Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Farfield Foundation: ATM of CIA Left-Gatekeeping?


Recommended Posts

This article is the only kitchen sink I'd ever want to clean.

"The Cold War period in American history was characterized by a seamless cooperation among international charities, quasi-governmental organizations, major foundation, funding conduits, and the CIA" And how!

http://www.questionsquestions.net/feldman/feldman03.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holly Cow, Nate,

Where'd that come from?

Those inclined to further research the financial and operational links between the CIA and the non-profit, Foundation charities and millionaire tax write offs should read GM Evica's A Certain Arrogance, which also makes the connections between many such orgs and Oswald.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill-- a friend sent it to me, after I'd gone on about Encounter magazine for the seventeenth time.

Is this guy Paul Buhle a member of the forum? Seems like I've heard of him. Have you read this book he references. It sounds very interesting for all Philly Phoundation Phanatics, and Main Lining "Progressives" :blink:

--------------

Paul Buhle made the following reference to the International Rescue Committee's historical role: "Eric Chester's important recent volume, COVERT NETWORKS: PROGRESSIVES, THE INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE AND THE CIA, offers a well-researched perspective on one of the most interesting Cold War (and post-Cold War) operations linked on one side to favorite causes of prominent liberals and on the other to assorted intelligence agency projects...The International Rescue Committee [iRC] became a central mechanism--through its spin-off American Friends of Vietnam [AFVN]--for selling the impending Vietnam War to the U.S. public...The young Daniel Patrick Moynihan, working as its public relations officer, had described the IRC as the `ideal instrument of Psychological Warfare.'

-------------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:blink:

Holly Cow, Nate,

Where'd that come from?

Those inclined to further research the financial and operational links between the CIA and the non-profit, Foundation charities and millionaire tax write offs should read GM Evica's A Certain Arrogance, which also makes the connections between many such orgs and Oswald.

BK

From my perspective, Evica's book, also pointed out the links between Fairfield Osborn the 2nd President of The Pioneer Fund and Wickliffe P. Draper who built the Hopedale Unitarian Church in Hopedale, MA. to my thinking this book cements the connections of the Draper crowd with the Richard Giesbrecht Winnipeg Airport Incident. Recall that I had postulated the identity of the person being discussed at that meeting with a "textiles background" was none other than Wickliffe P. Draper himself. Subsequent articles by Doug A. Blackmon in the Wall St Journal, identified Draper as the person sending money to finance the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission right around the timeframe of 2 other infamous assassinations in the 1960's that of Medgar Evers, Jr. by the nephew of Senator James O. Eastland who ran Draper's Genetics Committees, and later The Freedom Riders, Chaney, Schwerner and Goodman.

Either way, Evica's book is a worthwhile read. I would encourage anyone else who has materials or information about Major Carleton S. Coon or Colonel Ulius S. Amoss to forward them to me or post them here. These two ran the US Gov's version of Murder, Inc. via ISI in Baltimore until the reins were handed over to Ray S. Cline who was identified by Richard Condon in The Manchurian Candidate.

Evica also spend considerable amount of time on C. D. Jackson who was so close to Wick Draper that he was in the

wedding party of Draper's younger sister in about 1924 when Draper was 33 years old. C. D. Jackson was in fact

Mr. Psychological Warfare for decades. And do not forget that it was none other than Mary Ferrell herself who closed the final loop between the street level operatives in Dealey Plaza and the highest level plotmaster and paymaster, Wickliffe P. Draper, when her best informant Roy Hargraves identified a Pioneer Fund operative as putting together the killing team that day, including Robert Emmett Johnson.

To continue to marginalize or minimize these links back through The Pioneer Fund and the eventual takeover of Draper Corporation on 3/22/1967 by one of the major beneficiaries of The Viet Nam war, Rockwell International, would in my opinion be an oversight of a tremendous magnitude. Rockwell never made a penny on the Draper Corp. and shut them down as a bankrupt concern a few years later. It was an obvious payback to Draper and his cohorts for pulling off

the crime of the century. I actually had a Rockwell brochure which touted the marriage of rocket science and

textile loom equipment science as being the perfect marriage. What a joke. And the other major plotter from The

Giesbrecht Incident who profited immensely in the Spring of 1964 was Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith who had only $5,000.00

in the bank at the end of 1963 and yet managed to build a $500,000.00 theme park called Christ of the Ozarks in

Arkansas a few months after the Giesbrecht Incident and the subsequent payoff in March in Wichita, KS where The

Constitution Party of the USA run by Milteer and Gale held its annual confabs in 1965 and 1966 and probably in 1964 as well.

The Ghosts of Mississippi and the Confederate Yankees in King Camelot's Court like Frank G. Wisner from Laurel, MS

and Wickliffe Draper from Hopedale, MA and Carleton S. Coon's and Ulius L. Amoss' crews of professional assassins

who had their start during World War II eventually ended up under the control of Ray S. Cline who left the CIA for

greener pastures in the World Anti Communist League where he became President and Chief Assassin for anyone who

could put up the money. And his targets included totally unrprotected and innocent persons like Archbishop Romero and Benito Aquino. Richard Condon was on to Ray S. Cline but had no where to go to report his finding.

Edited by John Bevilaqua
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Much about Farfield Foundation in Hugh Wilford's new book.

* Somone named John Thompson was its Executive Director in 1959. He arranged the CIA cash funneling to Sidney Hook and Partisan Review

in 1959 for the Farfield Foundation..... "Still , this squemishness did not prevent him from pursing a plan for raising the international profile of

his beloved Partisan Review: publishing a Euro. edition of the mag. secretly backed by the CIA. In Jan. 1950, back in Paris, Phillips contacted

an expat. American author and UNESCO official, H.J. "Kappy" Kaplan, asking if Kaplan would be interested in managing the venture..." This

particular Kaplan said no. p. 105. (any other contracts of IRC types with UNESCO?)

* Who Knew? (unfortunately, this is now a genre: thank you Barnes and Noble! They had Mrs. Paines Garage in this new genre) The Farfield

Foundation was Originally called the Heritage Foundation. Its first suggar daddy was a "Junkie" (anything other than gin in that cash cow?)

Fleishman who got rich by making gin for the unchristian halves of Cincinnatti and keeping them up to date and plowed under. Julius"Junkie"

Fleishman was also asscociated with the ACCF (American Comm.. For Cultural Freedom) and its parent CCF. The author states that the ACCF

was originally there just as a US stabalizer/front for the CCF, and that the former was considerably more brusk 'n grumpy. This sometimes led

to conflict with the CCF, which was more atune to the left-liberal sensibilities of the European target group of Encounter Mag. Wilford makes it

seem like the ACCF was just a sideshow and often a nuisance to at least its most direct handlers at CIA.

* The Heritage Foundation was renamed the Farfield Foundation in August 1952.

* From the department of "No Worries, Different Division": author quotes the researcher Richard Cummings, stating that George Plimpton, later near

RFK at the time of his assassination, as a CIA 'agent of influence' This guy Cummings wrote what looks like a good book about AllArd Lowenstein, by

the way. Wolford says that Plimpton's partner at Paris Review Peter Matthiessen, used the magazine "as a cover for his his work as a CIA officer"

* Fleishman and the Farfield Foundation may have continued funding the ACCF for a little while after they had lived beyond their purposefullness as

a "backstop" to the CCF. Farfield funding stopped in Jan. 1953. Interestingly, the ACCF found another backer in Henry Luce. "whose contributions

came in the form of Time, Inc., stock" p.90

* wait a minute... the Farfield Foundation came up with another grant to the ACCF in 1955 to fund "its reception center for visiting European inteectuals,

and a further 4,000 by the Asia Foundation ( a CIA proprietary analogous in function to the Free Europe Committee) to help establish a similar facility

for Asian visitors. Wilord says that Farfield emphasized the 'European' more than the "vistors' in line with CIA and Farfields simply seeing the ACCF as

a "backstop" ... but there seems room for other interpretations i.e. some compartmentalization in CIA relations between ACCF and CCF.

Wilford's book The Mighty Wurlitzer: is worth owning. It is fair and balanced. At first I suspected that it might be a bit of a damage control after Francis Stonor Saunders, The CIA and Culture. It isn't. It credits and builds upon Saunders work, but adds a lot of new stuff. It deals with CIA relations with artisists and intellectuals, deftly and fairly without SEEMING to pull any punches. This is not easy, given the subject matter. I am just now reaching the section on the CIA and journalists. Unfortunately this seems to be one of the shorter chapters, but hell the guy's gotta hold a job down!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article is the only kitchen sink I'd ever want to clean.

"The Cold War period in American history was characterized by a seamless cooperation among international charities, quasi-governmental organizations, major foundation, funding conduits, and the CIA" And how!

http://www.questionsquestions.net/feldman/feldman03.html

That list of people in The Nation article includes such bona fide progressives as Jimmy Carter, Andrew Young, and even William vanden Heuvel who actually worked for Bobby Kennedy. Later The Nation was owned by Paul Newman and

Victor Navasky who don't rank very high on my list of Right Wing Extremists either. Sure, when that Hamilton Fish III

crowd owned it for a period you could question their bona fides, because Ham Fish's Grandfather was once accused

of being an America First, pro-Nazi congressman of the first magnitude. But Carter, Young, Newman and Navasky

being accused of non-liberal, non-progressive views is a bit over the top don't you think? And yes, vanden Heuvel

was a Bill Donovan original OSS member but if you recall there was a period when even the OSS was 70% liberal and only 30% right wing and that coincides exactly with vanden Heuvel's experience there. Why would Bobby Kennedy trust this guy if he was not all right? Certainly the IRC under William Casey was used for his and the CIA's own purposes but does that mean that the IRC under vanden Heuvel marched to the same drummer? I think The Nation

has returned to its original roots myself. We should look at The American Mercury and how its ownership changed to match the editorial policies of its owners for an example of how a magazine/newspaper can morph over time. Did you

know that Clendenin J. Ryan who funded both YAF and Ulius Amoss' ISIF which was little more than a Murder, Inc. once owned the American Mercury even before The Jayhawk Nazi, Rev. Gerald B. Winrod? Now there is a sinister magazine

which was once strongly influenced by Wickliffe P. Draper when it was published on one end of 57th St in NYC while

Draper lived on the other end.-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article is the only kitchen sink I'd ever want to clean.

"The Cold War period in American history was characterized by a seamless cooperation among international charities, quasi-governmental organizations, major foundation, funding conduits, and the CIA" And how!

http://www.questionsquestions.net/feldman/feldman03.html

Nathaniel, Thanks for that....it was better than any of the wine or J's here......I wish I'd known you when I lived at 93rd and Amsterdam. There are 'articles' and 'articles', and this falls into the first CLASS! Happy somethingorother....

...Control...is an FINE 'ART' form....and this article exposes part of that 'pallette'...most can NOT (or refuse to) see.

Not for a second do I think all in Pacifica [or even most!], for example, have 'sold-out', or been 'turned' (..even most of the way)....however, NPR and others on the chart have been long 'gone' to Mockingbirdland...and the Machine marches on.....unless we are aware and resist!

Peter, on this one we have to just agree to disagree. Regarding The Nation and William vanden Heuvel, I have to

trust my instincts and that of Jimmy Carter, Andrew Young, Bobby Kennedy, Victor Navasky, Bill Donovan and Paul Newman over you and Nathaniel. Whoever believes that The Nation is still some sort of CIA front long after William Casey's influence on predecessor Foundations is long gone is just not dealing with reality. As for me I plan to renew

my subscription next year. Have either of you read the magazine lately?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, the concept of Left-Gatekeeping can be confusing. This is because it is an attempt to describe a strategy made by experts in psychological warfare. Many rightists around Hoover in the early 1950s confused the CIA with being "liberal" Seen from one perspective there was SOME truth in this label. People like Cord Meyer and Allan Dulles in his work with liberal church groups with connections in Europe (like the Unitarians) worked with these left-liberal groups for

several reasons. Among these:

1) They were anti-Communist, at a time when many other potential US contacts had been discredited by either collaboration with or passivity towards

the fascists during WWII.

2) The entire European "center" could only hold in collaboration with a non-communist left, who was not too critical of its stance in the Cold War. This was

because of the way that WWII had shaken up the whole social order: the new political spectrum would be jump ball that would IN SOME WAYS NEED TO

APPEAR POLITICALLY TO THE LEFT of pre-war Europe. In many ways this was similar to Wilson's stance after WWI: he got hit from the right by backing

Social Democratic types in Central and Eastern Europe, but his response was "Hey what else is there to work with... you guys in Idaho haven't seen the

devastation. Im working with the Social Demo pinkos because they are the jump ball: the question is will they join with the reds on the left or on the

other hand will it break our way and we can use them as bridge while we rebuild the center-right." (not a direct quote)

Just so did the US create a moat or firewall between the left-liberals in Europre and the further left. Crucially, the digging of the moat would be done

liberal writers like Walter Lippmann and Euroepeans in a similar place on the ideological spectrum. It was ONLY via strategic alliances with these non-

communist (not simply non-stalinist but NOT FURTHER LEFT) European groups and publications was the US goal of "Recasting Bourgeois Europe"

achieved, and a Europe open to US economic penetration and cooperation achieved.

3) In essence, this would be the same question in Italy c1956 when Colby suggested working with the Social Dems for the same reasons but Clare Booth

Luce-leadPaint-Chips (and possibly Angleton) worked around his back to prevent a center-left coaliton.

What the rightists did not get was that this "liberal" appearance of much of the Eurocentric CIA opperators was PURE OPPORTUNISM. It was only done to

keep Europe in line with US Cold War stretegy, and to prevent their drift into neutralism, which they, of course read as pro-Soviet.

I think that The Nation can be understood in a similar light as this opportunistic backing of anti-communist Social Dems, like those in the IRC. They are like

John Murtha is for left Dem. voters. Murtha spoke out sort of strongly-- at least by DC insider criteria-- at a time WHEN THE DEMS HAD BEEN SUCH

COLLABORATORS WITH THE WAR THAT THEY NEEDED TO MAKE SOME LIGHTNINGROD NOISE or everyone would catch on.

A) But did Murtha have any real sway with the big-money dem leadership No, unless it was a machiavellian one of communications decoy to fool

the dem base while the Dem. Leadership maintained their incredibly profitable silence.

:lol: Now that US deaths are down to cellebrate the US election season, Murths has not only clammed up HE HAS ACTUALLY REVERSED HIMSELF AND

now claims the Surge is working! Aint it funny how all they peylons of "left democratic base" bridge building vanish as if in quicksand?

HOW AND WHY DOES THIS HAPPEN? Because much of the left does not understand the cynical nature of this COMMUNICATIONS THEORY manipulation. They mistake Mutha's words for a real pylon that will lead to a bridge out of Iraq. But the Pylon is a TV prop.

Now how does the Nation fit into this picture? They STILL BACK CLINTON and or Obama Deception. Now don't get me wrong. I don't think they back the Corporate Dems overtly or in a clear way. They back the Corporate Dems in a way that is specifically targetted to be effective among the tweedy left-liberal academic "how far can I go before they close the Sociology department and make it another wing of the B-School" type way. SURE THEY MIGHT PRAISE KUCINICH. They have to to win the allegeiance of this crowd in a "if I had my druthers" way. But the bottom line is that in the end they STILL DEFEND Hillary and just Obomb 'em IN A CROWD THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE THE MOST DANGEROUS should they decide to call the Democratic Leadership Council's big money bluff.

Now onto the invetable Mad Max Holland comments. Actually they are already on a Max Holland thread or two on the forum. Keep in mind that Mad Max is on the editorial board of The Nation and is also published on the CIAs own web-site. Not a litmus test in itself, but when one reads Max Holland and Cockburn and others in the magazine one realizes JUST HOW MUCH THIS MAG has done to separate the political assassinations of the 1960s FROM QUESTIONS OF THE RIGHTWARD DRIFT OF AMERICA SINCE THOSE KILLINGS. They are just called Conspiracy theory IRONICALLY BY more on the left than elsewhere on the political spectrum.!!! That is because this is where the GATEKEEPING ACTION IS!

Left Gatekeeping is done for Rightward purposses. That goes for post-War work with the Social Dems, and today's religous use of the mantra "Conspiracy Theory"

Consider the following:

Lots of political assassination in Japan during 1920s > CONNECTED TO rightward direction of ensuing Japanese political spectrum; Just basic Japanese

history 101

Critical "nodal" political assassinations in US during 1960s > the SEPARTATION of the assassinations form the overall continuum of US political history

instead the creation of a new term with constantly evolving meaning (witness the change during the critical years 1992-96 Oliver Stone X-Files

Foxification et. al. and contrast with what "conspiracy" meant around 1975 even on page one of NYT!) > result moated conscioussness in which

the assassinations are NEVER connected to the overall movement of the counrty rightwards since the assassinations.

Quite a contrast? Why? In my view it is because too few on the left understand the nature of left-keeping> that it is done as part of a psy war with

RIGHTIST INTENTIONS I agree with Peter that OF COURSE NOT ALL of the articles and writers of The Nation and Pacifica have this agenda.

Unquestionably, there is SOME VERY GREAT STUFF THAT APPEARS IN THE NATION. That is just the point. The CIA knows that their CT mantra would not

be persuasive to THIS PARTICULAR audience if they did not consider the magazine " on their side". In my opinon, John, you sometimes fail to see this

strategy, that the CIA clearly articlulated when it decided to entirely create and fund the Left-liberal magazine Encounter, which by the way was aimed at

the precise same crowd and at the precise same location on the political spectrum.

Please listen to these great Ralph and Maya shows called THE NATION MAGAZINE ADVANCES THE CIA AGENDA. They are not one to simply play "lefter

than thou" with publications, (even though they are). They quote from the Corporate Media all the time. But they sure do understand the RIGHTWARD

ESSENCE of left-gatekeeping, although I don't recall their using this term for it.

http://takingaim.info/ These are absolutely critical shows for the entire universe! Mad Max cogniscenti will especially enjoy these 2 programs.

060328 The Nation Magazine Advances the CIA Agenda, Part Two download play

060321 The Nation Magazine Advances the CIA Agenda, Part One download play

060318

Edited by Nathaniel Heidenheimer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...