From jad@ckuxb.att.com  Ukn Jan 27 11:59:41 1993
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
	id AA21485; Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:59:38 -0500
Message-Id: <9301271659.AA21485@css.itd.umich.edu>
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:37 EST
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Article 13680 of alt.individualism:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part I, DANIEL SHEEHAN: CIA Agents Infest U.S. Mass Media
Message-ID: <1992Nov11.124208.11887@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Keywords: Daniel Sheehan: CIA Agents Infest U.S. Mass Media 
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 12:42:08 GMT
Lines: 135


        I made the following transcript from a tape recording 
        of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
               WBAI-FM (99.5)
               505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
               New York, NY 10018       (212) 279-0707

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
GARY NULL:
The Public's right to know is not always what the Public ends up
getting. The Public frequently gets such one-sided, biased 
information -- and not just from the mass media. It's easy to have
a long arm that protects the special interest groups: this kind
of a "one world family" of insiders that is capable of affecting
federal judges, U.S. attorneys, to slant or obstruct justice, to
hide or cover up crucial information, and to interfere with our
liberties.

Daniel Sheehan, as much as any attorney in the United States, and
the Christic Institute have taken it upon themselves to try to
challenge some of these injustices and to give us the information
that they have distilled from their work that gives us a different
perspective. Unfortunately, rare is it that any of the mainstream
media covers the work of the Christic Institute or of Daniel Sheehan.
And if they did, it would be a very enlightened Public who would be
benefiting from this. Welcome to our program, Daniel Sheehan.

DANIEL SHEEHAN:
Thank you, Gary. 

GARY NULL:
Daniel, earlier on, one of our guests was talking about -- and I'd
like for you to follow through on this theme -- that what we're told 
in the media (and what we're told officially from Government sources) 
and what is the truth are frequently at varying degrees against
each other. Give us one specific .....

DANIEL SHEEHAN:
That's absolutely true. There has been a major campaign on the part
of the Central Intelligence Agency, for example, to place Central
Intelligence Agency agents, trained agents, IN various news media
posts. We've found the documents on this. It was called "Operation
Mocking Bird". And they placed Central Intelligence Agency operatives
in places like TIME Magazine and LIFE Magazine, the New York Times,
inside CBS and ABC News.

Originally, the intent of "Operation Mocking Bird" was to make certain
that these major media outlets reflected an adequately anti-communist
perspective. And then, of course, as they became entrenched and
in-place, any time the Central Intelligence Agency wanted a story
killed or distorted they would just contact their agents inside.
Now they have bragged openly in private memos back and forth inside
the Agency about how proud they are of having really important
"assets" inside virtually every major news media in the United States.
And I've encountered this repeatedly.

For example, the Chief National Security Correspondent for TIME
Magazine, Bruce Van Voorst[sp], is a regular Central Intelligence
Agency officer.  It turns out that Ben Bradlee from the Washington
Post was a regular Central Intelligence Agency officer prior to
coming to his post at the Washington Post.

     [JD: Once CIA, always CIA, unless they go public (e.g. Agee,
          Stockwell, McGehee, MacMichael, Marchetti, Riconosciuto, etc.)]

Bob Woodward at the Washington Post was the Point-Briefer for 
U.S. Naval Intelligence of the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff before he went
over to the Washington Post. 

     [JD: If anyone can summarize or make direct transcripts from
      published sources attesting to the CIA's subornation of such 
      journalists as Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather regarding the
      cover-up of the assassination of President Kennedy, please
      post it as a follow-up to this article. I know, from my own 
      observations of the Watergate scandal, that Dan Rather was the
      most vociferous attacker of Richard Nixon throughout that 
      long series of press conferences punctuating the process of
      what we now know to be a CIA-sponsored soft-coup -- the second 
      CIA coup d'etat in recent history.]  

We find these people constantly in the news media and, as I may
have pointed out to you in one of your shows, when the New York
Times was refusing to print any information about Oliver North and
Richard Secord [President Reagan's assistants], Albert Hakim and
Rob Owen, and all of these other men who, throughout 1985 and
1986, were engaged in this MASSIVE criminal conspiracy to violate
the Boland Amendment prohibiting any weapons shipments to the
Contras, and who were involved in smuggling TOW missiles to Iran ....
as this information was being communicated to the New York Times by
sources that we had, the New York Times absolutely refused to print
any of this. And the reason for it was, according to Keith Schneider
-- who was one of the reporters assigned to at least address this
stuff and look into it .... he said that they were refusing to
print any of it because their high-level sources inside the Central
Intelligence Agency refused to confirm the stories.

Now, that kind of relationship between self-conscious "assets" of
the Covert Operations Director of the Central Intelligence Agency,
a political police force on an international level, if you will,
and an economic police force to protect the ostensible economic
interests of United States industries .... to place those people
inside a news media -- which, under the First Amendment, ostensibly
has the responsibility to critique and investigate potential
injustices on the part of the State, inside the Government -- 
is an extraordinarily dangerous development here in the United States.

GARY NULL:
Thank you for that insight.  Could you also give us some
understanding of one case in particular (if you could highlight it)
that you're privy to, to show how we can export a form of terrorism,
we can support movements to destabilize DEMOCRACIES in any country
whose position we don't choose to support, where multi-national
corporations' interests may feel threatened and, as a result,
we'll use our various branches of Government to thwart the local
populace, invade their sovereignty, disrupt their complete
political system, and how they manipulate the stories in the 
Press so that it's NEVER the way that we're told it is.

DANIEL SHEEHAN:
Well, for example, I think one of the most obvious stories is about
the democratic socialist Government of Chile under Salvador Allende,
when he was popularly elected by a significant majority of the
populace in Chile, under a hundred-year-old democracy down there.
Now the confidential documents make it perfectly evident that the
Nixon Administration and Richard Helms [Director] of the Central
Intelligence Agency and Henry Kissinger, the National Security
Advisor, began a MAJOR covert campaign to attempt to destroy that
country. 

They mounted what they called the "Track One" and "Track Two"
strategies. The "Track One" strategy was to engage in an overt
political propaganda campaign against the Allende Government:
criticizing him constantly, attacking his economic programs,
attempting to give money through A.I.D. and certain other
above-the-table programs to counter the democratic socialist, or
mixed economy that was being advocated by Allende. Politically, it
was a completely democratic process, but economically, they were
looking for alternative mechanisms for stimulating the economy,
having some industries supervised by democratic governmental forces,
and others left completely in the private sector. This "Track One"

This "Track One" program, however, was not allowed to be the only
mechanism by means of which the Nixon Administration tried to destabilize
the Governmment. They had an ultra-covert program called "Track Two," 
and under this program, coordinated by Kissinger and the Central
Intelligence Agency under Richard Helms, they did such things as,
for example, they had two operatives of the Director of Latin
American Affairs for the Central Intelligence Agency, one being
Theodore G. Shackley, from 1971 all the way up to 1973. They, in
fact, ran the "Track Two" operation wherein they did such things as
physically kidnap the Chief-of-Staff of President Salvador Allende,
General Schneider and had him ASSASSINATED. They also met covertly
with the military forces under Ernesto Pinochet, a virtual fascist
inside the military, to plan and plot a military overthrow of the
democratically elected government, which they pulled off in September
of 1973. And they ultimately assassinated President Salvador Allende.

They then pursued the Ambassador of the democratic Government of
Chile in the United States. In fact, they tracked him down and
assassinated him right on the main streets of Washington, D.C.
They blew up his car and killed him.

     [JD: The murder victims were Ambassador Orlando Letelier and
      his American secretary, Ronnie Moffit. 

Now that kind of activity was being conducted by the Central
Intelligence Agency all the way up to and through 1976 when George
Bush was the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. It was in
1976 that the Chilean Ambassador to the United States, from the
former democratic Government, was assassinated. That democratic
Government was overthrown by Ernesto Pinochet and a military
dictatorship was established down in Chile.

These are the kinds of activities that they [the CIA] have been
engaged in for a long time. They have done this pursuant to a
doctrine which was enunciated back in 1954 under a secret commission,
that was set up inside the Central Intelligence Agency, known as 
"the Doolittle Commission". And they articulated -- in a classified
document which has now been obtained by the Christic Institute --
stating very specifically that they were engaged in a secret war
against forces of socialism and communism which had an alternative
economic theory of development. And they said that it was necessary
to combat these forces with any and all means necessary. And it
said in the report that it was going to be necessary to abandon the
normal standards of decency and fair play, that are believed in by
the American Public, in order to defeat these forces of socialism
and communism. And therefore, it's going to become inevitably
necessary to CAUSE the People of the United States to come to grips
with the need to abandon these traditional standards of decency;
and that that was going to be part of the obligation of the Central
Intelligence Agency: to, subtly and over time, persuade the American
Public that it was naive and impossible to adhere to these standards
and principles of honesty and decency in the international theater.

DANIEL SHEEHAN:
And that, of course, was what were the high halcyon days of this
under George Bush, when he was the Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency, and a little bit earlier when Richard Nixon
was the President of the United States. And when you have that kind
of attitude toward the rest of the world, it becomes inevitable, of
course, that that kind of infection tends to feed back into the
domestic policies of the United States, such that you have Richard
Nixon engaging the "Plumbers" unit, and the others who began to use
espionage and basically terrorist tactics against the domestic
citizenry of the United States: infiltrating Black civil rights
organizations, the feminist organizations, the anti-war groups.
And, in fact, they began playing dirty tricks on them: writing
false memos, accusing the leaders of certain movements of 
committing adultery, or of having affairs with other people inside
[their organizations]; consciously attempting to disrupt and to
destroy any type of democratic [any LEGAL] citizens' organization
that took a position that was contrary to the position advocated
SECRETLY by the Central Intelligence Agency.

That's the kind of infection that is at the heart of the democratic
principles of our nation that we still see manifesting in things
like the Iran-Contra Scandal with Oliver North and Richard Secord
and the others who, in fact, secretly defied all of our democratic
institutions: the resolutions of the Congress, the clearly
enunciated voice of the majority of the people of our country who
did not want to support the Contras in Latin America who were the
former military national guard officers of the dictator Anastasio
Samoza in Nicaragua. And so, these men went underground and
undertook criminal covert warfare which inevitably led them into
seeking illicit sources of money, since they couldn't get it from
the tax monies of the American People. And they ended up
establishing alliances with the Colombian cocaine cartel, that is
still in the news, even as of this morning, with Pablo Escobar
fighting his way out of his own luxury prison to escape.

We have this kind of history, tracking all the way from the end of
the Second World War in 1945 and 1946, all the way up to today, the
very day that we're speaking here, with manifestations of this type
of criminal undercover alliance that they have. And it is hacking
at the very heart of the institutions of democracy.

GARY NULL:
Thank you, Dan, for that explanation.  I'm wondering at what point
we will also begin to connect the corporate structures that function
as a government policy think-tank, frequently in the multi-national
corporations in different countries, that decide that THEIR use of
the natural resources, THEIR use of the cheap labor, THEIR use of
the local population, THEIR general support of the dictators,
all of this is in THEIR economic best interests. And then, if there
is any dissent .... if there is any journalistic dissent, political
dissent, social dissent, that they can then contact THEIR friends
in OUR State Department who then use OUR Defense Department as a
weapon of foreign policy to protect the interests of these
multi-national corporations.

Then they whip the media into a frenzy, always showing THEIR side.
But it is never an honest projection, so that when we do intervene,
we can violate the national sanctity of other countries, just like
we did with Grenada and Nicaragua and El Salvador [worst of all,
with Panama and Iraq] and these other countries.

DANIEL SHEEHAN:
Well, there are a number of very stark examples of this, of course.
Historically, Gary, one of the most transparent is the action
taken against Guatemala in 1954 wherein the United Fruit Company,
a member of the board of directors of which was the Director of
the Central Intelligence Agency, Allen Dulles, the brother of John
Foster Dulles who, in fact, was the Secretary of State of the
United States [under Eisenhower]. His brother, Allen was the
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and a member of the
board of Directors of United Fruit Company, which owned VAST land
holdings in the country of Guatemala, which had been SEIZED from
the peasants by a major military government that was basically
installed and kept in power by covert means of the Central
Intelligence Agency.

When, in fact, the citizenry of Guatemala had organized themselves
and had, in fact, installed a democratic government in Guatemala
under Arbanes[sp], the Central Intelligence Agency coordinated a
major covert alliance with elements of the military in Guatemala
and undertook a military seizure of the government in 1954.
That was coordinated by E. Howard Hunt [paymaster to the assassins
of President Kennedy].

Now, that overthrow was, for one of the major reasons, to reinstall
the United Fruit Company because the new democratic government
under Arbanes had begun to question the legitimacy of the United
Fruit Company to hold hundreds of thousands of acres of irrigatable
land under the control of growing bananas for export, instead of
allowing the peasants -- who had originally owned all of that land
which had been illegitimately seized by the military government --
to be reinstated with the possession of their land.

So, it was very clear, in that particular instance, that there is a
direct relationship between the economic interests of a privately-
owned, profit-making company, the United Fruit Company, and American
foreign policy, which was undertaken covertly and criminally by the
Central Intelligence Agency, at the helm of which was a member of
the board of directors of the United Fruit Company.

Now, those things have happened again and again. We have examples
in Panama. We have examples in, of course, El Salvador, and we have
examples in Nicaragua. There's some very unheralded writing in
books about this. There's a former general of the United States
Marine Corps, a man named Smedley Butler, who led three of the
expeditionary forces of the United States Military into Nicaragua
back during the 1930s. And he eventually -- from direct experience
on the ground -- came to his own personal conclusion that he could
no longer participate in doing those kinds of things because, as he
said, he realized that he was just a gun-thug for Brown Brothers-
Harriman, the major American capital investment corporation.

DANIEL SHEEHAN:
General Smedley Butler couldn't do this anymore, so he retired from
the United States Marine Corps and eventually led a major movement
in the United States to try to stop this kind of thing. In fact,
when Franklin Roosevelt was elected President, major economic
interests in the United States attempted to recruit General Smedley
Butler to lead a military coup against the United States because
there were large elements in the banking industry -- Jay P. Morgan
and all the way up to and including the father of John F. Kennedy,
Joseph P. Kennedy -- who, in fact, were EXTREMELY sympathetic to
the state capitalist system that was being set up by Hitler and the
Nazi Party in Germany. There were major investments being made.

There were a number of books written, giving great detail about the
kind of support that existed in very high-level industrial and
banking circles in the United States, through the 1930s, for this
peculiar concept of economics in government called "state
capitalism," whereby you don't really have just simple private
industry. And you don't have private enterprise and free
enterprise. What you have, instead, is a system by means of which
the organs of the state -- of the government -- gather tax money
from the average people and they transfer it to the private
companies that are owned by these few families. And they subsidize
those companies, whether they be major weapons industries,
ball-bearing factories, rolling-steel plants, etc.  Major heavy
industry is subsized by the hard-earned taxed salaries of average
working citizens. And they attempt to take away the risks of owning
and running huge private businesses like that under the theory that
those businesses are so big and so powerful that they need to be
kept healthy and stable by the tools of the state and the organs of
the state for the general health of the country.

So, that's what they do. That's what they did in Germany throughout
the 1930s. That was the basic thesis behind what they called
"national socialism" [naziism], which was -- from a purely
political science point-of-view and in economic analysis -- a
system of "state capitalism." 

GARY NULL:
But that's also one of the tenets of this "new world order."

DANIEL SHEEHAN:
That's exactly right!

GARY NULL:
People should understand where it's coming from. The same
architects of this old capitalist system are now the architects of
this new capitalist system.

Daniel Sheehan, I want to thank you very much for sharing insights
with us, as always, lucid and in-depth. And I appreciate your
participation. Could you please give us the phone number of the
Christic Institute?

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

     This is one of countless stories unveiling the deeply corrupted     
     and subverted state of our theoretically democratic Government.  
     This story makes disgustingly obvious the fact that patriotism
     is not the waving of flags, the tying of yellow ribbons and the 
     mindless support of the Government, just because it happens to be ours.
     You don't support cancer just because you happen to have it.
     Patriotism is telling the truth to the people of our country
     in order that they may unite to conquer the anti-democratic
     cancer that is gradually destroying ours and our children's
     freedom. So please post the installments of this ongoing series
     to other bulletin boards, and post hardcopies in public places,
     both on and off campus.  That would be a truly patriotic deed.
---
   The Christic Institute has recently suffered devastating
   blows from a vicious vendetta launched by the same treasonous 
   criminals, ensconced in our Federal Government, whom the
   Christic Institute has been suing for egregious violations of 
   United States laws -- crimes such as narcotics importation and
   the terrorist LaPenca bombing, which killed American journalist 
   Linda Frazier and wounded another American jounalist, Tony 
   Avirgan. The Christic Institute has evidence showing that the
   LaPenca bombing was perpetrated by the corporate-CIA under one 
   of its officers named John Hull. The Christic lawsuit was met 
   by retaliatory Federal fines designed to bankrupt the Christic
   Institute and to hold it up as an example, for all to see, that
   this is the punishment that citizens can expect whenever they
   dare to interfere with the criminals who usurp the People's 
   Government.
 
   The Christic Institute is still alive, however, but in
   desperate need of help from those few Americans of conscience
   who still exist in today's selfish society.  Please call the 
   Christic Institute at 1(310) 287-1556 in Los Angeles, even if
   it's just to offer a word of support.
----
      Over the years, we've been given purposeful treatments of
      visual thought-control via the cinema and television screens.
      A recent attempt to expunge the historical truth by washing 
      from the American viewer's brain any notion that the CIA just
      might be the real terrorist force that is murdering and torturing
      without provocation is the propaganda flick, PATRIOT GAMES.

      Now here we have an innocent CIA agent who is forced by Irish
      terrorists to retaliate with utter viciousness, even though
      it goes against his instinctive sense of decency. And this 
      mythical two-dimensional screen fabrication is supposed to
      cover up the three-dimensional reality of the typical real-
      life CIA agent's atrocities, which involve smuggling narcotics
      to the streets of United States cities, torturing and massacring 
      oppressed peasants in Central America, perpetrating terrorist
      bombings in public places, assassinating the people's elected
      leaders and installing naziistic dictators in their places,
      poisoning the food and water supplies of populaces,
      planning, provoking and leading the holocaust in Angola, 
      wherein two hundred thousand peasants were slaughtered ....

      So, if combatting terrorists is a "PATRIOT'S GAME," then
      the CIA, as the world's dominant terrorist organization, is a
      gang of TRAITORS. Every loyal CIA agent routinely desecrates
      his/her country's principles of "liberty and justice for all"
      -- not out of necessity, but because the CIA has historically 
      been commandeered as a weapon by the ruling elite to seize 
      possession and power over foreign natural and human resources.

      Don't allow the CIA's "assets" -- moguls in the film industry --
      to betray and deceive the movie-going public who enrich them.
      Loyal CIA agents are not "patriots." They are TRAITORS.
----
        Right now, Daniel Sheehan and the Christic Institute are trying
        to recover from a one-and-a-half million dollar fine imposed on them
        by the criminals in the Government who were being targeted by a
        Christic lawsuit charging CIA officer John Hull with the terrorist
        LaPenca bombing which killed American journalist Linda Frazier
        and wounded another American journalist, Tony Avirgan.

        Please help the Christic Institute to get back on its feet and
        continue fighting in defense of ours and our children's Constitution. 
        Please call them in Los Angeles at 1(310) 287-1556,
        if only to voice your moral support.

        John DiNardo