How can one see through the PSYOPS of the Mighty Wurlitzer: The Wikileaks - Julian Assange - Sibel Edmonds - Edward Snowden - Whistleblower Effect?
Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
Tuesday, March 11, 2014 01:58 am | Last Updated March 11, 2014 09:00 pm
This short article is excerpted from: The Report on the Mighty Wurlitzer: Architecture of Modern Propaganda for Psychological Warfare ( http://tinyurl.com/MightyWurlitzer )
How can one see through the psyops of the Mighty Wurlitzer?
As daunting as it might appear to the mainstream television watcher, it is in fact rather straightforward for those unencumbered by blind faith in governments and its statecraft.
Just look for the core-lies and unquestioned axioms of empire that are typically retained in the “leaks” and reportage which, in order to sound credible, often openly expose what is mostly already known anyway or judiciously employ some variation of “Limited Hangout” wrapped in a veneer of dissent, 'freedom of the press', and often accompanied by the facade of angst and opposition from the state.
Furthermore, look for some of the lauded dissent names rushing to support the Limited Hangout – just as it was with Daniel Ellsberg for his infamous Pentagon Papers – to afford a veneer of legitimacy to the whistleblowing revelations of supposed state-secrets having caused some great harm to the state. The extravagance enacted in the mainstream media, alternately making heroes of the whistleblowers and demonizing them, is a giveaway to the circus show being enacted for plebeian consumption.
For, it matters not which side one takes, as both sides are patently false, crafted of calculated omissions and half-truths that retain core-lies, right out of the text book of the Technique of Infamy : invent two lies and keep the public busy debating which of them is true!
The role of crafty omissions in fabricating propaganda was best captured by Aldous Huxley in his Preface to Brave New World thusly:
'The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr. Churchill calls an “iron curtain” between the masses and such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable, totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals. But silence is not enough. If persecution, liquidation and the other symptoms of social friction are to be avoided, the positive sides of propaganda must be made as effective as the negative.' — Aldous Huxley, Preface (circa 1946) to Brave New World, 1931, Harper, pg. 11
To uncover omissions in a discourse is very difficult for the public who do not often have command over the domain in which the falsehoods are being perpetuated. As the psychological insight already quoted above from the Terrorism Study Group betrays, “'Public Assumptions' Shape Views of History. Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community.”
Which is why inculcating ignorance, especially political-historical ignorance pertaining to international relations, and being made trusting of authority figures and the state, are the pre-requisites for any vile propaganda to succeed! A well bred lack of skepticism to authority figures, to experts in scientific disciplines, and to dissenting chiefs playing controlled opposition, thus becomes the heart of social engineering for 'United We Stand'.
This surfeit of blind trust in authority is what is ultimately harvested by the Mighty Wurlitzer. For a skeptical public, the tunes of the Mighty Wurlitzer would fall on very deaf ears and public governance for private agendas would be well-nigh impossible in democratic nations. This is qualitatively no different than the power exercised by the religious clergy upon their faithful flock in any religion. Except that modernity has perniciously replaced them with multi-faceted secular clergies, the “experts”, each demanding obedience from its own 'United We Stand' trusting flock in all aspects of modern life.
This is also why “leaking” information from “experts” and “insiders” commands such a premium in Machiavellian democratic statecraft. When used judiciously so as not to dilute its impact, it can herd the flock in pretty much any direction that is desired.
As further empirically evidenced in the forensic analysis presented here, these so called whistleblowing of leaky buckets also succeed in accomplishing two important elements of statecraft:
- vicariously reinvigorate in the short-term public memory, the already established-by-fiat facts and core-axioms of empire;
- establish new convenient facts on the ground which are subsequently accepted as revealed gospel truths because of the already established thought-stream by the scholars of empire that when something is held in secret or is classified and subsequently declassified, or is prematurely leaked to the public, that it must contain some genuine “state secrets”, and never red herrings. Such thought-streams enable the directives of NSC 10/2 for plausible deniability (and those like it which we do not know about) to be trivially impressed upon the public mind (see Anatomy of Conspiracy Theory). These revelations of presumed “state-secrets” subsequently become the new unquestioned backdrops for both state policies and public discourses – the new “doctrinal motivations” – with copious help from the Mighty Wurlitzer's refined machinery.
This enables the successful deployment of already pre-planned policy prescriptions which craftily impel the various incantations of hegemony forward in baby-steps. Both, domestically by incrementally clamping down hard on rising discontent in the name of “national security”, and internationally by continuing to wage unpopular wars of preemption upon the 'untermenschen'. The infernal enemy has now been (re)confirmed to exist (despite popular skepticism) since even empire's own henchmen in their secret documents also affirm that belief (sic!). Speak of self-servingly suffering from a incestuously self-reinforced “crippled epistemology”!
The grandmaster of The Grand Chessboard himself, in his volt face half-truth laced testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2007, strangely confirmed the deconstruction of the sole superpower's Machiavellian statecraft being done in this report: “To argue that America is already at war in the region with a wider Islamic threat, of which Iran is the epicenter, is to promote a self-fulfilling prophecy.” (see Brzezinski's full SFRC quote below)
But earlier, the same Polish-American Catholic (see Zbigniew Brzezinski footnote) architect of inflicting America's hegemony upon the world, Zbigniew Brzezinski, in his 1996 book The Grand Chessboard, had unabashedly examined the need for such invigorations of the public mind, and the very promotion of self-fulfilling prophecies as a basic primacy tactic in order to assert American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. As the former National Security Advisor under President Carter, and think-tank advisor to all subsequent occupants of the White House without prejudice, a diabolical strategist for the one-world oligarchic agenda in cahoots with the international banker David Rockefeller who appointed him the first executive director of the Trilateral Commission, Brzezinski with his imposing resume (see Zbigniew Brzezinski) betrays a shrewd comprehension of Machiavellian statecraft's reliance on engineering consent. Here is a snippet for the absolute necessity of controlling the public mind for “imperial mobilization”:
“It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is defense spending), and the human sacrifice (casualties even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization.” (pgs. 35-36) ;
“Public opinion polls suggest that only a small minority (13 percent) of Americans favor the proposition that 'as the sole remaining superpower, the US should continue to be the preeminent world leader in solving international problems'. ... Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat. .... More generally, cultural change in America may also be uncongenial to the sustained exercise abroad of genuinely imperial power. That exercise requires a high degree of doctrinal motivation, intellectual commitment, and patriotic gratification.” (page 211 and onwards, PDF book)
The diabolical utility of planting of “'Public Assumptions' [that] Shape Views of History” and therefore of current affairs, as the “doctrinal motivation” which can create “intellectual commitment”, and is rewarded by “patriotic gratification”, in this 'War on Terror' against the vile Militant Islam's torch bearers, the Islamofascists, cannot escape the careful reader's attention. It has wonderfully enabled “America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation.”
The Terrorism Study Group in fact took up the future foretelling in 1997-1998 where Brzezinski's self-serving clairvoyance had left off in 1996 with his pithy diabolical wisdom in The Grand Chessboard: “Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization.” Phil Zelikow, the future 9/11 Commission Executive Director, led the so called study on Catastrophic Terrorism. It presaged, on October 15, 1998, a full three years before 9/11, how that instinctual aversion of America's democratic public to “imperial mobilization” would be overcome by the United States striking out in response to catastrophic terrorism on its soil:
“An act of catastrophic terrorism that killed thousands or tens of thousands of people and/or disrupted the necessities of life for hundreds of thousands, or even millions, would be a watershed event in America’s history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented for peacetime and undermine Americans’ fundamental sense of security within their own borders in a manner akin to the 1949 Soviet atomic bomb test, or perhaps even worse. Constitutional liberties would be challenged as the United States sought to protect itself from further attacks by pressing against allowable limits in surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects, and the use of deadly force. More violence would follow, either as other terrorists seek to imitate this great ‘success’ or as the United States strikes out at those considered responsible. Like Pearl Harbor, such an event would divide our past and future into a ‘before’ and ‘after.’” --- History Commons ( http://tinyurl.com/mlzfns )
The reality du jour exactly matches the doctrinal presaging done years in advance. America today is a police-state continually “pressing against allowable limits in surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects”, “the use of deadly force” is ubiquitous, and is fully engaged in a perpetual war of “imperial mobilization”, ahem, 'war on terror' against some Ali Baba, which its own former director of the CIA calls “World War IV” (see CNN report Thursday, April 3, 2003: Ex-CIA director: U.S. faces 'World War IV'). Its next target: Iran.
Predictably, with rising skepticism among the public on the utility of pursuing endless wars against illusive enemies that is making their own nation go bankrupt, more “harmful leaks” from assets like Wikileaks will occur, but understandably none which are actually substantial. Like, blowing the lid on 9/11 as an inside job, directly naming the top beneficiaries who shorted the Airline stocks raking in billions, or revealing how BBC came to report the demolition of WTC-7 a full 20 minutes before it actually transpired, never mind lending confirmation to any of the forensic detective work by independent researchers from the debris of 9/11, etceteras. And the main leaker du jour, Mr. patsy Julian Assange, like Mr. patsy Lee Harvey Oswald before him, will be sacrificed, perhaps with a new 'lone gunmen' enactment, or perhaps juridically, to lend the hoopla even more public respectability.
Mr. Edward Snowden's NSA whistleblowing story is qualitatively the same and has the same underlying template of being the Mighty Wurlitzer's asset. Just because something is stamped “secret” does not make it so. The fact that NSA is doing full spectrum surveillance of the world, never mind of the American public, since the invention of satellite communication, of which smart phones are now the ubiquitously deployed Trojan horse of data gathering and data mining, is not really a deep or closely held secret. It has been public knowledge throughout the world. It is even popularized by Hollywood movies for decades. Perhaps it is only news for the American public, I don't know. It is quite a dog and pony show “miracle” how this young man has “managed” to elude the entire intelligence apparatus, including the NSA, the CIA, the DIA, and the drones, of the sole superpower on earth which spends upwards of a trillion dollars on its defence budget annually, but cannot capture one “rogue” who outwitted that entire spy apparatus in “leaking” their most cherished “secrets”. Thus they must now spend more money and resources one imagines. Almost parallels with how the same apparatuses could not interdict Ali Baba wielding box cutter knives on 9/11, and therefore the state not only had to clamp down harder on its national security with the Patriot Acts, but also increase its defence spendings. A Manchurian Candidate or a useful idiot is irrelevant. To his own mind this new addition to the whistleblower clique may well be taking a courageous stand to defend his nation against enemies, both foreign and domestic, like his predecessor Sibel Edmonds. But he may also meet the patsy's inevitable fate someday after his usefulness has expired.
As for Ms. Sibel Edmonds, the dissent-darling of America who collects a large body of its brilliant consciences around her for her FBI whistleblowing, see The Sibel Edmonds Story Revisited - How Manufactured Dissent contributes to War Crimes. There are more whistleblowers from other Western intelligence agencies as well, none of them having gained such outlandish celebrity status or notoriety. It is redundant to dissect them all since they all are, more or less, automatically unmasked by the Mighty Wurlitzer's template demonstrated here. They all, without exception, lie by omission, tell half truth, three quarter truth, and Limited Hangout variants, to implant or reinvigorate public beliefs without revealing anything substantial that can lead to overthrowing the villainy they endeavor to speak out against. It makes for manufacturing great dissentchiefs. As the final example, see the “former” CIA's own, Philip Giraldi, now leading the so called Council for the National Interest that routinely speaks out against Israel's influence in Washington, without ever mentioning who owns the Jewish state, Dismantling the Fiction of 'Former' and 'Ex' Intelligence – Zahir Ebrahim's Response to Philip Giraldi.
It’s the exact same recipe as is used by all the other fabricated and controlled dissent assets of empire when they are not outright spinning patent lies, for spinning half-truths requires far more brilliance. One can already see the main dissent-chiefs of the West, like the venerable professor Noam Chomsky, anointed by the New York Times as “arguably the most important intellectual alive”, and the distinguished Daniel Ellsberg, excitedly supporting these Wikileaks exposés as if something ethereal was “revealed in the Sinai” (borrowing that diction from Elie Wiesel). Snowden and Edmonds too find great support among dissentchiefs. What remarkable narrative control through repeated incestuous self-reinforcement --- keeping all the core axioms and presuppositions of empire intact!
There is no detectable difference among Assange, Snowden, Edmonds, and Ellsberg on the one hand as whistleblowers of “state secrets”, and Chomsky, Hedges, Brzezinski, Bernard Lewis, Ron Paul, the Left, the Right, Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Catholics, Protestants, Baptists, Jews, Zionists, neocons --- on the core lie of empire which has principally enabled all the rest of the evil that has followed from that catastrophic day of Operation Canned Goods Redux. They publicly claim, or believe, in grand unison that America was attacked on 9/11 by “militant Islam”! The Muslim house niggers equally rise to applaud that absurd narrative of the massa. Speak of “crippled epistemology”! The raison d'être of the Mighty Wurlitzer.
It is not for nothing that James Jesus Angleton, Head of CIA Counter Intelligence 1954-1974, is quoted in the 1992 BBC-2 Documentary on Operation Gladio: “Deception is a state of mind and the mind of the State”. See: Angleton (1917 - 1987). Manufacturing Dissent with controlled opposition is an indispensable core construct of that very statecraft of deception. See: 'Manufacturing Dissent: Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social Science'.
Such disingenuousness is evidently part and parcel of full spectrum “imperial mobilization”. Without all techniques of deception underlying modern statecraft, which is itself never homogeneous and is plagued by competing narrow political self-interests no differently than Mafioso families in bloody turf competition while also agreeing to rob and plunder the public at will, just as we see in Brzezinski's SFRC testimony against his own lieutenants, nothing unpopular can be mobilized in a “democracy”.
The common man today is as averse to projects of imperial mobilizations of the elite as in the yestercentury. He must be deceived into paying for these projects, both with his toil, and with his life. Machiavelli's thin book, The Prince, which is read by most high-schoolers in Westerndom, is surely the most misread book of all times. It is evidently read as a fairytale rather than as a most pertinent political science key to the cryptogram of current affairs --- for, the vast majority of these learned masses many of whom eventually graduate from Western universities with high-falutin credentials, demonstrate at best only a passing acquaintance with that strangely popular sixteenth century Italian name. The handful who may comprehend it, mostly go to work for statecraft and thinktanks. The remaining do nothing with any of its insights into how the elite must rule by way of deception and secrecy when they do not have autocratic and dictatorial open authority over the masses like that of kings and feudal lords in centuries past. In the modern fiction of “democracy”, the elite can only govern by way of engineering the public's consent, by keeping secrets, and by adopting covert means, especially for carrying out long-term unpopular agendas. The common man's attention span is just too short to think about these agendas, and to sensibly relate them to current affairs on a canvas any larger than his own immediate time and space which is almost always bounded by his very narrow immediate self-interests.
There is, however, a very tiny minority of intelligent ones among the public not so easily fooled. Some do learn from the lessons of history and are able to relate it to the present. There is surely something to be gained by examining what transpired during the recently defunct Cold War in its “demand creation” techniques (in marketing terms), and its four decades long continuance via global fear mongering, and relating that to the present. Otherwise, what's the grand purpose of studying history, especially forensically studying it by shrewdly treating it as the narrative of a crime scene written by the Mafioso families' own scribes. The modern history scribes, often paid for by the establishment, rehearse facts and figures ex post facto from official documents without addressing the secret, and the not so secret, motivations and behind the scenes forces that give birth to these facts and realities constructed by the “history's actors” (see history's actors quote below). It's almost like the sly French police Captain Louis Renault in the film Casablanca, saying to the gendarmes: “round up the usual suspects” to cleverly deflect attention from the protagonist who has just shot and killed the Gestapo chief – because, it is not in anyone's interest to spotlight the real behind the scenes forces. Especially when they or their legatees are still in control. And also because it is not judged to be “sound academics”. The fear of being seen as “conspiratorial” encourages intellectual self-policing long before the establishment's academe and media policing can kick-in and impact well-paying careers and fame. The only useful purpose of studying history accurately, without self-deception, without contrivance, and without apologetics, was most elegantly captured by the wise playwright of the early twentieth century, George Bernard Shaw:
“We are made wise not by the recollections of our past, but by the responsibility for our future.”
Witness the following from the period of the Cold War, where synthetic terror was used in Western Europe in order to convince the increasingly skeptical public that the Communist threat was real requiring the continuous heightened state of alert and rising military expenditures at the expense of domestic spending – all revealed ex post facto by the BBC documentary in 1992 on NATO's Operation Gladio. Part-3 of the Gladio documentary has the following lovely statement quoted from the US Army's Top Secret Field Manual:
“Top Secret: There may be times when host country governments show passivity or indecision in the face of Communist subversion ... US Army Intelligence must have the means of launching special operations which will convince host country governments and public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger ... US Army Intelligence should seek to penetrate the insurgency by means of agents of special assignments, with the task of forming special action groups among the most radical elements of the insurgency.”
Replacing “Communist subversion” in the text above with “Islamofascist terror” makes what is being stated in this report obvious. See Insurgency vs. Counter-Insurgency ( http://tinyurl.com/what-is-insurgency ) in order to relate that US Army Field Manual recipe of yesteryear with the present. In the year 2042, or even as early as 2032, surely by 2052, an updated BBC documentary will confirm it all, with at best, a mere tsk, tsk, and the all knowing characteristic nod at the imperial craftsmanship of empire. A new generation of Noam Chomsky legatees will emerge with new best-selling books waiving their sublime morality at empire (see Hegelian Dialectic of Dissent below) and will get to occupy prestigious chairs in the academe as the new conscience of the world in one-world government.
What appears to be out of control Terrorism worldwide in 2014, and which is continuing to extract its pound of flesh from the sovereignty of nation-states faster than any other global crisis to date, can easily be comprehended when NATO's Operation Gladio of yesteryear is employed as the political science template. The motivations and the forces that drive global terrorism is writ large in that most empirical exposure of state sponsored terror disguised as “insurgency”. To make it believable and plausible, real insurgents are created, and existing insurgent groups, especially those with existential discontents, are infiltrated, and their destructive energies channeled in service of larger political agendas of which often the patsies themselves remain unaware of. The evidence from CIA's MK ULTRA program of yesteryear, and the empirical suicide bombings in the terrorism acts today, indicate to those who can observe rationally with even an iota of brain functioning, that the art of manufacturing the perfect Manchurian Candidate has been perfected. And so has its deployment on demand as in Operation Gladio.
No intelligence apparatus in any country, no news media, no establishmentarian politician to scholar to military man, nor any of the touted intellectuals playing dissent with the establishment's narratives, go there. Why not? Because there are always substantial tangible and intangible, as well as existential rewards to be gained by silence. It is always beneficial to continue to play the fool, the patsy, and the willing mercenary. See: Operation Gladio Yesterday and Worldwide Terrorism Today – Identifying the Enemy, and Imperial Surrogates and 'Terror Central' in Operation Gladio Redux. See The Dying Songbird to comprehend the co-option of the intellectuals and how they diabolically mislead and misdirect the public conscience from Left to Right. They shall all be ceremoniously anointed “arguably the most important truth-tellers and intellectuals” tomorrow for their brilliant ex post facto exposés of the state deceptions of today, just as they are heralded today for their dry study of yestercentury and its war crimes.
That is the real import of the craftsmanship of the Mighty Wurlitzer! To engineer a fait accompli by manufacturing consent among the gullible masses and controlling dissent among the rabble rousers when “imperial mobilization” is still on-going, leaving future scholars, historians, and the odd malcontent to laudingly study the ashes, mea culpae, confessions, documentaries, de-classified documents, and strategic rattings left behind by “history's actors”. A diabolical modus operandi of democratic statecraft which the Mighty Wurlitzer's operators even brazenly gloat about:
'“We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”' (Ron Suskind, New York Times, Oct. 17, 2004)
It is now patently obvious with the Obama Administration officially declaring Osama Bin Laden killed in an American raid on May 1, 2011, why Wikileaks had to “leak” the officialdom's belief that he was still alive in July 2010! It is all too evident that some mileage is being derived by officially burying that nemesis at sea, a thousand miles from where they proclaim they killed him in an ambush in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Conveniently, it was in Pakistan and not Afghanistan that mankind's toughest and most resourceful nemesis was found and killed. The color coded threat alerts instantly went up worldwide. Pakistan Navy presumably already suffered a bizarre revenge attack on its naval base in Karachi from Ali Baba's elusive organization still intact, and now even more formidable than ever before. And its base of operation? Of course Pakistan!
Just as George W. Bush Jr., had intimated was the new Terror Central:
“If another September 11 style attack is being planned, it probably is being plotted in Pakistan, and not Afghanistan”!
Brzezinski's unraveling of that Bushism in his SFRC testimony quoted above notwithstanding, was the 43rd President of the United States, George W. Bush Jr., just inordinately insightful to predict such matters as he was preparing to hand the presidential charge to his successor on the “change” platform? Carefully dissecting the nature of such self-serving propagandistic clairvoyance can perhaps also help the public to become shrewdly clairvoyant in their own self-defense in these often confusing matters on international relations. Especially on what's likely to come as the next global mythical terror threat in the aftermath of Osama Bin Laden. Let's briefly review how the terrorism of 9/11 was continually foretold by the masters of discourse themselves – for that will surely show the public how to treat their next bit of self-serving fortune telling.
Short URL: http://tinyurl.com/Whistleblower-Psyop
Source URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2014/03/seeing-through-psyops-of-whistleblower.html
Zahir Ebrahim, an ordinary researcher and writer on contemporary matters, grew up in Pakistan, studied EECS at UET, MIT, and Stanford, engineered for a while in high-tech Silicon Valley (http://tinyurl.com/zahir-patents), and retired early to pursue other responsible interests. His maiden 2003 book of protest, written in the aftermath of 9/11, was rejected by countless publishers and can be read on the web at http://PrisonersoftheCave.org. His prolific writings may be read at http://Humanbeingsfirst.org. His extended bio at: http://zahirebrahim.wordpress.com/bio/
Full Report First Published May 31, 2009 | Last Updated on Tuesday, March 11, 2014 28243
This Adaptation First Published Tuesday, March 11, 2014 01:58 am | Last Updated March 11, 2014 09:00 pm
How to see through the PSYOPS of the Whistleblower Effect? By Zahir Ebrahim