Dave Lindorff Defines “Limited Hangout” and “Controlled Opposition”

by Scott Creighton (H/T mangrove)

Dave Lindorff recently wrote a childishly petty diatribe about Naomi Wolf because she dared to ask questions about the legitimacy of the Edward Snowden psyop. His baseless attack on her reasoned article amounts to little more than screeching “how dare she attack our new hero? She must be NSA”

There are tons of reasons to be more than a little suspicious of the Snowden psyop. I myself have been pointing them out one by one every day since the story broke. You can check my archives on the subject and you can also check the comment sections of the various articles for good information on the facts of the case which are leading more and more to the conclusion that something is very wrong with the whole story… it seems to have been produced rather than coming out organically. The hysterics from various “alternative” journalists lends more credibility to my conclusion.

A reader posted a rather complete list of many of those irregularities here. I am going to repost his list at the end of this article in order to emphasis the fact that there are many many problems with the story, not none like Lindorff seems to think.

I myself am on pace to lose several regular readers over my take on the little trick. That has happened before. I won’t lose sleep over it.

What gets me though is how deeply connected people become to these psyops. I understand how identity politics works. I understand how people like to see images of themselves on screen or people who they would HOPE to see come along and lead the way to a better tomorrow always seem to fit the ticket of what a marketing campaign would come up with. Then once they invest so much of themselves in BELIEF they are always extremely reluctant to see the forest for the trees.

In the case of Lindorff, I will not dignify his diatribe with discussion of his particular points of “proof”

But I will say what he has done is the worst kind of smear tactics you can imagine, asking in the title of his screeching attack if Naomi Wolf is now working for the NSA.

He concludes as follows, which is the basis for my title… unlike Mr. Lindorff, I actually have a basis for mine:

“Unless and until someone comes up with a single hard fact seriously suggesting that Snowden is a fake, this kind of fantasizing should halt. Wolf should apologize for her self-aggrandizing tripe and make a generous donation from her book sales to the Snowden defense fund — unless of course she has evidence that the Progressive Change Campaign Committee is an NSA or CIA front group.” Dave Lindorff

Lindorff is using his bully pulpit to attack a fellow independent journalist and analyst in the hopes that he can get pressure placed on her to stop calling their new  hero into question.

Questions are usually universally allowed. Apparently not to Dave Lindorff, not when it come to this month’s hero product.

If you go to Progressive Change Campaign Committee they have a big movement underway… they are asking people to sign a petition to get congress to investigate…..

…. oh… yeah…. that’ll get to the bottom of things, won’t it?

You would think Lindorff might be wise to the whole “congressional investigation” thing at this point, but apparently not.

No, apparently Dave’s big thing is “correcting” the behavior of people like Naomi Wolf, by implying she is NSA and telling her AND OTHERS what they can and cannot question.

It’s not important to Dave apparently that Ms. Wolf has been sticking her neck out for 6 years warning people of a coming totalitarian state (a book which Dave now refers to as “dated”) while his “real hero” Edward Snowden was getting paid serious money working for the same institutions that are making us a totalitarian state. Dave doesn’t quite seem to get that.

To the Dave Lindorffs out there, I will not be told when I can and when I can’t dare to question our prefabbed super heroes. I ask questions to get to the heart of all kinds of lies, and this one is no exception.

The Naomi Wolf piece was well written and merely posed a question, but because she has a great deal of credibility due to her book, when she did it, our GATEKEEPERS like Lindorff had to smite her down hard and fast.

So I finish with this, welcome to new normal where the O’Reilly’s of yesterday are the Lindorffs of today.

——

Tom, on June 16, 2013 at 1:14 am said: Edit Comment

• - The leak came at a critical time, at the height of the IRS scandal
• - The leak doesn’t already tell us what many Americans already knew, that the big tech companies were doing data collection for the NSA
• - The four ‘documents’ leaked to the press are nothing but crappy, goofy-colored charts displaying a partial hierarchy of PRISM
• - The ‘establishment’ media all have it front and center, unlike the Obama birth fiasco.
• - The same 4 slides were shown by both news agencies (Telegraph and Washington Post). If they checked with the NSA first, what is the point of the leak on the NSA?
• - Mainstream media have used the stickers to somehow enforce Snowden’s passion for online privacy (but no mention of the 1/2 million Soros donated). See the Snowden sticker story.
• - Snowden ‘heroism’ has become a major fundraiser for the EFF and the TOR project
• - Snowden is painted as a “Libertarian”
• - It, almost by any circumstance, takes a least one year to get top-secret clearance. Yet, Snowden only worked for contractor Booz Allen for not even quite 3 months.
• - Snowden girlfriend posting lame ‘broken-heart’ poetry on her blog/web. Now, all her stuff has been ‘scrubbed’ from the web and her blog closed. Why?
• - potential litmus test for the public to what some refer to as “The Good German Syndrome”. In other words, do the majority of Americans support this police state.
• - Snowden only got a GED, didn’t even finish at a Maryland College. How does someone like that get a job working for the intelligence community making 200k per year? I worked for a defense contractor and can tell you, a degree is certainly required
• - The PRISM logo is nearly an exact match to one created by a high school student in 1998. See story here.
• - Pictures of Snowden and Girlfriend use the same computer graphics library for manipulation. See story here.
• - Snowden said he got access to the documents using the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (you have to have warrent). How did he get a warrant? See story here.
• - Snowden conducted his interview from a lavish Hong Kong hotel, just up the street from CIA headquarters. The rooms start at 1900 US$/night. How many nights did he stay? It would cost thousands of dollars.
• - Snowden called for a March in Washington DC, something other ‘straw men’ have done in recent months. See story here.
• - Snowden’s second set of ‘explosive news’ was that the US was hacking China. As if the Chinese didn’t know this, just as we know China hacks the US.
• - Snowden said he make 200k per year, though he only worked at Booz Allen for less than 3 months. Booz said he made 120k per year, yet we are talking employment in months, not years.
• - Greenwald, the Telegraph reporter that broke the story, attends annual Marxist conferences. See story here.
• - Snowden worked for Booz Allen, which is a owned by the Carlyle Group.
• - The site that claims Snowden made donations to the Paul campaign is OpenSecrets.org. Another Soros backed prop-site. News sites are referring to OpenSecrets.org for this information. About as credible as another Soros prop-site, Factcheck.org. See story here.

source