PDA

View Full Version : BRZEZINSKI says Wikileaks used as psyops



Soflasnapper
02-09-2011, 09:33 AM
Who is really leaking to Wikileaks? (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2010/11/zbigniew-brzezinski-who-is-really.html)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> JUDY WOODRUFF: How easy would it be to seed this to make sure that it was slanted a certain way?

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: Seeding -- seeding it is very easy.

I have no doubt that WikiLeaks is getting a lot of the stuff from sort of relatively unimportant sources, like the one that perhaps is identified on the air. But it may be getting stuff at the same time from interested intelligence parties who want to manipulate the process and achieve certain very specific objectives.

It should be noted that while ZB suspects foreign elements behind some of the leaks, it could very well be internal U.S. elements unhappy with the direction the President is taking things. Wikileaks may have both domestic and foreign sources. There could very well be more than one playing this game. </div></div>

It seems just this kind of manipulation ZB suspects is occurring is proven by the screaming headline: US betrays Great Britain, from the UK's Telegraph newspaper's reporting. (See LWW's post for a wholly credulous take, swallowing it hook, line and sinker. Regime betrays another ally (http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=335608#Post335608) )

Apparently, the US has been providing the then-Soviets, since, turned into just the Russians, with exactly this same info on our nuclear warheads transferred to third parties, SINCE THE ORIGINAL 1991 TREATY.

And look how cleverly they word-smithed this frameup-job claim. They didn't even really say it. They merely put two unrelated things together, as if they were related, and as if the first thing mentioned was the same as the second unrelated thing.

All they need for this to work is the uncritical leap of faith of gullible readers (basically, all of us, unless you really parse out the language to realize it isn't saying what is implied at all).

LWW
02-09-2011, 02:41 PM
Did the Orbegons seed this story?

LWW

Soflasnapper
02-09-2011, 05:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Did the Orbegons seed this story?

LWW </div></div>

Yes. In fact, ZB himself is one of them, and there never was a year 1991 nor any nuclear treaty that year. That's all a contrivance of theirs.

What, you didn't know that?

LWW
02-10-2011, 03:11 AM
Well, I haven't been a subscriber to "RUMORMILLNEWS.COM" like you and Snoopy ... so I've been out of the loop.

Were they also in conspiracy with B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!! to knock down the towers ... or was that done with an Obregon weapon?

LWW

Soflasnapper
02-10-2011, 01:40 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I haven't been a subscriber to "RUMORMILLNEWS.COM" like you and Snoopy ... so I've been out of the loop.

Were they also in conspiracy with B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!! to knock down the towers ... or was that done with an Obregon weapon?

LWW </div></div>

I am not surprised to find you can't read these clues better.

Clearly, 'Obregon' is code for Oberlin College in Ohio, where these creatures have made their stronghold after escaping from Wright-Patterson Air Base.

Please try to keep up!

LWW
02-10-2011, 05:00 PM
Your "LOGIC" is difficult to keep up with, I'll give you that.

LWW

Qtec
02-10-2011, 10:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I haven't been a subscriber to "RUMORMILLNEWS.COM" <u>like you and Snoopy</u> ... so I've been out of the loop.

Were they also in conspiracy with B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!! to knock down the towers ... or was that done with an Obregon weapon?

LWW </div></div>

Am I a subscriber Dorothy?

Prove it or just confess <span style='font-size: 17pt'>you are lying, you just made it up</span>.

Q

LWW
02-11-2011, 03:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I haven't been a subscriber to "RUMORMILLNEWS.COM" <u>like you and Snoopy</u> ... so I've been out of the loop.

Were they also in conspiracy with B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!! to knock down the towers ... or was that done with an Obregon weapon?

LWW </div></div>

Am I a subscriber Dorothy?

Prove it or just confess <span style='font-size: 17pt'>you are lying, you just made it up</span>.

Q



</div></div>

What am I making up?

My claim is that the both of you licked the spoon clean when RMN ran the insanity about the October Surprise.

That you both blindly accewpted a story which defies the laws of physics.

That you both willingly accepted the word of a convicted felon.

Shall we go back to that thread ... or is your doublethink now so strong that you can believe all those things to be true while also believing that you never believed them?

Once again ... take leftists, especially troofers, and just keep them talking.

LWW

Qtec
02-11-2011, 04:54 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What am I making up?

My claim is that the both of you licked the spoon clean when RMN ran the insanity about the October Surprise. </div></div>

I had never heard of RM News before S posted a link to it. You claim a lot of things but if you are right then a whole lot of people are lying.

Some other evidence. Gary Sick's testimony...watch it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruf5CynbPJo)

Q

LWW
02-11-2011, 05:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What am I making up?

My claim is that the both of you licked the spoon clean when RMN ran the insanity about the October Surprise. </div></div>

I had never heard of RM News before S posted a link to it. You claim a lot of things but if you are right then a whole lot of people are lying.

Some other evidence. Gary Sick's testimony...watch it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruf5CynbPJo)

Q </div></div>

1 - Thanks for admitting you embraced this nonsense solely because it was the lie you wanted to hear.

2 - I am right.

3 - A lot of people are lying.

4 - Many people will claim anything in an attempt to get a plea bargain.

5 - Many people will say anything for money.

6 - You have been hoist by thine own petard yet again.

Proceed.

LWW

LWW
02-11-2011, 05:07 AM
That's precious.

Now your "PROOF" is a moonbat video on youtube quoting a Carter official about unnamed sources that he can't n or produce.


WOW! Just wow.

LWW

Qtec
02-11-2011, 05:13 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What am I making up?

My claim is that the both of you licked the spoon clean when RMN ran the insanity about the October Surprise. </div></div>

I had never heard of RM News before S posted a link to it. You claim a lot of things but if you are right then a whole lot of people are lying.

Some other evidence. Gary Sick's testimony...watch it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruf5CynbPJo)

Q </div></div>

1 - Thanks for admitting you embraced this nonsense solely because it was the lie you wanted to hear.<span style="color: #990000"> I admitted nothing.</span>

2 - I am right.<span style="color: #990000"> No, I am right.</span>

3 - A lot of people are lying. <span style="color: #990000">Take a look in the mirror.</span>

4 - Many people will claim anything in an attempt to get a plea bargain. <span style="color: #990000"> So?</span>

5 - Many people will say anything for money. <span style="color: #990000">..and?</span>

6 - You have been hoist by thine own petard yet again.

Proceed.

LWW </div></div>

Your opinion is worthless and lately that's all you have. You seem to think your delusions based on nothing hold some weight. They don't.

Q.....LWW.. a fly-by, one liner poster..

Q

Stretch
02-11-2011, 05:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What am I making up?

My claim is that the both of you licked the spoon clean when RMN ran the insanity about the October Surprise. </div></div>

I had never heard of RM News before S posted a link to it. You claim a lot of things but if you are right then a whole lot of people are lying.

Some other evidence. Gary Sick's testimony...watch it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruf5CynbPJo)

Q </div></div>

1 - Thanks for admitting you embraced this nonsense solely because it was the lie you wanted to hear.<span style="color: #990000"> I admitted nothing.</span>

2 - I am right.<span style="color: #990000"> No, I am right.</span>

3 - A lot of people are lying. <span style="color: #990000">Take a look in the mirror.</span>

4 - Many people will claim anything in an attempt to get a plea bargain. <span style="color: #990000"> So?</span>

5 - Many people will say anything for money. <span style="color: #990000">..and?</span>

6 - You have been hoist by thine own petard yet again.

Proceed.

LWW </div></div>

Your opinion is worthless and lately that's all you have. You seem to think your delusions based on nothing hold some weight. They don't.

Q.....LWW.. a fly-by, one liner poster..

Q

</div></div>

Very excellent post. St.

LWW
02-11-2011, 03:17 PM
I see these two vacation with Mubarak ... swimming in denial.

LWW

Soflasnapper
02-11-2011, 04:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I haven't been a subscriber to "RUMORMILLNEWS.COM" <u>like you and Snoopy</u> ... so I've been out of the loop.

Were they also in conspiracy with B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!! to knock down the towers ... or was that done with an Obregon weapon?

LWW </div></div>

Am I a subscriber Dorothy?

Prove it or just confess <span style='font-size: 17pt'>you are lying, you just made it up</span>.

Q



</div></div>

What am I making up?

My claim is that the both of you licked the spoon clean when RMN ran the insanity about the October Surprise.

That you both blindly accewpted a story which defies the laws of physics.

That you both willingly accepted the word of a convicted felon.

Shall we go back to that thread ... or is your doublethink now so strong that you can believe all those things to be true while also believing that you never believed them?

Once again ... take leftists, especially troofers, and just keep them talking.

LWW </div></div>

No, the RMN link was just the place I found this particular (and thorough) summary, REPRINTED. I never saw this there originally, and never had heard of this reporter or the Napa paper where he printed this series first.

My actual reliance was on reporting of the subject during the '80s and '90s, and in particular, Robert Parry's 3 books on the subject, Gary Sick's book, Barbara Honeggar's insider account, what Richard Allen said on McNeil/Lehrer, and what Reagan himself said more than once. Plus what the head of French intelligence told his biographer (according to the biographer's sworn testimony to the Hamilton committee), and what the Soviets reported to the committee.

And then there's Occam's Razor. What are the chances that NONE OF THOSE SAID TO BE ON THE FLIGHT couldn't prove they were somewhere else, ANYWHERE ELSE? And what were the odds that Bill Casey was provably out of the country that day, less than an hour away from that meeting, and that his diary and calendar FOR ONLY THIS TIME PERIOD would be missing?

LWW
02-11-2011, 04:21 PM
Actually ... many were in fact proven to have been elsewhere by the democratic led house investigation.

Now setting that aside, how do you rationalize that a private ncitizen should be made to prove where they were on a certain day years ago but feel it is unreasonable for the POTUS to prove he was born here?

LWW

Soflasnapper
02-11-2011, 05:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually ... many were in fact proven to have been elsewhere by the democratic led house investigation.

Now setting that aside, how do you rationalize that a private ncitizen should be made to prove where they were on a certain day years ago but feel it is unreasonable for the POTUS to prove he was born here?

LWW </div></div>

Hardly. There was dissent from some on the committee over the exact question that the claim was made that people had been proved to be elsewhere, because someone had supposedly remembered getting out their phone number (???) Bizarre, but true. (One man's dissent was buried under an unrelated index item footnote.)

Those private individuals were not REQUIRED to prove they were elsewhere, but it would have been conclusive proof they were NOT in Paris at that meeting. And they could not do that.

LWW
02-12-2011, 02:20 AM
So your claim that he testified is valid because no evidence of his testimony exists?

Interesting.

LWW

Qtec
02-12-2011, 02:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually ... many were in fact proven to have been elsewhere by the democratic led house investigation. </div></div>

Really?

Q

LWW
02-12-2011, 02:53 AM
If you didn't cower in fear at links to actual non moonbat crazy leftist data you would have realized this by now.

But, sadly, that's not how you roll.

LWW

Gayle in MD
02-12-2011, 11:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually ... many were in fact proven to have been elsewhere by the democratic led house investigation. </div></div>

Really?

Q </div></div>

LMAO! The radical RW responses on this thread reminds me of a quote. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

“By giving us the opinions of the uneducated, journalism keeps us in touch with the ignorance of the community.” -Oscar Wilde
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/whistle.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

LWW
02-12-2011, 12:43 PM
How do you know when you swear you have them all on total ignore?

Hoist by thine own petard as well dear heart.

LWW