rigorousintuition.ca

National Propaganda Radio's weekend programs are rich with misdirection and disinfo. Even 'This American Life' uses subliminal themes, natch.

Today, three days after the 39th anniversary of the FBI murder of Martin Luther King on 4/4/68, we were treated to a Saturday program about the conspiracy theories around the murder of President Lincoln on April 14, 1865.

>The woman host introducing the segment began deriding conspiracy theories with the "everyone LOVES a conspiracy theory no matter how disproven or improbable" theme.

>Then she went on and on with the theme "who can ever keep a secret?"

>Then she said that since 'someone always talks' that we KNOW about the real conspiracies, y'see.

After this misdirecting introduction the show proceded to an audio re-enactment of Booth sneaking up on Lincoln and shooting him complete with a play sounding like a sit-com with roaring crowd in the background.

Nothing on JFK, MLK, or RFK. Of course.

Listen to NPR on weekends and you will hear 'master craftsmen' working out on the PBS demographic. lol.[/b]

I fucking hate NPR.

The last three times I tried to listen to them, this is what I heard and I swear I am not making this up:

1. A piece about how our fearless war leader, normally steely and unemotional, gets all teary-eyed and weepy when he talks to war widows.

2. A piece about all the wonderful things Wal Mart was doing for Katrina victims.

3. A smear piece against Seymour Hersch.

I swear to God that is what I heard the last three times I TRIED to listen to them. I don't try anymore, needless to say.

Nordic wrote:I fucking hate NPR.

Agreed. But I learn their evil ways by listening to their spin and so I study them.

Listen for the keywords or themes in a story and relate them to recent image problems for power.
Listen for how stories are sequenced, even how much time there is between them to think.

Last Sunday there was a story about-
>a vocal choir from Arkansas in a competition
>at Carnegie Hall in New York City.

This was followed by an ad for an upcoming repeat of a 'This American Life'
show called 'Mean Girls' involving reunions of
nerdy men meeting up with the women who had humiliated them back in school days. Really awful examples of childhood cruelty perpetrated by girls on boys.

Anybody in politics come to mind? Someone campaigning, perhaps?
Hell, the 'Mean Girls' show was on only a few months ago at the most before this repeat.
But putting down women is a key part of the recruiting psychology game where men are encouraged to be fighters, not 'sissy nurturers.' So bashing Hilary Clinton serves multiple purposes in a male GOP-led war no matter how much she goes along with the PNAC.
Symbolism.

Media is used not just to discredit women and their values but more and more to desensitize us to death and suffering.

NPR recently did a show on 'the funny side of death.' It was horribly strained.
All I see in public are ads for horror and murder movies now. It's dark and grim out on those billboards and buses.

America has been turned into a 24/7 house of horrors in an effort to desensitize us to what is meant to be permanent war with torture plus the increased devastation of global warming.

And NPR is doing its part.
So listen and learn what it is they want us to think. Then do the opposite.

*(Alex Constantine explores the "what psy-ops?" attitude at 'corporate organs' including NPR. Go to source link. A MUST READ.
-HMW)*


http://alexconstantine.blogspot.com/2007/01/atlantic-monthly-cia-mockingbird.html

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY: CIA Mockingbird Propaganda for the Culturati (with Revealing Asides on 9/11, NPR and Howard Ahmanson, Jr.)

DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT:


James Fallows – former editor of US News & World Report & boring PBS "commentator" – dismisses the CIA-Media Connection

"Journalists at Work: Who's Watching the Watchdogs?"

"In the handful of self-critical articles about the media that appeared twenty years ago ... the matter of CIA connections with executives, editors, and reporters was emphasized. While this makes for GOOD COPY ... "

TRANSLATION: Scrutiny of CIA-media relations is an anachronistic, silly and sensationalistic enterprise ...

" ... and is certainly worth repeating ... "

... reshashing, that is ... redundantly ... as if the "mainstream" press this side of Rolling Stone has ever touched the topic ...

" ... it also fails to challenge American journalism at it weakest point: the corrupting influence of fame and fortune ... "
http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/reg.burma/ar ... 00222.html



NOTICE: YOU HAVE BEEN PROGRAMMED ... THE SUCCESS OF INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS IS THE CRUX OF MEDIA CORRUPTION (?) ... LET"S NOT DWELL ON THE CIA'S CENTRAL ROLE IN PERPETUATING THE WARFARE STATE BY CORRUPTING OUR MINDS AND BELIEFS VIA THE CYNICAL MANIPULATION OF MASS INFORMATION CHANNELS, OR THE CREEPING THREAT OF MEDIA CENTRALIZATION – FAME AND FORTUNE ARE KILLING THE (CENSORIOUS, DISINFORMATIONAL, CELEBRITY-WORSHIPPING, TRIVIAL, MOCKINGBIRD-INFESTED) JOURNALISM BIZ.

(?) ...

BTW, James Fallows is one of the country's leading "MEDIA CRITICS" ... who has yet to expose America's massive state propaganda system in its true bloody colors.
-------------
[img]
http://bp2.blogger.com/_mg7D3kYysfw/RcA ... images.jpg[/img]

Profile of DAVID BRADLEY, Owner of The Atlantic Monthly


In 2002, the Columbia Journalism Review called The Atlantic “a magazine that, under the leadership of the unusual new owner, David G. Bradley, is experiencing something of a renaissance.” Bradley later remarked that he took “unusual” to be the only convincing thought in the sentence.

A native of Washington, D.C., Bradley graduated from Swarthmore College and holds an M.B.A. from Harvard and a J.D. from Georgetown. During his early 20s, he served as a Fulbright Scholar in the Philippines.

At the age of 26, Bradley launched his first company, The Advisory Board Company, a for-profit think tank ultimately serving 4,000 corporations, financial institutions and medical centers around the world. The Advisory Board and its sister enterprise, the Corporate Executive Board, today are public companies, listed on NASDAQ. Bradley sold his ownership in the two companies soon after their public listing.

Today, Bradley owns Atlantic Media Company, the publisher of several high-end magazines and news services for the national and Washington professional classes. Company holdings include The Atlantic, National Journal, Congress Daily, Government Executive and The Hotline. Atlantic Media employs more than 350 professionals. ...


David Bradley's Wife, NPR's BARBARA BRADLEY "GOD IS MY EMPLOYER" HAGERTY, and HOWARD AHMANSON, Jr.

The Ballad of Barbara Bradley Hagerty
http://betterangels.blogspot.com/2004/0 ... gerty.html

MAY 11, 2004

A few months ago, Atrios posted about the World Journalism Institute and outed NPR religion reporter Barbara Bradley Hagerty as a member of this right-wing Christian organization.


"Escape with NPR"

People began taking a closer look at Hagerty's work, especially her recent report on John Kerry's Eucharistic Issues. Alert Eschaton readers pointed out that the seemingly "random" parishoners Hagerty spoke to were in fact conservative Catholic movers and shakers Hagerty most likely already knew. As far as I know, not one reader who wrote to NPR's Omsbudsman to complain about this has received a reply.

Something about this story still niggled at me, so I started to do some research of my own. What I found was, to say the least, enlightening:

Barbara Bradley Hagerty graduated from Williams College in 1981 with a degree in Economics. She then interned at the Christian Science Monitor and subsequently worked for the paper and its related media for 11 years. She joined NPR in 1995 as a contract reporter after having become a born-again Christian while writing a story for The LA Times Sunday Magazine. She eventually became a full-time employee, reporting on the Justice Department, the Clinton Impeachment, 9-11 and starting last year, religion, replacing Duncan Moon as religion reporter.

Her religion reporting for NPR has focused mainly on Christianity, including a report on the Christian Science Church, in which she did not disclose that she was herself a former member of the Church. (This little tidbit is revealed in "Citizen Bradley," a Washingtonian article from October 2000 about her multimillionaire brother, Atlantic owner David Bradley. The article isn't online, but is available through LexisNexis.)

In addition to her NPR gig and her deal with the World Journalism Institute, Hagerty has been keeping busy with other writing and speaking engagements. She is on the board of directors for Knowing and Doing, the magazine of the C.S.Lewis Institute, which "endeavors to develop desciples who can articulate, defend and live faith in Christ through personal and public life." (emphasis mine)

More troubling still is her association with Howard Ahmanson's Fieldstead and Co. and Fieldstead Foundation. Ahmanson is a California millionaire who uses his trust fund to finance right-wing Christian, anti-gay, anti-evolution groups and politicians. He was previously associated with Christian Reconstructionism, which advocates a Biblically-based governement for the U.S. (Neither Ahmanson nor his philanthropic endeavors have their own websites. Make of that what you will.)

Hagerty has spoken twice at the Summer Institute of Journalism, a program run by the Council for Christian Colleges and University and funded by the Fieldstead Foundation. Student reactions to her talks are here.

Hagerty's keynote address to the 2003 National Student Media Convention was also sponsored by Fieldstead and Co. In 2003 she also spoke at the Baptist Press Student Journalism Conference, along with Terry Mattingly, a Scripps-Howard reporter who is also a Fieldstead grant recipient.

One final Ahmanson-Hagerty connection: Since June of 2003, Hagerty has reported on the Episcopal Church and gay issues 20 times. (Full disclosure: I am a liberal Episcopalian) She has often quoted members of the American Anglican Council, a conservative group seeking to break away from the Episcopal Church USA and join with more orthodox Anglicans worldwide. This group receives major behind the scenes funding from...you guessed it! Howard Ahmanson. (More here.)

Eschaton reader Dreaming Feet brought the NPR Ethics Guide to my attention, especially this portion:

V. Outside work, freelancing, speaking engagements

7. NPR journalists may only accept fees from educational or nonprofit groups not engaged in significant lobbying or political activity. Determining whether a group engages in significant lobbying or political activity is the responsibility of the journalist seeking permission, and all information must be fully disclosed to the journalist's supervisor.

8. NPR journalists may not speak to groups where the journalist's appearance might put in question his or her impartiality. Such instances include situations where the employee's appearance may appear to endorse the agenda of a group or organization.

Hagerty's outside work certainly seems to violate both her employers ethics and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting's Independence and Integrity II:
The Updated Ethics Guide for Public Radio Journalism.

Hagerty likes to say that God is her "employer and audience." She's wrong. God may be her Creator and Savior, but she is employed by the millions of Americans who donate to public radio and finance NPR programming. They deserve better. Contact Jeffery Dvorkin, NPR's Omsbudsman to complain about Hagerty's blatant conflict of interest and violation of professional ethics.
---------------
Clive Crook, The Atlantic's Senior Editor

Clive Crook is a Senior Editor of The Atlantic. In addition to his work for the magazine, he writes a column for National Journal and serves as chief editorial adviser to David Bradley, the chairman of Atlantic Media Group. He was formerly on the staff of The Economist, latterly from 1993 to 2005 as deputy editor. A graduate of Oxford and the London School of Economics, he has served as a consultant to the WORLD BANK and worked as an OFFICIAL in the BRITISH TREASURY. He lives in Washington, D.C.

http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/ ... g00334.htm
-------------
In 2005, The Atlantic Moved to Washington, D.C. (as befitting a state propaganda outlet)

Boston's Atlantic hoists anchor for D.C.

>snip<

much much more MUST READ.-HMW

Thanks Hugh, that is some great stuff.

I can love/hate NPR because they illustrate how liberals are as easy to manipulate as are the conservatives.

I happen to work with radio headphones on most of the day because of power tools. It is a shitty radio so the strong signal NPR comes in the best, fancy that. 90% seems straight up designed to disinform.

Does anybody know of more organized NPR deconstruction sites?

I found; http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/2007/ ... ure_t.html

Tomorrow's Media Conspiracy Today

Esra is a professional journalist himself, so beware.

Sounder wrote:I can love/hate NPR because they illustrate how liberals are as easy to manipulate as are the conservatives.

Yup. Easier to manipulate since they are more forgiving and less suspicious in general, to stoke a stereotype. "It takes one to know one." Use art and a good vocabulary and you can nest any fascist theme covertly.

Alex Constantine pointed out the connection between NPR's religion reporter, Barbara Bradley Hagerty, and millionaire Dominionist Howard Ahmanson.

Ahmanson gets a special mention in NPR's online financial report for 2002.
http://www.npr.org/about/annualreports/npr2002.pdf

On page 19 of this pdf document you'll find at the top in orange highlights a quote from Lee Wolcott, Managing Director, the Ahmanson Foundation "upon awarding a grant to the NPR Endowment Fund for Excellence."

After the election theft of 2004, all the Mockingbird media used the cover story that "voters were concerned with values," codespeak for 'religion.'
Then religious stories became so numerous it was like EVERY channel was now 'The 700 Club.' NPR, too. And money from Ahmanson helped, no doubt.

And check out this shit from the ASsociated Press:

AP Asks: Why So Many Upset by Iraq Death Toll?

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp ... 1003526309

You'll have a field day with this one. It's brazen.

Here's the first two paragraphs of the article:

PHILADELPHIA The country largely kept the faith during World War II, even as about 400,000 U.S. forces died - 20,000 just in the month long Battle of the Bulge. Before turning against the wars in Korea and Vietnam, Americans tolerated thousands more deaths than in Iraq.

Has something changed? Do Americans somehow place higher value on the lives of their soldiers now? Do they expect success at lower cost? Or do most simply dismiss this particular war as the wrong one - hard to understand and harder to win - and so not worth the losses?

So right off the bat -- the first few words -- suggests, in fact ACCUSES us that we're not "keeping the faith".

And it just goes downhill from there. Unbefuckinglievable.

Yeah, I saw that article plus pie charts ala USA Today reminding us how many fewer AMERICAN deaths there've been in Iraq so far compared to much higher numbers in the 20th century wars.
The numbers game. Count just us and not their hundreds of thousands plus injured and traumatized and homeless and...

These psychic palliatives were trotted out after the odious odometer hit 3000 US dead.

I have a 1970 book of interviews with 32 US soldiers in Vietnam who lived through My Lai-type atrocities on an almost daily basis, some doing it and some just seeing it.
It's called 'Conversations With Americans' by Mark Lane of JFK expose fame.

Some of these US soldiers describe how the US casualty numbers were grossly under-reported due to politics. Easier to pull off with the bigger numbers in that war but it must be happening now, too.

NPR has a handful of news quiz shows running all trying to make horror seem "quirky."

Oh, and don't forget that it was NPR that stopped having Scott Ritter on and instead started promoting folk-rocker Josh Ritter who even got hooked up with the Washington Post's lead Pentagon correspondent.

Now ya can't tell me that isn't NPR pushing a 'decoy Ritter.'

Yes, I can.

NPR isn't "pushing a 'fake Ritter.'"

Whether or not you'll reconsider your wooly-minded solipsism on that point is another matter entirely, of course.

It isn't as if you haven't already been advised on the perils of undoing what is an arguably a quite meritorious argument through over-working it, Hugh.

To me, you all too often resemble a police recruit with a lightning draw and a deadeye aim, who nonetheless continues to flunk the firing range simulation because you fire at every target that pops up, seemingly unable to differentiate between a fugitive holding a weapon, and a mother pushing a baby stroller.

It would of course be irresponsible for me to recommend a brief but intensive regimen of psychedelic drugs to you, although it's perhaps the fastest and most effective method of initiating intelligent people to the merits of ontological agnosticism (i.e., disarming people of the disabling notion that they already know all that they need to know about the way the world works, "objectively".)

The problem is that such a crash course in Reality Testing would either induce you to adopt a more elastic and balanced approach to the symbolic continuum that interacts with human consciousness, or it would drive you irretrivably bonkers, and I'm not sure which outcome would ensue.

...with the usual ad hominum curmudgeonry in his best William F. Buckley Jr. accent. lol.
Nice similes, though.

So you think it is perfectly natural for a mediocre folk-rocker named Ritter to be appearing on TV and NPR as a duo with the Washington Post's lead Pentagon correspondent?:shock:

And you think I need therapy?!
I may not be right about every target but that's a bullseye. DECOY!

Perhaps you saw my thread asking you about William Joseph Bryan and keyword hijacking in your name, no less?

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board/viewtopic.php?t=11390

A couple of recent pieces on Lincoln...

Lincoln & Booth at Ford's Theater: 17 months before the assassination

Salon.com @Salon · “I know I am in danger”: Lincoln shouldn't have ignored the warnings -- or his ominous dreams http://slnm.us/a6j63Ik

“Deep Events”: The Lincoln Assassination and Cover-Up, Part of an On-Going Story

By Prof Peter Dale Scott
Global Research, April 21, 2015

The 150th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s murder is one more reminder from the past of a distinctive feature of the American system. This is that some American presidents reach office by assassination, not by election. More importantly, when this happens, a lot of facts are usually going to be left at best unexplained, and often covered up.

Few Americans know, for example, that in 1991 the body of President Zachary Taylor, who died in 1850 after a year in office, was exhumed and found to contain suspicious amounts of arsenic. But the New York Times announced that further analysis showed the amounts of arsenic were no more than what is normally found in the body, confirming that Taylor died a natural death.

Same Junk Science used in JFK Assassination

Wikipedia claims that this is proven by Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA) at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, citing an article on the Lab website that is forbidden to the public. Wikipedia does not mention that NAA analysis on the same Isotope Reactor was used four decades ago to analyze the bullets killing John F. Kennedy. (The use of NAA analysis of lead in bullets, once used to bolster the “single bullet theory” of Lee Harvey Oswald’s guilt, has since been decisively discredited by other U.S. Government experts at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. In September 2005 the FBI announced that it would no longer rely in criminal cases on the inaccurate evidence produced by comparative bullet lead analysis.)

Even more mysteries surround the assistance provided Lincoln’s assassin, John Wilkes Booth. In a recent article, the Washington Post described Booth as “embittered,” the term used by Psychology Today to “analyze” Lee Harvey Oswald. Other more scholarly studies have argued that Booth was originally plotting not the murder but the abduction of Lincoln, Vice-President Johnson, and Secretary of State Seward. This was part of a coherent strategy to throw the determination of the next president into the hands of the Supreme Court, where Chief Justice Roger Taney had already shown in the Dred Scott case that he was pro-slavery and sympathetic to the South.

Speculation of a cover-up about Booth has abounded since the time that four of his associates in the crime were swiftly hanged. A benign explanation for the cover-up would be the desire to avoid dealing with the possibility that Booth had been guided or at least assisted in his plotting by the Confederate Secret Service. This was suspected almost immediately when a Vigenère Cipher table (a code used by the South) was discovered among Booth’s effects. At that time a strong need to restore unity to a divided nation would have been an ample motive to present Booth, like Oswald a century later, as an embittered loner.

It is now pretty well established, by historian Thomas Goodrich and others, that Booth had traveled widely to Canada and elsewhere as a spy and courier for the Confederate Secret Service. Other historians have concluded, in the words of David Herbert Donald, that “at least at the lower levels of the Southern secret service, the abduction of the Union President was under consideration.”

Whether Booth was following orders in his activities or was acting on his own is less clear. But it is certain that Booth was able to elude capture for 12 days after the assassination by using safe houses in Virginia along an escape route which the Confederate Secret Service had previously organized.

The cover-up about Booth has long survived any original motive for it. Only in the last half century have we begun to see books like William Tidwell’s Come Retribution: The Confederate Secret Service and the Assassination of Lincoln. Yet from time to time we still continue to hear from authors like Jim Bishop and Bill O’Reilly, who write profitable best-sellers, one arguing that Booth, the other that Oswald, was essentially a loner.

An egregious attempt to present Booth as a loner was that of former CIA Director Allen Dulles, at an early executive session of the Warren Commission on January 16, 1964. Dulles explained that, according to a book he was handing out to members of the Commission, European assassinations were the work of conspiracies—but American assassins acted alone.

Given that two of Booth’s targets, Lincoln and Seward, were attacked almost simultaneously in different parts of the city (Seward was stabbed by Lewis Powell in his bed during the Lincoln assassination), John J. McCloy promptly objected, arguing that “the Lincoln assassination was a plot.” Undeterred, Dulles shot right back: “Yes, but one man was so dominant that it almost wasn’t a plot.” Dulles was using his authority to indicate what he thought the Commission should conclude. Seven months later the Warren Report amply fulfilled his wish and declared that the death of Kennedy was, too, the work of a loner.

Same Old Story—False, Ongoing, and Interconnected

Dulles’s intervention indicates to me that American cover-ups of what I call “deep events”—events about which we are denied the truth—are themselves an on-going and interconnected story. For example: in a special section of the Warren Report, written to discredit “Speculations and Rumors” of a possible conspiracy in JFK’s death, Commission staffer Alfred Goldberg began by noting that:

“Myths have traditionally surrounded the dramatic assassinations of history. The rumors and theories about the assassination of Abraham Lincoln that are still being publicized were for the most part first bruited within months of his death.”

Goldberg is also co-author of Pentagon 9/11 which is, possibly, another example of an ongoing coverup.

Goldberg was quite right in acknowledging the persistence of myths about assassinations. And we will never move beyond myths to a clearer understanding of what took place, who ultimately was responsible, what it meant, and how best to restore democracy to this country, until we fully grasp the role of Allen Dulles and others like him in sustaining those myths.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/deep-event ... ry/5444190

Here are a few of the better This American Life segments ..

This American Life: The Convert

and ..

MinM » Thu Mar 08, 2012 1:38 pm wrote:

Hugh Manatee Wins wrote:Good find, jingofever. You might change the thread title to reflect that this is Gary Webb's book list. I wonder what year he put this up.

My two books would both be exposes of how the CIA worked to entrench the military-industrial-media complex in the 20th century written by two men who were in a unique position to see the big CIA picture instead of just the compartmentalized view-

1) 1973 book by L. Fletcher Prouty (available online), the Pentagon-CIA liason from 1955-1964, 'The Secret Team: The CIA and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World.'

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/ST.html

(This man is the reason for the decoy 'Fletch' novels and movies. A new one is coming out in 2007 because Prouty helped expose CIA men in Dealey Plaza and it is anniversary time for JFK's murder.)

2) 1974 book by Victor Marchetti and John D. Marks called 'The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence.' Marchetti had been executive assistant to the deputy director of Central Intelligence and attended regular planning meetings along with Richard Helms. Marchetti had also been a courier for the Agency group that plans covert operations.

http://www.amazon.com/CIA-Cult-Intellig ... 700&sr=1-1

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

Here's Gary Webb's Amazon.com list-
The Way the World Really Works
A Listmania! list by Gary S. Webb (Sacramento, CA)

1. Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion by Gary Webb
Gary S. Webb says:
"My own modest contribution"


2. The Rise and Fall of Diamonds: The Shattering of a Brilliant Illusion by Edward Jay Epstein
Gary S. Webb says:
"Astounding look at what good public relations can accomplish."

3. Endless Enemies: Americas Worldwide War Against Its Own Best Interests. by Jonathan Kwitny
Gary S. Webb says:
"A former Wall Street Journal reporter, Kwitny was one of the best investigative journalists ever; this book is a mind-blowing expose of US foreign policy."

4. Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House by Seymour M. Hersh
Gary S. Webb says:
"From another giant of investigative reporting. A meticulous indictment of an extremely dangerous man."

5. Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich by William L. Shirer
Gary S. Webb says:
"My nominee as the most impressive work of pure journalism of the 20th Century."

6. The Hidden History of the Korean War, 1950-1951: A Nonconformist History of Our Times by I. F. Stone
Gary S. Webb says:
"Stone's legendary expose of the secrets reasons behind the Korean War -- written while the war and McCarthyism were in full swing. Truly inspired and courageous reporting."

7. The Guns of August by Barbara W. Tuchman
Gary S. Webb says:
"Lively, shocking, appalling and addictively readable account of military folly. One of the best works of non-fiction written."

8. Into the Buzzsaw: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press by Kristina Borjesson
Gary S. Webb says:
"Details the lingering death of investigative reporting"

9. Secret Agenda: Watergate, Deep Throat, and the CIA by Jim Hougan
Gary S. Webb says:
"The most intriguing Watergate book out there. An unjustly neglected work of serious journalism."

10. Nam: The Vietnam War in the Words of the Men and Women Who Fought There by Mark Baker
Gary S. Webb says:
"Vietnam uncensored and verbatim."

11. INSIDE THE COMPANY: CIA DIARY by Philip Agee
Gary S. Webb says:
"Former CIA agent's tell-all book about CIA dirty tricks in South America during the 1960s. ." ...

viewtopic.php?p=117499#p117499

While looking for something else I came across this list by Gary Webb. It's a little surprising to see that Webb was taken in by the likes of Seymour Hersh and Edward Jay Epstein.

The Spartacus Forum has a recent thread on Hersh:

Reznikoff and Hersh hoodwinked by fake documents | The Education Forum

Originally aired 02.11.2011
427: Original Recipe | This American Life

Act Two. Ask Not What Your Handwriting Authenticator Can Do for You; Ask What You Can Do for Your Handwriting Authenticator.

Jake Halpern tells this story about document expert John Reznikoff, who came into possession of some materials which—if authentic—would change history. Then things got complicated. Jake is the author of several books, including World's End. (32 minutes)

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-a ... nal-recipe

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index ... opic=17385

BTW npr's show On the Media which is ostensibly dedicated to highlight some of the more egregious cases of journalistic malpractice has yet to mention one word about the Richard Engle kidnapping false flag.

One last thing bringing it back to the op .. that line from the Salon story .. "I know I am in Danger" .. could have been taken right from the RFK story ..

MinM » Sun May 13, 2012 8:54 pm wrote:

...each of the subsequent high-profile targets had serious, almost haunting premonitions about their own deaths. They, like JFK, had received so many death threats, they had to have known the day would come. Their choice was to either cower or stand up for their convictions and carry on, until the inevitable day came. In the case of JFK, my post is pure speculation and pretty far out. But sometimes if you don't get the words outta your head they give you a cranial throb.

MLK: "I've been to the mountaintop...I may not get there with you...Tonight I'm not fearing any man..." Within twelve hours or so he was dead.

Malcolm: The day before he got shot his good friend Earl Grant actually invited him to spend the night at his apartment but Malcolm refused: "You have a family," said Malcolm. "I don't want anyone hurt on my account. I always knew it would end like this."

RFK: In late May, (1968) he slipped off to director John Frankenheimer's Malibu beach house with some Hollywood glitterati, including Shirley MacLaine, Warren Beatty, Jean Seberg and Seberg's novelist husband, Romain Gary. Unable to leave Kennedy alone, Gary accosted him: "You know, don't you, that somebody is going to kill you?" Kennedy fended him off with fatalism. "That's the chance I have to take," he said.

Edited by Mark Valenti, 24 May 2007 - 10:33 PM

Hugh Manatee Wins » Sat Apr 07, 2007 6:15 pm wrote:National Propaganda Radio's weekend programs are rich with misdirection and disinfo. Even 'This American Life' uses subliminal themes, natch.

Today, three days after the 39th anniversary of the FBI murder of Martin Luther King on 4/4/68, we were treated to a Saturday program about the conspiracy theories around the murder of President Lincoln on April 14, 1865.

>The woman host introducing the segment began deriding conspiracy theories with the "everyone LOVES a conspiracy theory no matter how disproven or improbable" theme.

>Then she went on and on with the theme "who can ever keep a secret?"

>Then she said that since 'someone always talks' that we KNOW about the real conspiracies, y'see.

After this misdirecting introduction the show proceeded to an audio re-enactment of Booth sneaking up on Lincoln and shooting him complete with a play sounding like a sit-com with roaring crowd in the background.

Nothing on JFK, MLK, or RFK. Of course.

Listen to NPR on weekends and you will hear 'master craftsmen' working out on the PBS demographic. lol.[/b]

I thought the Lincoln assassination was a conspiracy. I guess they were just testing the gallows when they hanged those folks, including the first woman executed in American history.

As for "public" media in general, I stopped watching History Detectives (online) when the first episode of their new version, to "solve" historical questions, discounted a particular version of events (the sinking of a Civil War era ship) because it was a "conspiracy theory." I don't think these folks even realize how idiotic this sounds any more. The engrammatic (yes, Mr. Spellcheck, this is a word) pathways have been so reinforced in recent years that it feels like rational thought.

As for "someone talking," in all of these cases someone did talk, or tried to talk, and ended up dead, thus dissuading others from talking. The Dorothy Kilgallen "suicide" comes to mind. Do these media twits even understand the concept of political murder? The only question that remains in my mind is whether these are tools of the establishment or simply idiots of the first water.

Lord Balto » Mon Apr 27, 2015 7:25 am wrote:As for "public" media in general, I stopped watching History Detectives (online) when the first episode of their new version, to "solve" historical questions, discounted a particular version of events (the sinking of a Civil War era ship) because it was a "conspiracy theory." I don't think these folks even realize how idiotic this sounds any more. The engrammatic (yes, Mr. Spellcheck, this is a word) pathways have been so reinforced in recent years that it feels like rational thought...

History Detectives nearly went all the way there in a subsequent episode. When they all but claimed that the CIA was behind Jimmy Hoffa's murder (Sam Giancana's and Johnny Roselli's too):

MinM » Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:57 pm wrote:This was the only search result for the name Russell Bufalino on the entire RI forum. Ran a search for his name after watching an episode of PBS' History Detectives in which they named him as suspect #1 in ordering the hit on Jimmy Hoffa (they also left open the likelihood of CIA involvement).

Apparently, as with this forum, Bufalino had managed to fly below the radar even as a Philly/NY mob boss. That is until the summer of 1975 when HMW's friends at CIA Time Magazine ran a story that (tipped-off) fingered Bufalino as a mob boss with CIA-ties. Shortly thereafter the 3 guys that could have verified this information (Sam Giancana, Johnny Roselli, and Jimmy Hoffa) were all killed just prior to scheduled testimony before the Church Committee.

So thank you to judasdisney (wherever you are ) for putting Russell Bufalino on the RI radar over six years ago.

http://www.rgj.com/story/life/2014/07/2 ... /12970871/

http://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetective ... mmy-hoffa/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025308872#post10

MinM » Mon Apr 27, 2015 6:15 pm wrote:

Lord Balto » Mon Apr 27, 2015 7:25 am wrote:As for "public" media in general, I stopped watching History Detectives (online) when the first episode of their new version, to "solve" historical questions, discounted a particular version of events (the sinking of a Civil War era ship) because it was a "conspiracy theory." I don't think these folks even realize how idiotic this sounds any more. The engrammatic (yes, Mr. Spellcheck, this is a word) pathways have been so reinforced in recent years that it feels like rational thought...

History Detectives nearly went all the way there in a subsequent episode. When they all but claimed that the CIA was behind Jimmy Hoffa's murder (Sam Giancana's and Johnny Roselli's too):

MinM » Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:57 pm wrote:This was the only search result for the name Russell Bufalino on the entire RI forum. Ran a search for his name after watching an episode of PBS' History Detectives in which they named him as suspect #1 in ordering the hit on Jimmy Hoffa (they also left open the likelihood of CIA involvement).

Apparently, as with this forum, Bufalino had managed to fly below the radar even as a Philly/NY mob boss. That is until the summer of 1975 when HMW's friends at CIA Time Magazine ran a story that (tipped-off) fingered Bufalino as a mob boss with CIA-ties. Shortly thereafter the 3 guys that could have verified this information (Sam Giancana, Johnny Roselli, and Jimmy Hoffa) were all killed just prior to scheduled testimony before the Church Committee.

So thank you to judasdisney (wherever you are ) for putting Russell Bufalino on the RI radar over six years ago.

http://www.rgj.com/story/life/2014/07/2 ... /12970871/

http://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetective ... mmy-hoffa/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025308872#post10

Funny, I just watched the Hoffa episode to see if they had mended their ways, and my take-away was that they thought he had been murdered by the mob (shades of the [in my opinion] ridiculous mob theory of the J Kennedy assassination flogged by Thom Hartmann). They mention Cuban ties and suggest, if memory serves, that Bufalino was embarrassed by the story in Time Magazine and sent everyone who could confirm the story to "Australia": I found their reasoning on this latter point rather fuzzy. I don't recall their suggesting that the CIA directly murdered Hoffa, though I must admit the idea occurred to me as I was watching the show and it's understandable that one could read this into the story if one were of that state of mind.

As for Time Magazine, it is my impression that corporate media like Life, Time, and Fortune do as much to influence the CIA as the other way around. I cannot really imagine Henry Luce taking orders from anyone.

Beyond that, I found the obvious staging of scenes in the show itself to be particularly blatant, almost embarrassing. Unlike shows like This Old House, where the acting is much less blatant, there is an obvious air of the staged to this program. One wonders what the back story is to the abrupt exit of two of the original cast members. Could it be that they refused to be associated with such a politically motivated production?

I'm really lucky. My rabbit ears hooked to the old CRT TV can't pick up the local "public" teevee station. I think the signal went to hell when I sold my Volvo station wagon with the ski rack on top.