Thread by @KanysLupin

There were, from what I recall, two major leaks regarding FBI and DHS covert people. One was just an office phonebook. The other was more scary, a biometrics database. The ability to, given the old methods, identity a covert operative in disguise using biometrics.

There was a lot of mum regarding the latter. There wasn’t any real explanation as to where the data went. Even the usual blame-Russia stuff was missing or less than usual.

Who benefits?

You’ve got an agency and you’ve got lots of private contractors, some working with for it, some independent for corporate interests, engaging in questionable activities and tactics {again, like snatching people off the street, though that’s a dramatic and obvious example}.

Wouldn’t they want that database to ensure they had not, will not, be infiltrated with undercover operatives? Isn’t @CIA, due to guilty conscience, afraid that law enforcement and counter-terror might come peeking in to see what’s really happening?

Occurred to me yesterday that once again perhaps I’m not being cynical enough. That, not being a monster—well, not *their* kind of monster—that I wasn’t seeing, assassination of Soleimani wasn’t b/c of the usual claims... not *in spite* of destroying ISIS... but *because* of it.

If you could run ISIS a la GLADIO where they ran the Red Brigade among others, then the Middle East is your oyster. You can deniably do anything, take anything, kill anyone.

Recall again how ISIS happened. And what came before. Saddam Hussein was a US asset against Iran. He bucked orders and so we got mad at him, regarding chemical weapons. It when he was ours, so was by extension his Baathist party.

About as secular as you can get, the Baathists. They were the ones keeping the Al Qaedas of the world out of Iraq.

And yet they founded and ran ISIS.

theintercept.com/2015/06/03/isi…

Former CIA assets founded, ran ISIS in what gets referred to, like 9/11 & anything else that forces Congress to throw more money at CIA or loop the other way when they bring opium and cocaine into the US, get referred to as an “intelligence failure.”

theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-i…

Now stepping back and assuming for a moment it was just an intelligence failure, that CIA wasn’t in this case, as it clearly has done in the past, playing both sides: Running ISIS and running counter-ISIS {see again take/do anything in ME}.

Let’s assume other anyway...

Why kill the guy who knew how to defeat them? CIA contractor Erik Prince with close ties to top CIA officers like Romney foreign policy adv Cofer Black & Buzzy Krongard, recommends to Trump—who was talking about defeating ISIS a lot yet failed to do so where Iran succeeded...

...to remove that expertise, belonging to a rival but one with a publicly considered common enemy in extremism, to remove that expertise from the world.

It just doesn’t make sense from a strategy perspective UNLESS we look for alternative goals, goals differing from those stated publicly.

Again, neocon, Mossad agent, Arms for Hostages co-conspirator and the only Rove WH visitor Michael Ledeen on truth in politics...

...not only unnecessary but often undesirable.

So I submit: The Soleimani assassination was revenge for destroying ISIS and to prevent him from stopping whatever is coming next.

The skirmish excuse, when we know worse happens all the time all over the world, doesn’t wash.

You want me to give a s*** about Resnick pistachios and accumulation of wealth? Go elsewhere. We’ve had enough of war propaganda that destroys the lives and communities of so many just so some a-holes with two much money can try to fill that empty hole inside them.

Right connection b/n the two things, the leaks and ISIS. ISIS got hold of personal details of FBI and DHS and military personnel and threatened them and their families on FB. Again, what a great way to make people emotional and manipulate them. And a stupid move on CIA’s part.

And that from yesterday’s Newsweek article on the larger than large DoD programs, including creating cover and protection for personnel likely to be targeted by terrorists.

newsweek.com/exclusive-insi…

Good wording there. Does sound like perhaps state-authorized by not necessarily state-run op by hackers. But was ISIS got hold of and released the data.

Very manipulative. Very “Remember the Maine.” Or the Alamo. Or 9/11. Once someone knows more about you than you know yourself, as they do from mass surveillance—worse for NATSEC workers than even activists probably—and they can make you emotional, they can control you.

Simplest form of “mind control.” Just making you mad and aiming / steering you where they want.