Jump to content
The Education Forum
Paul Rigby

'Arrogant' CIA Disobeys Orders in Viet Nam by Richard Starnes, Washington Daily News, October 2, 1963

Recommended Posts

ANDREWS: 
Good to see the Krock article, Jim.  Often that article is cited as anti-CIA and the source of warnings that the CIA was too powerful and interfering, but it's clear from reading Krock that his is an equivocating response to Richard Starnes' courageous work.  Krock is doing damage control, goading Kennedy, and stealing Starnes' glory, all in one shot.  If a plot against Kennedy were not already underway, this piece would be a serious incitement to war between the Agency and the Executive. 

I don't agree with your take that Krock was goading Kennedy. Krock was pretty loyal to the Kennedy family having been so since 20 years before. Based on that, I take it that the "high official" was someone very close to Kennedy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Krock

MIKE CLARK:
OMG you're actually "testing" computer things on a public forum?!  Can't you just start a private blog like with Blogger and test there?  This is NOT your personal playground, Mike! Jesus! Is it any wonder people are fleeing this forum in droves?

Edited by Michael Walton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Walton said:

MIKE CLARK:
OMG you're actually "testing" computer things on a public forum?!  Can't you just start a private blog like with Blogger and test there?  This is NOT your personal playground, Mike! Jesus! Is it any wonder people are fleeing this forum in droves?

Mike, ....

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/22548-michael-walton/#comment-355024

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/27/2006 at 2:17 PM, Paul Rigby said:

  .......

 

Quote

 

  .......

As far as I am aware, the remarkable example below of what CLAUD COCKBURN called “preventative journalism” has never appeared in its entirety anywhere on the internet. Instead, readers have had to make do with the next-day riposte of the NYT’s Arthur Krock. The latter, it should be noted, was a veteran CIA-mouthpiece and messenger boy.

  .......

 

[Emphasis added]

 

Paul,

 

With all due respect ... Claud Cockburn?  You mean the Communist and close friend at Oxford of KGB mole and MI-5 head, Roger Hollis (who, in 1961, forced MI-6 counterintelligence officer Peter Wright to tell him the true name of the GRU double-agent whom both CIA and MI-6 had only just started handling -- i.e., GRU colonel Oleg Penkovsky), and which "Claud Cockburn" Hollis had so conveniently forgotten to mention on his application with Britain's Secret Services back in the day?

THAT Claud Cockburn?

(lol)

 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2014.962362

"When Penkovsky came to London in April 1961, MI6 was compelled to bring this to the attention of MI5, which is responsible for secret operations on UK soil. They told only the top level. When Hollis asked [Peter Wright] the name of the imminent arrival, he was reminded that this was unnecessary and would breach the tight security barrier surrounding the operation. But, remarkably, Hollis insisted and was told."

-- (see note 30, which mentions Wright in this context, near the end of the PDF)

 

--  Tommy  :sun

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×