Now, Michael Rozeff – dang, why is he so stuck on promoting this Hersh story? – trots out A. J. Hillman, an intelligence contractor who came up with the same story about Bin Laden’s death in 2011, only with different sources.
Of course, at one shot, her “support” of Hersh undermines him completely, since it shows he didn’t break this story at all but just became the major mouthpiece for it.
That is often the case for stories “broken” by big-name journalists – they were usually broken by a whistle-blower or blogger or police detective, but the journalists have the public platform, the time and resources to write, and they get the credit.
But, alas, Hillhouse is not any more credible than Hersh. Not only is she an intelligence contractor, with a flair for novel writing and smuggling, she too does not have a documented source:
“my understanding was there was great concern with the security guys … Everything that I’ve written on national intelligence, [that] was the first time I ever had a [former] senior member of the intelligence community signal me to basically go black … I’ve never been waved off like I was signaled to [then].”
She was strongly warned by a high U.S. intelligence official to drop the matter and say no more. She says that because of this she destroyed her notes with her sources.”
Yes, the dog ate her home-work too.
So why does a story broken in 2011 (without a source) surface again in 2015 (without a source)?
Good question. I wish I knew the answer.
It obviously serves some other purpose than the apparent one of speaking truth to power.
Author Khaled Mohammed sums up some of the problems with Hersh’s story from the viewpoint of someone familiar with Pakistani terrain.
So could Hillhouse (intelligence contractor) be to Hersh (CIA journalist) as William Binney (original intelligence official and whistle-blower) was to Ed Snowden (intelligence contractor and supposed intelligence whistle-blower)?
But before Binney, decades before, there was Margaret Newsham, whom no one talks about at all.
The rabbit-hole goes deep.
At the risk of sounding unhinged, I suspect Hillhouse, if she is for real, is also a disinformation agent.
by jfshade » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:16 pm
Yes, it [Lila: the CIA] runs the government; or at least operates without any meaningful governmental oversight, or limitation on its access to public funds:Black budget [2003]”The CIA has the unique legal ability among all US government departments and agencies to generate funds through appropriations of other federal government agencies and other sources ‘without regard to any provisions of law’ and without regard to the intent behind Congressional appropriations. Every year, billions of dollars of Congressional appropriations are diverted from their Congressionally sanctioned purposes to the CIA and DoD based intelligence agencies without knowledge of the public and with the collusion of Congressional leaders. The covert world of ‘black programs’ acts with virtual impunity, overseen and regulated by itself, funding itself through secret slush funds, and is free of the limitations that come from Congressional oversight, proper auditing procedures and public scrutiny.” The CIA black budget is annually in the vicinity of 1.1 trillion dollars – a truly staggering figure when one considers that the DoD budget for 2004 will be approximately 380 billion dollars.[12]And who runs the CIA? Looks like the very corporations with vested interests in the endless war on terra have a vote:
The most intriguing secrets of the “war on terror” have nothing to do with al-Qaeda and its fellow travelers. They’re about the mammoth private spying industry that all but runs U.S. intelligence operations today.Surprised? No wonder. In April [2007], Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell was poised to publicize a year-long examination of outsourcing by U.S. intelligence agencies. But the report was inexplicably delayed — and suddenly classified a national secret. What McConnell doesn’t want you to know is that the private spy industry has succeeded where no foreign government has: It has penetrated the CIA and is running the show.
Over the past five years (some say almost a decade), there has been a revolution in the intelligence community toward wide-scale outsourcing. Private companies now perform key intelligence-agency functions, to the tune, I’m told, of more than $42 billion a year. Intelligence professionals tell me that more than 50 percent of the National Clandestine Service (NCS) — the heart, brains and soul of the CIA — has been outsourced to private firms such as Abraxas, Booz Allen Hamilton, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon.
The above is from a piece by RJ Hillhouse, who has written extensively about intelligence privatization. I sense planted disinfo by “intelligence professionals” in some of her work, but the outsourcing trend is real.
linkSo, I’m curious as to how Ron Paul thinks we should go about “tak[ing] out the CIA.” It has pretty much all the money that the banks don’t have, and is locked in serpentine embrace with the most powerful corporate warmakers.
As Sunny said:Smashing the CIA into a thousand pieces and scattering it to the winds in 1962 or so would have been the way to go but…
- jfshade
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:20 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Blog:View Blog (0)