand, might mean
forsaking some middle class comfort, and it would doubtless require a lot of
work. It would mean educating ourselves and others about the nature of the
truly 
apocalyptic beast we face. It would mean organizing at the most basic
neighborhood level, face to face. (We cannot put our trust in the empire's
technology.) It would mean reaching across turf lines and transcending
single-issue politics, forming coalitions and sharing data and names and
strategies, and applying energy at every level of government, local to
global. 
It would also probably mean civil disobedience, at a time when the Bush
regime 
is starting to classify that action as "terrorism." In the end, it may mean
organizing a progressive confederacy to govern ourselves, just as our
revolutionary founders formed the Continental Congress. It would mean being
wise 
as serpents, and gentle as doves.

It would be a lot of work. It would also require critical mass. A paradigm
shift. 

But as a paranoid, I'm ready to join the resistance. And the main reason is
I no 
longer think that the "conspiracy" is much of a "theory."

That the US House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations
concluded that the murder of John Fitzgerald Kennedy was "probably" the
result 
of "a conspiracy," and that 70 percent of Americans agree with this
conclusion, 
is not a "theory." It's fact.

That the Bay of Pigs fiasco, "Operation Zapata," was organized by members of
Skull and Bones, the ghoulish and powerful secret society at Yale University
whose membership also included Prescott, George Herbert Walker and George W
Bush; that two of the ships that carried the Cuban counterrevolutionaries to
their appointment with absurdity were named the "Barbara" and the
"Houston"--George HW Bush's city of residence at the time--and that the oil
company Bush owned, then operating in the Caribbean area, was named
"Zapata," is 
not "theory." It's fact.

That George Bush was the CIA director who kept the names of what were
estimated 
to be hundreds of American journalists, considered to be CIA "assets," from
the 
Church Committee, the US Senate Intelligence Committe chaired by Senator
Frank 
Church that investigated the CIA in the 1970s; that a 1971 University of
Michigan study concluded that, in America, the more TV you watched, the less
you 
knew; and that a recent survey by international scholars found that
Americans 
were the most "ignorant" of world affairs out of all the populations they
studied, is not a "theory." It's fact.

That the Council on Foreign Relations has a history of influence on official
US 
government foreign policy; that the protection of US supplies of Middle East
oil 
has been a central element of American foreign policy since the Second World
War; and that global oil production has been in decline since its peak year,
2000, is not "theory." It's fact.

That, in the early 1970s, the newly-formed Trilateral Commission published a
report which recommended that, in order for "globalization" to succeed,
American 
manufacturing jobs had to be exported, and American wages had to decline,
which 
is exactly what happened over the next three decades; and that, during that
same 
period, the richest one percent of Americans doubled their share of the
national 
wealth, is not "theory." It's fact.

That, beyond their quasi-public role as agents of the US Treasury
Department, 
the Federal Reserve Banks are profit-making corporations, whose
beneficiaries 
include some of America's wealthiest families; and that the United States
has a 
virtual controlling interest in the World Bank, the International Monetary
Fund, 
and the World Trade Organization, the three dominant global financial
institutions, is not a "theory." It's fact.

That--whether it's heroin from Southeast Asia in the '60s and '70s, or
cocaine 
from Central America and heroin from Afghanistan in the '80s, or cocaine
from 
Colombia in the '90s, or heroin from Afghanistan today--no major CIA covert
operation has ever lacked a drug smuggling component, and that the CIA has
hired 
Nazis, fascists, drug dealers, arms smugglers, mass murderers, perverts,
sadists, terrorists and the Mafia, is not "theory." It's fact.

That the international oil industry is the dominant player in the global
economy; that the Bush family has a decades-long business relationship with
the 
Saudi royal family, Saudi oil money, and the family of Osama bin Laden;
that, as 
president, both George Bushes have favored the interests of oil companies
over 
the public interest; that both George Bushes have personally profited
financially from Middle East oil; and that American oil companies doubled
their 
records for quarterly profits in the months just preceding the invasion of
Iraq, 
is not "theory." It's fact.

That the 2000 presidential election was deliberately stolen; that the
pro-Bush/anti-Gore bias in the corporate media had spiked markedly in the
last 
three weeks of the campaign; that corporate media were then virtually silent
about the Florida recount; and that the Bush 2000 team had planned to
challenge 
the legitimacy of the election if George W had won the popular, but lost the
electoral vote--exactly what happened to Gore--is not "theory." It's fact.

That the intelligence about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was
deceptively 
"cooked" by the Bush administration; that anybody paying attention to people
like former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, knew before the invasion that
the 
weapons were a hoax; and that American forces in Iraq today are applying the
same brutal counterinsurgency tactics pioneered in Central America in the
1980s, 
under the direct supervision of then-Vice President George HW Bush, is not a
"theory." It's fact.

That "Rebuilding America's Defenses," the Project for a New American
Century's 
2000 report, and "The Grand Chessboard," a book published a few years
earlier by 
Trilateral Commission co-founder Zbigniew Brzezinski, both recommended a
more 
robust and imperial US military presence in the oil basin of the Middle East
and 
the Caspian region; and that both also suggested that American public
support 
for this energy crusade would depend on public response to a new "Pearl
Harbor," 
is not "theory." It's fact.

That, in the 1960s, the Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously approved a plan
called 
"Operation Northwoods," to stage terrorist attacks on American soil that
could 
be used to justify an invasion of Cuba; and that there is currently an
office in 
the Pentagon whose function is to instigate terrorist attacks that could be
used 
to justify future strategically-desired military responses, is not a
"theory." 
It's fact. 

That neither the accusation by former British Environmental Minister Michael
Meacher, Tony Blair's longest-serving cabinet minister, that George W Bush
allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen to justify an oil war in the Middle East;
nor 
the RICO lawsuit filed by 9/11 widow Ellen Mariani against Bush, Cheney,
Rumsfeld and the Council on Foreign Relations (among others), on the grounds
that they conspired to let the attacks happen to cash in on the ensuing war
profiteering, has captured the slightest attention from American corporate
media 
is not a "theory." It's fact.

That the FBI has completely exonerated--though never identified--the
speculators 
who purchased, a few days before the attacks (through a bank whose previous
director is now the CIA executive director), an unusual number of "put"
options, 
and who made millions betting that the stocks in American and United
Airlines 
would crash, is not a "theory." It's fact.

That the US intelligence community received numerous warnings, from multiple
sources, throughout the summer of 2001, that a major terrorist attack on
American interests was imminent; that, according to the chair of the
"independent" 9/11 commission, the attacks "could have and should have been
prevented," and according to a Senate Intelligence Committee member, "All
the 
dots were connected;" that the White House has verified George W Bush's
personal 
knowledge, as of August 6, 2001, that these terrorist attacks might be
domestic 
and might involve hijacked airliners; that, in the summer of 2001, at the
insistence of the American Secret Service, anti-aircraft ordnance was
installed 
around the city of Genoa, Italy, to defend against a possible terrorist
suicide 
attack, by aircraft, against George W Bush, who was attending the economic
summit there; and that George W Bush has nevertheless regaled audiences with
his 
first thought upon seeing the "first" plane hit the World Trade Center,
which 
was: "What a terrible pilot," is not "theory." It's fact.

That, on the morning of September 11, 2001: standard procedures and policies
at 
the nation's air defense and aviation bureaucracies were ignored, and
communications were delayed; the black boxes of the planes that hit the WTC
were 
destroyed, but hijacker Mohammed Atta's passport was found in pristine
condition; high-ranking Pentagon officers had cancelled their commercial
flight 
plans for that morning; George H.W. Bush was meeting in Washington with
representatives of Osama bin Laden's family, and other investors in the
world's 
largest private equity firm, the Carlyle Group; the CIA was conducting a
previously-scheduled mock exercise of an airliner hitting the Pentagon; the
chairs of both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees were having
breakfast with the chief of Pakistan's intelligence agency, who resigned a
week 
later on suspicion of involvement in the 9/11 attacks; and the
commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the United States sat in a second
grade classroom for 20 minutes after hearing that a second plane had struck
the 
towers, listening to children read a story about a goat, is not
"theoretical." 
These are facts. 

That the Bush administration has desperately fought every attempt to
independently investigate the events of 9/11, is not a "theory."

Nor, finally, is it in any way a "theory" that the one, single name that can
be 
directly linked to the Third Reich, the US military industrial complex,
Skull 
and Bones, Eastern Establishment good ol' boys, the Illuminati, Big Texas
Oil, 
the Bay of Pigs, the Miami Cubans, the Mafia, the FBI, the JFK
assassination, 
the New World Order, Watergate, the Republican National Committee, Eastern
European fascists, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral
Commission, 
the United Nations, CIA headquarters, the October Surprise, the Iran/Contra
scandal, Inslaw, the Christic Institute, Manuel Noriega, drug-running
"freedom 
fighters" and death squads, Iraqgate, Saddam Hussein, weapons of mass
destruction, the blood of innocents, the savings and loan crash, the Bank of
Credit and Commerce International, the "Octopus," the "Enterprise," the
Afghan 
mujaheddin, the War on Drugs, Mena (Arkansas), Whitewater, Sun Myung Moon,
the 
Carlyle Group, Osama bin Laden and the Saudi royal family, David
Rockefeller, 
Henry Kissinger, and the presidency and vice-presidency of the United
States, 
is: George Herbert Walker Bush.

"Theory?" To the contrary.

It is a well-documented, tragic and--especially if you're
paranoid--terrifying fact.

Michael Hasty is a writer, activist, musician, carpenter and farmer. His
award-winning column, "Thinking Locally," appeared for seven years in the
Hampshire Review, West Virginia's oldest newspaper. His writing has also
appeared in the Highlands Voice, the Washington Peace Letter, the Takoma
Park 
Newsletter, the German magazine Generational Justice, and the Washington
Post; 
and at the websites Common Dreams and Democrats.com. In January 1989, he was
the 
media spokesperson for the counter-inaugural coalition at George Bush's
Counter-Inaugural Banquet, which fed hundreds of DC's homeless in front of
Union 
Station, where the official inaugural dinner was being held.

Permission to reprint is granted, provided it includes this autobiographical
note, and credit for first publication to Online Journal.

Advertise with us About mail2web Terms and Conditions Privacy
Policy Help Announcements


www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to