Chris Hedges, CIA?

[Grizzly]

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/03/av ... 703841970b

Who woulda thunk it?

Also see, http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/03/av ... 74b036970c

and http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/03/av ... 77f3ca970c

Edit... Gah! Due to some weird new formatting over at moonofalabama.org, you can't link directly to the comments anymore...

Fuck Chris Hedges. Like Juan Cole, he most likely is a CIA asset/perp.

Chris Hedges plays up the antiwar angle but he's insincere and has ulterior motives. Posted by: Walter Wit Man | Mar 5, 2012 11:17:04 AM | 95*

* comment 95

For instance, here's Chris Hedges the CIA stooge pretending to oppose U.S. imperialism, but subtly justifying it instead:

"It is we who legitimize the Mahmoud Ahmadinejads, suicide bombers and radical jihadists." [Uh, Ahmadinejad has suicide bombers and jihadis? Really Hedges you fucking stooge?]

"I am no friend of the Iranian regime, which helped create and arm Hezbollah, is certainly meddling in Iraq, has persecuted human rights activists, gays, women and religious and ethnic minorities, embraces racism and intolerance, and uses its power to deny popular will. And yes, it is a regime that appears determined to build a nuclear weapon, although I would stress that no one has offered any proof this is occurring. I have spent time in Iranian jails. I was once deported from Tehran in handcuffs." [Ah, yes, our hero was put in handcuffs by the regime. Just like with Occupy Wall Street, Chris Hedges was personally arrested and has street cred. If it's anything like his Occupy stunt it his expulsion from Iran was probably a U.S. psy op. Chris Hedges is simply establishing his bona fides so that liberals trust him. Don't fall for it.] [Also note that Hedges personally assures us the regime is determined to build a bomb. Fuck you Hedges you punk ass liar.]

"[T]he morally bankrupt clerics [] are ordering the beating and murder of demonstrators." [You know this how, Hedges? Marie Colvert? Tyler Hicks? Your CIA buddies?]

"The uprisings from Tunisia to Egypt to Greece to Occupy Wall Street to our gathering outside AIPAC’s doors in Washington are the same primal struggle for sanity, peace and justice . . . ." [No mention of U.S. involvement in these uprisings. Being a perp I'm sure Hedges is fully aware of Western clandestine efforts but is purposely pretending the 'Arab Spring' is an organic uprising/protest.]

Chris Hedges is lying. He's a perp. Don't trust him. He obviously is tasked with a role in Occupy Wall Street. Like a CIA agent helping organize the Arab Spring, Hedges is attempting to be a gatekeeper for U.S. protests.

Posted by: Walter Wit Man | Mar 5, 2012 11:31:37 AM | 97*

*comment 97

The quotes in #97 come from Hedges' latest piece, linked to in #94.

Posted by: Walter Wit Man | Mar 5, 2012 11:40:55 AM | 100

*comment 100

next page (wtf)?

Thanks Noirette. And yes I do know this already, but it has taken me longer to identify some of the perps than others (like Chomsky).

But I think you may be correct on all those perps you mention. As I mention up thread, Thierry Meyssan may also be another left wing gatekeeper, even though he may be reporting what is closest to the truth about Syria.

That's the problem with some of these left-wing perps. We hunger for a different perspective and Democracy Now and Chomsky and Hedges et al. seem to be the only ones offering it so even if I think they are perps I'm drawn to most of their message.

But the biggest secret is the little opposition we do have isn't even real. The fascists are completely in charge.

What's interesting is finding these left-wing perps in the blogosphere. You know many of these "progressive" bloggers are filling Chris Hedges' role in the internet. Surely Kos and Daily Kos are on the list, as well as Digby and Booman. Those three I'm almost positive are spooky perps and my suspect list is growing.

Posted by: Walter Wit Man | Mar 5, 2012 12:49:13 PM | 104*

*comment 104

I used to admire Chris Hedges as well. But his actions regarding Occupy protests and his article about the "black bloc" ( http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the ... _20120206/ ) is what led me to have suspicions and to analyze his work.

His article seemed out of character to me because he had previously encouraged people to resist the fascist state any way they could because the situation was so dire. He even said, to paraphrase, all acts of resistance are needed, he called for confrontation with the police using civil disobedience, and got arrested himself. Then, when people followed his advice, he turned on them in a vicious way, basically advocating they be turned over to the fascist police state for committing the wrong type of civil disobedience. He is purposely fomenting division within the left and focusing on protester "violence", when there isn't any of significance, and therefore justifying the massive and brutal police suppression of the protests.

He also uses subtle mindfucking techniques (which I only recently became aware of through my research in acid fascist cults and sex cults). I firmly believe there is a psychological reason for all his good vs. evil rhetoric. In fact, this rhetoric is in the most recent piece quoted above too! He says: "[partisanship] reduces the world to black and white, good and evil." So in this case Hedges is saying reducing concepts to black and white is simplistic but Hedges does this all the time himself! Hedges often projects like this. It's odd and something I never noticed back when I like him.

But mostly it's been my research into fake news and fake videos, like we are discussing on this thread, and this video that has convinced me Chris Hedges is a perp. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOde31QYbI0 Look at the production values of that video. Look at the black v. white imagery (setting up a perfect juxtaposition between the pure "white" protesters like Hedges, vs. the Anarchist hooligan "black" protesters). Plus, the scene looks staged. At around :52 a protester slips out of his handcuffs as if they were not really arresting him and only pretending. Also, note the presence of white masks at the protest, which is ironic because Hedges later uses the fact the black bloc covers their faces against them (is subsequent article after the "Cancer" article once again uses the imagery of a white masked protester [a "good" protester]). Also note that Hedges is giving an amplified speech in front of the white house under a pure falling white snow (the white theme). Hedges is giving a pretty speech with apparent police support.

Hedges is fucking with people's heads because he is saying resist, like he is, but he gets special treatment and it's an impossible standard to impose on fellow protesters. The police in his protest were friendly and nice so it's harsh to second guess protesters who are facing police brutality.

I'm still trying to figure out Messyan as well. He's reported some crucial facts--lots of them contradict the MSM and seem legit . . . . but I'm suspicious because even though he's critical he does backstop the existence of these journalists in the rebel areas of Syria that they claimed to be reporting from, which I am a bit dubious about.

Posted by: Walter Wit Man | Mar 5, 2012 1:38:47 PM | 107*

*comment 107

etc... as a courtesy & to save you guys and gals time, I posted the relevant comments...

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”
― Mark Twain

[Fresno_Layshaft]

Let me get this straight..

You are accusing Chris Hedges of being in the CIA, based entirely on comments posted on an article at "moon of alabama"? Comments that offer zero evidence for their slurs against one of the most unimpeachable lefties in the US?

This thread is a disgrace. You need to change its title because it is totally unfounded, dishonest and misleading.

[Simulist]

I agree with Fresno.

[Jeff]

I concur. I really despise the binary thinking of disagreement = CIA. Though I may be giving it too much credit by ascribing it thought. (But of course I'd say that, since I've been accused of being CIA myself. And it's just like a CIA asset to deny he's CIA. Right?)

Hedges is a former seminarian, and Christianity still very much informs his reflection and activism. His rejection of the Black Bloc didn't arise out of nothing and shouldn't have surprised anyone.

From Death of the Liberal Class (2010):

Radical anarchists often grasp the extent of the rot in our cultural and political institutions. They know they must sever the tentacles of consumerism. But many also naively believe it can be countered with physical resistance and violence. There are debates within the anarchist movement about acceptable degrees of violent resistance. Some argue, for example, that we should limit ourselves to the destruction of property. But that is a dead end. Once you start using plastic explosives, innocent people get killed. The moment anarchic violence begins to disrupt the mechanisms of governance, the power elite will use these acts, however minor, as an excuse to employ disproportionate and ruthless force against real and suspected agitators, only fueling the fear and rage of the dispossessed.

And so on.

Never mind the slander to Hedges. It does no credit to an argument to let it rest upon such a groundless smear.

[barracuda]

I have it on excellent authority that Hedges and Dr. Suess shared an oddly-shaped cubicle at Langley.

[Simulist]

I have it on excellent authority that Hedges and Dr. Suess shared an oddly-shaped cubicle at Langley.

But everything suddenly changed when Horton heard a who coming out of it.

[barracuda]

[norton ash]

If he 'hedges' it means he's playing both sides.

Not to mention the hedges in The Shining, and Benson and Hedges 100's whose 'you've come a long way baby' sold emancipation via addiction.

Some would tell you not to be alarmed by the bustle in your hedgerow, but it's likely that person is a plant.

[brekin]

Well I don't think there is anything wrong with asking the question.
The thread title is:Chris Hedges, CIA? not Chris Hedges is CIA!
Although the so called "evidence" provided is yes, alarmist, and less than a few microns thin.
George Orwell though, one of Hedges heroes (and mine) was an informer to British intelligence so anything is possible
and as a thought experiment it is intriguing.

Hedges has a lot in his bio which could fit a CIA asset or at least someone who may have allies in the CIA.
He comes from a definite WASP background, graduate of Colgate and Harvard, Seminary Student (Remember both Hitler and Stalin wanted to
be priests early on. And as far as devotion, indoctrination, discipline and global conquest the Church has provided the blueprint for all succeeding
intelligence agencies on those fronts) and:

He spent nearly two decades as a foreign correspondent in Central America, the Middle East, Africa and the Balkans. He has reported from more than fifty countries, and has worked for The Christian Science Monitor, National Public Radio, The Dallas Morning News, and The New York Times,[1] where he was a foreign correspondent for fifteen years (1990–2005).

I doubt one could be such a international journalist globe trotter in such hot spots and not have relationships or make associates within the Intelligence field. Who knows whether his possible relations are friendly and mutually beneficial? Maybe his message serves the CIA in some way, the provider of hard truths about the American Empire or some such, perhaps there is even a progressive, reformist branch within that gives him free rein? Or maybe his message ends up alienating a politically astute stratum which comes to think regular political participation is no longer tenable? I don't know. It would be interesting to see how often he has spoken out against the CIA specifically and not just the "American Empire".

I admire and respect Hedges, (as I do Chomsky), and don't believe in accusations without hard evidence.
However I think a suspicious mind may be healthy with darlings of the left. While we can't build our dreams on suspicious minds it may prevent us
from building them on sand.

[Simulist]

Chris Hedges might work for the CIA. (So might anyone.) And there's nothing wrong with asking the question.

But appearing to base ones reasons for asking that question merely on speculations from a message board someplace does seem a bit... surprising.

[Jeff]

I admire and respect Hedges, (as I do Chomsky), and don't believe in accusations without hard evidence.
However I think a suspicious mind may be healthy with darlings of the left. While we can't build our dreams on suspicious minds it may prevent us
from building them on sand.

I think baseless accusations are bad things, for both the accused and the accuser.

Better than having a suspicious mind is being a critical thinker and reader. We're not expected to co-sign every word written by Hedges or Chomsky. And we needn't believe them to be CIA because we can't.

[wordspeak2]

I've said numerous times I don't trust Chris Hedges, due mostly to his reporting for major capitalist media in former eastern block countries, and the way he talks about it; he comes off as an anti-communist. Also, as far as I can tell he doesn't write much if anything that's really original or radical. I could be wrong, and I haven't read the entirety of any of his books. However, the outright dismissal of the question of it by most of you is just naive, in my opinion. Again I recommend the book "The Cultural Cold War" by Frances Stoner Saunders to get at how the CIA made infiltrating the left-wing discourse with liberal, anti-communist writers of all sorts one of its *very top priorities.* There's nothing wrong with connecting dots and speculating; in fact, there's everything right about it.

"In 2002, Hedges was part of the team of reporters at The New York Times awarded the Pulitzer Prize for the paper's coverage of global terrorism." -wiki

[brekin]

brekin wrote:

I admire and respect Hedges, (as I do Chomsky), and don't believe in accusations without hard evidence.
However I think a suspicious mind may be healthy with darlings of the left. While we can't build our dreams on suspicious minds it may prevent us
from building them on sand.

Jeff wrote:

I think baseless accusations are bad things, for both the accused and the accuser.
Better than having a suspicious mind is being a critical thinker and reader. We're not expected to co-sign every word written by Hedges or Chomsky. And we needn't believe them to be CIA because we can't.

I don't think there is anything wrong with wondering what ties any influential public figure has to the Intelligence community. To publicly wonder I think is healthy.
Because the intelligence community has such a big influence and control over what thoughts we are exposed to, then I would tend to assume many thoughts and
people are vetted. And again, I'm not accusing Hedges or anyone else without hard evidence...I'm just keeping my eye on him

[Simulist]

I've said numerous times I don't trust Chris Hedges, due mostly to his reporting for major capitalist media in former eastern block countries, and the way he talks about it; he comes off as an anti-communist. Also, as far as I can tell he doesn't write much if anything that's really original or radical. I could be wrong, and I haven't read the entirety of any of his books.

A few other names fit that description too, some of which probably aren't enrolled in the CIA employee retirement program.

However, the outright dismissal of the question of it by most of you is just naive, in my opinion.

Expecting actual evidence and solid reasoning to accompany such a question is not dismissal. Nor is expecting those things naive.

Again I recommend the book "The Cultural Cold War" by Frances Stoner Saunders to get at how the CIA made infiltrating the left-wing discourse with liberal, anti-communist writers of all sorts one of its *very top priorities.* There's nothing wrong with connecting dots and speculating; in fact, there's everything right about it.

Okay. Then speculate! And please, do enjoy...

"In 2002, Hedges was part of the team of reporters at The New York Times awarded the Pulitzer Prize for the paper's coverage of global terrorism." -wiki

So?

[Project Willow]

I'm going to put this mildly.



You'd think some people grew up as hermits only exposed to tv or movies. Other human beings aren't cartoon cut-outs you know, and these accusations are harmful, FFS, especially against someone at the forefront of a burgeoning resistance movement.

[Edited with curses for caches and little scripts that deny hot linking, this post was not much more than swearing anyway. If people would only redirect all the energy they spend entertaining themselves with speculation, yeah, well, what's the point of repeating that wish anyway. /]