Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
91. That seems like synchronicity, so much serendipity.
Thu Dec 31, 2015, 07:51 PM
Dec 2015
Through a Glass Darkly

Alexander Cockburn
Lies Of Our Times (p. 12-13)
November 1991

"What was surprising to me was Reagan’s condition. He was exhausted to the point of incoherence throughout much of the interview and could not remember the substance of any subject that had been discussed apart from Mitterrand’s expression of anticommunism. I had not seen Reagan at such close range since the assassination attempt nearly four months earlier, and was shocked at his condition.... Reagan simply was unable to recall the contents of the talks in which he had just participated.... The interview concluded at a signal from Deaver, who did not seem to find the president’s condition unusual.”


Thus ran Lou Cannon’s recollections of an interview with the Commander-in-Chief in 1981, as set forth in his book President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1991), published earlier this year. But how did Cannon describe Reagan’s condition to the readers of the Washington Post when he wrote up his interview? In the July 23, 1981, Washington Post,Cannon’s story appeared under the headline “Reagan Describes Summit Meeting as ‘Worth Its Weight in Gold.’ ” Cannon’s report gives the impression of a lucid chief executive returning home after a fruitful colloquy with other western leaders at the economic summit held in Ottawa in mid-July. Cannon did mention in the tenth paragraph that “Reagan appeared tired to the point of near-exhaustion,” but this observation was quickly qualified by the opinion of “aides” that the president had been doing a lot of prep for the conference and was also worried about the Middle East.

Cannon shared his brief session with Reagan aboard Air Force One with Hedrick Smith of the New York Times, who similarly gave his readers the impression of a president in touch with things rather than the incoherent old man they had actually encountered. As did Cannon, Smith wove the few quotable remarks from Reagan into a tapestry of attributed presidential dicta passed on — and no doubt confected— by Meese, Deaver, and Speakes. It is clear from Cannon’s account of the conference itself that Reagan was fogged up throughout the actual conference, occasionally interjecting trivial observations or homely jokes into the proceedings and then relapsing into bemused silence. Cannon’s memoir is one more indication of the cover-up that took place in the wake of Hinckley’s assassination bid on March 30, 1981. At the time of the shooting, the press was full of phrases like “bouncing back,” “iron constitution,” and other terms indicating that Reagan had emerged from the ordeal in good shape. In fact Reagan very nearly died on the operating table and was a dotard afterwards. He never fully recovered.

Conclusion: Unless a president is actually dead, the White House press corps can be relied upon to present him as both sentient and sapient, no matter how decrepit his physical and mental condition.

SOURCE in PDF form:

http://liesofourtimes.org/public_html/1991/Nov1991%20V2%20N10/Nov1991%20V2%20N10.pdf

Old news to you, Rex-San, never screened on CIABCNNBCBSFoxNooseNutworks. The coup d'grace was "serving" Pruneface as veep. We may yet recover...



At a dinner during Republican National Convention, Detroit, 1980.



George Bush Takes Charge: The Uses of ‘Counter-Terrorism’

By Christopher Simpson
Covert Action Quarterly 58

A paper trail of declassified documents from the Reagan‑Bush era yields valuable information on how counter‑terrorism provided a powerful mechanism for solidifying Bush's power base and launching a broad range of national security initiatives.

During the Reagan years, George Bush used "crisis management" and "counter‑terrorism" as vehicles for running key parts of the clandestine side of the US government.

Bush proved especially adept at plausible denial. Some measure of his skill in avoiding responsibility can be taken from the fact that even after the Iran‑Contra affair blew the Reagan administration apart, Bush went on to become the "foreign policy president," while CIA Director William Casey, by then conveniently dead, took most of the blame for a number of covert foreign policy debacles that Bush had set in motion.

The trail of National Security Decision Directives (NSDDS) left by the Reagan administration begins to tell the story. True, much remains classified, and still more was never committed to paper in the first place. Even so, the main picture is clear: [font size="5"][font color="green"]As vice president, George Bush was at the center of secret wars, political murders, and America's convoluted oil politics in the Middle East.[/font color][/font size]

SNIP...

Reagan and the NSC also used NSDDs to settle conflicts among security agencies over bureaucratic turf and lines of command. It is through that prism that we see the first glimmers of Vice President Bush's role in clandestine operations during the 1980s.

SNIP...

NSDD 159. MANAGEMENT OF U.S. COVERT OPERATIONS, (TOP SECRET/VEIL‑SENSITIVE), JAN. 18,1985

The Reagan administration's commitment to significantly expand covert operations had been clear since before the 1980 election. How such operations were actually to be managed from day to day, however, was considerably less certain. The management problem became particularly knotty owing to legal requirements to notify congressional intelligence oversight committees of covert operations, on the one hand, and the tacitly accepted presidential mandate to deceive those same committees concerning sensitive operations such as the Contra war in Nicaragua, on the other.

[font color="red"]The solution attempted in NSDD 159 was to establish a small coordinating committee headed by Vice President George Bush through which all information concerning US covert operations was to be funneled. The order also established a category of top secret information known as Veil, to be used exclusively for managing records pertaining to covert operations.

The system was designed to keep circulation of written records to an absolute minimum while at the same time ensuring that the vice president retained the ability to coordinate US covert operations with the administration's overt diplomacy and propaganda.

Only eight copies of NSDD 159 were created. The existence of the vice president's committee was itself highly classified.
[/font color] The directive became public as a result of the criminal prosecutions of Oliver North, John Poindexter, and others involved in the Iran‑Contra affair, hence the designation "Exhibit A" running up the left side of the document.

CONTINUED...

CovertAction Quarterly no 58 Fall 1996 pp31-40.



Nobody's touched CIA ever since. And Reagan is a saint.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

It's a conspiracy. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2015 #1
That's what Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler, USMC (ret.) wrote. Octafish Dec 2015 #6
I'm not psychic so much as you are predictable. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2015 #18
You missed my point, then. Octafish Dec 2015 #19
I think the arc of history bends towards chaos. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2015 #22
You got it. You know who else really understands ''Realpolitik''? Octafish Dec 2015 #51
Game, Set and Match. CanSocDem Dec 2015 #65
Yeah, that's fascinating. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2015 #98
Maybe tied to the JFK shooting?? nt Logical Dec 2015 #84
The same people - those who profit - work for war. Octafish Dec 2015 #88
You're not able to answer the question. DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2015 #78
No question was asked. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2015 #95
So why don't you follow your own advice? Octafish Jan 2016 #121
Sorry, I may get an alert for this but it just seems to me 7wo7rees Jan 2016 #129
I guess you haven't an answer either. . . .n/t annabanana Dec 2015 #87
As a rule, I only provide answers to questions asked in earnest. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2015 #96
Please provide an answer to the question posed in the OP: Who are we fighting in Afganistan. nt ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2016 #128
We're fighting the POPPY MANUFACTURES....WE WANT TO CONTROL THE HEROIN TRADE AS ALWAYS! ViseGrip Jan 2016 #126
. Wilms Dec 2015 #2
You converted me into a Monkees fan. Octafish Dec 2015 #11
from the Ministry of Truth? Downwinder Dec 2015 #20
We've always been at pre-emptive war with Eurasia. Octafish Dec 2015 #21
Did Shrub spill the beans with his comment Downwinder Dec 2015 #27
Adam Curtis doc for the BBC... GreatGazoo Dec 2015 #40
Historical note: I think the comment to which you allude came, non from Shrub, but from KingCharlemagne Dec 2015 #92
Brown people mwrguy Dec 2015 #3
Brown people are ottomanitacally enemy. Octafish Dec 2015 #12
You know whose side we're on in Afghanistan? The "brown people", as you beautifully put it muriel_volestrangler Dec 2015 #23
Which bad guys? Octafish Dec 2015 #33
Your memory is apalling muriel_volestrangler Dec 2015 #34
I wish I could forget the time Obama repeated Bush line Taliban never offered up bin laden. Octafish Dec 2015 #61
This is correct. n/t Ghost Dog Dec 2015 #67
Waste of time. Rex Dec 2015 #38
You should see what they're planning for the Home Front. Octafish Dec 2015 #62
A lot of Afghans don't like their government. CJCRANE Dec 2015 #76
While its most certainly a position of some in the right... Docreed2003 Dec 2015 #35
The Brown People bigwillq Dec 2015 #4
Why would Obama fight people because they are brown?? GummyBearz Dec 2015 #5
Because they're terrarists bigwillq Dec 2015 #7
We have a commander in chief who knows that is not true, what a ridiculous thing to say GummyBearz Dec 2015 #9
I was being sarcastic (kind of) bigwillq Dec 2015 #24
They are soooo ungrateful. Octafish Dec 2015 #13
You know, the bad guys gratuitous Dec 2015 #8
Speaking of money... You know who's getting RICH off the war on ISIS? Octafish Dec 2015 #14
Sibel Edmonds knew, so she was fired and slapped with a gag order when she tried to tell. nt tblue37 Jan 2016 #120
Can you handle the truth? It's to OWN THE LAND. GOOGLE "Mineral wealth of Afghanistan"!!!! WinkyDink Dec 2015 #10
Trillions for Billionaires! Octafish Dec 2015 #17
Great post, Octafish. nt. polly7 Dec 2015 #43
And yet there are millions of americans who think that 3000 American lives in NYC would mean WinkyDink Jan 2016 #130
+1000. nt. polly7 Dec 2015 #44
and cell phones klyon Dec 2015 #70
Everyone wants Afghanistan for the location and resources KentuckyWoman Dec 2015 #15
Bush, Enron, UNOCAL and the Taliban Octafish Dec 2015 #29
Some combination of scary bogeymen. We lost. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2015 #16
I was hoping we would have closed the books back in 2009. Octafish Dec 2015 #31
WHY EVIL DOERS, that's who, SIR! bobthedrummer Dec 2015 #25
He may be the only uncorrupted guy in that whole bunch. Octafish Dec 2015 #52
Allowing our favored industries first dibs at a trillion dollar's worth of raw materials arcane1 Dec 2015 #26
That is a lot of awesome. Plus, the location! Octafish Dec 2015 #58
^^This, and of course to save face johnnypanic42 Dec 2015 #77
We're fighting FOR heroin. Rich people must get richer, after all. nt valerief Dec 2015 #28
Same Ol' World Odor Octafish Dec 2015 #64
The Nazis, cause they bombed Pearl Harbor. Crack a book for Pete's sake. Glassunion Dec 2015 #30
The American Dream Octafish Dec 2015 #66
Everybody Matrosov Dec 2015 #32
We need more guns to protect our ideals. Octafish Dec 2015 #94
Well we can eliminate the producers of heroin malaise Dec 2015 #36
The Politics of Afghan Opium (2002) Octafish Dec 2015 #104
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! malaise Jan 2016 #110
Eurasia. Or was that Eastasia? PowerToThePeople Dec 2015 #37
Got a box of rocks to boot for ever... Octafish Jan 2016 #105
Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia. Fozzledick Jan 2016 #122
The M$M likes this war, not enough are complaining and the ones that do Rex Dec 2015 #39
Maybe the big enemy isn't overseas at all. Octafish Jan 2016 #112
"Somebody" is making a lot of money off their poppy crops n/t Holly_Hobby Dec 2015 #41
The Real ''Surge'' Octafish Jan 2016 #127
Check the checklist ... Scuba Dec 2015 #42
The US invasion of Afghanistan was justified and fully supported by many allies. tabasco Dec 2015 #46
Sorry, but 9/11 should have been treated like the crime it was. Scuba Dec 2015 #47
That's like, your opinion, man. n/t tabasco Dec 2015 #49
Did you note that we're still wasting lives and money in Afghanistan, 15 years later? Scuba Dec 2015 #50
Er uh...er uh...well that is besides the point! Rex Dec 2015 #54
Thanks to Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq. tabasco Dec 2015 #59
Yeah and millions of us agree with it, man. Rex Dec 2015 #53
There's like 300 million in the US alone. tabasco Dec 2015 #60
"but 9/11 should have been treated like the crime it was" EX500rider Dec 2015 #68
If that's the only way you can think of to apprehend criminals you're not very thoughtful. Scuba Dec 2015 #71
Speaking of not very thoughtful... EX500rider Dec 2015 #72
"Beef up " means to add to. And legitimizing the CRIME by ... Scuba Dec 2015 #74
So you think law enforcement... EX500rider Dec 2015 #75
Ever hear of a SWAT team? 'Cause that's what took out Bin Laden. Scuba Dec 2015 #79
Yeah he was hiding in a house with a few guards.. EX500rider Dec 2015 #80
Hey if you want to defend one of the worst foreign policy blunders in American history, be my guest. Scuba Dec 2015 #81
Taking down the Taliban is the worst blunder in YOUR opinion... EX500rider Dec 2015 #82
In case you haven't noticed, we haven't taken them down, 15 years and a trillion dollars later. Scuba Dec 2015 #83
Actually we did...they are no longer the government of Afghanistan.. EX500rider Dec 2015 #86
The difference between a SWAT team and a US tier one military unit.. TipTok Dec 2015 #90
Seal Team Six is no fucking SWAT Team. Your ignorance of basic tactical msanthrope Jan 2016 #109
Condescension works great for building animus among the lower ranks. Octafish Jan 2016 #124
Al Qaeda was, like, 50 guys total truebluegreen Dec 2015 #103
Maybe you missed the African Embassy bombings... EX500rider Jan 2016 #108
Wikipedia? Srsly? truebluegreen Jan 2016 #119
Which law enforcement agency would you have sent? TipTok Dec 2015 #89
Historical note: the Taliban agreed to extradite bin Laden to a court with international KingCharlemagne Dec 2015 #93
If by "we" you mean NATO and Afghan Army forces tabasco Dec 2015 #45
So 15 years later and why are we still there? How many decades do we need to be there? Rex Dec 2015 #55
We are saving their mineral resources and poppies JEB Dec 2015 #48
Strange Victory Octafish Dec 2015 #102
They are just pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. JEB Jan 2016 #113
We are not fighting, we are making sure the opium drug lords have security from Rex Dec 2015 #56
Well said. Remember when Seymour Hersh had a job at The New Yorker? Octafish Dec 2015 #101
Who are we NOT fighting in Afghanistan? Wounded Bear Dec 2015 #57
Germany? Octafish Jan 2016 #114
Bad people. Don't you like cheap oil? TBF Dec 2015 #63
All the oil in the world won't bring back a lost life. Octafish Jan 2016 #115
... TBF Jan 2016 #116
We are fighting the people that assassinated JFK. kwassa Dec 2015 #69
''Money trumps peace.'' -- appointed pretzeldent George Walker Bush, Feb. 14, 2007 Octafish Dec 2015 #73
The corporate media seems to conveniently forget to report a lot of things. Rex Dec 2015 #85
That seems like synchronicity, so much serendipity. Octafish Dec 2015 #91
This has been a year of some interesting books, don't you think? MrMickeysMom Dec 2015 #99
Media Blackout shows it is Great Book. Octafish Dec 2015 #100
And it's 1-2-3, what are we fighting for? Don't ask me, I don't KingCharlemagne Dec 2015 #97
One Definition of Insanity Octafish Jan 2016 #123
;-) WinkyDink Jan 2016 #131
Kaos... madinmaryland Jan 2016 #106
A Strategy of Tension Octafish Jan 2016 #125
And what are we fighting for? bluedigger Jan 2016 #107
He's a Drug Store Truck Drivin' Man Octafish Jan 2016 #118
We are fighting ourselves. raouldukelives Jan 2016 #111
Operation CYCLONE Octafish Jan 2016 #117
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Who are we fighting in Af...»Reply #91