Ray McGovern, CIA media analyst. Infiltrator.

by **Dreams End** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 10:21 pm

I didn't write that, RDR, that was Pinochet. He doesn't have an account. As you well, know, the CIA engineered a coup against his predecessor, Salvador Allende in a model closely following the one used in Venezuela (but it worked in Chile). What is your argument, anyway? That McGovern doesn't know about CIA atrocities? But he's the one bragging about how he has all this access to information. It took me exactly 37.3 seconds to find a list. It would take a little more research for Mr. McGovern to confirm this list, but since I was already familiar with it, I didn't need to. Don't know who the author is, but sure saved me the trouble. Or is your point that, McGovern could know of the CIA but since it's compartmentalized he has no obligation to expose the CIA's crimes? The fact that the CIA is compartmentalized is so that a relatively small number of people can get things done without many others knowing about it. But much of it comes out, and anyone with an internet connection who cares to know about it, can learn about the CIA's history. Just because they are in a different department from the torture sqaud (we only had 12 or 13 guys who did that stuff, says McGovern...what he did to stop it is not stated.) does not reduce culpability. So toss me a coherent argument beyond "The Ruskies did it too" and I'll respond. Now, meanwhile, for your reading pleasure, a handy list of CIA atrocities. Perhaps this will clarify why I don't trust the CIA. Why that should need clarification, I have no idea. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> The following timeline describes just a few of the hundreds of atrocities and crimes committed by the CIA. (1) CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically elected leader. The people support their leader because he intends to conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers and the environment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with their help, the CIA mobilizes the opposition. First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the military), and offers them a deal: "We'll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for us." The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government (usually a democracy). It uses every trick in the book: propaganda, stuffed ballot boxes, purchased elections, extortion, blackmail, sexual intrigue, false stories about opponents in the local media, infiltration and disruption of opposing political parties, kidnapping, beating, torture, intimidation, economic sabotage, death squads and even assassination. These efforts culminate in a military coup, which installs a right-wing dictator. The CIA trains the dictator’s security apparatus to crack down on the traditional enemies of big business, using interrogation, torture and murder. The victims are said to be "communists," but almost always they are just peasants, liberals, moderates, labor union leaders, political opponents and advocates of free speech and democracy. Widespread human rights abuses follow. This scenario has been repeated so many times that the CIA actually teaches it in a special school, the notorious "School of the Americas." (It opened in Panama but later moved to Fort Benning, Georgia.) Critics have nicknamed it the "School of the Dictators" and "School of the Assassins." Here, the CIA trains Latin American military officers how to conduct coups, including the use of interrogation, torture and murder. The Association for Responsible Dissent estimates that by 1987, 6 million people had died as a result of CIA covert operations. (2) Former State Department official William Blum correctly calls this an "American Holocaust." The CIA justifies these actions as part of its war against communism. But most coups do not involve a communist threat. Unlucky nations are targeted for a wide variety of reasons: not only threats to American business interests abroad, but also liberal or even moderate social reforms, political instability, the unwillingness of a leader to carry out Washington’s dictates, and declarations of neutrality in the Cold War. Indeed, nothing has infuriated CIA Directors quite like a nation’s desire to stay out of the Cold War. The ironic thing about all this intervention is that it frequently fails to achieve American objectives. Often the newly installed dictator grows comfortable with the security apparatus the CIA has built for him. He becomes an expert at running a police state. And because the dictator knows he cannot be overthrown, he becomes independent and defiant of Washington's will. The CIA then finds it cannot overthrow him, because the police and military are under the dictator's control, afraid to cooperate with American spies for fear of torture and execution. The only two options for the U.S at this point are impotence or war. Examples of this "boomerang effect" include the Shah of Iran, General Noriega and Saddam Hussein. The boomerang effect also explains why the CIA has proven highly successful at overthrowing democracies, but a wretched failure at overthrowing dictatorships. The following timeline should confirm that the CIA as we know it should be abolished and replaced by a true information-gathering and analysis organization. The CIA cannot be reformed — it is institutionally and culturally corrupt. 1929 The culture we lost — Secretary of State Henry Stimson refuses to endorse a code-breaking operation, saying, "Gentlemen do not read each other’s mail." 1941 COI created — In preparation for World War II, President Roosevelt creates the Office of Coordinator of Information (COI). General William "Wild Bill" Donovan heads the new intelligence service. 1942 OSS created — Roosevelt restructures COI into something more suitable for covert action, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). Donovan recruits so many of the nation’s rich and powerful that eventually people joke that "OSS" stands for "Oh, so social!" or "Oh, such snobs!" 1943 Italy — Donovan recruits the Catholic Church in Rome to be the center of Anglo-American spy operations in Fascist Italy. This would prove to be one of America’s most enduring intelligence alliances in the Cold War. 1945 OSS is abolished — The remaining American information agencies cease covert actions and return to harmless information gathering and analysis. Operation PAPERCLIP – While other American agencies are hunting down Nazi war criminals for arrest, the U.S. intelligence community is smuggling them into America, unpunished, for their use against the Soviets. The most important of these is Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s master spy who had built up an intelligence network in the Soviet Union. With full U.S. blessing, he creates the "Gehlen Organization," a band of refugee Nazi spies who reactivate their networks in Russia. These include SS intelligence officers Alfred Six and Emil Augsburg (who massacred Jews in the Holocaust), Klaus Barbie (the "Butcher of Lyon"<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> , Otto von Bolschwing (the Holocaust mastermind who worked with Eichmann) and SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny (a personal friend of Hitler’s). The Gehlen Organization supplies the U.S. with its only intelligence on the Soviet Union for the next ten years, serving as a bridge between the abolishment of the OSS and the creation of the CIA. However, much of the "intelligence" the former Nazis provide is bogus. Gehlen inflates Soviet military capabilities at a time when Russia is still rebuilding its devastated society, in order to inflate his own importance to the Americans (who might otherwise punish him). In 1948, Gehlen almost convinces the Americans that war is imminent, and the West should make a preemptive strike. In the 50s he produces a fictitious "missile gap." To make matters worse, the Russians have thoroughly penetrated the Gehlen Organization with double agents, undermining the very American security that Gehlen was supposed to protect. 1947 Greece — President Truman requests military aid to Greece to support right-wing forces fighting communist rebels. For the rest of the Cold War, Washington and the CIA will back notorious Greek leaders with deplorable human rights records. CIA created — President Truman signs the National Security Act of 1947, creating the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Council. The CIA is accountable to the president through the NSC — there is no democratic or congressional oversight. Its charter allows the CIA to "perform such other functions and duties… as the National Security Council may from time to time direct." This loophole opens the door to covert action and dirty tricks. 1948 Covert-action wing created — The CIA recreates a covert action wing, innocuously called the Office of Policy Coordination, led by Wall Street lawyer Frank Wisner. According to its secret charter, its responsibilities include "propaganda, economic warfare, preventive direct action, including sabotage, antisabotage, demolition and evacuation procedures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-communist elements in threatened countries of the free world." Italy — The CIA corrupts democratic elections in Italy, where Italian communists threaten to win the elections. The CIA buys votes, broadcasts propaganda, threatens and beats up opposition leaders, and infiltrates and disrupts their organizations. It works -- the communists are defeated. 1949 Radio Free Europe — The CIA creates its first major propaganda outlet, Radio Free Europe. Over the next several decades, its broadcasts are so blatantly false that for a time it is considered illegal to publish transcripts of them in the U.S. Late 40s Operation MOCKINGBIRD — The CIA begins recruiting American news organizations and journalists to become spies and disseminators of propaganda. The effort is headed by Frank Wisner, Allan Dulles, Richard Helms and Philip Graham. Graham is publisher of The Washington Post, which becomes a major CIA player. Eventually, the CIA’s media assets will include ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Copley News Service and more. By the CIA’s own admission, at least 25 organizations and 400 journalists will become CIA assets. 1953 Iran – CIA overthrows the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in a military coup, after he threatened to nationalize British oil. The CIA replaces him with a dictator, the Shah of Iran, whose secret police, SAVAK, is as brutal as the Gestapo. Operation MK-ULTRA — Inspired by North Korea’s brainwashing program, the CIA begins experiments on mind control. The most notorious part of this project involves giving LSD and other drugs to American subjects without their knowledge or against their will, causing several to commit suicide. However, the operation involves far more than this. Funded in part by the Rockefeller and Ford foundations, research includes propaganda, brainwashing, public relations, advertising, hypnosis, and other forms of suggestion. 1954 Guatemala — CIA overthrows the democratically elected Jacob Arbenz in a military coup. Arbenz has threatened to nationalize the Rockefeller-owned United Fruit Company, in which CIA Director Allen Dulles also owns stock. Arbenz is replaced with a series of right-wing dictators whose bloodthirsty policies will kill over 100,000 Guatemalans in the next 40 years. 1954-1958 North Vietnam — CIA officer Edward Lansdale spends four years trying to overthrow the communist government of North Vietnam, using all the usual dirty tricks. The CIA also attempts to legitimize a tyrannical puppet regime in South Vietnam, headed by Ngo Dinh Diem. These efforts fail to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese because the Diem government is opposed to true democracy, land reform and poverty reduction measures. The CIA’s continuing failure results in escalating American intervention, culminating in the Vietnam War. 1956 Hungary — Radio Free Europe incites Hungary to revolt by broadcasting Khruschev’s Secret Speech, in which he denounced Stalin. It also hints that American aid will help the Hungarians fight. This aid fails to materialize as Hungarians launch a doomed armed revolt, which only invites a major Soviet invasion. The conflict kills 7,000 Soviets and 30,000 Hungarians. 1957-1973 Laos — The CIA carries out approximately one coup per year trying to nullify Laos’ democratic elections. The problem is the Pathet Lao, a leftist group with enough popular support to be a member of any coalition government. In the late 50s, the CIA even creates an "Armee Clandestine" of Asian mercenaries to attack the Pathet Lao. After the CIA’s army suffers numerous defeats, the U.S. starts bombing, dropping more bombs on Laos than all the U.S. bombs dropped in World War II. A quarter of all Laotians will eventually become refugees, many living in caves. 1959 Haiti — The U.S. military helps "Papa Doc" Duvalier become dictator of Haiti. He creates his own private police force, the "Tonton Macoutes," who terrorize the population with machetes. They will kill over 100,000 during the Duvalier family reign. The U.S. does not protest their dismal human rights record. 1961 The Bay of Pigs — The CIA sends 1,500 Cuban exiles to invade Castro’s Cuba. But "Operation Mongoose" fails, due to poor planning, security and backing. The planners had imagined that the invasion will spark a popular uprising against Castro -– which never happens. A promised American air strike also never occurs. This is the CIA’s first public setback, causing President Kennedy to fire CIA Director Allen Dulles. Dominican Republic — The CIA assassinates Rafael Trujillo, a murderous dictator Washington has supported since 1930. Trujillo’s business interests have grown so large (about 60 percent of the economy) that they have begun competing with American business interests. Ecuador — The CIA-backed military forces the democratically elected President Jose Velasco to resign. Vice President Carlos Arosemana replaces him; the CIA fills the now vacant vice presidency with its own man. Congo (Zaire) — The CIA assassinates the democratically elected Patrice Lumumba. However, public support for Lumumba’s politics runs so high that the CIA cannot clearly install his opponents in power. Four years of political turmoil follow. 1963 Dominican Republic — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Juan Bosch in a military coup. The CIA installs a repressive, right-wing junta. Ecuador — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows President Arosemana, whose independent (not socialist) policies have become unacceptable to Washington. A military junta assumes command, cancels the 1964 elections, and begins abusing human rights. 1964 Brazil — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the democratically elected government of Joao Goulart. The junta that replaces it will, in the next two decades, become one of the most bloodthirsty in history. General Castelo Branco will create Latin America’s first death squads, or bands of secret police who hunt down "communists" for torture, interrogation and murder. Often these "communists" are no more than Branco’s political opponents. Later it is revealed that the CIA trains the death squads. 1965 Indonesia — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Sukarno with a military coup. The CIA has been trying to eliminate Sukarno since 1957, using everything from attempted assassination to sexual intrigue, for nothing more than his declaring neutrality in the Cold War. His successor, General Suharto, will massacre between 500,000 to 1 million civilians accused of being "communist." The CIA supplies the names of countless suspects. Dominican Republic — A popular rebellion breaks out, promising to reinstall Juan Bosch as the country’s elected leader. The revolution is crushed when U.S. Marines land to uphold the military regime by force. The CIA directs everything behind the scenes. Greece — With the CIA’s backing, the king removes George Papandreous as prime minister. Papandreous has failed to vigorously support U.S. interests in Greece. Congo (Zaire) — A CIA-backed military coup installs Mobutu Sese Seko as dictator. The hated and repressive Mobutu exploits his desperately poor country for billions. 1966 The Ramparts Affair — The radical magazine Ramparts begins a series of unprecedented anti-CIA articles. Among their scoops: the CIA has paid the University of Michigan $25 million dollars to hire "professors" to train South Vietnamese students in covert police methods. MIT and other universities have received similar payments. Ramparts also reveals that the National Students’ Association is a CIA front. Students are sometimes recruited through blackmail and bribery, including draft deferments. 1967 Greece — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the government two days before the elections. The favorite to win was George Papandreous, the liberal candidate. During the next six years, the "reign of the colonels" — backed by the CIA — will usher in the widespread use of torture and murder against political opponents. When a Greek ambassador objects to President Johnson about U.S. plans for Cypress, Johnson tells him: "Fuck your parliament and your constitution." Operation PHEONIX — The CIA helps South Vietnamese agents identify and then murder alleged Viet Cong leaders operating in South Vietnamese villages. According to a 1971 congressional report, this operation killed about 20,000 "Viet Cong." 1968 Operation CHAOS — The CIA has been illegally spying on American citizens since 1959, but with Operation CHAOS, President Johnson dramatically boosts the effort. CIA agents go undercover as student radicals to spy on and disrupt campus organizations protesting the Vietnam War. They are searching for Russian instigators, which they never find. CHAOS will eventually spy on 7,000 individuals and 1,000 organizations. Bolivia — A CIA-organized military operation captures legendary guerilla Che Guevara. The CIA wants to keep him alive for interrogation, but the Bolivian government executes him to prevent worldwide calls for clemency. 1969 Uruguay — The notorious CIA torturer Dan Mitrione arrives in Uruguay, a country torn with political strife. Whereas right-wing forces previously used torture only as a last resort, Mitrione convinces them to use it as a routine, widespread practice. "The precise pain, in the precise place, in the precise amount, for the desired effect," is his motto. The torture techniques he teaches to the death squads rival the Nazis’. He eventually becomes so feared that revolutionaries will kidnap and murder him a year later. 1970 Cambodia — The CIA overthrows Prince Sahounek, who is highly popular among Cambodians for keeping them out of the Vietnam War. He is replaced by CIA puppet Lon Nol, who immediately throws Cambodian troops into battle. This unpopular move strengthens once minor opposition parties like the Khmer Rouge, which achieves power in 1975 and massacres millions of its own people. 1971 Bolivia — After half a decade of CIA-inspired political turmoil, a CIA-backed military coup overthrows the leftist President Juan Torres. In the next two years, dictator Hugo Banzer will have over 2,000 political opponents arrested without trial, then tortured, raped and executed. Haiti — "Papa Doc" Duvalier dies, leaving his 19-year old son "Baby Doc" Duvalier the dictator of Haiti. His son continues his bloody reign with full knowledge of the CIA. 1972 The Case-Zablocki Act — Congress passes an act requiring congressional review of executive agreements. In theory, this should make CIA operations more accountable. In fact, it is only marginally effective. Cambodia — Congress votes to cut off CIA funds for its secret war in Cambodia. Wagergate Break-in — President Nixon sends in a team of burglars to wiretap Democratic offices at Watergate. The team members have extensive CIA histories, including James McCord, E. Howard Hunt and five of the Cuban burglars. They work for the Committee to Reelect the President (CREEP), which does dirty work like disrupting Democratic campaigns and laundering Nixon’s illegal campaign contributions. CREEP’s activities are funded and organized by another CIA front, the Mullen Company. 1973 Chile — The CIA overthrows and assassinates Salvador Allende, Latin America’s first democratically elected socialist leader. The problems begin when Allende nationalizes American-owned firms in Chile. ITT offers the CIA $1 million for a coup (reportedly refused). The CIA replaces Allende with General Augusto Pinochet, who will torture and murder thousands of his own countrymen in a crackdown on labor leaders and the political left. CIA begins internal investigations — William Colby, the Deputy Director for Operations, orders all CIA personnel to report any and all illegal activities they know about. This information is later reported to Congress. Watergate Scandal — The CIA’s main collaborating newspaper in America, The Washington Post, reports Nixon’s crimes long before any other newspaper takes up the subject. The two reporters, Woodward and Bernstein, make almost no mention of the CIA’s many fingerprints all over the scandal. It is later revealed that Woodward was a Naval intelligence briefer to the White House, and knows many important intelligence figures, including General Alexander Haig. His main source, "Deep Throat," is probably one of those. CIA Director Helms Fired — President Nixon fires CIA Director Richard Helms for failing to help cover up the Watergate scandal. Helms and Nixon have always disliked each other. The new CIA director is William Colby, who is relatively more open to CIA reform. 1974 CHAOS exposed — Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh publishes a story about Operation CHAOS, the domestic surveillance and infiltration of anti-war and civil rights groups in the U.S. The story sparks national outrage. Angleton fired — Congress holds hearings on the illegal domestic spying efforts of James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s chief of counterintelligence. His efforts included mail-opening campaigns and secret surveillance of war protesters. The hearings result in his dismissal from the CIA. House clears CIA in Watergate — The House of Representatives clears the CIA of any complicity in Nixon’s Watergate break-in. The Hughes Ryan Act — Congress passes an amendment requiring the president to report nonintelligence CIA operations to the relevant congressional committees in a timely fashion. 1975 Australia — The CIA helps topple the democratically elected, left-leaning government of Prime Minister Edward Whitlam. The CIA does this by giving an ultimatum to its Governor-General, John Kerr. Kerr, a longtime CIA collaborator, exercises his constitutional right to dissolve the Whitlam government. The Governor-General is a largely ceremonial position appointed by the Queen; the Prime Minister is democratically elected. The use of this archaic and never-used law stuns the nation. Angola — Eager to demonstrate American military resolve after its defeat in Vietnam, Henry Kissinger launches a CIA-backed war in Angola. Contrary to Kissinger’s assertions, Angola is a country of little strategic importance and not seriously threatened by communism. The CIA backs the brutal leader of UNITAS, Jonas Savimbi. This polarizes Angolan politics and drives his opponents into the arms of Cuba and the Soviet Union for survival. Congress will cut off funds in 1976, but the CIA is able to run the war off the books until 1984, when funding is legalized again. This entirely pointless war kills over 300,000 Angolans. "The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence" — Victor Marchetti and John Marks publish this whistle-blowing history of CIA crimes and abuses. Marchetti has spent 14 years in the CIA, eventually becoming an executive assistant to the Deputy Director of Intelligence. Marks has spent five years as an intelligence official in the State Department. "Inside the Company" — Philip Agee publishes a diary of his life inside the CIA. Agee has worked in covert operations in Latin America during the 60s, and details the crimes in which he took part. Congress investigates CIA wrong-doing — Public outrage compels Congress to hold hearings on CIA crimes. Senator Frank Church heads the Senate investigation ("The Church Committee"<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> , and Representative Otis Pike heads the House investigation. (Despite a 98 percent incumbency reelection rate, both Church and Pike are defeated in the next elections.) The investigations lead to a number of reforms intended to increase the CIA’s accountability to Congress, including the creation of a standing Senate committee on intelligence. However, the reforms prove ineffective, as the Iran/Contra scandal will show. It turns out the CIA can control, deal with or sidestep Congress with ease. The Rockefeller Commission — In an attempt to reduce the damage done by the Church Committee, President Ford creates the "Rockefeller Commission" to whitewash CIA history and propose toothless reforms. The commission’s namesake, Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, is himself a major CIA figure. Five of the commission’s eight members are also members of the Council on Foreign Relations, a CIA-dominated organization. 1979 Iran — The CIA fails to predict the fall of the Shah of Iran, a longtime CIA puppet, and the rise of Muslim fundamentalists who are furious at the CIA’s backing of SAVAK, the Shah’s bloodthirsty secret police. In revenge, the Muslims take 52 Americans hostage in the U.S. embassy in Tehran. Afghanistan — The Soviets invade Afghanistan. The CIA immediately begins supplying arms to any faction willing to fight the occupying Soviets. Such indiscriminate arming means that when the Soviets leave Afghanistan, civil war will erupt. Also, fanatical Muslim extremists now possess state-of-the-art weaponry. One of these is Sheik Abdel Rahman, who will become involved in the World Trade Center bombing in New York. El Salvador — An idealistic group of young military officers, repulsed by the massacre of the poor, overthrows the right-wing government. However, the U.S. compels the inexperienced officers to include many of the old guard in key positions in their new government. Soon, things are back to "normal" — the military government is repressing and killing poor civilian protesters. Many of the young military and civilian reformers, finding themselves powerless, resign in disgust. Nicaragua — Anastasios Samoza II, the CIA-backed dictator, falls. The Marxist Sandinistas take over government, and they are initially popular because of their commitment to land and anti-poverty reform. Samoza had a murderous and hated personal army called the National Guard. Remnants of the Guard will become the Contras, who fight a CIA-backed guerilla war against the Sandinista government throughout the 1980s. 1980 El Salvador — The Archbishop of San Salvador, Oscar Romero, pleads with President Carter "Christian to Christian" to stop aiding the military government slaughtering his people. Carter refuses. Shortly afterwards, right-wing leader Roberto D’Aubuisson has Romero shot through the heart while saying Mass. The country soon dissolves into civil war, with the peasants in the hills fighting against the military government. The CIA and U.S. Armed Forces supply the government with overwhelming military and intelligence superiority. CIA-trained death squads roam the countryside, committing atrocities like that of El Mazote in 1982, where they massacre between 700 and 1000 men, women and children. By 1992, some 63,000 Salvadorans will be killed. 1981 Iran/Contra Begins — The CIA begins selling arms to Iran at high prices, using the profits to arm the Contras fighting the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. President Reagan vows that the Sandinistas will be "pressured" until "they say ‘uncle.’" The CIA’s Freedom Fighter’s Manual disbursed to the Contras includes instruction on economic sabotage, propaganda, extortion, bribery, blackmail, interrogation, torture, murder and political assassination. 1983 Honduras — The CIA gives Honduran military officers the Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual – 1983, which teaches how to torture people. Honduras’ notorious "Battalion 316" then uses these techniques, with the CIA’s full knowledge, on thousands of leftist dissidents. At least 184 are murdered. 1984 The Boland Amendment — The last of a series of Boland Amendments is passed. These amendments have reduced CIA aid to the Contras; the last one cuts it off completely. However, CIA Director William Casey is already prepared to "hand off" the operation to Colonel Oliver North, who illegally continues supplying the Contras through the CIA’s informal, secret, and self-financing network. This includes "humanitarian aid" donated by Adolph Coors and William Simon, and military aid funded by Iranian arms sales. 1986 Eugene Hasenfus — Nicaragua shoots down a C-123 transport plane carrying military supplies to the Contras. The lone survivor, Eugene Hasenfus, turns out to be a CIA employee, as are the two dead pilots. The airplane belongs to Southern Air Transport, a CIA front. The incident makes a mockery of President Reagan’s claims that the CIA is not illegally arming the Contras. Iran/Contra Scandal — Although the details have long been known, the Iran/Contra scandal finally captures the media’s attention in 1986. Congress holds hearings, and several key figures (like Oliver North) lie under oath to protect the intelligence community. CIA Director William Casey dies of brain cancer before Congress can question him. All reforms enacted by Congress after the scandal are purely cosmetic. Haiti — Rising popular revolt in Haiti means that "Baby Doc" Duvalier will remain "President for Life" only if he has a short one. The U.S., which hates instability in a puppet country, flies the despotic Duvalier to the South of France for a comfortable retirement. The CIA then rigs the upcoming elections in favor of another right-wing military strongman. However, violence keeps the country in political turmoil for another four years. The CIA tries to strengthen the military by creating the National Intelligence Service (SIN), which suppresses popular revolt through torture and assassination. 1989 Panama — The U.S. invades Panama to overthrow a dictator of its own making, General Manuel Noriega. Noriega has been on the CIA’s payroll since 1966, and has been transporting drugs with the CIA’s knowledge since 1972. By the late 80s, Noriega’s growing independence and intransigence have angered Washington… so out he goes. 1990 Haiti — Competing against 10 comparatively wealthy candidates, leftist priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide captures 68 percent of the vote. After only eight months in power, however, the CIA-backed military deposes him. More military dictators brutalize the country, as thousands of Haitian refugees escape the turmoil in barely seaworthy boats. As popular opinion calls for Aristide’s return, the CIA begins a disinformation campaign painting the courageous priest as mentally unstable. 1991 The Gulf War — The U.S. liberates Kuwait from Iraq. But Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, is another creature of the CIA. With U.S. encouragement, Hussein invaded Iran in 1980. During this costly eight-year war, the CIA built up Hussein’s forces with sophisticated arms, intelligence, training and financial backing. This cemented Hussein’s power at home, allowing him to crush the many internal rebellions that erupted from time to time, sometimes with poison gas. It also gave him all the military might he needed to conduct further adventurism — in Kuwait, for example. The Fall of the Soviet Union — The CIA fails to predict this most important event of the Cold War. This suggests that it has been so busy undermining governments that it hasn’t been doing its primary job: gathering and analyzing information. The fall of the Soviet Union also robs the CIA of its reason for existence: fighting communism. This leads some to accuse the CIA of intentionally failing to predict the downfall of the Soviet Union. Curiously, the intelligence community’s budget is not significantly reduced after the demise of communism. 1992 Economic Espionage — In the years following the end of the Cold War, the CIA is increasingly used for economic espionage. This involves stealing the technological secrets of competing foreign companies and giving them to American ones. Given the CIA’s clear preference for dirty tricks over mere information gathering, the possibility of serious criminal behavior is very great indeed. 1993 Haiti — The chaos in Haiti grows so bad that President Clinton has no choice but to remove the Haitian military dictator, Raoul Cedras, on threat of U.S. invasion. The U.S. occupiers do not arrest Haiti’s military leaders for crimes against humanity, but instead ensure their safety and rich retirements. Aristide is returned to power only after being forced to accept an agenda favorable to the country’s ruling class. EPILOGUE In a speech before the CIA celebrating its 50th anniversary, President Clinton said: "By necessity, the American people will never know the full story of your courage." Clinton’s is a common defense of the CIA: namely, the American people should stop criticizing the CIA because they don’t know what it really does. This, of course, is the heart of the problem in the first place. An agency that is above criticism is also above moral behavior and reform. Its secrecy and lack of accountability allows its corruption to grow unchecked. Furthermore, Clinton’s statement is simply untrue. The history of the agency is growing painfully clear, especially with the declassification of historical CIA documents. We may not know the details of specific operations, but we do know, quite well, the general behavior of the CIA. These facts began emerging nearly two decades ago at an ever-quickening pace. Today we have a remarkably accurate and consistent picture, repeated in country after country, and verified from countless different directions. The CIA’s response to this growing knowledge and criticism follows a typical historical pattern. (Indeed, there are remarkable parallels to the Medieval Church’s fight against the Scientific Revolution.) The first journalists and writers to reveal the CIA’s criminal behavior were harassed and censored if they were American writers, and tortured and murdered if they were foreigners. (See Philip Agee’s On the Run for an example of early harassment.) However, over the last two decades the tide of evidence has become overwhelming, and the CIA has found that it does not have enough fingers to plug every hole in the dike. This is especially true in the age of the Internet, where information flows freely among millions of people. Since censorship is impossible, the Agency must now defend itself with apologetics. Clinton’s "Americans will never know" defense is a prime example. Another common apologetic is that "the world is filled with unsavory characters, and we must deal with them if we are to protect American interests at all." There are two things wrong with this. First, it ignores the fact that the CIA has regularly spurned alliances with defenders of democracy, free speech and human rights, preferring the company of military dictators and tyrants. The CIA had moral options available to them, but did not take them. Second, this argument begs several questions. The first is: "Which American interests?" The CIA has courted right-wing dictators because they allow wealthy Americans to exploit the country’s cheap labor and resources. But poor and middle-class Americans pay the price whenever they fight the wars that stem from CIA actions, from Vietnam to the Gulf War to Panama. The second begged question is: "Why should American interests come at the expense of other peoples’ human rights?" The CIA should be abolished, its leadership dismissed and its relevant members tried for crimes against humanity. Our intelligence community should be rebuilt from the ground up, with the goal of collecting and analyzing information. As for covert action, there are two moral options. The first one is to eliminate covert action completely. But this gives jitters to people worried about the Adolf Hitlers of the world. So a second option is that we can place covert action under extensive and true democratic oversight. For example, a bipartisan Congressional Committee of 40 members could review and veto all aspects of CIA operations upon a majority or super-majority vote. Which of these two options is best may be the subject of debate, but one thing is clear: like dictatorship, like monarchy, unaccountable covert operations should die like the dinosaurs they are. Endnotes: 1. All history concerning CIA intervention in foreign countries is summarized from William Blum’s encyclopedic work, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995). Sources for domestic CIA operations come from Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen’s The 60 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time (Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press, 1997). 2. Coleman McCarthy, "The Consequences of Covert Tactics" Washington Post, December 13, 1987. <a href="http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/history-cia-atrocities.htm">link: Ray McGovern, please click here.</a> <hr></blockquote> I would add to this list likely complicity in the deaths of MLK, JFK and RFK. I also would like to suggest that CIA is an arm of the military industrial complex...and not a bunch of isolated groups randomly knocking off presidents and overthrowing countries. The logic behind the above actions is quite clear and quite consistent. Stop popular movements. Ensure US/corporate hegemony. I also would like to add that usually when I say CIA, I don't claim to know where CIA actions stop and DIA, NSA or any of the military Intel agencies begin. So CIA for me is sort of shorthand for U.S. intel. I don't know who McGovern's friends are. But if the CIA is as compartmentalized as you suggest then of course he wouldn't know what McGovern is up to, would he? Wouldn't even read it on the internet. Not his station, eh what? Whether or not Goodman approves of it, the fact that McGovern and Christisons are a) CIA b)represent other intel professionals and c)are putting out material that focuses almost exclusively on neocons and Israel and does not look at US (including well known CIA) involvement in the middle east demonstrates that elements of the CIA want the rest of us to focus on neocons and the Middle East. Seemed obvious to me. I liked my first post better, though.

by **robertdreed** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 10:35 pm

That list is an attempt to brand every last CIA officer, employee, analyst, and newspaper clipper with the brand of torturer and mass murderer. It's no less sloppy than insisting that every last member of the Soviet KGB was a master of the Pavlovian torture and brainwashing techniques employed against dissidents at Lubyanka Prison in the 1950s, or a leader of the ruthless counterinsurgency campaign employed by the SPETZNATZ during the occupation of Afghanistan by ther Soviets. Hokey demonology. I have a more precise fix on the logical fallacy you employed this time around. It's called Waving The Bloody Shirt. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 9/19/06 10:10 pm

by **Dreams End** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 10:47 pm

I think it's more like branding every member of the Mafia as a criminal. If you work for the group that does the crime, you don't get excused if it's not your department. Sorry. Those are the rules. I looked them up in the rulebook. It's on page 27.

by **Dreams End** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 10:54 pm

Here's McGovern, showing us how Israel is running the country. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Hats off to commission staff for shoehorning that information in and to the commissioners who let it stay. This is highly unusual prose for a Washington establishment usually allergic to any hint at the cruel reality that Israel is the tail wagging the dog--the dogs of war let slip on Iraq by those in the Bush administration who draw no distinction between U.S. strategic interests and those of Israel. <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/mcgovern07282004.html">Learn how bully Israel bosses the US around here.</a><hr></blockquote>

by **OpLan** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:02 am

For those who haven't seen <a href="http://www.bradblog.com/?p=2785" target="top">Rumsfelt eat his own shit.</a> Ex-CIA Analyst Ray McGovern smackdowned of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld during an event in Atlanta yesterday. During a Q&A period, McGovern demanded answers for a few of Rumsfeld's more specious claims. Almost certainly, you have already seen or heard highlights of this clip. This version from MSNBC's Countdown contains the full 4 minute exchange between Rumsfeld and McGovern as well various other protesters being roughly handled and removed from the venue. Richard Wolffe of Newsweek provides analysis of the political fallout for Rumsfeld and the Bush Administration. UPDATE: <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060505&articleId=2396" target="top">Text transcript here…</a> FURTHER UPDATE: Brad conducted an hourlong interview McGovern on The BRAD SHOW in June of 2005 just prior to his congressional testimony on the Downing Street Memos. It was a fascinating interview, if we say so ourselves. <a href="http://www.bradshow.com/Archives/BradShow_061105_Hour4.mp3" target="top">Audio archive [MP3]</a> <a href="http://bradblog.com/BradShow/Transcripts/RayMcGovern_061105.htm" target="top">or text transcript of the interview</a>

by **robertdreed** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:16 am

DE, you make it sound as if the criminal misdeeds of the CIA existed in a vacuum in the Cold War era, as if they held the geopolitical monopoly on supporting dictators, one-party states, martial law, torture regimes, suppression of popular movements. But what about what happened in the German Democratic Republic, in June of 1953? <a href="http://libcom.org/history/1953-the-east-german-uprising">libcom.org/history/1953-t...n-uprising</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uprising_of_1953_in_East_Germany">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upr...st_Germany</a> "The Uprising of 1953 in East Germany took place in June and July 1953. A strike by Berlin construction workers on June 16 turned into a widespread uprising against the East German government the next day. The uprising in Berlin was violently suppressed by tanks of the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany and the Volkspolizei. In spite of the intervention of Soviet troops, the wave of strikes and protests was not easily brought under control. There were demonstrations even after June 17 in more than 500 towns and villages. The high point of the protests was in the middle of July. June 16 In May 1953, the Politburo of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED) raised the work quotas for East German industry by ten percent. On June 16, between 60 and 80 East Berlin construction workers went on strike after their superiors announced a pay cut if they didn't meet their work quota. Their numbers quickly swelled and a general strike and protests were called for the next day. The West Berlin-based Radio in the American Sector reported about the Berlin events and thus probably helped to incite the uprising in other parts of East Germany. [edit] June 17 By dawn on June 17, 100,000 protesters had gathered in East Berlin, with more arriving throughout the morning. Many protests were held throughout East Germany with at least some work stoppages and protests in virtually all industrial centers and large cities in the country. Soviet Tank in Berlin Enlarge Soviet Tank in Berlin The original demands of the protesters, such as the reinstatement of the previous lower work quotas, turned into political demands. SED functionaries took to the streets and began arguing with small groups of protesters. Eventually, the workers demanded the resignation of the East German government. The government decided to use force to stop the uprising and turned to the Soviet Union for military support. Around noon, the Volkspolizei had trapped many of the demonstrators in an open square. When dozens of T-34 Soviet tanks arrived, a massacre followed. It is still unclear how many people died during the uprising, and by the death sentences which followed. The official number of victims is 51. After the evaluation of documents accessible since 1990, the number of victims appears to be at least 125. Higher estimates put the number of dead at 267. In addition, there were numerous arrests..." What happened in 1956 in Hungary? <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1956_Hungarian_Revolution">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/195...Revolution</a> "The 1956 Hungarian Revolution, also known as the Hungarian Uprising or simply the Hungarian Revolt, was an anti-Soviet revolt in Hungary lasting from 23 October to 4 November 1956. Political changes in the post-Stalinist Soviet Union, nationalist movements in the socialist parties of eastern Europe, and social unrest due to poor economic conditions for the Hungarian populace created conditions for a popular uprising in October 1956. On 23 October 1956 a student march supporting liberalization of social and economic policies attracted hundreds of thousands of Hungarians. Participants presenting their demands were attacked by security forces, and soon violently rose up against the government. Within days, millions of Hungarians were participating in or supporting the revolt. On the night of 23 October and subsequent days the Hungarian State Protection Authority (ÁVH) shot protestors. In comparison, Soviet troops stationed in Hungary generally attempted to keep order. Armed resistance by insurgents, and the collapse of the government of Ernő Gerő, caused a ceasefire between Soviet troops and insurgents by 1 November. The revolt achieved control over the Hungarian Communist Party, most social institutions and a large amount of territory. The participants began to implement their own policies, re-establishing multiparty rule and ousting the previous hard-line government ministers. Workers' councils established control over factories and mines, and assumed functions previously reserved for communist party bureaucrats. Executions of pro-Soviet communists, and ÁVH members started, especially by ultra-nationalist groups. The Hungarian Communist Party made Imre Nagy Prime Minister. After negotiating a ceasefire with Soviet forces in Hungary, Nagy declared his intention to withdraw Hungary from the Warsaw Pact. With the NATO allies engaged in the Suez Crisis, the Presidium of the Soviet Communist Party became alarmed at events in Hungary, and encouraged János Kádár to form a new pro-Warsaw Pact government on 3 November. Nominally invited by Kádár's "Revolutionary Worker-Peasant Government", on the night of 4 November the Soviet army intervened a second time. Soviet forces unleashed an artillery barrage and airstrikes in a multi-divisional offensive against Budapest, crushing the uprising by 10 November. In the wake of the Soviet invasion, mass arrests of dissidents began, and around 200,000 Hungarians fled to Austria. By January 1957 Kádár had brought the instability to an end..." "Casualties 720 killed according to official Soviet sources 6,000+ missing and wounded 2,502 killed (plus 20,000 more killed or executed months afterwards)" What was up with the guarded border that forcibly prevented East Germans and other Eastern Europeans from traveling to the nations of the West for much of the Cold War era? I know of no such analogous situation in non-Communist nations: "...From 1961 the GDR border was strengthened further to prevent mass migration to the west, and the westward movement slowed to a trickle. East German paramilitary police guarded on the border. Soviet troops were stationed well back from the inter-German line and normally did not stand daily watch there. The maintenance and operation of the border was largely left to the East Germans, not least because the East German leadership was conscious that the continued viability of their state was at risk if uncontrolled emigration continued. The border was actively guarded using a variety of often lethal methods. Mines were buried and watchtowers set up. Dogs patrolled the area and automatic firing devices pointing towards the GDR territory could be triggered by movement. The border guards stationed along the route had orders to stop anyone attempting to escape by shooting them. Freedom of movement across the border was not totally prevented, but was extremely tightly controlled. Several autobahns and rail lines remained as viable means of travel. West German citizens were allowed to travel to the GDR, but faced movement restrictions and police surveillance while there. Military and government officials of the Western Allies on their way to and from West Berlin could cross the border by car and train under Soviet travel authorization, outside of the GDR's authority. [edit] The Berlin Wall The most famous part of the GDR border was the Berlin Wall, built on 13 August 1961, cutting off the three Western sectors of Berlin from East Berlin and the GDR. There were small-scale counterparts of the Berlin Wall at sections of the border near inhabited areas. One example was built in the town of Mödlareuth in Thuringia which, like Berlin, was split in half by the border (and so was nicknamed "little Berlin" as a result). [edit] Escape attempts East Germans' desire to escape the confines of their state led to a number of daring crossings of the border, at great personal risk to the escapees. One of the more famous escape crossings was in September 1979 by hot air balloon. The Strelzyk and Wetzel families of Poessneck, in the GDR, built their own balloon, burner, basket and converted a barometer into an altimeter. Although the Strelzyks were left alone to make the attempt, the first attempt failed in June 1979, and the two families, knowing the secret police would find both, made the second attempt together and succeeded. Their story was made into a movie in 1981, Night Crossing, by Walt Disney Pictures. After living in several places in West Germany and Switzerland, the Strelzyks relocated back to Poessneck in 1999. [edit] Border deaths The border defences claimed a number of victims on both sides of the border. [edit] People killed while escaping the GDR Several hundred people died while attempting to escape from the GDR, mostly civilians. The exact number of victims is difficult to calculate. The Berlin Public Prosecution Department reckons that about 270 'proven' deaths on the border were due to acts of violence by GDR border security guards, including deaths caused by mines and automatic firing devices. The Central Assessment Group for Governmental and Federational Crimes (German ZERV), however, has registered 421 suspected cases of killings by armed GDR border guards..." And, even in the most repressive eras of American history, is there anything in the record that can top the following program in terms of abrogation of civil liberties and mass surveillance? <a href="http://www.subbrit.org.uk/rsg/sites/s/stasi/">www.subbrit.org.uk/rsg/sites/s/stasi/</a> "...the infamous Ministerium für Staatssicherheit (Ministry for State Security), usually known as the Stasi, was established in April 1950. Similar in structure to the then-operating Russian NKVD (predecessor to the KGB), the Stasi was the secret police force for the communist-controlled German Democratic Republic (GDR). The Stasi used a huge network of informants to repress the citizens of East Germany. It was not uncommon for members of families to spy on each other for fear of blackmail, as a result of physical threats and even because of monetary rewards from the secret police force. In the late '80s, the Stasi had nearly 175,000 official informants on their books, roughly one informant for every 100 people. (Some estimate the size of the "unofficial" Stasi informant force as nearly 10 times this level.) The Stasi maintained a force of over 90,000 uniformed and plain-clothes agents and kept files on up to 6 million East German citizens; one-third of the entire population. All phone calls from the West were monitored, as was all mail. Similar surveillance was routine domestically. Every factory, social club and youth association was infiltrated. Stasi agents collected scent samples from people by wiping bits of cloth on objects they had touched. These samples were stored in airtight glass containers and special dogs were trained to track down the person's scent. The agency was authorized to conduct secret smear campaigns against anyone it judged to be a threat; this might include sending anonymous letters and making anonymous phone calls to blackmail the targeted person. Torture was an accepted method of getting information..." For that matter, was there ever a police state as pervasive, all-encompassing, and long-lasting as that of East Germany established by even the worst, most fascist client regimes supported by the USA? I'm just trying to restore some balance to the discussion underway, here. In the context of the RI board, I can hardly be accused of harping on this history, or of repetitively posting details which have been made abundantly available already. And I could go on...the Soviet regime's pioneering of State-supported mind control experimentation, the suppression of Czechoslovakia's "Prague Spring" in 1968, the war crimes associated with the occupation of Afghanistan...the international assassination programs of the Soviet secret police (what happened to Trotsky?)...the Gulag Archipelago... Catalogue the crimes of the CIA as you will. I share your disgust and your outrage. It's a legacy of bad karma, and all too often, the negative consequences continue to reverberate. But my opposition to tyranny doesn't hinge on ideology, DE. And I maintain an awareness that despite a history that's sometimes undeniably morally outrageous and despicable, this country has yet to sink to the depths of the Marxist-Leninist regimes of the 20th century in terms of the systematic suppression of freedom and free expression at the hand of State coercion. I have no reassurance that their record of totalist rule would have improved and liberalized if only they had been allowed to spread their influence all over the globe, uncontested. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 9/20/06 12:32 am

by **dbeach** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:44 am

"this country has yet to sink to the depths of the Marxist-Leninist regimes of the 20th century in terms of the systematic suppression of freedom and free expression at the hand of State coercion. " my wife lived under USSR in Estonia..she is Russki she was denied religion ..free speech KGB watched the churches ..some elderly were allowed to go in but no real Mass or service.. she never owned a car or home nor did any of her friends the majority were not afforded any chance of ownership.. she was educated for free and taught that the USA was gonna nuke em any day .. even learned to hide under the desks {as IF that would prevent damage from a nuke} the US is a messed up place and the bushco mean machine is trying to make it a 1984 nightmare worse than Stalin or Hitler and the sleeping masses may just go along with it.. all these agencies and police have a sorry history and I think they will be used IF the pigs go for the whole police state.. but I am grateful to have HAD some freedoms here that many other nations did not enjoy... I would not trust Mcgovern or any former govt op..nor would I trust Putin or Castro or the red china dude ALL these big shots are a bunch of parasites in 3 piece suits anyways I dont trust any authority figures and NEVR did.. bunch of snakes. dont feed em deny em their loosh and be grateful you ain't one of em

by **robertdreed** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:45 am

I think Ray McGovern is expressing his personal opinion of why Bush decided to go to war in Iraq. And I personally think that, as stated in the referenced article, his analysis is oversimplified, and his emphasis is misplaced. I'd like to ask him some pointed questions, and get some clarification. But that doesn't mean that I hold with the view that he's a mouthpiece for a wider Covert Agenda being promulgated by his superiors at CIA (who exactly are we talking about, anyway?) to "blame Israel first", in order to work a smokescreen- whether in order to cover for the fact that the Iraq war plan is actually of "CIA" origin, to work a conscious misdirection distracting scrutiny from some assumed Agency complicity in 9-11, as a stalking horse for whipping up a neo-Nazi revival, or for a similarly nefarious purpose. I see no evidence of that. And at any rate, he isn't that influential of a person. As for the related idea being bandied about on the board here, that all of the mass resignations, dissent, and disaffection among present and former CIA, military, and allied intelligence/national security/foreign policy professionals is in actuality an insincere ploy, a monumentally duplicitous Trojan Horse...well, you'd have to be down with the notion of the Grand Unified CIA Conspiracy to grant that idea serious credence. To be kind, I think that's...callow. I don't think Ray McGovern is wrong in saying that the historic US tilt toward Israel is the main reason for Arab antipathy and hostility directed against the USA. I think that support needs to be talked about, rather than danced around or forbidden as a topic of discussion. I also think that the depth of the animus against the very existence of Israel by Islamist political forces such as Hamas and Hezbollah has to be openly put on the table for discussion, as well. I don't think that it's honest to pretend that the discussion revolves exclusively around Palestinian claims for a pre-1967 border. (Something that I wish that Mike Wallace would have pressed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about in the recent interview, in fact. But I think Wallace was the wrong choice as interviewer, anyway...granted, he did better than some other choices I could name. Imagine Bill Lehrer doing it, for instance...) I have my own way-out program for that area of the world. I'd like to see the mullahs surrender the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque as an act of magnaminity, and as a recognition of the unimportance of temples built by human hands. I'd like to see Mount Moriah become a playground for children, where no one can enter unless accompanied by a child. And I'd like to see Israel split the Golan Heights with Syria and Lebanon...and some portion of the huge military budget focussed on the present territorial dispute could be used instead to lavishly fund a resettlement of Palestinians to Jordan, until such time as all sides agree on how unimportant petty territorial disputes a la "North Jersey vs. South Jersey" really are, as long as everyone is pitching in to get the desert to bloom. At this point, I'm revealing the depths of my madness, of course. Too much ***, and all that, I suppose. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 9/20/06 12:37 am

by **Dreams End** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 2:38 am

Here ya go, RDR...beginning to spell it out more clearly on my blog. I'd just post the article, but none of the formatting or links will tranfer. When you have McGovern AND Bill and Kathy Christison posting at Counterpunch. When they are all three CIA. When their only return email address is to a Counterpunch domain name. When you consider that Counterpunch is allegedly a left publication (i.e. a shared assumption about the role of the CIA....whether or not Russkies "did it too"). When you have McGovern also working with the Revolutionary Communist party on their "Not in Our Name" project. When you understand what RCP really is...by knowing, for example, that RCP aligns itself with Peru's Shining Path, whose contribution to the proletarian and communist struggle has been primarily to kill proletarians and communists. When you note that it is a bit odd, isn't it, that a CIA guy doesn't mind aligning himself with such as RCP. When you note that RCP, McGowan, and the Christison's push an identical line regarding Israel. You start to get suspicious. You'll get there. I promise. You are too smart not to. Here's the article. <a href="http://nashvilleunderground.wordpress.com/2006/09/20/cia-to-anti-war-movement-well-save-you-from-israel/#more-11">link</a> And a handy graphic for inspiration: <img src="http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Opening/7482/cia.jpg" style="border:0;"/>

by **Et in Arcadia ego** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 3:13 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Back in the old days, they used to infiltrate peace groups under cover. These days, they don't even bother with cover. And yet they are embraced with open arms.<hr></blockquote> You got that right..I've bitched about people accepting his cunning brand of Shitola-Cola for awhile now, and the only response I get from people is: <img src="http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/images/smiles/icon_sleep.gif" style="border:0;"/> ____________________ Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.

by **robertdreed** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 3:32 am

As yet, I think that your thesis lacks coherence, and sufficient supporting evidence. I'm open to it, but it's going to take more than pointing out the odd instance of rhetorical use of hyperbolic metaphor and simile to convince me. Lots of people talk like that, these days. Ariel Sharon is not in the picture any more, which makes him inneffective in the role of Zionist villain/dybbuk/scapegoat. No sign of his replacement, either. I think that Sharon probably really did have some sort of charismatic influence over George Bush, Jr.- although not to the point of getting him to think or beleive things that he would not otherwise have considered, or would have opposed. Sharon is someone who's actually gotten gun grease on his fatigues. Like Napoleon, or Ollie North...Deplorable as it may be, that experience tends to suffuse people with a sense of resolve- however egotistical and misguided- and that in turn can translate into a sense of self-possession that's very persuasive, especially to mentalities who lack it. And that's what I think people are talking about when they speak of Bush coming under Sharon's sway. I think that Scowcroft was possibly being disingenuous, making excuses for GWB. And I think it was the wrong comment, and the wrong source, for anyone to hang their argument on. But I'm not ready to make that much of it, just yet. As for the RCP, they can continue to attempt to buy respect and influence in the wider American resistance movement with projects like Not In Our Name, but as long as they aren't strong-arming people into conformity with the views of the leadership, I don't view them as much of a Trojan Horse. I think people will take what they can use from the organization, and let the rest go by. I didn't run across any direct reference on the NION site to any role played by Ray McGovern in the effort, by the way. I don't necessarily find anything amiss in a former Cold War-era CIA analyst making use of a Left organization as a forum for his views. In the minds of many of the rank and file of Cold Warriors (all though by no means all of them), the Cold War was waged against a powerful tyrannical regime with global reach and ambitions, more than it was a campaign directed to oppose an ideology, or to forward an ideology. In the absence of something resembling a strong Bolshevist challenge subverting the foundations of this country, I don't think they have any ironclad objections to making common cause with Left organizations- conditionally, at least. Any more than I do, for instance...I like to think I'm more about ideals than ideology. In my experience, the Left is more likely to object to me than I am to them. To me, the Left is comprised mostly of good-hearted idealists who have yet to figure out that the secret to community is making oneself valuable by getting your own- an endeavor that, if honestly and ethically pursued, should inevitably lead to the provision of goods and services to others. A form of altruism both productive and profitable...but I digress. Unless I'm putting my own incorrect gloss on his comment, Ray McGovern points out something quite important at one point in the linked Mother Jones interview, when he alludes to the fact that the pretext for CIA covert operations in the Cold War era was the overarching struggle against the Soviet Union. What justified all of the crimes, the dirty tricks, the atrocities associated with CIA Covert Ops was the underlying assumption that it all had to be done to prevent something even worse from happening. Now that era is over, and it seems to me as if McGovern is saying, what do we need covert ops for, in a unipolar world? Well, perhaps they're needed in order to dismantle terror groups, which is a very specialized function- once again, to prevent something even worse from happening. A last resort, and even then subject to strict guidelines and the rule of law. But that's an entirely different prospect, more about SWAT team law enforcement than something that should be under the purview of an intelligence agency dealing with political questions and foreign policy. And the magnitude of threat is much, much lower than the rational pretense of thwarting the designs of the Soviet superpower and its allies. Also, McGovern admits that even during the Cold War, there was too much cooking of the books to inflate the threat as it was. So, taking him at his word, he's saying that recently there's been pressure on CIA Analysis to inflate a real ( but hardly mortally severe ) Islamic terror threat to the level of a global menace for political purposes, and that he and a lot of his colleagues have seen through it, leading to their disgust with the Bush administration and the direction that they've been pushing the agency. That analysis doesn't sound all that sinister to me. As for his views on "Israel"s role in pumping up the "Islamic terror ops" threat to the level of a transglobal menace threatening Western civilization- well, you read some of the material put out by the Jonathan Insitute and JINSA, and you'll find a lot more than the occasional hyperbolic comment to support his thesis. Except that I think that McGovern makes an error, the same one that I find so frequently on these questions- sloppy labeling. It isn't "Israel" who wants this threat pumped up, it's the militarist mentalities at some of the Israeli-associated think-tanks, which don't differ a whit from our own home-grown militarist mentalities who favor a would-be American Imperium. Both of them want to exploit American military might and the new, cutting-edge technologies of surveillance globally, in order to get everything under control, once and for all. Control freaks. Some of them capable of parsing their goals quite idealistically, but there's still something unwholesome about the gleam in their eye. An arrogance- "finally we can show the world what's best. And they'll have to do it." Full Spectrum Dominance- means, or end? As for Bob Avakian, the anti-Zionist comment sounds like simple hyperbole to me. It does lead me to want to find out a more extensive sampling of his thoughts on the subject. But I don't feature Avakian coming to much popular prominence as a political leader in this country, either as a spokesman for the resistance or in any other sense. His ideology sounds like a mess. But that doesn't necessarily make him a conscious provocateur. Lots of people swallow all sorts of self-contradictions as part of their political and worldviews, completely sincerely. It's all too normal, actually. But I confess my ignorance of the present-day politics of the American Left. I know a few things, but not much. I'm of the mind that mostly the Left in the USA is identified by what they oppose, rather than by a common ideological focus. For better or for worse. I'll try to note the membership roster of VIPS, read through any of their pronouncements I can find, and see if anything unseemly jumps out at me. In the meantime, I'll just note their barely-above-the-horizon media profile. It seems to me that a conjured up Trojan Horse effort of misdirection would be seeking ( and getting ) considerably more mainstream press attention than what I've observed so far. But perhaps they're just being patient. I think that a lot of the antiwar and Left focus on the presumed role of Israel as primary promoter of an increasingly belligerent US foreign policy is on the order of a natural reaction to the long-time suppression of debate over the exact nature of the relationship between the governments of Israel and the USA. I think the answer is more light, and less heat- along with a recognition that there are some viewpoints pertaining to the issue on the various sides who are out to distort and obfuscate it to serve their own private ends. It's quite a bit more complicated than simply "pro" or "anti." In fact, as complicated political issues go, it's even more complicated than most- a conundrum which doesn't necessarily reveal itself unless examined at length- which perhaps helps to explain the reluctance to have a full and candid public discussion of the controversies at stake, whether in the US media, the floor of the House and Senate, or at the United Nations... Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 9/20/06 8:08 am

by **Et in Arcadia ego** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 4:32 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I think that Sharon probably really did have some sort of charismatic influence over George Bush, Jr.- although not to the point of getting him to think or beleive things that he would not otherwise have considered, or would have opposed.<hr></blockquote> You're forgetting about Bush's handlers who are much less likely to be 'charismatically influenced' by much of anything that they themselves haven't concieved.. Nobody penetrate's that Goblin's Brain-Trust.. ____________________ Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.

by **robertdreed** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 4:39 am

I just addressed a few comments about my assessment of where they're at in my expanded remarks, above.

by **Dreams End** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:02 pm

Sharon as hypnotist simply shows real and deliberate ignorance of how policy gets made. Bush doesn't go talk to someone and then start dispensing orders. It's just silly, really. We'll have to disagree about the CIA in left leadership roles. However, that's actually not important as you aren't a leftist and my concern is about the acceptance of these people by the left, against all principles the left allegedly would rely on. It's a sad state of affairs. Avakian is not a threat to be a leader, but its curious that so many RCP projects gain such prominence and so quickly. RCP are, in my view, COINTELPRO style provocateurs. I think that's a pretty standard view of them among those knowledgeable on the left, which, again, makes it curious that they are given prominent roles. But the real issue is why McGovern would allow himself to be associated with those who overtly support groups like Shining Path. To me it is a pattern exactly following the model of Ramsey Clark. Neither man is forced to join these allegedly communist groups to make their views known. In fact, neither man expresses even anti-capitalist views, as far as I know. So why ally with these "extremists"? It doesn't make sense. Is Avakian's remark on Israel representative of his overall views? It is prominent on the front page of the RCP website. It may be a new position but it is definitely one he wants out there front and center. If you assume, just for argument, that RCP aren't a state sponsored project, then I think it represents an effort by RCP to absorb fascist elements along the lines of similar "red/brown" alliances taking place in the world, such as with Dugin's former National Bolshevik Party. However, I mostly think it's all part of the same game that McGovern is playing. In any event, whether I'm wrong about all these intel folks or not, my suspicion of them is fully in line with what leftists would normally believe, so it is simply inexplicable that they are being featured with such prominence in the left.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:36 pm

Well, I'm glad I started this thread. DE, I understand your valid concerns about infiltration and I share them, obviously. I also read your own account of having been burned by these types once upon a time and the resulting vigilance. But I disagree about Ramsey Clark. He has outed and scorned the spook system deployed by the US against the peace and justice community even going as far as to imply they got JFK, RFK, and MLK. Some folks wonder why he has gone to the side of every CIA show trial target and concluded he was part of the show. I see him as quite genuine if not as diligantly academic as William Blum or Peter Dale Scott. Because I don't think he has the same caliber mind. Ramsey was the son of a right-winger and got his Attorney General position through the Old Boy nepotism network in the 60s. Once in he was asked to sanction COINTELPRO and CHAOS-type activities he rebelled against that system of thwarting social movements for the rest of his life. His own comments to Covert Action Quarterly give me a sense of his bona fides. Here are abridged excerpts from ThirdWorldTraveler.com where the only thing he gets wrong is quoting someone else saying "Jack was responsible" for Diem's death meaning JFK, an easy mistake to make with all the CIA disinfo around the JFK years.- <a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA/CorruptionCovertActions.html">www.thirdworldtraveler.co...tions.html</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>The Corruption of Covert Actions by Ramsey Clark CovertAction Quarterly magazine, Fall 1998 Nothing is more destructive of democracy or peace and freedom through the rule of law than secret criminal acts by government. The fact, or appearance, of covert action by government agents or their surrogates rots the core of love and respect that is the foundation of any free democratic society. Every true citizen of any nation wants to be able to love her country and still love justice. Corrupt covert actions make this impossible. *** Despite common knowledge that the U.S. government is engaged continually in dangerous covert actions, some that can alter the futures of whole societies, most people cling desperately to the faith that their government is different and better than others, that it would engage in criminal, or ignoble, acts only under the greatest provocation, or direst necessity, and then only for a greater good. They do not want information that suggests otherwise and question the patriotism of anyone who raises unwanted questions. *** In Vietnam 30 years ago, with all of Charlie Company, including dozens of robust young American soldiers who shot and killed helpless Vietnamese women and children and many other U.S. military personnel witnesses to, or aware of, the slaughter at My Lai, few would imagine the murderous event could be kept secret. Yet few would deny the U.S. intended to do so. The tragedy barely came to light through the courage and perseverance of several men. Ron Ridenhour broke the story after personal inquiry with letters to the Congress. The hero of My Lai, Hugh Thompson, who ended the massacre by placing himself between the U.S. troops and surviving Vietnamese and ordering his helicopter machine gunner to aim at the American soldiers and shoot if they tried to continue, was removed from Vietnam, separated from the service, and threatened with prosecution supported by Congressmen Mendel Rivers and Edward Hebert. Lt. William Calley alone was convicted, confined to base for a while, and still enjoys government support. Only by the sacrifice and heroism of an unusual handful did the story become known, and even then there has never been an acknowledgment of wrongdoing by the U.S. The medal begrudgingly given Thompson in 1998 was for non-combat service. And My Lai is viewed as an aberration, an ambiguous aberration. When Salvadoran soldiers of the elite Atlacatl Battalion, which trained in the U.S., massacred Salvadoran villagers at El Mozote, shooting even infants Iying on wooden floors at point blank range, the U.S. government was able to cover up any public disclosure, even though top reporters from the New York Times and the Washington Post and a TV team from CBS knew the story. It was a dozen years later before the massacre at El Mozote was confirmed, and years too late to affect U.S. plans for El Salvador, or the careers of those responsible for yet another U.S.-condoned, and inspired, massacre. Just to list a few of the alleged assassinations conducted or planned by U.S. agents exposes the crisis in confidence covert actions have created for our country. Allende, Lumumba, Diem, Bhutto, with many questioning whether President Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr., should be included, and U.S. planning for the assassination of Fidel Castro part of our public record, while air and missile attacks directed at Qaddafi of Libya and Saddam Hussein of Iraq missed their targets. *** CIA Director Richard Helms pleaded guilty to perjury for false testimony he gave before the U.S. Senate on the CIA' s role in the overthrow of President Allende. He was fined, but his two-year prison sentence was suspended. But the American public is unaware of it, and Chile has never been the same. U.S. support for the overthrow of Allende was the essential element in that tragedy. For years, Patrice Lumumba's son would ask me whenever we met, first in Beirut, or later in Geneva, if the U.S. killed his father. I finally gave him a copy of former CIA officer John Stockwell's In Search of Enemies, which tells the story. Justice William O. Douglas wrote in later years that the U.S. killed Diem, painfully adding, "And Jack was responsible." Bhutto was removed from power in Pakistan by force on the l5th of July, after the usual party on the 4th at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, with U.S. approval, if not more, by General Zia al-Haq. Bhutto was falsely accused and brutalized for months during proceedings that corrupted the judiciary of Pakistan before being murdered, then hanged. That Bhutto had run for president of the student body at U.C. Berkeley and helped arrange the opportunity for Nixon to visit China did not help him when he defied the U.S. So we should not be surprised that patriotic Americans wonder whether, or even charge that, the U.S. government assassinated President John F. Kennedy and our greatest moral leader, Martin Luther King, Jr. We have been told time and again of the "Deadly Deceits" of our government, occasionally by career CIA officers like Ralph McGehee, by FBI agents, crime lab scientists, and city detectives like Frank Serpico. Major studies on the lawless violence of COINTELPRO, the Life and Death of National Security Study Memorandum 200, the police murders of Black Panthers Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, are a part of the lore of our lawless government. And still the People want to Believe. Our covert government's past is modest prologue to its new powers of concealment, deception, and deadly secret violent actions. Too often the government is supported by a controlled, or willingly duped, mass media, by collaborating or infiltrated international governmental organizations, and by key officials in vast transnational corporations. The new evil empires, terrorism, Islam, barely surviving socialist and would-be socialist states, economic competitors, uncooperative leaders of defenseless nations, and most of all the masses of impoverished people, overwhelmingly people of color, are the inspiration for new campaigns by the U.S. government ... to shoot first and ask questions later, to exploit, to demonize and destroy. The CIA is rapidly expanding its manpower for covert operations against these newfound enemies. The National Security apparatus, with major new overseas involvement by the FBI, is creating an enormous new anti-terrorism industry exceeding in growth rate all other government activities. *** The U.S. is not nearly so concerned that its acts be kept secret from their intended victims as it is that the American people not know of them. The Cambodians knew they were being bombed. So did the Libyans. The long suffering Iraqis know every secret the U.S. government conceals from the American people and every lie it tells them. Except for surprise attacks, it is primarily from the American people that the U.S. government must keep the true nature and real purpose of so many of its domestic and foreign acts secret while it manufactures fear and falsehood to manipulate the American public. The reasons for and effects of government covert acts and cultivated fear, with the hatred it creates, must remain secret for the U.S. to be able to send missiles against unknown people, deprive whole nations of food and medicine, and arrest, detain, and deport legal residents from the U.S. on secret allegations, without creating domestic outrage. As never before, it is imperative that the American people care about and know what their government is doing in their name. That we be demanding of government, skeptical, critical, even a little paranoid, because not to suspect the unthinkable has been made a dangerous naiveté by a government that does unthinkable things and believes it knows best. We must challenge controlling power in America that seeks to pacify the people by bread and circuses and relies on violence, deception, and secrecy to advance its grand plans for the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few. For 20 years, Ellen Ray, Bill Schaap, Lou Wolf, and Philip Agee, with the help of very few others, have struggled against all odds to alert our people to the perils of covert action. They started their lonely, courageous, dangerous struggle in what many want to think was the aftermath of the worst of times, but now we can clearly see the worst is yet to be. The American people owe an enormous debt of gratitude to these valiant few. The role of CovertAction Quarterly is more important than ever. Those who love America should support and defend its efforts, against the most powerful and secretive forces, to find the truth that can prevent our self-destruction and may yet set us free. *** Ramsey Clark was United States Attorney General during the Johnson administration. He is an international lawyer and human rights advocate, based in New York City, and a prolific author.<hr></blockquote>

Ray McGovern, CIA media analyst. Infiltrator.

Re: trying to make up my mind....

My comments still apply, DE

Re: My comments still apply, DE

Re: My comments still apply, DE

McGovern Versus Rumsfelt

Before I address Ray McGovern's comments...

Re: Before I address Ray McGovern's comments...

Ray McGovern's opinion...

Re: Ray McGovern's opinion...

Re: Ray McGovern, CIA media analyst. Infiltrator.

DE

Re: DE

yeah

Re: yeah

Re: Ramsey Clark - falsely accused.

Who is online