THIS is why DU is the antidote:
Thanks to the great DUer MinM!
George DeMohrenschildt is the only man known to have been friends with both George Herbert Walker Bush and Lee Harvey Oswald. The guy had both their names and contact info in his address book. Congressional investigator Gaeton Fonzi and the House Select Committee on Assassinations went to talk to him and ask what he knew regarding Dallas in 1977. They were too late. The same day, DeMohrenschildt became a suicide by shotgun.
When Oswald was new to the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, De Mohrenschildt who until then had hung out exclusively with country club oil-exec types took "the working class loner and loser" under his wing. There are good indications De Mohrenschildt was Oswald's CIA "handler," or the guy who kept an eye on a former or current contact or agent. Oswald, based on government records and the facts surrounding his "defetion" to the Soviet Union, was CIA-connected, if not an asset.
There are at least two outstanding books on the subject: Professor John Newman, a retired US Army major and a former instructor at West Point, wrote "Oswald and the CIA." Professor Philip Melanson, who teaches at a Massachusetts state university, wrote "Spy Saga."
Online, an excellent biography from Oliver Stone's JFK web site:
Baron George De Mohrenschildt -- he did not use the title, but claimed it based on his Swedish grandfather's commission from the Queen of Sweden -- was born in Czarist Russia near the Polish border. He spoke at least six languages; was married four times; and is alleged to have performed services for at least three intelligence agencies, including the CIA, the OSS (the CIA's predecessor), and French intelligence. His biography remains one of the great marginal mysteries related, at least by circumstance, to the Kennedy assassination. De Mohrenschildt could at various points of his life count as personal friends such notables as President Lyndon B. Johnson, Texas oil billionaire H. L. Hunt, then-Zapata Oil chief George Herbert Walker Bush, and Janet Auchinchloss, mother of Jacqueline Kennedy. Not to mention Lee Harvey Oswald.
De Mohrenschildt told the Warren Commission that, while living in Texas, he'd heard from friends of a young Russian-speaking American with a Russian-born wife living in Fort Worth, and was intrigued enough to arrange a meeting. He said he'd informally inquired about Oswald with a friend, J. Walton Moore of the CIA's Domestic Contact Service. According to the Baron, Moore informed him that Oswald was "just a harmless lunatic." Moore adamantly denied ever discussing Oswald with De Mohrenschildt, but acknowledged that he had a long-standing relationship with the Baron.
In 1977 De Mohrenschildt was recovering from a nervous breakdown. He tracked down at his daughter's home in Florida by author Edward Jay Epstein, then researching his Oswald biography, Legend. The Baron claimed that he'd deceived the Warren Commission on one significant issue: He hadn't asked J. Walton Moore about Oswald; Moore had first mentioned Oswald to him, as far back as 1961, when the "defector" was still in the USSR. Upon Oswald's return, Moore suggested De Mohrenschildt look into Oswald, as the Domestic Contact Division was anxious to debrief Oswald, and apparently Oswald had refused their overtures. In exchange for some assistance from the Agency in smoothing out bureaucratic details of his planned move to Haiti, De Mohrenschildt befriended Oswald and allegedly passed along information to Moore. (Perhaps correctly, perhaps not, Epstein did not believe him.)(1)
De Mohrenschildt's life took a serious turn for the worse after the assassination of President Kennedy. Called back from Haiti to testify before the Warren Commission, De Mohrenschildt would later claim he'd told the Commission what he believed it wanted to hear, characterizing Oswald as "an unstable individual, mixed-up individual, uneducated individual." 2) "He had nothing. He had a bitchy wife, he had no money, was a miserable failure in everything he did." 3)
DU2 OP from 2007: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=3029417&mesg_id=3046291
Which is, come to mention it, who most benefits from CIA Secret Government.
From Stephen Kinzer's The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulls, and Their Secret World War
(Allen Dulles's) ability to press his case (for the establishment of the CIA) improved sharply after the 1946 congressional elections, in which Republicans took control of both houses for the first time in sixteen years. The new chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Arthur Vandenberg, named one of Allen's old OSS comrades, Lawrence Houston, to his staff. Houston had directed many covert operations and shared Allen's love of them. Together they drafted a bill that would create a National Security Council to advise the president on foreign policy, and a Central Intelligence Agency authorized to collect information and to act on it. "Wild Bill" Donovan, the widely admired former OSS director, lobbied for the bill in Congress but found some members reluctant. Several wanted State Department, not a secret new agencey, to oversee covert operations, but their case was weakened when Secretary of State Marshall announced that he did not want his department to be involved in such operations. The bill made its way through Congress in a matter of weeks. on July 26, 1947, Truman signed it into law.
[font color="green"]"There were strong objections to having a single agency with the authority both to collect secret intelligence and to process and evaluate it for the President," according to one history. "The objections were overruled, and CIA became a unique organization among Western intelligence services, which uniformly keep their secret operations separate from their overall intelligence activities."
The new National Security Act contained a tantalizing clause worded to allow endlessly elastic interpretation. It authorized the CIA to perform not only duties spelled out by law, but also "such other functions and duties related to intelligence affecting the national security as the National Security Council may from time to time direct." This gave it the legal right to take any action, anywhere in the world, as long as the president approved.[/font color]
"The fear generated by competition with a nation like the USSR, which had elevated control of every aspect of society to a science, encouraged the belief in the United States that it desparately needed military might and counterespionage by agencies that could outdo the Soviet spymasters," the historian Robert Dallek has written. "Dean Acheson (who would succeed Marshall as secretary of state) had the 'gravest forebodings' about the CDIA, and 'warned the President atht neither he nor the National Security Council nor anyone else would be in a poistition to know what it was doing or to control it.' But to resist the agency's creation seemed close to treason."
--Stephen Kinzer, The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulls, and Their Secret World War, pp. 88
The Dulles Brothers played a major role in getting us into Vietnam and bringing the BFEE -- the Buy-Partisan/War Party/Money Party -- to power for much of the 20th and 21st century.
Kirkus Reviews via Amazon:
A joint biography of John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles, who led the United States into an unseen war that decisively shaped todays world
During the 1950s, when the Cold War was at its peak, two immensely powerful brothers led the United States into a series of foreign adventures whose effects are still shaking the world.
John Foster Dulles was secretary of state while his brother, Allen Dulles, was director of the Central Intelligence Agency. In this book, Stephen Kinzer places their extraordinary lives against the background of American culture and history. He uses the framework of biography to ask: Why does the United States behave as it does in the world?
The Brothers explores hidden forces that shape the national psyche, from religious piety to Western moviesmany of which are about a noble gunman who cleans up a lawless town by killing bad guys. This is how the Dulles brothers saw themselves, and how many Americans still see their countrys role in the world.
Propelled by a quintessentially American set of fears and delusions, the Dulles brothers launched violent campaigns against foreign leaders they saw as threats to the United States. These campaigns helped push countries from Guatemala to the Congo into long spirals of violence, led the United States into the Vietnam War, and laid the foundation for decades of hostility between the United States and countries from Cuba to Iran.
The story of the Dulles brothers is the story of America. It illuminates and helps explain the modern history of the United States and the world.
A Kirkus Reviews Best Nonfiction Book of 2013
Terry Gross interviews Kinzer on the book:
Most importantly: Thank you, Ichingcarpenter.
...separate from the facts.
How many times did CNN broadcast planes slamming into the WTC on September 11? 1,000 in one day?
Can't get the website to come up, but a GOOGLE cache of a good overview: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:SKNhPyoHXlsJ:www.fearexhibit.org/brain/memory+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
USA and Planet Earth should, too.
The worst thing a terrorist can do is kill a person. The globalists are working to kill democracy.
Greg Palast outlined the financial part of the process:
Larry Summers and the Secret "End-Game" Memo
Thursday, August 22, 2013
The Memo confirmed every conspiracy freak's fantasy: that in the late 1990s, the top US Treasury officials secretly conspired with a small cabal of banker big-shots to rip apart financial regulation across the planet. When you see 26.3% unemployment in Spain, desperation and hunger in Greece, riots in Indonesia and Detroit in bankruptcy, go back to this End Game memo, the genesis of the blood and tears.
The answer conceived by the Big Bank Five: eliminate controls on banks [font color="green"]in every nation on the planet in one single move.[/font color] It was as brilliant as it was insanely dangerous.
How could they pull off this mad caper? The bankers' and Summers' game was to use the Financial Services Agreement, an abstruse and benign addendum to the international trade agreements policed by the World Trade Organization.
Until the bankers began their play, the WTO agreements dealt simply with trade in goodsthat is, my cars for your bananas. The new rules ginned-up by Summers and the banks would force all nations to accept trade in "bads" toxic assets like financial derivatives.
Until the bankers' re-draft of the FSA, each nation controlled and chartered the banks within their own borders. The new rules of the game would force every nation to open their markets to Citibank, JP Morgan and their derivatives "products."
[font color="green"]And all 156 nations in the WTO would have to smash down their own Glass-Steagall divisions between commercial savings banks and the investment banks that gamble with derivatives.[/font color]
The job of turning the FSA into the bankers' battering ram was given to Geithner, who was named Ambassador to the World Trade Organization.
In other words, turn us taxpaying mopes into slaves continually bailing out crooks. No wonder they love TPP and all the rest over the horizon!
But that's not the biggest reason why we should fear the Globalists. It's how they make a killing: Off War. Which, thanks to modern spycraft cough ELINT means inside trading, er information. Sad that in the process 99-percent of the American people have to cut back so the wealthiest and most corrupt people on the planet can make themselves even wealthier through the most evil system of all, one where "Money Trumps Peace" and secret government works to carry out that process 24/7/366.
Behind the Curtain: Booz Allen Hamilton and its Owner, The Carlyle Group
Written by Bob Adelmann
The New American; June 13, 2013
According to writers Thomas Heath and Marjorie Censer at the Washington Post, The Carlyle Group and its errant child, Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH), have a public relations problem, thanks to NSA leaker and former BAH employee Edward Snowden. By the time top management at BAH learned that one of their top level agents had gone rogue, and terminated his employment, it was too late.
For years Carlyle had, according to the Post, nurtured a reputation as a financially sophisticated asset manager that buys and sells everything from railroads to oil refineries; but now the light from the Snowden revelations has revealed nothing more than two companies, parent and child, bound by the thread of turning government secrets into profits.
And have they ever. When The Carlyle Group bought BAH back in 2008, it was totally dependent upon government contracts in the fields of information technology (IT) and systems engineering for its bread and butter. But there wasn't much butter: After two years the companys gross revenues were $5.1 billion but net profits were a minuscule $25 million, close to a rounding error on the companys financial statement. In 2012, however, BAH grossed $5.8 billion and showed earnings of $219 million, nearly a nine-fold increase in net revenues and a nice gain in value for Carlyle.
Unwittingly, the Post authors exposed the real reason for the jump in profitability: close ties and interconnected relationships between top people at Carlyle and BAH, and the agencies with which they are working. The authors quoted George Price, an equity analyst at BB&T Capital: "[Booz Allen has] got a great brand, they've focused over time on hiring top people, including bringing on people who have a lot of senior government experience." (Emphasis added.)
For instance, James Clapper had a stint at BAH before becoming the current Director of National Intelligence; George Little consulted with BAH before taking a position at the Central Intelligence Agency; John McConnell, now vice chairman at BAH, was director of the National Security Agency (NSA) in the 90s before moving up to director of national intelligence in 2007; Todd Park began his career with BAH and now serves as the country's chief technology officer; James Woolsey, currently a senior vice president at BAH, served in the past as director of the Central Intelligence Agency; and so on.
BAH has had more than a little problem with self-dealing and conflicts of interest over the years. For instance in 2006 the European Commission asked the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Privacy International (PI) to investigate BAHs involvement with President George Bushs SWIFT surveillance program, which was viewed by that administration as just another tool in its so-called War on Terror. The only problem is that it was illegal, as it violated U.S., Belgian, and European privacy laws. BAH was right in the middle of it. According to the ACLU/PI report,
[font color="green"]Though Booz Allens role is to verify that the access to the SWIFT data is not abused, its relationship with the U.S. Government calls its objectivity significantly into question. (Emphasis added.)
Among Booz Allens senior consulting staff are several former members of the intelligence community, including a former Director of the CIA and a former director of the NSA.[/font color]
As noted by Barry Steinhardt, an ACLU director, Its bad enough that the (Bush) administration is trying to hold out a private company as a substitute for genuine checks and balances on its surveillance activities. But of all companies to perform audits on a secret surveillance program, it would be difficult to find one less objective and more intertwined with the U.S. government security establishment. (Emphasis added.)
CONTINUED w Links n Privatized INTEL...
Do you believe that this information is used for public good or private gain?
The answer is found in what we can see above-ground: The "Who Benefits?" part, that is Who controls that information which translates into political power and physical wealth and their , uh, un-democratic distribution.
For much of the 35 years, it's been politicians on the Trickle Down side of life. Their record is that of the latter: Wars without end for profits without cease. And, so far, they have cared who got killed in the process.
It also explains the common thinking of the benefits of keeping that same War Spy Apparatus turned and focused on the American people.
Jeb Bush: 'I don't understand' why anyone is upset about the NSA
The Week, February 19, 2015
Likely GOP presidential candidate Gov. Jeb Bush is eager to distinguish between himself and his ex-president father and brother. But comments he made on Wednesday about the creepy spying practices of the NSA suggest he shares their support for a robust surveillance state:
(T)he NSA metadata program... contributes to awareness of potential terrorist cells and interdiction efforts on a global scale. For the life of me, I don't understand [how] the debate has gotten off track, where we're not understanding and protecting we do protect our civil liberties, but this is a hugely important program to use these technologies to keep us safe. (National Journal)
Despite Bush's confident assessment of the effectiveness of the NSA, reports suggest the mass surveillance program "ha(s) no discernible impact" in preventing terrorism. Bonnie Kristian
Jebthro and the BFEE have served to create the fusion of state power and private wealth Mussolini described. Doubt that, consider how national priorities have changed. President Kennedy used every minute in office to keep the peace. Today, academics are getting with the program for wars without end for profit without cease. And to make sure that money flow continues uninterrupted, the moneyed class have corrupted the government of the United States and governments the planet over to continue their reign themselves the wealthiest -- and now that money is speech-n-all -- the most POWERFUL people to ever live.
Unfortunately, with all that secret government oaths and pledges and courts-martial under the UCMJ leading to prison and worse, it becomes easy to see why this stays out of the Mighty Wurlitzer. The people who can tell us about it are under an oath of secrecy and will lose their pensions if they talk about who benefits from all the secret government power.
Finally, because they never are held to account for their corruption -- by justice, government, press, or academia the Bushes and the War Party for whom they front continues to prey on America and the planet. Looting the planets riches and the Peoples futures through war and empire, they are killing Democracy along the way. By defunding and impoverishing public education, hiding news by catapaulting propaganda, loyalty oaths to secret government and corporations rather than to the Constitution, government officials and a cowed press corps in fear of speaking out and blowing the whistle, they also are killing our ability to even know about what they do. Perhaps one day soon, that will be the new normal we "move on" to -- the tragic day when no one remains who remembers when the United States and planet were any different.
Salon.com, Feb. 21, 2015
Indeed, the dynamics had changed dramatically after the coordinated terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. In the ensuing years, the CIAs budget ballooned to more than double its pre-2001 numbers. Moreover, it got the go-ahead to launch programs previously denied or sidetracked, and clearance to encroach on the Pentagons turf through extensive operations using armed predator drones. Washington, it seemed, had forgotten how to say no to Langley. Still, the operation of the black site and EIT program involves a strikingly different dynamicbecause the spring that fed it came not out of Langley but from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, inside the White House.
Senior figures in the CIA, including the agencys senior career lawyer, John Rizzo, fully appreciated that the black sites and the EITs presented particularly dangerous territory. Exposure of these programs could damage some of the agencys tightest points of collaboration with foreign intelligence servicesauthoritarian regimes such as Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Pakistan, Thailand, and Yemen, as well as among new democracies of Eastern Europe, like Lithuania, Poland, and Romania. British intelligence had been deeply involved and feared exposure, considering the domestic political opposition and the rigorous attitude of British courts.
CIA leadership was also focused on the high likelihood that the program, once exposed, would lead to a press for criminal prosecutions under various statutes, including the anti-torture act. It therefore moved preemptively, seeking assurances and an opinion from the Justice Department that would serve as a get out of jail free card for agents involved in the program. But when those opinions were disclosed, starting hard on the heels of photographic evidence of abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraqmuch of it eerily similar to techniques discussed in the Justice Department opinionsa political firestorm erupted around the world. The Justice Department was forced to withdraw most of the opinions even before George W. Bush left Washington.
Leon Panetta, arriving at the CIA in 2009, found top management preoccupied with concerns about fallout from this program.
The CIA chose to react to plans for a congressional probe cautiously, with a series of tactical maneuvers and skirmishes. Its strategy was apparent from the beginning: slow the review down while hoping for a change in the political winds that might end it. And from the outset it made use of one essential weapon against its congressional overseerssecrecy. For the agency, secrecy was not just a way of life; it was also a path to power. It wielded secrecy as a shield against embarrassing disclosures and as a sword to silence and threaten adversaries. It was an all-purpose tool.
Secrecy, Surveillance and Censorship
War by Media and the Triumph of Propaganda
by JOHN PILGER
CounterPunch, Dec. 5-7, 2014
Why has so much journalism succumbed to propaganda? Why are censorship and distortion standard practice? Why is the BBC so often a mouthpiece of rapacious power? Why do the New York Times and the Washington Post deceive their readers?
Why are young journalists not taught to understand media agendas and to challenge the high claims and low purpose of fake objectivity? And why are they not taught that the essence of so much of whats called the mainstream media is not information, but power?
These are urgent questions. The world is facing the prospect of major war, perhaps nuclear war with the United States clearly determined to isolate and provoke Russia and eventually China. This truth is being turned upside down and inside out by journalists, including those who promoted the lies that led to the bloodbath in Iraq in 2003.
The times we live in are so dangerous and so distorted in public perception that propaganda is no longer, as Edward Bernays called it, an invisible government. It is the government. It rules directly without fear of contradiction and its principal aim is the conquest of us: our sense of the world, our ability to separate truth from lies.
The most effective propaganda is found not in the Sun or on Fox News but beneath a liberal halo. When the New York Times published claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, its fake evidence was believed, because it wasnt Fox News; it was the New York Times.
It wasn't integrity killed Journalism. It was rigor mortis.
by Joshua Kupstein
Motherboard, February 16, 2015
Thanks to a recent court ruling in the UK, you'll soon be able to find out whether British spies illegally accessed your data through sharing programs with US intelligence agencies.
Starting today, a new site set up by Privacy International will begin funneling requests from anyonenot just UK citizensto check whether the British intelligence agency GCHQ was snooping on their communications via the NSA's PRISM and UPSTREAM surveillance programs.
That was a huge concern after the Snowden revelations suggested that the "Five Eyes" spying alliance (the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) have created a giant racket for second-hand surveillance.
While many of the individual countries have so-called "minimization" procedures for scrubbing "incidentally" collected data about their own citizens, there's nothing stopping them from getting that same data when it's collected and shared by an allied country.
"This will allow the public to finally know how the Snowden revelations have affected them personally and will allow people to hold intelligence agencies to account for their unlawful surveillance on the worlds communications," said Mike Rispoli, a spokesperson for Privacy International. "Even if you dont think you were spied on (you probably were), it may be fun to know either way."
What will they think of next?
What great things have we -- the USA and humanity -- done in the 45 years since walking on the moon "in peace for all mankind"?
Profile InformationGender: Male
Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 55,745
- 2016 (360)
- 2015 (578)
- 2014 (462)
- 2013 (548)
- 2012 (328)
- 2011 (16)
- December (16)