Politicians guarantee that Americans are left clueless on the most controversial or dangerous federal policies. The government is creating trillions of pages of new secrets every year. The total is equivalent to “20 million four-drawer filing cabinets filled with double-spaced text on paper,” according to The Washington Post. If those cabinets were laid end to end, they would stretch almost to the moon. The feds have accumulated the equivalent of hundreds of pages of secrets for each American, blighting any hope for citizens to learn of their rulers’ rascality.
Secrecy and lying are two sides of the same political coin. The Supreme Court declared in 1936, “An informed public is the most potent of all restraints upon misgovernment.” Thus, conniving politicians have no choice but to drop an Iron Curtain around Washington.
Politicians guarantee that Americans are left clueless on the most controversial or dangerous federal policies. The government is creating trillions of pages of new secrets every year. The total is equivalent to “20 million four-drawer filing cabinets filled with double-spaced text on paper,” according to The Washington Post. If those cabinets were laid end to end, they would stretch almost to the moon. The feds have accumulated the equivalent of hundreds of pages of secrets for each American, blighting any hope for citizens to learn of their rulers’ rascality.
“All rulers in all ages have tried to impose a false view of the world upon their followers,” George Orwell wrote in his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. This is where government classification—i.e., secrecy—comes in handy. The more information government classifies, the easier it becomes for politicians to dupe the American people. In Washington, deniability is better than the truth.
Secrecy was usually not a grave peril to most Americans’ rights, liberties, and safety until the U.S. government began warring in the 1940s and on into this century.
Secrecy helped deliver a death warrant for tens of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese. President Lyndon Johnson fabricated claims about an alleged North Vietnamese attack in the Gulf of Tonkin to sway Congress to give him unlimited authority to attack North Vietnam. Johnson assumed he was entitled to deceive Americans to vastly expand the war he decided to fight to boost his 1964 presidential election campaign. But other federal officials claimed a prerogative to blindfold the American people. When Assistant Defense Secretary Arthur Sylvester visited Saigon in 1965, he hectored American correspondents covering the Vietnam War: “Look, if you think any American official is going to tell you the truth, then you’re stupid. Did you hear that? Stupid!” Sylvester declared that he expected the American press to be “the handmaidens of government.” Most of the American media has followed orders regarding foreign reporting most of the time since then.
On April 6th, 2017, the Ron Paul Institute received credible information from its network that a US missile attack on Syria by President Trump was imminent. Just a couple of hours after we put out this urgent update, missiles were launched by Trump on Syria under the false pretense that they were retaliation for a Syrian government airstrike on civilians. That claim has since been proven bogus – cooked up by US government spooks and amplified by the media.
We reported it to you in real time, where we were told by a source that the “TLAMs were being loaded.” Sadly, we were right.
We are currently hearing from our sources that Israel may be planning a major “retaliatory” strike on Iran this weekend over the alleged involvement of Iran in the drone attack on a Japanese-owned but Israeli-managed ship, in which a British citizen was killed.
It’s hardly an Iranian attack on Tel Aviv, but the new government in Israel has been ratcheting up the rhetoric for days, recently claiming that it is “ready to attack Iran alone” over the alleged incident.
We are told it may happen over the weekend.
The Israeli defense minister is on the warpath, repeating an endless Netanyahu talking point that Iranian nuclear weapons would be rolled out tomorrow, or in a week, or a few weeks, etc. The Israeli government is tenuously positioned, with recently dethroned Bibi breathing down its neck, so what better way to shore up domestic support – where the “left” parties are as hawkish as the “right” parties – than to launch a big attack on Iran?
That would solve the ongoing problem of US President Biden’s negotiations – even if half-hearted and fruitless – with the Iranians over the return of the US to its commitment to the JCPOA (“Iran Deal”) the return to which Biden openly campaigned on.
There is nothing that would excite Israel’s bipartisan “Amen Corner” in the Washington Beltway more than a reckless Israeli attack on Iran (over a minor incident not at all related to Israeli national interests) and an Iranian response, which must come considering the incoming Iranian government is politically obliged to defend the conservative voices of those who recently elected it.
And the pro-Israel fanatics in the Biden Administration seem to be facilitating the escalation. Indeed, our source informs us, this Israeli attack may have some coordinating help from its friends in the Pentagon.
Speaking of Pat Buchanan, once again he has it totally on the mark when he warns of a “Gulf of Tonkin incident” in the Gulf of Oman. Writing in an article Friday, he blows apart this bogus narrative: while the Israelis are hysterically trying to frame this as some kind of existential threat to their existence, in fact, as Buchanan writes, such a frontal assault by the incoming Iranian Administration would make no sense.
Writes Buchanan: ‘We are confident that Iran conducted this attack,’ said Secretary of State Antony Blinken. ‘We are working with our partners to consider our next steps and consulting with governments inside the region and beyond on an appropriate response, which will be forthcoming.’Iran, however, has repeatedly denied that it ordered the attack.What makes the attack puzzling is its timing, as it occurred just days before the inauguration of the newly elected president of Iran, the ultraconservative hardliner Ebrahim Raisi.Query: Would Raisi have ordered a provocative attack on an Israeli-managed vessel, just days before taking office, when his highest priority is a lifting of the ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions imposed on his country by former President Donald Trump? Why?Would Raisi put at risk his principal diplomatic goal, just to get even with Israel for some earlier pinprick strike in the tit-for-tat war in which Iran and Israel have been engaged for years? Again, why? Indeed: why? We are providing this information to you, again, to let you know how things work inside the Washington war machine. Conflict is always good from the prospective of those who make millions off the rest of us to keep the tension high. High enough to justify more weapons sales but not too high where it all boils over.
This may boil over. Israel has been bombing Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, etc with impunity for years, and even its very friendly ally Russia is getting annoyed by Tel Aviv’s relentless attacks on its neighbors.
So keep an eye open. And, as ever, do NOT trust the mainstream media. Information from our sources may not play out as we have warned. And in fact we would be happy to be wrong, as there is nothing to be gained by Israel, the US, Iran, or any country in the region from a major war.
Our view is that were the US to disengage from the Middle East, Israel would have to face the music that it must find a way to get along with its neighbors – and the Palestinians who are its closest neighbors – and that would be good not only for the neighborhood, but for Israel as well.
The problem is not solely Israel or Palestine or Iran. The problem is, as Americans, is US foreign policy, as a major enabler for conflict for the benefit of special interests.
Pray for peace.
Sincerely yours,
Daniel McAdams Executive Director Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff should be embarrassed for their hypocrisy in calling for an inquiry into Trump, knowing full well how his phone call stacks up against true pure evil. And mainstream media is revealing whose side they are playing on, and it is not the side of truth and justice.
Put in the context of recent presidential history, the media’s objurgating of President Trump, because of his phone call to Ukranian president Volodymyr Zelensky, shows a remarkable lack of knowledge of recent American history or dishonesty—or both.
Laid next to the evil activities of other recent presidents, the Trump-Zelensky phone call is a nothing burger. At most, he asked for Zelensky to investigate what appears to be shady dealings by Hunter Biden in Ukraine at the time his father Joe Biden was vice president.
Compare this activity to most recent presidents. Lyndon Baines Johnson
Lyndon Baines Johnson lied about an attack in the Gulf of Tonkin. The Pentagon Papers, the memoirs of Robert McNamara, and NSA publications from 2005, proved material misrepresentation by LBJ to justify an escalation of the war against Vietnam.
The outcome of this false claim, along with another true claim, was the passage by Congress of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which granted Johnson the authority to assist any Southeast Asian country whose government was considered to be jeopardized by “communist aggression”. The resolution served as Johnson’s legal justification for deploying U.S. conventional forces and the commencement of open warfare against North Vietnam.
According to Raymond McGovern, a retired CIA officer (CIA analyst from 1963 to 1990, and in the 1980s, chairman of the National Intelligence Estimates), the CIA, “not to mention President Lyndon Johnson, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara and National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy all knew full well that the evidence of any armed attack on the evening of Aug. 4, 1964, the so-called ‘second’ Tonkin Gulf incident, was highly dubious. … During the summer of 1964, President Johnson and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were eager to widen the war in Vietnam. They stepped up sabotage and hit-and-run attacks on the coast of North Vietnam.”
Here is Johnson lying to the American people:
Ronald Reagan
One of the leading national issues during 1980 was the release of 52 Americans being held hostage in Iran since November 4, 1979. Many historians believe that representatives of Reagan’s presidential campaign had conspired with Iran to delay the release until after the election to thwart President Carter from pulling off an “October surprise”.
Reagan won the election. On the day of his inauguration— 20 minutes after he concluded his inaugural address—the Islamic Republic of Iran announced the release of the hostages.
It is believed the Reagan Administration subsequently rewarded Iran for its participation in the plot by supplying Iran with weapons via Israel and by unblocking Iranian government monetary assets in U.S. banks.
Several high ranking officials support these allegations, most notably former Iranian President Abulhassan Banisadr, former naval intelligence officer and U.S. National Security Council member Gary Sick, and former Reagan/Bush campaign staffer and White House analyst Barbara Honegger George H.W. Bush
Here is The New York Times explaining how the George H.W. Bush administration encouraged Iraq’s leader Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait, which ultimately led to the first US attack on Iraq.
In the two weeks before Iraq’s seizure of Kuwait, the Bush Administration on the advice of Arab leaders gave President Saddam Hussein little reason to fear a forceful American response if his troops invaded the country.
The Administration’s message to Baghdad, articulated in public statements in Washington by senior policy makers and delivered directly to Mr. Hussein by the United States Ambassador, April C. Glaspie, was this: The United States was concerned about Iraq’s military buildup on its border with Kuwait, but did not intend to take sides in what it perceived as a no-win border dispute between Arab neighbors.
In a meeting with Mr. Hussein in Baghdad on July 25, eight days before the invasion, Ms. Glaspie urged the Iraqi leader to settle his differences with Kuwait peacefully but added, ”We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait,” according to an Iraqi document described as a transcript of their conversation.
This is viewed by scholars as the US giving Saddam a green light to attack Kuwait, which was then used as cover to attack Iraq.
Bill Clinton
On August 20, 1998, President Bill Clinton ordered American cruise missile strikes on al-Qaeda bases in Khost, Afghanistan, and the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum, Sudan.
The missiles were launched three days after Clinton testified on the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and some countries, media outlets, protesters, and Republicans accused Clinton of ordering the attacks as a diversion from the Lewinsky scandal.
The best estimates available suggest that more than 250,000 people have died as a result of George W. Bush and Tony Blair’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003. A newly released investigative report from the UK government suggests that intelligence officials knew ahead of time that the war would cause massive instability and societal collapse and make the problem of terrorism worse — and that Blair and Bush went ahead with the effort anyway…
The Bush administration on numerous occasions exaggerated or outright fabricated conclusions from intelligence in its public statements. Bush really did lie, and people really did die as a result of the war those lies were meant to build a case for. Those are the facts.
The failure of Iraq was not merely a case of well-meaning but incompetent policymakers rushing into what they should’ve known would be a disaster. It’s the story of those policymakers repeatedly misleading the public about why, exactly, the war started.
In October 2002, Bush said that Saddam Hussein had a “massive stockpile” of biological weapons. But as CIA Director George Tenet noted in early 2004, the CIA had informed policymakers it had “no specific information on the types or quantities of weapons agent or stockpiles at Baghdad’s disposal.” The “massive stockpile” was just literally made up…
It has been a lively June so far in light of Washington’s apparent zeal to remake the world in its own image. There is considerable buzz among those networking in ex- or current government circles that the White House is preparing to “do something” about Iran. The recent incidents involving alleged attacks on Norwegian and Japanese tankers in the Gulf of Oman were immediately attributed to Iran by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo with so little regard for evidence that even the compliant American media was left gasping. In its initial coverage of the story The New York Times inevitably echoed the administration’s claims, but if one went to the readers’ comments on the story fully 90% of those bothering to express an opinion decided that the tale was not credible for any number of reasons.
Several commenters brought up the completely phony Gulf of Tonkin incident of 1964 that led to the escalation of American involvement in Vietnam, a view that was expressed frequently in readers’ comments both in the mainstream and alternative media. Others recalled instead the fake intelligence linking Iraq’s Saddam Hussein with the 9/11 conspirators as well as the bogus reports of an Iraqi secret nuclear program and huge gliders capable to delivering biological weapons across the Atlantic Ocean.
There were a number of questionable aspects to the Pompeo story, most notably the unlikelihood that Iran would attack a Japanese ship while the Japanese Prime Minister was in Tehran paying a visit. The attack itself, attributed to Iranian mines, also did not match the damage to the vessels, which was well above the water line, a detail that was noted by the Japanese ship captain among others. Crewmen on the ship also reportedly saw flying objects, which suggests missiles or other projectiles were to blame, fired by almost anyone in the area. And then there is the question of motive: the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates all want a war with Iran while the Iranians are trying to avoid a B-52 attack, so why would they do something that would virtually guarantee a devastating response from Washington? Read the rest of this entry »
All these newspapers used to have foreign bureaus. Now they don’t. They call us to explain to them what’s happening in Moscow and Cairo.
Most of the outlets are reporting on world events from Washington. The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns.
That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing.
-Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications under Obama
“Real journalism” is propaganda from Washington DC.
The news simply quotes the politicians, believes the names of bills will become reality, and buys hook, line, and sinker what the spy-masters in the Pentagon tell them.
And here we are again, being sold a justification for yet another war in the middle east.
The US government claims that Iran attacked a Japanese shipping vessel with mines. Iran claims this is a lie.
The events just seem too perfect, justifying what America already wanted: to go to war.
It doesn’t even have to be an American-orchestrated false flag. It could simply be a misrepresentation, like the Gulf of Tonkin incidents which escalated the Vietnam War.
The US said that North Vietnam attacked its ship, but the truth was that the American ship fired the first “warning shots.” In the end, the American ship sustained one bullet hole and no casualties, while four North Vietnamese soldiers were killed.
But most Americans would never even hear about the Gulf of Tonkin if it wasn’t for fake news sites like Babylon Bee.
The headline reads: John Bolton: ‘When Has The Government Ever Lied About Attacks On Ships In A Gulf Somewhere Just To Provoke War?’
MCViewPoint 