Cockburn on 9/11 CTs

Len Colby · September 9, 2011

The 9/11 Conspiracists: Vindicated After All These Years?

by ALEXANDER COCKBURN

We’re homing in on the tenth anniversary of the destruction of the Wall Street Trade Towers and the attack on the Pentagon. One in seven Americans and one in four among those aged 16-24, (so a recent poll commissioned by the BBC tells us) believe that there was a vast conspiracy in which the U.S. government was involved. But across those ten years have the charges that it was an “inside job” –– a favored phrase of the self-styled “truthers” — received any serious buttress?

The answer is no.

Did the Trade Towers fall because they were badly built as a consequence of corruption, incompetence, regulatory evasions by the Port Authority, and because they were struck by huge planes loaded with jet fuel. No, shout the conspiracists, they “pancaked” because Dick Cheney’s agents–scores of them–methodically planted demolition charges in the preceding days inserting the explosives in the relevant floors of three vast buildings, (moving day after day among the unsuspecting office workers), then on 9/11 activating the detonators. It was a conspiracy of thousands, all of whom–party to mass murder–have held their tongues ever since.

What has been the goal of the 9/11 conspiracists? They ask questions, yes, but they never answer them...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/02/the-911-conspiracists-vindicated-after-all-these-years/

Steven Gaal · September 9, 2011

The 9/11 Conspiracists: Vindicated After All These Years?

by ALEXANDER COCKBURN

We’re homing in on the tenth anniversary of the destruction of the Wall Street Trade Towers and the attack on the Pentagon. One in seven Americans and one in four among those aged 16-24, (so a recent poll commissioned by the BBC tells us) believe that there was a vast conspiracy in which the U.S. government was involved. But across those ten years have the charges that it was an “inside job” –– a favored phrase of the self-styled “truthers” — received any serious buttress?

The answer is no.

Did the Trade Towers fall because they were badly built as a consequence of corruption, incompetence, regulatory evasions by the Port Authority, and because they were struck by huge planes loaded with jet fuel. No, shout the conspiracists, they “pancaked” because Dick Cheney’s agents–scores of them–methodically planted demolition charges in the preceding days inserting the explosives in the relevant floors of three vast buildings, (moving day after day among the unsuspecting office workers), then on 9/11 activating the detonators. It was a conspiracy of thousands, all of whom–party to mass murder–have held their tongues ever since.

What has been the goal of the 9/11 conspiracists? They ask questions, yes, but they never answer them...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/02/the-911-conspiracists-vindicated-after-all-these-years/

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yes people have "QUESTIONS" about the honesty of 911myth people like Popular Mechaics. link http://911blogger.com/news/2011-09-07/popular-mechanics-911-iq-test

***************oooooooo*************+++++

Yes we have "QUESTIONS" about fake left gatekeepers.

link http://911review.com/denial/gatekeepers.html

Edited September 9, 2011 by Steven Gaal

Len Colby · September 10, 2011

LOL All the “Left Gatekeepers” essay demonstrates is that many truthers get over the rejection of their beliefs by leading leftists. The only evidence produced that these leftists might have ulterior motives is a chart showing some of them working for groups that supposedly received money from groups that supposedly received money from the CIA. Sometimes the chain is quite long for example, CIA  Rockefeller  FAIR  Gloria Steinem (Ms. Foundation)  Mort Zuckerman (NY Daily News)  Democracy Now  Amy Goodman.

The link about Popular Mechanics is a classic example of truthers trying to change the subject, Cockburn made no reference to it. As for honesty go back to your Tarpley MP3 thread to see how "truthers" dishonestly edit a video clip.

Steven Gaal · September 11, 2011

LOL All the “Left Gatekeepers” essay demonstrates is that many truthers get over the rejection of their beliefs by leading leftists. The only evidence produced that these leftists might have ulterior motives is a chart showing some of them working for groups that supposedly received money from groups that supposedly received money from the CIA. Sometimes the chain is quite long for example, CIA  Rockefeller  FAIR  Gloria Steinem (Ms. Foundation)  Mort Zuckerman (NY Daily News)  Democracy Now  Amy Goodman.

The link about Popular Mechanics is a classic example of truthers trying to change the subject, Cockburn made no reference to it. As for honesty go back to your Tarpley MP3 thread to see how "truthers" dishonestly edit a video clip.

####################################ooooooooOOOOOOOOoooooooo#######+

POINT ONE of TWO

Sorry,you didnt get the pun. Popular Mechanics are lies for the low brow class/Cockburn the 'reading class'. AS to honesty,Cocburn does use 911 Commission material. I can post for days here on the ED Forum about imcompleteness/fraud 911 commission. AS stated before ,I dont agree with Tarpley 100% ++ BUT his 46 Drill DATUM is important.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^########oooooooo########^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^+

POINT TWO

If the funding of the false left is too complex for 'some' they call it ,'untrue'. Now why the funding of the false left is complex is that Quigley exposed part of funding structure. See linked article below by Craig Lee Merrihue. THANKS Steven Gaal

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ooooooooOOOOOOOOoooooooo^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^+

1939: That year H.G. Wells revealed the socialists' plan to create a world government. In his book, The New World Order, he wrote:

"There will be no day of days... when a new world order comes into being. Step by step and here and there it will arrive, and even as it comes into being it will develop fresh perspectives.... Countless ... people will hate the new world order ... and will die protesting against it."(p 122,129)

###################################oooooooo###############

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^****

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Know Thy Enemy! Dark Genesis and Deep Politics: The New Republic

by Craig Lee Merrihue

link http://www.mediamonitors.net/craigmerrihue1.html

++oo++ooooooooooo=

“What the hell was a partner in the Morgan Bank doing starting a “pinko” journal like The New Republic in the first place?”

Jim Martin

++oo++ooooooooooo=

*~*~*~*~*~*~*

The New Republic magazine has once again been trotted out to play the Trojan-Horse role for which it was hired.

Los Angeles Times readers were recently lambasted with yet another shrill diatribe against the Palestinian people from New Republic editor-in-chief Martin Peretz (see “Traveling With Bad Companions; Western supporters of the Palestinian cause are morally blind”, June 23, 2003, Commentary) . Such hysterical obloquy would be simply tiresome were it not for the pernicious effect of such drivel on generations of innocent lives.

Those who support the Palestinian cause against Israel, are, at best, in Peretz’s condescending estimation, “myopic romantic{s}”, but more aptly designated as “deluded folk”, “certified kooks”, or by the almost quaintly anachronistic “fellow travelers.”

Some of these “certified kooks”, are genuinely mystified by such irrational invective coming from the helmsman of the most venerable flagship for thoughtful liberalism.

Deliciously tempting though it may be to pick apart Peretz’s logic or his lack thereof, it is more enlightening to assess by what right the New Republic’ arrogated to itself the moral authority to pontificate through its blow-hard editor-in-chief.

The truth is, there is no such moral authority. The New Republic is the cynical creation of self-serving men whose moral mandates seldom rise above the maxim “he who has the gold makes the rules.”

One of the most complete expositions of this little-told story is found in Professor Carroll Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World In Our Time (Macmillan, 1966). The eminent Dr. Quigley was professor of history at the Foreign Service School of Georgetown University, and had previously taught at Princeton and Harvard---certainly no academic slouch, he.

Quigley was also the favorite professor of little Bill Clinton. In fact, in his first presidential nomination acceptance speech, Clinton went out of his way to thank above all others two gone-but-not-forgotten influences who shaped his self-professed belief in the duty of public service: President John F, Kennedy and Professor Carroll Quigley. Clinton attended Georgetown when his professor’s 1300+page tome was probably required reading. Author Jim Martin conjectures that this is probably where the ambitious little suck-butt learned how power really works in the world.

The short of it is, the New Republic was founded in 1914 with J.P. Morgan Banking Money (specifically by Willard Straight who had married heiress Dorothy Payne Whitney) to manipulate the political left. In Quigley’s analysis on pages 936-956, this infiltration had a threefold purpose:

(1)To keep informed on Left-wing thinking; (2) to provide these liberal groups with a forum which would act as a safety-valve to “blow off steam”; and (3) to have a final veto on their publicity, and possibly on their actions, if they ever went “radical”.

Before launching this Trojan Horse, Cornell graduate Willard Straight had served as Far East expert for the Morgan Banking interests of which he was a partner, living in the region 1902-1910. He also was an assistant to Sir Robert Hard , Director of the Chinese Imperial Customs Service, who was lead man, according to Quigley in the European Imperialist penetration of China.

As her name indicates, Willard Straight’s wife, Dorothy Payne Whitney, was the product of an alliance between two of America’s richest families, with giant interests in New York utilities, Rockefeller’s Standard Oil (now Exxon), and much else. One of her brothers married into the equally aristocratic Vanderbilt dynasty, the other wed the daughter of Secretary of State John Hay, who articulated the so-called “open-door” policy in China.

Quigley sees the New Republic as the best example of the alliance between Wall Street and Left-wing publications. The original purpose of this particular alliance was “to provide an outlet for the progressive left and to quietly guide it in an Anglophile” direction. The author goes on to say that this task was given to a smug young man just out of Harvard, Walter Lippman, who would be the towering figure in American Journalism until his death in 1974. Lippman was one of the few American members of the mysterious Round Table Group (more on this later), which had been a dominant force in British foreign policy since its formation in 1909. Lippman’s bi-weekly columns appeared in hundred’s of papers over six decades. As a link between Wall Street and the Round Table Group, and an editor of New Republic, Lippman in 1918, still in his 20s, was given the opportunity to be the official interpreter of Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points at the Paris Peace Conference following World War I.

Guiding the American Left in an Anglophile direction is a goal that absolutely mystifies most modern Americans, who have lost touch with American democracy’s long history of opposing the philosophy and exploitive designs of the British Empire. After decades of “disneyfication” and tabloid celebrity mongering, few Americans see Monarchy as the bloodline worshipping cult of greed clung to by those who believe they are born to rule over others.

Quigley cites Willard Straight’s official biography by Herbert Croly, the first editor of the New Republic, who wrote in 1924, six years after Willard’s untimely death, that “Straight was in no sense a liberal or progressive, but was, indeed, a typical international banker and that the New Republic was simply a mechanism for advancing certain designs of such international bankers, notably to blunt the isolationism and anti-British sentiments so prevalent among many American progressives, while providing them with a vehicle for expression of their progressive views in literature, art, music, social reform, and even domestic politics…the chief achievement of the New Republic, however in 1914-1918 and again in 1938-1948, was for interventionism in Europe and support for Great Britain.

So the great journal of liberal democracy’s crowning glory was to shed blood on behalf of the Empire the nation had broken away from.

Dorothy Payne Whitney Straight was to support the paper until well in the 1950s. A few years after Willard’s death, she acted upon her true feelings for America’s democratic experiment with a new republic by marrying into British nobility and becoming Lady Elmhirst of Dartington Hall. She took her three young children from America and brought them up English. Once again demonstrating her true devotion to the liberal principles professed by the New Republic, Lady Elmhirst renounced her American citizenship in 1935. Her youngest son, Mike Straight, stood for Parliament, as was his right as a British subject. This situation proved to be no obstacle, however, when he returned to America at age 22 and was immediately appointed to the State Department. Paving the way for her son in America, Dorothy Payne Whitney Straight, transferred her sole ownership of the New Republic to a dummy corporation with her son Mike as president.

From this position, Mike Straight may have, in Quigley’s view, “pulled off the most skillful political coup in twentieth century American politics. “ Quigley is referring to the complete removal from the American scene of the Communist Party and Socialist organizations as the serious forces to contend with they had been for several decades.

Part Two

Only in America.

Mike Straight, J.P. Morgan Banker and blue-blood aristocrat, deploys that paragon of liberal journalism, The New Republic, to destroy the Left as a serious political power in America. Not surprisingly, the magazine continues today in its role of Trojan Horse with visceral polemics against all who dare challenge the pro-Israel party line.

Straight, although a declared anti-communist, was nonetheless quite cozy with the reds when it suited his purposes. Quigley highlights this collaboration in Straight’s role with the Progressive Party presidential bid of former vice-president Henry A. Wallace in 1948. Ironically, Wallace is denigrated in the opening sentences of Peretz’s diatribe as a gullible “fellow traveler”, although Peretz conveniently neglects to mention Wallace’s sojourn as editor of the New Republic.

Straight gave Wallace a bully pulpit in his magazine, and brought in a number of communists like Lew Frank as campaign insiders. In the meantime, Straight worked feverishly to block the candidacies of any state, local, or congressional level aspirants of Wallace’s new Progressive Party. He also worked behind the scenes with his anti-communist friends in labor, veteran, and liberal groups to prevent an endorsement of Wallace’s presidential bid, citing the presence of communists on the candidate’s staff (which Straight himself had brought in). Quigley states that these efforts resulted in nothing less than the shattering of the left-labor coalition of the 1930s (the Popular Front), driving the leftists out of the unions and the labor movement across the country. All of this years before the witch hunts of Sen. Joseph McCarthy or J. Edgar Hoover. In the meantime, Straight’s family (the Whitney’s on his mother’s side), founders of Pan-Amercian Airlines, profited handsomely when C.V. Whitney was appointed by President Truman, (who one would think grateful for the destruction of the left), to the most powerful Federal civil aviation post, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics.

As an interesting aside, while Mike Straight was at Cambridge, he was a member of a secret fraternal society called “The Apostles.” As John Costello writes in The Mask of Treachery, this group was in turn very close to the Anthony Blunt-Guy Burgess-Kim Philby spy ring. The Apostles were allegedly Marxist aristocrats (figure that out!), and included Lord Victor Rothschild of the powerful and Zionist-financing banking family. According to Costello, “Guy Burgess, in fact was being paid 100 pounds sterling a month as an ‘investment advisor’ to Mrs. Charles Rothschild while an active Soviet Spy.”

Oh what a knotted web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!

Straights subterfuge against true progressive politics, perpetrated while the controlling force of The New Republic, played to the development of a Radical Right mythology of liberal plots to undermine the American way of life, and the helped in the branding of left-ism as “un-American.”

However, Quigley says that this radical right fairy tale, “like all fables, does in fact have a modicum of truth.” Quigley then goes on to provide the history, based on his insider access to the group’s papers, of an “anglophile network, which operates, to some extent, the way the radical right believes the Communists act.” The modern form of this malignant misrule had its genesis in the Round Table Groups founded by world pirate Cecil Rhodes (for whom Rhodesia in Africa was named) and the subsequent trustees of his enormous ill-gotten gains. The stated purpose of the group was to federate the English speaking peoples of the world in accord with principles laid down by Cecil Rhodes and William T. Snead. By 1915 there were Round Table groups in seven English speaking countries, with the inventor of “professional and objective journalism", and New Republic icon, Walter Lippman, leading the American contingent. The “chief backbone” of the group was built around “the already existing financial cooperation between the Morgan Bank in New York and a group of international financiers in London led by the Lazard Brothers”, with numerous entities in between.

Known as “Lord Milner’s kindergarten” after the venerable English aristocrat’s demise in 1925, several front groups were established in each of the commonwealth nations, and led by a veritable who’s who of moneyed power: Lord Lothian, Lady Astor, the Dulles brothers, the Harrimans, and Morgan bankers too numerous to mention. Front groups were established in each of the member countries. The British entity is the Royal Institute of International Affairs, widely known by the name of its St .James Square location across the street from the Astors, Chatham House. The American Counterpart is the Council on Foreign Relations, publishers of Foreign Affairs magazine, and the source for nearly every Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense for the last 80 years, as well as most Presidents. The CFR has a small, select, by invitation-only membership, which makes its domination of U.S. foreign policy almost ludicrous, were it not so lethal for so many. Sister organizations include the Trilateral Commission, which consists of major players in America, Europe, and Japan, and the so-called Bilderberger group, largely concerned with Euro-American affairs.

Quigley claims this group has exerted inordinate influence in public debate not only through media ownership, but through what evolved from the J.P Morgan banks handling of academic endowments. In Quigley’s words, “access to publication and recommendations to academic positions in the handful of great American universities…required similar sponsorship.” In this way, a small, though mighty group determined to a large extent “the individuals who published, who had money, who found jobs, were consulted, and who were appointed to government missions.” Furthermore, Quigley points out that “the names of Wall Street luminaries still adorn these Ivy League campuses,” and that “the chief officials of these universities (Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc), were beholden to these financial powers and usually owed their jobs to them.” In summation, the Georgetown professor states, “On this basis…there grew up in the twentieth century a power structure between London and New York which penetrated deeply into university life, the press, and the practice of foreign policy.” It is this same Anglo-American axis threatening peace and justice in the world today.

The American branch of this Anglo-oriented cabal is said to have disseminated its influence primarily through five newspapers: The New York Times, the New York Herald Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, the Washington Post, and the Boston Evening Transcript. In fact, the Christian Science Monitor editor did surreptitious (and anonymous) duty as American correspondent for The Round Table. Lord Lothian, The Round Table’s first editor and secretary of the Rhodes Trust 1925-1939, contributed often to the Monitor. Morgan banking partner Thomas Lamont financially supported or owned outright The Saturday Review of Literature and the New York Post. In fact, Lamont attended the pivotal Paris Peace Conference following World War I, and there befriended his English counterparts who had been organized by Lord Milner’s group.

Lest one think Quigley a wide-eyed, wild-haired radical professor, bear in mind his own stated assessment that the goals of this group were, by and large, “commendable”: to federate the English speaking world, establish peace (think today’s Pax Americana), “help backward, colonial, and (to assist) underdeveloped areas advance toward stability along the lines taught at Oxford and the University of London (especially the London School of Economics and the Schools of African and Oriental Studies).” Quigley furthermore dismisses accusations of fascism against this group as communist propaganda”, and that they were really “quite the contrary.” They were “gracious and cultured gentlemen…who constantly thought in terms of Anglo-American solidarity…and who were convinced that they could gracefully civilize the Boers of South Africa, the Irish, the Arabs, and the Hindus, and who are largely responsible for the partitions of Ireland, Palestine, and India, as well as the federations of South Africa, Central Africa and the West Indies.”

May the Great Spirit deliver us from such gracious and cultured gentlemen. As economist John Kenneth Galbraith said of modern conservatives: (they are) "engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.”

Besides, Quigley certainly received his comeuppance and learned with whom he was dealing. Jim Martin cites letters from the early 70s in which the eminent Georgetown Professor writes that the British publisher of Tragedy and Hope , Macmillan, suppressed the book because “they didn’t like its gist. Quigley further wrote that Macmillan was preventing him from assuming copyright to his own book by keeping it technically “in print”, but withholding it from the general public. Martin states that “Quigley photographed each page of the book and sent it to a printer; that’s the only reason it was available at all in America.”

The lessons from The New Republic’s history and the Round Table movement which spawned it for today are legion. Progressives will never see power with justice implemented in this world until they fully comprehend the nature and threat of power in the world today, which seeks self-preservation and expansion at without regard to human cost. Without this comprehension of the beasts’ inclination and reach, global civil rights movements will only be tolerated as long as they do not succeed to a great degree. But long before any tangible success will comes infiltration, manipulation, repression, co-option and annihilation.

The faring of presidential aspirants Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich presents a case in point. Dean is the darling of the New Republic type crowd, and is therefore, this year’s Trojan Horse model, whether or not the former governor of Vermont is conscious of his designated role. The corporate media has been crowing over Dean’s first place finish among all Democratic contenders in the much ballyhooed “online primary” by Moveon.org, in which an astounding 317,000 people participated. Such was the case on the editorial page of the same L.A. Times which provided the soapbox for Martin Peretz’s ravings, but failed in the same article to mention Dennis Kucinich’s second place showing. This is particularly astonishing in view of the corporate media blackout of this sitting congressman who was once the youngest man ever elected mayor of a major city (Cleveland). That is because Kucinich is a genuine progressive with leadership skill, an egotistical dummy corporation, and a genuine threat to the powers that be. Dean, on the other hand, backs a bloated military budget and has deep relationships with the Israeli right wing. Needless to say, many well-intentioned progressives will fruitlessly attempt to jockey toward justice on the back of this Trojan Horse, only to eventually end up (once again) , with splinters in the rear.

The Money Power has absolutely no intention of handing over the reigns to justice and freedom. Nor does it care a twit what mothers and children live and die, or in what squalor. The innocents of Afghanistan and Iraq all had names, as do the subjugated poor everywhere, and were all beloved by someone, somewhere. But the bottom lines to power politics in the world in which we presently have our being are money and murder. If we hope ever to ameliorate that incontrovertible fact in at least some small way, we need to arm ourselves with knowledge of the details of power in the world.

Know thy enemy.

References:

Quigley, Carroll: "Tragedy & Hope-A History of the World in Our Time" (1966)

Martin, Jim: "Quigley, Clinton, Straight & Reich," article, Steamshovel Press, #8, Summer 1993

Bracken, Len: "Quigley Live!," article, Steamshovel Press, #10, 1994

Thomas, Ken, "Conspiracy in the Clinton Era," article, Steamshovel Press #10, 1994

Amidon, Beulah: The Nation and the New Republic, article, Survey Graphic Magazine of Social Interpretation, 1939.

Website for Whitney-Payne-Straight family tree: www.familytreemaker.com/users//a/y/Thomas-C-Payne/GEN6-0018.html

Parmalee, T.A., Herbert Croly, article

International Solidarity Movement (ISM) Media Alert and Call for Action _ LA Times

Edited September 11, 2011 by Steven Gaal

September 11, 2011

LOL All the “Left Gatekeepers” essay demonstrates is that many truthers get over the rejection of their beliefs by leading leftists. The only evidence produced that these leftists might have ulterior motives is a chart showing some of them working for groups that supposedly received money from groups that supposedly received money from the CIA. Sometimes the chain is quite long for example, CIA  Rockefeller  FAIR  Gloria Steinem (Ms. Foundation)  Mort Zuckerman (NY Daily News)  Democracy Now  Amy Goodman.

The link about Popular Mechanics is a classic example of truthers trying to change the subject, Cockburn made no reference to it. As for honesty go back to your Tarpley MP3 thread to see how "truthers" dishonestly edit a video clip.

"Leading leftists"....???? Name five.... I'll make it easier, name three "leftists" who the influence to be labeled "leading" and who have rejected the argument at its core, if we can agree that motivation is the catalyst, and this is fair description of the motivation and the opportunity?

Why are you bent on trivializing the shriller elements of those challenging the government/media explanation, while not comparing the assertions of those elements with the shrill intentionally inaccurate and thoroughly discredited, Iraqi WMD stockpiles, research and production infrastructure and "Zarqawi was al-Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded..." justifications?

Who are more ridiculous, the officials who intentionally lied to justify the unprovoked and unnecessary killing, destruction, and costs resulting from invading and occupying Iraq, or the comparatively harmless folk guilty of no more than communication opinions and accusations you find unlikely or impossible?

Scale and consequence of the arguments of "truthers" seems to elude you, Len, if your misplaced targeting and level of concern is an indicator. Compared to the justifications for the wasting actions of the Bush and Obama administrations, aren't the most controversial assertions of the truthers, almost not worth your attention and indignation? Have anything truthers said, killed any bystander, diminished our constitutional rights in any way, cost even the equivalent of what the U.S> government has spent in a week of war operations since the day Iraq was invaded?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-bromwich/what-911-makes-us-forget_b_956976.html
What 9/11 Makes Us Forget

Posted: 9/10/11 06:46 PM ET

David Bromwich

Professor of Literature at Yale

...One thing the shorthand 9/11 inclines us to forget is that the 1990s incubated a powerful sect of strategists who regarded the fall of communism as a letdown for the United States. Great powers need great enemies. The moment an empire contracts the scope of its ambitions is the moment it ceases to think itself an empire. It may then revert to a more modest condition: that of a free republic, or one power among others. The essence of empire, by contrast, is the spirit of militarism embodied in a policy of endless expansion. That understanding lay behind the neoconservative pamphlet Rebuilding America's Defenses: a full-scale policy memorandum, produced for the Project for the New American Century, published in September 2000 and running 76 pages in two columns.

Its author, Thomas Donnelly, took counsel from an advisory committee that included Stephen Cambone, Donald Kagan, I. Lewis Libby, Gary Schmitt, and Paul Wolfowitz. The "report" (as it called itself) contained a sentence that has acquired a separate fame. "The process," said the strategists at PNAC, of America's complete transformation into an unchallenged global superpower "is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor." One year later, the catalyzing event arrived. Among the reasons Dick Cheney was so quick off the starting blocks after a surprise attack was that he had long been preparing for such an incitement. Unlike most Americans, he knew exactly how to use it. The policy that was put into force without hesitation was best captured in a jotting by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: "Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

What history began on 9/11? American "force projection" in the Middle East and Southwest Asia. This meant the bombing and (where plausible) occupation of Iraq, Syria, and Iran; and, with the successes there, control over the dome of oil in the region and "the oil-rich Horn of Africa." Also, improved security for Israel; political advantage for the administration in charge of the quest; a geopolitical base from which to push (with assistance from the former Soviet republics after the "color revolutions" subsidized by the U.S.) against any possible resurgence of Russian power. These gains in political dominance and economic hegemony might prove useful, too, as a wedge against China in South Asia.

Such were the long-term goals. The necessary short-term method for dragging America in consisted of lies supported by other lies, half-truths, forgeries, a docile press and a clutch of reliable journalists and opinion-makers. Few analysts were so prescient as to get the whole story or almost all of it right. Two who did were Chalmers Johnson in The Sorrows of Empire and George Kateb in "A Life of Fear."...

Len Colby · September 12, 2011

"Leading leftists"....???? Name five.... I'll make it easier, name three "leftists" who the influence to be labeled "leading" and who have rejected the argument at its core, if we can agree that motivation is the catalyst, and this is fair description of the motivation and the opportunity?

Berlett, Chomsky, Cockburn, Corn, Goodman, Said etc. as well as others at publications sites like The Nation, The Progressive, AlterNet, CounterPunch, Village Voice etc. etc. Even extremist dirtbags like Carlos the Jackel and Ward Churchill accepted that AQ/OBL were responsible.

Gaal I can't make much sense of your drivel a book written in the 60s can't document covert funding of leftists during the 21st century.

Len Colby · September 12, 2011

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-bromwich/what-911-makes-us-forget_b_956976.html
What 9/11 Makes Us Forget

Posted: 9/10/11 06:46 PM ET

David Bromwich

Professor of Literature at Yale

...One thing the shorthand 9/11 inclines us to forget is that the 1990s incubated a powerful sect of strategists who regarded the fall of communism as a letdown for the United States. Great powers need great enemies. The moment an empire contracts the scope of its ambitions is the moment it ceases to think itself an empire. It may then revert to a more modest condition: that of a free republic, or one power among others. The essence of empire, by contrast, is the spirit of militarism embodied in a policy of endless expansion. That understanding lay behind the neoconservative pamphlet Rebuilding America's Defenses: a full-scale policy memorandum, produced for the Project for the New American Century, published in September 2000 and running 76 pages in two columns.

Its author, Thomas Donnelly, took counsel from an advisory committee that included Stephen Cambone, Donald Kagan, I. Lewis Libby, Gary Schmitt, and Paul Wolfowitz. The "report" (as it called itself) contained a sentence that has acquired a separate fame. "The process," said the strategists at PNAC, of America's complete transformation into an unchallenged global superpower "is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor." One year later, the catalyzing event arrived. Among the reasons Dick Cheney was so quick off the starting blocks after a surprise attack was that he had long been preparing for such an incitement. Unlike most Americans, he knew exactly how to use it. The policy that was put into force without hesitation was best captured in a jotting by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: "Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

What history began on 9/11? American "force projection" in the Middle East and Southwest Asia. This meant the bombing and (where plausible) occupation of Iraq, Syria, and Iran; and, with the successes there, control over the dome of oil in the region and "the oil-rich Horn of Africa." Also, improved security for Israel; political advantage for the administration in charge of the quest; a geopolitical base from which to push (with assistance from the former Soviet republics after the "color revolutions" subsidized by the U.S.) against any possible resurgence of Russian power. These gains in political dominance and economic hegemony might prove useful, too, as a wedge against China in South Asia.

Such were the long-term goals. The necessary short-term method for dragging America in consisted of lies supported by other lies, half-truths, forgeries, a docile press and a clutch of reliable journalists and opinion-makers. Few analysts were so prescient as to get the whole story or almost all of it right. Two who did were Chalmers Johnson in The Sorrows of Empire and George Kateb in "A Life of Fear."...

If anyone especially an Ivy League professor wants to pontificate on a document they should read and make sure they understood it before hand, very little if any of "the process," referred to in the infamous sentence came fruition after 9/11. The sentence did not mean what he claims so either he 1) never read the report, 2)read it a while ago and forgot what it said, 3)read it but did not understand (unlikely for a Yale lit prof) or 4) is a fraud.

Steven Gaal · September 12, 2011

Berlett, Chomsky, Cockburn, Corn, Goodman, Said etc. as well as others at publications sites like The Nation, The Progressive, AlterNet, CounterPunch, Village Voice etc. etc. Even extremist dirtbags like Carlos the Jackel and Ward Churchill accepted that AQ/OBL were responsible.

Gaal I can't make much sense of your drivel a book written in the 60s can't document covert funding of leftists during the 21st century.

###############################################################=

===============================================================+

Colby I cant make much sense of your drivel for Tragedy and Hope is one of the most important history books ever written. No footnotes/references...oh yeah , I found this unfootnoted

Julius Ceasar scroll,yeah I'll follow Colby's advice and throw it out. Quigley either made it up or its true ++ HE was allowed to see the inner papers of the elite. Quigely is a better historian than you are ,sir. Why ?? CAUSE YOU CANT FIND ELITE/CIA funding of the left in 21st century ??? Its hard to believe you have history degree and ACLU work. You do have a search program ?? See below

============================o===============================

============================+===============================****

link http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/FordFandCIA.html

The Ford Foundation and the CIA:

A documented case of philanthropic collaboration

with the Secret Police

by James Petras

15 December 2001

Rebelión

Introduction

The CIA uses philanthropic foundations as the most effective conduit to channel large sums of money to Agency projects without alerting the recipients to their source. From the early 1950s to the present the CIA's intrusion into the foundation field was and is huge. A U.S. Congressional investigation in 1976 revealed that nearly 50% of the 700 grants in the field of international activities by the principal foundations were funded by the CIA (Who Paid the Piper? The CIA and the Cultural Cold War, Frances Stonor Saunders, Granta Books, 1999, pp. 134-135). The CIA considers foundations such as Ford "The best and most plausible kind of funding cover" (Ibid, p. 135). The collaboration of respectable and prestigious foundations, according to one former CIA operative, allowed the Agency to fund "a seemingly limitless range of covert action programs affecting youth groups, labor unions, universities, publishing houses and other private institutions" (p. 135). The latter included "human rights" groups beginning in the 1950s to the present. One of the most important "private foundations" collaborating with the CIA over a significant span of time in major projects in the cultural Cold War is the Ford Foundation.

This essay will demonstrate that the Ford Foundation-CIA connection was a deliberate, conscious joint effort to strengthen U.S. imperial cultural hegemony and to undermine left-wing political and cultural influence. We will proceed by examining the historical links between the Ford Foundation and the CIA during the Cold War, by examining the Presidents of the Foundation, their joint projects and goals as well as their common efforts in various cultural areas.

Background: Ford Foundation and the CIA

By the late 1950s the Ford Foundation possessed over $3 billion in assets. The leaders of the Foundation were in total agreement with Washington's post-WWII projection of world power. A noted scholar of the period writes: "At times it seemed as if the Ford Foundation was simply an extension of government in the area of international cultural propaganda. The foundation had a record of close involvement in covert actions in Europe, working closely with Marshall Plan and CIA officials on specific projects" (Ibid, p.139). This is graphically illustrated by the naming of Richard Bissell as President of the Foundation in 1952. In his two years in office Bissell met often with the head of the CIA, Allen Dulles, and other CIA officials in a "mutual search" for new ideas. In 1954 Bissell left Ford to become a special assistant to Allen Dulles in January 1954 (Ibid, p. 139). Under Bissell, the Ford Foundation (FF) was the "vanguard of Cold War thinking".

One of the FF first Cold War projects was the establishment of a publishing house, Inter-cultural Publications, and the publication of a magazine Perspectives in Europe in four languages. The FF purpose according to Bissell was not "so much to defeat the leftist intellectuals in dialectical combat (sic) as to lure them away from their positions" (Ibid, p. 140). The board of directors of the publishing house was completely dominated by cultural Cold Warriors. Given the strong leftist culture in Europe in the post-war period, Perspectives failed to attract readers and went bankrupt.

Another journal Der Monat funded by the Confidential Fund of the U.S. military and run by Melvin Lasky was taken over by the FF, to provide it with the appearance of independence (Ibid, p. 140).

In 1954 the new president of the FF was John McCloy. He epitomized imperial power. Prior to becoming president of the FF he had been Assistant Secretary of War, president of the World Bank, High Commissioner of occupied Germany, chairman of Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan Bank, Wall Street attorney for the big seven oil companies and director of numerous corporations. As High Commissioner in Germany, McCloy had provided cover for scores of CIA agents (Ibid, p. 141).

McCloy integrated the FF with CIA operations. He created an administrative unit within the FF specifically to deal with the CIA. McCloy headed a three person consultation committee with the CIA to facilitate the use of the FF for a cover and conduit of funds. With these structural linkages the FF was one of those organizations the CIA was able to mobilize for political warfare against the anti-imperialist and pro-communist left. Numerous CIA "fronts" received major FF grants. Numerous supposedly "independent" CIA sponsored cultural organizations, human rights groups, artists and intellectuals received CIA/FF grants. One of the biggest donations of the FF was to the CIA organized Congress for Cultural Freedom which received $7 million by the early 1960s. Numerous CIA operatives secured employment in the FF and continued close collaboration with the Agency (Ibid, p. 143).

From its very origins there was a close structural relation and interchange of personnel at the highest levels between the CIA and the FF. This structural tie was based on the common imperial interests which they shared. The result of their collaboration was the proliferation of a number of journals and access to the mass media which pro-U.S. intellectuals used to launch vituperative polemics against Marxists and other anti-imperialists. The FF funding of these anti-Marxists organizations and intellectuals provided a legal cover for their claims of being "independent" of government funding (CIA).

The FF funding of CIA cultural fronts was important in recruiting non-communist intellectuals who were encouraged to attack the Marxist and communist left. Many of these non-communist leftists later claimed that they were "duped", that had they known that the FF was fronting for the CIA, they would not have lent their name and prestige. This disillusionment of the anti-communist left however took place after revelations of the FF-CIA collaboration were published in the press. Were these anti-communist social democrats really so naive as to believe that all the Congresses at luxury villas and five star hotels in Lake Como, Paris and Rome, all the expensive art exhibits and glossy magazines were simple acts of voluntary philanthropy? Perhaps. But even the most naive must have been aware that in all the Congresses and journals the target of criticism was "Soviet imperialism" and "Communist tyranny" and "leftist apologists of dictatorship" -- despite the fact that it was an open secret that the U.S. intervened to overthrow the democratic Arbenz government in Guatemala and the Mossadegh regime in Iran and human rights were massively violated by U.S. backed dictators in Cuba, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua and elsewhere.

The "indignation" and claims of "innocence" by many anti-communist left intellectuals after their membership in CIA cultural fronts was revealed must be taken with a large amount of cynical skepticism. One prominent journalist, Andrew Kopkind, wrote of a deep sense of moral disillusionment with the private foundation-funded CIA cultural fronts. Kopkind wrote

"The distance between the rhetoric of the open society and the reality of control was greater than anyone thought. Everyone who went abroad for an American organization was, in one way or another, a witness to the theory that the world was torn between communism and democracy and anything in between was treason. The illusion of dissent was maintained: the CIA supported socialist cold warriors, fascist cold warriors, black and white cold warriors. The catholicity and flexibility of the CIA operations were major advantages. But it was a sham pluralism and it was utterly corrupting" (Ibid, pp. 408-409)."

When a U.S. journalist Dwight Macdonald who was an editor of Encounter (a FF-CIA funded influential cultural journal) sent an article critical of U.S. culture and politics it was rejected by the editors, working closely with the CIA (Ibid, pp. 314-321). In the field of painting and theater the CIA worked with the FF to promote abstract expressionism against any artistic expression with a social content, providing funds and contacts for highly publicized exhibits in Europe and favorable reviews by "sponsored" journalists. The interlocking directorate between the CIA, the Ford Foundation and the New York Museum of Modern Art lead to a lavish promotion of "individualistic" art remote from the people -- and a vicious attack on European painters, writers and playwrights writing from a critical realist perspective. "Abstract Expressionism" whatever its artist's intention became a weapon in the Cold War (Ibid, p. 263).

The Ford Foundation's history of collaboration and interlock with the CIA in pursuit of U.S. world hegemony is now a well-documented fact. The remaining issue is whether that relationship continues into the new Millenium after the exposures of the 1960s? The FF made some superficial changes. They are more flexible in providing small grants to human rights groups and academic researchers who occasionally dissent from U.S. policy. They are not as likely to recruit CIA operatives to head the organization. More significantly they are likely to collaborate more openly with the U.S. government in its cultural and educational projects, particularly with the Agency of International Development.

The FF has in some ways refined their style of collaboration with Washington's attempt to produce world cultural domination, but retained the substance of that policy. For example the FF is very selective in the funding of educational institutions. Like the IMF, the FF imposes conditions such as the "professionalization" of academic personnel and "raising standards." In effect this translates into the promotion of social scientific work based on the assumptions, values and orientations of the U.S. empire; to have professionals de-linked from the class struggle and connected with pro-imperial U.S. academics and foundation functionaries supporting the neo-liberal model.

As in the 1950s and 60s the Ford Foundation today selectively funds anti-leftist human rights groups which focus on attacking human rights violations of U.S. adversaries, and distancing themselves from anti-imperialist human rights organizations and leaders. The FF has developed a sophisticated strategy of funding human rights groups (HRGs) that appeal to Washington to change its policy while denouncing U.S. adversaries their "systematic" violations. The FF supports HRGs which equate massive state terror by the U.S. with individual excesses of anti-imperialist adversaries. The FF finances HRGs which do not participate in anti-globalization and anti-neoliberal mass actions and which defend the Ford Foundation as a legitimate and generous "non-governmental organization".

History and contemporary experience tells us a different story. At a time when government over-funding of cultural activities by Washington is suspect, the FF fulfills a very important role in projecting U.S. cultural policies as an apparently "private" non-political philanthropic organization. The ties between the top officials of the FF and the U.S. government are explicit and continuing. A review of recently funded projects reveals that the FF has never funded any major project that contravenes U.S. policy.

In the current period of a major U.S. military-political offensive, Washington has posed the issue as "terrorism or democracy," just as during the Cold War it posed the question as "Communism or Democracy." In both instances the Empire recruited and funded "front organizations, intellectuals and journalists to attack its anti-imperialist adversaries and neutralize its democratic critics. The Ford Foundation is well situated to replay its role as collaborator to cover for the New Cultural Cold War.

Reprinted for Fair Use Only.

James Petras is a Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghampton University, New York, and author of:

Globalization Unmasked: Imperialism in the 21st Century with Henry Veltmeyer (Zed Books, 2001),

The Dynamics of Social Change in Latin America with Henry Veltmeyer (McMillan, 2000),

Empire or Republic: Global Power or Domestic Decay in the US with Morris Morley (Routledge, 1995),

Latin America in the Time of Cholera: Electoral Politics, Market Economics, and Permanent Crisis with Morris Morley (Routledge, 1992),

Latin America: Bankers, Generals and the Struggle for Social Justice (Rowman & Littlefield, 1986),

Class, State, and Power in the Third World, With Case Studies on Class Conflict in Latin America (Rowman & Littlefield, 1981)

The Nationalization of Venezuelan Oil (Holt Rinehart & Winston, 1978),

The United States and Chile: Imperialism and the Overthrow of the Allende Government (Monthly Review Press, 1975),

Latin America: From Dependence to Revolution (John Wiley & Sons, 1973),

Peasants in Revolt; A Chilean Case Study, 1965-1971 (Univ of Texas, 1973),

How Allende fell: a study in U.S.-Chilean relations (Spokesman Books),

Cultivating revolution; the United States and agrarian reform in Latin America (Random House, 1971)

Politics and Social Forces in Chilean Development (University of California Press, 1969).

James Petras' web site in english is at: http://www.rebelion.org/petrasenglish.htm

#######################****************#########################+++++

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^00000

The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters

by Frances Stonor Saunders

The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters

The "rivetingly told" (Times Literary Supplement) story of the CIA's Cold Warcultural operations, short-listed for the Guardian First Book Award. In The Cultural Cold War, Frances Stonor Saunders presents for the first time the shocking evidence that the CIA infiltrated every niche of the cultural sphere during the postwar years. In a "hammer-blow of a book"...moreThe "rivetingly told" (Times Literary Supplement) story of the CIA's Cold Warcultural operations, short-listed for the Guardian First Book Award. In The Cultural Cold War, Frances Stonor Saunders presents for the first time the shocking evidence that the CIA infiltrated every niche of the cultural sphere during the postwar years. In a "hammer-blow of a book" (The Spectator, London) drawing together recently declassified documents and exclusive interviews, the author narrates the extraordinary story of a secret campaign in which some of the most vocal exponents of intellectual freedom in the West were instruments of America's secret service. The CIA's front organizations and the philanthropic foundations that channeled its money organized conferences, founded magazines, ran congresses, mounted exhibitions, arranged concerts, and flew symphony orchestras around the world. Many of the period's foremost intellectuals, artists, and philanthropists appear in the book#58; Isaiah Berlin, Clement Greenberg, Sidney Hook, Arthur Koestler, Irving Kristol, Robert Lowell, Henry Luce, Andr� Malraux, Mary McCarthy, Reinhold Neibuhr, George Orwell, Jackson Pollock, Nelson Rockefeller, Bertrand Russell, Jean-Paul Sartre, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and Stephen Spender, among others. While many were unwitting participants in the CIA's cultural operation, others were willing collaborators. In this expose of covert patronage unprecedented in modern history, recently short-listed for the Guardian First Book Award, Saunders has created "a crucial story" (The Times, London) that is "quite unputdownable" (Literary Review).br(less)

Hardcover, 528 pages

Published April 28th 2000 by The New Press (first published January 1999)

September 12, 2011

"Leading leftists"....???? Name five.... I'll make it easier, name three "leftists" who the influence to be labeled "leading" and who have rejected the argument at its core, if we can agree that motivation is the catalyst, and this is fair description of the motivation and the opportunity?

Berlett, Chomsky, Cockburn, Corn, Goodman, Said etc. as well as others at publications sites like The Nation, The Progressive, AlterNet, CounterPunch, Village Voice etc. etc. Even extremist dirtbags like Carlos the Jackel and Ward Churchill accepted that AQ/OBL were responsible. .....

LOL !!!

and...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-bromwich/what-911-makes-us-forget_b_956976.html
What 9/11 Makes Us Forget

Posted: 9/10/11 06:46 PM ET

David Bromwich

Professor of Literature at Yale

...One thing the shorthand 9/11 inclines us to forget is that the 1990s incubated a powerful sect of strategists who regarded the fall of communism as a letdown for the United States. Great powers need great enemies. The moment an empire contracts the scope of its ambitions is the moment it ceases to think itself an empire. It may then revert to a more modest condition: that of a free republic, or one power among others. The essence of empire, by contrast, is the spirit of militarism embodied in a policy of endless expansion. That understanding lay behind the neoconservative pamphlet Rebuilding America's Defenses: a full-scale policy memorandum, produced for the Project for the New American Century, published in September 2000 and running 76 pages in two columns.

Its author, Thomas Donnelly, took counsel from an advisory committee that included Stephen Cambone, Donald Kagan, I. Lewis Libby, Gary Schmitt, and Paul Wolfowitz. The "report" (as it called itself) contained a sentence that has acquired a separate fame. "The process," said the strategists at PNAC, of America's complete transformation into an unchallenged global superpower "is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor." One year later, the catalyzing event arrived. ...

..........

If anyone especially an Ivy League professor wants to pontificate on a document they should read and make sure they understood it before hand, very little if any of "the process," referred to in the infamous sentence came fruition after 9/11. The sentence did not mean what he claims so either he 1) never read the report, 2)read it a while ago and forgot what it said, 3)read it but did not understand (unlikely for a Yale lit prof) or 4) is a fraud.

...People all over the world, are shoutin'

End the war

And the band played on. :

:

(quote) http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/foreign-policy-initiative-obama-us-allies-must-act-libya_552509.html

Foreign Policy Initiative to Obama: U.S., Allies Must Act on Libya

2:09 PM, Feb 25, 2011 • By MICHAEL WARREN

Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

The Foreign Policy Initiative has authored a letter to President Obama recommending his administration act with America's NATO allies on ending the violence and the "murderous regime" in Libya. The letter was signed by 41 former U.S. government officials, human rights and democracy advocates, and foreign policy experts, including the boss and several contributing editors and contributors to THE WEEKLY STANDARD. The text of the letter is below.

Foreign Policy Initiative to Obama: U.S., Allies Must Act on Libya

The Honorable Barack Obama

President of the United States

The White House

Washington, DC

February 25, 2011

Dear Mr. President:

In your 2009 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, you rightly declared that “Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later.” Today the United States and our allies in Europe must take action in response to the unfolding crisis in Libya. With violence spiraling to new heights, and with the apparent willingness of the Qaddafi regime to use all weapons at its disposal against the Libyan people, we may be on the threshold of a moral and humanitarian catastrophe. Inaction, or slow and inadequate measures, may not only fail to stop the slaughter in Libya but will cast doubt on the commitment of the United States and Europe to basic principles of human rights and freedoms. Therefore, we recommend the United States, in conjunction with NATO allies, take the following specific actions immediately:

1) The United States should call upon NATO to develop operational plans to urgently:

· Establish a presence in Libyan airspace to prevent the continued use of fighter jets and helicopter gunships against civilians and carry out other missions as required.

Related Stories

The U.K. Hits Tipping Point

Special Report Panel on Libya and Afghanistan

Conservatives Urge House Republicans Not to Cut and ...

GOP Foreign Policy Hands to House Republicans: Don’t ...

Special Report Panel on Obama, Europe, and Libya

More by Michael Warren

More Universities Remember 9/11

Obama Already Losing North Carolina?

House Republicans React to Jobs Address

Happy Hour: Are You Ready For Some Football?

Immelt, Trumka to Join First Lady at Jobs Speech

· Move naval assets into Libyan waters to aid in evacuation efforts and prepare for possible contingencies. Establish the capability to disable Libyan naval vessels used to attack civilians.

2) Freeze all Libyan government assets in the United States and Europe.

3) Consider temporarily halting importation of Libyan oil to the United States and Europe.

4) Make a clear statement that Col. Qaddafi and other officials who order and participate in massacres of civilians will be held accountable for their crimes under international law.

5) Provide humanitarian aid to the Libyan people as quickly as possible.

The United States and our European allies have a moral interest in both an end to the violence and an end to the murderous Libyan regime. There is no time for delay and indecisiveness. The people of Libya, the people of the Middle East, and the world require clear U.S. leadership in this time of opportunity and peril.

Elliott Abrams

Stephen E. Biegun

Max Boot

Ellen Bork

Scott Carpenter

Eliot Cohen

Seth Cropsey

Larry Diamond

Thomas Donnelly

Michelle Dunne

Eric Edelman

Jamie Fly

Reuel Marc Gerecht

John Hannah

Neil Hicks

William Inboden

Bruce Pitcairn Jackson

Robert Kagan

David Kramer

Irina Krasovskaya

William Kristol

Tod Lindberg

Michael Makovsky

Cliff May

Joshua Muravchik

Martin Peretz

Danielle Pletka

John Podhoretz

Randy Scheunemann

Dan Senor

John Shattuck

Mike Singh

Gare Smith

William Taft

Marc Thiessen

Daniel Twining

Pete Wehner

Ken Weinstein

Leon Wieseltier

Damon Wilson

Paul Wolfowitz (/quote)

Len Colby · September 13, 2011

Berlett, Chomsky, Cockburn, Corn, Goodman, Said etc. as well as others at publications sites like The Nation, The Progressive, AlterNet, CounterPunch, Village Voice etc. etc. Even extremist dirtbags like Carlos the Jackel and Ward Churchill accepted that AQ/OBL were responsible. .....

LOL !!!

and...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-bromwich/what-911-makes-us-forget_b_956976.html
What 9/11 Makes Us Forget

Posted: 9/10/11 06:46 PM ET

David Bromwich

Professor of Literature at Yale

...One thing the shorthand 9/11 inclines us to forget is that the 1990s incubated a powerful sect of strategists who regarded the fall of communism as a letdown for the United States. Great powers need great enemies. The moment an empire contracts the scope of its ambitions is the moment it ceases to think itself an empire. It may then revert to a more modest condition: that of a free republic, or one power among others. The essence of empire, by contrast, is the spirit of militarism embodied in a policy of endless expansion. That understanding lay behind the neoconservative pamphlet Rebuilding America's Defenses: a full-scale policy memorandum, produced for the Project for the New American Century, published in September 2000 and running 76 pages in two columns.

Its author, Thomas Donnelly, took counsel from an advisory committee that included Stephen Cambone, Donald Kagan, I. Lewis Libby, Gary Schmitt, and Paul Wolfowitz. The "report" (as it called itself) contained a sentence that has acquired a separate fame. "The process," said the strategists at PNAC, of America's complete transformation into an unchallenged global superpower "is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor." One year later, the catalyzing event arrived. ...

..........

If anyone especially an Ivy League professor wants to pontificate on a document they should read and make sure they understood it before hand, very little if any of "the process," referred to in the infamous sentence came fruition after 9/11. The sentence did not mean what he claims so either he 1) never read the report, 2)read it a while ago and forgot what it said, 3)read it but did not understand (unlikely for a Yale lit prof) or 4) is a fraud.

...People all over the world, are shoutin'

End the war

And the band played on. :

:

(quote) http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/foreign-policy-initiative-obama-us-allies-must-act-libya_552509.html

Foreign Policy Initiative to Obama: U.S., Allies Must Act on Libya

2:09 PM, Feb 25, 2011 • By MICHAEL WARREN

Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

The Foreign Policy Initiative has authored a letter to President Obama recommending his administration act with America's NATO allies on ending the violence and the "murderous(/quote)

How exactly was the post above a reply to mine?

Len Colby · September 13, 2011

Berlett, Chomsky, Cockburn, Corn, Goodman, Said etc. as well as others at publications sites like The Nation, The Progressive, AlterNet, CounterPunch, Village Voice etc. etc. Even extremist dirtbags like Carlos the Jackel and Ward Churchill accepted that AQ/OBL were responsible.

Gaal I can't make much sense of your drivel a book written in the 60s can't document covert funding of leftists during the 21st century.

###############################################################=

===============================================================+

Colby I cant make much sense of your drivel for Tragedy and Hope is one of the most important history books ever written. No footnotes/references...oh yeah , I found this unfootnoted

Julius Ceasar scroll,yeah I'll follow Colby's advice and throw it out. Quigley either made it up or its true ++ HE was allowed to see the inner papers of the elite.

You are entitled to your opinion but as you pointed out it has no source notes so one just has to take Quigley's word for it, even the best academics can be blinded by their biases or otherwise misinterpret their sources. This is why end/footnotes are required for a work to be taken seriously, and why it is seldom, if ever, cited by other academics. But that is besides the point, it was published in 1966 and thus can not 'document' CIA funding of leftists 4 decades later. Your other sources likewise refer to the 50s and early 60s.

Steven Gaal · September 13, 2011

Point one********

COLBY QUOTE // You are entitled to your opinion but as you pointed out it has no source notes so one just has to take Quigley's word for it, even the best academics can be blinded by their biases or otherwise misinterpret their sources.// COLBY QUOTE

Quigley was reading secret papers from one think tank to another. Misinterpret ?? How ?? He had real raw data were elites plan x in secret and 'x" occures afterword (afterward) in the real world. History is on Quigley's side regarding the slow march of the creation of a world federation of Reserve Banks working in the background together (in secret,together,in secret) that control their governments. If you would indulge me and go yourself to youtube for the Ned Beatty speech in the film 'NETWORK'. There is more truth in that speech than in all the MSM . You Mr. Colby seem to swallow the MSM baloney 'whole-hog'.

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOxOOOOOOOOooooooooo

Point two ********

COLBY QUOTE// But that is besides the point, it was published in 1966 and thus can not 'document' CIA funding of leftists 4 decades later. Your other sources likewise refer to the 50s and early 60s COLBY QUOTE//.

Sir the Elite funding of false left pundits had to go deeper and more hidden because of what Quigley made public. ==============

GAAL QUOTE// Now why the funding of the false left is complex is that Quigley exposed part of funding structure. // END GAAL QUOTE

If you had reseached the GATEKEEPER FLOW CHART you would have found the DATUM below. Your research grade on this topic is F grade.

THE FUNDING OF FALSE LEFT PUNDITS BY ELITES CONTINUES TO THIS DAY,CONTRARY TO YOUR F grade UNRESEARCHED OPINIONS. Please see Datum below. THANKS Steven Gaal

*********************OOOOOOOOooooooooOOOOOOOOXXXXXXXX***

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^***

oooo+oooo

+

link http://blogs.alternet.org/refugee/2011/04/15/the-nation-magazine-and-the-cia/

The Nation Magazine and the CIA

Posted by Dr Stuart Jeanne Bramhall alternet site 4/15/11

**************oooooooo************

Bob Feldman’s unraveling of the indirect CIA funding received by the Nation and Radio Nation is the most instructive in demonstrating how “pass-through” funding works (see http://www.questionsquestions.net/feldman/nation_ned_1.html). According to their tax returns, the Nation Institute receives major funding from the MacArthur Foundation and the J. M. Kaplan Family Foundation. Both, according to Frances Stoner Saunders (Who Paid the Piper?: the CIA and the Cultural Cold War), have a history of accepting CIA “pass-through” funding and collaborating with them on cold war projects. The Nation also also has an interesting relationship with a third left gatekeeping foundation the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute (FERI), in that publisher, editor and part owner Katrina van den Heuvel serves on the FERI governing board and her father, William vanden Heuvel, on the board of directors. FERI, like its namesake Eleanor Roosevelt has always pursued a clear mandate of supporting the development of anti-communist “parallel left” political groups.

Nation editor Katrina van den Heuvel

Moreover William van den Heuvel himself has well-established intelligence credentials, as a protege and executive assistant to “Wild Bill” Donovan, the founder and director of OSS (Office of Strategic Services). The OSS, which oversaw intelligence operations during World War II, became the CIA in 1947. In 1953-54 van den Heuvel accompanied Donovan to Thailand, where he served as ambassador (and lead CIA agent) to Thailand. Later as executive assistant to Robert Kennedy, van den Heuvel was the architect of the Kennedy administration’s staunch anti-Castro policy.

Other Left Gatekeepers Funding Alternative Media

Here is a brief summary of “alternative” media outlets the Feldman has linked to foundations the Church Committee identified as receiving CIA pass-through funding (see http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/legacy/research/edu20/moments/1976church.html?cms_page=edu20/moments/1976church.html). It is also of note that they all systematically marginalize journalistic and academic research into 911 and CIA-linked political assassinations.

Feldman’s co-author Eric Salter has drawn up a more detailed flow sheet demonstrating these complex inter-relationships at http://www.questionsquestions.net/gatekeepers.html

MacArthur Foundation

FAIR

The Progressive

Working Assets Radio

Rockefeller Foundation

FAIR

The Progressive

Working Assets Radio

Carnegie Foundation

Democracy Now!

J. M. Kaplan Family Foundation

Democracy Now!

Soros Family Foundation

Pacifica Radio

The Nation

Although Soros himself has no known CIA connections, he’s strongly linked to the military industrial complex as a major stockholder in Bush senior’s Carlyle Group and through his direct funding of “color” revolutions in Eastern Europe.

Schumann Foundation

Mother Jones

Alternet

Fair

Z Magazine

Run for many years by “progressive-lite” Bill Moyers, the Schuman Foundation (as evidenced by the projects it funds) has a rabidly pro-capitalist agenda. According to Feldman, Moyers himself has engaged in some pretty anti-progressive behavior, such as orchestrating (as Lyndon Johnson’s press secretary) the wiretapping of Martin Luther King and leaking the transcripts to the media. And his heavy promotion of the rabid anti-Semite and Holocaust denier Joseph Campbell on PBS (see http://www.undueinfluence.com/schumann_foundation.htm, http://www.undueinfluence.com/bill_moyers.htm, http://constantineinstitute.blogspot.com/2009/06/profiles-of-americas-beloved-tv.html and http://mindbodypolitic.com/2010/06/17/barry-zwicker-noam-chomsky-and-the-left-gatekeepers/)

Feldman notes that the alternative magazine Counterpunch receives no direct left gatekeeper funding, although one of their editors is on the Nation payroll (which does).

To be continued.

Edited September 13, 2011 by Steven Gaal

Len Colby · September 14, 2011

Point one********

COLBY QUOTE // You are entitled to your opinion but as you pointed out it has no source notes so one just has to take Quigley's word for it, even the best academics can be blinded by their biases or otherwise misinterpret their sources.// COLBY QUOTE

Quigley was reading secret papers from one think tank to another. Misinterpret ?? How ?? He had real raw data were elites plan x in secret and 'x" occures afterword (afterward) in the real world. History is on Quigley's side regarding the slow march of the creation of a world federation of Reserve Banks working in the background together (in secret,together,in secret) that control their governments.

How could Quigley misinterpret the texts he read? Was that a serious question? It is impossible to answer with out examining them, which is impossible because he never told anyone what they were. It is not uncommon for researchers to be swayed by their biases or otherwise mistake what they read or even to stretch the truth to fit their thesis, that's why source notes are de rigueur. It is probably due this lack of documentation that few if any serious historians cite the book despite the prominence of the author.

If you would indulge me and go yourself to youtube for the Ned Beatty speech in the film 'NETWORK'. There is more truth in that speech than in all the MSM . You Mr. Colby seem to swallow the MSM baloney 'whole-hog'.

No, if the subject interests me I examine claims made by CTs but in the vast majority of cases I find their cases to be lacking. You on the other hand seem to blindly accept any claims that conform to your world view. Please cite cases where Quigley's claims in T&H have been proven correct, that would form the basis for a new thread.

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOxOOOOOOOOooooooooo
Point two ********

COLBY QUOTE// But that is besides the point, it was published in 1966 and thus can not 'document' CIA funding of leftists 4 decades later. Your other sources likewise refer to the 50s and early 60s COLBY QUOTE//.

Sir the Elite funding of false left pundits had to go deeper and more hidden because of what Quigley made public. ==============

GAAL QUOTE// Now why the funding of the false left is complex is that Quigley exposed part of funding structure. // END GAAL QUOTE

Riddle me this, if the elites really were involved in a secret plot for world domination why would they give Quigley access to their archives?

If you had reseached the GATEKEEPER FLOW CHART you would have found the DATUM below. Your research grade on this topic is F grade.
THE FUNDING OF FALSE LEFT PUNDITS BY ELITES CONTINUES TO THIS DAY,CONTRARY TO YOUR F grade UNRESEARCHED OPINIONS. Please see Datum below. THANKS Steven Gaal

*********************OOOOOOOOooooooooOOOOOOOOXXXXXXXX***

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^***

oooo+oooo

+

link http://blogs.alternet.org/refugee/2011/04/15/the-nation-magazine-and-the-cia/

The Nation Magazine and the CIA

Posted by Dr Stuart Jeanne Bramhall alternet site 4/15/11

**************oooooooo************

Bob Feldman’s unraveling of the indirect CIA funding received by the Nation and Radio Nation is the most instructive in demonstrating how “pass-through” funding works (see http://www.questionsquestions.net/feldman/nation_ned_1.html). According to their tax returns, the Nation Institute receives major funding from the MacArthur Foundation and the J. M. Kaplan Family Foundation. Both, according to Frances Stoner Saunders (Who Paid the Piper?: the CIA and the Cultural Cold War), have a history of accepting CIA “pass-through” funding and collaborating with them on cold war projects. The Nation also also has an interesting relationship with a third left gatekeeping foundation the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute (FERI), in that publisher, editor and part owner Katrina van den Heuvel serves on the FERI governing board and her father, William vanden Heuvel, on the board of directors. FERI, like its namesake Eleanor Roosevelt has always pursued a clear mandate of supporting the development of anti-communist “parallel left” political groups.

Nation editor Katrina van den Heuvel

Moreover William van den Heuvel himself has well-established intelligence credentials, as a protege and executive assistant to “Wild Bill” Donovan, the founder and director of OSS (Office of Strategic Services). The OSS, which oversaw intelligence operations during World War II, became the CIA in 1947. In 1953-54 van den Heuvel accompanied Donovan to Thailand, where he served as ambassador (and lead CIA agent) to Thailand. Later as executive assistant to Robert Kennedy, van den Heuvel was the architect of the Kennedy administration’s staunch anti-Castro policy.

More drivel, the Nation is suspect because a) it supposedly received funding from foundations that supposedly received funding from the CIA in the 50s and 60s and the father of the editor/publisher worked with Robert Kennedy and a foundation named after Franklin and Elanor Roosevelt. Neither are relevant especially the 2nd. It is true but the 1st is not documented by the cited source

Other Left Gatekeepers Funding Alternative Media
Here is a brief summary of “alternative” media outlets the Feldman has linked to foundations the Church Committee identified as receiving CIA pass-through funding (see http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/legacy/research/edu20/moments/1976church.html?cms_page=edu20/moments/1976church.html). It is also of note that they all systematically marginalize journalistic and academic research into 911 and CIA-linked political assassinations.

There was no mention of '“alternative” media outlets' on the linked page.

Feldman’s co-author Eric Salter has drawn up a more detailed flow sheet demonstrating these complex inter-relationships at http://www.questionsquestions.net/gatekeepers.html

Other than two quotes the page is just a collection of links.

MacArthur Foundation

FAIR

The Progressive

Working Assets Radio

Rockefeller Foundation

FAIR

The Progressive

Working Assets Radio

Carnegie Foundation

Democracy Now!

J. M. Kaplan Family Foundation

Democracy Now!

Soros Family Foundation

Pacifica Radio

The Nation

Although Soros himself has no known CIA connections, he’s strongly linked to the military industrial complex as a major stockholder in Bush senior’s Carlyle Group and through his direct funding of “color” revolutions in Eastern Europe.

OK so the Nation is suspect because it got money from Soros. And Soros is suspect because because he and Bush are supposedly major shareholders in the same company and because he supported pro-democracy movements in the part of the world where he was born.

Schumann Foundation

Mother Jones

Alternet

Fair

Z Magazine

Run for many years by “progressive-lite” Bill Moyers, the Schuman Foundation (as evidenced by the projects it funds) has a rabidly pro-capitalist agenda. According to Feldman, Moyers himself has engaged in some pretty anti-progressive behavior, such as orchestrating (as Lyndon Johnson’s press secretary) the wiretapping of Martin Luther King and leaking the transcripts to the media. And his heavy promotion of the rabid anti-Semite and Holocaust denier Joseph Campbell on PBS (see

http://www.undueinfluence.com/schumann_foundation.htm,

http://www.undueinfluence.com/bill_moyers.htm,

http://constantineinstitute.blogspot.com/2009/06/profiles-of-americas-beloved-tv.html

and

http://mindbodypolitic.com/2010/06/17/barry-zwicker-noam-chomsky-and-the-left-gatekeepers/

)

There is very little if any documentation on the 4 linked pages, the 1st two are from a far right crank. As for Campbell I don't think anyone denies he was one the preeminent experts on mythology. Charges that he was anti-Semtic seem to stem from single critic who only made them after he died and are disputed by people who knew him as well as Robert Segal, a professor of religion who seems to be Jewish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Campbell#Posthumous_controversy

Feldman notes that the alternative magazine Counterpunch receives no direct left gatekeeper funding, although one of their editors is on the Nation payroll (which does).

Lame attempt at guilt by association especially since the case against the Nation was so weak.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Len Colby

Steven Gaal · September 15, 2011

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

CIA is connected to COLOR revolutions/Soros is connected to color revolutions. Soros is connected to West China unrest areas and so is the CIA. Soros was/is very close to Rockefeller family that funded false left 50-60s (Soros funds same left people/organizations today). sg

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXoooooooXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

#########################################****o

COLBY QUOTE // Other than two quotes the page is just a collection of links.??

What ,sorry the fellows links are part of his research. "OTHER THAN ??? You are kidding ? Weak response/analysis.

Edited September 15, 2011 by Steven Gaal

Len Colby · September 15, 2011

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

CIA is connected to COLOR revolutions/Soros is connected to color revolutions. Soros is connected to West China unrest areas and so is the CIA. Soros was/is very close to Rockefeller family that funded false left 50-60s (Soros funds same left people/organizations today). sg

Just saying it doesn’t make it so, the real world isn’t like OZ where repeating something over and over (while clicking your heels/mouse) makes it come true.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXoooooooXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
#########################################****o

COLBY QUOTE // Other than two quotes the page is just a collection of links.??

What ,sorry the fellows links are part of his research. "OTHER THAN ??? You are kidding ? Weak response/analysis.

Unless the reader has several spare hours a collection of 20 odd links is not documentation. If the claims are true the authors should be able to spell out their case more succinctly.

Cockburn on 9/11 CTs

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment