Reply #33: More often I'm like... "Dulles and Other Dullards" ...

[Octafish]

...as I'm no better than anyone else. My difference -- and yours and most of DU, evolvenow -- is a clear understanding of right and wrong. For the uneducated, ignorance is strength.



Now THIS feller can write and reason. And I wouldn't be surprised if Werther's wife's a CIA agent:

Werther Report:

What do Reinhard Gehlen and
Ahmed Chalabi Have in Common???

February 23, 2005

The Poisoned Well

by Werther*

EXCERPT...

Dulles and Other Dullards

In 1945, when Walter Bedell Smith, Alan Dulles, and their coat holders fell for Gehlen's pitch, they were in possession of a priceless insight into the spying abilities of their wartime foe - the Ultra secret.

Beginning in 1940, the British were able to read the ciphers transmitted by what the Germans believed to be their unbreakable Enigma code machine. Intermittently at first, the British (with their American allies looking over their shoulder) succeeded with increasing speed and accuracy to crack first the sloppy Luftwaffe code, then the Army's, and finally the Kriegsmarine's. The allies not only knew what the Germans knew and planned, but perhaps more critically what they did not know about allied operations.

And in fact, strategic intelligence about the allies was a blank spot for Germany. Tactically and operationally very proficient (perhaps the best in the world), the Germans were amateurish in divining what B.H. Liddel Hart would have called what was happening "on the other side of the hill." What else would explain the fact that MI 5 turned or executed every single agent the Germans attempted to insert into Britain? What else would explain the Germans' falling for the elementary ruse of the fake "Army Group Patton" in the buildup to D-Day? What else would explain the Germans' horrendous failure at Kursk, in contrast to the Russians' accurate divination of the Wehrmacht's plans to attack the Kursk salient?

Given their access to this information, why did the American authorities nevertheless assume that Reinhard Gehlen had something valuable to offer them - at extortionate terms? Foreign Armies East may have been more or less accurate in providing rough order-of-battle estimates of Red Army strength, as long as there was a copious supply of Red Army POWs, but why did the Americans assume, against all evidence, that Gehlen had the slightest clue about strategic matters: what Stalin was planning, the general thrust of Soviet policy?

Ordinary human experience suggests that the wish was father to the thought: American intelligence believed because it wanted to believe. Far from being righteous and wise pillars of the American Century, Allen Dulles and his comperes were merely corrupt and incompetent scions of rich establishment families; in Dulles's case, he elbowed his way into intelligence work in order to provide hot tips to his investment banking friends.

Dulles's post-World War II partiality towards Nazi war criminals was merely a continuation of his pre-war activities as a partner of Sullivan and Cromwell, a firm which facilitated transnational business agreements with the German cartels. Dulles's performance in the Bay of Pigs invasion does not suggest a penetrating strategic mind. His primitive thinking more likely went along the following lines: If Meyer Lansky could replace Castro as the ruler of Cuba it would signify a victory for private investment, just as Gehlen or Alfred Krupp was preferable to some German Social Democrat who had spent the war in Buchenwald.

CONTINUED...

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/comments/c538.htm

Most important: You truly are most kind, evolvenow. I appreciate it and will try my damndest to see our goals reality.