CIA and FBI Corruption Past, Present, and Future

Gladio Logo Operation Gladio Logo

8 Historic Cases That Show the FBI and CIA Were Out of Control Long Before Russiagate

Foundation for Economic Freedom,
March 25, 2019

Government bureaucrats were out of control long before the 2016 presidential election.

Unlike some more seasoned media, conservatives have appeared genuinely shocked by revelations of the Trump-Russia saga: abuse of FISA warrants, classified leaksfrom top FBI brass,corruption, campaign moles, and an apparent plot to remove an elected president through undemocratic (and likely extra-constitutional) means.

These revelations are unique in that they have become highly public and involve a sitting president. However, an examination of the history of US intelligence agencies reveals government bureaucrats were out of control long before the 2016 presidential election.

It’s no secret that the US government sought to assassinate Fidel Castro for years. Less well known, however, was that part of their regime-change plot included a plan to blow up Miami and sinking a boat-full of innocent Cubans.

The plan, which was revealed in 2017 when the National Archives declassified 2,800 documents from the JFK era, was a collaborative effort that included the CIA, the State Department, the Department of Defense, and other federal agencies that sought to brainstorm strategies to topple Castro and sow unrest within Cuba. One of those plans included Operation Northwoods, submitted to the CIA by General Lyman Lemnitzer on behalf of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It summarized nine “pretexts” the CIA and US government could employ to justify military intervention in Cuba. One of the official CIA documents shows officials musing about staging a terror campaign (“real or simulated”) and blaming it on Cuban refugees.

“We could develop a Cuban Communist terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” the Operation Mongoose document says.

Read More: https://fee.org/articles/8-historic-cases-that-show-the-fbi-and-cia-were-out-of-control-long-before-russiagate/

Operation Gladio: The Unholy Alliance Between the Vatican, the CIA and the Mafia: Overview of the book by Paul L. Williams

Antony C. Black Published on Apr, 6, 2019

On Aug. 2, 1980 a massive explosion ripped apart the main waiting room of the Bologna railway station. Eighty-five people were killed and hundreds more injured. Though at first blamed on Italy’s legendary urban guerrillas, The Red Brigades, it soon emerged that the attack had, in fact, originated from within the ‘deep state’ of the Italian government itself.

The full nature of this secret parallel state would only come to light a decade later when the Italian premier, Giulio Andreotti, under questioning from a special commission of inquiry, revealed the existence of arms caches stashed all around the country and which were at the disposal of an organization which later came to be identified as ‘Gladio’.

The members of this group turned out to include not only hundreds of far-right figures in the intelligence, military, government, media, Church and corporate sectors, but a motley assortment of unreconstructed WW2 fascists, psychopaths and criminal underworld types to boot. And despite Andreotti’s attempts to airbrush the group as ‘patriots’ it appeared evident to much of the rest of the Italian polity that these seemed rather more like pretty bad folk indeed. Little did they know. Follow-up research by the likes of Daniele Ganser, Claudio Celani, Jurgen Roth and Henrik Kruger traced connections to similar groups spread throughout Europe of which all were found to be deep state terrorist organizations, and all of which were found, ultimately, to be subservient unto the highest levels of the CIA and NATO command structures.

Read More: https://off-guardian.org/2019/04/06/operation-gladio-the-unholy-alliance/

CIA IS TURNING REFUGEE CAMPS IN EASTERN SYRIA INTO ISIS HOTBEDS

Southfront.org 13.03.2019

The CIA is conspiring with ISIS commanders in northeastern Syria supplying them with fake documents and then transferring them to Iraq, according to reports in Turkish pro-government media.

About 2,000 ISIS members were questioned in the areas of Kesra, Buseira, al-Omar and Suwayr in Deir Ezzor province and at least 140 of them then received fake documents. Some of the questioned terrorists were then moved to the camps of al-Hol, Hasakah and Rukban, which are controlled by US-backed forces. The CIA also reportedly created a special facility near Abu Khashab with the same purpose.

Israeli, French and British special services are reportedly involved.

Read More: https://southfront.org/cia-is-turning-refugee-camps-into-hotbeds-of-isis-cells-in-eastern-syria/

S-P-L-C for Your Fear Money

Orwell and the Southern Poverty Law Center: Four Legs Good Two Legs Bad
Source: http://thepeoplescube.com/

5 Reasons The Southern Poverty Law Center Is A Hate-Mongering Scam

By
7, 2018

The Southern Poverty Law Center is not a legitimate arbiter of public discourse. It poisons public discourse for profit.

Amazon has decided to pull the Alliance Defending Freedom from its Amazon Smile program, in which shoppers can send a portion of their Amazon purchases to charities. Because the Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled ADF a hate group, Amazon yanked its opportunity to receive donations on an equal playing field with other Amazon Smile participants, which include highly political leftist organizations Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union, Media Matters, and Oxfam-America.

ADF is a nonprofit, First Amendment-focused legal organization that has successfully argued in front of the Supreme Court seven times in the past seven years. It is not some Klu Klux Klan revival, and to suggest so is both false and deeply offensive. Yet slandering good-faith people is SPLC’s raison d’etre. Why? Because that’s how it rakes in millions of dollars a year, show its latest tax filings, to fund its astronomical $432,723,955 endowment and management’s $200,000-$350,000 annual salaries (plus perks!).

Numerous media outlets and watchdog organizations have documented this reality, and over several decades. The Atlantic and Politico have covered, albeit in friendly fashion, the organization’s decision to group with neo-Nazis, black power groups, and Klu Klux Klan chapters people and organizations like Sen. Rand Paul, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, ADF, the Family Research Council, the Center for Immigration Studies, and Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaz. Publications that have exposed SPLC’s hate-profiteering include Tablet magazine; a newspaper local to SPLC’s headquarters, the Montgomery AdvertiserPhilanthropy magazine, Harper’s magazine, Megan McArdle at Bloomberg; The Weekly StandardCity JournalNational Review; and The Washington Free Beacon.

Simply put, SPLC is not a legitimate arbiter of public discourse. It poisons public discourse for profit. Its business model is to target groups and people, sometimes with baseless smears, to gin up fear and anger so people send SPLC gobs of cash it largely doesn’t use to benefit the oppressed. Neither Amazon nor major media outlets — such as CNNThe Los Angeles TimesThe Boston GlobeThe Washington Post, the Associated PressCBS, and PBS — should amplify or give any credence to SPLC’s highly partisan, highly personal, self-interested fear-mongering.

Here are a few reasons why. (The Federalist senior contributor Stella Morabito offers more here.)

Read More: http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/07/5-reasons-southern-poverty-law-center-hate-mongering-scam/

Wall Street Journal Fires Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Over Arms Dealer Links – News From Antiwar.com

I suck for the CIA

Just goes to show once again, the deep state, legacy media and criminal activity are all connected.

How is Bezos and the CIA’s lucrative server contract in anyway different?

The Wall Street Journal today announced that it is sacking its chief foreign affairs correspondent, Jay Solomon, related to “ethical lapses” that were revealed in a Tuesday AP expose that revealed Solomon’s substantial ties to an arms dealer and smuggler for the CIA.

The AP investigation focused on Farhad Azima, an Iran-born magnate who had ferried weapons for the CIA, and founded a company, Denx LLC, that was trying to make a deal with the United Arab Emirates on a surveillance scheme intended to spy on Iran.

Read More: news.antiwar.com/2017/06/21/wall-street-journal-fires-chief-foreign-affairs-correspondent-over-arms-dealer-links/

More proof that the media is controlled

“Just to give you some context, President Trump pulled out of the climate accords. For a day and a half we covered the climate accords. And the CEO of CNN [Jeff Zucker] said in our internal meeting, he said good job everybody covering the climate accords, but we’re done with it. Let’s get back to Russia.”

Notice that the CEO of the network (Jeff Zucker) told his staff to focus on the Russia story. This shows that media is controlled from the top down, and that any reporter that wants to give an alternative view will be silenced by the editors and owners that control their work.

The idea that having a couple of staff members resign clears the network of being fake news, doesn’t hold up when the CEO is clearly directing the staff of what to report on.

We're doing it too

From Nuisance to Threat: The High Cost of Truth — Paul Craig Roberts – PaulCraigRoberts.org

1984 big brother

I am convinced that the US, and probably the entire Western world, that is, the American Empire, has entered an era in which respect for truth does not exist in public and private institutions. We have been watching this develop for some time. Think, for example, back to August 3, 2002, a recent time in terms of our present predicament, but a time prior to political consciousness of anyone younger today than 33 years old. In the summer of 2002, the world was being prepared by propaganda for a US invasion of Iraq. On August 3 of that year, the prestigous British publication, The Economist, summed up the consensus of ruling opinion in two sentences: “The honest choices now are to give up and give in, or to remove Mr. Hussein before he gets his [nuclear] bomb. Painful as it is, our vote is for war.”As Lewis Lapham, myself and others asked at the time, what bomb? The only evidence of a bomb was fabricated and known to be fabricated. The UN weapons inspectors concluded that the infamous Weapons of Mass Destruction were a creation of US propaganda. President George W. Bush eventually acknowledged that Iraq had no such weapons. US Secretary of State Colin Powell said that the lies he was deceived by the Bush regime into telling the UN about Saddam Hussein’s WMD are a stain on his career.

Despite the 2003 US invasion known to have been based entirely on lies, US troops were not pulled out of Iraq until 2011, and whether or not they were pulled out, they are back in Iraq now. None of these facts has had any impact on the good opinion that Washington and the media have of themselves.

Read More: www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/03/16/nuisance-threat-high-cost-truth-paul-craig-roberts/

American Corporate MSM Is Merged With CIA And Has Been Since The 1950s

Cocaine Import Agency Seal

By Brandon TurbevilleHat tip to Washington’s Blog for collating much of this information.

With the recent back and forth seemingly taking place between two different factions of the American Deep State and playing out before the entire country, a few alternative media outlets have begun to question whether or not certain mainstream media outlets are actually connected to the Deep State, most notably the CIA. With an unimaginable scale of disinformation being released and promoted throughout mainstream channels on a daily basis, all propagandizing the public to go along with the desired direction of the American establishment, few could assume otherwise. However, such connections between American mainstream outlets and the CIA are more than mere conjecture, they are well known and have been documented for some time.

For instance, back in the late 1940s and early 1950s, Operation Mockingbird, a plan known to many researchers today but known to virtually no one at the time it was originally being implemented, was a secret CIA effort to influence and control the American media and, thus, to influence and control the information received (as well as the opinions) of the American people. The first report of the program came in 1979 in the biography of Katharine Graham, the owner of the Washington Post, written by Deborah Davis.[1]

Davis wrote that the program was established by Frank Wisner, the director of the Office of Policy Coordination, a covert operations unit created under the National Security Council. According to Davis, Wisner recruited Philip Graham of the Washington Post to head the project within the media industry. Davis wrote that, “By the early 1950s, Wisner ‘owned’ respected members of The New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles.” Davis also writes that Allen Dulles convinced Cord Meyer, who later became Mockingbird’s “principal operative,” to join the CIA in 1951.[2]

But while Davis’ book may have been the first mention of Operation Mockingbird by name, Carl Bernstein addressed the CIA influence over the media in 1977. According to Bernstein’s Rolling Stone article, after 1953, the media control program was overseen by Allen Dulles, the CIA Director. Bernstein says that, at that time, the CIA had influence over 25 newspapers and wire agencies. Bernstein wrote,

Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were Williarn Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Tirne Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the LouisviIle Courier‑Journal, and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps‑Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald‑Tribune.

By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc.

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.

. . . . .

During the 1976 investigation of the CIA by the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Senator Frank Church, the dimensions of the Agency’s involvement with the press became apparent to several members of the panel, as well as to two or three investigators on the staff. But top officials of the CIA, including former directors William Colby and George Bush, persuaded the committee to restrict its inquiry into the matter and to deliberately misrepresent the actual scope of the activities in its final report. The multivolurne report contains nine pages in which the use of journalists is discussed in deliberately vague and sometimes misleading terms. It makes no mention of the actual number of journalists who undertook covert tasks for the CIA. Nor does it adequately describe the role played by newspaper and broadcast executives in cooperating with the Agency.

THE AGENCY’S DEALINGS WITH THE PRESS BEGAN during the earliest stages of the Cold War. Allen Dulles, who became director of the CIA in 1953, sought to establish a recruiting‑and‑cover capability within America’s most prestigious journalistic institutions. By operating under the guise of accredited news correspondents, Dulles believed, CIA operatives abroad would be accorded a degree of access and freedom of movement unobtainable under almost any other type of cover.

American publishers, like so many other corporate and institutional leaders at the time, were willing to commit the resources of their companies to the struggle against “global Communism.” Accordingly, the traditional line separating the American press corps and government was often indistinguishable: rarely was a news agency used to provide cover for CIA operatives abroad without the knowledge and consent of either its principal owner, publisher or senior editor. Thus, contrary to the notion that the CIA insidiously infiltrated the journalistic community, there is ample evidence that America’s leading publishers and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services. “Let’s not pick on some poor reporters, for God’s sake,” William Colby exclaimed at one point to the Church committee’s investigators. “Let’s go to the managements. They were witting.” In all, about twenty‑five news organizations including those listed at the beginning of this article) provided cover for the Agency

In addition to cover capability, Dulles initiated a “debriefing” procedure under which American correspondents returning from abroad routinely emptied their notebooks and offered their impressions to Agency personnel. Such arrangements, continued by Dulles’ successors, to the present day, were made with literally dozens of news organizations. In the 1950s, it was not uncommon for returning reporters to be met at the ship by CIA officers. “There would be these guys from the CIA flashing ID cards and looking like they belonged at the Yale Club,” said Hugh Morrow, a former Saturday Evening Post correspondent who is now press secretary to former vice‑president Nelson Rockefeller. “It got to be so routine that you felt a little miffed if you weren’t asked.”

. . . . .

From the outset, the use of journalists was among the CIA’s most sensitive undertakings, with full knowledge restricted to the Director of Central Intelligence and a few of his chosen deputies. Dulles and his successors were fearful of what would happen if a journalist‑operative’s cover was blown, or if details of the Agency’s dealings with the press otherwise became public. As a result, contacts with the heads of news organizations were normally initiated by Dulles and succeeding Directors of Central Intelligence; by the deputy directors and division chiefs in charge of covert operations—Frank Wisner, Cord Meyer Jr., Richard Bissell, Desmond FitzGerald, Tracy Barnes, Thomas Karamessines and Richard Helms himself a former UPI correspondent); and, occasionally, by others in the CIA hierarchy known to have an unusually close social relationship with a particular publisher or broadcast executive.1

James Angleton, who was recently removed as the Agency’s head of counterintelligence operations, ran a completely independent group of journalist‑operatives who performed sensitive and frequently dangerous assignments; little is known about this group for the simple reason that Angleton deliberately kept only the vaguest of files.

The CIA even ran a formal training program in the 1950s to teach its agents to be journalists. Intelligence officers were “taught to make noises like reporters,” explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management. “These were the guys who went through the ranks and were told ‘You’re going to he a journalist,’” the CIA official said. Relatively few of the 400‑some relationships described in Agency files followed that pattern, however; most involved persons who were already bona fide journalists when they began undertaking tasks for the Agency.

Forty years later, Bernstein’s article is still a must read for understanding the CIA’s relationship to the corporate media.

Indeed, a declassified memo from 1965 confirms much of what Bernstein wrote about in 1977. This memo was addressed to the Deputy Director of the Directorate of Intelligence, Ray S. Cline, and revealed the names of several high profile journalists who were “receiving intelligence” from Cline. By “intelligence,” however, one can read simply that reporters were receiving their marching orders for publication and print from the CIA. The memo contained the names Joseph C. Hersch, Walter Lippmann, John Scott, Joseph Alsop, Wallace Carroll, Cy Sulzberger, Henry Gemill, Charles Bartlett, Max S. Johnson, Harry Schwartz, Bill Shannon, Jess Cook, Stewart Alsop, William S. White, Chalmers Roberts, Murrey Marder, Charles J.V. Murphy, Russell Wiggins, Alfred Friendly, Ted Szulc, and Kay Graham. The outlets listed include Christian Science Monitor, Los Angeles Times, NBC, TIME, Publishers’ Newspaper Syndicate, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, U.S. News and World Report, Saturday Evening Post, United Features Syndicate, Washington Post, Fortune, and Newsweek.

Even the U.S. government’s official summary of the overthrow of the elected President of Iran in the 1950s admits that the CIA was planting stories in the American press. It reads, “In cooperation with the Department of State, CIA had several articles planted in major American newspapers and magazines which, when reproduced in Iran, had the desired psychological effect in Iran and contributed to the war of nerves against Mossadeq.”

Read More: www.activistpost.com/2017/03/american-corporate-msm-is-merged-with-cia-and-has-been-since-the-1950s.html

Confronting Russophobia | Zero Hedge

Notice a Pattern?

There is a paranoid, hysterical quality to the public discourse on Russia and all things Russian in today’s America.  The corporate media machine and its Deep State handlers have abdicated reason and common decency in favor of raw hate and fear-mongering.  We have not seen anything like it before, even in the darkest days of the Cold War.

Read More: www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-23/confronting-russophobia

The Two Bents Of The Media Are An Illusion Of Choice: “All Of The Mainstream Media Is Liberal, Marxist, Biased, And Profit-driven”

by Jeremiah Johnson

Bret Baier conducted an interview with Senator Mitch McConnell on Fox News recently.  Of itself, this is no big news.  What was noteworthy, on the other hand, were two points that are indicators of the “sea change” that has been made with the new administration under President Trump.  Firstly, McConnell was far from his usual wishy-washy, middle-of-the-road self, and secondly, Bret Baier took a stance that was so antagonistic toward the Republican Senator as to make Baier appear to be a Democrat.

Now that Donald Trump is President, the Mainstream Media (MSM) have been pulling out all the stops, and the allegedly conservative Fox News was no different.  Baier was badgering McConnell over the President’s selection for a new Supreme Court Justice and pressured him to say whether the Republicans would push it through.  McConnell told him no less than three times [para.] “the judge will be confirmed,” and each time Baier badgered him akin to a prosecuting attorney.

Baier asked about Obamacare, and McConnell said that it would be “repealed and replaced.”  Baier grilled him about whether the President would allow Obama’s executive orders to stand, and McConnell flatly informed him that the President would utilize executive orders of his own to remove those of Obama.  The interview was conducted Tuesday, January 31st on Fox News, and you must see it to believe it…on both sides.

Read More: www.dcclothesline.com/2017/02/13/the-two-bents-of-the-media-are-an-illusion-of-choice-all-of-the-mainstream-media-is-liberal-marxist-biased-and-profit-driven/

How ‘News’ Media Lie

Eric ZUESSE | 07.03.2017

I happened to be reading at Huffington Post on March 6th their truthful top-of-homepage news-report:

«Trump Forced To Water Down Executive Order On Immigration: The new order leaves out many of the most forceful points from the original one».

And I saw there also a March 3rd headline regarding a news-event that I happened to have researched in depth (as will be summarized below), this headline being:

«Syria Rebels Want Trump To Know They’re The Ones Fighting ISIS: The Free Syrian Army is hopeful for more support despite the president’s praise of Bashar Assad».

That was from HuffPo’s reporter, Akbar Shahid Ahmed, who writes:

Speaking from Geneva after the latest round of internationally sponsored talks between the opposition and the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad, Maj. Issam Al Reis, spokesman for the Free Syrian Army, cited its push against ISIS in northern Syria, in collaboration with Turkish forces, and the rebels’ resistance against ISIS advances in the south as evidence that it’s ready for the U.S. to step up. …

«The regime is not fighting ISIS», Al Reis, a former officer in Assad’s army, said. He noted that Assad’s forces, which rely heavily on Russian jets and pro-Iran fighters, had captured and then lost Palmyra to ISIS before.

Analysts say Assad’s coalition has focused most of its attacks on the Free Syrian Army, which is relatively moderate and which the West considers an acceptable alternative to the regime, rather than on ISIS and the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda, which the U.S. and a host of other nations are committed to defeating.

Here are the facts, which I had reported and documented at the end of 2016, headlining «How Obama Overrode Kerry’s Agreements with Russia». I documented there that on September 17th, Obama’s forces had bombed the Syrian Army at Deir ez Zor, which brought to an end the U.S. participation in the peace-negotiations on Syria, “the sabotaging-event, which naturally caused Putin to instruct [Russia’s Foreign Minister] Lavrov to terminate all discussions with [Secretary of State] Kerry, because it displayed Obama’s unwavering determination to defeat Russia».

Read More: www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/03/07/how-news-media-lie.html