Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Colombia demands answers from US about Washington Post .

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 07:56 PM
Original message
Colombia demands answers from US about Washington Post .
Source: Colombia Reports

Colombia demands answers from US about Washington Post
Monday, 22 August 2011 15:30
Sarah Cast

The United States needs to verify whether or not The Washington Post falsely claimed that U.S. security aid was used in illegal wiretapping, Colombian Vice President Angelino Garzon said Monday.

“The government of the United States today has a moral and ethical duty to the Colombian government, the Colombian society, and that is to say whether or not the Washington Post is right,” the vice president said according to El Espectador.

The Washington Post claimed Saturday that U.S. cash, equipment and training were supplied to the Colombian intelligence agency DAS to carry out illegal wiretapping and smear campaigns against opponents of the administration of former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe.

"DAS units depended on U.S.-supplied computers, wiretapping devices, cameras and mobile phone interception systems, as well as rent for safe houses and petty cash for gasoline," The Washington Post reported a former DAS official said.

Read more: http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/18480-colombia-demands-answers-from-us-about-washington-post.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. Silly Columbian Vice-President.....
...don't you know that your country is just another subsidiary/franchisee of the Corporate States of America!?!?!?!

- Now STFU or you'll be demoted.

K&R

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Standard GOPer/Demo. foreign policy procedure. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. Are we sure Obama would know? Maybe this is a CIA ops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-11 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. It's his watch.


''What sort of moral compass allows us to condemn actions by one administration only to be silent (complicit?) when our own candidate commits them?''

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/07/30-2">Norman Mathews, ''Time to Reset Our Moral Compass''
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-11 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. "Modified limited hangout" by the Washington Psst ( = CIA).
For the non-old foggies who may not remember the Nixon/Watergate scandal, a "modified limited hangout is a partial disclosure to fool critics, investigators, impeachers, et al, that you are being candid. And I think, here, we've come full circle, and the Washington Psst ( = CIA) itself is engaging in a modified limited hangout. My (educated) guess: This is a "managed" disclosure intended to immunize 'news' consumers against much, much worse Bush Junta crimes in Colombia, where it was supporting, essentially, a Mob Boss (Bush Jr. pal Alvaro Uribe) as president, with $7 BILLION in U.S. military aid and the U.S. military on the ground, providing "training" and "technical assistance" for the following...

... the murders of thousands of trade unionists, human rights workers, teachers, community activists, peasant farmers, Indigenous leaders, political leftists, journalists and others;

...forced displacement of FIVE MILLION peasant farmers from their lands, with state terror (which surpassed Sudan as the worst human displacement crisis on earth);

...training of mercenary death squads for use in Iraq and Afghanistan ("turkey shoots" of peasants for practice--my guess);

...testing out Pentagon/USAID-designed "pacification" programs for use in Afghanistan (connected to the La Macarena massacre);

...testing out of surveillance and bombing systems (f. i., drone aircraft) for use in Afghanistan;

...luring youngsters with promises of jobs, murdering them and dressing their bodies up like FARC guerrillas, to up "body counts" to earn bonuses and promotions and impress U.S. senators (keep those billions coming)--this was Colombian military in particular--the infamous "false positives" scandal;

... Uribe and his spy agency, DAS, spying on judges and prosecutors to interfere with their investigations and pass names to the death squads for death threats, as well as for smear campaigns;

...Uribe and his spy agency, DAS, spying on trade unionists and developing "hit lists" for assassination;

...numerous other victims of spying, death threats and assassination;

...consolidation of the cocaine trade into fewer hands and direction of its trillion+ dollar revenue stream to certain beneficiaries (f.i., U.S. banksters) (my guess);

...election fraud, bribery, graft, land theft, ponzie schemes and other crimes.

Most of these things in fact occurred (and I've marked the ones I'm guessing at). The question is to what extent the Bush Junta, in command of U.S. military and security forces, were complicit in it. And I think that's where this "modified limited hangout" comes in.

For instance, Amnesty International has attributed about half of the murders of trade unionists in Colombia to the Colombian military itself and the other half to their closely tied rightwing paramilitary death squads. Their study was of the mid-2000s period, so it comes under the Bush Junta escalation in Colombia. If Uribe and the Colombian military were using U.S. spying assistance, U.S. money, U.S. arms, U.S. hardware, etc., to murder trade unionists, was this authorized by the Bush Junta? And were U.S. military or security personnel, or U.S. contractors, involved?

The Washington Psst ( = CIA) article "admits" that U.S. resources were used for the spying, but specifically promotes the narrative that Bush Junta intentions were good ("smashing drug rings," etc.) and it was the Colombians who "misused" U.S. aid for political purposes (Uribe smashing his "enemies"). This is bullshit, in my opinion. The Bush Junta had no interest whatever in stopping the cocaine traffic (and I believe was doing the opposite).

Almost all of the above occurred under the Bush Junta (Bush Jr's and Uribe's terms were almost simultaneous), not Obama, although Obama, Panetta (CIA), the U.S. ambassador to Colombia during the Bush Junta (Wm. Brownfield), the U.S. State Department (Clinton), the U.S. Dept. of Justice (Holder), the U.S. federal court in Washington DC, the U.S. federal prison system, and probably others (DEA, FBI) have been involved in covering it up. I think that Obama, et al, are under Bush Cartel constraints, forced to protect "made man" Uribe because the Bush Junta was very involved in his crimes.

And they have been very active in protecting him, including extraditing 30 death squad witnesses--whom Uribe probably identified as dangerous to him, by spying on judges and prosecutors--to the U.S. and their "burial" in the U.S. federal prison system, and instant asylum for Uribe's spy chief in Panama. The U.S. (Obama) helped remove these witnesses out of the reach of Colombian prosecutors, who vociferously objected to it. The coverup occurred in the overlap period--2009-2010--with Uribe still in power in Colombia, and Brownfield still ambassador. It appears that Obama/Clinton/Panetta left Brownfield in place to accomplish the coverup. One other thing he did was to secretly negotiate and secretly sign (with Uribe) a U.S./Colombia military agreement granting "total diplomatic immunity" to all U.S. military personnel and all U.S. military 'contractors' in Colombia. (This was rather curious, since the U.S. military has been in Colombia for over a decade. Why did they suddenly need signed immunity?)

Early this year, the U.S. State Department "fined" Blackwater for "unauthorized" "trainings" of "foreign persons" IN COLOMBIA "for use in Iraq and Afghanistan." I don't believe the word "unauthorized." I think this, the above extraditions, and the military agreement giving immunity to all, are the tips of a volcano of horrendous crimes committed by the U.S. military and security agencies in Colombia during the Bush Junta. No one has been able to hold Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, accountable for their war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and torture dungeons around the world--but this "out the way" scandal could be the one that breaks that embargo. Colombian prosecutors are very determined to hold Uribe accountable, and Uribe is closely tied to the Bush Junta.

The Washington Psst ( = CIA) doesn't do ANYTHING that doesn't serve the military industrial complex, transglobal corporations and war profiteers. That includes the U.S. "war on drugs"--a war profiteer backup boondoggle--and what it may have really been used for, under the Bush Junta (in my opinion, to get control of the cocaine revenue stream). (That's what driving 5 million peasants off their land was partly about.) The Psst may be intending to dump this scandal on Obama as part of the narrative of installing Bush Junta II next year. Or it could be that we are about to see some lesser lights in the U.S. military/security establishment sacrificed as "rogues" to keep the Bush Junta principles out of legal hot water. We may also be witnessing the jettisoning of Uribe as too much of an embarrassment. (I don't think he's as much of a "made man" as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others.)

It's very difficult to know what's really happening in our very secretive government and the backrooms of the controlled press, but there is another possibility that puts Obama/Panetta in a better light, and that is, that perhaps they have chafed under "the deal" to protect Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, from investigation and prosecution, and this deep scandal in Colombia is a sort of backdoor indictment, with the Colombian prosecutors doing the work and enduring the death threats. I don't think this is likely but it's possible.

I do think Panetta was very involved in ousting Rumsfeld, back in '06, over the Rumsfeld/Cheney plan to nuke of Iran--which the military brass opposed--and the outing of CIA agents. Panetta was a member of Bush Sr's "Iraq Study Group." It was at that time that I believe that the no prosecution "deal" was made ("impeachment is off the table"--except for fall guy Libby on the CIA outings) and then Panetta was made CIA Director to monitor and enforce the "deal" (head off investigations), to end the war between the Pentagon and the CIA that Rumsfeld/Cheney had started and probably to protect Bush Jr in particular and clean up any messes tied to him. Panetta's very first act as CIA Director (that I noticed in the 'news') was to visit Bogota.

We shouldn't think of the U.S. government as a monolith. You can miss a lot by doing that--for instance, the deep cracks in the Bush White House (circa 2005-2006) over Iran and outing CIA agents and the Pentagon vs CIA war and how that might have turned out for us and for the world. We may hate the U.S. war machine and the U.S. "Roman Empire" but there are, indeed, "bad guys" and "not so bad guys"--or maybe the line is "insane and not insane"--within the Imperial establishment.

On the whole, I think what's happened is that the diligent and courageous (and I mean courageous) Colombian prosecutors are on to the deeper scandal, and something worse than U.S. spying help to Uribe (yawn!) may be about to be disclosed. A "modified limited hangout" is a scandal management tool, to allow the Psst (= CIA) to manipulate information and public perception, and to better direct the harm that scandals may inflict. The purpose is not likely good--is not "openness," is not leaders being held accountable, is not questioning of U.S. military budgets or crime. The purpose is likely bad. This follow up story is interesting (from Colombia Reports), that Colombia's VP seems upset by this disclosure. I'm not sure where this VP stands, in the Uribe (bad guy) vs. Santos (not so bad guy) split in Colombia's rightwing political establishment, and I'm not sure why he's challenging this story. I don't know if he's on the prosecutors' side. (Uribe considers the prosecutors his "enemies" who are "out to get him." But the thing is, he's a Mob Boss, so of course they're out to get him. That's their job.) We need more information on this VP. Another factor: The Psst was relying on some prosecution documents. Where did they get them? Was it a leak? From whom? For what purpose?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-11 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Thanks for highlighting areas many haven't considered yet, as where DID the Psst get the info.
Will be keeping an eye out for anything on that.

The new President has nothing to lose by insisting we all get to the bottom of this. The more attention in throws on these things, the more emphasis is placed on the criminality being tied DIRECTLY to Uribe.

We remember Uribe started his attacks on Santos almost immediately after inauguration, as if he suspected this was all in the air, and he needed to discredit Santos ASAP. He started flinging claims that Santos is a wretched President and the country is going to hell, drugs are getting worse, violence worse, etc., etc.

He became almost a daily presence with his constant comment, leaving the impression he will NEVER leave office. "How can we miss you if you won't leave?"

Looks as if Uribe started outing himself, instead of pointing the giant finger of blame at the next President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-11 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. You lost credibility, PP, when you wrote "Washington Psst ( = CIA)"
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I lost credibility with whom? You? Ha-ha! That's supposed to worry me because...? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rabs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Heavens to Betsy, you lost credibility? Will be on the lookout for it.





Back to topic (caps mine)

The U.S. Embassy in Bogota yesterday denied everything, calling the Washington Post story "incorrect."

The embassy issued a Spanish-language communique to the Colombian media saying that the use of U.S.-donated technology to wiretap Supreme Court judges, journalists, labor leaders and opposition politicians was not correct.

The communique said that when the illegal wiretaps became public knowledge, the embassy asked the Colombian government to conduct a rigerous investigation.

(BUT, what the communique did not say was that it had asked the uribe government to investigate, the same regime that ORDERED the wiretapping in the first place. What? Uribe was going to admit that it was true?)

Meanwhile, up in Washington, a State Department flack named Victoria Nuland said on Monday that the U.S. government did NOT KNOW if the equipment provided to the uribe government had been used in the wiretapping.

So, in the end, the embassy said one thing, the State Department said another. They did not get their act together.

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

Oh, just now saw credibility going hell-bent down the hill on a bike. :rofl:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 02:07 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. No, I found it! I found it! It was in the "miracle laptop"! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-11 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #8
20. FWIW, I didn't notice any loss of credibility on your part.
I thought WAPO was Republicon, but I am open to CIA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Useful information many of us learned long ago concerning the Washington Post, and the CIA:
Edited on Wed Aug-24-11 01:13 AM by Judi Lynn
It's not as if this is hidden information, it's all over the place, common knowledge to so many long, LONG ago. Example:
Operation Mockingbird

Operation Mockingbird was a secret Central Intelligence Agency campaign to influence foreign media beginning in the 1950s.

The activities, extent and even the existence of the CIA project remain in dispute: the operation was first called Mockingbird in Deborah Davis' 1979 book, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and her Washington Post Empire. Davis' book, detailing how the media had been recruited and infiltrated by the CIA for propaganda purposes, was controversial and not always accurate.<1> More evidence of Mockingbird's existence emerged in the 2007 memoir American Spy: My Secret History in the CIA, Watergate and Beyond, by convicted Watergate "plumber" E. Howard Hunt and The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America by Hugh Wilford (2008).<2>

~snip~
HistoryIn 1948, Frank Wisner was appointed director of the Office of Special Projects (OSP). Soon afterwards OSP was renamed the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC). This became the covert action branch of the Central Intelligence Agency. Wisner was told to create an organization that concentrated on "propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world."<3>

Later that year Wisner established Mockingbird, a program to influence foreign media. Wisner recruited Philip Graham from The Washington Post to run the project within the industry. According to Deborah Davis in Katharine the Great; "By the early 1950s, Wisner 'owned' respected members of The New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles."<4> Wisner referred to this apparatus as a "Mighty Wurlitzer", referencing the theater organ capable of controlling diverse pipes, instruments, and sound effects from a central console.<5>

In 1951, Allen W. Dulles persuaded Cord Meyer to join the CIA. However, there is evidence that he was recruited several years earlier and had been spying on the liberal internationalist organizations he had been a member of in the later 1940s.<6> According to Deborah Davis, Meyer became Mockingbird's "principal operative".<7>
More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

~~~~~

Select Committee into Intelligence Activities

In 1975, Frank Church became the chairman of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities. This committee investigated alleged abuses of power by the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Intelligence.

~snip~
Frank Church showed that it was CIA policy to use clandestine handling of journalists and authors to get information published initially in the foreign media in order to get it disseminated in the United States. Church quotes from one document written by the Chief of the Covert Action Staff on how this process worked (page 193). For example, he writes: “Get books published or distributed abroad without revealing any U.S. influence, by covertly subsidizing foreign publicans or booksellers.” Later in the document he writes: “Get books published for operational reasons, regardless of commercial viability”. Church goes onto report that “over a thousand books were produced, subsidized or sponsored by the CIA before the end of 1967”. All these books eventually found their way into the American market-place. Either in their original form (Church gives the example of the Penkovskiy Papers) or repackaged as articles for American newspapers and magazines.

In another document published in 1961 the Chief of the Agency’s propaganda unit wrote: “The advantage of our direct contact with the author is that we can acquaint him in great detail with our intentions; that we can provide him with whatever material we want him to include and that we can check the manuscript at every stage… (the Agency) must make sure the actual manuscript will correspond with our operational and propagandistic intention.”

Church quotes Thomas H. Karamessines as saying: “If you plant an article in some paper overseas, and it is a hard-hitting article, or a revelation, there is no way of guaranteeing that it is not going to be picked up and published by the Associated Press in this country” (page 198).

By analyzing CIA documents Frank Church was able to identify over 50 U.S. journalists who were employed directly by the Agency. He was aware that there were a lot more who enjoyed a very close relationship with the CIA who were “being paid regularly for their services, to those who receive only occasional gifts and reimbursements from the CIA” (page 195).

More:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKintelligence.htm

~~~~~

Originally published in Rolling Stone, October 20, 1977.

How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up

THE CIA AND THE MEDIA

BY CARL BERNSTEIN

~snip~
The CIA’s use of the American news media has been much more extensive than Agency officials have acknowledged publicly or in closed sessions with members of Congress. The general outlines of what happened are indisputable; the specifics are harder to come by. CIA sources hint that a particular journalist was trafficking all over Eastern Europe for the Agency; the journalist says no, he just had lunch with the station chief. CIA sources say flatly that a well‑known ABC correspondent worked for the Agency through 1973; they refuse to identify him. A high‑level CIA official with a prodigious memory says that the New York Times provided cover for about ten CIA operatives between 1950 and 1966; he does not know who they were, or who in the newspaper’s management made the arrangements.

The Agency’s special relationships with the so‑called “majors” in publishing and broadcasting enabled the CIA to post some of its most valuable operatives abroad without exposure for more than two decades. In most instances, Agency files show, officials at the highest levels of the CIA usually director or deputy director) dealt personally with a single designated individual in the top management of the cooperating news organization. The aid furnished often took two forms: providing jobs and credentials “journalistic cover” in Agency parlance) for CIA operatives about to be posted in foreign capitals; and lending the Agency the undercover services of reporters already on staff, including some of the best‑known correspondents in the business.

In the field, journalists were used to help recruit and handle foreigners as agents; to acquire and evaluate information, and to plant false information with officials of foreign governments. Many signed secrecy agreements, pledging never to divulge anything about their dealings with the Agency; some signed employment contracts., some were assigned case officers and treated with. unusual deference. Others had less structured relationships with the Agency, even though they performed similar tasks: they were briefed by CIA personnel before trips abroad, debriefed afterward, and used as intermediaries with foreign agents. Appropriately, the CIA uses the term “reporting” to describe much of what cooperating journalists did for the Agency. “We would ask them, ‘Will you do us a favor?’”.said a senior CIA official. “‘We understand you’re going to be in Yugoslavia. Have they paved all the streets? Where did you see planes? Were there any signs of military presence? How many Soviets did you see? If you happen to meet a Soviet, get his name and spell it right .... Can you set up a meeting for is? Or relay a message?’” Many CIA officials regarded these helpful journalists as operatives; the journalists tended to see themselves as trusted friends of the Agency who performed occasional favors—usually without pay—in the national interest.

~snip~
In 1964 and 1965, Salant served on a super-secret CIA task force which explored methods of beaming American propaganda broadcasts to the People's Republic of China. The other members of the four‑man study team were Zbigniew Brzezinski, then a professor at Columbia University; William Griffith, then professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology., and John Haves, then vice‑president of the Washington Post Company for radio‑TV5. The principal government officials associated with the project were Cord Meyer of the CIA; McGeorge Bundy, then special assistant to the president for national security; Leonard Marks, then director of the USIA; and Bill Moyers, then special assistant to President Lyndon Johnson and now a CBS correspondent.

More:
http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/cia_press.html

~~~~~

Operation Mockingbird - Government Control of Mainstream Media
Operation Mockingbird

~snip~
Operation Mockingbird, as it was called, was exposed in 1975 during the Church Committee investigation, which then published its findings the following year. The full name of the committee which investigated and uncovered such activities was called, “The United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities” which was chaired by Senator Frank Church (D-ID).

Through this investigation it became clear that such a program was developed in the 1950s for the purpose of persuading American and foreign media, as well as to use the media as gate-keepers to prevent certain information from being published and reaching the masses.

In 1948 an espionage and counter-intelligence branch within the CIA was created for the purpose of “propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.” Later that year Operation Mockingbird was established to influence the domestic and foreign media. Philip Graham, the owner of The Washington Post, was first recruited to run the project within the industry and develop a network of assets.

After 1953, the network had influence over twenty-five newspapers and wire agencies and was overseen by Allen Dulles, who was director of the CIA. The Mockingbird program also involved major television broadcasters, including William Paley, the CEO of CBS broadcasting.

More:
http://www.markdice.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=113:operation-mockingbird-government-control-of-mainstream-media&catid=66:articles-by-mark-dice&Itemid=89

~~~~~

A great thread by NNN0LHI (1000+ posts) Sat Dec-01-07 03:24 AM
Original message
Here is when the CIA took control of our media

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2382678

~~~~~

kpete (1000+ posts) Wed Feb-13-08 08:11 AM
Original message
"The black arts of propaganda" - How the spooks took over the news (

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2856571

~~~~~

Church Committee information concerning CIA and U.S. media:

~snip~
The Media

Journalism is a perfect cover for CIA agents. People talk freely to journalists, and few think suspiciously of a journalist aggressively searching for information. Journalists also have power, influence and clout. Not surprisingly, the CIA began a mission in the late 1940s to recruit American journalists on a wide scale, a mission it dubbed Operation MOCKINGBIRD. The agency wanted these journalists not only to relay any sensitive information they discovered, but also to write anti-communist, pro-capitalist propaganda when needed.

The instigators of MOCKINGBIRD were Frank Wisner, Allan Dulles, Richard Helms and Philip Graham. Graham was the husband of Katherine Graham, today’s publisher of the Washington Post. In fact, it was the Post’s ties to the CIA that allowed it to grow so quickly after the war, both in readership and influence. (8)

MOCKINGBIRD was extraordinarily successful. In no time, the agency had recruited at least 25 media organizations to disseminate CIA propaganda. At least 400 journalists would eventually join the CIA payroll, according to the CIA’s testimony before a stunned Church Committee in 1975. (The committee felt the true number was considerably higher.) The names of those recruited reads like a Who's Who of journalism:

  • Philip and Katharine Graham (Publishers, Washington Post)
  • William Paley (President, CBS)
  • Henry Luce (Publisher, Time and Life magazine)
  • Arthur Hays Sulzberger (Publisher, N.Y. Times)
  • Jerry O'Leary (Washington Star)
  • Hal Hendrix (Pulitzer Prize winner, Miami News)
  • Barry Bingham Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal)
  • James Copley (Copley News Services)
  • Joseph Harrison (Editor, Christian Science Monitor)
  • C.D. Jackson (Fortune)
  • Walter Pincus (Reporter, Washington Post)
  • ABC
  • NBC
  • Associated Press
  • Hearst Newspapers
  • Scripps-Howard
  • Newsweek magazine
  • Mutual Broadcasting System
  • Miami Herald
  • Old Saturday Evening Post
  • New York Herald-Tribune

Perhaps no newspaper is more important to the CIA than the Washington Post, one of the nation’s most right-wing dailies. Its location in the nation’s capitol enables the paper to maintain valuable personal contacts with leading intelligence, political and business figures. Unlike other newspapers, the Post operates its own bureaus around the world, rather than relying on AP wire services. Owner Philip Graham was a military intelligence officer in World War II, and later became close friends with CIA figures like Frank Wisner, Allen Dulles, Desmond FitzGerald and Richard Helms. He inherited the Post by marrying Katherine Graham, whose father owned it.

More:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html

~~~~~

There is a MOUNTAIN of information available on this subject for those who bother to look for it.

On edit, adding a snippet concerning the former publisher of the Washington Pssst, Phil Graham:
It is claimed that Graham had close links with the Central Intelligence Agency. He had a close relationship with Tracy Barnes and Frank Wisner. it has been claimed that Graham played an important role in Operation MB, the CIA program to infiltrate domestic American media. According to Katherine Graham, her husband worked overtime at the Post during the Bay of Pigs operation to protect the reputations of his friends who had organized the ill-fated venture.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKgrahamP.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-11 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #11
21. What a great post, Judi Lynn. Thanks to you and Peace Patriot for all the info.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-11 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
9. Hilarious!
"U.S.-supplied computers, wiretapping devices, cameras and mobile phone interception systems"

In other words, a laptop, a cell-phone and software anybody can download for free.

(That's all you need).

Since I don't believe Angelino Garzon is really that fucking stupid, I'm guessing this is PR bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. it may be bullshit, but what FOR? Why are they doing it? What is the goal?
I think my theory is a good guess. It's FLAK--story "management"--because something worse is coming. The Washington Psst ( = CIA) doesn't go to all this trouble for nothing.

It could be that somebody's trying to DISRUPT this investigation in Colombia--say, a mole in the prosecutors' offices (?), who leaked this "modified limited hangout" disclosure (U.S. helping Uribe to spy on his "enemies" and create "hit lists" oh-so-innocently--LOL!) but how it might disrupt the investigation, I don't know.

What I do know is that horrendous crimes were committed throughout Uribe's tenure while the U.S. was larding him and the Colombian military with $7 BILLION of our money plus on-the-ground U.S. military "training" and "technical assistance." It isn't just the spying--it's what's connected to the spying that could result in the naming of U.S. participants and even their indictment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PufPuf23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 03:32 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. Why do you think the USA intelligence and technolgy communities are incompetent and
out of date?

I can insure you that the competence and sophistication is competent.

I cannot insure you that the use of the resource or transparency to the People are not occult.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 04:57 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. I can ensure you that modern geeks do not find this a mystery.
I said nothing about "out of date".

WRT:
"I cannot insure you that the use of the resource or transparency to the People are not occult."

That sentence does not work well in English, let alone American English, or US English, or UK English.

I'm guessing this is a colonial variant, with a giggle about 'occult'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-11 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. Can you really insure me that the competence is competent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-11 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #9
22. The operative term was "U.S. supplied." No one was claiming this was esoteric technology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Helenahidalgo Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-25-11 10:21 PM
Response to Original message
16. In Defense of President Uribe
Only a person ignorant of the Colombian reality could believe what the article of the Washington Post says. I'm sure these accusations came from the Colombia's left-wingers and is an intent to smear President's Uribe. During 55 years the communist guerrillas have scourged Colombia. They assassinated hundreds of thousands, thousands have been kidnapped, millions have been extortionate, and millions have abandoned their lands for dead threatens. Many young people have been obligated to enroll the guerrilla’s armies or to serve as sexual slaves. Also, currently the communist guerrillas are the most powerful drug cartels in Colombia.

Former Colombian’s governments allowed this criminality by trying to stop the guerrillas offering peace agreements that the insurgents never accepted. Most Colombian saw the guerrillas more like criminal gangs than political groups. The guerrillas created a realm of terror, and operated in complete impunity until President Uribe came and put some order. Using the power that the constitution grant to the head of the state, who has the obligation of protect the life and the integrity of the citizens, Uribe militarily combatted the guerrillas and diminished their power for the good of Colombians. Many kidnapped people were freed, many others were able to go back to their lands, people were able to drive at night without fear of abduction, others started businesses without been killed for no paying quotes for "protection" to the guerrillas.

The Post has to be careful with this kind of articles that could affect negatively the delicate Colombian situation since the guerrillas are strengthening again. The guerrillas have a powerful arm of communications that distorts the truth. There is no doubt that adulteration of the facts is one of the most effective weapons that helps communism. The guerrillas have agents experts in manipulate the information, they can fool some columnist. They also can pay very well for favors since they earn billions for trafficking drugs. The communist guerrilla was wounded by president Uribe and now they are seeking for revenge they have the means and the cleverness to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rabs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-25-11 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Lloviendo pa' arriba


Your defense of Uribe is like "lloviendo pa' arriba." (like when it rains up)

Still, it is good you posted so that DUers who may read your post will see the hard-core uribista defense of the former president and his eight years in office.

Welcome to DU.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-11 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. Didn't know anyone actually felt that way who wasn't working for one of Uribe's FIVE
U.S. public relations firms working for him, one of whom (Mark Penn's Burson-Marsteller) worked on Hillary Clinton's campaign!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-11 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. yeah. that must be it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-11 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
23. Look Forwards, not Backwards! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 12:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC