Jump to content


Spartacus

Operation Mockingbird


  • Please log in to reply
280 replies to this topic

#1 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,087 posts

Posted 28 January 2005 - 04:51 PM

I have now been able to reconstruct the early history of Operation Mockingbird. After the Second World War a group of people met on a regular basis in Georgetown. They became known as the Georgetown crowd. Most of them knew each other from before the war. Some had gone to the same schools or universities. Others had worked together as lawyers in New York. Many of them had been members of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) during the war.

The group was united by a shared political ideology. They had become involved in politics during the 1930s. They were Roosevelt supporting Democrats. In fact, they thought FDR had not been radical enough with his policies. They retained these progressive views on domestic issues (in fact, in most cases they held these views until they died).

When it came to foreign policy they were staunchly anti-communist. In most cases, these views had been developed while serving in the OSS. However, their anti-communist views was not applied to domestic policy. For example, they did not believe like say J. Edgar Hoover, that American communists posed a threat to national security.

They were also intellectuals. They had no time for those rabble rousers who attempted to use anti-left-wing views to put forward racist ideas. This distanced themselves from the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in the Deep South. They supported Harry Truman in 1948 and Adlai Stevenson in 1952. Many of them held posts in the Truman administration. They supported his Fair Deal policies and his tough stance against the Soviet Union. They were keen advocates of the Marshall Plan, as they saw it as the best defence against communism in Europe.

The Georgetown crowd included the following: Frank Wisner, Richard Bissell, Desmond FitzGerald, Joseph Alsop, Tracy Barnes, Philip Graham, Katharine Graham, Clark Clifford, Walt Rostow, Eugene Rostow, William Bundy, Charles Thayer, Chips Bohlen and Paul Nitze. This group had access to and support of, James Forrestal, Dean Acheson, George Kennan and Adlai Stevenson.

This group basically supported Trumans policies. However, they felt he was not pro-active enough with his anti-communist strategy. They were especially concerned about the possible growth of communism in under-developed countries. They therefore came up with a plan of action. This was drawn up by Frank Wisner and George Kennan. It was then shown to the Secretary of Defence, James Forrestal. He approved it and as a result the Office of Special Projects was established in 1948. Soon afterwards it was renamed the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC). This became the espionage and counter-intelligence branch of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Frank Wisner was made director of OPC. The aim of the OPC was to create an organization that concentrated on "propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world."

Wisner realised that propaganda was going to play an important role in this work. This did not only mean propaganda abroad. If this covert action was going to work it had to control the way these events were reported in America. He therefore established Operation Mockingbird, a program to control the media. Wisner recruited Philip Graham (Washington Post) to run the project within the industry. According to Deborah Davis (Katharine the Great): "By the early 1950s, Wisner 'owned' respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles." By 1953 the OPC had a major influence over 25 major newspapers and wire agencies. One of the most important journalists under Wisner's control was Joseph Alsop, whose articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers.

Wisner also recruited into the OPC several members of the Georgetown crowd. This included Richard Bissell, Desmond FitzGerald, Tracy Barnes and Cord Meyer. Other former members of the OSS such as Arthur Schlesinger worked closely with this group.

For Operation Mockingbird to work, Wisner could not just rely on those journalists and publishers who shared the Georgetown Crowd view of the world. It was therefore not too difficult to get right-wingers like William Paley (CBS), C.D. Jackson (Fortune Magazine), Henry Luce (Time Magazine and Life Magazine), Arthur Hays Sulzberger (New York Times), Jerry O'Leary (Washington Star), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Barry Bingham Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal), James Copley (Copley News Services) and Joseph Harrison (Christian Science Monitor) involved in the operation.

It was also important for Wisner to be able to influence journalists who were respected for their objectivity and their willingness to criticise the government. They did this by providing them with leaks that furthered the cause. Drew Pearson is an example of someone who was used in this way. People like Pearson were important when the OPC wanted to deal with people within the CIA.

J. Edgar Hoover grew very concerned with the power that the OPC and the Georgetown Crowd was having over political life. He carried out investigations into their past. It did not take him long to discover that some of them had been active in left-wing politics in the 1930s. This information was passed to Joe McCarthy who started making attacks on people like Dean Acheson, William Bundy, Charles Thayer, Paul Nitze, Chips Bohlen and Cord Meyer. Hoover did not realise what he was taking on. Wisner unleashed Operation Mockingbird on McCarthy. Drew Pearson, Joe Alsop, Jack Anderson, Walter Lippmann and Ed Murrow all went into attack mode and McCarthy was destroyed (although the monster he had created went on).

According to Alex Constantine (Mockingbird: The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA), in the 1950s, "some 3,000 salaried and contract CIA employees were eventually engaged in propaganda efforts". Wisner was also able to keep newspapers from reporting about certain events. For example, the CIA plots to overthrow the governments of Iran and Guatemala.

The overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala is particularly interesting. This was very much a OPC operation. It included the following cast of operators: Frank Winser, Tracy Barnes, Richard Bissell, David Atlee Phillips, Rip Robertson, David Morales and E. Howard Hunt.

Wisner was also able to use Operation Mockingbird to keep the true story out of the American media. For example, people like Henry Luce were called into to censor stories that appeared too sympathetic towards the plight of Arbenz. (Journalists working on Time Magazine were shocked to see him taking out articles that had already been approved by the editor). Wisner was also able to use the CIA to stop honest journalists from travelling to Guatemala. This included Sydney Gruson of the New York Times.

Eisenhower was very impressed with Wisners work in Guatemala. Eisenhower asked Wisner how much the operation cost ($20m). He then asked how many men Castillo Armas lost during the overthrow of Arbenz. The answer was only one. Eisenhower shook his head, remembering the thousands that had been killed in various operations during the Second World War. Eisenhower could only reply incredible.

Wisner suffered a mental breakdown after Eisenhower refused to support the Hungarian Uprising in 1956 (we must not forget that the Georgetown Group were idealists who really believed in freedom and democracy). Bissell eventually took over CIA covert operations from Wisner (he eventually committed suicide). It is no surprise that when Bissell began planning the overthrow of Fidel Castro he called on the same team who had successfully overthrown Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala. Operation Mockingbird was also used to ensure the right sort of coverage in the American media.

By 1960 the Georgetown Crowd were still supporters of the Democrats (they had also supported Adlai Stevenson in 1956). Nixon was too closely identified with Eisenhower, a man who had been a great disappointment to them. They had been concerned by his decision to have a summit meeting with Khrushchev in Paris in May, 1960. It was now clear that Khrushchev was willing to negotiate an end to the Cold War. Eisenhower, coming to the end of his time as president, wanted to leave this as his legacy. Bissell decided to undermine the summit by arranging for the U-2 spy plane to go on a mission over the Soviet Union on 1st May, 1960. As this was May Day Soviet airspace was virtually empty and they therefore picked up the U-2 the moment it crossed the border. On 7th May Khrushchev made a speech where he revealed that the U-2 spy plane had been shot down near Sverdlovsk. That put paid to Eisenhowers peace negotiations.

The Georgetowns first choice was Lyndon Johnson. However, despite the help given by Philip Graham and other members of Operation Mockingbird, by the summer of 1960 it was clear that LBJ was not going to get the nomination. The strategy had to change. JFK became their candidate.

Dulles already had a close relationship with JFK. This is revealed by an incident that took place on 13th March, 1960. Oatsie Charles and Ian Fleming, the creator of James Bond, attended a dinner party at JFKs house in Georgetown. At the end of the meal JFK asked Fleming how he would get rid of Castro. Fleming outlined several different methods.

At 7.45 the next morning, Allen Dulles phoned up Oatsie Charles and asked to be put into contact with Ian Fleming. Dulles said he had heard that Fleming had developed some interesting ideas of how to deal with Castro and he wanted to hear them personally.

Bissell asked Joe Alsop to arrange a meeting with JFK. Both men attended a dinner party at Alsops house in August. This was followed by several other meetings. Bissell was impressed with JFK. What he liked was his anti-communism. More importantly, he liked the way he intended to deal with it. Bissell told friends that JFK was action-orientated and impatient with bureaucracy. Bissell was convinced that a JFK presidency would get quick results. Bissell, who had supported Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and 1956, compared the two men. Whereas he saw Stevenson as a Cicero, JFK was a Caesar.

However, there were still deals to be done. This is why Philip Graham had his meeting with JFK after he won the nomination. JFK would be given the full support of Operation Mockingbird as long as he took LBJ as his running-mate. They also wanted two of their friends to be given senior posts in his administration. Douglas Dillion as Secretary of the Treasury and David Bruce as Secretary of State. JFK agreed to Dillion but rejected Bruce for this post. Instead he was appointed as Ambassador to London. This was an important post for the CIA to get as Britain was seen as its staunchest ally in its fight against communism.

Although I have yet to find any evidence of this I suspect that Bissell got a third person into the administration. This was McGeorge Bundy as National Security Adviser. He proved to be a Bissell loyalist during the problems over Cuba. Arthur Schlesinger was the inside man for this group).

Another Bissell supporter was Chester Bowles. In early 1961 he attempted to persuade JFK to appoint Bissell as Secretary of State. JFK refused saying that Bissell was going to take Allen Dulles job as director of the CIA on 1st July, 1961.

Why did Bissell want Dillon as Secretary of the Treasury? We know that Bissell and Dillon were close friends (they had met while students at Gorton School). Dillon had been a source of information and encouragement while serving as Under Secretary of State in Eisenhowers administration. He met Lumumba in July, 1960. Dillon came to the conclusion that Lumumba was a communist. He told Bissell about this. A few days later Lumumbas assassination was discussed at a National Security Council meeting (21st July).

How does this information help us understand the JFK assassination? First of all, because of the history of the Georgetown Crowd, I dont think any of them were involved in planning the assassination of JFK. However, Operation Mockingbird was used for the cover-up. This I think helps us understand the assassination. It confirms my belief that the Soviets or Castro had anything to do with the assassination. If so, Operation Mockingbird would have been used to fulfil their major objective of destroying communism.

Therefore, why did they do it. One possibility is that CIA members outside the Georgetown Group had been involved. Maybe those non-Georgetown people who had helped overthrow Arbenz (Morales, Philips, Hunt, Robertson).

Another possibility is that the Georgetown Crowd had joined forces with the Suite 8F Group. Had LBJ brought these two groups together. They were both groups who cared a great deal about military spending. The Suite 8F Group was also concerned about the Texas oil industry. This included getting federal contracts from the Secretary of the Navy. Take a look at the three people who held this post in JFK and LBJs administration: John Connally (January, 1961 December, 1961), Fred Korth (December, 1961 to November, 1963) and Paul Nitze (November, 1963 to June, 1967). The first two were members of Suite 8F and Nitze was a member of the Georgetown crowd.

The other thing that Suite 8F cared about was the Oil Depletion Allowance. Dillon, as Secretary of the Treasury was in a good position to block that move. Dillon was eventually replaced by Henry Hammill Fowler in 1965. He was someone who was at Yale with Bissell. He also worked as assistant general counsel of War Production Board in Germany during the war. He was also a member of the National Security Council. I have yet to discover if Fowler was a member of Bissells group but it seems likely and could be further evidence of how the Suite 8F Group and the CIA worked together during the 1960s.

Were the CIA therefore involved in covering up the role that Suite 8F Group had played in the assassination? Or were they protecting their own? Or were they doing both of these things?

http://spartacus-edu...mockingbird.htm



#2 John Korienek

John Korienek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Am interested in who killed Kennedy. Am not interested in ballistics, z films, fake photos, xrays, etc. Am not interested in who pulled the triggers, etc. For now assume the ZR Rifle program of the american cia Executive Action group was the killing mechanism.

Posted 29 January 2005 - 04:14 AM

I have now been able to reconstruct the early history of Operation Mockingbird. After the Second World War a group of people met on a regular basis in Georgetown. They became known as the Georgetown crowd. Most of them knew each other from before the war. Some had gone to the same schools or universities. Others had worked together as lawyers in New York. Many of them had been members of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) during the war.

The group was united by a shared political ideology. They had become involved in politics during the 1930s. They were Roosevelt supporting Democrats. In fact, they thought FDR had not been radical enough with his policies. They retained these progressive views on domestic issues (in fact, in most cases they held these views until they died).

When it came to foreign policy they were staunchly anti-communist. In most cases, these views had been developed while serving in the OSS. However, their anti-communist views was not applied to domestic policy. For example, they did not believe like say J. Edgar Hoover, that American communists posed a threat to national security.

They were also intellectuals. They had no time for those rabble rousers who attempted to use anti-left-wing views to put forward racist ideas. This distanced themselves from the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in the Deep South. They supported Harry Truman in 1948 and Adlai Stevenson in 1952. Many of them held posts in the Truman administration. They supported his Fair Deal policies and his tough stance against the Soviet Union. They were keen advocates of the Marshall Plan, as they saw it as the best defence against communism in Europe.

The Georgetown crowd included the following: Frank Wisner, Richard Bissell, Desmond FitzGerald, Joseph Alsop, Tracy Barnes, Philip Graham, Katharine Graham, Clark Clifford, Walt Rostow, Eugene Rostow, William Bundy, Charles Thayer, Chips Bohlen and Paul Nitze. This group had access to and support of, James Forrestal, Dean Acheson, George Kennan and Adlai Stevenson.

This group basically supported Truman’s policies. However, they felt he was not pro-active enough with his anti-communist strategy. They were especially concerned about the possible growth of communism in under-developed countries. They therefore came up with a plan of action. This was drawn up by Frank Wisner and George Kennan. It was then shown to the Secretary of Defence, James Forrestal. He approved it and as a result the Office of Special Projects was established in 1948. Soon afterwards it was renamed the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC). This became the espionage and counter-intelligence branch of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Frank Wisner was made director of OPC. The aim of the OPC was to create an organization that concentrated on "propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world."

Wisner realised that propaganda was going to play an important role in this work. This did not only mean propaganda abroad. If this covert action was going to work it had to control the way these events were reported in America. He therefore established Operation Mockingbird, a program to control the media. Wisner recruited Philip Graham (Washington Post) to run the project within the industry. According to Deborah Davis (Katharine the Great): "By the early 1950s, Wisner 'owned' respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles." By 1953 the OPC had a major influence over 25 major newspapers and wire agencies. One of the most important journalists under Wisner's control was Joseph Alsop, whose articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers.

Wisner also recruited into the OPC several members of the Georgetown crowd. This included Richard Bissell, Desmond FitzGerald, Tracy Barnes and Cord Meyer. Other former members of the OSS such as Arthur Schlesinger worked closely with this group.

For Operation Mockingbird to work, Wisner could not just rely on those journalists and publishers who shared the Georgetown Crowd view of the world. It was therefore not too difficult to get right-wingers like William Paley (CBS), C.D. Jackson (Fortune Magazine), Henry Luce (Time Magazine and Life Magazine), Arthur Hays Sulzberger (New York Times), Jerry O'Leary (Washington Star), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Barry Bingham Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal), James Copley (Copley News Services) and Joseph Harrison (Christian Science Monitor) involved in the operation.

It was also important for Wisner to be able to influence journalists who were respected for their objectivity and their willingness to criticise the government. They did this by providing them with leaks that furthered the cause. Drew Pearson is an example of someone who was used in this way. People like Pearson were important when the OPC wanted to deal with people within the CIA.

J. Edgar Hoover grew very concerned with the power that the OPC and the Georgetown Crowd was having over political life. He carried out investigations into their past. It did not take him long to discover that some of them had been active in left-wing politics in the 1930s. This information was passed to Joe McCarthy who started making attacks on people like Dean Acheson, William Bundy, Charles Thayer, Paul Nitze, Chips Bohlen and Cord Meyer. Hoover did not realise what he was taking on. Wisner unleashed Operation Mockingbird on McCarthy. Drew Pearson, Joe Alsop, Jack Anderson, Walter Lippmann and Ed Murrow all went into attack mode and McCarthy was destroyed (although the monster he had created went on).

According to Alex Constantine (Mockingbird: The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA), in the 1950s, "some 3,000 salaried and contract CIA employees were eventually engaged in propaganda efforts". Wisner was also able to keep newspapers from reporting about certain events. For example, the CIA plots to overthrow the governments of Iran and Guatemala.

The overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala is particularly interesting. This was very much a OPC operation. It included the following cast of operators: Frank Winser, Tracy Barnes, Richard Bissell, David Atlee Phillips, Rip Robertson and E. Howard Hunt.

Wisner was also able to use Operation Mockingbird to keep the true story out of the American media. For example, people like Henry Luce were called into to censor stories that appeared too sympathetic towards the plight of Arbenz. (Journalists working on Time Magazine were shocked to see him taking out articles that had already been approved by the editor). Wisner was also able to use the CIA to stop “honest” journalists from travelling to Guatemala. This included Sydney Gruson of the New York Times.

Eisenhower was very impressed with Wisner’s work in Guatemala. Eisenhower asked Wisner how much the operation cost ($20m). He then asked how many men Castillo Armas lost during the overthrow of Arbenz. The answer was “only one”. Eisenhower shook his head, remembering the thousands that had been killed in various operations during the Second World War. Eisenhower could only reply “incredible”.

Wisner suffered a mental breakdown after Eisenhower refused to support the Hungarian Uprising in 1956 (we must not forget that the Georgetown Group were idealists who really believed in freedom and democracy). Bissell eventually took over CIA covert operations from Wisner (he eventually committed suicide). It is no surprise that when Bissell began planning the overthrow of Fidel Castro he called on the same team who had successfully overthrown Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala. Operation Mockingbird was also used to ensure the right sort of coverage in the American media.

By 1960 the Georgetown Crowd were still supporters of the Democrats (they had also supported Adlai Stevenson in 1956). Nixon was too closely identified with Eisenhower, a man who had been a great disappointment to them. They had been concerned by his decision to have a summit meeting with Khrushchev in Paris in May, 1960. It was now clear that Khrushchev was willing to negotiate an end to the Cold War. Eisenhower, coming to the end of his time as president, wanted to leave this as his legacy. Bissell decided to undermine the summit by arranging for the U-2 spy plane to go on a mission over the Soviet Union on 1st May, 1960. As this was May Day Soviet airspace was virtually empty and they therefore picked up the U-2 the moment it crossed the border. On 7th May Khrushchev made a speech where he revealed that the U-2 spy plane had been shot down near Sverdlovsk. That put paid to Eisenhower’s peace negotiations.

The Georgetown’s first choice was Lyndon Johnson. However, despite the help given by Philip Graham and other members of Operation Mockingbird, by the summer of 1960 it was clear that LBJ was not going to get the nomination. The strategy had to change. JFK became their candidate.

Dulles already had a close relationship with JFK. This is revealed by an incident that took place on 13th March, 1960. Oatsie Charles and Ian Fleming, the creator of James Bond, attended a dinner party at JFK’s house in Georgetown. At the end of the meal JFK asked Fleming how he would get rid of Castro. Fleming outlined several different methods.

At 7.45 the next morning, Allen Dulles phoned up Oatsie Charles and asked to be put into contact with Ian Fleming. Dulles said he had heard that Fleming had “developed some interesting ideas of how to deal with Castro” and he wanted to hear them personally.

Bissell asked Joe Alsop to arrange a meeting with JFK. Both men attended a dinner party at Alsop’s house in August. This was followed by several other meetings. Bissell was impressed with JFK. What he liked was his anti-communism. More importantly, he liked the way he intended to deal with it. Bissell told friends that JFK was “action-orientated” and “impatient with bureaucracy”. Bissell was convinced that a JFK presidency would get “quick results”. Bissell, who had supported Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and 1956, compared the two men. Whereas he saw Stevenson as a “Cicero”, JFK was a “Caesar”.

However, there were still deals to be done. This is why Philip Graham had his meeting with JFK after he won the nomination. JFK would be given the full support of Operation Mockingbird as long as he took LBJ as his running-mate. They also wanted two of their friends to be given senior posts in his administration. Douglas Dillion as Secretary of the Treasury and David Bruce as Secretary of State. JFK agreed to Dillion but rejected Bruce for this post. Instead he was appointed as Ambassador to London. This was an important post for the CIA to get as Britain was seen as its staunchest ally in its fight against communism.

Although I have yet to find any evidence of this I suspect that Bissell got a third person into the administration. This was McGeorge Bundy as National Security Adviser. He proved to be a Bissell loyalist during the problems over Cuba. Arthur Schlesinger was the inside man for this group). 

Another Bissell supporter was Chester Bowles. In early 1961 he attempted to persuade JFK to appoint Bissell as Secretary of State. JFK refused saying that Bissell was going to take Allen Dulles job as director of the CIA on 1st July, 1961.

Why did Bissell want Dillon as Secretary of the Treasury? We know that Bissell and Dillon were close friends (they had met while students at Gorton School). Dillon had been a source of information and encouragement while serving as Under Secretary of State in Eisenhower’s administration. He met Lumumba in July, 1960. Dillon came to the conclusion that Lumumba was a communist. He told Bissell about this. A few days later Lumumba’s assassination was discussed at a National Security Council meeting (21st July).

How does this information help us understand the JFK assassination? First of all, because of the history of the Georgetown Crowd, I don’t think any of them were involved in planning the assassination of JFK. However, Operation Mockingbird was used for the cover-up. This I think helps us understand the assassination. It confirms my belief that the Soviets or Castro had anything to do with the assassination. If so, Operation Mockingbird would have been used to fulfil their major objective of destroying communism.

Therefore, why did they do it. One possibility is that CIA members outside the Georgetown Group had been involved. Maybe those non-Georgetown people who had helped overthrow Arbenz (Philips, Hunt, Robertson).

Another possibility is that the Georgetown Crowd had joined forces with the Suite 8F Group. Had LBJ brought these two groups together. They were both groups who cared a great deal about military spending. The Suite 8F Group was also concerned about the Texas oil industry. This included getting federal contracts from the Secretary of the Navy. Take a look at the three people who held this post in JFK and LBJ’s administration: John Connally (January, 1961 – December, 1961), Fred Korth (December, 1961 to November, 1963) and Paul Nitze (November, 1963 to June, 1967). The first two were members of Suite 8F and Nitze was a member of the Georgetown crowd.

The other thing that Suite 8F cared about was the Oil Depletion Allowance. Dillon, as Secretary of the Treasury was in a good position to block that move. Dillon was eventually replaced by Henry Hammill Fowler in 1965. He was someone who was at Yale with Bissell. He also worked as assistant general counsel of War Production Board in Germany during the war. He was also a member of the National Security Council. I have yet to discover if Fowler was a member of Bissell’s group but it seems likely and could be further evidence of how the Suite 8F Group and the CIA worked together during the 1960s.

Were the CIA therefore involved in covering up the role that Suite 8F Group had played in the assassination? Or were they protecting their own? Or were they doing both of these things?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

John,
Regarding C Douglas Dillon, I think the readers of your forum, especially Shanet Clark, deserve another view of this squeaky clean, distinguished patriot, a view not to be found in your bio of Dillon. Perhaps you could include it.

This is from George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, by Tarpley and Chaitkin.

"C Douglas Dillon was the boss of William H Draper, Jr in the Draper-Prescott Bush-Fritz Thyssen Nazi banking scheme of the 1930's and 40's. His father, Clarence Dillon, created the Vereinigte Stahlwerke (Thyssen's German Steel Trust) in 1926."

In other words, Dillon was part of the Neo-Nazi crowd of the inner core of the Council on Foreign Relations. Strange that you missed this.

For more info on Dillon, put his name and "nazi banking" in google. You could spend all night on this.

John

Edited by John Korienek, 30 January 2005 - 04:42 AM.


#3 Shanet Clark

Shanet Clark

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:US/Georgia 9/06- PHOTO ON FILE VIA URL
  • Interests:Masters in Education; B.A. (Summa Cum Laude) History. GSU.

Posted 29 January 2005 - 07:05 AM

John and John

Douglas Dillon, Clarence's father, was also notorious as the man who wrote the famous "million dollar check" -- I believe it was to buy the struggling Dodge Motor Company, and that was a scandal in its day, as well, has anyone heard of that ? ....

#4 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,087 posts

Posted 29 January 2005 - 11:48 AM

Details of Operation Mockingbird was revealed as a result of the Frank Church investigations (Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities) in 1975. I received a copy of this report this morning. It makes interesting reading.

Here is one passage from the report that relates to Operation Mockingbird:

The Covert Use of Books and Publishing Houses

The Committee has found that the Central Intelligence Agency attaches a particular importance to book publishing activities as a form of covert propaganda. A former officer in the Clandestine Service stated that books are "the most important weapon of strategic (long-range) propaganda." Prior to 1967, the Central Intelligence Agency sponsored, subsidized, or produced over 1,000 books; approximately 25 percent of them in English. In 1967 alone, the CIA published or subsidized over 200 books, ranging from books on African safaris and wildlife to translations of Machiavelli's The Prince into Swahili and works of T. S. Eliot into Russian, to a competitor to Mao's little red book, which was entitled Quotations from Chairman Liu.

The Committee found that an important number of the books actually produced by the Central Intelligence Agency were reviewed and marketed in the United States:

* A book about a young student from a developing country who had studied in a communist country was described by the CIA as "developed by (two areas divisions) and, produced by the Domestic Operations Division... and has had a high impact in the United States as well as in the (foreign area) market." This book, which was produced by the European outlet of a United States publishing house was published in condensed form in two major U.S. magazines."

* Another CIA book, The Penkorsky Papers, was published in United States in 1965. The book was prepared and written by omitting agency assets who drew on actual case materials and publication rights to the manuscript were sold to the publisher through a trust fund which was established for the purpose. The publisher was unaware of any US Government interest.

In 1967, the CIA stopped publishing within the United States. Since then, the Agency has published some 250 books abroad, most of them in foreign languages. The CIA has given special attention to publication and circulation abroad of books about conditions in the Soviet Bloc. Of those targeted at audiences outside the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, a large number has also been available in English.

Domestic "Fallout"

The Committee finds that covert media operations can result in manipulating or incidentally misleading the American public. Despite efforts to minimize it, CIA employees, past and present, have conceded that there is no way to shield the American public completely from "fallout" in the United States from Agency propaganda or placements overseas. Indeed, following the Katzenbach inquiry, the Deputy Director for Operations issued a directive stating: "Fallout in the United States from a foreign publication which we support is inevitable and consequently permissible."

The domestic fallout of covert propaganda comes from many sources: books intended primarily for an English-speaking foreign audience; CIA press placements that are picked up by an international wire service; and publications resulting from direct CIA funding of foreign institutes. For example, a book written for an English-speaking foreign audience by one CIA operative was reviewed favorably by another CIA agent in the New York Times. The Committee also found that the CIA helped create and support various Vietnamese periodicals and publications. In at least one instance, a CIA supported Vietnamese publication was used to propagandize the American public and the members and staff of both houses of Congress. So effective was this propaganda that some members quoted from the publication in debating the controversial question of United States involvement in Vietnam.

The Committee found that this inevitable domestic fallout was compounded when the Agency circulated its subsidized books in the United States prior to their distribution abroad in order to induce a favorable reception overseas.


The Covert Use of 11.5. Journalists and Media Institutions on, February 11, 1976, CIA Director George Bush announced new guidelines governing the Agency's relationship with United States media organizations: "Effective immediately, CIA will not enter into any paid or contractual relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station."


Agency officials who testified after the February 11, 1976, announcement told the Committee that the prohibition extends to non-Americans accredited to specific United States media organizations.

The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.

Approximately 50 of the assets are individual American journalists or employees of US media organizations. Of these, fewer than half are "accredited" by US media organizations and thereby affected by the new prohibitions on the use of accredited newsmen. The remaining individuals are non-accredited freelance contributors and media representatives abroad, and thus are not affected by the new CIA prohibition.

More than a dozen United States news organizations and commercial publishing houses formerly provided cover for CIA agents abroad. A few of these organizations were unaware that they provided this cover.

The Committee notes that the new CIA prohibitions do not apply to "unaccredited" Americans serving in media organizations such as representatives of US media organizations abroad or freelance writers. Of the more than 50 CIA relationships with United States journalists, or employees in American media organizations, fewer than one half will be terminated under the new CIA guidelines.

The Committee is concerned that the use of American :journalists and media organizations for clandestine operations is a threat to the integrity of the press. All American journalists, whether accredited to a United States news organization or just a stringer, may be suspects when any are engaged in covert activities.


#5 Dawn Meredith

Dawn Meredith

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,494 posts
  • Location:Austin, Tx.
  • Interests:political justice, conspiracy/truth, music, law, Bible prophecy

Posted 29 January 2005 - 06:46 PM

Details of Operation Mockingbird was revealed as a result of the Frank Church investigations (Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities) in 1975. I received a copy of this report this morning. It makes interesting reading.

Here is one passage from the report that relates to Operation Mockingbird:

The Covert Use of Books and Publishing Houses

The Committee has found that the Central Intelligence Agency attaches a particular importance to book publishing activities as a form of covert propaganda. A former officer in the Clandestine Service stated that books are "the most important weapon of strategic (long-range) propaganda." Prior to 1967, the Central Intelligence Agency sponsored, subsidized, or produced over 1,000 books; approximately 25 percent of them in English. In 1967 alone, the CIA published or subsidized over 200 books, ranging from books on African safaris and wildlife to translations of Machiavelli's The Prince into Swahili and works of T. S. Eliot into Russian, to a competitor to Mao's little red book, which was entitled Quotations from Chairman Liu.

The Committee found that an important number of the books actually produced by the Central Intelligence Agency were reviewed and marketed in the United States:

* A book about a young student from a developing country who had studied in a communist country was described by the CIA as "developed by (two areas divisions) and, produced by the Domestic Operations Division... and has had a high impact in the United States as well as in the (foreign area) market." This book, which was produced by the European outlet of a United States publishing house was published in condensed form in two major U.S. magazines."

* Another CIA book, The Penkorsky Papers, was published in United States in 1965. The book was prepared and written by omitting agency assets who drew on actual case materials and publication rights to the manuscript were sold to the publisher through a trust fund which was established for the purpose. The publisher was unaware of any US Government interest.

In 1967, the CIA stopped publishing within the United States. Since then, the Agency has published some 250 books abroad, most of them in foreign languages. The CIA has given special attention to publication and circulation abroad of books about conditions in the Soviet Bloc. Of those targeted at audiences outside the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, a large number has also been available in English.

Domestic "Fallout"

The Committee finds that covert media operations can result in manipulating or incidentally misleading the American public. Despite efforts to minimize it, CIA employees, past and present, have conceded that there is no way to shield the American public completely from "fallout" in the United States from Agency propaganda or placements overseas. Indeed, following the Katzenbach inquiry, the Deputy Director for Operations issued a directive stating: "Fallout in the United States from a foreign publication which we support is inevitable and consequently permissible."

The domestic fallout of covert propaganda comes from many sources: books intended primarily for an English-speaking foreign audience; CIA press placements that are picked up by an international wire service; and publications resulting from direct CIA funding of foreign institutes. For example, a book written for an English-speaking foreign audience by one CIA operative was reviewed favorably by another CIA agent in the New York Times. The Committee also found that the CIA helped create and support various Vietnamese periodicals and publications. In at least one instance, a CIA supported Vietnamese publication was used to propagandize the American public and the members and staff of both houses of Congress. So effective was this propaganda that some members quoted from the publication in debating the controversial question of United States involvement in Vietnam.

The Committee found that this inevitable domestic fallout was compounded when the Agency circulated its subsidized books in the United States prior to their distribution abroad in order to induce a favorable reception overseas.


The Covert Use of 11.5. Journalists and Media Institutions on, February 11, 1976, CIA Director George Bush announced new guidelines governing the Agency's relationship with United States media organizations: "Effective immediately, CIA will not enter into any paid or contractual relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station."


Agency officials who testified after the February 11, 1976, announcement told the Committee that the prohibition extends to non-Americans accredited to specific United States media organizations.

The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.

Approximately 50 of the assets are individual American journalists or employees of US media organizations. Of these, fewer than half are "accredited" by US media organizations and thereby affected by the new prohibitions on the use of accredited newsmen. The remaining individuals are non-accredited freelance contributors and media representatives abroad, and thus are not affected by the new CIA prohibition.

More than a dozen United States news organizations and commercial publishing houses formerly provided cover for CIA agents abroad. A few of these organizations were unaware that they provided this cover.

The Committee notes that the new CIA prohibitions do not apply to "unaccredited" Americans serving in media organizations such as representatives of US media organizations abroad or freelance writers. Of the more than 50 CIA relationships with United States journalists, or employees in American media organizations, fewer than one half will be terminated under the new CIA guidelines.

The Committee is concerned that the use of American :journalists and media organizations for clandestine operations is a threat to the integrity of the press. All American journalists, whether accredited to a United States news organization or just a stringer, may be suspects when any are engaged in covert activities.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

_______________________________________-

Great stuff on this and other threads. On the "are researchers weird" thread I proposed that readers on this forum pick a memember of Congress, or perhaps two members and write to them. I now specifically propose that we utilize this particular thread, and the earlier one where John lists the CIA -owned media "assets" and EDUCATE our government.

Keep in mind folks that W got Patriot Act passed very quickly and that the members of of Congress passed it without even reading it!!!. Now we have that and Pat. 11. If our elected representatives do not even read the legislation they pass, what good are they to us? No good, but leaving us vulnerable to the total dismantling of the US Constitution. We must quit fooling around arguing about the number of shots here on the forum and educated our elected representatives.

Bombard them with mail. Someone reads this, even if just a secty, at least it gets to someone who is close to the elected official. And it will get a response.

Dawn

#6 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,087 posts

Posted 01 February 2005 - 06:16 PM

In 1964 Random House published Invisible Government by David Wise and Thomas Ross. The book exposed the role the CIA was playing in foreign policy. This included the CIA coups in Guatemala and Iran and the Bay of Pigs operation. It also revealed the CIA's attempts to overthrow President Sukarno in Indonesia and the covert operations taking place in Laos and Vietnam.

As part of Operation Mockingbird the CIA considered buying up the entire printing of The Invisible Government. This idea was rejected when Random House pointed out that if this happened they would print a second edition.

It is indeed a very good book. Fabian Escalante points out in his book The Cuba Project that Castro found the book very informative.

#7 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,087 posts

Posted 02 February 2005 - 01:21 PM

In June, 1965, Desmond FitzGerald was appointed as head of the Directorate for Plans. He now took charge of Operation Mockingbird. At the end of 1966 FitzGerald discovered that Ramparts, a left-wing publication, had discovered that the CIA had been secretly funding the National Student Association. FitzGerald ordered Edgar Applewhite to organize a campaign against the magazine. Applewhite later told Evan Thomas for his book, The Very Best Men: "I had all sorts of dirty tricks to hurt their circulation and financing. The people running Ramparts were vulnerable to blackmail. We had awful things in mind, some of which we carried off."

This dirty tricks campaign failed to stop Ramparts publishing this story in February, 1967. As well as reporting CIA funding of the National Student Association it exposed the whole system of anti-communist front organizations in Europe, Asia, and South America was essentially blown.

#8 Shanet Clark

Shanet Clark

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:US/Georgia 9/06- PHOTO ON FILE VIA URL
  • Interests:Masters in Education; B.A. (Summa Cum Laude) History. GSU.

Posted 02 February 2005 - 10:04 PM

The fact that Des Fitzgerald was elevated to DDP (deputy director, but really chief executive over all programs in the field) this shows me that he was totally on board and committed to the cover up of the century. Helms's other Deputy Director (of intelligence analysis) was Marshall Carter.

Obviously Des wasn't demoted or sanctioned for his role in the Cubela, Mexico City and JM/Wave activites he had been running.....rather rewarded.

Also, again obvious, is that DOMESTIC COVERT CIA operations did not end with the inauguration of Johnson...they accelerated apace, utterly against the Constitution and relevant laws....internal press intimidation was the hallmark of the whole period, and COINTELPRO, CHAOS and MOCKINGBIRD were the chief vehicles of this effort, which can only be seen as a cover-up and illegal domestic interference in representative government.

#9 Shanet Clark

Shanet Clark

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:US/Georgia 9/06- PHOTO ON FILE VIA URL
  • Interests:Masters in Education; B.A. (Summa Cum Laude) History. GSU.

Posted 14 February 2005 - 08:48 PM

John,

I just found a great quote from Alexander Cockburn's new book, the chapter on Gary Webb and the CIA is available online at COUNTERPUNCH:

"Most revealing, perhaps, Cockburn and St.Clair quote the Washington Post's president, Katherine Graham, as assuring CIA recruits in 1988 that

<< "We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know, and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows.">>

#10 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,087 posts

Posted 10 March 2005 - 11:01 AM

I have been doing a lot of research on Phil Graham recently. I am mainly interested in his relationship with the CIA and LBJ. As I have pointed out before, Graham was recruited by Frank Wisner in 1948 to help him run Operation Mockingbird. Graham was also responsible for persuading JFK to make LBJ his running mate in 1960.

Philip Graham committed suicide by killing himself with a shotgun on 3rd August, 1963. I suspect that his death might be linked to the assassination of JFK.

I have been investigating the last few months of Graham’s life. During this period his behaviour was very strange. Graham was a manic depressive (first diagnosed in 1952) and a alcoholic. It is not uncommon for CIA people to suffer from psychotic illness. It probably is something to do with the job. Frank Wisner had similar problems. So did James Jesus Angleton.

Anyway, his behaviour in the early months of 1963 would have worried the CIA. For example, he began telling friends that he was unhappy with the way that the CIA manipulated journalists. As one of the most important figures in Operation Mockingbird he knew all about the way CIA controlled the media. I found one comment of Graham’s particularly interesting. He told a friend: “Newspapers are the rough drafts of history”. I think what he meant by this was that CIA controlled journalists were involved in distorting the historical record. That things being published in his Washington Post, Newsweek, etc. would become the accepted facts of history.

Graham was also giving away other secrets. In January, 1963, there was a conference for journalists in Phoenix. Graham was drunk when he attended the meeting. During one session of the conference Graham grabbed the microphone and gave a speech on the sexual activities of JFK. This included the news that his current favourite was Mary Meyer. He also pointed out that she was the wife of the CIA’s Cord Meyer and the sister-in-law of Ben Bradlee (the editor of the Washington Post and another important figure in Operation Mockingbird). Graham claimed that Bradlee was in possession of love letters written by JFK to Meyer. Mary Meyer never told her side of the story. She was murdered in Washington on 12th October, 1964.

Graham actually knew a great deal about JFK’s love life. They both attended the same sex parties and even shared the same women. We now know that these sex parties were organized by Bobby Baker. However, in 1963, Graham was not interested in women he met at sex parties. He was deeply in love with a woman called Robin Webb. They had moved in together and Graham began divorce proceedings against his wife Katharine Graham. What is really interesting about this is his choice of lawyer: Edward Bennett Williams. See:

http://educationforu...?showtopic=3253

Graham had several meetings with Williams about legal matters. In 1957 he had made a will leaving all his stock in the Washington Post Group to his wife. In the spring of 1963 Graham got Williams to change his will concerning his control of the media group. However, it appears that Williams made a hash of Graham’s will and after his death, the register of wills revoked them. Graham had effectively died intestate. The absence of any legal will meant that Graham’s stock in the media group was distributed according to the terms of the 1948 trust agreement that had created the Washington Post Group. As a result, Katharine Graham retained control of the media empire. This must have pleased the CIA as they knew Graham was a strong supporter of Operation Mockingbird. In 1988 she made a speech at CIA headquarters. It included the following passage: "We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows."

Interesting stuff. Especially as it was her newspaper that exposed the events of Watergate. It should not be forgotten that Ben Bradlee (a schoolboy friend of Richard Helms) had worked for a CIA fronted organization, the office of US Information and Educational Exchange, in Paris in the early 1950s. In fact, he was eventually deported by the French government after taking part in a CIA operation that involved working with the FLN. Was Ben Bradlee "Deep Throat"?

#11 Robert Charles-Dunne

Robert Charles-Dunne

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 855 posts

Posted 10 March 2005 - 03:08 PM

With all of the foregoing in mind, it is interesting to reappraise the Agency's instructions on how to use its assets in countering questions and suspicions arising from the Kennedy assassination. Clearly, whatever was prescribed for foreign use was just as important domestically.


QUOTE:


CIA Document #1035-960
RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report


1. Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy's assassination on, there has
been speculation about the responsibility for his murder. Although this was
stemmed for a time by the Warren Commission report, (which appeared at the end of September 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the Commission's published report and documents for new pretexts for questioning, and there has been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of some kind of conspiracy, and often they have implied that the Commission itself was involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission's report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse results.

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government,
including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally
chosen for their integrity, experience and prominence. They represented both
major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all
sections of the country. Just because of the standing of the Commissioners,
efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole
leadership of American society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing
tendency to hint that President Johnson himself, as the one person who might be
said to have benefited, was in some way responsible for the assassination.
Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also
the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is
directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the
investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our
organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for
us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting
the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such
claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified
section and in a number of unclassified attachments
.


3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be
initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active
[business] addresses are requested:

a. To discuss the publicity problem with [?] and friendly elite contacts
(especially politicians and editors),
pointing out that the Warren Commission
made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the
critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative
discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that
parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist
propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and
irresponsible speculation.


b. To employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the
critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for
this purpose
.
The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide
useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out,
as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the
evidence was in, (I) politically interested, (III) financially interested,
(IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own
theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a
useful strategy may be to single out Epstein's theory for attack, using the
attached Fletcher [?] article and Spectator piece for background. (Although
Mark Lane's book is much less convincing than Epstein's and comes off badly
where confronted by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to
answer as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.)

4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in
attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments
should be useful:


a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not
consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten
and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the
attack on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits
have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the
critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the
Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, AJ.P.
Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Vander Lubbe on his own initiative,
without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the
blame on the Communists, but the latter have been more successful in
convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)

b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to
place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are
less reliable and more divergent--and hence offer more hand-holds for
criticism) and less on ballistics, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close
examination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting
eyewitness accounts are quoted out of context, or were discarded by the
Commission for good and sufficient reason.

c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to
conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive
large royalties, etc. Note that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the time
and John F. Kennedy's brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal
any conspiracy. And as one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford
would hardly have held his tongue for the sake of the Democratic
administration, and Senator Russell would have had every political interest in
exposing any misdeeds on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator
moreover would hardly choose a location for a shooting where so much depended
on conditions beyond his control: the route, the speed of the cars, the moving
target, the risk that the assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy
conspirators could have arranged much more secure conditions.

d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light
on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission
because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way
or the other. Actually, the make-up of the Commission and its staff was an
excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory, or against the
illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties.

e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for a
co-conspirator. He was a "loner," mixed up, of questionable reliability and an
unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service.

f. As to charges that the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged three
months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the
Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the
pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming
from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out
new criticisms.

g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died
mysteriously" can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the
individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes; the
Commission staff questioned 418 witnesses (the FBI interviewed far more
people, conduction 25,000 interviews and re interviews), and in such a large
group, a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn Jones, one of
the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths" line, appeared on television,
it emerged that two of the deaths on his list were from heart attacks, one
from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on a bridge, and one occurred
when a driver drifted into a bridge abutment.)

5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the
Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be
impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the
Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far
superior to the work of its critics
.


QUOTE OFF

If memory serves, both Carl Bernstein and Howard Kohn did some sensational reporting on the phenomenon of CIA-sponsored journalism within the USA. Both items ran in Rolling Stone magazine in the mid-to-late 1970s and are highly recommended as deep background reading for those interested in Agency influence of and over the control and distribution of domestic propaganda.

#12 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,087 posts

Posted 10 March 2005 - 03:33 PM

If memory serves, both Carl Bernstein and Howard Kohn did some sensational reporting on the phenomenon of CIA-sponsored journalism within the USA.  Both items ran in Rolling Stone magazine in the mid-to-late 1970s and are highly recommended as deep background reading for those interested in Agency influence of and over the control and distribution of domestic propaganda.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Carl Bernstein, CIA and the Media, Rolling Stone Magazine (20th October, 1977)

In 1953, Joseph Alsop, then one of America’s leading syndicated columnists, went to the Philippines to cover an election. He did not go because he was asked to do so by his syndicate. He did not go because he was asked to do so by the newspapers that printed his column. He went at the request of the CIA.

Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty-five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters. Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services - from simple intelligence­ gathering to serving as go-betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors-without-portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested it the derring-do of the spy business as in filing articles, and, the smallest category, full-time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements America’s leading news organizations.

The history of the CIA’s involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception . . . .

Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were William Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Time Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald-Tribune.

By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc....

The Agency's dealings with the press began during the earliest stages of the Cold War. Allen Dulles, who became director of the CIA in 1953, sought to establish a recruiting-and-cover capability within America’s most prestigious journalistic institutions. By operating under the guise of accredited news correspondents, Dulles believed, CIA operatives abroad would be accorded a degree of access and freedom of movement unobtainable under almost any other type of cover.


American publishers, like so many other corporate and institutional leaders at the time, were willing us commit the resources of their companies to the struggle against “global Communism.” Accordingly, the traditional line separating the American press corps and government was often indistinguishable: rarely was a news agency used to provide cover for CIA operatives abroad without the knowledge and consent of either its principal owner; publisher or senior editor. Thus, contrary to the notion that the CIA era and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services. “Let’s not pick on some poor reporters, for God’s sake,” William Colby exclaimed at one point to the Church committee’s investigators. “Let’s go to the managements. They were willing”. In all, about twenty-five news organizations (including those listed at the beginning of this article) provided cover for the Agency....

Many journalists who covered World War II were close to people in the Office of Strategic Services, the wartime predecessor of the CIA; more important, they were all on the same side. When the war ended and many OSS officials went into the CIA, it was only natural that these relationships would continue. Meanwhile, the first postwar generation of journalists entered the profession; they shared the same political and professional values as their mentors. “You had a gang of people who worked together during World War II and never got over it,” said one Agency official. “They were genuinely motivated and highly susceptible to intrigue and being on the inside. Then in the Fifties and Sixties there was a national consensus about a national threat. The Vietnam War tore everything to pieces - shredded the consensus and threw it in the air.” Another Agency official observed: “Many journalists didn’t give a second thought to associating with the Agency. But there was a point when the ethical issues which most people had submerged finally surfaced. Today, a lot of these guys vehemently deny that they had any relationship with the Agency.”

The CIA even ran a formal training program in the 1950s to teach its agents to be journalists. Intelligence officers were “taught to make noises like reporters,” explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management. “These were the guys who went through the ranks and were told, “You’re going to be a journalist,” the CIA official said. Relatively few of the 400-some relationships described in Agency files followed that pattern, however; most involved persons who were already bona fide journalists when they began undertaking tasks for the Agency...

At the headquarters of CBS News in New York, Paley’s cooperation with the CIA is taken for granted by many news executives and reporters, despite the denials. Paley, 76, was not interviewed by Salant’s investigators. “It wouldn’t do any good,” said one CBS executive. “It is the single subject about which his memory has failed.”

Time and Newsweek magazines. According to CIA and Senate sources, Agency files contain written agreements with former foreign correspondents and stringers for both the weekly news magazines. The same sources refused to say whether the CIA has ended all its associations with individuals who work for the two publications. Allen Dulles often interceded with his good friend, the late Henry Luce, founder of Time and Life magazines, who readily allowed certain members of his staff to work for the Agency and agreed to provide jobs and credentials for other CIA operatives who lacked journalistic experience.

At Newsweek, Agency sources reported, the CIA engaged the services of several foreign correspondents and stringers under arrangements approved by senior editors at the magazine...

After Colby left the Agency on January 28th, 1976, and was succeeded by George Bush, the CIA announced a new policy: “Effective immediately, the CIA will not enter into any paid or contract relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station.” ... The text of the announcement noted that the CIA would continue to “welcome” the voluntary, unpaid cooperation of journalists. Thus, many relationships were permitted to remain intact.

#13 Lee Forman

Lee Forman

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,047 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York

Posted 11 March 2005 - 05:53 AM

John,

Not worth much, I'm afraid - mainly just speculation. Mary Pinchot Meyer has a 9 page CIA file [2 documents] dated 1953. It's 95% redacted.

Mary and Cord Meyer were married in 1945.

The one document, dated September 4, 1953, does not give reference as to the individual being addressed, nor the author. However, it appears that it was directed to Cord, due to the only 2 paragraphs that were deemed worthy enough to be released:

a. Your wife, Mrs. Mary Pinchot Meyer, is alleged to have registered as a member of the American Labor Party of New York in 1944, at which time it was reportedly under extreme left-wing or Communist domination.

b. Your wife, Mrs. Mary P. Meyer, is acquainted with James Aldridge.


Her husband Cord and the Georgetown crew, Phil Graham's 'alleged' outburst concerning Mary's relationship with Kennedy, some of Mary's comments [if they are to to be credited] to Timothy Leary, her sister being married to Ben Bradlee, the Angleton caper, her brutal murder...

If we were to one day learn that she was somehow working under the guidance of CIA, and associated with Mockingbird, and keeping tabs on JFK, I would not be at all surprised.

The FBI wouldn't release their files without a proof of death - I never troubled to pursue it. NARA has only one hit on her [an article] and one hit on Cord [a different article].

- lee

#14 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,087 posts

Posted 11 March 2005 - 08:37 AM

If we were to one day learn that she was somehow working under the guidance of CIA, and associated with Mockingbird, and keeping tabs on JFK, I would not be at all surprised.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


That is my view as well. One of the roles Phil Graham played was to plant CIA people into organizations. The Grahams and Meyers were part of Wisner’s Georgetown crowd. The Meyers, like most of this group had a left wing past. In the 1950s they were supporters of the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA). This was a pressure group that was attempting to move the Democratic Party to the left on domestic issues (they were very hostile to communism – as was the American Labor Party). To Hoover they were neo-communists and in 1953 began working with Joe McCarthy to oust them for power. Hoover targeted several members of the Georgetown crowd including Cord Meyer who was accused of being a communist spy. Others targeted including Wisner (he had an affair with a communist while serving in Rumania during the war), Charles Thayer and Chip Bohlen. Thayer was forced to resign but the Dulles’ brothers came to the rescue of the others. I believe it was the CIA who were really behind the decline in McCarthy’s fortunes and it all started when he made the mistake of taking on the Georgetown crowd.

As I have said before, the CIA hierarchy were strong supporters of JFK who felt he could be manipulated to carry out their policies. However, there was another group within the CIA that included people like David Phillips, David Morales, William Harvey and Howard Hunt that were totally opposed to everything that people like Wisner, Bissell, Barnes, Meyer, FitzGerald, etc. stood for. If the CIA was involved in the assassination of JFK it was the Phillips faction that was responsible. The others were just involved in the cover up.

http://www.spartacus...o.uk/USAada.htm

#15 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,087 posts

Posted 25 March 2005 - 09:34 AM

People interested in this subject might find it worth reading this thread on the murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer.

http://educationforu...?showtopic=3520

As a result of the large numbers of websites linked to my website (167,000), within days of producing a page on a particular topic, it appears in the top couple of Google searches on the subject. However, there is one major exception to this. My page on Operation Mockingbird. It is in the Google database but for some reason the normal rules do not apply. The same is also true of the two leading figures in Operation Mockingbird: Frank Wisner and Philip Graham. Interestingly both Graham (1963) and Wisner (1965) committed suicide in the same way (shotgun to the head).




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users