Burning Bright is very wordy... but writes good articles. I will post two, getting backed up with saved stuff lately. I like this title. [skipping a lot of chit/chat stuff in the beginning]
Bright Brief - Pretty Pleas with Tribunals on Top On 9/11, JFK and Generational Convergence
Burning Bright
No doubt most of you saw the news last week that a plea deal had been reached between the Defense Department and three of the supposed masterminds behind the 9/11 attacks … and no doubt, by now, most of you have seen that the Biden Regime’s (acting, perhaps in more ways than one?) Secretary of Defense has made the unprecedented move of undoing those agreements by rendering them null and void, using the Military Commissions Act of 2009 to do so.
...from a Narrative perspective, I find this one-two-three combination to be highly cognitively delectable.
The Defense Department announces plea deals with the (alleged) 9/11 masterminds, apparently negating the possibility of death sentences and curtailing their ability to hold military tribunals, in which more information about the larger scale nature of that long-ago plot might be revealed to the American people.
MAGA pounces all over this decision by calling it a weak and feckless move by the establishment that announces to the world the west’s increasing capitulation to terrorism, and the lack of importance it places on the ideal of truth-gathering, disclosure and, well, awakening.
Sec Def Lloyd Austin abruptly reverses the plea agreement, apparently caving to the pressure (ie: the express mandate) of the American public in order to ensure the door to true justice (ie: the truth) is not closed on this seismic event in world history. ....
While I’ve gone back and forth on what colored hat Austin and many others that orbit the Biden Regime (or are ostensibly a part of it,) wear in the winding ways of the Shadow War, a focus on the plot structure of the current lay of the land sees establishment capitulation to the first principles desire for truth above all else.
That in and of itself would be a welcome narrative win, but what makes this particularly intriguing to me is the prospect that the very decision of the plea deals by Gen. Susan K. Escallier put the Biden Regime in the crosshairs of the Collective Mind in the first place.
But then, peep this headline from exactly one year ago, this month:
And the following, relevant excerpt:
Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III has chosen a former career Army lawyer who served in Iraq to oversee the Guantánamo war court, a job that includes approving plea deals and deciding whether prosecutors can seek death sentences.
In a memo signed this week, Mr. Austin said that Susan K. Escallier, the former Army lawyer, would become the convening authority for the Office of Military Commissions on Oct. 8. The current convening authority, Jeffrey D. Wood, will voluntarily leave the job on that date, Mr. Austin’s memo said.
Ms. Escallier will take over as the Pentagon has been reducing detention operations at the base. The prison, which held about 660 prisoners at its peak, now has 30 detainees and 900 guards and support staff members. Eleven of the detainees are charged with war crimes or have already been convicted.
In the meantime, the war court complex, Camp Justice, has been expanding under a program that began during the Trump administration. Contractors have been preparing a second, maximum-security courtroom, so two judges can hear cases simultaneously; new prefabricated administrative buildings; and more housing near the court.
Ms. Escallier retired from the Army in 2021 as a brigadier general after 32 years of service. She provided legal advice on the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and other issues there, and she was the senior lawyer in the subsequent campaign to defeat the Islamic State. — NYT
So … we’re told that Escallier replaced Jeffrey D. Wood of the Trump era, which would seem like a Deep State obfuscation effort on the surface … only for Escallier to apparently go off the reservation when it comes to handing down a highly controversial (and publicized) plea deal with 9/11 terrorists that the very man who appointed her felt compelled to undo in dramatic fashion within the week?
Folks, either we have a case of the Regime bowing to public pressure here, something they’ve never really been wont to do … or, we have a case of a Regime that doesn’t quite have the loyalty (or control, at the very least) over its own appointees as they might have thought.
(OR … the appointER is not playing on the same team as the appointEE … which I think is often the case in this war.)
And if you think the establishment approves of Austin’s about-face or capitulation … the Washington Post is signaling that they most certainly are not …
Now … this confluence of turns and counter-turns in the recent 9/11 narrative—along with the preponderance of Sovereign Alliance stalwart and known Donald Trump ally Mohammed bin Salman in the mass psychological zeitgeist in recent years—couldn’t possibly be signaling that patriot ghosts in the media machine have just successfully deployed a PsyOp in order to resurface and resurrect the public mandate for 9/11 disclosure, could it?
And that couldn’t POSSIBLY suggest that Lloyd Austin isn’t exactly what the Con Inc. media have told you he is, could it?
The deeper we go, the stranger—and more encouraging, with the right perspective—it all becomes.
Either way, the larger point I want to make here is that this very public and very dramatic about-face comes at a time when a growing plurality of the American people are calling for transparency and disclosure as the mass psychological walls close in on an increasingly-exposed regime that’s less transparent than ever.
Oh, and as Jon Herold was digging on this particular subject (the tribunals of it all,) he unearthed this rather juicy morsel regarding the infamous (to both sides of the Mind War,) Bill Barr.
To which I quipped,
You’re beginning to sound like you think there’s some sort of plan going on wherein military tribunals will be commonplace.
But that would only be necessary if there was some sort of long term insurgency that had infiltrated all levels of US government that required a COUNTERinsurgency to root out and expose to the American people using asymmetric means in order to both gauge and cultivate mandate from the people.
In other words, when it comes to the one-two-three punch of the 9/11 plea deal, the reaction to that plea deal and the rescinding of that plea deal—leading to military tribunals and a cascade of public disclosure regarding the underlying truths of the whole charade, perhaps?—I believe this situation represents Exhibit #1,000 of why you have a choice of whether to react to the narrative cycle or let it pass through you, and observe the path it charts, Paul Atreides-style. [Who is Paul Atreides?] (For more on that particular refrain, check out one of my favorite long-forms around these parts, The Mind-Killer.)