I'm following this thread closely, because the proposed end-goal of this agenda is pretty personal... to wipe out my tiny country.
Acknowledging what you call the dramatic facts (a good term) is not new to me. My first exposure to them was The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People (Loftus & Aarons, 1994), which I read cover to cover despite its length.
Some of the history documented here is the same, other parts are new, but I long ago gave up the idea that the US admin is playing straight with us (unlike the many American citizens who are true friends of Israel). I'm even ready to embrace the idea that Trump is about to turn our success in Iran to our disadvantage. Or as you pithily put it, Trump "will screw Israel" in the near future.
But IMO the MOR model, which is good at explaining many dramatic facts, is not yet accounting for all of them:
"The US bosses have consistently weakened Israeli security and strengthened jihadism because the US bosses are totalitarian antisemitic psychopaths who use jihadism in their efforts to produce an anti-Jewish genocide in Israel."
Fact One: The US intel cabal have been weakening Israeli security and supporting jihadi attempts to carry out a Jewish genocide for all the years of Israel's existence, now 78 years. It's more like 100 years if we factor in the Nazi connection. But not only did they fail in 1947, when Israel had no weapons, no economy, and a mere 630,000 Jews (counting women and children). The genocide support project has failed countless times, despite giving the jihadis lots of advantages while trying to sabotage the Jews.
How does the MOR model explain this outcome? The bosses planned a century of failures for the sake of theater? For some other purpose? Or is there something not under their control that keeps causing them to fail, despite all that investment? One of the two theories needs to go into the model.
Fact Two: "The US bosses have had a pro-jihad and anti-Israel policy." Why should they invest in Shi'ite jihadis when there are ME Marxists who are also anti-Israel? Are the US bosses secret Muslims? (I've actually wondered that.)
The MOR model says that they "have been deliberately promoting jihadism in their efforts to destroy modern Western democracy." The goal makes sense if you are aiming for a totalitarian global regime. But to destroy Western Democracy "beginning with a genocide in the State of Israel"? Why Israel? As democracies go, we are not really Western in our thinking (the majority of Israelis are from the ME or the FSU), our 'democracy' has always been chaotic, and no one is inspired to emulate our ridiculous governing style.
Nor is our Jewish population of 7 million in any position to challenge someone else's global takeover -- unless you believe in the ZOG conspiracy theories that WE are the ones taking over, and that the US bosses are OUR tools... and so are the jihadis... yada yada.
In short, a model that names Israel as the top priority on a totalitarian hit list needs to find a better reason for that obsession, because the dramatic facts of Israel itself do not spell "political threat".
I have to wonder about this quaint system of declassifying documents that reveal telling information. It surely goes against the grain of much that you teach. I can understand having the process helping feed the narrative of transparent governence but why would important documents, especially damning, in the modern context be released? Why not destroy incriminating evidence? A lot of your material likely comes from them. So to amunition for the false flag stories and covert missions that become common knowledge.
None of it becomes common knowledge. Not at all. Why? Because they control the media.
But why are they released? People confuse power with absolute power. They don't have absolute power. There is a law that forces the release of documentation: the Freedom of Information Act. If they defied the law, that would get them in trouble. Better to comply, and hide things with management of reality.
I'm not understanding something. On the one hand, the CIA has a license to do whatever they want. No auditors, no questions asked. That's my understanding of what you're saying. Now you're saying they are accountable. If they defied the law by destroying documents, who would ever know? In this scenario then covert actions become common knowledge to those that study the declassifieds. Besides enemy countries, journalists and authors. What a wonderful way to source your next big story.
They can certainly do some of that, and they have. For example, they destroyed most of the documents relating to MKUltra.
But some things always leak.
And if they destroyed EVERYTHING then it would be transparent that democracy is a farce. If there were ZERO compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, the same thing would happen.
One of the problems they have, in this respect, is that you can't turn everyone responsible for archiving documents into a traitor.
There aren't that many traitors.
Bureaucracies are staffed mostly by (relatively) unwitting, ordinary folk.
I explain that in the following piece. Please read it and tell me if it is helping you understand this.
Great article. I've read it a few times but somehow this time was so much more informative. I get what you're saying but this question then tests Jolly's model. It may be limited and takes time, but eventually, questions can be raised. I first became awake to False flags whilst watching a fascinating series by Richard Dolan on Gaia. What made his series so plausible was when he said that he got certain information from documents released because of the Freedom of Information Act. I suppose it's not much different to the examples you've given, where The New York Times publishes something damning but then just doesn't talk about it again. A minority would read it in the first place, for a few reasons. In Jolly's days, literacy was still not universal, and today, anything longer than a headline is too long for the growing band of TikTok fans. I'm just saying that it surprises me what they allow to be released. Your points about creating authenticity for the system are understood, but certain information, which I understand they can refuse to make public, can cause great harm and expose the CIA for what it is. People like yourself are given credibility with these revelations. In my case, a few years ago, I would have asked of Richard Dolan, nothing more than 'how do you know this?" I was clueless as to the depths of deceit we are subjected to. I trusted the system. So when analysts such as yourself 'wake me up', I then thank the Freedom of Information Act for releasing these snippets.
I'm following this thread closely, because the proposed end-goal of this agenda is pretty personal... to wipe out my tiny country.
Acknowledging what you call the dramatic facts (a good term) is not new to me. My first exposure to them was The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People (Loftus & Aarons, 1994), which I read cover to cover despite its length.
Some of the history documented here is the same, other parts are new, but I long ago gave up the idea that the US admin is playing straight with us (unlike the many American citizens who are true friends of Israel). I'm even ready to embrace the idea that Trump is about to turn our success in Iran to our disadvantage. Or as you pithily put it, Trump "will screw Israel" in the near future.
But IMO the MOR model, which is good at explaining many dramatic facts, is not yet accounting for all of them:
"The US bosses have consistently weakened Israeli security and strengthened jihadism because the US bosses are totalitarian antisemitic psychopaths who use jihadism in their efforts to produce an anti-Jewish genocide in Israel."
Fact One: The US intel cabal have been weakening Israeli security and supporting jihadi attempts to carry out a Jewish genocide for all the years of Israel's existence, now 78 years. It's more like 100 years if we factor in the Nazi connection. But not only did they fail in 1947, when Israel had no weapons, no economy, and a mere 630,000 Jews (counting women and children). The genocide support project has failed countless times, despite giving the jihadis lots of advantages while trying to sabotage the Jews.
How does the MOR model explain this outcome? The bosses planned a century of failures for the sake of theater? For some other purpose? Or is there something not under their control that keeps causing them to fail, despite all that investment? One of the two theories needs to go into the model.
Fact Two: "The US bosses have had a pro-jihad and anti-Israel policy." Why should they invest in Shi'ite jihadis when there are ME Marxists who are also anti-Israel? Are the US bosses secret Muslims? (I've actually wondered that.)
The MOR model says that they "have been deliberately promoting jihadism in their efforts to destroy modern Western democracy." The goal makes sense if you are aiming for a totalitarian global regime. But to destroy Western Democracy "beginning with a genocide in the State of Israel"? Why Israel? As democracies go, we are not really Western in our thinking (the majority of Israelis are from the ME or the FSU), our 'democracy' has always been chaotic, and no one is inspired to emulate our ridiculous governing style.
Nor is our Jewish population of 7 million in any position to challenge someone else's global takeover -- unless you believe in the ZOG conspiracy theories that WE are the ones taking over, and that the US bosses are OUR tools... and so are the jihadis... yada yada.
In short, a model that names Israel as the top priority on a totalitarian hit list needs to find a better reason for that obsession, because the dramatic facts of Israel itself do not spell "political threat".
I have to wonder about this quaint system of declassifying documents that reveal telling information. It surely goes against the grain of much that you teach. I can understand having the process helping feed the narrative of transparent governence but why would important documents, especially damning, in the modern context be released? Why not destroy incriminating evidence? A lot of your material likely comes from them. So to amunition for the false flag stories and covert missions that become common knowledge.
None of it becomes common knowledge. Not at all. Why? Because they control the media.
But why are they released? People confuse power with absolute power. They don't have absolute power. There is a law that forces the release of documentation: the Freedom of Information Act. If they defied the law, that would get them in trouble. Better to comply, and hide things with management of reality.
I'm not understanding something. On the one hand, the CIA has a license to do whatever they want. No auditors, no questions asked. That's my understanding of what you're saying. Now you're saying they are accountable. If they defied the law by destroying documents, who would ever know? In this scenario then covert actions become common knowledge to those that study the declassifieds. Besides enemy countries, journalists and authors. What a wonderful way to source your next big story.
They can certainly do some of that, and they have. For example, they destroyed most of the documents relating to MKUltra.
But some things always leak.
And if they destroyed EVERYTHING then it would be transparent that democracy is a farce. If there were ZERO compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, the same thing would happen.
One of the problems they have, in this respect, is that you can't turn everyone responsible for archiving documents into a traitor.
There aren't that many traitors.
Bureaucracies are staffed mostly by (relatively) unwitting, ordinary folk.
I explain that in the following piece. Please read it and tell me if it is helping you understand this.
https://franciscogilwhite.substack.com/p/ramparts-cia-national-student-association
You are asking the right questions.
Great article. I've read it a few times but somehow this time was so much more informative. I get what you're saying but this question then tests Jolly's model. It may be limited and takes time, but eventually, questions can be raised. I first became awake to False flags whilst watching a fascinating series by Richard Dolan on Gaia. What made his series so plausible was when he said that he got certain information from documents released because of the Freedom of Information Act. I suppose it's not much different to the examples you've given, where The New York Times publishes something damning but then just doesn't talk about it again. A minority would read it in the first place, for a few reasons. In Jolly's days, literacy was still not universal, and today, anything longer than a headline is too long for the growing band of TikTok fans. I'm just saying that it surprises me what they allow to be released. Your points about creating authenticity for the system are understood, but certain information, which I understand they can refuse to make public, can cause great harm and expose the CIA for what it is. People like yourself are given credibility with these revelations. In my case, a few years ago, I would have asked of Richard Dolan, nothing more than 'how do you know this?" I was clueless as to the depths of deceit we are subjected to. I trusted the system. So when analysts such as yourself 'wake me up', I then thank the Freedom of Information Act for releasing these snippets.
Indeed. The FOIA is a good thing!