-12 votes

Sibel Edmonds On Snowden Story: "It's so fake and so obviously fake, I can't believe people are falling for it"

I highly encourage everyone to watch this. Start at 1 hr 5 min 57 sec. Watch until at 1 hr 16 mins 55 secs.


http://youtu.be/aqfiLaaTk-o

For what it's worth, I agree w/ Sibel. Btw, I'm not saying some good hasn't come out of the Snowden story but I'm just not buying this story.

A few points she made:
-This is a psyop to desensitize people to the spying.

-Snowden hasn't release any new info that previous whistle blowers (e.g. Russ Tice, Bill Binney) hadn't released.

-The media is so obviously compromised but they're covering this story? Seems fishy.

-Hollywood movie to be made about Snowden by same people who made Zero Dark Thirty (which the CIA had a hand in)

-This is the most successful psyop in CIA history, in her opinion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqfiLaaTk-o&feature=youtu.be...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I see no evidence ...

... that Glenn Greenwald is in any way legitimate.

He has made grandiose promises, yet he has revealed nothing of serious substance.

He is a business partner of a man who has admitted to assisting the NSA in its unlawful spying. He admits that before release, he vets his "leaks" via the US government, the very organization he is claiming to expose.

He claims to have the goods, but delivers nothing.

Good rhetoric, but an empty suit. Or worse.

Sibel has never been beyond suspicion.

Government told her to hush and she obeyed.

Ed skipped town with copies of records of criminal activity.

Sibel 0 Ed 1.

Free includes debt-free!

In Light Of Today's (7-9-2014) Greenwald "Revelations"

Early returns are Sibel's comments were on the money. She mentioned "3, 4 or 5 names" would be released (it was 5). She was also correct that Greenwald did not confirm Russ Tice's revelations (Obama, Feinstein and SCOTUS were being spied on).

1 hr 7 min 40 second mark

Peter B Collins:

If Greenwald confirms through Snowden documents what Russ Tice told us that Diane Feinstein and Barack Obama and the members of the supreme court were wiretapped, it comes back to what we discussed earlier about Vietnam. Their self-interest will motivate them to action where the purported public interest has not.

Sibel Edmonds:

"Well how about this. I know this is not a gambling site but I'm willing to go ahead and bet it is not going to be Feinstein. It's going to be some people they would like to see go because the election season is coming. And I will wage my bet this way. Nothing will even come out of it even if they were to put 3, 4 or 5 names. Come on what is Merkel doing with finding out that Obama and NSA they are spying on them. This has made Americans far more desnsenitized and open to being propagandized.

Distraction and misdirection

Most of what I see from Glen Greenwald and the Snowden incident is distraction and misdirection.

It is heavy on drama and light on substance. Example: Glenn will reveal who has been targeted by the NSA. Big deal, who cares?... That is not the issue. The NSA or any agency could elect target anybody they wish at any time, like a giant dragnet, because the data collection is indiscriminate. This is a blackmail/extortion racket that defies imagination.

One real issue is that data are being collected outside the law, prior to targeting, and with the help of key non-governmental entities that most people expect to be good stewards of their private information. Another issue is the dangerous relationship established between rogue agencies and commercial interests. When will that be addressed?

During this distraction toward the NSA, what is being done by other agencies, such as the CIA? There is no point in nit-picking what the NSA is doing, how about working across the board to terminate any and agencies and activities that operate outside the law/Constitution? Congress, you want a pubic debate? Then how about explaining how you are cleaning house or how you will be leaving office?

You dont seem to understand

You dont seem to understand that of we could prove that non-muslims are targeted then we could convince the people that this has zero to do with terrorism.

If that is a "distraction" to you then I just cant help but wonder...

Ventura 2012

Excellent comment ...

... and we can also see a distinct difference between how Wikileaks operates and how Greenwald/Snowden operate.

That is telling, as well.

Could it be a psy-op?

Let's try a little Q & A -

1)
Q: Does it make any sense for a rogue government to tell the civilian population it is being watched/tracked/spied on? If so, why?

A: Yes, it does. So they don't speak out, don't act out, and comply in fear with the criminals running the state.
The Gestapo did this. The Stasi did this.
It's pretty routine secret police state procedure.
It's called Disclosure and Normalization.

2)
Q: Why did they need a psy-op to disclose the spying, and not an open, official announcement?

A: In the U.S. of America, this type of extra-governmental action is historically criminal, but currently quasi-legal under the controversial Patriot Act, and NDAA.
In order to make the full transition into the New World Order fascist state, the "new rules" must be carefully disclosed, and made to seem normal, without directly exposing the new regime as tyrannical, just yet. Otherwise there would be much greater political backlash.

3)
Q: The government did all that just to disclose the spying?

A: Not just. Psy-Ops are known for "killing two (or more) birds with one stone". Other recent psy-ops, and open government harassment of civilians has targeted the liberty movement patriots and anti-big-government activists. When the Snowden story first broke the MSM went on for days on end about how he was a Ron Paul supporter and a traitor and should be executed.

4)
Q: OK, but Russia was involved. How does that work if it was a U.S. government agency psy-op?

A: Snowden allegedly "escaped" to Russia making Putin look like the good guy to libertarians around the globe.
This psy-op makes Russia look better in the eyes of liberty activists around the globe and makes America look worse.
Obama is a traitor to the USA, a NWO globalist and communist sympathizer. So are many others in our government.
Putin is also these things. Or at least he is willing to work with Obama to weaken America in the name of globalism. He certainly has a similar communist ideology background.
Obama is working with Putin on the NWO (World Communist Conspiracy - as G. Edward Griffin called it).

5)
Q: How did Snowden get out of the country, wouldn't he be tracked?

A: As far as I've always heard from people in the know if you're in the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc., and privy to highly classified info you are tracked at all times. If you think they spy on us a lot, imagine how they track their own.
Despite the fact he was an NSA agent privy to all kinds of supposedly highly classified information he somehow managed to escape to politico-economic rival Russia even after the story had already gone mainstream and was all over the MSM... And the spy state, which tracks your every move, couldn't (or wouldn't) stop him.

**************

I said I thought it could be a psy-op, for the very reasons I just mentioned, way back when it broke. Considering he still really hasn't released any bombshell info, nor anything we hadn't basically already known about, I'm saying it's quite possible it was a NWO psy-op.
Fits perfectly with the Bowe Bergdahl psy-op modus operandi too.
Obama's main goal is to take America down.

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Any evidence that it actually

Any evidence that it actually IS a psyop? Doesnt seem to be that successful. Seems more like a self-confirming theory that every whistleblower is a psyop.

Ventura 2012

Cyril's picture

So, checkmate?

So, checkmate -

globalists - 1, the peoples - 0

?

Well, we shall see.

Here's what the globalists didn't see coming, though:

http://www.w3.org/History/1989/proposal.html

And I'd bet that makes them itch a lot.

Much unpleasantly.

Me thinks they're still (more and more obviously) trying hard to figure out how to defeat that one.

I wish them "good luck".

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

No, not yet, by a long shot...

But score another point for them.

The good news is, as with the Bergdahl thing, that it was not totally successful (I don't think).

The Normalization aspect was certainly successful.

But the demonization of libertarians, and labeling us as "domestic terrorists" hasn't fully caught on yet, and that is a partial victory for us. It also is proof that the PTB are desperate to turn the tide back towards people going back to sleep, instead of waking up.

So really, we are winning, or it's tied, or too close for comfort for the PTB.

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Could it be real?

The US diverted the Bolivian prime minister's plane nearly causing an international incident because they thought Snowden was on it. When they were trying to capture him, the government's actions were heavy handed and desperate, not the kind of picture you would want to paint with your psy-op.

The contention that Snowden hasn't revealed anything new might have some merit at this point in time. However, he did provide undisputed documented proof of the abuses. That is something no one else has done.

Many people claim that Snowden's revelations are old news. But if you had said two years ago that the NSA was intercepting shipments of technology devices to companies and hacking them, tapping in to all the internet traffic on undersea fiber, able to remotely turn on and monitor sensors on anyone's cell phone, and actively bugging the cell phones of allies like Angela Merkel, you would have been dismissed as a paranoid lunatic.

This incident has not portrayed the government in a positive light. Clapper has had to tacitly admit that he lied to Congress. Our allies are pissed off that we are using electronic eavesdropping to get a leg up in trade negotiations. Everytime the government makes a claim that refutes one of Snowden's claims, it is proven that they are lying.

Google has started encrypting Gmail end to end, China is no longer buying Cisco equipment, our allies are outraged and betrayed, and Brazil has cancelled military contracts. These all would appear to be negative outcomes from the government's point of view.

As far as Snowden being able to get out of the country without a red flag, that is a further confirmation of government incompetence (something I don't think they would necessarily want as part of their psy-op).

It was also reported that Snowden held clinics while he was in Hawaii that taught people how to encrypt their data and protect their privacy. That is an awful lot of trouble to go through for a cover story.

Responses

The US diverted the Bolivian prime minister's plane nearly causing an international incident because they thought Snowden was on it. When they were trying to capture him, the government's actions were heavy handed and desperate, not the kind of picture you would want to paint with your psy-op.

It would certainly but a lot of credibility that our government was angry with Snowden. And it's not like Putin's plane was brought down. Bolivia isn't a major world power.

The contention that Snowden hasn't revealed anything new might have some merit at this point in time. However, he did provide undisputed documented proof of the abuses. That is something no one else has done.

I fully agree w/ you here. Fwiw, I've said this many times.

This incident has not portrayed the government in a positive light. Clapper has had to tacitly admit that he lied to Congress. Our allies are pissed off that we are using electronic eavesdropping to get a leg up in trade negotiations. Everytime the government makes a claim that refutes one of Snowden's claims, it is proven that they are lying.

How do you know this wasn't part of the psyop. The idea that the head of the NSA is publicly announcing that he's collecting info on millions of Americans has a chilling effect on speech. Maybe they wanted something dramatic to make sure the story was very well-read by the population.

Google has started encrypting Gmail end to end, China is no longer buying Cisco equipment, our allies are outraged and betrayed, and Brazil has cancelled military contracts. These all would appear to be negative outcomes from the government's point of view.

As far as google, do you really trust their "encrypted email" is inaccessible to the government? Also, do you really believe that they're now anti-government spying? If so, I'm guessing you don't believe that we live in a "corporatocracy". Read this btw:

www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-11/microsoft-helped-nsa-bypas...

As far as the negative outcomes (e.g. Brazil canceled contracts), I can't say I know all the answers but I would say that there are a lot of cases where the media hypes something that isn't true. Or maybe these companies will get government handouts so it's still worth it to them despite losing business.

As far as Snowden being able to get out of the country without a red flag, that is a further confirmation of government incompetence (something I don't think they would necessarily want as part of their psy-op).

The government is full of red tape but the intelligence agencies are a separate thing. They don't have any real counterbalancing to the way the work. For example, when has the FISA court refused their requests?

It was also reported that Snowden held clinics while he was in Hawaii that taught people how to encrypt their data and protect their privacy. That is an awful lot of trouble to go through for a cover story.

Not really when it's such a big psyop (big defined by # of people who would be hearing about it).

Early on I thought Ron Paul was part of a psy-op.

Think about it: what better way to draw liberty minded individuals out into the open than running a candidate with an impeccable record who said all the right things? You would have a pretty good roster of everyone who might resist tyranny by stealing Ron Paul's donor list. I then saw Ron Paul in person and quickly realized there was nothing duplicitous or sneaky about the man. I think I would probably have the same reaction to Edward Snowden.

The question I end up asking myself is:
Is it better or worse that the country is now talking about these issues? They were spying on us before and after the Snowden revelations. If we make jokes about it and become desensitized to it, that is our own fault. But now at least we can't say we didn't know. And if it weren't for Greenwald and Snowden, we wouldn't be talking about it.

And no, I do not trust Google or Microsoft or any other big corporation to stand up to the government over customer privacy. However, encrypted data is much harder to access than unencrypted data, and at least these companies are having to pay lip service to privacy.

Snowden also revealed that the NSA has systematically undermined RSA encryption (something I don't think any previous whistle blower has revealed). This has pissed a lot of people in the tech community off, and I would imagine you will see more encryption and privacy tools as a result of his revelations.

DNI James Clapper did not publicly announce he was collecting info on millions of Americans. He had to backtrack and say he gave Congress the least untruthful answer. This makes him look like the slimy bureaucrat he is, not some villain out of 1984.

Maybe the Bolivian President thing was 'one of the birds'...

The Bolivian President had recently publicly condemned the Obama administration and other globalist entities, shortly before that incident. Maybe Snowden was the excuse they used to put pressure on the Bolivian President to cooperate?

Thanks for bringing that up, it supports the psy-op theory.

I never claimed I know for sure that it is a psy-op. I said I think it is a strong possibility. I also said that is because I remain open to all possibilities.
You shouldn't knock me or others for questioning things, and not desperately clinging to the hope of a hero saving us from tyranny.

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Wasn't trying to knock you, just arguing for a position.

I don't know for sure the whole Snowden affair is not a psy-op. I just lean towards it being for real.

Either way, Snowden won't save us from tyranny. We have to do that ourselves.

No, it's cool, I think I mis-read a line in the first paragraph

..of your first response.

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

bullcrap

This would mean that Snowden is the greatest actor in the history of acting.

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

Um, really?

I just don't know what to say to that. I guess it really works. Personally, I've never thought it was anything but a show, but boy when it sets in on somebody it really seems to grab them.
Let me know when a single revelation is something new or surprising.

Michael Nystrom's picture

High level spies are good at lots of things

Acting being the least of the tools in their toolbox.

I don't know whether Snowden is for real or not.

I've been fooled so many times that making the emotional investment in belief isn't worth it any more.

Keep an open mind. Look at all the angles. Don't let your rational mind be blinded by emotion.

To be mean is never excusable, but there is some merit in knowing that one is; the most irreparable of vices is to do evil out of stupidity. - C.B.

Exactly...

It can't hurt to always keep an open mind, and one should always be objective as possible, try not to get unnecessarily emotionally invested.

I'm still open to the possibility that Snowden is not part of a psy-op.
Or, that he is but is involved unwittingly.
Or that it wasn't a psy-op, but things were just spun that way after the fact.
And I'm still leaning to the possibility it was a psy-op as described previously.

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

This is a smart stance

emotional investment in belief isn't worth it any more.

Keep an open mind. Look at all the angles.

That is how cons work: being emotionally invested.

"Revelation of the Method"

is a real problem.

This is where people become pacified by the slow revelation that something grandiose was actually planned by a powerful group of people. Then, not only did they succeed in the plan, but they had been getting away with it for decades.

You may think that that it defeats the whole purpose but revealing a big secret can accomplish 3 things:

1) makes you feel powerless to said group of people.
2) makes you apathetic to try and stop it because "they already got away with it" or "it's already happening and not going to be stopped."
3) The next generation will accept it as a way of life. While, at least the previous generation knows why it is bad. The next generation only knows that "that's the way things always have been."

This doesn't mean every revelation is a bad one. But there is a real danger in the psyop/magik trick, "revelation of the method."

Think about in the last year how many of your friends/family have gone from saying massive surveillance was just a conspiracy to merely accepting of the way things are now.

It is worth considering, particularly because of Snowden's cozy relationship with Assange who allegedly assisted in his asylum in Russia.

aka Disclosure and/or Normalization

...

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

I can say that for me

I can say that for me personally and those that I keep talking to about this issue. Nothing about it desensitizes me to the issue.

Edmonds is full of nonsense


First of all, regardless of what whistleblowers came before, the manner in which Snowden leaked intell (selectively choosing to speak only with favorable journalists) was the thing that made it successful -- and created the degree of coverage. That is to the credit of Snowden and Greenwald.

Edmonds claims are ridiculous:
1. The Establishment loves him?...oh yeah..then why did they ban his passport? Why must he live under asylum in Russia in order not to be killed?
2. He didn't leak any new information? well..maybe not if you are a CIA insider...but to the general public, the information did make a liar out of Clapper and Obama and other NSA officials, and change the whole public conversation now taking place in Washington.
3. Nothing good will come from the Snowden leaks? Perhaps..but that makes the act to inform no less courageous or important.
4. And finally: What he did will make the Country desensitized? Wow...she's really spinning here. Keeping stuff buried and hidden offers no chance of any change. Only exposure and transparency can accomplish a change and a reappraisal. The idea that exposure of government wrongdoing is a bad thing is totally absurd.

I think Edmonds is just jealous here. Snowden and Greenwald succeeded where others have failed.

Responses

1. The Establishment loves him?...oh yeah..then why did they ban his passport? Why must he live under asylum in Russia in order not to be killed?

How do you explain this...
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/03/world/americas/bolivia-plane-s...

...and then this...
http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/edward-snowden-interview/excl...

If Obama was so desperate to get Snowden how does NBC News get an interview like this. NBC News can find Snowden but the CIA can't? Give me a break.

2. He didn't leak any new information? well..maybe not if you are a CIA insider...but to the general public, the information did make a liar out of Clapper and Obama and other NSA officials, and change the whole public conversation now taking place in Washington.

Yes he changed the conversation but the BIGGER question is about the way info was released and the effect it's having on the public. Maybe the psyop is to introduce and either desensitize and/or legitimize the spying. Of course, the info would have to be released at some point. And that would change the conversation. So that would HAVE TO BE in the plans if it was a psyop. The question is about the way it's being released in such a way to desensitize people. Again, Greenwald released info that other whistleblowers did (though, I will absolutely admit it took things a step further w/ actual documents). Second, think about the last several months. Has Greenwald released anything from Snowden? And for a while when he was releasing info, it was basically variations on the same point. Check some of the articles from Greenwald's "The Intercept". Notice the overlap.

============================================================
Data Pirates of the Caribbean: The NSA Is Recording Every Cell Phone Call in the Bahamas

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/article/2014/05/19/data-p...
============================================================
The Bahamas Wants to Know Why the NSA is Recording Its Phone Calls

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/05/20/bahamas-wants-...
============================================================
Der Spiegel: NSA Put Merkel on List of 122 Targeted Leaders

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/article/2014/03/29/der-sp...
============================================================
Inside the NSA’s Secret Efforts to Hunt and Hack System Administrators

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/article/2014/03/20/inside...
============================================================
Compare the NSA’s Facebook Malware Denial to its Own Secret Documents

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/03/15/nsa-facebook-m...
============================================================
How the NSA Plans to Infect ‘Millions’ of Computers with Malware

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/article/2014/03/12/nsa-pl...
============================================================

3. Nothing good will come from the Snowden leaks? Perhaps..but that makes the act to inform no less courageous or important.

That is, unless it was a psyop to desensitize the public.

4. And finally: What he did will make the Country desensitized? Wow...she's really spinning here. Keeping stuff buried and hidden offers no chance of any change. Only exposure and transparency can accomplish a change and a reappraisal. The idea that exposure of government wrongdoing is a bad thing is totally absurd.

Why? I think it was Mike Nystrom who made a comment like "people make NSA jokes all the times. I've done so myself". I have noticed similar stuff w/ my friends. That feels like a sign we've already seen the desensitization. Now we've gone through a period of time of no big stories from Snowden. People probably were like "well, they're spying on me but I guess it's no big deal. I haven't noticed any changes in the world. Plus when they put these repeating stories on, they'll just be more of the same boring stuff. Hey, my favorite TV show is on now!"

I think Edmonds is just jealous here. Snowden and Greenwald succeeded where others have failed.

This again brings up the point about the MSM. Are you a believer that we have a free press? Do you not think that the giants that own the media don't attempt to control the message?

This is flawed thinking

If Obama was so desperate to get Snowden how does NBC News get an interview like this. NBC News can find Snowden but the CIA can't? Give me a break.

You're assuming Brian Williams just flew to Russia unannounced and traipsed in to the location where Edward was at that moment. And for all we know, CIA knows where Edward is in Russia, but they can't get to him for obvious reasons: FSB.

No I'm not making that assumption

My point is that if the CIA was rally after Snowden then Brian Williams would have to "trapeze" (I use this term figuratively) into the hidden location where Snowden was hiding. The fact that Brian Williams clearly didnt have to do that is telling. In other words Brian Williams can set up this interview but Obama has to force the president of Bolivia's plane down to look for Snowden? I ask again - does this make any sense?

Those are completely different circumstances.

Evo Morales' plane incident was 1 month after the first story, when Edward was in Sheremetyevo, and it was based on rumor. The Brian Williams interview was 1 year after the first story, with Edward in Russia under FSB protection and was obviously arranged by Edward and/or his helpers with full consent and involvement of FSB. Who did Brian Williams or NBC staff initially contact to arrange? I have no idea. Perhaps Edward's lawyer? Perhaps Wikileaks? Perhaps Glenn? Perhaps Edward himself? You also have no idea the FSB security procedures required for Brian Williams and his crew to successfully conduct that interview. It does make sense.

Why is it

Why is it that it's so easy for DPers to believe in internet people but refuse to believe one single thing that also has a following offline? Like this is a perfect example. Don't believe Greenwald or Snowden... no, believe this internet person named Sibel.