Another US president's 'Military-Industrial Complex' warning

by **proldic** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:11 pm

Truman's Warning: “ On December 22, 1963, just 30 days after the assassination of JFK, there appeared in an early addition of the Washington Post a remarkable article. Its heading read “US Should Hold CIA to Intelligence Role”. Its content was a warning to the American people that the CIA must be brought under presidential control. Its author was Harry S. Truman. I submit without qualification that it is the least known important public policy statement by any president or former president in the 20th century, and probably in the nation’s entire history…. [begin quote] I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency – CIA…. For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times policy-making arm of the government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas. We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it. [end quote] How can it be that a statement of such obvious significance by a widely respected former president is virtually unknown to the public? I first learned about it in 1966, while reading Roger Hilsman’s 1964 book, ‘To Move a Nation’. He quotes extensively from it in his chapter titled “The Problem of the CIA”…. This surprised me, for I thought I had followed Truman’s public statements quite carefully, and this one was completely unfamiliar to me.… I then went to the UCLA library and located a copy there. According to my information, it was not carried in later editions that day, nor commented on editorially, nor picked up by any other major newspaper, nor mentioned in any national radio or TV broadcast. (At my urging, it was reprinted in full more than 11 years after its original publication date on the editorial page of the LA Times, January 24 1975. There was no editorial comment, follow-up, or letters-to-the-editor presented.) It is not mentioned in any of the prominent biographies which have since appeared, including David McCullough’s excellent study, ‘Truman’. I have nor reason to believe the authors were aware of it. Can this be accidental? Can editors of all major newspapers, magazines, and news broadcasts have really been unaware of its existence? Can such individuals looking at the Truman article really have thought, no, this is of insufficient importance or interest to reprint, editorialize on, or even mention? Such an idea seems preposterously naïve. It is much more probable that the article was consciously suppressed by deliberate inattention, at decisive points of intervention. The pertinent question is – why? Standing alone, the vital significance of the article, WRITTEN BY THE MAN WHO ORIGINALLY CAUSED THE CIA TO BE ESTABLISHED, is almost too obvious to comment on. Here is former president Truman warning the nation, ‘There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.’…. …the timing of the article makes it potentially even more crucial and explosive, for it implicitly suggests that Truman may have been warning us, as subtly as he dared under the circumstances, consistent with his view of the public interest, that the CIA may have had a hand in the assassination. Consider: Truman’s article appeared on December 22,just thirty days after JFK’s murder. The country was still reeling in shock. Rumors were rampant about possible conspiracies, foreign and domestic. Truman was not a reckless or irresponsible man. It would at least border on irresponsibility for him to release his article for publication so soon after Kennedy’s death unless he was trying to warn the public, implicitly and obliquely, since it must surely have occurred to him that his words might be misconstrued to mean just that…. Whether or not Truman had the assassination in mind while accusing the CIA of exceeding its legal authority, it is unlikely in the extreme that the effective suppression of his article could have been anything but deliberate.” From “The Work of Ray Marcus: Excerpts from Addendum B” in the book “History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy” by E. Martin Schotz (Kurtz, Ulmer & Delucia, 1996)

by **heath7** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:45 pm

This is as fascinating as when I first read the Eisenhower quote. Thanx. Because Harry was the one to drop the bombs, its easier for me to question just exactly where he's coming from in that Washington Post piece. Although he makes a good point, I wonder if it was a politically expedient statement for him to make; perhaps he was more allied with forces opposed with the CIA, but not necessarily any less sinister. Maybe the Kennedy gig was just one big gang-bang of all the market forces, and Truman was attacking the other conspirators (CIA)preemptively... Just brain-storming... I imagine nuke 'em Harry had shady motives for his well-timed attack

by **sunny** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:01 pm

proldic, thanks for the heads up on the book- I intend to find and purchase it right away.

by **DrDebugDU** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:16 pm

Operation Mockingbird was in full force after the JFK assassination, so the press control in those days was gigantic to prevent people from finding out the truth and that could be one of the explanations. It's a great find. I've never heard of it either.

by **Starman** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:32 pm

Great heads-up -- Thanks for pointing this out. Intriguing to say the least, as the evidence now is VERY strong of the CIA's and FBI's Division Five's hands, along with Mafia and Cuban Dissident/terrorists, in the JFK assassination/coup -- which essentially marks the US's precipitous slide down the moral slippery-slope of covert operations and policy-making by elements of the Military/Intelligence Industry that are totally beyond public/congressional oversight and legal accountability. I agree that the almost-total lack of reportage or follow-up in the MSM is hardly accidental -- but shows the hand of hidden media-influence and censorship to 'channel', direct and gatekeep public information and debate. Through the years of my personal study and research, I'm increasingly of the opinion that the US's covert intelligence agencies, chief among them the CIA and NSA and ONI (and possibly too the FBI) have done far more damage to the security and integrity and general well-being of the Nation and its citizens than of benefit. Of course, such a relatively subjective thesis is almost impossible to conclusively prove, especially with such sweeping secrecy attributed to these agencies operations. But from what is knowable thru diligent second-source research and insider whistleblowing and leaks, the thesis withstands a lot of scrutiny. Operation Phoenic and Condor are appalling examples of something utterly foul and despicable that has become a fixture in American policy-making. Now, how can we possibly reform it or excise it? MKUltra and mind-control, political assassinations, military investment in occult practices and secret RA rites by high-rank officers to reinforce their criminal, extra-legal operations, overthrowing foreign governments and waging economic terrorism, engaging in targetted drug-and-arms smuggling, money-laundering and trillion-dollar black-budget frauds and scams, etc. -- The implications are very, very dark and foreboding. Is it possible any 'good' agents exist who haven't been corrupted by the many temptations and moral relevancy employed as justification for the so-called abstract 'greater good'? One likes to think so, but ... I'm DAMN skeptical. Starman <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smokin.gif ALT=":smokin">

by **Sweejak** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:50 am

Wow quite a find. Forwarding this on.

by **proldic** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:23 pm

By Kevin Anderson BBC News Online Washington Correspondent Richard Nixon left the White House in disgrace as the only president in US history to resign, and with the release of 500 hours of taped conversations covering the time of the Watergate break-in, researchers hope to find new clues to how much the president knew of the "third-rate burglary". 500 hours of tape have been released The tapes are of the first six months of his second term of office, covering not only the Watergate break-in but also his historic trip to China and the continuing war on Vietnam. Congress had once battled the president for release of the tapes, and now for the first time researchers and historians can record them to review them for new insights into the past. But some questions will go unanswered as gaps remain on the tapes - gaps in key conversations that might have revealed how much Nixon knew about the break-in. Hardball politics Nixon had the Secret Service install recording equipment in the White House, and the 1,000 tapes represent the first six months of 1972 as he turned his attention to winning re-election. His political career had been a mixture of triumph and disappointment. After serving in Congress, he served as President Dwight Eisenhower's vice president. He narrowly lost the 1960 presidential election to John Kennedy, and two years later, he lost the election for governor of California. The tapes include the Watergate "smoking gun" conversation Nixon did not want to lose again. He was a fierce political competitor. When running for Congress in 1946, he printed his opponent's voting record on pink paper to suggest that he had Communist sympathies. And as Nixon considered his re-election bid in 1972, he was looking for ways to beat his opponents. In May of 1972, Arthur Bremer attempted to assassinate White House hopeful George Wallace. The tapes reveal that Nixon wanted to pin the blame on supporters of Democrats George McGovern and Edward Kennedy, whom he might face in the November elections. "Just say he (the shooter) was a supporter of McGovern and Kennedy," he said to HR "Bob" Haldeman, his chief of staff, and Charles Colson, then special counsel to the president. "Now, just put that out!" Nixon said, his voice rising for emphasis. "Just say you have it on unmistakable evidence." Kennedy's assassination In the same conversation, Nixon gave new fodder for conspiracy theorists who question whether Lee Harvey Oswald was the only shooter involved in the assassination of President John Kennedy. An 18 minute gap remains on the tape Referring to the report by the Warren Commission, "it was the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated," Nixon said. He did not elaborate why he questioned the report. The tapes also record a conversation between President Nixon and former Treasury Secretary John Connally who was in the car with President Kennedy when he was killed. It contains graphic details of the shooting. "I was lying... down on (wife) Nellie's lap like this to shield her head on top of me and I had my eyes open and I heard that bullet hit his head ... I knew he was dead," Mr Connally said. Panda politics President Nixon was also concerned that losses in Vietnam might threaten his re-election chances, and the frustrated president discussed using nuclear weapons with his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger. Mr Kissinger quickly dismissed the idea. "That, I think, would just be too much," he told the president. "The nuclear bomb. Does that bother you?" he asked Mr Kissinger, adding, "I just want you to think big". But the tapes also relate to more mundane topics such as his conversation with a Washington reporter about panda mating habits. As part of improved relations with the US, China gave two giant pandas to National Zoo in Washington. There were great hopes that the panda pair would mate, but President Nixon explained a delay in the arrival of the pandas by saying they were learning to mate. "The only way they learn how is to watch other pandas mate, you see, and so they're keeping them there a little while - these are younger ones - to sort of learn, you know, how it's done," he told the reporter, adding with a laugh that the reporter could not get back to covering more important subjects. Watergate But no doubt researchers will be poring over the tapes to learn more about Watergate, the scandal that eventually led to Nixon's resignation. Many questions remain about "who knew what when" with respect to Watergate, and some of those questions will remain. The tapes include the so-called smoking gun conversation that was played during the Watergate investigation. But a gap of 18 minutes and 30 seconds still remains, the tape going from the hiss and echoes of the long ago recorded conversations to a steady hum. WATCH/LISTEN ON THIS STORY The BBC's Tom Carver "He fought till his dying breath for these tapes not to be revealed" See also: 28 Feb 02 | Americas Tapes shed light on Nixon era 28 Feb 02 | Americas Remembering 1972 20 Feb 02 | Asia-Pacific Flashback: Nixon in China 29 Aug 00 | Americas Nixon 'was on drugs' 03 Dec 98 | Americas Compensation battle over Nixon archives 02 Dec 98 | The big picture Echoes of Nixon Internet links: The Richard Nixon Library and Birthplace The Watergate Scandal US National Archives The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites Top Americas stories now: Bush vows action after scandals 'White supremacists' on trial in Boston WorldCom chiefs refuse to testify Canada blazes send smoke south Pentagon team to examine bomb error Hundreds mourn LA airport victims New hope for Aids vaccine Texas pleads for more flood aid Links to more Americas stories are at the foot of the page.

Another US president's 'Military-Industrial Complex' warning

Another US president's 'Military-Industrial Complex' warning

Re: Another US president's 'Military-Industrial Complex' war

Re: Another US president's 'Military-Industrial Complex' war

It is the first time I've heard of it as well

Truman's Warning

Re: Truman's Warning

Nixon:the Warren Commission the greatest hoax ever perpetuat

Who is online