Ivo Daalder
CIA LEAK: JUDITH MILLER OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD ASSET!
Mon Oct 17, 2005 14:13
64.140.159.52
CIA LEAK: JUDITH MILLER OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD ASSET!
MOCKINGBIRD
The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html
Miller's Security Clearance
By Ivo Daalder | bio
From: America Abroad
Having now waded through The Times's articles on Judy Miller, one new fact struck me as particularly bizarre -- Miller, by her own admission, was cleared to see secret information as part of her assignment as an "embedded" reporter in Iraq.
I had no idea journalists could receive security clearances -- and I had no idea that the mainstream media would allow their reporters to have such clearances. After all, one of the most important obligations of a person receiving security clearances is not to reveal that information at any time, while one of the most important obligations of a reporter is precisely to reveal information the public has a need and right to know.
Can someone explain why this glaring conflict of interest is acceptable? And does anyone know whether Miller's clearance was an exception or whether this is a common practice in journalistic circles, be it today or in the past? And, finally, as I note below the fold, could it be that this fact becomes the key to Libby's defense?
Oct 16, 2005 -- 11:22:38 AM EST
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/10/16/112238/93
---------------------------------------------
Monday, October 17, 2005
http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/
Dr. Yes?
Seems like our boy Fitz is asking an awful lot of questions about Dick Cheney lately. From an awful lot of staffers who might be in the know on an awful lot of things.
This morning's Bloomberg contains an intriguing story that details questions being asked by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald of a series of witnesses who have either cooperated with FBI investigators and the prosecutor and given statements or who have been called before the Grand Jury to testify under oath.
Fitzgerald has questioned Cheney's communications adviser Catherine Martin and former spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise and ex-White House aide Jim Wilkinson about the vice president's knowledge of the anti-Wilson campaign and his dealings on it with Libby, his chief of staff, the people said. The information came from multiple sources, who requested anonymity because of the secrecy and political sensitivity of the investigation.This, coming on the heels of the Judy Miller expose series in the NY Times and the WSJ, cannot be good news for an Administration already reeling from sagging poll numbers and Karl Rove and Scooter Libby feeling substantial heat.
Traitorgate officianados will no doubt remember that Ms. Miller was also asked about the role of VP Cheney and his connection with his Chief of Staff Scooter Libby in disseminating the fact that Valerie Plame Wilson worked for the CIA in its WINPAC division. (WINPAC consists of a group of undercover analysts and covert agents, some of whom are NOC status, who work on issues of non-conventional weapons, including those used by terrorists as weapons of mass destruction.)
It certainly doesn't help when you have Miller's attorney saying something like this on yesterday's This Week on ABC:
``Fitzgerald is putting together a big case,'' Washington attorney Robert Bennett, who represents Miller, said on the ABC-TV program ``This Week'' yesterday.
Well, that doesn't lend itself to good sleep going into a Monday, now does it?
There is a possibility that it may not stop at Number 2, either, although most reports have said that is a more remote possibility based on leaks that have come from witnesses in the case thus far.
Fitzgerald, 45, has also questioned administration officials about any knowledge Bush may have had of the campaign against Wilson. Yet most administration observers have noted that on Iraq, as with most matters, it's Cheney who has played the more hands-on role.
One lawyer intimately involved in the case, who like the others demanded anonymity, said one reason Fitzgerald was willing to send Miller to jail to compel testimony was because he was pursuing evidence the vice president may have been aware of the specifics of the anti-Wilson strategy.Judge Tatel's opinion was very stern in its issuance of a contempt citation for Miller, suggesting that those eight redacted pages contained a whole heck of a lot of smackdown for those involved in the outing of Valerie Wilson Plame.
My guess? If there are any charges in the offing for the VP, look for him being attached to a broader conspiracy. That new house in Maryland is taking on a whole new meaning -- sure hope it has nice views. Home confinement can get tedious looking at the same rooms all day long.
posted by ReddHedd @ 4:47 AM
Comments (53) | Trackback (0)
Sunday, October 16, 2005
Next Time, Try Monster.com
Judy is being more cooperative with the Wall Street Journal than she is the New York Times (part of the job hunt?) She gave them a phoner and cleared up some of the outstanding questions that the Times pieces did not:In a brief telephone interview yesterday, Ms. Miller said she discovered the June 2003 notes in her office after being prompted to seek out answers to another question Mr. Fitzgerald had asked her. "There was an open question about something, and I said I would go back and look and see if there was anything in my notes that would address that question," she said yesterday.Yeah, like "how does wearing an orange jumpsuit for the next twenty-five years strike you?"She said she found the notebook in her office. She reiterated that she couldn't recall who told her the name that she transcribed as "Valerie Flame." "I don't remember who told me the name," she said, growing agitated. "I wasn't writing a story, remember?" Asked if the other source was Mr. Rove, she replied, "I'm not going to discuss anyone else that I talked to."Well that's enlightening. Judy's a bitch, even on the job hunt. But it answers the question we all wanted to know the answer to -- to which set of notes, the June or July ones, was the "Valerie Flame" note attached?
Since we now know it's the June ones, we also know Judy punked Bennett, who made his deal with Fitzgerald to limit her testimony to only Libby under false pretenses, i.e., that she had no other sources.
DAMN I bet Bennett was hacked about that one.
But here's another enlightening moment from the WSJ:Mr. Keller left the country late last week on a previously planned trip to Asia, the company said. Reached in Beijing, where he is visiting the paper's Asia bureau, Mr. Keller wrote in an email: "Knowing everything I know today about this case, I might have done some things differently, but I don't feel the least bit apologetic about standing up for a reporter's right to do the job."But -- Judy just said she "wasn't writing a story." What "job" was she doing exactly, Bill?
Keller might think twice about rushing back. Because I did not even think about this at the time, but reader Andy brought it to my attention. In yesterday's NYT piece it says:But Mr. Sulzberger and the paper's executive editor, Bill Keller, knew few details about Ms. Miller's conversations with her confidential source other than his name. They did not review Ms. Miller's notes. Mr. Keller said he learned about the "Valerie Flame" notation only this month. Mr. Sulzberger was told about it by Times reporters on Thursday.Okay, Thursday was the 13th, the Times first published the fact that Judy found another notebook on October 8, so that makes Sulzberger Bang Bang the Idiot Boy. But as Andy notes, if Judy only found those notes a week ago, how could Keller know about the "Valerie Flame" notation "this month," which could mean weeks ago? We may only be parsing words here, but that sure is an odd way to describe last week.
I hear real estate is cheap in Shanghai. posted by Jane Hamsher @ 10:25 PM
Comments (35) | Trackback (0)
====================================================
Judy the Obscure
Well we finally got the tua culpa from Judith Miller we've all been expecting:"W.M.D. - I got it totally wrong," she said. "The analysts, the experts and the journalists who covered them - we were all wrong. If your sources are wrong, you are wrong. I did the best job that I could."In other news, Mohammed ElBaradai and the International Atomic Energy Agency win the Nobel Prize for getting it right. You can't blame Judy. It's hard to hear when you're so full of shit it's coming out your ears.
Besides, she was otherwise engaged in screwing over everyone she ever touched in this walking disaster.
She sticks it to her willfully ignorant bosses:Interviews show that the paper's leaders, in taking what they considered to be a principled stand, ultimately left the major decisions in the case up to Ms. Miller, an intrepid reporter whom editors found hard to control.
"This car had her hand on the wheel because she was the one at risk," Mr. Sulzberger said.News flash, Pinch: she's been driving on the rims, and you're along for the ride.
She sticks it to her co-workers:In two interviews, Ms. Miller generally would not discuss her interactions with editors, elaborate on the written account of her grand jury testimony or allow reporters to review her notes.So much for the Hallmark Moment that was Judy's return to the newsroom.
Then she starts to get a little crazy and reckless. She sticks it to her lawyer, which is not really the best idea when he's the only thing standing between you and a ten year stretch in chick prison:Mr. Bennett, who by now had carefully reviewed Ms. Miller's extensive notes taken from two interviews with Mr. Libby, assured Mr. Fitzgerald that Ms. Miller had only one meaningful source. Mr. Fitzgerald agreed to limit his questions to Mr. Libby and the Wilson matter.Which would have been fine if it was true, but unfortunately Judy left one thing out:On one page of my interview notes, for example, I wrote the name "Valerie Flame." Yet, as I told Mr. Fitzgerald, I simply could not recall where that came from, when I wrote it or why the name was misspelled.
I testified that I did not believe the name came from Mr. Libby, in part because the notation does not appear in the same part of my notebook as the interview notes from him.Which means Judy DID have another source, and Bennett went to Fitzgerald and sold him a big, fat load of bullshit in order to cut a deal for his client and get the limited testimony she was so proud of:Without both agreements, I would not have testified and would still be in jail.Yeah you are PRETTY clever, Judy ol' gal. Get yourself a deal to preserve your "principles" by punking your lawyer and getting him to sell one of the toughest US attorneys in the country a bill of goods.
Wow, you are sharp.
Judy skillfully avoids revealing in the article specifically when in the timeline this "unremembered source" (*cough*) revealed to her the identity of "Valerie Flame."
She had two sets of notes -- one she turned over to Fitzgerald covering her July 8 and July 13, 2003 meetings with Libby, which she testified about in her original September 30 command performance before the grand jury. Then there are the one she "discovered" buried in her desk at the Times covering the June 23, 2003 meeting.
(As a side note, no wonder she was so nervous in prison. If I had incriminating evidence that could send me to the slam indefinitely that was sitting in the midst of a bunch of people by whom I was pretty much universally hated, I'd be thinking "I owed it to myself" to get the ... out of there, too. Hey -- how did Fitzgerald find out about that June meeting?)
Adam Entous of Reuters says that the "Flame" reference appeared in the July notes:Miller also disclosed for the first time that the notebook she used for an interview with Libby in July 2003 contained the name "Valerie Flame," a clear reference to Valerie Plame, the covert operative whose outing triggered a sweeping criminal investigation that has shaken the Bush administration.But unless Entous has some special inside information, and there is no indication he has any more than what appears in the Times, I think he's presuming something that isn't there. A careful reading of Miller's sodomizing of the journalistic tradition shows no indication of which set of notes the name appears in.
Indeed, inclusion in the June notes seems more likely. Bennett didn't seem to realize that Judy had any other sources before he went off on his mission to poke the pit bull with a sharp stick.
And misspelling a name like that is a mistake you make the first time you hear it -- not the second or third or fourth. She says that Cowboy Scoots didn't bring up the name of Valerie Plame until the July 8 meeting, however:I said I couldn't be certain whether I had known Ms. Plame's identity before this meeting, and I had no clear memory of the context of our conversation that resulted in this notation.If Entous is right about the appearance in the July notes, and the second "Flame" source was already indicated by Bennett and dismissed by Fitzgerald as not being "meaningful" when he cut a deal for Judy to exclude any testimony that was not about Libby, Fitzgerald wouldn't be able to ask about that, right?Mr. Fitzgerald asked if I could recall discussing the Wilson-Plame connection with other sources. I said I had, though I could not recall any by name or when those conversations occurred.What's that? Why, that would be Patrick Fitzgerald asking questions at the time outside the scope of the deal to limit her testimony to Libby. Moreover, she did not refuse to answer. Which means that her original deal with Fitzgerald was, indeed, bustado.
So what was Judy doing in Fitzgerald's office all day Tuesday with her criminal -- not First Amendment -- lawyer Bob Bennett?
I'm guessing she was playing Let's Make a Deal. posted by Jane Hamsher @ 1:30 AM
Comments (110) | Trackbacks (3)
======================================================
MOCKINGBIRD
The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA
"You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month." - CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. "Katherine The Great," by Deborah Davis (New York: Sheridan Square Press, 1991)
As terrible as it is to live in a nation where the press in known to be controlled by the government, at least one has the advantage of knowing the bias is present, and to adjust for it. In the United States of America, we are taught from birth that our press is free from such government meddling. This is an insideous lie about the very nature of the news institution in this country. One that allows the government to lie to us while denying the very fact of the lie itself.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html
-----------------------------------------
Operation Mockingbird: CIA Media Manipulation
By Mary Louise
The CIA's secret activities, covert missions, and connections of control are all done under the pretense and protection of national security with no accountability whatsoever, at least in their minds. Considering the public is held accountable for everything we think, say, and do there is something seriously wrong with this picture. The CIA is the President's secret army, who have been and continue to be conveniently above the law with unlimited power and authority, to conduct a reign of terror around the globe.
The "old boy network" of socializing, talking shop, and tapping each other for favors outside the halls of government made it inevitable that the CIA and Corporate America would become allies, thus the systematic infiltration and takeover of the media.
Under the guise of 'American' objectives and lack of congressional oversight, the CIA accomplish their exploits by using every trick in the book (and they know quite a few) that they actually
MOCKINGBIRD
The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html
Miller's Security Clearance
By Ivo Daalder | bio
From: America Abroad
Having now waded through The Times's articles on Judy Miller, one new fact struck me as particularly bizarre -- Miller, by her own admission, was cleared to see secret information as part of her assignment as an "embedded" reporter in Iraq.
I had no idea journalists could receive security clearances -- and I had no idea that the mainstream media would allow their reporters to have such clearances. After all, one of the most important obligations of a person receiving security clearances is not to reveal that information at any time, while one of the most important obligations of a reporter is precisely to reveal information the public has a need and right to know.
Can someone explain why this glaring conflict of interest is acceptable? And does anyone know whether Miller's clearance was an exception or whether this is a common practice in journalistic circles, be it today or in the past? And, finally, as I note below the fold, could it be that this fact becomes the key to Libby's defense?
Oct 16, 2005 -- 11:22:38 AM EST
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/10/16/112238/93
---------------------------------------------
Monday, October 17, 2005
http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/
Dr. Yes?
Seems like our boy Fitz is asking an awful lot of questions about Dick Cheney lately. From an awful lot of staffers who might be in the know on an awful lot of things.
This morning's Bloomberg contains an intriguing story that details questions being asked by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald of a series of witnesses who have either cooperated with FBI investigators and the prosecutor and given statements or who have been called before the Grand Jury to testify under oath.
Fitzgerald has questioned Cheney's communications adviser Catherine Martin and former spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise and ex-White House aide Jim Wilkinson about the vice president's knowledge of the anti-Wilson campaign and his dealings on it with Libby, his chief of staff, the people said. The information came from multiple sources, who requested anonymity because of the secrecy and political sensitivity of the investigation.This, coming on the heels of the Judy Miller expose series in the NY Times and the WSJ, cannot be good news for an Administration already reeling from sagging poll numbers and Karl Rove and Scooter Libby feeling substantial heat.
Traitorgate officianados will no doubt remember that Ms. Miller was also asked about the role of VP Cheney and his connection with his Chief of Staff Scooter Libby in disseminating the fact that Valerie Plame Wilson worked for the CIA in its WINPAC division. (WINPAC consists of a group of undercover analysts and covert agents, some of whom are NOC status, who work on issues of non-conventional weapons, including those used by terrorists as weapons of mass destruction.)
It certainly doesn't help when you have Miller's attorney saying something like this on yesterday's This Week on ABC:
``Fitzgerald is putting together a big case,'' Washington attorney Robert Bennett, who represents Miller, said on the ABC-TV program ``This Week'' yesterday.
Well, that doesn't lend itself to good sleep going into a Monday, now does it?
There is a possibility that it may not stop at Number 2, either, although most reports have said that is a more remote possibility based on leaks that have come from witnesses in the case thus far.
Fitzgerald, 45, has also questioned administration officials about any knowledge Bush may have had of the campaign against Wilson. Yet most administration observers have noted that on Iraq, as with most matters, it's Cheney who has played the more hands-on role.
One lawyer intimately involved in the case, who like the others demanded anonymity, said one reason Fitzgerald was willing to send Miller to jail to compel testimony was because he was pursuing evidence the vice president may have been aware of the specifics of the anti-Wilson strategy.Judge Tatel's opinion was very stern in its issuance of a contempt citation for Miller, suggesting that those eight redacted pages contained a whole heck of a lot of smackdown for those involved in the outing of Valerie Wilson Plame.
My guess? If there are any charges in the offing for the VP, look for him being attached to a broader conspiracy. That new house in Maryland is taking on a whole new meaning -- sure hope it has nice views. Home confinement can get tedious looking at the same rooms all day long.
posted by ReddHedd @ 4:47 AM
Comments (53) | Trackback (0)
Sunday, October 16, 2005
Next Time, Try Monster.com
Judy is being more cooperative with the Wall Street Journal than she is the New York Times (part of the job hunt?) She gave them a phoner and cleared up some of the outstanding questions that the Times pieces did not:In a brief telephone interview yesterday, Ms. Miller said she discovered the June 2003 notes in her office after being prompted to seek out answers to another question Mr. Fitzgerald had asked her. "There was an open question about something, and I said I would go back and look and see if there was anything in my notes that would address that question," she said yesterday.Yeah, like "how does wearing an orange jumpsuit for the next twenty-five years strike you?"She said she found the notebook in her office. She reiterated that she couldn't recall who told her the name that she transcribed as "Valerie Flame." "I don't remember who told me the name," she said, growing agitated. "I wasn't writing a story, remember?" Asked if the other source was Mr. Rove, she replied, "I'm not going to discuss anyone else that I talked to."Well that's enlightening. Judy's a bitch, even on the job hunt. But it answers the question we all wanted to know the answer to -- to which set of notes, the June or July ones, was the "Valerie Flame" note attached?
Since we now know it's the June ones, we also know Judy punked Bennett, who made his deal with Fitzgerald to limit her testimony to only Libby under false pretenses, i.e., that she had no other sources.
DAMN I bet Bennett was hacked about that one.
But here's another enlightening moment from the WSJ:Mr. Keller left the country late last week on a previously planned trip to Asia, the company said. Reached in Beijing, where he is visiting the paper's Asia bureau, Mr. Keller wrote in an email: "Knowing everything I know today about this case, I might have done some things differently, but I don't feel the least bit apologetic about standing up for a reporter's right to do the job."But -- Judy just said she "wasn't writing a story." What "job" was she doing exactly, Bill?
Keller might think twice about rushing back. Because I did not even think about this at the time, but reader Andy brought it to my attention. In yesterday's NYT piece it says:But Mr. Sulzberger and the paper's executive editor, Bill Keller, knew few details about Ms. Miller's conversations with her confidential source other than his name. They did not review Ms. Miller's notes. Mr. Keller said he learned about the "Valerie Flame" notation only this month. Mr. Sulzberger was told about it by Times reporters on Thursday.Okay, Thursday was the 13th, the Times first published the fact that Judy found another notebook on October 8, so that makes Sulzberger Bang Bang the Idiot Boy. But as Andy notes, if Judy only found those notes a week ago, how could Keller know about the "Valerie Flame" notation "this month," which could mean weeks ago? We may only be parsing words here, but that sure is an odd way to describe last week.
I hear real estate is cheap in Shanghai. posted by Jane Hamsher @ 10:25 PM
Comments (35) | Trackback (0)
====================================================
Judy the Obscure
Well we finally got the tua culpa from Judith Miller we've all been expecting:"W.M.D. - I got it totally wrong," she said. "The analysts, the experts and the journalists who covered them - we were all wrong. If your sources are wrong, you are wrong. I did the best job that I could."In other news, Mohammed ElBaradai and the International Atomic Energy Agency win the Nobel Prize for getting it right. You can't blame Judy. It's hard to hear when you're so full of shit it's coming out your ears.
Besides, she was otherwise engaged in screwing over everyone she ever touched in this walking disaster.
She sticks it to her willfully ignorant bosses:Interviews show that the paper's leaders, in taking what they considered to be a principled stand, ultimately left the major decisions in the case up to Ms. Miller, an intrepid reporter whom editors found hard to control.
"This car had her hand on the wheel because she was the one at risk," Mr. Sulzberger said.News flash, Pinch: she's been driving on the rims, and you're along for the ride.
She sticks it to her co-workers:In two interviews, Ms. Miller generally would not discuss her interactions with editors, elaborate on the written account of her grand jury testimony or allow reporters to review her notes.So much for the Hallmark Moment that was Judy's return to the newsroom.
Then she starts to get a little crazy and reckless. She sticks it to her lawyer, which is not really the best idea when he's the only thing standing between you and a ten year stretch in chick prison:Mr. Bennett, who by now had carefully reviewed Ms. Miller's extensive notes taken from two interviews with Mr. Libby, assured Mr. Fitzgerald that Ms. Miller had only one meaningful source. Mr. Fitzgerald agreed to limit his questions to Mr. Libby and the Wilson matter.Which would have been fine if it was true, but unfortunately Judy left one thing out:On one page of my interview notes, for example, I wrote the name "Valerie Flame." Yet, as I told Mr. Fitzgerald, I simply could not recall where that came from, when I wrote it or why the name was misspelled.
I testified that I did not believe the name came from Mr. Libby, in part because the notation does not appear in the same part of my notebook as the interview notes from him.Which means Judy DID have another source, and Bennett went to Fitzgerald and sold him a big, fat load of bullshit in order to cut a deal for his client and get the limited testimony she was so proud of:Without both agreements, I would not have testified and would still be in jail.Yeah you are PRETTY clever, Judy ol' gal. Get yourself a deal to preserve your "principles" by punking your lawyer and getting him to sell one of the toughest US attorneys in the country a bill of goods.
Wow, you are sharp.
Judy skillfully avoids revealing in the article specifically when in the timeline this "unremembered source" (*cough*) revealed to her the identity of "Valerie Flame."
She had two sets of notes -- one she turned over to Fitzgerald covering her July 8 and July 13, 2003 meetings with Libby, which she testified about in her original September 30 command performance before the grand jury. Then there are the one she "discovered" buried in her desk at the Times covering the June 23, 2003 meeting.
(As a side note, no wonder she was so nervous in prison. If I had incriminating evidence that could send me to the slam indefinitely that was sitting in the midst of a bunch of people by whom I was pretty much universally hated, I'd be thinking "I owed it to myself" to get the ... out of there, too. Hey -- how did Fitzgerald find out about that June meeting?)
Adam Entous of Reuters says that the "Flame" reference appeared in the July notes:Miller also disclosed for the first time that the notebook she used for an interview with Libby in July 2003 contained the name "Valerie Flame," a clear reference to Valerie Plame, the covert operative whose outing triggered a sweeping criminal investigation that has shaken the Bush administration.But unless Entous has some special inside information, and there is no indication he has any more than what appears in the Times, I think he's presuming something that isn't there. A careful reading of Miller's sodomizing of the journalistic tradition shows no indication of which set of notes the name appears in.
Indeed, inclusion in the June notes seems more likely. Bennett didn't seem to realize that Judy had any other sources before he went off on his mission to poke the pit bull with a sharp stick.
And misspelling a name like that is a mistake you make the first time you hear it -- not the second or third or fourth. She says that Cowboy Scoots didn't bring up the name of Valerie Plame until the July 8 meeting, however:I said I couldn't be certain whether I had known Ms. Plame's identity before this meeting, and I had no clear memory of the context of our conversation that resulted in this notation.If Entous is right about the appearance in the July notes, and the second "Flame" source was already indicated by Bennett and dismissed by Fitzgerald as not being "meaningful" when he cut a deal for Judy to exclude any testimony that was not about Libby, Fitzgerald wouldn't be able to ask about that, right?Mr. Fitzgerald asked if I could recall discussing the Wilson-Plame connection with other sources. I said I had, though I could not recall any by name or when those conversations occurred.What's that? Why, that would be Patrick Fitzgerald asking questions at the time outside the scope of the deal to limit her testimony to Libby. Moreover, she did not refuse to answer. Which means that her original deal with Fitzgerald was, indeed, bustado.
So what was Judy doing in Fitzgerald's office all day Tuesday with her criminal -- not First Amendment -- lawyer Bob Bennett?
I'm guessing she was playing Let's Make a Deal. posted by Jane Hamsher @ 1:30 AM
Comments (110) | Trackbacks (3)
======================================================
MOCKINGBIRD
The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA
"You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month." - CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. "Katherine The Great," by Deborah Davis (New York: Sheridan Square Press, 1991)
As terrible as it is to live in a nation where the press in known to be controlled by the government, at least one has the advantage of knowing the bias is present, and to adjust for it. In the United States of America, we are taught from birth that our press is free from such government meddling. This is an insideous lie about the very nature of the news institution in this country. One that allows the government to lie to us while denying the very fact of the lie itself.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html
-----------------------------------------
Operation Mockingbird: CIA Media Manipulation
By Mary Louise
The CIA's secret activities, covert missions, and connections of control are all done under the pretense and protection of national security with no accountability whatsoever, at least in their minds. Considering the public is held accountable for everything we think, say, and do there is something seriously wrong with this picture. The CIA is the President's secret army, who have been and continue to be conveniently above the law with unlimited power and authority, to conduct a reign of terror around the globe.
The "old boy network" of socializing, talking shop, and tapping each other for favors outside the halls of government made it inevitable that the CIA and Corporate America would become allies, thus the systematic infiltration and takeover of the media.
Under the guise of 'American' objectives and lack of congressional oversight, the CIA accomplish their exploits by using every trick in the book (and they know quite a few) that they actually
- URL: CIA LEAK: JUDITH MILLER OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD ASSET! —WEBMASTER, Mon Oct 17 20:33
- CIA leak probe 'widening to include use of intelligence' —Lori Price, Mon Oct 17 20:54
- Cheney May Be Entangled in CIA Leak Investigation —Reuters / TRUTHOUT, Mon Oct 17 20:44
- CIA Leakgate may be part of a larger intelligence war —Wayne Madsen Report, Mon Oct 17 16:01
- SPJ to Give Judith Miller 'First Amendment' Award —E&P Staff, Mon Oct 17 14:51
- Judith Miller to speak on Oct. 18 —SPJ in Las Vegas!, Mon Oct 17 15:00
- Operation Mockingbird: CIA Media Manipulation —Mary Louise, Mon Oct 17 14:19
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
