Anthrax and Matt DeHart

Matt DeHart has agreed to seven and a half years in prison…

Adrian Humphreys, “Matt DeHart, the hacktivist who was refused asylum in Canada, sentenced in U.S. on child porn charges,” National Post, 22 February 2016:

nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/news/world/matt-dehart-the-hacktivist-who-was-refused-asylum-in-canada-sentenced-in-u-s-on-child-porn-charges

…rather than face the prospect of 40 years for that which many government employees don’t ever even have charges brought up against them. Not even when they use work computers to do it and those in the photos are much younger.

Bryan Bender, “Pentagon lagged on pursuing porn cases,” Boston.com, 5 January 2011:

boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2011/01/05/pentagon_lagged_on_pursuing_porn_cases/

{Note: There are several more articles along these lines. May dig them up and add them later}.

This is because it’s not about that, of course. It’s about the Amerithrax terror attacks. Yes, the subsequent to 9/11 terror attacks that occurred while George W. Bush was in office but which none or few Republican candidates for President seem to be able to recall. And sometimes the memories of their allies are even worse, even when those allies couldn’t stop saying 9/11 over and over again for personal gain.

The question any rational person would ask is, “Well, Chris, if CIA is responsible for the anthrax attacks, how does that fit with the narrative that Bruce Ivins did it?”

I’m glad you asked. Because this is the kind of thing I’ve explained over and over and I just don’t ever get tired of talking about it. And I never, ever will.

BACKGROUND – FBI TERROR STING OPERATIONS

FBI pays its informants up to $100,000 for each “assignment” completed.

Trevor Aaronson, “Inside the Terror Factory,” Mother Jones, 11 January 2013:

motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/terror-factory-fbi-trevor-aaronson-book

The tactics involved range from first selecting people who are either mentally ill or challenged, and sometimes even physically unable to perform that which they are brought up on charges for. Next, they are separated from whatever form of support network they may have. Fired from their jobs, estranged from loved ones, now the informant has their complete attention and the target can more easily be incited and has lots more free time to buy parts from other FBI informants and listen to the plans that the informants have come up with. Psychologically, this is similar to how cults work. This all works best after many months of surveillance to find the target’s weak points, psychological triggers, and other details so as to make their lives so artificially hellish that blowing themselves up is preferable to listening to one more word that the informant has to say. *

But how did CIA pull off something similar with a career biologist who worked at Fort Detrick?

THE COLD WAR – FRANK OLSON

First, if you have not already done so, you may want to familiarize yourself with another Fort Detrick scientist, Frank Olson. The work there was joint US Army and CIA, mostly on biological and chemical weapons and their applications on the battle field and in covert operations.

In the early 1950s, Olson witnessed MI6 killing some UK soldiers while testing a nerve agent. He did what was expected of him and reported his misgivings to a government psychiatrist. The CIA boss of the operation, Sidney Gottlieb, called an isolated weekend meetup where Olson and others were drugged. They were told it was LSD mixed with liquor, but Olson alone may have been given something else or something in addition to that from a duplicate flask.

Olson’s emotional and psychological state deteriorated, resulting in his death by flying through the window of his hotel.

MODERN DAY TRACELESS TERROR AND BRUCE IVINS

Replace the FBI informants with a PSYOPs team, so that a target like Ivins doesn’t realize he has anyone intentionally trying to alter his behavior at all. Replace being mentally ill or challenged with being drugged, more like Olson. Replace the meetings with informants explaining the targets and methods to be used with either voice-to-skull or something like acoustic psycho-correction.

Same psychological tricks, different methods, similar results. Except of course instead of adding to FBI’s yearly quota…

Jenna McLaughlin, “FBI Won’t Explain Its Bizarre New Way of Measuring Its Success Fighting Terror, Intercept, 18 February 2016:

https://theintercept.com/2016/02/18/fbi-wont-explain-its-bizarre-new-way-of-measuring-its-success-fighting-terror/

…you add to the public’s outrage and support for wars such as the invasion of Iraq.

Pretty simple once you realize that human beings are a lot easier to hack, especially when they don’t know that they are being hacked, than we prefer to think. The drugs and surreptitious frustrations make it easier to accomplish. The tech exists and has for decades, check the citations.

* This is possibly enhanced by watching Chuck Todd and Wolf Blitzer, though I know of no studies done to confirm this as yet.

New Tab

“Targeting Motives.” Intend to add to it as I come across more stories.

Disinfo Series

WhoWhatWhy has published a series on the old forum troll/COINTELPRO document that’s been floating around the web for quite some time. I think it’s worth the read.

Milicent Cranor, “DISINFORMATION PART 1: HOW TROLLS CONTROL AN INTERNET FORUM; An Insider’s Guide to Online Disinformation,” WhoWhatWhy, 27 January 2016:

whowhatwhy.org/2016/01/27/disinformation-part-1-how-trolls-control-an-internet-forum/

Parts 2 and 3 are linked at the bottom of part 1.

Also, I’ve turned the “New COINTELPRO” post into a page at top {“COINTELPRO 2”} and rearranged the page tabs a bit.

What’s interesting about part 2 is how it seems like random people on the Internet do those very things in comment sections. It’s not like I frequent that many {though you will find a comment from me in part 3}. It’s just so strange how often it happens though.

#ThingsThatMakeYouWonderWhy.