HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Editor of major German ne...

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 11:19 AM

Editor of major German newspaper says he planted stories for CIA

"...taught to lie, to betray and not to tell the truth to the public."



Editor of major German newspaper says he planted stories for CIA

By Ralph Lopez
Common Dreams, Jan 26, 2015

Becoming the first credentialed, well-known media insider to step forward and state publicly that he was secretly a "propagandist," an editor of a major German daily has said that he personally planted stories for the CIA.

Saying he believes a medical condition gives him only a few years to live, and that he is filled with remorse, Dr. Udo Ulfkotte, the editor of Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, one of Germany's largest newspapers, said in an interview that he accepted news stories written and given to him by the CIA and published them under his own name. Ulfkotte said the aim of much of the deception was to drive nations toward war.

Dr. Ulfkotte says the corruption of journalists and major news outlets by the CIA is routine, accepted, and widespread in the western media, and that journalists who do not comply either cannot get jobs at any news organization, or find their careers cut short.

Dr. Ulfkotte is the author of a book currently available only in German, "Bought Journalists" (Kopp 2014.) Aged 55, he was also once an advisor to the government of German Chancellor Helmet Kohl.

The book has become a bestseller in Germany but, in a bizarre twist which Ulfkotte says characterizes the disconnect caused by CIA control of the western media, the book cannot be reported on.
Ulfkotte says:

"No German mainstream journalist is allowed to report about (my) book. Otherwise he or she will be sacked. So we have a bestseller now that no German journalist is allowed to write or talk about."


CONTINUED...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/world/editor-of-major-german-newspaper-says-he-planted-stories-for-cia/article/424470

109 replies, 10693 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 109 replies Author Time Post
Reply Editor of major German newspaper says he planted stories for CIA (Original post)
Octafish Feb 2015 OP
on point Feb 2015 #1
Octafish Feb 2015 #3
Enthusiast Feb 2015 #14
raging moderate Feb 2015 #21
JackRiddler Feb 2015 #25
billhicks76 Feb 2015 #42
Jackpine Radical Feb 2015 #2
Octafish Feb 2015 #4
erronis Feb 2015 #16
erronis Feb 2015 #29
grasswire Feb 2015 #36
jtuck004 Feb 2015 #51
KoKo Feb 2015 #79
msanthrope Feb 2015 #81
Jackpine Radical Feb 2015 #82
msanthrope Feb 2015 #83
Jackpine Radical Feb 2015 #86
msanthrope Feb 2015 #87
roamer65 Feb 2015 #91
jalan48 Feb 2015 #5
grasswire Feb 2015 #13
jalan48 Feb 2015 #15
GoneFishin Feb 2015 #67
woo me with science Feb 2015 #18
jalan48 Feb 2015 #19
Octafish Feb 2015 #28
elias49 Feb 2015 #6
ND-Dem Feb 2015 #9
merrily Feb 2015 #7
Enthusiast Feb 2015 #24
judy Feb 2015 #8
Octafish Feb 2015 #107
FLPanhandle Feb 2015 #10
Luminous Animal Feb 2015 #26
tblue37 Feb 2015 #11
Octafish Feb 2015 #99
Enthusiast Feb 2015 #12
BrotherIvan Feb 2015 #22
Octafish Feb 2015 #32
BrotherIvan Feb 2015 #34
Jamastiene Feb 2015 #56
Enthusiast Feb 2015 #58
Jamastiene Feb 2015 #59
wildbilln864 Feb 2015 #17
Octafish Feb 2015 #35
pa28 Feb 2015 #20
Octafish Feb 2015 #108
BrotherIvan Feb 2015 #23
grasswire Feb 2015 #37
BrotherIvan Feb 2015 #40
Baitball Blogger Feb 2015 #27
Luminous Animal Feb 2015 #30
closeupready Feb 2015 #31
JDPriestly Feb 2015 #48
WillyT Feb 2015 #33
malaise Feb 2015 #38
JDPriestly Feb 2015 #50
Ichingcarpenter Feb 2015 #39
Pooka Fey Feb 2015 #41
G_j Feb 2015 #43
gratuitous Feb 2015 #44
YOHABLO Feb 2015 #45
Major Nikon Feb 2015 #46
Octafish Feb 2015 #47
Major Nikon Feb 2015 #65
grasswire Feb 2015 #72
Rex Feb 2015 #75
Major Nikon Feb 2015 #84
reorg Feb 2015 #78
Major Nikon Feb 2015 #85
reorg Feb 2015 #88
Major Nikon Feb 2015 #92
reorg Feb 2015 #101
Major Nikon Feb 2015 #102
reorg Feb 2015 #103
Major Nikon Feb 2015 #104
reorg Feb 2015 #105
Alkene Feb 2015 #49
Octafish Feb 2015 #94
DeSwiss Feb 2015 #52
nationalize the fed Feb 2015 #53
Octafish Feb 2015 #100
LineReply ,
blkmusclmachine Feb 2015 #54
Jamastiene Feb 2015 #55
DetlefK Feb 2015 #57
djean111 Feb 2015 #60
DetlefK Feb 2015 #61
djean111 Feb 2015 #62
DetlefK Feb 2015 #63
djean111 Feb 2015 #64
reorg Feb 2015 #70
DetlefK Feb 2015 #71
reorg Feb 2015 #80
DetlefK Feb 2015 #89
reorg Feb 2015 #96
DeSwiss Feb 2015 #106
father founding Feb 2015 #66
GoneFishin Feb 2015 #69
grasswire Feb 2015 #73
JEB Feb 2015 #68
NCTraveler Feb 2015 #74
Rex Feb 2015 #76
Lint Head Feb 2015 #77
roamer65 Feb 2015 #90
johnnyreb Feb 2015 #109
pauldp Feb 2015 #93
Octafish Feb 2015 #95
grasswire Feb 2015 #98
woo me with science Feb 2015 #97

Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 11:27 AM

1. The NYT could start on VERY VERY long trail of amends by doing expose

They should do a complete, through, open, no holds barred on this corruption, including their role as one ver small step in their very long road to redemption as a newspaper

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to on point (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 11:39 AM

3. Correspondence and collusion between the New York Times and the CIA

Mark Mazzetti's emails with the CIA expose the degradation of journalism that has lost the imperative to be a check to power

Glenn Greenwald
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 29 August 2012 14.58 EDT

EXCERPT...

But what is news in this disclosure are the newly released emails between Mark Mazzetti, the New York Times's national security and intelligence reporter, and CIA spokeswoman Marie Harf. The CIA had evidently heard that Maureen Dowd was planning to write a column on the CIA's role in pumping the film-makers with information about the Bin Laden raid in order to boost Obama's re-election chances, and was apparently worried about how Dowd's column would reflect on them. On 5 August 2011 (a Friday night), Harf wrote an email to Mazzetti with the subject line: "Any word??", suggesting, obviously, that she and Mazzetti had already discussed Dowd's impending column and she was expecting an update from the NYT reporter.

SNIP...

Even more amazing is the reaction of the newspaper's managing editor, Dean Baquet, to these revelations, as reported by Politico's Dylan Byers:

"New York Times Managing Editor Dean Baquet called POLITICO to explain the situation, but provided little clarity, saying he could not go into detail on the issue because it was an intelligence matter.


CONTINUED with LINKS...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/29/correspondence-collusion-new-york-times-cia

Thank you for putting it into words, on point. Weird how the most strategic news for those interested in democracy -- a corrupted news media, is never mentioned by the Paper of Record.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to on point (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:46 PM

14. That would be the day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to on point (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:29 PM

21. Danke schoen, Udo Ulfkotte.

I will buy this book, if I get the chance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to on point (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:59 PM

25. Their own role?

 

That would be most of the international reporting they've done at every stage of the postwar period? When has the NYT not served as the transmission belt for the deep state's propaganda product at the highest level?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to on point (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 10:12 PM

42. Wow...CIA Writes Stories Here Too

 

And it's the owners at the top on the boards who pressure managers to fire journalists. Time to do away with mainstream media and start a new paradigm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 11:36 AM

2. Damn. Now you've gone and given me a case of Quoter's Itch.

In his book "The CIA and the Media," Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein quotes William B. Bader, former CIA intelligence officer, in his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Baeder said:

"There is quite an incredible spread of relationships. You don’t need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are [Central Intelligence] Agency people at the management level."

Bernstein writes:

"The Agency’s relationship with the Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. From 1950 to 1966, about ten CIA employees were provided Times cover under arrangements approved by the newspaper’s late publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. The cover arrangements were part of a general Times policy—set by Sulzberger—to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible."


Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/world/editor-of-major-german-newspaper-says-he-planted-stories-for-cia/article/424470#ixzz3QVnpKHq9


Nicht nur in Deutschland, Leute.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:09 PM

4. Church Committee in 1976 reported CIA manipulated US Press...

...stating a number, 500 journalists, but not naming names. As you wrote, Jackpine Radical, Carl Bernstein filled in the blanks:



THE CIA AND THE MEDIA

How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up

BY CARL BERNSTEIN
(originally in Rolling Stone way back when)

In 1953, Joseph Alsop, then one of America’s leading syndicated columnists, went to the Philippines to cover an election. He did not go because he was asked to do so by his syndicate. He did not go because he was asked to do so by the newspapers that printed his column. He went at the request of the CIA.

Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty‑five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters. Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services—from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go‑betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors without‑portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested in the derring‑do of the spy business as in filing articles; and, the smallest category, full‑time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations.

The history of the CIA’s involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception for the following principal reasons:

■ The use of journalists has been among the most productive means of intelligence‑gathering employed by the CIA. Although the Agency has cut back sharply on the use of reporters since 1973 primarily as a result of pressure from the media), some journalist‑operatives are still posted abroad.

■ Further investigation into the matter, CIA officials say, would inevitably reveal a series of embarrassing relationships in the 1950s and 1960s with some of the most powerful organizations and individuals in American journalism.


Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were Williarn Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Tirne Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the LouisviIle Courier‑Journal, and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps‑Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald‑Tribune.

By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc.

The CIA’s use of the American news media has been much more extensive than Agency officials have acknowledged publicly or in closed sessions with members of Congress. The general outlines of what happened are indisputable; the specifics are harder to come by. CIA sources hint that a particular journalist was trafficking all over Eastern Europe for the Agency; the journalist says no, he just had lunch with the station chief. CIA sources say flatly that a well‑known ABC correspondent worked for the Agency through 1973; they refuse to identify him. A high‑level CIA official with a prodigious memory says that the New York Times provided cover for about ten CIA operatives between 1950 and 1966; he does not know who they were, or who in the newspaper’s management made the arrangements.

CONTINUED...

http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php



And then George H.W. Bush became head of CIA and the subject sank from the front page faster than one can type: "Orwell."

Vielen Dank, Jocko. Reichen immer reicher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #4)


Response to Octafish (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 02:17 PM

29. Yes, and they are here on this board also.

Mining or shill-ing. When you got the bucks, use them. Gather intelligence and influence discussions. Watch how the participants react to your plants (shills) and use that reaction to build a better dossier.

Choose your bunk now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erronis (Reply #29)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 04:54 PM

36. and remember....

....you don't need a shower, and you don't want to get on any trains.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erronis (Reply #29)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 04:35 AM

51. "Choose your bunk now." < The problem most people have is that they don't

 

recognize when they are already sleeping in it, lulled into complacency with nice speeches and credit.

"They" don't really want you incarcerated, unless it makes them money. You are far more profitable to rentiers and bank$ters and their lapdog politicians by staying alive and living in or near poverty.

Just keep your mouths shut and the fees coming. If you can't do that you can be disposed of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:02 PM

79. Thanks for that bit of history reminder!

Recommend..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:17 PM

81. Woodward was (and is) Naval Intelligence. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #81)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:20 PM

82. The only thing that surprises me about this statement

is that my wife got it wrong. She thinks he's CIA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #82)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:23 PM

83. Nah--he's not Agency, although they've used him from time to time. He's straight ONI.

 

And those motherfuckers make the CIA look like Chatty Cathys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #83)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:41 PM

86. This goes all the way back to Watergate for me.

I think Nixon had become a liability to somebody BIG. I can only speculate as to why, and have imagined some scenarios that were plausible to me, but never come up with anything particularly compelling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #86)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:07 PM

87. Nixon pissed off the wrong people, that's for sure. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #87)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:06 PM

91. Nixon had knowledge of those involved in the Kennedy assassination.

As John Ehrlichman said, the "Bay of Pigs" thing Nixon always mentioned on tape was code for the Kennedy assassination. I do believe that the topic just before the 18.5 min gap on the tape was the "Bay of Pigs". I think that day Nixon spilled his guts on who was involved in it.

Nixon knew. He was up to his armpits in CIA dirty and black ops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:17 PM

5. Like the Mafia

"Ulfkotte says he is better positioned to come forward than many journalists because he does not have children who could be threatened."

Wow! That says it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:46 PM

13. !!

I have often thought that we need to elect that kind of presidential candidate. No family ties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #13)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:47 PM

15. LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #13)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:03 AM

67. I think that is why Dennis Kucinich is stomped into the dust every time he gains a slight

bit of notoriety.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:19 PM

18. It does say it all, doesn't it.



The depth of corruption and moral/ethical depravity that is our government now.

America is gone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #18)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:21 PM

19. Global capitalism with it's own secret police force-publically financed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 02:11 PM

28. Makes one wonder, especially considering who Uncle Sam has done business with.

Stuff I have seldom seen mentioned anywhere, let alone the New York Times:

[font color="purple"]President Dwight D. Eisenhower was in office when members of his administration hired the Mafia to murder Fidel Castro in 1960.[/font color]



AUG 1960: Richard Bissell meets with Colonel Sheffield Edwards, director of the CIA's Office of Security, and discusses with him ways to eliminate or assassinate Fidel Castro. Edwards proposes that the job be done by assassins hand-picked by the American underworld, specifically syndicate interests who have been driven out of their Havana gambling casinos by the Castro regime. Bissell gives Edwards the go-ahead to proceed. Between August 1960, and April 1961, the CIA with the help of the Mafia pursues a series of plots to poison or shot Castro. The CIA’s own internal report on these efforts states that these plots "were viewed by at least some of the participants as being merely one aspect of the over-all active effort to overthrow the regime that culminated in the Bay of Pigs." (CIA, Inspector General's Report on Efforts to Assassinate Fidel Castro, p. 3, 14)

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/chron.html



[font color="purple"]Details on the actual sit-down:[/font color]



Ever wonder about the sanity of America's leaders? Take a close look at perhaps the most bizarre plot in U.S. intelligence history

By Bryan Smith
Chicago Magazine
November 2007
(page 4 of 6)

EXCERPT...

By September 1960, the project was proceeding apace. Roselli would report directly to Maheu. The first step was a meeting in New York. There, at the Plaza Hotel, Maheu introduced Roselli to O'Connell. The agent wanted to cover up the participation of the CIA, so he pretended to be a man named Jim Olds who represented a group of wealthy industrialists eager to get rid of Castro so they could get back in business.

"We may know some people," Roselli said. Several weeks later, they all met at the Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami. For years, the luxurious facility had served as the unofficial headquarters for Mafioso leaders seeking a base close to their gambling interests in Cuba. Now, it would be the staging area for the assassination plots.

At a meeting in one of the suites, Roselli introduced Maheu to two men: Sam Gold and a man Roselli referred to as Joe, who could serve as a courier to Cuba. By this time, Roselli was on to O'Connell. "I'm not kidding," Roselli told the agent one day. "I know who you work for. But I'm not going to ask you to confirm it."

Roselli may have figured out that he was dealing with the CIA, but neither Maheu nor O'Connell realized the rank of mobsters with whom they were dealing. That changed when Maheu picked up a copy of the Sunday newspaper supplement Parade, which carried an article laying out the FBI's ten most wanted criminals. Leading the list was Sam Giancana, a.k.a. "Mooney," a.k.a. "Momo," a.k.a. "Sam the Cigar," a Chicago godfather who was one of the most feared dons in the country—and the man who called himself Sam Gold. "Joe" was also on the list. His real name, however, was Santos Trafficante—the outfit's Florida and Cuba chieftain.

Maheu alerted O'Connell. "My God, look what we're involved with," Maheu said. O'Connell told his superiors. Questioned later before the 1975 U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (later nicknamed the Church Committee after its chairman, Frank Church, the Democratic senator from Idaho), O'Connell was asked whether there had ever been any discussion about asking two men on the FBI's most wanted list to carry out a hit on a foreign leader.

"Not with me there wasn't," O'Connell answered.

"And obviously no one said stop—and you went ahead."

"Yes."

"Did it bother you at all?"

"No," O'Connell answered, "it didn't."


CONTINUED...

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/November-2007/How-the-CIA-Enlisted-the-Chicago-Mob-to-Put-a-Hit-on-Castro/index.php?cparticle=4&siarticle=3



[font color="purple"]Yet, the CIA uses the media to repeat the false news that Kennedy was the guy who wanted Castro dead.[/font color]



Spies: Ex-CIA Agent In Raleigh Says Castro Knew About JFK Assassination Ahead Of Time

Former CIA agent and author Brian Latell in Raleigh

By The Raleigh Telegram

RALEIGH – A noted former Central Intelligence Agency officer, author, and scholar who is intimately knowledgeable about Cuba and Fidel Castro, says he believes there is evidence that Castro’s government knew about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 ahead of time.

SNIP...

Robert Kennedy, as the Attorney General of the United States, was in charge of the operation, said Latell. Despite the United States’ best efforts, the operation was nonetheless penetrated by Cuban intelligence agents, said Latell.

Latell said there were two serious assassination attempts by the United States against Castro that even used members of the mafia to help, but both of them were obviously unsuccessful.

He also said that there was a plot by the United States to have Castro jabbed with a pen containing a syringe filled with a very effective poison. Latell said that he believes the experienced assassin who worked for Castro who originally agreed to the plan may have been a double agent. After meeting with a personal representative of Robert Kennedy in Paris, the man knew that the plan to assassinate Castro came from the highest levels of the government, including John F. and Robert Kennedy.

The plan was never carried out, as the man later defected to the United States, but with so many double agents working for Castro also pledging allegiance to the CIA, Latell said it was likely that the information got back to Havana that the Kennedy brothers endorsed that plot with the pen.

CONTINUED...

http://raleightelegram.com/201209123311



I wonder why that is? And if I wonder, I would think the United States' self- and otherwise-proclaimed "Paper of Record," were it interested in justice, would find that information and the many ancillary leads worth pursuing.

Thank you for putting the situation into words, jalan48.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:22 PM

6. Welcome to state-controlled media

 

move over RT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias49 (Reply #6)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:26 PM

9. +100

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:22 PM

7. Another whacko conspiracy theorist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #7)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:53 PM

24. That's an example of what happens when you read the Huffington Post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:24 PM

8. This is huge...thank you for posting this

And the Carl Bernstein quotes, etc. as well.
War is one of the biggest money making schemes ever devised...pushing for mass murder so some people can make more money.
It is so pathetic and horrible, but reminiscent of WW1, and other wars pushed by private interests...
This should be front page news everywhere.
But of course it will never be.
In the total absence of truth in our media, our world's prospects are not very good...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to judy (Reply #8)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 11:45 AM

107. As long as there are two like you, Judy, Democracy has a chance.

And why trying matters:



Drone Killings and Torture: Peace Activists to be “Rehabilitated” in Jail

Institute for Public Accuracy
Press Release, December 15, 2014

Students gather at the site of a suspected U.S. drone strike on an Islamic seminary in Hangu districtMarcy Wheeler writes in “From Bush to Obama, Eyes Wide Shut: The same memo Bush used to wall himself off from the details of CIA torture is keeping Obama’s drone war alive” that: “On the second day of Barack Obama’s presidency, he prohibited most forms of physical torture. On the third, a CIA drone strike he authorized killed up to 11 civilians.”

Also, see: “U.S. drone strikes kill 28 unknown people for every intended target, new Reprieve report reveals.”

KATHY KELLY, kathy at vcnv.org, @voiceinwild

Co-coordinator of Voices for Creative Nonviolence, Kelly was just sentenced to three months in prison for protesting against drone killings. Recently in Afghanistan, Kelly is currently in Chicago. She will be in New York City around Christmas and in Washington, D.C. just after New Years. She has been told to “self-report” by the court on Jan. 23.

She recently wrote the piece “Drones and Discrimination: Kick the Habit,” which states: “On December 10, International Human Rights Day, federal Magistrate Matt Whitworth sentenced me to three months in prison for having crossed the line at a military base that wages drone warfare. The punishment for our attempt to speak on behalf of trapped and desperate people, abroad, will be an opportunity to speak with people trapped by prisons and impoverishment here in the U.S.

“Our trial was based on a trespass charge incurred on June 1, 2014. Georgia Walker and I were immediately arrested when we stepped onto Missouri’s Whiteman Air Force where pilots fly weaponized drones over Afghanistan and other countries. We carried a loaf of bread and a letter for Brig Gen. Glen D. Van Herck. In court, we testified that we hadn’t acted with criminal intent but had, rather, exercised our First Amendment right (and responsibility) to assemble peaceably for redress of grievance.

“A group of Afghan friends had entrusted me with a simple message, their grievance, which they couldn’t personally deliver: please stop killing us.

“I knew that people I’ve lived with, striving to end wars even as their communities were bombed by drone aircraft, would understand the symbolism of asking to break bread with the base commander. Judge Whitworth said he understood that we oppose war, but he could recommend over 100 better ways to make our point that wouldn’t be breaking the law.

“The prosecution recommended the maximum six month sentence. ‘Ms. Kelly needs to be rehabilitated,’ said an earnest young military lawyer. The judge paged through a four page summary of past convictions and agreed that I hadn’t yet learned not to break the law.”

JACK GILROY, jgilroy1 at stny.rr.com

Gilroy recently completed a two month sentence for protesting drone killings at the Hancock Air base in upstate New York. See from Syracuse.com: “Grandfather of eight/drone protester says he was not ‘corrected’ at Jamesville Correctional Facility.” Gilroy wrote the play “The Predator” about drone killing.

MARK COLVILLE, amistadcwh at yahoo.com

Colville is a member of the Amistad Catholic Worker in New Haven, Conn. and is, like Gilroy, one of about 100 activists who have been charged following protests at the Hancock Air base organized by the Upstate New York Coalition to Ground the Drones and End the Wars.

He was recently on the program “Democracy Now!,” where he stated: “The United States government, through its drone program, is claiming the legal right to targeted assassinations, extrajudicial killings, indiscriminate killing and the targeting, deliberate targeting, of civilians. For example, even the military admits that one of its modes of operation in drone strikes is something that they have called ‘double tapping,’ which is that after striking a target, the drone is directed back to that same target 20 minutes or a half an hour later in order to strike again after first responders have come to help the wounded. And so, it’s on a foundation of criminality. And as we’ve experienced in the numerous public actions and arrests at Hancock Air Field, this program operates beyond the reach of courts and law. And what we’re trying to do is to get courts to [address] the criminality in which the United States government is engaged through the drone program.”

See IPA news release: “31 Protesters Arrested at Drone Base in Syracuse.”

SOURCE w/links: http://www.accuracy.org/release/drone-killings-and-torture-peace-activists-to-be-rehabilitated-in-jail/

Judy: Have you met my friend, the great DUer Savannahmann?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:33 PM

10. Is there an English version of his book out?

I admit I'm a natural born skeptic on conspiracy stories especially when coupled with the letters CIA, but I would like to read his claims. He does seem credible.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FLPanhandle (Reply #10)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 02:11 PM

26. The article states it is available in German only.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:41 PM

11. We should be outraged at the way major media allow themselves to be used for

propaganda, but we should be a million times more outraged when one of the main purposes of that propaganda is to push for war.

I think of the Hearst papers ginning up a war with Spain over a lie, but at least he did it to sell newspapers, not to please government masters who could ruin his life if he resisted. His was a one-man corruption train, not corruption of the entire operation of the intelligence apparatus of the government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tblue37 (Reply #11)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:13 PM

99. Absolute Outrage



The Man Who Sold the War

by James Bamford
Rolling Stone, November 18, 2005

The road to war in Iraq led through many unlikely places. One of them was a chic hotel nestled among the strip bars and brothels that cater to foreigners in the town of Pattaya, on the Gulf of Thailand.

On December 17th, 2001, in a small room within the sound of the crashing tide, a CIA officer attached metal electrodes to the ring and index fingers of a man sitting pensively in a padded chair. The officer then stretched a black rubber tube, pleated like an accordion, around the man's chest and another across his abdomen. Finally, he slipped a thick cuff over the man's brachial artery, on the inside of his upper arm.

Strapped to the polygraph machine was Adnan Ihsan Saeed al-Haideri, a forty-three-year-old Iraqi who had fled his homeland in Kurdistan and was now determined to bring down Saddam Hussein. For hours, as thin mechanical styluses traced black lines on rolling graph paper, al-Haideri laid out an explosive tale. Answering yes and no to a series of questions, he insisted repeatedly that he was a civil engineer who had helped Saddam's men to secretly bury tons of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. The illegal arms, according to al-Haideri, were buried in subterranean wells, hidden in private villas, even stashed beneath the Saddam Hussein Hospital, the largest medical facility in Baghdad.

It was damning stuff -- just the kind of evidence the Bush administration was looking for. If the charges were true, they would offer the White House a compelling reason to invade Iraq and depose Saddam. That's why the Pentagon had flown a CIA polygraph expert to Pattaya: to question al-Haideri and confirm, once and for all, that Saddam was secretly stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.

There was only one problem: It was all a lie. After a review of the sharp peaks and deep valleys on the polygraph chart, the intelligence officer concluded that al-Haideri had made up the entire story, apparently in the hopes of securing a visa.

The fabrication might have ended there, the tale of another political refugee trying to scheme his way to a better life. But just because the story wasn't true didn't mean it couldn't be put to good use. Al-Haideri, in fact, was the product of a clandestine operation -- part espionage, part PR campaign -- that had been set up and funded by the CIA and the Pentagon for the express purpose of selling the world a war. And the man who had long been in charge of the marketing was a secretive and mysterious creature of the Washington establishment named John Rendon.

Rendon is a man who fills a need that few people even know exists. Two months before al-Haideri took the lie-detector test, the Pentagon had secretly awarded him a $16 million contract to target Iraq and other adversaries with propaganda. One of the most powerful people in Washington, Rendon is a leader in the strategic field known as "perception management," manipulating information -- and, by extension, the news media -- to achieve the desired result. His firm, the Rendon Group, has made millions off government contracts since 1991, when it was hired by the CIA to help "create the conditions for the removal of Hussein from power." Working under this extraordinary transfer of secret authority, Rendon assembled a group of anti-Saddam militants, personally gave them their name -- the Iraqi National Congress -- and served as their media guru and "senior adviser" as they set out to engineer an uprising against Saddam. It was as if President John F. Kennedy had outsourced the Bay of Pigs operation to the advertising and public-relations firm of J. Walter Thompson.

CONTINUED...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1118-10.htm

Money and Power should be shared, not concentrated. So, to keep things honest, we need an honest news media. Which, is the problem...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 12:45 PM

12. The CIA is mucking about world wide picking winners and losers in the interest of crony capitalism.

Last edited Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:19 AM - Edit history (1)

There is no bottom to the trough of their largess nor the uselessness of their assignment. If we ended the CIA charter this very moment the world and especially the United States could flourish without their incessant interference. Hear that you Nazis?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enthusiast (Reply #12)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:39 PM

22. She didn't mean it Agent Mike!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #22)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 03:43 PM

32. But I did.

And I hope Agent Mike puts "Why" in the File.

Know your BFEE: Spawn of Wall Street and the Third Reich

Thank you both for getting why Freedom of the Press is the cornerstone of Justice, BrotherIvan and Enthusiast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #32)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 04:27 PM

34. Oh, your file is BIG

Last edited Sun Feb 1, 2015, 06:29 PM - Edit history (1)

Thank you for all your posts and information. Your links are shocking, and nothing shocks me anymore. I'm happy to see the information get out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enthusiast (Reply #12)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:10 AM

56. I agree with every word except the last one.

That is usually used as homophobic slur. What you had to say before that part was spot on. I cringed when I saw that last word though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jamastiene (Reply #56)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:19 AM

58. It wasn't being used as a homophobic slur when I used it. I don't play that.

See, even though I am a heterosexual male I have always supported LGBT issues. Most men in my age group (62) are on the wrong side on these issues.

How about if I just remove it altogether?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enthusiast (Reply #58)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:20 AM

59. I was pretty sure you weren't using it to mean that, but a lot of people do.

The rest of the post is spot on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:01 PM

17. and a big K & R! n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wildbilln864 (Reply #17)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 04:48 PM

35. Stratfor: executive boasted of 'trusted former CIA cronies'

By Alex Spillius, Diplomatic Correspondent
The Telegraph, 28 Feb 2012

A senior executive with the private intelligence firm Stratfor boasted to colleagues about his "trusted former CIA cronies" and promised to "see what I can uncover" about a classified FBI investigation, according to emails released by the WikiLeaks.

Fred Burton, vice president of intelligence at the Texas firm, also informed members of staff that he had a copy of the confidential indictment on Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks.

The second batch of five million internal Stratfor emails obtained by the Anonymous computer hacking group revealed that the company has high level sources within the United States and other governments, runs a network of paid informants that includes embassy staff and journalists and planned a hedge fund, Stratcap, based on its secret intelligence.

SNIP...

Mr Assange labelled the company as a "private intelligence Enron", in reference to the energy giant that collapsed after a false accounting scandal.

CONTINUED...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9111784/Stratfor-executive-boasted-of-trusted-former-CIA-cronies.html

The things one wouldn't know, were it not for DU and wildbilln864.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:22 PM

20. And the obsolete mainstream media still wonders why it's ignored and ridiculed.

Stephen Colbert from the 2006 correspondent's dinner.

But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works: the president makes decisions. He's the Decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know - fiction!


Elite media figure reaction in the room . . . offended silence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pa28 (Reply #20)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 11:52 AM

108. Colbert saved Democracy.

At least, it seems that way to me. It wasn't comedy. The nation was on the verge of four more wars and Colbert, scripted press conferences on the eve of the invasion of Poland, and apart from Helen Thomas who got moved to the back of the J-bus, Stephen Colbert spoke truth to the thief and drunk George W Bush.

This is old hat for you, pa28, but news to 99-percent of America:

Time of Useful Consciousness - Corporations and Propaganda: The Attack on Democracy

Maria Gilardin reports the people of the US have been subjected to the most costly, unparalleled, 3/4 century propaganda effort by corporations in order to expand corporate rights, limit democracy and destroy the unions. Her webcast covers the history from WWI to Reagan. It centers on Alex Carey: Corporations and Propaganda. When Noam Chomsky dedicated his book "Manufacturing Consent" to the memory of Alex Carey, he said that the Australian sociologist would have written the definitive history of propaganda in the US, had he lived to complete his work. The 20th century, Carey says, is marked by three historic developments: the growth of democracy via the expansion of the franchise, the growth of corporations, and the growth of propaganda to protect corporations from democracy.



Alex Carey: Corporations and Propaganda


The Attack on Democracy

The 20th century, said Carey, is marked by three historic developments: the growth of democracy via the expansion of the franchise, the growth of corporations, and the growth of propaganda to protect corporations from democracy. Carey wrote that the people of the US have been subjected to an unparalleled, expensive, 3/4 century long propaganda effort designed to expand corporate rights by undermining democracy and destroying the unions. And, in his manuscript, unpublished during his life time, he described that history, going back to World War I and ending with the Reagan era. Carey covers the little known role of the US Chamber of Commerce in the McCarthy witch hunts of post WWII and shows how the continued campaign against "Big Government" plays an important role in bringing Reagan to power.

John Pilger called Carey "a second Orwell", Noam Chomsky dedicated his book, Manufacturing Consent, to him. And even though TUC Radio runs our documentary based on Carey's manuscript at least every two years and draws a huge response each time, Alex Carey is still unknown.

Given today's spotlight on corporations that may change. It is not only the Occupy movement that inspired me to present this program again at this time. By an amazing historic coincidence Bill Moyers and Charlie Cray of Greenpeace have just added the missing chapter to Carey's analysis. Carey's manuscript ends in 1988 when he committed suicide. Moyers and Cray begin with 1971 and bring the corporate propaganda project up to date.

This is a fairly complex production with many voices, historic sound clips, and source material. The program has been used by writers and students of history and propaganda. Alex Carey: Taking the Risk out of Democracy, Corporate Propaganda VS Freedom and Liberty with a foreword by Noam Chomsky was published by the University of Illinois Press in 1995.

SOURCE: http://tucradio.org/new.html



Here's the first part (scroll down at the link for the second part) on Carey:

http://tucradio.org/AlexCarey_ONE.mp3

Corporate Owned News is a fraud. Ask William K. Black or Rory Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:40 PM

23. It will take the courage of individuals to turn the tide

Personal sacrifice is the only way now, just as it always has been. Dr. Ulfkotte has made his very important.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #23)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 04:58 PM

37. I have been re-reading histories of American Revolution.

The time comes when each American must choose liberty or tyranny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #37)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 06:31 PM

40. We've seen it time and again

When your back is up against a wall, you have to do something. The Civil Rights Movement, The Labor Movement, and every uprising that ever helped the little people was through the courage and suffering of individuals who gave for future generations. I'm getting there. It's good to see movements in other countries as well, because as the tide swells, it sweeps people into the momentum.f

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 02:11 PM

27. Marked this as one of those things that we suspected and are grateful that someone confirmed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 03:16 PM

30. Kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 03:29 PM

31. It's interesting. I generally check DU first thing every morning for my news.

 

In part because I get on-the-ground coverage unfiltered by toadies at Establishment news sources. This story is a bit of a surprise, but in another sense, not in that it confirms for me that there is a real reason why I find DU a better source for 'stuff that happens'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to closeupready (Reply #31)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:45 AM

48. I mostly trust DU because if a news item does not seem relevant or does not seem to fit or

make sense, someone on DU will call it out. There is a healthy cynicism here about a lot of things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 04:03 PM

33. K & R !!!

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 05:07 PM

38. But but but - the problem is RT! DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dr. Ulfkotte says the corruption of journalists and major news outlets by the CIA is routine, accepted, and widespread in the western media, and that journalists who do not comply either cannot get jobs at any news organization, or find their careers cut short.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #38)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:51 AM

50. Russian media is probably no better than ours, but we don't follow Russian media, so it is

not relevant to us. Chinese media is probably utterly insane.

It is natural for the powerful in a country to want to control the news. It is the job of the press to prevent the powerful from doing so. The question is not whether the press is helping the CIA collect information. If the information is accurate, so what?

The problem is whether the press is being fed inaccurate information by the intelligence services in order to mislead the public.

The press is supposed to vet it sources. If the news from the CIA is reliable and verifiable, so be it. But if the CIA is making up news stories in order to influence the political opinions of Americans, then we have a problem. Because at that point, if that were so, the CIA would be making the news and forming opinion. And that is NOT ITS JOB.

If the CIA is receiving information from legitimate or knowledgeable sources, and that information is accurate and reliable, then it is doing its job which is to obtain information so that the administration can make good decisions for the American people. That is the idealistic purpose of intelligence. All countries need information. All countries need intelligence.

We make enough mistakes as a nation with our intelligence. But if we tried to make decisions without knowing what is going on beneath the surface, if we did not have intelligence we would make even worse mistakes. The question is whether our intelligence is honest or whether it is tainted by a political point of view. And it might be tainted if it serves the corporate leadership and not all Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 05:07 PM

39. Kick nom n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 09:18 PM

41. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 10:20 PM

43. K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 10:38 PM

44. Makes you wonder . . .

Well, maybe not you, but it certainly makes me wonder if some of our leading lights in the journalism world aren't on the take. I remember conservative nitwit Michael Kelly getting killed in Iraq in 2003. There was a big kerfuffle for about two weeks. Then nothing. No ongoing bereavement, no endless speculation from his former pals on the right. These are the people, remember, who blame the financial meltdown of 2008 on the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. They forget nothing, they remember everything, even if it's wrong. None of them bring up Michael Kelly, and I used to attribute it to their reluctance to criticize the Dim Son, even tangentially.

I wonder if Kelly was in Iraq for some reason other than being a reporter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Sun Feb 1, 2015, 11:26 PM

45. We can only hope that journalists with terminal diseases will come forth as a deed to society.

 

Last edited Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:12 AM - Edit history (1)

And I am not being sarcastic here. It seems the only time we get the truth is when an operative, or journalist for that matter, has no collateral damage to speak of and nothing left to lose. I mean who did kill Michael Hasting? Very suspicious indeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Major Nikon (Reply #46)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 01:49 AM

47. The guy wasn't a senior editor at Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung?

Who's "Dialogue International"? From what they post, they imply Ulfkotte is racist bigot with an agenda to support Putin.

I thought he was all right, posting how the CIA paid him and other journalists to post certain articles and perspectives. Perhaps they approached him because of right-wing or conservative Christian views.

His story made sense, considering how CIA said it was a slam-dunk and helped Bush and Cheney lie America into war. And instead of pursuing them, the press has pretty much protected the traitors.

And is calling him "Alex Jones of Germany" accurate? CJournalInfo seems to paint a more nuanced view, "Udo Ulfkotte blows the whistle on himself":

http://www.cjournal.info/2014/10/10/udo-ulfkotte-blows-the-whistle-on-himself/


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #47)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:37 AM

65. His story made sense?

His story is that he was paid to post lies, but now he's selling books about the truth, which is supposedly a vast conspiracy nobody has ever heard of before? How gullible does one have to be to buy that nonsense?

Besides self publishing, the only people that seem to be giving him any airtime are RT, and "truther" sites like Kopp Online which posts anti-vax and other assorted nutbaggery. Here's one of their "stories" published just today:

02/02/2015

Five-year-old dies in exactly the flu strain against which it has been vaccinated
Ethan A. Huff

Another child died in the United States, which had previously been vaccinated against influenza - the latest victim of a murderous campaign that masquerades as a medicine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #65)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:05 PM

72. a vast conspiracy that nobody has heard of before?

Where have you been? Hello? Operation Mockingbird? The reality that the CIA has coopted members of the press is certainly nothing new.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #72)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:19 PM

75. There are plenty of gullible people, sadly they all believe that CTs are not real.

 

That humans don't conspire against other humans. That people can't keep secrets. I've met real skeptics, but these people that say there are no conspiracies don't live in the real world or are just concern trolling. Are some CTs crap? Of course. Are the all crap? Of course not. Only a total idiot would believe that all CTs are real and conversely only a total fool would believe that everything happens in a vacuum.

Also it seems some are either terribly ignorant of history or just don't give a shit. Probably the second option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #72)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:30 PM

84. 50 years ago during the cold war, seriously?

It's also true that Saint Ronnie had his own propaganda ministry.

But if we limit ourselves to something this side of reality, in the last 25 years or so, and in Germany, what other actual journalists can corroborate his story?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #46)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 01:56 PM

78. Alex Jones has a PhD in international politics?

And he wrote for the leading conservative newspaper in his country for 17 years?

There is no doubt that Dr. Ulfkotte is a right-winger (just like most of his former colleagues and superiors at that newspaper). It is true that he makes provocative statements, sometimes bolstered with spurious evidence.

I'm afraid the same or worse must be said about your own 'source', though. It doesn't take much effort to find claims there which are outright false. As regards Ulfkotte:

In 2003 the journalist and security expert Dr. Udo Ulfkotte published a book So lügen Journalisten ("This is How Journalists Lie" where he accused the fourth estate of deliberately distorting the truth.

http://www.dialoginternational.com/dialog_international/2010/05/so-l%C3%BCgt-udo-ulfkotte.html

The writer and "Islam expert" Dr. Udo Ulfkotte has made a nice career for himself in Germany by spreading hate and fear against Muslims. ... What concerns me is that he is viewed by the German media as an "expert" and frequently appears on German television.

http://www.dialoginternational.com/dialog_international/2011/05/ulfkotte-turkish-womens-poor-hygiene-to-blame-for-ecoliehec-outbreak.html

Ulfkotte was pretty much ignored by legitimate news outlets. Or he was derisively dismissed as a conspiracy nut. But two events happened last year that revitalized his career in fake journalism: the unfolding events in the Ukraine and the rise of the "Pegida movement".

http://www.dialoginternational.com/dialog_international/2015/01/fake-journalist-udo-ulfkotte-makes-a-comeback-as-putin-propagandist.html

According to this ominous blog, it was 'the Lügenpresse! battle-cry of the Pegida protesters' which gave 'Ulfkotte a convenient cover to go after the journalists who scorned or ignored him in the past'. 'Lügenpresse' means 'lying press' and is a fighting term with a long tradition reaching back almost 200 years. Since it has also been used by Goebbels (denouncing the foreign press), it is now seen as a given that everyone who uses it now must be a Nazi.

But was it in fact the 'Pegida' rabble who started denouncing the German press of unfairly reporting the events in Ukraine? 'Pegida' was founded in October 2014, after Ulfkotte's book came out. Harsh criticism of mainstream media reporting had been voiced much earlier, not only at 'Montagswachen' (Monday peace vigils) throughout the year but also by official supervisory organs:

The supervisory committee of Germany’s ARD public television station has criticised the station’s coverage of developments in Ukraine. The station’s coverage had “given the impression of bias” and appeared to be directed against “Russia and Russian standpoints”, the committee declares in the minutes of its meeting of June 24, which has been published in the online magazine Telepolis. ...

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/09/26/ardp-s26.html

The widely known and appreciated satirical TV progam 'Die Anstalt' had aired some skits on the same topic in September:



Some of the more interesting information mentioned by 'Die Anstalt' and also cited in Ulfkotte's book, about the pro-NATO networking among journalists, was cited from a book that came out in February 2014: Uwe Krüger: Meinungsmacht. Der Einfluss von Eliten auf Leitmedien und Alpha-Journalisten - eine kritische Netzwerkanalyse

That must be one big conspiracy indeed, I guess, no doubt directed by the lying press of Putin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #78)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:40 PM

85. ...and now Ulfkotte writes for Kopp Online


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #85)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:45 PM

88. wow, I'm deeply impressed over your astute and factual rebuttal

of everything I said.

Why would I give a flying f about Mr Ulfkotte's publisher? His books were also published by Fischer, Goldstein, Bertelsmann, Eichborn in recent years. What he writes about in his latest book is not really news to anybody who has paid some attention. It is noteworthy only because he provides anecdotal evidence through his personal experience. Whereas previous studies such as the one about trans-Atlantic networks I mentioned, or about the cooperation of intelligence services with journalists such as the ones by Erich Schmidt-Eenboom have documented pretty much the same, they are probably not such an easy read and have not become bestsellers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #88)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:11 PM

92. I didn't notice you said much of anything

You made some half-assed ad hominem about my "source" while completely ignoring the lunacy Ulfkotte wrote, complete with references. Then you claimed that because some German committee wrote that German media "appears" to be biased against Russia, that must somehow mean that RT is now the gold standard of journalism.


Now you're claiming that because Ulfkotte gets published by somewhat notable publishers, that must mean he's not full of shit. I suppose if I wanted to offer a rebuttal I could point out Hannity and Beck are published by Simon & Schuster and Palin is published by HarperCollins.

I could care less if you give a "flying f" whether the only "news" outlets that are publishing Ulfkotte are RT and nutbag conspiracy theory website Kopp Verlag along with it's UFO, 9/11 "truther", and anti-vax bullshittery, but I suspect reasonable people might find that somewhat relevant. YMMV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #92)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:39 PM

101. of course you didn't

and reading your reply I have to wonder if you even read what I said.

It is not 'some' german committee which found that the major German news channel ARD, watched by 25 percent of Germans, was biased against Russia in its reporting. It is THE official ARD oversight committee which made this finding.

Instead of reading what I wrote, you make some bizarre allegations, like I was 'claiming' this or that when everybody who actually can read can see that I didn't.

No, even if you don't want to see it, the media bias is being discussed openly now and Ulfkotte, whatever his motives, contributed to this discussion. Some of what he now admits is what others have accused him of some twenty years ago, so it's not actually news. But it's nice to see someone like him admitting he was bribed and pressured to toe the line, just like many of his colleagues in the 'leading' media. And if someone from the valley of the clueless is asking now 'has any journalist ever admitted that he was fed information by intelligence services' we can point to him and say yes, someone did. He even wrote a bestseller about it.

But, guess what, they only mention his book on independent blogs and the odd radio program, and no major publishing house would touch it ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #101)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:30 PM

102. So because one TV station's public advocate wrote that some reporting might have been biased...

That proves the vast conspiracy Ulfkotte is alleging must be true. As if that wasn't good enough, the fact that the mainstream media is ignoring his nonsense proves the conspiracy is real.



More likely the reason nobody in mainstream media will touch this guy is because he is a far right wing bigoted nutjob.

Here's the guy you are so vehemently defending making a half-fast, yet highly bigoted speech cheering on far right, and batshit crazy PEGIDA. So it appears Ulfkotte and the "Pegida rabble" are pretty much one in the same.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #102)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:08 PM

103. please educate yourself about what ARD is and how it works

Of all Germans, 50 percent don't watch any news on state TV, half of those who still do watch ARD. When even ARD's own oversight comitee finds that the reporting on Ukraine and Russia was blatantly biased (a fact that didn't escape its viewers and neither a lot of eminent guests on their shows), it is significant and not a 'vast conspiracy theory'.

The reporting on other TV channels wasn't any better, of course, they just don't have any oversight committees who would criticize them for it.

The fact that Ulfkotte is a right-winger has nothing to do with any of this. He shares his 'anti-Islamisation' paranoia with others such as Mr Broder, who invented this term, or rather imported it from American neo-cons. Mr Broder writes for Der Spiegel and Die Welt and is not only a welcome guest on state TV, he has his own show. Despite the fact that mass-murderer Breivik appreciatingly cited him in his manifesto, next to the Dutch rabble rouser and Pegida friend Geert Wilders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #103)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:50 PM

104. Please...

I could really give a shit less what you have to say about ARD, because even your best defense of whatever you're claiming about them still adds up to nothing more than a hill of beans as far as Ulfkotte is concerned. Feel free to toss that red herring around all you like.

Henryk Broder isn't associating himself with Pegida, and "paranoia", while related, is not the same thing as overt bigotry. Even if it did (and it doesn't), that still isn't a defense for Ulfkotte's shitbaggery. If you want to defend a far right wing bigoted nutbag, be my guest, but let's not pretend that in itself doesn't speak volumes.

Cheers!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #104)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 12:32 AM

105. I pointed out

that Ulfkotte was just jumping on the bandwagon, that what he writes was basically known and widely discussed already before he published his book. That's why I believe him in this instance, when he admits that yes, travels were paid for by those he was reporting on, and yes, he was handed information by intelligence services which he published under his name, during his 17 years as an editor of Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

Broder may not associate himself with Pegida, he is still the one who first whined about the dangers of "Islamisation" in Germany and, of course, still does. My point, obviously, was that such screeds don't get you banned from the media. Even your ominous blogger source complained that Ulfkotte was a frequent talkshow guest - as long as he was just writing about the 'dangers of Islamism' and whatnot. Interestingly, though, as soon as you write about media manipulation and name names you will be shunned, even though everybody has read the book by now or heard about it.

Incidentally, the first publication Broder contributed to was a book about "self-censorship" in the German media. Back in the seventies when one could still take him somewhat seriously. He has learned since to keep his provocations within the bounds of trans-Atlantic acceptance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:46 AM

49. Sounds like a conspiracy theory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Alkene (Reply #49)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:04 PM

94. Beautiful! I love Cowboy and Yankee movies.



CIA Document #1035-960, marked "PSYCH" for presumably Psychological Warfare Operations, in the division "CS", the Clandestine Services, sometimes known as the "dirty tricks" department.



CIA Instructions to Media Assets

RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report

1. Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy's assassination on, there has been speculation about the responsibility for his murder. Although this was stemmed for a time by the Warren Commission report, (which appeared at the end of September 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the Commission's published report and documents for new pretexts for questioning, and there has been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of some kind of conspiracy, and often they have implied that the Commission itself was involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission's report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse results.

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally chosen for their integrity, experience and prominence. They represented both major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all sections of the country. Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of American society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing tendency to hint that President Johnson himself, as the one person who might be said to have benefited, was in some way responsible for the assassination. Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:

a. To discuss the publicity problem with (?)and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Epstein's theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher article and Spectator piece for background. (Although Mark Lane's book is much less convincing that Epstein's and comes off badly where confronted by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.)

4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:

a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the attack on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, AJ.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Vander Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists, but the latter have been more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)

b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent--and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) and less on ballistics, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close examination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting eyewitness accounts are quoted out of context, or were discarded by the Commission for good and sufficient reason.

c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc. Note that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the time and John F. Kennedy's brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal any conspiracy. And as one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford would hardly have held his tongue for the sake of the Democratic administration, and Senator Russell would have had every political interest in exposing any misdeeds on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator moreover would hardly choose a location for a shooting where so much depended on conditions beyond his control: the route, the speed of the cars, the moving target, the risk that the assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy conspirators could have arranged much more secure conditions.

d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other. Actually, the make-up of the Commission and its staff was an excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory, or against the illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties.

e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for a co-conspirator. He was a "loner," mixed up, of questionable reliability and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service. (Archivist's note: This claim is demonstrably untrue with the latest file releases. The CIA had an operational interest in Oswald less than a month before the assassination. Source: Oswald and the CIA, John Newman and newly released files from the National Archives.)

f. As to charges that the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.

g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died mysteriously" can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes; the Commission staff questioned 418 witnesses (the FBI interviewed far more people, conduction 25,000 interviews and re interviews), and in such a large group, a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn Jones, one of the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths" line, appeared on television, it emerged that two of the deaths on his list were from heart attacks, one from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on a bridge, and one occurred when a driver drifted into a bridge abutment.)

5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.

SOURCE: http://www.boston.com/community/forums/news/national/general/cia-instructions-to-media-assets-doc-1035-960/80/6210620

From 2003, first OP on DU I could find on it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x765619



When the facts related or story told don't go as intended, the instructions call for an attack on the messenger. Must work the same in any format -- except in Sincerity. Thank you, Alkene!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:07 AM

52. Of course he did! He ain't alone!!!

 

- They were exposed for this in the 1970s!!! Remember, last century?!?!?!

K&R



WELL THEY NEVER STOPPED!!!!

THEY NEVER STOPPED ANY OF IT!!!

THEY ONLY GOT WORSE!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:42 AM

53. Remember the Army Psyop troops that were "working" at CNN and NPR

during the PNAC war against Serbia?
http://web.archive.org/web/20030210080835/http://www.newamericancentury.org/balkans.htm

U.S. Army 'Psyops' Specialists worked for CNN
By Abe de Vries
From the Dutch newspaper, Trouw, 21 February 2000

WASHINGTON, ATLANTA - For a short time last year, CNN employed military specialists in 'psychological operations' (psyops). This was confirmed to Trouw by a spokesman of the U.S. Army. The military could have influenced CNN's news reports about the crisis in Kosovo.

"Psyops personnel, soldiers and officers, have been working in CNN's headquarters in Atlanta through our program 'Training With Industry,'" said Major Thomas Collins of the U.S. Army Information Service in a telephone interview last Friday. "They worked as regular employees of CNN. Conceivably, they would have worked on stories during the Kosovo war. They helped in the production of news.''

These military, a "handful" according to Collins, stayed with CNN for at least a couple of weeks "to get to know the company and to broaden their horizons''. Collins maintains that "they didn't work under the control of the army." The temporary outplacement of U.S. Army psyops personnel in various sectors of society began a couple of years ago. Contract periods vary from a couple of weeks to one year.
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/devries/psyops.htm


Army embeds active-duty PSYOPS soldiers at local TV stations
By John Cook
October 1, 2010

The U.S. Army has used local television stations in the U.S. as training posts for some of its psychological-operations personnel, The Upshot has learned. Since at least 2001, both WRAL, a CBS affiliate in Raleigh, N.C., and WTOC, a CBS affiliate in Savannah, Ga., have regularly hosted active-duty soldiers from the Army's 4th Psychological Operations group as part of the Army's Training With Industry program. Training With Industry is designed to offer career soldiers a chance to pick up skills through internships and fellowships with private businesses. The PSYOPS soldiers used WRAL and WTOC to learn broadcasting and communications expertise that they could apply in their mission, as the Army describes it, of "influenc[ing] the emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign audiences."

WRAL and WTOC were on a list of participants in the Army's Training With Industry program provided to The Upshot in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, and a spokeswoman with the Army's Human Resources Command confirmed that PSYOPS soldiers worked at the stations...
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/upshot/army-embeds-active-duty-psyops-soldiers-local-tv.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Reply #53)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:29 PM

100. Great memory, yours, nationalize the fed!

From 2003:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=729470&mesg_id=729780

Good training for the troops. Ja.

Remember what Socrates said:



"Please assume, then, for the sake of argument, that there is in our souls a block of wax, in one case larger, in another smaller, in one case the wax is purer, in another more impure and harder, in some cases softer....Let us, then, say that this is the gift of Memory, the mother of the Muses, and that whenever we wish to remember anything we see or hear or think of in our own minds, we hold this wax under the perceptions and thoughts and imprint them upon it, just as we make impressions from seal rings; and whatever is imprinted we remember and know as long as its image lasts, but whatever is rubbed out or [191e] cannot be imprinted we forget and do not know.

CONTINUED...

http://www.historyofinformation.com/expanded.php?id=3993



These top secret intern reverse-imbed guys are learning how to impress -- burn in -- new types of memories. What they are is classified.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:46 AM

54. ,

 

,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:01 AM

55. Of course, it is probably true.

I once found an old U.S. Army manual about psychological warfare in an old building. I read it from cover to cover. I live in a military family and was afraid I would be told to hand it over and not speak of it. So, I left it in the building to go back later once I thought of a good hiding place for it. Rats or something got to it and shredded into a nest of some kind. I wish I still had that training manual. It mentioned how they plant people in media on purpose for that very purpose. It's no secret, but try telling that to the majority of people of DU or even irl people you meet. They think you are nuts, but it is absolutely what they do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:16 AM

57. The book is not a "bestseller" and it was reported on in fall 2014.

It made it to rank 6 on amazon, but never made it into the Top 20 of overall book-sales in Germany. (web-page in german)
http://www.wallstreet-online.de/diskussion/1199918-1-10/bestsellerlisten-manipuliert-vernuenftige-erklaerung

And there is about a dozen of online-articles on this book from fall 2014.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #57)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:27 AM

60. Does not make it any less true or disturbing.

 

Especially at a time when we jeer at news from RT, and none of us has any idea if what we read in American media is true in any way, shape, or form. Plus, who cares about sales?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #60)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:41 AM

61. He does. He claims that his book doesn't get media coverage despite being a bestseller.

Maybe it doesn't get media coverage because IT'S NOT a bestseller?
Meh, no. That's boring. Gimme that conspiracy theory how the whole world is against me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #61)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:45 AM

62. You honestly do not think the CIA plants stories?

 

I do. That's not "the whole world is against me", that is acceptance that our government, like others, does a lot of shady things designed to further their interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #62)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:03 AM

63. I never said that. I said that he made up the claims about a plot to suppress coverage of his book.

People can say several things at a time. And it is possible to agree with some of those things and to disagree with others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #63)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:07 AM

64. Okay. I sort of think the CIA could care less about his book, because the CIA

 

is pretty much, at this point, invulnerable.
Leaders come, leaders go, terms expire, etc., but the CIA is a permanent fixture. I doubt that they consider that they really answer to anyone, just like the NSA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #57)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:53 AM

70. the book is currently ranked third on Der Spiegel's bestseller list

and has been on this list since it came out in October.

All you need to do in order to find this out is look at the damned list:

http://www.buchreport.de/bestseller/hardcover.htm

What you cite as a "source" is a private discussion board. Obviously, the participants there don't know shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #70)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:57 AM

71. My apologies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #71)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:05 PM

80. Since you have admitted you have provided false information

how about some evidence of your other claim, that his book was not ignored in the (mainstream) media?

Some links to bloggers don't count.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #80)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 04:23 PM

89. I am supposed to document that something wasn't documented???

Not to be insulting, but I have better things to do than doing a statistical evaluation whether one book got significantly or non-significantly less media coverage than other books.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #89)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:34 PM

96. You cannot find a single review?

Because I asked you to document that something happened, not that something didn't happen. It would indeed be a little difficult for Ulfkotte to prove that there are no reviews.

But you said the opposite, you claim his book wasn't ignored by the media. So, provided you did not just make that up (in addition to your other claim that you have already admitted to be false), it shouldn't be all that hard for you to tell us where you have seen a review.

I have tried to find one and can help you out - a little: I found the podcast of an interview: 'Wolfram Wessels im Gespräch mit Ulrich Teusch' on the radio program 'SWR2 Literatur'.

Close to the end, 10:20 minutes into the podcast, Wessels says 'It is amazing that the book hasn't been reviewed anywhere, at least I haven't seen it' ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #57)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 01:03 AM

106. You know.....

 

...you're really obvious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:31 AM

66. If I were a betting person

 

I would bet this book will never be translated into English by any American publisher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to father founding (Reply #66)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:09 AM

69. Given the extent to which they have gone to propagandize and corrupt the media I think it

is safe to say that dropping a few million (at least) to have full-time shills manipulate discussions of on-line political forums is a no-brainer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to father founding (Reply #66)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:09 PM

73. yes

and if it came to you from Germany, no doubt you would be on some kind of a watch list. The only way to get it here would be to go to Germany, copy it, and smuggle it in to the U.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:05 AM

68. The "press" certainly did its part

 

in the lead up to Iraq invasion. This country is not a democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:19 PM

74. Spent part of his career being a voice that helped to "drive nations toward war"

 

and now he needs to clear his conscience. You can't undo your warmongering asshole. This is the lowest of the low in journalism. This is what is wrong with journalism. People with such limited ethics as this man has. I truly hope his conscience feels no better after this book. Although I have often found people with such limited ethics as this sleep much better at night when their bank account is on the rise. A medical condition and guilt. Yeah. Didn't stop you from profiting throughout your life. Now that you are leaving us behind it is time to clear your conscience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:28 PM

76. Like the CIA cares. They got caught spying on Congress and do they give a shit?

 

Hell no! The CIA is a kingmaker organization far beyond the laws of us normal people. Things would have been so different if JFK was still alive. However he is not and we are now in an endless cycle of wars, thanks largely to the CIA making sure to keep things unstable around the world.

I have a hard time feeling sorry for some asshole that helped get people killed by the truckload. So he wants to die with a clear conscience? How do you erase boatloads of blood on your hands? I don't think you can. At least he is reporting what many of us already knew. The NYT is practically a CIA hub. Controlling the media makes sense if you don't want people talking about certain things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:36 PM

77. It is nuts to think this has stopped. I had a relative in the

CIA who told me that if US citizens actually knew what was done in their name people would rise up and there would be a revolution that would totally change the power structure in this country. He was never specific because he could not be. That was 40 years ago. The way he said it was so chilling I remember it to this day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lint Head (Reply #77)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:00 PM

90. To quote Poppy Bu$h...

"If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched."

This is from a former CIA director.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roamer65 (Reply #90)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 12:49 PM

109. bushisms and cites

"If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched."
George H.W. Bush, cited in the June, 1992 Sarah McClendon Newsletter

"I'll be long gone before some smart person ever figures out what happened inside this Oval Office."
--GWB, 12 May, 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7809160.stm

Bob Woodward, George W. Bush, "History we won't know, we'll all be dead."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shKh5PnBssA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:36 PM

93. An institution of sociopaths

Actively working against the interests of those they are supposed to serve, while advancing the brutal agenda of their wall street masters...for decades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pauldp (Reply #93)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:09 PM

95. Capitalism's Invisible Army

THE ORIGINS OF THE OVERCLASS

by Steve Kangas

The wealthy have always used many methods to accumulate wealth, but it was not until the mid-1970s that these methods coalesced into a superbly organized, cohesive and efficient machine. After 1975, it became greater than the sum of its parts, a smooth flowing organization of advocacy groups, lobbyists, think tanks, conservative foundations, and PR firms that hurtled the richest 1 percent into the stratosphere.

The origins of this machine, interestingly enough, can be traced back to the CIA. This is not to say the machine is a formal CIA operation, complete with code name and signed documents. (Although such evidence may yet surface — and previously unthinkable domestic operations such as MK-ULTRA, CHAOS and MOCKINGBIRD show this to be a distinct possibility.) But what we do know already indicts the CIA strongly enough. Its principle creators were Irving Kristol, Paul Weyrich, William Simon, Richard Mellon Scaife, Frank Shakespeare, William F. Buckley, Jr., the Rockefeller family, and more. Almost all the machine's creators had CIA backgrounds.

SNIP...

How did this alliance start? The CIA has always recruited the nation’s elite: millionaire businessmen, Wall Street brokers, members of the national news media, and Ivy League scholars. During World War II, General "Wild Bill" Donovan became chief of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the CIA. Donovan recruited so exclusively from the nation’s rich and powerful that members eventually came to joke that "OSS" stood for "Oh, so social!"

SNIP...

Historically, the CIA and society’s elite have been one and the same people. This means that their interests and goals are one and the same as well. Perhaps the most frequent description of the intelligence community is the "old boy network," where members socialize, talk shop, conduct business and tap each other for favors well outside the formal halls of government.

CONTINUED...

http://www.american-buddha.com/illum.originsofoverclass.htm

Going from who gets ahead nationally and internationally implies there is a very generous amount of nepotism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #95)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:46 PM

98. RIP Steven Kangas, author

Found dead in the restroom outside the office of Richard Mellon Scaife.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pauldp (Reply #93)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:24 PM

97. Well said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread