Jon Rappoport: The attempt to destroy the individual

The attempt to destroy the individual

The attempt to destroy the individual

by Jon Rappoport

May 27, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

“What is finished is the idea that this great country is dedicated to the freedom and flourishing of every individual in it. It’s the individual that’s finished. It’s the single, solitary human being that’s finished. It’s every single one of you out there that’s finished. Because this is no longer a nation of independent individuals. It’s a nation of some two hundred odd million transistorized, deodorized, whiter-than-white, steel-belted bodies, totally unnecessary as human beings and as replaceable as piston rods.” — Howard Beale, in Paddy Chayefsky’s 1976 film, Network

But that was only a movie. Who cares about that? You go into a theater, sit there in the dark for a couple of hours, walk out, and think about something else.

For several years now, I’ve been writing about the decline of the individual. The wipeout.

Every time I write an article on this subject, I receive suggestions. I should go back and re-read Marx. I need to understand the difference between “communal, communitarian, community, communist.” I should research worker-owned businesses. What about trans-substantial transpersonal sub-brain algorithmic psychology? How about the pygmies? Ego? Superego? Id?

I appreciate these and other remarks, but I’m talking about the individual, about Self, beyond any construct, beyond citizenship, beyond membership, beyond sociology or anthropology or archaeology.

The individual is enshrined in various political documents, but his rights don’t originate there. Neither does courage nor imagination.

I’ve laid out the enormous psyop designed to submerge the individual in unconscious goo. This psyop depends on the repetition of words like: unity, love, caring, community, family. And phrases like “we’re all in this together.”

The individual is characterized as: lone, outsider, selfish,greedy, inhumane, petty. Turn him into an exile, excommunicated from the great body of humanity.

Here, in the usual prose, is a familiar formulation of the grand psyop: “We can no longer afford the luxury of thinking of ourselves as individuals. The stakes are too high. Finally, we must all come together and realize our presence on this planet is a shared experience. The decimation of our resources, through hatred and divisive behavior, the denial of love and community, the cold greed and excessive profit-making, the whole range of social and political injustices—all this can ultimately be laid at the door of the individual who refuses to join the rest of humanity…”

Is this manifesto valid? It’s a deception, BECAUSE it’s aimed at making the individual extinct.

And once that happens, the collective, managed by Globalist princes, will have a clear path to the control of Earth, at the expense of the rest of us. And the cruelties we now witness will pale in comparison to what is in store for us.

“When hopes and dreams are loose in the streets, it is well for the timid to lock doors, shutter windows and lie low until the wrath has passed. For there is often a monstrous incongruity between the hopes, however noble and tender, and the action which follows them. It is as if ivied maidens and garlanded youths were to herald the four horsemen of the apocalypse…The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready he is to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race, or his holy cause…Collective unity is not the result of the brotherly love of the faithful for each other. The loyalty of the true believer [who surrenders Self] is to the whole — the church, party, nation — and not to his fellow true believer. True loyalty between individuals is possible only in a loose and relatively free society.” — Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, 1951

Wait. Isn’t that a bit harsh? Isn’t that too “critical and negative?” Where is the cosmic share-and-care we need to spread like butter over the whole universe? I mean, Eric Hoffer was a wonderful writer, and he was a working man, a longshoreman for his whole life, so we should admire him, but today’s prophets are wired directly into the Unity that will save us all automatically—like a toaster popping up with toast every time…right?


On some mid-west college campus, a wide-eyed kid of 19, full of hope and optimism, is studying political science. His professor is running down the catalog of stunning injustices that populate far-off regions of the planet.

The boy wants to help. His professor gives him the name of a humanitarian group that runs operations in Africa. The boy, in some sort of “personal crisis,” drops out of school and signs on with the group.

Little does he know that the charity he is now working with in Africa has ties to USAID, which in turn is a solid CIA front. The real mission of the charity, unknown to most or all of its members, is gathering information that can be used as intelligence.

Under the banner of justice, help, hope, and unity of all peoples, the charity is providing actionable intell to CIA-backed “rebel forces” who are carrying out assassinations and bombings in advance of a political coup.

The coup will pave the way for new deals with multinational scum, organized as corporations, to enter the scene and plunder natural resources and labor at more formidable levels.

Five years later, the boy leaves the charity and returns to the US. He is confused, looking for another group in which he can submerge himself. He’s hooked on groups…

The naïve have given up the ghost on their own independent existence. That is the key.

Think of some of the messages of recent pathetic presidents. Bush the Elder: “Kinder, gentler.” Clinton: “I feel your pain.” Bush 2: “No child left behind.” Obama: “We’re all in this together.”

Judging by these presidents’ murderous actions, it’s clear they were selling unity and caring and togetherness as cover stories for oppressive business as usual.

The op? Make the individual extinct, present him as a useless and dangerous and outmoded construct. Then, whatever real unity that might exist between individuals will vanish, because the population will take on the shape of a coagulated mass melted down into a cosmic glob of androidal harmony.

Artists have warned about all this. Their so-called supporters say, “Oh yes, he was a wonderful writer. Misunderstood, of course, but brave in the face of utter rejection.” The usual claptrap. Point is, these gushing advocates conveniently and easily forget what the artists actually wrote.


Here is another reminder from an Outsider who was glad to be outside. He was a hero to some. He was reviled by many.

“A bureau operates on opposite principles of inventing needs to justify its existence. Bureaucracy is wrong as a cancer, a turning away from the human evolutionary direction of infinite potentials and differentiation and independent spontaneous action to the complete parasitism of a virus…Bureaus die when the structure of the state collapse. They are as helpless and unfit for independent existence as a displaced tapeworm, or a virus that has killed the host.”

“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”

“There is simply no room left for ‘freedom from the tyranny of government’ since city dwellers depend on it for food, power, water, transportation, protection, and welfare. Your right to live where you want, with companions of your choosing, under laws to which you agree, died in the eighteenth century with Captain Mission. Only a miracle or a disaster could restore it.”

The author? William S. Burroughs. But not to worry, he was crazy. Of course he was. He didn’t profess utter loyalty to the mass of humanity. He didn’t prostrate himself before “the greater good.” He didn’t preach unity and togetherness.

He was an individual. Therefore, he is obsolete. A cherished memory of a time now wiped from the mind. Now we are all dancing and marching in the psyop.

Here’s another psyop and cultural theme: the distortion of money and the free market.

The psyop goes this way: The making of $$ is a religious event comparable to the arrival of Jesus or the appearance of the Great Buddha. Indeed, isn’t Christmas the season measured by consumer sales?

A life justified is a life of the bottom-line cash register, a poem to make Shakespeare turn pale with envy.

It doesn’t matter what a product is. If it sells, it must be good. It must mean something profound.

Nail polish, a new plastic toy, a little robot that sings songs—they’re Walt Whitman and Michelangelo and Bach because they jumped off store shelves.

Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are geniuses because they and their companies amassed billions. It has to be so.

The team that put together Goofy Bird III, the summer blockbuster hit, are the Chaucers of our time. The box office proved it.

What product makes more money than any other? War. Therefore, Jesus wore a white leisure suit and played golf with generals and made deals for weapons systems.

“If a young man or woman today wants to express his true individuality and succeed with other like-minded individuals who have no fear of failure, the two businesses to go into are war and banking. My father told me that, and it’s stood me in good stead all these years. It’s the apotheosis of America…”

An artist named Paddy Chayefsky, in his film, Network, covered this waterfront pretty well:

“You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and inhummane, interwoven, interacting, multi-variate, multi-national dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels. It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and sub-atomic and galactic structure of things today! And you have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and You Will Atone!”

Hail to the collective, managed from the top. Ah, but as I said, Network was just a movie.


Who cares about American artists? They need monuments and grants here and there, if they’re still alive, but…taking them seriously? Who would want to do that? They’re just…INDIVIDUALS.

Who would want to keep the individual alive, especially the free, independent, and creative individual? We can learn all we need about that by listening to TED lectures!

Here is another quote from an American artist. This one is REALLY not in the politically correct mode. I mean, how dare he!:

“Tomorrow you may bring about the destruction of your world. Tomorrow you may sing in Paradise above the smoking ruins of your world-cities. But tonight I would like to think of one man, a lone individual, a man without name or country, a man whom I respect because he has absolutely nothing in common with you—MYSELF. Tonight I shall meditate upon that which I am.” — Henry Miller, Black Spring, 1936

And this! From the most celebrated American poet of all! Is this what he really wrote?

“I CELEBRATE myself, and sing myself/And what I assume you shall assume/For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you/I loaf and invite my soul/I lean and loaf at my ease observing a spear of summer grass/…Creeds and schools in abeyance…I will go to the bank by the wood and become undisguised and naked…The smoke of my own breath/ Echoes, ripples, buzz’d whispers, love-root, silk-thread, crotch and vine…The delight alone or in the rush of the streets, or along the fields and hill-sides/The feeling of health, the full-noon trill, the song of me rising from bed and meeting the sun.” — Walt Whitman, Song of Myself, I, II, VI & LII

A celebration of self, and self expanded out into limitless dimensions?

And this is is our real poet laureate?

Something must be wrong.

Yes, the individual, the self—these individual artists—far too messy, too uneven, too unpredictable, too complex to fit into a scheme of the future in which we’ll all be subsumed in a cosmic order.

No, the individual, the self, must be shaved and carved so we can all meld together in a simplified enlightenment.

Here, from the universally acclaimed author of Moby Dick, Herman Melville, another quote that sticks out from the great uniform mass of group-think:

“There is the grand truth about Nathaniel Hawthorne. He says NO! in thunder; but the Devil himself cannot make him say yes. For all men who say yes, lie; and all men who say no,—why, they are in the happy condition of judicious, unincumbered travellers in Europe; they cross the frontiers into Eternity with nothing but a carpet-bag, — that is to say, the Ego. Whereas those yes-gentry, they travel with heaps of baggage, and, damn them! they will never get through the Custom House.”

There is no doubt; these Individuals are too thorny, too different—and even different from each other. How can we build a world of unity and unified enlightenment if we let them in the door?

We must erase the memory that these people ever existed. We need to cut down space and time, leave them out, and outfit a new continuum so it will accept only the brainwashed and reduced and harmonized desires of the collective.

Yes. That’s it.

Let’s cause everyone to accept one of two things. We are either “all in this together forever,” or money is the supreme and final god of all time and space. Those are the two choices. They both flatten out the soul and prepare it for the endless gray day.

The Individual must be put into permanent exile. We can’t even say what he is. We can’t define him. We can’t hold him within borders. We can’t know what he’ll do.

Sometimes he’s up, sometimes he’s down, sometimes he’s sideways. Sometimes he embraces the whole cosmos, sometimes he’s alone in a room.

The new world can’t have him. For sake of the coming glory, he has to exit.

The Great Psyop hath spoken.


So, you see, when it comes to freedom, I’m not talking about columns and columns of people marching in one direction, most of them moving ahead together, and a few dropping out and scattering. I’m not talking about a billion androids, among whom a few thousand defect.

I’m not talking about androids or columns of marchers at all. I’m talking about Self. The individual apart from any coordinated picture, apart from any tedious idea about what a human being is.

I don’t care whether he chooses to live in a one-room apartment in New York or a commune in Georgia. I don’t care whether he votes Republican or Democrat or the Party of Golden Lucifer. I don’t care about any of those distinctions, because they all proceed from some horrendous and mutilated idea, some shrunken desiccated idea of what the Self IS in the first place.

“Well, we’re really all the same, so the choices a person has aren’t that important…”

We’re really all the same AFTER the great curtain has lowered on the individual and his psyche and his imagination and his daring. Yes, THEN we’re all the same. And then it doesn’t matter what the individual thinks or does, or whether he goes left or right or stays down the middle. THEN he begins to concoct systems and counter-systems and parochial visions he wants to impose on everyone else.

The truth is, we’re all different, astonishingly different. So different, in fact, that left to our own devices, over a long enough span of time, how each one of us would express his deepest thoughts and inventions would make the world into a completely different place.

The individual, the Self, isn’t just a little different or moderately different or quite different. The individual is a revolution all his own, a living breathing revolution.

He can become and identify with any other thing or creature in the universe—or not. He can think with seventeen brains and walk on eight legs if he wants to. He can be Self inventing more Self. He can destroy all forms and shapes of slavery—most importantly his own.

He can love and he can hate. He can experience and create emotions that have never been dreamed of. He can dance with the angels on the head of a pin or drift off past the stars.

He knows freedom is real, and he doesn’t have the slightest interest in interfering with another’s freedom.

This is what political and social movements are FOR: to establish enough freedom for the individual, any individual, so that he can then, if he wants to, become what he is, which is to say, invent his existence entirely according to his own fecund imagination. It will not be a copy of anyone else’s existence. It will not even be close.

After enough time has elapsed, it will be astonishing.

I know many people who believe they are already free and are already living life exactly the way they want to. This is preposterous. At a superficial level, yes. But beyond that, there are oceans of potential expression and invention they haven’t begun to fathom. If by “free” they mean relatively unencumbered by outside forces, but locked down tight as a drum from the inside, then yes, they are free, and good luck to them.

I’ve quoted artists in this essay because I want to impart at least some sense of how different we are from each other. This doesn’t mean we can’t bridge the gulf; of course we can. In fact, it becomes far easier when each of us is speaking with a Voice uncoupled from the “wisdom” of this joke of a society in which we currently live.

The ultimate and permanent fusion of all things is a myth and fairy tale. It’s a fairy tale bought by people who have never ventured off the reservation to discover and invent their own Voice.


Exit From the Matrix


If all this is true, then why do I write about the crimes of the medical cartel, the crimes of Monsanto, the corrosive destruction wrought by television? Why bother with any of this? Because I’m for authentic movements to end these crimes. The mafias of this world are out to gain as much control as possible…and finally and ultimately, this means a war against the freedom of every individual. It means writing the individual and his enormous untapped potential out of existence.

When the android-uniformity of all individuals is being sold as marvelous unity, that needs to be pointed out. When millions of people believe uniqueness=uniformity=unity, that’s more Orwellian than Orwell, and it needs to be pointed out.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails atwww.nomorefakenews.com

Roger Ailes: Speak Truth to Power

Roger Ailes: Speak Truth To Power

  

Breitbart News

By Stephen K. Bannon, Larry Solov, & Alexander Marlow

Fox News CEO Roger Ailes’ May 23 stirring letter to Fox employeeswill be remembered as a turning point in the battle for freedom of the press in the age of Obama.

The Ailes letter, denouncing the Obama administration’s trampling on the First Amendment, should be seen, of course, as a strong defense of Fox correspondent James Rosen. In addition, the Ailes letter–in truth, a manifesto–is a staunch vindication of Fox News and its “speak-truth-to-power” approach to journalism. Finally, the Ailes Manifesto should be seen as a clarion call for freedom–for freedom of the press, and also for the right of all Americans to think freely, liberated from the MSM thought-monopoly.  .

As Patrick Caddell has pointed out here at Breitbart News, the Obama Administration has never truly been worried about leaks, because the Administration itself has been the main source of leaks. Why? For political advantage, of course. That is, to make the Administration look good, especially in regard to the war on terror in the run-up to the 2012 election.

The Obamans wanted to maintain their exclusive “franchise” on leaks, rewarding friendly reporters, such as The New York Times’ David Sanger, with information on highly-classified programs, including the Stuxnet virus used against Iran. In fact, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, SenatorDianne Feinstein, upon reading Sanger’s book Confront and Conceal: Obama’s Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power, said, “You learn more from the book than I did as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, and that’s very disturbing to me.” In other words, US national security was a distant second, well behind the primary goal, which was the President’s re-election.

To be sure, the Obama Administration leaked for other reasons, as well. As Breitbart News’ Matthew Boyle reported, the Obama Justice Department was happy to leak documents to advance its own interests in the “Fast and Furious” scandal.

It is obvious that the Obama Administration will leak any information regardless of its sensitivity to national security or to individuals’ reputations when it is expedient for political gain. The facts are incontrovertible, over a broad range of issues, over a long period of time.

While the Obama administration has been playing this dangerous game, Roger Ailes has been clear and straightforward. The Ailes Manifesto is, indeed, fierce in its defense of freedom. As the Fox News founder–at the helm, now, for 17 years–wrote:

The administration’s attempt to intimidate Fox News and its employees will not succeed and their excuses will stand neither the test of law, the test of decency, nor the test of time. We will not allow a climate of press intimidation, unseen since the McCarthy era, to frighten any of us away from the truth.

Even amidst the greatest threat to press freedom in six decades, neither Fox, nor its friends and allies, are going to back away, or back down. The fight for freedom is a fight for all of us.

Indeed, as the Ailes Manifesto continues to reverberate through the media and political landscape, we can observe three kinds of reaction: first, strong awareness and support from the activist public; second, a surprising amount of solidarity from the other journalists and journalistic organizations; and third, a cringing U-turn by some notorious Obama administration lackeys and lapdogs.

So let’s look at each of these three categories in turn.

First, support from the activist public. Social media showed a huge outpouring of support for reporter Rosen and the Ailes letter. “Ailes’ letter give you a sense of him as a boss,” one Twitter user said. “Kind of man that inspires real loyalty out of respect.”

“Simply put, Roger Ailes, a true principled Leader,” said another. One response read, “The Roger Ailes memo might be the most badass thing I’ve ever read.”

Another reader remarked, “Roger Ailes sounds downright Churchillian.”

Second, others in the MSM have chosen to side with Fox, at least on this one issue. Urged on by press leaders–including Fox News’ Ed Henry, who said to fellow pressies, “let’s not be a bunch of lemmings”–many MSM-ers have chosen to do the right thing, even if it pains them. As Joel Pollak noted, stalwart liberal Alex Seitz-Wald of Salon.com was moved to tweet, “I understand lib cognitive dissonance on Obama admin going after Fox reporter, but only right answer is #TeamRosen.”

Fox News Opinion summed up much of this diverse media support in a May 23 compendium titled, “They All Stand with Fox News’ James Rosen.” The piece took note of supportive comments from staffers of CNN, The New YorkerThe Washington Post–even former anchor Keith Olbermann. Remarkably, the tabloid-y TMZ, not known for its political coverage, had to agree that the controversy, and the Ailes Manifesto, constituted a hot story.

On May 21, the White House Correspondents Association issued a strong statement:

Reporters should never be threatened with prosecution for the simple act of doing their jobs. The problem is that in two recent cases, one involving Fox News’ James Rosen and the other focused on the Associated Press, serious questions have been raised about whether our government has gotten far too aggressive in its monitoring of reporters’ movements, phone records, and even personal email.

Meanwhile, the support keeps coming. On Saturday, The Washington Post wrote a tough pro-Rosen editorial titled, “The freedom to ask,” in which the Post quoted the Justice Department’s own stated policy on leak investigations, which declares, “The prosecutorial power of the government should not be used in such a way that it impairs a reporter’s responsibility to cover as broadly as possible controversial public issues.” The Post then added, “The Obama administration should recommit to its spirit.”

Third, even some of Obama’s most groveling fans have had to adjust course in light of the new knowledge about his administration’s bullying methods. In fact, support for Ailes and Fox has been so broad and strong that even mortal enemies of Fox have had to come around, however grudgingly. For example, Media Matters for America (MMFA), the George Soros-funded anti-Fox smear operation run by David Brock, has been forced to do a 180 from its original pro-Obama position.

On May 14, as the news about the Justice Department investigations was breaking, MMFA slavishly published talking points in support for the Obama administration. In other words, the MMFA Obama-propaganda operation was trying to teach others how they, too, could be Obama-propagandists. Yet after a firestorm of criticism, MMFA shifted its position, albeit over ten long days.

On May 24, MMFA Senior Fellow and Andrew Breitbart bête noire Eric Boehlert, reflecting this new line, complained that “federal law enforcement seems preoccupied with snooping around, in increasingly clandestine ways, and ensnaring reporters in criminal investigations.” Well, yes; better late than never.

Boehlert continued in this manner, even allowing for the heretical thought that Fox News might not be at fault in everything:

Whether it was the Department of Justice’s wild overreach in seizing phone records of more than 20 separate telephone lines used by Associated Press editors and reporters, or the Department’s more focused, yet even more troubling, information grab of a Fox News reporter, the practice is wrong and shortsighted. It’s also un-American.

One can only imagine the drama inside MMFA before those anti-Obama Administration words were printed on its site. Which was more gut-wrenching for David Brock, criticizing the Obama Administration or defending Fox News from it?

Of course, as Pollak wrote, the pro-Ailes/pro-Fox sentiment, while welcome, is unlikely to last for long:

Now that Holder has been caught in a hacking scandal of his own–first of telephones at the Associated Press, then of Rosen and other Fox News journalists–the playing field is leveled. And even though the wider media solidarity with Fox News is doomed to be short-lived, from now on the White House will face bolder, fearless conservative media, confident in the knowledge that they are defending universal principles.

Still, Ailes and Fox have made their point, and it will be an enduring point. The impact of the strong Ailes Manifesto and the unyielding Fox stance may be felt only briefly among the MSM, but it will remembered forever in conservative, libertarian, and constitutionalist circles.

On this Memorial Day, these words of Ailes have it exactly right:

Too many Americans fought and died to protect our unique American right of press freedom. We can’t and we won’t forget that. To be an American journalist is not only a great responsibility, but also a great honor. To be a Fox journalist is a high honor, not a high crime.

And we here at Breitbart News might humbly add: it’s a high honor to be an American on the same side as Roger Ailes, James Rosen, and Fox News, in this historic fight for freedom. Together, we will win, because victory begets victory.

Related:

Benghazi: Let’s Have the Whole Truth

Benghazi media monkeysBenghazi LiarsBenghazi Hillary rageBenghazi_13Benghazi_12Benghazi_15Benghazi Stand Down 3 times

 

Four Star Admiral James Lyons: Benghazi a “Plot of Pure Deception”

Saturday, April 27, 2013 4:33
By Douglas V. Gibbs
On Thursday Night, as my Constitution Class mulled over the final clause in Article II regarding impeachment, one student said, “This President has a whole list of reasons he should be impeached.”  I agreed.  But, bringing impeachment is one thing.  The hearing before the Senate going the way of removal from office is a whole different ball of wax.
“But what about Fast and Furious, and Benghazi?”
A non-liberal president would be in big trouble over stuff like that, but not this guy, even with the mounting evidence that is still piling up.
For example, when it comes to Benghazi, it is now known that Hillary Clinton purposely lied, and the actions, or lack thereof, of the White House resulted in the deaths of Americans at the U.S. Consul in Libya.  The Obama administration even altered the talking points to purposely cover-up their involvement, and to divert attention away from the truth.
The poor handling of the Benghazi terrorist attack also led to a domino effect that led to terrorist attacks against U.S. diplomatic buildings throughout the Middle East and North Africa.  These all, to this day, remain largely uninvestigated by the federal government, unprosecuted by AG Eric Holder’s Depart of Justice, and the Obama administration refuses to bring the guilty parties to justice while many know the truth and are not coming forward.

Enter into the picture Admiral James Lyons, who has knowledge of the true story of what did happen without the lies and cover-ups, which could lead to blowing the Benghazi scandal wide open.

From Your Daily Dose of Conservatism:

 
According to a report from the Washington Times, retired 4 Star Admiral James Lyons reveals the entire plot that led to the deaths of Americans in Libya that could have been prevented, who gave the orders, and why events took place as they tragically did. Admiral James Lyons is probably the highest ranking figure ever to intervene in a federal government criminal case, and testify. Thanks to this man’s dedication to his country and the truth, we will finally know the truth and who was responsible.In his words Lyons says that the attack on Benghazi was a bungled kidnapping attempt to be perpetrated upon Ambassador Stevens. This was to appear to be a hostage exchange for a terrorist prisoner who was to be released in trade for a supposedly captured US ambassador. The trade would have been for Omar Abdel Rahman an international prisoner, known as the Blind Sheikh.

This apparent abduction by terrorists of our ambassador and then negotiated trade for the Blind Sheikh would have been the “October Surprise” that would have elevated President Obama’s flagging popularity and boosted his approval ratings for a re-election. A dramatic prisoner exchange that saved our ambassador’s life However, something went horribly wrong. A cunning and illegal bit of treachery by the Obama White House turned into something entirely different. Obama’s October surprise turned into a carnage orchestrated by the White House itself as the President, Leon Panetta, and CIA Director, David Petraeus watched via a UAV real-time feed as a 7 hour attack on the Benghazi Embassy raged. Reportedly, stand down orders were given several times to different units within striking distance.

A plot of pure deception

With what should have been only a staged kidnapping of Ambassador J. Christian Stevens, instead, Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty refused a stand down order and began doing their job of protecting the ambassador using force. Immediately the well-trained Seals began inflicting heavy casualties upon the terrorists who thought they were merely in a cake walk to abduct Ambassador Stevens without mishap. As a result of the plan going awry, a massive attack arose from the anger of the terrorists who felt they had been betrayed by President Obama. In the aftermath of the battle which saw Navy Seal Glen Doherty was killed after the embassy had been overrun along with the ambassador’s staff. Ambassador Steven’s whose body showed up 5 hours later at a Benghazi hospital supposedly overcome by smoke as the initial press reports indicated was, in fact, raped, tortured, and dragged around Benghazi in retaliation for the botched Obama White House plan.

Obama hands over Libya to Al Qaeda

Was this just a freak occurrence that belies the true nature of dealings in Libya with American diplomatic efforts, just one glitch in normal standard operating procedure? No, according to former Admiral Lyons and many others such as Glen Beck, who have all uncovered evidence that lead to much more sinister deeds being undertaken. Evidence of a working relationship between the US and its alleged terrorist enemies had already delivered Libya to the Al Qaeda terrorist organization through infiltration of the government, media, and general society prior to the rebellion against Muammar Gaddafi that toppled the dictator last year. That the US has worked with Al Qaeda awarding them security contracts for all US embassies and consulates as well as border protection has instead allowed Libya to become a haven for numerous terrorist operators who have automatic access to Libya’s territory to carry out their training. All this with the support and blessing of the Obama administration. This is not only unthinkable, but beyond excuse or rationalization. There should already be indictments for many in the state department, in the DOJ, all the way up to the oval office, yet, so far nothing has been done.

Treason plain and simple

It goes even farther than that. Evidence indicates that Ambassador Stevens was being used as an arms dealer to supply Jihadists in the region to support yet another uprising in Syria. Just prior to the murder of our ambassador, he was trying to locate guns that had been walked across Libya’s border to other countries just as the ATF had done in operation Fast and Furious on the border of Mexico. These are not the actions of inexperience or bad intelligence. They are the actions of traitorous intention. President Obama will, no doubt, be linked to these deaths and operations if Congress will only act, and do its duty in prosecuting a treasonous president who is endangering national security.

There is no where else for a Congressional investigation to turn other than naming the conspirators, determining when officials knew, and assembling the evidence that murder was committed on behalf of the White House to silence those who knew and could testify. Through out the Obama presidency over the last four years the administration has master minded operations that have caused numerous controversies and crises.

When will the GOP take action?

The Republicans have missed opportunities to discredit the President, to impeach Obama in the wake of waging war against Libya without Congressional approval, and allowed executive privilege to quash subpoenaed demands for evidence on Fast and Furious never released by AG Eric Holder. John Boehner, Speaker of the House, has refused to exercise initiative whenever the GOP could have used much-needed momentum to stem the tide against the incessant assaults against state’s rights, constitutional rights, and the traditional institutions of America. Will the recent damning evidence now uncovered over the Benghazi fiasco thanks to Admiral James Lyons be implemented to convict the President of potential high treason, or will we see yet another case of criminal acts ignored and hidden at the expense of the American people? If you bother to take interest and act as a responsible citizens contact your congressman and demand action!

– Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

 

The Reporter the White House Fears

The Sharyl Attkisson approach

Sharyl Attkisson is shown on CBS News. | CBS Photo

Producers at CBS News once nicknamed Attkisson ‘Pit Bull.’ | CBS Photo

By DYLAN BYERS | 5/24/13 12:10 PM EDT

Sharyl Attkisson has problems.

The Obama administration won’t answer the CBS News correspondent’s questions because her investigations — into Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra — often reflect negatively on it. Some colleagues at CBS News, where she has worked for two decades and earned multiple Emmy awards, dismiss her work because they perceive a political agenda. And now, she says, someone may have hacked into her computers.

Attkisson’s one piece of solace may come from finally gaining some like-minded colleagues in the media. For years, Attkisson has been one of the few mainstream reporters pursuing critical stories about the Obama administration. Today, as “scandal season” takes hold in Washington, she has seen her longstanding skepticism of the White House and the Justice Department become the conventional attitude among a formerly deferential Beltway press corps.

(Also on POLITICO: DOJ: We haven’t ‘compromised’ Sharyl Attkisson’s computers)

Attkisson is a dogged reporter, driven by a strong skepticism of government. Producers at CBS News once nicknamed her “Pit Bull,” a source said, because she gets on a story and won’t let go. But that is seen as both a strength and a weakness. Her drive can produce great journalism, but it can also cause her to push stories to the point that colleagues — especially those of a more progressive bent — suspect a political agenda.

Among conservatives who rarely find champions in the mainstream media, however, Attkisson is widely respected.

“She goes after the stories others won’t go after, and she was right to go after them,” Greta Van Susteren, the Fox News host, told POLITICO.

(Also on POLITICO: Sharyl Attkisson in talks to leave CBS)

“She is actually doing what journalists are supposed to do,” said Laura Ingraham, the conservative radio host. “That’s not easy in Washington, D.C., where we have a president with whom the majority of reporters agree with politically.”

Last year, in a rare moment of right-wing support for a mainstream reporter, the conservative watchdog group Accuracy In Media gave Attkisson an award for her “outstanding contribution to journalism.”

Earlier this week, Attkisson told POLITICO her personal and work computers had been “compromised” and were under investigation. Though she said she was “not prepared to make an allegation against a specific entity,” she said elsewhere that “there could be some relationship between these things and what’s happened to James [Rosen],” the Fox News reporter who became the subject of a Justice Department investigation after reporting on CIA intelligence about North Korea in 2009.

Dean Boyd, a Justice Department spokesperson, told POLITICO, “To our knowledge, the Justice Department has never ‘compromised’ Ms. Atkisson’s computers, or otherwise sought any information from or concerning any telephone, computer or other media device she may own or use.”

The bulk of Attkisson’s work over the past five years has focused on the failures or perceived failures of the Obama administration, which has led to an icy relationship with the White House and the Justice Department.

In February 2011, Attkisson wrote a landmark report about the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal, which earned her an Emmy award. Months later, she went on Ingraham’s radio show and said that officials from both the White House and the Justice Department had yelled and screamed at her because of her report.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/sharyl-attkisson-91871.html#ixzz2UajzaXLb