The attacks on Tulsi Gabbard are not random. They are defensive fire from a bureaucracy that has spent decades hiding files, laundering narratives, and calling secrecy “national security.” Whether the CIA literally “raided” ODNI or fought a custodial war over explosive records, the core question remains: who owns the truth—the people, or the intelligence cartel? Tulsi stands in the blast zone because she represents civilian control, transparency, and service over institutional self-protection. That is why the Deep State and its useful idiots howl. A decorated soldier threatening the vault is their nightmare. America should want her opening it.
This is not the first time that the CIA has obstructed a Congressional investigation. We interviewed Dan Hardway, an investigator on the House Select Committee on Investigations. He told us about numerous CIA shenanigans. So, while Tulsi's office is denying that boxes were taken in a raid, that the Agency would seek to bury evidence, steal files and engage in all manner of obstructionist activities is part of a patter of decades long behavior. It is time that the Agency is held accountable for ALL it's actions.
But the article really brings out that we are caught in a kind of twilight zone where the difference between transparency and hidden motives and actions is blurred or obscured. The real problem isn't the hiding, but the operant conditions that make it so difficult for us to know what is hidden and what is not.
the hiding IS the problem imo...my aunt had a G-11 clearance during WW2, she worked for the OSS, she died never telling us what she did there...the UK gov also clamps down on people telling what they do/did for their various MI sections...look how long it took for us to know about the enigma machine, Bletchley and the SOE...if Oswald really did it, then why all the secrecy? I hope Tulsi is able to to release what she can without risking her own life...even the files on the British actor Leslie Howard about how his civilian plane was shot down over the Bay of Biscay in June 1943 on his return from spying in Portugal and Spain were reclassified--who is the Brit govt protecting? That is the question--especially when just about all the actors re JFK and RFK and MLK and LH are long dead...
The theory is, and I think this is a cover, that the Brits don't want to admit that they were spying on their ally, us.. but that is obvious. They are protecting the vat that is the deep state that they were the head of...
it no doubt went both ways...but the Brits are old hands at spy craft...it's about being on the same side and also not trusting your Allies...a game with major collateral damage like people's lives but that's ok as long as you're in the "game"...
As I began this article, I affirmed my reading of it with a self-assurance that "this sounds interesting." Yet, as I read it, I began to feel very "emotional" and conflicted. I was gripped by Mr. Stone's wisdom and sensitivity by the way he expressed this conflict between Gabbard and the agency as well as the denials of there being a conflict. My emotions were aching and conflicted because the importance of this intra-agency disagreement seemed to hang on subtle distinctions. Was there full-blown antagonism between Gabbard and the CIA or is it just a minor intra-agency dispute that has been blown out of proportion? Stone is like a careful physician examining a patient to make a correct diagnosis. So much of our destiny as a country really depends on properly understanding and coming through sensitive disputes such as the one described so well in this article. What are we reading that is true, what is partially true, and what is false but masquerades as true? Since high school, I have been concerned with these questions after studying the poem "Richard Cory." Mr. Stone is obviously also deeply concerned with appearance vs. reality issues, and this passionate article clearly reveals that concern. Thank you Mr. Stone. The sensitivity of this piece really makes my day!!
There’s nothing murky or blurry here. One President was assassinated for confronting the unelected, conspiring, and power-mad Deep State, and our current President has had multiple attempts on his life, masked as amateur work but laden with evidence of Deep State control.
The asinine practice of document redaction alone is proof that We the People are considered mere serfs to those who prosper on NGO money.
It’s unknown to me why they killed him, or how. But, you can read the FBI file if you want to know more. No hagen dags for you kids. Only fat cats have that mature taste.
The attacks on Tulsi Gabbard are not random. They are defensive fire from a bureaucracy that has spent decades hiding files, laundering narratives, and calling secrecy “national security.” Whether the CIA literally “raided” ODNI or fought a custodial war over explosive records, the core question remains: who owns the truth—the people, or the intelligence cartel? Tulsi stands in the blast zone because she represents civilian control, transparency, and service over institutional self-protection. That is why the Deep State and its useful idiots howl. A decorated soldier threatening the vault is their nightmare. America should want her opening it.
“I will splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds” ~ John F. Kennedy
This is not the first time that the CIA has obstructed a Congressional investigation. We interviewed Dan Hardway, an investigator on the House Select Committee on Investigations. He told us about numerous CIA shenanigans. So, while Tulsi's office is denying that boxes were taken in a raid, that the Agency would seek to bury evidence, steal files and engage in all manner of obstructionist activities is part of a patter of decades long behavior. It is time that the Agency is held accountable for ALL it's actions.
But the article really brings out that we are caught in a kind of twilight zone where the difference between transparency and hidden motives and actions is blurred or obscured. The real problem isn't the hiding, but the operant conditions that make it so difficult for us to know what is hidden and what is not.
You are right. The hope is that Tulsi may finally be able to to bring real transparency. The old guard will fight to the death however.
the hiding IS the problem imo...my aunt had a G-11 clearance during WW2, she worked for the OSS, she died never telling us what she did there...the UK gov also clamps down on people telling what they do/did for their various MI sections...look how long it took for us to know about the enigma machine, Bletchley and the SOE...if Oswald really did it, then why all the secrecy? I hope Tulsi is able to to release what she can without risking her own life...even the files on the British actor Leslie Howard about how his civilian plane was shot down over the Bay of Biscay in June 1943 on his return from spying in Portugal and Spain were reclassified--who is the Brit govt protecting? That is the question--especially when just about all the actors re JFK and RFK and MLK and LH are long dead...
The theory is, and I think this is a cover, that the Brits don't want to admit that they were spying on their ally, us.. but that is obvious. They are protecting the vat that is the deep state that they were the head of...
it no doubt went both ways...but the Brits are old hands at spy craft...it's about being on the same side and also not trusting your Allies...a game with major collateral damage like people's lives but that's ok as long as you're in the "game"...
Yes ! Very murky. I have the book : “ Operation Paperclip” by Annie Jacobson I bet you do too ! Keep me posted please. And Thankyou.
As I began this article, I affirmed my reading of it with a self-assurance that "this sounds interesting." Yet, as I read it, I began to feel very "emotional" and conflicted. I was gripped by Mr. Stone's wisdom and sensitivity by the way he expressed this conflict between Gabbard and the agency as well as the denials of there being a conflict. My emotions were aching and conflicted because the importance of this intra-agency disagreement seemed to hang on subtle distinctions. Was there full-blown antagonism between Gabbard and the CIA or is it just a minor intra-agency dispute that has been blown out of proportion? Stone is like a careful physician examining a patient to make a correct diagnosis. So much of our destiny as a country really depends on properly understanding and coming through sensitive disputes such as the one described so well in this article. What are we reading that is true, what is partially true, and what is false but masquerades as true? Since high school, I have been concerned with these questions after studying the poem "Richard Cory." Mr. Stone is obviously also deeply concerned with appearance vs. reality issues, and this passionate article clearly reveals that concern. Thank you Mr. Stone. The sensitivity of this piece really makes my day!!
There’s nothing murky or blurry here. One President was assassinated for confronting the unelected, conspiring, and power-mad Deep State, and our current President has had multiple attempts on his life, masked as amateur work but laden with evidence of Deep State control.
The asinine practice of document redaction alone is proof that We the People are considered mere serfs to those who prosper on NGO money.
I believe Tulsi Gabbard is an honest and capable individual. The truth will come out. And her lips will be the ones issuing it.
This speaks volumes about who owns the director of the CIA.
We'll never see anything substantive.
Not anything of consequence. Because it would prove that the US government is mostly theater (at least the political side it).
The illusion of control *is* the control mechanism.
Everyone can feel it, but nobody challenges it.
If everything that's gone down up to and since the JFK assassination was revealed it would all come tumbling down.
There's no other reason to withhold so much.
It goes back to Eisenhower's farewell address referring to military/industrial complex.
Past time for POTUS and Congress to assert their authority, arrest, try and hang the traitors involved. Military tribunals only please.
The only time Chuck Schumer told the truth. "'If you take on the intel agencies, they have six ways from Sunday at getting revenge.'
Well, of all government officials I trust John Ratliff as much as any…
This is monumental, because it makes the public wonder who is in charge. It certainly isn’t anyone we voted for.
https://vault.fbi.gov/frank-olson/Frank%20Olson%20Part%2001%20%28Final%29
It’s unknown to me why they killed him, or how. But, you can read the FBI file if you want to know more. No hagen dags for you kids. Only fat cats have that mature taste.
I am pray that she is successful is draining the swamp