Saturday, August 1, 2015

Charlatans, Operatives & Disinformation Agents - Episode I: Gordon Duff

It has been close to a decade since I unplugged from the current of mainstream news story-telling, unrelenting propaganda and the entirely manufactured state of things most have been brainwashed into perceiving as reality. In that time I’ve developed a pretty robust level of discernment when it comes to wading through the oceans of disinformation and spotting the characters who peddle it. Senior editor of the alternative news website ‘Veterans Today’ Gordon Duff is an individual who has always aroused a great deal of suspicion in me. Though I could never really put my finger on what exactly it was that made me uneasy, I nevertheless always knew something was “off.” Without question, his publication has offered a great deal of extremely valuable information. His contributions, however, have always stood out to me as something out of the ordinary from not only the other contributors to his site, but in contrast to all other respectable and well-informed independent researchers and journalists I’ve become familiar with. For starters, his writing has a rather hyperbolic and sensationalist tone to it, somewhat along the lines of what is displayed by notorious Zionist shill and agent provocateur Alex ‘Stratfor’ Jones. Duff is more eloquent and composed in his delivery, while at the same time he is also inexplicably vague and ambiguous in much of what he puts forward. His writing can be qualified more as semi-coherent rambling than investigation. I’m inclined to believe this is not by chance, but rather because Mr. Duff (almost certainly not his real name) is not who he says he is.

Before citing some examples of Duff’s questionable background and dubious claims, I want to call attention to an article of his published in the online publication New Eastern Outlook, of which his VT is a partner. I would like to go through and highlight the many excerpts which reinforce my suspicion about this man, and why they do so. The aforementioned article is titled ‘Understanding Manufactured Dissent In America.’ The title in itself – a very common theme in Duff’s pieces – made putting this post together a no-brainer. Duff begins by throwing out a few recent economic developments in the US, resulting in – as he makes no attempt to clarify just how – “rising wages,” with absolutely no context given for this “rise,” or who exactly this has affected. It matters none, however, since this opening tidbit has very little, if anything, to do with the theme of his article. He proceeds, in typical fashion, to jump around in his subject matter and create a convoluted collection of apologetics for the Democratic party, references to martial law and gun control, and projection in regards to controlled opposition. A few curious statements he makes are:

“So, let’s talk about martial law. For those who really know American politics, the idea of a Democratic president being authoritarian is funny. There is nothing totalitarian about Democrats, in fact there is nothing even “organized” about the Democrats. They fight among each other so much, no two have ever agreed on anything.”

First, to make a distinction between the Republican and Democratic parties in such a way as to suggest the latter being authoritarian in nature is “funny,” whether in contrast to their Republican counterparts or at all, is bizarre to say the absolute least. It’d be difficult to make a case that the entire American political establishment itself is anything but authoritarian, among other reasons such an assertion is head-scratching. That aside, what it comes off as in this context is a subtle endorsement of the Democratic party, and /or an attempt to de-legitimize entirely people’s concern over an increasingly militarized society and ever-more-persistent calls for gun confiscation. Both of which, by the way, are anything but unfounded when you consider the false flag terror attacks and outright fake mass shootings that have grown increasingly more frequent. It’s worth noting, Duff himself has called many of these hoaxes and psychological operations for exactly what they are. So what gives?

He goes on:

“You see, the funny thing is the Democratic Party tends to stand for reform, civil rights, due process, free elections, environmental protections, quality education, health care and limitations on the privilege and power of those who have looted America.”

They do? This is news to me.

Perhaps puffing his chest, he states:

"As to the mechanisms of control in the US, few remotely understand any of it…"

I’m beginning to wonder if he knows a whole lot more than he’s willing to admit, and this statement is his way of rubbing in the faces of his readers what team he is actually playing for, without actually saying as much.

This is immediately followed by:

"America is highly decentralized as to political control."

This can be interpreted any number of ways. It’s a vague statement with context that doesn’t bring any real clarification to the claim. What’s interesting, though, is one way in which government authority has certainly been “decentralized” is through the infiltration and occupation by agents of Israel and the Mossad. And by decentralized, of course, we mean usurped and rendered completely opaque. For someone who continuously rails about Zionists, it’s odd to find no mention of Israel in this context.

The remainder of the “article” persists in its apologetics and borderline praise of president Obama, portraying him as merely a victim of Bush’s precedents and absolving him of any responsibility for the reign of terror he has overseen and even intensified, both overseas and domestically. For reasons unclear, he feels compelled to bring the subject of FEMA into the foray, stating:

"…thus the lunatic fringe talking about FEMA camps, which do not exist. However, they could exist but if they did, they would have been put there by Bush, not Obama…"

Every evil that currently exists in the US is a creation of right-wing entities, with Obama and his Democratic constituents merely standing helplessly on the sidelines. (And for the record, FEMA camps absolutely do exist, though they aren’t termed as such.)

One last excerpt I find very peculiar, before I touch on Duff’s shady background, is this:

"However, the Democratic Party is guilty of pandering to certain “urban elites” who advocate gun control. Their position is a rational one, people probably shouldn’t be able to own better weapons than the military but it is too late to do anything about it."

It is perplexing to me how someone like Duff can consider pandering to urban elites who want to disarm the public as a rational position. Who is this man, really? What is his real agenda? Furthermore, it is evident he harbors not only an unhealthy sympathy with a military industrial complex responsible for the mass murder of millions and millions of people (he was a marine, after all, though the veracity of "combat" veteran claim has not been without scrutiny), but also a certain level of contempt for the public at large. This is a revealing statement on his part which should call into question his true motives.

Duff's interesting background

Duff once admitted that as much as 40% of the information he writes is false, using as justification the notion that he'd be killed by TPTB if he simply told the whole truth. This open admission is absolutely astonishing coming from someone who writes about the subject matter he does and someone who has amassed the following he has among the 'truth-seeking' crowd. Taken at face value, it is nothing less than an admission to being a purveyor of disinformation; an acknowledgement that he possesses information he cannot or will not disclose. But it must be asked, why make such an admission in the first place? Is the notion that he'd be murdered if this were not the case a poorly-formulated tactic of building credibility, or is there a much more calculated reason? Perhaps this admission is in fact 100% true, only his perceived "fear" and "speculation" are in reality part of his job description as dictated by his handlers. If the latter is the case, it certainly doesn't pose any kind of risk to him or any entity Duff seemingly targets. The incident is a bizarre spectacle that only adds to the confusion and mystery surrounding this figure.

Something very few, if any of Duff's readers are aware of (or care to think twice about) is he belongs to an organization called Adamus Defense Group (ADG), based in Switzerland. Duff himself describes this organization as such:

Adamus, among other things, manages a series of organizations that oversee high security databases for national intelligence agencies, law enforcement groups and financial institutions. Several Adamus group companies work in the area we broadly refer to as “disclosure,” managing the integration of “after next-gen” technologies.  Among those are energy sectors including a variety of fusion systems, advanced energy weapons and unconventional flight systems. Adamus is privately held, quasi-governmental and operates under the authorities of several treaties and conventions.

Additionally, it has been noted, "Adamus boasts about owning and operating Pentagon flying defense surveillance platforms, (allegedly to watch wildlife in Africa and elsewhere) with USAID, US gov and UN contracts." Duff apparently makes no secret of this information. To call this peculiar would be an understatement of incredible proportions. In my opinion, with connections like this, only two conclusions can be drawn. The first being, he is an intelligence asset embedded in the opposition; a mole whose job it is to market one particular "brand" of "resistance." The other, far less likely conclusion, would be he is walking the fence between "tolerated" opposition -- which has thus far not crossed any boundaries worthy of elimination -- and slipping up and finding himself on the receiving end of a "freak accident." Based on his '40%' declaration and his hyperbolic, sensationalist brand of "opposition," it's difficult to imagine he's hanging by a thread and selflessly putting his life on the line. In fact, there is even more reason to believe he himself is a direct link in the stream of information and to what extent it is controlled, twisted, cherry-picked or censored. 

Recently, Veterans Today saw a sort of mass exodus of their writers. Jade Helm has made headlines and grabbed attention in a way few events in recent memory have. Duff is clear on his assessment of this massive military exercise among the civilian population of the Southwestern United States. It's nothing. Innocuous. The military would never, ever be a party to betraying the citizens of the United States, let alone knowingly involve themselves in a conspiracy that entails practicing scenarios in which US citizens are enemy combatants. He has little more to say outside of this, despite the fact that Jade Helm's true purpose could certainly lie outside this 'good guy-bad guy,' martial law takeover plan narrative many have seemed to adhered to. It could be multi-faceted and more than anything psychological in nature, a study on the perceptions and mind state of the American public. It could have a variety of possible explanations. Nevertheless, Duff did not take kindly to a few of his colleagues' thoughts on this operation. Five VT contributors were unexpectedly fired after Duff took extreme issue with, and actually deleted, articles by them about Jade Helm and the Boston Marathon bombing hoax. From the site

"Stew Webb, Jim Fetzer, Dean Henderson, Gene Tatum, and Bruce Campbell come together in a 3 hour special to give the proof that Gordon Duff is a lying fraud that only wants to try to control the alternative media so he can put out his known lies. Gordon Duff has put out lies such as vaccines are good for you, Jade Helm is no big deal, Jesus never existed, he protects Lee Wanta, he runs security for Africa and that he would never censor his writers!"

One of the fired contributors, Jim Fetzer, goes on to say:

"....I had noticed almost immediately that two of my other articles were missing, having “disappeared” over night after Gordon took me out of Veterans Today. One of them was on the Boston bombing,entitled “Faking the Boston bombing: How it was done”, which followed up on Nathan Folks’ observation that it had been done using (what is known as) “hyper-realistic” filming. So I embedded a sensational two-and-a-half hour program aired on Caravan to Midnight, which John B. Wells has regarded as important enough to make public as a YouTube [….] I was therefore astonished to discover that not just one but my four most recent and important articles about the Boston bombing–none of which has anything remotely to do with JADE HELM–had also been “disappeared”. So I have written to John Allen, the General Manager of Veterans Today, the following email explaining that, if this is not a crime in itself, it at least appears to involved Veterans Today in covering up a crime [….] Since I have now asked Gordon Duff a half-dozen times about “Faking the Boston bombing: How it was done”, and had no reply, I am convinced he is responsible, which means he is not only covering for JADE HELM but also for the Boston bombing. This man appears to me to embody corruption. The day before he sacked me from Veterans Today, by coincidence, I did a “False Flag Weekly News” about JADE HELM, which includes around 20 reference[s] that anyone can verify for themselves [….] That the situation has come to this grieves me. I began writing for Veterans Today when Gordon invited me to join in 2011. I have believed in Gordon and thought he was a serious and professional journalist. I am dismayed at the turn of events, but […] As the evidence I have presented explains, I no longer believe in Gordon Duff."

To make matters worse, there is suspicion that Duff went even farther, actually attempting to have two men killed in the aftermath of this mass defection. Fetzer was scheduled to do interviews with alternative news radio hosts Stew Webb and Jeff Rense, discussing what had transpired at Veterans Today and why he believes Duff is not who he says he is. Fetzer's account of the two car accidents that took place before he could speak with Webb and Rense is as follows:

"I was scheduled to appear with Jeff Rense on Friday to discuss JADE HELM. When I linked with the station, the producer explained that he was having trouble getting in touch with Jeff. I hung around for 45 minutes in the hope that he might make contact and, when I reluctantly concluded it wasn’t going to happen, I sent an email saying that I hoped he was OK. The next morning I received a reply from his girlfriend, telling me that he had been in a serious automobile accident and giving me the number of the hospital treating him. […]
I called later that morning and was informed that he was resting comfortably in ICU. On Monday I learned that he was home with a broken wrist–and he called me that afternoon to invite me on his show (again) to talk about JADE HELM. He told me he had been hit with some kind of psychotronic weapon that rendered him complete unconscious and his car went off the road into a rather substantial ditch. It was totaled–actually, a complete wreck–and the police described it as “an unsurvivable accident”. It looks like no accident to me."

All things considered, it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch that Duff has the motivation and the means to arrange such "incidents." 

This is just the tip of the iceberg, or course. Information suggesting Duff is a disinformation agent and possible intelligence asset on the feds' payroll seems to be growing. With this borne in mind, his writing begins to develop a new character that perhaps wasn't so evident taken at face value. What was originally and persistently general suspicion of the man on my part, has ultimately been confirmed to me. Enough of the tell-tale signs and red flags of an operative/disinformation agent are present, and I suggest everyone who has followed this man's work tread very carefully and with their guard up. 

To return briefly to the matter of what originally made me suspicious of him -- his bizarre and seemingly intentionally disorienting writing style and themes -- I would like to call attention to another recent piece written by Duff, published again in New Eastern Outlook. The piece, titled "Will the Gay Mafia Take Over America Again?" epitomizes the bombastic, provocateur-ish character of Duff's writing. Without going into great detail or analysis, this article is an exercise in amateurish, hyperbolic partisanship which serves no real purpose and offers no real educational value. While the theme (ostensibly) of sexual abuse and pedophilia within the ranks of high-profile politicians is certainly a subject that deserves as much attention as can be had, the elements of 'good guy-bad guy' dynamics favoring the Democratic party, subtle homophobia and directionless diatribe are what best define this "article."

Read it for yourself here: Gordon's "Gay Mafia" rant

In closing, there are three more interesting points I feel need to be considered. 

The first being, Duff's unwavering pro-vaccine stance. Coming from an alternative media personality or independent journalist, this is a huge red flag from my point of view. The reasons for which need not be elaborated on in this post. 

The second point of interest, which smacks of asset/paid agent, is Duff's take on Libya and its late leader Muammar Gaddafi. Not only did Duff make a point of smearing Gaddafi pre-NATO bombing and coup when he made the unfounded claim that the latter worked directly with the Mossad, but even after they had savagely murdered the man in the street and laid to ruins what was a vibrant and prosperous nation, Duff could be found peddling disinformation about the Libyan state and conditions prior to the bombing and destruction. A quick search for me turned up VT articles "de-bunking myths" about the Libyan state under Gaddafi, emphasizing his status as a "brutal dictator" and downplaying the numerous achievements made under his rule. To be honest, it seemed fitting, all things considered, that Duff would land in that camp. Gaddafi, while not perfect, and towards the end maneuvering himself more towards Western capital, represented a threat to the status quo that very few leaders have, especially in the last half century. Is this lost on Duff? I seriously doubt it.  

Lastly, it's worth mentioning that a good buddy of mine on Twitter who has read VT for a long time, and who I've regularly thrown thoughts around with on Duff, was actually randomly emailed by Duff at one point. I have no idea how many subscribers VT has, but I imagine it's many thousands. Getting a random email from Duff doesn't in itself imply much of anything, of course. However, this buddy of mine is on a level few are in terms of knowledge and discernment, and his comments on VT would certainly reflect that. Taken in context with what I have learned about Duff and what I have tried to convey here, it does raise an eyebrow. At this time he is unable to retrieve the conversation, but one thing that stood out to him was Duff's claim that approximately 50% of the TV show 'The X Files' episodes were based on true facts of some sort. Take that for what it's worth, but I'd add it to the list of puzzling and outright bizarre statements Duff has made.

No comments:

Post a Comment