Thursday, January 14, 2010

'Conspiracy Theories' COINTELPRO thesis by Obama Czar

Obama's Kosher Czar Cass Sunstein demands false-flag domestic terrorism to blames patriot patsies

Conspiracy Theories by Cass R. Sunstein PhD, Harvard University - Harvard Law School, January 15, 2008


Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined. “The truth is out there”:1 conspiracy theories are all around us. In August 2004, a poll by Zogby International showed that 49 percent of New York City residents, with a margin of error of 3.5 percent, believed that officials of the U.S. government “knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act.” In a Scripps-Howard Poll in 2006, with an error margin of 4 percent, some 36 percent of respondents assented to the claim that “federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center or took no action to stop them.” Among sober-minded Canadians, a September 2006 poll found that 22 percent believe that “the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001 had nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden and were actually a plot by influential Americans.”5 In a poll conducted in seven Muslim countries, 78 percent of respondents said that they do not believe the 9/11 attacks were carried out by Arabs. Consider, for example, the view that the Central Intelligence Agency was responsible for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy; that doctors deliberately manufactured the AIDS virus; that the 1996 crash of TWA flight 800 was caused by a U.S. military missile; that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud; that the Trilateral Commission is responsible for important movements of the international economy; that Martin Luther King, Jr., was killed by federal agents; that the plane crash that killed Democrat Paul Wellstone was engineered by Republican politicians; that the moon landing was staged and never actually occurred. Of course some conspiracy theories, under our definition, have turned out to be true. The Watergate hotel room used by Democratic National Committee was, in fact, bugged by Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House. In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs under Project MKULTRA, in an effort to investigate the possibility of “mind control.” Operation Northwoods, a rumored plan by the Department of Defense to simulate acts of terrorism and to blame them on Cuba, really was proposed by high-level officials.


Of course some conspiracy theories, under our definition, have turned out to be true. The Watergate hotel room used by Democratic National Committee was, in fact, bugged by Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House. In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs under Project MKULTRA, in an effort to investigate the possibility of “mind control.” Operation Northwoods, a rumored plan by the Department of Defense to simulate acts of terrorism and to blame them on Cuba, really was proposed by high-level officials.

But we have seen that in many communities and even nations, such theories are widely held. It is not plausible to suggest that all or most members of those communities are afflicted by mental illness. The most important conspiracy theories are hardly limited to those who suffer from any kind of pathology.

Those who believe that Israel was responsible for the attacks of 9/11, or that the Central Intelligence Agency killed President Kennedy, may well be responding quite rationally to the informational signals that they receive.

How many people know, directly or on the basis of personal investigation, whether Al Qaeda was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, or whether Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy on his own, or whether a tragic death in an apparent airplane accident was truly accidental?

What can government do about conspiracy theories? Among the things it can do, what should it do? We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help. Each instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of (3), (4) and (5).

We suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of those who subscribe to such theories.

Some believe that the Bush administration deliberately spread a kind of false and unwarranted conspiracy theory – that Saddam Hussein conspired with Al Qaeda to support the 9/11 attacks. Suppose for discussion’s sake that this is so.

Imagine a government facing a population in which a particular conspiracy theory is becoming widespread. We will identify two basic dilemmas that recur, and consider how government should respond.

The most direct response to a dangerous conspiracy theories is censorship. The effort to censor the theory might well be taken as evidence that the theory is true, and censorship of speech is notoriously difficult. [authors arrested and books and TV shows banned by govt in USA:,,, ]

Government can partially circumvent these problems if it enlists nongovernmental officials in the effort to rebut the theories. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts. When Popular Mechanics offered its rebuttal of 9/11 conspiracy theories, conspiracists claimed that one of the
magazine’s reporters, Ben Chertoff, was the cousin of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and was spreading disinformation at the latter’s behest. [Popular Mechanics and History Channel discussed ]

One promising tactic is cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. By this we do not mean 1960s-style infiltration with a view to surveillance and collecting information, possibly for use in future prosecutions. Rather, we mean that government efforts might succeed in weakening or even breaking up the ideological and epistemological complexes that constitute these networks and groups. Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action.

In one variant, government agents would openly proclaim, or at least make no effort to conceal, their institutional affiliations. A recent newspaper story recounts that Arabic-speaking Muslim officials from the State Department have participated in dialogues at radical Islamist chat rooms and websites in order to ventilate arguments not usually heard among the groups that cluster around those sites, with some success. In another variant, government officials would participate anonymously or even with false identities. Each approach has distinct costs and benefits; the second is riskier but potentially brings higher returns. In the former case, where government officials participate openly as such, hard-core members of the relevant networks, communities and conspiracy-minded organizations may entirely discount what the officials say, right from the beginning. The risk with tactics of anonymous participation, conversely, is that if the tactic becomes known, any true member of the relevant groups who raises doubts may be suspected of government connections. Despite these difficulties, the two forms of cognitive infiltration offer different risk-reward mixes and are both potentially useful instruments.

There is a similar tradeoff along another dimension: whether the infiltration should occur in the real world, through physical penetration of conspiracist groups by undercover agents, or instead should occur strictly in cyberspace. The latter is safer, but potentially less productive. The former will sometimes be indispensable. Infiltration of any kind poses well-known risks: perhaps agents will be asked to perform criminal acts to prove their bona fides, or (less plausibly) will themselves become persuaded by the conspiratorial views they are supposed to be undermining; perhaps agents will be unmasked and harmed by the infiltrated group.

In 2004, the U.S. government set up a broadcast network for the Middle East – Al-Hurrah, “the Free One” – that puts out news and third-party opinion. In May 2007, a House subcommittee called a hearing to investigate reports that Al-Hurrah had broadcast “terrorist” content, including “a 68-minute call to arms against Israelis by a senior figure of the terrorist group Hezbollah; [and] deferential coverage of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial conference." Legislators sharply questioned officials of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the government corporation that ultimately funds Al-Hurrah, and those officials had to promise to address the legislators’ concerns. Those problems, however, were part and parcel of a broader strategy for enhancing credibility by permitting other viewpoints and voices on the air.

A mini-scandal erupted in 2006 when U.S. newspapers revealed that the Lincoln Group, an independent contractor of “influence services,” had paid Iraqi newspapers to publish hundreds of “news stories” written by U.S. military personnel but not identified as such, most of which portrayed events in Iraq in cheery terms or rebutted circulating conspiracy theories.

A better objection to this practice may instead be tactical. By outsourcing this form of quasi-propaganda to an independent contractor whose participation would sooner or later be brought to light, the U.S. government fell between two stools, obtaining neither the credibility benefits of full transparency nor the credibility benefits of totally anonymous speech. Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA case officer, commented that “[t]he historical parallel would be the [CIA’s] efforts during the Cold War to fund magazines, newspapers and journalists who believed that the West should triumph over communism. Much of what you do ought to be covert, and, certainly, if you contract it out, it isn’t.”

In 2004, the U.S. administrator for Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, ordered troops to shut down a weekly newspaper in Baghdad that had propounded false conspiracy theories damaging to the U.S., such as a story that “an American missile, not a terrorist car bomb, had caused an explosion that killed more than 50 Iraqi police recruits.”

Some conspiracy theories create serious risks. They do not merely undermine democratic debate; in extreme cases, they create or fuel violence. If government can dispel such theories, it should do so. One problem is that its efforts might be counterproductive, because efforts to rebut conspiracy theories also legitimate them. We have suggested, however, that government can minimize this effect by rebutting more rather than fewer theories, by enlisting independent groups to supply rebuttals, and by cognitive infiltration designed to break up the crippled epistemology of conspiracyminded groups and informationally isolated social networks.

Obama Information Czar Outlined Plan For Government To Infiltrate Conspiracy Groups

In a 2008 article published in the Journal of Political Philosophy, Obama information czar Cass Sunstein outlined a plan for the government to stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine” those groups.

The aim of the program would be to “(break) up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories,” wrote Sunstein, with particular reference to 9/11 truth organizations.

Sunstein pointed out that simply having people in government refute conspiracy theories wouldn’t work because they are inherently untrustworthy, making it necessary to “Enlist nongovernmental officials in the effort to rebut the theories. It might ensure that credible independent experts offer the rebuttal, rather than government officials themselves. There is a tradeoff between credibility and control, however. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts,” he wrote.

“Put into English, what Sunstein is proposing is government infiltration of groups opposing prevailing policy,” writes Marc Estrin.

“It’s easy to destroy groups with “cognitive diversity.” You just take up meeting time with arguments to the point where people don’t come back. You make protest signs which alienate 90% of colleagues. You demand revolutionary violence from pacifist groups.”

This is what Sunstein is advocating when he writes of the need to infiltrate conspiracy groups and sow seeds of distrust amongst members in order to stifle the number of new recruits. This is classic “provocateur” style infiltration that came to the fore during the Cointelpro years, an FBI program from 1956-1971 that was focused around disrupting, marginalizing and neutralizing political dissidents.

“Sunstein argued that “government might undertake (legal) tactics for breaking up the tight cognitive clusters of extremist theories.” He suggested that “government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action,” reports Raw Story.

Sunstein has also called for making websites liable for comments posted in response to articles. His book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, was criticized by some as “a blueprint for online censorship.”

Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation, Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist

"The FBI has issued a BOLO on suspected terrorists driving a white delivery van from New York City to the Mexican border. The suspects are using Israeli passports. They are armed and dangerous."
-Knox County TN Emergency 911 Dispatch, Sept 11, 2001, 11am EST,2933,34250,00.html

"Vehicle possibly related to New York terrorist attack. White, 2000 Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration with 'Urban Moving Systems' sign on back seen at Liberty State Park, Jersey City, NJ, at the time of first impact of jetliner into World Trade Center. Three individuals with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent explosion. FBI Newark Field Office requests that, if the van is located, hold for prints and detain individuals."
-FBI BOLO ("Be On Lookout"), 11 September 2001, 3:31 p.m., according to Bergen County Police Chief John Schmidig

OPERATION NORTHWOODS - the signed confession by US Govt for perping terrorist attacks, sniper attacks, airline hijackings and bombings in USA then blame patsies

"I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks.”
—Usama bin Laden, CNN, "Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks," September 17, 2001

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming."
—Dick Cheney, "Interview of the Vice President by Tony Snow", March 29, 2006

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Dining in a sleazy diner with Sir George Magog Poppy Bush Pedophile Knight of the British Empire

Twilight of the Psychopaths by Dr Kevin Barrett PhD

"If the people knew what we had done, they would chase us down the street and lynch us."
-George HW Bush, to White House journalist Sarah McClendon, December 1992

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Pirate News Radio Show

December broadcast, 5:10 pm Friday, on WBCR 1470am in Alcoa Tennessee. Global Warming scam by Al Gore, pro se traffic ticket defense, drunk driving defense by hemodialysis, Blount County TN sheriff Berrong threatens to kill his secretary and her dog.

Pirate News Radio Show December 2009

Worldwide Live Radio Stream

Blount County Highway Named for Convicted Hit-and-Run Killer of Biker Tourist - The ultimate drunk driving defense by hemodialysis

"I'll burn your house down, set your dog on fire and there wonât be a member of your family left, do you understand me? I wonât hire it done, I will do it myself! Do you understand me?"
-Deals Gap Blount County sheriff James B. Wrong, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, Nuchols v. Berrong, No. 04-5645, July 11, 2005

Constitutional Right to Travel without a Driver License Contract - 75% of Judges Lack a License to Practice Law

Beat Your Ticket, Go to Court & Win

101 Ways to Avoid a Drunk Driving Conviction

Saturday, January 9, 2010

Skull & Bones Secret Society used human skull for ballot box, BUY IT NOW

Head for Sale, Nazi paraphenalia also available

Grisly Skull and Bones trophies to be auctioned

Grisly trophies from Yale University's mysterious Skull and Bones society, whose members include former president George W. Bush, are to go on auction in New York this month.

The human skull and two large bones are estimated to sell for between 10,000 and 20,000 dollars on January 22 at Christie's.

The auction house said the human remains were used as a ballot box by the secret society. The skull includes a specially cut lid in the top -- apparently for ballots -- and one of the bones is inscribed "THOR."

The auction lot also comes with a black book listing names of Skull and Bones members back in 1831-1877.

"The ballot box and documents offer a rare glimpse into an organization in which membership has evolved into a closely guarded secret," Christie's said.

Members, dubbed "Bonesmen," have included Bush and his father, who also served as president, Senator John Kerry, the late conservative writer William F. Buckley, Jr, and a number of major businessmen such as Averell Harriman and H.J. Heinz II.

The society, joined by leading students at the university and which is said to maintain bizarre initiation rites, was founded at Yale in 1832. Women were admitted for the first time in the 1990s.

Prospective buyers can learn more at Christies, Department Information, American Furniture & Decorative Arts.

I have been a funeral director in Wisconsin for 18 years. There is absolutely nothing about this that is legal. You can not sell human remains unless it is for the sake of science. Period. I expect the AG of NY to step in and stop this - and further more - begin a full investigation into the origin of these remains.

This makes me sick. Human remains should never be exploited in this manner. Shame on Christie's - I strongly encourage a boycott of them forever - Nevermind if they change their mind because of public pressure and opinion - they need to be boycotted until they are gone. Period. These are the same people who would be selling Elephant tusks, harp seals, and rhino horns if it were semi-acceptable.

§4200 of the PUBLIC HEALTH LAW of New York State

"1. Except in the cases in which a right to dissect it is expressly conferred by law, every body of a deceased person, within this state, shall be decently buried or incinerated within a reasonable time after death.
2. The provisions of this section shall not impair the right to carry the body of a deceased person through this state, or to remove from this state the body of a person who has died within it, for the purpose of burying the same elsewhere."

Geronimo's Descendants Sue Yale, Skull & Bones and Obama to recover stolen skull and bones

George W Bush fucks roommate and fellow cheerleader Victor "Victoria" Ashe at all-male Yale and Skull & Bones - Their dominatrix Leola McConnell is missing and presumed murdered.

Boners at Bohemian Grove


$10,000 - $20,000

Sale Information
Sale 2287
Important American Furniture, Folk Art, Silver & Chinese Export
21 - 25 January 2010
New York, Rockefeller Plaza

Lot Description
Together with a small black book listing member names inscribed Edward T. Owen. 1872. on one side and 322. on the other, along with approximately 50 photographs
The skull: approximately 7½ in. high, 17½ in. wide, 10 in. deep.

Saleroom Notice
Prospective purchasers are advised that several countries prohibit the importation of property containing materials from endangered species, including but not limited to coral, ivory and tortoiseshell. Accordingly, prospective purchasers should familiarize themselves with relevant customs regulations prior to bidding if they intend to import this lot into another country.

Pre-Lot Text

Lot Notes
Founded in 1832 at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, Skull and Bones is thought by many to be one of the oldest and most prestigious secret societies in the United States. The symbolism of the skull and cross bones is synonymous with this group as its name is derived from the symbol itself. The present lot, with hinged flap on top of the skull was said to have been used as a ballot box during society meetings or displayed in the Society's headquarters at 64 High Street in New Haven. The inscription on the right cross bone Thor could be a name which would have been assigned to a member upon induction. Accompanied by approximately 50 photographs of society members and a small black book inscribed with names (which were published until 1971), the present lot provides a rare glimpse into the society which has been linked to many influential figures and leaders at Yale University and in this country.

Department Information
American Furniture & Decorative Arts
19th Century
All other categories of objects
bone & horn

Monday, January 4, 2010

Psycho cop pulls gun on handgun licensee, court says courthouse is a 'high crime area'

Court upholds police pointing gun at lawful carrier

It's open season on gun carriers.

A case out of the First Circuit has some painful lessons for gun carriers in Georgia. A United States Circuit Court of Appeals last week upheld the constitutionality of pointing a gun at any citizen daring to carry, lawfully, a concealed weapon in public.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals is the Court just below the United States Supreme Court in the New England states. The case stems from a lawyer who sued a police officer after he was detained for lawfully carrying a concealed weapon while in possession of a license to carry concealed. According to the case opinion, the lawyer, Greg Schubert, had a pistol concealed under his suit coat, and Mr. Schubert was walking in what the court described as a "high crime area." At some point a police officer, J.B. Stern, who lived up to his last name, caught a glimpse of the attorney's pistol, and he leapt out of his patrol car "in a dynamic and explosive manner" with his gun drawn, pointing it at the attorney's face.

Officer Stern "executed a pat-frisk," and Mr. Schubert produced his license to carry a concealed weapon. He was disarmed and ordered to stand in front of the patrol car in the hot sun.

At some point, the officer locked him in the back seat of the police car and delivered a lecture.

Officer Stern "partially Mirandized Schubert, mentioned the possibility of a criminal charge, and told Schubert that he (a cop) was the only person allowed to carry a weapon on his beat."

For most people, this would be enough to conclude that they were being harassed for the exercise of a constitutional right, but the officer went further, seizing the attorney's pistol and leaving with it. Officer Stern reasoned that because he could not confirm the "facially valid" license to carry, he would not permit the attorney to carry. Officer Stern drove away with the license and the firearm, leaving the attorney unarmed, dressed in a suit, and alone in what the officer himself argued was a high crime area.

The attorney sued in federal court, but the District Court threw out his suit, ruling that Officer Stern's behavior is the proper way to treat people who lawfully carry concealed pistols. Mr. Schubert appealed, and the First Circuit upheld the District Court's ruling. The court held that the stop was lawful and that Officer Stern "was permitted to take actions to ensure his own safety."

The court further held that the officer was entitled to confirm the validity of a "facially valid" license to carry a concealed weapon. The problem for Officer Stern was that there is no way to do so in Massachusetts, where this incident occurred. As a result, the court held that Officer Stern "sensibly opted to terminate the stop and release Schubert, but retain the weapon."

Georgia is not in the First Circuit, but this case holds some harsh lessons for Georgians who exercise their right to bear arms. Recall that in the MARTA case here in Georgia, the court held that the officer was entitled to take measures to protect himself, including disarming the person carrying, and entitled to investigate further for a half hour even after Mr. Raissi produced a Georgia firearms license.

Although the officers in that case did not actually point a gun at Mr. Raissi's face, as Officer Stern did to attorney Schubert, it is a logical conclusion that the court would have upheld the constitutionality of them doing so. The vast majority of the cases MARTA cited in its briefs to the federal court included an officer pointing a gun at the person stopped. In addition, carrying a concealed weapon onto the MARTA system is a felony, and no court is going to hold that an officer violated any constitutional right by pointing a gun at an armed felon.

Furthermore, it must be recalled that Georgia, like Massachussetts and the vast majority of states, has no system to confirm the validity of a Georgia firearms license. The similarities between the MARTA federal opinion and the First Circuit opinion are startling, and the implications for Georgia are clear.

This First Circuit case is a logical extension of the MARTA case here in Georgia, and it shows what armed Georgians can expect if the General Assembly does not take action soon to correct the presumption of criminality that federal judge Thomas Thrash attached to the exercise of the right to bear arms.

Welcome to the new "right" to bear arms.


Compare to: Flip off the cops, win $50,000! ACLJews pocket 80% of settlement. You didn't think they work for free did you?

Yes ALL courthouses are "high-crime areas" because cops, prosecutors and judges perp 99% of all crimes.

The lawyer may have botched his 1983 lawsuit by laziness -- hard to tell from this report or the court order. 1983 lawsuits are won against govt by proving "defective training". Surviving a motion for summary judgement (filed before discovery is allowed) requires filing as much evidence as possible to "prove facts are in dispute". Filing a similar lawsuit in state court might succeed. No mention of police audiotape or transcript, which should have recorded the entire arrest since the cop was sitting in his patrol car. Lawyer knew better than to not have his own audio recorder at all times, for use every time he talks to a cop. No real damages, since he got his gun back and no "real" arrest -- courts allow "reasonable detention" without charges or probable cause for less than 15 minutes. But he should appeal to US Supreme Court, just for clarification, and to learn RW CLE.

Jew cop.

Cops must fail an IQ test as condition of employment.

Cops score 30% on employment tests.

to steal; filch.
to buy (narcotics).
cop out, to avoid one's responsibility, the fulfillment of a promise, etc.; renege; back out.
cop a plea.
to plead guilty or confess in return for receiving a lighter sentence.
to plead guilty to a lesser charge as a means of bargaining one's way out of standing trial for a more serious charge; plea-bargain.
-Random House Unabridged Dictionary

Head of State 2003: "The Great Culling will soon begin..."