HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Octafish » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 112 Next »

Octafish

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 40,449

Journal Archives

Secret Government. Secret Agents. Secret Agendas.

Secret Beneficiaries.

Yeh. One thing: Dulles didn't ask, he FORGED a retraction for Truman.

Truman’s True Warning on the CIA

Exclusive: National security secrecy and a benighted sense of “what’s good for the country” can be a dangerous mix for democracy, empowering self-interested or misguided officials to supplant the people’s will, as President Truman warned and ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern explains.

By Ray McGovern
ConsortiumNews, December 22, 2013

EXCERPT...

Dulles and Dallas

Dulles could hardly have expected to get Truman to recant publicly. So why was it so important for Dulles to place in CIA files a fabricated retraction? I believe the answer lies in the fact that in early 1964 Dulles was feeling a lot of heat from many who were suggesting the CIA might have been involved somehow in the Kennedy assassination. Columnists were asking how the truth could ever be reached, with Allen Dulles as de facto head of the Warren Commission.

Dulles had good reason to fear that Truman’s limited-edition Washington Post op-ed of Dec. 22, 1963, might garner unwanted attention and raise troublesome questions about covert action, including assassination. He would have wanted to be in position to dig out of Larry Houston’s files the Truman “retraction,” in the hope that this would nip any serious questioning in the bud.

As the de facto head of the Warren Commission, Dulles was perfectly positioned to protect himself and his associates, were any commissioners or investigators — or journalists — tempted to question whether Dulles and the CIA played a role in killing Kennedy.

And so, the question: Did Allen Dulles and other “cloak-and-dagger” CIA operatives have a hand in John Kennedy’s assassination and in then covering it up? In my view, the best dissection of the evidence pertaining to the murder appeared in James Douglass’s 2008 book, JFK and the Unspeakable. After updating and arraying the abundant evidence, and conducting still more interviews, Douglass concludes that the answer is Yes.

CONTINUED...

http://consortiumnews.com/2013/12/22/trumans-true-warning-on-the-cia/

As Nixon said, "Beg your pardon."

Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy believed President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy.

That's what his son and daughter, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Rory Kennedy, reported in an interview with Charlie Rose last weekend in Dallas.



It's also what author and Salon founder David Talbot reported, when he called Robert F. Kennedy the "first conspiracy theorist" in 2007.

Here's why the news from Robert and Rory is so important:

The important issue is that he and his sister reported their father -- the president's principal counselor and the nation's chief law enforcement officer -- privately thought a conspiracy was behind the assassination of President Kennedy.

RFK called the Warren Commission report "shoddy workmanship."

Attorney General Kennedy knew about the Ruby-Mafia connections immediately, which is vital when considering the Mafia were hired by Allen Dulles and the CIA during Eisenhower's administration to murder Fidel Castro -- an operation which the CIA failed to inform the president and attorney general.

The interview with Charlie Rose marked the first time members of the immediate Kennedy family have voiced the attorney general's doubts about the Warren Commission and its lone gunman theory.


Those are the facts we learned Friday, Jan. 11, 2013. It's called history.

Original OP in which you commented. This one, though, really got your goat:

Mass Media ignoring 'RFK Believed in Conspiracy' shows corrupt nature of America's Press

Why does RFK mentioning his uncle, the president, was murdered by a conspiracy bother you so much, SidDithers of Du?

Corporate Power = State Power = Secret Power = Insider Power

Greg Palast says that is how the game is played, via the World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. His source, Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize winning economist and a man of integrity.



An example of how, during the times of greatest accumulation o wealth in human history, the already rich beyond imagination rig the game:



Greg Palast: Why Are the Greek People Agreeing to Their Own Destruction?

By Michael Nevradakis, Truthout | Interview
Friday, 09 August 2013 00:00

EXCERPT...

In his critique of privatization programs, Palast referenced Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist who had been the World Bank's chief economist prior to being fired for expressing dissent against its policies. "(Stiglitz) called privatization 'briberization' because ... when we talk about privatization, we talk about a couple of guys who are close to the government in Greece, who are close to the German government, and they pick up the properties for next to nothing."

One of the biggest controversies in Greece over the past year has involved the Skouries gold mine. Originally transferred to private hands by the Greek state in 2004 for the paltry sum of 11 million euros, the mine has since come into the possession of the Canadian company Eldorado Gold, which has commenced mining activities. This has resulted in a vociferous grassroots movement, protesting the mine on both economic and environmental grounds. According to Palast, companies like Eldorado Gold prey on vulnerable countries.

"What they do is, they wait for the moment where a nation is really weak and on its back, and has to give away its gold. Tanzania sold its gold mines for nothing under IMF pressure to Barrick Gold. They've made billions and billions and billions."
"Let's not kid ourselves," added Palast. "Nobody gets a gold mine without making a payoff to the powers that be. That's just how it is ... they're not privatizing, they're stealing your gold."

CONTINUED...

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/18069-why-are-the-greek-people-agreeing-to-their-own-destruction



Like Austerity and TPP, there really is amazingly little coverage in Corporate McPravda of how the filthy rich get richer from the labors of the many and wars without end.

Where does the Bush Family Evil Empire come in? Through the front door of the White House, via Poppy Bush.



Poppy Strikes Gold

Sunday, April 27, 2008
Originally Posted July 9, 2003
By Greg Palast

EXCERPT...

And while the Bush family steadfastly believes that ex-felons should not have the right to vote for president, they have no objection to ex-cons putting presidents on their payroll. In 1996, despite pleas by U.S. church leaders, Poppy Bush gave several speeches (he charges $100,000 per talk) sponsored by organizations run by Rev. Sun Myung Moon, cult leader, tax cheat—and formerly the guest of the U.S. federal prison system. Some of the loot for the Republican effort in the 1997–2000 election cycles came from an outfit called Barrick Corporation.

The sum, while over $100,000, is comparatively small change for the GOP, yet it seemed quite a gesture for a corporation based in Canada. Technically, the funds came from those associated with the Canadian's U.S. unit, Barrick Gold Strike.

They could well afford it. In the final days of the Bush (Senior) administration, the Interior Department made an extraordinary but little noticed change in procedures under the 1872 Mining Law, the gold rush–era act that permitted those whiskered small-time prospectors with their tin pans and mules to stake claims on their tiny plots. The department initiated an expedited procedure for mining companies that allowed Barrick to swiftly lay claim to the largest gold find in America. In the terminology of the law, Barrick could "perfect its patent" on the estimated $10 billion in ore—for which Barrick paid the U.S. Treasury a little under $10,000. Eureka!

Barrick, of course, had to put up cash for the initial property rights and the cost of digging out the booty (and the cost of donations, in smaller amounts, to support Nevada's Democratic senator, Harry Reid). Still, the shift in rules paid off big time: According to experts at the Mineral Policy Center of Washington, DC, Barrick saved—and the U.S. taxpayer lost—a cool billion or so. Upon taking office, Bill Clinton's new interior secretary, Bruce Babbitt, called Barrick's claim the "biggest gold heist since the days of Butch Cassidy." Nevertheless, because the company followed the fast-track process laid out for them under Bush, this corporate Goldfinger had Babbitt by the legal nuggets. Clinton had no choice but to give them the gold mine while the public got the shaft.

Barrick says it had no contact whatsoever with the president at the time of the rules change.(1) There was always a place in Barrick's heart for the older Bush—and a place on its payroll. In 1995, Barrick hired the former president as Honorary Senior Advisor to the Toronto company's International Advisory Board. Bush joined at the suggestion of former Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney, who, like Bush, had been ignominiously booted from office. I was a bit surprised that the president had signed on. When Bush was voted out of the White House, he vowed never to lobby or join a corporate board. The chairman of Barrick openly boasts that granting the title "Senior Advisor" was a sly maneuver to help Bush tiptoe around this promise.

CONTINUED...

http://www.gregpalast.com/poppy-strikes-gold/



Wow. So his flock of supporters in the media and elsewhere wanted it known: George Herbert Walker Bush did do something nice when he was President. It just happened to be that he was really, really good to a rich, powerful corporate person.

The story continues, in which Mr. Palast details how said gold mining company employed fascist tactics to take over the mine, part of which involved bulldozing the miners homes and mines, some with the miners still inside. Let that, uh, sink in.



So, for his trouble in reporting the story, Barrick threatened to sue. And Barrick Gold, one of Poppy Bush's favorite charities, did -- to The Guardian and Greg Palast. Their crime? Telling the truth. And in Britain, if the Crown wants the truth to be a crime, it is.



The Truth Buried Alive

—By Greg Palast, From The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (Penguin/Plume, 2003)

Source: UTNE Reader
April 2003 Issue

EXCERPT...

Bad news. In July 2001, in the middle of trying to get out the word of the theft of the election in Florida, I was about to become the guinea pig, the test case, for an attempt by a multinational corporation to suppress free speech in the USA using British libel law. I have a U.S.-based Web site for Americans who can’t otherwise read my columns or view my BBC television reports. The gold-mining company held my English newspaper liable for aggravated damages for my publishing the story in the USA. If I did not pull the Bush-Barrick story off my U.S. Web site, my paper would face a ruinously costly fight.(1)

Panicked, the Guardian legal department begged me to delete not just the English versions of the story but also my Spanish translation, printed in Bolivia. (Caramba!)

The Goldfingers didn’t stop there. Barrick’s lawyers told our papers that I personally would be sued in the United Kingdom over Web publications of my story in America, because the Web could be accessed in Britain. The success of this legal strategy would effectively annul the U.S. Bill of Rights. Speak freely in the USA, but if your words are carried on a U.S. Web site, you may be sued in Britain. The Declaration of Independence would be null and void, at least for libel law. Suddenly, instead of the Internet becoming a means of spreading press freedom, the means to break through censorship, it would become the electronic highway for delivering repression.

And repression was winning. InterPress Services (IPS) of Washington, DC, sent a reporter to Tanzania with Lissu. They received a note from Barrick that said if the wire service ran a story that repeated the allegations, the company would sue. IPS did not run the story.

I was worried about Lissu. On July 19, 2001, a group of Tanzanian police interest lawyers wrote the nation’s president asking for an investigation–instead, Lissu’s law partner in Dar es Salaam was arrested. The police were hunting for Lissu. They broke into his home and office and turned them upside down looking for the names of Lissu’s sources, his whereabouts and the evidence he gathered on the mine site clearance. This was more than a legal skirmish. Over the next months, demonstrations by vicims’ families were broken up by police thugs. A member of Parliament joining protesters was beaten and hospitalized. I had to raise cash quick to get Lissu out, and with him, his copies of police files with more evidence of the killings. I called Maude Barlow, the “Ralph Nader of Canada”, head of the Council of Canadians. Without hesitation, she teamed up with Friends of the Earth in Holland, raised funds and prepared a press conference–and in August tipped the story to the Globe & Mail, Canada’s national paper.

CONTINUED...

http://www.mapcruzin.com/palast-2.htm



Greg Palast told the truth, including the bits about the buried alive gold miners, as it happens. So, the Big Corporation sued and sued and sued. With their deep pockets, they can buy justice, judges, prime ministers, presidents and whoever and whatever else they need to turn a buck. That is fascism, pure and simple.

The BFEE -- the War Party -- do that by using their money to buy political power and their political power to make money. So today, it's damn hard for a human voice to compete with that of a corporate person. Perhaps one day soon, no one will wonder why so few people remember democracy. They won't remember it.

I'll remember this.

REP: "You don't think you grovel at the feet of all things Kennedy, because it is hard to recognize one's own behavior for what it is. You do not bow; you prostrate yourself and have no idea how ridiculous you look to those outside the cult of the criminal's family."

Thanks. Now I see where you're coming from. Same treatment was given to Joseph Stiglitz.

The guy told the truth. He got the treatment.

Redemption

Thank you for putting it into words, Peace Patriot.

For those new to the subject: CIA used media extensively in their first big overthrows in Iran and Guatemala.



THE PLAN The planners decided to employ simultaneously all the tactics that had proved useful in previous covert operations. PBSUCCESS would combine psychological, economic, diplomatic, and paramilitary actions. Operations in Europe, and Iran had demonstrated the potency of propaganda-"psychological warfare"-aimed at discrediting an enemy and building support for allies. Like many Americans, US Officials placed tremendous faith in the new science of advertising. Touted as the answer to underconsumption, economic recession, and social ills, advertising, many thought, could be used to cure Communism as well. In 1951, the Truman Administration tripled the budget for propaganda and appointed a Psychological Strategy Board to coordinate activities. The CIA required "psywar" training for new agents, who studied Paul Linebarger's text, Psychological Warfare, and grifter novels like The Big Con for disinformation tactics. PBSUCCESS's designers planned to supplement overt diplomatic initiatives-such as an OAS conference convened to discredit Guatemala-with "black operations using contacts within the press, radio, church, army, and other organized elements susceptible to rumor, pamphleteering, poster campaigns, and other subversive action." They were particularly impressed with the potential for radio propaganda, which had turned the tide at a critical moment in the Iran operation.

SOURCE: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=1119



Those interested in the Big Con in Dealey Plaza, DUer Bill Kelly's outstanding blog and post: http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2008/01/big-con-at-dealey-plaza.html

When was the last time William K. Black appeared on US television?



William K. Black: Justice Department is the Dog that has Refused to Bark for a Decade

Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

I am surprised.

Why do you keep insisting I answer how you want? I would think my answer was obvious.

Perhaps a quote will help you:



So, it seems "Yes" and "No."
Yes, because that is what RT said. No, because mass media lie.
The reality is what I answered: I await the truth before venturing a guess.



Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 112 Next »