Been in the hardcore activist scene since the Freedom Riders.
When was the last time you felt a lit molotov cocktail escape the palm of your hand, Bambi?
Quote:
I know what a rat smells like.
Not by the looks of it.
Quote:
These kinds of pissing contest, conspiracy shit-throwing because someone isn't exactly who you wanted them to be is why the "left" can't get things done. Think about it. Divide and conquer, hello!!!!
See, what I'm pointing out is that GNN in part fulfills this role, which is the point. They neuter "the left" and make it into an impotent, useless ideological dinosaur with little bark and no bite.
Quote:
Maybe it's time to retire or consider a change of strategy because, obviously, the left has failed miserably at doing whatever it is they niavely think is helping the country.
So, considering our circumstances in the here and now, I think we can conclude that the 'left's' methods are just not effective anymore. The left has no testicles and hasn't for a very long time.
Word.
Quote:
Obviously more than a few people actually do care whether the organizations they are involved with, actively support and provide content for are legitimate or not. And why shouldn't they? GNN, Inc's connections to US and Israeli intelligence agencies cannot be refuted, no matter how hard they try to keep the information off their wikipedia entry.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:43 pm Post subject: Re: The So-Called "left" is part of the problem
Gren wrote:
Bambi,
The so-called left is part of the problem. As you've said, you're old and been around for decades. Maybe it's time to retire or consider a change of strategy because, obviously, the left has failed miserably at doing whatever it is they niavely think is helping the country.
.
I couldn't agree with you more, Gren. And, I'm really not part of the so called left. I just focus on the environment and social issues. The left has failed, definitely, but the right has succeeded .... they've raped the land real good.
The folks I've worked with over the years have had some successes. Read my reply to AnubisOReilly if you're so inclined.
I am retired now, as a matter of fact. I'm busy raising grandkids and passing on stories.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:52 pm Post subject: Re: Here's what I posted at GNN
Angel wrote:
Bambi wrote:
Psyops, schmyops…who give a shit?
You could have stopped right there, Bambi. Obviously more than a few people actually do care whether the organizations they are involved with, actively support and provide content for are legitimate or not. And why shouldn't they? GNN, Inc's connections to US and Israeli intelligence agencies cannot be refuted, no matter how hard they try to keep the information off their wikipedia entry.
Here's where I need help. I've been trying to see this connection. It's not that I refuse to see it, I would just like some evidence. Trust me, I'm no big fan of the GNN overlords. I've had some serious issues with them. I do, however, recognize it as a good place for young journalists and activists to hone their skills
Hey, if I'm being had....I'd like to know as well.
Been in the hardcore activist scene since the Freedom Riders.
When was the last time you felt a lit molotov cocktail escape the palm of your hand, Bambi?
You just outed and discredited yourself. You're exactly the kind of plant that's transparent!!
As for my achievements, and they are numerous, they are as follows:
Freedom Riders (end of segregation in the South)
Black Panthers' Lunch School Program
Helped end the Vietnam War
Worked with Caesar Chavez's attorney to launch successful lettuce/grape boycotts that resulted in better conditions for farm workers
Organized Santa Rosa's Roseland district tree lovers to design snake-designed sidewalks as a way to preserve trees on streets.
Organized first computerized databases in Oregon that united many, many environmental groups in forest activities spurred by 1995 "Salvage Rider"
Helped organize largest forest protest in the history of Oregon, covered by 60 Minutes
Organized and facilitated (on my own) successful protest against forest closure in Mt. National Forest....only closure of that period that was declared unconstitutional
Successfully prevented developers from development of Sacred Native American Site at Lyle Point, WA into upscale housing development
These are only a few of the activities in which I took a leading role. Molotov cocktails are for losers who hide behind stupid internet handles and throw shit on people that actually use their real names, real actions and have real lives.
It's obvious that you are jealous, hateful and violent. That's a shame, because your investigative and journalist qualities could be developed and used for something other than making your imaginary dick hard.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:06 pm Post subject: Re: Here's what I posted at GNN
Bambi wrote:
Angel wrote:
Bambi wrote:
Psyops, schmyops…who give a shit?
You could have stopped right there, Bambi. Obviously more than a few people actually do care whether the organizations they are involved with, actively support and provide content for are legitimate or not. And why shouldn't they? GNN, Inc's connections to US and Israeli intelligence agencies cannot be refuted, no matter how hard they try to keep the information off their wikipedia entry.
Here's where I need help. I've been trying to see this connection. It's not that I refuse to see it, I would just like some evidence. Trust me, I'm no big fan of the GNN overlords. I've had some serious issues with them.
What is it you need help with? If you can read, this shouldn't be a problem. Refer to the article in the original post.
The connections to US and Israeli intelligence agencies are spelled out clearly.
First you say "who give(s) a shit", now you're asking for help reading.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:43 pm Post subject: Re: Here's what I posted at GNN
Angel wrote:
What is it you need help with? If you can read, this shouldn't be a problem. Refer to the article in the original post.
The connections to US and Israeli intelligence agencies are spelled out clearly.
First you say "who give(s) a shit", now you're asking for help reading.
It's difficult to take you seriously.
Honestly, I still need help here. Ian Inaba worked for Check Point. They make Fucking Zone Alarm, for christsake. It's one of the most popular low tech firewalls out there. I have a friend who is very high up at McAfee Security software who says it's better than their product for mid-expert end users like myself.
Look at the recent HP scandals. Indite everyone who worked there as well?
The Check Point stuff in the post to which you're referring is about Gil Shwed, not Ian. Ian worked for the company. Big deal. More evidence please. I like the idea of people who share some of my ideals working in places like this. I'm not saying he was complicit in anything or not.
Evidence is evidence. Connecting fuzzy dots is another. Frankly, I don't care if you take me seriously or not.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:05 pm Post subject: Re: Here's what I posted at GNN
Bambi wrote:
The Check Point stuff in the post to which you're referring is about Gil Shwed, not Ian.
Anyone with the ability to read can click back to page one and see what the article says about Ian Inaba. I have a feeling "who give(s) a shit" is going to end up being your most honest contribution to the topic. You should have just let that suffice - enough of your time wasting.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:06 pm Post subject: Re: Here's what I posted at GNN
Angel wrote:
Anyone with the ability to read can click back to page one and see what the article says about Ian Inaba. I have a feeling "who give(s) a shit" is going to end up being your most honest contribution to the topic. You should have just let that suffice - enough of your time wasting.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Here's the mention of Ian Inaba on page 1
Anthony Lappe is one of the four people who own and operate GNN, and is the website's editor and primary contributor; the other three owners are Stephen Marshall, Josh Shore, and Ian Inaba. Anthony is the son of the (moderately popular) American leftist writer Frances Moore Lappe, who - together with her daughter - operates the Small Planet Institute. The Institute has acknowledged that it has received funding for book tours from Heifer International, the WK Kellogg Foundation, The Sunflower Fund and Sustainable Table. It's also worth noting that the Small Planet Institute's primary sources of funding, in terms of day-to-day operations, are not publicly disclosed on their website, not unlike GNN's primary sources of funding are not publicly disclosed. Keep all of this in mind, because it will be important later.
===============================================
Here's the Ian Inaba Check Point connection, and the article is mostly about Gil Shwed, not Ian Inaba.
I don't even know Ian Inaba, not trying to defend him, I just demand good investigative journalism.
I never lost a case for my clients, ever....when I did this kind of investigative work.
4. Ian Inaba and the Israeli Connection
The fourth and final GNN partner (and the one who has passed largely without mention thus far) is Ian Inaba. Ian had - as seems to be the trend among GNN owners - a well-off upbringing, graduating from the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, and quickly landing a spot as an investment banker at the San Francisco financial group Robertson Stephens & Co., staying on until 1996, when he left to work for a large Israeli corporation, Check Point Technologies. Last year, Check Point posted half a billion dollars of revenue; it’s one of the most well-known Israeli technology corporations, largely due to its popular firewall software. The company was founded (and has since been run) by an enigmatic young Israeli man named Gil Shwed. According to Fortune magazine, in 1986 Shwed, just 18 years old, joined the supersecret electronic intelligence arm of the Israeli Defense Forces called Unit 8200. His job most likely was to string together military computer networks in a way that would allow some users access to confidential materials while denying access to others. When he left the service in 1990, Shwed walked off with the idea that would define his career and make him one of the youngest members of FORBES' billionaires list. Ian’s role at Check Point, according to his profile on GNN version 1 (cached here), was as the director of corporate development … where he headed the company's investment and acquisitions activities. This seems like a remarkably important job for such a young and relatively inexperienced person, especially when one takes into account that the firm in question is an Israeli intelligence-connected technology giant. While it’s unclear which “acquisitions” Ian oversaw during his time at Check Point, the company caught newspaper headlines earlier this year under rather dubious circumstances; namely, according to the Washington Post, by trying to buy the Maryland software security firm Sourcefire, which does business with Defense Department agencies. Not surprisingly, Check Point's proposed $225 million purchase of Laurel-based Sourcefire raised red flags with government cybersecurity officials … Check Point was built by Gil Shwed, whom Forbes magazine has described as an Israeli billionaire who served in the electronic intelligence arm of the Israeli Defense Forces. By contrast, the firm that Check Point was attempting to buy out, Sourcefire, has deep roots in the National Security Agency. Its founder and chief technology officer, Martin Roesch, has served as an NSA contractor. Its vice president of engineering, Tom Ashoff, developed software for the secretive spy agency. After it became obvious that certain entrenched interests in the American security establishment didn’t want to let an Israeli intelligence-connected firm acquire an American intelligence-connected firm, Check Point quietly withdrew its buy-out plans. In the same vein as Anthony Lappe and Stephen Marshall, then, we can regard Ian Inaba as a wealthy elite with connections to state intelligence agencies; in his case, Israeli military intelligence. Hardly a “guerrilla” former employer, if indeed there were such a thing.
===============================================
If the accusations are, in fact, true.....then good investigative work with real dots connecting will blow this thing up and expose GNN. Thus far, I haven't seen that.
I'm not saying that the dots don't connect where you say they do....let's just see the work.
Hey, had to work with people within the Forest Service, Sheriff's Offices and Police Departments .... the enemy .... so to speak to get our work done.
The person who did this work wants me to use a molotov cocktail. Puhleese...this is so lightweight "agent provacateur".
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:20 pm Post subject: Re: Here's what I posted at GNN
Bambi wrote:
I'm not saying that the dots don't connect where you say they do....let's just see the work.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. The article argues that GNN, Inc. functions as a psy-op, whether intentionally or not and delineates the owners' links to various intelligence agencies.
Bambi wrote:
The person who did this work wants me to use a molotov cocktail.
I'm pretty sure that was an off-the-cuff joke - either that or she's Canadian.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:39 pm Post subject: Re: Here's what I posted at GNN
Angel wrote:
Bambi wrote:
I'm not saying that the dots don't connect where you say they do....let's just see the work.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. The article argues that GNN, Inc. functions as a psy-op, whether intentionally or not and delineates the owners' links to various intelligence agencies.
Bambi wrote:
The person who did this work wants me to use a molotov cocktail.
I'm pretty sure that was an off-the-cuff joke - either that or she's Canadian.
Let's stay on topic.
Let's shall we. You still have not posted one quote or reference to Ian Inaba and links to a PsyOp.
I posted what I read .... and what to you referred to. Pull something out of the article and reference or highlight it, and show me where Ian Inaba was the mastermind behind Check Point or something like that organization. He worked there doing investments....he was an investment banker prior to taking that job.
Your facts and research are non-existant.
There's more damning evidence and discussion of this situation over on GNN itself. The stuff on Ian is nothing. The information on the others...it's interesting and has my attention. Nothing's going on here.
BTW, any front line activist knows exactly what is meant by "who gives a shit" about Psy-Ops .... they are part of the whole game. You just get a chance to hone your skills and crap detectors.
I think we only have armchair 'puter folks here who have never done anything out in the field, ever.
Here's where I need help. I've been trying to see this connection. It's not that I refuse to see it, I would just like some evidence.
Try reading my post on page 1.
Quote:
These are only a few of the activities in which I took a leading role.
Those are some pretty cool things, Bambi. Good for you.
That said, the fascists are still kiiiinda taking over, and street marches and constitutional challenges aren't exactly going to stop them. Which leads me to...
Quote:
Molotov cocktails are for losers who hide behind stupid internet handles and throw shit on people that actually use their real names, real actions and have real lives.
Maybe Molotov Cocktails - and direct action in general, regardless of the legality of the action - are for people who understand the necessity of such acts at this point in time. I understand you're a grandmother now and your pitching arm may not be what it used to be, but the least you could do is not hate on people who are actually resisting, from the anticolonial movement in Iraq to the black bloc at every G8 and WTO meeting.
Quote:
It's obvious that you are jealous, hateful and violent.
...What?
Quote:
That's a shame, because your investigative and journalist qualities could be developed and used for something other than making your imaginary dick hard.
.....What?
Quote:
If the accusations are, in fact, true.....then good investigative work with real dots connecting will blow this thing up and expose GNN. Thus far, I haven't seen that.
Maybe you're seeing what you want to see, Bambi.
Take a step back and look at the bigger picture. In and of itself, Ian working for Check Point (which has a direct connection to Israeli military intelligence through Gil Shwed) is suspicious at best. But when you combine that with Anthony's direct USIA connections, Stephen's alleged CIA connections, GNN's direct Ford Foundation connections, and the systemic way in which GNN has acted as a gatekeeper, it becomes much more suspicious, to say the least.
Do you honestly believe that Ian gave up the prospect of millions of dollars from Check Point to "work" at GNN, Bambi?
Quote:
Your facts and research are non-existant.
You're willfully blind, what can I say. My article has been fact-checked over and over again; it's all true. What can be criticized is the conclusions I draw from these facts, but even then it seems to me that my conclusions are most likely true.
What can be criticized is the conclusions I draw from these facts, but even then it seems to me that my conclusions are most likely true.
Guilt by association is the stuff of which HUAC hearings were made. (If you don't know what HUAC stands for, those were the hearings that made Joseph McCarthy a househould name)
Analyzing your articles logically, you have not established the truth of your conclusions. Anthony Lappe once worked for the USIA for a short period of time. His explanation as to what he did in that time seems quite plausible. If you're going to assert that working for the USIA is de facto proof that he is an intelligence asset, then you need some actual evidence that he is working for the government.
The same standard holds true for the rest of the GNN owners. The only evidence you have that Stephen Marshall is an intelligence asset is that the CIA has, in the past, helped fund radio stations overseas to disseminate American propaganda. Does it necessarily follow that Stephen Marshall working with a radio station to overthrow a brutal dictator is de facto evidence of being an intelligence asset? Applying simple rules of logic to this argument shows it to be totally fatuous.
Ian Inaba once worked for a company that apparantly did some work for Israeli intelligence. I would guess that any tech company in Israel has rubbed shoulders with Israeli intelligence. For all we know, it could be a requirement to getting a business license. Again, this is not evidence of Mr. Inaba's involvement in Israeli intelligence.
These ties that you, Gren, and Angel see as being so self-evident are flimsy connections. It's obvious that a great many people also see them as flimsy. Gren suggested to Bambi that she should consider the possibility that she is 100% wrong. Why that should apply to Bambi and not to yourselves has yet to be explained.
What is it that makes you above criticism and reproach? What gives you the license to presume infallibility?
This whole sorry episode is a case study in witch hunting, and illustrates perfectly how "religious" thinking corrupts minds. The true believers are always right, their critics always wrong, and when the critics point out the flawed logic that the self-appointed witch-hunters have built their arguments on, they are told to stand aside and keep quiet, and to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
Analyzing your articles logically, you have not established the truth of your conclusions.
I'm aware that there is no "smoking gun" evidence in this article. There is, however, a number of important points that, when taken together, form a rather convincing argument.
And like Gren has said, all of us who helped write this report have somewhere in the vicinity of 5 years of close experience working at and with GNN. We've seen first-hand, for years, the type of gatekeeping that took place at that website. I own one of their docs, I own some GNN t-shirts, I briefly helped Stephen Marshall on his upcoming book... Trust me when I say we've seen this disinformation in action.
Quote:
If you're going to assert that working for the USIA is de facto proof that he is an intelligence asset, then you need some actual evidence that he is working for the government.
The USIA was an American government propaganda agency. You don't seem to fully appreciate this point.
Quote:
The only evidence you have that Stephen Marshall is an intelligence asset is that the CIA has, in the past, helped fund radio stations overseas to disseminate American propaganda.
Actually, the evidence I have that Marshall is an intelligence asset is the fact that he told me in a public forum that the Nigerians accused his station of being a CIA front. Combine that with his hilariously unlikely back-story and I don't think my conclusions are the least bit unlikely.
Quote:
Ian Inaba once worked for a company that apparantly did some work for Israeli intelligence. I would guess that any tech company in Israel has rubbed shoulders with Israeli intelligence.
Well, there's a more direct connection than that. Check Point was founded by someone who served in the most elite unit of the Israeli military's electronic warfare branch. He "got the idea" for his company while serving in that unit.
Again, do you people really believe that Inaba left the potential for millions of dollars at Check Point to "work" at GNN? Do people go to Business School at U Penn because they're interested in being revolutionaries, or because they're interested in making lots of money?
Quote:
Gren suggested to Bambi that she should consider the possibility that she is 100% wrong. Why that should apply to Bambi and not to yourselves has yet to be explained.
I've been very critical of my stance on this issue, which is why I have repeatedly conceded that there is no "smoking gun," nor is there likely to be such in a situation like this. That said, I stand by my conclusions and welcome any and all criticism, such as yours.
Quote:
What is it that makes you above criticism and reproach? What gives you the license to presume infallibility?
Nothing, nor have I ever claimed such.
Quote:
This whole sorry episode is a case study in witch hunting
"Witch hunting"? I worked with these people and this community for five years before - upon happening upon much of this information - growing convinced that something seriously fishy was going on. There was no "witch hunt," just several revelations and a logical conclusion drawn from them.
Quote:
The true believers are always right, their critics always wrong, and when the critics point out the flawed logic that the self-appointed witch-hunters have built their arguments on, they are told to stand aside and keep quiet, and to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
I haven't told anyone to "stand aside" or "keep quiet" whatsoever. Like I said, I welcome any and all criticism of this article, and I will defend my conclusions so long as I remain convinced that they are the most likely to be true.
There is, however, a number of important points that, when taken together, form a rather convincing argument.
I respectfully disagree. I want more, and better, evidence.
AnubisOReilly wrote:
We've seen first-hand, for years, the type of gatekeeping that took place at that website.
In perusing the GNN.tv forums, I see numerous articles (or are they blogs? kind of hard to tell) about 9/11, Israel, and other topics. If they are gatekeepers, then they're doing a really lousy job of it. Or do you mean gatekeepers in the "they don't agree with me about 911" sense?
The accusation of "gatekeeper" smacks of Orwell. Clearly there needs to be room at the progressives table for more than one point of view, otherwise we're no more than leftist Sean Hannities. While it's obvious to any thinking person that there is something seriously fishy with 911, I think it's a mistake to label anyone who doesn't necessarily buy into your own point of view "gatekeeper". I see this term used a lot on the internet, and it seems too quick and easy a label.
AnubisOReilly wrote:
I own one of their docs, I own some GNN t-shirts, I briefly helped Stephen Marshall on his upcoming book... Trust me when I say we've seen this disinformation in action.
I can't say the same thing, but I have seen some of the videos on their website. The Dangerous Game one, which talks about the CIA, Operation Paperclip, and the nature of propaganda, seems like a really strange video to put out if you're a disinfo agent. If you were a disinfo agent, would you make a video describing how disinfo works? That doesn't seem likely to me.
AnubisOReilly wrote:
The USIA was an American government propaganda agency. You don't seem to fully appreciate this point.
I did read that. Still, that is not de facto proof of anything. What I read of Anthony Lappe's explanation seemed plausible to me. He said he didn't really know, that he was a young kid fresh out of school, and that if he had it to do over again he wouldn't. If he openly states that he held this position in his bio, that would seem to suggest he didn't see anything suspicious about it. Moreover, that was in 1996. That's already 10 years ago. According to his bio, he writes for Details magazine. Not exactly what I'd consider to be a CIA front.
AnubisOReilly wrote:
Actually, the evidence I have that Marshall is an intelligence asset is the fact that he told me in a public forum that the Nigerians accused his station of being a CIA front. Combine that with his hilariously unlikely back-story and I don't think my conclusions are the least bit unlikely.
This is what I was alluding to when I made the HUAC reference. You just stated that an accusation from "the Nigerians" (which Nigerians? do you have any documentation of this? all Nigerians?) is evidence. Think about that.
An accusation is evidence?
Does that mean when the police accuse people in BC of growing bud that's sufficient evidence to convict? I can't believe you think of yourself as an anarchist!
I think your conclusions are possible, but I wouldn't label them likely without evidence, and stating that an accusation is evidence is chillingly Big Brother.
AnubisOReilly wrote:
Well, there's a more direct connection than that. Check Point was founded by someone who served in the most elite unit of the Israeli military's electronic warfare branch. He "got the idea" for his company while serving in that unit.
Ahhh, OK. I didn't catch that. Still, it's not evidence. So the founder of Check Point served in the Israeli military. Considering that every citizen in Israel is required to serve in the military, that's not much of a revelation. Looking at the Check Point website, I don't see what is so nefarious about this software.
What troubles me about your accusation here, though, is that you seem to be implying that anyone who works for Check Point is an Israeli intelligence asset. Doesn't that seem to be something of a stretch to you?
AnubisOReilly wrote:
Again, do you people really believe that Inaba left the potential for millions of dollars at Check Point to "work" at GNN? Do people go to Business School at U Penn because they're interested in being revolutionaries, or because they're interested in making lots of money?
Making lots of money, of course. Your investigation didn't really cover what Ian Inaba is doing these days. Maybe he left Check Point when the dot com bubble burst? Maybe Stephen Marshall sold him on the idea that GNN would be the next CNN? When I looked up some of your sources on Stephen Marshall, it looks like a lot of people said they wouldn't trust him, and they wouldn't give him money. Maybe Ian will be one of those people down the road?
AnubisOReilly wrote:
"Witch hunting"? I worked with these people and this community for five years before - upon happening upon much of this information - growing convinced that something seriously fishy was going on. There was no "witch hunt," just several revelations and a logical conclusion drawn from them.
Maybe witch hunt was too strong a term. I am simply not persuaded by what you're proffered as evidence. It's too easy to conceive of plausible, alternate meanings to the ones you've presented.
I went to school with a lot of anarchists, or people who say they believe in anarchy, and some of them come from cushy backgrounds. The central thrust of your argument is that because these people at GNN are from moneyed backgrounds (at least Stephen Marshall and Ian Inaba's, it was less clear to me what Anthony Lappe's background is), and did work which conceivably could have been for the government, then their media outlet is a psyop.
I respect your willingness to stand firm by your conclusions, and your willingness to debate this with an open mind. I don't want to appear as though I think government psyops are impossible (after all, COINTELPRO was obviously real), I just want better evidence before I accept your conclusions.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
