From October 20th, 2014 CE, forward – all new podcasts shall and will be free. Gratis. The truth must be deliverable without impediment — cognitive or otherwise.
Membership to LionelMedia grants access to the entire archive of past member podcasts since the inception of this site and also future announcements directed just towards members.
How do I become a member? It’s easy!Click here to subscribe. It’s $5.99 a month or $65.00 per year. You get a user name. You get a password. You can listen to the podcasts whenever you want; streaming on your computer or downloadable to your mobile device.
Behold JFK’s assassination. Take a good look. This is what it looks like when a President is removed via a coup d’état. And that’s precisely what happened 51 years ago this week. This was a conspiracy, plain as day. The Warren Commission was a joke . . . no, a bad joke . . . and led the way for government commissions to be farcical at best. Just look at the pathetic 9/11 carnival. It was a time when organized crime and American intel were ofttimes so interrelated and entwined that you couldn’t tell who was the bad guy. This was a President who threatened the CIA that he wanted to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds.” And the ultimate and sick irony? Having Allen Dulles on the Warren Commission. They must have had quite the laugh then. Remember also Calogero Minacori aka Carlos Marcello who quipped you kill the dog by cutting off its head, not its tail. This is textbook conspiracy.
Watch this superb piece by Paul Joseph Watson. This is simply breathtaking and why our own mainstream media aren’t repeatedly reviewing this is beyond me. It’s just another point of fascination that I have as to the most obvious case of inside job ever recorded. Thank Gawd for alternative media.
It changed my life and my perspective. This event changed my life and makes me who I am today: suspect, untrusting and not a conspiracy theorist but a conspiracy analyst. In my lifetime I knew assassinations during a five-year span from 1963-1968. JFH, RFK, MLK, Malcolm X, Medgar Evers and the three American civil rights‘ workers, James Earl Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael “Mickey” Schwerner. And throw in Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonkin and Watergate for good measure. I was born in conspiracy; it’s all I’ve ever known.
Behold the man who dared to question. Professor James Tracy of Florida Atlantic University and Memory Hole Blog joined me for a conversation on the dread conspiracy theory, the label that shuts down and shuts up without fail. Behold the man who dared to question the official account of Sandy Hook, a man who simply and merely asked questions and then uncured the usual and predictable wrath of a feckless and impuissant mainstream media who don’t take kindly to those who question whether they’re doing their job. There was a time when academic freedom provided the backdrop and stage for intellectual inquiry. The proscenium for ideation and issue inspection. Jim Tracy dared to question the official account of Sandy Hook and continues to.
The subject of this recordation. In this interview the good professor and I discuss the retooling of the term conspiracy theory to connote that of lunacy and the baseless, the future of the classroom and campus as crucibles of truth, attempts to stifle and silence daring academics and what “woke him up,” a concept many are familiar with, i.e. the event or events that made him aware of organized and concerted media deception.
“So, tell me again how Al Sharpton’s not in prison, why that cretin Don Lemon’s on CNN blaming rape victims not to mention that insane black hole comment and why Charles Manson can marry in prison but gay marriage is illegal in 17 states.”
Al Sharpton on television. Sure, but as a host?! First, he can’t read a prompter. Seriously, he can’t read a prompter. Why is that important, you ask? You’re kidding, right? Television is all prompter-fed and scripted. But you knew that. No, the righteous Reverend is on for reasons most mortals can only speculate on. My guess: pictures of network heads with barn owls, miscellaneous blackmail, who knows. But it sure as hell ain’t talent.
So, why’s he not in jail? Great question. The New York Times piece on his Eminence, the tax prevaricator and BFF of POTUS’s and AG’s, the Geppetto to de Blasio’s Pinocchio, NYPD Commish Bill Bratton’s boss, provides a bill of particulars that would land you or me in the hoosegow without a doubt, yet he remains unscathed. “The recent Treasury report that called that sort of practice abusive also said only 1,200 organizations in the nation owed more than $100,000 in unpaid payroll taxes, which would put Mr. Sharpton’s group among the most delinquent nonprofit organizations in the nation.”
MSNBC has all but invited this embarrassment. As the Erik Wemple Blog has reported, Sharpton negotiated his contract with MSNBC under the stipulation that his work as an activist would continue. In remarks in D.C. last year, Sharpton recalled what he told MSNBC President Phil Griffin about his status: “I said, well, I’m still going to run NAN, I’m still going to be an activist.” Griffin responded positively. “He said, ‘Put it in the contract. We’d never interfere with what you’re doing, your civil rights work,’” Sharpton quoted Griffin as saying.
On one level, Sharpton’s various hats carry implications for the ethics of his work at MSNBC. Being an anchor on a news network while also serving as a big shot at the White House and the head of a civil rights group creates a jumble of undiagrammable — and almost unknowable — conflicts of interest.
Yet the other level of concern is precisely what the Times has exposed: Sharpton Inc. is a sprawling concern, clearly more than one overbooked man can handle. By employing Sharpton as a prominent figure in its news rotation, MSNBC must own the failings of his empire. A spokeswoman for MSNBC says the network has no comment on the situation.
And then there’s Lemon. A lemon historically was “a person who is a loser, a simpleton,” which is perhaps from the notion of someone a sharper can “suck the juice out of.” Don Lemon is a cretin. A Boeotian. A dullard of Olympic proportion. This is the same feller who posited a black hole as a source of missing MH370. Well, Ol’ Don may have out “Don” himself in this latest snafu.
Lemon: Can I ask you this, because — and please, I don’t mean to be crude, ok?
Lemon: Because I know some of you — and you said this last night, that he — you lied to him and said “I have an infection, and if you rape me, or if you do — if you have intercourse with me, then you will probably get it and give it to your wife.”
Lemon: And you said he made you perform oral sex.
Lemon: You know, there are ways not to perform oral sex if you didn’t want to do it.
Tarshis: Oh. Um, I was kind of stoned at the time, and quite honestly, that didn’t even enter my mind. Now I wish it would have.
Lemon: Right. Meaning the using of the teeth, right?
Tarshis: Yes, that’s what I’m thinking you’re —
Lemon: As a weapon.
Tarshis: Yeah, I didn’t even think of it.
Lemon: Yes. I had to ask. I mean, it is, yeah.
Tarshis: Yes. No, it didn’t cross my mind.
And finally, Charles Manson’s tying the knot. In a country where 17 states have prohibited same-sex marriage, an 80-year-old notorious convicted killer can marry a 25 year-old named “Star.” Think about it. The Menendez Brothers and Charlie can traipse down the proverbial aisle in matrimonium ducere, but a respectable gay couple can’t. Are you mind-boggled? You should be.
“Women, fire in their crotch, won’t burn out, begin by fighting off pricks, end by going wild hunting for one that still works.” ― John Updike, Rabbit Redux
This kid. Is taking no chances. And you have to respect that. After all leporiphobes and kouneliophobes, and their often paralyzing fear of the ostensibly evil mutant bunnies, can miss the comedic and artistic intention. Hare today, gone tomorrow, right? Look at the expression, the affect of his kid. It’s perfect. Trepidation meets embarrassment meets horror. I am the eggman, they are the eggmen. I am the walrus. As Elena Anaya quipped, “I can hypnotize rabbits.” Am I making any sense? Too bad.
Full disclosure. No, I didn’t spend any appreciable time talking about this kid. Instead I discuss the accusations anent and regarding Bill Cosby as to rape allegations. What took so long for anyone to take notice of them? When does a story take legs and become significant and verifiable enough for media exposure? A discussion herein as to the architecture of scandal.
Truth is a luxury. This was Tom Wilkinson’s line in 2011’s “The Debt,” a suspense thriller of espionage, morality, courage and patriotism. It’s a remake of the award-winning 2007 film “Ha-Hov” by Assaf Bernstein & Ido Rosenblum. And a fascinating discussion of what happens when the official story that inspires a nation is wrong or, worse, a blatant lie. It inspires me to think about co-opting truth as a symbol and label and meme.
Truthers. I’m not oneper se, though I share many of their points of view, but hats off to those who grabbed the meme as their own. In today’s double-parked attention span, whoever seizes the best label and imagery, wins. Look at the conservatives who nabbed family, flag, Gawd, patriotism, Reagan and the Eagle. (While the progressives took what again as their symbols?)
Verity, anyone? And it all begs the question: What is the truth? The unvarnished and absolute and pure and clean and not subject to obfuscation or the like? Tell me true and pure history without perspective. Tell me the history of the Vietnam War — from the point of view of the Vietnamese. History, like incest, is relative.
What the hell is a progressive anyway? For the life of me I have no idea and neither do you. It’s a vague, ossified, spineless, impuissant and squishy label that was seized after any vitality in “liberal” was dessicated and sucked bone dry. If these mealy-mouthed losers ever want to get ahead they must learn from their right wing brethren and seize coherent and palpable imagery and semiotics and forge ahead. And who cares if no one but no one has an earthly clue as to what they seek to connote, convey or connect. This is politics, Sparky. And politics by nature means lying. And it’s better to lie with a misleading symbol and image than without one.
Get ready for the undoing. Without the ability to reason and critically think and apply issue analysis, without rudimentary critical thinking abilities, and without a deep-seated and earned skepticism, we are doomed as a society and species. There are avalanches of data before your very eyes thanks to the Internet that are providing clues and data of impending cataclysms, but it seems that all we’re interested in for the most part is the latest photoshopped picture of Kim Kardashian’s steatopygian arse or the latest viral video of a duck playing the piano. The mainstream news media monkeys are helping not in the least for they’ve been selected for “talents” that have nothing to do with brilliance, deep-thinking or analytical skill sets. No, without abecedarian issue deconstruction and a minimal conversance of science, you will be lost in the proverbial shuffle. Herein I respectfully attempt to explain why that is and what can be done to change that.
Miscellany. The brain disengaged is a wonderful thing. It’s what one seeks to achieve in analysis, what poets and writers try to tap into. It lets thought and ideation pour forth. It’s (out)spoken word at its best . . . if you can dig it. It’s a tough sell to the unenlightened. But trust me, Cochise. It’s a thing of beauty when done under medical supervision. You’re welcome. #LionelNation
My YouTube Channel is open. Veterans Day tributes have been carefully crafted.
“CIA Document 1035-960” was released in response to a 1976 FOIA request by the New York Times. The memorandum delimits a detailed series of actions and techniques for “countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.” It provided the blueprint of discrediting any idea or theory deemed unpalatable or embarrassing with the blanket and dismissive pejorative “conspiracy theory.”
Proem. Nothing will grind to a halt a discussion or disquisition quicker than calling it a “conspiracy theory.” So how did this come to be? Have we always enjoyed this distinction? Or rather, this almost patellar rejection of anything deemed to be the product of an illegal confederation.
It’s the third rail of political discussion. Kryptonite. A mine field. Drop the topic altogether. Don’t go there. Bring up a verboten or sensitive topic and watch what happens if it’s dubbed a conspiracy theory by an audience. All discussions ceases and you are a de facto nut, a loon, whose opinion is baseless and motivation (as well as sanity) is suspect. So where and when did this conspiracy phobia emerge? Was it always a part of our inquiry-killing repertoire? And what exactly is wrong with a conspiracy or theory of one? There are scores of convicted defendants warehoused today for conspiracies. How successful would they have been in seeking to have their convictions overturned by saying “This was just a conspiracy theory!” No, we’ve changed the meaning of the charge. It’s synonymous with insane, baseless, paranoid and baseless. And the transmutation of terminology was deliberate and by design. Courtesy of your CIA.
Your forebears would be livid. Professor Lance deHaven-Smith in Conspiracy Theory in America details “how the Founders’ hard-nosed realism about the likelihood of elite political misconduct—articulated in the Declaration of Independence—has been replaced by today’s blanket condemnation of conspiracy beliefs as ludicrous by definition.” It was ostensibly their deep-seated and well-founded suspicions that gave way to the inspiration and motivation to create our republic, borne from . . . you guessed it, conspiracy theories.
The weaponization of a term. In Conspiracy Theory”: Foundations of a Weaponized Term Professor James F. Tracy explains accordingly. And remember, the CIA under the Allen Dulles was the beginning of the transformation of the agency from intelligence-gathering to that of covert operations. Remember as well that Dulles, no fan of Kennedy, was positioned on the Warren Commission, which today is synonymous with whitewash and distortion.
Conspiracy theory’s acutely negative connotations may be traced to liberal historian Richard Hofstadter’s well-known fusillades against the “New Right.” Yet it was the Central Intelligence Agency that likely played the greatest role in effectively “weaponizing” the term. In the groundswell of public skepticism toward the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA sent a detailed directive to all of its bureaus. Titled “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” the dispatch played a definitive role in making the “conspiracy theory” term a weapon to be wielded against almost any individual or group calling the government’s increasingly clandestine programs and activities into question.
Sound familiar? But even today the same techniques are employed, specifically this favorite argument: Conspiracy on a large scale would be impossible to conceal in the United States. Its synthetic reasoning and the transmission of such as a potent meme to this day serve to divert, obscure and redirect valid considerations and review of critical issues. And along with knee-jerk and Pavlovian false claims of racism and to a lesser extent homophobia, all discussion stops, valid areas of inquiry are sidelined and shelved, discussion ditched and sanity reevaluated. The history of the construction of his meme is mandatory for any truth-loving American who cherishes historical verity.
The latest introduction of the dread theory. So, do you think that conspiracy theory as pejorative weapon of distraction is limited only to truthers, birthers and vaxxers? Think again. Behold the rudiments of distraction.