Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Iran-Contra's Lost Chapter
The Education Forum > Controversial Issues in History > JFK Assassination Debate
Nathaniel Heidenheimer
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/30/9992/

I think this story belongs here because it connects in so many ways with the Coup D'etat Of 11-22-63
Peter Lemkin
QUOTE(Nathaniel Heidenheimer @ Jun 30 2008, 09:39 PM) *
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/30/9992/

I think this story belongs here because it connects in so many ways with the Coup D'etat Of 11-22-63


Interesting, thanks. Hamilton knew then and knew during the 911 Commission - he's one of the old reliables for keeping things secret from the American People - of which the Congress is full. Just another peek at the hidden machinery of the Deep Political structures grinding away and grinding our Democracy into dust - all but done now...the coming Iran Bombing may well be the last nail in the coffin. ALL of the things we talk about here are interconnected in so many ways - this missing chapter only makes that ever more clear.
John Simkin
QUOTE(Nathaniel Heidenheimer @ Jun 30 2008, 08:39 PM) *
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/30/9992/

I think this story belongs here because it connects in so many ways with the Coup D'etat Of 11-22-63



Great article. I also believe the assassination of JFK is connected to Iran-Contra. I tried to show here but have not had time to finish it. Hopefully, I will get time to do it later:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5799
Pat Speer
QUOTE(John Simkin @ Jul 2 2008, 07:37 AM) *
QUOTE(Nathaniel Heidenheimer @ Jun 30 2008, 08:39 PM) *
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/30/9992/

I think this story belongs here because it connects in so many ways with the Coup D'etat Of 11-22-63



Great article. I also believe the assassination of JFK is connected to Iran-Contra. I tried to show here but have not had time to finish it. Hopefully, I will get time to do it later:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5799


I read the missing chapter yesterday and agree that this is an important development. The Republicans on the committee allowed the report to reveal many bits damaging to Reagan and his legacy, but (from what I can recall) they successfully kept under lids that North's network of Contra lobbyists were simultaneously engaging in domestic political activities, targeting Democrats against his pro-Contra policy. While the report claims the money wasn't mixed, it is undoubtedly disturbing that the Federal government, under Reagan, transferred a CIA employee with Psy-ops and propaganda background, to a domestic position, to help build domestic support for a specific policy. He then helped orchestrate a media campaign against specific Democrats, targeting Democrats close to Washington D.C. so that his campaign would have a spill-over effect. Even worse, the money for these activities came from private donors, and the men hired by North to collect this money, unbeknownst to the donors, were allowed to pocket huge sums.

This represents everything that is wrong in American politics today. You have privatization of government activities in order to avoid accountability. You have greed and inefficiency--with these lobbyists pocketing much of the money. And you have the government using propaganda techniques against its own people as part of the "permanent campaign" to push the President's agenda that Scott McClellan--and the rest of America--finds so distasteful. The President is NOT a king. Sometimes congress can tell him NO. Sometimes he is supposed to listen to the 435 elected representatives to congress, who are supposed to take action when the guy in the White House is WRONG.

If Clinton had moved CIA assets around to push his foreign policy to the public, and had NSA stooges directing networks of lobbyists running around the country to fund a private army, and had sold American military equipment to a sworn enemy in order to raise funds to fight a war against a nation that had never attacked the U.S., in direct defiance of a congressional ban on such funding, the Congress and his own party would have called for his head. While Uncle Ron may have been a nice guy face to face, his lust for absolute power infected Dick Cheney, and has led us to the current situation. Cheney, we should recall, was put in the position of defending Reagan's lust as "executive privilege" while on the committee investigating Reagan's crimes. He asserted then, and apparently convinced himself, that the President has sole authority when it comes to protecting the United States, and that ANY effort by congress to rein in his absolute authority is to be disregarded.

When a country has been run for 8 years by a man with a less than 20% approval rating, and a less than 35% approval rating within his own party, can you call that country a democracy? I don't think so.

Peter Lemkin
QUOTE(Pat Speer @ Jul 2 2008, 05:21 PM) *
QUOTE(John Simkin @ Jul 2 2008, 07:37 AM) *
QUOTE(Nathaniel Heidenheimer @ Jun 30 2008, 08:39 PM) *
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/30/9992/

I think this story belongs here because it connects in so many ways with the Coup D'etat Of 11-22-63



Great article. I also believe the assassination of JFK is connected to Iran-Contra. I tried to show here but have not had time to finish it. Hopefully, I will get time to do it later:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5799


I read the missing chapter yesterday and agree that this is an important development. The Republicans on the committee allowed the report to reveal many bits damaging to Reagan and his legacy, but (from what I can recall) they successfully kept under lids that North's network of Contra lobbyists were simultaneously engaging in domestic political activities, targeting Democrats against his pro-Contra policy. While the report claims the money wasn't mixed, it is undoubtedly disturbing that the Federal government, under Reagan, transferred a CIA employee with Psy-ops and propaganda background, to a domestic position, to help build domestic support for a specific policy. He then helped orchestrate a media campaign against specific Democrats, targeting Democrats close to Washington D.C. so that his campaign would have a spill-over effect. Even worse, the money for these activities came from private donors, and the men hired by North to collect this money, unbeknownst to the donors, were allowed to pocket huge sums.

This represents everything that is wrong in American politics today. You have privatization of government activities in order to avoid accountability. You have greed and inefficiency--with these lobbyists pocketing much of the money. And you have the government using propaganda techniques against its own people as part of the "permanent campaign" to push the President's agenda that Scott McClellan--and the rest of America--finds so distasteful. The President is NOT a king. Sometimes congress can tell him NO. Sometimes he is supposed to listen to the 435 elected representatives to congress, who are supposed to take action when the guy in the White House is WRONG.

If Clinton had moved CIA assets around to push his foreign policy to the public, and had NSA stooges directing networks of lobbyists running around the country to fund a private army, and had sold American military equipment to a sworn enemy in order to raise funds to fight a war against a nation that had never attacked the U.S., in direct defiance of a congressional ban on such funding, the Congress and his own party would have called for his head. While Uncle Ron may have been a nice guy face to face, his lust for absolute power infected Dick Cheney, and has led us to the current situation. Cheney, we should recall, was put in the position of defending Reagan's lust as "executive privilege" while on the committee investigating Reagan's crimes. He asserted then, and apparently convinced himself, that the President has sole authority when it comes to protecting the United States, and that ANY effort by congress to rein in his absolute authority is to be disregarded.

When a country has been run for 8 years by a man with a less than 20% approval rating, and a less than 35% approval rating within his own party, can you call that country a democracy? I don't think so.




Good analysis Pat; great pointing to an important issue Nathanael, and yes John in many ways Dallas and Iran-Contra were connected 'at the hip'. Iran-Contra also IMO had a side operation that involved the killing of Palme - and many other side operations we've not been informed of. It was the real growth of the privitized black operations [staffed greatly by Dallas 'graduates'] that we now have wholesale. The whole trail of major [and some minor] covert ops (Gehlen Org; Japanese and Nazi Gold; Korea; Iran; Guatamala; U-2; Diem; BOP; Dallas; Malcolm; King; RFK; Tonkin; Vietnam; Nugan-Hand; Watergate; Chile; Iran-Contra; Savings & Loan; Panama; Grenada; October Surprise; Gulf War I & II; Former Yugoslavia's demise; 911, and a few hundred I left out) are in many ways inter-connected - by methodology; by motive and ends sought, and by more than some overlapping persons and networks. PDS's The Road To 911 covers the latter part and Bill Blum connects the dots on other portions.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.