Dutch CIA Agent changes sides, reveals 9-11 info & Net infiltration

[Abe Linkman]

http://lightscion.com/whistleblower.htm

[BigBadDaddy-O]

1. Interesting stuff

How sad though, Bush has to have pen men do his dirty work.

[donsu]

2. kick

nt

[peacetalksforall]

3. Nothing surprises me, but something continually

puzzles me...if the origin of race purity coincides with the origin of strategies to dominate the world, who among the aryan christains agreed to partner with people of a darker skin and who are non-cristian. What exactly is the source and rational of the jewish-christian partnerships for rule and control?

(I will capitalize Jewish and Christian only when I speak of well-intentioned, innocent ones.)

Back to Eddy - if only higher ups would come up with a conscious other than to be upset with the betrayal of Plame (which is not really a conscious issue).

[Virgil]

4. I enjoyed the article

It just goes to show the thought herders are trying to roundup the strays that find new pasture on the Internet.

[DulceDecorum]

5. OMG!!

Surely there CANNOT actually be people who are paid to post on forums and to

" discredit any contributions that did not fall into place with the Bush agenda. This ranges from ridiculing alternative views on 9/11 up to prevention of public inquiries..."

That MUST be some sloppy reporting.
Time for me to put on my :tinfoilhat:

[Bolo Boffin]

6. Ahem.

This is a scandalous story. However, bearing in mind the anonymous nature of the Internet, I'd need some more information on this guy. Does he have any paycheck stubs from the CIA? When was he recruited? Is he who he says he is?

prevention of public inquiries: Continual posting of extreme viewpoints of the 9/11 attacks, and stubborn adherence to these Occam's Razor-defying positions in the face of clear evidence and logical arguments to the contrary - these things damage the credibility of alternative ideas about what happened on 9/11. They taint any legitimate question with the stench of darkweave, and leave the regular reader, who otherwise might be open to legitimate questions, cold on the entire subject. That does more to prevent a public inquiry into what happened on 9/11, because it isolates the mainstream from 9/11 inquiries. It chills the key audience that would otherwise demand an investigation.

My counsel to people who really believe things like "Flight 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon" or "WTC 1, 2, and 7 were taken down by controlled demolitions" is to drop the subject cold. Focus on topics that are better entry-level questions for the audience. If you can get enough people concerned about some really puzzling things (like what BushCo knew and when did they know it, or business ties between BushCo and the Saudi protectors of al-Qaeda), enough outrage can be generated to start pulling on these threads. By advocating gross incompetence, who can tell what will be unraveled in the end?

Watergate was a product of investigating the break-in. They followed the money. They followed the paper trail, and they brought down an corrupt administration. This is our goal. The extreme positions being advocated here by some hinder that goal. You must pick your battles on the basis of victory, not principle. Choosing victory gets you Sherman's March to Atlanta. Choosing principle gets you Pickett's Charge.

[RH]

7. a product

of investigating the break-in?

Watergate was an opportunistically deliberate political betrayal. The hacks would never have got anywhere if they'd not been pointed.

For my money then the same goes now. It will only crack if pulled from the inside.

In the mean time, re. "No Boeing", CIA on the Internet etc.

Voltaire's prayer: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous"

[Bolo Boffin]

8. I'd agree with that, RH.

It will only crack from the inside, but the BushCo Deep Throat will be looking for some hack with a shred of credibility. As you're well aware, a journalist who would be chasing such extreme fantasies about 9/11 would be anathema to such a source.

For example, what if Woodward and Bernstein has started chasing some of the more outlandish theories behind the JFK assassination as a collorary to their Watergate work? Deep Throat would have dropped them like a hot rock.

If our chances for exposing any Bushian advancement of the 9/11 plot rests solely on one member of the Administration being unable to sleep with the knowledge, we might be wasting our time. Maybe.

But there are lots of inroads into the administration. The Plame affair has the best chance in my mind of cracking someone with some real information on the inside. It's a couple of degrees of seperation from the 9/11 issues, but who cares how Bush's house of cards collapses when it's down. Even NIST won't touch that mess.

In the meantime, I love me some Voltaire.

[RH]

9. Indeed.

The administration's spin folk would surely have access to enough hard information, sworn affidavits, photos etc. to blow most of CT nonsense away overnight, so why don't they bother?

The "No Boeing" joke and ancilliary stunts are deliberately pumped up, the net effect being exactly to distract, to wreak havoc while roundly insulting insiders with better information to give.

[DulceDecorum]

12. Please elaborate

RH says:
"...insiders with better information to give."

Are you an insider, RH?
What is this "better information" you have to give?
Were you PERSONALLY INVOLVED in the events of September 11?
Please elaborate.

[RH]

27. I have previously elaborated.

My own position has been stated on several occassions.

I do not intend to repeat myself just to be subject to willful ignorance.

[demodewd]

10. re: extreme positions advocated by some here

In the every day course of American human events the "extreme positions advocated here by some" don't mean diddly squat in a meat grinder. So what will your better than diddly squat victory be? A DLC vice grip on the executive with a Kerry ticket...most probably. Excuse me if I don't get all excited and start doing hand stands on my favorite living room chair.

[Bolo Boffin]

11. Victory for me would be:

None of the people associated with this administration are ever allowed near the reins of power again. That some of them knock Benedict Arnold out of his infamous position in history. Hanging's too good for them. That's the complete package. I'll settle for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, and any member of the Bush family.

And why would you think Kerry is my second choice? Edwards is my second choice. The best endorsement I've heard of Edwards came from the White House: "Clinton without the scandals, JFK from the south." If Clark drops from the race, my money, my blog, and my time belong to Edwards.

[Zhade]

16. This is the most disturbing thing I've read in a while.

You must pick your battles on the basis of victory, not principle.

Beg your pardon, but going for the win and not going by one's principles is something rightwingers do. Are you serious?

[RH]

17. Right wingers may

go for the win, but since when did they do so without a principle?

Theirs may not be yours but....

Where anyway does it get them? There are many varieties of victory, and if a principle is not conducive to win then maybe you are better off without, but is that really the case?

[Bolo Boffin]

18. I didn't say, "Don't go by your principles".

Find the strongest position available for your principles and fight from that position. Positions like "Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon," are losing positions.

Victory has the priority because the principles are just, and it doesn't exclude a principled stand. Why should your principled stand exclude victory from the equation?

I'm sorry that my language was that confusing. Thanks for the heads up.

[Zhade]

20. Thank you for the clarification.

NT!

[BeFree]

22. Paid dis-information spreaders?

Ya know, I can't help but feel that there are a couple of them on DU.

Over in GD, that is...not here

[hang a left]

33. And paid debunkers as well

n/t

[Bolo Boffin]

13. Again, I ask, where is the evidence that Eddy_Smith is a CIA agent?

I'd be happy right now with just a confession. All I'm seeing there and what I can puzzle together at the forum, is that Eddy_Smith changed his mind. Nothing about being a paid disruptor at all.

What I'm puzzling together: Eddy_Smith's original message at Knack's website (found here) is available to us (it's down at the very bottom). The Lightscion website claims that Eddy_Smith confesses to being a CIA disrupter, but the initials CIA appear only four times in that original message, and the Lightscion article translates each of the uses!

Compare:

Eddy_Smith: De CIA, FBI, de Rockeller foundation en nog enkele extremistisch Jezuïtische en Christelijke verenigingen ensceneerden de aanslag op het WTC complex.

Lightscion: The CIA, FBI, the Rockefeller foundation together with some extremist Jesuit and Christian groups, staged the attack on the World Trade Center complex.

Eddy_Smith: Israël en de Rockefellers waren het brein, Saoedi-Arabië liet enkele radicalen het vuile werk opknappen en de CIA moest ervoor zorgen dat alles vlekkeloos zou verlopen.

Lightscion: Israel and the Rockefellers were the brain, Saudi-Arabia let some radicals do the dirty work and the CIA had to make sure everything went smoothly.

Eddy_Smith: Hij moest het met zijn leven bekopen, hij werd in koelen bloede door de CIA vermoord.

Lightscion: He had to pay with his life, killed in cold blood by the CIA.

Eddy_Smith: Denk je dat Bush niet herverkozen zal worden? Dan zal de komende president zich MOETEN schikken naar de CIA of hij leeft geen 3 dagen!

Lightscion: You think Bush won't be reelected? Then the next president will HAVE to obey the CIA, or he won't live through 3 days.

As you can see by clicking the links, this is the sum total of Eddy_Smith's mention of the CIA in his original speech. The Lightscion site itself shows that each of these mentions aren't a confession. You don't even have to speak Dutch to recognize this.

So where's the confession?

Edited: to get my freaking formatting right!!! 3 times!!!

[Abe Linkman]

14. These two gentleman could probably confirm that sort of thing.

1.) Karl

2.) Robert

[Bolo Boffin]

15. Sad attempt at evasion, Abe.

Your title for this thread says Dutch CIA Agent.

There is absolutely no evidence presented thus far that Eddy_Smith is anything of the sort.

Why are you publishing links to anti-Semitic disinformation on this forum?

[Bolo Boffin]

19. No evidence that Eddy_Smith was CIA at all has come forth.

The title of this thread is incredibly misleading.

[Abe Linkman]

21. You gotta give Karl Rove & Bob Novak more time, bolo.

It's a little unusual for an intelligence agent (or a disinfo agent, for that matter) to "come out" in the media. I would have thought you knew that.

[Bolo Boffin]

23. Abe - quit evading the issue and answer the question.

It's really simple. Point to where Eddy_Smith claims to be CIA.

Because if you can't point to this admission, then you are admitting that your title is a fraud.

[Abe Linkman]

24. Eddy says he quit the disinfo business. Doesn't that please you, too?

http://lightscion.com/whistleblower.htm

Read what he says about why he changed sides. It's really worth reading, because we don't hear from very many former disinfo agents who talk about their experience on the Net messin' with people's heads by spreading BS.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RH]

26. Where does he say that?

All I can see is "I made a fool of my SELF for more than a year.....I can't continue to live in lies".

While some may be better fit than others to identify with that it should hardly amount to the ascribed "disinformation agent" characterisation.

Where does he say that he was a "disinformation agent"?

Where does he mention any association with the CIA?

Seems to me that those would have me think so supply the disinformtation.

Does that please you?

[DulceDecorum]

28. Guide to Rightwingnut Posers

http://www.unknownnews.net/cs020602.html

[LARED]

29. But how do you know the author

isn't a poser? Hmmmmmm? :)

[DulceDecorum]

30. This author

used to post here.

The dutch 9/11 ties- a tribute to Daniel Hopsicker
http://www.globalfreepress.com/article.pl?sid=03/09/04/081209&mode=thread

And as for your allegation that Cheryl Seal is herself a rightwingnut poser,
well,
that only proves that we all need to read her article.
And the one that started this thread.
And consider putting Lared on ignore.

[LARED]

31. DD

There is this thing called a dictionary. Try it out once in a while. I made no allegations regarding the author. I asked you how you knew she wasn't a poser. That's not an allegation.

I think there is a strong possibly anyone one on this board (including you) could be an imposter.

[NV1962]

32. *cough*

Knack is a publication issued in Belgium, not the Netherlands (close enough, but still another country.) TLD's ending on .be are from Belgium; Dutch sites end on .nl - I swear to Beelzebub they do. And the character going by the handle of "Eddy_Smith" openly states that his real name is Marc Eddy Smith.

Also, in the original thread on that Knack forum here the same Eddy_Smith pokes fun at the story that he, not only "Dutch" but even a "CIA Agent" has gotten around.

Now... Different question: pretend, for a moment, that you're running a big, bad organization (let's call it the "CIA") with teams of spooks (let's call them "agents") doing all sorts of propagandistic dark ops stuff in allied countries, such as in Belgium, which happens to be home of NATO and a very close net of security... Would you inform your "agents" of all the intriguing connecting dots that place Bush in the middle of a dark conspiracy? Don't think so; not unless you pretend to run a serious outfit - eh, "agency"

Last detail: the "fellow agent" named "emichiel" is chuckling along about his "victory" in that same thread...

Sorry... You've been had here, big time.