Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times

William B. Fox Archive
Mission of Conscience Book III Contents


The ominous theme of increasing police state militarization of America with Pittsburgh's "Storm Cops" at the G-20 meeting in fall 2009. Covered in the beginning of Police State 4 video by Alex Jones. See also "PITTSBURGH G20 SUMMIT PHOTOS," September 27, 2009,

Chapter 38

Pittsburgh False Flag "Anarchists,"
Cyber Militia, and the
Principles of Info War

First published Feb 2010
Updated/revised 3 Dec 2012

A number of very significant domestic and international political events in summer-fall 2009 underscored the broader ideological undercurrents behind the Info War and false flag attacks. These included the heavy-handed police crack down on "anarchist" protestors at the Sept. 2009 Pittsburgh G-20 conference, the Orwellian environment surrounding the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Obama in October, more revelations about the bizarre personal life of the former FBI Director "Gay Edgar Hoover," and the Copenhagen global warming conference scam in December.
Meanwhile, as I have already covered in Chapter 36, during this period there was rising global push-back against swine flu mandatory vaccination, despite the scary outbreak in the Ukraine. This was important good news stemming largely from Internet and alternative media activism.
An important topic for broader intelligence analysis that I will address at the end of the chapter involves finding suitable principles for a cyber intelligence militia like Ghost Troop to use in fighting back. We have tried to perform a variety of functions, ranging from interdicting specific false flag attack threats to addressing generalized PSYOPs waged against the American people. Among other things, I will explore the analyses of William S. Lind regarding the four generations of warfare paradigm, and explain how Ghost Troop may fit within this conceptualization as a volunteer counter covert 4th generation warfare cyber militia.

The Pittsburgh False Flag "Anarchists"

The 30 Sept 2009 Idaho Observer article "G20 Protestors Blasted by Sonic Cannon" identified a dangerous police false flag operation where "dissidents" become "anarchists.":


Pittsburgh – Sept. 24-25 – Using sonic cannons, tear gas and flash grenades, police created a near war-zone environment to disperse and suppress G20 protesters in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Sonic weapons or long-range acoustic devices (LRADs) are used by the U.S. military overseas to disable the enemy. LRADs can permanently damage the eardrums and may cause fatal aneurysms. Effective out to 300 meters, the emit a focused beam of sound.
The G20 Meeting was “protected” by a massive, militarized police contingent in full battle dress. Numerous surrounding police jurisdictions gave allied support to the Pittsburgh police battalions.
As has been the case with other G20 meetings, not all of the protesters were protesters. Video has emerged of police agents posing as “anarchists” protestors. These provocateurs and their violent antics tainted an otherwise peaceful demonstration, justifying the excessive police presence.
The G20 is a group of international government, financial and industrial interests that meet to plan their ongoing strategy to dominate world policy and politics. They fulfill the very definition of fascism. The inherent rights that would naturally accrue to free people were once again violated en mass by deployment of militarized police power and weaponry.

In his Dec 2009 Intelligence Report, The Nationalist Times publisher Don Wassall explained the significance of this event from broader national viewpoint:


The G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh in late September showed off the newest advances in police state technology and tactics.
There were only an estimated 5,000 protestors for the event, mostly curious college kids and the usual gaggle of scrawny anarchists – but they were confronted by a massed presence of 6,000 heavily armed cops who fired bean bags from shotguns, tear gas, OC spray, and flash-bang grenades while wielding batons against the demonstrators, who were kept far away from the globalist festivities. Also utilized was an armored personnel carrier, which went through residential neighborhoods, blasting a shrill, eardrum piercing sound from a Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD) that drove people off the streets and into homes and buildings. Altogether four of the LRAD military weapons were purchased and used – for the first time on Americans -- courtesy of a $200,000 grant from Homeland Security, which also paid $250,000 for the armored personnel carrier.
Writes Kurt Nimmo of Infowars: “The G-20 police response in Pittsburgh was a beta test. ‘We spent months getting ready for this and it was a lot of preparation, but we’ll see the dividends of that for a long time to come,’ Public Safety Director Michael Huss told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.
In other words, Pittsburgh is not going to stand down now that the G-20 has departed. The ‘dividend’ is that it will remain a militarized police state. . .
All around the country local law enforcement is looking to the feds to provide high-tech military hardware. San Francisco wants $125,000 for an armored vehicle and $200,000 for a mobile command vehicle. Sparks, Nevada wants $600,000 to purchase a ‘live fire’ house its SWAT team can shoot up, and another $420,000 for a SWAT armored vehicle. Gary, Indiana wants $750,000 for a host of ‘modernization’ upgrades to its police department, including ‘sub-automatic guns’ and an armored vehicle. Ottawa, Illinois (population: 18,307) wants $60,000 to purchase, among other things, five ‘tactical entry rifles.’ ‘
Why is our civilian law enforcement in an arms race, and who are they arming against? Why us of course. What used to be six to ten man SWAT teams are now platoon size of 25 if not more. The city police, sheriffs, etc., are armed to the teeth and resemble SS units, this is a way to circumvent Posse Comitatus in the coming martial law.”
In addition to the above mentioned wish lists, many other cities are using “stimulus” money to buy high-tech weaponry. As The Nationalist Times has been writing for over 20 years, multiculturalism is a failed and unworkable concept, and can only be attempted to be held in place through every increasing police state methods.

My mind flashed upon some major ironies from a historical perspective.
In his brilliant series Conceived in Liberty, Dr. Murray Rothbard described how once upon a time in early American colonial history, Pennsylvania was a model of libertarian idealism. It helped define "the American experience."
Pennsylvania had naturally grown its population from settlers who forged their way into wilderness. Between 1700 and the American Revolution, the population had approximately tripled from the natural increase of several generations of big families. Pennsylvania's population grew to the size of a small European state. However, one thing the pioneers left behind in Europe were professional lawyers, bureaucrats, court retainers, aristocratic rent seekers, professional soldiery, and other members of the "tax-eating" classes as opposed to "tax-producing" entrepreneurs and common folk. (According to Dr. Ralph Raico of the Mises Institute, the concept of the "tax-eating" vs. "tax-producing" social dichotomy was central to the analysis of 17th and 18th century French libertarians). Everything was handled on a local level, where citizens typically served in multiple voluntary civic organizations, such as the militia, fire departments, planning committees, and charities.
According to Dr. Rothbard, the good people of colonial Pennsylvania had virtually no central government by European standards. As a consequence, they made an interesting discovery. They weren't missing anything! In fact, they were much happier and more prosperous than most of their counterparts back in the Old Country.
True, they had acquired a lot of land for almost nothing that was not available back in Europe, but they had also regained something else that their European forebears had lost over the centuries as a consequence of gradual encroachments. They had regained ancient freedoms that once existed among individuals within various European tribal groups prior to takeover by rent-seekers!
The historical experience of early Pennsylvanians serves as a role model for what many libertarians such as the late Nobel Laureate Friedrich von Hayek called "spontaneous order." The idea is that man --or at least certain groups of people ---are fundamentally social animals who instinctively create family, tribal, religious, and ethnic bonds at the grass roots level as a form of "spontaneous order" whenever any kind of order is needed, to include whenever centralized control is either not present or removed. This natural and spontaneous form of grass roots "order" is usually superior to centralized order, particularly when it comes to engaging in business entrepreneurship or defining moral and ethical relationships among people. If anything politicians who represent "centralized order" are often over-represented by pyschopathic career climbers, glad-handlers, and bureaucratic rent-seekers and hence may be more corrupt than common citizens, particularly those who run their own farms or businesses and actually have to work for a living. Significantly, libertarians often view "anarchism" as a smear word that statists, fascists, and other "rent-seekers" use to muscle in on people who are perfectly capable of running their own affairs at the local level.
Pittsburgh itself carries important historic ironies. Located where the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers converge to form the highly strategic Ohio River, Pittsburgh became a major focal point of the contest between England and France for control of the Ohio Valley during the French and Indian War, as evidenced by Braddock's Defeat and other campaigns.
The English prided themselves on their parliamentary traditions, individual liberties, and the decentralization of their Protestant institutions away from Vatican control. There was also still a strong straight-laced Puritan influence from the New Englanders, whose ancestors believed that the Pope was the anti-Christ. They felt contempt for French monarchical absolutism and Catholic dogma. Seizing control of the Ohio Valley had Manifest Destiny overtones of advancing "democracy" by "Anglo-Saxons" against what they viewed as a morally and politically degenerate people.
Lew Rockwell once observed that the American Revolution was based on the idea that over the long run, government tends to be more of the problem than the solution. Piling more government on top of government, such as the U.N., or the G-20 meeting, would hence involve creating even more problems still.
Rockwell views all these people as glorified "rent-seekers," or the "tax-eating class" who abuse their authority by inventing wasteful government programs as excuses to get something for nothing. "Rent-seekers" are incapable of providing the kind of market-competitive "value proposition" that I describe in Chapter 33, but instead look for nonproductive angles to chisel taxpayers out of their assets.
Even worse, the G-20 Meeting was all about advancing the agenda of the New World Order. Most of its participants belong to the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, and other Rothschild-affiliated organizations whose members routinely formulate high level policy at secret meetings. Under U.S. law, policy formulation in secret meetings is illegal and contrary to basic republican principles for a free and open society.
The Corbettt Report provides a link page for numerous major news sources that openly describe how G-20 meetings advance the New World Order agenda. The following apply to the Pittsburgh conference:


2009-09-25 Obama to Usher In New World Order at G-20 by Kelly Chernenkoff -
2009-09-25 New World Order: Obama to Widen G-20's Role; China, India and Brazil win new clout, NBC Miami

The police strong arm men for the New World Order in Pittsburgh darkly symbolize how everything that early Americans once stood for has now been turned on its head. According to some news reports, the cops even infiltrated agents provocateurs --that is, false flaggers -- into demonstrations posing as "anarchists."
This terminology alone shows a repudiation of libertarian reverence for "spontaneous order" as well as unmolested First Amendment rights.
This also suggests that certain Pittsburgh police are infected with a similar parasitic rent-seeking mentality that I describe among politicians in Chapter 29, Wall Street Robber Barons in Chapter 33, Big Pharma in Chapter 36, the military-industrial complex in Chapter 37 --or worst of all--the Mossad-CIA false flaggers I cover repeatedly throughout this series.

The "False Flag" Nobel Peace Prize Award

One of the most outrageous developments in the Info War took place on October 9, 2009 when Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. From our viewpoint as anti-false-flag activists, this award decision seemed to reinforce rather than help defuse the PSYOPs that support the Zionist neo-con Global War on Terror (GWOT) –and America's zombie march into “Stalingrad” that I will explain later in this chapter.
This award to Obama was analogous to the medical condition of hypothermia, where the sensation of feeling warm all over is the exact opposite of the reality of being close to freezing to death. As I will discuss later in this section, there is strong evidence that "the usual suspects" --of the false flag variety-- were behind this Orwellian travesty.
Rick Rozoff commented in "World's Sole Military Superpower's 2 Million-Troop, $1 Trillion Wars:"


In his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech on December 10 the president of the United States appropriated for his country the title of "the world's sole military superpower" and for himself "the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars."
This may well have been the first time that an American – and of course any – head of state in history boasted of his nation being the only uncontested military power on the planet and unquestionably the only time a Nobel Peace Prize recipient identified himself as presiding over not only a war but two wars simultaneously.

I also have some strong personal motivations to examine this episode in some detail. In my 5 Sept. interview on Dr. Rebecca Carley's Show "What's Ailing America," I urged mass political support to nominate Jane Burgermeister, Dr. Rebecca Carley, and Capt. Eric May to share next year's Nobel Peace Prize for their outstanding activist work against the swine flu false flag pandemic (see Chapter 36). I also think that the cyber militia methods identified in this Mission of Conscience series are emerging as potent tools to advance Alfred Nobel's objectives for Peace Prize winners. Lastly, as a Norwegian-American I resent seeing Zionist Neocons manipulate the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee behind the scenes (explained later) and in essence abuse Nordic prestige more shamelessly than Adolf Hitler.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts wrote Oct 10, 2009 in “Warmonger Wins Peace Prize


It took 25 years longer than George Orwell thought for the slogans of 1984 to become reality.
"War Is Peace," "Freedom Is Slavery," "Ignorance Is Strength."
I would add, "Lie Is Truth."
The Nobel Committee has awarded the 2009 Peace Prize to President Obama, the person who started a new war in Pakistan, upped the war in Afghanistan, and continues to threaten Iran with attack unless Iran does what the US government demands and relinquishes its rights as a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty.
The Nobel committee chairman, Thorbjørn Jagland said, "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future."
Obama, the committee gushed, has created "a new climate in international politics."
Tell that to the 2 million displaced Pakistanis and the unknown numbers of dead ones that Obama has racked up in his few months in office. Tell that to the Afghans where civilian deaths continue to mount as Obama's "war of necessity" drones on indeterminably...

Michel Chossudovsky makes similar points in his excellent article “Obama and the Nobel Prize: When War becomes Peace, When the Lie becomes the Truth


When war becomes peace,
When concepts and realities are turned upside down,
When fiction becomes truth and truth becomes fiction.
When a global military agenda is heralded as a humanitarian endeavor,
When the killing of civilians is upheld as "collateral damage",
When those who resist the US-NATO led invasion of their homeland are categorized as "insurgents" or "terrorists".
When preemptive nuclear war is upheld as self defense.
When advanced torture and "interrogation" techniques are routinely used to "protect peacekeeping operations",
When tactical nuclear weapons are heralded by the Pentagon as "harmless to the surrounding civilian population"
When three quarters of US personal federal income tax revenues are allocated to financing what is euphemistically referred to as "national defense"
When the Commander in Chief of the largest military force on planet earth is presented as a global peace-maker,
When the Lie becomes the Truth.

Obama's "War Without Borders"
We are the crossroads of the most serious crisis in modern history. The US in partnership with NATO and Israel has launched a global military adventure which, in a very real sense, threatens the future of humanity.
At this critical juncture in our history, the Norwegian Nobel Committee's decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to President and Commander in Chief Barack Obama constitutes an unmitigated tool of propaganda and distortion, which unreservedly supports the Pentagon's "Long War": "A War without Borders" in the true sense of the word, characterized by the Worldwide deployment of US military might…

Dr. David Duke explained an important "false flag" decoy element in his article "Crazy! Nobel Peace Prize Awarded to Obama. What is Behind this Insanity?”:


The Zionist influenced media all over the world continues to promote Barack Obama as a man of great intellect and a man of peace and reasonableness. In fact, he has been controlled from the Zionists for years and is even described by Jewish leaders as the first “Jewish President” because he is completely a puppet Zionist power. Obama’s biggest corporate contributor in his race for U.S. President was the very Jewish, Goldman Sachs Corp, the most powerful international financial house in the world. Obama went on to get over 80 percent of the Jewish vote in the election.
The prestige of the Nobel Prize and Obama’s universal media adulation makes him far more effective in achieving Zionist aims, including their number one objective: war against Iran.
The biggest item on the Zionist agenda during the Bush administration was the removal of the biggest Israeli enemy at the time: Saddam Hussein. The most important issue now to Israel and Zionist power around the world is war against Iran, the most powerful nation on earth that opposes the Zionist regime.
The greater Obama’s prestige around the world, the greater his ability to orchestrate a Zionist instigated war against Iran.
In short, the greater Obama’s popularity, the greatest danger that this Zionist-controlled President can launch a catastrophic war against Iran.
A Nobel Prize winning Obama is far more able to sell the war as one necessary rather than being a catastrophic and inhuman enterprise.

The article “Why Barack Obama Does NOT Deserve the Nobel Peace Prize” by Peter Baofu, Ph.D. tries to explain possible ideological dimensions behind the decision:


The official citation of the decision is “unanimous,” for the good publicity of the Nobel committee, as its decision-making process remains secretive. It is not clear if this so-called “unanimity” is true; should it be true, however, it would reveal a dangerous sign of groupthink in the Norwegian Nobel committee, with the political zealousness for its leftist ideological interests.
This is all the more revealing, in the public statement by Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, who told the Associated Press: “If everything goes wrong, then one cannot say that this was because of Barack Obama. It could be that it is because of us, all the others, that didn't respond” to his rhetorical inspirations.
This kind of fanatic zealousness to support a leader with ideological views compatible with one’s own reminds us the fanatic zealousness that many supporters of charismatic leaders in history have, in blindly supporting their leaders and, even when things go wrong, in fanatically blaming the failures of their leaders on others. When Stalin and Mao committed mistakes which led to the deaths of countless innocent civilians, their supporters wasted no time to blame others who were accused to have betrayed their leaders, but not on Stalin and Mao themselves...

In the Oct 12, 2009 Pravda article “Is Obama's Nobel Prize a Preemptive Prize?” Hans Vogel suggested an alternative motive:


Like other “Washington-watchers” the Norwegian Nobel Committee may have become scared at what they were seeing. For a nation as powerful and proud as the US, the kind of crisis it has been experiencing for some time now, is life-threatening. And we all know the US always looks for the solutions to its problems beyond its own borders. By blaming others, by blackmailing them, invading them, occupying them and destroying them. With Iran the target of US wrath, and with the constant saber-rattling coming out of Washington, the Norwegians must have been thinking they urgently needed to do something to prevent a world disaster.
By giving the Prize to Obama, the Norwegians may have hoped to put moral pressure on him. It would be quite difficult for a Nobel Peace Prize laureate to start a war against Iran. Therefore, the Prize should be considered as a kind of “Preemptive Prize.”
Moreover, with the prize, the Obama's prestige would grow, his spine would get extra support and his shoulders might become just a bit broader. Who knows, with enough support from the outside world (the “Rest of the World,” or ROW) Obama might even stand up to his handlers.

There is a huge moral and ethical problem behind any use of the Nobel Peace Prize as a preemptive tool. It smells like the legal definition of bribery: “The offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of something of value for the purpose of influencing the action of an official in the discharge of his or her public or legal duties.”
Without question there are broad sociological dimensions behind the Nobel Prize Committee. For example, in my Henrik Holappa archive web page, I list some articles suggesting that many Norwegians have become so brainwashed by Zionist neocon-controlled global media that they can no longer adequately defend their own ethnic-genetic interests, national interests, or recapture Nordic popular sovereignty. The following are two examples:


2009-04-22 Will Beautiful Norway be Snuffed Out? ‘In 2005, 64,000 children were born in Norway of two foreign-born parents, compared to only 13,800 children born to parents of European origin’ By Arthur Kemp "The state-owned Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (Norsk rikskringkasting AS) or NRK has broken ranks with the rest of the controlled media in Europe and has openly declared an emergency over the Third World origin of sexual assaults in that country. In a remarkable broadcast last week, NRK reported that `immigrants from Kurdistan and North Africa' are behind most cases of aggravated sexual assault in Norway. According to the NRK, police figures from Oslo reveal that over the past three years, they have investigated a total of 41 cases of rape in that city. All of these assaults, reports NRK, were carried out by `non-western immigrants to Norway.' According to the Norwegian police, the rapists terrorizing the beautiful white women of Oslo are of `a Kurdish or African background” and all have one thing in common, `namely the use of gross violence...Third World immigrants are, the study showed, recipients of social security benefits at a rate ten times that of native Norwegians - destroying the liberal argument used by pro-immigration politicians in Norway that immigration was necessary to maintain the social welfare state...'
2007-05-31 Norway: Professor Unni Wikan On Rape. "`It is sensational how blind and naive Norwegian can be towards non-Western men. Norwegian women must use common sense,' says Wikan to Dagbladet. Shocking numbers were published yesterday which show that the total number of rapes in Oslo went up by 40% from 1999 to 2000. For the first time, police classified rapists by ethnic background. The statistics show that fully 65% of the rapists come from a non-Western country." The rest of this article explores whether or not one of Wikan's quotes was taken out of context and called for appeasement of would-be Muslim rapists. One thing is clear; Norwegian women are being forced to compromise Nordic culture to swarthy alien predators in their midst.

Suspected Mossad-CIA collaborator and former Norwegian Prime Minister (1996-1997) Thorbjorn Jagland pictured with former U.S. Secretary of State and arch-Zionist Madeleine Albright.


Fortunately I do not need to engage in much social speculation regarding the Nobel Peace Prize award to Obama. In his article "Behind the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize" French political analyst Thierry Meyssan provides us with a direct explanation that fingers Mossad-CIA. This story is particularly fascinating because it meshes with our discussions of Jewish-funded "colored revolutions" (Chapter 32), economic "hit man" operations in Third World countries (Chapter 33), Obama as a Mossad-CIA asset (Chapter 35), and Obama's ties to the Zionist-controlled big pharma (Chapter 36).


....In 2006, the European Command (i.e. the regional command of U.S. troops whose authority then covered both Europe and most of Africa) solicited Barack Obama, a Senator of Kenyan origin, to participate in a secret inter-agency (CIA-NED-USAID-NSA). The goal was to use his status as a parliamentarian to conduct a tour of Africa that would allow both to defend the interests of pharmaceutical companies (against off-patent productions) and to counter Chinese influence in Kenya and Sudan. We shall only examine the Kenyan episode here...
...Kenya was then experiencing a booming economy. Since the beginning of the presidency of Mwai Kibaki, the growth rate had increased from 3.9 to 7.1% of GDP and poverty had declined from 56 to 46%. These exceptional results were achieved by reducing economic ties with post-colonial Anglo-Saxon partners and replacing them with more equitable agreements with China. To put an end to the Kenyan miracle, Washington and London decided to topple President Kibaki and impose a devoted opportunist: Raila Odinga. To that effect, the National Endowment for Democracy oversaw the creation of a new political party, the Orange Democratic Movement, and plotted a "color revolution" in the forthcoming parliamentary elections of December 2007.
Senator Obama was greeted like a native son and his journey was hyper-publicized. He interfered in local politics and participated in Raila Odinga meetings. He called for a "democratic revolution" and his "companion", General Gration, gave Odinga one million dollars in cash. These actions destabilized the country and raised official protests from Nairobi to Washington. Following this tour, Obama and Gen. Gration reported to General James Jones (then head of the European Command and NATO Supreme Commander) in Stuttgart before returning to the United States.
The operation continued. Madeleine Albright, as NDI President (the branch of the National Endowment for Democracy that specializes in handling left-wing parties) traveled to Nairobi, where she oversaw the organization of the Orange Movement...
During the parliamentary elections of December 2007, a survey funded by USAID announces the victory of Odinga. On election day, John McCain announced that President Kibaki rigged the election in favor of his party and that in fact the opposition led by Odinga had won. The NSA, in conjunction with local phone operators, sent anonymous text messages to the population. In areas populated by the Luo (Odinga’s ethnic group), they read "Dear Kenyans, the Kikuyu have stolen our children’s future... We must treat them in the only way that they understand... with violence." ...Within days, this peaceful country sank into sectarian violence. The riots caused over 1,000 deaths and 300,000 displaced. 500,000 jobs were lost.
Madeleine Albright came back. She offered to mediate between President Kibaki and the opposition trying to overthrow him. With finesse, she stepped aside and placed in the spotlight the Oslo Center for Peace and Human Rights. The board of this respected NGO was newly chaired by the former Prime Minister of Norway, Thorbjørn Jagland.
Breaking with the Center’s traditional impartiality, he sent two mediators on site, whose expenses were entirely footed by Madeleine Albright’s NDI (that is to say ultimately out of the U.S. Department of State’s budget): another former Norwegian Prime Minister, Kjell Magne Bondevik, and former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan (the Ghanaian is very much on the scene in Scandinavian states since he married the niece of Raoul Wallenberg). Compelled to accept the compromises forced on him in order to restore civil peace, President Kibaki agreed to create a prime minister post and to entrust it to Raila Odinga, who immediately began reducing trade with China.
Small gifts between friends
The Kenyan operation stopped then but the lives of the protagonists went on. Thorbjørn Jagland negotiated an agreement between the National Endowment for Democracy and the Oslo Center, which was formalized in September 2008. An attached foundation was created in Minneapolis that allows the CIA to indirectly subsidize the Norwegian NGO. It acts on behalf of Washington in Morocco and especially in Somalia .
Obama was elected President of the United States. Odinga declared several days of national holiday in Kenya to celebrate the outcome of the election in the United States. General Jones became a national security adviser. He appointed Mark Lippert as Chief of Staff and General Gration as Deputy. During the presidential transition in the U.S., the President of the Oslo Center, Thorbjørn Jagland, was elected chairman of the Nobel Committee, despite the risk that such a crafty politician would pose to the institution . The nomination of Barack Obama for the Nobel Peace prize was filed no later than January 31, 2009 (regulatory deadline, twelve days after he took office in the White House.
Lively debates took place as the Committee was still unable to agree on a name in early September, as outlined in the usual timetable. On September 29, Thorbjørn Jagland was elected Secretary General of the Council of Europe following a behind-the-scenes agreement between Washington and Moscow. This called for a favor in return. Although membership of the Nobel Committee is incompatible with a major executive political position, Jagland did not resign. He argued that the law strictly prohibits the combination with a ministerial office but says nothing about the Council of Europe. He then returned to Oslo on October 2. The same day, the Committee appointed President Obama for the 2009 Peace prize.

Mossad-CIA likes to use people from relatively "clean" countries as cover for dirty operations. Various global transparency indices typically rate the Scandinavian countries as the least corrupt in Europe, and Israel as the most corrupt. Norwegians in particular go out of their way to cultivate a "nice global citizen" image, in fact, in the 1990's I recall seeing an opinion research piece in the old Norway Times that headlined "It's Cute to Be from Norway." Other countries like New Zealand or the Netherlands may not appear quite so "cute," but they still have relatively clean images awaiting exploitation as well. Not surprisingly, in the Cherbourg Boat Affair of 1969, the Israelis used a "Norwegian" shipping owner and Nordic-looking Israeli sailors to snake torpedo boats right out from under the French. As another example, in 2004 we got the passport scandal where "The prime minister of New Zealand angrily denounced Israel and imposed diplomatic sanctions on it after two suspected Mossad agents were jailed for six months for trying on false grounds to obtain a New Zealand passport."
These kinds of intrigues are finally creating blowback against the global Zionist agenda in Nordic countries, just as the disastrous Georgian invasion of South Ossetia in August 2008 sponsored by Israel and the U.S. has increased pro-Russian tilt in Azerbaijan and other central Asian countries, according to Dr. Mathew Raphael Johnson..
The Sept. 6, 2009 article "Norway leads the way and boycotts the apartheid state of Israel. It’s time for Europe to follow!" commented: "In the wake of the crisis after a Swedish newspaper revealed the heinous, and criminal activity, of Israel which has been harvesting organs and body parts from murdered Palestinians and selling them on to the USA it seems that Israel is facing another crisis, this time with Norway. The Norwegian Government Pension Fund, which has $400 billion in assets under management, has sold its $5.4 million holding in Israeli defense contractor Elbit Systems Ltd."
Adding to growing Nordic resentment is the feeling that evil Zionists in the City of London are trying to molest their dear little brother Iceland. Both New World-resistant Russia under Putin, and EU-resistant Norway under its Labor Party government, understand the Icelandic desire to maintain independence. In contrast, the Obama regime is so heavily in bed with the City of London and Mossad-CIA that it roots for the other side; namely to absorb Iceland into the New World Order global collective.
In his Oct. 7, 2009 article "Iceland Political Leader Calls For Debt Moratorium As Government Crumbles," Webster Tarpley observed:

"London and The Hague are demanding $6 billion in restitution for losses incurred by private Icelandic bankers operating in their countries as Icesave, even though the Icelandic government had never guaranteed these operations, and even though British and Dutch regulators were deeply implicated in the Icesave debacle, which came in the wake of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy.... If the politically desperate [British Prime Minister James Gordon] Brown and his Dutch retainer Balkenende get their way, Icesave will turn into Iceslave ­ a future of poverty, unemployment, depopulation, and national collapse for Iceland, which could never pay the sums being demanded."

Snubbed by many "usual friends," Iceland resorted to Norway and Russia for bailout loans. In the view of STRATFOR, a loan "will give Russia the opportunity to challenge the West in an extremely strategic venue." ("Strategic" equates to "GIUK Gap," "GIAK" meaning "Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom", as a key choke point in naval grand strategy).
The U.S. abandoned its Naval facilities in 2006 as part of a geopolitical shift towards new locations ranging between Romania and central Asia, another special gift of Zionist neocon lunacy. Norway stepped in with its own fighter jets and naval patrols to assist Iceland's defense.
The 16 July 2009 article "Russia approves 64 billion ISK loan to Iceland" stated: "Icelandic President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson said a few months ago that Iceland needs to find new friends since some close allies refused to grant Iceland a loan. The President then offered to Russia use of the Keflavik Airport for military operations but the Russian government denied this proposal."
This is a diplomatic disaster for America. But then again, what else should we expect from the same Zionist neocons who have brought us misadventures in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in Central Asia, not to mention the 9/11 inside job, London 7-7-2005, and the Wall Street shakedown described in Chapter 33?

Hoover in his younger years

The "False Flag" FBI Director

Former FBI Los Angeles field officer Ted Gunderson has talked about how pedophile rings now involve the highest levels of CIA. Both on radio interviews, and in my own conversation when I met him at a Barnes Review /American Free Press conference in September 2006, he lamented that the FBI is no longer what it used to be when he retired in the early 1980's. The FBI stopped recruiting as many "All American" types into its ranks.
This underscores an important underlying theme in this Mission of Conscience series about how we need more private citizen cyber vigilance groups to help us monitor government officials who are monitoring us so that they can receive adequate adult supervision.
In December, former Naval Intelligence officer Wayne Madsen posted "The Truth About `Gay Edgar Hoover,'" which gives new meaning to the concept that for most people in high places, posturing is the first priority:

December 4-6, 2009 -- The truth about "Gay Edgar Hoover."
Three separate and well-informed sources, including a former White House press photographer and a noted researcher on the late FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, have confirmed that not only was Hoover gay, which, according to FBI agents interviewed by one of our sources, was well-known to a number of FBI agents, but was a cross-dresser, as well. Apparently, it was Hoover's fondness for male nude figurines that prompted the few FBI agents invited to visit Hoover's home to wonder about their celebrated "tough guy" director.

In addition, Hoover's longtime close association with his deputy director Clyde Tolson -- some would call it a gay marriage -- set off the "gaydar" among many seasoned FBI agents.

Hoover, who was known as "Weird Mary" by his neighbors who lived near his eerily quiet home at 4936 31st Place in northwest Washington, DC, was often spied wearing either a dress or an old woman's-style house coat while watering his flowers and rosebushes. Hoover masked his face by wearing a beekeeper's hat and face net, according to one source who often passed by "Weird Mary's" home. Hoover insisted on being called "Mary" when in the company of gay partners at his home and at parties with very exclusive invitation lists.

Hoover's homosexual and transvestite antics were also known to the Mafia, which used the information to blackmail Hoover into never waging a full scale onslaught by the FBI against its top leaders, including mob financier Meyer Lansky.

Although Hoover's relationship with Tolson seemed monogamous enough, WMR learned from one informed source that Hoover once had a homosexual relationship with a young Chilean diplomat assigned to the Chilean embassy in Washington.

"Mary" and "Franny"

A source who is familiar with the child abuse scandals of the Roman Catholic Church also revealed to WMR that Hoover also frequently swapped young males, some underage, for the purposes of sex with the gay Archbishop of New York City, Francis Cardinal Spellman, known as "Franny" in New York's gay community. Hoover and Spellman shared something in addition to young males -- a fervent commitment to right-wing politics.

The boy swapping between Hoover and Spellman was known to President John F. Kennedy through the Archbishop of Boston, Richard Cardinal Cushing, who, although a heavy drinker, was straight but despised Spellman with a passion. Cushing reportedly told Kennedy and his brothers Robert and Teddy about Spellman and Hoover. Hoover, who maintained an extensive personal file on the Kennedys, as he did a number of U.S. political and other leaders, realized that he faced a situation of "mutually assured destruction" if he exposed any of the Kennedys' affairs.

President Kennedy was not the only president to know about Hoover's secret life style. When White House Chief of Staff H. R. Haldeman informed President Richard Nixon of Hoover's sudden death in May 1972, Nixon replied, "Jesus Christ! That old cocksucker!"

This passage reinforces the observation made in prior chapters by Capt. May that as he went up the chain of command of the FBI, it became increasingly perverse and political in its policies.
However, I must add that while for libertarian ideological reasons it may be healthy to have a few laughs on the FBI as an overweening federal political police as well as anti-criminal force, there still remain important reasons why certain members of the FBI deserve our respect and cooperation.
Willis Carto, publisher of the American Free Press, once opined that for all his faults, things could have been vastly worse for America in the 1930's-1940's if Hoover had not been FBI Director. The Venona Papers and other leaked Soviet archives prove that the threat of high level Communist infiltration and takeover of America was in fact worse than even Sen. Joe McCarthy stated. One shudders to think what may have happened if an evil Jewish genius like Leon Trotsky, father of the Red Terror, had taken control of the FBI.
I think that most sane Americans would infinitely prefer someone like "Weird Mary." In fact, maybe it took a "Weird Mary" to play the complex double games necessary to navigate through such a dangerous situation, where Jews controlled the central bank and were trying every trick in the book to achieve outright takeover.
As an important second point, for all the FBI's faults, the Department of Homeland Security under American-Israeli dual-loyalist Michael Chertoff was hardly a sigh of relief. The FBI has at least been around for a while, and has been staffed with many middle managers from solid American middle class backgrounds who can provide some kind of counter inertia to dangerous recent creatures like Jonathan Pollard, Michael Chertoff, Larry Franklin, Rahm Emmanuel, Janet Napolitano, or perhaps even Barack Hussein Obama II himself. Things are still dangerous like in the 1930's despite the fact that superficially the flavoring of problems may seem different.
Last, but not least, the FBI does in fact go after common criminals. Any American, myself included, could easily find ourselves in an unexpected situation where we suddenly have to report a crime to the FBI or ask the FBI for assistance, so maybe it is not wise to go too far in knocking these people.
Furthermore, as the value of the dollar goes to zero, and America comes under extreme social stress, maybe someone will come out of the FBI just like the way Vladimir Putin came out of the KGB in Russia, or perhaps even out of the U.S. Armed Forces like the way Gustaf Mannerheim came out of the Finnish and Russian militaries, and decisively help Americans navigate through very difficult political circumstances, to include finally turning the tables on the Zionists and helping most parts of America sort themselves out and become productive again.
In spite of everything, we must remain calm and cool, for reasons I will explain later. As Professor Bob Whitaker has famously put it, "The situation is terminal, but not serious."




The "Climategate" PSYOP

As if Holocaustianity, false flag global pandemics, and the 9/11 cover up is not enough to keep responsible debunkers busy, the "Global Warming" PSYOP heated up again when Obama visited Copenhagen in December. Many individuals who called in to Republic Broadcasting Network hosts were fearful that Obama was going to sign away the last of America's sovereignty in a U.N. treaty designed to coercively curtail carbon emissions.
The articles "Toro! Toro! Michael Crichton" by Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD and "The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming" by Michael Crichton himself explain why scientists have failed to establish a meaningful correlation between CO2 emissions and global warming. The famous author Michael Crichton has been a leading activist against the Global Warming scam, somewhat comparable to the crusades by Jane Burgermeister and Dr. Rebecca Carley against toxic vaccines and Capt. May's campaign against false flag attacks.

YouTube: Michael Crichton on Environmentalism as a Religion

As Crichton explains, one of the strongest correlations for historic earth heating and cooling cycles is sunspot activity. Besides, the earth is due for another ice age, which has been taking place in cycles about every 20,000 years. Nevertheless, this does not stop the globalists from trying to institute international coercive measures to tax carbon-producing industrial countries.
The article "Toro! Toro! Michael Crichton" does an excellent job of identifying key Info War ingredients behind the Global Warming push:


Why do so many people (including those 1,500 scientists) believe in global warming? One reason, as one of the characters in State of Fear puts it, is that "all reality is media reality." People who get their information from watching television and reading the New York Times do not learn the true facts of the matter. Media reality says there is man-made global warming, which if not constrained will be catastrophic...
For some scientists their views on this subject can affect their livelihood. Government and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) award $2 billion in grants each year for climate research. These organizations expect the scientists they fund to support the idea that global warming is a problem. As Michael Crichton points out (in his Caltech lecture), we now live in an "anything-goes world where science – or non-science – is the hand maiden of questionable public policy… Evidentiary uncertainties are glossed over in the unseemly rush for an overarching policy, and for grants to support the policy by delivering findings that are desired by the patron."
There are two other reasons why people believe in human-caused global warming despite strong evidence against it. Global warming is like a religion. In "Distinguishing Reality from Fantasy, Truth from Propaganda," a lecture given to the Commonwealth Club in September 2003, Michael Crichton identifies environmentalism as "the religion of choice for urban atheists"...
Global warming also has ideological underpinnings. "Environmentalism is the last refuge of socialism," as one observer puts it. Although socialism may have failed as an economic model, many believe it can halt man-made global warming and, by this means, reform civilization...

Interestingly enough, in his 18 Dec 2009 article "Shakedown in Copenhagen," by Patrick J. Buchanan also exposed the Climategate scam:


If you would know what Copenhagen is all about, hearken to this nugget in The Washington Post's report from the Danish capital.
"Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenari -- who is representing all of Africa here -- unveiled his proposal Wednesday for a system in which rich countries would provide money to poor ones to help deal with the effects of climate change. ...
"Zenawi said he would accept $30 billion in the short term, rising to $100 billion by 2020. ... This was seen as a key concession by developing countries, which had previously spurned that figure ... as too low."
There was a time when a U.S. diplomat would have burst out laughing after listening to a Third World con artist like this.
But not the Obamaites. They are already ponying up...
When you slice through the blather about marooned bears and melting ice caps, oceans rising and cities sinking, global warming is a racket and a crock. It is all about money and power.
Copenhagen has always been about an endless transfer of wealth from America, Europe and Japan and creation of a global bureaucracy to control the pace of world economic and industrial development.
End game: enrichment and empowerment of global elites at the expense of Western peoples whose leaders have been bamboozled by con artists...


Cyber Activism and the
Covert 4th Generation Warfare Model


We are stuck with an important intellectual problem. As cyber militia, how do we conceptualize the nature of this perpetual war being waged against the common people of America -- ranging from false flag attacks to PSYOPs-- within the context of the overall study of war itself?
This problem is particularly acute, because we want to portray ourselves as essentially defensive and peaceful civilians focused upon objective analysis, yet we are up against extraordinarily evil people willing to promulgate assassination, nuclear terror, and mass pandemic genocide -- all of which can easily drive any relatively sane and normal person into extreme militance and partisanship for perfectly legitimate reasons.
Complicating matters further, our enemies frequently cloak their extremely hostile and treasonous behavior behind mountains of lies and phony false fronts to create appearances of normalcy and legitimacy. Most of the public has no idea about this war for very high stakes taking place behind the scenes. Nor do they understand how they are being manipulated.
Despite massive public pushback against mandatory swine flu vaccinations in fall 2009, or the high level U.S. military pushback involving the Summer 2007 B-52 Loose Nukes affair, or the firing of U.S. CENTCOM commander Admiral Fallon in Spring 2008, I do not think that most members of the American public or military fully grasp the real underlying source of the trouble.
A good starting point to understand how both "false flag" attacks and "Info War" fit into the spectrum of the study of warfare itself is the four generation paradigm developed by Col John Boyd and his star protege William S. Lind.
This conceptualization has gained enough visibility even within establishment military science circles that one needs to understand the parlance, even if one does not fully agree with the ideas themselves.
The punch line is that I view a key mission of a cyber militia like Ghost Troop as one of countering covert forms of 4th generation warfare. But before I can make this case, or explain why I believe that Zionists are deliberately waging covert 4th generation warfare against America --to include the use of false flag attacks - we first need to understand William Lind's model:

William S. Lind's Four Generations of War Paradigm

In his article “Understanding Fourth Generation Warfare,” William Lind provided the following overview:


The First Generation of Modern War runs roughly from 1648 to 1860. This was war of line and column tactics, where battles were formal and the battlefield was orderly…
…Second Generation warfare was… Developed by the French Army during and after World War I, it sought a solution in mass firepower, most of which was indirect artillery fire. The goal was attrition, and the doctrine was summed up by the French as, "The artillery conquers, the infantry occupies." Centrally-controlled firepower was carefully synchronized, using detailed, specific plans and orders, for the infantry, tanks, and artillery, in a "conducted battle" where the commander was in effect the conductor of an orchestra.
Third Generation warfare, like Second, was a product of World War I. It was developed by the German Army, and is commonly known as Blitzkrieg or maneuver warfare. Third Generation warfare is based not on firepower and attrition but speed, surprise, and mental as well as physical dislocation. Tactically, in the attack a Third Generation military seeks to get into the enemy's rear and collapse him from the rear forward: instead of "close with and destroy," the motto is "bypass and collapse." In the defense, it attempts to draw the enemy in, then cut him off. War ceases to be a shoving contest, where forces attempt to hold or advance a "line;" Third Generation warfare is non-linear. Not only do tactics change in the Third Generation, so does the military culture. A Third Generation military focuses outward, on the situation, the enemy, and the result the situation requires, not inward on process and method (in war games in the 19th Century, German junior officers were routinely given problems that could only be solved by disobeying orders). Orders themselves specify the result to be achieved, but never the method ("Auftragstaktik"). Initiative is more important than obedience (mistakes are tolerated, so long as they come from too much initiative rather than too little), and it all depends on self-discipline, not imposed discipline. The Kaiserheer and the Wehrmacht could put on great parades, but in reality they had broken with the culture of order.
In Fourth Generation war, the state loses its monopoly on war. All over the world, state militaries find themselves fighting non-state opponents such as al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the FARC. Almost everywhere, the state is losing.
Fourth Generation war is also marked by a return to a world of cultures, not merely states, in conflict… ….we have pointed out over and over that the 4th Generation is not novel but a return, specifically a return to the way war worked before the rise of the state. Now, as then, many different entities, not just governments of states, will wage war. They will wage war for many different reasons, not just "the extension of politics by other means." And they will use many different tools to fight war, not restricting themselves to what we recognize as military forces.

Hollywood romanticizes the buccaneer or quasi-privateer version of 4th generation warfare in the swashbuckling fictional work Captain Blood (1935), starring Erroll Flynn. Many real life buccaneers in the Caribbean alternated between nonstate warlike enterprises "for a cause," that is, 4th generation warfare as a continuation of the religious wars of the 16th and 17th centuries between Protestants against Catholic Spain, and pro-state activities, such as when Henry Morgan became acting governor of Jamaica, elements of the "Sea Beggars"(Geuzen) helped lay the foundation of the Dutch Republic navy, or Jean LaFitte and his followers assisted Major General Andrew Jackson in the Battle of New Orleans.



Beyond William S. Lind

I am in essential agreement with Lind’s conceptualization, except for a few areas where I tweak his model. I think Lind’s timeline from 1648 to 1860 is chronologically and conceptually too constrictive. On an abstract conceptual level, we see line and column tactics of First Generation warfare used by the ancient Greek phalanx and many other ancient armies. Many ancient and medieval armies also used catapults, ballistas, and massed arrow volleys which archived a similar purpose as massed artillery fire employed in Second Generation warfare in the 19th and 20th centuries.
A second point is that all these forms of warfare are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They can take place simultaneously or in various sequences. As one example, the Viet Cong engaged in political organizing and tunnel and cache preparation for five years before they turned violent. This was 4th generation warfare. In the early stages of their violent insurgency, they resorted to both first and third generation tactics. They usually lacked the heavy weapons to use 2nd generation tactics until the last phase of the war when the North Vietnamese Army became a major player. First generation tactics, such as human wave assault attacks or the use of advancing infantry skirmish lines to uncover enemy positions, are still used even in modern warfare in cases where commanders need to tightly control their troops. This can be because the troops are politically unreliable, unsophisticated, or otherwise advantageous to use as cannon fodder. In fact, William Lind accuses the U.S. military of still relying heavily on first generation tactics, to the extent that it often likes to move infantry like a screening force through enemy-held territory, and then rely on supporting arms such as massive artillery or air power to destroy the enemy once they bump into something.
I like Lind's conceptualization of 4th generation warfare as "nonstate. " It is like a catchall to describe a form of conflict that is simultaneously more primitive in some areas, and more sophisticated and diversified in other areas, compared to generations 1-3.

One of the biggest problems with 4th generation warfare is that its practitioners are usually incapable of holding any specific territory or protecting civilian populations from occupation by an enemy army. They are usually constrained to hit-and-run tactics in the face numerically stronger and better equipped conventional armies. This can make the civilian populations that they represent vulnerable to terrible reprisals.
Since an important function of most states is to defend lives and property, the state usually feels compelled to put up a 1-3rd generation warfare fight to defend territory in order to retain legitimacy.
Many libertarians define the state as whoever is the territorial monopolist on violence within a given area. Whoever can monopolize violence can usually also monopolize taxation, media, and life itself.
Using this definition, 4th generation warfare practitioners are usually just powerful enough as political organizers to put up a fight, but not so powerful that they can monopolize violence within a territory on a sustainable basis. Once 4th generation warfare practitioners become powerful enough to become the long term territorial monopolists on violence, historians often switch gears and begin to call them "the state."
There are quite a few interesting historical examples of 4th generation actors who --abracadabra!-- suddenly become "the state" once they decided to permanently hold and administer a territory, such as the great Ukrainian nationalist Cossack leader Bohdan Khmelnytsky or the head of a nomadic Mongolian clan named Ghengis Khan. Another interesting example involves Henry Morgan, who made a quick transition from preying on the Spanish Main as a roving non-state privateer in the Carribean to becoming acting governor of Jamaica.
It is equally interesting to observe 4th generation actors who have all the raw economic power and other influence to immediately create a state, but for various social and political reasons decide to deliberately keep their power base camouflaged for extended periods of time. One example involves the Rothschilds, Schiffs, Sassoons, Warburgs, and other Jewish dynasties in the 19th century and part of the 20th century. When they decided to suddenly parlay all this power into the creation of "the state" on 14 May 1948 -- Ouila! -- behold the State of Israel!

The practice of 4th generation warfare can have many different dimensions. For starters, we need to distinguish between its overt and covert forms, as well as the underlying racial, ethnic, and cultural character of its combatants.
It is interesting to me that historic masters of overt forms of 4th generation warfare tend to be very mobile and have decentralized leadership structures that put great emphasis on personal honor, self-discipline and initiative. They often operate from various "sanctuaries" that may include mountainous terrain, frozen steppes, tunnels, islands, or cross-border lands of "neutral" countries. They include various "barbarian" tribes (Hun, Mongols, Vikings), privateers (Dutch Sea Beggars, English Buccaneers of the Caribbean), and independent militia or insurgents (Cossack hosts of Ukraine and Russia, Watauga settlement of American Revolution, Viet Cong, or even guerillas of the Cuban Revolution). All this makes sense, since they usually need to be able to outfight, outmaneuver, outrun, and hide from military forces sent against them by conventional states in order to survive.

From the Wikipedia article on T. E. Lawrence. Left, Lawrence at Rabegh, north of Jidda, Arabia, 1917. Right: Emir Faisal's party at Versailles, during the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Prince Faisal (front), T. E. Lawrence, third from right.


Guerrilla of Arabia: How one of Britain's most brilliant military tacticians created the Taliban's battle strategy by Neil Faulkner,, 17 Sept 2010, notes that "One can identify 15 distinct principles of guerrilla warfare [from the works of Lawrence of Arabia]. They are extraordinary. They invert many principles of conventional military theory, such as concentration of force, and the centrality of pitched battle to destroy the enemy's main forces and will to fight. In this sense, they are the work of a brilliant maverick...Guerrilla warfare is as old as human conflict, but Lawrence's treatises represent the first systematic conceptualisation of its strategy. And this conceptualisation is remarkably comprehensive. Later theorists of guerrilla warfare – notably Mao, Nguyen Giap and Che Guevara – have added little of substance. Lawrence is the real teacher of the guerrilla fighter...":


1. Strive above all to win hearts and minds
2. Establish an unassailable base
3. Remain strategically dispersed
4. Make maximum use of mobility
5. Operate mainly in small, local groups
6. Remain largely detached from the enemy
7. Do not attempt to hold ground
8. Operate in depth rather than en face (i.e. not in lines)
9. Aim for perfect intelligence about the enemy
10. Concentrate only for momentary tactical superiority
11. Strike only when the enemy can be taken by surprise
12. Never engage in sustained combat
13. Always have lines of retreat open
14. Make war on matériel rather than on men
15. Make a virtue of the individuality, irregularity, and unpredictability of guerrillas

Significantly, many 4th generation fighters have been able to quickly ramp up from nonstate to state or even superstate. This challenges us to conduct a deeper functional analysis of the popular sovereignty concepts I addressed in Chapter 6. Once all the key elements of "sovereignty" become embedded within a paramilitary organization, the formal creation of "the state" can almost become an after thought.

Lind is correct that most people in the U.S. military today don't get 4th generation warfare. One reason is because the U.S. Government, controlled by Zionists, wants to them to continue thinking like obedient functionaries.
Historically, the imperial state is a jealous master. It wants its subjects to worship it as a surrogate "tribal chieftain" and bearer of "culture" and "identity." For purely selfish reasons, the imperial state wants it citizens to think like peasants and serfs and always "Come to Pappa" --the imperial state-- for all their psychic gratification needs.
The imperial, Zionist-dominated, neo-Jacobin, multi-racial, multi-cultural global super state that is America today usually does not want its own military establishment to "get it" because then U.S. military personnel might start to think "dangerous thoughts." They might start pursuing their own separate sovereignty rights, just like some of the secessionist rumblings coming out of Texas and Idaho, which challenge the Zionist plutocracy. Why else would the Director of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, who identifies as a likely Jewish lesbian, express fear about returning Iraqi veterans becoming potential "terrorists"? (See Chapter 31).
Hence, we see an interesting paradox. The U.S. government on one level sends its young warriors to fight against 4th generation actors like the Taliban and "Al Qaeda" in Afghanistan, but on another level their de facto CFR-Bilderberg-Rothschild rulers do not want them to understand a bigger picture that includes themselves.
There is also another important paradox at play. The U.S. military's greatest 4th generation warfare enemy is not in the Iraq-Af-Pak-Iran-Yemen theater, but rather it lies in the rear. The ultimate threat lies on Wall Street, within the Federal Reserve Banking System, and within the top offices of the Pentagon.
The Zionist neocons who occupy these top positions are the all-time masters of covert forms of 4th generation warfare on an ongoing basis. This is exactly what Col Donn de Grand Pre meant when he titled his book series "Barbarians Inside the Gates."
It is no accident that the Mossad, considered by many to be the most effective espionage organization in the world, has the support of millions of "sayanim" or Jewish "helpers" around the world. According to Victor Ostrovsky in By Way of Deception, it is the most admired organization in Israel. In fact, Ostrovsky claims that the Mossad effectively runs Israel.
Nor is it any accident that Jewish covert operations are able to effectively "politicize," "militarize," and "weaponize" all areas of civilian endeavor, ranging from national media used for PSYOPs, to the use of entrepreneurial businesses as false fronts, to the exploitation of the financial system to grab control of the strategic bases of target countries.

...A few words from the "Mongols of Covert
4th Generation Warfare"


The Jews are the "Mongols" of covert forms of 4th generation warfare, every bit as much as the Mongols themselves were the masters of overt forms. Jews run organized crime in America and other major countries around the world, which is a mainstay of covert 4th generation warfare. They are also typically leaders in the types of businesses that involve brokerage and other forms of mediation.
Another reason why William S. Lind is correct that the U.S. military does not "get" 4th generation warfare is because most professional military people have never acted as political or business brokers. Nor have they ever tried to run their own businesses or engage in any form of grass roots political organizing. Instead they get promoted by inventing and fulfilling bureaucratic projects within the context of a bureaucratic environment. They get a steady paycheck for affecting attitudes consistent with those of their superiors and the general tone of their organization. They are not forced to think like entrepreneurs and brokers and take entrepreneurial risks. Instead, on an intellectual and emotional level, many of them function amazingly like proles, Party members, and other functionaries in Orwell's 1984. As James Billington put it in his definition of the apparatchik, they are quite often men "...not of grand plans, but of a hundred carefully executed details."
Military personnel are certainly very sensitive to all the little signals of hostility and marginalization that are involved in competing for bureaucratic funding and promotion. However, most military commanders have no real feeling or understanding for subtle forms of warfare in unstructured environments involving business, economics, media, competing civilian cultures and ethnicities, or grass roots civilian politics. They are mainly trained to drive ships and tanks and planes, hold troop inspections, and operate weapons that put steel on steel.

It is also interesting to observe how both overt and covert practitioners of 4th generation warfare may choose to deliberately understate themselves, much like a poker player who hides his high cards. The following are some famous examples.
In The New Babylon, Michael Collins Piper describes how the Rothschilds were obsessive in the 19th century about keeping their position in society and extent of wealth out of the papers, even though many acknowledged them as "the financial rulers of Europe."
The "Taliban" means "the students." This hardly sounds like an insurgent army on the surface.
The mafia in America has often called itself "La Cosa Nostra" or "Our Thing."
Movies like "The Godfather," "Once Upon A Time in America," and "Goodfellas" are particularly interesting not only because of the innocuous-sounding names, but also because they illustrate a gray zone between "organized crime" per se and "4th generation warfare."
One way to distinguish between run-of-the-mill criminals who are definitely not "4th generation" fighters and real insurgents is the extent to which they are socially, politically, ethnically, ideologically, and culturally organized, and motivated to sustain violence or economic warfare to create a "nation within a nation" that pursues alternative sovereignty rights.
In his book Civil War Two: The Coming Breakup Of America, Thomas Chittum describes mushrooming numbers of highly armed Mexican, Asian, and other gangs in America that are not only engaged in criminal behavior, but also consciously seek to create ethnically independent little mini-"nations within a nation", such as the vision of "Azatlan."

As a final example, the "Sea Beggars" get the "humility" prize for an innocuous-sounding name. Regarding "criminal-related" issues, they occasionally acted in the gray zone, functioning more like pirates than privateers when they ran out of supplies.
The Sea Beggars were named after a Dutch group of "Geuzen" or "beggars" who humbly petitioned their Spanish occupation overlords in the 16th century for religious freedom in the face of a threatened Inquisition. Some time after their humble requests were thrown back in their faces, they continued to "beg" the Spaniards with the muzzle flashes of broadsides that won major naval battles. They played an important role in the Dutch War For Independence that culminated in the Dutch Republic. Wikipedia states:"Some of the forefathers of the great Dutch naval heroes began their naval careers as Sea Beggars, such as Evert Heindricxzen, the grandfather of Cornelis Evertsen the Elder."
The Sea Beggars were definitely a 4th generation force. They had a distinctive culture, ethnicity, religion, ideology, and urge towards the establishment of full-blown separate sovereignty rights relative to the Spanish Empire.

The Nine Principles of War

Can we "abstract" and apply the nine principles of war taught in most American service academies to the Info War and our volunteer civilian cyber militia activities? I think so.
The nine principles of war consist of Mass, Objective, Offensive, Security, Economy of Force, Maneuver, Unity of Command, Surprise, Simplicity; (acronym: MOOSE MUSS).
The article “How did General Schwarzkopf apply the Nine Principles of War?” by LCDR Roberta Stein, is one example of an online analysis that addresses a conventional, boots-on-the-ground military campaign. In her article, LCDR Stein sequences "MOOSEMUSS" as "OUESOMMSS" (could be pronounced "awesomes"), or Objective, followed by Unity of Command and Effort, Economy of Force, Security, Offensive, Maneuver, Mass, Surprise, and Simplicity. I have decided to utilize this approach in the following short list of definitions:


Direct every military operation toward a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable objective.
For every objective, seek unity of command and unity of effort
Economy of force is the judicious employment and distribution of forces.
Security results from the measures taken by a commander to protect his forces.
Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative.
Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible application of combat power?
Synchronizing all the elements of combat power where they will have decisive effect on an enemy force in a short period of time is to achieve mass
Strike the enemy at a time or place or in a manner for which he is unprepared.
Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and concise orders to ensure thorough understanding


The following is my attempt to adapt and reinterpret conventional warfare principles in our role as a counter covert 4th generation warfare cyber militia.

Direct every military operation toward a clearly defined,
decisive, and attainable objective.


Our first and most immediate objective has been to proactively investigate and publicize analyses of false flag indicators in order to thwart repeat false flag attacks conducted by a hostile foreign entity such as the Mossad which acts directly against the American national interest and subverts popular sovereignty. This is a reasonably clear and definable objective.
In my interview with Mark Dankof on his Republic Broadcasting Network Show described in Chapter 37, I explained how we try to stay focused on attacking the parasite and not the host. In other words, we want to bolster counter intelligence activities to prevent military and police exercises from getting hijacked.
We do not oppose defense or preparedness-related exercises in themselves. In fact, under ordinary circumstances, we strongly support these things. We do not want to appear like we are encouraging military or police to shirk their ordinary duties in any way.
Of course in order to make this objective comprehensible to most readers, it should be accompanied with a "situation" statement. This is similar in concept to the sequencing of the standard NATO five paragraph order, whose acronym "SMEAC" begins with "situation" as in Situation, Mission, Execution, Admin and Logistics, Command and Signal.
This whole Mission of Conscience series has helped explain the overall "situation," so no need to revisit the topic here, except to point out that a major purpose of a situation brief should be to explain why the current establishment in America today --to include national media, the Jewish Lobby, Wall Street, the central bank, the Obama administration, FBI, DHS, and Pentagon --are so heavily infiltrated and compromised that our efforts are necessary.
Our next objective is to provide analysis that defeats the web of lies and illusion, commonly called "Info War," necessary to support false flag attacks. This can include analyses of the basics of ideology and propaganda warfare.
Our third objective is to provide analysis that exposes the deeper sociological basis of false flag attacks and "Info War." This means educating the public about the true nature of "Alien" and "Predator" and other natural enemies of the Constitution within our society who pose a perpetual threat.
This third objective fits hand and glove with the first objective, to the extent that it addresses everything below the waterline of the proverbial iceberg that one must understand in a complete intelligence analysis order to fully comprehend what appears above the water line in the form of false flag attacks and "Info War."
Our fourth objective is to inspire adequate financial and political support to defend ourselves, disseminate our message, and work towards achieving a reasonably sane and viable society. This last objective enables us to survive, leverage our influence, and even roll back malevolent forces identified in the first three objectives.
Consistent with the fourth objective, in the "Why We Fight" section of Chapter 6, I explain why the concept of increasing popular sovereignty is a superordinate goal that is consistent with our goal of protecting the Constitution and defeating high-level criminal behavior.
Our fifth objective is to inspire the formation of other activist groups and more effective citizen vigilance activity in America and around the world. This includes at the very least activism to preserve a free Internet and free speech.
I believe strongly that there is no one segment in American society that holds all the answers for America's problems moving forward, to include the military. We need a wide variety of groups with a wide variety of backgrounds serving as activists and informing each other through the Internet as a "collective intelligence medium" for Americans to find our way through the difficulties that lie ahead.
The anti-genocide objective: In wrapping up this section, I want to add a sixth objective which is more of my own personal objective, not necessarily shared by other members of Ghost Troop, but is nevertheless too important for me personally to avoid mentioning.
Out of control "Alien" and "Predator" means much more than endless threats of false fag attacks involving violent terrorist acts. We saw beginning in spring and summer 2009 how it could mean false flag pandemics directed at all of humanity. The ultimate agenda in that case involved global depopulation. It threatened the worst mass genocide seen in human history.
The topic of ethnic, tribal, racial, or cultural survival is relevant to this threat because I think that mankind is instinctively tribal in nature, and the cyber activist groups that will endure the longest and be the most effective will likely have tribal as well as ideological motivations. Furthermore "Alien," or unlimited Zionism, is one of the most tribalistic forces on this planet. It will require the reawakened, healthy tribalism of one or more competing groups to act as a successful counterpredator to keep the predatory criminal Zionist brand of tribalism in check. Anarcho-libertarianism and left wing "anti-racist" ideology alone cannot do the job.
Last, but not least, I believe that Dr. William Pierce was correct in his article "Why Conservatives Can't Win," or Kevin Strom in his article "Multiracialism and Conservatism." For that matter, I encourage the reader to visit my own answer to the question "Why Have Conservatives Been So Ineffective in America?" in my "Have You Been Brainwashed?" quiz. One requires a decisive, over arching objective to win in the long run.
Most conservatives in America are too cowardly and limited in their worldview and political activism. A truly effective rightist is conscious of the need to protect and assert the indigenous culture, religion, and physical type of his own people. He is very much aware of the extent to which they have retained or lost their full sovereignty rights that I address in chapter 6.
For me as a Scandinavian-America, the alternative to tyrannical Zio-federal government and Jewish-controlled multi-racial and multi-cultural degradation is the creation of independent Nordic or Nordic-Celtic ethnostates in North America, each with its own vibrant and productive indigenous culture, and each with as many sovereignty rights as possible.
Hence, I harbor two over-arching objectives. It is either to whole-heartedly support the U.S. Government so long as it can treat my own people --and other peoples as well -- with adequate respect, or the creation of alternative ethnostates in North America that can enable my own people to survive, determine their own destiny, and otherwise enjoy full popular sovereignty rights.
For quite some time, Western countries have been in the grip of psychopathic elites. They can do very evil things on short notice. Who could have predicted in 1788 that the Celtic Vendee of western France would become the targets of outright government-sponsored genocide within only a few years? Who could have predicted in 1913 that the Ukrainian Kulaks and various Cossack groups --traditionally the bulwarks of Ukrainean and Russian patriotism, conservatism, and productivity-- would some day become the targets of government-sponsored mass genocide campaigns?
Most Russians and Ukraineans in 1913 probably would have thought any person who suggested such a thing was a likely candidate for the lunatic asylum.
Lunatic things are now happening to America. The country is bankrupt. It can not control its skyrocketing debt or the hemorrhaging of its strategic industries. We have a neo-communist Black President in the White House who is also likely a front man for Mossad-CIA. He is surrounded by Zionist neocon subversives and funded by the same types of Jewish plutocrats who supported the Bolshevik Revolution.
On top of all this, I believe that Jane Burgermeister, Capt. May, and Dr. Rebecca Carley (all of whom I wish to nominate for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize) are correct that the psychopathic power elite tried to hit us with a global population reduction pandemic last summer.
No particular group of people is safe. We need all the activist help and citizen vigilance we can muster from people of all backgrounds.
Part of my own personal strategy to avert genocide is to not only address the threat to global humanity --as well as the obvious threats to our Constitution and civil liberties-- but also to tailor my discussion of the nature of the threat to my own particular ethnic group -Scandinavian Americans or WASPs-- to try to intensify their motivation for activist action. I think that Americans of other racial and ethnic backgrounds should try to do the same thing with their own people. The process of getting the nationalisms of various peoples around the world to work together for common positive goals is what I call "international nationalism."
Using my own people as an example, I can try to appeal to their pride and heritage. At the time of the American Revolution, this country was overwhelmingly WASP in its demographic composition. Going back further in time to the Reformation, those countries which were overwhelmingly Nordic or Nordic-Celtic went Protestant, whereas virtually all of the majority non-Nordic countries in Europe tended to remain shackled to the very corrupt and centralized Catholic Church. This speaks volumes to me, particularly today when the U.S. Government increasingly acts like a secular version of the unscrupulous Catholic Church of the late Middle Ages -- heavily immersed in the use of torture, witch hunts, and intrigue-- that ultimate drove my Northern European ancestors to arms in order to protect their ancient rights and liberties.
The historical record shows me that Nordic-Celtic peoples tend to have a higher percentage of innovators, early adopters, technologically proficient people, free spirits, free thinkers, nonconformists, and individualists within their populations relative to other white ethnic groups. They also have greater percentages of people with the innate self restraint, altruism, and chivalry necessary to sustain principled republican, scientific, and technological institutions.
As their percentage within the overall population continues to decline (a sad trend in effect since 1861, according to Madison Grant in his classic work The Passing of the Great Race), America is not only effectively reversing the American Revolution and the Protestant Reformation on a deep sociological level, but is also surrendering any real chance that it can restore a world class, innovative, and competitive industrial base. Instead, it is stacking the deck that it will turn into a a permanent, poverty-laden Third World country like Brazil, India, or Nigeria.
As long as we can maintain a free Internet, and enough of a climate of freedom so that activist groups can speak out, I would like to remain cautiously optimistic that we can muddle through our coming crises in a relatively nonviolent and rational way, reminiscent of the way Britain muddled through its bankruptcy crisis under Margaret Thatcher or the Russians muddled through the collapse of the Soviet Union and Zionist kleptocracy in the 1990's.
On the other hand, I can also foresee plausible scenarios that are utterly ghastly and horrible. They are even worse than what Tom Chittum describes in his classic work Civil War II: The Coming Breakup of America. These scenarios might duplicate the bloodiest phases of the French Revolution, Bolshevik Revolution, or the destruction of Germany during the Thirty Years' War.
I am not saying that such horrible things will necessarily take place, only that the downside risks are becoming increasingly plausible and worrisome as potential future scenarios.
Therefore, I encourage multi-pronged approaches by as many private citizen vigilance groups as possible:


(a) Anarcho-libertarian approach, because anarcho-libertarians do a lot of good work to expose establishment corruption, and many people simply do not share my nationalist sentiments on an emotional level
(b) Paleo-conservative "international nationalist" approach, particularly one that helps people get through IQ levels 1-4 described below

We have already seen the success of the international approach through the way Jane Burgermeister in Austria was able to quickly work with Dr. Rebecca Carley and other activists in America to develop an effective alterative media response to the swine flu false flag pandemic threat. Capt. May, to his credit, recognized the significance of Jane Burgermeister's work early. We need to build on this kind of success.
By raising the "internationalist nationalist" issue, I am adding some extra levels to the "IQ Test" that Capt. May discussed in his earlier talk show interviews when discussed levels 1-2:


IQ Level One: Figuring out that 9/11 was an inside job
IQ Level Two: Figuring out that if the inside job perpetrators of 9/11 have not been brought to justice, and national media continue to warn about likely terror strikes, then we need citizen vigilance efforts to try to thwart the real possibility of repeat attacks.

To all this, I would add the following two additional IQ levels


IQ Level Three: Figuring out that repeat false flag threats must stem from deep sociological roots such as "Predator" (out of control federal government) and "Alien" (out of control Zionism), and "Dumber and Dumber" (the general public has become an increasingly incompetent, lazy, and gullible as a counter predator over the last 100 years towards false flag predators, which is why these monsters are so out of control today ).
IQ Level Four: If we can not muzzle the repeat false flag threat by muzzling Predator and Alien through the normal democratic process, then Americans need to start reinventing alternative forms of popular sovereignty to protect themselves from these monsters. This means reinvoking all the tactics of alternative nation-building that patriotic nationalists have used for ages, such as forms of secessionism and the creation of alternative media and racial, ethnic, and national identities. It can also entail looking for foreign allies such as what American Revolutionaries established with France, except first we must exhaust all legal and nonviolent forms of support. Hopefully the required changes can take place in a reasonably peaceful and rational manner.

An excellent example of beneficial , peaceful foreign assistance to American patriots is RT (Network), formerly Russia Today online television, sponsored by the state-owned Russian news agency RIA Novosti. Capt. May has frequently commented on how Russians are willing to run stories that mainstream "American" media will not touch. Note how former Naval Intelligence Officer Wayne Madsen is a regular contributor to RT. A good example is provided below, where he is part of the panel on "Cross Talk on Media: Brainwash, Bias, Agenda:"

January 14, 2010 -- RT: Media Bias


We need more independent sources like RT around the world who can work with American patriots and challenge America's controlled national media. According to the RT segment above, 90% of U.S. media is controlled by six mega-companies. (They left out Mossad-CIA). The more truly independent alternative media in this world, the better.

For every objective, seek unity of command and unity of effort


An interesting paradox of a cyber militia like Ghost Troop is that as an analytical civilian operation dedicated to free thought and free speech, American citizen-soldier traditions run contrary to the kinds of authoritarian "unity of command" often found among active duty personnel.
Instead, we prefer generalized "mission orders" analogous to broad goals given to unit commanders in maneuver warfare that enable them to retain enormous flexibility while reacting to unfolding general events.
Hence, our ultimate Commanding Officer is "General Truth" in the same vein that the supreme commander behind the Russian victory in fighting Napoleon was "General Winter." If nothing else, adherence to Truth will bring us victory against the Matrix of Deception just as Winter annihilated Bonaparte's Grand Armee.
The honorary commander-in-chief of Ghost Troop can only be someone like the ghost of Thomas Jefferson. America's third President listed the following three things on his tombstone as his greatest accomplishments:




Although not perfect by any means, Jefferson nevertheless had important strengths worth emulating. He unquestionably displayed a Faustian search for knowledge as a true Renaissance Man. When faced with tyranny, he risked life, fortune, and sacred honor to oppose it, just as we today must battle the creeping totalitarianism of Predator and Alien.
Our standing general orders consist of the U.S. Constitution. However, as I discuss in regard to the "Constitution Cult" problem in the "Maneuver" section below, drilling down on exactly what our oath to protect and defend the Constitution means can create many interesting social and intellectual challenges. After all, Barack Hussein Obama II taught Constitutional law for ten years, but despite this, I think that every major libertarian writer in America today, to include Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, James Bovard, and Nat Hentoff, would agree that this has failed to prevent "Bush in Blackface" or "Bush II" from continuing the assault on our civil liberties.
Our moral authority comes from our basic right of self-defense, to include our right to avoid becoming additional casualty figures from more false flag attacks. This also include our right to prevent our own deaths or paralysis from vax-assassination campaigns (Chapter 36), avoid getting herded like cattle into FEMA slave camps, and avoid brainwashing by controlled national media and Holocaust propaganda.
Our moral authority also stems from our ability to say things that appear fair, truthful, accurate, insightful enough to be widely read on the Internet. As civilians we have no legal "command" authority over anybody.
Like any type of organization, we always have certain leadership issues that must always be dealt with, such as defining goals, avoiding infiltration and takeover by hostile parties, encouraging creativity and initiative, and maintaining "brand consistency" and quality control in our product.

One of the greatest problems that any dissident movement faces today is the possible of getting infiltrated or disrupted by the FBI's COINTELPRO, the ADL, Mossad-CIA, or any other establishment organs of repression. In the long run, it is much safer if we can employ "swarm tactics" and work in sympathy with many other independent organizations rather than try to build a monolithic movement. Indeed, we have benefited from many "Secret Sharer's" -- people who we are unlikely to ever meet or get to know in person-- who have helped our alerts go viral on the Internet.
On the other hand, there is such a thing a becoming too atomized and individualized. While it is great to reward individual initiative, man is inherently a tribal animal. He usually needs the social reinforcement of close friends and some kind of group to stay in the fight for any extended period of time. Therefore, I would tweak Louis Beam's Leaderless Resistance model. Yes, I agree that resistance should be decentralized, but not so decentralized that people lose necessary social support.

Economy of force is the judicious
employment and distribution of forces.


From our vantage point, "force" means the liberating power of making suppressed "truths" known to the public, because truth is a powerful sword. According to one translation of Victor Hugo: "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come."
One of our biggest challenges is to find ways to get truthful information across to the public about extreme threats in ways that are easily digestible and credible. We do not want to overstress people, but at the same time we must try to be completely truthful.
We also want people to feel optimistic and empowered enough to engage in effective activist action. If our message makes people feel depressed and fatalistic, then we have failed in our ultimate purpose, even though the content itself may be completely truthful.
There are many "economy of force" issues involved in measuring out and dispensing "truth." How much reasonable speculation is appropriate before one starts engaging in unnecessary "fear mongering?" How much editing of truth can one perform to fit time and space constraints before one is guilty of "limited hangout?"
We have had success with 500 word alerts that seem to fall within the attention span of most readers. At the same time, I am trying to tell as much of the complete story as I can to the public through this extensive Mission of Conscience series. Hopefully we can now enjoy the best of both worlds.
It is axiomatic that in the long run, people tend to pay a greater price for their delusions than anything they gain from them, both in terms of real costs and opportunity costs. Furthermore, truth does not fear investigation or revision.
However, humans are creatures of emotion and instinct as well as logic. In his article "Are Americans Too Broken for the Truth to Set them Free? Counterpunch, 4 Dec 2009, Bruce E. Levine explained: .


Can people become so broken that truths of how they are being screwed do not “set them free” but instead further demoralize them? Has such a demoralization happened in the United States? Do some totalitarians actually want us to hear how we have been screwed because they know that humiliating passivity in the face of obvious oppression will demoralize us even further? What forces have created a demoralized, passive, disCouraged U.S. population? Can anything be done to turn this around?
Can people become so broken that truths of how they are being screwed do not “set them free” but instead further demoralize them?
YES. It is called the “abuse syndrome.” How do abusive pimps, spouses, bosses, corporations, and governments stay in control? They shove lies, emotional and physical abuses, and injustices in their victims’ faces, and when victims are afraid to exit from these relationships, they get weaker; and so the abuser then makes their victims eat even more lies, abuses, and injustices, resulting in victims even weaker as they remain in these relationships.
Does the truth of their abuse set people free when they are deep in these abuse syndromes? NO. For victims of the abuse syndrome, the truth of their passive submission to humiliating oppression is more than embarrassing -- it can feel shameful; and there is nothing more painful than shame....

Hence, we are faced with another important economy issue, namely managing our emotions, health, and spirituality.
I have heard quite a few talk radio show hosts quote the character Howard Beale from the movie Network with the line "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!" They think Americans are too apathetic, and we need to whip up anger to get activists moving.
I think this is an immature approach to political activism. People who "act out" risk being rated unstable by their peers. They also risk burnout, or get caught up in a negative feedback circle where they can become addicted to the "pornography of rage" where the proverbial lion has to hear himself roar in order to function, but becomes noxious to bystanders who do not enjoy hearing the expressions of anger.
One of the greatest difficulties I have experienced in my own close personal dealings with Zionists is their incredible gift for telling big lies and saying extremely vicious things while acting very casual, calm, and even jocular. They are amazingly good at playing their cards close to the vest. The problem with most gentiles is that once they catch on to what is really going on behind the scenes, and they blow up with anger, most bystanders will simply see the gentile anger, but they will remain totally clueless about the passive aggressive Jewish behavior that prompted this anger in the first place. The gentile gets left holding the bag, looking like an unstable buffoon, and the Zionist gets to walk away with another smirk on his face. "Gotcha!"
When one deals with Zionists, one cannot let them get ones goat, even though in fact quite a few of them are extremely evil and dangerous people.
I think that Dr. Lorraine Day was also correct when she noted that for our long term health, we need to learn how to eat right, avoid toxins, exercise, learn how to manage stress, and maintain positive spirituality.
Regarding activism, one often catches more flies with honey than vinegar. Our enemies try to take our message and make it appear "marginal," "hateful," and "extreme." Jewish controlled media has spent untold millions of dollars demonizing anything to do with Nazis (see ADL support of Nazis in Chapter 34) and the Klan as hate mongers. Their next step is to try to link Americans with conservative views with either of these entities on a superficial level that forever keeps Americans in a fearful, disorganized, and "political correctness-walking on egg shells" mode.
In reality, my message is very "normal" by traditional American conservative standards, it is just the country that has become hijacked by coldly manipulative, extremist Zionist neocons.
One conservative activist, Lady Michele Renouf, summed it up well when she quoted Dostoyevsky "Beauty Will Save the World." Beauty will inspire us to rise above the ugliness, inhumanity, and dark intrigues of Zionist plutocrats.
The article 19 Jan 2009 article in the Idaho Observer titled "Are You Fighting Out of Love for Those Who You Are Fighting For or Hatred For Those You Are Fighting Against?" by Darrell van Mastrigt, editor of the Innocence Denied newsletter, talks about the power of love that motivated Don Harkins, editor and publisher of The Idaho Observer, to stay in the fight prior to his tragic death from cancer:


...Don's spirit will live through everyone he has touched in life because it was full of love. Love for Ingri [his wife]. Love for truth. Love for justice. Love for us. His words made me wonder if an advocate is stronger by fighting out of love for those he is fighting for or by hatred towards those he is fighting against. Seeing, hearing and feeling the impact Don has had in my life, and for so many others, has given me the answer.
Hatred burns strong and hot until there is nothing left. Love sustains through good and bad while growing stronger over time. Love never gives up and it never loses hope because it is always needed. Don fought with love because it made him stronger...

It is also interesting how various military and intelligence organizations who train individuals how to engage in effective behavior while under extreme stress, typically encourage the exact opposite of "acting out" behavior.
Marine officer training often focuses on the ability to organize and discipline oneself to get a lot done in very little time while maintaining a stoic demeanor. One Marine career retention poster shows a reconnaissance Marine on beach in combat gear holding an automatic rifle with words to the effect: "We get more done by 9:00 AM than most people get accomplished all day." I also like another Marine recon slogan: "Swift, Silent, and Deadly."
This is not "I'm mad as hell" type "acting out" behavior. This is beyond open displays of anger.
As another interesting example, the book The O.S.S. and I by William Morgan describes training methods for guerillas and spies to be dropped into Nazi-occupied France. The Office of Strategic Services, the WWII precursor of the CIA, taught agents to techniques to remain very calm, use ones head, and avoid showing ones hand under conditions of extreme stress. For example one bit of advice for the spy who has been freshly inserted "in country" is to not try to do too much too soon, but rather to spend some time relaxing and familiarizing oneself with ones environment in order to learn how to appear very calm and "normal." One technique was to sit on a park bench out side a Gestapo headquarters and just try to feel calm while reading a newspaper as German soldiers walk back and forth. Another bit of advice when planting explosives to blow up a bridge was to try to casually walk away once the timer is set in order to practice being calm, rather than run. The idea is that once one stops acting calm, one starts making more mistakes.
In his book By Way of Deception, Victor Ostrovsky talks about how Mossad agents are sometimes encouraged not to carry guns. They are told that their most dangerous weapon is their own brain, and their ability to think through situations in advance. If they have not though through a situation in advance, then being found in possession of a gun will probably not do much to save them.
Another interesting individual, Hans Joachim Scharff, who is profiled in Raymond Toliver's book The Interrogator, got everything he wanted out of all but ten of 510 Allied airmen he interrogated for the Luftwaffe in World War II. He never got angry and he never used torture. To the contrary, he usually acted very personable, charming, and humble. He put the emphasis on meticulously doing his homework, and using his head about every move he made. In fact, he was so well-respected that in the post-war era, when he relocated to southern California and became a U.S. citizen, he was honored by U.S. Air Force associations compromised of the very men he had interrogated!
I think that an important aspect of "economy of force" in the Info War is to distinguish between "truth effrontery," which is what we try to practice, and "shock jock" which is inappropriate for a defensive, analytical, academic-leaning approach. In "truth effrontery" we try to tell the plain truth in the clearest, calmest, most direct way possible. In "shock jock," activists deliberately act like the proverbial bull in the china shop by engaging in intemperate language and dragging in extraneous issues that needlessly entangle and sensationalize an issue in order to get attention or even communicate hostility to the audience. I have already described examples of "shock jock" in Chapter 34.

Security results from the measures taken by
a commander to protect his forces.


Obviously the term "security" has a very different meaning for a cyber intelligence unit than, say, an infantry unit in the field that worries about enemy soldiers infiltrating their perimeter to slit their throats.
In our case, "security" means keeping our guard against factors that can degrade our degree of truthfulness, the quality of our analysis, damage our reputation, impair our efficiency, undermine our working relationships, or subject us to unnecessary legal action.
We are also faced with a peculiar cultural and psychological problem in facing a covert 4th generation warfare opponent like the Zionists. In a Northern European culture, people have chivalrous and rationalistic instincts that tend to make them naive and "happy go lucky" in a normal civilian, peacetime environment. In contrast, many Zionists engage in covert 4th generation warfare --to include psycho-political warfare -- in all environments.
Paradoxically, for an "intelligence" unit, we are not particularly concerned about leaking our modus operandi to the pubic, since we have decided to become "public people" who work purely "open source." We invite imitators. We have no agendas that encourage illegal behavior. We believe that if anything, government-sponsored intelligence services are too secretive and compartmentalized. Our biggest problem is not in guarding secrets, but rather we have more information that we want to share with the public than we have time to post on the Internet. We also wish we could find more time to do interviews. Far from retaining secrets, we often cannot disclose information to the public fast enough.
The main tools of our enemies in the Infowar involve the use of propaganda to brainwash the public into support policies that ultimately benefit the power elite at their expense. I have a fairly simple definition of propaganda, namely the deliberate use of logical fallacies to steer thinking and public sentiment.
These are typically the same fallacies identified in college textbooks on informal logic. Logical fallacies such as Ad Hominem, "Glittering Generality" or "Hasty Generlization," and "Bandwagon" were specifically listed in the appendix of an older version of the U.S. Army PSYOPs manual as propaganda techniques. An quaint introduction for the uninitiated is the story "Love Is a Fallacy" from the Dobbie Gillis TV series of the 1950's.
On a broader intellectual level, a major goal of our enemies is to engage in "sophistry," which the ancient Greeks identified as the fine art of making weaker arguments appear to be the stronger arguments. I am reminded of certain multiple choice question alternatives once offered in a reading comprehension section of the Graduate Management Admission Test:


A if the item is a MAJOR OBJECTIVE in making the decision, the is, one of the outcomes or results sought by the decision-maker;
B if the item is a MAJOR FACTOR in making the decision, that is, a consideration, explicitly mentioned in the passafe, that is basic in determining the decision;
C if the item is a MINOR FACTOR in making the decision, that is, a secondary consideration that affects the criteria tangentially, relating to a Major Factor rather than to an Objective;
D if the item is a MAJOR ASSUMPTION in making the decision, that is, a supposition or projection made by the decision-make before weighing the variables;
E if the item is an UNIMPORTANT ISSUE in making the decision, that is, a factor that is insignificant or not immediately relevant to the situation.

The process of making an accurate analyses of most complex political and economic issues usually involves properly sorting out all of the above elements. In contrast, an important objective of our enemis is typically to turn all these things on their head, whereby major objectives are portrayed as minor objectives and vice versa, major factors are treated as minor factors and vice versa, and major assumptions are treated as unimportant issues and vice versa.

Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative.


This is a tricky topic to address, since for moral and political purposes we want to cultivate and maintain an image of being essentially "defensive" in nature. However, paradoxically enough, there are many ways we can assert various forms of strong offensive power even while maintaining this "defensive" posture.
We currently enjoy an enormous advantage from the fact that the Internet is now exposing the mountains of lies that have accumulated in the hands of our Predator and Alien enemies through their national media control for over a hundred years. As their house of cards crumbles before the Internet, this sometimes creates the illusion that we have "offensive power" when in reality we, like thousands of other cyber activists, are simply kicking in the rotten door.
Under under even relatively benign conditions, there is a considerable potential to generate heat and light by simply telling the straight truth in public. This is because there are so many people who engage in intellectual repression under even normal circumstances. For example, how many people who have grown up in a "religious household" are able to entertain the rationalist ideas of the Enlightenment?
Our favorite tactic is called "truth effrontery," a form of "political grandstanding." This involves discussing Predator and Alien-related issues in a very matter of fact, calm manner without going through any of the usual political correctness hand wringing or apologies,
We can also engage in "truth effrontery" on a broader philosophical level, by pointing out important facts and insights that challenge the very existence of tyrannical Predator and Alien. In the "Maneuver" section of this discussion, I go into some detail into what I call "turning movement" philosophical issues.
I feel strongly that it is not enough to try to thwart specific false flag attacks, whether they consist of threats to Texas-based oil refineries, the Chicago Willis Tower, or cities in the Pacific Northwest. We must go on the strategic counteroffensive and sustain it until we have achieved victory, and muzzled Predator and Alien once and for all so that never again will they present a threat to come back at us and enslave us.


Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage
through the flexible application of combat power


When it comes to thwarting false flag attacks, we have two basic maneuvers.
Our first approach, which is heavily focused on breaking news and exercise schedules, is to publicize indicators in advance of an event such as a major military exercise that we believe has a plausible likelihood of serving as a riding horse for the false flag attack. Since false flag attacks are inherently criminal and treasonous in nature, there is a credible chance that conspirators will scurry like cockroaches once a spotlight is shined in their direction.
This is analogous to the allopathic medical model, where one tries to use a drug or surgical procedure to attack a specific disease condition before it spreads and grows worse. In regard to military tactics, it would be similar to launching a spoiling attack along a specific front to disrupt an enemy as he is massing his troops and logistical stores to attack you. It might also be equated to Sun Tzu's concept of balking the enemy's plans, as he discussed in the following passage from his classic work The Art of War:


1. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them.

2. Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.

3. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.

III: Attack by Stratagem, Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Our second approach, which is ongoing, is to counter the general psychological environment and body of beliefs required to support a false flag attack. Since false flag attacks reflect a union of unlimited "Predator" (federal government) and out-of-control "Alien" (Zionism), we will never stop this evil until we figure out a way to discredit these monsters on a broad ideological level as well as interdict specific bad behaviors.
This broader approach, which I call "Counter-PSYOPS", is analogous to the homeopathic medical model, where naturopathic healers focus on rebuilding the immune system through adequate nutrition, exercise, avoidance of toxins in food and vaccines, adequate sleep, positive attitude (spirituality) and stress management.
A good military analogy would be the "turning movement," where one's own forces typically seize a highly strategic position in the enemy's rear that forces him to pull back his forward lines, even though they have not been attacked directly. One historical example involves the campaign by Gen. Douglas MacArthur where he landed Marines deep in the rear of North Koreans at Inchon, threatening all of their supply lines and communications, and forcing all the Communists forces to quickly retreat out of the southeaster part of South Korea all the way back up into North Korea. Another example involves the Richmond-Petersburg campaign during the War for Southern Independence, where Gen. Ulysses Grant's forces successfully wrapped around and seized railroads south of Richmond that comprised the last major supply routes for Robert E. Lee's Army, forcing the Confederates to retreat from Richmond to Appomattox.
There are myriad historical distortions and political and economic ideologies that provide a one-sided view of reality in support of Predator and Alien, which I would consider PSYOPs. In fact, our enemies have already executed ideological "turning movements" against us over the last two hundred years in order to undermine traditional American conservative values. As some examples, "Federalism," the "Whig Theory of History" (see "Shattering the Icon of Abraham Lincoln" by Sam Dickson),and "Neo-Jacobinim" are all ideologies whose one-side presentation undermine States Rights and various other forms of political decentralization in America. Marxism, Zionism, and Christian Zionism have served as potent ideologies whose one-sided presentation camouflages the alien nature of Jews and Israel and gives them both a very specially privileged position in American society. Not surprisingly, Jews have shown an unusual affinity for both Marxism and Zionism. See, for example "Zionism versus Bolshevism. A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People" by the Rt. Hon. Winston S. Churchill.
Beliefs do matter. As Dr. Rebecca Carley puts it, we first have to focus on achieving a nonviolent "revolution of consciousness." An important first step in defeating Predator and Alien is to deal with all the faulty reasons for why people have been brainwashed to love these monsters.
I have already provided some in depth discussion of examples of what I regard as evil PSYOPs, such as my links to critiques of Keynesianism in Chapter 33 and irresponsible Holocaustianity exaggeration in Chapter 34. In an earlier draft of this ebook, I went on for many pages specifically outlining all the leading ideologies that I believe have brainwashed Americans, and ways that I think we can counter-PSYOP these evil PSYOPs, however, I later decided to provide this additional work as attachments and supplements at some future date to avoid turning this chapter into a book itself.
Before closing out this section, there is one last PSYOP I need to mention because I believe it illustrates perfectly the interesting concept of a "sugar false flag." This is the "Moon Hoax" in 1969. This was "too wonderful" in a mirror image way to how the attacks on Washington, D.C. and New York on 9/11 were "too horrible." Nevertheless, both events were deliberately fabricated by the same totally shameless and criminal power elite to serve their long term interests.

On the 4 Sept 2009 interview "The Apollo Moon Landing Hoax" Part II, Dr. James Fetzer's guest Rich DellaRosa opined that the hoax helped distract the world away from America's problems in Vietnam.
I would go a step further. The Zionist power elite wanted to create a mass false confidence on steroids that America could reengineer itself socially in the same apparent way it was able to engineer itself into a successful Moon Landing. Racial integration, multi-culturalism, out-sourcing of industry, blank check support for Israel, One World Government --everything on the modern liberal and Zionist agenda were now going to work, because America now became the "can do" country where "this time it is different."
Similarly, I often wonder if Wall Street in the late 1990's was also the subject of a "sugar false flag" from the way the stock markets were heavily manipulated upwards by the Fed, other central banks, and major Wall Street allies in order to generate a prolonged "feel good" environment prior to 9/11 and the Zionist-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. One of the purposes of a sugar false flag is encourage the general public to keep its guard down and go about "business as usual" as high level malefactors work feverishly behind the scenes to get their ducks in a row for their next major high level criminal campaign.

Synchronizing all the elements of combat power where they will have decisive effect on an enemy force in a short period of time is to achieve mass


As a cyber intelligence unit heavily involved in analysis, we employ a very different and much more abstract form of "mass" than the stereotypical concentrations of troops, tanks, planes, and artillery that might confer superior combat power in an infantry attack.
Our "mass" or "potency" comes from our ability to deliver hard-hitting, truthful, deep analysis to the public in a timely manner.
In this section I would like to explain some analytical approaches that I have found to be particularly helpful in looking at a wide variety of social, political, and economic issues, namely:


a) The Constraint Analysis Approach
b) The Real Estate Appraisal Approach (adapted to generalized intelligence analysis)
c) The "Three-Bin" Approach for Country-related Case Study Analysis
d) Fundamental vs. Technical approaches used by securities analysts

Constraint Analysis:
This approach is frequently used in operations research. It is also known as "linear programming" in computer science.
What I find particularly fascinating about constraint analysis is the way its underlying concepts can be transferred to apply to a wide variety of fields, ranging from understanding political and economic systems to military strategy and false flag operations. The methodology typically involves three basic steps:
a) Grasp how things work on a total system level. What are all the critical variables? How do all the "moving parts" mesh with each other? What are the inputs and outputs to the system?
b) Identify all the "process flows" and their critical nodes or "choke points." In other words, as things flow from steps "A" to "Z," what are all the critical points along the process that impact on the quality and rate in which outcomes get produced? It helps to diagram the system. What are the most constraining factors in each process flow?
c) Identify the various costs and benefits of trying to free up constraints within all the various critical points of the process flows. (The marginal costs to free up constraints are called shadow prices). Find the lowest cost solutions to maximize desired outputs.
This may sound like a lot of dry operations research jargon to many readers, but on a conceptual level I can show how it is very relevant to what we try to accomplish in running interdiction missions against potential false flag attacks.
Military strategy has been defined as finding ways to maximize the constraints on ones enemy, to include his access to power bases, while doing the exact opposite for ones own side.
Despite their tremendous financial and other governmental resources, Mossad-CIA is extremely constrained in certain areas. When we can identify critical nodes, and apply the right pressure at the right time, we can stop them cold, just like the way loose lips can sink ships or a sling shot aimed at just the right spot can fell a big giant.
In prior chapters I have already identified many of these constraints. For starters, false flag activities are extremely criminal. False flag operators have to operate in secrecy. They typically have to propagandize the public and put potential activists to sleep ahead of time. They also frequently need to piggy-back off military exercises. Lastly, they usually need to depend on "fear momentum." Many rely on occult numerology to assign target dates.
All these things are potential constraining points or "nodes" in their operational "process flows" that we can possibly target as part of our interdiction strategy.

Real Estate Appraisal Approach:
Obviously we are not involved in appraising real estate, however, on a conceptual level, the three different perspectives used to appraise real estate can be abstracted and applied to false flag analysis.
The three standard approaches to real estate appraisal are the income, production, and market comparable approaches. Let us look first at how they apply to real estate, and then how they can be applied to political, economic, and intelligence analysis.

Income Approach:
In real estate, this means creating an estimate of property value based upon the rental income it is likely to generate. In its simplest "back-of-the-envelope" form, it involves a two step process where one first acquires rent roll data, and then applies a "capitalization rate" to a total annual income estimate to estimate a viable offering price for a building.
The analogue of collecting a rent roll for false flag analysis is the age-old key to detective fiction and murder mysteries, namely "Cui Bono?" or "who benefits.
The analogue of finding the "cap rate" is to determine who has the power to commit the heinous act and sustain a cover up.
An excellent example of this form of analysis was the booklet "JFK: The Mystery Unraveled" published by the old SPOTLIGHT in the 1980's. It first provided a list of various entities that could benefit from the death of JFK. Next, it analyzed who had the power to sustain the cover up. That reduced everything down to one group of suspects: Zionists. This is a thesis that a journalist of the former SPOTLIGHT (later reincarnated as The American Free Press once the SPOTLIGHT folded in 2000), Michael Collins Piper, pursued in his classic work Final Judgment.
Similarly, the first step in analyzing 9/11 using this approach is to analyze all the parties who benefited. Next, we determine for our "cap rate" who has the resources to pull off the operation and sustain the cover up. Once again, the list narrows to one prime suspect.
There are many forms of deep analysis that assist our structural analysis. For example, in my "Centralized vs. Decentralized" online essay, I provide a libertarian analysis about how government can degenerate over time from a limited government, to a ponzi-pork barrel racket, and then finally slide into the terminal "evil" government phase. In this last phase, oligarchical leaders protect their special privileges and ruthless rent-seeking by waging covert war on the people. Hence, the false flag attack is symptomatic of evil government.
In my "Mutualism vs. Parasitism" article, in the "Functional Analysis of Jewish Criminal Totalitarian Psychopathology" section, I try to explain how an utterly criminal Zionist oligarchy has received more support from America than any other country in history. As part of the Cui Bono? analysis, I necessarily have to explain the dynamics of psychopathy so that we can understand why such a group would feel motivated to viciously turn on its prime benefactor.

Production Approach:
In real estate, this approach involves asking what a building would cost if one had to acquire raw land and hire a construction company to put up the building from scratch.

When applied to other fields, this is essentially the "tinkering" approach used by self-taught great inventors such as Thomas Edison and Henry Ford used. One starts by asking basic questions and then building a body of understanding through the deductive process. The Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank, calls this the "Praxeology" or "deductive" approach.
A great advantage of this approach is that one focuses on specific problems. It does a much better job than the other approaches to avoid ideological preconceptions. It enables one to conduct political analysis from the ground up and detect bugs and errors along the way that typically comprise mental logjams for people think only on an ideological level. In addition, one teaches oneself how to think independently, connect all the dots, and understand how all the "moving parts" of a situation mesh together without being spoon-fed by other people. If one has the time and resources, this is the best of all approaches, although one also needs to use the other approaches as well for a reality check.
There are several "sub-approaches" typically incorporated into this deductive or "praxeology" approach:
Learning how to ask the right questions: I am reminded of a corporate law course I once took as a graduate student, where for each homework assignment, we were supposed to read a state supreme court opinion on a legal case, and then figure out the best formulation of the legal question that was being addressed. As Thomas Pynchon stated, "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
Learning how to dissect down to the roots: This involves learning how to question all ones assumptions to test their validity to avoid the problem of "garbage in- garbage out."
The thought experiment: This involves taking a relatively simple situation and then demonstrating that one understands what is going on as one adds layers of complexity to replicate a real world situation.
In his lectures at the Mises Institute, one can hear Dr. Murray Rothbard use the example of Robinson Crusoe to try to explain economic actions taken in a very primitive environment in ways that are conceptually consistent with economic theory for actors in an advanced industrial economy. Economic concepts such as "entrepreneurial calculation," "marginal utility," and "time preference" can be applied to simple projects like collecting coconuts as well as more complex operations like running an automobile manufacturing operation. After all, truthful knowledge should be interrelated and consistent, so micro-economic theory should mesh with macro-economics. Interestingly enough, a big complaint made by many Austrian economists with the Keynesian economic theory currently practiced by the Federal Reserve is that it is typically completely decoupled from the common sense economic realities that most people generally experience in managing their own small businesses or their own personal financial affairs. Logically, we should smell some rats on these economic issues, as I have already done in Chapter 33.
One can use the "praxeological" or "deductive" approach to analyze false flag attacks by placing oneself in the shoes of some hypothetical operational planner for Mossad-CIA. As a thought experiment, one starts out by trying to identify all the problems that such a planner would need to solve from A to Z in order to pull off a 9/11 inside job and get away with it. Or expressed differently, how does one go about mass-murdering 3,000 Americans and then get the FBI to help sustain the cover-up and on top of this continue to soak America's Congress for trillions more dollars in direct and indirect aid for Israel while keeping national media on your side?
This is similar to the concept "It takes a thief to catch a thief." To understand the criminal conspirator, you must first learn how to think like him, and learn how to think through his operational planning the way he does, step by step.
From the "Why We Fight" perspective, the "thought experiment" also serves as a valuable tool to address important issues and concepts.
Consider the "Republican Virtue" concept frequently discussed by patriot leaders at the time of the American Revolution. One way to approach this concept is to compare it to a business partnership. Imagine that in order to prevent tyranny, one divides up ownership and managerial control in a business venture among many different people. What are the minimal qualities of cooperation, moral character, competence, and social responsibility that one should expect of individuals before one accepts them as a coequal partners to run a company? How should a partnership punish or exclude other partners who show themselves to be dishonest or irresponsible? And now for the clincher, why should we parcel out citizenship rights with any less care than we might go about sharing partnership rights in a business?
One of the interesting results of vigorously pursuing the "republican virtue" thought experiment is that it makes one seriously question the validity of the ethic of "universal suffrage," particularly after one considers objective research into the level of character flaws and other weaknesses in the general population.

Market Comparables:
In real estate, this involves tries to find properties on the market that are as similar as possible to the property one is trying to appraise, and then extrapolate the market-pricing of their features.
This is very similar to what is known as the "case study" method in academia, or the "case law" approach in legal jurisprudence, where one looks at many historic situations that seem to be similar to ones own, and tries to make logical comparisons.
An important advantage of this approach compared to the Production ( or "deductive" or "praxeological") approach is that typically real world situations are much more complex than theoretical models we can use as "thought experiments." Furthermore, people often filter out important variables based upon their own biases, creating a "garbage in, garbage out" problem in their deductive process. Therefore, the "case study" method helps to capture more "realism."

"Problem-Reaction-Solution" can not only be used to steer thinking, but also to stampede public behavior into highly contrived "choices" designed by the power elite to suit their interests. The case study approach helps avoid overly channelized analysis.

This is more than just "academic." In fact, this approach provides an important defense against what is known as the "false Hegelian Dialectic" used by our Info War enemies to falsely steer our thinking. This deception tries to portray the opposing sides of an issue in a false manner to manipulate public opinon. It usually provides a false representation of the pros and cons involved in an argument, and omits or distorts important alternative ideas and options. This faulty argument construction, also known as the fallacy of the bifurcated argument in informal logic, or the "problem-reaction-solution" approach in PSYOPs, is particularly effective when the power elite can not only control our flow of information, but also force us to react at a faster speed than we have time to adequately access and weigh truthful and balanced information.
Controlled media often present only the "left" vs. "right" (or "environmental vs. genetic") paradigm, and ignore other dualities that I identify in my online "Resolving Opposing Ideological Viewpoints" series such as "centralization vs. decentralization" or "mutualism vs. parasitism" (or "mutually supportive productive honesty" vs "criminal exploitation"). Furthermore, controlled media might try to distort the political debate even further, by portraying modern liberals, Jews, and homosexuals as trendy, intelligent, and charming people, and straight white male conservatives as brutal and inarticulate oafs. In reality, throughout history there have been thousands of different kinds of leftist and rightist movements, each with unique variations regarding such factors as ethnicity, specific political objectives, degree of authoritarianism or decentralization, and levels of honesty.


The case study approach forces one to focus on real world examples that may contain important nuances and variables that one might overlook in the initial phases of an analysis, or in trying to use an alternative approach such as the praxeological approach mentioned earlier in this section..
Even in a man-made environment like computer programming, analysts can use an approach that has similarities to the case study method where they run simulations that show how complex systems made up of myriad variables interact with each other over time under different scenarios.
In regard to our analysis of false flag attacks, our first step in using the case study approach is to build a historical data base of all suspected attacks. Then we can try to filter out common patterns. In fact, we do see quite a few similarities among such cases as the JFK assassination, assault on the U.S.S. Liberty, Oklahoma City Bombing, 9/11, Madrid 3-11-2004, and London 7-7-2005.

The "Three Bin" Country Analysis Approach
There are a number of "sub-approaches" that can assist the case study analysis approach. For example, back in 1984 I took a "Business, Government, and the International Economy" course where the professor encouraged us to take country case studies and sort their information into the following three "bins:"
Context: In the case of a false flag operation, we look at the history of false flag attacks, as well as the history of social and political phenomena that relate to false flag attacks, such as the history of "terrorism," of intelligence organizations like the Mossad, CIA, and Russian FSB and former KGB and GRU, and also look at the history of social, political, and economic challenges faced by countries involved with false flag attacks.
Objectives: What are the likely short term, intermediate, and long term goals of all relevant players? This dovetails with the "Cui Bono" analysis I have described earlier in the "Income" approach area above.
Performance: How well have all the various countries and intelligence agencies relevant to false flag attacks been able to fulfill their social, political, and economic objectives? What are their capabilities both now and in the future?

Fundamental vs. Technical approaches used by securities analysts
In securities analysis, "fundmental analysis" typically involves looking at the basic ability of a company to function successfully and grow over the long term in order to increase its earnings or asset value and in turn its stock price. This usually means looking at such basic factors as financial fundamentals (strength of cash flow, balance sheet, and income statements), quality of leadership (track record, expertise, and reliability of the management team), the strength of the product line and new product development, and the viablilty of the corporate strategy. In other words, what is the "reality" behind the company. Typically fundamental analysis is most effective for long run predictions, since over the long run market valuations tend to regress towards rational rules of thumb that compare rates of return with competing investments. The investment style that corresponds with this mentality is typically called "value investing."
The "technical analysis," approach typically focuses on market sentiment, trends, and buying and selling behavior in order to help predict stock price behavior. Here, "perception is reality." The idea is that in the short run, market behavior is heavily influenced by such emotional or instinctive as herd psychology, false pride, impulsiveness, and excessive fear and greed. In the short run, most investors act like overgrown children rather than fully rational and well-informed adults. The investment strategy that typically coincides with this view point is called "momentum investing." An interesting emergent field in business psychology that studies this area is called behavioral finance. The idea is that most people are still biological "cavemen" and their cognitive and emotional processes are still heavily geared towards addressing prehistoric problems. They tend to misapply these instinctive tendencies when engaged in common stock investments, since this is involves a very different problem-solving paradigm than the general thrust of their evolutionary cognitive development over the last one hundred thousand years.
When it comes to analyzing "Info War," the "fundamental" approaches involves collating facts and analyses regarding "black ops" and then applying deductive logic, much like the way Sherlock Holmes solves murder mysteries.
The "technical approach" can involve looking at how controlled national or local media promote logical fallacies (propaganda) to prevent the public from drawing logical conclusions. For example, I have heard people like Capt. May, Wayne Madsen, Gov. Jesse Ventura, and Alex Jones comment innumerable times that America's national media controllers must think the American public is pretty cowardly, gullible, lazy, and stupid to take at face value official government versions of the JFK assassination, 9/11, or the more recent "Panty Bomber" episode used to "justify" airport scanners. Certainly a big part of black op-related "technical analysis" involves looking at what has happened to America that has caused so many Americans to become so gullible or heavily in denial.

Strike the enemy at a time or place or
in a manner for which he is unprepared.


The principle of "Surprise" obviously has a very different meaning for us as a volunteer unit dedicated towards openly dissemination of truth to the public compared to, say, an infantry unit preparing to attack its enemy.
Our best success in achieving surprise has taken place when we have surprised ourselves as much as the public by opportunistically jumping on hot issues and producing timely alerts that just happen to go viral on the Internet. Our 2008 Mayday alert achieved twice the reach of the Kennebunkport Warning in Summer 2007.
In another paradoxical way , we achieve "surprise" by consistently sticking to our policy of "truth effrontery." By relying totally on open source material, and by rejecting secrecy, we are in many ways like an "anti-intelligence" intelligence unit. This is probably something that most conventional intelligence professionals would have a very hard time getting used to.
We also achieve "surprise" in another unique way. The agents of both Predator and Alien suffer from their own ideological blinders and are frequently their own worst enemies. We achieve "surprise" when we can consistently embarrass them before the public by simply exposing the ways they over reach themselves.
Zionists have been spoiled by their own success. For most of the last eight decades (at least) they have become used to seeing journalists cower and pull in their horns for fear of being called "anti-Semitic" or some other label. Up until the advent of the free Internet, their bullying tactics were adequate to keep most Americans intimidated most of the time.
Historically, Zionists thrive best in very racially and culturally mixed social environments where most people remain focused most of the time on having a nice life and making money and taking care of their families. In such an environment, a combination of bribery and bullying by groups like the ADL goes a long way.
I think that much of this Zionist behavior is semi-conscious. It is a tropism that has developed from a unique evolutionary history of nearly three millennia where Jews have existed in small colonies among host nations, heavily focused on middle man operations and high end criminal operations to survive. Through a unique Darwinian process, this has bred a unique mentality well suited for covert forms of 4th generation warfare. However, it has also inbred psychopathic forms of greed that are without bounds.
Because much of this behavior is semi-conscious for Jews, I think that it always a bit of a surprise to them when they finally break down the social structure or hijack a nation to the point that they start generating truly focused and determined opposition. Zionists always seem to push to the limit until they finally create the enemies they deserve. They always overreach themselves. In many ways, this is a very tragic and pathological situation.
To make a long story short, we do not have to try to "surprise" anybody. We can just stand back and help Predator and Alien stumble into the pits they dig for themselves.

Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and concise
orders to ensure thorough understanding


I think that we can observe the principle of "simplicity" in a number of important ways to effectively communicate truth to the public..
First, rather than beat around the bush with euphemisms and talk only about mysterious things like "Illuminati," "Levantines," or :"Bilderbergers," we should come right out and say "Jews" if this is what we really mean. This is especially true with the Internet, where we can say what we really think and not have to worry about getting misquoted in sound bytes by hostile media channels. The Internet is an outstanding medium for plain, straight talk, and we should use it for such.
I also think that Occam's Razor in biology is the best way to go in the long run regarding explanations. Occam's Razor states that when confronted with various theories that try to explain biological phenomenon, the simplest and most common sense explanation is typically the most likely to be correct.
We can apply a similar principle to explain the behavior of Alien and Predator. For example, in nature, when animals start acting very strangely, such as when whales start beaching themselves, the first thing that most Zoologists suspect is that they have been infected with parasites.
Similarly, when the United States attacks itself in false flag operations, squanders trillions of dollars to support Zionists who give nothing in return, and liquidates its founding Northern European genetic stock in favor of Third World illegal immigrants, and provides a home base for pharmaceutical companies that plot global false flag pandemic genocide, obviously something very strange is going on.
In keeping with Occam's Razor, I believe that one of the first things that most reasonable people should suspect when confronted with these facts is that America is infected with dangerous parasites.


Update References:

The Obama-Nobel Prize fiasco

2011-04-22 Nobel Peace Drones, Glenn Greenwald,
2010-03-30 Is Nobel Peace Prize Winner Obama More Brutal Than Bush?
2010-10-18 Nobel Committee Aiming for War And Domination in The Name of Peace, by Yoichi Shimatsu, New America Media. The fact that an open warmonger heads the Nobel Peace Committee has completely discredited what was once the world’s most prestigious Peace Prize."

Other Refernces

2010-12-31 10 Modern Methods of Mind Control by Nicholas West
2010-10-30 Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura - "Area 51" Pt 1/3 (Season 2, Episode 2) [Editor's Note: Reminiscent of NASA defensiveness regarding "Moon Hoax" is the "Area 51" secrecy phenomenon]

A good companion video for this video is Alex Jones on UFO and Project Blue Beam (20 Dec 2009) on staged UFO events to distract the public. There are declassified U.S. Government plans known to the public for over 15 years to project a giant Buddha, Jesus, or UFOs in the sky with holograms. "The New World Order is about hoaxes, all about control, all about mass panic." Jones discusses his interviews with Dr. Robert M. Bowman, former head of the "Star Wars" program. Senior staff in the Vatican have talked about UFO's, Larry King Live has had guests who talk about how it is real, a prominent astronaut has come out and said that UFOs are visiting the world... and all of this seems to be coming out at once. This looks contrived to Alex Jones. He also describes how the the use of advanced techology with "black ops" and the creation of religious hoaxes with holograms or use of fake alien invasions to panic the public can constitute the ultimate "false flag" operation.


2010-03-24 Truth Has Fallen and Has Taken Liberty With It, Good-bye, by Paul Craig Roberts.
"...The Council of Europe is investigating big pharma’s role in hyping a false swine flu pandemic in order to gain billions of dollars in sales of the vaccine.
The media helped the US military hype its recent Marja offensive in Afghanistan, describing Marja as a city of 80,000 under Taliban control. It turns out that Marja is not urban but a collection of village farms.
And there is the global warming scandal, in which climate scientists, financed by Wall Street and corporations anxious to get their mitts on `cap and trade' and by a U.N. agency anxious to redistribute income from rich to poor countries, concocted a doomsday scenario in order to create profit in pollution.
Wherever one looks, truth has fallen to money....
2010-03-08 First Iceland, Then the World by Michael Collins
2009-12-16 Conspiracy Theory With Jesse Ventura: Global Warming

Conspiracy Theory With Jesse Ventura: Global Warming, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, and Part 7 "Global Warming Premiered Wed, December 16 at 10P Whether global warming is real or not, it's believed some people are using the issue to make billions of dollars, start a one-world government and control our lives, from the cars we drive to the foods we eat. Jesse Ventura starts with Al Gore and goes far beyond as he uncovers the evidence that leads to one man thought to be behind the global warming conspiracy."


2009-01-06 A Call to the People of the World to Support Iceland Against Financial Blackmail, Birgitta Jónsdóttir,
2009-09-14 Lord Christopher Monckton presentation


Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty? October 14, 2009 Lord Christopher Monckton presentation in St. Paul, MN on the subject of global warming "In this 4-minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty that is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009."


Web sites:

Study of psychopathic societies (high fraud, high greed, high predator/ parasite societies): "Welcome to Without Conscience - the website devoted to the study of psychopathy. These pages represent the efforts by Dr. Robert D. Hare and his associates, colleagues and students in studying forensic psychology here in Canada and around the world." "PONEROLOGY: THE STUDY OF EVIL: In the author’s opinion, Ponerology reveals itself to be a new branch of science born out of historical need and the most recent accomplishments of medicine and psychology. In light of objective naturalistic language, it studies the causal components and processes of the genesis of evil, regardless of the latter’s social scope..."




Forward to Chapter 39
Back to Contents
Books I-III Summary Table of Contents


Short URL for this web page:

Flag carried by the 3rd Maryland Regiment at the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781

© America First Books
America First Books offers many viewpoints that are not necessarily its own in order to provide additional perspectives.