Saturday, August 18, 2007

Is Daily Kos a CIA operation to control the opposition?

The Truth About Kos is gaining traction, because the truth is mightier than the Kos. And you can tell which websites are "assets" of Kos because they are the ones that steadfastly refuse to post the news that Kos spent six months at the CIA simultaneously with starting DailyKos. I found the following article over at Conceptual Guerrilla, which clearly is NOT a member of the DailyKos family of "assets." "Assets?" Maybe only metaphorically. Yes, let's see. Who are the closest blogosphere associates of Markos Alberto C. Moulitsas Zúñiga?

Pen's picture

Outrageous? Not quite so much after you consider the fact that Markos Alberto Moulitsas Zúñiga, or Kos, worked for the CIA.

In an article that didn't surprise me at all entitled Daily Kos: CIA Engineered Controlled Opposition? , I find out that Kos was in the employ of the CIA.

“In a one-hour interview on June 2, 2006 at the Commonwealth Club, Moulitsas, also known as ‘Kos,’ admitted that he was a CIA employee and would have ‘no problem working for them’ in the present.”

“I applied to the CIA and I went all the way to the end, I mean it was to the point where I was going to sign papers to become Clandestine Services,” Moulitsas admits in the interview. “And it was at that point that the Howard Dean campaign took off and I had to make a decision whether I was gonna kinda join the Howard Dean campaign, that whole process, or was I was going to become a spy. (Laughter in the audience.) It was going to be a tough decision at first, but then the CIA insisted that if, if I joined that, they’d want me to do the first duty assignment in Washington, DC, and I hate Washington, DC. Six years in Washington, DC [inaudible] that makes the decision a lot easier.”

So he worked in the CIA right up until Deans campaign took off. His website, btw, had ALREADY taken off long before Deans campaign did. Meaning he set up the Daily Kos while he was with the CIA. I was there when Deans campaign got going and the Daily Kos was about as anti-Dean a crowd to run with as you could find. Markos didn't do much to support Dean on his website. Kinda strange if you ask me. Well, maybe not when you consider how the place has been run from day one.

Markos is an ex-Republican who professes to be a libertarian who set up his website to be a Democratic Party only website and who worked and possibly still does work for the CIA. What effect has the Daily Kos had on the political scene?

First off the site forbids any diaries that can be considered "conspiracy theory". A rather broad definition the effect of which is to shut down any talk of 9-11 and even other potentially explosive topics.

The site is about electing Democrats only. It's about maintaining the status quo. In 2004 that meant they were behind Kerry and Dean supporters were snubbed without mercy. It's Dems first, what the candidate stands for second. Is it any wonder, therefore, that people like Webb who got elected because of DKos support, then turn around and pass the new FISA bill? Progressives get spat on if they try to primary a centrist Democrat. The tide is turning against the DLC, but Daily Kos only hinders that tide with its Democrat first policy.

The other effect of the Daily Kos has already been touched upon here by none other than Conceptual Guerilla himself when he wrote Fuck Daily Kos!.

Here’s the bottom line -- the realization I had as a result of this. There is nothing particularly important or useful going on there -- other than assembling a group of leftwing lemmings, only distinguishable from the lemmings over at Little Green Footballs by the pitch of the dog whistle they respond to. There are “activists” exactly to the extent that they can be motivated by those dog whistles to “make noise” in response to the stimulus. Don't get me wrong, there are some original and interesting individuals around, but they mostly fail to connect with the community as a whole. Meanwhile, original and interesting writers at other places are dying out.

And that's the point, isn't it? The CIA wants to maintain the status quo. Elect Dems, just don't elect progressive ones. And while we're at it, let's direct all online progressive traffic into our little website here and make all the other websites that we don't control dry up.

Here's the thing, I don't think people get. The days of the "wide open" blogosphere are over. If you weren't on the ground floor 3 or 4 years ago, you missed the boat. Today, a half a dozen blogs dominate the market, and it's damn hard to write your way in. A lot of good writers out there have given up.

As for Kos, he's not helping. His site is a mini version of the same phenomenon. A handful of folks who got in early dominate that market, and he won't open up the place to allow some other talent to emerge. The result are a lot of writers over there who can't any traction, simply because they can't get any visibility.

Which is exactly the way the CIA wants it. Because if enough voices are drowned out, no one will realize they're being had on both ends, Democrat and Republican.

And it's no coincidence that Kos repeats the corporate talking points whenever possible. Not blatant ones, but ones that the left still buy into. Like how he reinforced the notion that Chaves gave himself dictatorial powers.

I have no love for Chavez. Despite his populist record, he's also given himself dictatorial powers usurping his nation's courts and legislature.

Nevermind, as I pointed out, that

ummm, about those "dictatorial powers"

It's their nations tradition to allow their president a period during which he has an incredible level of control. Chavez was given those same "dictatorial powers" by the government in his previous term as well. He didn't abuse them. They are temporary powers granted to every Venezuelan president. Why they do that I have no frickking clue, but no one claimed the capitalist presidents before him were "Dictatorial".

And let's not forget that he didn't "give himself" those powers, the congress did. As they've done before.

Tell me, does THIS sound like the talk of a liberal leaning libertarian?

Moulitsas considers the CIA “a very liberal institution,” never mind the agency, according to John Stockwell, former CIA Station Chief in Angola (see my John Stockwell: The Third World War video), is responsible for killing more than six million people.

This is a very liberal institution. And in a lot of ways, it really does attract people who want to make a better, you know, want to make the world a better place…. Of course, they’ve got their Dirty Ops and this and that, right but as an institution itself the CIA is really interested in stable world. That’s what they’re interested in. And stable worlds aren’t created by destabilizing regimes and creating wars…. I don’t think it’s a very partisan thing to want a stable world. And even if you’re protecting American interests, I mean that can get ugly at times, but generally speaking I think their hearts in the right place. As an organization their heart is in the right place. I’ve never had any problem with the CIA. I’d have no problem working for them.

An ex-Republican, left-leaning libertarian calls the CIA "liberal"? It's like finding that piece of the jigsaw puzzle that snaps into place and then everything else suddenly makes perfect sense. Of course DKOS is drying up the blogosphere of writers. Of course frontpagers like Miss Laura are defending Hillary Clinton with polls from Fox News. Of course they rip into anyone who says Nader was right about Dems and Repugs being identical. Of course they're Dem first, progressives, well, if you don't vote Dem you'll get a Repug. Beware the boogey Repug man! Of course they were all about Kerry and putting down Dean despite the fact that Kos alleges it was the Dean campaign that made him not join the CIA.

Yet if he HAD become a spy he wouldn't out himself would he?

Of course they want to control both sides, that's what they're all about.

No comments: