Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Gopher]

[bucheon bum]

probably something like www.iluvconspiricies.com

[igotthisguitar]

[Gopher]

You present a crude false delimma: either Colby revealed the truth of CIA's ownership of everyone in the media or there is nothing at all -- as you say: "Minimal. Marginal. Zero."

And, as usual, you take bits and pieces of facts and then reconstruct them, entirely out of context, so that your bizarre worldview is somehow "validated."

In fact, Cord Meyer, Thomas Braden, and others, including Colby while he was stationed in Italy, ran Cold War-era operations, as directed by several presidents and as part of the U.S. govt's overall containment strategy, to counter similar and apparently more massive Soviet operations in Western Europe and elsewhere. (Moscow took Prague by coup action and nearly took Greece, Italy, and France through its control of local labor confederations and their newspapers.)

Through Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe, and many print organizations as well, such as, I believe it was called, Encounters, CIA aimed to influence public opinion against Soviet Russia and Marxism and in favor of the U.S. and liberal democracy. Outside of Europe, high points were the radio wars between the U.S. and Havana (which may be ongoing) and the progaganda wars between the left and right, as funded by the United States, the Vatican, the Italian and German Christian Democrats on the one hand, and the Soviets, the Cubans, and the Chinese on the other in Chile throughout the 1960s.

I believe the Agency's European efforts continued through the 1980s but were eventually discontinued, particularly in the aftermath of the Church Committee investigations. The two aforementioned radio stations are now totally independent, for example.

It was all one massive propaganda war. But it ended, starting after 1975 (Cuba notwithstanding).

Those who participated in this, on the U.S. side, have explained and clarified and the historical record has thus far confirmed that CIA selected suitable international, regional, and local organizations, radio stations, newspapers, magazines, and well-placed individuals who naturally and on their own already held views sympathetic to the U.S. position and hostile to the Soviet position and, through so many intermediaries that it was (hopefully and theoretically but not always practically) impossible for them to know where it was coming from, they funded them with cash grants and other contributions so that they could continue doing what they were already doing. The Soviets did the same, but, obviously, from the other direction.

Both superpowers also funded, sub rosa, political parties they wanted to succeed. In the Chilean case, the Soviets and Cubans were very much involved in training and advising the Chilean Communist Party and the Chilean Socialist Party (and the MIR), respectively, just as the U.S. and its allies backed and advised the Christian Democrats and the National Party (formerly the Conservative and Liberal Parties), and just as, as it is increasingly apparent, the Brazilians were running their own covert operations and intelligence-gathering operations there, and for their own purposes, too, during this same time.

Also, I believe that Beijing is increasingly getting involved in this now, at least in the Western United States and parts of Canada, in order to cultivate, sub rosa, and without their knowing it, local and regional politicians who might be more sympathetic to Chinese interests than their colleagues.

In any case, neither CIA (nor KGB in the past or Beijing today, for that matter) ever pulled the strings like you seem to allege. Think of it as identifying certain plants in your garden you want to be sure survive and thrive, and giving them special attention so that they are more likely to do so.

Furthermore, your quote, which I believe you and others have simply invented, goes way beyond the evidence of what actually happened and suggests something else that is much more sinister and, indeed, ongoing.

You suggest that we stick to the facts. And I wholly agree. Show us where Colby said what you say he said.

Also, regarding this:

[igotthisguitar]

Operation Mockingbird
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Operation Mockingbird is an Central Intelligence Agency operation to "influence" domestic and foreign media, whose activities were made public during the Church Committee investigation in 1975 (published 1976).

The word Mockingbird was first used by Deborah Davis in Katharine the Great (1979). There is no evidence that the CIA called it this. Cord Meyer said that when he joined the operation in 1951 it was so secret that it did not have a name.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

http://www.blueagle.com/

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html

[Gopher]

Igotthisguitar: have you read the Church Committee depositions, hearings, and interim reports that treat this issue? Or is your sole source of information Wikipedia and that which you Google?

Please tell us that it is not the latter.

In any case, as I tried to help you see, above, you are referring to Cold War-era operations that have long been dead, and you are referring to them entirely out of context as well.

You are also inventing quotes and attributing them to Colby. This is intellectual dishonesty, if not simply a lie.

And you left this out of the Wikipedia article you cited...

[igotthisguitar]

I'm confident enough material has been presented for "discerning" readers to figure things out for themselves

TELE-VALIUM.

[igotthisguitar]

Feds Probe "Fake News" at 77 Stations

Todd Shields
AUGUST 14, 2006

Federal regulators are asking scores of broadcasters whether they failed to tell viewers about the sponsors behind corporate video releases presented as news, a practice criticized by watchdog groups who say showing "fake news" is an illegal breach of trust with local communities.

The Federal Communications Commission has issued 42 formal letters of inquiry to holders of 77 broadcast licenses, the office of Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein said Monday.

"The public has a legal right to know who seeks to persuade them so they can make up their own minds about the credibility of the information presented," Adelstein said. "Shoddy practices make it difficult for viewers to tell the difference between news and propaganda."

In April, Free Press and the Center for Media and Democracy filed a complaint with the FCC after the center conducted a study finding unattributed video news releases had been aired at 77 stations. It said owners of those stations included Sinclair Broadcast Group, News Corp.'s Fox Television Stations, Clear Channel Communications, Tribune Co. and Viacom/CBS. The non-profit groups said the practice "has infiltrated broadcast news programming across the country."

The FCC did not immediately release who received its letters, which Reuters reported were to have been sent on Friday.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]