Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Operation Mockingbird

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
Devon77 Donating Member (99 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 08:55 AM
Original message
Operation Mockingbird
Further details of Operation Mockingbird was revealed as a result of the Frank Church investigations (Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities) in 1975. According to the Congress report published in 1976: "The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets." Church argued that the cost of misinforming the world cost American taxpayers an estimated $265 million a year.

Frank Church showed that it was CIA policy to use clandestine handling of journalists and authors to get information published initially in the foreign media in order to get it disseminated in the United States. Church quotes from one document written by the Chief of the Covert Action Staff on how this process worked (page 193). For example, he writes: Get books published or distributed abroad without revealing any U.S. influence, by covertly subsidizing foreign publicans or booksellers. Later in the document he writes: Get books published for operational reasons, regardless of commercial viability. Church goes onto report that over a thousand books were produced, subsidized or sponsored by the CIA before the end of 1967. All these books eventually found their way into the American market-place. Either in their original form (Church gives the example of the Penkovskiy Papers) or repackaged as articles for American newspapers and magazines.

In another document published in 1961 the Chief of the Agencys propaganda unit wrote: The advantage of our direct contact with the author is that we can acquaint him in great detail with our intentions; that we can provide him with whatever material we want him to include and that we can check the manuscript at every stage (the Agency) must make sure the actual manuscript will correspond with our operational and propagandistic intention.

Church quotes Thomas H. Karamessines as saying: If you plant an article in some paper overseas, and it is a hard-hitting article, or a revelation, there is no way of guaranteeing that it is not going to be picked up and published by the Associated Press in this country (page 198).


http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm


If you can inject a story into a Newswire, which will be picked up by every station without questioning, you have won.

Unfortunately in the case of BBC it's raining while the reporter is telling us about a dry sunny day.
But oh, magically the connection drops just before WTC 7 is going to blow up ... just a coincidence.





Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
1. a quick google on "Church Committee "
yields some interesting material:

http://history-matters.com/archive/church/contents.htm
..Since the passage of the JFK Assassination Records Collection Act in 1992, over 50,000 pages of Church Committee records have been declassified and made available to the public. These files contain testimony and information on U.S. attempts to assassinate foreign leaders, on the Church Committee's investigation of the intelligence agencies' response to the JFK assassination, and related topics.

Also available is the report of the Rockefeller Commission, which preceded the Church Committee and issued a brief report on CIA activities within the U.S.

The AARC sells a CD-ROM, produced by History Matters, which contains the 14 Church Committee Reports and over 1000 pages from released files, along with sophisticated search tools. See the Catalog.
...


http://history-matters.com/store/store.htm

JFK: Medical Evidence Archive, Volume 1: Assassination Records Review Board Medical Releases

JFK Records Collection Act Research Series, Volume 1: 1995 and 1996 ARRB Releases

The Church Committee Reports

The Garrison Transcripts

The Russ Holmes Work File

Assassination Transcripts of the Church Committee

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Devon77 Donating Member (99 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The last good dead of Oliver Stone JFK (1991)
Oliver Stone showed this film in December of 1991 to all of Congress on Capitol Hill. It led to the 1992 Assassinations Disclosure Act

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102138/trivia



Still not everything was released.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. "The Men Who Killed Kennedy", The Final Chapter
http://www.jfk-online.com/tmwkk.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNTeQ9ckmD8

shows how LBJ was involved, acting on behalf if certain Big Oil interests.


I've seen "JFK" several times, i think a good companion to it is one of Stone's other movies: Nixon".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Devon77 Donating Member (99 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. The Directors cut is really good,
I remember seeing the cut version as a kid and I wasn't really impressed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-18-08 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
36. But the Tunnheim Panel found that: "Oswald was employed by CIA
working on high level projects and probably also for FBI" --



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. No, they didn't, D&P....
You keep peddling this bullshit and, when asked for evidence, you claim it was on some program you saw. I have repeatedly linked to the Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board (chaired by Tunnheim) and challenged you to find anything remotely like what you claim. When pressed for proof, you put me on ignore, because you don't like hard questions.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/advisory/arrb98/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
EPIC1934 Donating Member (172 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #40
45. Newman and MOrley
I suggest you look up the new edition of Oswald and the CIA by University of Maryland History Professor John NEwman.

Also the recently published book by a former Washington Post Editor Jefferson Morley has tons of new stuff about the CIA and Oswald in the Mexico City operations IT is called Our Man In Mexico, published by University of Kansas Press 2008. Just some of the latest in the ocean of evidence showing Oswald was doing work for the CIA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NowHearThis Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #36
46.  He was an FBI informant for SAgent Hosty & also worked for...
the CIA - most likely on-loan to The Company from the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI). Those are reasons why he had no problems
in securing employment at Jagger-Stiles, in Dallas. J-S did top-secret defense work for the U.S. Government.

There is physical evidence that Oswald was an intelligence services asset - such as the Minox camera which he had and it is known
that he was debriefed by a woman CIA employee upon his return from the Soviet Union. He wasn't arrested for treason, he was
debriefed and redeployed for future operations.

Many JFK assassination experts contend, correctly, in my view, that Oswald had been led to believe that he was taking part in
a mock assassination exercise on 11-22-63. As everyone here knows, military/defense exercises are often used as cover protection
for black operations. Mrs. Barbara Olson went to Jesus while innocently participating in what she had been led to believe
was a simulated attack on the Pentagon. Mrs. Olson had been a faithful, somewhat glamorous mouthpiece for right-wing orthodoxy
for a long time, but that didn't prevent her from being sacrificed by the 9/11 perps -- for what they would probably say was
a "greater cause" (the giving - or taking, as it was) her life in service to her country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. More conjecture on your part....
Edited on Sun May-10-09 10:51 AM by SDuderstadt
For example, why would Oswald have been arrested for treason upon returning from the USSR? Are you claiming that defection and subsequent repatriation is treason?

BTW, it's Jagger-Chiles-Stovall, not Jagger Stiles. You can't even get basic information right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NowHearThis Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #47
48. Not conjecture. History.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. Why should we believe anything you say....
when you can't even get basic facts right? I'm not sure posting drivel from CT sites amounts to "history". Anyhow, why don't you phone President Obama and tell him you've cracked the JFK assassination? Here's his number: (202) 456-1111. I'm sure he'll take your call.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NowHearThis Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #49
50. Here's why Oswald could have been charged with treason
The Soviets were unable to shoot down U2 spy planes because they were unable to accurately determine the altitudes
of the planes. Oswald gave the Soviets that crucial information which made it possible for them to shoot down the U2 plane piloted
by Francis Gary Powers.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #50
51. Prove that Oswald had or gave that information and you might have something...
BTW, did you notice the intermal contradiction in your claim? On the one hand you want us to believe that he worked for the CIA, yet he gave the USSR information that enabled them to shoot down U-2 spy flights?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NowHearThis Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. That's one of the main things he did while he was there
Eisenhower was scheduled to have a summit meeting with Soviet Premier Khrushchev but the military and MIC didn't want that
to happen (they didn't want detente, they wanted the Cold War to heat up even more). To achieve their ultimate goal, a plan was
hatched to sabotage the up-coming summit.

So, Oswald was tasked with passing along crucial data about U2 flight altitudes which enabled the Soviets to target U2 flights
with sufficient accuracy in order to shoot them down.

Once the Soviets shot down Mr. Powers' plane, Eisenhower had little choice but to cancel the U.S./Soviet Summit meeting.

Many people are convinced that Oswald was actually in attendance at the Soviet trial of Mr. Powers!

CIA capabilities have always been put to use for carrying out missions which serve the interests of the military and
its associated military industrial complex.

Anyone interested in this and related topics is urged to study some of the available research that has been done on this
and related matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. and, of course...
Edited on Sun May-10-09 04:28 PM by SDuderstadt
you don't have a shred of proof for any of this. do you ever bother to fact-check anything you read on jfk assassination ct websites?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NowHearThis Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. Yes, I've researched it. Obviously, you have not.
If you knew anything about the subject you wouldn't have responded with a standard Untruther insult.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. ''truther logic''
being challenged for proof is an insult. the funniest thing about is, when challenged for proof, you just repeat the claim again, as if that proves something. if you've ''researched'' this so much, why can't you provide some semblance of proof?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-11-09 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #54
56. Apparently the HSCA disagrees with you....
didn't they get your memo?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/oswald5.txt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NowHearThis Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-11-09 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. So does the Warren Commission and the 9/11 Commission
You must think that those of us on this side are politically naive. We may not be members of PNAC or some of the others you are no
doubt familiar with but we know plenty about how they operate. We just have different values. Maybe one day
you'll join us. You'll feel much better about yourself if you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-11-09 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. Are you implying that any of us embrace PNAC?
Edited on Mon May-11-09 10:27 AM by SDuderstadt
Of course, you're not...that would be stupid, wouldn't it? I see you're back to not arguing actual issues and playing your old guilt-by-association game. Pity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NowHearThis Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-11-09 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #58
59. Why would you ask such a stupid question?
However, feel free to state your position on PNAC if you wish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-11-09 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #59
60. Because you implied it, dude...n/t
Edited on Mon May-11-09 10:51 AM by SDuderstadt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #2
41. It also almost toppled Sen. Arlen Specter of "Magic Bullet" fame . ..
but somehow he pulled it out -- ????

I think him one of the most suspicious and perverted members of Congress --


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-24-07 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. Have things changed; I understood that the Church investigation records were never
released . . . ?????
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #9
20. Frank Church | Jack Anderson
"Have things changed?" since the Church Committee

Frank Church

Zachary Sklar talks about Jack Anderson's role in smearing Jim Garrison

Jack Anderson

The C.I.A. and the Culture War - Paper Cuts - Books - New York Times Blog
January 23, 2008, 9:53 am
So far as I know, I have never taken money from the C.I.A. (though I have worked for some organizations that have had C.I.A. connections, including, apparently, my present employer). The same cant be said for any number of prominent writers and artists, from Arthur Schlesinger Jr. to Jackson Pollock.

During the early years of the cold war, they were supported, sometimes lavishly, always secretly, by the C.I.A. as part of its propaganda war against the Soviet Union. It was perhaps the most successful use of soft power in American history. Yet once the facts came out in 1967 the episode became a source of scandal and controversy that continues to percolate to this day. How close should presumably independent intellectuals get to their government?

Many books and articles were written about all this until 1999, when one book, Frances Stonor Saunders Cultural Cold War, swept the field. Saunders was highly critical of the octopus-like C.I.A. and those intellectuals who allowed themselves to be used as pawns in the governments cold war game. But though her book was diligently researched and vigorously argued, it can hardly be considered the last word if only because the issue doesnt allow for last words.

Now the historian Hugh Wilford has come out with The Mighty Wurlitzer, and it can be seen as a direct rejoinder to Saunders. The story, Wilford says, is complicated. Far from being pawns, the intellectuals on the C.I.A. payroll were willing participants in what they understood as the legitimate cause of opposing Soviet tyranny. They took money for what they would have done anyway; the C.I.A. simply allowed them to be more effective at doing it. Who was using whom? Even more complicated is the question of secrecy. Many, if not most of the beneficiaries didnt know where the money was coming from (or didnt want to know). They professed outrage when the truth was revealed. Were they right to be upset?

http://papercuts.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/the-cia-a...

unfortunately it probably has changed. But not for the better:

Osama's head on ice: CIA and Bush administration fire up mighty Wurlitzer
Shortly after the founding of the CIA, OSS/CIA legend Frank Wisner gleefully coined the CIA's powerful propaganda machine "the Mighty Wurlitzer." Today, the "Wurlitzer" is a global orchestra. It is the so-called mainstream media, and vice versaand its disinformation is played around the clock, echoing in every corner of the world. It is the noise of an irrevocably criminal empire, rotten to its core.

Those who willingly consume the CIA's brain-numbing indoctrinations, who accept any aspect of the Bush administration's "war on terrorism" myth, have delivered their own heads, their minds, to George W. Bushon dry ice and on pikes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-15-08 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #20
35. Great book.
Talks about how 'Encounters' magazine was a CIA front. The mag was edited by neocon godfather, Irving Kristol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-18-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #20
37. Former Sen. Frank Church whose revealing hearings re CIA ...
Edited on Thu Dec-18-08 01:13 PM by defendandprotect
and US involvement with drugs told us what we long suspected and more --

Church died at age 59 - Only a few years after the hearings --

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Church

Church is widely quoted in regards to the National Security Agency: "I don't want to see this country ever go across the bridge... I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return."

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-25-08 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #9
21. kicking for more......
exposure!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Devon77 Donating Member (99 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. planting the official story
Prouty had been sent as the military escort for a group of international VIPs. It had nothing to tit1 with Special Operations: it was deemed a "paid vacation." It was on his way back, during a stopover in New Zealand, that Prouty heard of Kennedy's murder. Immediately, things didn't fit. New Zealand's Christchurch Star carried a full story about Lee Harvey Oswald, an unknown 24 year old, complete with a studio picture and detailed biographical data including his trip to the Soviet Union. But Oswald had hot yet been charged with Kennedy's murder.

"Who the hell wrote the story before the police had charged him?" asks Prouty.

"It was a put-up job. It was a worldwide cover story being put out".


When Prouty returned to the Pentagon where he had access to newspaper, special reports and hot wires from around the world, he was stuck again by the "packaged'' Oswald story.

"I knew immediately the story was written before the shots were even fired... Oswald was a designated patsy whether he shot or not."

http://www.prouty.org/giamarco.html



http://library.christchurch.org.nz/Heritage/Newspapers/...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Devon77 Donating Member (99 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Nobody thinks this could be the case in the recent BBC debate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-24-07 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Prouty is a good, solid source for information on the assassiantion and
intelligence -- black jobs, etal ---

and he did a great job in getting his info out --- I've read at least two of his books ---
I'll have to check at some point to find how many he wrote.

He used to have a website --- I think an assistant still runs it???


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Len Osanic
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Mark Lane | X | Zachary Sklar
http://www.blackopradio.com/black38a.ram and
http://www.blackopradio.com/black38b.ram featured Zachary Sklar, who co-wrote JFK with Oliver Stone, detailing the making of JFK. Here's a clip from JFK

X (Col. L Fletcher Prouty)

And http://www.blackopradio.com/black294a.ram features

Mark Lane recounting among other things getting the only verdict won in the JFK case ( a verdict against E Howard Hunt ). Escaping Jonestown and writing Rush to Judgment, Plausible Denial, Executive Action (1973):
YouTube | Executive Action (1973)1

and Two Men In Dallas
Released 1976, produced by attorney Mark Lane, author of Rush To Judgement (1966).

Lane tells the story of Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig. Craig was on duty on November 22nd, and made crucial observations. Unlike others, he saw nothing wrong in telling people the truth of what he observed. After his name appeared in books, articles etc., his life changed, not for the better. Attempts were made on his life; his car blew up, he was shot at, and he was practically forced off the road and barely survived the accident.

Amongst his many crucial observations at the Plaza, is Oswald running down the Grassy Knoll, being picked up by a slow driving station wagon, heading west in Elm St. After being signaled to. Also the rifle with the clear stamp on the barrel reading "7.65 Mauser" found in the depository. That is only some of the crucial observations he made.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPIo8B7S1k4
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #14
42. What's the trend in the current discussions--?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. still pushing the official story
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. I suggest you read Vincent Bugliosi's excellent book on the JFK assassination
Edited on Thu Jan-17-08 01:37 PM by SDuderstadt
Your OWN claims are rife with errors. Mark Lane is not remotely believable and I have two of his books.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. my preference is non-fiction
Thanks anyway ;-)

BTW .. Mark Lane at the 57 minute mark of this interview http://www.blackopradio.com/black294a.ram discusses attempts to debunk his work.

The CIA received a draft of Rush to Judgment and verified his findings. And a law professor devoted a class to debunking it and failed. But I'm sure he would welcome any 'concerns' you may have. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Man, this is so convincing...
"The CIA received a draft of Rush to Judgment and verified his findings. And a law professor devoted a class to debunking it and failed."

Do you have any proof at all that these things happened? Ever heard of "begging the question"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Diane_nyc Donating Member (714 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-11-08 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. Question about Vincent Bugliosi's book
Does Vincent Bugliosi's book on the JFK assassination deal specifically with the question of how the New Zealand newspaper ChristChurch Star managed to produce such a detailed biography of Lee Harvey Oswald so quickly, as discussed in this article by David Giamarco, quoted here by Devon77 (with a photo of the ChristChurch Star front page)?

The JFK assassination is not a topic I've yet dug into much at all, from any side of the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Yep...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
KDLarsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #15
63. Nice quote
Edited on Sat Oct-03-09 08:44 PM by KDLarsen
Just a shame there is no evidence at all that William Colby has ever uttered it. Every single source I've found so far leads back to Dave McGowan, a 'Shadow elite' conspiracy author, whom I wouldn't rate high on my list of credible sources.

ETA: Gah, failed to notice the date on the posts...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 02:08 AM
Response to Reply #5
24. The Christchurch Star explains.
Edited on Sat Jul-12-08 03:08 AM by Bassman66
http://christchurchcitylibraries.com/Heritage/Newspaper...

The Stars reporting of the assassination
Bob Cotton, Chief Reporter of the Christchurch Star, says that following the release of JFK, the Star received numerous requests from investigative writers, journalists and authors in the US for copies of the pages of the November 1963 issue. Some conspiracy theorists have made special trips to Christchurch to interview him and there have even been suggestions that the Star company was involved. These theories, however, are based on inaccurate assumptions about the Star newspaper's production.

Bob Cotton was a reporter at the paper at the time and can recall clearly the events of November 1963. He says that even in 1963 global communication was fast and effective everywhere and an assassination of a US President meant that everything and everyone on the Star worked doubly quick. News then came by AAP and various wire services which would have been competing to get the news out to their subscribers. Photographs were usually wired to Australia, then to Auckland and thence to Christchurch. This time, to get the photographs early, some of the geographical links were by-passed through technical ingenuity at the Star. Even so the paper would not have been published until 1.30 pm or 2.15 - 2.30 pm depending on the edition. Bob Cotton says that the Star was never published in the morning during his time on the newspaper (from 1958). The JFK character Mr X is not even shown with a genuine Star newspaper. He buys a thin-width broadsheet whereas the Star was always produced as a full-width broadsheet.

Bob Cotton also explains that every newspaper has a large store of biographical material and says that Lee Harvey Oswald was not a stranger to the media. Information on him would have been readily available in US newspapers and media offices and would have been sent out quickly. In 1959 there had been much coverage in newspapers about young men defecting to the Soviet Union and Oswald's defection had been covered in detail in The Washington Post, The Washington Evening Star and The New York Times. Again it was widely reported when Oswald, now with a Russian wife and child, returned to the United States in 1962. The portrait of him in the Star had appeared in The Fort Worth Press on 16 November 1963.


A readable version of the front page.
http://christchurchcitylibraries.com/Heritage/Newspaper...

New Zealand was 18 hours ahead of the USA.
Kennedy killed at 12.30 which is 6.30 NZT
Kennedy pronouced dead at 13.00 which is 7.00 NZT (the time stated in the paper)
Oswald was arrived at the Police Station at 14.15 which would have been 8.15 NZT.
He was named Prime Suspect by NBC at 15.55 which is 9.55 NZT.
Oswald was charged with Tippits murder at 19.05 which is 13.05 NZT

That's the timeline.

The Christchurch Star first edition is printed at 13.30 NZT according to Bob Cotton and indeed this edition of the paper would need to be printed some time after 7.30 NZT when Kennedy was pronouced dead, so this was not a morning edition of the paper.

The only problem I have with the story is that they do know a lot about Oswald at this point only 4 or 5 hours after his arrival at the Police station which could be due to Cotton's explanation of Oswald's defection having been in the press, but I'm bothered about the "Fair Play for Cuba" reference, how well known would that have been (he did debate it on a radio show, but how well known was that)?

In looking this up I am struck by the thought that Oswalds "Fair Play for Cuba" routine is very much like COINTELPRO.

On May 26, 1963, Oswald wrote a letter to the New York City headquarters of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and proposed "...renting a small office at my own expense for the purpose of forming a FPCC branch here in New Orleans."<3> Three days later, the FPCC responded to Oswald's letter advising against opening a New Orleans office "at least not ... at the very beginning."<4> In a follow-up letter, Oswald replied, "Against your advice, I have decided to take an office from the very beginning."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Play_for_Cuba_Committ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #5
26. McAdams explains
Edited on Sat Jul-12-08 02:59 AM by Bassman66
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty2.txt

He covers most of it except for one sleight of hand.

"worked in a factory in Minsk"

I was unable to find an appropriate New York or Washington
press citation for this item although it was well reported in the
Dallas/Fort Worth newspapers.


So "well reported" that he doesn't produce a single citation like he did for the others including other Fort Worth articles.

You have to be careful with McAdams, at times very devious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. Re: McAdams
It's fitting that you bring up McAdams in this thread (Operation Mockingbird):

John McAdams
If you do any research of major figures in the JFK assassination via web search engines you will soon find yourself on John McAdams website. He is clearly the main disinformation source on the net. He adopts an academic tone and if one was not aware of the facts of the person or event he is writing about, one would think he has logically looked at the evidence available. He is therefore doing a successful job in misleading students about the JFK assassination. In fact, it could be argued that his impact has been as great as other disinformation agents such as David Atlee Phillips, G. Robert Blakey, Dick Billings, Jack Anderson, Gary Mack and Gerald Posner.

Macadams is reluctant to get involved in debate over these issues. Although he is a member of this forum he has so far refused to post. I thought that if we analyse his articles in great detail we can expose his disinformation strategy. We might even goad him into trying to defend himself (maybe another non-posting member, Gary Mack, will help him out)...
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1...


John McAdams attended the 1995 Copa Conference using the assumed name Paul Nolan. More than that, he also fabricated a background to go with the name in that he purported himself to be a jet-propulsion expert and some-time computer store owner from Sherwood, Wisconsin. In that guise, he was quoted in an article in the Washington press by journalist Matt Labash. Mr. Labash later confirmed that McAdams had duped him. Mr. Labash had quoted Paul (McAdams) Nolan in good faith whilst in fact McAdams was lying through his teeth.

McAdams later claimed he had used an assumed name to avoid contact with users of the alt.conspiracy group who may have been attending the conference. With McAdams record of willfully abusing users of the group, this story might seem plausible but going to trouble of inventing a detailed cover story and lying to the press have more sinister overtones...
http://www.prouty.org/mcadams/faq.html

Very Bugliosi-like indeed
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #27
43. Get them while they're young . . .
and just beginning to try to find out what went on!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #5
61. When 9/11 happened, how did they know it was al Qaeda so quickly??
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-22-07 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
7. kick. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-23-07 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
8. nothing is real . . .
nothing to get hung about
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
11. CNN Psyops
DU: CNN Is An ACTIVE Participant In Planning War With Iran!!

YouTube - IRANIAN BOATS PROVOKE U.S. NAVY - CNN REPORT

The Raw Story | Bogus Iran story was product of Pentagon spokesman, reporter says
This press release, however, went ignored by the media, Porter notes. Instead, the focus turned to CNN's Barbara Starr, who touted allegations that military officials told her Iranian boats were carrying out "threatening maneuvers." CBS soon followed up with a story positing that the Persians had dropped white boxes in the water around the American ships.

Starr added that one American boat had been given the order to fire, and the Iranians had moved away just in time.

Porter identifies Bryan Whitman, the Pentagon's top spokesman, as the culprit for the spurious account. Most of Whitman's remarks that formed the basis for Starr's and other stories were drawn from an off the record press briefing that was held on the condition he not be identified as a source.

But, "in an apparent slip-up, however, an Associated Press story that morning cited Whitman as the source for the statement that US ships were about to fire when the Iranian boats turned and moved away - a part of the story that other correspondents had attributed to an unnamed Pentagon official," he writes.

After facing suspicion, the Pentagon released a four-minute, 20-second condensed video clip that appeared to show small Iranian boats swarming around a US Navy vessel. A voice was heard to say, "I am coming to you. ... You will explode after (inaudible) minutes."

In the wake of reports, the Iranians said the footage had been fabricated.

What later emerged was a more complex view of the incident -- that in fact the threatening transmission did not come from the Iranian ships.

On Jan. 13, Pentagon officials said they did..


Why Were Government Propaganda Experts Working On News At CNN?
The Return of PSYOPS
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. CIA psyops agents at CNN during Kosovo war... Pincus & Daily Kos
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 07:36 PM by JackRiddler
I found a link on that one, then noticed you had one too.

http://www.agitprop.org.au/stopnato/20000324cockbsjmus....

Author: Alexander Cockburn
Publisher/Date: San Jose Mercury News (US), March 23, 2000
Title: CNN and the CIA
Original location: http://www.commondreams.org/views/032300-107.htm


A handful of military personnel from the 4th Psychological Operations Group (i.e. PSYOPs) based at Fort Bragg in North Carolina have until recently been working in CNN’s headquarters in Atlanta. An enterprising Dutch journalist named Abe De Vries came up with this important story in mid-February, and he remains properly astounded that no mainstream news medium in the United States has evinced any interest in the story.

I came across translations of De Vries’ stories on the matter, after they had appeared in late February in Trouw, the foremost quality newspaper in Holland.

De Vries later told me he’d originally come upon the story via an article in the French Intelligence newsletter (available on a pay-per-story basis on the Internet) Feb. 17, which described a military symposium in Arlington, Va., held at the beginning of that same month, discussing use of the press in military operations.

Col. Christopher St. John, commander of the U.S. Army’s 4th PSYOPs Group, was quoted by a French Intelligence correspondent, present at the symposium, as (in the correspondent’s words) having “called for greater cooperation between the armed forces and media giants. He (St. John) pointed out that some Army PSYOPs personnel had worked for CNN for several weeks, and helped in the production of some news stories for the network.”

(snip - plenty more in article)





In addition to Anderson Cooper, let's not forget the well-known example of the admitted student snitch, Walter Pincus of the Washington Post ("How I Travelled the World on a CIA Stipend"), who basically serves as the CIA press officer. He was given the sensitive assignment of doing a dirty journalistic hit job on Gary Webb during the CIA-crack revelations of the mid-1990s ...

And of course ...

"Markos Moulitsas Zniga, owner of the DailyKos website, now admits that he spent six months in the employ of the US Central Intelligence Agency in 2001," writes Holland. "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."

Moulitsas considers the CIA "a very liberal institution," (...)

"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 ... "


http://uruknet.info/?p=m35220&s1=h1

To put it as diplomatically as I can stand: What an asshole! I don't care if he's no longer working for them; that would make him less complicit in a criminal organization, but an incomparably far greater idiot than his apologia for the CIA already indicates - a fucking wannabe gangster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Bookmarked.
Enjoy your day, o hater of the Great Orange Kos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-04-09 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
64. Did I miss something?
Is there a DU rule prohibiting comments on Markos Moulitsas's admission he worked for the CIA, or his defense of this criminal organization as a "very liberal" institution?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-04-09 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #64
65. Evidently you did.
Is there a DU rule prohibiting comments on bookmarking a post to remind myself who I'm speaking to on days that you seem rational?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-08 02:25 AM
Response to Reply #12
25. "I dont think its a very partisan thing to want a stable world."
What an idiot!

Hitler wanted a stable world.

Wanting a "stable world" justifies nothing.

Wanting a fair and free world would be a much better objective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-08 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
34. Gary Webb
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #34
44. Great loss-!! but I think we should remember how impotant this Drug War . . .
is to the PTB ....

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-08 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
28. AP's Ron Fournier To Karl Rove: "Keep Up The Fight"
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-18-08 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #28
38. Right ...keep in mind pretty much all our news agencies were
sold over last 15 years or so ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
29. How They Slant TV From A Z
This is CNN

Why Were Government Propaganda Experts Working On News At CNN?

The Return of PSYOPS

How They Slant TV From A Z, by Bruce Herschensohn (1976)


Amazon.com: The Gods of Antenna: How Never to Be Afraid of Anything YES! Anything!: Bruce Herschensohn: Books

The tricks to manipulating TV news were exposed by an angry U.S. Information Agency video expert in his 1976 book, 'The Gods of Antenna.'

Ironically, this book by an award-winning US government propaganda expert, Bruce Herschensohn, helps us better understand the most valuable of the CIA's 'family jewels' revealed to the Church Senate sub-committee in 1975 by CIA Director, William Colby, the Central Intelligence Agency's control of mainstream media news used to manage public opinion and appropriately called 'Operation Mockingbird.'

Herschensohn was an ultra-conservative Nixon staffer who was mad at the network newsrooms for their calculated campaign to create an atmosphere of outrage that enabled the 'Silent Coup' (different book) we call Watergate, a campaign enabled by Naval Intelligence officer, Bob Woodward at the CIA-Washington Post.

Sometimes when factions within the secret government duel, we find out how they work.
Both the Pentagon and CIA wanted to get policy control back from Nixon.
Nixon was also emotionally unstable and drinking.

According to Anthony Summers' 2000 biography of Nixon called 'The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon,' the unstable president was prone to ordering air strikes and threatening nuclear retaliation often enough to have to be carefully buffered by insiders who knew his foibles.

Instead of getting shot like JFK, Nixon was made to walk the media plank towards impeachment and then resigned the day after GHW Bush told him to, not wanting that crossfire of hot lead used to overcome other 'political obstacles.'

Watergate hearings revived the myth of 'the rule of law in a system that works' and the outraged masses (recently called by Barak Obama "the excesses of the sixties") were placated by Nixon's removal.
This enabled the Reagan cocaine-death squad years as 'investigative journalism' was stuffed back into its bottle by blaming it for losing the Vietnam War, the same 'stab in the back' psy-ops that helped the rise of Hitler.

Bruce Herschensohn saw all his own professional tricks being used by the CIA's network news writers and angrily let the psy-ops cat out of the bag himself, right into our hands, the hands of the 'outraged masses.'
Live and learn.

From Herschensohn's book on page 68-
"For years, film and video techniques were used only to enhance the productions for audiences that wished to be entertained; therefore, those techniques deserved to be as guarded as a magician's hat. But those techniques were being used, and at the writing are still being used, to enhance distortion for audiences that wish to be informed.
As in the days of varityped contracts, the fine print of television is more important than the bold print, but too often it passes unnoticed, just as it is intended to do."

After citing tactics used by Nazi propaganda master, Joseph Goebbels, such as "the list" technique of piling on charges so that some inevitably stick in the public's mind, Herschensohn gives us hints about the CIA's Operation Mockingbird by paying an insider's clever tribute to the musical nick-names for both major Cold War propaganda organizations, the Soviet KGBs 'Red Orchestra' and the American CIA's 'Mighty Wurlitzer.'

page 45-
"The symphony was being conducted by network television, playing to the national audience for a year and a half. Its orchestration and performance were masterful. Its composer remained anonymous to most of the millions who watched as the musicians played their instruments almost flawlessly."


Bookjacket flap bio of author-

"Bruce Herschensohn was deputy special assistant to President Nixon in 1973-74, having first served as director of Motion Picture and Television Services of the United States Information Agency from 1968 through 1972.
Born in Milwaukee in 1932, he spent his teen years in Los Angeles and went to work for RKO Radio Pictures in the early 1950s. After a stint with the Air Force during the Korean War, he returned to Hollywood and the motion picture industry as producer, director, writer, and editor. For eleven years he headed his own motion picture company.
His film credits include the documentaries 'Years of Lightening, Day of Drums' and 'The Five Cities of June,' the latter nominated for an Academy Award in 1964. Under Herschensohn the USIA Film Division won an Academy Award and was nominated for five others. He was named one of the ten Outstanding Young Men in the Federal Government in 1969 and received the Distinguished Service Award in 1972, the second highest civilian honor."

Glenn Beck Confronted, Protagonists Questioned By Secret Service
U.S. taxpayers footed the bill for four police to man the event at the second appearance in Columbus, along with several other plain clothed officers and even Secret Service officials who, according to demonstrators, questioned Ron Paul supporters.

Activists claimed that Beck's employees admitted Secret Service were chaperoning Beck, leading to charges that Beck is being directly bankrolled and protected by the government to spew his propaganda.


"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media."~ William Colby
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-22-08 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
30. Kick for #5
Edited on Sat Nov-22-08 09:43 PM by MinM
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-23-08 12:20 AM
Response to Original message
31. Great thread. The US broadcast media are basically one big propaganda function
at this point, ditto newsmagazines, with more and more newspapers falling in line every year. Sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-23-08 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. yes, sad indeed it is. nt
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-08 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
33. How the spooks took over the news - Media, News - The Independent
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
39. Tom Braden, 92, dies; former CIA operative, 'Crossfire' creator, "Eight is Enough" author
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

"Watching Crossfire was like watching the left wing of the CIA debating the right wing of the CIA." ~ Timothy Leary
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Torn_Scorned_Ignored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
62. There's
a bot living in the Dungeon. It's programed to disagree with convincing evidence regardless of topic.

:silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-29-10 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
66. NY Times v JFK On the 93rd Anniversary of JFK's Birth
This story is about a month old Daily Paper, but it is cromulent ;-) to this thread, and important anniversary.

Why the New York Times Deserves to Die
Jerry Policoff wrote his first essay critiquing the NY Times on the JFK case back in 1971. (James DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed, p. 379) At the time, it had no effect. And in the following nearly four decades, the increasing barrage of criticism also went unheeded. And the worst aspect of this controversy is this: Those organizations do not seem to understand how their obstinacy led to 1.) The increasing public cynicism about both politics and the media, and 2.) The rise of alternative forms of media, especially on the Internet. That's arrogance for you.

The Times' latest outburst of arrogance forms the basis for this column. On April 14th, the New York Times published an essay, properly labeled an opinion piece, co-authored by Mark Medish and Joel McLeary. The title of the essay was Assassination Season is Open. The authors begin the piece by saying that "state-sponsored assassinations are back in season". They then marked this trend by referring to "targeted snuff jobs" from "Dubai to Dagestan, from Yemen to Wazirstan". As if somehow this had been dominating the news and American consciousness lately. Well no one has approached me lately and said, "Jim, what did you think about that political hit in Dagestan last month?" If they did, my reply would have been, "Where is Dagestan?"...

As I wrote in Part 8 of my review of Reclaiming History, the concept of "regime change" and the consequent murders that accompany it originated with the changes brought to the CIA by Allen Dulles. Which was seven years before John Kennedy even ran for president. But since the MSM had always been close with the CIA, and since Allen Dulles had actually started Operation Mockingbird-the attempt by the CIA to control the media-they were not going to readily admit this. Even if it was true. So during the 1974-75 investigations by the Church and Pike committees when the crimes of the CIA and FBI were first given heavy exposure these CIA murder plots were heavily publicized. And the CIA took a public flogging over it. Especially since, in their own Inspector General report, they admitted that they had no presidential approval for the plots to kill Fidel Castro, and that they deliberately kept them from the Kennedys. (The Assassinations, pgs 327-28) So when the NY Times says that Kennedy's 'executive action" policy targeted Fidel Castro in Cuba, this is ass backwards. And the CIA admitted it in their own report. And it is a primary document in this discussion. A primary document, which somehow, these two reporters failed to consult.

In fact, the Church Committee clearly demarcated the beginnings of these assassination plots against foreign leaders as beginning with Allen Dulles and President Eisenhower. And they blamed the eventual plot that took the life of Patrice Lumumba as being OK'd for Dulles by Eisenhower. (ibid, p. 326) Which again shows how stupid the Times is. Because, incredibly, the Times article also blames the murder of Lumumba on the Kennedys! This is so wrong as to be Orwellian. (Or, even worse, Chomskyian, since Noam Chomsky blames this one on Kennedy also.) The truth is the opposite. As more than one author has insinuated, Allen Dulles speeded up the plot against Lumumba in the interim between Eisenhower's departure and Kennedy's inauguration because he knew that Kennedy would never approve it. (John M. Blum, Years of Discord, p. 23; Jonathan Kwitny, Endless Enemies, p. 69) Therefore, Lumumba died on January 17, 1961, three days before Kennedy took office. Dulles turned out to be right. Because right after entering office, but before learning of Lumumba's death, Kennedy formulated a new policy for Lumumba's Congo. One that pretty much was a reversal of Eisenhower's. A part of this new policy was to free all political prisoners-including Lumumba. Lumumba was being held by an enemy tribe at the behest of the former mother country Belgium, which was in league with the CIA. If he had been freed, he would not have been killed. Dulles obviously knew Kennedy better than the New York Times does. Which, by the way, was opposed to Kennedy's Congo policy at the time. For another part of his plan was to oppose the breaking away of the mineral rich Katanga province from Congo. The Times supported that breakaway. Which would have helped Belgium and American investors but hurt the Congo. (Kwitny, p. 55)...

Read more: http://www.ctka.net/2010/nyt.html

Show #471
Original airdate: April 22, 2010
Guest: Jim Marrs / Jim DiEugenio
Topic: JFK Assassination Research

Play Part Two Interview - Jim DiEugenio


# How the newspapers have been misleading the public and why they're failing
# CIA foreign leadership assassination plots and how the news tries to pin the history on JFK
# Jim cites the assassinations of the Diem brothers, Rafael Trujillo and Patrice Lumumba
# In fact, the Kennedys had no idea until they found out about the assassinations by accident
# The New York Times has held to the "Kennedys did it" beyond the evidence
# As Jim shows, The Kennedys had no idea the CIA was plotting these murders

http://www.blackopradio.com/pod/black471b.mp3

http://www.blackopradio.com/black471b.ram
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 22nd 2014, 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC