I cannot believe what a disappointment the Washington Posts's report "Top Secret America" by Dana Priest and William Arkin is.
It begins with the premise that 9/11 was carried out by Arab terrorists and that America rebuilt its intelligence apparatus in response to it. It then goes on to accuse that intelligence apparatus of being unwieldy, expensive and incoherent.
What? Where have they been since 9/11?
Will they give America's spooks a detention after school?
9/11 was a false-flag operation designed to create the illusion of "terrorism," to justify a war on it and to provide grounds for an invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.
It sought to increase the restrictions
on personal freedom and subvert American (and British) democracy.
But if Priest and Arkin don't even see that 9/11 was a black operation, how would they see the other false-flags like the Oklahoma, London, and Madrid bombings, the Mumbai assault, the Christmas bomber, shoe bomber, etc.?
How would they see that 9/11 was carried out in part to provide the excuse for the taking away of constitutional rights from the population, exactly as was done, and the promotion of the very national security state which Priest and Arkin write about?
I have to conclude that they know nothing about them or anything else "top secret."
They may as well have given the alphabet agencies a clean bill of health, as the 9/11 commission did. A slap on the wrist for going forth and multiplying.
Fluff. A complete failure of the press. The Post oughta hang its head. I'm sure "Deep Throat" is rolling over in his grave.
This shows how far behind the curve the mainstream media are. If the Washington Post is taking its first baby steps to come back from Operation Mockingbird (CIA) control, I say well and good.
The small benefit of the series - that it shows how the national-security and intelligence community has mushroomed and fails to communicate - is residually welcome.
But please don't represent yourselves as talking about what is top secret in America. You are so far behind the curve it's pitiful, as any Internet reader of the alternative press probably sees.