Charlie Rose

Max83  07/17/2012 05:01 PM Report

I had a very good feedback on my posts on the comment section of the Jane Harman interview from July 5, 2012 here on the Charlie Rose Show. Here the link to the interview: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12441 and here my reply back to commenter BENEZRAA:

Thank you very much for your helpful feedback BENEZRAA. I very much appreciate it and I was able to learn many new things from it.

I am aware that some of my writings and claims are idealistic and even naive and some of it in regards to the MI6 and false flag terrorist attacks might be exaggerated. I did this on purpose to wake up people up to both, the positive and very negative possibilities that are present at this time in our world and to make people aware of the shadow sides and shadow tactics of politics and the intelligence community which greatly influences policy through their assessments, reports and perspective on events i.e. WMDs and the Iraq Invasion back in 2003.

Like you said I am in no way defending Iran or any other militant Islamic countries, groups or movements, because they are dangerous and very populist, however I feel we really need an open and honest dialogue in this country about the influence the Israel and the military and intelligence industrial complex lobby i.e. AIPAC and others have in regards to American foreign policy and we need to acknowledge that their interests and policies only profit a very small percentage and group of the American people and mostly otherwise devastate and traumatize large numbers of the populace, both financially and psychologically.

How I see things is that AIPAC and the military intelligence industrial complex have different goals, but they both agree upon that these goals can be best achieved through another war in the Middle East. The military and intelligence services lobbies fear for their jobs and budgets and the Israel Zionist lobbies fear for their country and religion/ideology/identity to be wiped out and so they are both heavily invested in making these wars happen in my opinion and they use all kinds of methods to achieve this, false flag terror attacks being the most extreme and rare form of that, but I would not discard it and would not put it past some these guys. There are some really whacky and paranoid people in the military and intelligence services that live, love and breath wars, conflict, tension and Death and that have not much interest in preventing wars. On the other hand there are many very noble and very capable people in these institutions like Admiral William J. Fallon for example. It is a really mixed bag. It is my intention to support this sane and benevolent element within the intelligence and military community and weaken and expel the violent, deceptive and rogue element because all they do is cause harm to people and the country as a whole.

I think what we need to understand is that all this manipulation of public opinion through the media, through biased news stations like FOX News is only possible because like Zbigniew Brzezinski said in his CFR interview, the foreign policy knowledge and education levels of the average American citizen is very much lacking. The solution really is to educate the general public on these topics and then I feel that Americans will become interested in foreign policy and as a result the USA will become a role model again in the world of a super power that stands for justice and peace, both domestically as well as internationally and that only uses her military might as a last resort.

What is very concerning is that in the last few days many normally neutral news sources have switched around their news coverage towards Iran from only a couple of months ago and are displaying Iran as a major potential threat not just to Israel, but also to the USA. I am talking specifically about Wolf Blitzer on CNN here, whose loyalties have to be questioned and who himself has to question his loyalties, especially because of his past involvement with AIPAC. Wolf Blitzer and Mrs. Harman have to really ask themselves as I said before if they are foremost Americans or Zionists. If they are Zionists first they will go along with the Benjamin Netanyahu and MI6 rhetoric towards Iran as a major threat, or if they are first truly American citizens and even global citizens that are interested in long term global peace and prosperity they will side more with Zbigniew Brzezinski view of things in my opinion because that view is a lot more balanced and just plainly makes a lot more sense. Common, historic and cultural sense .

Here is a very good example of what I was talking about in regards to Wolf Blitzer and his CNN coverage towards Iran. From The Young Turks from yesterday:

CNN's Flawed Coverage of Iran Threat

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI6nLD-MkE8&list=UU1yBKRuGpC1tSM73A0ZjYjQ&index=7&feature=plcp

"So back in November, when the Pentagon wanted to spew derision at the boasting of Iranian leaders, CNN.com dutifully quoted experts ridiculing the notion that Iran could get near the U.S. with its Navy. Now that the Pentagon wants to warn of the Grave Iranian threat, CNN hypes the very threats it was mocking just last year. Where the Pentagon goes, CNN follows, like an impossibly loyal dog."

Read more at: http://www.salon.com/2012/07/16/cnn_on_the_iran_threat/

If you do not have the time to see the full hour interview of Zbigniew Brzezinski at the CFR BENEZRAA, there is another great 15 minute clip of him on Morning Joe talking about all these topics from September 2011, here the link:

Ambushing MSNBC, Zbigniew Brzezinski: US Veto of Palestinian State Historic Failure 2011-09-19

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBCr991Xij8

''This is the most important political policy statement made by any American in years.

Brzezinski, a director of the Council on Foreign Relations, is by far, the "brightest bulb" America has.

This is the only statement of its kind that lays out issues of American and EU security, that speaks honestly about Israel and Palestine and addresses the Pakistani situation.

He goes two steps further, taking America's political "loonies" as he calls them "to the woodshed" and, avoiding the term "class war," speaks of the real violence of poverty, of the real extremism from above, the top 1% looting the world and what it will cost us all.''

Thank you very much again for your very helpful feedback BENEZRAA, I am very happy and grateful we are having this conversation, because I feel this kind of dialogue is what America needs to really awaken and really live up its full potential, even if we are not agreeing on all the details of how this can be achieved most practically and realistically.

Max83  07/12/2012 10:40 PM Report

Today MI6 chief Sir John Sawers made the following very rare public announcement in the Telegraph:

'We foiled Iranian nuclear weapons bid'

You can find the complete article here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/9396360/MI6-chief-Sir-John-Sawers-We-foile d-Iranian-nuclear-weapons-bid.html

Like I said it is very rare for the chief of MI6 to make any public announcements and that really concerns me.

I trust the CIA, Mossad and BND more than I trust the MI6 and this should say a lot about the MI6.

I am concerned that when the MI6 is so interested in the USA attacking Iran that they are very desperate and will do anything to achieve this goal which could result in false flag terrorist attacks on US installations world wide, false flag terror attacks on US soil and on US citizens (this could potentially be American Olympic athletes or American spectators at the London Olympics) and/or even false flag terrorist assassinations of US public officials conducted by the MI6 through rouge elements in the CIA or Mossad that will then be blamed on Iran to sway US public opinion towards a military attack on Iran.

This needs to be avoided at any price in my opinion and I would like to urge all US Homeland Security agencies and US Intelligence agencies to seriously consider these possibilities. This is speculation on my part. But when Intelligence agencies like MI6 start involving themselves in public announcements like this, this needs to be taken very seriously and their intentions have to be questioned and scrutinized.

The public outcry over this MI6 announcement is very great in England and the public accuses MI6 to want to distract from the recent LIBOR banking scandal in the City of London and I think there could be some truth to that, however the risk of rouge elements within the intelligence agency apparatus plotting false flag terrorist attacks to advance their Geo-political agendas is even higher in my personal opinion.

Thank you for considering these possibilities. I am usually an optimist and like to inspire people. My intuition told me to share these thoughts here in this case, so these scenarios won't play out in reality and won't weaken the USA even more and won't further destroy its public image and standing around the world if it were manipulated into another foreign war that is not necessary.

I would like to refer you again to the brilliant Conversation with Zbigniew Brzezinski at the CFR:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTKOqH0mF9c

SPEAKER:

Zbigniew Brzezinski

PRESIDER:

Sam Feist

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/05/2012 04:21 AM Report

IS TORTURE EFFECTIVE? Yes if you already know the answer you want. The Russians have known this since the '50s when they needed confessions so their due process didn't take too long.

We use torture to get false information so we can go to war with Iraq.

Please watch "Taxi to the Dark Side" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxi_to_the_Dark_Side.

Please pay particular attention to the CIA's work in torture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Army_and_CIA_interrogation_manuals#CIA_manuals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_deprivation#Jos.C3.A9_Padilla

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/05/2012 04:09 AM Report

Charlie, you hit him pretty hard on bin Laden and Tora Bora.

Intelligence on bin Laden should have gone all the way to the President. He was the target.

One is left wondering, perhaps they did not really want bin Laden at that time because Iraq was the real goal.

Taking out bin Laden would have cut short the Iraqi War.

Perhaps the Congress needs to follow-up on this. That is if they can and there already hasn't been a Presidential pardon.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/05/2012 03:50 AM Report

Yes, NINETEEN GUYS WITH BOX CUTTERS cause the United States to spend one or two TRILLION dollars on defense.

This is not just asymmetry of power.

This is leverage on steroids and could cause enough economic pain to weaken our country and spend away our power.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/05/2012 03:41 AM Report

Charlie, you didn't let him finish.

So he had bin Laden and was told to forecast where bin Laden might be in six hours because that is when a Cruise Missile would arrive from a submarine.

He knew he had bin Laden because of human intelligence and seeing him with a Predator Drone.

So then load up the Drone with the missiles and don't wait six hours for a Cruise Missile.

There is much more to this story. Perhaps Clinton wasn't the assassin that Obama is today?

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/05/2012 03:28 AM Report

Charlie, this is interesting:

"Cofer Black's role in the United States torture regime was threefold:

he ran well-funded secret operations throughout Afghanistan and Pakistan as a CIA warlord;

he oversaw our country's early development and implementation of "enhanced interrogation" techniques, renditions, black sites, and disappearances around the world;

and he privatized murderous violence with Blackwater USA and other corporate ventures."

http://tortureaccountability.org/cofer_black/

We heard on this show from Cofer, "By the time we are through with these guys they are going to have flies walking across their eyeballs.”

He is advising Romney now. Perfect.

TBLA  06/16/2012 10:14 PM Report

I thought it was great when he contradicted Rumsfeld. When I watched old Donald interviewed here I kept thinking "you're a liar". I am not a Democrat but Rumsfeld contradicts himself so many times. His lack of accountability is shameful.

Massive  06/12/2012 08:54 PM Report

Another fairly naive discussion of torture. In a sense a non-expert, expert. You would think he should know better, but then again, he claims not really know so why his being asked.

Contrary to popular myth torture can be effective. Amnesty has always said that the ethics of torture should not hinge on it's effectiveness because it can be effective, and so when the trend has run against it, it has been because of the human rights dimension not the effectiveness question.

The main use of the high value target discussion, or the ticking timebomb discussion is to soften resistance to broad use of torture. The US has a long history of embracing torture, and it's use in counter insurgency is to change "hearts and minds". This is code for a broad spectrum campaign, both brutal and soft, to change the minds of a resistant population. Widespread use of torture is sanctioned for the same kind of reason that lynching occurred in the south. The idea is to regress the population and hope it will give up, and not continue to oppose the unpopular policies being imposed on it.

The US has used the torture strategy in other places like south America, and Vietnam. It is textbook, and not something the US invented. In the south and places like colonial Africa, there was less back home public resistance to widespread use of force. Today one needs to come up with a pretext for torture during counter insurgencies. Whatever high value targets may give up, they are a tiny minority of the people being tortured. Interrogators in the field are dealing with low value people whom they process to no intelligence effect. This seems to be pointless to the people involved who are trained in interrogation but just end up beating on the common people. But what other option is there to get whole peoples to do what they don't want to do.

In this interview there are the usual silly exchanges like those around sleep deprivation. What are we supposed to imagine are the techniques that are used to keep people who want to sleep from doing so. The purpose of the "interrogations" is not to get information since the targets do not possess any, but to traumatize them. It is simply naive to believe that the cocktail of carefully considered abuses are not extremely traumatic. That is their purpose.

tabs  06/12/2012 07:27 PM Report

Against this rock Donald Rumsfeld's story crumbles. Mr Crumpton has extreme credibility in his account. Now comes the caveat, when Mr Crumpton gets to Mr Rodriguez and "enhanced interrogation" Mr Crumpton cites the old boy party line of believing your own and thus rallying around your own familiar team. This denotes an institutional mind speak which colours any narrative. The trick for the viewer is to be able to separate out that mind speak however slight it maybe.

BoseEinstein  06/12/2012 04:11 PM Report

Outstanding interview!

REMant  06/12/2012 11:52 AM Report

Is the Taliban OUR enemy, or are we, ITS? If the Taliban is supposed to be a disease, I suppose it's the latter, tho they might well think otherwise. Nevertheless, he's right to point out the Afghan beachhead was not secured, because we didn't let them do it themselves, and pay attention to our own business, which was al-Qaeda. My guess is that our govt wanted to liberate the Middle East - its Jews, its women or its oil - and Bin Laden's escape was expedient. Makes about as much sense as keeping the Pacific fleet in neat rows at Pearl Harbor.