Barrett Brown and How Did We Get Here?

The fourth installment of The Barrett Brown Review of Arts and Letters and Jail was just released: “Enter the Kissinger.” I’m particularly fond of Brown’s articles for a number of reasons.

First, of course, he was on a portion of our public/private intelligence community that got missed when the Washington Post did it’s expose: Top Secret America. Most of what the Post revealed was the sheer size, that most of it was dedicated to NSA, and those odd little things like the sheer number of facilities throughout das Mutterland, some of which sport GPS jammers. One assumes this is so one knows when one is near one.

Brown focused on Stratfor, which as I’ve noted before, I read periodically in the 90s, believing I was reading some interesting information up until 9/11 or so when they threw up a paywall and it became obvious that their prediction that the Chinese Government was going to fall by the year 2000 did not come to pass. I would learn later that The Atlantic referred to Stratfor as ‘The Economist six weeks later and ten times as expensive.’ Among the haul pulled out of the documents from Stratfor servers by FBI informant Hector Monsegur and non-FBI-informant-doing-rest-of-10.5-years hacker Jeremy Hammond, were documents and presentations indicating that at the very least, Stratfor intended to run covert operations against people exercising their right to free speech and to address grievances against megacorporations through the court system.

More recently, NBC and Glenn Greenwald have made mention of the British intelligence apparatus GCHQ doing some similar things. The mention of honey pots, for example, runs concurrent through both sets of documents.

NBC, “Snowden Docs: British Spies Used Sex and ‘Dirty Tricks’,” Matthew Cole, Richard Esposito, Mark Schone and Glenn Greenwald, 7 February 2014:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/snowden-docs-british-spies-used-sex-dirty-tricks-n23091

Brown’s creation of Project PM, an open-source effort to document Stratfor and other such corporations like The Carlyle Group’s Booz Allen Hamilton. I mention in Wicked Game particularly noting the woman Linda de Lotto who lived in my building and therefore rather near to Jeremy Scahill. It seems very unlikely that BAH was unaware of that.

Then there’s Barrett’s and my shared interest in the dark past of America. He mentions CHAOS, for example, in the latest piece. For me, much of my interest has been a matter of survival. As I also noted in Wicked Game, there was the case for invading Iraq, Plamegate, and the case of Sibel Edmonds who showed that several US officials conspired to sell US nuclear secrets and faced no prosecution for it. That information very likely wound up in the hands of international arms dealers like A.Q. Khan. Some see that as an unfortunate, unforeseen side-effect of treason-for-cash, whereas I see it for what it is: a future excuse to invade some country because they’ve gotten their hands on how to make nukes.

This is the real face of Washington exposed. Sanctions and embargoes are simply ways to charge more money if you’ve got the contacts, and people in the Deep State and the Military-Industrial-Complex, that is spooks and high-ranking military officers and all the politicians, bureaucrats, Wall Street CEOs, subcontractors, and multinational banks who are tied into it have those. In making the rest of us less safe, they make themselves a fortune, or several.

Next, Brown is fond of pointing out funny grammar and especially long sentences. I’m {apparently} fond of using funny/bad grammar and especially long sentences. It never fails to make me laugh.

In this particular piece by Brown, he discusses some portions of Henry Kissinger’s book on his years in the Nixon administration. I’ll let you read what one tweeter called “the best Henry Cabot Lodge joke you’ll read all week” for yourself and focus instead on Kissinger’s love-that-dare-not-speak-the-crime regarding former DCI Richard Helms. On top of what Brown says about Helms in the piece, Helms was the one who ordered the destruction of the documents related to MKULTRA and related programs. He knew without a doubt that if the truth came out that it would spell the end of the CIA. It would go the way of those several precursors to DEA–at least one of which was closed for reasons of rampant corruption and investigated with the help of the CIA. This no doubt was as much learning the ropes of the international drug business as much as helping out a fellow agency. We can see the results today, I’ve mentioned Afghanistan and Honduras repeatedly in recent weeks as related to this.

But MKULTRA especially was troubling. See again the testimony and statements of the women in the post below. Can you imagine what would have happened if that had gotten out just after Vietnam, Watergate, etc.? We might actually have a government for the people, of the people, by the people today. I know, I’m so footloose and fancy-free in my thinking.

This is also interesting, because I’ve been updating some of the MKULTRA-related pages at top.

In fact, I think I’ve had something of a small breakthrough. Subproject 119, which John Marks labels “Telecontrol-Texas Christian [University],” actually has three pages of draft memo much like the 5-5-55 one you find up top. This one makes it clear that CIA was indeed looking for a method of controlling human behavior electronically and remotely, beginning in 1960. As noted above in the second acoustic psycho-correction article at top, the FBI consulted with the Russians on their version in 1993, notes that CIA was on to the Russians’ version as early as 1983. And it must be capable of doing what it does–planting ideas in a person’s head without them necessarily knowing it even occurred–from a distance. They wanted to use it to talk David Koresh down. They were at a standoff. The only way that scenario could work was if they could do so from outside the compound.

image

slavery.org.uk/mkultra119.pdf

Also as noted above, that which is generically known as voice-to-skull, pretty much any method of getting what the brain interprets as sound into the head without actually using sound everyone can hear, was once defined by the US Army online. The definition included that it could do so subliminally.

They later removed that definition. DoD also issued memos altering how the Inspector General operates for civil liberties investigations and defined what constitutes damage from non-lethal weapons, voice-to-skull having been defined as a NLW. Both memos were issued on the same day.

The 1977 Senate hearings focused largely on the use of drugs and make no mention of subproject 119 at all that I can find. Is that a limited hangout? The drug research was an important part of the research though much of what they set out to do with it failed. For example, they did not so far as we know discover a truth serum, but they did discover how to drug people silly and make them seem insane. CIA also, along with the Department of Defense, had already done considerable research on hypnosis. Put that with voice-to-skull and acoustic psycho-correction, and you have a method of making a target at least generally do something that they may not normally do.

Like make an angry YouTube video naming the FBI agent who just ransacked your mother’s home resulting in facing up to 70 years in prison.

Now, believe me, I know all the reasons people don’t like to talk about things like this. First, there’s been such a good job of painting anyone who does as a “conspiracy nut” at best; paranoid schizophrenic at worst.

Then there’s the fact that, unless there were a large, hard-hitting expose on this that included the FBI as having used it on US citizens on US soil, and maybe even then it would have to include evidence that Brown was such a target, it will do likely no good whatsoever in Brown’s legal defense. Believe me, I understand this.

Further, it only further serves to harm my own credibility in general, assuming I have any left to begin with. But let me reiterate: this is not a guess for me. I have witnessed this stuff in action many times, both on myself and those around me. Combined with other more mundane actions–like harassing someone’s mother, a likely easily discoverable “weak” point for even the most basic psychological profile, and you can get someone in the ballpark of the behavior you are trying to create. My guess is, they wanted Brown to become physically violent as an excuse to shoot him. As you can see, he showed amazing restraint if it is as I’m suggesting.

You’ll find the standard psych profile discussion in Marks’ book as well as some of the few known successes with hypnosis that CIA carried out.

I leave you with a quote. It seems they are just absolutely convinced that they only have the option of driving me to suicide at this point. I’m attempting to show them for the kinds of people they are, and simultaneously just how broken the system is when you have no rights at all, no legal recourse, when the crooks are running it all.

Also from Marks’ book:

It was planned destructiveness. First, you’d check to see if you could destroy a man’s marriage. If you could, then that would be enough to put a lot of stress on the individual, to break him down. Then you might start a minor rumor campaign against him. Harass him constantly. Bump his car in traffic. A lot of it is ridiculous, but it may have a cumulative effect.

Search for the Manchurian Candidate, John Marks, ch. 10:

druglibrary.org/schaffer/lsd/marks10.htm

Those of you already in Texas and those on your way, wish I were there with you. Alas, the money situation didn’t work out as I had hoped. What I get for saying I was going so soon before, I suppose.

Please give him my best, and my best to all of you. One day…

DMagazine/Frontburner, “Enter the Kissinger,” Barrett Brown, 11 March 2014:

frontburner.dmagazine.com/2014/03/11/the-barrett-brown-review-of-arts-and-letters-and-jail-enter-the-kissinger/

Advertisements

1 Comment

  1. […] Barrett Brown and How Did We Get Here […]


Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s