Barry Chamish: Israel Involved In 9/11

From Veteran’s Today:

|

————–
Barry Chamish is one of the most radical, out-of-control Zionists you’ll ever meet. Chamish is so extreme right-wing pro-settler, pro-Greater-Israel, pro-Jabotinsky, pro-Zio-terrorist, he makes Netanyahu look like a peace-loving statesman.

But one thing you can say about Chamish: He’s not stupid, he has guts, and he pretty much calls it the way he sees it. At the personal level, I actually like the guy.

So when Chamish recently wrote what he intended as a hostile review of Christopher Bollyn’s Solving 9/11, but couldn’t help admitting that Bollyn was basically right, that the big-money Zionist mob did 9/11 with the help of Mossad and its American assets…well, that’s about the highest praise Bollyn could ever get.

Chamish claims it was the “Labor Zionists” that did 9/11, and faults Bollyn for failing to exonerate the likes of Netanyahu. But the evidence shows that Bollyn is right, and Chamish is wrong: Netanyahu was obviously a key player in the 9/11 conspiracy.

Bollyn cites Netanyahu’s 1979 Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism(JCIT) where the whole game-plan for the upcoming “war on terror,” i.e. the war on Israel’s enemies, was developed. Chamish fatuously writes: “In 1980, Netanyahu was selling furniture at the RIM company and not formulating plans for 9-11.” The seminal importance of Netanyahu’s JCIT in creating the “war on terror” out of whole cloth, and setting the stage for 9/11, is obvious to anyone who reads Netanyahu’s book that came out of JCIT. In that compilation, arch-Zionist Orientalist Bernard Lewis reveals his plan, supported by the pro-Israel wing of Western intelligence agencies, to create a modern version of the medieval assassins – namely, al-CIA-duh – and use it to smash the Middle East to pieces on behalf of Israel (the Oded Yinon plan). If that isn’t the game plan for 9/11, what is? (Bernard Lewis was the first person from outside the government to meet with George W. Bush in the immediate aftermath of 9/11; obviously he was there to quarterback 9/11 and its intended aftermath.)

If there are any doubts that Netanyahu is at the top of the list of 9/11 criminals, they should be dispelled by the reports informing us that Netanyahu and confessed insurance fraudster and 9/11 demolition criminal Larry Silverstein is such a close friend of Netanyahu’s that they speak on the phone every single week.

Chamish claims that Bollyn fails to see that Likud and Netanyahu are the good guys, and the Labor Zionists the bad guys, due to Bollyn’s supposedly anti-Zionist or anti-Jewish ideology. But it is actually Chamish who is letting his raving-extremist Likudnik ideology blind him to some of the simple, obvious facts of 9/11, including the involvement of his heroes Sharon and Netanyahu.”

Comment:

Chamish’s admission underscores yet again that Assange’s kiss up to Netanyahu  is a sign of where his real loyalties lie. Some have called Bollyn’s work anti-Semitic disinformation. Perhaps. I don’t know enough to say. But of the foreknowledge and complicity  in 9/11 of certain elements in the  US government and the Israeli government, there is perhaps not much doubt at this stage.

Questions From The Floor About Ron Paul

An Adam Kokesh interview at Reason magazine raises a bunch of interesting concerns in the comment section:

ZacksReasonUsername| 8.28.12 @ 6:17AM |

Ron Paul should fight for whatever he wants to fight for. I think the main concern of people is honesty. Did the Ron Paul campaign spend most of the year raising money for a Rand Paul 2016 campaign while telling the contributors that it was for a Ron Paul 2012 campaign, when as Kokesh correctly points out, those two people have radically different philosophies?

Romulus Augustus| 8.27.12 @ 6:42PM |

It’s been quite awhile since I started to feel this was about building an e-mail list for future Ron Paul Inc. endeavors and less about running a successful campaign. Nothing wrong with “if the country is worth saving, it is worth saving at a profit” but this became a bit too money grubby like a hundred conservative outfits that provide a good living for a handful of operatives.

Cenotaph| 8.27.12 @ 7:24PM |

Everyone around Paul lost two consecutive campaigns by wide margins despite tens of millions of dollars in donations. That’s not shit, that’s fact.

ZacksReasonUsername| 8.28.12 @ 6:40AM |

Adam Kokesh doesn’t display the worlds most amazing critical thinking skills when it comes to what are commonly referred to as “conspiracy theories”. He doesn’t seem to have what I would call a realistic idea of human social structures or psychological commonalities. If you look up the phrase “Messiah Complex” in an encyclpedia, there will certainly be a big ol’ picture of his mug.

Having said all that, he’s essentially correct about all of the above points he makes about the ethics of the 2012 Paul campaign and the fundraising. Jesse Benton is a troubled young man, and not in the good-intention style of Kokesh. Contrasting someone with Benton is a wonderful way to make that person look really, really good. That may be the best explanation as to why Ron Paul has kept Benton so close by his side.

Assange Case Being Misrepresented?

A Gawker piece, dated August 21, separates the facts from the myths generated by overheated blogging about Rothschild’s controlled- opposition mouthpiece Assange:

“The latest Wikileaks farce came to a head this weekend, with Julian Assange thundering from a balcony at the London Ecuadorian embassy that Obama must end the “witch hunt,” against Wikileaks. That Assange is holed up in the embassy after seeking asylum in Ecuador to avoid two-year-old Swedish rape and sexual molestation accusations, not a U.S. government investigation, proved no obstacle: His supporters are now seized by one of their periodic spasms of delusional op-ed writing, blogging and tweeting in the hopes of throwing up a screen of bullshit thick enough to hide the fact that this is a very straightforward case of a dude allegedly being a sex creep—not a shadowy conspiracy against a free speech champion.

The charge is being led this time by the filmmakers Michael Moore and Oliver Stone. They argue in a Times op-ed today that Assange’s Ecuadorian asylum bid is an important struggle for “global free speech” instead of a struggle by Julian Assange to not go to jail for rape. Moore has thankfully backed off of his most offensive argument, that what Assange is accused of is not really rape, as he claimed to the BBC back in December of 2010 after donating $20,000 to Assange’s bail fund. (In fact one of Assange’s two accusers claims Assange forcibly held her down while having sex with her; the other claims she woke to find him having sex with her without a condom.)

Moore and Stone concede that the allegations should be “thoroughly investigated”; but then argue that the attempt to extradite Assange to Sweden in order to investigate them is a secret ploy to send him to the U.S. to face trial for Wikileaks’ classified diplomatic cable release. “Taken together, the British and Swedish governments’ actions suggest to us that their real agenda is to get Mr. Assange to Sweden,” they write.

But every one of their points in support of a dark Swedish-U.S.-U.K. conspiracy is false, having been debunked in earlier posts by New Statesman writer and lawyer David Allen Green, and the British lawyer Anya Palmer. The facts show that there is nothing more to the case than Swedish prosecutors trying to get Assange to face justice.

First: Moore and Stone toss out the old chestnut that “Sweden has not formally charged Mr. Assange with any crime.” Assange hasn’t even been charged, so why are the Swedes pursuing him so aggressively? It must be because the CIA has secreted Swedish lawmakers’ families to black sites and won’t release them until they get Assange.

But the argument that Assange “hasn’t even been charged,” is based on a meaningless technicality: Assange has not been formally charged because in Swedish criminal cases nobody is charged until very late in an investigation, unlike in the U.S. and Britain where charges are filed early on. Assange high-tailed it out of Sweden before the investigation reached the point of a formal charge—which is why they want him back.

The UK Supreme Court made this point in turning down Assange’s request to appeal his extradition, per Anya Palmer:

“Although it is clear a decision has not been taken to charge him, that is because, under Swedish procedure, that decision is taken at a late stage with the trial following quickly thereafter. In England and Wales, a decision to charge is taken at a very early stage; there can be no doubt that if what Mr Assange had done had been done in England and Wales, he would have been charged and thus criminal proceedings would have been commenced.

Assange has effectively been charged, then, in the sense we think of it in the U.S and Britain.

Moore and Stone then go on to suggest that Sweden should just interview Assange in London.

Swedish authorities have traveled to other countries to conduct interrogations when needed, and the WikiLeaks founder has made clear his willingness to be questioned in London. Moreover, the Ecuadorean government made a direct offer to Sweden to allow Mr. Assange to be interviewed within Ecuador’s embassy. In both instances, Sweden refused.

But Assange isn’t wanted simply for an interview—he’s wanted for a criminal prosecution. The Swedish prosecutor told the UK Supreme Court that she plans on filing an indictment against Assange directly after the interview, unless he says anything “which [undermines] my present view.” After the likely event of charges being filed, Swedish law dictates that a trial must happen within two weeks. As Palmer writes, “It is difficult to see how this could happen if the final interview takes place in the Ecuadorian embassy in Knightsbridge.”

Moore and Stone also ask why Sweden doesn’t guarantee Assange won’t be extradited to the U.S. Even if they did this, it would be meaningless, as David Allen Green points out:

By asking for this ‘guarantee’, Assange is asking the impossible, as he probably knows. Under international law, all extradition requests have to be dealt with on their merits and in accordance with the applicable law.

Finally, Moore and Stone’s entire argument rests on the false premise that it’s easier to extradite Assange from Sweden than from Britain “because of treaty and other considerations.”

This is an easy claim to make since few people will bother to read boring treaties to see it’s true. (Even the Times’ opinion section editors, apparently.) But it wouldn’t be easier to extradite Assange from Sweden to the U.S.: it would be harder. Treaty law says the U.S. would need permission from both the UK and Sweden if Assange were to be extradited from Sweden to the U.S., as opposed to simply the British permission they’d need when he’s in England, according to David Allen Green.

And anyway, why would they need to send Assange to Sweden first, when the UK has shown it’s more than willing to send criminals to the U.S?

“In reality, the best opportunity for the United States for Assange to be extradited is whilst he is in the United Kingdom,” writes Green.

Julian Assange’s sex crimes case has nothing to do with free speech, or Wikileaks. Swedish prosecutors are not handling this case differently because it’s Julian Assange. In fact slavish supporters like Michael Moore and Oliver Stone are the ones holding Assange to a different standard, one where it’s OK to bend and break international law to aid an accused rapist’s flight from justice, as long as he embarrassed the U.S. government once.”

Always Keep Multiple Tapes

As the incidence of police violence increases, one of the best things you can do to protect yourself is to document things.

Not just in writing, but on tape.

In some states, it is illegal to tape a conversation without giving notice to the other person.

However, it would be advisable to take that with a pinch of salt. It’s always better to have tapes.

If you have tapes from beginning to end, of course, you’re bullet proof. A cheap camcorder is enough to keep you sleeping peacefully. That, and plenty of friends in high places, whom you keep regularly informed.

It doesn’t mean they might not try bullets anyway, but it does mean that any such caper will result in international headlines and footsteps right up to their doors.

I mean, not every cop can be bought off even at the highest levels.

And when that begins, see the rats jumping ship themselves and throwing each other over board.

Ron Paul’s Gold Investments

Ron Paul investments at OpenSecrets.org:

“In 2009 Paul’s net worth is approximately $5,064,000. He ranks 77th richest in the US Congress.  The three mining corporations in which Ron Paul is most heavily invested, Barrick Gold, Anglogold Ashanti Ltd
and Newmont Mining, [Lila: all bankster related companies] are incidentally among those that have reportedly done the most harm to workers and the environment of the world.  They number as perhaps the worst among the worst.

________________________________________________________

Agnico-Eagle Mines $100,001 to $250,000

Anglogold Ashanti Ltd $250,001 to $500,000
According to Forbes AngloGold Ashanti was accused in 2007 in Colombia for “murders of trade union and community leaders who opposed the company’s activities in the region”. The company disclosed itself in 2006 or in 2007 unacceptable safety performance in its platinum mines. Safety measures were taken.[10]
In January 2011, AngloGold Ashanti was named the world’s “Most Irresponsible Company” at the Public Eye Awards, hosted by the Berne Declaration and Greenpeace in Davos, Switzerland. The nominating organisation, WACAM (Wassa Association of Communities Affected by Mining), catalogued the company’s history of “gross human rights violations and environmental problems.”

Apollo Gold Corp $1,001 to $15,000

Barrick Gold $100,001 to $250,000
In April and May 2008, indigenous leaders from four countries opposing large-scale gold mining on their lands described the adverse impacts of Barrick Gold Corporation. These leaders spoke of Barrick Gold’s tactics in “suppressing dissident voices, dividing communities, and manipulating local and national politics”. They also related stories about “lack of free, prior and informed consent for local people”.

Coeur D’Alene Mines $1,001 to $15,000
El Dorado Gold $50,001 to $100,000
Goldcorp Inc $500,001 to $1,000,000
Metalline Mining $1,001 to $15,000

Newmont Mining $250,001 to $500,000
Newmont Mining  (NEM.N) halted work at its giant Yanacocha gold mine on Monday after protesters blocked an access road and torched eight pieces of earth-moving equipment, prompting the company to ask Peru’s government to intervene. The mine, partly owned by Peruvian precious metals miner Buenaventura BVN1.N, said the drastic measure to suspend work was taken to ensure the safety of its employees.The latest flare-up could test leftist President Ollanta Humala, who took office in July promising to calm conflicts between rural communities and companies. The conflicts have threatened to delay some 200 mining and oil projects nationwide.

In August 2004, the Indonesian Ministry of Environment filed a US $133.6 million civil lawsuit against Newmont, claiming the company’s Minahasa Raya mine contaminated local fish stocks, causing serious illness and death for nearby villagers. Indonesia is a G-20 nation and the fourth most populous nation in the world at 230 million people. It is comprised of over 17,000 islands”

9/11, Rudy Giuliani, and Ron Paul

Rudy Giuliani is calling Ron Paul a kook today.

Had Dr. Paul actually championed 9/11 Truth and the evidence showing insider fore-knowledge and complicity,  he could have rebutted immediately and to sensational effect by pointing out how Giuliani was actually a key enable of 9/11, which is the real reason why he is attacking any critic of the War On Terror, as this piece at HuffPo shows:

“Lawrence O’Donnell condemned Rudy Giuliani on his Tuesday show, calling the former New York mayor an “ego-driven” “fraud” and saying that his actions made 9/11 worse than it could have been.

O’Donnell was reacting to an interview Giuliani gave to the Associated Press in which he said that 9/11 was “so far beyond what we’d contemplated.”

“it certainly was beyond anything Rudy Giuliani had contemplated,” O’Donnell began. He accused Giuliani of making “the worst tactical decision in the history of the city of New York” by ordering the city’s emergency command center to be placed in the World Trade Center over the objections of police and other officials.

[Lila: Intentionally?]

O’Donnell said Giuliani had made this decision because the Twin Towers were closer to the City Hall press corps, and so would provide him with more photo opportunities. He also vehemently criticized the faulty fire department radios which failed to alert hundreds of firefighters that the towers were collapsing.

“Despite the painful truth of these details, which show Rudy Giuliani to have been an ego-driven incompetent in dealing with the threat of terrorism in New York City … most of the media will continue to portray him as one of the heroes of 9/11,” O’Donnell concluded. “Know this: there is no more fraudulent public image in our politics.”

Run, Pat, Run

Patrick Buchanan:

“The GOP used to be united on a traditionalist view of social and moral issues. Now, not only the Log Cabin Club, but libertarians and some moderate Republicans are receptive to the idea of homosexual marriage. And the ticket of Romney-Ryan accepts abortion in the case of incest or rape.

Once the principled position is yielded, where do we draw the line? At what point does constant accommodation cause True Believers to depart?”

Answer:

True believers shouldn’t look to politics to see their positions enacted.

They will have to limit their preferences to their immediate family.

The point is there’s a new religion in town, eco-feminism.  Traditional Christianity (or anything else) is the out of favor heresy.

Christians should migrate. Russia seems a good idea, given the reactions of people there to punk provocation.

Catholics will have to learn to compromise with Orthodoxy, but compared to what they compromise with here, that would be a cinch.

Of course, Buchanan’s issues are mistaken.  Gay marriage isn’t a problem. In the context, it’s a solution.

What’s a problem is treating sex as a consumer item among many, an appetite no different from eating or drinking.

Changing that would need a dismantling of corporate culture.

Something tells me no one at LRC is too keen on that.

Confidence men are despicable, not admirable

Here’s why libertarianism is not convincing to ordinary people. Dozens of libertarian sites like to quote old chestnuts like “You can’t fool an honest man,” or refer to “victimology” and blame the victim as someone who had it coming. I beg to differ. Here’s one example why conmen who try to justify fraud by blaming the victim are only proving themselves to be sociopaths:

“Violet Christensen is 90-years-old and lives alone in her home in Minnesota with a telephone. That’s about all the information the out-of-country phone scammers needed to get to work on her.

According to Christensen’s daughter Vickie Popovich, 60, her mom suffers from mild dementia. She is able to continue to live alone only because Popovich brings over meals and checks on her mom at least five times a day. Popovich quit her job several years ago to devote herself to taking care of her mother and her in-laws and by all accounts, she’s on top of things. She pays their bills, makes sure they take their medicines on time, are well-fed, their homes kept clean and orderly and that they never miss a medical appointment or an opportunity to socialize at church or with other friends.

Yet even she was surprised by the small window of opportunity that opened wide enough for her mother to come within a hair of losing everything in a phone scam. All it took was a few hours and the skill to convince an elderly woman that she was sufficiently competent to take care of updating a file herself and that she shouldn’t “burden” her daughter with such a small problem. Talk about hitting the right trigger points.

Popovich learned of the phone scam when she made her regular 4 p.m. call to her mother. Popovich was cooking dinner and called to let Christensen know that she’d be bringing over some spaghetti for her at around 5 p.m. But the daughter sensed that her mom was a little distressed and asked her what was going on.

“She said, ‘Oh, I’ve just been dealing with these people on the phone all day,’ and my heart sank,” said Popovich. Popovich immediately asked “WHAT people?”

Christensen told her that she had gotten a call from a very nice man who said Medicare needed to update her file or she would lose her benefits on Monday. When Christensen told him that her daughter “handles all that for me,” he told her how it was something she was “capable” of handling herself, that he knew she was a “very capable” woman — repeating it over and over in a trusting manner. He also said it wouldn’t be right to “burden” her overworked daughter with this, something so easy for Christensen to do by herself.

“They knew precisely what to say to her,” Popovich said. The information the caller requested included her bank account and routing numbers, her Social Security number, address and other information that would allow identity theft and a withdrawal of Christensen’s funds.

Popovich turned off the spaghetti pot and raced over to her mother’s. On a pad near the phone, she found account numbers and personal information scribbled in her mother’s handwriting. A check of the caller ID on the phone showed the same number had phoned nine times in two hours. Popovich surmises that her mother took the first call and then went to retrieve the information for the scammer, who called back to get it. She transposed numbers once or twice on the pad, which led the scammer to keep calling her back.

Popovich called the bank immediately and closed her mother’s accounts.

“I caught it in time,” she said, “I was up to midnight making calls and working online” to mitigate the damages, she said. She has since enrolled her mother in various programs that freeze your accounts at the first sign of suspicious activity and monitor your credit reports automatically. She reported the incident to the sheriff’s department, primarily so that if suspicious activity was determined later on she would have proof that confidential information had been solicited unlawfully.

But what the sheriff told her was disturbing: Don’t expect anyone to get caught here and don’t be surprised if there are more attempts to scam your mother.

The elderly are ripe targets, he said. The call her mother got was most likely random. Scammers make hundreds of calls listening for an elderly voice to answer; when one does, the scammers turn the phone over to a confidence artist to seal the deal. Popovich changed her mother’s phone to an unlisted number. “It probably won’t matter, but I felt I had to do something.

“I stood up in church and told about what happened. I was shocked but at least six other people came up and said they had had elderly friends and relatives with similar stories,” Popovich said. In a few cases, the scammers pretended they were the senior’s grandchild stranded on spring break, robbed and left with no money to get home. Can Granddad please wire some money?

The most disturbing element for Popovich? “They made my mother feel like she was doing such a good job by answering all these questions by herself. They exploited her worries about dependency and fed into her fears of not being able to manage her life any more. It’s despicable.”

Was Pegasus behind the murder of Bill Colby?

Links added on May 15, 2013

[I think I originally had links, but they seem to have vanished so I’m adding them back.]

Update:

Journalist Christopher Ruddy has also written about the death of Bill Colby while he (Colby) was employed at “Strategic Investment” a newsletter edited at the time by James Dale Davidson and William Rees-Mogg and thus affiliated to Agora Inc.

[Note: the passage “edited…..and thus” was added on May 15, 2013].

Ruddy, an investigative journalist, was originally hired by SI’s James Dale Davidson to investigate the Vince Foster murder death [corrected, May 15, 2013], which Davidson believed was linked to Bill Clinton.

[May 15, 2013 Clarification: Ruddy was funded by right-leaning financier Andrew Mellon Scaife, who later backed NewsMax, the publishing company, of which Ruddy later became the CEO. He was also backed by Joseph Farah, founder of the  conservative Western Journalism Center. But it was Davidson who funded and circulated Ruddy’s influential video of the Foster death, Unanswered: The Death of Vincent Foster.”]

In writing about Colby’s death, Ruddy implies that there is significance in Colby joining SI. He believed SI gained a high profile by carrying the DCI’s name and gave Colby’s name greater recognition. Colby had already annoyed Agency staff by his revelations about past CIA misdeeds. Ruddy seems to imply that Colby’s death had something to do with this.

What Ruddy doesn’t mention is that there is equal evidence that others in government had as much motive to silence Colby as Clinton did, for example, figures like Henry Kissinger and Alexander Haig.

Haig was on the board of News Max, of which Ruddy was at one time is [May 15 – correction] the chief editor and CEO.

Whether Colby’s arrival at SI lent it credibility and thus lent credibility to Davidson’s and Ruddy’s accusations against Clinton, who then had Colby terminated; or whether Colby was killed because of Operation Red Rock, by those who ordered that operation (Nixon, Kissinger, Haig); or whether the reason lies elsewhere,  Colby was evidently murdered, and did not commit suicide, as a son of his, Carl Colby [added, May 15, 2013], now conveniently claims.

Yet another theory is that the Agency itself assassinated Colby to prevent further disclosures about certain illegal CIA operations around the time of Watergate.

Then there is the theory that Colby was taking an interest in the bizarre pedophile ring that John De Camp has written about. (See also this summary of the Franklin investigation). I admit to having a liking for this one.

Finally, some people theorize that Colby’s killing arose from the Aldrich Ames spy case.

Colby, it is claimed,  was himself spying for the Soviets and it was the FBI that disposed of him to spare themselves the embarrassment of a trial.

That would make FBI director Louis Freeh the culprit.

Not being an expert in CIA history, I am hardly qualified to judge the probability of any of these no doubt entertaining tales.

It’s not the villainy that appalls me, really.

Villains one comes across everywhere.

It’s the complete pointlessness of it all. What exactly was accomplished by espionage besides provoking more conflict and retaliation from other countries?

Nothing that couldn’t have been learned by good analysis.

Further comment:

I should state, off the bat, that I am thoroughly unsympathetic to Bill Colby, beyond the sympathy one feels toward anyone who is assassinated.

The man supervised and put through the most horrendous operations (Gladio, Phoenix, MKUltra) all in the name of the government.

He was, at very best, a deluded fool.

Given his position at the top of the intelligence services, he was much more likely to have been fully immersed in evil actions as a high-functioning sociopath, despite his religious leanings.

So, as is usually the case in politics,  both sides (the top brass who likely hunted him down and he himself),  are equally repugnant to normal human beings.

ORIGINAL POST

In Deep Black Lies” David Guyatt describes the formation of the secretive “Pegasus” group, a cover for a deep intelligence group (Operations Sub Group) emerging out of President’s Reagan’s National Security Defense Directive No. 138 (NDSS-138) in Feb 1986.

The OSG had 3 parts: OSG 1 (anti-narcotics, headed by Ted Shackley); OSG 2 (anti-terrorism, headed by Colonel Oliver North, and, after North’s exposure in Contra-gate, by Richard Secord); OSG 3 (“alignment” – i.e.  assassinations to take care of potential problems, by Richard Secord and then Tatum).

The groups reported to the CIA, the FBI, the NSC, the DoD, MI6, Israeli intelligence, George Bush, and a British peer with expertise in Middle Eastern affairs, Lord Chalfont.

Pegasus was responsible for multiple covert operations, including the Superbills Sting, a deal between Iranian leadership, VP George Bush (a former CIA director), and Panama’s Manuel Noriega. The sting involved depositing $8 billion from the Iranians in drug-lord Pablo Escobar’s bank; then, exchanged half of that sum for twice the number of counterfeit bills from the Iranians (courtesy of a printing press and bank quality paper  gifted to the Shah years earlier).

At the end of some clever machinations, the Iranians were supplied with arms by Colonel Oliver North, the counterfeits were left safely in Escobar’s account, and Bush got a real loan on the back of the counterfeit deposit. That money he laundered through a series of banks, including the Vatican bank, to pay off various covert operations around the world.

That left President Bush finally with $3.8 billion, which went to fund the espionage, surveillance, and research apparatus of the coming New World Order.

Central to the new order would be the global drug trade, which would be in the hands of senior people in 11 different countries. In the US, the names included Bill Casey, Bill Colby, Bush, Kissinger, Haig, Secord, Gregg, North, Clinton, and others.

The most fascinating part of the story for me, however, was Tatum’s interactions with Bill Colby, the former CIA director, turned Agora Inc.  newsletter publisher, who had brought Tatum in as a deep cover agent decades earlier.

Before Tatum’s induction into the agency, Colby was CIA Saigon station chief and was organizing a highly confidential operation at the direction of the White House.

Nixon planned to withdraw from SE Asia, because of the unpopularity of the war domestically.

Afraid that the withdrawal would leave a power vacuum into which the North Vietnamese would rush (those were the days of the “domino” theory), he hoped to strengthen the resolve of local Cambodian forces under Lon Nol, against the N. Vietnamese forces, by staging a false-flag attack on military, air and civil installations in Phnom Penh, leaving behind as decoy the bodies of some North Vietnamese “Sappers.”

They would be brought in there and sacrificed by a super secret agency group, Team Red Rock.

What Red Rock members, including Tatum, were not told, was that they too were to be sacrificed. No word was to ever go back home about such a radioactive operation.

But the Red Rock team managed to spot the treachery in advance and escaped, hoping to get back to the Vietnamese border. It wasn’t to be. Their numbers thinning, they ran into the North Vietnamese and ended up tortured by Chinese and Russian interrogators.

Tatum was one of only two who survived. He was debriefed by Bill Colby, who then inducted him into the CIA, to protect him from what he claimed were powerful enemies in DC, i.e., Nixon, Kissinger and the rest of the top brass, from whom the whole criminal adventure had originated.

For the next ten years, Tatum was stationed all over the country at bases like Fort Bragg (Green Berets) and others, safe under the mentoring of Colby.

Then, when Colby retired, he called Tatum and told him to deactivate, claiming he would be in danger without his old boss to look out for him.

Tatum left and was involved in civilian life for a while, until reactivated on orders from above into the US army and from there to Special Forces aviation, through which he became involved in confidential business in the Grenada invasion.

Tatum was contacted again by Colby in 1983 and assigned a role in flying for Oliver North’s “Enterprise” – the whole-sale shipment of cocaine from Latin America (from the Colombian cartels), in return for gun-running to the Nicaraguan Contras.  The Mena airforce shipments during the Clinton era were part of this. Tatum was apparently ignorant of the actual nature of what he was shuttling back and forth. He claims he was also used by another covert group, Pegasus, at the same time.

But soon he realized the dangers and to safeguard himself started keeping records of his activities. Around the same time, he was given a list of the important figures in the global drug-trade by Barry Seal, a pilot from “Enterprise,” based in Mena airport in Arkansas. Seal later turned DEA informant and was killed, allegedly by the Colombian mafia, as retaliation for exposing it.

Before Clinton’s inauguration, Bush pardoned many of those in his circle who were likely to face prosecution imminently.

“In a very real sense, Chip Tatum’s story has now gone full circle. In March 1996, Tatum wrote to former Director of Central Intelligence, William Colby. Readers will recall that it was Colby who originally recruited Tatum into the CIA in 1971 and set him on his career as a covert intelligence operator. Since that time, Tatum developed a fondness for the super-spook, and Colby, in turn, played the role of mentor. In his letter, Tatum asked Colby to write a foreword for his book, Operation Red Rock, which he had completed just two months earlier. But there was another purpose in writing to the former DCI.

Four years earlier, when Tatum resigned his OSG command, he had volunteered to plead guilty on a felony charge in order to discredit himself. This was part of Tatum’s strategy of survival, as he was aware that one didn’t resign this particular team and remain alive for long. The fact that he had collected a body of evidence (including video and audio tapes and other related documentation) as ‘life insurance’, gave muscle to his negotiation. At that time he had not planned to reveal any of the details that he has now provided. In the event, his offer was taken up and he served a prison sentence of just over one year. That is where matters should have ended.

However, having served his sentence-thus complying with his part of the agreement-both Tatum and his wife, Nancy, were subsequently arrested and charged with another misdemeanour [sic]. Tatum got angry. His letter to Colby stated: “I have always kept my word with you. I told you that I would discredit myself. I don’t need your help to accomplish this. But to charge Nancy with a crime, and expect me to allow this, is beyond my comprehension.” He angrily continued: “I know that North and Rodríguez are the fuel for this, but haven’t you warned them that I wouldn’t sit still for this?” He then added: “I do not blame you for this; I am disappointed that you have allowed the ‘Pond Scum’ to control you!”

There then followed a warning: “The second book that I have already started will contain my movements from 1980 through today. I will not only write about the missions but about the NWO [New World Order] timetable and planned events including a chronology.” Ominously he added: “And I will name names. You must detach yourself from these people!”

Tatum then continued by outlining how he would enter evidence for his forthcoming trial and warning that if disallowed for reasons of classification, then “a Special Prosecutor will be required to investigate the information, and the videotape tells no lies.” He added: “I also had stills and an audio clip of a meeting added to the video. Out of respect for you I have kept your name out to this point, but if you don’t separate yourself from these terrorists I will have no choice but to reveal your involvement also. Either way, the group will be exposed-by the media or by the investigating committee. Either way, they’re out of gas!” Tatum closed the letter by saying: “Mr Colby-you’ve done too much for your country to be disgraced in the manner that these men will be.”

Less than two months later, the former DCI was reported missing. By Monday 6 May 1996, Colby’s body was found. It was later reported that Colby died following a “canoeing” accident on the Wicomico River, Maryland. Tatum and many others (including this writer) doubt this. Throughout his life, Colby had an all-abiding fear of water. It would have been entirely out of character for him to step voluntarily into a boat, let alone a canoe.

Despite this, Colby’s death officially remains an accident. This has come as no special surprise to Tatum, who recently stated to this writer: “I knew the OSG were bulletproof when one of our targets, a 25-year-old, was reported to have died of a heart attack. His name was Al-Jarrah.” That, however, is another story.

POSTSCRIPT

At 3 pm on Friday 4 April 1997-shortly after publication of Part 1 of this article-Chip Tatum was roused from a mid-afternoon snooze and told to report to the warden of his prison. He was informed that he was being released-less than midway through his 27-month sentence-with immediate effect, following an appellate court decision that found his conviction by Judge Adams to be illegal.”

Where are the Non Paul Libertarians?

1.  Adam Kokesh was banned from the Ron Paul Festival. That’s the REAL Ron Paul festival. Even though Paul has endorsed Kokesh.  Maybe it was the video Kokesh circulated (I posted it) speculating that Benton was under the dire influence of Trygve Olson and that Ron Paul (maybe) also approved.

Kokesh always struck me as an odd libertarian hero, or titan, or whatever they’re calling them these days. But he was popular and brought some passion to all those deadly dull hair-splittings between the faithful  interspersed between shrieks of “evil statist war-monger” emerging from the primal jungle around Auburn.

2.  EPJ posted a video of Peter Schiff reading a Benton text advising him to stay away from the P.A.U.L festival That’s the one run by Paul supporters, for Paul, although Paul didn’t endorse it.  Apparently, this is a low self-esteem fan club that doesn’t mind their hero dissing them left and right, so long as they can take darshan from a distance.

Inexplicable cult-worship among so called free-thinkers (see also Rothbardianism….opposite but equal to Randianism, file under COLLECTIVIST ANTHROPOLOGY AMONG FREE THINKING EURO-AMERICAN TRIBALS

3. Schiff asks EPJ to remove it and Wenzel refuses, claiming it’s public domain. Actually, as a pro-IP guy, he should rethink that. Schiff didn’t authorize anyone to take the picture or circulate it. It’s his image, it was a private conversation, and the photographer was boorish, even if, under current law, not acting illegally.  It would be great, if, as in more progressive countries on privacy,  you needed someone’s permission to create imagery from their body or face.  It should be. Your body and face are yours. They are not public domain just because you walked outside. But that’s how barbaric people are.

Not only that, Schiff explicitly asked for the video not to be posted. He’s also a colleague and friend. But what does Wenzel do? Go ahead and post it.

Libertarians are nice people. But don’t tell me they’re clever. They’re not. Not one has a consistent logically tight philosophy, even though they all claim to be the most rigorous minds on the planet.  It’s all emotion. Just read the comments.

All abuse and name-calling and knee-jerk reactions. Must be the testosterone.

The left is a good deal smarter. Just more evil. The campaign proved it. It was one of the most inept I’ve seen.

4. All this making Jesse Benton out as the villain is highly disingenuous. It’s true that Paul didn’t explicitly endorse Romney himself. But listen closely to his words. There is some ambiguity, at least in the videos I have seen. In any case, you don’t get to run a campaign where your staffers are always doing things that oppose your positions, without either firing them or taking part of the blame for the fall out. Or else, the obvious conclusion is that you’re just playing a deep game to keep yourself above the fray, but are quite hip to what’s going on.

5.  If this doesn’t once and for all prove the worthlessness of time and money spent on politics to you, you are hopeless. Any of those kids following the campaign could have built a small business with the energy spent on Paul.  The whole thing was a bad example.

6. I was disappointed that LRC spun all the way, instead of being honest about what happened.

It’s all very well to say you can fill a stadium. But with all the stadiums you filled, you could not accomplish one political goal. Not one. Not a single solitary goal.

If it’s that difficult, then why did you even bother? And why keep at it, with P.A.U.L.?

It sounds desperate.

Personally, I’m waiting for the Non-Paul Libertarians to open doors.

There’ll be a chance for change when that happens.  True religion is inside you. That’s what Jesus said.  True religion is shown in deeds, not dogmas.

Same goes for freedom lovers.  True freedom isn’t what libertarian cult you espouse or which rally you’re attending. It’s economic freedom. It’s good personal networks that support your actions. It’s knowledge.

I’d rather spend my time that way, than interacting with thousands of people who aren’t even on the same page about what they want or how to get it.