rigorousintuition.ca

Beware CIA men bearing limited hang-out criticisms.<br><br>'Retired' CIA analyst Ray McGovern lets slip four interesting words in an interview with Dahr Jamail posted at TruthOut.org.<br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><br>"Control of the media"</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> Oops, Ray. Are you sure you meant to tell Americans they live under a system of state-controlled press?<br><br>McGovern decries the influence of Israel on US policies and then goes on to line out what he thinks Rumsfeld/Cheney might say to Bush about their situation in the middle east during the 2006 election season.<br><br>McGovern has been acting as mouthpiece for the 'liberal wing' of the CIA in criticising Bush II admin. policies while pretending that his CIA isn't the largest terrorist organization on the planet with hypocritical huffing like this-<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The whole thing is so corrupt. The whole thing is so disingenuously deceitful that it's hard to believe that our elected leaders and the people they appoint could be so corrupt.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>McGovern even minimizes CIA torture as only "12-13 guys"--<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>When the president decided he'd like the CIA to start torturing folks who were captured in Afghanistan, they came back to him and said, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"We have 12-13 people who are willing to do this, they are all special-ops guys from Vietnam and know how to do this. </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->But Mr. President, we have this little paper we'd like you to sign."<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>McGovern reinforces the bogus 9/11 cover story, too.<br><br>But, more importantly, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START--><span style="text-decoration:underline">I think he accidentally re-confirmed Operation Mockingbird, the CIA control of US 'mainstream media' going back to the 1950s which was exposed in the 1975-1976 Senate hearings on CIA abuses which even the complicit NYTimes had to report on to pretend they weren't a Mockingbird stronghold. The NYTimes slipped this little bombshell past the American people by printing it on Christmas Day, 1977. </span><!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END--> --<br></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/090506R.shtml">www.truthout.org/docs_2006/090506R.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Interview With Ray McGovern, Part 3<br> By Dahr Jamail<br> t r u t h o u t | Perspective<br><br> Tuesday 05 September 2006<br><br> During the Veterans for Peace National Convention in Seattle, I conducted an interview with Ray McGovern. McGovern was a CIA analyst for 27 years and is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).<br>.....<br>So what I'm saying is these people are criminally culpable, in my view, criminally liable under US Code, criminal statute for war crimes. This is something that has to worry them, and it's precisely why they are trying to change the law. They are trying to change the US War Crimes Act of 1996 to permit the kinds of things that they've already done. I've never seen the likes of it.<br><br> How does this all play out?<br><br> If I were they, I would be very receptive to a Karl Rove and a Dick Cheney who would come up and say, "Mr. President, we have to do something to prevent this. And the best thing we can think of is: you did pretty well as a war president. You like that role. So we think if we take off after Iran, because of course it is threatening Israel, and juice that as the justification and the fact that they are still trying to get a nuclear weapon - we can make people think that. Then you'll be a war president again. It's risky, these damned armed-forces guys are a bunch of cowards and warn that all hell could break loose, but look at the downside here. Let's say the Democrats take the House. We are in very deep kimshei. So this is what we advise. We advise using these smart bombs, and the Air Force guys say they can do it, even though the Army and Marines are being a bunch of wimps about this, they are afraid of having to go in and clean up after the Air Force. But the Air Force guys say they know where most of the targets are and the Israelis could start it. We could finish it up. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The domestic ramifications would be OK because of the control of the media </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->and the Israeli lobby and there's a good chance that if you could become that kind of war president, maybe it would be accompanied by a minor terrorist incident - which we could certainly arrange - you have a decent chance of hanging onto the House."<br><br> Is that Machiavellian? Is that un-American? Is that beyond the pale? Yeah, it is! But I would not put that past this crew. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 9/6/06 10:10 am<br></i>

"maybe it would be accompanied by a minor terrorist incident - which we could certainly arrange"<br><br>He takes false flags for granted too. Some hang-out! <p></p><i></i>

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>But I would not put that past this crew<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>McGovern's focus is on Rumsfeld and Cheney</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, not the long history of CIA torture, terror, assassination, coups, media control, economic sabotage, etc.<br><br>And that is a limited hang-out coming from a "27-year CIA analyst." <p></p><i></i>

Hugh, great catch! <p></p><i></i>

That's not an admission. He's putting words into a hypothetical Cheney or Rove's mouth in this hypothetical monologue to Bush.<br><br>Of course it's pretty hard to believe he would be surprised at this sort of behavior unless he is seriously overstating his credentials in the CIA. <p></p><i></i>

I hate the idea that I'm letting myself slip with what double-speak's currently in vogue, but can someone please explain to me what's meant by 'limited hang-out'? <p>____________________<br>Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.</p><i></i>

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br>Essentially, it's when the bad guy says "ok guys, I'll come clean," and then doesn't tell you everything. <p></p><i></i>

cheers; Describes McGovern quite well if you ask me. How does someone lend even the tiniest credibility to a 'former' CIA employee in the first place? The guy's like a Pied Piper for Advanced Sheople; it drives me crazy how many people hang on his every word.<br><br>Infiltrate a group, establish confidence(in this case, even leadership), then diffuse/destroy opposition from within<br><br>Sound familiar, anyone?<br><br>The only thing I know about the CIA is the one thing they have in common with the Mob: Once you're in, you're <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>NEVER</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> out.<br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/images/smiles/headbang.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p>____________________<br>Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.</p><i></i>

"How does someone lend even the tiniest credibility to a 'former' CIA employee in the first place?"<br><br>I agree.<br><br>WHY do so many lend credibility to Valerie Plame..??<br><br>the ex Cia-er tuned cover girl.<br><br>limited hang out is one crime is revealed to hide a more serious and dangerous crime.<br><br><br>{I posted this article at PI. last wk or so..<br><br>Zero responses.}<br><br><br>the bad cia as led by GHW Bush vs the good CIA with Rays crowd..like rival criminals gangs ..in the end the working class gets the abuse and the bills..<br><br>all the cia is a big corporat front<br>and no real benefit to anyone who happens to be a free thinker. <p></p><i></i>

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>WHY do so many lend credibility to Valerie Plame..??<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I asked this over and over when she became the Jilted SweetHeart of DU. All these 'democrats' howling for the blood of the person who outted this National Hero..<br><br>Does anyone know what her work actually was, because I remember reading about it a year or so back and it wasn't very slick business. Something alledgedly about optimizing existing genocide techniques in other countries, I'm not certain..Who knows, and who cares; I've never felt that my life has ever been personally saved by a CIA agent at any point, but play on, Maestro, play on..And by all means neccessary, please stay in tune..<br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/images/smiles/icon_violin.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p>____________________<br>Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.</p><i></i>

I don't think anyone cared or cares whether she is credible. She just provides a convenient platform from which activists imagine they can claw at the feet of the GOP.<br><br>And where does all of this leave sibel edmonds? <p></p><i></i>

yea i'm a little confused, how is this a slip admission? i thought it was common understanding that virtualy all of the media is all controlled. no?<br><br>on a side note: i don't like how Mcgovern likes to talk about current geo politics in terms of the official narrative as if it were true. very wierd. but he may be trying to appeal as broadly as he can. <p>___________________________________________<br>"BUSHCO aren't incompetent...they are COMPLICIT." -Me<br><br>"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act" -George Orwell<br><br>"When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it - always."-Mahatma Gandhi</p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=dugoboy@rigorousintuition>dugoboy</A>  <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://www.geocities.com/orcthrasher/files/images/Qn38113.gif" BORDER=0> at: 9/6/06 2:28 pm<br></i>

Haha that's one wikipedia article that will get deleted/heavily edited once someone other than the original author sees it!!<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Examples of limited hangouts<br><br> * The Warren Commission<br> * The 911 Commission<br> * The book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins<br> * The Iran-Contra investigation<br> * The BCCI Scandal investigation<br> * The Enron investigation<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Probably most/all of those are to some extent..., but boldly stating them like that without evidence is definitely not NPOV! <br><br><!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :D --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif ALT=":D"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>I wish people would think (or better still, read <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm">Orwell's "Politics and the English Language"</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->) before using buzzword like 'limited hangout', 'MIHOP/LIHOP', etc... for that matter Wikipedia jargon like NPOV and the truely newspeak "Copyvio" is pretty horrid too... Certainly sometimes jargon and technical terms are neccessary, but too often they're counterproductive and dangerous. <p></p><i></i>

I think Plame has been elevated to Heroine status by many<br><br>Sibel is quite a mystery and I would like to think of her as legit BUT..<br><br>IF they worked for the CIA they are liars ...<br>DUNNO? then what??..IF its all govt controled lies.. <p></p><i></i>