Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » MinM » Archives Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
MinM's Journal - Archives
Posted by MinM in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sun Aug 10th 2008, 12:40 PM
Mole exposed doubts on JFK assassination | Freep.com | Detroit Free Press
WASHINGTON -- More intrigue about the death of President John F. Kennedy:

Former President Gerald R. Ford secretly advised the FBI that two of his fellow members on the Warren Commission doubted the FBI's conclusion that Kennedy was shot from the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository in Dallas. This is according to newly released records from Ford's FBI files.

Ford, then a Republican congressman from Grand Rapids, also told a senior FBI official about internal panel disputes over hiring staff, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren's timetable for completing the final report on the assassination and what panel members said about the FBI.

In turn, Assistant FBI Director Cartha (Deke) DeLoach confidentially advised Ford of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's position on panel disputes, discussed where leaks were coming from and, with Hoover's personal approval, loaned him a bureau briefcase with a lock so he could securely take the FBI report on the 1963 assassination with him on a ski trip...
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article...


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/...
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by MinM in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sat Aug 09th 2008, 10:56 AM
Seven Days in May (1964) with John Frankenheimer, who had an interesting career as well.
Executive Action (1973)
Twilight's Last Gleaming (1978)
The Osterman Weekend (1983)

-more-

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/...

'n R
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by MinM in September 11
Fri Aug 08th 2008, 11:19 AM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...
Bill O'Reilly is scared to death of Stone's 'W'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

Ironically it was Bill O'Reilly who clued Gaeton Fonzi in on the "suicide" of

George DeMohrenschildt

Now Gaeton Fonzi's 'The Last Investigation', to be re-released:

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/...
http://www.ctka.net/2008/fonzi.html
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by MinM in Latest Breaking News
Mon Aug 04th 2008, 01:23 PM
Not that it mitigates any responsibility here, at least in my mind, but it would be interesting to know if this went down like the case just documented in Mother Jones:

Mother Jones: There's Something About Mary: Unmasking a Gun Lobby Mole

Outside the gun control world, Mary Lou Sapone was, as Mother Jones has previously reported, a for-hire operative who spied on citizens' groups for corporate clients. Property and phone records indicate that the two names belong to the same person. Last week, a reporter for Mother Jones called the Sarasota phone number that McFate had given her gun control allies and asked the woman who answered if she was Mary Lou Sapone. "Yes," she responded. But Sapone then refused to answer any questions about Mary McFate or her work for gun control. She quickly hung up—and did not respond to subsequent calls and emails.

During Sapone's ascent through the ranks of the gun control movement, she worked for the NRA, according to a business associate. In a 2003 deposition, Tim Ward, who had been president of the Maryland-based security firm Beckett Brown International, said that the NRA had been "a client" of Sapone's. (As a subcontractor for BBI, Sapone had planted an operative within an environmental group in Lake Charles, Louisiana.) According to Ward, at his request Sapone had introduced BBI to the NRA in early 1999. And that introduction quickly paid off. Billing records obtained by Mother Jones indicate that between May 1999 and April 2000, the NRA paid BBI nearly $80,000 for various services...

Sapone's earliest known private intelligence operation occurred in the mid-1980s, when she served as an operative for Perceptions International, a Connecticut-based security firm. Working for Perceptions, which has since been shuttered, she infiltrated the animal rights community for US Surgical Corporation, a target of activists who objected to its testing on dogs. According to a 1989 article in New England Business, Sapone appeared on the animal rights scene in 1986 and quickly became "involved in at least a half dozen animal rights groups." She "made a point of getting to know all of the key people in the movement," and "traveled around the country to most protests, meetings and conferences." At meetings, activists would later say, Sapone advocated taking illegal or violent action to advance the movement. She befriended a 33-year-old activist named Fran Trutt, who in November 1988 would be arrested for planting a remote-controlled pipe bomb near the parking space of US Surgical chairman Leon Hirsch. According to Trutt, on her way to carry out the bombing she lost her nerve and placed a call to Sapone, who convinced her to follow through with the plan—a fact that prompted activists to accuse Sapone of acting as an agent provocateur. (Another Perceptions International operative, Marcus Mead, drove Trutt to US Surgical on the day of the attempted bombing.)

In the 1990s—while working within the gun control community as McFate—Sapone formed her own intelligence-gathering business. And she enlisted family members for its operations. "In our business, it's my daughter-in-law, Montgomery Sapone does all the analytic reports, forecasting, and white papers," Sapone wrote to a client in an August 1999 email obtained by Mother Jones. "She produces a very professional product." Sapone continued, "We are warning our clients that activist groups are moving towards ballot initiatives…And it's easy for groups like Greenpeace to emotionally shape a looming crisis in a 10 second TV spot 2 days before a referenda election. My daughter Shelley specializes in that aspect of our business. We are doing a lot of work now to help clients in the 2000 election."...
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/20...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/8/4/leadi...
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by MinM in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sun Aug 03rd 2008, 11:22 PM
An Anthrax Timeline:

On September 5, Ms. Clarke--lured back into government service by pal Mary Matalin on Vice President Dick Cheney's staff, from a high-paying post as Manhattan office director for the venerable public relations firm of Hill & Knowlton--the former PR chief to Senator John McCain and one-time George Bush (the elder) staffer would divulge to foreign media that the United States, via the Pentagon and the shadowy Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, would begin producing a new and potent strain of anthrax bacteria, and that such plans had been in the works since 1997. The source of the anthrax was to be from Russian stock, and, according to Ms. Clarke, would be used "purely for defensive measures."

At the popular political site FreeRepublic.com, Victoria Clarke posts as "Torie"--a self-proclaimed "statist neocon." The Pentagon's disinformation campaign was already in motion on September 5, 2001, and Victoria Clarke, then employed as Deputy Director for Public Affairs, was its "go-to girl" on "the anthrax question
."...


After the Oct. 5, 2001, death from anthrax exposure of Sun photo editor Robert Stevens

On October 15, 2001, President Bush said, "There may be some possible link" to Bin Laden, adding, "I wouldn't put it past him." Vice President Cheney also said Bin Laden's henchmen were trained "how to deploy and use these kinds of substances, so you start to piece it all together."
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2...

October 17, 2001: Top Bush Administration Officials Look to Blame Anthrax Attacks on Al-Qaeda, Iraq, or Russia
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...

On Oct. 18, 2001, a White House alarm went off indicating that sensors had detected dangerous levels of radioactive, chemical or biological agents. According to Mayer, anyone who had entered the White House situation room, including Cheney, had been exposed...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

October 18, 2001 (days before ABC News first broadcast their bentonite report) John McCain, on the David Letterman Show:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by MinM in Political Videos
Sat Aug 02nd 2008, 12:06 AM
Glenn Greenwald: Vital unresolved anthrax questions and ABC News

UPDATE IV: John McCain, on the David Letterman Show, October 18, 2001 (days before ABC News first broadcast their bentonite report):
LETTERMAN: How are things going in Afghanistan now?

MCCAIN: I think we're doing fine . . . I think we'll do fine. The second phase -- if I could just make one, very quickly -- the second phase is Iraq. There is some indication, and I don't have the conclusions, but some of this anthrax may -- and I emphasize may -- have come from Iraq.

LETTERMAN: Oh is that right?

MCCAIN: If that should be the case, that's when some tough decisions are gonna have to be made.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/200...

ThinkProgress has the video. Someone ought to ask McCain what "indication" he was referencing that the anthrax "may have come from Iraq."
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/01/mccain... /

Read entry | Discuss (7 comments)
Posted by MinM in September 11
Thu Jul 31st 2008, 07:15 PM
Cheney Considered Proposal To Dress Up Navy Seals As Iranians And Shoot At Them
HERSH: There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war. The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build — we in our shipyard — build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up.

Might cost some lives. And it was rejected because you can’t have Americans killing Americans. That’s the kind of — that’s the level of stuff we’re talking about. Provocation. But that was rejected.


Hersh argued that one of the things the Bush administration learned during the encounter in the Strait of Hormuz was that, “if you get the right incident, the American public will support” it.

“Look, is it high school? Yeah,” Hersh said. “Are we playing high school with you know 5,000 nuclear warheads in our arsenal? Yeah we are. We’re playing, you know, who’s the first guy to run off the highway with us and Iran.”...
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/31/cheney... /
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by MinM in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Tue Jul 29th 2008, 12:33 AM

It looks like our old 'friend' Monica Goodling has found herself one. Michael Krempasky, of Falls Church, and the Mullen err..Edelman 'PR' Firm and Red State:
http://www.atlargely.com/2008/07/speaking-...


BTW -- Dan Senor seems to be right out of central-casting, for the weasel-like State Department tool, such as depicted from the 6-7 minute mark here, chatting it up with James Woods, in Oliver Stone's 'Salvador':
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6xYSZZ9QIpM
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by MinM in Political Videos
Thu Jul 24th 2008, 08:59 AM
This was posted as a response in this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

Kennedy didn't say he was a donut! "Ich bin ein Berliner" means just what Kennedy meant - "I am a Berliner"
I love how these CIA-spread myths end up as the gospel truth, when they are nothing of the sort. Even Keith Olbermann fell for this one.

No, Kennedy did not say he was a donut.

He said, "Ich bin ein Berliner." And if you look up Berliner in a German dictionary, you will find that while donut is one meaning, the other meaning, the one Kennedy was obviously saying, is this:

"to be born in Berlin; to be a native Berliner; to be Berlin-born"


I am never surprised to hear the ignorant say Kennedy said this "wrong," when he didn't. But my heart sank when good ol' Keith Olbermann fell for the disinformation. Wow. I guess if a few people say it, it's suddenly true, eh?

Will all of you reading this please help spread the TRUTH about what Kennedy said? No doubt this will come up in the next few days as Obama prepares his own version of such a speech...
http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com/20...


JFK went on to Ireland:

NPR: Here and Now: A Kennedy's Journey Home
Story aired: Friday, December 29, 2006

The Kennedy Library launched this year a new exhibit commemorating President John F. Kennedy's journey home to Ireland in 1963.

After President Kennedy's historic speech at the Berlin Wall on June 26, 1963, he made a trip to Dublin, the land his great grandparents fled during the potato famine in the 19th century.

The exhibit, "A Journey Home," highlights this personal time for the president. And now, newly de-classified documents reveal that Kennedy was the object of death threats during that trip to Ireland.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

Read entry | Discuss (25 comments)
Posted by MinM in September 11
Sat Jul 12th 2008, 12:27 PM
It's fitting that you bring up McAdams in this thread (Operation Mockingbird):

John McAdams
If you do any research of major figures in the JFK assassination via web search engines you will soon find yourself on John McAdams’ website. He is clearly the main disinformation source on the net. He adopts an academic tone and if one was not aware of the facts of the person or event he is writing about, one would think he has logically looked at the evidence available. He is therefore doing a successful job in misleading students about the JFK assassination. In fact, it could be argued that his impact has been as great as other disinformation agents such as David Atlee Phillips, G. Robert Blakey, Dick Billings, Jack Anderson, Gary Mack and Gerald Posner.

Macadams is reluctant to get involved in debate over these issues. Although he is a member of this forum he has so far refused to post. I thought that if we analyse his articles in great detail we can expose his disinformation strategy. We might even goad him into trying to defend himself (maybe another non-posting member, Gary Mack, will help him out)...
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...


John McAdams attended the 1995 Copa Conference using the assumed name Paul Nolan. More than that, he also fabricated a background to go with the name in that he purported himself to be a jet-propulsion expert and some-time computer store owner from Sherwood, Wisconsin. In that guise, he was quoted in an article in the Washington press by journalist Matt Labash. Mr. Labash later confirmed that McAdams had duped him. Mr. Labash had quoted Paul (McAdams) Nolan in good faith whilst in fact McAdams was lying through his teeth.

McAdams later claimed he had used an assumed name to avoid contact with users of the alt.conspiracy group who may have been attending the conference. With McAdams record of willfully abusing users of the group, this story might seem plausible but going to trouble of inventing a detailed cover story and lying to the press have more sinister overtones...
http://www.prouty.org/mcadams/faq.html

Very Bugliosi-like indeed
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by MinM in Editorials & Other Articles
Mon Jul 07th 2008, 03:19 PM
That was another example of the CIA subverting JFK's policy -- not supporting it as Weiner claims:

Henry Cabot Lodge and Lucien Conein subverted JFK's vision for Saigon

Ngo Dinh Diem and Ambassador to Saigon Henry Cabot Lodge (October 1963)
Kennedy was so distraught by this outcome he decided to recall Lodge and fire him. He had arranged to do this on November 24th. Instead, President Johnson called the ambassador back with a different message: the US must not lose in Vietnam. (p. 375)...

Of course that was far from the first run-in Kennedy had with them (unfortunately it proved to be one of the last). The CIA proved to be a constant source of frustration for the Kennedy Administration. As the following video demonstrates:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by MinM in Editorials & Other Articles
Mon Jul 07th 2008, 01:59 PM
As will this:

Tim Weiner's "history" of the CIA
I just finished listening on C-SPAN to Tim Weiner being interviewed by David Ignatius re his new book on the CIA. Weiner is remarkably misleading about the CIA's record, especially in relation to the Kennedys. This is not surprising, however, since Weiner has been a favored reporter of the CIA's for years now.

Weiner's point he most wants to convey is that -- far from being the "rogue elephant" that Frank Church called it -- the CIA has always been ultraresponsive to Presidents. But that is provable untrue.

I'm shocked he would open with a quote from Richard Helms, and then return to him on the subject of Kennedy's assassination, given Helms' willingness to lie under oath (he was charged with perjury for denying the CIA's role in the Chilean operations).

Let's look at how "responsive" the CIA has been to the president over the years:

Truman wanted an information agency. The CIA essentially blackmailed itself into existence (see CIA officer Miles Copeland's veiled account of this in his book "The Real CIA.") So right off the bat, the CIA was doing something Truman didn't want. After Kennedy's assassination, Truman wrote a letter that was published in the Washington Post, in which he stated:

I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations. Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue-and a subject for cold war enemy propaganda.

With all the nonsense put out by Communist propaganda ... the last thing we needed was for the CIA to be seized upon as something akin to a subverting influence in the affairs of other people
. ...

The CIA was clearly not created to serve only the President. It was created to serve the interests of Wall Street, and if you follow their pattern of covert action around the globe, you'll see who benefitted. The Guatemalan coup in 1954 benefitted the United Fruit Company. The Iranian coup in the early fifties benefitted the oil barons (access to oil was listed as the first explicit goal of the coup in the summary of that operation.) The CIA was created from the OSS, itself a creation not of the government so much as of Wall Street. The top officers all came from children of lawyers, bankers, and other money men. The OSS's nickname was "Oh So Social" due to its high profile roster.

The CIA has often run an agenda counter to what the president wished. This is easy to document in the Kennedy administration - they were at odds at nearly every turn. But it wasn't only the Kennedy adminstration that had difficulty with the CIA.

Under the Eisenhower administration, for example, Eisenhower was set to meet with Khrushchev to discuss a mutual reduction in arms. The CIA didn't want to see any such accommodation. So in express defiance of Eisenhower's request that no such flights be made, the CIA flew the U2 over the Soviet Union. As the "official" story goes, the Soviets shot it down. As people close to those events have said in print and elsewhere, there's good evidence that the flight was deliberately sabotaged by the CIA so that it would crash over the Soviet Union, preventing a peace treaty. Even CIA director Allen Dulles stated the plane was not shot down. As Dulles testified to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on May 31, 1960:

"We believe that it was not shot down at its operating altitude of around 70,000 feet by the Russians. We believe that it was initially forced down to a much lower altitude by some as yet undetermined mechanical malfunction." ? "It is obvious to us that the plane was not hit. If the plane had been hit by a ground-to-air missile, in our belief, it would have disintegrated."

While Eisenhower later claimed responsibility for the overflight, the evidence is strong that he was surprised, and upset, that the CIA would risk upsetting the all-important peace conference. I believe that incident is part of the reason Eisenhower gave us that famous warning as he prepared to leave office...
http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com/20...

A TIMELINE OF CIA ATROCITIES... By STEVE KANGAS
Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.