Whistle blower faces 100 years for blowing the cover CIA Plantng False evidence

http://armstrongeconomics.com/author/martin/

Crazy stuff this is.

 

So what's news about this?

Obama is the Liar-in-Chief, we already knew that.

Nothing new here...

 

`
Another "Non sequitur" post.

`

 

`
It falls in line with Obama's war on Journalists. And since his party, the Democrats are silent on this issue, they condone it. The Republicans also have a major ax to grind with any journalist that speaks truth or facts.

`

 

Re
CIA Whistleblower face 100 years for Exposing Gov’t Lies
Posted on March 4, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

Oh wow, poor guy! I see how over his head deep in trouble this guy has gotten himself into.

The CIA is creating our future wars for us. Heaven help you if you get in the way of such things.

It's not right, but after years of investment into such lies, might makes right.

 

The media today is worse than I can ever recall. It was always bad, especially in relation to foreign policy but you could at least find most stuff reported even if it was on page 32 of the NTY.

There is a huge cone of silence and there are things that Journalists are not allowed to print. If they speak up there are consequences. Phil Donahue spoke his mind during the Iraq war and hasn't worked since.

Now we hear of numerous efforts under the Obama admin to silence and coerce journalists into compliance.

 

I was told it was Bushes fault?

 

And he was caught thanks to surveillance. That's what the surveillance apparatus is for - spying on us and protecting the corrupt government from the people it manipulates and controls. It has f**k-all to do with terrorism.

 

How is he a "whistle blower"? The actions of the CIA in this are not illegal. There is not law saying the CIA can't run misinformation campaigns against foreign governments.

 

Thanks for updating the link.

IMO some sort of organization needs to be started to go to bat for the whistle blowers.

About the only thing I can think of that might help them would be a safe house somewhere, though, and any contributors to it would probably end up in jail.

 

I agree, 100%.

The risk of harm from a terrorist attack to a US citizen is lower than it ever was since stats started being kept in the 70's.

The risk of harm to a US citizen from terrorism is 400 times less than the risk of harm from walking. God forbid one drive a car .. 1000s of times greater risk.

Using fear of a foreign threat to take away rights is nothing new. It was not new in Stalin's day but he wrote the textbook
"Security for the Motherland"

Hitler called his program "Fatherland security" .... Bush did the same thing but the parental titles were already taken: "Homeland Security"

Obama in response to NSA spying after the head of the NSA was caught lying to congress and of course never even punished never mind fired.

I almost fell over in my chair hearing a Harvard trained Constitutional lawyer and civil rights crusader say this.

This has to be the most disingenuous fallacious flip flop of the century.

Fallacy - You want me to give up my rights due to a threat of harm that is thousands of times less than walking ? Also, how is spying on the average US citizen going to help increase security. Go spy on the bad guys.

Also, what about the risk of harm from the Government going bad (Its not like McCarthy was centuries ago) and using this information against average citizens.

Folks forget that the whole purpose of these rights and freedoms is not to protect us against "Bin Laden". They are to protect us against the Government and the Police.

Disingenuous - Obama knows this and he also knows what Ben Franklin had to say about this issue.

Ben Franklin "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary security deserve neither liberty or security".

 

I do not know that the act has to be strictly "illegal" in order for it to be called Whistle Blowing but in general I get your point. I is certainly sensational in any case.

It is definitely against international code of conduct and it is pretty bad to be planting false evidence of nuclear weapons. This to me I almost like a form of treason against not only the nation but the world.

Nukes are a very serious issue. In fact they are the most serious issues. We want to have credibility when trying to stop proliferation of nukes.

What credibility do we have when we do stuff like this.

What credibility do we have in relation to the Syrian chemical weapons thing. Was that a false flag as well ?

It is a form of treason to turn our word into a joke ... IMO. Not that this hadn't been done already.

 

I was not surprised that 0bama supported the NSA's abuses. The guy's a total charlatan, and that's precisely why he got the nomination. He lies so good.

As for Homeland Security, it's always made me think of the Ministerium für Staatssicherheit, more commonly referred to as the Stasi, the East German DHS. Department of Homeland Security is actually pretty much an exact translation of Ministerium für Staatssicherheit in name, and it appears to be so in function as well. But then we also have other alphabet organisations like the NSA helping. Not sure what that's about, to be honest. Why have so many different spy agencies? I guess each specialises in different areas.

Wasn't long ago I came across a story about someone who was caught for trading and storing child porn. Not a national security threat, is it? But the story said nonetheless that the DHS had investigated that as well. That's the new America, a great big police state with a rotten government. Might as well call it the USSA as some have done previously, say the United Socialist State of America, state being intentionally singular.

 

The article is very misleading
Not a whistleblower
But a person who exposed a CIA operation to the new york times

http://linkis.com/M29Hk

 

And still many people are deluded enough to believe Assange would not be extradited to a dungeon in the United States should he leave the embassy building in London.

 

I hated it when Bush was taking away our liberties to keep Osama from hating us for out liberties. Bush thought that if he took away our liberties Osama would have nothing left to hate us for. But now that Obama is doing it I'm all in favor.

 

Interesting info. Of course Obama is not acting as a singular individual. It is the system any president walks into and a system the president is afraid to change.

 

I do not think the term whistleblower is that misleading and I gave some rational to this effect in an earlier post.

At the end of the day it makes little difference. It is what the CIA did that is the issue.

At the end of the day we can not trust much comes out of the Pentagon or State Department. That is the main take away.

Not that we did not already know this ... it is just yet another example.

 

Osama could not have dreamed for a better result. 14 years later and Americans are still quivering in fear and happily giving up their rights and freedoms.

Not the French though.

 

There would be a puppet show first in a kangaroo court to create the "necessary illusion" of justice. Then it would be straight to the dungeon.

 

Exactly right. Osama has kicked our arses. In terms of dollars and freedoms, it ain't even close.

 

One hand the Government is doing all it can to ramp up the "fear factor" in relation to Islamic terrorists to take away our rights and freedoms while the other hand is giving arms and support to groups like Al Qaeda and Al Nusra.

Something is really wrong with his picture.

 

There is something wrong with the picture until you figure that a lot of powerful forces in this country would sell out to al Qaeda to see Assad's head on a pike.

 

How could it not be???

And of course, Obama "didn't no nuttin bout dat".

 

Your article also calls him a whistleblower. And describes him as such.