by Hugh Manatee Wins » Tue Oct 10, 2006 12:14 pm
I agree with all you wrote here, RR.<br><br>Especially-<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Among other things, even from the viewpoint of suspicion, you don't learn anything by shutting people down. It's lousy counterintelligence.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The Wilson-Plame affair was turned into a 'white girl story' of Little Red Riding Hood vs the Big Bad Wolves.<br><br>One of the reasons I point to a high level of CIA involvement with the media is to qualify how media portrayals of internecine tussles between White House-NSC, Pentagon-DIA, and CIA-CFR are viewed 'down here.'<br><br>We are left watching the equivalent of a wrestling match between King Kong, Godzilla, and Frankenstein while their own PR people snow us to keep us rooting them on.<br><br>I'm trying to research the evolution of the balance between those three branches of the secret government.<br><br>My goal is to better understand what were the efforts by those other two branches to counterbalance against the Dulles-thru-Colby era CIA which was so autonomous up until the post-Vietnam reconstruction period.<br><br>The near-collapse of American domestic stability from 1969-1972 led to a reigning in of the CIA-only domestic perception management and I think naval intelligence officer Bob Woodward is evidence of the Pentagon stepping in to put more pressure on the steering wheel through the Washington Post.<br><br>Interesting, isn't it, that now the Council on Foreign Relations has come out of the woodwork and is routinely being the interviewed expert on NPR. They are taking their spoils. And still the 'left' doesn't look at the CFR, just Republicans.<br><br>Woodward's latest book, 'State of Denial,' is the centerpiece for Mockingbird chatter now. Like a passed around box of chocolates, tasty nuggets are being oohed-aahed over and relished one at a time to shape perceptions of the Albert Speer class of America.<br><br>His role as mouthpiece for the secret government branches that are not the White House-NSC is quite clear. He is outing some journalists as being in on Iraq strategy meetings as if to neutralize those outed and their potential WH-NSC shilling effect for (s)election 2006. This also acts as a shot across the bow of other shillers to let them know they'll have to keep their heads down if they want to get through the season.<br><br>And this game is for the purpose of changing a few polls here, a few House seats there, and steer the ship of state through the shoals of fascist policies while sustaining the myth of democracy for the passengers.<br><br>Cross-posting thread about Woodward outing other journalists-<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=6476.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...6476.topic</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/09/business/media/09zakaria.html?ex=1318046400&en=ab43603ab31201e7&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">www.nytimes.com/2006/10/0...nd&emc=rss</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Secret Iraq Meeting Included Journalists<br><br>October 9, 2006<br><br>By JULIE BOSMAN<br><br>It was the kind of shadowy, secret Washington meeting that Bob Woodward is fond of describing in detail. In his new book, “State of Denial,” he writes that on Nov. 29, 2001, a dozen policy makers, Middle East experts and members of influential policy research organizations gathered in Virginia at the request of Paul D. Wolfowitz, then the deputy secretary of defense. Their objective was to produce a report for President Bush and his cabinet outlining a strategy for dealing with Afghanistan and the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11.<br><br>What was more unusual, Mr. Woodward reveals, was the presence of journalists at the meeting. Fareed Zakaria, the editor of Newsweek International and a Newsweek columnist, and Robert D. Kaplan, now a national correspondent for The Atlantic Monthly, attended the meeting and, according to Mr. Kaplan, signed confidentiality agreements not to discuss what happened.<br><br>While members of policy research groups often dispense advice to administration officials, journalists do not typically attend secret meetings or help compile government reports. Indeed, many Washington journalists complain that the current administration keeps them at an unhealthy distance.<br><br>Mr. Zakaria takes issue with Mr. Woodward’s account, saying that while he attended the meeting for several hours, he does not recall being told that a report would be produced.<br><br>“I thought it was a brainstorming session,” he said. “I was never told that there was going to be a document summarizing our views and I have never seen such a document.” (Mr. Woodward wrote that the report, which supported the invasion of Iraq, caused Mr. Bush to focus on the “malignancy” of the Middle East situation.)<br><br>Mr. Kaplan said much of the meeting was spent drafting and reworking the document, which in the end carried the names of all 12 participants and was “a forceful summary of some of the best pro-war arguments at the time.” Could any of the participants have been unaware there was a document in the making? “No, that’s not possible,” he said.<br><br>Mr. Kaplan, who was then a freelancer at The Atlantic Monthly, said he spoke to his editor before attending, and was given approval to attend because “everybody was in a patriotic fervor.”<br><br>Mr. Zakaria said he felt participating was appropriate because his views, as a columnist for Newsweek, were public, although he has never divulged his involvement to his readers.<br><br>“My column is an analytical column,” he said, adding that he gives advice to policy makers and elected officials: “If a senator calls me up and asks me what should we do in Iraq, I’m happy to talk to him.”<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: 10/10/06 10:33 am<br></i>