If you want to ignore the context of his accusation, go right ahead. Let's just pretend he wasn't towards the top of the CIA's most wanted list for a massive intelligence leak that came just weeks before his arrest. Let's ignore that he had never been accused of any crime, save hacking, prior. Let's pretend that sexual assault isn't the perfect charge to use if you want to publicly discredit someone. Let's pretend similar false charges weren't aimed at Dominque Strauss-Kahn at about the same time (whom the CIA also had a strong interest in publicly discrediting). Let's just pretend that it all happened in a nice little bubble.
These are hardly "grand conspiracies." They're actually quite simple. The mafia has done operations WAY more complex that any of these. Hell, the average Ocean's Eleven movie heist is way more complex. Bribing someone with a shitload of money to sleep with a guy (or bribing someone who *had* slept with him) then to claim rape is as straightforward as it comes. Putting a plant inside an organization you want to stop is a no-brainier. Shit, a child could have pulled that much off. Really doesn't take much in the way of a cover-up either. As long as none of your agents spill the beans and the press remains stupid, you don't even really need one. Just let CNN replay the arrest footage all day and wait for the fallout.
If the CIA wanted DSK gone they could have created a watertight case and made him unquestionably guilty.
Again, why bother? All they needed was the accusation, a perp walk from the prosecutor, and some press coverage. You don't need an airtight case for those, just a opportunistic maid and a cooperative district attorney.
Why would they go to all that trouble only to have their great coup be unraveled by a simple 5-item timeline?
Because the press is stupid and no one will listen to the handful of "tin-foil-hat-wearing nutters" who make the connections.
Assange is hardly my guy. He's an arrogant prick in many respects, and his judgement is often rash. But that doesn't make it okay to frame him for crimes he didn't commit.
Everyone should read Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. Perkins is a little self-aggrandizing, but it's still a great insight into how our big global/corporate/military/industrial complex actually works (especially in the poorer countries we're looking to exploit).
I love it when morons say "facts" as if it's some magical word. They say it with the same reverence that many Christians say "Bible." They say it as if historians work with a large pile of clear, black-and-white "facts," which they just rearrange in a clear and concise manner--where history is just a chronicle of clear snippets (much like an elementary school history timeline, I suppose). That's so much more pleasant that the world that historians and journalists really work in-- a much-messier world of "evidence," "connections," "reasonable conclusions," "historical context," etc., a world where to establish any MEANING they must examine the messy grey goo of complex human social behavior, beyond rote dates and snippets.
Tell me, what "facts" should I assemble for you? Would a statement from a CIA agent saying "This was a setup" suffice? Perhaps if I can get the President to make a speech saying "Yep, we did it" Would that be a "fact," or just the President's...like opinion, man?
The CIA learned a long time ago that discrediting was a WAY better tactic than anything as messy as assassination. Give them some credit for not being completely stupid. Think of it as a kindler, gentler CIA.
I don't know, do *YOU* believe that CIA hasn't done these sorts of operations (and much worse) before? In South America, the Middle East, Cuba, Asia...should I go on? Maybe we should do some reading and then come back to my crazy ideas. I'll put on my tin-foil hat and wait while you read.
If the claims against the IMF head were a CIA operation, surely the US prosecutor would've actually done his fucking job and brought charges
The goal was never a conviction. The goal was to discredit him long enough to get him booted as IMF head. Look at the timeline if you don't believe me. The prosecutors first admitted that their case was a joke literally TWO DAYS after a new pro-American IMF head was appointed.
Let me help you:
February 11, 2011: Dominque Strauss-Kahn, International Monetary Fund head, makes a speech in Washington calling for the establishment of a new global currency that would devalue the U.S. Dollar
May 14, 2011: Dominque Strauss-Kahn arrested in New York City on rape charges. Prosecutors make him take a very public "perp walk" (with press in tow), and claim an ironclad case.
May 14, 2011: Dominque Strauss-Kahn resigns as IMF chief
June 28, 2011: New pro-American Christine Lagarde appointed IMF chief, with the U.S. cheering her on.
June 30, 2011: Prosecutors meet with Strauss-Kahn attorneys and admit their "ironclad" case is a joke, later drop all charges.
All just coincidences of course, the rantings of a tin-foil hat enthusiast.
Believe what you want to. I'm sure it was just a convenient coincidence that a guy who was calling for the establishment of a new international currency that would have devalued the U.S. dollar was arrested on rape charges just weeks later, with a public "perp walk" and a DA who bragged about an ironclad case. And also just a coincidence that just *days* after he lost his IMF position to a pro-American stooge, suddenly the DA admits that he really has no case and that the alleged victim is laughably uncredible. All just happy little coincidences, in a world where the U.S. would NEVER do such a nasty thing just to advance its own economic interests.
Never said it *proved* anything. Just says that they've done something similar before. And this isn't a court of law.
Jimmy caught stealing pie from Ms. Reynold's window. Jimmy caught stealing pie from Ms. Smith's window. Pie goes missing from Ms. Wilson's window. Police baffled.
Not sure how this plays into the recent bevy of activity in the CIA's shattershot attempt to sabotage and discredit Wikileaks, but I suspect someone is getting played here. First you have Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a guy with a shady and rather thin past, come into Wikileaks and immediately start stealing documents and attempting to sabotage the operation--later participating in the discrediting campaign too by writing a book bad-mouthing Assange (and starting his own competing honeypot site to boot). Then rape allegations (the same kind that Dominique Strauss-Khan suddenly found himself facing just weeks after he began questioning the value of the U.s. dollar). Now all this recent uproar.
The CIA is really throwing everything at the wall here. Looks like some of it is sticking. Well played.
Some will laugh at me for saying all this. But, let's face it, this is hardly the first time they've used similar tactics.
Well, first of all this is Japan, where they're at least supposed to be more social than that.
You've obviously never been there. That place is crazy loner central. You ever been to a place where the wild-eyed guys walking down the street talking to themselves are wearing business suits?
...or Japanese people. Seriously, that place puts a crazy premium on space, and behaviors associated in the Western world with schizophrenic lone gunmen are considered the norm.
1) Giant Panda: big, lazy, retarded member of the Family Ursidae 2) Evidence of just how retarded they are, eating bamboo instead of more energy-laden plant life 3) No, most non-retarded animals actually WANT to fuck--and require little more cue than a nod of the head, a simple "yes," or the acceptance of their credit card.
So, let me get this straight. A panda has to eat 85 lbs. of bamboo a day just to laze around on its fat ass, only waking up occasionally to stare blankly at zoo patrons like some kind of ursine retard? These are your super-efficient power plants?!? Come on, those pathetic creatures won't even reproduce without some zookeeper to show them where to put it and help them thrust. They're the Urkels of the bear world.
So either bamboo contains almost no energy, or pandas are expending a *lot* of energy somewhere behind our backs. Personally, I think someone should be digging through Grizzly shit. At least *they* have the energy to occasionally maul some back-to-nature hippie.
Slashdot Mirror
You want something else to think about? Google "Mahmoud Abdel Salam Omar"
If you want to ignore the context of his accusation, go right ahead. Let's just pretend he wasn't towards the top of the CIA's most wanted list for a massive intelligence leak that came just weeks before his arrest. Let's ignore that he had never been accused of any crime, save hacking, prior. Let's pretend that sexual assault isn't the perfect charge to use if you want to publicly discredit someone. Let's pretend similar false charges weren't aimed at Dominque Strauss-Kahn at about the same time (whom the CIA also had a strong interest in publicly discrediting). Let's just pretend that it all happened in a nice little bubble.
These are hardly "grand conspiracies." They're actually quite simple. The mafia has done operations WAY more complex that any of these. Hell, the average Ocean's Eleven movie heist is way more complex. Bribing someone with a shitload of money to sleep with a guy (or bribing someone who *had* slept with him) then to claim rape is as straightforward as it comes. Putting a plant inside an organization you want to stop is a no-brainier. Shit, a child could have pulled that much off. Really doesn't take much in the way of a cover-up either. As long as none of your agents spill the beans and the press remains stupid, you don't even really need one. Just let CNN replay the arrest footage all day and wait for the fallout.
lots of officals have questioned the value of the dollar.
How many of them were the head of the International Monetary Fund, in a position to actually establish a real rival global currency?
If the CIA wanted DSK gone they could have created a watertight case and made him unquestionably guilty.
Again, why bother? All they needed was the accusation, a perp walk from the prosecutor, and some press coverage. You don't need an airtight case for those, just a opportunistic maid and a cooperative district attorney.
Why would they go to all that trouble only to have their great coup be unraveled by a simple 5-item timeline?
Because the press is stupid and no one will listen to the handful of "tin-foil-hat-wearing nutters" who make the connections.
Assange is hardly my guy. He's an arrogant prick in many respects, and his judgement is often rash. But that doesn't make it okay to frame him for crimes he didn't commit.
Everyone should read Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. Perkins is a little self-aggrandizing, but it's still a great insight into how our big global/corporate/military/industrial complex actually works (especially in the poorer countries we're looking to exploit).
Certainly a nice side-benefit. He was a thorn in a lot of sides.
Why arrest all of them when they only need to discredit one?
I love it when morons say "facts" as if it's some magical word. They say it with the same reverence that many Christians say "Bible." They say it as if historians work with a large pile of clear, black-and-white "facts," which they just rearrange in a clear and concise manner--where history is just a chronicle of clear snippets (much like an elementary school history timeline, I suppose). That's so much more pleasant that the world that historians and journalists really work in-- a much-messier world of "evidence," "connections," "reasonable conclusions," "historical context," etc., a world where to establish any MEANING they must examine the messy grey goo of complex human social behavior, beyond rote dates and snippets.
Tell me, what "facts" should I assemble for you? Would a statement from a CIA agent saying "This was a setup" suffice? Perhaps if I can get the President to make a speech saying "Yep, we did it" Would that be a "fact," or just the President's...like opinion, man?
The CIA learned a long time ago that discrediting was a WAY better tactic than anything as messy as assassination. Give them some credit for not being completely stupid. Think of it as a kindler, gentler CIA.
I don't know, do *YOU* believe that CIA hasn't done these sorts of operations (and much worse) before? In South America, the Middle East, Cuba, Asia...should I go on? Maybe we should do some reading and then come back to my crazy ideas. I'll put on my tin-foil hat and wait while you read.
If the claims against the IMF head were a CIA operation, surely the US prosecutor would've actually done his fucking job and brought charges
The goal was never a conviction. The goal was to discredit him long enough to get him booted as IMF head. Look at the timeline if you don't believe me. The prosecutors first admitted that their case was a joke literally TWO DAYS after a new pro-American IMF head was appointed.
Let me help you:
February 11, 2011: Dominque Strauss-Kahn, International Monetary Fund head, makes a speech in Washington calling for the establishment of a new global currency that would devalue the U.S. Dollar
May 14, 2011: Dominque Strauss-Kahn arrested in New York City on rape charges. Prosecutors make him take a very public "perp walk" (with press in tow), and claim an ironclad case.
May 14, 2011: Dominque Strauss-Kahn resigns as IMF chief
June 28, 2011: New pro-American Christine Lagarde appointed IMF chief, with the U.S. cheering her on.
June 30, 2011: Prosecutors meet with Strauss-Kahn attorneys and admit their "ironclad" case is a joke, later drop all charges.
All just coincidences of course, the rantings of a tin-foil hat enthusiast.
Believe what you want to. I'm sure it was just a convenient coincidence that a guy who was calling for the establishment of a new international currency that would have devalued the U.S. dollar was arrested on rape charges just weeks later, with a public "perp walk" and a DA who bragged about an ironclad case. And also just a coincidence that just *days* after he lost his IMF position to a pro-American stooge, suddenly the DA admits that he really has no case and that the alleged victim is laughably uncredible. All just happy little coincidences, in a world where the U.S. would NEVER do such a nasty thing just to advance its own economic interests.
No, all of those past allegations were only reported after-the-fact.
Never said it *proved* anything. Just says that they've done something similar before. And this isn't a court of law.
Jimmy caught stealing pie from Ms. Reynold's window. Jimmy caught stealing pie from Ms. Smith's window. Pie goes missing from Ms. Wilson's window. Police baffled.
Not sure how this plays into the recent bevy of activity in the CIA's shattershot attempt to sabotage and discredit Wikileaks, but I suspect someone is getting played here. First you have Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a guy with a shady and rather thin past, come into Wikileaks and immediately start stealing documents and attempting to sabotage the operation--later participating in the discrediting campaign too by writing a book bad-mouthing Assange (and starting his own competing honeypot site to boot). Then rape allegations (the same kind that Dominique Strauss-Khan suddenly found himself facing just weeks after he began questioning the value of the U.s. dollar). Now all this recent uproar.
The CIA is really throwing everything at the wall here. Looks like some of it is sticking. Well played.
Some will laugh at me for saying all this. But, let's face it, this is hardly the first time they've used similar tactics.
Well, first of all this is Japan, where they're at least supposed to be more social than that.
You've obviously never been there. That place is crazy loner central. You ever been to a place where the wild-eyed guys walking down the street talking to themselves are wearing business suits?
...or Japanese people. Seriously, that place puts a crazy premium on space, and behaviors associated in the Western world with schizophrenic lone gunmen are considered the norm.
No, I'm jealous of *Red* Pandas. *Giant* Pandas can suck my balls.
1) Giant Panda: big, lazy, retarded member of the Family Ursidae
2) Evidence of just how retarded they are, eating bamboo instead of more energy-laden plant life
3) No, most non-retarded animals actually WANT to fuck--and require little more cue than a nod of the head, a simple "yes," or the acceptance of their credit card.
Perhaps Jobs just prefers to donate anonymously, as many of us do.
And perhaps unicorns are just really good at hiding.
There's just as much evidence for that supposition as yours.
And just because I've never actually seen the Tooth Fairy doesn't mean she doesn't exist.
1) Find a an Jewish employee
2) Tell them it's for Israel
FTFY
So, let me get this straight. A panda has to eat 85 lbs. of bamboo a day just to laze around on its fat ass, only waking up occasionally to stare blankly at zoo patrons like some kind of ursine retard? These are your super-efficient power plants?!? Come on, those pathetic creatures won't even reproduce without some zookeeper to show them where to put it and help them thrust. They're the Urkels of the bear world.
So either bamboo contains almost no energy, or pandas are expending a *lot* of energy somewhere behind our backs. Personally, I think someone should be digging through Grizzly shit. At least *they* have the energy to occasionally maul some back-to-nature hippie.