 |
| Source |
Activist Post
March 31, 2015
The United States is increasingly becoming a tossup between being a land of inertia and unimaginable apathy versus a powder keg of hatred, violence, and civil war. With this bizarre cultural crossroads – every bit created and initiated by an oligarchical government, corporate and banking superstructure, and a totally controlled media – it is no wonder why the news coming from America gets more and more peculiar with each passing day. While the rest of the world may have no right to throw stones, the truth is that the United States has become, in essence, Crazy Town.
Perhaps this is why when, in January 2014, a retired US Army General stated that he would be willing to lead a coup against Obama with a contingency of around 250,000 Marines, virtually no one even batted an eye.
To be fair, the date is over a year after Gen. Vallely’s speech and no coup has taken place. Yet, with American politics having become so volatile – with Conservatives so hate-filled against anything that does not represent the scorched earth of warfare, austerity, and greed they have come to know and love, Liberals radicalized to the point that no law is too oppressive to enforce politically correct newspeak, the concept of the “collective,” or humanitarian bombing, and the vast majority of the public who simply stare lifelessly into their television screen with whatever free time they have left – you would think that Vallely’s comments would have drawn more ire from the left or even more support from the right.
With the exception of a few media outlets designed to stir up and “inform” the left, however, very little was reported about Vallely’s statements.
I had a call this afternoon from Idaho, the gentleman said, ‘If I give you 250,000 Marines to go to Washington, will you lead them?’ I said, ‘Yes, I will, I’ll surround the White House and I’ll surround the Capitol building, but it’s going to take physical presence to do things.Vallely was allegedly referring to a number of “veterans” and “veterans-based” organizations as the source of the 200,000 or so Marines.
Think Progress reported further on the speech by writing,
Vallely suggested that a new George Washington be discovered amid the ranks of retired military personnel to take a stand against the “tyranny of a corrupt government.” Only they, in Vallely’s view, have the right education, background, and experience to combat current politicians who only have “legislation experience, not leadership experience.” He also suggested that action against the current government was necessary as not even the upcoming midterm congressional elections will be able to solve the problems posed as a result of President Obama’s presence in the White House.
“I don’t want to be criticized for starting a revolution,” Vallely assured the group, “but I’d certainly head it if we had to. We all love a good fight if it’s worth it, right?”Obviously, the US government is out of control. It has proven itself to be one of the greatest forces for evil and destruction across the world time and time again. For that reason, a mass revolt – whatever form it may take – is necessary.
To be clear, however, a military coup is not one of these forms. Especially not one lead by the likes of Paul Vallely.
It is difficult to mention Vallely’s statements without mentioning the obvious historical parallel of the 1934 Business Plot where a number of oligarchs, bankers, and industrialists attempted to recruit Gen. Smedley Butler for the purpose of leading a coup against Franklin D. Roosevelt. Unlike Vallely, Butler maintained loyal to the American people and the country as a whole, refused to take part, and reported the attempted coup. But Paul Vallely and Smedley Butler are very different people to say the least.Only a cursory search into the career of Vallely reveals the fact that he is anything but a patriot, despite the fact that he plays one on TV.
After all, it has been part of Vallely’s mission and purpose to promote US wars overseas and paint them as a religious war – a PSYOP and propaganda maneuver that is extremely important to the continued perpetration of these wars and the acceptance they are able to gain from the ranks of the general public.
In his position as FOX News military analyst from 2001 - 2007, Vallely unwaveringly promoted the US wars of naked aggression against Iraq and provided the personal defense of Donald Rumsfeld in the media as well as initiated a cover-up of the Valerie Plame affair.
During his tenure at FOX News, Vallely served as a PSYOP agent designed to promote the Pentagon’s wishes through the mainstream media in a more direct (while still secret) fashion. In short, Vallely acted as an agent of the US military establishment to brainwash and guide public opinion into supporting an illegal war of imperialist aggression. Clearly, the case for Vallely’s actions to be considered treasonous is one that could easily be made.
As the Institute For Policy Studies (Right Web) writes,
Retired Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely is a former military analyst for Fox News and is the host of the conservative radio show, "Stand Up America." Vallely, who serves on the boards of a number of hawkish policy groups that have pushed interventionist U.S. policies in the Middle East as part of the "war on terror," was one of several retired military figures who was involved in a controversial Pentagon program aimed at disseminating favorable views of U.S. policies in the Iraq War by debriefing analysts like Vallely before their appearances on TV news programs.[1]In regards to the Valerie Plame affair, IPS writes,
According to the New York Times, which broke the story in April 2008, the Pentagon program, which ran from 2002 until this year, was initially aimed at pushing public support for the Iraq War. The program focused specifically on retired military men because as analysts on TV programs, they "often got more airtime than network reporters, and they were not merely explaining the capabilities of Apache helicopters. They were framing how viewers ought to interpret events. What is more, while the analysts were in the news media, they were not of the news media. They were military men, many of them ideologically in sync with the administration's neoconservative brain trust, many of them important players in a military industry anticipating large budget increases to pay for an Iraq war."[2]
When the U.S. occupation of Iraq began deteriorating into a bloody counterinsurgency war in mid-2003, Vallely and other analysts in the Pentagon program where flown to Iraq to get a look at "the real situation on the ground." Although Vallely would later tell the Times that he "saw things were going south," his message on Fox News shortly after the trip was altogether different. He told Fox's Alan Colmes, "You can't believe the progress," and predicted that within months the insurgency would be "down to a few numbers."[3]
In early 2006, after several retired generals issued scathing critiques of then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's performance and demanded his resignation, the Pentagon hurriedly planned a damage-control meeting between its invited analysts and Rumsfeld. On April 17, 2006, just a few days before the scheduled meeting, Vallely and three other retired military officers penned an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal titled "In Defense of Donald Rumsfeld." Its text and talking points came at least in part from the Pentagon. According to the Times, after Vallely sent a note to the Pentagon saying that any help with his draft "will be much appreciated," Rumsfeld's office "quickly forwarded talking points and statistics to rebut the notion of a spreading revolt. 'Vallely is going to use the numbers,' a Pentagon official reported that afternoon."[4]
In 2005 Vallely made a startling claim regarding the Valerie Plame case (in which Plame was revealed as a CIA operative to members of the press). Vallely declared that Plame's husband, Amb. Joseph Wilson, had revealed his wife's role to Vallely in 2002 as they were chatting in the greenroom at Fox's studios, well before Plame's identity was apparently leaked to reporters by administration officials in July 2003. (Dick Cheney's former chief of staff I. Lewis Libby was charged with five felony counts related to this case and convicted in March 2007 of lying to government investigators before having his sentence commuted by President George W. Bush.) "[Wilson] was rather open about his wife working at the CIA," Vallely asserted. Immediately after Vallely's claims were published online, Wilson demanded a retraction from both Vallely and the website that ran the story, the conservative WorldNetDaily.com.Vallely has repeatedly voiced support for an American invasion of Iran, even going so far as to suggest that Osama bin Laden was hiding out in Iran, presumably at the behest of the Iranian government, a claim that is both absurd and unbelievably stupid.
Clearly, the attempt by Pentagon counterintelligence, while going much deeper than mere military plants in mainstream media organizations, is still on the roll today as is Vallely. Apparently, Vallely has been tasked with representing and subsequently leading to the slaughter the hordes of conservative Republican “Tea Party” crowds of the Glenn Beck variety. His niche is clearly the version of the Right for whom no theory of impending terrorism or Obama treachery is too far-fetched to latch onto.
Of course, Vallelly should know very well about PSYOPs and the war for the minds of the general public. After all, he co-wrote a paper with notorious Satanist and alleged pedophile Michael Aquino on just this very subject.
The paper, entitled “From PSYOP To MindWar: The Psychology Of Victory,” argued for the application of Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) and “Psychotronics” at the national level both in the target country (in warfare) and, more importantly, at home.
In this paper, Vallely and Aquino wrote,
Psychotronic research is in its infancy, but the U.S. Army already possesses an operational weapons systems designed to do what LTC Alexander would like ESP to do - except that this weapons system uses existing communications media. It seeks to map the minds of neutral and enemy individuals and then to change them in accordance with U.S. national interests. It does this on a wide scale, embracing military units, regions, nations, and blocs. In its present form it is called Psychological Operations (PS YOP).Although the paper and its strategies were allegedly supposed to be directed at military targets overseas, the doctrine contained therein has been and is clearly used against the US domestic population, as Aquino admitted in a later “Introduction” to the re-release of the paper. He wrote,
[...]
The first thing it is necessary to overcome is a view of PSYOP that limits it to routine, predictable, over-obvious, and hence marginally effective "leaflet and loudspeaker" applications. Battlefield devices of this sort have their place, but it should be that of a accessory to the main effort. That main effort cannot begin at the company or division level; it must originate at the national level.
While in the 1980s I had no reason to think that this paper had had any official effect upon U.S. PSYOP doctrine within or beyond the Army, it was with some fascination that I saw specific of its prescriptions applied during the first Gulf War, and recently even more obviously during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. In both instances extreme PSYOP was directed both against the object of the attack and upon U.S. domestic public perception and opinion, in 2003 to the extent of "embedding" journalists with military units to inevitably channel their perspectives and perceptions.With that statement borne in mind, consider the section of Vallely and Aquino’s paper that states,
To this end MindWar must be strategic in emphasis, with tactical applications playing a reinforcing, supplementary role. In its strategic context, MindWar must reach out to friends, enemies, and neutrals alike across the globe - neither through primitive "battlefield" leaflets and loudspeakers of PSYOP nor through the weak, imprecise, and narrow effort of psychotronics 11 - but through the media possessed by the United States which have the capabilities to reach virtually all people on the face of the Earth.It should be pointed out that now-retired US Army Lt. Col., Michael Aquino, who co-authored the paper with Vallely, is an avowed Satanist and founder of the Satanic Temple of Set. Aquino was implicated in the abduction and ritual sexual abuse of children nationwide through pedophilia rings connected to the highest levels of American society including the military.
These media are, of course, the electronic media - television and radio. State of the art developments in satellite communication, video recording techniques, and laser and optical transmission of broadcasts make possible a penetration of the minds of the world such as would have been inconceivable just a few years ago. Like the sword Excalibur, we have but to reach out and seize this tool; and it can transform the world for us if we have the courage and the integrity to enhance civilization with it. If we do not accept Excalibur, then we relinquish our ability to inspire foreign cultures with our morality. If they then desire moralities unsatisfactory to us, we have no choice but to fight them on a more brutish level.
For instance, during the court hearings surrounding the disappearance of 12-year-old Johnny Gosch, Noreen Gosch (Johnny’s mother) was forced to do the job that investigators and law enforcement personnel refused to do. She eventually arrived at the conclusion that such highly connected pedophilia networks not only existed but were highly active across the country. At one of the court hearings, she explicitly fingered Aquino as one of the culprits. She stated,
There was a man by the name of Michael Aquino. He was in the military. He had top Pentagon clearance. He was a pedophile. He was a Satanist. He’s founded the Temple of Set. And he was also a very close friend of Anton LaVey. The two of them were very active in ritualistic sexual abuse. And they deferred funding from this government program to use this experimentation upon children …where they deliberately split off the personalities of these children into multiples so that when they’re questioned or put under oath or questioned under lie detector, that unless the operator knows how to question a multiple personality disorder, they turn up with no evidence. They use these kids to sexually compromise politicians or anyone else they wish to have control of…they were taken to be used by professional pedophiles. People that have the money to buy what they want, take the kids wherever they want... and by splitting the children’s personalities they could then train each one of the personalities to do a different function. And the rest of the personalities within that host personality would not be aware of it or remember it.It is with individuals like Aquino that Vallely is a close associate and with whom he was responsible for theorizing the furthering of a “MindWar” operation to be aimed at the American people as well as targets overseas.
Regardless, Vallely’s statements are a perfect example of the need to retain street smarts and to avoid knee-jerk reactions since his stint as Obama critic and “defender of the United States” has obviously worked over the minds of many who would consider themselves to be patriots and followers of the US Constitution. By allowing emotional reactions to control good judgement in the minds of the general public or the activist, one allows himself to be nothing more than a motivated pawn in a larger game.
Many of these types of statements, as well as movements, contain a substantial amount of legitimate factual information, anger, and motivation. However, for whatever they may contain that is, on its own, legitimate, they are designed to spin the individual, the activist, and the observer off into a world that generally worse than the one he revolted against.
For instance, Vallely’s statements carry with them some validity. He criticizes Obama. Good. He states that something must be done to control the powers-that-be (although the only powers he mentions are government-based). OK.
He states that Americans may have to make hard choices in order to make this revolution possible, even to the point of such a revolution becoming physical. Hmm. OK.
But what is Vallely’s goal? Is it the creation of a system of government that finally works for the American people and not against them? Will that government be one that tames Wall Street and finance capital? Will it be one that breaks the secrecy of any number of secret societies that control the halls of government and Wall Street? Will it be one that ends foreign wars? No. It is, essentially, a military dictatorship and one that would be headed by an individual whose hands are dripping with blood and his judgement of character is at best nonexistent. In reality, Vallely is an individual with connections to some of the most treasonous elements of American society, warmongers, culture creators, mind controllers, Satanists, and pedophiles.
Individuals who are taken in by Vallely’s rhetoric, however, may actually believe they have found their conservative hero who will finally bring them their country back. Such is the effect of rhetoric or, as Vallely and Aquino themselves put it, MindWar.
If Smedley Butler had agreed to the Business Plot, he would have undoubtedly received a substantial amount of support from many Americans. He was, after all, one of the highest decorated military officers in the US military at the time. But, he didn’t. Because Butler could recognize a con and because Butler had principles.
The American people thus need to immediately become able to do the same and recognize when they are being played for emotional fools.
It will not likely be known how serious Vallely may have been regarding his willingness to lead a coup in 2014. After all, it is over a year since his public statement and there has been no coup. But there will undoubtedly be a situation in the future in which activists and the general public at large will be forced to make a choice to act as cannon fodder for a revolution with vague goals, catchy slogans, and colorful banners being led by leaders with shadowy and questionable backgrounds. Let’s hope they will make the right choice.
Notes:
[1] David Barstow, "Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon's Hidden Hand," New York Times, April 20, 2008.
[2] David Barstow, "Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon's Hidden Hand”
[3] David Barstow, "Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon's Hidden Hand”
[4] David Barstow, "Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon's Hidden Hand"; John Crosby, Thomas McInerney, Buron Moore, and Paul Vallely, "In Defense of Donald Rumsfeld," Wall Street Journal, April 17, 2006.
Recently from Brandon Turbeville:
- US Military Gloats Over ISIS Victories In Iraq, Rushes In To Save It From Iran
- Yemen and Syria - Two Different Rebellions, Two Different Stories, Same Belligerent West
- Report: US Stationing Marines In Ghana On Eve Of Nigerian Elections
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.